Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

The Danger of Calling Behavior "Biblical"

Posted by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 8:27 AM
  • 33 Replies
5 moms liked this
By Rachel Held Evans, Special to CNN

On “The Daily Show” recently, Jon Stewart grilled Mike Huckabee about a TV ad in which Huckabee urged voters to support “biblical values” at the voting box.

When Huckabee said that he supported the “biblical model of marriage,” Stewart shot back that “the biblical model of marriage is polygamy.”

And there’s a big problem, Stewart went on, with reducing “biblical values” to one or two social issues such as abortion and gay marriage, while ignoring issues such as poverty and immigration reform.

It may come as some surprise that as an evangelical Christian, I cheered Stewart on from my living room couch.

As someone who loves the Bible and believes it to be the inspired word of God, I hate seeing it reduced to an adjective like Huckabee did. I hate seeing my sacred text flattened out, edited down and used as a prop to support a select few political positions and platforms.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

And yet evangelicals have grown so accustomed to talking about the Bible this way that we hardly realize we’re doing it anymore. We talk about “biblical families,” “biblical marriage,” “biblical economics,” “biblical politics,” “biblical values,” “biblical stewardship,” “biblical voting,” “biblical manhood,” “biblical womanhood,” even “biblical dating” to create the impression that the Bible has just one thing to say on each of these topics — that it offers a single prescriptive formula for how people of faith ought to respond to them.

But the Bible is not a position paper. The Bible is an ancient collection of letters, laws, poetry, proverbs, histories, prophecies, philosophy and stories spanning multiple genres and assembled over thousands of years in cultures very different from our own.

When we turn the Bible into an adjective and stick it in front of another loaded word, we tend to ignore or downplay the parts of the Bible that don’t quite fit our preferences and presuppositions. In an attempt to simplify, we force the Bible’s cacophony of voices into a single tone and turn a complicated, beautiful, and diverse holy text into a list of bullet points we can put in a manifesto or creed. More often than not, we end up more committed to what we want the Bible to say than what it actually says.

Nowhere is this more evident than in conversations surrounding “biblical womanhood.”

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Growing up in the Bible Belt, I received a lot of mixed messages about the appropriate roles of women in the home, the church and society, each punctuated with the claim that this or that lifestyle represented true “biblical womanhood.”

In my faith community, popular women pastors such as Joyce Meyer were considered unbiblical for preaching from the pulpit in violation of the apostle Paul’s restriction in 1 Timothy 2:12 (“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent”), while Amish women were considered legalistic for covering their heads in compliance with his instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:5 (“Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head”).

Pastors told wives to submit to their husbands as the apostle Peter instructed in 1 Peter 3:1, but rarely told them to avoid wearing nice jewelry as the apostle instructs them just one sentence later in 1 Peter 3:3. Despite the fact that being single was praised by both Jesus and Paul, I learned early on that marriage and motherhood were my highest callings, and that Proverbs 31 required I keep a home as tidy as June Cleaver’s.

Opinion: What all those Jesus jokes tell us

This didn’t really trouble me until adulthood, when I found myself in a childless egalitarian marriage with a blossoming career and an interest in church leadership and biblical studies. As I wrestled with what it meant to be a woman of faith, I realized that, despite insistent claims that we don’t “pick and choose” from the Bible, any claim to a “biblical” lifestyle requires some serious selectivity.

After all, technically speaking, it is “biblical” for a woman to be sold by her father to pay off debt, “biblical” for a woman to be required to marry her rapist, “biblical” for her to be one of many wives.

So why are some Bible passages lifted out and declared “biblical,” while others are explained away or simply ignored? Does the Bible really present a single prescriptive lifestyle for all women?

These were the questions that inspired me to take a page from A.J. Jacobs, author of “The Year of Living Biblically”, and try true biblical womanhood on for size—literally, no “picking and choosing.”

This meant, among other things, growing out my hair, making my own clothes, covering my head whenever I prayed, abstaining from gossip, remaining silent in church (unless I was “prophesying,” of course), calling my husband “master,” even camping out in my front yard during my period to observe the Levitical purity laws that rendered me unclean.

During my yearlong experiment, I interviewed a variety of women practicing biblical womanhood in different ways — an Orthodox Jew, an Amish housewife, even a polygamist family — and I combed through every commentary I could find, reexamining the stories of biblical women such as Deborah, Ruth, Hagar, Tamar, Mary Magdalene, Priscilla and Junia.

My goal was to playfully challenge this idea that the Bible prescribes a single lifestyle for how to be a woman of faith, and in so doing, playfully challenge our overuse of the term “biblical.” I did this not out of disdain for Scripture, but out of love for it, out of respect for the fact that interpreting and applying the Bible is a messy, imperfect and — at times —frustrating process that requires humility and grace as we wrestle the text together.

The fact of the matter is, we all pick and choose. We’re all selective in our interpretation and application of the biblical text. The better question to ask one another is why we pick and choose the way that we do, why we emphasis some passages and not others. This, I believe, will elevate the conversation so that we’re using the Bible, not as a blunt weapon, but as a starting point for dialogue.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Rachel Held Evans.

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 8:27 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
survivorinohio
by René on Nov. 18, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Good read, gonna come back and read it again after I get my coffee

How far you go in life depends on your being: tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of both the weak and strong.  Because someday in life you would have been one or all of these.  GeorgeWashingtonCarver


SunshneDaydream
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 8:44 AM
7 moms liked this

 Great article, but I'd like to also point out that when it comes to politics and the laws of our country, biblical interpretation should be completely taken out of the equation because we are a secular nation that does not use religion to dictate law.

rfurlongg
by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 9:29 AM
Bump!
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
mikiemom
by Ruby Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 9:38 AM
2 moms liked this

I disagree, much of the christian bible is designed to thwart other religions and beliefs and make them "wrong". I think people should be able to worship as they wish, I don't think sociatal laws should be based on a single religion's text.

rfurlongg
by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 9:43 AM
The author is not advocating the joining of religion and politics. She is pointing out the choice of some groups to impose certain biblical laws and ignore other laws.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
annabl1970
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 9:54 AM
1 mom liked this
I agree.
I just have to add: the same with Quran and Torah. So tired of people using them to justify injustice. Or support the the laws which are
convinient that moment and forget about others laws, if don't fit in in their agenda.
IMO religion should have NO impact on government whatsoever.


Quoting rfurlongg:

The author is not advocating the joining of religion and politics. She is pointing out the choice of some groups to impose certain biblical laws and ignore other laws.

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
circle_of_life
by Bronze Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 10:01 AM
2 moms liked this

 Very interesting. It honestly just strengthens my belief that the Bible is pretty much just a collection of convoluted, contradictory hogwash.

AdrianneHill
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 11:42 AM
2 moms liked this
I liked the article and wish more people of faith were as engaged and truly thinking about their faith as she is.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
rfurlongg
by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 12:16 PM
So do I.

Quoting AdrianneHill:

I liked the article and wish more people of faith were as engaged and truly thinking about their faith as she is.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
mustbeGRACE
by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

This  woman didn't mention Christ one time.

And on top of that, she's ignorany and silly.



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN