# Bible Made Impossible?



## Ne Oublie (Aug 29, 2011)

Has anyone on the board read the book "The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture"?

I heard about it through Kevin DeYoung's blog as he reviewed it there and the author of the book responds somewhat in the comments.

I would be interested to hear what folks here would have to say about this book. Mr. DeYoung's blog review explains this further, although in reading the book I have some different conclusions.


----------



## athanatos (Aug 29, 2011)

Interesting. I might take a stab at reading that sometime soon.


----------



## Pilgrim (Aug 29, 2011)

Thanks for pointing out the DeYoung post. Based on it as well as what I saw on a more left-leaning blog that I was directed to today, this looks like warmed over Barthianism at best. 

Given his background, I'm sure Dennis McFadden can speak volumes regarding this.


----------



## Wayne (Aug 30, 2011)

> The great believers we read of in the Word, the confidence of their faith rose up to that height and strnegth that we admire, from a clear persuasion of the truth of the promises, and of the faithfulness of the maker of them. So it is said of Abraham, Rom iv. 20-21, <i>He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, butr was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and being full persuaded, that what he had promised, he was able also to perform...Now it was not written for his sake alone, but for us also,</i> &c.


-Robert Traill, Sermon IV of <i>The Throne of Grace</i>, pp. 85-86.

"Again, the promises of God are sure, because they are his, Heb. vi. 17-18."

The Christian life is one of constant dependence upon the sure Word of God. Those who would attack the trustworthiness of the Word seek to attack the very substance of the Christian faith, for they seek to make God Himself untrustworthy.


----------



## DMcFadden (Aug 30, 2011)

> "Many books have been written either defending or detracting from an evangelical view of the Bible. Christian Smith, as a trained sociologist, offers a much-needed perspective: explaining evangelical biblicism as a sociological phenomenon. Smith demonstrates, respectfully but critically, that the type of biblicism that often characterizes evangelicalism cannot account for how scripture itself behaves. Biblicism is retained, however, because of its sociological value for 'maintaining safe identity boundaries.' Smith's analysis of the problem of biblicism and his offer of a way forward are important contributions to the current developments surrounding evangelicalism and the Bible."--*Peter Enns*, author, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament



Peter Enns? Hmmmmm. He sure keeps popping up in interesting contexts.


----------



## dudley (Aug 30, 2011)

Thanks for sharing this , I will keep it on a list of thigs to check out. It does sound interesting


----------



## athanatos (Aug 30, 2011)

Wayne said:


> The Christian life is one of constant dependence upon the sure Word of God. Those who would attack the trustworthiness of the Word seek to attack the very substance of the Christian faith, for they seek to make God Himself untrustworthy.


Amazon.com: The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture (9781587433030): Christian Smith: Books
Go "look inside!" and read the second paragraph.


----------



## Wayne (Aug 30, 2011)

Jonathan:

I'm aware of that stated premise. I just don't think the contents are in keeping with that premise.

To put it charitably, the author fails to stay within the boundaries he himself sets out. [On the whole of the work, here revisit DeYoung's critique]

Or the cynical among us might see it as a setup, inviting the reader to let down their guard.


----------



## MW (Aug 30, 2011)

Ne Oublie said:


> I would be interested to hear what folks here would have to say about this book. Mr. DeYoung's blog review explains this further, although in reading the book I have some different conclusions.



I haven't read the book so I won't comment on it. Two points in general on the stated aim of the book might be worth considering:



> Acclaimed sociologist Christian Smith argues that this approach is misguided and unable to live up to its own claims.



What Christian has "lived up to" the claims of his own creed? A creed is a standard. A Christian creed is a Christian standard. At the heart of that standard is the attainment of Jesus Christ for His people; but so far as the people themselves are concerned, there can be no genuine claim to having apprehended all for which they have been apprehended. At the very outset, therefore, it should be observed that the book is based on a criticism which arises from a perfectionist understanding.



> 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.



The perfectionist basis for the book is carried through to its logical conclusion. If individual Christians are expected to attain to perfection then it follows that the church as a whole should share in some form of "perfectionist unity." Such unity, however, is not to be expected in this present age. The apostle Paul, having denounced perfectionism on a personal level, sets out the way for Christians to be able to dwell together in unity even where perfect agreement cannot be reached, Philippians 3:15-16. Again, the heart of the Christian message is Christ's attainment for His people, which forms the basis for an essential unity among His people notwithstanding the differences which still obtain amongst them.


----------



## athanatos (Aug 31, 2011)

Wayne said:


> Jonathan:
> 
> I'm aware of that stated premise. I just don't think the contents are in keeping with that premise.
> 
> ...


Without reading the book apart from what Amazon makes available for free, I don't see him as a threat at all. I think given DeYoung's critique, it is more fair to say that he is addressing a problem that --as he defines it-- isn't actually there, nor does his "solution" really help. It is like Don Quixote jousting at windmills. He is misidentifying what is really there. As such, he isn't framing the real issues nor giving real solutions. Meanwhile, you're right to say that he isn't being consistent with his own critique, since he falls short of it.


----------



## ZackF (Sep 5, 2011)

This by no means invalidates the author's criticism of evangelicalism but Christian Smith has converted to Roman Catholicism over two years ago. So he is now an outsider looking in.


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 5, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> > "Many books have been written either defending or detracting from an evangelical view of the Bible. Christian Smith, as a trained sociologist, offers a much-needed perspective: explaining evangelical biblicism as a sociological phenomenon. Smith demonstrates, respectfully but critically, that the type of biblicism that often characterizes evangelicalism cannot account for how scripture itself behaves. Biblicism is retained, however, because of its sociological value for 'maintaining safe identity boundaries.' Smith's analysis of the problem of biblicism and his offer of a way forward are important contributions to the current developments surrounding evangelicalism and the Bible."--*Peter Enns*, author, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Enns? Hmmmmm. He sure keeps popping up in interesting contexts.


Enns provides a very valuable service to the Church. He lets us know what books *not* to read by his endorsements.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 5, 2011)




----------

