Is the Bible simple and straightforward to understand?

I was reading a debate recently where some people were describing the Bible as being clear.

Over the months, many have also used the expressions "the plain reading of Scripture" or "the Bible is unambiguously clear".  These are usually in the context of sin and homosexuality.

We do need to acknowledge the incredible hard work that Bible translators over the centuries have put into translating the original texts.  Anyone with a knowledge of translation will know that this is no easy task.   There is no such thing as a literal translation, as words and language have meaning that is bound up with their context and culture.  To give a simple example, take the French expression "je t'aime".  What does this mean?

In one context, it means "I love you".  In another context it means "I like you".  These different understandings could have profound implications in certain situations!  Some words do not translate at all into other languages.  Some have many words for snow or types of cloud or weather.

And then, there is historical context.  A word can change its meaning over time.  Take for example the word "gay".  Decades ago, this meant happy or bright.  Now it means homosexual.  In some contexts it is a fashion statement.

Bible translators have a very tricky job of not only finding the original meaning of a word in its original context, but they must then choose a word that conveys a similar meaning in the new context.  This is why we have countless Bible translations on our shelves and why there is no single "best translation".  You might be interested to know that the word "homosexual" does not feature in the Bible for example, but translators used that word to convey different meanings into a context where they felt it was the best word (do a word search online in the old King James Bible if you don't believe me!).

But another thing we must remember about the Bible is that it is not a single book, but a collection of 66 books, which include poetry, song, stories, historical documentation, biography, prophetic vision, pastoral letters and more.

When someone says "the Bible says..." they usually mean "my understanding of what God teaches us through the Bible is..."  At least, I hope they do.  Sometimes it feels like the Bible is a glove puppet that pops up and starts speaking to people from behind a pulpit.

We must also remember that the early Church did not have the Bible we know today.  They created much of the New Testament themselves, yet God clearly spoke to them in different ways.

In light of all these facts, we should be cautious when we hear the words "the Bible clearly says..."  Really, we are trying to discern the will of God through the Bible.  I personally believe that God inspired the writers and that God speaks to us today through the Bible and that the Bible translators take great care in their work.    However, it is clear that throughout the centuries, different understandings of what God says through the Bible have resulted in countless denominations, religious orders, divisions and even war.

This is not to say we should discard the Bible.  I have had profoundly moving spiritual experiences through devotional Bible studies.  The Bible is the first place I turn to after prayer when looking for guidance in life.  We can learn so much about God, Jesus, the Church and how to live lives as Christians through the amazing words of these sacred texts.

However, we worship a living God, not a book about a living God.  God speaks to us through the Bible, yes.  He also speaks to us in different ways and through different people.  The key is that each time we think we know what God would say, to return to God in prayer and ask him directly!  We need to check our initial interpretations for the consistency with the message, example and life of Jesus.  We need to discern through the Holy Spirit residing in us if we are on the right track.  We need to check things out with the community of believers.  These are all important safeguards in our walk as Christians.

The Bible is the most amazing book in the world.  Through it, God transformed my life and I love it dearly and I would fight for it to be freely available to all.   It is most certainly not simple and straightforward (and at times can be very unclear), but then neither is God and neither are we.  If the Bible were a simple textbook with all the answers, then we wouldn't need the gifts of teaching or preaching.  We would just need to hand everyone a copy and say "just do what it says".

why people thought the Bible was against homosexuality

I've been wondering a lot about the issue of homosexuality and why readers of the Bible see it as being against homosexuality. You'll see from my earlier posts that I think this is a mistake, but below is a more general view of how I think this has happened.

The first clue is that the concept of homosexuality (and consequently heterosexuality) allegedly only emerged in the late 19th Century (according to the philosopher Foucault). Before then, if you had talked about homosexuality, it would have been a meaningless concept.

Of course, homosexual practice did happen much, much earlier than this. Yet nobody would have thought of this as being a result of sexual orientation. Rather, it would have been seen as sexual practice - often linked to pagan temple rites, hedonism or pederasty (a man having sexual relations with a boy).

To the religious mind, this kind of behaviour would have been considered disgusting and sinful, for fairly obvious reasons.

When we read about homosexuality in the Bible, it's really important to understand that the early Bible writers did not use the term "homosexual". Instead, they would have said things like "lying down with a man as with a woman". When Bible translators started to translate the scriptures into modern English, they had to work out how best to translate these things. The Bible would invariably talk of these things in a negative light - and right up until the mid 20th Century, homosexuality was illegal. This combination would mean that just translating the concept into "homosexual" would have made perfect translation sense.

A good example of this kind of translation issue is found in the King James Version of the Bible (a relatively old translation). One passage, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says:

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

There are 2 things to note in this passage. Firstly, they did not use the term "homosexual". Instead, they said "abusers of themselves with mankind", reflecting the lack of use of this term when the King James was written (originating in the 17th Century). The second thing is that there is a curious expression of "effeminate" here. A more modern translation, such as the New International Version, translates this as "male prostitutes".

Why is this interesting? Because it shows us that modern translators appreciated that the Bible could not really have been talking about effeminate people - after all, why would an effeminate man not be able to enter the kingdom of heaven? Yet male prostitutes (often associated with pagan temple worship) would clearly be going against the will of God.

Yet the King James tells us that those who abuse themselves with mankind won't enter the kingdom of heaven. This is fascinating, because the word "abuser" suggests a crime and a victim. In the early 20th Century we can forgive translators for assuming this meant homosexuals, because it was widely accepted that this was wrong (and illegal). However, we now have a much more enlightened understanding of sexuality and therefore it would seem logical that a new translation is required that more accurately translates the original scriptures, in a way that is not influenced by our cultural understanding of right and wrong.