We'll look now at the second half of this chapter and Christian Smith's dealing with what he sees as problems with "pervasive interpretive pluralism."
What the author is referring to is the reality that "the very same Bible - which biblicists insist is perspicuous (clear) and harmonious - gives rise to divergent understandings among intelligent, sincere, committed readers about what it says about most topics of interest. Knowledge of 'biblical' teachings, in short, is characterized by pervasive interpretive pluralism." In other words, while the biblicist insists in theory that Scripture is clear and that anyone can understand it, the reality is that we all read the same Bible but come up with very different understanding and interpretations on the same topic.
This is a problem that has been acknowledged by many evangelical writers/scholars over the years. Smith quotes several respected Bible scholars such as Geoffrey Bromiley, Mark Noll, N.T. Wright, D.A. Carson, and more - all of whom acknowledge that our claims that Scripture is authoritative while not being able to arrive at anything like agreement on what it says is self-defeating. (N.T. Wright says, "It seems to be the case that the more you insist that you are based on the Bible, the more fissiparous (divisive) you become; the church splits up into more and more little groups, each thinking that they have got the biblical truth right.")
Smith suggests that rather than deal with this problem seriously, we have preferred to try to make this into a "virtue" by presenting our divergent viewpoints in popular books about "Three Views...", "Four Views...", etc. Some examples:
- The Nature of Atonement: Four Views
- Four Views of Hell
- Divorce and Remarriage: Four Views
- Women in Ministry: Four Views
- Four Views of the End Times
- Science and Christianity: Four Views
- Three Views on the Rapture
- Five Views on Apologetics
- etc., etc.
(The author challenges the well-known mantra, "In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberty; in all things, charity" saying that "there simply is not unity on many essentials"; in fact, "...not only are Christians divided about essential matters of doctrine and faithful practice; they are also sometimes divided on what even counts as essential.")
The chapter concludes with this question: "if the Bible is given by a truthful and omnipotent God as an internally consistent and perspicuous text precisely for the purpose of revealing to humans correct beliefs, practices, and morals, then why is it that the presumably sincere Christians to whom it has been given cannot read it and come to common agreement about what it teaches?"
Next week we'll cover chapter 2 which deals with the extent and source of pervasive interpretive pluralism...
