Spong: "Why We Must Reclaim The Bible From Fundamentalists"

by leavingwt 87 Replies latest jw friends

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    John Shelby Spong, the retired American Bishop, has written a new book. His article, below, briefly explains the purpose of his new book.

    Why We Must Reclaim The Bible From Fundamentalists

    The contrast between the way the Bible is understood in the academic world and the way it is viewed in our churches is striking. I know because in my life as a priest and a bishop I have both served typical congregations and been privileged to study and to teach in some of the best known Christian academic centers in the world. In academia I discovered that issues and insights, commonplace among the scholars, are viewed as highly controversial and even as "heresy" in the churches. The result has been that the majority of people who have remained in the church have become more and more rigid and fundamentalist, while those who have left have become more and more dismissive of everything, good or bad, about Christianity. We also now have a crop of writers like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchen, who have totally demolished the fundamentalist approach to God with their clever and penetrating books, yet they are seemingly unaware that there are other ways to view Christianity.

    In the world of Christian scholarship, for example, to read the Bible literally is regarded as absurd. To call the words of the Bible "the Word of God" is more than naïve. No modern person can still believe that a star can wander through the sky so slowly that wise men can keep up with it, that God actually dictated the Ten Commandments -- all three versions, no less -- or that a multitude can be fed with five loaves and two fish. No modern person understanding genetics and reproduction can believe that virgins conceive, nor can those who understand what death does to the human body in a matter of just minutes still view the resurrection as the resuscitation of a deceased body after three days. Biblical scholars know that the accounts of the crucifixion read in Christian churches on Good Friday are not eye witness reports, but developed interpretations of Jesus' death based on a series of Old Testament texts selected to convince fellow Jews that Jesus "fulfilled the scriptures" and thus really was the "messiah." These issues and many others are assumed in the world of biblical scholars, but are viewed by many church-goers, together with the vast majority of television evangelists and radio preachers, as attacks on divine revelation that must be resisted in order to save Christianity. They thus, knowingly or unknowingly, join in a conspiracy of silence, ignoring truth when they feel they can and viewing biblical scholars, strangely enough, as the church's ultimate enemy. At the same time secular critics attack what Christian scholars know is nonsensical about both the Bible and Christianity and act as if they have discovered something new.

    There are some biblical facts that cannot and should not be ignored, if Christians really value truth. For example, the time separating when Moses lived (ca. 1250 BCE) from when the stories of Moses were written in the Bible (ca. 950 BCE) is about 300 years, representing 15 generations of oral transmission. Can anyone knowing this continue to be a literal believer? The gospels were written 40 -70 years after the crucifixion, which means that most of what we read about Jesus in the Bible was handed down orally for two to three generations before one word of it achieved written form. The gospels were also first written in Greek, a language which neither Jesus nor his disciples spoke or wrote! How can anyone claim "inerrancy" for such material? Other facts well-known in the academy, but seemingly unknown outside by either believers or critics, are that scholars can find no evidence that miracles were associated with the memory of Jesus before the 8th decade of the Christian era, that there is no mention of the virgin birth anywhere before the 9th decade and that the narratives of the ascension and Pentecost did not appear until the 10th decade. The New Testament does not agree on such basic issues as the identity of the twelve disciples or the details of Easter. Why has none of this been made available in churches or been discovered by those who pose as the church's secular critics?

    The New Testament also introduces us to a group of characters who are far more likely to be literary creations than they are to be literal. Was Judas Iscariot a figure of history? I do not think so. There is no mention of him in any source before the 8th decade. Paul, writing between 51 and 64 CE, appears never to have heard of the tradition that one of the twelve was a traitor. In addition to that, every detail of the New Testament portrait of Judas can be located in other traitor stories in the Hebrew Scriptures. If a major figure like Judas is not real then what about such lesser characters as Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman by the well, Lazarus, miraculously raised from the dead four days after being buried, or even the "Beloved Disciple?" All of them, I now believe, were created to illustrate a theme.

    It was fascinating for me in writing this book to explore the scriptures from these perspectives by journeying through the entire biblical landscape from Genesis to Revelation. That enabled me with both integrity and conviction to challenge the literal assumptions of the past and to open the biblical story to new levels of understanding that I believe are profoundly real. Who would have thought, for instance, that Hosea's domestic life would illumine his understanding of the love of God; or that Amos, a keeper of sycamore trees in the village of Tekoa, would be the one to redefine God as justice? The book of Jonah is seen as a readable mythological tale, deliberately designed to hook its audience emotionally in order to break them out of the bondage of prejudice. The book of Job explores the universal theme of why innocent people suffer. There is great stuff in the Bible that needs to be opened in new ways.

    Christianity is, I believe, about expanded life, heightened consciousness and achieving a new humanity. It is not about closed minds, supernatural interventions, a fallen creation, guilt, original sin or divine rescue. I am tired of seeing the Bible being used, as it has been throughout history, to legitimize slavery and segregation, to subdue women, to punish homosexuals, to justify war and to oppose family planning and birth control. That is a travesty which must be challenged and changed.

    I wrote "Re-Claiming the Bible for a Non-Religious World" to do precisely that.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-shelby-spong/why-i-wrote-re-claiming-t_b_1007399.html

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    Spong is perhaps the most rational believer I know of.

  • darthfader
    darthfader

    Very interesting article.. thanks LWT!

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    It is because of people like Spong that fundamentalisim came to be.

    He seems to take what HE wants out of the academic view and disregard the rest, much liek the fundamentalists he decries.

  • undercover
    undercover

    So why was this guy a priest and bishop if he realized it wasn't a holy book and the more fantasical stories of it are made-up?

    He wants to be a Christian, yet doesn't accept the miracles performed by Jesus as real or other characters from the NT as real?

  • XJW4EVR
    XJW4EVR

    So why was this guy a priest and bishop if he realized it wasn't a holy book and the more fantasical stories of it are made-up?

    He wants to be a Christian, yet doesn't accept the miracles performed by Jesus as real or other characters from the NT as real?

    Very simply, he does not have the courage of his convictions. My own view is simple, if someone can disprove that Jesus rose from the dead then I will become an atheist. There would no longer be a need to profess Christianity, and since all other religions are just the opinion of people, and incompatible with logic & reason, atheism would be the only religion left.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety

    Spong is right about some things, wrong about others, in my views.

  • botchtowersociety
    botchtowersociety

    Basically what PSac and XJW4evr said.

  • Ding
    Ding
    Christianity is, I believe, about expanded life, heightened consciousness and achieving a new humanity. It is not about closed minds, supernatural interventions, a fallen creation, guilt, original sin or divine rescue.

    This is nonsense. If the man wants to reject the Bible, that's his right, but to pretend it says what he wishes it said is sophistry, not scholarship.

    How many people turn to cults like the WTS because of pseudo-intellectual gibberish like this?

  • jay88
    jay88

    XJW4EVR My own view is simple, if someone can disprove that Jesus rose from the dead then I will become an atheist

    ............

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit