Written by Britt Towery   

To read the Bible as literal is less than best

Myths evolve from history, but they are not history. As one old timer put it: “Y’all, nothing puts a burr under my saddle more than folks that think the King James Bible is filled with myths.”

More folks than we can count do not take kindly when someone hints that the Christian Bible (as it is today) just might, ever so slightly have some myths buried beneath the surface, even the red-letter editions.

A few years ago on the TV program Nightline, the interviewer queried President George W. Bush with this question: “Is the Bible literally true?” He answered, “Probable not … I am not a literalist. But you can learn a lot from it.”

It is always in order to question myths – if we know what they are. Not knowing what something is, is always the biggest road block on the path to truth. Myths are our major resource of pre-historical days.

Conferences of importance met during the first four centuries after Christ to find how Christianity should be recognized in a pagan world. There were literally hundreds of gospel stories of Jesus and even more groups with strong views on the new faith that was going in every direction.

A New Testament Canon (Greek meaning “rule” or “measuring stick.”) came together after many a debate and struggle. Irenaeus of Gaul (c. 130-202 A.D) noted there should be only four Gospels, for there are four quarters of the earth, four pillars holding up the world in which we live. It was fitting that there be four pillars breathing out immortality on every side.

In 367 A.D. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, suggested a list of 27 books for the New Testament. It was not until at least the 4th century that some unanimity developed. With such a long history of error-filled and notes attached to the texts the Bible cannot be a faultless guide.

Lately a survey said that three in ten Americans read the Bible literally; taking it to be infallible in history and science. They chose to see the Bible as history and not as a spiritual guide. That is the sad Christian heritage we inherited.

David J. Lose, Director of the Center for Biblical Preaching at Luther Seminary and author of “Making Sense of Scripture” and “Making Sense of the Christian Faith,” has four reasons against reading the Bible literally:

First, nowhere does the Bible claim to be inerrant. The word "Inerrant" was coined in the middle of the 19th century to counter the increased popularity of reading the Bible as history.

Second, reading the Bible literally distorts its witness. It was never meant to be a history book. The transcribed stories and inconsistencies hurt inerrancy claims.

Third, most Christians across history have not read the Bible literally. Augustine (354-430 A.D.) was kept from believing Christianity because of fables like Jonah in the belly of a whale. Amrose, bishop of Milan, told Augustine the story was an allegory and should be so interpreted. David Lose writes: “Stories that point metaphorically to spiritual realities rather than to historical facts” caused Augustine to take the Bible seriously.

Fourth, reading the Bible literally undermines a chief confession of the Bible about God. The characters in the Bible are complicated people with feet of clay. And that’s the point: the God of the Bible regularly uses ordinary people to accomplish extraordinary things.

Karl Barth, one of the greatest theologians of the last century, once said, “I take the Bible too seriously to read it literally.”

--30--