Does Faith Crumble When Errors Are Exposed?

There has been several discussions(arguments?) here about faith and what happens to faith once some of it's underpinnings are stripped away.  Does faith crumble away when things we assumed to be true are only myth, allegory or metaphor?

One should also note that just because it is a myth, metaphor or allegory does not make it meaningless.  Some of our greatest national stories on who we are as a people are centered around myths, metaphors and allegories.

Christianity Today recently had an article on Adam and Eve The Search for the Historical Adam  NPR (National Public Radio) picked up the story and it went viral.  Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve


NPR had this to say: 

Polls by Gallup and the Pew Research Center find that four out of 10 Americans believe this account. It's a central tenet for much of conservative Christianity, from evangelicals to confessional churches such as the Christian Reformed Church.

But now some conservative scholars are saying publicly that they can no longer believe the Genesis account. Asked how likely it is that we all descended from Adam and Eve, Dennis Venema, a biologist at Trinity Western University, replies: "That would be against all the genomic evidence that we've assembled over the last 20 years, so not likely at all."

 The OOZE (Evolving Spirituality) has an article up on this subject The Debate About Adam and Eve Has Nothing to do With Adam and Eve! 

The NPR article, rightly calling this a Galileo moment, cites professor Karl Giberson: “When you ignore science, you end up with egg on your face… The Catholic Church has had an awful lot of egg on its face for centuries because of Galileo. And Protestants would do very well to look at that and to learn from it.”

 The article goes on: “Asked how likely it is that we all descended from Adam and Eve, Dennis Venema, a biologist at Trinity Western University, replies: ‘That would be against all the genomic evidence that we’ve assembled over the last 20 years, so not likely at all.’”

Evolution isn’t the issue. Adam and Eve are not the issue. The science on origins is only becoming more solid- although there is an interestingly powerful myth that circulates in Christian subculture that there are tons of credible scientists that dispute the issue. Biblical scholarship isn’t the issue either- very few (any?) well-respected Biblical scholars take Genesis 1 and 2 as history (you can find creationists among biblical scholars at plenty of schools- but they have virtually no contribution to the field and trade credibility for tenure… it’s all about the money). The issue isn’t inerrancy or infallibility. Evolution is so contentious that most of my professors at seminary hesitate to admit to the class that they, along with pretty much everyone in the field of academic theology, believe in evolution (and it creates a firestorm when they occasionally do!). You won’t hear that in the pulpit either- because the study of the text is not the issue either. You also don’t generally hear that Genesis 1 and 2 are two different stories, written several hundred years apart in different parts of the world. You don’t hear that, even if you desperately want to take Genesis 1 and 2 literally, you cannot because of internal contradictions. That’s just a matter of reading the text, and when pointing that out is considered controversial and gets professors nervous about job security, we are reminded that the study of the text isn’t actually the issue.

So what is the issue that gets so many Christians wrapped  up in such a tizzy?  The OOZE article continues:

So what is the issue?

Fazale Rana, vice president of apologetics group Reason to Believe, opines: “From my viewpoint, a historical Adam and Eve is absolutely central to the truth claims of the Christian faith…But if the parts of Scripture that you are claiming to be false, in effect, are responsible for creating the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, then you’ve got a problem,”

Exactly. She gets credit for honesty. What undergirds this controversy is not a disagreement about the text or science; instead, it’s the belief that faith crumbles once you admit that the text has an error, isn’t historically accurate, or else it says correctly exactly what it means to say and you’ve simply misunderstood it all this time.

Philosophers Imre Lakatos and Thomas Kuhn described this phenomenon as epistemological webs and paradigm shifts. Lakatos described all our knowledge as interconnecting in a web, with more important, reinforced ideas consisting an epistemic core. Experiences hit the boundary of this web and force you to decide whether to incorporate new data or reject it. The knowledge within the web need not all cohere- it is only most important that the core ideas cohere well. When the web’s integrity breaks down due to dissonant data points, it becomes more parsimonious to think with a different core set of beliefs. This results in what Kuhn calls a paradigm shift in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

The text of scripture is very, very rarely the issue in theological debates. 

The real issue is that we’ve decided to believe something and are desperately grasping for any way we can use the text to backward-engineer justification for our beliefs. This isn’t controversial. It’s just how we are wired…by evolution.

These concepts above are totally foreign to many hardliner evangelicals and to most in the Church of God.  To dare to question, to really examine scripture and tradition in depth is NOT something that is ever done.  To do so is heretical in the the eyes of most.

What does faith mean to you?  Can faith be destroyed by questioning?  Does not believing in a literal Adam and Eve undermine all the rest of the teaching in scriptures?

Fearing to Question Faith

Fearing to Question Faith

If you wish to see the good, the bad and the ugly side of people of faith, just question the faith. I was a pastor soaking in Christianity and the Bible for three decades. I heard, read and studied all the plain and simple truth in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. I can tell you the truth is neither plain nor simple and rather liked Paul's description of it all as being "the present truth." At least calling truth something that is currently understood gives some wiggle room for those times which shall come to grow a bit in the grace and knowledge that most Christians think they are open minded enough to really do. Most I know grow neither in grace, unless they attach a few dozen laws that you must keep to be one of the good people, nor knowledge which seems to scare the bejesus out of them when they really run up against it.

I fully understand the anxiety caused when faith fails and why questioning it causes no end to grief and strong reaction. As humans, we are aware of our awareness.  We know we will die.  That is troubling and we spend large parts of our life in denial of that.  Faith, any Faith that assures us that we will go on after death, even faith in quantum physics and the non-religious possibilities are all held on to so that our anxiety is kept at bay. It is why people argue and fight over religion.  If you are able to plant doubt in my mind about my faith, Mr. Anxiety returns and I will do almost anything to keep that from happening.  Religion calms our anxious souls from the meaning of impending death and dissolution of the body.  We get rather fond of living and know we are fond of living.

I had little satisfaction as a student asking questions of the WCG teachers and "theologians."  A question well put and not in line with current or rather cemented truth could get you put on the pastor's terrorist watch list.  The best answer I ever heard to a question was when HWA was asked, "who are the Two Witnesses?"  He said,  "Joe Blow and Harry Smith!"   I have met many Joe Blows along the way since then.  As a pastor, and in hindsite, I realize when I was asked questions, I either answered as expected (and believed true) and felt a bit threatened if the question was outside the box of what I understood at the time.  However, most members were not good question askers.  You have to know what questions to ask to ask a good one.  Some asked, especially publically, to show off how much they had studied and were merely kiss up to the pastor.  Those were easy to spot.

By far, the writings I have done that have proven to be the most popular for the open minded and enraging for those who enjoy that frame of mind a bit less, have been on Questions Your Pastor Will Hate. Many appreciate the questions and admit that they too have had the same questions as they sincerely study the text of the Bible stories and accounts of varied topics. These are the people who see the politics behind the texts. They admit that James and Paul really did bash heads and Peter was bashed by Luke and John as one who was totally unworthy of any authority in the church. Judas had betrayed Jesus and Peter had denied him, so that's pretty much the end of them in the eyes of John, Luke and Paul.

The story of Annias and Sapphira in Acts 5 is not a story about Peter killing two church members for not coughing up all the money they had "pledged" to the church. It is a spoof that the readers of Luke and Paul's community would understand of the buffoon Peter who, like the two church members who said they would give something to the church and didn't, said he'd never leave Jesus and fled. Peter who said he'd do one thing and did another is now punishing a couple who said they'd do one thing and did another. It was hilarious and a poke at Peter the Pathetic according to Luke and Paul.

 John mentions Peter three times in his Gospel and each time sandwiches Peter stories between two comments about Judas. The point is not missed on the original audience as is the story of Peter being forgiven three times by Jesus tacked on to the end of John's Gospel to show Peter is just as able to be forgiven as anyone else. (Side note: A really fascinating possibility is that the 21st chapter of John is the Missing ending of the pro-Peter Gospel of Mark. Mark is known to have no good ending to the Jesus story. It's ending has been added to make up for the bummer ending at Mark 16:8. John, on the other hand, has two obvious endings in chapter 20, the real ending and chapter 21, the forgive Peter ending.)

At any rate, to question the story is to run great risk of abuse at the hands of the faithful who need the stories to be literally true as they learned in Sunday School and that all the characters of the New Testament Church loved each other in Jesus and got along famously in the faith. That is very far from reality, but don't question it.
I can't tell you how many, while not near as many as those who appreciate the inquiry, take the time to write and remind me I will change my mind when I am frying in the fires of Hell in the judgment. No one has bothered to answer one question posed, but they just know I should go to hell for asking it. Some who write are subtle in their warnings to me. Some sound like a human form of God who will warn me to "gird up my loins" (my loins are just fine) and get ready to answer, but that's where it ends. I guess they feel God himself is about to break out upon me for asking questions about the faith. So far so good. Some talk to me like I imagine Moses talked to the Children of Israel when he was really angry at them in God's name. Some are not so subtle as one reminded me that "Dennis, words can get you killed." Well the history of religion that does not appreciate questions proves that!

Is it wrong to notice the inconsistencies, errors, goofs, bad science, poor examples, contradictions, animosities, politic and real history of the Bible? Depends who you ask. Those who believe that none of those things exist in the Holy Book would shout "yes!" In my view, the answer is "no it is not." Why is it OK and even something one should demand of their honest selves? Because ideas have consequences. Because the stories and ideas expressed in the texts are used to control people in various life circumstances. Because some use the mythologies of the Bible to make up literally real laws that effect women and children, and generally not in a good way. Because many are kept in fear, guilt and life long shame being reminded way too often that they, as a human, are worthless without divine intervention. Being born right the first time, as I have said in the past, is a truth that is kept far from their consciousness.

It is always right to ask questions about that which seems like it deserves to have a question asked. If you can't imagine Joshua raising his hands and stopping the earth from rotating without planet wide consequences...just ask your Pastor how can that be. Of course be ready to hear, "with God all things are possible," which is not what you asked. If you can't picture penguins and polar bears ambling down to the middle east to get on the Ark, just ask your Pastor about that. If you wonder where dinosaurs or Homo Erectus fit in, just ask your Pastor. The answer might be ill informed, but it's ok to ask.

If you notice that Paul never quotes Jesus, yet gets to write most of the NT heavy meaning of Jesus, just ask. If you notice that Paul thinks Peter, James and John, the disciples of Jesus don't seem to have anything Paul needs to learn from them and he learns nothing from them, and think that's kinda strange...just ask.  When Paul says he learned nothing from Peter, James and John and the Jerusalem types, I have to admit, it took me back a bit.  Paul seems somewhat of a loon to me now.

 If you notice the Birth or Resurrection of stories as written in the Gospels don't match very well and seem contradictory, just ask. If you say "they seem to be contradictory," be prepared to have the word "seem" jumped upon, but you still have the right to ask. I'm not saying you'll get a good or correct answer. You might, but probably not. But you have the right to ask. And you certainly have the right to notice the many problems in the Bible if you know the Bible well enough to notice in the first place.
If you wonder why the five women in Jesus family line are all fallen women, just ask.  It is fascinating. 
If it ever crossed you mind that Jesus death was not the worst in history. Thousands were crucified in far more terrible ways than Jesus.

If you wonder why, if Jesus knew he was coming back in three days and God knew he would get him back better than ever in three days, that was such a great sacrifice for God or Jesus, just ask.  If the thought "weekend inconvenience at best," or "shouldn't a real sacrifice stay dead,"  or " Every type of sacrifice in the Bible that is said to point to Jesus stayed dead, why not this one?"  just ask.   I am not being disrespectful. These are questions I was asked and I had to think them through long and hard. 

What do you tell a teen who asks "If Mary was not married to anyone when she got pregnant and God, who didn't marry her either,  got her pregnant, did God commit fornication?"   Go ahead, give it your best shot.  How about, "If God impregnated Mary but she was pregnant "by the Holy Spirit, the Third Person according to some ...what's that all about?"

One thing is for sure. If you are a genuine seeker and you truly notice that the Bible has some real problems with what we truly know today about many topics and even within itself in the form of many contradictions and editing done by one to correct the problems of the other, it's ok to ask. A real seeker cannot not notice what they notice. You can't go back to the lame apologetics that many offer to explain away the problem as if there is no problem. You can't unsee what you do see. You can't unring a bell. Oh..you also have the right to expect not to be penalized for asking in the first place. Just don't count on it.

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com