Revealing Details: Why I’m Still an Evangelical (Part Four: Biblicism)

[We’re considering four aspects David Bebbington cites as characterizing Evangelicals from 1730 to the 1980s. This is the third most important element, per my experience among North American Evangelicals.]

Consider any book you read. Authors, editors, publishers, publicists, bookstore owners, and even friends and family members hold opinions regarding it. Because books, fiction/non-fiction, single author/edited anthology, simplified for popular consumption/impenetrably detailed for only the most academically-ascendant among us: they have a point.

The Bible has a point. But some twist it. Since I disagree with the two most frequently presumed purposes, some definition is in order.

Many study the Bible for Orthodoxy. The word combines two Greek terms to mean “right thought,” conforming to right doctrine. Some study the Bible to “think the right things.”

Others, in reaction to divisive debates over Orthodoxy, consider Orthopraxis the point of Bible study. This means “right action,” conforming to right behavior. These read the Bible to “do the right things.”

Of the two most commonly pursued purposes, Orthopraxis is my preference. But I hope to promote a third option.

Orthohomily, frankly, is not a word…yet. But it should be. For most, “homily” is synonymous with “sermon,” a one-sided proclamation of one person’s conclusions. In Biblical Greek, though, homiliadenotes not just conversation, but relationship(s) that result from significant conversations. So my hope in pursuing Bebbington’s Biblicism as a core element of being Evangelical is not prescribing right doctrine (though conversations can result in such agreements), nor prescribing right behavior (Scriptural examples vary widely.), but to engage one another in “right conversation” – among ourselves but primarily, with the Bible being the divine side of our conversation, with God Themself.

About the images: Outtakes and BTS (behind-the-scenes) shots should always be discussed with the model. That conversation’s conclusion can result in a change to both the model’s and photographer’s vision. In some shots Mina, being asked permission, turns, changes posture, and gives us a wonderful “modeling” expression. In others, the photographer is clearer that a more natural image is the intent. And those are wonderful images, too.