Smith argues that “the American evangelical commitment to “biblicism,” is an unattainable position that should be left altogether and proposes a better approach to Christian accuracy and power.” Smith delves into the archeology of both familiar and trustworthy evangelical biblicism. He accomplishes this by pointing out how biblicism frequently assumes comedic and tragic proportions. The evangelicals are aware of the possibility of turning the Holy Canon scripture into a self-help group that generates questions that are not the primary goal and are not addressed1. He clarifies that the way the scriptures are read to accommodate a support system and promote practices and beliefs that cannot be applied in one position.
Smith’s objective was to articulate the unattainability of making a god from the Bible. Hence, he pointed out that conservative evangelicals face a challenging discussion over nature and practice. His writing on the image portrayal of evangelical Biblicism is quite exaggerated and adopts a rhetorically charged style. He states that countless evangelical biblicists exist in the United States, counting estimates of over 100 million2. He goes further to describe their project their perspectives on biblicism as foolish as well as arrogant, inadequate, lacking direction, dishonest, untenable, self-defeating, and intellectually and practically wanting. Furthermore, he asserts that evangelical Christians need to be fearful and ashamed since they hold their version of sola scriptura.
Smith’s writing style is assertive and recurring, and he frequently employs sarcasm, which adds to the rhetorical element. The author’s rhetorical style created barriers for the potential audience that would otherwise assist and play a crucial constructive role. As a result, it shortened an audience’s attention span that could have benefited from reading. Smith keeps reminding the audience that they are ridiculous and arrogant, causing them to lose their minds and tune out. It is unlikely that a reader continues to read to materials in which he has been abused. Only a few people can stand up to the author and continue reading despite being labeled arrogant.
Smith’s primary target audience in the United States was evangelical Christians. He investigates the issue of biblicism as a bible handbook. The audience can read the Bible as if it were a guidebook to help them answer all of life’s questions. He argues that some existing elements are properly arranged to suit avenues that eventually lead to their attitude toward the Bible3. Smith’s viewpoint on evangelical biblicism is eerily familiar and contains some elements of truth. He explores at some of how biblicism maintains a sense of humor while also taking on tragic proportions. The evangelicals recognize that turning the Bible into a self-help manual and asking specific questions that does not address the issues. The way the scriptures are read has been adopted to support and promote practices and beliefs that have become difficult to reconcile with others. While his assertions are correct, the assessment overlooks the important traces of origin and the reasons why they appear to be unique to modern evangelicals.
Smith identifies ten characteristics of bad biblicism, each of which has a long history in the church. He does not see any link between his ten characteristics and the most common causes of Biblicist pathology. While attempting to assist Smith, it can be argued that the list is not the issue but rather how the list vehemently emerges to generate aspects such as the Bible’s “handbook model.”4 It is critical to make a precise observation and delve deeper into the question. The problem of bad biblicism stems from a particular way of interpreting the reader’s character and the Bible’s text character and drawing inferences from their comparisons. Although Smith does not specifically mention this theme, it runs throughout his arguments. The basic premise is that both the bible text and the reader are self-sufficient and unmediated.
The bible text is said to have self-contained unity and integrity that is unaffected by its relationship to the church or other factors such as confessions or theology. The “solo Scriptura” and “internal harmony” are described in Smith’s number 6 and 7 lists, respectively5. Smith is most concerned about this aspect because it emphasizes framing while utilizing the others. Such activities remove the scripture based on current discussions about Jesus Christ’s life and work.
A critical and honest reader may come from Smith’s book convinced that Biblicism is completely ineffective. Smith’s argument, however, is insufficient to point to this new anchor because they may be left wondering and feeling adrift, unsure of where to turn. He must describe the next course of action because he gave the people the opportunity to reject Biblicism. Smith gave the audience no specific options when it came to this.
Bibliography
Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.
Footnotes
- Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.
- Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.
- Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.
- Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.
- Smith, Christian. The Bible made impossible: Why biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of Scripture. Baker Books, 2012.