The Problem With "Biblical"

I know this is going to sound funny since I am a pastor and all, but I'm growing increasingly concerned about how people understand the Bible.  More specifically, I've grown uncomfortable with the phrase, "the biblical view of ___________."  Let me explain.

There are many expressions of Christianity today, including many expressions of Baptist life.  Each denomination claims to be "biblical."  Each one reads Scripture, studies Scripture, and seeks to practice Scripture.  It's just that each tradition interprets the Scriptures differently.  It took me a while to come to the realization that Presbyterians, Episcopals, Methodists, and Catholics all care about the Bible as much as Baptists do.  For one expression to say that it has "the biblical view of ___________" takes more than a little hubris and intellectual pride.  Furthermore, I heard biblical references in both political conventions over the last several weeks.  How can you read the same Scripture and come to so very different conclusions? Both conservatives and liberals read the Bible.  People on both sides of "the issues" read Scripture.  Maybe it's a matter of emphases; maybe it's a matter of perspective; or maybe it's a matter of agenda- but varying perspectives can claim to have a "biblical view."

I'm convinced that several unchallenged assumptions underlie much of the popular understanding of Scripture.  Here are a few:

1) Many people believe that the Bible speaks univocally.  Thus, Scripture has one perspective on just about everything.  However, I'm convinced that the Bible should not be read as one book, but as 66 books, written over the span of many years from many different contexts. Furthermore, many of the books argue with each other.  If you ask the question, "Why do people suffer," while reading the book of Deuteronomy, you are going to get a vastly different answer than when asking the same question of the book of Job.   It's not that one is true and the other isn't, but that suffering is mysterious and one perspective is insufficient in exploring the depths of it.  In this way, the Bible mirrors the polyvalence of real life.

2) I believe that many people underestimate the meaning that the reader brings to the text.  To assume that one meaning lies within a text and can be purely extracted apart from the attitude, faith, and perspective of the reader is just nonsense.  Does a faithful reading of Scripture not demand illumination from the reader as much as inspiration from the writers?  The character of the reader is as important as the text itself.

3) Finally, I believe this perspective ignores the lessons of the past.  Many of the slave owners in our nation's history justified their depraved practices by quoting Scripture.  They believed they were doing the "biblical" thing.  Even within the Bible itself is a story of Satan who tempted Jesus by quoting Scripture!  Surely "biblical" must mean something more than placing biblical texts in parentheses after stating our convictions or quoting a hodgepodge of verses.    

I'm growing increasingly convinced that how we read the Bible is as important as that we read the Bible.  I am convinced that many times, the phrase "the biblical view of __________" is veiled speech for "my interpretation is __________."  However, when my view is couched as the view, then I place it above reproach and correction, and I'm in a position of authority over any who would disagree with me.

Over the next couple of weeks, I plan to blog on our perspective of Scripture, and I welcome your comments.  I want us to think together about what we mean by "biblical," and how we can become more faithful readers of the text.