Lent Post 2: Giving Up Biblical Literalism
Biblical literalism makes a mockery of faith and God. Moreover, biblical literalism often turns the Bible into an idol. On the surface, especially for those who adhere to biblical literalism (or grew up believing in it), that statement seems ridiculous. Biblical literalism appears to take the Bible seriously. After all, it supposedly takes the Bible at “face value” and as a result, Biblical literalists argue that they value what the Bible actually says and don’t attempt to impose their own interpretations.
One common critique that Biblical literalists have of those who do not adhere to a literalist interpretation of scripture is that non-literalists, “pick and choose” which scripture passages/ books to follow. The implication being that biblical literalists take into account each Bible verse and book when trying to live out their faith.
However, biblical literalism often ignores the historical context of Biblical texts and passages or they selectively examine historical context. For example, Biblical literalists, insist that Christians do not need to follow Levitical laws and they will point not only to passages in the New Testament that seem to affirm that, but they will examine the historical context of the Book of Leviticus to argue why Christians do not need to follow prohibitions on wearing certain clothes or eating certain forms of meat. Yet, while claiming that Christians don’t need to follow Levitical laws on food or dress, they will assert that Leviticus 18:22 needs to be interpreted literally and that this passage is evidence that God detests same-sex relationships or sexual activity.
In other words, Biblical literalism isn't an objective or value-free way to interpret the Bible. It involves picking and choosing which texts to take literally and it involves selectively examining historical context. However, unlike Christians who do not adhere to literalism, biblical literalists are not always honest with themselves or others about how they selectively pick and choose which Bible passages to elevate and endorse.
Another issue with Biblical literalism is that the differences within the various books of the Bible or even within a single book are ignored. Because many literalists view the Bible as offering one single message pointing to (their version) of Jesus any Biblical book or story that doesn’t fit into that predetermined narrative either gets ignored or is forced to fit into their theological box, even if doing so, means disregarding or misinterpreting key parts of the text.
For instance, I didn’t learn until college that there were two creation stories within Genesis. But a close reading clearly demonstrates that the two stories are similar but not quite the same. Yet, even though I grew up in a tradition that encouraged and even demanded a literal reading of the Bible, the two creation stories were somehow conflated into one. The differences were erased. Which makes sense, because if there are two creation stories, that leads to questions of accuracy. Which creation story is “true” and “factual?” Why would the Bible include an “inaccurate” creation story?
While these issues are important the major problem with biblical literalism is not necessarily its inconsistency or that involves picking and choosing which scripture passages to follow (Christians across the theological spectrum share those struggles) but that it more often than not elevates and promotes harmful theologies.
For example, Biblical literalism often promotes anti-science positions. Science is often posited as being untrustworthy and as attempting to “play God.” When science allegedly contradicts scripture, Christians are supposed to choose the Bible-no matter what. Growing up, the big issue was evolution. I was taught that evolution was a lie from satan meant to convince the world that the Bible (and by extension) God was not real. I was taught that God created the world as depicted in Genesis.
However, during my academic studies, it became clear to me that Genesis mattered not because it accurately depicted the creation of the world but because of what it seeks to say about humanity and God. The Genesis creation stories have a lot to say about human dignity and humanity’s relationship to God, animals, and other humans, even while it has very little to say about the scientific creation of the world.
This view of science as the enemy not only has negative consequences when it comes to discussing evolution, but it also has ramifications for how to deal with the pandemic. To be clear, not all biblical literalists refuse to wear masks or adhere to CDC guidelines to minimize the spread of COVID 19. There are biblical literalists who are taking the pandemic very seriously and non-biblical literalists who feel free to do whatever they want. But one cannot deny that biblical literalism can and does foster a distrust of basic scientific facts that is dangerous. Christians who follow this worldview are conditioned to believe that science is inherently hostile to faith and that if push comes to shove, they will need to pick between faith and science.
As mentioned before, biblical literalism has also been used to justify denying members of the LGBTQ+ community basic rights. Biblical literalists point to a handful of passages that they claim condemn Queer people, yet they ignore the literary and historical context of said passages. For instance, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not in fact about homosexuality but it is about sexual assault and inhospitality.
Biblical literalism is not the only way to interpret scripture. It’s not even the best or most accurate way. Instead, when reading and interpreting the Bible, one needs to ask themselves: does this interpretation fit the literary and historical context? And much more importantly, does this interpretation foster justice, or does it lead to violence and oppression?
