The Bible Made Impossible Interview With Christian Smith

7/29/2019 The Bible Made Impossible Interview With Christian Smith

1/4

Interview Frank Viola to Christian Smith

The Bible Made Impossible: Interview withChristian Smith

Christian Smith is a professor at Notre Dame and a prolific author. Smith shares an accolade with F.F. Bruce,N.T.

Wright, andScot McKnight. Each author has written books that made both my 100 Best Christian Books Ever

Writtenandmy 100 Best Academic Christian Books lists.

A double threat!

I maintain that one of the best books ever written on church practice (ecclesiology) is Christian Smiths, Going to

the Root. (I quote Smith four times in Reimagining Church.)

And one of the best books on how Christians should approach the Bible is Christian Smiths new volume, The

Bible Made Impossible.

I heartily recommend both books to every follower of Jesus.

What I like best about Smiths newest book is that it argues for understanding Scripture through a Christologicallens (i.e., employing a Christocentric hermeneutic). When my next book is unveiled later this year, youll better

understand why I appreciate Smiths point so much.

What follows is my interview with Christian Smith. He talks about his new book, answers critics, and unveils his

writing routine.

Frank:Whatmotivatedyou to write TheBible MadeImpossible?

Christian Smith: The simple fact that Biblicismis widespread and yet impossible, that it cannot really function as it

claims to. I dont think it is good for believers or the church to be trying to operate with theories about the Bible

that do not add up, which require various forms of exegetical gymnastics and smoke and mirrors to seem to make

work.

If Christian faith is true, as I believe it is, then it has to be reasonably sensible and defensible, not built on

impossibilities. My sense is that very many people are vaguely aware of the problems of biblicism but dont really

know how to put their finger on it and what to possibly do about it. So I wrote to help people express an

uneasiness they probably already feel.

Frank:Tell us aboutthe title (TheBible MadeImpossible). . . what doesit meanand what doesit not mean?

Christian Smith: The key word is made. The Bible itself is not impossible. I am clear in the book that the Bible is

Gods inspired Word written and should and does function as a central authority in Christian life. The impossibility

comes in when biblicism as a theory is applied to or imposed upon the Bible, as an account of how the Bible

ought to function.

I notice that many people confuse the Bible with biblicism, theyre literally unable to distinguish the two. But

biblicism is not the Bible itself, but rather a (human) theory about the Bible. And, while it contains some elementsof truth and often has very good intentions driving it, as a larger theory it is deeply misguided and I think over the

long term destructive.
http://www.nd.edu/~csmith22/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/23/ntwright/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/23/ntwright/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/23/ntwright/http://frankviola.org/2012/02/08/scotmcknight/http://frankviola.org/2012/02/08/scotmcknight/http://frankviola.org/2012/02/08/scotmcknight/http://frankviola.org/top100http://frankviola.org/top100http://frankviola.org/top100http://frankviola.org/academichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/0836135849/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0836135849&adid=07YR7S8ZKKBH9BHFSHZD&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Ftop100http://www.amazon.com/dp/0836135849/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0836135849&adid=07YR7S8ZKKBH9BHFSHZD&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Ftop100http://www.amazon.com/dp/0836135849/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0836135849&adid=07YR7S8ZKKBH9BHFSHZD&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Ftop100http://www.reimaginingchurch.org/http://www.reimaginingchurch.org/http://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://earliestchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/christian-smith-the-crumbling-foundation-of-biblicism-part-1/http://earliestchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/christian-smith-the-crumbling-foundation-of-biblicism-part-1/http://www.nd.edu/~csmith22/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/23/ntwright/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/23/ntwright/http://frankviola.org/2012/02/08/scotmcknight/http://frankviola.org/top100http://frankviola.org/top100http://frankviola.org/academichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/0836135849/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0836135849&adid=07YR7S8ZKKBH9BHFSHZD&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Ftop100http://www.amazon.com/dp/0836135849/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0836135849&adid=07YR7S8ZKKBH9BHFSHZD&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Ftop100http://www.reimaginingchurch.org/http://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://www.amazon.com/dp/1587433036?tag=reimagchurch-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1587433036&adid=1SSV0BDRG02KCT095JX7&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fptmin.org%2Facademichttp://earliestchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/christian-smith-the-crumbling-foundation-of-biblicism-part-1/


2/4

So, in short, the human theory of biblicism makes the Bible as Gods authoritative written Word impossible to

function as the theory demands that it does function. We can and have to do better, and that requires moving into

a post-biblicist world.

Frank:In simpleterms,definewhat you meanby interpretativepluralismand what doesit suggestto us primarily?

Christian Smith: Interpretive pluralism means that (I presume usually) well-meaning, well-educated, smart, serious

Bible readers come away from studying scripture believing that it teaches many different things on most

theological topics imaginable, both small and large. Everyone says scripture is divinely given to provide the

reliable basis for truthful knowledge about Christian faith, church, life, and practice.

But those same people disagree into various camps on most issues about what the Bible actually teaches. That

itself undermines the claims to scriptures authority. How can it be an authority if on nearly every topic we go to it

to learn about people say it teaches many different things?

I also argue in my book that this interpretive pluralism is not constrained or marginal, but pervasive. It is

everywhere on nearly every theological issue imaginable. Often only at a surface level do many people agree, but

when it comes down to the real meaningof biblical and theological claims, people end up all over the place,

claiming mutually exclusive positions. It is easy to agree that Jesus saves, but when it comes down to

interpreting the Bible on the hows, whys, whos, etc. then we have pervasive interpretive pluralism. The specifics

of this are all spelled out in almost-overkill detail in the book.

Frank:As someonewhohas writtenbooksthat challengethe statusquomyself, I can easily identifythe tool of

misrepresentationthat peoplepick up whentryingto dismissa paradigm-shiftingwork. Giventhe natureof your book, Ive seen

it misrepresentedby somewhoare threatenedby its message.Whatare the 3 mainobjections(or misrepresentations)of your

bookamongevangelicalChristians,and what are your responsesto thoseobjectionsand/ormisrepresentations?

Christian Smith: Before I published this book, a sympathetic and insightful pastor told me, You know, when

peoples basic epistemological paradigms are threatened, even the smartest, most well-meaning people can

become irrational, be ready for that, especially if they earn their livelihood by relying on biblicism.

His prediction has certainly become true. Ive been very amazed and disappointed by some of the reviews of this

book. Some are simply amazing. I have decided strategically to push back on them in most cases, however, tonot let them get away with saying crazy and unfounded things simply because they do not want to like the

implications of my argument.

One major criticism has been that I am attacking a straw-man, that biblicists are much more sophisticated than I

suggest, that only the most extreme simpleheads would believe what I present. On the one hand, my response is:

If the shoe fits, wear it, otherwise, whats the big deal? But I find it telling that people feel the need to defend a

theory that they say they do not believe. If my characterization of biblicism is so off, then why do they not simply

dismiss and ignore what I write?

I think the response tells that it is not so far off. I think the shoe often fits very well. In which case, the straw man

charge of simplification and greater sophistication is a diversion. It is a standard rhetorical move in various fields

when one has no real reply, to simply object generally, Well, were much different than that, much moresophisticated, but then never really produce evidence of the greater sophistication. Of course there are more or

less sophisticated versions of biblicism, but that itself does not make biblicism as I have described it not a

problem.

A second major response to my book has been to attack the second halfs constructive proposals, most of which

are oriented around a strongly Christocentric approach. Ironically, some critics insist that they are obviously

already highly Christocentric, that any dunce knows that, and then other critics insist that a Christocentric

approach is unrealistic and unhelpful. Well, I wonder, which is it? Cant have it both ways.

My sense is that many critics know that they should be strongly Christocentric and to some extent are, but not

consistently and resolutely so. A strong and truly Christocentric reading of scripture requires backing off some

other biblicist claims and sensibilities, which feels threatening and raises the anxiety level. So there again I have

touched a nerve and so evokes the odd responses I have gotten. A third major criticism I have gotten is that


3/4

American evangelicalism simply is not so fragmented and divided as I claim it is, that most people mostly agree

on most things of importance.

My answer is: bunk. Thats empirically false. Its just avoiding the facts. So what Id like to know is this: if

evangelicals are really so unified in their biblical and theological views, then why are they so fragmented

organizationally? Why the need for literally thousands of different denominations, conventions, associations, etc.

etc.? Historically these grew because of doctrinal disagreements.

Given what scripture clearly says about unity and fellowship and agreeing, if evangelicals reallyagree so much,

then why are they so divided? In the end, I find most criticisms of my book unconvincing. Many are simply

evasive, diversionary, and reality-denying. In truth, I expected better and have been disappointed by the quality of

much of the engagement. It is actually somewhat embarrassing to me that so many evangelical critics have

offered such lousy arguments against my book. I would like to have been confronted with better.

Frank:Threecheerson your answer.Im all too familiar with howsomepeoplereact to a bookthey feel threatenedby (or havent

read carefully), and the uncannyextentthey will go tomisrepresent it. I quicklyspottedthis after readingsomeof the reviews

on your book, TheBible MadeImpossible,and that was one of the reasonsthat provokedme to do this interviewwith you.

That said, whensomeonefinishesyour book,what do you want themto walk awaywith knowingor feeling?Whatare the big

takeaways?Christian Smith: I would like readers to fully, honestly confront the fact of pervasive interpretive pluralism and to

see that those facts make biblicism an impossible theory to hold, to understand that one can only be a serious

biblicist (as I define it) by being intellectually dishonest.

My hope is that this will motivate change. I do not feel the need to be in charge of the change. But change is

needed, of one kind or another. People need a better, more realistic, more evangelical, in fact, account of what

the Bible is and how it functions as an authority. My hope is that when the change happens, Jesus Christ will

shine out from scripture more clearly and forcefully than biblicism tends to allow.

Frank:AntherreasonwhyIm promotingyour bookis becauseI deeplybelievein and advocatea Christologicalapproachto the

Scriptures.Its akeynote of my entire ministry. Ive noted,however,that *many*Christiansassumethat they look at the

Bible Christologically(as if it werea given), whenin reality they do not. I knowyouveobservedthe samething. Talk aboutthis abit. Whatare the benchmarksof an authenticChristologicalreadingof Scripture?

Christian Smith: Yes, this is an important point, as I mentioned above. It has to be said first that I am

professionally a sociologist, not a biblical scholar or theologian. However, reading Karl Barth and finally really

getting his approach has transformed by understanding of the Word, and scriptures relation to Christ. My personal

and scholarly observation is that for many believers the Bible is actually the most real and holy authority there is.

They would never say this, but how things really function is not always how they are admitted and professed. I

suspect that for many Christians (despite what they say) God actually seems far off, Christ is a great idea and

person and savior, but what seems most real, most accessible, most reliable (and, unfortunately, most

controllable) is the Bible. This can easily slip into idolatry. The Bible then becomes for us a How To book, when

in fact it is a Who Is booktelling us who Jesus Christ is, and therefore who God the trinity is, and therefore who

we are and what the rest of reality is.

It was not until I studied Barth with a group of great friends for a few years that the light here finally went on. Jesus

Christ is the final reality, the ultimate truth, the complete authority. Scriptures main job it to point us to Christ, like

John the Baptist pointing to Jesus. It is of course more than that, but that is centrally what its function is. To say

this of course only scratches the surface of the implications and meanings. But it is truly a paradigm shift. And it

really, really changes the way to read scripture, once the full force of the idea hits home.

As to benchmarks, it would require a lot more than this venue allows to explore that adequately. But in essence,

every reading of scripture must be through the lens of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, of the fact that God is

reconciling the world to himself in Christ. Every imperative (You shall (not)) must come after and be more

fundamentally grounded on The Indicative, namely, the reality of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, it all goes out of whack

very quickly.
http://frankviola.org/2010/08/30/misrepresentations/http://frankviola.org/2010/08/30/misrepresentations/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/27/unveilingchrist/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/27/unveilingchrist/http://frankviola.org/2010/08/30/misrepresentations/http://frankviola.org/2012/01/27/unveilingchrist/


4/4

Frank:Lookingat the initial salesof this book, howdoesit compareto your manyother titles?(I ask becausesalesnumbersare

a goodmeasureof interestin the subject.)

Christian Smith: Its too soon to say. My sense is that it has gotten a lot of attention and is selling well. The

ranking on Amazon.com is good. But I have not yet seen any concrete sales numbers yet. That said, I hope it gets

widespread attention and close reading.

Frank:As a writer myself, Im particularlyinterestedin this question.Talk aboutyour writingroutines.Whatdoesa normalday

and weeklook like in your writing?

Christian Smith: Some writers are chippers (they write a little bit every day, chipping away at the project) and

some are bingers (they dont write until they have big blocks of time and inspiration, then they write like mad). I

tend to be both a chipper and a binger. Normally, I will spend some years reading, thinking, and talking out the

ideas of a book, then set down and start writing. Even so, much of my thinking is not really worked out until my

fingers are on the keyboard. I think best when writing, not in the abstract. Exactly how this all plays out depends

upon my school schedule.

Some semesters I teach a lot and can write very little. Others I have more free time and write a lot. I also write a

lot during summers and holidays. Once I have an idea that I think is worth publishing and people need to read it,

that pushes me very hard to get it done. I also go in phases when I submerge myself in writing and dont paymuch attention to anything else. I even let those I work with know that Im going under for some time but will

resurface in due time.

But then there are other phases when I can only devote an hour or two to a writing project. In short, chipping does

not provide enough time and attention for me to get things done. But binging is too uneven and lumpy to really

make sustained progress. So I try to do both.

http://frankviola.org/2012/02/15/christiansmith/ (18 aprilie 2013)
http://frankviola.org/2012/02/15/christiansmith/http://frankviola.org/2012/02/15/christiansmith/

Documents

The Bible Made Impossible Interview With Christian Smith