The Scriptures Don’t Demand Such Blind Obedience

Recently I did a series of interviews, mostly by phone from my office at home, with radio stations all over the country calling to discuss my book. Most of the broadcasts were enjoyable because it’s a provocative book--the title is “How to Get to Heaven Without Going to Church”--and most radio talk shows like provocative topics.

A handful of interviews, however, were broadcast on Christian radio stations where the host and the callers were fundamentalists.

In my 40 years of ministry, I have never had a good discussion with people who take the Bible literally. Inevitably, they ask loaded questions, quote the Bible out of context, and question whether I am a Christian.

On one show, for example, we had just gone on the air when the host asked, “So you are a Christian minister. Why did you write this book?”

It was a fair question, and I answered that the book is trying to appeal to those who feel disfranchised--fence-sitters, newcomers or longtime Christians with open minds.

The host asked, “How?”

I answered, “By taking Christianity back to its roots, talking about who Jesus really was and demythologizing many of the stories.”

As an example, I cited the Nativity stories and explained how they were really two very different stories that have become intertwined over the years. Neither of them tells the actual facts about the birth of Jesus, but both share a truth: from the empty tomb we see that the birth of Jesus was and is very special.

He did not like my answer and told me that these stories recount what actually happened.

I replied that there seem to be many contradictions in the stories. I mentioned that the Bible refers to Joseph as the father of Jesus.

“Where?” the host demanded angrily.

When I said, “Luke 2:33,” I could almost hear all the Bibles being opened.

“I have it right here,” said the host. “It says ‘Joseph,’ not ‘father.’ ”

I asked if he was using the King James version, and he said he was. I suggested that the original version in Greek used “father.” The host was livid. “You are toying with the Word of God,” he said, and quickly cut me off.

This is typical of my interactions with Biblical literalists. Name-calling is also part of the routine on these shows. Callers who disagree with me suggest I am a false prophet or worse: the antichrist or “the lawless one.” I tell them I respect their position, but when I ask why I can’t believe in a different way, I am told that what is in the Scriptures is the only way.

I would like to ask them about early Christians who had no New Testament to quote from. Were they wrong?

Why are some people so rigid that we can’t have a discussion and share knowledge? Is it because some people don’t want to think for themselves? Do they need to see everything as either black or white with no gray areas? I can’t find where the Scriptures demand such blind obedience. Jesus and Paul questioned the ways of Judaism. They also encountered the same kind of rigidity--loaded questions, name-calling, Scripture quoting and legalistic answers--that often did not make sense.

My brand of Christianity frees me to question everything. It allows me to seek answers different from some of the traditional ones. I have been given the gift of a brain so that I can make my own decisions and formulate new ideas. I only wish that fundamentalists would respect my point of view and allow me to work out my own salvation without fear and trembling.

*

On Faith is a forum for Orange County clergy and others to offer their views on religious topics of general interest. Submissions, which will be published at the discretion of The Times and are subject to editing, should be delivered to Orange County religion page editor Jack Robinson.