As we celebrate the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Bible, A C Grayling has published a book that he hopes will be as popular and be in competition to the book we are commemorating.
A C Grayling is the professor of philosophy at Birkbeck University and a well-known atheist. In his parody of the original (whether intentional or not), he has called it ‘The Good Book: A Secular Bible’ (Bloomsbury, April 2011). He informed an interviewer in The Guardian that it would be read by ‘absolutely every human being on the planet.’
The cover states that it was ‘made’ by the author – a dig at the fact that the Bible was inspired totally by God. The title page has toned this aspect down by admitting that the tome has been ‘conceived, selected, redacted, arranged, worked and in part written’ by the Professor.
His claim is that it was ‘put together by one person in one lifetime whereas the Bible emerged from editing by many people over many centuries.’ He neglects to observe that this is a strength of the Bible in that God used different personalities (together with their characteristics) to transmit His Word to mankind, using inputs from various languages to transmit His thoughts to us and showing that His truth is sure throughout the ages.
The publication then proceeds to vaguely imitate the Bible as we know it today. The layout is in the format of chapter and verse. Professor Grayling stated that: ‘In mimicking that format, the Good Book, says something about how it sees itself: as a book of wisdom and insight for life.’ In doing this, he has missed the point that the original in Hebrew and Greek did not have such artificial divisions, but they were only introduced as an aid to church readings.
The main divisions are a pastiche of the original books of the Bible. There is: Genesis, Wisdom, Parables, Concord, Lamentations, Consolations, Songs, Sages, Proverbs, The Lawgiver, Acts, Epistles and the last chapter is entitled The Good, which he admits is ‘largely me.’
He argues that the layout is deliberate: ‘The language of my book also has that formal feel because I am saying things that have a slightly heightened importance in our lives. It enables you to ask what is being said, and then to ask: which of the two books do you find speaks more warmly, humanely and generously about the human condition?’ Surely, the additional question should be: and which of the two books speaks more honestly about the human condition and how we can be redeemed through God’s work on the cross?
The selection of passages were all secular in nature, missing out any references to ‘gods, souls, the afterlife, religion or any associated topic.’ The result is that there are many passages from the Greek and Latin classics with some from the East. There are also some references from the poet Robert Herrick, which was ironic as he was a vicar at the time of the English Civil War and the Restoration.
However, in the smorgasbord of moral thoughts, there are no acknowledgements as to the originals and Professor Grayling has adapted his own heavy application on them. He has commented that: ‘I don’t think there is a line in the whole thing that hasn’t been modified or touched by me.’
Where he is original, there are strains of trying to put over the atheistic ‘gospel.’ He writes: ‘In the garden stands a tree. In the springtime it bears flowers; in the autumn, fruit. Its fruit is knowledge, teaching the good gardener how to understand the world. From it he learns how the tree grows…’ It makes much sense to go back to the original and find out about the Garden of Eden and how God has given us wisdom.
The professor acknowledged that the first chapters were written out of his own experiences, when his older sister was murdered and his mother died from the shock. He was quoted as saying: ‘I did it because some years ago I realised almost all of us, if we got beyond childhood, has experiences of great grief and loss and desperate things.’ In consequence, he wrote in the first person, in Chapter 1 of Lamentations: ‘When I was without comfort, and sorrowing; when the grief of life was present to me, and afflictions common to man were upon me, then I lamented.’
In the final chapter, there are A C Grayling’s own Ten Commandments: ‘Love well; seek the good in all things; harm no others; think for yourself; take responsibility; respect nature; do your utmost; be informed; be kind; be courageous; at least, sincerely try.’ Among the number of flaws to this list, the chief one is that, without God, we will all fall short of honourable intentions. The point seems to have been lost on the author of The Good Book that the laws in the Bible were to be lived out in lives of faith and in relation to the divine Author, not to be construed as restrictively regulations. There are no encouragements to fulfil the commandments of Professor Grayling, nor is there any grace to enable the person to move on with a second chance.
Even the writer Jeanette Winterson, who turned her back on her Pentecostal roots, was quoted in The Daily Telegraph as saying: ‘What secularists forget about Christianity is that belief in that system prompted the creation of an astounding body of imaginative work that in turn uplifts and alters the human spirit.’
If we are to compare The Good Book with the original, we will find that it deals with the transient without addressing the real issues that confront us. God in his Word speaks clearly of the fallen mankind with the inherent consequences, but reminds of His eternal grace through the work of Jesus Christ.
The London Evening Standard reviewer makes the point that ‘the poverty of this book proves absolutely that if you do try to present the whole story of mankind without reference to religion, you end up with thin pickings, a travesty of human history. But then humanists have never been rational about that.’
Comments