Telling God’s Story, Not the Old Testament’s

tgscoredropYou might recall that way back, at the beginning of this blog, I compared the Old Testament to an embarrassing family member for whom one must frequently apologize. While I don’t feel that’s the case anymore, there remains a problem: How to teach it to children.

My wife and I have gone around this issue a few times since we had our first daughter more than four years ago, and our struggles have led us to Peter Enns, a biblical scholar we both respect for his willingness to both love the Bible and present it as it was intended to be read – as opposed to how modern-day Christians might like it to be read.

The problem as I see it with presenting the Old Testament stories to children is three-fold:

1. Their view of God sucks. As a child, I struggled to understand the story of Abraham’s near-sacrifice of Isaac. Why would God tell him to do that? What if Abraham hadn’t heard the angel sent to stop him in time? What kind of God makes requests like that? That story was problematic for me. As an adult, I realize others are no less problematic; they paint a picture of an arbitrary, capricious, mean God, a God who, for example, gets so fed up with the people he created that he decides to wipe them all out – including, apparently, every single child on the planet – and start over. Our children may never question the basic unfairness of these stories, but that doesn’t mean these stories won’t shape their view of God.

2. They are fantastical. From the talking snake in the Garden of Eden to the picture of lions and wolves lining up next to zebras and hedgehogs to board the ark, the Old Testament is chock full of stories that children love because they’re just like all of the other stories they love, filled with animals and larger-than-life situations that capture the imagination. We expect our kids to let go of those other stories at some point – not necessarily stop reading and enjoying them, but to at least recognize that Santa Claus and magic and talking animals do not actually exist and have never existed. Except, apparently, the ones found in the Bible. So when kids get older, we tend to devolve these stories into morality tales from which children should find examples for their own lives. But here’s the problem: At some point, no matter how much faith you have, if you believe God is telling you to kill your child, I hope you’ll check yourself into a psychiatric clinic rather than follow the example of Abraham, and if you’re telling us the world is going to end and we should climb aboard the big boat you’ve built for the occasion, no one is going to be applauding your obedience to God. These stories were not intended for children, and attempting to make them kid-friendly stretches them beyond meaning and relevance, even coherence.

3. They are not factual. Going hand in hand with the point above, to what extent should we act as if these biblical stories are historically accurate when we do not act as if, say, the Chronicles of Narnia are historically accurate. No matter how true the creation stories of Genesis 1-3 are, they are not factual, and the evidence that everything around us, including us, evolved over billions of years is overwhelming and irrefutable. Likewise, geological evidence rules out the possibility of a worldwide flood, and the notions of Adam naming every animal on earth or all languages finding their origins in Babel fail to withstand any logical thought whatsoever. This is not to say these stories don’t have value, but again, they were not written for children, and they were not written with our modern concepts of historicity in mind. Teaching them as literally true now, then defending them as literally true later, often becomes problematic when they are confronted with a thorough presentation of the evidence against them.

Perhaps no story better covers all three of these problems than the Battle of Jericho. What kid doesn’t love a story of the little guy versus the giant races of Canaan. Every child can identify with the forces of Joshua as they circle the walls, mocked for their unconventional battle style. There’s intrigue, as the spies must escape detection and are saved by a quick-witted lady of the night, and there’s excitement as the walls come a-tumbling down, and the victory is won.

Of course, God also orders Israel to kill every last resident of Jericho, including every child. And when Achan tries to sneak some booty out of the city and hide it in his tent, it’s not just him who pays the price after the defeat at Ai, but his entire family, who may or may not have known anything about it. Our kids may ask us about these parts of the story, but even if they don’t, they certainly notice them, and they file them away as data points in what kind of God we worship.

Finally, despite the great effort put forth by apologists such as Josh McDowell to muster the weight of 60-year-old archaeology in support of the conquest narratives, more recent finds have all but ruled out the military events described in the Bible. Very few of the cities described in Joshua were actually habited at the time when Israel would have had to sweep through, and others show no signs of violent overthrow. The text itself is inconsistent about which cities Joshua did and did not conquer. The historicity of these accounts is simply unlikely, if not impossible, unless God rigged the evidence to contradict his own people’s account of what happened.

So what do we do about that? How do we teach our children from the Bible when so many of the traditional stories leave such baggage? Enter Enns, whose Bible curriculum, Telling God’s Story, takes a different focus than most. In a short, easy-to-read parents’ guide, he sketches out what he sees as a better way of teaching God’s truth.

He argues children should, first and foremost, be taught about Jesus in their early years, so he structures the curriculum around the life and teachings of Jesus because, well, that is the focus of the Bible itself.

I propose focusing on what the Bible as a whole is about, rather than zeroing on individual Bible stories or snippets of moral teaching taken out of context. This approach introduces young students to the big picture, encouraging them to understand the entire biblical story – as, I believe, it is intended to be understood.

The goal for this kind of approach is to prepare young Christians to have a vibrant faith in God and trust in Scripture in a world that is changing more quickly than we can describe.

So Enns argues for getting our children to know Jesus during elementary school, then getting a “big picture” of the Bible in middle school, which means explaining how the Old Testament functions in the story of God, which culminates with Jesus. This is more than simply showing all the ways in which Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy, but pointing out how the whole sweep of the story from Eden to exile and back is looking forward to the final revelation of Israel’s messiah, the ultimate rescuer and ender of exile for Israel and therefore the world. In high school, then, children are ready to deal with the Bible in a more critical manner, dealing with the challenges it presents while understanding the purposes underlying the text.

I like this approach very much. It presents the Old Testament in a useful way – one that gives it far more relevance than when it is presented as a loose collection of stories and prophecies – and the idea of focusing on Jesus, as the Bible does, is dumbfouding in its simplicity. How has no one thought of this before?

On the other hand, one cannot simply choose to ignore the Old Testament until fifth grade. Even if you wanted to, it’s impossible. Sunday school lessons and Bible classes in Christian elementary schools are designed around the stories of the Bible, and that means a healthy dose of Eden, Flood, Babel, exodus, conquest, judges and kings. Enns does not give any guidance on how to handle those stories if we still struggle with their historicity and their portrayal of God and our children are too young to begin introducing the notion of the Bible’s Jesus-centered sweep.

What Telling God’s Story: A Parents’ Guide to Teaching the Bible does is set up a quick-and-dirty framework for parents wanting to present a healthier vision of God and his word than a simple telling of Old Testament stories would otherwise provide. He quickly and effectively knocks down various alternative approaches to the Bible – the Bible story approach, character study approach, book-by-book approach and the defensive (i.e., apologetic) approach – then briefly presents what he calls the five acts of the Bible, from Genesis 1 through the Gospels.

And here’s the beauty of the whole thing: If we can get the framework right, it’ll be much easier to get God right.

If our framework is the capricious and arbitrary God of the Old Testament stories, then we will filter the New Testament portrayals of Jesus and the teachings of his apostles through that lens. But if our framework is Jesus, whose incredible love and compassion led him to the cross, and he becomes the lens through which we see the rest of the Bible, God’s story becomes much brighter – and our children have a better chance of becoming the followers and lovers of God we want them to be.

7 thoughts on “Telling God’s Story, Not the Old Testament’s”

  1. I agree Christ totally defines who Yahweh is and seen through Jesus the OT text is properly illuminated.

    However, taking Christ as the NT demonstrates Him to be, He is just as much a judge of man’s thoughts and intents now as He was as pre Incarnate Yahweh.

    We are remiss if we ignore the side of Christ Himself that continues to judge both His people and those who choose not to be in time, on earth with the level of harshness as the circumstances deserve from His virtuous viewpoint . He did pre incarnate, He does post incarnation.

    70 AD is enough proof of that. Read His warnings to His church in Rev 2-3.

    Jesus claimed to be the Yahweh of the OT, He validated the Torah, writings and prophets as oracles of Yahweh, so from that perspective I could never conclude the OT God is “capricious and arbitrary”. No more than I think Jesus is that.

    If the text appears that way, to anyone, it’s because we mis understand it like Marcion did.

    Since I take Jesus at His word on being the OT Yahweh, I also give Him the benefit of the doubt and assume the OT harsh judgments(including the “herem/ban” on some groups) by Yahweh were necessary to prevent the opponents of God from killing off the Jews, thus shutting down the Genesis 3:15 promise which is the basis for the entire idea of the redemption of humanity and the universe.

    I’d go so far as this, if there is a form of universalism with God( I lean to thinking there is through Christ), those under the ancient ban today are glad they lost and got killed because they realize now that Christ paid for their sins as well and had they prevailed, that would not be true. He never would have existed because all the Jews would have been slaughtered.

    For whatever reason, this ancient OT paradigm seems beyond our ability to grasp, yet most of us assume the Jerusalem elite who motivated the murder of The Lord had hearts THAT full of hatred of God.

    The Jewish leadership of Jesus’ day had way less excuse than the OT Gentiles and nephilim had to hate God, yet, most of us don’t question that part of the narrative.

    1. I think where we disagree is that you are taking the texts in question as literal – that they in fact happened in history, while I believe they are products of oral myth and tradition shaped during the writing by an exilic and post-exilic people struggling to explain why Yahweh allowed such catastrophe to befall them.

      I’m not saying the OT Yahweh isn’t God, or that Jesus is somehow not Yahweh; I am saying the OT God is revealed most completely in the person of Jesus, and that the efforts of the exilic and post-exilic priests and scribes to understand God may not have understood him completely or accurately, only catching glimpses of his true nature while relying on their cultural contexts to provide the rest.

      I’m a little baffled by the excursus into Jesus and the Jewish leaders. I do not, in fact, think they hated God. They misunderstood him, as did the Jewish scribes writing about him during and after the exile. As we all do, in fact. Their actions are certainly unfortunate, but even Jesus himself is quoted as seeking their forgiveness not because of their hatred of God, but because of their ignorance of what God was really up to.

  2. Paul,

    I agree the sanhedrin types “did not know what they are doing”, but, that ignorance was driven by personal decisions/ambitions, delusion by evil thinking.

    Re-read the parable of the wicked tenants for example Matthew 21:33-45 or Matthew 23. Harsh stuff there.

    The OT God is revealed most completely in Christ?

    True. No question you’re correct there.

    Where I disagree with lots of modernists is I think the OT is valid historic info except for the scientific type statements(ancient cosmology, etc).

    You’ll disagree with me, but, I think Jesus treated that text the same way. He discussed as reality “weird” stuff like Psalm 82, Noah and the flood, Jonah, Israel in the desert, manna, Abel’s murder by Cain, fallen angelic beings,etc.

  3. It’s a minor point, but I’d hesitate to ever use the word “irrefutable” in regard to science, even extremely well-supported science. Evolution is theory (the formal definition of theory, not the colloquial one) and it is possible that a new theory somewhere down the line will better fit observed facts. Everything in science should be up for a well-reasoned challenge – it’s how the scientific process works.

  4. If you truly love your wife and kids, DO NOT buy into the bible not being the inspired word of God. Many people as yourself want a god they can easily understand, that makes sense, and that is simple to figure out. The second a verse or chapter doesn’t make sense, you throw it all out as if it were illogical and therefore, claim it as fiction. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY…”Who can understand the mind of God”.
    Imagine you could somehow comunicate with a germ (microscopic, super limited in knowledge, wisdom, experience and understanding,etc.) How could you explain to it to read, workout algorithms, solve life problems, and analyze from a human point of view. That’s ridiculous!! Simmilarly it would be illogical for anyone to think that we , mere humans, could understand fully the mind of God or His Word without any power from Him.
    Ask God to give you guidence and truth as far as the sins in your life, your pride, and anything that separates you from Him.
    ABOUT EVOLUTION. ..sorry to say but even major evolutionist do not believe it. Our textbooks are filled with so many errors and “proofs” that have been known to be flawed but are still there. It is 1 of the biggest lies this country has ever allowed and believed. If anything there is more holes in the theory than most other explanations and possibilities. Read and visit Kent Hovind’s page about this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s