Recently while I was in a cynical mood, I was struck profoundly by a message I saw on a T-shirt that reads, “I used to care. I take a pill for that now.” It was a message that resonated with my cynicism at that moment. It was an ominous thought.
Imagine. Could it be true that our urge to care, our instincts to love and to hate, our constant inclination to wage war, even our hunger for justice, are all nothing more than biological impulses that are amenable to “treatment” if they get in our way? Fundamentalists would say, Absolutely not. Atheists would say, Absolutely yes. Others struggle to decide whether they wish to stand with or against “science” on an issue on which “science” may not be capable of speaking.
This past week we buried our family cat. A source of joy for the past 8 years becomes a lifeless ball of fur after a brief but painful illness. What shall I believe? Revelation 5:13 gives us a picture of “every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them” singing praise to God. Some would take this scripture to mean that yes, we will see even animals we have loved beyond the grave. Our atheist neighbors, of course, would reject this claim categorically. Still others would choose to find spiritual comfort in these words, but would not take them to be literally true.
Such is the nature of the chasm that divides us. We have literalism, the insistence that Biblical faith is based on more than mythology. (Perhaps “quasi-literalism” is a better term, since it’s hard to find a true literalist.) We have materialism, the insistence that nothing exists that cannot be measured by science. And in between we have those who follow neither literalism nor materialism, who see God’s word as being more in the eyes of the beholder, who see everything from the patriarchal narratives to the resurrection of Jesus as purely stories to be mined for spiritual truth, not as events that happened in the real world.
If we buy into non-literalism, it would logically follow that we must quit trying to convert anyone in our relations with other religions, and even in our internal denominational debates. All we can do is pursue understanding. How can we say that one person’s favorite myth or Biblical bias is any truer than anyone else’s?
The problem with non-literalism is: Why should we lay down our lives for our favorite myth? Faced with a gun to the head and a demand to say the Shahada, “whatever” becomes a logical response. Is my life, is my time, worth a sentimental attachment I may have to a feeling that has no concrete anchor in reality?
No one truly believes non-literalism, anyway, when it comes to issues we truly care about. In our sex debate, “there must be room at the table for everyone” is usually only a ploy to secure our place at the table, a ploy to be discarded when we have the power to shout down opponents with our vision of justice. Justice cannot permit injustice at the table. The same is true for the materialist. All truths are equally true (and equally false), except for materialistic evolution.
A famous Roman (whose name I have misplaced) is reported to have said just before he died, “Ah, virtue! So you were just a name! And I followed thee as something real!” Faith, if it is to have any value at all, if it is to be truly worth living for or dying for, must be more than a myth, more than a feeling. Otherwise, we might be better off taking a pill for it.
TOM HOBSON of Belleville, Ill., a PC(USA) pastor for 29 years, is adjunct professor at Morthland College, West Frankfort, IL, and is currently preaching at Wabash Presbyterian Church, Allendale, IL. He is author of What’s on God’s Sin List for Today? (Wipf and Stock, 2011).
