SPONG, THE AND TRUTH by Nick Hawkes (May, 2002)

Episcopalian , John Spong, (now retired) wrote a book, "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism" in which he sought to rid the Christian faith of all things that were hard to believe, (relegating these things to myth). In doing this, he hoped to redefine Christian belief, making it acceptable to more people outside the church. It is a noble sentiment and he does well to challenge the idea that Christianity requires people to commit intellectual suicide and believe twelve impossible things before breakfast. However, Spong wants to cut so much that is definitive of the Christian faith away that all that is left is universal moralism that features the current values of society.

Spong is a passionate and compelling writer and orator who is very well practised in his arguments. He follows the tradition of the 19th century rationalists and sees himself as the spiritual heir of John A.T. Robinson, English bishop and Cambridge scholar whose 1963 book Honest to caused such a stir. It is not always apparent from his lectures what Spong actually believes and his insistence on loving and accepting everyone can cause people to wonder what the fuss is all about.

The real shape of Spong's radical ideas can be seen in his 'Twelve Theses'. It should be noted that it is easier to state what it is that Spong doesn't believe rather than what he actually affirms as eleven out of his twelve 'theses' are negative. Only the final statement is positive.

John Shelby Spong: Twelve Theses (from "A Call for a New ")

1., as a way of defining God, is dead. So most theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way to speak of God must be found. 2.Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the of the ages is bankrupt. 3.The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense. 4.The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ's divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible. 5.The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post- Newtonian world as events performed by an incarnate deity. 6.The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed. 7.Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history. 8.The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age.

1 9.There is no external, objective, revealed standard writ in scripture or on tablets of stone that will govern our ethical behavior for all time. 10.Prayer cannot be a request made to a theistic deity to act in human history in a particular way. 11.The hope for life after death must be separated forever from the behavior control mentality of reward and punishment. The Church must abandon, therefore, its reliance on guilt as a motivator of behavior. 12.All human beings bear God's image and must be respected for what each person is. Therefore, no external description of one's being, whether based on race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation, can properly be used as the basis for either rejection or discrimination.

The essential content of his Twelve Theses and his books can be summarised in seven points:1

1."God" has no identity, and does not exist in any form in which a relationship can be established. "God" is merely the source of life, love and meaning (which he defines using Tillich's term "Ground of Being."). God does not engage with us in any way but we can "turn inward to meet God" within us and so have an expanded transcendent consciousness.2

2.If "God" cannot and has not entered history or the realm of human experience, it follows that any notion of God entering our world as Christ Jesus must be dismissed. "The Christology of the ages is bankrupt." (Spong's Article 2). There is no virgin birth, no miracle stories, and no ascension (Articles 4,5,8).

3.There is nothing unique about Jesus of Nazareth. The 'deity' evident in Christ is within all humanity. Jesus has simply allowed it to be seen more than any one else, as such, he sets a 'benchmark' by which everyone else's experience of God can be measured. "Jesus is "a channel for transcendence, a person at one with the source of life, the revealer of the source of love, a new being who makes plain the Ground of all Being."3

4.The death of Jesus on the cross has no significance for Spong. Any notion of "sin" or "guilt" is the result of ancient mythological frameworks no longer credible to the modern mind.

5.The Trinity, whether understood as "Father, Son and Holy Spirit", or as "Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier" is flawed in that it is tied to 'theism' and implies that "God" has an identity of being. Rather, "we locate God in every person, and we call this God the Holy Spirit."4

1I am grateful to Rev. Tim Harris of St. Mathew's Anglican Church, (Kensington, Adelaide,) for his synthesis of these seven points which I have simplified slightly. 2John Spong, "The God Beyond Theism", The Voice October 1999 3John Spong, "Reforming Christology: "He Did not Die for My Sins", The Bishop's Voice, May, 1999 4Spong, Why Christianity must change or die , 220-225

2 6.There is no reality or point to prayer.5

7.The resurrection should not be understood as a physical event. It was "an action of God whereby Jesus was "raised into the meaning of God" (Article 7). The resurrection was simply the Apostle Peter's dawning realisation of the purpose of Jesus.

The bulk of Spong's writings attempt to separate the Biblical accounts of the gospel from any notion of truth, except where the Bishop finds a saying or thought helpful to his gospel of tolerance. The virgin birth, the deity of Christ, the atoning death on the cross, the resurrection, the miracles, everything that would verify the biblical claims of Christ's authority and uniqueness, are discounted. The words of the Bible are not the words of God.6

Scholarly concerns

Spong is not considered to be a reputable biblical scholar in academic circles. Despite this, he passes comment and judgment on those who are (in so doing, incurring the wrath of eminent scholars such as N.T. Wright (who lectured for twenty years at Oxford, McGill and Cambridge universities)7 and Gerald O'Collins who wrote of Spong's book Resurrection - Myth or Reality that it did "not belong in the world of international scholarship."8

One of the reasons why Spong is not considered to be a reputable scholar by many in the academic world is that Spong replaces responsible historical inquiry with speculation. For example, Spong writes: "So enter with me into the realm of speculation as we probe the life of Paul, using his words not as literal objects but as doorways into his psyche, where alone truth that changes life can be processed."9 This is an invitation for us to ignore what Paul actually wrote and accept what the Bishop speculates. Spong has also been castigated for believing that the gospel accounts in the Bible are all a Jewish "midrash" where convictions held in the present were translated by writers into the sacred symbols and stories from their history to lend them credibility and respectibility.10 Whilst this appears to set the gospels within an accepted literary style, it is, in reality an unrestrained use of a poorly understood Jewish technique of biblical interpretation which Spong has pressed into service to support his ideas, regardless of scholastic integrity.11

Spong's other particular weakness is that he grossly misrepresents the views of those with orthodox traditional Christian faith. These he savagely caricatures as people

5Ibid. 140 6John Spong, Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism (San Francisco, CA: Harper SanFranscisco, 1992), 249. See also a good synthesis of Spong's belief in: Don Closson, "Rescuing the Gospel from Bishop Spong" http://www.probe.org/docs/spong.html 7N.T. Wright, Who Was Jesus? (Eerdmans, 1993) 8Gerald O'Collins, Tablet 30 April, 1994 Father O'Collins teaches at the Gregorian University of Rome and is the author of over 30 books. 9Spong, Rescuing the Bible p.107 10Ibid. 8-9 11See: Wright, Who Was Jesus?

3 who believe impossible things, who lack intellectual credibility, and who are intolerant of others. In his book Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, he speaks of "hysterical literalism." Whilst these misrepresentations makes it easier for him to win his own argument, it in no way represents reality. He does not address the views of evangelical Christians who have both academic integrity and social compassion.

Following on from this weakness, comes Spong's difficulty in being gracious to those who differ from his opinions. He savaged the Episcopalian of Africa with barely disguised elitism (intimating that they were backward) because they opposed the acceptance of homosexual leaders at the 1998 Lambeth conference. He said, "They've moved out of animism into a very superstitious kind of Christianity. They've yet to face the intellectual revolution of Copernicus and Einstein that we've had to face in the developing world."12 When the bishops voiced their objections, Spong responded by declaring "I'm not going to cease being a twentieth-century person for fear of offending somebody in the Third World." He also said, "No one seemed to recognize that the church in the West had engaged our modern world with its challenging scientific and secular insights far more significantly than has any other part of the communion."13

More locally, he savaged, in a most ungracious way, those in Australia who did not approve of his 2001 speaking tour (whilst calling those who did approve of him "heros").

Pluralism and the identity of Jesus

One can quickly see that central to debate about Spong is the identity of Jesus. Jesus' question to his disciples "Who do people say I am?" (Mark 8:27) has never been so relevant.

Spong's philosophy is essentially that of pluralism (which says that all religious understandings lead to God). What are the essential features of pluralism?

1) Pluralism removes everything that is diagnostic about Christianity (eg. Christ's saving action on the cross, Christ's resurrection and the authority of Scripture).

2) Pluralism defines an overarching ideological cause eg. eco-justice, feminism or social justice (as with Spong) and then designs a god to serve it. To help do this, it may borrow selectively from sections of Scripture which support its cause.

3) The pluralist god lacks identity, is impersonal and unknowable. It is simply a vague abstract form that hides behind the of many religions,

12Bishop John Spong in debate with Bishop Peter John Lee of South Africa, reported by Doug LeBlanc "Spong's elaboration dismays Kenyans" in United Voice (Episcopalian newspaper) July 27, 1998. See also http://www.thecrimson.harvard.edu/opinion/article.asp?ref=6329 13John Spong, "Christianity Caught in a Timewarp" The Voice, September 1998

4 able to be revealed as any or all of them.

4) Fourthly, those who don't subscribe to this new or revised faith are accused of being imperialist bigots. Pluralism tries to silence a lot of people. Pluralism is equated with social tolerance and if you don't embrace pluralism you risk being considered intolerant.

Three things can be said in response:

First, any god created to meet the need of humankind is not much of a god. Sadly, inventing such a god stands in a long tradition of humankind wanting to control their own destiny and .

Secondly, pluralism fails to address the reality of the sinful nature of humankind or explain the suffering that occurs naturally in nature. It has no answers to these issues and offers no hope to overcome them. Spong believes that whatever we desire becomes a good thing as long as it allows everybody to do their thing.14

Thirdly, the pluralist god is someone who allows our religious deception (in the form of diverse and often contradictory religions) and refuses to reveal himself in any definitive way. Most aspects of pluralism can be found in Spong's thinking.

Finding God's timeless truth amidst the human authorship of Scripture

Spong rejects the revealed truth of Scripture but claims to find what he wants to believe by reading between the lines of Scripture. His is not a very modest position as it suggests that Christians have been wrong for twenty centuries - until Spong came along with his views. This leads to an interesting question. What importance (if any) should be attached to 20 centuries of the church's experience and synthesis of God's revelation in Christ Jesus - and why?

Spong seeks to build on the work of the German theologian Rudulf Bultmann and to demythologize Christianity (cut through the exaggerations and stories to get to the essential essence of what faith is [or should be] about that work for us today.

Spong says (quite rightly) that there is no such thing as "objective history" but that scripture represents the culture and world-view and self-interests of those living at the time it was written. As this culture was often intolerant of other groups (eg. of other faiths and other sexuality) we should recognise their writings as culturally imprisoned anachronistic literature.

Most evangelical Christians would have no difficulty with the idea that Scripture comes to us packaged in the culture of the time/s it was written and have long understood this to be the case. They understand that the Bible says that people were "inspired" to write by God (2 Timothy 3:16). They were not "controlled" like some sort of divine word processor. As such, their character, and world-view

14Spong, Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p.236

5 comes through in their writing. Evangelicals also understand from 2 Peter 1:19-21 that the Holy Spirit oversaw both the inspiration of the writers and what they wrote. Notwithstanding this, biblical principles also exist which have remained remarkably consistent over the many centuries the Bible was written and these have formed the basis of our faith. As such, Scripture reflects the wisdom, understanding and theology of its authors who were influenced by the politics, social problems and culture of their day. Their humanity comes through in their writing. This means that our job is to understand the cultural setting of their times but to see through it to the consistent biblical principles which are beyond culture which the Spirit of God has placed there for our guidance and good today.

There will always be debate over some biblical issues which are ambiguous. However, much of it is not and there is a point where these consistent biblical principles cannot be bent without fracturing biblical authority altogether, so relegating Scripture to something we use selectively to adorn our own agendas. Human history has proved time and again that Scripture is a surer guardian of Christian faithfulness than any prevailing values of society and it is to biblical principles that the Holy Spirit has never failed to return the church every time it has sought to wander.

It is also worth remembering that the Bible contains many things other than the interpreted history that Spong has so much difficulty with. It also contains poetry (eg. the Psalms); prayers; picture stories designed to teach "who" and "why" rather than "how" and "when," (eg. much of Genesis); a love song (Song of Solomon); hopes and visions for the future (eg. The Book of Revelation) and ancient cultural wisdom (Proverbs). Not everything in the Bible is history.

However, some is based on history. The Bible includes the written record of how people interpreted the historical events that gave rise to faith. The convictions and insights they recorded did not come from a vacuum but arose as a result of historical events. In particular, our faith has at its foundation the basic historical facts of Jesus. Without the Christ of history there can be no basis for Christian hope.

What does all this mean for how we should go about studying the Bible? Firstly, we need to come humbly to the word of God and be open to God's agenda. In doing this, we open ourselves up to the Holy Spirit who reveals God's truth to us.

Secondly, the meaning of the text must be understood rightly in its context. We must know what is written in the Bible before and after the section of text we are looking at so we can know the circumstances that surround it being written. This ensures that we don't use a text for guidance in circumstances which are unlike those it was intended for. It is also important to appreciate the cultural context that existed when it was written. We can then ask whether there is an underlying truth that is beyond culture that applies to us today.

Thirdly, the meaning we attach to any single piece of Scripture should reflect the general principles that can be distilled from all of Scripture. This will prevent us from becoming unbalanced in our understanding.

6 Fourthly, any biblical text understood in its context and applied to today's circumstances can still remain a dry academic understanding unless something else happens. It is only when the Holy Spirit highlights a truth or promise in the Bible to your heart, that it truly becomes the "active" word of God to you. The active "word of God" is therefore more than letters on a page. As Leslie Weatherhead says, our own individual insight needs to "leap up and recognise it and possess it as our own."

Finally, we must not just select those bits of Scripture that fit into our already held beliefs. We are not to sit in judgement of Scripture so much as to allow it to search us. St. Augustine said, "If you believe what you like in the gospel and reject what you like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself."

Representing the authority of the Bible in pictures

Human beings are composed of those things which don't change from age to age (such as human nature) and a part which does change, such as customs and understandings, ie. our culture.

Unchanging Human being human nature

understanding

Christianity is where the human and the divine join hands. God chooses to do things with us. This means we bring to Christianity both the unchanging part of our humanity as well as the changeable cultural aspects of our humanity.

Human Divine

7 Our Scriptures are the product of our Christian faith. This means that they result from both a divine element and a human element, a human element composed of unchanging human nature and changeable human culture.

Human Divine

Our Scriptures did not come fully written from one period of history. They came together from accumulated material over many centuries. Much of this material was edited and reworked by subsequent writers in the light of new insights about God resulting from God's self-revelation. God completed his self-revelation to humankind in Jesus. This meant that the canon of Scripture could then be closed (meaning that nothing more could be added to or subtracted from it).

Scripture grew with time with editing and addition

8 9 Running though Scripture are God's unchanging Biblical principles. However, these principles are embedded in the cultural context of the time the scriptural passages were written. Our task is therefore to understand the culture which prevailed when Scripture was written but also to look past it for the consistent principles of God that are relevant to all cultures in all times that God has placed there for our good. Cultural background

God's unchanging principles

Our job is therefore to find the right balance. We must not throw the Bible away because we want to throw away historical cultural constraints that are no longer relevant to us. To do that would be to also throw away God's unchanging guiding principles. Neither must we make no allowance for the fact that some of the content of Bible is culturally conditioned and treat everything in it as literal truth that must be believed against all academic evidence. To do that would be to commit intellectual suicide.

10 Literalism Liberalism

Balance is required

The proof is in the pudding

Bishop Spong believed that his convictions would help people outside the church find their way back into the church. It is perhaps fitting to record what has statistically been the result of his convictions. Spong became Bishop Coadjuter of the Diocese of Newark (USA) in 1977 and was made Bishop in 1979 (retiring in 2000). Between 1978 and 1999, the number of baptised persons in his diocese declined by 43.5%, compared with a decline of 23.4% in the Episcopalian Church overall during 1978-97. Spongs ideas have not grown the church but have emptied the church because there was simply nothing left to believe in. Spong's god lacked any definition and there was no purpose to prayer or faith.

In contrast to this, the Bible and biblical principles rightly understood has been responsible for a remarkable amount of growth in faith throughout history. The Bible has revolutionised lives and has brought hope and purpose to people previously enslaved by sin and despair. It is a witness to God's actions, a description of God's revelation of himself and a repository of God's values. That's why despots and oppressive rulers have often tried to ban it. The Bible is a potent weapon. Hebrews 4:12 says: "For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart."

Enjoy submitting to God, reading the Bible and meeting with God in it.

11