Surronding the Text

Even with the great dichotomizing confession that the Word of God is really the word of God and therefore inerrant - still some wrong thinking and wrong approaches sneak into the orthodox camp, still the luster and allure of respectability infect the ground.

Just what is the implication of "a believing" approach? And how far does it extend?

Current scholarship (even with in the Reformed world) has undertaken the task of learning the culture and the literature that surrounds the text of the Bible in an effort to try to refine its understanding of the biblical text. The argument is rather straight forward - if the biblical author was influenced by something else that we can get a hold of (like other literature or schools of thought, well, or even not so well, documented) then it will only aid in our further understanding of the text to study these.

Concerning the schools of thought - it would seem quite obvious that God speaks to our condition, condescends to our estate, even our trends in epistemological frameworks. This seems quite clear from the ease at which the Bible was able to speak to both the Hebrew culture and the Greek culture - but equally obvious is that the revelation of God while coming to and through these cultures always transcended those cultures. The idea "product of your environment" is not a biblical one! And needs to be rejected no mater how heartily one believes it to be true. If we deny the ability of God to transcend the boundaries of human culture and thinking then we make those out to be gods and ascribe to them the worth that is due the creator. This is also true when we force or pigeon hole any person into that same cage of human culture and context. Those things being ever so potent - remain finite, limited and week in the presence of God. No man is necessarily one way or another because of his environment - whether he is a Biblical author or not. God is sovereign over the likes of all this - and try as we may - we cannot make anything else the sovereign over God - even the use of means that he chooses! So in the study of what has influenced the text, we need to be always careful to ascribe full rights unto God to do as he pleases.

What about studying the other non biblical literature - what value do these works bring to our understand of God's Word?

Scholars, much like great artist, are appreciated for their fine observation skills. It is these skills that can add the greatest amount of color and interest to what they produce. The ability to spot similitude is one of the most important tools of the trade, and with both art and science, is able to help gain better mastery of things - by placing a similar -yet simpler object in view. This has been the approach to understanding inspiration in many scholarly circles. Find something that acts/looks like the Bible and build up from that an understanding of what the Bible is doing. The problem is - the Bible is unique. No matter how much God condescends in it - it still remains His Word, and all other writings always remain - not His Word. Thus to use the comparison of other text to gain understanding is only legitimate with in the Bible itself, apples to apples(as the Reformed have always held).

Scholars, put down your Babylonian scripts, there is no life in them! The Dead Sea Scrolls are not worth their weight in paper!
Students, use the phrase "inter-testamental" as opposed to "2nd Temple" for we are all about presupposing the inspiration of the one and not the other.
Christians, stop being embarrassed by the Word of God! They mocked Christ, they will mock His Word