Skip to content

Do You Really Want To Study The Bible?

July 30, 2009

This rather embarrassing article started me thinking about my scholastic experiences. Why is it embarrassing you ask? Well, unfortunately, I attended the same University as Nelson for my undergrad. It’s hard to fathom that the same program that turned out myself and some of the great students I had the opportunity to learn and grow with could turn out someone this misguided, but perhaps, with the amount of students with whom I also interacted that made it their goal to be as willfully ignorant and purposefully stupid regarding biblical studies as humanly possible I should not be surprised.

One example shall suffice.

In one of my classes at the graduate level during a discussion of the Hebrew Bible a student definitively declared with an air of finality, “If it is not going to help my faith then I don’t want to deal with it.” At that moment my head almost exploded. Shouldn’t someone have worked through this at least  a little at the undergrad level? Basically, “I already know everything about the Bible so don’t confuse me with none of that there learning.” I have everything figured out; now give me some sources to confirm that.

That my friends is the definition of willfully ignorant; and it’s intellectually and spiritually arrogant to boot.

Might I suggest that if you are unwilling to deal with tough issues that won’t help your “faith” then biblical studies is not for you. Go find a really conservative seminary, or better yet, a one or two year Bible college. You should be able to stay inside your bubble with little cognitive dissonance other than trying to ascertain what God wants for you and “your ministry.”

In the past I have suggested that pursuing biblical studies is akin to taking the red pill in the movie The Matrix: once you do you will never be able to return to the blissful, idyllic world of blind faith. Nope, once you take that pill you’re going to have to deal with tough, tough questions that reject pat answers, and sometimes presents answers quite unpalatable to those who have developed a taste for theories straight from the Sunday School.

Perhaps, the distinction of modality and sodality will help. The church is a modality that all Christians are called to. If you are a Christian you should belong to a church. However, the academy is a sodality, a para-church entity that only some members are called to. In the church “tradition” is protected, generated, and enhanced. In the academy “tradition” is probed, questioned, and sometimes modified.

Because not everyone from the church is called or gifted (to use some Christianese) to the para-church branch of the academy inevitably some misguided souls operating under the delusion that the academy is the place to play protector of tradition some persons can do a lot of damage to their own “faith”, ultimately, even abandoning it.

Sometimes the stated goal of liberal academies is deconstruction of the student and their presuppositions. If your operating strategy during this process is to ignore everything that does not concord with your truncated, immature philosophy then it’s not going to be a pretty sight or very much fun.

If you want to posit arguments about the historicity of Jonah based on Jesus’ assuming it in the gospels then declare “Jesus said it, so I believe it. You didn’t really think that historical criticism would have the last word on the Word Of God, did you?” Then biblical studies is probably not the place for you. Go to a seminary, become a small group leader, or read articles on AiG.

However, if you want to learn Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, German, and a variety of other languages, study hermeneutics, sociology, developments in Israelite religion, history, textual criticism, and a number of other things. Have cognitive dissonance dealt on your assumptions like the plagues on Egypt. Are willing to entertain the possibility that you definitely do not have everything figured out about everything, and there is a whole lot you can learn from people a lot smarter than you.  Perhaps, biblical studies is a sodality you might be suited for.

If your “faith” is dependent on having everything that Mommy, Daddy, or your Sunday school teacher ever said confirmed by your professor and it’s a bedrock of your “faith” that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, or you’re going to take a ride down everybody’s favorite fallacy, the slippery slope, then whatever you do avoid biblical studies.

NOTE: All examples of the word faith in this post are usually gnostic and Cartesian, and in need of much rehabilitation.

9 Comments leave one →
  1. July 30, 2009 3:11 pm

    Maybe HE is the one who did well in school, and you had the presuppositions and missed the young earth part of the course.

    He’s drives the freaking dinomuseummobile! What super power, hide out or awesome vehicle do you have???

    In honesty though – I’d love to see a school that booked “Dr.Fossil” with his traveling museum. Standing with their pupils as he starts to talk about a young earth and creationism.

  2. July 30, 2009 8:04 pm

    Might I suggest that if you are unwilling to deal with tough issues that won’t help your “faith” then biblical studies is not for you.

    You remind me, not just of younger friends my own age with the I-need-to-affirm-what-I-learned-in-Sunday-School approach to Bible study, but of older Christians (pastors and teachers) who, whenever I would ask them a difficult question launched immediately into the “well, there are some things God never meant us to understand, our ways are not His ways, you just have to have faith” answer.

  3. July 30, 2009 8:24 pm

    JP,

    I think you have misunderstood me and the point of this article. I am certainly not advocating a dodge of hard questions… or maybe you meant “this reminds me of” and not “you remind me of,” or maybe “You remind me, that is your article reminds me…”

    At least I hope or my writing is worse than I thought.

  4. Dr. Jim permalink
    July 31, 2009 7:03 am

    You can’t argue with the dinomuseummobile.
    I remember taking a class on “The Prophets” (i.e., Jewish canonical division) in a secular university during my undergrad years, and on the first day one of the students said he took the course because biblical prophecy was so accurate he wanted to find out what happened next.

    P.S. that student was not me…

  5. July 31, 2009 11:26 pm

    yeah man, it was your story, not your point of view, that reminded me of getting the same “we can’t question/challenge our faith” mindset from the other end

  6. August 2, 2009 5:23 pm

    A question for someone who’s currently planted in the modality group: What is/should be the relationship between the sodalitors and the modalitors?

    • August 3, 2009 9:24 pm

      In Essentials, Unity; in Non-essentials, Liberty; in All Things, Charity…

      Your question actually requires a super long answer: like a book! Kenton Sparks offers some good suggestions (I think) in his God’s Words in Human Words.

      I think the important part of the relationship is what I wrote above “In the church “tradition” is protected, generated, and enhanced. In the academy “tradition” is probed, questioned, and sometimes modified.”

      There have been many persons that have dashed from the academy to the church and perhaps questioned the tradition in a place and time that was inappropriate. When this is done their “true fact” is actually “untrue” for those that do not have a context. The academic needs to be aware of their context and if they are going to probe the tradition and cause cognitive dissonance they better have a game plan and the time to work people through that.

      On the other hand, the church which has been rightly afraid of the academy and some historical criticism, I believe, needs to learn and adapt from those gifted to be in the academy rather than “Circle the wagons” so to speak, and refuse to question any assumptions, as if we have it all figured out.

      • August 4, 2009 5:15 am

        There you go again…

        Look, pal: you keep all your “facts” and your “non-essentials,” your “cognitive dissonance” and your inappropriate questioning; all those kowledgey things you eggheads like to preen about.

        Faith is knowledge of things not seen, man! So if your “facts” (so-called) contradict the plain reading of the Bible in its context-free, obviously original English meaning (KJV only, just as Christ spoke it), then you and your “facts” need to just take a hike…

        Anyways, I gotta go. I have a dinomuseummobile to catch, and books about the 6000-year history of, well, EVERYTHING to read….

Trackbacks

  1. I Think I Believe » Blog Archive » You are right, Scott – studying theology IS like taking the red pill!

Leave a comment