Symbolic vs. Literal Interpretations of the Bible
The Wisconsin State Journal reports on reactions to the scholarship of John Dominic Crossan:
John Dominic Crossan, often called the premier expert on the words and life of the historical Jesus, says the truth of the Christmas story is spiritual, not necessarily factual. “The only thing for me sadder than accepting a metaphor or a parable literally is denying it literally,” Crossan argues.
Claiming that the stories in the Bible are “spiritually” true is merely double-talk to avoid the consequences of admitting that they aren’t really true in the first place. Notice how awful he thinks it is to “deny” the stories, despite their being historically untrue. Is it sad to deny Santa Claus?
Crossan is a leader in a school of biblical scholarship that has sought to clarify stories of the historical Jesus, gradually removing two millennia of what scholars believe to be creative additions and interpretation that began even before the Gospels were written.
Such efforts are predicated on the idea that there is some essential core of truths behind the additions and interpretations. What if that isn’t the case, though? If Crosson had a genuinely skeptical and scientific attitude, he would allow for that possibility and insist on strong evidence before rejecting it.
“One of the problems I have, as a pastor, with Crossan’s approach to the study of scripture is that it seems to operate with a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mentality,” says the Rev. Kirk Morledge, pastor at Waunakee’s First Presbyterian Church.
This is precisely how we should approach all empirical claims. I’ll bet Morledge would insist on at least this much skepticism with the claims of other religions — it’s just his own beliefs he’d like to be privileged with a “true until proven false” attitude. That’s precisely the wrong way to approach things.
“When it comes to assessing the historicity of New Testament accounts and deciding whether or not certain things actually ‘happened,’ ‘no’ seems to be the default assumption unless sufficient ‘evidence’ can be cited. This obviously shifts the burden of proof to those who have affirmed the historicity of biblical accounts like the story of Christ’s birth.”
Uh.... yeah? The burden of proof lies with those who claim that the New Testament is historically accurate; absent and evidence that the text is accurate, then it’s reasonable to think that maybe they aren’t. I fail to see anything wrong with such a situation. Indeed, I only see it as right — and it’s just the sort of approach which people should use generally with empirical claims.
“Crossan’s conclusions about the Christmas story are based not on things he has discovered. They are based on things he has decided. And not everyone agrees with him, or with his assumptions.”
In other words, Kirk Morledge doesn’t agree with approaching the Bible in a skeptical manner, doesn’t agree with requiring evidence before accepting the claim that the New Testament is historically accurate, and doesn’t agree with rejecting a belief when the evidence doesn’t justify it. This would make Morledge a representative of everything that’s wrong with Christianity — not to mention religion generally. Crossan may not be great, but he’s a rationalist saint in comparison to people like Morledge.
Quick Poll: How historically accurate is the Bible?
- The Bible is 100% accurate
- The Bible is mostly accurate
- The Bible is occasionally accurate
- The Bible is rarely accurate
- The Bible is never accurate
- I don't know
- I don't care
Religion & Religious Beliefs:
Topics in Religion & Religious Studies:
Comments
I dont know why you dont see Gods beauty in and outside this earth!I did not write to condem you but to show you I still love you because I have JESUS in me.I will pray for you.You dont know me and you may not like what I am saying to you at this very moment but I pray that God will take the blinders off so you can see and to release satans grip on you.You just did’nt pop up on earth on your own.May God BLESS YOU!
We may be thralls of satan (if there is such a being (we’re seen 0 evidence of such)) but at least we can punctuate and spell.
“I will pray for you”
I’ll think for you. Despite your arrogant condescension.
If god put these blinders on me, who are you to question his will?
May you figure out how to think for yourself!
I dont know why you dont see Gods beauty in and outside this earth!I did not write to condem you but to show you I still love you because I have JESUS in me.I will pray for you.You dont know me and you may not like what I am saying to you at this very moment but I pray that God will take the blinders off so you can see and to release satans grip on you.You just did’nt pop up on earth on your own.May God BLESS YOU!
Interesting how Christians project their own doubts on non-believers; the truly blinded accuse everyone else of wearing blinders! And somehow we “pop[ped] up on earth on our own”? Hmmm….that sounds strangely like what Christians claim happened!
Like it or not Mrs. Cone; the scientific evidence provided by paleontology, genetics, and every branch of biology indicates that life on earth evolved. Moreover, the historical evidence for the character of Jesus is dubious at best. Perhaps it would behoove you to read something other than the Bible; I highly recommend the . As for the history of Jesus; well, where is it? The life of Jesus is only documented in the New Testament gospels which were written by evangelicals. The stories are Midrashic in nature; based on the ‘visions’ that Paul of Tarsus described in his epistelic letters as well as select verses from Tanakh scripture.
If Jesus really existed as a historical character, why wasn’t he known by Jewish historians of the time like Phylo? Why do Paul’s epistles never talk about Jesus as a real person, only in the spiritual sense?
Darn; made a mistake in my web link. I wish there was a preview feature on the comments!
I dont know why you dont see Gods beauty in and outside this earth!I did not write to condem you but to show you I still love you because I have JESUS in me.I will pray for you.You dont know me and you may not like what I am saying to you at this very moment but I pray that God will take the blinders off so you can see and to release satans grip on you.You just did’nt pop up on earth on your own.May God BLESS YOU!
Interesting how Christians project their own doubts on non-believers; the truly blinded accuse everyone else of wearing blinders! And somehow we “pop[ped] up on earth on our own”? Hmmm…that sounds strangely like what Christians claim happened!
Like it or not Mrs. Cone; the scientific evidence provided by paleontology, genetics, and every branch of biology indicates that life on earth evolved. Moreover, the historical evidence for the character of Jesus is dubious at best. Perhaps it would behoove you to read something other than the Bible; I highly recommend the Prentice Hall High School Biology textbook .
As for the history of Jesus; well, where is it? The life of Jesus is only documented in the New Testament gospels which were written by evangelicals. The stories are Midrashic in nature; based on the ‘visions’ that Paul of Tarsus described in his epistelic letters as well as select verses from Tanakh scripture.
If Jesus really existed as a historical character, why wasn’t he known by Jewish historians of the time like Phylo? Why do Paul’s epistles never talk about Jesus as a real person, only in the spiritual sense?
If someone trips me in a hallway, I get mad at the person who did the tripping. I don’t fall for it when the crook points to someone else. Satan is a con.
Mrs Cone, I suggest you ACTUALLY READ that bible of yours…. If you read it (and are capable of comprehension) you’ll come to find that there really is no such thing as satan in it. The hebrew word used is just “evil”. Like your god, satan is an entirely manufactured entity that has personified in your satan.
And since you’re praying, you are effectively doing nothing. I appreciate that.
… I pray that God will take the blinders off so you can see…. — Mrs.Cone on August 29, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Ah, Christians. Always so eager to pluck the mote from someone else’s eye. What does the Bible say about people like that? Oh, yeah:
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye. Luke 6:42.
Mrs Cone
I’m an atheist that used to have a strong faith in god when I was a kid. When I was a teenager, I came to realise that I believed in god and christianity because I always had done and for no other reason. I became obssessed with informing my beliefs about the big things like god and morality and became determined to get as close to the truth as I could. I decided to explore my world beliefs by reading about science, religion and philosophy. After a lot of thinking, and reading, I decided that while I’ll never know the absolute truth, there was no real reason to think there is a god. And so, in a Catholic school, in a catholic family with mainly catholic friends, I took it upon myself to be as open to different possibilities about the nature of things as possible and ended up godless.
My point (which I’ve taken a while getting to, sorry) is that to say that atheists are blinded is not only silly but quite offensive. I personally had to prise away the circular dogma that maintained my own beliefs and face the UNBLINKERED and, at the time, rather scary world of uncertainty. It is belittling to suggest that atheists are blinkered when so many of us have had a right good look far and wide before making an educated best bet. Have you ever REALLY questioned why you believe what you do and how plausible your beliefs are compared to the alternatives? If not, don’t tell me I’m blinded or narrow minded because I’m an atheist. And btw, if you cant think of any plausible alternatives to what you believe, try taking off your blinders.
Excellent comment, Pedro!!
I, too, was raised in the Catholic Church and now am an atheist. I wonder what percentage of atheists were once indoctrinated in the Catholic Church?
Your comment has helped me have a concise way of dealing with comments from self-righteous christians.
I decided to add my comment to this. I think it is Mrs. Cone who needs her blinders removed. People like her who only bury their minds and noses in the bible, cannot fathom reality at all. Never mind science, history physics…if it isn’t in the bible, it doesn’t count. If you think I’m exaggerating,check out a site called “Fundies Say the Darndest Things.com”. Those are real comments, folks!
The lack of even any interest in thousands of years of knowledge, dismissed, as though somehow it doesn’t apply if it’s not in the bible. Or worse, the bible has all the answers to everything. Not only that, the bible is absolutely factual.
Never confuse them with the facts. In this day and age it is disgraceful that some individuals are so ignorant as to be near illiterate, in a way. I shudder to think what could happen without the separation of church and state.
We already are a very low rank in the world in educating our children. Can you imagine what would happen if the fundies took over the education of all the children in the country?
As it is we’re losing ground in training people in the sciences and mathematics. No thanks in small part to the fundie explosion in our population. I hope things level off before we become the laughing stock of the world.
Believe it or not, I was the most open-minded and tolerant of others beliefs, once upon a time. When certain elements of the religious right started trying to turn the country into a theocracy, that was where I drew the line.
They are still trying, that’s pretty frightening. How does the “United States of Jesus” sound? I don’t think most Americans would want that any more than I do.
you all are right on some things. no one should judge another, especially Christians. but we as Christians are merely trying to get everyone to see the real truth, assure them that yes, there really is something out there that cares for you. My reason for believing? Christ has shown me His love for me by giving me life and a hope.
and another thing, noone can be sure about what there isn’t. in the garage, for example, just bc you can’t see or find a hammer in the mess does not mean it’s not there. it only means that ‘from your knowledge, you think that there isn’t a hammer in the garage’ even though it might just be buried deep under the tool box.
i’m not going to accuse those who don’t believe, but i will say that GOd loves all His creation and like a father and a long-lost son, He will embrace all who acknowledges Him and accept Him as their father.
great logic to think about : Mere Christianity by CS Lewis
And atheists don’t believe you.
Fortunately, you don’t need religion or gods for any of that.
Yes, sometimes you can. You can be sure that there are no married bachelors.
And, even when you can’t be absolutely sure about something, you can be sure enough to dismiss it. I can’t be absolutely sure that there are no teacups orbiting Jupiter, but I’m sure enough that I dismiss it.
Personally, I consider that book to be really poor apologetics, of value only to those who already believe or who want to believe so they can rationalize beliefs which they would never accept in another context.
However, if you think so highly of it, why don’t you point to an argument in it which you think is particularly good. What I’d really like to see is an argument you think so highly of that, if it were shown to actually be a bad argument that doesn’t work, then you’d rethink your opinion of the book and perhaps even you theism.
If there is no such argument in that book, then I would have to conclude that you yourself don’t find any of the book’s arguments truly credible or convincing and, furthermore, that your theism itself is not founded on reason or logic.
I agree with Joan, Pedro – an excellent comment!
I was a catholic who once trained for years for the catholic priesthood. It has taken me a long time to shed the indoctrination by the catholic church, which commenced with being given a “christian” name and baptism at birth and continued through my formative years into early adulthood.
The first conscious choice I can remember making, of my own free will and without the influence of my beloved parents or others, was to give up my “vocation” and leave the seminary. My “blessed by god” parents were initially horrified, but were ultimately supportive of my decision.
I continued to live a “normal” catholic life for another 40 years before arriving at the decision, ever so slowly, but ever so surely, that “there is no god” – so beautifully described by Julia Sweeney in “Letting go of god”.
I claim 100% responsibility for making what is probably the second most important decision of my life. No person influenced me to “lose my faith”, nor did I read anything that did so.
One thing I can say – the bible, particularly the old testament, played no active part in my religious upbringing, other than the readings at “holy mass”. Prior to attending the seminary, where I had to learn ancient greek as well as latin so that we could study the scriptures in their “original languages”, the bible was not studied, read or used by catholics of my generation. In fact, at school we were told, in effect, that the bible is “used by protestants” and we all knew how bad they were!
Am surprised to see this discussion pop up again!
bcofhim, no offense but I am so done with this whole “real truth” thing. Of course you believe what you believe but for the love of… whatever: don’t pretend that you have a logical reason to, don’t pretend your premises for belief are sounder than those of ALL atheists and please please PLEASE don’t try to “get us to see the real truth”. I understand that you believe in life after death and that the only way to have a good life after death is “through god”. If you believe this then it would take a bitter bitter person to NOT want others to believe what you believe so i do get where you’re coming from. BUT (a big but as you say in the states) to approach an atheist forum, one of the most well informed forums i’ve ever come across, with unsupported absolutisms like “the real truth” is offensively condescending.
I know it comes from a good place but make it logical or quit it.
It makes me feel real bad to hear all the non-believers and I know there is nothing I can say to chage of how you think about God and I wish you the best of luck. I love you all and hope you all change your faith.
Your blog is insanely arrogant. An intelligent person would seek truth in a mature manner. There are so many phenomena within the world that have yet to be explained by science or history. If everything were wrong until proven true, then how would the “truth” within the world ever come about. Think of the whole root of the world, the creation of science, the universe and how humans came on earth before you make the assumption about the things you don’t accept as truth are wrong.
You cannot explain supernatural events with arrogance and a narrow minded vision of the world. I would be interested to know what you “believe,” if you believe in anything. Perhaps you only believe in yourself, ignoring the world, the universe and god. OR maybe it is all too overwhelming for you to reach intelligent conclusions about what you don’t see or feel.
I don’t think of myself as a hardcore Christian, but to believe in nothing at all while tearing down everyone else’s beliefs is ridiculous.
Furthermore, you must not believe in the collection of evidence. In order to develop something that is true, you have to pool thoughts and ideas together. After all, the world is not flat, like people thought back in the day.
You should look to the future and stop trying to create what is “true” or “false” from the past. There are always things you think of right that will someday be proven wrong. We may never know if there is a god, but if you saw him tomorrow you would refuse to believe. You are seeking only what you believe.
You are shutting down the bible, as if Christian share the same beliefs on what was right and wrong in the bible. You are pointing out all that you think is wrong, but little to show for what you know and what is factual. You are just another viewpoint and a bad one at that.
What are you going to do if all is is still “false” and not proven “true” by the time you are in a state of terminal illness, nearing your death. I hope and pray that if you get to that point that you to will find something to believe in.
I like that you are seeking answers within the bible, but you are doing so for the wrong reasons. As you said, there is a symbolic and literal interpretation of everything within the bible.
I even agree with you that some of the things within the bible cannot be true. A human being living for hundreds of years, some locations of biblical events and even the idea of thousands or even millions of people being around within the the early days of mankind seems impossible.
However, if the supernatural is true, if god is true, then anything can happen today, as it may have happened yesterday.
That’s a pretty serious accusation. Can you support it?
And I’m sure you can demonstrate how I have not?
True, but what does that have to do with anything I have written?
I don’t see any reason to think that supernatural events have ever occurred. So, I don’t see anything to explain.
I don’t ignore the universe or the world. I don’t see any gods, though.
I don’t “believe in nothing,” but I see no reason to ignore false or harmful beliefs.
Feel free to support this claim.
I fail to see the relevance of this question.
I hate to break the news to you, but I don’t look in the Bible for answers any more than I look in the Upanishads or the Iliad.
And if the supernatural is not true, if there is no god, you’re wasting your time with believing nonsense.
bcofhim says:
My reason for believing? Christ has shown me His love for me by giving me life and a hope…
Ever wonder why he has singled out his love for you, because he doesn’t seem to have shown much to many others? Is it because you have led such an exemplary life!
If god loves us all, why are we now in the middle of a swine flu epidemic? Is it a test, because it’s affecting both theists and atheists alike? What’s he trying to prove?
War in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, war in Somalia, war in Sudan, contention and unrest almost everywhere else, eons-old slavery still alive and well in many countries, including the US, UK and Europe; apparently your god doesn’t seem to show much love for any of his creations!
Judging by the comments of others, there are many, many more atheists out there than we realize, and their numbers are growing, no doubt in tandem with the gradual realization among inquiring people that we are here alone on this planet Earth, and that it’s high time we took control of our own destinies. Instead of listening to delusional ignoramuses, who urge us to discard our self-reliance and put all our trust in a sky-bound, mythical figure, I urge all nonbelievers to come out of the closet and be counted.
@ Jesse: I read your comments thoroughly, actually several times. The conclusion is actually quite simple; you aren’t sure of anything, you can’t explain anything, everything you now know will someday be proven wrong, you’re not sure what’s true, but you are better informed than everyone here and the only one being factual. Remind me again who is insanely arrogant?
Jolly Jack to bcofhim: “Ever wonder why he has singled out his love for you, because he doesn’t seem to have shown much to many others?”
I’ve been compelled to infer that for many Christians, nothing that happens in this world matters except what happens to them. The way God seems to treat them is the way God is, period. It doesn’t make a speck of difference how he seems to treat the rest of the human race.
While reading the comment by Jesse (16), I was reminded of an old proverb.
He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. Shun him.
He who knows not and knows that he knows not is ignorant. Teach him.
He who knows and knows not that he knows is asleep. Wake him.
He who knows and knows that he knows is wise. Follow him.
I leave it to the reader to decide which applies to (16).
AGB21
Nice little quotes, but surely you should be a little more accepting of Jesse 16. From my perspective it appears that English must be a second language for Jesse, judging by syntax, grammar and spelling, so a little leeway should be allowed. If I am wrong and it is just poor education levels then once again a
tittle of understanding is called for. It is apparently a prerequisite that low education levels and biblical fundamentalism are usually the norm. When not so, invariably the higher educated are the ones who are, financially, gaining by their affiliation.
Oh! Jesse. You rely on a lot of ifs. Will you do what other religionists have failed to do, supply verifiable, replicable evidence of any gods existence?
Failing that,I appeal to God, any God. Show yourself.
TE (22). Thank you for your comments, Tom. I “should be a little more accepting of Jesse”? I did not evaluate Jesse; I only said that his comments reminded me of the old proverb, and left it to each reader to decide which sentence applies to him. I think I know which one you think I attribute to Jesse, but you could be wrong.
Jesse, you admit that you do not believe some statements in the Bible because they are preposterous, others because they are factually incorrect. How did you choose what to believe?
Hey AGB – What do you do in this case:
He who knows not and knows that he knows not is ignorant, but he is not willing to be taught.
In my experience if have encountered the above on many occasions!