I was listening recently to a recording of a public conversation between two Old Testament scholars, Dr. Peter Enns and Dr. Stephen Chapman, held at Duke and advertised as Is the Bible Ever Wrong? It is a fascinating conversation - well worth the time. At one point during the evening Dr. Chapman was reflecting on the difficulty of the Old Testament in the evangelical church and evangelical scholarship and asked if it is too strong to suggest that there is a conspiracy of silence in our churches. We all, especially scholars and pastors, know that there are serious issues and questions, but most of the time we dare not talk about it because the topic is highly threatening and controversial. Textual criticism, archaeology, history, science, - all of these subjects have made it difficult to read or study the old testament, except in isolated bits and pieces.
Last year I was having coffee with a pastor, a man who was a campus pastor when I was an undergrad and had helped me a great deal at that time in my life. The conversation came around to one of my favorite topics - how should Christian colleges prepare college students, especially science students, for the intellectual challenges that will surely come in graduate study and the professional world? This pastor reflected that one of his sons came home after his first term at seminary and asked why his dad had never told him, never talked about, the issues and questions he was learning at school. The answer of course, was that there are some things that a pastor simply cannot talk about in church, he dare not raise the question much less provide scholarly answers.
I contend that this conspiracy of silence does as much, perhaps more, damage than good.
First: brushing the problems, "the blue parakeet texts," under the rug means that evangelicalism cannot develop a robust and defensible view of scripture.
Second: the lumps under the rug are not really hidden. We simply all agree to pretend that we cannot see them. The OT becomes a book we avoid rather than a heritage we embrace. For 20 years I found it difficult to read the OT except in carefully selected verse sized fragments - because it simply is not what it is supposed to be. A fact that is painfully obvious, even to an educated layperson.
Third: the science, the historical study, the textual criticism, none of this is going away - ever. We have to deal with it honestly.
Fourth: it becomes a stumbling block that contributes to loss of faith for many and prevents many more from ever even considering the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
So I have two questions for pastors and others in ministry:
Is there a "conspiracy of silence," and if so is it a pastoral necessity? How should we deal with these issues in our churches?
and
How would you deal with an educated layperson with very real and very deep questions about the nature of the Bible?
The answer by the way to the question "Is the Bible Ever Wrong" is no according to Enns and Chapman - but we sometimes ask the wrong questions and have the wrong expectations of the Bible.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
joey #12 actually did mention this. I'm less original than I thought!
Tony,
Thanks, I'm glad you came back and commented.
I find myself backing off the term "conspiracy" somewhat because it carries a connotation of motive that doesn't really capture the whole situation. Many factors and motives are at work.
But it is a problem for our mission in the world. And you give an excellent synopsis of the situation in too many places.
i have a friend who has a graduate degree from a well-known conservative evangelical seminary, but he finds his studies have brought him to the place where he can't hold to the definitions of inerrancy as commonly believed or taught, nor possibly even to the classic definition of the trinity.
he realizes that he can't sign the statements of faith in the churches he wants to serve in or for the journals/societies that might publish his papers.
he believes, but is unwillingly to sign a "confession"/"profession" of faith that is a simplistic and reductionist and perhaps dishonest declaration or definition of, e.g., "inerrancy."
he doesn't know what to do future-wise in terms of jobs and ministry. if seminaries and churches and pastors were more honest about these biblical difficulties and less adamant about portraying the texts and things like inerrancy in black and white terms, he might have a chance to serve in these churches.
RJS,
I don't know if you take unsolicited requests for contact but I had a couple science related questions I would love to ask you. tonydhunt@gmail.com
"Your Name #69"
Your friend might want to look into some of the "mainline" denominations. I myself found a charismatic Episcopalian church and I haven't been so excited in some years to be a part of a worshiping community.
I don't think the term "conspiracy" is too strong to use about this very common problem. It is a kind of "don't ask, don't tell" situation in many faith communities. Perhaps it is better described as conforming to the kind of conspiracy in dysfunctional families where everyone learns the rules: Don't Talk (about certain things); Don't Feel (what we don't approve); Don't Trust (we'll use it against you and if you tell outsiders then you are a traitor).
At one time it may have been possible to avoid sharing these "hard truths" about Scripture and theology to "protect" people from being discouraged who could not handle the information well. After all, how many of them would ever read anything about the issues anyway?
But the internet and programing on the History Channel, etc. people in the pews are finding the information in ways that communicate effectively. So, what are they to do with this new information? Clergy can find themselves in triangled communication where to be honest with part of the congregation means to be threatening to another part less open to dialog about the issues.
But is there an integrity issue for a clergy who knows that these "issues" exist but builds a life-time of ministry never being honest with congregations about them? Are we "protecting" them or ourselves? I for one am not longer willing to be part of the dysfunctional conspiracy and at the same time I have no desire to place information before people who are not ready to digest it.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.