I have never read the bible.
I went to Sunday school with my friend Sianne, but more for the singing and lollies than the content of the sermon. That’s why doing Theology is so interesting. I’m plunging into the Christian world completely blind.
I was gobsmacked to find the sheer amount of contradictions in a book that is the cornerstone of millions of lives and further surprised that a text with conflicting ideas can still be so meaningful.
In fact, there are contradictions in the first verses, Genesis 1 and 2. Both cover the creation story, the classic “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”, yet there are many factual clashes. Was the earth barren and dry, or mossy and wet? Did the animals come first or ‘man’? And what I’m going to discuss: Were women and men created equal? Or were women made from ‘man’ for men?
Genesis 1:27 says “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” This alludes to the creation of men and woman being equal, or at least at the same time. Comparatively, Genesis 2:18 states “The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”” and the verse later explains that “the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man”. This depiction of women as a ‘suitable helper’ for men, is not only a damaging theme but is also in complete contradiction to the equality between the sexes in Genesis 1.
But are these major contradictions a big deal?
In theology, we talk about the spectrum of bible readers, from the people who regard the Good Book as historical and factual to those who think of it as mythological with important themes. Some clashes in stories (such as the wet or dry state of the earth) do not have significant meaning in either realm. But something as integral in society as gender roles is heavy, both in a factual and thematic sense.
From a historical sense, it can only logically be one or the other, man and woman cannot be created at the same time, yet women are made from man’s rib. In a mythological context, both stories have incredibly different themes, one of equality and the other of servitude with obvious preference to the male sex.
Having a multitude of conflicts in theme in the first two verses of one of the most popular books of all time is absolutely mindblowing to me. But the bible is used not only as a book providing principles and examples on how to live life but also as a tool of validation to our ideals. In a way, even though thematic clashes are confusing to a new reader like me, the stark differences mean that readers can pick and choose which verse they want to abide by. A sexist man may use Genesis 2:18 to validate his views of women as the servant to men and be just as pious as the feminist that says “on the sixth day God created man and woman equal”. These contradictions, though confusing to an agnostic person, allow a more universal relatability to the bible and to Christianity as a whole.
This is such an interesting post, Rose!! I really think you captured the purpose of the bible as a religious text and not a historical or factual one. The meaning and virtue in the book have always been more important than the exact words for many. Growing up in a Christian family, it was easy for me to see contradiction within the bible, what they taught my cousins at Sunday school and with how people realistically acted. Your comparison of the creation of man and woman really highlights this. Of course, my uncles never said that my aunts were this subservient being, but through the gender roles and social hierarchy in South Africa, you could easily pick out this dynamic. So, from this post, I gather the best way to use the bible and to follow it is not to cherry-pick or ignore segments but to follow the underpinning themes and morals – not to quote scripture but live as you think you should and allow others to do the same.
Rose, thank you for your post. As a Christian myself there are many times I have grappled with scripture (which I think is important to do, apathy towards it is dangerous). I’ve learnt that scripture must be removed from the ‘science textbook’ view and rather considered as a great narrative of God’s love for his people. Taken out of context, the Bible can (and very much has) cause/d significant damage. Using scripture to justify harming others does not align with the teaching of Jesus himself who instructs us to “love our neighbour as ourselves”. I might mention that this works both ways – consider the role of the Bible in the causation of slavery, but then again its instigation of the Abolishment Movement out of William Wilberforce and the Clapham Sect.
In regards to your questions of the creation story, it is important to view this for what it is; not a prose-orientated book but rather a poem and love song from God. There are many different styles of books in the Bible, consider the psalms (poems of lament and hope), the Gospel recounts, and the letters of the New Testament. Genesis is in no sense an evolutionary history or textbook, although it certainly has been used as such… I myself am studying biology and have learnt to grapple with the accounts in Genisis, but have come to the conclusion that there really may be no debate and the two are entirely mutually exclusive…
On The Bible and gender equality, again – used to harm and hurt women historically – but this is a human failure and not God himself. As I understand it this imagery is used to understand the sacrality of marriage, of life, and of the relation between man and woman. Jesus himself can almost be considered the first feminist – I have included a quote here which unpacks this a little…
“Perhaps it is no wonder that the women were first at the Cradle and last at the Cross. They had never known a man like this Man – there never has been such another. A prophet and teacher who never nagged at them, never flattered or coaxed or patronised; who never made arch jokes about them, never treated them either as “The women, God help us!” or “The ladies, God bless them!”; who rebuked without querulousness and praised without condescension; who took their questions and arguments seriously; who never mapped out their sphere for them, never urged them to be feminine or jeered at them for being female; who had no axe to grind and no uneasy male dignity to defend; who took them as he found them and was completely unself-conscious. There is no act, no sermon, no parable in the whole Gospel that borrows its pungency from female perversity; nobody could possibly guess from the words and deeds of Jesus that there was anything “funny” about woman’s nature.”
― Dorothy L. Sayers, Are Women Human? Astute and Witty Essays on the Role of Women in Society
I hope you enjoy your theology studies. As you can probably tell, I myself am highly interested in the topic (and have many, many books on it if you ever want to borrow them…)! Your post shows a beautiful critical consideration of the texts which are so important if we are to use it as it was intended. Much to think about, thank you!!
yikes sorry, i did not realise that was so long…. !!!!
Frances thankyou so much for this comment! It’s so cool to hear about this from someone who has grown up with the bible. I’m glad that my post wasn’t perceived as a critique, but rather an extended question to help me in my understanding of scripture! Thanks again 🙂
I found this post super interesting and informative thanks Rose! I myself have never grown up religious and no one in my family is either. This meant that I struggled for so long to see religion as others did as I only saw the contradictions that you mentioned in your post. I have always gone to schools that consider themselves religious but I had never met a single person who went there that would have considered themselves a Christian. Reading Frances comment I started to realise that it isn’t about the scientific aspects of the bible that matter to people its the way that it’s written that makes people feel its love. Through what you wrote and the comments people have been writing about their own perspective I have gained a lot of respect for the way people interpret the bible and Christianity.
Hey Rose. Nice post. I’ve also found the fact that the bible is so culturally elevated and significant while also extremely contradictory very confusing. And I didn’t even realise there were contradictions on the first page.
The bible is obviously an interpretive text and as you recognise has been used for a variety of functions. I believe it is perfectly possible for readers to take a holistic view of the bible, to internalise it’s underlying principles while taking other parts of it as metaphorical. Ideally readers of the bible could acknowledge that it was written at a certain point of time by certain individuals influenced by a certain historical context, so it is obviously subject to historically specific and contingent values… so maybe we don’t need to take everything it says as immutable truth…
But of course, critical readership is not how everyone is approaching the bible. As you point out, these contradictions of the bible can be “heavy” and problematic issues especially when the bible is functioning “as a tool of validation” for certain ideals. This allows it to be abused as a justification for sexist ideas. Damn it.
The presence of contradictions in the bible is also interesting to me because it explodes the idea that the bible is perfect and unquestionable and contingent and human. It completely undercuts the legitimacy of fundamentalism. Unfortunately fundamentalists don’t really care.
Anyway, thank you for your post. It’s a very interesting topic.
These are heavy topics!! But simultaneously, so important! Thank you for your honest and interesting post, Rose 🙂
I’m Christian myself and have struggled at times to know how to interpret passages such as these in the Bible. I guess, like Frances in her comment above, I’ve learned to view the Bible as less of a scientific account, and more as a love story from God to his creation: a collection of stories that demonstrate who God is and his love for us.
I really appreciate your comment that Biblical contradictions are confusing but how they also make the Bible and Christianity more relatable. The Bible, of course, was written by people and contains the stories of so many different people across history, so naturally, sometimes things go a bit awry. In saying this, however, the Bible still manages to be so impactful as these stories continue to display this message of love.
It is very concerning that the Bible is used in ways that contradict this, however, and your example of gender equality is super important. Women certainly do play important roles in the Bible, even if they are not as extensively recorded – from prophets to queens to even the mother and friends of Jesus – and the way that Jesus treated women was revolutionary in that historical context. As Christianity is inherently Christ-centred, that the Bible has been used to justify actions so contradictory to how Jesus lived and taught is worrying. For many, quoting Scripture as justification is enough, but your post has definitely been a reminder for me that context – both historical and just generally in the story – is very important. Thank you again for your post that explores such important questions!
This was such a great read! As someone who grew up in the Catholic faith and attended solely Catholic schooling, it’s always wonderful to see a complete outsiders perspective on the controversies of scripture. In class,especially as we reached those long awaited final years of high school, similar questions would be posed to our teachers and priests. Does God favour man? How much of the scripture is intended to be interpreted as a metaphor? If we are told to follow one set of rules, why don’t we still follow the others? We were often given vague or subjective answers, often with a smattering of ‘faith’ and ‘just believe’ thrown in for good measure. I think that’s primarily because there is no right answer. The Bible has been rewritten over and over and there are countless different versions of it, each just changing the words of verses ever so slightly in order to mean something else. It creates a tricky and rather convoluted narrative.
However, if there was any one place where the answers were intended to be straightforward and and less contradictive, then I implore you to search through the Catechism. It’s not for all Christian religions, but for Catholics, it’s considered almost the encyclopedia for the Bible. A clear, definitive answer as to what those of the faith should believe.
We may never find out what the original Bible said, or how women we held in regards to respect, but in some ways I’m kinda okay with. I’m not sure I’d be too happy with the result considering the time period and society it was written in!
Once again, extremely interesting post, I can’t wait to explore this topic more on my own 🙂
This is such an enlightening post! I never knew enough about the bible to realise how many contradictions there are and I really like how Frances explained it above from a Christian point of view as well.
What you said about how different people can draw on the parts of the bible that resonate with their beliefs and not with the parts that don’t is really interesting, and it made me think of how people can do the same thing with the US constitution. It astounds me how people can pull that thing apart to find the one line they need to “cement” their argument, like they did with Kaepernick’s kneeling during the national anthem. Sure the constitution says Americans must stand during the national anthem, but it also says you are not allowed to put the American flag print on any clothing etc, and you can bet that all the people defaming Kaepernick’s kneeling pull out their American-flag printed shorts and bikinis for the 4th of July.
Obviously the bible is a much more sacred and significant text that the US Constitution, but at the same time I don’t think it’s difficult to find links in the ways people can take their values and beliefs and use powerful texts to back themselves up, even if it is contradictory.