In the debate regarding the fate of the Christian Reformed Church, one side often says something along the lines of “Just look at the clear teaching of scripture.” This phrase is typically sent as a final dart into the heart of some “liberal who refuses to simply take scripture for what it says.”
To those who have studied or taught Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology, this might sound familiar. Berkhof advances the “perspicuity of scripture,” saying scripture is clear to any who would read it, a position counter to the Roman Catholicism of the Reformation era which taught an educated clergy was needed to interpret scripture. “Just take Scripture for what it says,” Berkhof argues—it’s clear, available to all and, read in obedience, life changing.
I get it. I’ve been there. I remember sitting in a class studying Old Testament Interpretation at Calvin College called “Hermeneutics,” with Dr. Clarence Vos. He was teaching the early stories in Genesis, citing literature and artifacts from early history, including some recent discoveries from the Dead Sea Scrolls. He spoke about the Gilgamesh Epic and how that story helped him understand the story of Noah. He told of the Enuma Elish, the Babylonian creation story, and he showed a diagram depicting the Hebrew understanding of the world.
The more he talked, the more agitated some in the class became, until finally one student raised his hand and quietly suggested that his very devout mother “was doing just fine” without any of this information or speculation, because she was able to “simply take the Bible for what it says.” His statement was bold, and it was readily affirmed by many others in the class.
Professor Vos just smiled and, rather than offer a rebuttal, simply said, “Pack a lunch for tomorrow’s class. We’re going to Chicago.”
The next day, we drove to the University of Chicago and visited the Institute for the Study of Ancient Culture, where we saw Egyptian mummies, Babylonian tablets with cuneiform texts written on them, and displays with votive idols.
Professor Vos called us together to look at some Egyptian writing, noting that many of the Pharaohs in Egypt died at the age 110, the same age to which Joseph lived according to Genesis 50. He posited that in Egypt at that time to say someone lived to be 110 was not a statement about how many actual years the person lived, but rather a statement about the quality of the individual’s life.
He taught us that if you are going to take the Bible for what it says, you need to know what it said to the person who originally wrote it and the audience that first read it. He made it clear that we do not take the Bible for what it says by reading it through the lens of twentieth-century Western culture. The Bible was not written as a science book meeting the standards of contemporary scientists. The Bible was not written as a history book with the same parameters as one written today.
The Bible is theology, written to teach about God. When we take the Bible for what it says, Dr. Vos said, we approach the Bible asking the kinds of questions it was originally written to answer.
To illustrate his point, Dr. Vos pointed to the votive idols. To understand what it means to be an image-bearer of God, we need to know that votive idols were made in the image of their creator. He showed us pictures of various stone writings, one of which contained a genealogy of Babylonian kings, all of whom had reigned for over 1,000 years. When all the years of their reigns were added together the sum was fantastical. Why? Because the numbers were never meant to speak to quantity but only to quality.
Such discoveries help us understand the clear teaching of scripture—clear teaching, that is, as it was understood by its original audience. We learned about Hebrew idioms, something modern readers never figure out on their own. For example, a person said to have “good eyes” was generous, while someone with “bad eyes” was stingy. This explains why Proverbs 22:9 says “Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed” in the English Standard Version and “The generous will themselves be blessed” in the NIV. Or take Proverbs 23:6—the American Standard Version says, “Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye,” and the NIV says, “Do not eat the food of a begrudging host.” This explains why Jesus talked about healthy or unhealthy eyes in the Sermon on the Mount just before speaking about laying up treasures in heaven and saying you cannot serve both God and money.
During my 41-year teaching career, as well as a second career as a parish pastor, I always wanted to teach and preach the clear meaning of the Bible. I have always wanted students and parishioners to take the Bible for what it says; but, thanks to teachers like Dr. Vos, that always meant what scripture truly says, given the literary, historical, and cultural context in which it was written. I am extremely grateful for teachers who lovingly guided me and countless others by giving us the tools with which we could truly “take the Bible for what it says.”
One more thing I remember and admire about Clarence Vos: although he was a great scholar and a very capable teacher, he was, even more, a humble follower of Jesus. He maintained we can never fully understand God and should not pretend that we can.
Today, I stand amazed at the young theologians in the Christian Reformed Church (and yes, almost all of them are young) who insist they have the final word on the clear teachings of the Bible. They are armed with proof texts to support their position, but sometimes miss the forest for the trees. When they insist that they know the clear teaching of the Bible, they ignore and sometimes even scoff at other teachings that are equally clear but contradict what they are proposing.
As Paul wrote: “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and how inscrutable his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?”
Professor Vos interpreted the Bible in the spirit of Saint Paul: with honest awe and with appropriate humility. The young theologians in the Christian Reformed Church would do well to cultivate that same spirit.
Maybe it’s time for them to pack a lunch and head to Chicago.
21 Responses
Thank you so much for this. I also had the privilege of having Clarence Vos for a professor. For Old Testament. Kind, wise, sharp, widely read, patient, gentle, humourous, and fearless. I can still hear his voice. “Yes, well. . . .”
Being in Clarence Vos’ and John Primus’ classes 50 years ago encouraged and convinced this born & raised Baptist kid to embrace and follow Reformed tradition and teaching of Christian faith. A few good pastors and teaching mentors along the way helped confirm that chosen direction.
Thanks, Dan. Indeed, this basic and obvious way of reading any literature, including the Bible, is being extinguished in and removed from the CRC. Look over the names of the 33 CRC pastors who moved their ministerial credentials to North Grand Rapids Classis of the RCA in February as well as the additional group of about that size that will probably move to that classis in May, not to mention the CRC pastors who are leaving the CRC for other RCA classes and other denominations across the US and Canada. The loss of Reformed theological capital embodied in these departing pastors is staggering. Next up is the loss of the congregations many of these pastors led or belonged to. Consider that Clarence Vos as well as half of the signatories of Report 44, the landmark synodical study from 1972 that makes your hermeneutical point, were members of Neland Ave. CRC, and that Neland is only one of ten Grand Rapids East churches that have been forced out of the CRC, and that those ten departing churches are replicated by dozens of other departing churches across the US and Canada packed with the same rich theological capital and past denominational leadership. Just yesterday I read a blog where a CRC moderate lamented the price the CRC is paying for its hysterical reaction to same sex marriage. Unfortunately, it’s too late. What a field day future historians will have with this era in American church and political history.
Amen! Except we have hope it is NOT too late. Wherever they go they will bring with them their wisdom and biblical insight. We envision a sprout coming up out of the tree of Jesse stump.
Thanks, Duane! Well said, and a sad commentary on the denomination that nurtured and nourished me for nearly 90 years, but has lost its way, so we now are happily members of Hope Church (RCA) in Holland.
Thanks, Dan, for laying an important point out so clearly, and for honoring Clarence in the process. I got to know Clarence and his wife in their last years, when I served as their Elder. I never met with them without feeling that their wisdom, grace, and pastoral care for me made the situation ironic.
I hope you’re well, brother.
Clarence Vos served our fellowship as a congregational care pastor in his retirement; he and Jean were a gentle and affirming presence in our life, preaching with clarity and the discernment that came from a lifetime of searching for the message of the scriptures. Thank you for this powerful tribute to a humble, yet powerful servant.
A good book to refer modern people to is Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible by E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O’Brien. Another similar book is Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes: Patronage, Honor, and Shame in the Biblical World again by E. Randolph Richards but this time with Richard James. There is much to learn and no, the meaning of scripture is anything but plain to us from Western, Individualist eyes today.
Another good resource would be John H. Walton’s Wisdom for Faithful Reading: Principles and Practices for Old Testament Interpretation (IVP Academic, 2023). Walton teaches at Wheaton College, so he navigates an environment very similar to what Clarence Vos faced at Calvin.
I did not have a class with Dr Vos when I was at Calvin, but I remember him preaching at my home church one Sunday evening. What stuck with me was his point about God’s sense of humor: that Roman guards (known for their fastidiousness) were sent to a tannery (known to be quite odoriferous) to take Peter to Cornelius must have made God smile if not laugh! Pastor Vos was laughing! I’m not sure of what God thinks of the decisions made by the denomination. I drive by the former headquarters of the CRC as it is being demolished and wonder if that is an apt metaphor.
Dan, thanks for this. I needed this reminder. The way I understand the perspicuity of Scripture is that although the Bible is quite clear about the theological points made in the Apostles’ Creed, it’s not nearly so clear about so much else. Your blog reminds me of the time I was invited to be a guest speaker at a Christian high school Bible class. I came with an ancient Egyptian illustration of their cosmology with Nut the sky goddess arching across the top, giving birth to Re the Sun God, and along the bottom Geb the earth God. As I described the illustration I drew a variety of parallels to the account of creation in Genesis 1 – 3. I was not invited back. Your blog reminds me again that approaching the interpretation of Scripture begins with humility and appreciation that we can only speak tentatively about most of Christian theology, life, and ethics.
In 1978-79 I was working on my dissertation while in residence at the Ecumenical Institute for Theological Research near Jerusalem. Calvin’s Religion and Theology Department contacted me to ask if I was interested in a one-year appointment at my alma mater. I certainly was; but how to schedule an initial interview across such a distance in those pre-Zoom days? Clarence had a solution: he would be leading a tour group to the Holy Land shortly; could I meet him in Jerusalem? So, my first academic job interview was on a King David Hotel balcony on a lovely spring night, with a nice glass of wine. I found him then, and over the following years, to be a wise and gracious mentor.
I don’t really understand how people believe in a 7 day creation when Genesis 2 directly contradicts Genesis 1 if you do a literal reading.
I also do not know how anyone can visit a zoo and find the story of Noah’s ark to be believable.
On the other hand, once you start to consider the book of Genesis to be a collection of myths that show the character of God, it is hard to know when to stop. Did Abraham and Isaac ever exist or are those myths? Is King David a historical figure or another myth? Taken to the logical extremes is even Jesus real? To believers of 7 day creation I imagine the thought that some of the Bible isn’t literally true is a slippery slope that ends in Atheism.
My Uncle Clarence was a blessing to my life and an inspiration for my ministry! I did not get to spend as much time with him over the years as I would have liked but I always learned something when I was with him. I pray I can be a humble follower of Jesus as he was. Thanks for honoring him with this article.
Thanks Dan for such a well expressed tribute and reminder of how to treat scripture. I just used the words “clobber texts” with a gay parent who was considering sending their child to a Christian school. These “clobber texts” remind me of a poem I learned 60 years ago at GRCHS.
“He drew a circle that kept me out,
heretic rebel, a thing to flout,
Love and I had the wit to win,
We drew a circle that drew him in.”
Kind of a primitive hermeneutic.
Thanks, Dan. A great reminder to me of how Dr. Vos’s class from 50 years ago is still so relevant today.
I met Clarence as a 30-something new deacon when he was an 80-something interim pastor (and long-time member) at Neland, and in our household group. He helped me navigate the new post with grace, humor, and humility. His reputation preceded him, so I was aware of the privilege he and Jeanne were in my life. They quickly became friends to us, and I am so grateful for their deep wisdom, their winsome hospitality, and their role modeling of humility and deep trust in God.
Thanks, Dan, for these reflections. I share your respect and appreciation for Dr. Vos, and also some of your memories of learning from him at Calvin. We still need reminders that part of being humble is to be ready to keep learning. I also appreciate your blog for being so clear, well-written. Finally, I am grateful for you as a colleague, friend, and brother.
Thanks, Dan. Of course, it is not just the ‘new’ CRC leaders who claim to take the Bible literally. It seems to be a trend among Christians, maybe because of groups like The Gospel Coalition and others. Whenever a friend starts by saying, “The Bible clearly says…”, I know where they are going and I usually just bow out of the conversation. I have no way to say, “pack your bags, we’re going to Chicago – or Israel, or Turkey.” BUT an even bigger issue for me is the spiritual abuse that happens when spiritual leaders use the Bible as a weapon to denigrate others. As a woman, I have seen many pastors and leaders quote Bible verses that keep women from using their spiritual gifts of leadership in the pastorate or council rooms. That kind of quenching the Spirit is wrong and abusive – but who dares call that out? When Christian leaders stand up and ‘hit people over the head’ with their interpretation of the English words in their Bible, it puts others down and lifts themselves up. To exclude those on the margins (including the LGBTQ+ population) just doesn’t feel like what Jesus would do.
Diane, I am so sorry that people have used God’s Word to attack you and others, but also happy you did not listen.
This article is so good. My dad, John Bratt, was a long-time professor of theology at Calvin as well as a colleague and friend of Clarence Vos. I’m sure he would have agreed with Dr. Vos’s assessment. Although he would’ve been so sad about the breakup of the CRC over this issue having nothing to do with our salvation, he would have understood the need for disaffiliation by Calvin Church—a church my parents were members of for many years and in which my husband and I still belong.