What do you think?
Rate this book
The Bible Against Itself: Why the Bible Seems to Contradict Itself
All books are written for or against some point of view, and the books of the Bible are no different. Bible book authors were often motivated to write because they wanted to challenge or correct those who had written before them. As Helms explains, The Bible is a war-zone, and its authors are the combatants. Paul said of Peter, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong (Gal. 2:11). Helms notes that Jeremiah condemned the entire religious establishment of his time the very same people that other Bible authors held in highest prophets and priests are frauds, every one of them (Jer. 8:10). Luke felt the need to write another gospel even though many writers have undertaken to draw up an account of the events (Luke 1:1). Luke obviously felt that Mark s gospel was filled with errors and edited it freely. Not even Mark s account of the words of the dying Christ was left unaltered.
178 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2006
6 people are currently reading
136 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 7, 2020
This is a tenacious and credible dissection of the Bible, both New and Old Testaments. The author is not disparaging of the Bible. He does not denigrate the books. He just explains the intent of the writings. In essence, if you understand the underpinnings of the books, the Bible provides a historical record of the development of its theology.
I struggled at times to read through the author’s comprehensive textual analyses, but it was rewarding. He carefully shows how many of the writings are based on the “conviction that a predecessor’s work was wrong or inadequate and in need of correction.” With the Books of First and Second Chronicles, for example, he provides credible and thorough references to support his contention that these books “give us the Hebrew’s Bible’s finest example of historical narrative as wishful thinking. The Chronicler rewrites history, making it look just the way he would have it be.” On the other hand, there are times the author’s analysis, as credible it is, does not leave out other possibilities, such as the author’s painstaking attempt to link migraines with prophecy. As credible a case he builds, I think there remains possible alternatives, such as the various ceremonies of shamans to induce visions. Overall, I think the author presents a strong case that “attack, revision and reinterpretation is the true history of the Bible.” This includes the New Testament, such as with the writings of Matthew & Luke that “transume” Mark, and II Peter transuming the Letter of Jude.
Three chapters I found most noteworthy were the chapters covering Wisdom (Chap. 4), the apocalyptic books (Chap. 5), and the conflict between Paul and James (Chapter 8). I gained a fresh perspective and greater appreciation for Job and Ecclesiastes, and I didn’t realize that many failed prophecies have been “recycled as reinterpretations.”
Chapter 8 account’s of the conflict between Paul and James was an eyeopener as to how this debate is depicted and constructed (sometimes, deconstructed) in the New Testament. Paul’s Second Letter to Corinth, for example is not a single letter, but “fragments of several letters, unskillfully edited together long after Paul’s death. The letters were not sufficiently valued for multiple copies to be made and reassured, and only the fragments (of 6 letters) survive.”
I struggled at times to read through the author’s comprehensive textual analyses, but it was rewarding. He carefully shows how many of the writings are based on the “conviction that a predecessor’s work was wrong or inadequate and in need of correction.” With the Books of First and Second Chronicles, for example, he provides credible and thorough references to support his contention that these books “give us the Hebrew’s Bible’s finest example of historical narrative as wishful thinking. The Chronicler rewrites history, making it look just the way he would have it be.” On the other hand, there are times the author’s analysis, as credible it is, does not leave out other possibilities, such as the author’s painstaking attempt to link migraines with prophecy. As credible a case he builds, I think there remains possible alternatives, such as the various ceremonies of shamans to induce visions. Overall, I think the author presents a strong case that “attack, revision and reinterpretation is the true history of the Bible.” This includes the New Testament, such as with the writings of Matthew & Luke that “transume” Mark, and II Peter transuming the Letter of Jude.
Three chapters I found most noteworthy were the chapters covering Wisdom (Chap. 4), the apocalyptic books (Chap. 5), and the conflict between Paul and James (Chapter 8). I gained a fresh perspective and greater appreciation for Job and Ecclesiastes, and I didn’t realize that many failed prophecies have been “recycled as reinterpretations.”
Chapter 8 account’s of the conflict between Paul and James was an eyeopener as to how this debate is depicted and constructed (sometimes, deconstructed) in the New Testament. Paul’s Second Letter to Corinth, for example is not a single letter, but “fragments of several letters, unskillfully edited together long after Paul’s death. The letters were not sufficiently valued for multiple copies to be made and reassured, and only the fragments (of 6 letters) survive.”
August 8, 2024
AN UNUSUAL CRITIQUE OF THE BIBLE
Randal McCraw Helms is a professor of English at Arizona State University. He wrote in the Introduction to this 2006 book, “This is a study of writers in the Bible who… disagree with, explicitly attack, or covertly rewrite the works of other authors in the Bible… inattentive readers will be … surprised to learn that the Bible is a self-destructing artifact. It has already deconstructed itself before we pick it up… The Bible is a war zone, and its authors are the combatants… This is a book about reading the Bible with the confidence and honesty of a Jeremiah, not trying to ignore or iron out the conflicts but to understand them… I conclude with a suggestion that the reader who has finished this book will not fine outrageous: that ‘belief’ in what Harold Bloom would call a ‘weak misreading’ of the Bible. Strong readers, proceed.”
Rather than simply to juxtapose seemingly contradictory verses against each other, he treats one topic per chapter, such as “The Chronicler Against the Deuteronomist,” “How the New Testament [Mis]Reads the Old,” “One Jesus Against Another,” “James Against Paul,” etc.
For example, the Afterword states, “Luke admits to being no eyewitness of Jesus, but is rather a careful researcher writing during a time of flowering of literature about Jesus (works by ‘many writers’). If those writers had got the story right, Luke’s account would be superfluous. But clearly they had not, in Luke’s view, and Luke now wants to provide ‘authentic knowledge’ to Theophilus…”
This is not a typical “skeptic’s book” about the Bible; but will be of interest to those looking for fresh ideas about it.
Randal McCraw Helms is a professor of English at Arizona State University. He wrote in the Introduction to this 2006 book, “This is a study of writers in the Bible who… disagree with, explicitly attack, or covertly rewrite the works of other authors in the Bible… inattentive readers will be … surprised to learn that the Bible is a self-destructing artifact. It has already deconstructed itself before we pick it up… The Bible is a war zone, and its authors are the combatants… This is a book about reading the Bible with the confidence and honesty of a Jeremiah, not trying to ignore or iron out the conflicts but to understand them… I conclude with a suggestion that the reader who has finished this book will not fine outrageous: that ‘belief’ in what Harold Bloom would call a ‘weak misreading’ of the Bible. Strong readers, proceed.”
Rather than simply to juxtapose seemingly contradictory verses against each other, he treats one topic per chapter, such as “The Chronicler Against the Deuteronomist,” “How the New Testament [Mis]Reads the Old,” “One Jesus Against Another,” “James Against Paul,” etc.
For example, the Afterword states, “Luke admits to being no eyewitness of Jesus, but is rather a careful researcher writing during a time of flowering of literature about Jesus (works by ‘many writers’). If those writers had got the story right, Luke’s account would be superfluous. But clearly they had not, in Luke’s view, and Luke now wants to provide ‘authentic knowledge’ to Theophilus…”
This is not a typical “skeptic’s book” about the Bible; but will be of interest to those looking for fresh ideas about it.
January 10, 2013
Randel Helms deserve a wider readership. He is on par with Bart Ehrman when it comes to sorting our fact from fiction in biblical textual criticism. Helms takes the reader on a quick but fun romp through the bible, pointing out the variations in the texts because of differing viewpoints of the authors. For example, he traces the path of Jewish thought from sacrifice to the end of sacrifice while explaining the gradual shift from wisdom literature to prophecy and then back to wisdom literature and finally arriving at apocalyptic. Later in the book he shows how new testament texts pit Paul against James in a struggle to determine the future of fledgling Christianity. (He even makes a case for Paul's dying without the knowledge that his particular form of faith would prevail.)
While Helms occasionally makes reference to original languages, he does so in a way as to make them accessible to the laymen interested in such matters.
While Helms occasionally makes reference to original languages, he does so in a way as to make them accessible to the laymen interested in such matters.
March 8, 2013
This is a good introductory read into analysis of the bible and is at its best in looking at the Old Testament. I think Helms fails his readers in his New Testament material in that he takes a specific perspective regarding the Gospels which guides his conclusions--but he doesn't really delve into the arguments for why and that's a critical failing.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews