Another quote from Spong:

"Unless the truth of the Bible is lifted out of the literalistic framework that captured it some two thousand years ago, that truth can have for modern women and men no meaning, no credibility, and no appeal. The end of such a warped version of biblical truth is surely death, and with that death will come the end of all those values that derive from the Bible, including in large measure historic Christianity. This is no exaggeration. The people of this twentieth- and twenty-first-century world of science and technology will not long take seriously a faith story that is proclaimed inside the fantastic symbols of a premodern world, especially if the popular voices of that faith story insist on a literalistic acceptance and interpretation of those symbols. When the religious liberals whose voices might reject that literalism are so mired in an overwhelming biblical ignorance and see no compelling reason to dispel that ignorance, the alternatives facing the modern Christian pilgrim are bleak.

Christianity has in our time increasingly divided into these two sterile camps, neither of which gives hope of having the ability to revive the faith system. The fundamentalists will appeal to emotional security by trafficking in religious certainty. The system they create will survive momentarily-- it might even flourish for a time-- but it will not endure. Delusions are immensely satisfying. For short periods of time people seem to enjoy turning off their brains and listening to those who assure them all is well" (Spong, "Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism", p. 133).



Shalom,
Vern

Another attempt to Spong people into oblivion.


Typical secular blindness. He assumes only two possibilities: literalism and liberal intervention. As a secularist he cannot see of course that the problem is the effects of technology obscuring the need to develop new eyes to see and ears to hear in order to draw the unique value from Christianity

We will always have literalists and secular liberals. We need more conscious understanding of the human condition and the importance of these new eyes and ears. I don't know if enough can escape the clutches of the Great Beast to pursue common sense especially with all these Spongian influences dragging the soul into secularism.


Yes, this is the danger that the Spongian influence helps to actualize.

Vern, thank you for the Spong quotes. They are highly provocative.

What does Spong suggest is the correct way to use and interpret the Bible?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

Essentially he believes that some of what we see written in the "N.T." was a reaction from the admiration of his followers, especially since he was tragically martyred. Accompany that with the very subjective approach that was commonplace then, we can't always take words at literal face value.

For example, did Jesus actually teach that he was a literal "son of god"
and that through his death, believers would have their sins "forgiven" through this "final sacrifice" and be "saved"? A great many theologians doubt that these words ever came out of Jesus' mouth or that he implied as such. Such "teachings" would have been scandalous to any observant Jew, who would abhor the thought that a human sacrifice would somehow forgive the sins forever for any "believer".

So what did Jesus actually say? That's a million dollar question that's far too difficult to answer in regards to certain specifics. Like Spong, I feel that Jesus taught more inclusion, less hypocrisy, more tolerance, less judgementalism than what he saw with many who he observed. And in this arena, he was not unusual to a certain degree.

In the Galilee region and by the coastal cities of eretz Israel were many who we now call "liberal Pharisees" or "love Pharisees". Whether Jesus saw himself as being one of them is too difficult to tell. They disliked the extra rules that "built a wall around the Torah" that the mainline Pharisees believed in, and they felt that the full love of all people, including the disenfranchised and even thieves, was to more fully recognize the love of god and his creation.

But the downside of this way of reading scripture is that it leaves us with some uncertainty. It's far more comfortable to believe in literalism because then you can be satisfied in believing that you have "the answers" right there in front of you.

Spong encourages the recognition of the great spirituality of Jesus along with the general teachings mentioned above, and that Christians should not get hung up on taking many of the verses in a literal fashion.

I don't know if this helps answer your question or not.

Shalom,
Vern

I think this is a key phrase. If we take things literally, maybe we don't have to work or dig deep into ourselves.

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.