There has been some interesting dialogue thus far about Christian Smith’s new book The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture. Three negative reviews in particular stand out:
- Kevin DeYoung, “Christian Smith Makes the Bible Impossible“
- Peter Leithart, “A Cheer and a Half for Biblicism” (First Things, “On the Square”)
- Robert Gundry, “Smithereens!” (Books & Culture)
Scot McKnight and Christian Smith—in his reply to DeYoung, and his reply to Leithart—have expressed dismay and exasperation at the reviewers’ “evasive tricks” and “baffling conversation” and other labels. As DeYoung says in his latest post:
As often as Calvinists are charged with being rhetorically strident (and sometimes they are), it is worth noticing that for Smith and McKnight their objectors in this case are not just mistaken. We are guilty of evasion and sabotage. Those who agree with us are simply circling the wagons and hunkering down. While those who dare to disagree with Smith must conjure up magic or take a leave of reality to do so. It seems we are the Gollums of the evangelical world—wicked, tricksy, and false.
You can read Kevin’s long entry where he goes into more detail in answering the charges of (1) biblicism and (2) pervasive interpretive pluralism.
I agree with this piece by Andrew Wilson on his main point in this piece: “The Biggest Theological Debate of the Next Twenty Years.” This is an important discussion worth having.
