A Strange Mix - Part 2a

In the last post I wrote about my appreciation for forms of worship rooted in practices that hark back nearly two millennia, to the formative centuries of the Christian community. While I experience the possibility of deep meaning in this tradition, I am at the same time a person of the present day who demands a faith that also makes sense within the context of the twenty-first century. Thus the acknowledgment echoed in the title, that in terms of spirituality I may be considered a rather strange mix.

The German monk Martin Luther (1483 - 1546) was, as you probably know, one of the early leaders in what came to be called the Protestant Reformation. While perhaps best remembered for his re-definition of “salvation,” he also proposed, a new principle for interpreting the Bible. The approach he championed was based on the view that the true meaning of the Bible's words are to be found in their “literal sense.”¹ This understanding, which was more fully developed in the years following the Reformation period, was broadened to associate the biblical words with the very words of God.² In my family and in the faith communities I grew up in, this was the understanding I was taught and, in my experience, it is the understanding of many if not most Christians (at least in the United States) today.³

I have often commented, tongue in cheek, that out-growing a fundamentalist upbringing requires years of attending a “fundamentalists anonymous” program. And it has in fact been a gradual process, but through the years I have come to the place where I can no longer affirm the so-called “literal” understanding of the Bible. Now, for many Christians, such a statement is anathema. However there are too many things in the Bible that I simply cannot believe literally.

That does not mean however that I do not take the Bible seriously. Besides being made up of many different books written by different authors and reflecting numerous time periods and historical/cultural settings, the Judeo-Christian Scriptures are composed of a variety of different types of literature as well. There are origin stories, nationalistic propaganda, liturgy, poetry, sermons, and apocalyptic, to name a few. Now, we all know that poetry has layers of meaning deeper than what a simple literal reading might suggest. Sermons and nationalistic language may use hyperbole (not literally true or accurate) to get a point across. Stories can teach important lessons and in this sense communicate truth without necessarily being literally factual or historical. And apocalyptic is characterized by hallucinatory or dream qualities with its fantastic visions. So to take a literal approach to everything in the Bible is actually to mis-read and thus to mis-understand what is intended.

It seems to me then – and it has been experientially the case for me in my own spiritual journey – that not being tied to a literalistic interpretation not only leads to a clearer understanding of what the biblical authors desired to communicate but it actually opens up the possibility of discovering deeper meaning in the Biblical narrative. This approach has helped lead me to the understanding that faith is not only about a journey inward but also and equally a call to the journey outward.

1  Theologian and biblical scholar Hans Frei, quoted in David E. Klemm. Hermeneutical Inquiry, Volume I: The Interpretation of Texts. p. 11.

2  J. I. Packer. “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God. pp. 77-101.

3   I heard a Rabbi speak recently who suggested that most Jews grow up with a literalistic approach to the Jewish Scriptures as well.