Wrong ways to read the bible
https://www2.cbn.com/news/cwn/man-converted-islam-then-he-met-jesus-supernatural-dream-and-it-changed-everything
https://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-who-tried-killing-family-was-being-evicted-court-records.html
https://www2.cbn.com/news/us/homeschooling-asylum-seekers-facing-deportation-us-i-stand-against-it-jesus-name
The futility of reading the Bible
There was a lot more I could have said about wrong ways to read the Bible on the show. But I actually think the nameless apologist did a pretty good job for the most part. Unfortunately, he failed to see his own biases as he warned others about theirs. I will just reiterate a couple of points that I often bring up with no meaningful response from believers. Perhaps it will be different this time: probably not:
Jesus didn't want the masses to understand him
There is no need for me to recapitulate the passages where Jesus explained why he spoke in confusing riddles. The upshot of his answer in all of the synoptics was that the mysteries of the kingdom were meant to be understood by only a few and not the many. He didn't want others to understand. It was never clear why he didn't want everyone to understand. We can only go by what he said.
Guess what, you are most likely among the many and not the few. Jesus spoke mystically so that you would be left scratching your head wondering what on earth he was on about. Your confusion is what he was going for. That is why it is so weird that some evangelistic types tell nonbelievers to read the book of John. Why would they do that since Jesus already said they would not understand? Was he wrong? It gets worse:
Only for the spiritual
Paul said something similar and I suspect most believers haven't spent much time thinking about it. I have. This is what he said:
An unspiritual person refuses to accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him such things are foolish. He is unable to understand them because they can be discerned only in a spiritual way. A spiritual person[f] discerns all things, and he is himself subject to no one else's judgment: 1Cor. 2:14-15
If an unspiritual person refuses to accept what pertains to the spirit of god, why tell them to search out spiritual truths? Do Christians disagree with Paul on this point? Did Paul misspeak? If such things are foolishness to me, why ask me to accept them since it would be beyond foolish to just accept pronouncements that I deem foolish. It gets worse:
It is not just that these things are foolish to an unspiritual person, such a person is incapable of understanding because "they can be discerned only in a spiritual way." Ridiculing me for not discerning spiritual things is about as sensible as ridiculing a newborn for not understanding calculous. If you can believe it, things get even worse:
Magically, a spiritual person discerns all things, ALL things! To Paul, this means that a spiritual person is subject to no one else's judgement. You can never understand the text the way a believer can because you are unspiritual. And Paul has given them an out so that they never have to listen to anyone when it comes to the texts or anything else. They're above such criticisms. They have properly basic beliefs as confirmed by the sensus divinitatis. Paul has given them the cover to just proclaim that they're right and you're wrong and nothing more needs to be said on the matter.
Therefore, it is not just the mysteries of Jesus, but everything in the Bible that is out of reach of the nonspiritual person. No spiritual truth is accessible to such a person. And the believer has no reason to listen to anyone who criticizes their understanding of such matters because they are subject to the judgement of no person including other believers. Reading the Bible is utterly futile for the nonbeliever. Don't waste your time if you buy into what Jesus and Paul have said about the matter.
Conclusion: No way to factcheck
As it has already been observed. Bible study is futile for a number of reasons, including the fact that there is simply no way to factcheck a claim or interpretation. You have studied to the best of your ability and someone else comes along with a different understanding of what god is saying. Who is right? How can you tell? Who is the umpire? Where is the definitive word to be found?
If everyone is getting their own spiritual confirmation that is not subject to another person's judgement, resolving theological disputes is impossible. It must be nice to have a pope who can just rule ex cathedra. Perhaps Peter can come and bind and loose on some LGBTQ issues. This would be helpful even as a nonbeliever.
I passed over a handful of videos on the subject of hell and why it is important to believe it is a real place of everlasting, conscious torment in real fire. But what's the point? Some other Christian will just come along with a different opinion and say that I am the idiot without mentioning the belief stated by the other Christian. With no way to factcheck, there is no way to win.
You might say that the only way to win is not to play. But as I have been demonstrating in my shorts series of podcasts, not playing just results in the worst of the fundamentalists using their faith to restrict my freedoms. They are not satisfied with believing things. They want to use those beliefs to control you. They are doing it now at every opportunity.
So we continue to play the game, without a net, without boundaries, and without a referee.
See you in the comments...
David Johnson
