March 1999 Question
If people can become demon possessed, why didn't God warn Moses about this when He warned him about sin (10 commandments)? Why wasn't Adam deceived? Wasn't Adam with Eve when the serpent deceived her, Adam ate also, after Eve. Why did God sentence man to death and hell but woman through childbirth is saved? (OT) If we have dominion over animals, why can they eat us? God is an image of light, was Adam created in His image, or mans? Seth was like Adam, was he different? If Noah was the 8th person, does that make Adam and Seth different? Is the garden of Eden in heaven? Why does Jesus say if you cast out devils in his name he will tell you to depart you that work iniquity? Didn't demons and devils originate in Babylon? Why did the Jews adopt the Babylonian Talmud? Have you seen the tabernacles on Mount Carmel that Daniel spoke of?
Dr. Cobb's Response
This set of questions arises from a way of
reading the Bible that creates
endless difficulties and confusions. It might be possible to
deal with
them one by one and give some kind of sensible answer, but that
would not
be very helpful. I will instead offer a few comments from a specifically
process perspective, recognizing that most of what I say could
be asserted
by almost any Bible scholar in the oldline churches.
The Bible is a thoroughly
human document written, edited, and compiled
over many centuries by numerous people. From the perspective
of process
thought, to say that it is thoroughly human does not exclude
God from
involvement in its authorship. God is present and active in every
moment
of human experience, and in some moments that activity, the Holy
Spirit, is
more effective than in others. In extreme cases we may properly
speak of
someone as inspired. There are many inspired passages in the
Jewish and
Christian scriptures.
But inspiration does not by any means entail
inerrancy. An inspired
author may rely on inaccurate historical information and prescientific
notions of the natural world. Inspiration does not guarantee
that a writer
fully transcend the cultural values of one's time and write for
all the
ages. Hence to press even the most inspired words in the Bible
for
accurate information or definitive judgments will often lead
to absurdities.
Christians are fortunate that the Bible does
not make the claim to be
inerrant or even consistently inspired. There are a few places
where
individuals do make strong claims for what they have to say.
For example,
a prophet may assert that the Word of the Lord came to him, and
"Thus says
the Lord". We should take these claims to extraordinary
inspiration
seriously. But we should also note that what follows are typically
statements directed to particular people at particular times
and places. It remains for us to discern their relevance today. Despite this
lack of
claim to divine inspiration in most of Scripture, many Christians
want to
claim inerrancy and infallibility for every passage in it. This
witnesses
to the human tendency to idolatry -- treating the earthen vessels
as if
they were God.
We are now heirs of two centuries of Biblical
scholarship based on
assumptions of the sort I have sketched. Some of it is iconoclastic
and
largely negative. It has an important role in clearing away idolatrous
attitudes toward the Bible.
Most of it is extremely helpful in giving
us access to the astonishing
richness of insight and deep wisdom of the ancient Jews. This
insight and
wisdom had to do especially with the relationship of God and
the world, and
no other literature, ancient or modern, supersedes this in illuminating
these most important of all questions. The Bible remains our
basic source
for reflecting on these matters.
For this purpose the diversity within the
scriptures is very valuable. One cannot simply agree with everything one finds there. There
are
contradictions, and there are depictions of God in some of the
earlier
writings that a Christian simply cannot accept. But for the most
part the
diversity of experiences of God reflected in scripture enable
the Bible to
speak to us now in many and varied conditions and situations.
Passages
that one generation ignores often become crucially important
to a later
generation.
Several of the issues posed by the questioner
deal with the Genesis
account of creation. These stories contain internal contradictions
as well
as prescientific ideas about how the world came into being. But
when we
recognize this and move to the deeper theological level, they
are immensely
important for good and ill.
For many generations they were read as authorizing
human exploitation of
the natural world. In the past few decades we have realized that
this
exploitation is threatening to render the Earth uninhabitable.
This has
brought us to repentance.
It has also brought us to study the creation
stories afresh. We have
recognized that, although human beings are given a central place
in them,
all creatures are affirmed as of value, and the human role for
which the
stories call is not so much that of exploiter as of steward.
The
theological importance of these alternative ways of understanding
the
relation of God, humanity, and the other creatures is not affected
by
recognition that the stories are told by fallible human beings
and cannot
be relied on for factual accuracy.
Of equal importance is what the stories say
about the relation of males
and females. Of the two creation stories, one sees male and female
as
together constituting the human that is created by God. The other
definitely subordinates woman to man. It is this subordination
that has
dominated the history of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Today
we must
expose this account for the patriarchal prejudice that it expresses
and
establishes.
On what grounds can we pick and choose among
Biblical passages and themes? This is the heart
of the theological question today. For Christians, the answer
is that we read all of the Bible from the perspective given us
in
Christ. But that is only the beginning of an answer. We must
go on to
clarify what we mean by Christ and how Christ is related to the
historical
Jesus. Are the words of Jesus our final authority? No, not if
that means
that they are treated literally and legalistically. But we do
find in
Jesus a purity of the way in which he points to God's love of
us and our
calling to love God and fellow creatures that guides all our
critical
reflection about other ideas and themes in the scriptures.
It is sad, indeed, that for so many people
being a Christian is associated
with an idolatrous understanding of the Bible. The writings that
should
liberate us to think critically and creatively in ever new situations
have
been turned into bonds that tie us to ancient and outdated notions.
We
become absorbed in petty and even silly questions that have nothing
to do
with faith in Christ. Paul's distressed question to the Galatians
applies
to the contemporary church as well: "Having started with
the Spirit, are
you now ending with the flesh?" (3:3)
If you found this article helpful, please consider contributing to Process & Faith by making a donation or becoming a member.
Process & Faith is a program of the Center for Process Studies, an affiliated program of the Claremont School of Theology.
This site and all content ©2006 Process & Faith, unless otherwise noted.
Please support this website by becoming a member of Process & Faith.