Broken Angel and fundamentalists

In reviewing Sigmund Brouwer’s book, Broken Angel, there have been discussions over the last few days in blogland about fundamentalists. Broken Angel is a futuristic tale about a government by fundamentalism and how their legalistic ways impact people.

As I said yesterday, I have dear friends who are fundamentalists and I can tell you some things I treasure about them. They are passionate and willing to put into action what they believe. They will put their money where their mouth is. They stand firm when others compromise. They are quick to pray and quick to help, even when it inconveniences them.

But I disagree with them on several points as well, including our topic of fantasy. For some, fiction is forbidden since it is not true. But how do they explain Jesus’ parables? Sometimes truth is more eloquently stated through fictional works.

I know parents who forbid their children to watch the Lord of the Rings movie series because of the magic and fantasy elements, totally ignoring the beautiful images of courage, honesty, honor and good that course through the story.

While I find LOTR a brilliant story about how good overcomes evil, these fundamentalist parents fear the wizards and warlords.

Some have cast out C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia books because of satyrs and witches. They miss the beauty of Aslan going to stone table, a chapter which brought tears to my eyes.

For the fundamentalists I know, a key to getting through this life to heaven is by staying unstained by the world, which happens through separation. They wish to present themselves to Christ as an unstained bride.

I think that it is Christ who does the washing and it is Christ who makes the bride pure. Not rules and effort. The bride comes unstained because of Jesus’ work, not mine.

Rules or relationship. I think it may come down to that. Read Broken Angel and see what you think.

Looking literally

In yesterday’s post, you were introduced to a new book, Broken Angel, by Sigmund Brouwer. Brouwer has created a futuristic world in his book, one where fundamentalists have pushed their literal interpretations to the forefront of politics, and now run things.

The topic is a thoughtful one. I have close friends who are fundamentalists, believing that a literal interpretation of the Bible is the proof of faith. They are committed and passionate in their faith and I will not belittle them.

However, I want to introduce you to a resource that may shed a little light on biblical texts. The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (general editors are Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit and Tremper Longman III) explores the images, motifs, symbols, figures of speech and literary patterns of the Bible.

Once I said to my three-year-old nephew, “Oh, you’re pulling my leg, aren’t you?” And he looked solemnly at his leg and my leg before shaking his head. No.

I was using a figure of speech that he didn’t yet understand. Those are common in our literature today and were common in the writings of the Bible as well. Those who insist on a literal interpretation of texts often lose the very meaning of that text because they don’t examine possible images or figures of speech.

As Brouwer suggests, literal isn’t always best.