The Bible Assembled

In his book, The Secular Bible, Jacques Berlinerblau shows why preachers can provide proof texts for any doctrine they wish to promote. In essence the fault is the bibles multiple meanings in its text. Its compositional history provides the reason why this is so. The diagram refers to the Hebrew Bible but in principle the same problems exist for the New Testament although in a less extreme form.

Original oral story

Original oral story

Original oral story

Modified by usage

Modified by usage

Modified by usage

Collected and written down by scribes Modified by their political/theological agendas

Further edited by scribes Modified by their political/theological agendas

Further editing by scribes Modified by their political/theological agendas

5th to 10th centuries Masorites insert vowels in Hebrew Bible. However there is a great deal of guesswork

Assemblage of texts occurs over centuries by various contributors. Juxtaposition of unrelated texts Compositional simply collecting the texts together. Interpretive creation of meaning. 1

Superimposition additional layer placed on top of existing text: words, ideas, corrections, clarifications. Scribal errors.

These factors have produced a bible which contains the following: Contradictions Textual repetition Missing words Ungrammatical text or text without meaning. Abrupt changes in literary and linguistic style Sudden changes in plot. In consequence many parts of the bible do not make much sense to the reader, hence the early rabbis created the Mishna to try and resolve these issues by interpreting the problematic texts. Similarly Christian commentaries attempt to do the same. Nevertheless there is no consensus amongst biblical scholars over what these unclear texts actually mean. Examples: Moses father in law is either Jeter, Jethro or Reuel. Psalm 145 is an acrostic poem but the letter nn is missing. Adam is created twice. Etc, etc. This means of course that that there is no original text to go back to, no autograph. The original oral story has been lost for ever beneath all the subsequent textual emendations. For contemporary bible readers there is an additional problem. Translators of the text sometimes have to guess what its meaning might be. In some cases this is too difficult and it is commonly noted as: Heb uncertain. In other cases they may interpret the text according to their religious persuasion, hence the wide divergence of readings between different bibles. Although the variants are sometime subtle, nevertheless one can identify a bible with an evangelical slant for example. Berlinerblau writes: It is through the act of reading that these meanings are discovered, ignored, embellished and distorted beyond recognition by sociologically situated agents. In other words we, the readers, bring to our reading of the bible a host of assumptions and expectations which interact with the text to the extent that, in the worst case, we create a meaning to suit ourselves. An outstanding example of the influence of personality on biblical interpretation is the article by H Edward Everding Jr. Et al., inPsychological Insight into the Bible. Students at a theological college were asked questions about their interpretation of a verse from scripture. After analysing the wide divergence in responses, the results

indicated four basic cognitive orientations that shaped their faith and understanding.
Interestingly, this reader-response analysis is one of several new approaches to biblical understanding i.e.
Structuralist, post-structuralist, psychoanalytic, feminist, womanist, deconstructionist and ideological.

The role of the Holy Spirit in all this is another question.