Letters to the editor

View on desacralized Bible follows flawed reasoning
Dan Adams wants to “desacralize” the Bible, insisting it is no more than the “history of the human search for the holy, the transcendent” (“We should desacralize, critically consider what Bible says,” Sept. 28). The flaws in reasoning are too numerous for a letter to the editor, so I’ll address only a few.
Mr. Adams reluctantly acknowledges the Bible has been “distorted” to “sanction injustices.” Those distortions are evidence that the Bible itself is flawed?
He suggests the Bible was only “sacralized” by readers who “imagine it ‘came down’ to us directly from God.” Mr. Adams conveniently ignores the history of the canonization of the Bible, which includes second century believers who knew very well the humanity of the biblical authors and strongly believed the biblical writings to be divinely inspired and uniquely authoritative.
If we ignore those points and follow Mr. Adams’ reasoning, where does it lead us? The logical conclusion is that the Bible is just one among many human writings about spiritual things, to be set alongside many other human writings.
We can pick and choose what we want from this broad menu. What if I like the Quran’s teaching on husbands disciplining their wives with a light beating? Or the polytheism of the Bhagavad Ghita? Or the polygamy in Mormon doctrine? What if I want to ignore what the Bible says about love and justice? What if I find inspiration through a cookbook and decide God is a cumquat?
Yes, it’s a healthy and liberating occurrence for a debate team or a philosophy class. But it’s not much of a unifying foundation for a church. It’s certainly nothing to give your life to.
J. David Trawick
San Antonio

Many opinions about Bible have me jumping for joy
I jumped for joy when I read the Viewpoint page in the Sept. 28 issue. John Yeaman’s letter on Christian pluralism (“Learning about other faiths helps broaden our own”) was great! 
Dan Adams speaks for more than a few of us United Methodists when he posits that the Bible should be viewed from a more objective and critical standpoint (“We should desacralize, critically consider what Bible says”).
My own experience has shown me that Scripture is often used for ignoble purposes. I particularly wince at verses taken out of context and metaphors used as literal truth.
Time spent in a community of Bible inerrantists taught me how lives can be damaged and hearts broken when so-called promises of God are held out as absolute fact. When healings don’t come and prayers seem to go unanswered, yet another Scripture is quoted to “explain” God (as if God can be explained).
Current biblical scholars such as Bart Ehrman and Marcus Borg offer much insight into how the Bible was compiled. It is very helpful to understand the history, culture and politics of the times in which the books of the Bible were written.
Just as God may have inspired the early writers, I believe God is still inspiring those willing to go out on a limb to educate and illuminate.
Thanks, Dan Adams.
Shelley Henderson
La Vernia