Help! My professor is attacking the Bible!

Julie cornered me after a fellowship meeting one night, clearly agitated. Her boyfriend stood beside her, calm but helpless. “Now I’m really upset,”she said. I didn’t have time to ask why; she rapidly proceeded to tell me.

“My professor has been saying all semester long that the Bible is written by all these different people and that it’s inaccurate, and some parts are just made up. I asked my pastor about it, and he admits that some of what my prof says is true! Now what am I supposed to do? If the Bible is the word of God . . .” She stopped, unsure of what to say next.

Perhaps you (or your friends) are in a history or religion class and the professor is criticizing the Bible. You could be a) angry, b) embarrassed, c) confused and full of new doubts or d) all of the above. What do you do?

First, take a deep breath and relax. Be reassured; if your faith is genuine, it can take a few critiques and hard questions. Christianity has been around a long time and is still standing on its own two feet, even after much debate from both sides. God is real. Jesus is Lord. The gospel is not shaky; it provides a sure foundation from which to hear (and learn from) anything that comes your way.

Okay, now that you’re not hyperventilating anymore (that’s an act of faith right there; good first step!), here are some questions you can ask when you face new information or critiques about the Bible. These questions can help you engage new material and find a good response to it.

Start with questions
Is the new information truly damaging to the Bible’s authority? In other words, is it the faith or just my faith that is being questioned? Often it is hard to separate our assumptions and views from the core of the gospel itself. It’s like finding out as a child that your mother had dated other men before she married your father, and being initially shocked by the revelation. You had a simple and unquestioned picture of your mother as always having been with your father. Thinking about it a little bit, though, easily brings you to the conclusion that this new revelation doesn’t make Mom any less wonderful as a woman, a wife or a mother. It simply means that her story was more complex than you imagined. Many of the things that you learn about the Bible will be in this category. Its history is more complex than you might have imagined at first. Though your picture of the Bible might be changing, its essential nature will not. I think you’ll find that your appreciation for the Bible will only deepen as you find out more about it.

What is the attitude or bias of the speaker or teacher? We all have perspectives on things that color the way we see them. One key attitude of any good student is respect for the material. Another important attitude is respect for other people in the learning community. Does your professor have respect for the material being taught? Is there an attitude of respect for students in the class? If not, then be wary of the information and the statements made. Only someone who respects something can truly see it for what it is.

A couple of cautions here: you may be saying, “I know my teacher is biased, and that’s the problem!” First, do not be too quick to judge your teacher. Remember that respect for other people in your learning community is important to demonstrate. Ask yourself if you are assuming your teacher is antagonistic toward the Bible, when perhaps he or she is only challenging your view of the Bible. Also be willing to examine your attitude toward the Bible. Are you letting the Bible tell you what it is, or are you telling it what it must be? Remember, the basis of Christian faith is strong enough for you to be open and learning. You may be the truest witness when you stand for the faith without being defensive.

Is the critique fair? Is it a good reading of the text? It’s easy to bring modern assumptions and prejudices to an ancient text. It is also very easy to prejudge texts (like people) before getting all the facts. Here is where respect for your material can help you. If you can avoid pushing your own needs on the text, and listen to it speak in its own voice, you’ll be less likely to take it out of context or out of proportion. This may help you look at some of the strange and disturbing statements and stories in the Bible.

Is the critique well-grounded? Your professor may have a Ph.D., and you ought to show respect for your teacher. But even Ph.D.s disagree with each other; it’s part of their job. Treat statements by your professor as the first word in a conversation, not the last. (Even so, do take notes, because it may be on the test!) Also, ask if your professor is making statements in an area of personal expertise or not. For example, religious studies professors are professionals in their field, but when they make statements about history, psychology or philosophy, they are speaking outside their profession. Now, I am not against people commenting outside their fields, but be aware that anyone with a degree in anything can seem to be an authority on everything. Just because a famous scientist has won the Nobel Prize for biochemistry doesn’t mean that person’s philosophy of life is any more informed than yours. Be a discerning student.

In short, be a respectful learner, but also active and questioning. Any good teacher would be delighted to have such a student. And if your teacher isn’t a good one, well, go ahead and be the student you need to be anyway.

Applying the questions
Now, let’s apply some of these principles to particular statements that might be made in your classes.

“X didn’t really write Y.”

With this statement, the question “Does this truly damage the authority of the Bible?” helps. Actually, few biblical books claim authorship. For many, nothing in the text says who wrote them. Jewish or Christian tradition has often supplied that gap with a traditional connection, usually with a known biblical character. This is one fact that comes along with the faith, but isn’t critical to the faith itself.

For example, tradition says that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. What you might hear in class is that there were several different versions of the creation and exodus stories that were blended together by later editors into the form that we have now. This idea began when scholars noticed that the style and vocabulary of the text seems to change throughout these books, as if the work of several different people had been patched together.

Does the possibility of multiple authors and the idea of the text’s coming together over many years undermine the authority of the Bible? What is the essential difference if God involved one partner (such as Moses) to work with him on his book or if God involved a number of partners? Throughout the Bible, God is constantly asking people to get on board with him and his mission. Would it be so out of character for him to work with a team of people over time? I don’t think so. Instead of a novel written in one period, the Bible is more like a family treasury that was added to and used over generations. We have a picture of a God who has been working with his people since creation—“a shelter to every generation.”

It is also popular to question the authorship of those books that do claim authorship for themselves, notably the New Testament letters. These arguments are also based on matters of content and style, saying, for example, that some of Paul’s letters were clearly written by someone else. But arguing from style is a very weak argument. Authors can easily change their style, tone and vocabulary when the subject matter calls for it. It has also been said that this practice of writing under a famous person’s name was an accepted practice at the time. But that argument is usually applied to literary forms other than letters. Because the church put so much stock in the authority of the apostles, to write in their names would hardly be an accepted practice.

Most authorship debates have led me to a deeper appreciation of the text. In most cases, I have come out better for wrestling with the material. So let’s look at another question. “The author just put together other sources to write the book.”

We have seen an idea like this with the Pentateuch, the books of Moses. But you’ll also hear it when you study the Gospels. It is a very common idea that both Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. It is also said they had another common source and some original material, unique to each, that they edited and wove together into the two Gospels, Matthew and Luke.

First of all, realize that this theory was created on the basis of the content of the texts alone. There is no other historical evidence, such as other drafts or other editions of Matthew and Luke, or even of the source material other than Mark. Even so, the case is compelling and most evangelical scholars also hold this view. Many do not even think this necessarily cuts out the apostle Matthew as a possible author of the book Matthew or Paul’s companion Luke as the author of the book Luke.

Why does this theory about these Gospels not bother these believing scholars? Remember to ask if a critique is a good reading of the text. It is easy to bring alien assumptions to a text that was produced in another culture. One alien assumption that we bring here is about the value of originality. We think it is better to write originally from one’s own mind, rather than to copy someone else’s material. We tend to think that people who merely copy someone else’s material do so because they don’t have their own first-hand knowledge or their own inspiration to write well and with authority. But we’re looking at a text that comes from a culture that reveres tradition and authority. Preserving what is good was a very high value, higher than creating something new and original. In our culture we worship the new; their culture honored what was sure, established and authoritative. Back then, authors considered it a sacred duty to pass on what was handed to them. If the gospel of Mark was already a trusted source in the community, it’s easy to see how these authors would use it as basic source material to expand on. They would use this source material as a sure foundation for building on the church’s understanding of Jesus. It is our modern assumption that “newer is truer” which causes us to question this use of another source.

“This material was written later to justify Israel’s (or the church’s) position. They put their own words in the mouth of God or Jesus.”

Maybe you’ve heard a story like this: “The church at a particular time was facing a crisis, and a document appeared that said just what the orthodox needed in order to combat the heretical.” This argument seems very suspicious, as if the church produced a little revisionist history as propaganda. But look at it differently. Suppose that in John’s time, as stories about Jesus were in circulation, the church hit a problem. Perhaps John could see the words and actions of Jesus in a new light, and realize how helpful it would be for the church and its current problem. He might write a letter or a Gospel account to serve the church in that time with that truth.

Remember that the oral preaching of the gospel is earlier than the written pieces known as Gospels. These books were written expressly to take some of the truth about Jesus and give it in a useful way to the believers (see Luke 1:1-4 and John 20:30-31).

What about the argument that these documents were written to glorify or justify Israel or the disciples? Just read them. They don’t make the chosen people look good. In fact, they seem to be saying that only an infinitely good, wise, powerful and—above all—patient God could redeem such a bumbling, faithless mess as the believers we meet in the Bible’s pages. If these documents are self-serving histories, they are very poor pieces of work. But if they were written to glorify God, well then, we have a different story!

“The Bible shows a lot of barbaric actions and values. It is a classic study in the evolution of religion.”

Again, ask that first question: Is this truly damaging to the authority of the Bible? Just for the sake of argument, what if this statement were true? What if the values in the Bible were very low in the beginning, grew stronger in the prophets, and reached a new height in Jesus and the church? Wouldn’t it be something we might expect, given the story the Bible tells? It’s a story of a perfect creator working with fallen creatures! Might even the Lord’s commands be suited to the understanding and capability of his people at a given time? For example, Jesus said that Moses permitted the people to divorce because of their “hardness of heart.” But divorce was never God’s intent (see Matthew 19).

Ask another of our questions: Is the critique a good reading of the text? Of course, a good reading of the text implies that the real situation is much more complex than this. While there is an element of progressive revelation in the Bible and of God’s progressive work with his people, other things are also going on in the text. There is a baseline of common humanity in all the ages, a humanity that has both a strong evil streak and a built-in sense of right and wrong. It is also the same God speaking through the ages. And, at all times, some people listen to God more than others. While God is doing a progressive work, a simple developmental explanation will not suffice.

We can take a look in the book of Judges to find a classic “text of terror.” Read the story of the Levite and his concubine in Judges 19-21. What happens in this story is plainly horrible and barbaric. And clearly, the narrator also thinks so. The whole book of Judges is a story of Israel falling away from its call to be the people of God. To read the text well is to hear the author say “Look what happens to people who reject the rule of their God.”

Now, while this kind of incident can be easily dealt with, other passages are definitely more ambiguous. Over time, I’ve been helped by some of the very questions and approaches I am now urging you to consider.

What about something like Psalm 137, where the author is hoping he gets a chance to dash his enemies’ infants against the rocks? Again, we have to do some careful reading. (“Yeah, let’s see how he handles this one. . . .”)

I would say that this psalm, while a part of the Word of God, is not directly the voice of God. It doesn’t claim to be. It’s the honest voice of an angry human being in prayer to God. It’s included in this collection of poetry, praise and prayers to show us how to offer up to God all the parts of life we deal with, even the anguish and the anger. You may say, “Aha, but that’s just your interpretation.” Yes, it is. So let’s go on to the last statement to be considered.

“Interpreting the Bible is all in the reader’s mind and heart. What matters is that the text leads us into good actions.”

Is this a good reading of the text? Yes and no. It is clear that both Judaism and Christianity are historical religions. They were not founded on moral principles, but on saving acts of God in history. If God did not bring the children of Israel out of Egypt, then the faith of Israel is a farce. If Jesus did not really die and rise again, then, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15, “We are more to be pitied than all people.” What actually happened in history does matter.

But so does interpretation. You can take beautiful words out of Scripture, corrupt their meaning and do harm with them, if you use them wrongly. The devil quoted Scripture to Jesus, but it became an evil message. You can also take ugly words in Scripture (like Psalm 137) and use them in a way that brings peace to people’s hearts and lives.

2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.” Useful . . . to whom? To the one who knows how to use it. Proverbs 25:11 says, “A word aptly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver.” The words of Scripture need to be “aptly spoken,”—understood and spoken with wisdom in the right place at the right time. Conversely, Proverbs also says, “Like a lame man’s legs that hang limp, so is a proverb in the mouth of a fool.” We have all seen cases where the Bible’s words were spoken foolishly or with malice, and they “hang limp.”

We cannot take the reader out of the idea of reading, or the interpreter out of the idea of interpretation. There is no reading without interpretation, no belief without understanding. We cannot take people and their responses out of the equation. But then, would we want to? We don’t really want to just point to a book and say, “The truth is in there.” No. The Bible itself teaches us to say, “God’s Spirit is alive and active today, and he speaks to us through his Word.”

We not only have to trust that God was watching over the process of writing and collecting the biblical books, we also have to trust that they were brought properly to us in our time and, even more, that the Word is brought home to our hearts by his Spirit. The big issue is not whether or not we trust a book, but whether or not we trust God. Is the Creator of the universe someone we can trust to get a message through to one of his creatures, or not? It has always been, and always will be, a question of trust.

Well, now, perhaps you feel better, but . . . what about standing up for the truth in your class?

Raising issues in class
Mike was talking about his class as we walked past the pond at St. Mary’s College. “. . . and this prof gave me a C just because I’m a Christian.”

“How do you know that?” I asked.

“Well, I witnessed in my paper, you know, included my testimony and the gospel. And he gave me a bad grade. He said that my testimony was inappropriate.”

“Hmm. Did your testimony have anything to do with the assignment?”

“Not really. I just fit it in . . .”

There has to be a better way to stand for truth in class than this—ignoring the instructor and spouting a gospel message whenever possible. What is a good alternative to Mike’s approach when you’re squirming uncomfortably in class? You can take up the time-honored tool of the student: you can raise good questions.

If you can develop the ability to ask good questions, you will be able to serve not only the truth, but also your professor and your classmates. Good questions can get you far. People can react quickly to a statement, but a good question evokes some thought. Both teachers and students learn from good questions raised in class. Questions are also less threatening than position statements or objections. They are more likely to lead to open dialogue. Furthermore, a good question is an appropriate move for a student; it shows respect and a willingness to learn. You honor Christ in how you carry yourself and his message.

How do we ask good questions? First, the question should be genuine. If a question is asked in an arrogant way, merely to score a point, people will know. Arrogance and argumentativeness are unbecoming to a believer. And, frankly, you probably can’t beat your professor in a duel, so don’t even try. Of course, it is true that some professors (and students) enjoy a lively debate as a way of getting at truth together. In some situations, friendly sparring is welcomed. You have to know your situation. Still, the general rule is that questions should be genuine. Either you want to know more information, or perhaps want to know why your professor thinks so differently from you.

When you ask for an explanation, it helps you understand better, and makes clear to the class the logic and assumptions that your teacher is using. Both kinds of questions can be genuine.

Second, a good question will try to get to the heart of the matter. You need to ask about the key assumptions behind a statement, and the reasoning your teacher used. Often, you won’t be able to do this on the spur of the moment, but that is what study time is for, to think over what was said in class and work with it so that you understand it. Get together with your classmates and think of good questions that you would like to see the professor answer.

For example, let’s say that the instructor says that a particular prophecy must have been written after the fact, because it so accurately describes real historical events. You might ask, “Why is it impossible to suppose that God might occasionally tell people what is going to happen?” Now, you might get a patronizing answer, but at least the class will have heard a very reasonable question about the professor’s assumptions, with a chance to hear an attempt at a defense for this bias against the supernatural. (And if some students do not find the professor’s answer satisfying, they might leave class with the nagging question in the back of their mind, unanswered. The Spirit may then use that to move someone into seeking a better answer. You never know.) Another question could be, “It sounds to me like this is based on the assumption that there is no such thing as a real predictive prophecy. Is that what you would say, or is there any hard evidence that this was written after the fact?”

Or suppose that your professor says that Paul did not write the book of Ephesians, though he did write the book of Galatians. You could simply ask on what basis that was decided. After an answer you could follow up with, “Is this a broadly accepted view, or is there some debate about this?” You could also ask, “What is the best argument against this view? What would some critics of this theory say?” These questions are based on the reality that many things are discussed and debated in scholarly circles, some things hotly so. To do a good job in teaching, a professor should be letting you know where some of the key discussions and debates are. Asking these questions will not only get you more information, they will also help your classmates realize that your teacher is just one voice in a community of scholarship. There are many views and options out there.

What to expect
Will all this keep you from making mistakes, being humiliated, or getting a B instead of that A from some professors? No guarantees. Will you score great victories over a Christian-eating professor? Don’t bet on it. It’s the job of Christian professors to deal with other professors on a peer level. Perhaps you’ll have that role someday. But for now you are a student. Be a good and faithful one. Learn all you can. Offer your perspective and witness in class as you can. God will take care of the rest. Trust him.

Hmm. We’ve come back to trust again. Remember that God is running the show. He truly is our Lord and our Teacher. Your professors and instructors work for him whether they know it or not. He has his eye on you, and will help you learn and do everything you need. Bank on it. So pray, go to class, ask good questions and see what happens.

Neil Livingstone serves as InterVarsity® staff in the Washington, DC, area.