As explained in my review of A Year of Biblical Womanhood,
much of Rachel Held Evans’ book could be summed up, sadly, as an
attempt to discount the validity of Scripture. I am hopeful that she
does not intend for this to happen, but it is unfortunately what happens
when she repeatedly speaks of the Bible as being outdated, useless in
parts, and at times downright horrific — including at one point
describing having a terrifying nightmare as she contemplated the texts
(62). Tragically, that is her claim.
Evans is troubled by many things in the Old Testament, but especially
by the harsh consequences in the law that follow from sexual sin —
consequences that often required the death of men and women. In
explaining why these same codes do not apply today — why adulterers are
not stoned to death — she can only say, “Most Jews and Christians have
long abandoned the practices associated with hard patriarchy” (51). But
is it that simple — and that shallow?
She suggests this is because Jesus ignored certain Old Testament
laws. He was a revolutionary who used “selective literalism” and who
broke these anti-adultery laws when he urged compassion on the
adulterous woman (53). But before we charge Jesus with breaking the law, we should give this question some serious thought.
Actually, we are faced with two questions. First, how should we
handle the abuse of women recorded in the Old Testament? And second, how
should do we properly evaluate the ongoing value of the Old Testament
law?
Handling Abuse in the Old Testament
In one chapter, Evans sets out to find groups “committed to
preserving as much of the patriarchal structure of Old Testament law as
possible,” including polygamists. In polygamy, “the man’s consequent
procreative prowess is listed by writers of Scripture as one of his
most worthy virtues” (51, 58). That is a bold claim, but she provides no
biblical citations to back it up. Continue at Trillia Newbell
No comments:
Post a Comment