MORE ON THE SBL RESOLUTION: Maxine Grossman has taken up my challenge and has drafted another resolution with the same aims as the first. She writes:

During the United States election of 2004, an equation was made between specific political arguments and the concept of "moral values" or "biblical values." This claim confuses politics with theology and fundamentally misunderstands both the history of the Bible and its place in contemporary faith communities.

As an organization of professional Bible scholars we share the consensus that biblical texts are diverse in their origins and their theologies, and that they are always understood through the filter of present-day concerns and interpretations.

Interpretations of the Bible can vary widely, but all such interpretations are selective. A "literal" approach, itself a thoroughly modern response to critical Bible scholarship, has no greater claim to theological legitimacy than any other approach, and it is, if anything, less reflective of the history of biblical interpretation since its origins.

A serious and sincere interpreter of the Bible can find support in its texts for almost any political view on issues including abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. To say otherwise, or to equate one's own political agenda with "biblical morality" to the exception of all others', is both a bad reading of the Bible and a marker of bad faith.

We call upon those who would base their political arguments on exclusive scriptural claims to recognize the hubris of such practices and the damage that they do to civil discourse on issues of concern to all of us.


Comments?

For the record, y'all, I want to say that I voted in favor of the SBL's statement, and I will do so again if that is the one they approve. I may not agree with all of its content, but I think the issues are too important to ignore. Why should other people's politics be a measure of my morality?

I like this a lot better than the first one. I may have more comments on it as they come to me. As for the last paragraph of her message, I think the last sentence cuts both ways, which is why I voted against the statement. What I really like about Max's statement is that it addresses the "biblical values" question from the viewpoint of a biblical scholar without advocating a specific political position. I consider that public service (i.e., contributing our expertise to the public debate) without it being political activism (which I use to mean advocating a particular political line). I still think the latter should be an individual matter. But thanks to Dr. Grossman for contributing to the debate and for helping me clarify my own thinking on it.