CNN’s Beliefnet blog looks at some of the misconceptions people have about what is in the Bible:
The Bible may be the most revered book in America, but it’s also one of the most misquoted. Politicians, motivational speakers, coaches – all types of people – quote passages that actually have no place in the Bible, religious scholars say.
These phantom passages include:
“God helps those who help themselves.”
“Spare the rod, spoil the child.”
And there is this often-cited paraphrase: Satan tempted Eve to eat the forbidden apple in the Garden of Eden.
None of those passages appear in the Bible, and one is actually anti-biblical, scholars say.
But people rarely challenge them because biblical ignorance is so pervasive that it even reaches groups of people who should know better, says Steve Bouma-Prediger, a religion professor at Hope College in Holland, Michigan.
“In my college religion classes, I sometimes quote 2 Hesitations 4:3 (‘There are no internal combustion engines in heaven’),” Bouma-Prediger says. “I wait to see if anyone realizes that there is no such book in the Bible and therefore no such verse.
“Only a few catch on.”
My pastor tried that trick one time, preaching a sermon out of the book of “Habakkuk.” I looked around at the faces in the congregation and the entire crowd acted like that was actually a book that was in the Bible! I was embarrassed for them.
However, the worse offenders—and I hate to say this—are Catholics. Occasionally you’ll hear them refer to books like Tobias, Judith, and the Wisdom of Solomon. I’m not sure why people think those are in the Bible but I’ve checked the index to my copy of the NIV (twice) and can assure you that those books are definitely not in there.
June 9th, 2011 | 9:05 am
Now, now, Joe.
I presume that last comment is meant to be apocryphal? I call Seventy Jewish Scholars from Alexandria to vouch for my Canon. That trumps one German Augustinian!
June 9th, 2011 | 9:47 am
How about Pulp Fiction, which convinced everyone that they could recite at least one Bible verse, Ezekiel 25:17. Here’s Jules’ (Samuel Jackson’s) version in the film:
“The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know My name is the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon thee.”
Here’s the actual verse:
“I will execute great vengeance on them with wrathful rebukes; and they will know that I am the LORD when I lay My vengeance on them.” (NAS)
Personally, I like Jules’ version better (dodging lightning bolt)….
June 9th, 2011 | 10:14 am
Just so, aonghus. And Joe, the Apocrypha were originally in the KJV!! The KJV-only crowd denies that is the case, but it’s true. Joe Carter, meet Peter Ruckman!!
June 9th, 2011 | 10:19 am
Also worth noting that there were copies of Tobit in Hebrew and Aramaic found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
June 9th, 2011 | 10:29 am
I’m pretty sure Joe’s pulling your leg in that last paragragh.
“pulling your leg” Isn’t that in the Bible somewhere?
I think it’s in Genesis;)
June 9th, 2011 | 10:29 am
Hi, Joe. Ho ho!
But seriously, I think you Protestant fellows are missing a lot by not having the book of Wisdom in your bibles. It contains remarkable prophetic passages about Christ. (e.g. Wisdom 2:12-21. Wisdom 14:1-7. Note: “For blessed is the wood by which justice comes”.) There are great theological riches in that book. Taste and see.
June 9th, 2011 | 10:31 am
Habakkuk is in my NIV bible between Nahum and Zephaniah.
June 9th, 2011 | 10:34 am
This actually reminds me of the many times I turned to the back pages of my Tanakh, looking for the Gospel according to St. John or the writings of Paul. They were of course not there.
My reaction to the absence was, at least to me, memorable – something resembling awe and silence; humility too.
I think that a faithful Jew, being told of my my mistake, would have had a reaction similar to that of faithful Catholics who are told that Tobit is not “in the Bible”.
I do understand that Joe Carter intended to say that it is not in his Bible.
June 9th, 2011 | 11:03 am
However, the worse offenders—and I hate to say this—are Catholics. Occasionally you’ll hear them refer to books like Tobias, Judith, and the Wisdom of Solomon. I’m not sure why people think those are in the Bible but I’ve checked the index to my copy of the NIV (twice) and can assure you that those books are definitely not in there.
I assume this was meant to be a joke rather than a statement from an Evangelical that Catholics have books in their Bible that don’t belong there.
I will say, as someone who received a Catholic education in grades 1 through 12 (1950s to early 1960s) that I was never expected to own a Bible or even (as best as I can recall) have access to one. I did not discover “real” biblical scholarship until I read the Westminster Pelican Commentary volumes on Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which I assume are far too “liberal” for Evangelicals, although by now they would not be considered controversial among those familiar with mainstream Catholic biblical scholarship. (That would probably be a minority of Catholics, though.)
June 9th, 2011 | 11:41 am
Joe was just joshin’ us at the end.
I agree with Professor Barr about the book of Wisdom. It is stunningly rich, and the connections between it and the Gospel of John are really enlightening (and they show that the Jews had reacted to, and partly against, Plato long before Philo of Alexandria). The first verse of the book, in Latin “Diligite justitiam qui judicatis terram,” is the verse spelled out by the constellation of just rulers in Dante’s Paradise, in the sphere of Jupiter. And the book contains one of Augustine’s favorite verses, and one that had tremendous influence upon the poetry of the middle ages and the Renaissance clear down to Milton: the Lord created the universe “in measure, weight, and number.”
Milton, who regarded the Catholic Church as the Ho’ of Babylon, and who used the Council of Trent as his model for the conclave of devils in Pandemonium in Paradise Lost 2, read these books and honored them. He got from Tobit his portrait of the affable angel, Raphael — meaning “God heals,” and he mentions Raphael’s expulsion of Asmodeus.
Shakespeare may well have been Catholic, so I suppose he doesn’t count, but I’ve been told that he cites Ecclesiasticus more than he cites any other book in the Bible (and his echoes of the Bible are frequent and significant). Ecclesiasticus’ reminiscences of the patriarchs is reprised in the letter to the Hebrews.
One more thing about Tobit: it is the only book in the Bible wherein man’s best friend appears in a gracious light. The family dog accompanies Raphael and Tobias, and runs ahead of them when they come home, wagging his tail. I’ve always liked that …
June 9th, 2011 | 11:51 am
Well, sometimes the literal words are not there in an English translation of the Bible, but “spare the rod” is awfully close to Proverbs 13:24.
The fun with the “that’s not in the Bible” crowd is how often they are wrong too.
June 9th, 2011 | 12:01 pm
@David
What you describe is true of most self-professing Christians. They are almost completely ignorant of the Bible. I’ve heard of a New Testament professor who mocks his students on this fact:
Professor: How many of you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God?
(almost every hand shoots up)
Professor: How many of you have read Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings?
(almost every hand shoots up)
Professor: How many of you have read the Bible, cover to cover?
(a few scattered hands)
Professor: I can understand why you’d like to read Tolkien and Rowling. But you are claiming that God wrote a book. Wouldn’t that be a book you’d want to read?
June 9th, 2011 | 12:09 pm
“However, the worse offenders—and I hate to say this—are Catholics.”
As a Catholic I burst out laughing. This is really good.
Ruefully, even after putting aside Tobit, Judith and Maccabees, there’s truth to that.
Very well done.
June 9th, 2011 | 12:15 pm
Good grief, some of our literalist friends here seem unable to spot a joke. It reminds me of that great bit of Old Testament wisdom: “Think ye not upon the spurious nor the facetious, for all must be sober unto the Lord.” (Gullible 4:12)
June 9th, 2011 | 12:21 pm
There is a principle at work on the internet, that no matter how facetious you intend to be, a subset of your readers, notwithstanding their high level of with and intelligence, will read you as being sincere.
June 9th, 2011 | 1:19 pm
Nice tongue firmly in cheek at the end, though there are enough people out there that seem to think the index was divinely inspired and that the bible basically fell out of the sky with indexes and chapter markers.
June 9th, 2011 | 1:42 pm
Joe is kidding on the last TWO paragraphs. (Habakkuk only sounds like it’s not in the Bible!)
June 9th, 2011 | 2:48 pm
@Jeremy, I listened to a course from the Teaching Company in which the professor asked that question, though I wouldn’t say his tone was mocking – it was more along the lines of a challenge.
But its a good question, right? I’m sure the answer is in Wisdom, or maybe Habakkuk.
June 9th, 2011 | 5:16 pm
If y’all had been paying attention, you would have realized that every word after the end of the quote was tongue in cheek. There’s a glaring clue right there in the penultimate paragraph.
June 9th, 2011 | 6:55 pm
So Joe,
Your non-Habakkuk NIV doesn’t have Habakkuk? Which NIV are you using? It wouldn’t happen to be a pre-exilic NIV Bible would it?
Here is a link to another NIV Bible that has Habakkuk:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Habakkuk+1&version=NIV
June 9th, 2011 | 9:34 pm
In praise of the book of Wisdom: isn’t it quoted in the New Testament? or is that another DT book? or am I confusing this with something else entirely?
June 9th, 2011 | 9:40 pm
Thank you Joe Carter! That elicited a hearty laugh!
June 9th, 2011 | 9:44 pm
One of the good things about being a fundamentalist. You actually read the thing. It is an education in itself. For all the diatribes against Christianity the Bible is an enduring work of literature and a lot more subtle and nuanced than people think.
I’d say more, but not my place to comment on it in depth.
June 10th, 2011 | 2:13 am
MarkO: Fail.
Honest to goodness: In a Greek exegesis class at a major div school some years back, a student actually said that if he were Paul, he wouldn’t have put all the stuff in brackets at the bottom of the page. He was talking about the NA27 textual apparatus.
June 10th, 2011 | 8:35 am
Thanks for encouraging me to read Habakuk, Joe.
And lest I be counted among Matthew’s subset of over-earnest readers, my first comment was as tongue in cheek as Joe’s piece.
June 13th, 2011 | 3:24 pm
@Jeremy, I listened to a course from the Teaching Company in which the professor asked that question, though I wouldn’t say his tone was mocking – it was more along the lines of a challenge.
The Wisdom Literature one, right?
I listened to that. I loved that guy.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact