Your Church is not Biblical

Recently a friend pointed out to me that a couple of disgruntled former members of our church had written Google reviews about our church saying we weren’t “Biblical.” Setting aside the facts that we read and teach on the Bible every single week and giving your former faith community an uncharitable and inaccurate review seems exceptionally unchristian, I don’t understand their comment even on a surface level. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but no church is Biblical. None of us follow all the Bible’s teachings. I know this because no one, including the Bible authors themselves, can completely agree with various ideas and interpretations throughout history.

For example, I don’t recommend following this verse even if you consider yourself a Biblical believer.

Leviticus 20:9

All who curse father or mother shall be put to death; having cursed father or mother, their bloodguilt is upon them.

Our youth groups are small enough without killing off the smart mouths.

The Problem with Sola Scriptura

I’m guessing most of my readers are Protestants, or at least Protestant-curious. Sola Scriptura (Latin for “only scripture,” or “by scripture alone”) is a key doctrine in Protestantism going back to Martin Luther and other reformers. The idea that the Bible alone is the main basis of your faith was very handy when it came to pointing out the abuses of the Catholic Church in the 16^th century. I mean, if you were going to leave the Roman church, you were going to need something else on which to base the authority of your teaching. It seems like the Bible is an obvious choice.

I have problems with Sola Scriptura, however, not the least of which is that it is typically defended with circular logic: If the Bible is the only basis for our faith, then who decided the Bible was the only basis for our faith? It must have been the Bible (circular reasoning) or else some other authority which means the Bible is not the only basis for our faith, that other authority that told you to follow Sola Scriptura must be higher. I would take it a step further and argue that not even the Bible says it should be the sole source of authority.

Sola Scriptura is a kind of self-defeating doctrine. We received our Bible through tradition and authority in a process we call canonization. Early church councils – again based on their own tradition, history and presumption of authority and power structures they felt worthy of protection – chose which writings they felt were divinely inspired. And to be clear, they didn’t draw names out of a hat. Neither did they censor certain important texts they felt threatened by as many TikTok creators want you to believe. They chose texts that were already important to Christian communities, both East and West, over the preceding 300 or more years. So how can the Bible alone be our authority if its existence relies on preexisting tradition?

If you think the Bible is authoritative as is, then you support the authority of that tradition and the church. Why not, then, study all of church history and theology in your path toward God? Large libraries are filled with extra-Biblical theology and witness that is certainly inspired by God from the early Apostolic fathers through the mystics to Luther and Calvin, Karl Barth, C.S. Lewis, Marcus Borg, Richard Rohr, Pete Enns and Matthew Myer Boulton. It may surprise you to find out I even think Jonathan Edwards had some enduring and still-fertile insights about God’s sovereignty that go far beyond the hands of an angry God. There’s enough in that list to keep you busy for the next four years and it doesn’t even scratch the surface of God’s still speaking voice across the generations.

We Cannot Escape Our Private Interpretations

The only way we can interpret anything in life, including the Bible, is through our own experiences. Believing that you can somehow rise above your private lens to assess ultimate truth claims is as naïve as it is smug. Insisting that someone else’s interpretation is incorrect because it conflicts with yours is a kind of high-handed condescension that rises to the level of a 16^th century pope. If you are completely certain you have the right interpretation, you aren’t really relying on the Bible, you are placing yourself as your primary authority. But guess what? We all do.

I always say that the genius of Protestantism is not Sola Scriptura, but the fact that there is something for everyone. You can find your preferred flavor of Christianity somewhere. If you want to believe that your denomination has the one right, “biblical,” approach, that’s on you, not the Bible, not Jesus, not tradition, but you. In any other area of life we would celebrate diversity. You don’t hear musicians saying things like, “he’s not a real bebop player because he doesn’t play saxophone.” Or a tennis player saying, “he’s not a real player because he only uses an Eastern grip.” This variety in Christianity is what keeps a lot of people on The Way.

There are many noteworthy differences in how different denominations in Christianity interpret the very same Bible. Which among them are, “Biblical,” pray tell?

• Who gets saved? Many in reformed traditions believe in a form of predestination where God must call the elect to be saved. Most evangelical traditions assert that individual believers choose Jesus in some fashion and are then saved. I’m a universalist who believes all of God’s children are somehow and someday saved. All these positions have Biblical support, yet none of them can logically coexist in their absolute expression.
• What are the mechanics of baptism? My sons were baptized as infants into the United Church of Christ in a Congregational church as a sacrament of grace and a public showing that they are part of a loving community of believers. I personally was raised SDA where you needed to be old enough to give your consent (a “believers baptism”) not to assure salvation, but upon accepting Jesus as your savior to demonstrate your commitment. My kids were sprinkled, I was dunked. Some churches believe you must be baptized to be saved at all.
• How much of the Old Testament are we to follow? Some churches still follow much of the Old Testament law like Sabbath keeping. Some don’t follow any of it. Some just want to hold up the parts they want to use to clobber LGBTQ+ people and ignore the uncomfortable stuff about which foods to eat, owning slaves, making animal sacrifices and stoning daughters for various reasons.
• Who can serve as clergy? Men only? Unmarried men only? Women? Must there be apostolic succession? Do you need an advanced degree?

I could go on much longer, but my point is that the Bible must not be perfectly clear on these issues. Or maybe you think your particular church has the exact right “Biblical,” teachings for any issue. If so, congratulations, I’m just not as smart as you are.

What Do Some People Really Mean by the Word “Biblical?”

Gatekeeping.

When someone says, “your church is not Biblical,” the only thing they are really saying is, “I have a particular way of reading the Bible that supports my own ideas of power structures, cultural norms, individual values and boundary definitions.” The word “Biblical,” screams bigotry in that context.

You cannot come up with a single systematic theology let alone any workable underpinnings for a consistent philosophy through the Bible alone because the Bible is a collection of different and often conflicting voices. It was written for and through a culture we no longer understand or agree with, so it requires wisdom and interpretation to be useful to us. Instead of finding a universal Biblical truth, what you are really doing is foisting your preexistent philosophical underpinnings onto your reading of the text. People do this all the time, that doesn’t make it, “Biblical.” People do this because these preexistent underpinnings serve the purposes of the people who promote them. People who claim their faith is, “Biblical,” typically do so to marginalize other people and ideas. They ascent to certain passages at the expense of other conflicting passages. The Bible isn’t their authority, their personal agenda is their authority.

Does the Word “Biblical,” Have Any Meaning at All?

I love the Bible and so should you. Most mainline churches read lectionary texts each week, expound on those texts through sermons and song, explore those texts in Bible study groups and more. Is that not, “Biblical?” God meets you in the Bible through inspiration of both the writer and the reader. This is what the word, “Biblical,” means to me – we hold up the Bible not for certainty or dogma or gatekeeping, but for connection to our faith history and spiritual guidance.