Tuesday, 16 February 2016
Seeing Judaism Anew: Christianity's Sacred Obligation,
Ed. Mary C. Boys, Rowman and Littlefield, 2002
Chapter 13, "Covenant and Conversion" (pp. 151-162), page 153
The third of Philip Cunningham's list of approaches to the Bible is perhaps the most liberal:
Still another group regards the Bible as a profound instance of human literary genius. They see little or no need to posit a divine influence in its origins or composition. Such persons may or may not consider themselves to be people of faith and the Bible exerts little or no special authority for them This perspective might be called the "Bible as human artifact" approach.
And don't we all know people like this. This category sweeps up in one place a number of liberal positions at that end of the spectrum and, in my experience, generally means little or no faith.
Actually, this position seems to represent a contradiction. If you cannot accept the story of, for example, the Exodus from Egypt with the parting and crossing of the Reed Sea, it appears contradictory to see it as profound literary genius. If it peddling an outright lie, then there must be a problem with it. Conversely, if it is a work of genius, then there must be some truth in it and thereofre it must have some authority and purpose. What do you think?