The following is something I wrote in response to a class discussion question on contradictions in scripture. The question was what we can do with such contradictions. I wasn't expecting to write anything useable for this blog, but it just sort of happened, and I feel comfortable sharing. I hope it helps you in some way.

-James

"As someone who is re-experiencing biblical material from a philosophical background, I appreciate things like clearly defined terms and mutually affirming accounts of things. Contradictions, I've learned, are to be avoided or rooted out. But this is not possible in the case of scripture, or even of ancient literature. The method of editing is drastically different from the one we've adopted today. Rather than edit the text to coalesce as a whole in order to make a single point, ancient editors compile different views and thoughts in order to present the subject in as nuanced a light as possible. While maddening in its own way, I think these inevitable contradictions give us the opportunity, as readers open to experiencing the Divine, to examine faith in very important ways (of which I mean to present two).

First, the contradictions provide us a window into the mindset of the author(s) and editor(s). As has often been noted in class, an interpretation of a thing will always reveal more about the interpreter than the thing being interpreted. We can learn from the contradictions by encountering them not as objective, literal accounts, but as viewpoints that color the text. Biology teaches us that diversity is a sign of health in any given system; I'd argue that this holds true even in matters of scripture. It is well that I have multiple accounts of the creation myth or of David's introduction to Saul. This means that I am presented with not just one viewpoint to consider, but two. If I were only interested in scripture for its prescriptive value to tell me what to believe, multiple accounts of a single event might be distressing. But if the study of human nature has taught me anything, it's that no two people ever encounter the same phenomenon in quite the same way. If I approach scripture from the viewpoint of a learner, I have more material to work with if I have multiple accounts. The unravelling of a mystery is always richer and more satisfying when there are many layers to consider. In this way, contradiction in scripture can be edifying in a scholarly way. I can learn to read the text as the author(s) intended it to be read.

The second opportunity provided by contradictions in scripture is a result of the first; it is the mystical encounter with the God who is infinitely larger than the scriptural context that presumes to encapsulate him. When I am presented with two different accounts, I am not passively spoon fed the Word of God; I am forced into picking up the spoon and feeding myself. The contradiction of opposing accounts of creation may initially be distressing, but when I meditate on them and listen to which of the two is meant for me, suddenly I have found something far more valuable than a scholarly "guesstimation" of the truth of the matter. Suddenly, I have found a truth that achieves reality in me. Kierkegaard called this a process of subjective appropriation, wherein truth is not only encountered by the individual, but also absorbed into the individual. When I am forced into grappling with the different accounts of the Christian Gospels, I am pulled into a deeper examination of what significance Christ's words hold. The result of my grappling is a mystical experience with truth, with God, which goes beyond mere intellectual assent; the truth achieves reality within me. This is merely my personal way of thinking on the subject. Suffice it to say that contradictions in scripture can be the catalyst for a mystical experience of the Divine, one that is not bogged down by doctrine or dogma. I can learn to read the text as God, not just the author, intended me to read it.


All this has been a rather longwinded way of saying that I think the key to dealing with any given discrepancy in a scriptural text is first to discover what the author meant and how they encountered the Divine. Second, to discover what the Divine means to you. We can't just jump back in time and witness the past for ourselves, that is, an objective view of scripture is denied us. But a subjective view, whether through the our own eyes or the eyes of the author(s), is always accessible."

This is the Idiot, signing out.