A devoted Presbyterian (I think taht was me, once upon a time) moves from his confession of faith to the Bible. He had read about “the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one),” and embraced the parenthetical warning against multiple meanings. Then he looked up the OT passage from which a NT citation was drawn. One meaning? Uh oh…
Rachel Held Evans attempts a year of living biblically. As her year winds down, what does she have to say? That adjective “biblical” is really hard to pin down. Does biblical womanhood mean camping out in the back yard during your period?
We all think we know what biblical means. In our North American Christian context the word is thrown around as a way of demanding that all of life be lived in accordance with the Bible as the Word of God.
And Christian Smith is here to tell us that the two experiences summarized above are exactly what we should expect when we come to the Bible with the impossible demands of the biblicism of current evangelicalism.
His book is, The Bible Made Impossible, a book for which I shelled out my own money, so I am under no obligation by the Fed to make any disclosures to you about having my eyes blinded through having received it for free.
Smith affirms that the Bible is inspired by God. He recognizes its importance in the continuing story of the church.
But he also calls us to recognize that a “biblicist” view of scripture creates expectations that cannot be met, and that in the end it is an impossible theory to maintain in practice. And, in fact, nobody does.
So what is this impossible biblicism? Smith sees it delineated by these 10 claims / assumptions (pp. 4-5):
- scripture contains the very words of God (divine writing)
- the Bible is God’s exclusive means of communication with people
- everything God needs to tell us about belief and life is in the Bible
- anyone can read, understand and thus rightly interpret the Bible
- the Bible can be understood in its plain, literal sense
- we can build theology from scratch without creeds or confessions
- all the passages touching on the same topic can be brought together into a harmonious whole
- the Bible is universally applicable to people in all times and places
- inductive method leads to right hearing of the text
- the Bible, read this way, provides a handbook for living
Of course, no one person or group will necessarily hold to, or put on display, all ten.
These sorts of claims ring true to many of us: the big idea behind much of it is that if we sit down and read the text we can actually know what it says. God speaks in the Bible and we need simply to listen.
If the Bible is so easy to read and understand, why is it that Christians who hold to similar convictions about what scripture is nonetheless cannot agree on what scripture actually says.
This, claims Smith, is more than simply a phenomenon of people’s practice not reflecting the theory as well as it should. It is a determinative indication that the theory itself is flawed.
We do not simply read “what is there.” People interpret differently. People read preexisting theologies into and out of texts. Pluralism will not go away. And it does not simply touch on incidental matters such as whether or not we pass a holy smooch, this plurality extends even to such central ideas as what happens for our good on the cross.
And so, Smith will contend, the Bible is not what is so often claimed.