Making the Bible Impossible (Part 3)

Recap of previous two posts: The most important and thought-provoking book I’ve read this year is The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture by Christian Smith. In it, the author critiques a particular way of interpreting the Bible, a method he calls “biblicism,” which he sees as widespread in the evangelical world. In fact, he argues that biblicism is so problematic that it impossible to hold to it. In my first post, I summarized Smith’s 10-point definition of biblicism, which must be understood before the rest of his argument makes sense. In the second post, we looked at the main problem Smith sees, pervasive interpretive pluralism (PIP),and why it is particularly problematic for biblicism.

Obviously, different individuals and groups interpret the Bible differently to some extent. Is that really a problem? Smith argues that PIP is such a severe issue that it literally makes biblicism impossible. How does he support this claim? The first part of the question, which we’ll examine now, is whether the differences are so important and pervasive as to constitute a serious problem. The second part is whether there are not already adequate explanations for PIP, explaining it in within the context of biblicism.

Pervasive Interpretive Pluralism—How Serious a Problem?

I'm writing this from Miango, not far from Jos, as we are attending our annual SIM Spiritual Life Conference. The cattle and kids in the photos are just across the fence outside our window.

This year's conference speaker is focusing on the book of Hebrews. In the introduction last night, he mentioned in passing the "warning passages" of Hebrews,¹ which warn the hearers to continue in the faith lest they be condemned. The interpretation of these is controversial because some seem to address believers and imply that they can lose their salvation. The speaker last night told us that he does not believe that believers can lose their salvation, but said that for anyone interested, he had a paper we could read exploring six different interpretations of these warning passages.

This illustrates one of the problems Christian Smith sees with biblicism. It's fine to believe that the Bible is inerrant, he says, but how helpful is that given the extent of uncertainty and disagreement over its interpretation? Can believers lose their salvation or not? One group of scholars says "absolutely, yes, it's in the Bible" and another group says "absolutely not, the Bible clearly says so." If I understand Smith correctly, the issue is not so much the disagreement, but that both sides prove their contradictory positions from the Bible, and "since the Bible says it, that settles it," leaving little room for uncertainty or compromise. So what is the truth about eternal security? I'm not sure whether Smith's view of a better answer would be "we don't know," "that's not the right question," or something else.

Speaking of works like the paper above on six views of the warning passages, Smith says, "The inability of Bible-reading evangelicals to come to anything like a common mind about a host of topics is turned into published scholarly debates conducted under the guise of helpful theological orientation and education." As examples, Smith lists books such as

• Four Views on Hell
• Perspectives on Christian Worship: Five Views
• Four Views of the End Times
• Science and Christianity: Four Views

along with 30 others on subjects including the nature of atonement, baptism, hell, divorce and remarriage, free will, war, women in ministry, and many others.


Looking at the popular level or "folk" evangelicalism, Smith gives examples such as

• A statement by John F. MacArthur Jr. that the Bible is “the only reliable and sufficient worship manual.”
• Bumper stickers like “Vote Responsibly—Vote the Bible!” “God said it, I believe it, that settles it,” and “Confused? Read the Directions” [picture of Bible].
• Books such as
  • Bible Answers for Almost All Your Questions
  • The World According to God: A Biblical View of Culture, Work, Science, Sex, and Everything Else
  • Bible Solutions to Problems of Daily Living
  • A Crown of Glory: A Biblical View of Aging
  • Christian Dress and Adornment—Biblical Perspectives
• Preaching based "on the assumption that a minister can select virtually any passage of scripture and adduce from the text an authoritative, relevant, 'applicable' teaching to be believed and applied by the members of his or her congregation."

Smith finds biblicism and its problems in the charters or statements of faith of mainstream evangelical institutions as well. For example, he cites from the Westminster Confession of Faith, "The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture." In other words, there is no part of God's counsel in any of these areas, including the broad area "life," that is not derived directly from the Bible.

But isn't it true that evangelicals agree on all the essentials of the faith, and disagree only on less important, peripheral matters? Smith says that not, and goes into some detail about the disagreements over what the Bible says about several specific issues, "because many biblicists seem accustomed to easily ignoring or dismissing the 'biblical' convictions of others who read the Bible differently than they happen to, or to minimizing those disparities by suggesting that they are only slight variations on what are commonly shared Bible-based interpretations and convictions. Yet the differences cannot be ignored, dismissed, or minimized. They are real and concern important matters."

The examples discussed in the book's next eight pages include church polity or governance; free will and predestination; the fourth commandment (keeping the Sabbath); the morality of slavery (as argued in the 19th century); gender difference and equality; wealth, prosperity, poverty, and blessing; war, peace and nonviolence; charismatic gifts; atonement and justification; God-honoring worship; and general Christian relation to culture. In each case, there is a wide disparity of interpretations among evangelicals of what the Bible actually says or what "good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture."

We could easily think of other topics such as abortion, divorce, the fate of those who reject the gospel or have not heard it, and homosexuality—Smith has just chosen a few examples to give us an idea of the scope of the problem. In Africa, the list would also include polygamy. Some of these topics will appear unimportant to any given person or group, but I doubt that anyone would claim that most are unimportant details of doctrine or Christian living. Many have very practical implications about how we should live our lives.

I think that Smith has established the point that PIP exists and is a serious problem. We all agree on the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and most of us probably accept the Nicene creed. We doubtless agree on the importance of love, forgiveness, faith, faithfulness, prayer, seeking God's will, and many other core issues, but when it comes to many other areas where guidelines have been drawn from the Bible, there seems to be no agreement. So, if this pluralism is a problem, can it be absorbed or explained away within the bounds of biblicism? That will be the next topic.

¹ Such as "It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace" (Hebrews 6:4-6)