We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

Justice and Biblical Clarity in Hindsight

slavery memorial

 Murky1 via Compfight

Rachel Held Evans posted a challenging look at our history of using the Bible to uphold things like slavery and to condemn people like Galileo for his scientific findings. You really need to check out the specific quotes she cites to experience the full horror of the ways the Bible was used to justify some pretty horrible things. It’s easy for us to see from our vantage point the mistakes and prejudices of these people, but it may be that we have our own blind spots in how we view Scripture. Hindsight is 20/20.

From Rachel’s post:

It’s easy to look down our noses at the Christians who have come before us and discount them as unenlightened and uninformed. But to accept Galileo’s thesis, our 17th century forbearers would have had to reject 1600 years of traditional Christian interpretations of passages like Psalm 93:1, Ecclesiastes 1:5, and Joshua 10:12-14. And to accept the arguments of the abolitionist, our great-great-grandparents had to see beyond the “plain meaning” of proof texts like Ephesians 6:1-5, Colossians 3:18-25; 4:1, and I Timothy 6:1-2 and instead be compelled by the general sweep of Scripture toward justice and freedom . (I wrote more about this in my post, “Is abolition biblical?”)

We like to characterize the people in the quotes above as having used Scripture to their own advantage. But I find it both frightening and humbling to note that, often, the way we make the distinction between those who loved Scripture and those who used Scripture is hindsight. 

 

Related Reading

How Should We Do Theology?

Delirious? via Compfight In yesterday’s post, we introduced a way of talking about theology with the use of concentric circles. At the center, is the revelational of Jesus—most keenly revealed on the cross. The next circle is dogma, which includes the central tenants of the historic-orthodox church. The next is what is called “doctrine.” And…

The Idolatrous Devotion to Inerrancy

Luca Rossato via Compfight Ed Cyzewski posted some thoughts on his blog on why he hates the word “inerrancy”. He agrees with something Greg has been saying for a while now that seems shocking to many: fighting for the idea of inerrancy can devolve into a kind of idolatry. This is well worth the read if…

Podcast: If Jesus is the Word of God, Why Call the Bible the Word of God?

Stories and words and Bible nerds.  http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0459.mp3

Podcast: Doesn’t Claiming that the Old Testament Writers were Sometimes Wrong Inevitably Lead to a Slippery Slope?

Greg talks about cataphatic prayer and the role of the imagination. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0470.mp3

Getting Behind the “Letter” of Violent Portraits of God

“I will do to you what I have never done before… in your midst parents will eat their children, and children will eat their parents…” Ezek. 5:9-10 In my previous post I offered a brief review of Matthew Bates’ fascinating work, The Hermeneutics of the Apostolic Proclamation by Matthew Bates (Baylor University Press, 2012). Among other…

The Bible Contains Errors

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus expressed an unqualified confidence that Scripture infallibly communicates the will of God. He consistently referred to it when deciding matters related to faith. This same attitude was also adopted by the earliest disciples. This attitude of trust relates to what Christians are to believe and how they are to live. The…