Posted by Helen on: 11.29.2007 /
I’m reposting part of a comment by Steve S responding to me saying I read the Bible the same way I read Jane Eyre.
Do you read all books like you read Jane Eyre?
The New York Times?
A New Kind of Christian?
The Audacity of Hope?
Gallic Wars?
The Gospel of Judas?
Because I would have a completely different approach to Jane Eyre than I would to a newspaper article or a history textbook, or even a cookbook. Don’t the genres and the authorship play any role in your approach to a piece of writing?
I guess I don’t understand what you are saying…
Could you clarify how the approach is the same?
There’s no ‘obligation’ in the way I read it any more than when I read Jane Eyre - why would there be?
I recognize that there is no obligation for you, I am merely arguing that there should be an obligation if one is to approach the text. Would you say that there is an obligation for someone to approach the City of Chicago Municipal Code, or the National Enquirer in a certain manner?
If I like something I might incorporate it into my values/goals for my life. If I don’t I won’t. End of story.
I can appreciate you saying you don’t believe the historical reconstruction of academics like Wright to be accurate depictions of reality, (although I would be really interested in why) but shouldn’t truth and reality take precedence over affinity for incorporating something into ones life?
thanks again for the dialogue!
Comment by: joe
1 11/29/07 4:52 AM | Comment Link |I can’t see how you can read the bible like a novel, given that Jane Eyre is written and modified by a single author to be read as a novel, whereas the bible isn’t.
I’d suggest that anyone saying such things does not regularly read novels, does not regularly read the bible or has a tendency to make unsupported statements about the bible.
Comment by: Helen
2 11/29/07 5:06 AM | Comment Link |Thanks for your comment Joe.
What I mean by “I read the Bible the same way I read Jane Eyre” is - to me they are both stories about people. Yes the Bible is a collection of stories about people, if you will, with some other stuff in too. But a lot of it is stories about people. I like people and reading about them and sometimes what I read impresses me enough that I might want to emulate some of the characters. Sometimes it’s the opposite - I read about people I absolutely don’t want to think, talk or act like.
The point is, I don’t read it as having more authority over me than fiction.
Does that help explain what I mean?
I’m not saying that’s how people should read the Bible - that’s up to them. I’m only saying, this is how I read it.
Underlying this is my belief that if God exists he would be fine with the way I read it. I realize there are many people who would strongly disagree.
Comment by: Helen
3 11/29/07 5:22 AM | Comment Link |Steve, I was going to respond to your request that I elaborate on how I read the Bible like Jane Eyre but then Joe commented already so some of that turned into my response to him.
I only look up recipes in cookbooks so no I don’t read them like Jane Eyre. If I read the newspaper it’s primarily to find out what’s going on in the world around me (the only newspapers I get are very local ones though - I listen to the radio and read the Internet to find out what’s going on more than 2 miles from my house :)). To some extent the news is stories of people so to some extent I read them the same way I read Jane Eyre - I’m interested in how people behave and sometimes I think about whether I do or don’t want to be like them.
Actually here’s a difference between the Bible and Jane Eyre - I think the reasons for writing them are different so, my expectations of the quality of writing of novels are higher. A similarity is - I sometimes think about why the author wrote what they wrote - what were they trying to bring about in readers?
*sigh* I really don’t think I said that. What I said is, I have no way of assessing whether they are accurate. (That’s why it only makes sense to me to view them as ’stories’)
I don’t read municipal codes but if what you’re saying is, do I pay attention to laws and consequences, then, yes, I do. I stop at red lights. I thought ‘the Bible is an instruction manual’ was one of the views you rejected as erroneous. But perhaps you are saying you see it that way to some extent.
When truth and reality are knowable, sure. That’s why I listen to the weather forecast before I go outside - it’s generally accurate enough to pay attention to and it’s relevant to what I wear. That’s why I look at the clock before I leave the house for an appointment. I would read the Bible before I left if it helped me with truth and reality in my day like the weather forecast and the clock do, but, it doesn’t, so, I don’t.
Comment by: Pam Hogeweide
4 11/29/07 11:02 AM | Comment Link |well i’m impressed that you even have the bible in your reading diet!
reading the bible like a story is a great way to discover the humanity of “bible people.” because the bible is viewed as a sacred book it is too easy to consider the characters as sacred men and women, when really, they were flesh and blood.
in recent years i’ve had interesting discussions with people who are bible scholars and who maintain that some bible characters might be fictional, invented for the sake of the story. Like Moses, for instance. At one time I would not have been able to indulge the possibility that Mo could be a story character rather than a historical person. But, as I get into writing stories myself I am learning the power of a good story. A successful novelist here in Portland says, “Fiction is the lie that tells the truth truer.” I love that. What if some stories in the bible are fictional, created to tell a truth, inspired, but not historically factual? Jesus told stories to communicate spiritual truth. What if some of our most beloved bible characters are made up? I’m not a scholar, and I certainly have not studied up on this very much, just a few simple conversations with friends….but it is an interesting thing to think about as a woman with deep evangelical roots.
So reading the bible like a collection of stories makes perfect sense to me.
Comment by: Helen
5 11/29/07 11:27 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Pam!
To be honest I don’t actively read it much these days. The stories are ‘in me’ if you know what I mean, from all the Bible study I’ve done.
If a specific one comes to mind I might look it up to see if I’m remembering it right.
I can’t sit and read it for any length of time - all my unresolved questions surface and my frustration with people who think it’s ‘clear and obvious’ what it means and basically it’s wayyyy too intense. Too triggering.
But the stories are part of me; I expect they always will be. And when I think of them I think about the people in the stories and wonder about what they said and did and how they felt.
After reading a few novels that profoundly affected me I realized there’s no reason fiction characters can’t be very influential.
And the Jewish tradition was to make up stories that fit ‘in between the lines’ when they read the stories in their Bibles. The point was ‘what can we learn from this’ rather than ‘is it TRUE?’
Comment by: Steve S.
6 11/29/07 8:49 PM | Comment Link |Helen, I don’t see the Bible as a list of rules, because it is easy to see that it is not that. But it seems like an easy parallel between the levitical codes and the legal codes of contemporary society. This of course, doesn’t mean we are to obey the levitical laws, merely that they are a part of our understanding of how God interacted with humanity. My comment about the municipal code had more to do with the contextualization we do when reading the text than with ‘obedience.’
I guess, it seems to me like you are saying that the Bible is not a source of information about the past, which I find confusing given all of the consensus of scholarly opinion about what we can reasonably know about the past given the record we possess (including the Bible). It also doesn’t seem like you are carrying your doubt through to other places.
I assume you don’t disbelieve the accounts that Washington was the first president or that Napoleon conquered much of Europe. Shouldn’t the same standards of inquiry apply to what the Bible has to say?
It was this that I was trying to get at by referencing Wright. He, and others like him, are giving us a way to assess the accuracy and validity of the Bible. Of course we have to decide how much weight to place on his academic opinion, but that is true of countelss other disciplines. Airplane engineers, Civil War historians, cartographers, etc.
I would be interested in the role any of the academic arguments (from various viewpoints) have played, or continue to play, in your understanding of the Bible.
I realize that I didn’t really adress what I wanted to above.
The question of the validity of the Bible is obviously of quite a bit of importance. I have, however, been wanting to have the conversation about, ‘how to read the Bible’ and so, to set aside the question of validity.
That really does cause problems doesn’t it?!
This takes us back to Wright’s quote/metaphor about the play. I think that is a helpful hermeneutic. If we were to set aside the question of the Bible’s historical accuracy, would this approach help in finding wisdom, and beneficial guidance from the Bible?
Comment by: Helen
7 11/29/07 9:28 PM | Comment Link |I don’t recall saying that. It might be.
No, it doesn’t cause me any problems.
I’m not sure you’re really hearing me. I’m happy with my way of reading the Bible like Jane Eyre. You’re asking me about other ways to read it but why would I change if I’m happy reading it the way I do?
Comment by: joe
8 11/30/07 4:43 AM | Comment Link |I think it would (maybe, possibly) be more honest to just say that you don’t read the bible, have no interest or motivation in reading the bible and generally can’t sum up much energy to waste time reading the bible, has about as much impact on you as a cheap novel or a chinese meal, Helen.
Well that describes my position anyway!
I’m not moved by wild claims or detailed apologies or logical explanations about why it must be accurate. It doesn’t move me. I’m just not bothered by most of it. Period. It bores me to tears.
As Helen said, I also have a bible in my head - which challenges and informs me. I’m not so sure that wasn’t the intention, how long ago did people start reading it like a book? Only a few hundred years.
Comment by: Helen
9 11/30/07 7:11 AM | Comment Link |Joe wrote:
If that’s your position, fair enough…that doesn’t exactly describe my position, though.
Jane Eyre isn’t a cheap novel and I found the way the people in it behaved quite thought-provoking. I see much to admire in Jane. She has amazing strength of character.
Having trouble reading the Bible is different from having no interest or motivation in reading it.
I completely agree with this part of what you wrote:
Comment by: joe
10 11/30/07 7:26 AM | Comment Link |fair enough. I’m not trying to pick a fight, I just think you and steve are talking across each other. I’ll shuddup now.
Comment by: Helen
11 11/30/07 7:44 AM | Comment Link |Thanks for not picking a fight - I appreciate that! :)
I sense that Steve and I are talking across each other too. I’m not sure whether I’m the cause of that. My view of the Bible does seem to be fairly close to yours, Joe.
I think mine is affected by my history of 16 years of studying the Bible and believing it was the Word of God. I don’t know whether you ever did that or thought that.
Comment by: joe
12 11/30/07 1:59 PM | Comment Link |Well, I’ve been in the church longer than that, Helen. I’m not entirely sure what I think any more.
One thing is sure - I don’t read the same bible as Mark Driscoll. That is probably a good thing.
Comment by: Paul
13 11/30/07 3:32 PM | Comment Link |all i know is somedays i’d rather read jane eyre than the bible - but then i think heh i don’t have to read the bible or jane eyre. Relief :)
Comment by: Kathy
14 11/30/07 10:04 PM | Comment Link |I often like to read your conversation here, though I rarely have time or any original thoughts to post, but I couldn’t resist mentioning the “Thursday Next” series of mysteries by Jasper Fforde, in case you haven’t read them. He writes about a surreal version of Great Britain, where literature is taken very seriously and the characters can get lost (literally) in a book. The first book in the series is “The Eyre Affair.” It gives one a new outlook on Jane Eyre. The main character of the series (Thursday Next, herself) even has a brother who is a clergyman of the church(or GSD - Global Standard Deity in the Thursday Next universe).
Comment by: joe
15 12/1/07 4:21 AM | Comment Link |Strangely I just read a Thursday Next novel. Very random, but quite enjoyable.
Comment by: Helen
16 12/1/07 6:00 AM | Comment Link |Joe, I’m not sure I ever read the same Bible as Mark Driscoll. Well, to be fair, parts of it overlap.
That’s part of the problem - that if we do read the same book it leads us to such different conclusions on various issues.
Paul, freedom of choice in what we read is a wonderful thing, isn’t it? :)
Kathy, thanks for the recommendation - I hadn’t seen those books yet.
Comment by: Benjamin ady
17 12/1/07 1:56 PM | Comment Link |way off topic. I finally went and bought golden compass, so I can make sure I read it before I see the movie. I bought it with a gift card from my super awesome parents-in-law, David and Gretta.
Bookstore gift cards are, in my opinion, the very very very best presents in the whole universe.
I practically never read the bible anymore. But I have so much of it in my head after all those years of massive exposure to it. So I hardly have to read it, I can almost just refer to the iteration in my memory.
Comment by: Helen
18 12/1/07 2:21 PM | Comment Link |I found myself very moved by the trilogy which starts with The Golden Compass. I would say it helped move me further way from Christianity, not because of its negative portrayal of the church (which is very negative) but because of its positive portrayal of what humans who aren’t ‘Christian’ are capable of. That’s all I’ll say since you haven’t read it yet :).
Exactly - that’s how it is with me. If I’m referring to a passage I generally look it up just to check I’m remembering the details right. Otherwise I don’t actively read it these days. But I couldn’t get it out of my thoughts if I tried.