The origins and status.of the bible have been considered a number of times in this blog. The following quotations are on these themes.
The Christian story does not drop from heaven fully written. It grew and developed over a period of forty-two to seventy years. This is not what most Christians have been taught to think, but it is factual. Christianity has always been an evolving story. It was never, even in the New Testament, a finished story.
JOHN SHELBY SPONG
It is not honest to say those who follow the law of love don't care about scripture as much as those who take the texts literally.
The whole idea of one clear interpretation of the Bible to which every opinion must kneel is a product of the power hungry framework of European colonizers, not on the inventive creative spiritual interpretations of scripture’s Middle Eastern authors.
There is certainly one reality that undergirds us all, but that reality is to be found in our actual interactions not in the clear definitions of any one philosophy. We cannot understand ourselves in the same way we understand objects because that kind of objectivity leaves out the very subjective consciousness we are trying to understand.
Sartre called our efforts to reduce ourselves to objects so that we might avoid the ambiguities of life “bad faith.” We are not computers in search of the right code, we are biological critters who mistakenly think themselves to be independent from the web of life.
Our task in religion is to re-connect with our source- be that source spiritual, biological or cosmic. My rule of thumb for religion is: if obeying scripture makes me stupid and cruel, either it is wrong, or I am reading it wrong. Either way, we must often disobey the letter of a law to seek out the spirit of goodness, truth and beauty.
I do not believe slaves should obey their masters. I do not believe the world was created in seven days. I do not believe we should stone witches, or anyone else. I DO believe we must pick and choose from scripture with love and truth as our interpretive devices or we are better off leaving the text behind as a relic of an earlier day.
If scripture is not used as roots out of which to grow, it is a dead tree anyway. Any religion must be dismissed as “bad faith” if it does not call us to radical honesty about our world, wildly creative expression of our own hearts, and to work for justice for our ENTIRE human family.
JIM RIGBY
“The question about the sources of our knowledge (...) has always been asked in the spirit of: 'What are the best sources of our knowledge--the most reliable ones, those which will not lead us into error, and those to which we can and must turn, in case of doubt, as the last court of appeal?' I propose to assume, instead, that no such ideal sources exist--no more than ideal rulers--and that all 'sources' are liable to lead us into error at times. And I propose to replace, therefore, the question of the sources of our knowledge by the entirely different question: 'How can we hope to detect and eliminate error?'
The question of the sources of our knowledge, like so many authoritarian questions, is a genetic one. It asks for the origin of our knowledge, in the belief that knowledge may legitimize itself by its pedigree. The nobility of the racially pure knowledge, the untainted knowledge, the knowledge which derives from the highest authority, if possible from God: these are the (often unconscious) metaphysical ideas behind the question. My modified question, 'How can we hope to detect error?' may be said to derive from the view that such pure, untainted and certain sources do not exist, and that questions of origin or of purity should not be confounded with questions of validity, or of truth.”
KARL POPPER
I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understandings and affirmations, statements not coming directly or somewhat directly from God.....I realised that whatever "divine revelation" and the "inspiration of the Bible" meant (if they meant anything), they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority.
MARCUS J BORG
Properly understood the Bible is a potential ally to the progressive Christian passion for transformation of ourselves and the world. It is our great heritage. Along with Jesus, to whom it is subordinate, it is our greatest treasure.
MARCUS J BORG
My point is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are not smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now dumb enough to take them literally.
JOHN DOMINIC CROSSAN
When it comes to the Bible, the question is always going to be how one should interpret it. Unfortunately, there is more than one answer to this question depending on who you ask. Even before a single verse of the Bible is read, an argument will ensue about the proper way to interpret it. In seminary I had a class on biblical hermeneutics. We were mostly encouraged to apply a literal interpretation.
The literal interpretation asserts that a biblical text is to be interpreted according to the “plain meaning” conveyed by its grammatical construction and historical context. The literal meaning is held to correspond to the intention of the authors. This type of hermeneutics is often associated with belief in the verbal inspiration of the Bible, according to which the individual words of the divine message were divinely chosen.
There are other ways people have interpreted the Bible. In the history of biblical interpretation, there are four major types of hermeneutics: literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical. Oddly enough, there is even debate and argument over how to define each of these four interpretive approaches.
So, before a single verse in the Bible is read, there will be an argument about what interpretive approach should be used, followed by an argument about how these interpretive approaches should be understood and properly applied. That's a lot of arguing!
The issue at hand is who or what determines a Bible verse's meaning?
Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in Bible study. Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.
The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.
Theology's little secret is the claim that "exegesis" is being done, when in fact it's always tainted by some "eisegesis". In other words, there is no objective interpretation of Scripture. All biblical interpretation is subjective.
There are at least 14 Factors that influence how one interprets the Bible:
1. Your views regarding the inspiration of Scripture.
2. Whether you would favor a literal or figurative interpretation of any given passage.
3. Your knowledge and awareness of other “related” Scriptures dealing with the same issue, including the immediate context and the broader context of the entire body of Scripture.
4. Your knowledge and understanding of the background and motivation of the writer.
5. The way in which a given interpretation fits into your over-all theological belief system.
6. Your level of understanding of the original language in which the text was written.
7. The various interpretations and commentaries to which you have already been exposed.
8. The ways in which one processes information - a Western cerebral approach, an Eastern intuitive approach, and others.
9. The degree to which you are willing to accept logical inconsistencies as part of your belief system.
10. Your willingness to change your views in the light of new information.
11. The degree to which you are satisfied with your current views.
12. The amount of time you are willing to devote to your theological study and inquiry.
13. The unwillingness to consider alternative interpretations that diverge from your religious tradition.
14. Your overall view of God that has been conditioned by many different life experiences and relationships.
Based on the above variables, does it surprise anyone that there are many different ways the Bible is interpreted? This is especially problematic because many people view the Bible as something to be "right" about.
Our best interpretations of the Bible are subjective. That's not a criticism. We just have to know this is the case. People start with their own subjective presuppositions about what the Bible is, such as:
- the Bible was meant to present a coherent theology about God and is a piece of coherent doctrinal exposition
- the Bible is the inerrant, infallible and sole message/"Word" of God to the world
- the Bible is a blueprint for daily living
People will often say, “My authority is the Bible.” It would be more accurate for them to say, “My authority is what they told me at church the Bible means.” That's not meant to be overly snarky. It's just the reality of it. There has never been a singular or unified interpretation of the Bible.
One's theological understandings are shaped and formed by their religious sub-culture or tradition. Throughout history there have been varying Christian views on even the most fundamental doctrines associated with the Christian faith such as the divinity of Jesus, existence of hell, God as a supreme being, the doctrine of original sin, and the Trinity. The idea that there is an enduring core theology that is accepted as "Christian" is not true. What is "Biblical Christianity" to one person is not to another.
Progressive theologians, as a countermeasure to a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, find a way to interpret every Bible verse through the lens of love or through the lens of their understanding of Jesus. Though they can't claim their approach is "right", I believe it can be argued that it produces a more redeeming result, which should not be taken lightly.
Jesus was a sage and story-teller, and did not ordinarily take his point of departure from texts of Scripture. In his core sayings and parables, the Scriptures are conspicuously missing.
Neither did Jesus write anything, or instruct his apostles to record what he said or did. It was not Jesus who commissioned the writing of the New Testament. Instead, Jesus confronted the religious leaders, finding them guilty of what amounted to Bibliolatry – the glorification of a scared writing.
One can take the Bible as a literary anthology—a collection of varied literary genres written by multiple authors over the span of many centuries. The Bible is an Epic, telling the saga of humankind. It speaks to the central themes of our existence, including life and death, good and evil, the nature of reality, meaning and purpose, the non-material or transcendent dimension, suffering and flourishing, love and hate, politics and religion. The saga includes both the ugly and beautiful things we do in the name of God. It’s a story that is still going strong.
Personally, I think the originality of the story the Bible tells makes it a fascinating and profound piece of literature. In the beginning God creates the universe, gives life and orders everything, gradually fades into the background, hands the keys over to a nobody in Palestine who cobbles together a small group of peasant followers, and single-handedly sparks a revolution against the institution of religion, which results in his execution.
The Bible is based upon the construct of theism and anthropomorphism as its primary literary vehicle for expressing the reality of "God." Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, or intentions to non-human entities. Theism views God as a sentient consciousness which witnesses, governs, judges, forgives, and outlives.
Keep in mind, that the word "God" is a linguistic marker to identify an ultimate reality that cannot by definition be fully comprehended. Consider the possibility that the word and concept of "God" is a metaphor itself - that the construct of theism is symbolic of a higher power, governing force, creative energy, vitality or essence behind or infused into all existence.
But even given all of that, because of how the Bible was abused to damage many people spiritually and psychologically, it may never be a piece of literature one will be able to embrace meaningfully. That's okay too.
The ultimate authority of one's life is not the Bible. The highest truth is not confined between the covers of a book. It is not something written by men and frozen in time. It is not from a source outside oneself. One's ultimate authority is the voice of truth within one's own innermost being.
JIM PALMER
I
