Who's Afraid Of The Big Black Book?

Dick Blackford

There are a number of people who are as fearful of the Bible as Little Red Riding Hood should have been of the Big Bad Wolf. Who are these people and what are they afraid of?

The Supreme Court

They recently ruled against a teen-age girl who had an assignment to write a report on a historical character. She wrote hers on Jesus. The teacher gave her an "F" because of her controversial choice. It happened in the heart of the "Bible belt" near Nashville, Tennessee. There is an abundance of evidence that Jesus was a historical character  much more than for Socrates, Plato, Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Tacitus, and others. Never mind that our coins and calendars are dated from his birth. To exclude historical information because it corresponds with the Bible is censor-ship of the worst kind. To do so is neither American, civil, nor liberty. With such logic our children should not be exposed to the Mayflower Compact, Patrick Henry's famous speech, the Declaration of Independence, the Gettysburg Address, the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address, the Pledge of Allegiance and other similar documents because they extol another controversial character  God.

Would the student have been given an "F" if she had chosen to write on Martin Luther King, Jr. or Charles Darwin? Certainly not. But there is an obvious bias against the central figure of the Bible. The teacher, the school board who backed her, and the Supreme Court all deserve an "F" for fearful. It took less courage to make the decision they made (Matt.10:32).


They have yet to make a movie that is true to the Bible. It is as if they are compelled to misrepresent it in some way. Lately, movies like The Last Temptation are actually vicious attacks on the word of God as they slander Jesus and make scoffing sacrilege. Others also pervert family values taught in the Bible. But most sitcoms totally omit religion as part of people's lives, unless to make light of it. So the Bible is either perverted and ridiculed or omitted. It is rarely depicted in a favorable light as a positive solution for the abundant problems of our day.

The White House

I know the president often laces his campaign speeches with Bible quotes in trying to cover all the political bases. But they are limited to a few select verses that are often taken out of context (and in some cases actually misquoted) to support what he is trying to say. However, he never quotes verses on morality, such as Romans 1:26, 27, which condemns homosexuality. (While governor of Arkansas he tried to strike down the laws against homosexuality and bestiality.) He seems bent on making this an accepted way of life. Nor does he quote Scripture on respect for life. His pro-choice view is pro-abortion. It says, "I want you to have the right to murder your preborn child." Such Scriptures would conflict with that view. Claiming to be personally opposed to abortion does not free him from the moral dilemma. Pontius Pilate was personally opposed to the crucifixion of Jesus, but he took a pro-choice position when he said "Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas or Jesus, who is called Christ?" (Matt.27:17). The very man who was supposed to uphold justice, perverted it. And "its deja vu all over again."

Perhaps we, as Christians, are not praying enough for our leaders (1 Tim. 2:2).

The Media

A large percentage of articles that deal with Christianity are negative toward the Bible. A case in point is two recent issues of Time Magazine. The first (December 4, 1995) extolled evolution and the "big bang" on its cover and in its content. The second (December 18, 1995) raised the question on the cover "Is the Bible Fact Or Fiction?" The article tells us that "tales from the Bible are in doubt"  that scholars doubt the existence of Abraham and the patriarchs, Moses, the Exodus, and Joshua's conquest of Jericho because of no archeological evidence. They fall into the same blunder as skeptics who were their forerunners who denied the existence of the Hittites for the same reason. The skeptics were later proven wrong. The mind set of skeptics is to assume the Bible is wrong till proven right. It is a shame they don't approach evolution with the same mind set ("big bang," animal origins, etc.) Except they see, they will not believe  unless it supports evolution.


Why are these afraid of the big black book? Why do they feel compelled to slander and misrepresent the Bible? We never see them approach other historical documents with such disdain. Their treatment of the Bible is reminiscent of Jehoiakim who took his penknife and cut up the Scriptures of Jeremiah and burned them in the fire (Jer. 36). The reason Jehoiakim so reacted is because the Scriptures said some things he didn't want to hear. It is no different now. The Bible calls us to a high standard of morality, which is not popular today. In a time when a lust for self-indulgence permeates the air men develop a disdain toward one who called us to live a life of self-denial (Matt.16:24). The truth is, the powers that be in Washing-ton and Hollywood cannot deal with Jesus and his superior system of ethics and justice.

When giving the Bible a fair hearing one has to be overwhelmed with the concept that its author had the total welfare of his readers in mind. But when one looks at those who are afraid of the big black book, it isn't difficult to see their ulterior motives in ruling against, attacking and slandering the word of God. If the Bible is right, all will be called to account for our behavior on the day of judgment (2 Cor.5:10). Men (and women) will have to answer for their lying, stealing, homosexuality, adultery, hypocrisy, covetousness, irreverence, etc. Many of these are common in the upper (?) echelons of society.

There is no reason to be afraid of the Bible. It is our best friend. The attitude of those who are afraid of it is a far cry from the Christian who can say "0 how love I thy law! It is my meditation all the day" (Psalm 119:97).

Guardian of Truth XL: 6 p. 1
March 21, 1996