B&C <\/em>review is largely negative. It declares right off the bat that this book will \u201cfizzle \u2026 at least among the readers to whom it is primarily addressed: evangelical Christians.\u201d And the review goes on to complain at great length that Smith\u2019s book does not provide an acceptable substitute for the biblicism the book critiques.<\/p>\nThis negative review very much makes me want to read Smith\u2019s book. Particularly the final sentences, which read: \u201cBut what do I know? I\u2019m neither a sociologist nor a theologian. Just a biblicist.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ah, OK then.<\/p>\n
The reviewer, Robert Gundry, is a professor emeritus at Westmont College and an engaging fellow, if a bit of a name-dropper. Once B&C<\/em> had made the initial decision to have Smith\u2019s critique of biblicism reviewed by a biblicist, he became a good choice, but that initial decision was unhelpful.<\/p>\nI suppose the idea was that a biblicist reviewer would be expected to engage Smith\u2019s critique and to attempt a defense of biblical literalism. Gundry doesn\u2019t do that. Whether or not he could<\/em> have thus can\u2019t be known, but he chose another approach.<\/p>\nHere is Gundry:<\/p>\n
What does [Smith] mean by \u201cbiblicism,\u201d and by its making the Bible \u201cimpossible\u201d? Biblicism makes the Bible impossible to put into practice, according to Smith; and as used by him, biblicism means an emphasis on the Bible\u2019s \u201cexclusive authority, infallibility [or \u2018inerrancy\u2019], perspicuity, self-sufficiency, internal consistency, self-evident meaning, and universal applicability,\u201d though not every version of biblicism contains all these ingredients, at least not all in equal measure.<\/p>\n
How then does the foregoing constellation of emphases make the Bible impossible to put into practice? It does so by producing \u201cpervasive interpretive pluralism,\u201d so that evangelical Christians differ widely on what they should believe and how they should behave; and their differences include important as well as unimportant matters. Thus \u201cpractice\u201d includes belief as well as behavior, and \u201cimpossible\u201d has to do with shared<\/em> practices. For example, biblicists differ over human free will and divine sovereignty; penal satisfaction and Christus Victor; creation and evolution; sprinkling and immersion; divorce and remarriage; complementarianism and egalitarianism; just war and pacifism; pretribulationism and posttribulationism; amillennialism, premillennialism, and postmillennialism; everlasting torment and annihilation; soteriological exclusivism, inclusivisim, and universalism; and on and on. In other words, biblicism fails to produce the theological and behavioral unity that Smith thinks necessary to validate it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\nThose last six words are where I call foul.<\/p>\n
It won\u2019t do to try to foist that off onto Smith. He<\/em> is not the one seeking the authoritative consistency of \u201ctheological and behavioral unity\u201d in the certainty promised, but not delivered, by biblicism. It is the biblical literalists themselves who seek this validation. That\u2019s why<\/em> they\u2019re biblicists. That unity and authoritative clarity is what biblicism is supposed to be for.<\/em> Smith is merely describing the problem that biblicism was adopted to solve.<\/p>\nAnd his main point seems to be that it doesn\u2019t work.<\/p>\n
Gundry provides a summary of Smith\u2019s contention that biblicism, in fact, fails to deliver the authoritative certainty it was meant to provide:<\/p>\n
Why then do biblicists go wrong? Because they mistakenly assume that the Bible contains no errors in whatever it says, always speaks clearly, and therefore can be understood correctly by any able- and fair-minded individual who reads it inductively. \u2026<\/p>\n
Undermining the biblicists\u2019 assumptions, according to Smith, are biblical texts that almost no reader, biblicists included, actually lives by, such as \u201cGreet one another with a holy kiss\u201d; that need explaining away by arbitrary appeals to cultural relativism, such as Paul\u2019s prohibiting women from braiding their hair; that seem so strange as to merit neglect, such as the statement, \u201cCretans are always liars, bad beasts, lazy bellies\u201d; and that disagree with other biblical texts, such as the disallowing of women\u2019s speech in church meetings over against an allowance if their heads are covered.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
That\u2019s Smith\u2019s critique. But rather than engage it or seek to defend biblicism against such criticism, Gundry goes on offense, arguing that Smith\u2019s proposed alternative approach to the Bible cannot provide the authoritative clarity that biblicists seek:<\/p>\n
How then does Smith propose to solve the problem of pervasive interpretive pluralism while maintaining a belief in the Bible\u2019s divine inspiration \u2026? His main answers: (1) by accepting the presence in the Bible of ambiguity, complexity, errors, contradictions, and thus the legitimacy of at least some different and even opposing interpretations of Scripture; (2) by importing extrabiblical theological concepts, such as that of the Trinity with its ontological categories of person and nature; (3) by submitting to \u201ca stronger \u2026 ecclesial teaching office than biblicism has ever provided\u201d \u2026; and, most important, (4) by reading Scripture christologically, \u00e0 la Barth, so that its problematic passages and the different interpretations thereof recede in importance before the main message of salvation in Christ, the incarnate second person of the Trinity.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Readers of this blog will recognize that I\u2019m a big fan of No. 1 and No. 4 in that list, to which I would also add experience, reason and reasoning together.<\/p>\n
But note the change in direction in that last paragraph from Gundry. After side-stepping Smith\u2019s critique of biblicism, the remainder of his long review essay is his critique of Smith\u2019s proposed alternative.<\/p>\n
This is a popular dodge, but I\u2019ve never understood why it\u2019s thought to be compelling. Every critique does not need to be accompanied by a fully realized alternative. The lack of such an alternative does not render the critique invalid, or insulate the thing critiqued from criticism. Biblicists are clinging to a solution that does not solve the problem they are seeking to solve. If Smith fails, in Gundry\u2019s view, to offer an effective alternative, that still doesn\u2019t mean it makes sense for Gundry to stick with his own failed approach.<\/p>\n
In any case, Gundry\u2019s dissatisfaction with Smith\u2019s proposed approach to scripture is more a matter of miscommunication than of disagreement with the substance of Smith\u2019s framework. They are asking two very different questions. Smith is asking, \u201cGiven the reality of \u2018pervasive interpretive pluralism,\u2019 how should we read the Bible?\u201d Gundry is asking, instead, \u201cGiven the challenge of \u2018pervasive interpretive pluralism,\u2019 how can we avoid and\/or win disputes when appealing to the Bible as our final, unambiguous authority?\u201d Those very different questions are bound to require very different answers.<\/p>\n
Gundry wants certainty, and Smith\u2019s contention is that biblical literalism does not and cannot provide such certainty, only a feeble counterfeit of it. Smith\u2019s suggested alternative does not pretend to make certainty available, only greater understanding. Given the choice between the counterfeit certainty of biblicism and Smith\u2019s humbler aims, Gundry opts to stick with the counterfeit. I find that an odd choice.<\/p>\n
Here is the publisher\u2019s summary of Smith\u2019s book:<\/p>\n
Biblicism, an approach to the Bible common among some American evangelicals, emphasizes together the Bible\u2019s exclusive authority, infallibility, clarity, self-sufficiency, internal consistency, self-evident meaning, and universal applicability. Acclaimed sociologist Christian Smith argues that this approach is misguided and unable to live up to its own claims. If evangelical biblicism worked as its proponents say it should, there would not be the vast variety of interpretive differences that biblicists themselves reach when they actually read and interpret the Bible.<\/p>\n
Smith describes the assumptions, beliefs, and practices of evangelical biblicism and sets it in historical, sociological, and philosophical context. He explains why it is an impossible approach to the Bible as an authority and provides constructive alternative approaches to help evangelicals be more honest and faithful in reading the Bible. Far from challenging the inspiration and authority of Scripture, Smith critiques a particular rendering of it, encouraging evangelicals to seek a more responsible, coherent, and defensible approach to biblical authority.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
One more to add to the list.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies of American evangelical Christianity. Smith\u2019s new book tackles a subject essentially important to evangelical culture and faith: biblicism, or biblical literalism. He\u2019s against it, as is clear from his […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":111,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[11,12,65],"class_list":["post-3969","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-evangelicals","tag-bible","tag-books","tag-tribalism"],"yoast_head":"\n
Christian Smith on biblicism<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Christian Smith on biblicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"slacktivist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-08-30T20:36:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2012-06-24T20:15:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/wp.patheos.com\/community\/slacktivist\/files\/2011\/08\/BibleImpossible-193x300.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/\",\"name\":\"Christian Smith on biblicism\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-30T20:36:10+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2012-06-24T20:15:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\"},\"description\":\"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Christian Smith on biblicism\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\",\"name\":\"slacktivist\",\"description\":\""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\",\"name\":\"Fred Clark\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"Fred Clark\"},\"description\":\"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Christian Smith on biblicism","description":"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Christian Smith on biblicism","og_description":"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/","og_site_name":"slacktivist","article_published_time":"2011-08-30T20:36:10+00:00","article_modified_time":"2012-06-24T20:15:58+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/wp.patheos.com\/community\/slacktivist\/files\/2011\/08\/BibleImpossible-193x300.jpg"}],"author":"Fred Clark","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Fred Clark","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/","name":"Christian Smith on biblicism","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-30T20:36:10+00:00","dateModified":"2012-06-24T20:15:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e"},"description":"Books & Culture just posted a review of the latest from Christian Smith, a sociologist who has produced some of the most insightful and useful studies","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/08\/30\/christian-smith-on-biblicism\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Christian Smith on biblicism"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/","name":"slacktivist","description":""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e","name":"Fred Clark","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","caption":"Fred Clark"},"description":"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3969","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/111"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3969"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3969\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3969"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3969"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3969"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp.patheos.com\/community\/sites\/52\/2011\/08\/BibleImpossible-193x300.jpg\")
<\/a>The B&C <\/em>review is largely negative. It declares right off the bat that this book will \u201cfizzle \u2026 at least among the readers to whom it is primarily addressed: evangelical Christians.\u201d And the review goes on to complain at great length that Smith\u2019s book does not provide an acceptable substitute for the biblicism the book critiques.<\/p>\n