In The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture, Christian Smith addresses American evangelicals in an effort to demonstrate that the typical commitment to “biblicism” is fundamentally flawed, cannot be consistently maintained by intellectually honest believers, and ought to be abandoned for a better approach to discerning Christian truth and authority. He argues that the assumptions underlying much of evangelical thought inevitably beget a failure to recognize the multivocal and polysemous nature of Scripture. Smith also contends that—while evangelical aversion to a descent into theological liberalism is well-founded—biblicist ideals are not the necessary and proper alternative, but American evangelicals, in their effort to avoid liberalism, err too far in the opposite direction.
By “biblicism,” Smith refers to a particular theory and method of using the Bible that involves beliefs that, among other things, the Bible has perfect internal harmony, is the sum total of God’s communication for the will of humanity, functions as a handbook containing God’s will about all issues relevant to Christian life and belief, and can be interpreted according to its plain meaning by reasonably intelligent people. Even if some of this constellation of beliefs ostensibly has theoretical merit, says Smith, this paradigm of thought has failed to foster and maintain the kind of unity the Scriptures call Christians to develop and maintain. Instead, biblicism has consistently produced a pervasive interpretive pluralism and denominational division that proves the Bible is not as clear, consistent, and unequivocal as biblicists typically suppose. Moreover, according to Smith, most evangelicals do not obey or intend to obey the commands that are actually clear.
Smith’s scathing critique of “biblicism” is essentially a critique of American evangelicalism. He insists that he intends, ultimately, to be constructive, and perhaps he does so intend, but it is noteworthy that he offers little, if any, positive reflection on evangelism. His stated purpose is to present the problem. Still, acknowledging a couple of strengths would have produced a bit more balance and a more measured treatment. Smith, however, was apparently on the verge of leaving Protestantism as he wrote because he joined the Catholic Church before The Bible Made Impossible was even printed.
Smith devotes the second half of book to outlining what he sees as a truly evangelical method of reading Scripture. He asserts that such an approach involves, first and foremost, an unwavering commitment to recognizing Jesus as the subject, hermeneutical key, and chief end of reading and interpreting the Bible. Next, Smith suggests that evangelicals must become comfortable with the reality that there is considerable ambiguity in Scripture; properly distinguish matters of dogma, doctrine, and opinion; and stop embracing ancient Christian practices as normative.
Smith makes some valid and thought-provoking observations, and many of his critiques have some merit, but his arguments seem to overstate the extent of the problems in some cases. Many Christians—whether evangelical or not—would profit from reading Scripture with a sharper Christological lens and reexamining their understandings about the matters that Christians absolutely need to agree on. His presentation might have been more constructive, though, had he avoided presenting certain evangelical understandings in an almost caricaturized fashion.