Do Christian Fundamentalists really completely misread the Bible?
According to a Salon article, there are five ways fundamentalists are misreading the Bible. We all likely misunderstand Scripture at times, and in more ways than listed by Salon. Are the misgivings valid? How much of it is personal opinion?
The writer (Sean McElwee) describes himself as a “liberal Christian.” Given Salon’s large audience I think this broad brush treatment of fundamentalism is worthy of a brief reply.
We can be unfair when labeling groups. Even so, liberals (and fundamentalists) tend to gravitate to particular causes. McElwee’s article suggests this is the case for him.
What is a Christian Fundamentalist? The term often evokes examples of misguided behavior which the secular media prefers to feed on. One definition of fundamentalism can be read at GotQuestions.
“Right-wing Evangelical Fundamentalism” is ridiculed for accepting “seven literal days” of creation. McElwee claims this was invented in the 19th century. Actually, this period saw scholars revising the allegorical approach to eschatology which conflated Israel with the church (Spiritual Israel).
Note that creation occurred over six days. God rested on the 7th. Many church fathers also believed in a literal 6 day creation – Basil (AD 329-379) being just one.
McElwee claims few fundamentalists care about the early church, the Gospels and heresies. He accuses fundamentalists of blending Southern Conservatism, Protestantism, some Pauline doctrine, gross nationalism, a heavy dose of naive anti-intellectualism for a peculiar American strain of fertilizer. There may be some examples of this. But, broadly speaking, fundamentalists routinely discuss church fathers, doctrine, Pauline Theology, the nature of the gospel, innerancy and various heresies. Just about any fundamentalist book on Systematic Theology contradicts these assertions.
Rev. Cornel West is also cited as noting that fundamentalist Christians want to be fundamental about everything except “love thy neighbor.” Does West presume to know the collective hearts of fundamentalists?
Here are the five claims:
1) Immigration. Fundamentalists hate Lev 19:33-34 (and Mal 3:5), “because of xenophobia and a reaction to the multiculturalism of liberal democracy.” Fundamentalists hate “social justice.” Hence, they aren’t biblical.
Firstly, the problems are illegal and unchecked immigration. As a former migrant, I empathize with migrants. But I migrated legally. “Liberals” tend to dismiss data validating security issues of unauthorized immigration. We must balance empathy with national security, along with multicultural and economic considerations. Would liberals indiscriminately invite strangers into their homes in the current climate?
Secondly, ancient Israel’s treatment of sojourners doesn’t fit modern multicultural examples. I refer readers to the Jewish Virtual Library and Walter Kaiser for more details. For example, only Israelites could own land.
2) Poverty. The next claim is the far-right Christianity’s reverence of capitalism while shaming the poor. We’re not actually shown any empirical evidence that this is the general case.
Luke 19:25 and Matt 19:24 are said to terrify fundamentalists.
These texts speak about lack of compassion and loving wealth more than the Lord. The rich young man was mistaken in thinking he could gain eternal life through his own efforts. Jesus went to the crux of the problem – he needed to follow Christ. John MacArthur comments that many rich Jews at the time believed one could buy salvation through alms. Hence, it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than anyone to save themselves via good deeds.
Do rich liberal Christians ever get to heaven? Or must they give all their money away first? Or perhaps they don’t exist because they gave all their money away.
There are New Testament examples of rich disciples such as Joseph of Arimathea and Philemon. The latter owned slaves and property, yet forgave a runaway slave.
Those who genuinely cannot help themselves should be helped into a position where they can. Throwing money at the problem doesn’t necessarily work. Note Greece’s economic woes. Capitalism certainly has its problems. Notwithstanding, it pays the bills and employs people who pay taxes which help the poor. We all have a responsibility to ensure resources are used appropriately.
Heck, even Bono understands capitalism’s benefits! He’s a “liberal Christian” who re-located so he could pay fewer taxes.
3) Then there’s the environment. Fundies are supposed to love money more than the environment. This is a commonly used smear tactic.
Dr. Paul Ehrlich once warned about a coming ice age. Then there was “global warming.” Now it’s “climate change.” If the science is right then which is it? Just give me the facts.
The so-called problem verses for fundamentalists are Col 1:16-17 and Luke 16:13 and both are taken out of context. Pope Francis’ climate change advisers support abortion and population control, among other things. McElwee is “pro-choice.” I wonder how this sits biblically with Gen 1:28 and Matt 19:18.
4) War. The passages referred to are Matt 5:38-45 and Luke 6:27-30. The claims is that Far-right fundamentalist Christians love pre-emptive war. As a political movement they are motivated by fear, disgust and opposition, rather than grace and mercy.
Once again we hear about xenophobia, with homophobia, sexism and torture thrown in. Surprisingly, Islamophobia was missing. Where past “awakenings” of Christians saw them look inwardly at their own sins, modern fundies allegedly look outwardly at the evils of the secular culture.
There isn’t space to fully address these complex issues. We must look at our own sins while being a light to the world. At times the latter hasn’t been done well. The church wasn’t mandated to impose moral law. However, both fundamentalist and liberal Christians regularly exercise democratic voting and lobbying freedoms to influence society. And so they should.
Esther chapter 9 (especially v 5) might strike some terror in those who shun pre-emptive war, and love to mine-quote the Bible. If Esther and Mordecai had not acted, all the Jews would have been slaughtered.
Jesus’ advice to His disciples was to sell their garments and buy a sword for protection (Luke 22:36). Some insist the sword is a metaphor. Yet if the garments, knapsacks and money bags are literal, then so is the sword. Moreover, the Old Testament is full of inconvenient examples where God orders the Israelites to attack certain nations.
Finally, the verses cited by McElwee have to do with interpersonal conduct rather than how governments arrive at decisions to go to war etc.
5) Women. Gal 3:28 is cited:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
The context of Paul’s message is that there are no distinctions in salvation. It has nothing to do with the church replacing Israel or gender roles, despite the writer linking to N. T. Wright’s article. Wright tries hard to defend Paul from feminists. Unfortunately, he often allegorizes texts and champions the controversial New Perspectives on Paul.
Not all fundamentalists think women should be subjugated at home; else you wouldn’t see fundamentalist women politicians, women commentators in the media and women missionaries. But what did God say in Gen 3:16?
For some reason the writer feels the need to share that Sam Harris (an atheist) and Reddit have fun destroying fundamentalism. He also boasts about attending a Christian college and having had a “jolly good time of it as well.” He writes:
“We can continue to have a fun time berating those who believe the Bible explains science and that there was a snake in the Garden of Eden, but it’s really a waste.”
McElwee is selective regarding which biblical texts he believes (2 Tim 3:16). Genesis isn’t science; it’s a record of God’s creation. There’s a difference.
Whereas Sam Harris likes to poke fun of fundamentalists on atheist-riddled Reddit forums, he doesn’t fare so well with the likes of William Lane Craig. See also HERE and HERE. McElwee is a Christian while Harris denies Christ – one wonders why the former smugly enjoys the mocking of fellow Christians (Gal 5:22-26; 1 Thess 4:9).
In conclusion, we’re asked to think of the men who changed the world – Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi etc. He says that ultimately Christianity and other religions are about social justice, love and equality.
Not quite.
Christians are called to be God’s servants and witnesses to Christ (Matt 28:19-29; Acts 1:8). The gospel is the good news about escaping God’s judicial wrath (Rom 1:18, 2:5-6; Eph 2:3) on sin via Christ’s death on the cross and His subsequent resurrection (John 3:16; 1 Cor 15:2-4).
The apostles weren’t concerned about social justice or diversity issues. Changes in societies come about as an indirect consequence of people coming to Christ. These have never, however, been biblical Christianity’s primary focus.
Christianity is unlike other religions. Its focus is on how one may attain eternal life and joy in fellowship with God (Rev 21:3-4, 22:3-5). And avoid hell (Rev 20:15).
Happy Thanksgiving!
Sharing is caring!
