Learning to Read, Understand, and Love the Bible, With Tara-Leigh Cobble—The Alisa Childers Podcast #70
I am an evangelical Christian who is wrestling with what it means to say that the Bible is true, and whether this is different than saying that it is in all ways at all times 100% accurate in all its details.
The best way I know to try to explain what I mean is to use the example of a typical poster of the Solar System on the wall of a typical elementary school classroom. It depicts the Sun and all of the planets orbiting around it. Is it true? Is it in error? Or is it both? And how do we evaluate these questions?
I'd suggest that the vast majority of such posters are in error. The Sun is often scaled down and some of the smaller planets are scaled up so that they are easier to see or can more easily be labelled. The distances between the planets are scaled down so that they all fit on the poster. Orbits are often simplified as perfect circles on a single plane.
At the same time, there are things about the poster that clearly make it profitable for reproof, correction, and instruction. There may be much about the poster that is inaccurate, but there is also much about it that is true. To dismiss the poster as metaphorical would be a mistake. If the point is to instruct children in basic concepts like heliocentrism or the names and order of the planets, then the posters might not only be adequate to the task, they may well be very appropriate. If you were to insist on the accuracy of every minute detail (assuming that such were not completely impractical if not entirely impossible), you may have only avoided errors on the poster by making a pedagogical error regarding what your students can relate to and comprehend.
The poster, like many such models that are helpful in starting to develop an understanding of new and complex systems, exists somewhere between the purely metaphorical and actual reality. A model, by definition, is not exactly the thing that it represents.
I think it is here that I struggle with what the word "literal" means when considering something like the poster in question. Is it literally true? Is it literally false? The scales are literally false, but heliocentrism is literally true. Can I say anything definitive about the motives or qualifications of the person who designed the poster as a result?
At the end of the day, accuracy is a function of the intent of the one firing the arrow. I may make assumptions about the accuracy of an archer who does not hit the "bullseye" on a target, but it is just an assumption. The archer may well have hit the fly he was aiming at over near the edge of the target.
I believe that God always and consistently hits what He aims at in the Scriptures. I just don't know that our definition regarding what we think the "bullseye" must be is nearly as accurate as God's aim.
Does any of this make sense? I really am struggling with nailing down what I believe and why. Nor do I feel 100% comfortable having these conversations with my evangelical friends for fear that they may think I've gone off the rails. If anyone would like to have a completely open and transparent discussion of this topic, I would be very grateful.
–Paul
