Musings: Notes From My Daybook

People have interpreted Scripture in all sorts of ways. How do we know that we are right? Mark Noll, in his book, America’s God, quotes Nicholas Wolterstorff, as Noll concludes his review of how church leaders that believed that slavery was biblically ordained also held to a literal interpretation of the Bible. Wolterstorff reminds us that “interpretation of Scripture is always caught up within a broader interpretation of reality and experience and responsibility, in one way or another grounding that larger interpretation.”

Noll’s book is an insightful one. He explores in depth the a number of important theological themes from the 1730’s to 1865. Germane to the questions of how Scripture is to be read is Noll’s assessment on biblical literalism in the 1860’s. The focus on the authority of the Bible in the middle of the 1800’s had led to a set of convictions that the Bible was true—literally true. This point of view then led to a wide-spread conviction by people, North and South, that since the Bible was literally true, then slavery was ordained by God.

So, many people, in the years leading up to the Civil War, were faced with the dilemma—either Scripture is literally true, i.e., slavery is right or slavery is wrong and we have to find some new way of thinking about Scripture. Common sense thinking, also a major component to 19th century Americans, found the idea that slavery was a good thing and so a major rethinking of the how the Bible speaks authoritatively was underway. Sometimes life experiences force a new look at the way in which we hear the voice of Scripture.

Unfortunately, the easy and popular thing in America was to assert that the Bible was literally true, accept slavery as something affirmed by God, and then go on with life. People found it easier to live with biblical literalism, than to ask the deeper, harder questions about how to hear and learn the heart of God from Scripture.