Letters to the editor

Desacralizing Bible would tear heart out of church
I read the unusual article by Dan G. Adams with complete dismay (“We should desacralize, critically consider what Bible says,” Sept. 28).
I realize some of his arguments are based on ideas that go back into the 1800s. That doesn’t give him any more credibility.
The bottom line is that desacral-izing the Bible would be like tearing the heart and soul out of Christianity. That seems to me to be a very high price for making the author feel “liberated” and “healthy.”
If indeed the Bible is simply a work by nomadic humans looking for answers, then it has no credibility or authority. It would allow each of us to make up our own religion as we go.
If the Bible isn’t a sacred work, the church itself has no relevance and no authority to tell us how we should live or how we can achieve salvation. That is hardly liberation. It could be described best as anarchy.
Even the stories of Jesus Christ become nothing but fantasies.
Forget about our system of morals based on biblical teachings. No longer would our ministers be able to start reading scripture by saying “Listen now to the word of God.”
Blaming the Bible for man’s often obscene behavior is simply wrong. Blame transference is a typical human trait, but the real truth is that the atrocities are actually committed by the man, not the word of God.
My biggest disappointment isn’t that this thing was written by a Methodist pastor but that such a message should be distributed by the Witness. That is a real mistake, in my opinion.
Bert C. Striegler
Rochelle

Metaphor, allegory, opinion deliver message of Scripture
I think Dan Adams is right on regarding changing the way we view the Bible without diminishing its importance to our beliefs (“We should desacralize, critically consider what Bible says,” Sept. 28).
A quotation attributed to George Bernard Shaw is that the British and Americans are two people separated by a common language. The same might be said of Christians. We are many people separated by a common book.
The importance of the Bible is its message, not its factuality. Its message comes to us in folklore, metaphor, allegory and opinion as well as some factual accounts.
When Christians can get away from, “God said it. I believe it. That settles it” (which implies that I am right, and you are wrong if you disagree with me), search out the message together, and apply it to our lives, then we might be begin to travel together in a positive direction.
I wonder about two things when I encounter insistence on Biblical factuality and literal interpretation:
n How many of our young people leave religion in disgust when they are told to believe events that are highly improbable or physically impossible.
n How many literal readers of the Bible really believe in the Nephilim, as told in the Genesis 6?
Understanding the truth of the message contained in the Bible is the starting point for a life of faith and service. Demanding that it be read as a fact book is a stumbling block.
Russ Marlett
Wimberley

I’ll continue to believe Holy Writ is infallible
I read with interest Dan Adams’ “My view” article urging that we “desac-ralize” and “critically consider” Holy Writ (“We should desacralize, critically consider what Bible says,” Sept. 28).
Mr. Adams informs us that Scripture isn’t inerrant, infallible or sacrosanct. In fact, we are urged to suffer the like of former Episcopal Bishop John Spong and acknowledge that imperfections in Scripture have spawned injustice!
That seems to me to be proverbial tossing of the baby out with the bathwater.
I grew up in an admittedly non-Methodist tradition that acknowledges the Bible to be divinely inspired, true and infallible in every meaningful respect. I’ll continue to embrace that view.
“Desacralizing” Holy Writ might be easy enough, but I suspect it is human abuse and misuse of Scripture, rather than the word itself, that errs. A study of such human desecration of Holy Writ would be a self-examination worthy of effort and every bit as “healthy and liberating” as the opposite course.
We need not insist the word of God is just another imperfect book.
Frank Bain Jr.
Stockdale