Honest
Bible study enriches life
YOU hear a wide range of opinions when it
comes to the Bible. I’ve talked to “cultured
despisers of religion” who have no use for it at
all. They say it’s a collection of fairy tales at
best and self-serving propaganda at worst.
At the other extreme, Biblical literalists say, “God wrote it, I believe it, that settles it.” If even one word is wrong, they say, the whole thing could just as easily be worthless. So every word must be true.
I’m sure it’ll get me into hot water, but I think both opinions are lazy and shortsighted. They miss the Bible’s real richness, wisdom and complexity. Many devout Jews and Christians read Scripture modestly and honestly without turning it into a graven image. We learn more that way.
For example, take the Christian scholar who wrote that people who take the Bible too literally are “disgraceful and dangerous,” and that they “talk nonsense.”
This fellow wrote that the “light” God created in Genesis was spiritual, not physical, and that the “days” of the creation were not to be understood as ordinary, 24-hour days. The Bible was “written to nourish our souls,” he said, not to present a literal description of how the world works. In his words, such literalism caused people to see “vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.”
There’s nothing atheistic or radical in this. Saint Augustine wrote it, more than 1,600 years ago!
Behind Jesus and Saint Paul themselves, Saint Augustine was the person who most made Christianity what it is today. He developed the doctrine of Original Sin. We are conceived in sin, he wrote, so all need to be saved through Jesus’ sacrifice — which comes only through God’s grace, not human action.
Not everyone agrees with Saint Augustine. But he strongly influenced Martin Luther and Jean Calvin. If you believe in Original Sin and the essential nature of redemption, he’s strongly influenced you, too.
A non-literal view of the Bible doesn’t make someone an atheist or a radical. Biblical literalism was silly to Augustine, whose thinking still defines Roman Catholicism. Catholic Bible scholars still view the Bible the same way. It’s a keystone of faith, but God is bigger than the Bible. (I found this out when I studied under devout Catholic Bible scholars in divinity school.)
But when Luther and Calvin challenged the Catholic Church in the Reformation, they based a lot of that challenge on Scripture.
One good result was that their independent reading of the Bible made Christianity more democratic. When people started reading the Bible for themselves, they no longer had to take some religious leaders’ word for what it said and meant. People started thinking for themselves more.
One bad result was that this gave the Bible such weight some people began to see it not only as a source of wisdom, but as perfect and true in every word — which it’s not. The foolish started to worship the Bible itself. They still do.
We shouldn’t worship the Bible. Just for starters, the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life differ greatly and cannot be reconciled.
Matthew tells us that when Jesus was born his family fled to Egypt. Luke tells us, no, they stayed near Jerusalem to present Jesus at the Temple, where people made a big fuss over him. Then they journeyed home to Nazareth.
According to John, Jesus chased the moneylenders from the Temple at the start of his ministry. According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, that happened at the end of his ministry, just before he was arrested.
None of this should matter. It’s about faith, not perfect transcription. John even pokes fun at people who take things too literally. (John 3:3-4; John 4:10-11; John 4:33 and elsewhere.)
Mind you, I didn’t figure this out all by myself.
When I study the Bible, I also study standard Biblical reference works used in every serious divinity school.
Such references as “The Anchor Bible Dictionary,” “The New Interpreter’s Bible” and “The Oxford Companion to The Bible” are written by devout scholars from many mainline Jewish and Christian traditions.
They’ve devoted their lives to studying the Bible — how it got written, who wrote it, and what they were really trying to say. Literalism just doesn’t hold up under that kind of scrutiny. It’s not because Bible scholars lack faith, but because they’re honest about what they read.
Some people despise the Bible and refuse to read it at all. Others worship it as a graven image, but ignore passages that disagree with their fixed opinion. Both those extremes miss the richness of studying the Bible honestly and in real depth.
The Rev. Dennis McCarty
is a Unitarian Universalist minister in Columbus.
His opinions are his own, and not necessarily shared
by members of his church. He can be reached by
e-mail at
columnists@therepublic.com
At the other extreme, Biblical literalists say, “God wrote it, I believe it, that settles it.” If even one word is wrong, they say, the whole thing could just as easily be worthless. So every word must be true.
I’m sure it’ll get me into hot water, but I think both opinions are lazy and shortsighted. They miss the Bible’s real richness, wisdom and complexity. Many devout Jews and Christians read Scripture modestly and honestly without turning it into a graven image. We learn more that way.
For example, take the Christian scholar who wrote that people who take the Bible too literally are “disgraceful and dangerous,” and that they “talk nonsense.”
This fellow wrote that the “light” God created in Genesis was spiritual, not physical, and that the “days” of the creation were not to be understood as ordinary, 24-hour days. The Bible was “written to nourish our souls,” he said, not to present a literal description of how the world works. In his words, such literalism caused people to see “vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.”
There’s nothing atheistic or radical in this. Saint Augustine wrote it, more than 1,600 years ago!
Behind Jesus and Saint Paul themselves, Saint Augustine was the person who most made Christianity what it is today. He developed the doctrine of Original Sin. We are conceived in sin, he wrote, so all need to be saved through Jesus’ sacrifice — which comes only through God’s grace, not human action.
Not everyone agrees with Saint Augustine. But he strongly influenced Martin Luther and Jean Calvin. If you believe in Original Sin and the essential nature of redemption, he’s strongly influenced you, too.
A non-literal view of the Bible doesn’t make someone an atheist or a radical. Biblical literalism was silly to Augustine, whose thinking still defines Roman Catholicism. Catholic Bible scholars still view the Bible the same way. It’s a keystone of faith, but God is bigger than the Bible. (I found this out when I studied under devout Catholic Bible scholars in divinity school.)
But when Luther and Calvin challenged the Catholic Church in the Reformation, they based a lot of that challenge on Scripture.
One good result was that their independent reading of the Bible made Christianity more democratic. When people started reading the Bible for themselves, they no longer had to take some religious leaders’ word for what it said and meant. People started thinking for themselves more.
One bad result was that this gave the Bible such weight some people began to see it not only as a source of wisdom, but as perfect and true in every word — which it’s not. The foolish started to worship the Bible itself. They still do.
We shouldn’t worship the Bible. Just for starters, the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life differ greatly and cannot be reconciled.
Matthew tells us that when Jesus was born his family fled to Egypt. Luke tells us, no, they stayed near Jerusalem to present Jesus at the Temple, where people made a big fuss over him. Then they journeyed home to Nazareth.
According to John, Jesus chased the moneylenders from the Temple at the start of his ministry. According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, that happened at the end of his ministry, just before he was arrested.
None of this should matter. It’s about faith, not perfect transcription. John even pokes fun at people who take things too literally. (John 3:3-4; John 4:10-11; John 4:33 and elsewhere.)
Mind you, I didn’t figure this out all by myself.
When I study the Bible, I also study standard Biblical reference works used in every serious divinity school.
Such references as “The Anchor Bible Dictionary,” “The New Interpreter’s Bible” and “The Oxford Companion to The Bible” are written by devout scholars from many mainline Jewish and Christian traditions.
They’ve devoted their lives to studying the Bible — how it got written, who wrote it, and what they were really trying to say. Literalism just doesn’t hold up under that kind of scrutiny. It’s not because Bible scholars lack faith, but because they’re honest about what they read.
Some people despise the Bible and refuse to read it at all. Others worship it as a graven image, but ignore passages that disagree with their fixed opinion. Both those extremes miss the richness of studying the Bible honestly and in real depth.
The Rev. Dennis McCarty
is a Unitarian Universalist minister in Columbus.
His opinions are his own, and not necessarily shared
by members of his church. He can be reached by
e-mail at
columnists@therepublic.com