You may recall a few years ago I pointed you towards a project digitising the Codex Sinaiticus – now you can view a digitised version of the Dead Sea Scrolls as well.

I’ve been watching and reading with a mixture of fascination, pity, and even horror the various stories coming out of the US about the group predicting the arrival of the apocalypse on 21 May.

Millenarian movements are fascinating, not new, and not limited to fringe Protestant groups – there was a serious millenarian movement in the early Middle Ages for example.

Modern examples include the Jehovah’s Witnesses who until recently predicted the end was nigh on more than one occasion – resulting in the recall of literature, and a collective moment of “oops” before finding some reason why they mis-calculated.

I’ve never heard of an Independent Catholic community developing a millenarian theology – have you?

Jesus said that nobody knows the hour but God alone – and a good thing too because lets face it from some of the reports and interviews I’ve been seeing of true believers in next week’s end of the world event – it is the source of a great deal of mental and emotional anquish. The point about the story is to encourage individual believers, and communities of faith to live – to really and truly live as if this moment is the very last moment you’ll have. It presses upon us the impetus to live thoughtfully, faithfully, and fully engaged.

Thinking about those groups and individuals promoting Millenarian ideas leads me to another question – does artificially creating mental and emotional distress not fall into the category of creating a stumbling block for people’s faith? I think it does. It certainly is the cause of suffering – and since Christ teaches us to end the suffering of others I would suggest that Millenarian groups, and their promoters are . . . well . . . sinful.

This morning’s news trawl dropped me into a number of posts and articles that touched on what one article referred to as “biblical literacy”. That is to say, it explored the amount which people understood modern UK society to be influenced by, or shaped by the biblical narrative. It’s a fascinating idea but one that will have to wait for another post, because I (as you might expect) went wandering off on a tangent.

Where does the Bible “fit” into your OC/IC praxis? There’s the question, now how did I get here. One of the sources that intrigued me was a summary of a study being conducted to guage the level of “biblical literacy”. It had a series of preliminary questions that were interesting; asking if the respondant had a Bible, how many, a modern or traditional translation, and how often they used it.

I started thinking about my own “Bible usage”. In my case as a clergyman you’d expect me to “use” the Bible quite a bit. So lets level the playing field a bit and exclude those forms of use that are directly related to my being ordained – such as liturgies and services. Its probably also a good thing to exclude writing & research purposes – since I’m a theolgian by training and this is, shall we say, “work related”. Now, I’m on the same level playing field as everyone else in the community (in theory at least). So, where does the Bible fit into my praxis as an OC/IC believer?

Oh my. Well. I have multiple copies of the Bible (as you might expect), in different languages – I’ve got two Russian editions, and OCS edition, a Greek edition, a German NT, a New Jerusalem Bible, and the NAB. I did have an NRSV once – hated it – and gave it away. We have a copy of the KJV floating around somewhere but we don’t like it much either and only keep it because it was a confirmation present for my other half when still an Anglican. So what does this say about my “approach” to the text? An interesting thought really, and I’ve not got an answer other than to say that I’m not a huge fan of English translations (grin).

Once a year, usually during Lent, I sit down and read the whole Bible cover to cover – except Revelation which I think should never be read if you wish to stay sane. How, I started doing this remains I mystery – I just do it, almost without rhyme or reason – there is no “thought” that: “Oh, its Clean Monday – time to start Genesis . . . ” But I’ve been doing this now for more than a decade and see no reason to stop. Occasionally I find myself feeling somehow disconnected from a particular text and will sit down and read it. But I don’t have a systematic daily or weekly “Bible study” plan. I tried that once during my first two years at university and hated it. I found that “Bible Study” often broke up the text in unnatural chunks.

What is interesting – sitting here and consciously considering my own approach to “using the Bible” on a personal rather than official, or “work related” level is how it is almost erratic. This has lead me to my main question – how is the Bible used, in the praxis of other indie folk?

I find it interesting that in over 20 years of public ministry in the OC/IC community – I’ve never once experienced a community that held an organised Bible study. That is not to say it does not happen – only that I’ve never witnessed it. Indeed in the communities I’ve served in, or participated in there was never expressed an interest for such a thing. Furthermore it is more common – in my experience – for indie folk to read theology and spirituality texts and experiment with those rather than to read and experiment with the Bible as a part of their indiviual devotion and praxis. Why is this so?

Is it because we are sacramental christians who don’t accept the notion of “sola scriptura”? So it is not a “natural” part of our religious culture outside of a liturgical or formal context. What changes would our communities experience if we were to begin to cultivate a greater emphasis on “Bible use” outside the context of the liturgical assembly?

I’ve been waiting for this for some time now – I heard about it when it first started – and have remembered and forgotten about it off and on for two years since. But here it is – finally – the web site of the Codex Sinaiticus.

What!? Youd don’t know what it is? Ach Mein Lieber Gott! It’s only the oldest complete manuscript of the NT (fourth century)! Oh and its very pretty too.

So sit back, rev up your browser, and enjoy a piece of Christian history online! Oh, and if you like this – I can point you to some other really nifty papyriology/manuscript sites of similar vein.

I must admit I take perverse pleasure in reading the legal sections of the Old Testament – sometimes you’ve just got to sit, laugh, and wonder, what was going on that made this particular point worthy of recording.

“You must have a latrine outside the camp, and go out to this; you must have a trowel in your equipment and, when you sqat outsde, you must scrape a hole with it, then turn round and cover up your excrement. For Yahweh your God goes about the inside of your campt to guard you and put your enemeis at your mercy.” (Dt. 23.13-15)

This one had me laughing and asking some rather . . . . unfortunate questions.

First, the suggestion here is that Yahweh likes to keep his sandals clean. It’s O.K. to be wading knee deep in the blood of your enemies, (borrowing here from the tales of Anat), its quite another to have to step outside the camp, grab a stick and scrape the bottom of your chrysolite sandal.

Second, one wonders, what other tribes might have done, or even what Israelites did before God made this helpful suggestion – was there perhaps a lack of consitency, visit the area where the Benjaminites camped and you had to avoid the area of the left facing corners of their tents? Hmmmm. . . .

Under the heading: “Modesty in brawls” I found this curiosty -

“If, when two men are fighting, the wife of one intervenes to protect her husband from the other’s blows by reaching out and seizing the other by his private parts, you must cut off her hand and show no pity.”

– Dt. 25.11-12 (NJB)

Typical me – I had to ask – does the LXX text use a euphemism for “private parts”, does it say “private parts” or does it use a more . . . “technical” term like genitals? The greek text in fact uses didumun that is to say if she reaches out and takes in her hands the “twins” of the other . . . I’d say that falls under the category of euphimism.