Spong answers a question:
***
Grimes G. Slaughter from Oak Ridge, Tennessee writes:
"I have just been fired as a Jr. High Sunday School teacher at the
First Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, TN, because I would not
represent the Bible as perfect and infallible to the children. I have
lots of proof to the contrary: I have many versions of the Bible on
my hard drive and can search any of them for any word or phrase in a
fraction of a second. It is possible that I have found ugly and evil
content of which you are unaware. I would be pleased to send you a
list of what I have found. Apparently "The Sins of the Scripture:
Exposing the Bible's Texts of Hate to Reveal the God of Love' is
exactly what I need. I intend to procure a copy soon."
Dear Grimes,
There is much in the Bible that is, in your words, "ugly and evil."
When I wrote the "Sins of the Scripture" I examined only the most
glaring texts that have shaped public behavior. The idea that any
educated person would today try to defend the idea that the Bible is
either perfect or infallible is difficult for me to imagine.
When I confront people quoting biblical texts literally and thus in
defense of some theological agenda or prejudiced attitude, I tell
them they are asking the wrong question of the Bible. The appropriate
question is not, "Is this literally true?" for the world of biblical
scholarship settled that question years ago with a resounding 'no'.
The proper question is rather, "What does this story mean? Then I
might inquire about "What need in the life of the person making the
literal claim does the presumed literal authority of scripture meet?"
Religion has always been more about the search for security than it
is the search for truth - people crave certainty. When there is no
certainty or insufficient certainty, people will go to great lengths
to create it. The more irrational the claim, the more the insecurity
is apparent. There is nothing rational about claims for the inerrancy
of the Bible, or for the infallibility of the Pope. There is nothing
rational about religious anger, religious persecution, religious
wars, religious inquisitions or religious hatred of other faith
traditions. However, the way to confront this irrationality is not
with rational arguments no matter how tempting it is to try that
approach.
If you were dismissed in order for the myth of biblical perfection to
continue to live, proving them wrong by rational argument will not
touch the issue. What you have done is to threaten the security
system of your congregation's leadership. You have two choices for an
appropriate response:
1. Remain in the congregation and bear your witness lovingly - hoping
to bring about change.
2. Find a new church whose leadership is not so threatened and help
to make an alternative available for people like you in Oak Ridge.
I did a series of lectures in Oak Ridge last year so I know there are
churches there that are open to reality and truth in a way your
church is apparently not. My first advice is always to stay where you
are and to work for change. If change is impossible, my second choice
is to go to a place where you can be fed.
-- John Shelby Spong
.
.