The Bible’s teachings are often open to interpretation, to put it mildly. Many fundamentalists bridle at that idea, but consider how much disagreement there is among those who claim to take the Bible literally.
Now zoom out and consider the disagreements within major faiths and between faiths. For a really jolly time, watch a debate between a Southern Baptist and a Roman Catholic on transubstantiation or the rite of baptism.
Yet for all its ambiguities, certain Biblical ideas are nearly universally accepted. Nearly, because Democratic Texas Senate nominee James Talarico begs to differ, offering up enough points of disagreement to suggest he’s seeking to establish his own cult rather than run for Senate.
Consider abortion. As a far-left warrior, Talarico says he supports abortion, “not despite my faith, but because of my faith. Jesus never talks about abortion. The Bible is silent on abortion.”
It is undeniable the Bible is silent on abortion, per se. Talarico takes the Bible’s silence as license to advance his preferred policy of abortion on demand.
Problem one is that the Bible is silent on a lot of issues which, upon broader reading, appear to contravene God’s will. Cheating at poker, for example. I’ve found no Biblical prohibitions against palming cards, yet I’m pretty sure that’s a no-no, and not just in Vegas.
Problem two is that despite their many disagreements on matters of faith, Christians across the spectrum agree on certain propositions. From Roman Catholic to Baptist to Mormon, abortion is wrong, an obvious violation of the Sixth Commandment “thou shalt not kill.” Maybe Talarico missed Exodus during his extensive scholarship.
Talarico’s Biblical oddities don’t end with abortion. For example, he claims, “God is both masculine and feminine and everything in between. God is non-binary.” On what possible basis can he make this claim?
To be fair, numerous translations of the Bible and many approaches to translating text are on offer. Perhaps Talarico knows of one he finds superior to all others and in which evidence is presented for a non-binary God. As a public service, he should reference his preferred version by name.
The first clue to Talarico’s confusion comes quickly in Genesis 2:27 when the text reads, “So God created man in his own image; in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
Time and again, God is referred to in the masculine. How many times does Jesus refer to God as “my Father” or “the Father”? The Lord’s Prayer doesn’t start with “Our non-binary heavenly entity.” It starts with “Our Father who art in heaven.”
Talarico supports abortion because the Bible is silent on abortion. The Bible is certainly not silent about God’s gender and it sure ain’t non-binary.
Not surprisingly, Talarico has some odd ideas about trans children, as well. “Trans children are God’s children, made in God’s own image.”
Talarico is intentionally slippery here. All children, trans and non-, are God’s children, made in His image. Note above from Exodus that God created them “male and female.”
It doesn’t say the Bible created them male, female, and LGBTQ@. This, along with that pesky science of biology also addresses Talarico’s claim there are six sexes, not two.
The Bible is silent on God creating trans children and so, by Talarico’s own guide, he should be extremely wary of asserting anything about God’s views on trans children.
On the flip side, the Bible’s silence about trans children means we need to look elsewhere for guidance, such as the aforementioned Genesis 2:27 and the reference to male and female. Talarico doesn’t bother. Instead, he just makes stuff up claiming it represents his faith, which is likely true, but that’s a Christian faith very few Christians would recognize.
Likely, few Texans would, either, regardless of religious orientation. The extreme Leftists in Texas surely won’t care. If Talarico were running in Maine or Oregon, it probably wouldn’t matter. But the vast majority of Texans, even progressives, would probably prefer their junior United States senator be a little less willing to twist plain language into cold spaghetti for the sake of political convenience.
Talarico is now walking back his more curious statements, acknowledging he “missed the mark” as he scrambles up the slippery slope to the political center. Don’t hold your breath waiting for him to explain which comments missed the mark and what new revelations guide him. Until he does, those old comments are fair game.
Having opened Pandora’s box, having missed the mark, it is fair to ask, “what do you believe now, James?” The answers, if any, should be most entertaining.
J.D. Foster is the former chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget and former chief economist and senior vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He now resides in relative freedom in the hills of Idaho.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
