Biblical literalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biblical literalism is the supposed adherence to the explicit and literal sense of the Bible.[1] In its purest form such a belief would deny the existence of allegory, parable and metaphor in the Bible, however the phrase "biblical literalist" is often a term used (sometimes pejoratively) to refer to those who subscribe to biblical inerrancy. [2][3][4]
In a sense, however, biblical literalism is not synonymous with biblical inerrancy. [5] Whereas inerrancy doctrine deals with the truthfulness of the author's intended message [6], biblical literalism deals with the interpretation of certain passages being literal.
The term has also be used to refer to historical grammatical method in Biblical hermeneutics which is a common practice of conservative Christians.[7] According to the Elwell Evangelical Dictionary, the term literalism describes a practice that "seeks to discover the author's intent by focusing upon his words in their plain, most obvious sense". [8] In this definition, a "literalist" reading of scripture would not take the literal interpretation of allegory, parable and metaphor in the Bible as seen for example in biblical poetry or the parables of Jesus.[8]
Contents |
[edit] History
Biblical interpretations that were considered literalist have changed through history. For example: Saint Augustine, (4th century), claimed that the entire Bible should be interpreted as literally as possible, but his own interpretation of the book of Genesis was made in such a way that would be considered "allegorical" by many modern readers[9] (see Augustine's interpretation of Genesis).
In modern times the term has been used pejoratively. Hyers, professor of comparative religion at Gustavus Adolphus college in St. Peter, Minnesota criticized this as "a mentality [that] manifests itself [not] only in conservative churches, private-school enclaves, television programs of the evangelical right, and a considerable amount of Christian bookstore material; one often finds a literalist understanding of Bible and faith being assumed by those who have no religious inclinations, or who are avowedly antireligious in sentiment. Even in educated circles the possibility of more sophisticated theologies... is easily obscured by burning straw effigies of biblical literalism."[10]
Experts in the field such as Steve Falkenberg, Ph.D, professor of religious psychology, note, "I've never met anyone who actually believes the Bible is literally true. I know a bunch of people who say they believe the Bible is literally true but nobody is actually a literalist." [11] "Taken literally, the Bible says the earth is flat and setting on pillars and cannot move (1 Chr 16:30, Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, 1 Sam 2:8, Job 9:6). It says that great sea monsters are set to guard the edge of the sea (Job 41, Ps 104:26)..."
[edit] Literalism, inerrancy and grammatical-historical
It is commonly taught in the most conservative Christian seminaries[12] that certain sections of the Bible should be interpreted as literal statements of the author and are not intended as parable. These include creation in Genesis, the flooding of the entire world in Genesis, the lifespans as enumerated by genealogies of Genesis, the historicity of the narrative accounts of Ancient Israel, the supernatural intervention of God in history, and Jesus' miracles [13][14] These views however do not contend the literalistic values that parables, metaphors and allegory are not existent in the Bible [15][16] but rather relies on contextual interpretations based on the author's intention. [17]
As a part of Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy[6] conservative Christian scholarship affirms the following:
"WE AFFIRM the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support."
Noted inerrantist Norman Geisler in his commentary on the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics states: "The literal sense of Scripture is strongly affirmed here. To be sure the English word literal carries some problematic connotations with it. Hence the words normal and grammatical-historical are used to explain what is meant. The literal sense is also designated by the more descriptive title grammatical-historical sense. This means the correct interpretation is the one which discovers the meaning of the text in its grammatical forms and in the historical, cultural context in which the text is expressed." [18]
[edit] Arguments against Biblical literalism
- Bible scholars, even those who are theologically conservative, agree that parables should not be taken literally. [19]
- "Biblical literalism contributes to a lot of mental illness" [20]
- "Biblical literalism commits a seductive form of idolatry."[21]
- Biblical literalists are heretics [22]
- Biblical literalism conflicts with the cultural context of scriptures. [23]
- Biblical literalism is akin to sexism. [24]
- Taking a literalist stance on biblical violence promotes violence. [25]
[edit] References
- ^ The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language Houghton Mifflin; 4 edition (September 14, 2000) defines literalism as "1. Adherence to the explicit sense of a given text or doctrine. 2. Literal portrayal; realism."
- ^ Gerald T. Sheppard "Future of the Bible: Beyond Liberalism and Literalism", United Church Pub House (June 1990)
- ^ George Regas "Take Another Look At Your Good Book". Los Angeles Times, February 3, 2000
- ^ Smith, Rev. R. A. "The Covenantal Kingdom" Christian Liberty Press (January 1996) ISBN 1-930092-23-7 [1]
- ^ Vanhoozer, Kevin "The Inerrancy of Scripture" Latimer House (1992) [2]
- ^ a b The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1997) [3]
- ^ Bartkowski, John "Beyond Biblical Literalism and Inerrancy: Conservative Protestants and the Hermeneutic Interpretation of Scripture'". Sociology of Religion, 57, 1996. [4]
- ^ a b Elwell, Walter A. "Elwell Evangelical Dictionary" Baker Publishing Group (May 1996) ISBN 0-8010-2049-2 [5]
- ^ http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Bible-Science/PSCF3-88Young.html
- ^ Hyers, Conrad "Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance" Christian Century August 4-11, 1982, p. 823 [6]
- ^ http://www.newreformation.org/literalism.htm
- ^ http://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinalstatement/
- ^ http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/pages/resources/publications/knowingDoing/2004/Miracles.pdf#search=%22miracles%20C.S.Lewis%22
- ^ http://www.icr.org/pdf/imp/imp-395.pdf#search=%22Genesis%20Flood%20Whitcomb%22
- ^ http://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinalstatement/
- ^ Henry A Virkler (1981) Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation
- ^ http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago2.html
- ^ http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago2.html
- ^ http://www.episcopalian.org/efac/articles/inerncy.htm
- ^ http://www.whosoever.org/editorial/literal.html
- ^ http://people.cas.sc.edu/lewiske/heresy.html
- ^ http://people.cas.sc.edu/lewiske/heresy.html
- ^ http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1332
- ^ http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00241.x
- ^ http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=847
[edit] See also
- Biblical inerrancy
- Legalism (theology)
- Historical-grammatical method
- Biblical Hermeneutics
- Science and the Bible
[edit] Literalists reported views on sex
- http://www.lgcm.org.uk/useful/chright.html
- http://www.whosoever.org/editorial/literal.html
- http://www.bridgewater.edu/~jjosefso/tragedy%20of%20literalism.htm
- http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/bible/
[edit] Further reading
- Bullinger, E., W.. "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible". Baker Book House. 1970.
