8.  Why must religious scriptures be interpreted?

Summary:

•	Many religious believers read their scriptures literally, which means they assume that every word means exactly what it says.  But this approach, called literalism, misses or ignores the contradictions, symbolism, and cultural complexity in ancient texts.

•	In the Book of Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve they will die if they eat the forbidden fruit, yet they do not die immediately.  This compels readers to think about what God actually meant because a strictly literal reading would suggest that God lied.

•	The Bible contains hundreds of similar contradictions: some passages describe God as peaceful and loving, while others show God ordering war and violence.  These passages cannot all be literally true at the same time. 

•	Different branches of Christianity use slightly different versions of the Holy Bible.  The four Gospels contradict each other and were chosen from a much larger collection of books.  Early Church leaders accepted the Gospels’ inconsistencies, reasoning that the truth must be in them somewhere.  Jesus often taught using symbolism and metaphors rather than direct statements and literalism.  For these reasons, interpretation has always been part of the Christian faith. 

•	When people apply strict literalism to a text full of symbolism and contradictions, they risk moral confusion and even hypocrisy, especially when literalism is used to justify harsh, ancient punishments that most people today would consider cruel and immoral. 

•	The true purpose of religious scriptures, according to many religious teachers and many near-death experiencers, is to deepen your faith and inspire love, compassion, and mercy toward others.

Some believers assume that their preferred religious scripture requires very little thought.  They believe that every story is obvious, every teaching is simple, every sentence is straightforward, and every rule is absolute.  They assume that the scripture contains no contradictions and that nothing in it could cause confusion.  They assume that only one meaning is possible—the direct meaning—and therefore they see no need for interpretation.  They prefer not to consider that one direct meaning might contradict another direct meaning.

That belief is called literalism, a word derived from the Latin word literalis. It asserts that every word in a religious scripture must be true in a directly literal way, rather than true in a symbolic or metaphorical way.  Non-literal meanings are never obvious: you must ponder the text with no certainty of being correct because your interpretation is only your opinion.  Literalism often arises from a sincere desire to honor God, but it also reflects fear: fear that multiple interpretations might mean they are wrong—and that being wrong might anger God.  So some believers assume that the scripture means exactly what it says and they never need to interpret it, only obey it without much thought.  Most of them are deeply devout and that devotion deserves respect, but the belief that God wants literalism applied to every scripture, always, without exception—every story, every sentence, every word—is dangerous.  It ignores contradictions, moral dilemmas, and the complexity of ancient texts.

This does not mean literalism is always wrong.  The direct meaning of a sentence is often the intended meaning. But literalism can become an excuse for not seeking deeper meaning in the scripture.  God gave us powerful minds to ponder and interpret scripture.  Ancient texts were written in cultures where symbolism, metaphor, and exaggeration were common tools for teaching moral lessons.  When a person refuses to acknowledge contradictions, that person risks becoming a religious hypocrite.  And what would God think of that?

The Holy Bible, with more than a thousand pages, contains many contradictions.  One appears early in the Book of Genesis.  It is the story of when God commands the first man and the first woman (Adam and Eve) to not eat fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, a tree located in the Garden of Eve.

The direct meaning is obvious: If you eat the forbidden fruit, you will die.  The story says a serpent later tempts Eve to eat the forbidden fruit.  She tells him of God’s warning.  The serpent replies, “You will not certainly die; for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”  (Genesis 3:4-5.)  Now persuaded, Eve eats some of the fruit and so does Adam.  Then they realize they are naked.  Embarrassed, they use leaves to cover parts of their bodies.  God later returns and asks what happened.  Ashamed, they explain.

What happens next is a contradiction: Adam and Eve do not die.  God said they would die if they ate the forbidden fruit, but they do not die.  The story suggests the serpent was right: by eating the fruit, they gain knowledge of good and evil.  Instead of dying, they are expelled by God from the Garden of Eden. 

Is God a liar?  Most readers conclude that God is not a liar, that Adam and Eve died a spiritual death, not a literal death.  That is a reasonable interpretation—but the Book of Genesis never says that.  Genesis never directly says that Adam and Eve died a spiritual death.  We, the readers, interpret that answer.  This Biblical story compels us to interpret an answer, to find a non-literal answer with a moral lesson, because otherwise the story portrays God as a liar.

Defenders of literalism might argue that Adam and Eve did die eventually.  Genesis 5:5 says Adam died a physical death—after 930 years.  That is not an immediate death.  And God gave Adam and Eve the power to have children.  Some people might call that a bad result.  Others call it a good result.  So, when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, did they sin?  Were the results of their actions only bad?  Is God a liar or at least deceptive?  We are compelled to interpret the answers.

Scholars have identified hundreds of contradictions in the Bible.  Many passages depict God as peaceful, as in Psalm 34:14, Psalm 144:1, Proverbs 20:3, Isaiah 2:4, and Isaiah 54:10.  However, other passages portray God commanding war or violence, including Exodus 15:3, Exodus 17:16, Exodus 23:27-31, Deuteronomy 7:2, Deuteronomy 20:12-17, Joshua 6:21, and 1 Samuel 15:3.  If you embrace every passage literally, then God is both peaceful and violent, both merciful and merciless.  If you choose some passages and reject others, then you are interpreting scripture.  If you refuse to interpret any passage, then your faith is vulnerable to arguments that simply point out the contradictions.

Some defenders of literalism say the Bible is without error because God was involved in creating the Bible.  But how was God involved?  Did God dictate every word?  If so, did God dictate the Book of Psalms?  The Book of Psalms comprises more than one hundred songs, all praising God.  The book is known in Hebrew as תהילים (pronounced Tehillim), meaning “Praises.”  The Psalms are songs of human praise for God.  Why would God dictate human songs that praise God?  That would mean people have no free will.  Any song of human love praising God is not really sincere if God dictated the song. 

This implies that the all-powerful Creator of the Universe somehow lacks emotional maturity, that God suffers from self-hatred and is addicted to lavish praise.  The most loving, most gentle people do not need praise.  (They may like to hear praise, but they do not really need praise.)  Is God less mentally healthy than those gentle people whom God created?  Did God not trust the writers of the Psalms to be sincere?  Could they not write songs praising God without God dictating their words?  And if God can control human minds, then why use that Divine power to control an activity as innocent as writing songs?  Why not use that Divine power to stop evils such as rape and murder? 

Perhaps those questions have some good answers, but only by interpreting the scripture.  The Psalms are more than human songs praising God, they are prayers, expressing human beliefs about God, expressed as poetry to excite your emotions and challenge your mind.  The Psalms are also a connection to past generations of people who had emotions, concerns, and desires very similar to yours.  The Psalms, therefore, have an authenticity that only humans can provide.

Most scholars of the Bible agree that it was written by many authors over many centuries.  Each author wrote what he believed God had done and what God wants.  Those authors were inspired by God, not controlled by God.  Perhaps not every story in the Bible is historically accurate, but that was not their purpose.  They were written to be consistent about faith, not consistent about facts.  They were written for readers to ponder what the stories reveal about faith and morality.

The Christian Bible includes the New Testament, which in fact contains fewer books than it once did.  Many centuries ago, some Church officials decided that some of the original books were not important enough, and so those books were removed and placed in a category called the apocrypha scripta—a Latin term meaning “hidden scriptures.”  Those books are not really hidden: they are published as a set called the Apocrypha.  As a result of those changes, Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholic Christianity, and Protestant Christianity each use somewhat different versions of the Christian Bible.  The books of the Apocrypha also differ, though typically they include the Books of Tobit, Judith, Baruch, and Enoch, among several others. 

If God dictated every word in the Christian Bible, then which version of the Bible do you mean?  Literalism rarely addresses this.

The New Testament includes four short biographies of Jesus, called Gospels, which are named Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  (Their names may refer to their authors, but nobody knows for certain.)  The Gospels share some stories in common; indeed, some portions of Matthew, Mark, and Luke use very similar wording.  Despite their similarities, however, all four Gospels contain inconsistencies.  In fact, their inconsistencies are why the Christian Bible has four Gospels instead of only one.  Centuries after the crucifixion of Jesus, the New Testament was compiled by very religious men sometimes called the “Church fathers.”  At that time, many more than four Gospels existed across the Roman Empire—including the Gospel of Thomas, of Marcion, of the Ebionites, of the Hebrews, of the Nazarenes, of Apelles, of Basilides, of Nicodemus, of Batholomew, of Mary, of Peter, of Philip, and, remarkably, of Judas Iscariot.  All were written by believers in Jesus Christ.  With so many Gospels to choose from, the Church fathers could not be certain which one was the most accurate.  Unable to agree on only one, they selected four, reasoning that between those four Gospels the truth must be in there somewhere.  Minor inconsistencies were tolerated as long as the basic teachings were in there.  The Church fathers expected those scriptures to be interpreted—because otherwise the four Gospels are inconsistent.  Today, if a Christian assumes absolute literalism when reading the four Gospels, that believer is assuming more certainty than even the Church fathers had.

Jesus was not a literalist.  This fact is revealed in the Gospels again and again, for Jesus often used symbolism in his teachings.  Sometimes this caused confusion among literalists.  In the Gospel of John 3:1-9, Jesus told a Jewish religious scholar, a Pharisee named Nicodemus, that “unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”  Confused, Nicodemus asked Jesus how a man can be born when he is already old, or enter his mother’s womb a second time to be born?  Jesus explained, “what is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.”  Nicodemus remained confused.  Today, Christians know that “born again” refers to a profound religious experience that transforms a person’s moral beliefs and priorities, and so the Christian begins a new life spiritually, not literally.  Nevertheless, many Christians today are literalists, as religiously devout as Nicodemus was, without realizing that literalism can become an obstacle that prevents spiritual wisdom from being fully understood.  In the Gospel of Matthew 18:21-22, Jesus was asked how many times you should forgive someone.  Seven times?  Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but 77 times.”  (Some translations say the number is 70 times seven, which equals 490 times.)  Is a person supposed to carry around a list of how many times that person has forgiven someone?  Jesus meant that there is no limit on the number of times you should forgive someone.  He answered with a large number because he knew that nobody would maintain a list.

When a religious scripture contains symbolism and inconsistencies, as the Bible does, then treating it with literalism creates moral contradictions.  And those contradictions can harm your faith.  Literalism justifies stoning people to death for minor sins because ancient texts once commanded that.  The songs of the Psalms praising God become insincere when literalism treats every word as directly from God, not from imperfect people.  If you recognize that the Psalms were written by imperfect people who love God, people who were as imperfect as you are, that fact can strengthen your faith.  Their words become sentiments worth pondering. 

What matters most in this lifetime is how well you love others and how well you love your own soul.  Love that is compassionate, respectful, forgiving, selfless, unconditional.  If you treat religious scriptures in ways that deny or corrupt these expressions of love, then outwardly you may appear religious but inwardly you are not truly faithful.  Near-death experiencers have emphasized this point.  So have religious sages for thousands of years, warning against religious hypocrisy.  The true purpose of religious scriptures is to interpret and ponder those words in ways that deepen your faith by encouraging you to treat everyone with love, compassion, and mercy.  Anything different misses the point.