The four Gospels are reasonably consistent, but I would love to see the other Gospels restored to a book titled: “The Gospels Alleged to Have Been Written By the Apostles of Jesus” The Epistles should be broken out to its own book and labeled, as should all of these writings, as to whom, to the best of our knowledge, actually wrote them and when. Each of these writings should also be prefaced with the history of its inclusion in the canon.

I believe that the Old Testament should also be removed from the canon and broken up into the form of the Septuagint and the individual books should be prefaced with its know history.

There can be little doubt that the early church codified the canon and edited the collection to remove the most glaringly contrary material. Epistolary materials was included to legitimize the growing gynophobic, and homophobic positions.It also acted to shore up the rights of its blossoming bureaucracy. This period of consolidation of power crushed the independent African church and weakened the faith in central asia.

In my opinion, the formulation of canon, sowed the seeds that would eventually grow to schism the church, promote doubt and weaken faith. The strengthening of the Apostolic church weakened and distorted the teachings and mission of Jesus.

I believe that Jesus mission was to destroy the illusion of a personal existence separated from God. He came to promote love of God and each other (pretty much the same thing, once you accept the universality of God in the creation). He taught that formulated prayer was unnecessary, as the Universal God was indwelling and knew our needs. He came to teach us that sin was a willful act against the will of God that hurt us and our relationship with Him. By five hundred C.E., the church had pretty much managed to sweep all of these things under the rug, and was moving the Western world into the dark ages. The lasting symbol of this corruption has come to be the “Holy Bible”.

I am a follower of Jesus. I was blessed with indestructible faith in childhood. I was also blessed with a discerning intelligence, a strong love of reading, and an insatiable curiosity. These blessings in combination to a ready source of of religious history gave me a good perspective into the bible. It cost me any faith in the “Holy Writ” aspects of the bible. Sadly, it has also distanced me from the apostolic aspects of the Episcopalian church. I will always love it. It will always be the touchstone of my faith. I have just outgrown it theologically.

So it is with the bible. I love so much of it. It was a great initial tool for understanding much of the past of our faith. It gave me my first notions of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit (I still think of it as the Holy Ghost – Anglican Hangover). I have had to watch, saddened as it has been misused and twisted. I have had to suffer watching used to support hate and division. I have come to know the history of its misuse. I still find myself alienated from many people I know and love by their “Bible Believing Christianity”. I personally feel that it is long past time to actively work to reform it in such a way that it can no longer be misused. I will be sad to watch that happen, but not nearly as sad as I have been for the last forty years watching people misuse the bible in the evangelical support of a twisted relationship with God.

A sound hermeneutical strategy also has to take into account developing understandings of the nature of God within the canon of scripture itself, as well as the interpretative lens provided by holy Tradition. (Of course I had to get that in.)

The only problem with pieces such as Ship of Fools “Ten Worst Bits of the Bible” is that they can be misused to discredit the whole idea of biblical authority in general — “See the Bible says such ridiculous things, we don’t have to take *any* of it seriously.” The question is whether we are willing to let the Bible seriously challenge our worldview and lead us to question our own assumptions and values; or are we only going to accept its authority on those points where we are already predisposed to agree with it?

There’s quite a difference between strictly obeying the commandments of Torah (which is more than the Hebrew Bible) and being a biblical literalist. In fact, it’s precisely a non-literal interpretation of scripture which makes many of the “nasty bits” mentioned sources of great wisdom and teaching, rather than simply things that must just be tossed aside as historic, cultural reflections of their authors that no longer have relevance.

Chasidim don’t really read the bible as a literal book, but rather as a timeless book. And those who teach from the Jews’ scripture while misunderstanding it (e.g. those crazies who talk about all the things/people God hates) would do well to spend a year or 30 in a Yeshiva.

Other than that, I’m also thankful (and proud) that TEC participates in and encourages such thought and questioning. The Hebrew Bible more or less expects it.