CNN takes on biblical literacy

And gives plenty to talk about.  It was an interesting article.  Like most things in the press, however, it said more than it needed to in some areas, and less than it needed to say in others.  For instance, it could have focused more on quotes that not only are not in the Bible, but also fly in the face of the traditional Faith of the Bible.  For instance, 'God helps him who helps himself', or 'God won't give us more than we can endure'.  Not only are those not in the Bible, but they actually contradict the overarching messages of the Bible.

Some of what the article says, that Satan never tempted Eve (it was a serpent), are taking a purely literalistic scholarly look at the Bible, and ignoring the role of theology and doctrine.  The idea that Satan tempted Eve is not some strange spin, but solid biblical theology going back to the beginning.  That's different than Ben Franklin whipping out his own private spin on things and adding where he saw fit. 

Others, such as the Three Wise Men, are known to most who have any training in the Bible.  We know that the Bible never said there were three.  That number comes from the gifts.  But it is an ancient tradition that is outside of the Scriptural corpus, and we don't know if it is right or wrong - the Bible is silent about it.  We also know that the Gospel of Matthew is different than the Gospel of Luke's account, though Hallmark and Department stores were more than happy to combine the two in order to force a singular consumer based day of getting giving.

More problematic were the article's occasional attempts to move into its own version of 'what the Bible really should have said.' One thing that has gotten much attention in our anti-spanking media has been the revelation that 'spare the rod and spoil the child' isn't really in the Bible.  Problem?  It is. Not in those exact words, but the essence is clearly there:

 "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24) and "Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs 23:13-14)

So while the exact phrasing isn't 'spare the rod, spoil the child', in this case it is a simplification of what is in the Bible.  Yet already the web is abuzz with folks saying 'see, the Bible never said you should spank your kids!"  Well, it certainly said you should discipline them, and used the imagery of using a rod to do so. 

So like all things when you hand religion over to the press, expect - at best - some interesting points, a few neat discussions, some mountains made from molehills, and a few flagrant errors and factual inaccuracies, often in order to advance this or that latest ideal that the press has embraced.

By the way, I see some Protestants have also taken issue with the article's assertion that this practice of adding to Scriptures is more prevalent since the Reformation.  I don't know if it is or isn't.  I know that the Protestant sensitivities about keeping it in the Bible means most Protestants would worry about such things more than informed Catholics, who are aware that just because something - like the Three Wise Men - isn't in the Bible, doesn't mean it's not worth retelling.  Of course the Reformation and its focus on individual interpretation may have had an impact. I'm sure that would be difficult to get down to, by way of axes to grind and defenses to put up.