Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says “yes”)

I just received my copy of Christian Smith’s The Bible Made Impossible (Brazos) and am eager to alert interested readers about it. Smith is William R. Kenan Jr. Professor of Sociology at University of Notre Dame, and his book looks at evangelical views of Scripture from a sociological perspective.

To summarize, Smith shows how evangelical “biblicism” (his term) crumbles under its own weight, but continues to survive because of its historical role in establishing evangelicalism’s sociological boundary markers.

This is why evangelicals have had a history of bending over backwards to protect their doctrine in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

Smith’s central contention is that “pervasive interpretive pluralism” renders moot evangelical presumptions of the nature and authority of Scripture. Smith means that since the Bible clearly “teaches very different things about the most significant subjects” and since highly competent biblical interpreters come to very different conclusions about the same texts, assertions about the Bible’s inerrant authority ring hollow (pp. x-xi).

Smith’s solution to this dilemma, rather than ignoring or contorting texts (what Kenton Sparks calls “scholastic alchemy” on the cover blurb), is to be more consistently evangelical, which for Smith would involve a Christ-centered hermeneutic and accepting complexity and ambiguity as part of the nature of Scripture.

Smith strikes a good balance between an “emperor has no clothes” vibe and a truly constructive and irenic tone. He will not doubt attract a vociferous response from some, but Smith’s thesis deserves careful consideration, and I am sure it will receive the attention it richly deserves.

 


  • http://thecreationofanevolutionist.blogspot.com/ Mike Beidler

    Thanks for the lead, Pete!  Consider it on my Amazon wishlist.

  • AHH

    So is this an academic tome, or something that could be appreciated by the somewhat informed layman?  How does it compare (in terms of, for example, background knowledge required or theological complexity) to your I & I, or to Kenton Sparks’ “God’s Word in Human Words”?

    • Anonymous

      It is easily accessible–far easier than GWHW. Also, it is not a book that argues anything about the Bible from the Bible, but more observes evangelical behavior. So, comparing to GWHW and I&I is comparing apples and oranges.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

    I got linked over here from a comment under my blog post. Glad I did. Definitely want to read this book… And if anyone wants to read that post, here’s the link:

    “Miniblog #71: The Bible is ‘Man-Made’”
    http://carsontclark.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/miniblog-71-the-bible-is-man-made/

  • Pingback: Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says “yes”) « Persona

  • Richard Heyduck

    How does his sociological account defend the apparently normative claim of his subtitle?

    • Anonymous

      Richard, I suppose the question is “why can’t he?” He may be in a unique position to see things more clearly. But, more importantly, publishers pick titles to grab readers’ attention.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1303927158 Richard Heyduck

        Since I don’t buy into the divorce between the descriptive and the normative, I don’t have trouble thinking it’s possible. I was just curious how he did it. I guess I’ll find out when I read the book.

  • Pingback: The Impossible Bible? « Insomniac memos

  • Richard

    It sounds an interesting read, I first heard of it from The Gospel Coalition when Kevin DeYoung reviewed it.