Every Question Helps You Learn

Join Us
Leading Streak Today
Your Streak Today
Leading Streak Today
Your Streak Today
Christianity - The Bible in the 21st Century
Is the Bible relevant today?

Christianity - The Bible in the 21st Century

This GCSE RE Christianity quiz asks questions about the Bible in the 21st century. It has been almost 2,000 years since the last book in the Holy Bible was originally written, and many centuries since its overall contents were broadly agreed across and within the Christian traditions. In the 21st century we inhabit a world in which people are still working and worshipping, raising families, coping with life’s joys and sorrows etc., but there are many developments that the Bible writers ~ for all their gifts of prophecy, in many cases ~ were unable to foresee.

Some of these issues are technical, but many of them also have a moral dimension, such as those involving humankind’s newfound scientific abilities to preserve, extinguish or adapt the life of organisms ~ including both living humans and embryos.

Each human life ~ ordained and beloved by God, so Christians believe ~ ostensibly begins at birth, though effectively it starts at the moment of conception (preferably, itself, within the context of a loving and stable parental relationship rather than a casual encounter). As such it is of course deeply precious.

Catholics and various others have very strict beliefs about the sanctity of life, based on the Commandment 'You shall do no murder'. What is their outlook on abortion (the stopping of the life of the unborn baby)?
If the baby has been conceived as a result of a sexual assault on the woman, it would be fair to allow her the option of an abortion (perhaps up as far as a certain point into the pregnancy, to be established)
If it becomes clearly and unavoidably apparent that the baby will be born with life-limiting disabilities, the parents should be given the option of a termination after due medical consultation and consent
If the health of the mother may put her in danger should she continue with the pregnancy, an abortion should be duly considered
None of these circumstances can excuse the extinction of an unborn child
Even ~ especially ~ in an age when society and medicine are sensitive to such considerations, an absolute Biblical standard should apply, in the view of believers from these traditions.

Within living memory, time was when (usually) young unmarried mothers-to-be would be hustled away to an institution where they would be away from awkward questions, but work to pay their keep, such as the infamous (and long-since-closed) Magdalene Laundries. At least these days there is less stigma attached to a woman being pregnant outside the context of a formalised relationship.
On somewhat the other face of a similar coin, other couples may be trying yet failing to conceive a child: modern science can achieve 'in vitro fertilisation' (the first example having been 'test-tube baby' Louise Brown almost 50 years ago). Catholics and some others are not only generally wary of this, but believe it is tantamount to 'playing God' and therefore unacceptable in Biblical terms, however plangent the circumstances. On what grounds?
The Creator God is the sole bestower of life
The natural time-honoured method of generating a new human life, within the context of a loving relationship, is the only right one ~ since human marriage is the closest and deepest analogy of Christ's love for His Church
Just because human accomplishment now allows the option, does not mean we ought to exercise it (however wisely we believe so, or with whatever sympathetic intentions)
(Choose this answer if you believe all three of the above Biblical precepts are relevant)
One can only imagine the heartbreak of couples who have enjoyed trying, yet never succeeded. There is, however, the alternative option of adopting children: the opening of an 'expectant' home to give fresh hope to another young person is in itself a wonderful example of charitable love in action.

If ever you have watched 'Long Lost Families' on Channel 4 (British tv) you will have seen plangent anecdotal evidence of the strength of the bonds and yearnings between people separated in the 'bad old days', when unmarried mothers were unable to keep their children.
Applying Biblical principles to modern situations is one matter, but debates meanwhile continue about what the Bible and its writers were actually saying, or meant. Which of the following is a FALSE 'explanation' of how the text should be approached?
Textual, historical and redactional ('editing') criticism: i.e., scholarship pertaining to the accuracy, authorship and transmission of the text
Canonical criticism: the 'official line' recommended by cathedral canons and other venerable experts
Source and literary criticism: i.e., concerned with whence authors drew their material (e.g. eye-witness accounts of Gospel events such as miracles), and the audiences for whom they were originally writing
Hermeneutics and exegesis: two broadly parallel disciplines concerned with the general and specific interpretation of holy writings
Despite the similar term, this refers not to cathedral canons, but to the Canon of Scripture: i.e. which books were determined by the early Church to be worthy of inclusion in the Bible as we now have it.
What discovery in the mid-20th century, since minutely researched with the help of emerging technologies, has provided direct evidence of Bible writings from New Testament times and earlier (rather than the previously oldest extant materials, which were copies dating back only about half as far)?
The Nazarene Documents
The Essene Hoard
The Dead Sea Scrolls
The Kadesh Barnea Manuscripts
These documents, and fragments, discovered in the years shortly after World War 2, brought to light the existence of the ancient Essene community at the Wadi Qumran. For a while it was widely believed that Jesus of Nazareth had been a member of this community, possibly during the 'lost years' between His childhood and ministry. At any rate, this trove has yielded far more, older and genuine copies of Old Testament texts than any other before or since. A judicious search for this topic online would probably be of interest to you, and is recommended.
It might very broadly be said that societies in Bible times (Old and New Testaments) were very 'patriarchal', i.e. based on sweeping assumptions about the roles of men and women; and that Women's Liberation ~ as we now know it ~ has since been a very recent development in terms of social history, perhaps over only about the past century or so (a handful of human generations, at most). Bible study and interpretation has had to accommodate major changes within a relatively short time. Which of these would perhaps have been the LEAST major concern for sincere Bible followers with a feminist leaning?
The gender (if any, as such) of God
Women's specific roles and potential within faith hierarchies (i.e. priesthood, and its equivalents across other religions)
'What women are for ~ no longer 'mere mothers-and-housewives by default', but capable of almost infinitely more'
(Opt for this answer if you believe all the above have been matters of active and ongoing debate among feminist theologians and others)
We have covered issues around women and priesthood elsewhere, but these wider matters are certainly and rightly open to discussion now as never before.
In our own age we hear plenty about 'sexual and gender rights', not least various statistics about how many % of the world population may be (supposedly) naturally homosexual. It would probably still be broadly fair to regard homosexuals as a minority ~ statistically speaking ~ though certainly not an insignificant one; if most of the population were homosexual, for one thing, the birthrate would probably be rather lower than it is. (We make no implication nor blame in any quarter for pointing this out.)

So: what does the Bible have to say on this topic?
The God of the Old Testament, as His people then knew Him, was against homosexuality (e.g. His punishment for the men of the Cities of the Plain, notably Sodom, who took what many of us might regard as an inappropriate interest in His angels, of all people ~ however good-looking they may have been). The primary reason for this was not so much one of any distaste ... as that, if men expressed themselves sexually other than within the context of committed, heterosexual marital intercourse, they were wasting an opportunity to bring new lives into being within God's Chosen Race
Jesus certainly endorsed the model of faithful monogamous marriage (though so far as we know, He was never married Himself) and even suggested it as a model of faithfulness between humankind and God. (It bears mentioning, in this context, that in Old Testament times God had prompted His prophet Hosea to marry a known prostitute, so that when people pointed the finger of scorn at him, he could criticise their own spiritual unfaithfulness in worshipping other, false local gods.) Jesus notably spent a lot of his time among the marginalised and minorities (women in general, in those days; and people with longterm illnesses and disabilities) and His overall message is surely that even for those who do not perhaps conform or aspire to any 'traditional respectable' model, an all-loving God is still there for the comfort of their soul. So while there are perhaps other recommendations, nowhere does Jesus in as many words say directly that homosexuality is 'bad'
St Paul, who wrote more than anyone else of what we have in the New Testament, was a traditional Jewish teacher by upbringing, but also fully conversant (as a born Roman citizen) with the civilisation and values of the classical age. His views, recommendations and interpretations ~ which he, and all earnest Christian Bible students since, would hold to be inspired by God's Holy Spirit ~ are clearly against homosexual practices
Most mainstream Christians would accept each of the above summaries as being broadly true, though their response could range between outright condemnation of homosexuals (perhaps as 'deviant' or even 'idolatrous') and a more tolerant acceptance of diversity
This is all angled at homosexuality between adult males; there appears to be nothing much about what we now know as lesbianism, except in one passage of Paul's letter to the Romans (perhaps an unsurprising context). It perhaps bears saying that when, in 1885, British law stood poised to confirm homosexuality ('gross indecency') as a punishable offence, no mention was made of its female form ~ since Queen Victoria would, we are told, never even have believed it existed. All such laws were in any case repealed, after about a century, in 1967 (the same year when abortion was decriminalised).
It may seem ~ from our previous question and elsewhere (by no means only within our own quizzes) ~ that St Paul was overly strict, as we might now consider it, about a number of personal lifestyle issues and choices. Whether or not that is the case, his overall contribution to the spread and understanding of Christianity in its formative earliest years was clearly almost incalculable.

THREE of the following are direct quotations, or close paraphrases, from a single one of his many letters, in this case the first of two to the believers at Corinth (thus usually known as '1 Corinthians'). Which ONE of the following passages is NOT from this letter?
On the night of His betrayal, Jesus took bread, broke it and offered it to his followers, saying, 'This is my body, given for you: do this in remembrance of me'.
May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
The body is one unit, though composed of many parts ... So it is with Christ: we were all baptised by one Spirit into one body ... There are many parts, but one body.
When I became a man, I put childish things behind me. Now we see only a poor reflection, but then we shall see face to face. And ... these three great things remain: faith, hope and love, but the greatest of these is love.
Each of these is from Paul's pen, but answer 2 (almost universally used across Christendom and known as The Grace) is the closing verse from his second ~ rather than first ~ letter to Corinth. The first letter includes the institution of the eucharist (answer 1, from Chapter 11), the analogy of the church as comprised of many complementary elements (answer 3; Chapter 12) and the great passage about love, as so often read at weddings (answer 4: Chapter 13) ... and these gems were 'only' from three consecutive chapters!
What is the usual label applied to believers in any faith (not only Christianity) who insist that every word of their scriptures must be literally true ~ rather than open to interpretation in the light of the context of the writer, or subsequent developments in preaching and practice, or in technology and society?
Bible Bashers
You might usefully research each of these other terms, but answer 1 is the appropriate one here.
In approximately how many of the United States is it legal ~ or even compulsory ~ to teach the Genesis account of the creation of the world as word-for-word true fact?
No States
5 States
About one State in every 4
Around 1/3 of the USA
We pass no value judgement ~ other than that this potentially means that of the US total population of around 320 million, perhaps not far short of 10 million have been (or are being) educated in environments that encourage literal belief while dismissing scientifically-evidenced evolution as a mere 'theory'. Make of that what you will, in the early 21st century.
One way of looking at the Bible, its purpose and potential influence, would at least be to make it available to every (literate) person in the world so that they could try reading it and make up their own mind about any personal response. The total number of languages spoken in the world is, sadly, shrinking steadily, while the work of Bible translators is bringing the text to more and more of them. What are the broadly accepted statistics?
Complete Bibles are now available in approaching 10% of the world's 6,000 or so languages
Complete Bibles in 750+ out of 5,000 languages
Complete Bibles in almost 1,000 of just over 4,000 identified languages
Complete Bibles in nearly half out of 3,000 languages
Around 1/3 of these languages have fewer than 1,000 speakers, so these sadly cannot be a priority on practicality grounds.
You can find more about this topic by visiting BBC Bitesize - The revelation of God and the Christian Church

Author:  Ian Miles

© Copyright 2016-2024 - Education Quizzes
Work Innovate Ltd - Design | Development | Marketing