My Analysis of the Bible Part 1C: The Biblical Essentialist

I am not a Biblical Essentialist 

A Biblical Essentialist is a term I use to represent those who believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but in a way to inspire righteousness in man as opposed to record explicitly accurate history. These people generally reject that the earth was created in 7 literal days, or other seemingly exaggerated events such as Samson lifting city gates and carrying them for 35 miles.⁴ This leads to the serious questioning of what is literal and what is figurative. Catholic doctrine takes this kind of view, believing that context and author intent can make the Bible more figurative at times (although I think it is safe to say it is a very conservative Biblical Essentialism).

This is the best argument of the three. If Genesis is not supposed to be literal, how then can we say the Bible is wrong when science tells us that the earth is far older than a few thousand years? And it makes sense too. For instance, it is unlikely that whoever wrote Job actually believed the scene between God and Satan was a real event.⁵ How would he witness this? It is also very unlikely that whoever wrote the Genesis account was trying to write an exact historical account. The purpose is generally believed to be more theological, to demonstrate God’s place in human life. This idea can be scary to Christians because it leaves room for interpretation of a text that Christians use to base their faith. Issues like homosexuality now need to be reasoned with, as it being spoken against in “God’s Word” is not enough of an authority to many Christians today. It makes issues more complex, and can be inconvenient to those pursuing Christian unity. While I understand the problems that this raises, that is not a reason to reject this way of thinking. I believe God’s nature is of love and truth, and therefore I must base my understanding of texts about him in the same light. In other words, I must read them searching for truth, rather than being more focused on the fear of the truth’s consequences. Imagine if Jesus adopted an attitude of fear of consequences, where would we be? His speaking of truth caused many to die in his name, should he have went along with the misconceptions of others about religious life to keep things running smoothly? While I am certainly no Jesus Christ, I am doing my best to learn from him and follow in his footsteps. While faith is certainly an aspect of Christian life, a reverence for truth in its doctrines is equally important, in my opinion. While I do not call the Bible God’s Word, I am very open to this interpretation. However, I do have a problem with it. If we are to title the Bible as “God’s Word” in this light, what stops other wisdom texts from being God’s Word as well? Does the title “God’s Word” simply imply a work which inspires good nature in mankind? Can other religions’ texts also be God’s Word? A simple answer to this is that the Bible is unique in that it revolves around the Church set up by Jesus the Christ; therefore its inspiration is different than other texts since it is meant to be a part of that system established by God. I find this to be a well thought argument. My only disagreement would be I have little faith in the organized church, and therefore do not recognize it as an authority to distinguish uniquely inspired scripture. I suppose the next big question would be why I reject the organized Church. In short, I have found it to be of destructive force in the past (especially when it gained political power) and therefore see no reason to think that it was established by God. I believe that when Jesus says “my kingdom is not of this earth” he means that no church organization or political power can truly contain the Church. This, however, is not the purpose of this essay. It is not to debate the authority of the church (although I suppose this is being challenged by the mere topic of this essay), but rather to investigate the Bible itself. However, if one does share my protestant view of the limits of church authority, one must ask oneself who does have the authority to call any man-made document “God’s Word.”

4. The Strength of Samson
In the book of Judges, Samson is depicted as a lone warrior who had divine strength. One of his feats is mentioned in Judges 16.1-3:

“Once Samson went to Gaza, where he saw a prostitute and went in to her. The Gazites were told, “Samson has come here.” So they circled around and lay in wait for him all night at the city gate. They kept quiet all night, thinking, “Let us wait until the light of the morning; then we will kill him.” But Samson lay only until midnight. Then at midnight he rose up, took hold of the doors of the city gate and the two posts, pulled them up, bar and all, put them on his shoulders, and carried them to the top of the hill that is in front of Hebron.”

Gaza being a Philistine city, this is just one of the miraculous events Samson does to embarrass the Philistines. The city gate would be a fortified structure. His total distance carrying the gates on his shoulders would be over 35 miles.

5. The content of Job
Job is a work of poetry. In the Jewish tradition Job is counted among the poetic books in the sect of scripture known as Writings (or Ketubim). This section also includes Psalms and Proverbs. While this by definition does not mean it is inaccurate, it provides no reason to suspect its purpose is anything beyond inspiring faith and devotion to God, not historical accuracy.