More than a few folks bristle at the idea that people of faith get their warp and woof from a book. There are numerous examples of people, past and present, who use(d) their “holy” book to excuse wreaking havoc on the world. Others who believe all people are “basically good” are forced to conclude that these books and their brandishers must necessarily brainwash adherents – those who believe their specific book is given by God – and are therefore dangerous to the continued progress of man.
Religious books aren’t all of the same stripe. The ethereal natures of some Eastern and “New Age” religions don’t require verifiability or historical accuracy of their texts because their “truths” transcend those categories. Others, whose books would seem to be historical (including some Judaism and Christianity), use various four-fold interpretive methods that include the literal meaning of the text, but go to a more allegorical, subjective sense to derive ultimate meaning. Biblical Christians, and I suppose Qur’anic Muslims, and maybe Mormons and other quasi-Christian sects, must needs be “people of the book,” and those books must be in accord with actual natural and supernatural events to be coherent.
For the last 150-200 years, liberal scholars have taken to “demythologizing” the Bible. Enlightenment rationalism has forced many who would “save Christianity” to skew the Bible almost as ethereal, mystical and mythical, so that events like the virgin birth and the resurrection are not taken literally, but super-spiritually – “Jesus has risen in my heart” even if his body still lays dead somewhere. For Paul (and us), Christ’s actual, bodily resurrection is an imperative (1 Corinthians 15:12-19).
The Bible depends ultimately on the objective truth of God as he has revealed himself, and what his Word says he has actually said and done in history (revelation). There are copious tests for historicity, continuity, coherency and authority, and biblical Christians welcome honest scrutiny as should any said “people of the book.”
That said, there is indeed a spiritual component to understanding the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 2:14), so if you approach it to disprove it, you might indeed do so to your and others’ satisfaction. Blaise Pascal stated, “In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.” (Note: authors Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell are two of many exceptions – scoffers whose investigations led to faith.)
So, I may take a later column to dispel some popular misconceptions (or skeptics’ holstered challenges – locked and loaded for rapid fire avoidance of actually considering answers) about the Bible and how it’s to be read and interpreted as the author(s) intended. For now, let me speak to (myself and) my brothers and sisters.
The reformers stated regarding the sufficiency of Scripture that “the Bible is our only rule for faith and practice.” Given that Christian Scriptures are central to understanding the God who made us – the Christ who saved us (Luke 24:27) – you might agree that knowing it should be somewhat paramount in our practice of the faith. Knowing it…is knowing Him. Reading, learning, memorizing and meditating on “the Word of God” would seem to be essential to leading a life pleasing to the God who made himself known. Yet, Christians are in too large measure illiterate of the book they claim to love. It is meant to be consumed for our guidance and delight (Psalm 119:11; 1:1-2).