What is Biblical?

What is Biblical?

When thinking about or discussing the Bible, the word “biblical” is a term that comes up frequently, almost reflexively,  while fraught with multiple, diverse meanings and applications. Consider the following seven statements, each using the word “biblical”:

  • 1 Samuel 17 contains the biblical account of David’s battle with Goliath.
  • Deep biblical study is the provenance not just of clergy, but of the laity as well.
  • People believe society should be guided by a biblical worldview.
  • The biblical book of Job is a work of great literature as well as divine wisdom.
  • Biblical marriage is the standard to which all couples should aspire.
  • We should seek out biblical truth when formulating Christian doctrine and practice.
  • The flood in Mississippi brought about destruction of biblical proportions.

Because the word “biblical” isn’t a term found anywhere in Scripture, it functions as a mental construct external to the Bible itself. This externality to the Bible means that “biblical” is a subjective term, as evidenced above by the diversity of ways it is used. This diversity is made even more complex by the disagreements among Christians about what is or is not “biblical” even when using the same semantic sense of the word. Relatedly, we might hear the word “unbiblical” used to describe behavior or teaching that doesn’t align with one’s understanding of Scripture. One might say, for instance, that homosexual marriage is unbiblical or failing to warmly welcome undocumented immigrants is unbiblical. Even so seemingly innocuous a term as “biblical truth” can have multiple meanings. Yes, most people would define that as truth emanating from the Scriptures, but differing interpretive approaches will yield different biblical truths.

Biblical Is in the Eye of the Beholder

The non-presence in the Bible of the word “biblical” should thus raise important questions. If biblical simply means “found in the Bible,” then Amnon’s rape of Tamar is biblical. But we would never phrase things that way. That’s because we typically use the word biblical to mean things found in the Bible and approved by God.  This is especially important in regard to uses of the term such as “biblical truth,” “biblical values,” or “biblical behavior.” But there’s the rub. One person or denomination may say, for instance, that singing hymns without instruments is biblical and therefore the only right way to sing in church. Another says anything not forbidden in Scripture is biblically permissible, so using instrumental music is good to go. (This was actually a big debate in the denomination I attended for many years.) Biblical, it would appear, is in the eye of the beholder.

Still a Useful Term…with a Caveat

This is not to suggest that we should avoid the word “biblical.” It is useful and intuitive; but as with all things intuitive, we do well to think critically about using a term that is so familiar to us. This is particularly important  when “biblical” is combined with words like “mandate” to call for some sort of action by bible-believing Christians. For example, consider these recent news headlines:

  • Most U.S. Pastors Don’t Believe Tithing Is a Biblical Mandate
  • Commanders Accused of Framing Iran War as Biblical Mandate, Jesus’ ‘Return’
  • Jesus And The Aliens Among Us: A Biblical Mandate

In each case, biblical is used to mean an authoritative imperative—a requirement for the faithful, either individually or corporately as the church or even the nation. But in all three cases cited above, you can find both proponents and opponents of those mandates. 

One of “biblical’s” most common uses is that of representing a God-approved pattern of living, such as biblical marriage or a biblical work ethic. We can cite texts that back up the pattern, proving our perspective to be biblical. But a pattern-centric hermeneutic is inevitably selective and subjective. For example, meeting on the first day of the week and making weekly contributions takes its cues from the pattern found in 1 Corinthians, and is generally practiced by most churches. But the pattern of selling possessions and holding them all in common as seen in Acts 4 or greeting others with a kiss (Romans 16:16) are biblical patterns that don’t get taken very seriously in most churches. The biblical pattern, despite its presumed authority, is inconsistently applied by even the most pattern-centric churches.

Or take biblical marriage: the book of First Chronicles tells us that King David had eight named wives along with other wives and concubines. That’s not exactly the pattern we’d endorse today, but technically, that is a biblical marriage. In all fairness to the Mormons of the past and some today who still support plural marriage—what we’d called more pejoratively polygamy—is in some sense a biblical model of marriage.

Why All of This Matters

While all this might seem like an arcane line of semantic inquiry, there is more here than meets the eye. The polysemous nature of the word “biblical” is a reminder that our approach to the Bible is conditioned by assumptions about what it is supposed to say. How we use the word “biblical” can thus serve as a lens through which to focus on these presuppositions and prejudices. That which we call biblical forms a map of the topography of our belief systems. This is not to say that every belief must be untethered from received learning, but rather to hold our convictions just loosely enough to have them further enlightened—to be like the noble Berean Jews in Acts 17 who having heard Paul’s preaching, “received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” That seems like a safe biblical pattern to follow. We do well to pray like the Psalmist (119.8): “Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law,” trusting in the Spirit to enlighten our understanding while also sharing in community the insights we gain and that others gain. We will surely all “see through a glass darkly,” but the gospel will most assuredly get through to our hearts.