The Bible is Electricity 1

Last updated on: September 2, 2011 at 10:14 am by Scot McKnight

The Bible is Electricity 1 2011-09-02T10:14:13-05:00 Scot McKnight

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This blog has given some concentrated attention to how we understand the Bible and, in particular, we’ve been examining an approach to the Bible Christian Smith calls “biblicism.” This sort of thing also came up yesterday in William Webb’s discussion of corporal punishment. Now we are moving to another scholar who asks aloud how to use the Bible in our world, and this time it is from a scholar from a completely different angle. His name is Richard Elliott Friedman and he has written a new book with Shawna Dolansky. The book is called The Bible Now.

Friedman is a brilliant and engaging writer and a professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Georgia; Dolansky was one of Friedman’s students. The most important feature of this book is that it approaches the Bible, not from the lens of biblicism or orthodox Christian theology, but from the angle of a Jewish scholar and from the angle of the significance of the historical critical method for “using” the Bible today.

How do you describe the “method” of these scholars below? What steps do they take? Do you think it differs from Protestant or Liberal or Evangelical approaches to appropriating the Bible for today?

They observe, no matter what faith you have, the Bible is electricity and it must be handled with care. Which topics will they engage? Yes, you may have guessed: homosexuality, abortion, women’s status, capital punishment, and the earth. How’s that for some engaging issues. Friedman is known for even-handedness, and I hope you will join us for this series. Some people approach the Bible as divine and with final authority, while others from the angle of wisdom. Either way, this book will help.

Friedman and Dolansky begin by observing there are three kinds of literature in the Hebrew Bible: prose (story, narrative), poetry and laws.

We begin with homosexuality, and they open with the story/prose in Genesis 18 (Sodom and Gomorrah) and Judges 19 (Gibeah). Both texts are about sex, but it is not clear — the authors — that this is “men” with “men” but “people” with “people.” The Hebrew uses masculine nouns (anashim). And “brothers” may not be males but people in general. The term is used 22x in Genesis: 15x for males, 2x clearly for males and females. Thus, it might mean males and it might not mean males. [That’s Friedman’s view. My view is that it most likely does refer to males. Without textual warrant indicating mixed company, I’d suggest the term means males.] He sees the offering of daughters as typical Near Eastern bargaining, and not the offer of women (instead of men) for sex. Nor is the hospitality theory sufficient here. We don’t know, the authors say. The Gibeah story, in fact, has the males raping a woman (showing homosexuality is not the point). All the people are destroyed in Sodom, but that means women too … because all were involved. And, one more, why would the other cities be destroyed? Were they all male homosexuals? For these authors the text is about rape. They believe we should not use this text when discussing homosexuality.

The authors to poetry: 2 Sam 1:26: when Jonathan dies, David says: “Your love was more wondrous to me than love of women.” Are there reasons to see this poetic line about homosexuality? The authors: “Actually, there are none.”

Then to laws: “male homosexual acts are prohibited.” They quote Lev 18:22 and 20:13, and wonder aloud why women are not prohibited (lesbian acts of sex). They think standard explanations are not adequate and that it has to do with polygamy, which was an option for males with wealth. The Bible nowhere prohibits lesbian acts. There is something about male-to-male contact that is prohibited. Why?

Seed or command to multiply? They think no. Distinction among things — purity laws? They think no again. Immoral? No. The term is to’ebah, and that means “offensive.” This prohibition is found only the priestly codes, the latest of law codes. Is this about purity? No. They think it is difficult to know, but most probably visceral and cultural and not theoretical. Cultic prostitution? Again, no. Not enough evidence for cultic prostitution in the area.

They do seem to soften a bit on the seed idea above when they discuss how the family was ordered: what furthered seed was good; what didn’t was not good.

Their contention is that homosexuality was not understood then as it is now; it was not an identity factor. People weren’t “homosexuals” or “heterosexuals.” They were humans with sexual desires. They sketch laws and practices in the ancient world — Assyria, Egypt, Greece, etc — about homosexual acts. They contend it is not about homosexual orientation but the status of the persons involved: male citizens were not to have homosexual acts with other male citizens. Superior-inferior statuses were seen otherwise. It was about dominance and superior status; those who were penetrated were considered like women and not equal male citizens.

So they contend Lev 18 and 20 prohibit robbing another man of his status by feminizing him. The holiness codes treated all males as equal, so there was not superior/inferior set of laws. It has to do with the violation of a fellow citizen in Israel.

They also contend that to’ebah, the abomination, is relative. That is, the law prohibits male sexual homosexual acts but it does not make that law eternal and unchanging. [I think they are pressing this sense of to’ebah.] Thus, they argue as long as it is offensive it is prohibited.

Bible

Previous Post

September 1, 2011

World Youth Day and "Evangelical Catholics"

Next Post

September 2, 2011 What Type of School Did You Attend?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: Solomon asked God for wisdom rather than wealth or long life.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE