What do you think?
Rate this book
The Bible Says So: What We Get Right (and Wrong) About Scripture’s Most Controversial Issues
Bible scholar and popular TikToker Dan McClellan confronts misconceptions about the Bible.
The Bible is the world’s most influential book, but do we really know what it says? Every day across social media and in homes, businesses, and public spaces, people try to cut debate short by claiming that "the Bible says so!" However, they commonly disagree about what it actually does and doesn't say, particularly when it comes to socially significant issues. For instance, does the Bible say we should be on the lookout for an antichrist associated with the number 666? Does it say women shouldn’t wear revealing clothing? Does it say it’s okay to hit your kids?
In The Bible Say So, Dan McClellan leverages his popular "data over dogma" approach, and his years of experience in the academy and on social media, to lay out in clear and accessible ways what the data indicate the Bible does and doesn't say about issues ranging from homosexuality, abortion, and slavery to monotheism, inspiration, and even God's wife. Smart, accessible, and informative, The Bible Says So is an invaluable resource for our fractious times.
The Bible is the world’s most influential book, but do we really know what it says? Every day across social media and in homes, businesses, and public spaces, people try to cut debate short by claiming that "the Bible says so!" However, they commonly disagree about what it actually does and doesn't say, particularly when it comes to socially significant issues. For instance, does the Bible say we should be on the lookout for an antichrist associated with the number 666? Does it say women shouldn’t wear revealing clothing? Does it say it’s okay to hit your kids?
In The Bible Say So, Dan McClellan leverages his popular "data over dogma" approach, and his years of experience in the academy and on social media, to lay out in clear and accessible ways what the data indicate the Bible does and doesn't say about issues ranging from homosexuality, abortion, and slavery to monotheism, inspiration, and even God's wife. Smart, accessible, and informative, The Bible Says So is an invaluable resource for our fractious times.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published April 29, 2025
808 people are currently reading
12398 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 268 reviews
August 10, 2025
The author of this book, a biblical scholar, has a motto: data over dogma. That means looking at the Bible as its original readers would have seen it, rather than imposing his own religious and cultural ideas on it. This book explores some of the most common popular misinterpretations of Scripture, and the ways in which we err by approaching this complex historical document as a single, cohesive book.
You don’t need to be a Christian to enjoy this book, and in fact, you might have an easier time with it if you aren’t! As a progressive Christian, there were parts of this book that absolutely affirmed my prior ideas. The author’s most forceful argument is in favour of LGBTQ+ inclusion, and he notes that Biblical ideas of modest dress for women were about refraining from flaunting wealth more than refraining from showing skin. But there were parts of this book that also deeply challenged me, like the evidence that early Israelites likely believed God had a wife, or the idea that trinitarian theology is not necessarily clearly evident in the Gospels. This book is very deeply researched and uses additional sources like archaeological evidence, the Apocrypha, and documents from other ancient Southwest Asian cultures to inform the author’s ideas of how the Bible’s earliest readers would have seen things.
I wasn’t necessarily on board with all of the theological ideas in this book, but I am very much on board with the author’s key point: that the way the Bible is wielded in our culture, the verses that we choose to take literally and those we avoid (because let’s be real, even the biblical literalists are picking and choosing to some extent), are too often used as a tool of the powerful to keep others down. It’s my personal belief that the lens the author is advocating for, namely a deeper understanding of biblical history, and an openness to allowing Biblical norms to change with time (as with the abolition of slavery), can help our Christianity to look more like Christ.
Thank you to the publisher for gifting me an early copy of this book!
You don’t need to be a Christian to enjoy this book, and in fact, you might have an easier time with it if you aren’t! As a progressive Christian, there were parts of this book that absolutely affirmed my prior ideas. The author’s most forceful argument is in favour of LGBTQ+ inclusion, and he notes that Biblical ideas of modest dress for women were about refraining from flaunting wealth more than refraining from showing skin. But there were parts of this book that also deeply challenged me, like the evidence that early Israelites likely believed God had a wife, or the idea that trinitarian theology is not necessarily clearly evident in the Gospels. This book is very deeply researched and uses additional sources like archaeological evidence, the Apocrypha, and documents from other ancient Southwest Asian cultures to inform the author’s ideas of how the Bible’s earliest readers would have seen things.
I wasn’t necessarily on board with all of the theological ideas in this book, but I am very much on board with the author’s key point: that the way the Bible is wielded in our culture, the verses that we choose to take literally and those we avoid (because let’s be real, even the biblical literalists are picking and choosing to some extent), are too often used as a tool of the powerful to keep others down. It’s my personal belief that the lens the author is advocating for, namely a deeper understanding of biblical history, and an openness to allowing Biblical norms to change with time (as with the abolition of slavery), can help our Christianity to look more like Christ.
Thank you to the publisher for gifting me an early copy of this book!
April 26, 2025
You know when someone swears their book is based on “unbiased” and “purely critical scholarship,” but the second you crack it open, you realize it’s basically an opinion piece wrapped in academic name-dropping? Yeah. Welcome to The Bible Says So by Dan McClellan, a man who is apparently extremely proud to remind us every three pages that he’s a biblical scholar (and we’re all just drooling peasants in comparison).
First off, McClellan loves to tell us what the Bible really says. Because obviously, 2,000+ years of scholarship, tradition, and debate have just been sitting around waiting for Dan from TikTok to show up and set us straight with a bunch of condescending explanations about ancient Hebrew grammar. Spoiler alert: it’s mostly a lot of, “Well technically that’s a mistranslation,” sprinkled liberally with pop culture references so cringe-worthy that even a youth pastor would wince. Basically, it’s like if a Reddit thread and a peer-reviewed article had a baby, and that baby grew up to be insufferable. Cool story, bro.
Let’s talk about the “God lies” bit. According to McClellan, Adam ate the fruit and didn’t keel over instantly — therefore, God = liar? Instead of exploring the deep, layered meanings, he just flattens everything into a smug “gotcha” against Christians. Maybe Adam had a Matrix-style “red-pill” awakening? Ever think of that, Dan?
Also, who exactly was the intended audience for this book? Because it’s definitely not for the average reader unless you love feeling like you’re being lectured at a family reunion by the one cousin who just finished their first semester at Liberal Arts U. McClellan’s “data over dogma” shtick quickly turns into “my politics over yours,” with thinly veiled jabs at conservatives that would make even MSNBC producers go, “Tone it down, buddy.”
And for the record: I may not have a biblical studies degree, but I do have three master’s degrees, 21 years of teaching AP English, Media Specialist certification, and former Mensa membership (still smart, just allergic to annual dues). So yes, Dan, I know how to read a text. And I can also tell when someone is weaponizing “critical scholarship” to push a one-sided agenda while pretending they’re the only adult in the room.
The Bible, for all its contradictions, was never meant to be a one-note instruction manual. It’s a messy, beautiful anthology reflecting multiple viewpoints across centuries. Yes, it says war is good. Also, that peace is better. It’s complicated. Like life.
The Bible is a complex, messy, beautiful anthology with contradictions, tensions, and multiple viewpoints — that’s its richness, not a flaw to be smugly “fixed” by Mr. I-Know-What-Hebrew-Really-Means.
Final verdict? The Bible Says So is less “invaluable resource” and more “doorstop with a superiority complex.” Save yourself the time. Go read literally anything else.
First off, McClellan loves to tell us what the Bible really says. Because obviously, 2,000+ years of scholarship, tradition, and debate have just been sitting around waiting for Dan from TikTok to show up and set us straight with a bunch of condescending explanations about ancient Hebrew grammar. Spoiler alert: it’s mostly a lot of, “Well technically that’s a mistranslation,” sprinkled liberally with pop culture references so cringe-worthy that even a youth pastor would wince. Basically, it’s like if a Reddit thread and a peer-reviewed article had a baby, and that baby grew up to be insufferable. Cool story, bro.
Let’s talk about the “God lies” bit. According to McClellan, Adam ate the fruit and didn’t keel over instantly — therefore, God = liar? Instead of exploring the deep, layered meanings, he just flattens everything into a smug “gotcha” against Christians. Maybe Adam had a Matrix-style “red-pill” awakening? Ever think of that, Dan?
Also, who exactly was the intended audience for this book? Because it’s definitely not for the average reader unless you love feeling like you’re being lectured at a family reunion by the one cousin who just finished their first semester at Liberal Arts U. McClellan’s “data over dogma” shtick quickly turns into “my politics over yours,” with thinly veiled jabs at conservatives that would make even MSNBC producers go, “Tone it down, buddy.”
And for the record: I may not have a biblical studies degree, but I do have three master’s degrees, 21 years of teaching AP English, Media Specialist certification, and former Mensa membership (still smart, just allergic to annual dues). So yes, Dan, I know how to read a text. And I can also tell when someone is weaponizing “critical scholarship” to push a one-sided agenda while pretending they’re the only adult in the room.
The Bible, for all its contradictions, was never meant to be a one-note instruction manual. It’s a messy, beautiful anthology reflecting multiple viewpoints across centuries. Yes, it says war is good. Also, that peace is better. It’s complicated. Like life.
The Bible is a complex, messy, beautiful anthology with contradictions, tensions, and multiple viewpoints — that’s its richness, not a flaw to be smugly “fixed” by Mr. I-Know-What-Hebrew-Really-Means.
Final verdict? The Bible Says So is less “invaluable resource” and more “doorstop with a superiority complex.” Save yourself the time. Go read literally anything else.
March 7, 2025
Reviewed for the Association of Mormon Letters
https://www.associationmormonletters....
Anyone who’s been online on social media in the past few years has likely stumbled across Dan McClellan’s content. His videos usually start with some content creator asserting something about the Bible, followed by a shot of a sometimes bearded and (surprisingly) sometimes not McClellan clad in some sort of comic book t-shirt (he explains “the fit” at the end of each video) saying “Alright, let’s see it.” The content creator then continues to make some (usually outlandish) claim about something that proves some biblical prophecy or something that the Bible says that supports some kind of political or moral position (often tied to something racist, sexist, or bigoted). Dan then comes back and carefully, calmly, and thoroughly demolishes such claims, often (to the delight of his fans) employing catchphrases such as “laughably ignorant” and “pure and utter nonsense.” He is also, however, a good citizen of the internet who admits and apologizes when he gets something wrong.
McClellan is not just some random content creator who’s studied the Bible a lot. He really knows his stuff, having received advanced university degrees in biblical languages, theology, and the cognitive science of religion. His stated goal is to try to make the academic study of the Bible more accessible to the general public. He also explicitly works to debunk false claims about biblical history and interpretation, a job that keeps him very busy. His motto “Data Over Dogma” (also the name of his podcast) stresses his privileging of the scholarly data-based consensus on all biblical issues over any type of religious custom or orthodox belief about what some passage of the Bible may mean. He is articulate, compelling, accessible, and very entertaining.
Judging by the popularity of his content and the number of followers across platforms (9.3k on Facebook, 84k on YouTube, 212k on Instagram, and 866k on TikTok) McClellan has found a ready audience for his brand of no-nonsense biblical fact-checking. He works full-time making his content, trying to keep up with all of the videos he’s tagged in, creating weekly livestreams and episodes of his Data Over Dogma podcast and making appearances on a growing number of other podcasts. He’s probably well on his way (if not there already) to being one of the foremost biblical content creators online. In comparison to other biblical scholars, he has attained a minor celebrity status, as attested by photos of him being recognized in public or at conferences (always in his comic tees). He’s even been retweeted by Congresswoman AOC.
McClellan is also an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although this fact might seem to complicate things on his channel, he seems to have decided early on to make it as much of a non-issue as possible. His channel is generally strictly about biblical content, and he does not normally address his Mormon beliefs unless required to, usually by some content creator who blames his “heretical” beliefs about the Bible on his LDS membership.
His approach to biblical scholarship and interpretation places him squarely outside of the orthodox LDS position, which favors biblical literalism and fundamentalist interpretation over academic study and scholarly consensus. This, combined with his explicit privileging of marginalized groups when a scholarly consensus is unclear, makes him unpopular both with conservative Christians and Mormon apologists. For more progressive members of the church and anyone who is tired of the influence of conservative Christian opinion on law and politics, however, McClellan is a breath of fresh air. Moreover, for members of the LDS church, his status as an active member confers on him a position of respect and reliability as an authoritative source of information. In fact, his no-nonsense approach and strict adherence to the scholarly consensus has made him fans out of both active members and ex-Mormons.
It was no surprise, given his popularity, that McClellan was tapped to write a general-audience book based on his online content. His book The Bible Says So is just what his fans will be expecting. More importantly, it will provide a new way into McClellan’s work for people who are not on social media.
After a brief Introduction in which McClellan situates himself in terms of his background, training, and intentions and an opening chapter that summarizes the history of the biblical record, the book is broken into 18 chapters on various topics. The names of the chapters all follow the same pattern, beginning with “The Bible Says…” and then addressing a greatest hits of McClellan’s online content (biblical inspiration, slavery, abortion, homosexuality, God’s wife, women’s modesty, Jesus’s divine sonship, the virgin birth, and more). Most chapters are around 10 pages (the longest is around 20 and the shortest is 4) making the book an accessible and fast read. Each chapter has a helpful conclusion at the end that summarizes the chapter’s content and reinforces remembering the main points.
The book is written in a conversational style, frequently breaking out of scholarly discussion into colloquialisms or humorous asides (fans will smile each time they encounter one of his catchphrases in text). Most chapters incorporate examples and stories from McClellan’s online content and personal experience, further increasing accessibility and relatability. Each chapter also contains a number of notes and references to further articles and sources, but not too many that the presentation feels dense or inaccessible. One recurring feature that is sure to amuse is the use of movie and sitcom catchphrases, song titles, and lyrics as section headers, using everyone from Bob Dylan to Pearl Jam to Salt-N-Pepa to Metallica to AC/DC to Britney Spears to Blink 182 (with a tongue-in-cheek apology for each use).
All of this serves to make the book very accessible to a general audience while still providing substantive and rigorous scholarly arguments and discussions. The chapters are brief but feel thorough and comprehensive. One never gets the feeling that McClellan is pushing any kind of agenda, only summarizing the scholarly consensus. Indeed, the book could be used as a template by other scholars to increase their accessibility to a wider public audience.
Given the overlap in the book’s content and McClellan’s online material, I wondered if the book would feel redundant or repetitive. Though people familiar with his content will recognize much of what is presented here, the book format allows for more in-depth discussion of these issues and more citation of sources for skeptical or more interested readers. This results in the book being a useful addition to his online content, rather than simply a rehash. I can see this book being a go-to reference for people who want to know the scholarly consensus on various biblical issues. Furthermore, given that only a subset of the topics McClellan covers on his social media channels were able to be covered in this book and given the appetite and need for this content, I can see the possibility of future editions of this series.
Overall, The Bible Says So is a necessary and useful addition to McClellan’s online content and will likely bring many more people in contact with his unique and topical brand of biblical scholarship. I can see this book serving as the catalyst for discussions, being given as a gift to friends or parents who have expressed interest in these ideas, and as stated, serving as a reference for those already familiar with biblical scholarship. The many additional references and sources will help interested readers delve further into the world of biblical scholarship, a task that can seem daunting to even the most intrepid of readers. This book should go a long way to making this scholarship accessible to a wide audience.
For a specifically Latter-day Saint audience, the book is a needed corrective to fundamentalist and literalist interpretations of the Bible. These interpretations aren’t backed by data, are used to support politics and ideologies that are harmful to marginalized communities and reinforce an adherence to dogma and orthodoxy that stamps out inquiry and expansive interpretations of LDS doctrine and theology. McClellan’s work, coming from someone on the inside of the faith, is indispensable for helping to move the tradition forward in this regard. In addition, those who are deconstructing their Mormon faith in one way or another will find his work incredibly helpful, compelling, relieving, and ultimately freeing.
https://www.associationmormonletters....
Anyone who’s been online on social media in the past few years has likely stumbled across Dan McClellan’s content. His videos usually start with some content creator asserting something about the Bible, followed by a shot of a sometimes bearded and (surprisingly) sometimes not McClellan clad in some sort of comic book t-shirt (he explains “the fit” at the end of each video) saying “Alright, let’s see it.” The content creator then continues to make some (usually outlandish) claim about something that proves some biblical prophecy or something that the Bible says that supports some kind of political or moral position (often tied to something racist, sexist, or bigoted). Dan then comes back and carefully, calmly, and thoroughly demolishes such claims, often (to the delight of his fans) employing catchphrases such as “laughably ignorant” and “pure and utter nonsense.” He is also, however, a good citizen of the internet who admits and apologizes when he gets something wrong.
McClellan is not just some random content creator who’s studied the Bible a lot. He really knows his stuff, having received advanced university degrees in biblical languages, theology, and the cognitive science of religion. His stated goal is to try to make the academic study of the Bible more accessible to the general public. He also explicitly works to debunk false claims about biblical history and interpretation, a job that keeps him very busy. His motto “Data Over Dogma” (also the name of his podcast) stresses his privileging of the scholarly data-based consensus on all biblical issues over any type of religious custom or orthodox belief about what some passage of the Bible may mean. He is articulate, compelling, accessible, and very entertaining.
Judging by the popularity of his content and the number of followers across platforms (9.3k on Facebook, 84k on YouTube, 212k on Instagram, and 866k on TikTok) McClellan has found a ready audience for his brand of no-nonsense biblical fact-checking. He works full-time making his content, trying to keep up with all of the videos he’s tagged in, creating weekly livestreams and episodes of his Data Over Dogma podcast and making appearances on a growing number of other podcasts. He’s probably well on his way (if not there already) to being one of the foremost biblical content creators online. In comparison to other biblical scholars, he has attained a minor celebrity status, as attested by photos of him being recognized in public or at conferences (always in his comic tees). He’s even been retweeted by Congresswoman AOC.
McClellan is also an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although this fact might seem to complicate things on his channel, he seems to have decided early on to make it as much of a non-issue as possible. His channel is generally strictly about biblical content, and he does not normally address his Mormon beliefs unless required to, usually by some content creator who blames his “heretical” beliefs about the Bible on his LDS membership.
His approach to biblical scholarship and interpretation places him squarely outside of the orthodox LDS position, which favors biblical literalism and fundamentalist interpretation over academic study and scholarly consensus. This, combined with his explicit privileging of marginalized groups when a scholarly consensus is unclear, makes him unpopular both with conservative Christians and Mormon apologists. For more progressive members of the church and anyone who is tired of the influence of conservative Christian opinion on law and politics, however, McClellan is a breath of fresh air. Moreover, for members of the LDS church, his status as an active member confers on him a position of respect and reliability as an authoritative source of information. In fact, his no-nonsense approach and strict adherence to the scholarly consensus has made him fans out of both active members and ex-Mormons.
It was no surprise, given his popularity, that McClellan was tapped to write a general-audience book based on his online content. His book The Bible Says So is just what his fans will be expecting. More importantly, it will provide a new way into McClellan’s work for people who are not on social media.
After a brief Introduction in which McClellan situates himself in terms of his background, training, and intentions and an opening chapter that summarizes the history of the biblical record, the book is broken into 18 chapters on various topics. The names of the chapters all follow the same pattern, beginning with “The Bible Says…” and then addressing a greatest hits of McClellan’s online content (biblical inspiration, slavery, abortion, homosexuality, God’s wife, women’s modesty, Jesus’s divine sonship, the virgin birth, and more). Most chapters are around 10 pages (the longest is around 20 and the shortest is 4) making the book an accessible and fast read. Each chapter has a helpful conclusion at the end that summarizes the chapter’s content and reinforces remembering the main points.
The book is written in a conversational style, frequently breaking out of scholarly discussion into colloquialisms or humorous asides (fans will smile each time they encounter one of his catchphrases in text). Most chapters incorporate examples and stories from McClellan’s online content and personal experience, further increasing accessibility and relatability. Each chapter also contains a number of notes and references to further articles and sources, but not too many that the presentation feels dense or inaccessible. One recurring feature that is sure to amuse is the use of movie and sitcom catchphrases, song titles, and lyrics as section headers, using everyone from Bob Dylan to Pearl Jam to Salt-N-Pepa to Metallica to AC/DC to Britney Spears to Blink 182 (with a tongue-in-cheek apology for each use).
All of this serves to make the book very accessible to a general audience while still providing substantive and rigorous scholarly arguments and discussions. The chapters are brief but feel thorough and comprehensive. One never gets the feeling that McClellan is pushing any kind of agenda, only summarizing the scholarly consensus. Indeed, the book could be used as a template by other scholars to increase their accessibility to a wider public audience.
Given the overlap in the book’s content and McClellan’s online material, I wondered if the book would feel redundant or repetitive. Though people familiar with his content will recognize much of what is presented here, the book format allows for more in-depth discussion of these issues and more citation of sources for skeptical or more interested readers. This results in the book being a useful addition to his online content, rather than simply a rehash. I can see this book being a go-to reference for people who want to know the scholarly consensus on various biblical issues. Furthermore, given that only a subset of the topics McClellan covers on his social media channels were able to be covered in this book and given the appetite and need for this content, I can see the possibility of future editions of this series.
Overall, The Bible Says So is a necessary and useful addition to McClellan’s online content and will likely bring many more people in contact with his unique and topical brand of biblical scholarship. I can see this book serving as the catalyst for discussions, being given as a gift to friends or parents who have expressed interest in these ideas, and as stated, serving as a reference for those already familiar with biblical scholarship. The many additional references and sources will help interested readers delve further into the world of biblical scholarship, a task that can seem daunting to even the most intrepid of readers. This book should go a long way to making this scholarship accessible to a wide audience.
For a specifically Latter-day Saint audience, the book is a needed corrective to fundamentalist and literalist interpretations of the Bible. These interpretations aren’t backed by data, are used to support politics and ideologies that are harmful to marginalized communities and reinforce an adherence to dogma and orthodoxy that stamps out inquiry and expansive interpretations of LDS doctrine and theology. McClellan’s work, coming from someone on the inside of the faith, is indispensable for helping to move the tradition forward in this regard. In addition, those who are deconstructing their Mormon faith in one way or another will find his work incredibly helpful, compelling, relieving, and ultimately freeing.
May 6, 2025
Dan McClellan and his book really could have helped me as a kid. I started life as a PK (preacher’s kid), raised in a fundamentalist evangelical church and home. I was sincere and pious, with aspirations of becoming a minister myself someday. As such, I studied the Bible and took it seriously, believing it (as I’d been taught) to be the inspired, inerrant Word of God. Yet, studying it, I found problems that bothered me. I’d been taught that the Bible never contradicted itself, yet reading the text I found clear and obvious contradictions. Then there were the issues I found, like the fact that the Bible I was reading obviously supported slavery, including it in divine law codes. When I questioned my elders about what I was discovering, their answers were either glib or awkward, and totally unhelpful. Often it was implied that I shouldn’t even be asking such questions. These are some of the very questions that McClellan answers using his motto “Data over Dogma.”
McClellan describes himself as a scholar of the Bible, and he has the degrees to back up the claim. He is on TikTok and has a podcast called Data over Dogma, where he wields his knowledge and scholarship of the Bible both to teach and to combat those who have weaponized the Bible in service to the culture wars. (If you have seen Dan on social media, you know what you’re getting in this book, which is largely an expansion of the subjects he covers there.) His oft expressed motto is “data over dogma,” a short hand for using available data to understand what the Bible has to say rather than interpreting it to service and reinforce dogmas of various traditions. He says:
”I use a historical critical perspective because I think the earliest reconstructable meanings make for a useful point of departure for discussing what the Bible means to us and how it’s used by us today.”
”We take an awful lot of time to gather data, to see what other scholars have done, and then to go about reconstructing that meaning in a way that tries to minimize the role of our own needs and interests and tries to maximize what we think the earliest authors, editors, and audiences most likely understood by these texts.”
Using this approach, Dan examines fascinating ancient puzzles hidden in the Bible, like what was the divine council? Were the ancient Hebrews monotheist as we now understand it? Did God have a wife? Did the ancient Israelites practice child sacrifice? He also addresses issues such as Hell, Satan, the virgin birth, the number of the beast, and what exactly the Bible has to say about Jesus being God. Along the way he also jumps in to examine what the Bible actually has to say about hot button culture war issues, such as homosexuality and enforced female modesty. He presents an intriguing potpourri of issues with a unique combination of solid scholarship and an informal, approachable, and pop culture laced presentation.
This book isn’t for everyone. If you are utterly convinced by the dogmas of your tradition and have no issues with them, and no curiosity to look beyond them, don’t bother with this book. It will just make you angry and raise your blood pressure to no purpose. But if you are genuinely curious about this ancient book that has had such a central place in our culture, or, if like the kid I once was you are bothered by things you’ve found in it and want some answers, no matter where they might lead, then you are this book’s intended audience.
McClellan describes himself as a scholar of the Bible, and he has the degrees to back up the claim. He is on TikTok and has a podcast called Data over Dogma, where he wields his knowledge and scholarship of the Bible both to teach and to combat those who have weaponized the Bible in service to the culture wars. (If you have seen Dan on social media, you know what you’re getting in this book, which is largely an expansion of the subjects he covers there.) His oft expressed motto is “data over dogma,” a short hand for using available data to understand what the Bible has to say rather than interpreting it to service and reinforce dogmas of various traditions. He says:
”I use a historical critical perspective because I think the earliest reconstructable meanings make for a useful point of departure for discussing what the Bible means to us and how it’s used by us today.”
”We take an awful lot of time to gather data, to see what other scholars have done, and then to go about reconstructing that meaning in a way that tries to minimize the role of our own needs and interests and tries to maximize what we think the earliest authors, editors, and audiences most likely understood by these texts.”
Using this approach, Dan examines fascinating ancient puzzles hidden in the Bible, like what was the divine council? Were the ancient Hebrews monotheist as we now understand it? Did God have a wife? Did the ancient Israelites practice child sacrifice? He also addresses issues such as Hell, Satan, the virgin birth, the number of the beast, and what exactly the Bible has to say about Jesus being God. Along the way he also jumps in to examine what the Bible actually has to say about hot button culture war issues, such as homosexuality and enforced female modesty. He presents an intriguing potpourri of issues with a unique combination of solid scholarship and an informal, approachable, and pop culture laced presentation.
This book isn’t for everyone. If you are utterly convinced by the dogmas of your tradition and have no issues with them, and no curiosity to look beyond them, don’t bother with this book. It will just make you angry and raise your blood pressure to no purpose. But if you are genuinely curious about this ancient book that has had such a central place in our culture, or, if like the kid I once was you are bothered by things you’ve found in it and want some answers, no matter where they might lead, then you are this book’s intended audience.
January 10, 2025
ARC review- very well written with a strong attention to detail. in my opinion, the best part of this book is that Dan does not include his own beliefs, but instead gives you all of the information to form your own thoughts. This is definitely not a quick read. Just the introduction is 17 pages, but I feel like it helped me get into the right headspace for reading this book. Being born and raised Catholic I had one set of beliefs. As an adult, I enjoyed learning more about other religions and religious history, including the history of the Bible and it’s different versions. I won’t say that I went into this believing that I knew it all, because I most definitely do not haha but I was surprised at how much I learned from this book. I will say go in with an open mind. As we all know, ‘The Bible’ is the most passion inspiring, life-changing, war battling and most controversial set of stories ever written. An open mind and willingness to challenge what you may have been taught in the past or always believed, will make for a more enjoyable reading experience.
June 24, 2025
Pre-Read Notes:
I grabbed this book because I don't get along with the Bible. Reading it never has made me feel closer to God or clearer about my faith. I'm always questioning the Bible. In fact I would say questioning--doubt--is my clearest connection to faith.
"... I have to try to understand the Bible on its own terms. What that means is I try to understand it as its authors, editors, and earliest audiences understood it. I recognize that to understand the Bible on its own terms, I need to be willing to allow for those terms to diverge from my own. I have to be willing to distinguish “the Bible” from “my interpretation of the Bible” or “what I want the Bible to be.” " p5
Final Review
(thoughts & recs) I really learned so much about the Bible and how it can be misused or misinterpreted. I was engaged and interested the whole way through, but I won't lie, this is a bit of a slog. The authors understanding of Biblical verses is very layered-- what was going on at the time? what did the author's intend it to mean? how did early audiences interpret the Bible? He layers all these interests in his considerations of the Bible and discusses them in a clear way. But if I'm being real, this research is thick.
I think this is an important book that compares modern Christianity and ancient Christianity, a book that affects not just those who believe in God, but those on whom those believers set their gaze. I recommend this to anyone interested in an academic perspective on the Bible.
My 3 Favorite Things:
✔️ I always like books that inspire me to read further. As this is an analysis of the Bible written by a Mormon author, he thought it best to address that in the introduction. Because of this proposed conflict in ideologies, I was compelled to reap up on aspects of Mormonism with which I was unfamiliar. I just love learning new, weird stuff in books!
✔️ The provided comparisons of varying interpretations of different passages were a very intuitive way for me to learn.
✔️"Across the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, God frequently treats human life as negligible and in some circumstances even orders humans to treat it the same way." p87 This is exactly my issue with the Bible. I've never heard anyone write this in a book let alone suggest it out loud. And it's perfectly put, except I would add that God treats all life as negligible in the Bible..
Notes:
1. Content Notes: religion, Christianity, the Bible, slavery, gr*pe (off page), patriarchy, violence against women(off-page), violence against children (off-page), there are more of course, it's the Bible.
Thank you to the author Daniel McClellan, publishers St. Martin's Essentials, and NetGalley for an accessible digital arc of THE BIBLE SAYS SO. All views are mine.
I grabbed this book because I don't get along with the Bible. Reading it never has made me feel closer to God or clearer about my faith. I'm always questioning the Bible. In fact I would say questioning--doubt--is my clearest connection to faith.
"... I have to try to understand the Bible on its own terms. What that means is I try to understand it as its authors, editors, and earliest audiences understood it. I recognize that to understand the Bible on its own terms, I need to be willing to allow for those terms to diverge from my own. I have to be willing to distinguish “the Bible” from “my interpretation of the Bible” or “what I want the Bible to be.” " p5
Final Review
(thoughts & recs) I really learned so much about the Bible and how it can be misused or misinterpreted. I was engaged and interested the whole way through, but I won't lie, this is a bit of a slog. The authors understanding of Biblical verses is very layered-- what was going on at the time? what did the author's intend it to mean? how did early audiences interpret the Bible? He layers all these interests in his considerations of the Bible and discusses them in a clear way. But if I'm being real, this research is thick.
I think this is an important book that compares modern Christianity and ancient Christianity, a book that affects not just those who believe in God, but those on whom those believers set their gaze. I recommend this to anyone interested in an academic perspective on the Bible.
My 3 Favorite Things:
✔️ I always like books that inspire me to read further. As this is an analysis of the Bible written by a Mormon author, he thought it best to address that in the introduction. Because of this proposed conflict in ideologies, I was compelled to reap up on aspects of Mormonism with which I was unfamiliar. I just love learning new, weird stuff in books!
✔️ The provided comparisons of varying interpretations of different passages were a very intuitive way for me to learn.
✔️"Across the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, God frequently treats human life as negligible and in some circumstances even orders humans to treat it the same way." p87 This is exactly my issue with the Bible. I've never heard anyone write this in a book let alone suggest it out loud. And it's perfectly put, except I would add that God treats all life as negligible in the Bible..
Notes:
1. Content Notes: religion, Christianity, the Bible, slavery, gr*pe (off page), patriarchy, violence against women(off-page), violence against children (off-page), there are more of course, it's the Bible.
Thank you to the author Daniel McClellan, publishers St. Martin's Essentials, and NetGalley for an accessible digital arc of THE BIBLE SAYS SO. All views are mine.
May 30, 2025
This book tricked me (in a good way). I’d seen enough of Dan McClellan’s YouTube videos to know that he doesn’t mess around when it comes to scrutinizing ancient texts, but the brightly-colored cover and whimsical font made me expect a somewhat dumbed-down summary of Bible controversies. Not so! The author wades boldly into the weeds of textual criticism, bolstering his analysis of scripture with rigorous research and careful logic. There are chapters that you’d expect in a book like this (Biblical inspiration, homosexuality, slavery, abortion, hell, women’s rights, the divinity of Jesus), but there are also topics that I wouldn’t have predicted and thoroughly enjoyed (God’s body, God’s wife, divine deception, polytheism in the Old Testament, modest clothing, the mark of the beast, etc). McClellan’s challenges to Christian fundamentalism are incisive, and his nuanced argumentation was right up my alley.
That said, the book is consistently inviting. The author keeps things conversational, cracking jokes and referencing many TikTok duels with over-zealous and under-informed Christian apologists. Occasionally, his rhetoric turns sharp, especially when denouncing the religious oppression of vulnerable people, but overall the book’s tone is gracious. The short chapters make for an engaging listen. In an era when the Bible is increasingly wielded as a club to silence marginalized groups, McClellan’s “data over dogma” approach is both a breath of fresh air and an urgent rallying cry.
That said, the book is consistently inviting. The author keeps things conversational, cracking jokes and referencing many TikTok duels with over-zealous and under-informed Christian apologists. Occasionally, his rhetoric turns sharp, especially when denouncing the religious oppression of vulnerable people, but overall the book’s tone is gracious. The short chapters make for an engaging listen. In an era when the Bible is increasingly wielded as a club to silence marginalized groups, McClellan’s “data over dogma” approach is both a breath of fresh air and an urgent rallying cry.
June 3, 2025
Scripture doesn’t change over time but its interpretation inevitably does, and to believe in inerrancy is all too convenient if the text happens to support your every comfortable, convenient opinion. Dan sheds light succinctly and successfully as he addresses some of the core claims that modern Christians fling around with “the Bible says so!” as their infallible evidence and justification.
Does the Bible say what you say it says? Or do you just say it says what you want to say? ;)
Does the Bible say what you say it says? Or do you just say it says what you want to say? ;)
May 14, 2025
A nice collection of Dan's take on contemporary social/political/religious claims attributed to the Bible. Dan's writing is clean and he's talented at discussing academic ideas about the Bible and related topics in nonacademic ways. He's a fantastic communicator, as his social media following makes clear. He's also a mensch.
May 23, 2025
Książka, którą przydałoby się wydać w Polsce. Pół-prawdy, przekłamania i mity na temat Biblii mają się u nas bardzo dobrze. Autor w przystępny sposób tłumaczy zawiłe kwestie naukowo-historyczne mając na uwadze również dobro społeczne jakie może wyniknąć z właściwych interpretacji tekstów biblijnych.
August 7, 2025
Dan McClellan, making public scholarship cool again!
I’ve been a fan of Dan’s TikTok work for some time now, so I was obviously excited to dig in to his new book. The Bible Says So is laid out in a way that makes it so you can either read straight though or jump to a chapter according to your interest/question. Definitely plan to read it with a Bible next to you (NRSVue preferred, obviously) to get the most out of it.
While Dan does get fairly technical in most chapters, as is necessary for the subject matter, he continues to make the scholarship as accessible as possible for the lay Bible reader. Really, The Bible Says So serves as a deeper dive into many of the topics he regularly discusses on social media (see especially chapters 13 and 17). Seeing it all written out, with references to the relevant research as well as other historic literature (the footnotes alone are worth the purchase price), makes following his arguments that much easier—and his many fans already know he has a talent for communicating the minutiae of biblical scholarship and its implications for Bible readers.
Dan’s overarching argument is made clear through the book’s introduction and conclusion—that we are all of us negotiating with biblical texts. This will inevitably be hard to read for the most conservative Bible readers; as Dan aptly observes, “The reality is that there’s no such thing as a biblical literalist. Everyone who treats the Bible as an inspired and/or authoritative document negotiates with it. There is no other possible choice.” So, yeah, I don’t know that I would hand this to a literalist, because Dan certainly calls out the logical fallacies of this belief system, and if you know literalists you know they won’t hear it until they’re ready. But for anyone who is ready, and especially for the progressive Christian who wants to reckon with the Bible seriously, chapter 2 is absolutely essential reading for helping you to learn how to grapple with the historical-critical approach to reading. Dan’s tone is delightfully irreverent in the best way (I like it when he says that something is “pure and utter nonsense”—it just makes me feel good), but no argument can be made for his disrespecting the text itself. The Bible is, after all, his life’s work. He simply makes plain what the Bible is: Texts.
It’s important also to note that Dan does not, as some try to say, only write what serves himself. He explains what the Bible actually says, calling out even the most well-meaning but incorrect interpretations. Writing about a particularly disturbing passage, he explains, “I don’t think insisting the authors actually meant something else entirely is a productive way to try to rehabilitate this passage, though. Nor do I think it’s consistent to dismiss the harmful ideology [found in this passage] as the product of the authors’ own time while simultaneously maintaining the inerrancy, inspiration, and authority of the words themselves. The words are simply wrong.” He returns to this idea throughout the book, explaining the ways that we might continue to negotiate with biblical texts while acknowledging, “Sometimes the Bible is the problem.”
In a world where we no longer have Rachel Held Evans to guide us, I like many other progressives am constantly seeking out voices to help me navigate my faith. (I’ve never been one to harbor any desire to meet my heroes, but what I would give to sit down and have a conversation with Dan!) While he may not be positioning himself as a faith leader, Dan McClellan stands out as one of the foremost voices helping us all understand this Book we love and struggle with.
*ARC via NetGalley* (and I enjoyed it so much, I’ll be buying a hard copy on release day)
I’ve been a fan of Dan’s TikTok work for some time now, so I was obviously excited to dig in to his new book. The Bible Says So is laid out in a way that makes it so you can either read straight though or jump to a chapter according to your interest/question. Definitely plan to read it with a Bible next to you (NRSVue preferred, obviously) to get the most out of it.
While Dan does get fairly technical in most chapters, as is necessary for the subject matter, he continues to make the scholarship as accessible as possible for the lay Bible reader. Really, The Bible Says So serves as a deeper dive into many of the topics he regularly discusses on social media (see especially chapters 13 and 17). Seeing it all written out, with references to the relevant research as well as other historic literature (the footnotes alone are worth the purchase price), makes following his arguments that much easier—and his many fans already know he has a talent for communicating the minutiae of biblical scholarship and its implications for Bible readers.
Dan’s overarching argument is made clear through the book’s introduction and conclusion—that we are all of us negotiating with biblical texts. This will inevitably be hard to read for the most conservative Bible readers; as Dan aptly observes, “The reality is that there’s no such thing as a biblical literalist. Everyone who treats the Bible as an inspired and/or authoritative document negotiates with it. There is no other possible choice.” So, yeah, I don’t know that I would hand this to a literalist, because Dan certainly calls out the logical fallacies of this belief system, and if you know literalists you know they won’t hear it until they’re ready. But for anyone who is ready, and especially for the progressive Christian who wants to reckon with the Bible seriously, chapter 2 is absolutely essential reading for helping you to learn how to grapple with the historical-critical approach to reading. Dan’s tone is delightfully irreverent in the best way (I like it when he says that something is “pure and utter nonsense”—it just makes me feel good), but no argument can be made for his disrespecting the text itself. The Bible is, after all, his life’s work. He simply makes plain what the Bible is: Texts.
It’s important also to note that Dan does not, as some try to say, only write what serves himself. He explains what the Bible actually says, calling out even the most well-meaning but incorrect interpretations. Writing about a particularly disturbing passage, he explains, “I don’t think insisting the authors actually meant something else entirely is a productive way to try to rehabilitate this passage, though. Nor do I think it’s consistent to dismiss the harmful ideology [found in this passage] as the product of the authors’ own time while simultaneously maintaining the inerrancy, inspiration, and authority of the words themselves. The words are simply wrong.” He returns to this idea throughout the book, explaining the ways that we might continue to negotiate with biblical texts while acknowledging, “Sometimes the Bible is the problem.”
In a world where we no longer have Rachel Held Evans to guide us, I like many other progressives am constantly seeking out voices to help me navigate my faith. (I’ve never been one to harbor any desire to meet my heroes, but what I would give to sit down and have a conversation with Dan!) While he may not be positioning himself as a faith leader, Dan McClellan stands out as one of the foremost voices helping us all understand this Book we love and struggle with.
*ARC via NetGalley* (and I enjoyed it so much, I’ll be buying a hard copy on release day)
June 1, 2025
I wasn’t familiar with Dan McClellan before picking up this book, but was not surprised to discover he’s a tik-tok personality. The thrust of his book seems primarily geared to gain the admiration of a social media audience rather than the applause of nail-scarred hands. Thus thrust of his analysis is this: the underlying documents that made up the Bible have been misinterpreted, and a true translation according to McClellan is one that affords the reader far more latitude in their lifestyle, and overall greater inclusion, things that are cat-nip to Tik-Tok’s majority audience. The problem, as one previous reviewer apply notes, is that the world has not been desperately seeking a biblical scholar who can take biblical passages to its root levels and finally give us the true answer. Instead there have been several biblical scholars that have gone before Mcclelkan, whose work is vastly different, thereby pushing Mcclellans interpretations to the fringe of the field. While I appreciate his diligence, the reader comes away with the impression that the readers goals is appeasement of a youthful demographic rather than true Biblical focus.
May 18, 2025
The author describes how there is no inerrancy in the Bible and we negotiate meaning with the text.
He addresses in each chapter various Biblical misunderstandings or controversies.
Well written. Accessible to lay readers.
He addresses in each chapter various Biblical misunderstandings or controversies.
Well written. Accessible to lay readers.
June 30, 2025
Dan offers his readers a mountain of insights about what the Bible says (and doesn’t say) about a host of topics. This is extremely helpful for all who will never study Hebrew or Greek and whose background and experiences limits their understanding of Scripture. There are times when the conclusion & interpretation of the data seems incomplete or misguided, but this book is best utilized by doing one’s own interpretation based on the data provided.
People who have never studied the Bible as an historical document and delved into academic criticism will find this book very challenging. It’s hopefully a good challenge that benefits and enriches faith & understanding, but readers ought to know!
People who have never studied the Bible as an historical document and delved into academic criticism will find this book very challenging. It’s hopefully a good challenge that benefits and enriches faith & understanding, but readers ought to know!
May 3, 2025
This book is absolutely captivating. I couldn’t put it down.
As a teen and young adult, I shied away from reading the Old Testament because it was confusingly repetitive and if I knew what it said, I’d feel some responsibility to conform my life to its weird and archaic teachings. If you likewise find the Old Testament or parts of the New Testament confusing or intimidating, this book is a good entry point to modern Biblical scholarship. There are people who spend their entire lives deciphering and understanding the books of the Bible, each on its own terms. And one of them has spent years sharing those insights on social media, honing his message, and now offers the most salient points to us in this book.
Some key insights:
(*) No Biblical authors challenge slavery as an institution. Instead, they uphold the slave-master relationship as the divine ideal between a disciple and God.
(*) All Biblical authors depict God as having a body, albeit an invulnerable body composed of Spirit matter (think of wind and fire, both of which are fully material).
(*) The Trinity is a post-Biblical concept developed to resolve the tension in how Jesus is depicted as both God and not God. Paul depicts Jesus as invested with God’s divine name. Mark depicts Jesus as God’s son by adoption.
(*) The virgin birth is a combination mistranslation in the Greek Septuagint and proof-texting by Matthew that really is unsupportable.
(*) The Josiahic reforms inserted propaganda against Asherah, the female consort of El/Yahweh.
(*) The Biblical basis for condemning homosexuality is weak because the Biblical authors had no more understanding of sexual orientation than they did of calculus or iPhones. The frameworks at play for understanding and regulating sex in OT times and NT times are both so vastly different from modern ones as to make Biblical teachings irrelevant. There was no notion of consent or equality between sexual partners. Rather, OT concerns revolve around social hierarchies of dominance while Paul views prioritizes celibacy and only allows passionless sex as a relief valve for those two weak to withstand burning sexual desires.
As a teen and young adult, I shied away from reading the Old Testament because it was confusingly repetitive and if I knew what it said, I’d feel some responsibility to conform my life to its weird and archaic teachings. If you likewise find the Old Testament or parts of the New Testament confusing or intimidating, this book is a good entry point to modern Biblical scholarship. There are people who spend their entire lives deciphering and understanding the books of the Bible, each on its own terms. And one of them has spent years sharing those insights on social media, honing his message, and now offers the most salient points to us in this book.
Some key insights:
(*) No Biblical authors challenge slavery as an institution. Instead, they uphold the slave-master relationship as the divine ideal between a disciple and God.
(*) All Biblical authors depict God as having a body, albeit an invulnerable body composed of Spirit matter (think of wind and fire, both of which are fully material).
(*) The Trinity is a post-Biblical concept developed to resolve the tension in how Jesus is depicted as both God and not God. Paul depicts Jesus as invested with God’s divine name. Mark depicts Jesus as God’s son by adoption.
(*) The virgin birth is a combination mistranslation in the Greek Septuagint and proof-texting by Matthew that really is unsupportable.
(*) The Josiahic reforms inserted propaganda against Asherah, the female consort of El/Yahweh.
(*) The Biblical basis for condemning homosexuality is weak because the Biblical authors had no more understanding of sexual orientation than they did of calculus or iPhones. The frameworks at play for understanding and regulating sex in OT times and NT times are both so vastly different from modern ones as to make Biblical teachings irrelevant. There was no notion of consent or equality between sexual partners. Rather, OT concerns revolve around social hierarchies of dominance while Paul views prioritizes celibacy and only allows passionless sex as a relief valve for those two weak to withstand burning sexual desires.
May 12, 2025
The kind of public service Dan McClellan does is incredibly helpful and brings us ever closer to a future in which there will be no ivory towers separating the few from the many in terms of knowledge on various academic subjects.
The book itself is an expansion of Dan's mission to make biblical scholarship more accessible to the majority of us who will probably never get a Biblical studies degree (or sometimes ever read a Bible for that matter).
It does well in addressing commonly held positions by not just Christians but even what non-religious people may believe about the Biblical texts and uses a data-driven approach to analyze questions of "Does the Bible say X?"
One thing we still ought to be cautious of is taking the word of one scholar to settle long-disputed academic debates, especially on the matter of interpretation of ancient texts from cultures that are nothing but a distant memory to us now.
Luckily McClellan puts in a ton of references in this work for the reader to double-check. I know the work isn't aimed at an academic audience but I do wish the reference citations were footnoted rather than a list in the back. Nevertheless, I think the book will inspire readers (hopefully, the especially dogmatic Evangelical ones.) to dig further into the references used and serve as a great jumping-off point for further research into these questions of "What do the various Biblical authors say about X?"
I am a big fan of McClellan's work on social media and his public scholarship motivates and gives me hope that the internet (for as much misinformation it has spread) can be revolutionary in terms of the ability to seriously self-educate oneself on academic topics. I wish him a very long career in being a public scholar and hope that through him the world learns a little bit more about how to put data over dogma.
The book itself is an expansion of Dan's mission to make biblical scholarship more accessible to the majority of us who will probably never get a Biblical studies degree (or sometimes ever read a Bible for that matter).
It does well in addressing commonly held positions by not just Christians but even what non-religious people may believe about the Biblical texts and uses a data-driven approach to analyze questions of "Does the Bible say X?"
One thing we still ought to be cautious of is taking the word of one scholar to settle long-disputed academic debates, especially on the matter of interpretation of ancient texts from cultures that are nothing but a distant memory to us now.
Luckily McClellan puts in a ton of references in this work for the reader to double-check. I know the work isn't aimed at an academic audience but I do wish the reference citations were footnoted rather than a list in the back. Nevertheless, I think the book will inspire readers (hopefully, the especially dogmatic Evangelical ones.) to dig further into the references used and serve as a great jumping-off point for further research into these questions of "What do the various Biblical authors say about X?"
I am a big fan of McClellan's work on social media and his public scholarship motivates and gives me hope that the internet (for as much misinformation it has spread) can be revolutionary in terms of the ability to seriously self-educate oneself on academic topics. I wish him a very long career in being a public scholar and hope that through him the world learns a little bit more about how to put data over dogma.
May 22, 2025
This is a great book that takes you through a series of claims people make about what the Bible “says,” often to reaffirm their own worldviews and maintain boundaries against other groups. This book comprehensively (more or less) covers everything from claims regarding biblical univocality, God’s body, God's wife, Slavery, child sacrifice, homosexuality, to hell and more. McClellan offers the historical context of biblical passages and the scholarly consensus view (as he understands it as a biblical scholar) surrounding these claims, and it’s really helpful in terms of both understanding the biblical texts as their original authors and audiences used and understood them, as well as interrogating the poor ways we often use the texts anachronistically to confirm our own worldviews, maintain boundaries, and structure power---among other things. It also offers some great insights into how everyone, including McClellan, negotiates with the biblical texts to make meaning. The bible, in this way, doesn't "say" anything. As McClellan concludes in this book:
"We can claim to be sharing what the Bible "says" if we're just quoting it verbatim, but the instant we paraphrase those words or try to explain what they mean to modern events, circumstances, relationships, or identities, or how they should be applied, the Bible is no longer "saying" anything at all; we're just using the Bible as a bullhorn to authorize, validate, and amplify what WE'RE saying" (253).
This is a book I’ll be coming back to again and again.
"We can claim to be sharing what the Bible "says" if we're just quoting it verbatim, but the instant we paraphrase those words or try to explain what they mean to modern events, circumstances, relationships, or identities, or how they should be applied, the Bible is no longer "saying" anything at all; we're just using the Bible as a bullhorn to authorize, validate, and amplify what WE'RE saying" (253).
This is a book I’ll be coming back to again and again.
May 23, 2025
just an absolute must read if the bible has ever been used against you or been provided as the source for questions that have answers that just don't make sense.
dan mcclellan does an excellent job at making the text extremely accessible to understand, providing every angle possible, and leaving it up to you to decide how you want to use the bible going forward. his call to action in nearly every chapter on why using the bible as a weapon towards marginalized communities is something i wish we would see more often in other people of faith with a platform (or without, honestly).
while i have been deconstructing for years and already knew most of what the bible "says" has no real authority in lawmaking or society or how people are supposed to live their life, this book further solidified to me that the bible can't really agree on any one thing, and is one of the most unreliable historical texts we have, while simultaneously being the most impactful book in history.
thank you a million to the author for writing this book and being on the right side of the movement.
dan mcclellan does an excellent job at making the text extremely accessible to understand, providing every angle possible, and leaving it up to you to decide how you want to use the bible going forward. his call to action in nearly every chapter on why using the bible as a weapon towards marginalized communities is something i wish we would see more often in other people of faith with a platform (or without, honestly).
while i have been deconstructing for years and already knew most of what the bible "says" has no real authority in lawmaking or society or how people are supposed to live their life, this book further solidified to me that the bible can't really agree on any one thing, and is one of the most unreliable historical texts we have, while simultaneously being the most impactful book in history.
thank you a million to the author for writing this book and being on the right side of the movement.
January 24, 2025
Preordered, review forthcoming.
I have followed Dan on Tik Tok for years so I’m very happy he is putting out a book!!
I have followed Dan on Tik Tok for years so I’m very happy he is putting out a book!!
August 15, 2025
Effectively nineteenish of McClellan's most prominent videos, but in written form. Maybe it's because I'm more accustomed to dealing with written sources than Youtube shorts (never mind TikToks), but when you see it all written out it does become hard to miss that what he calls academic consensus is pretty often just a broad tendency, or only a consensus with theologians and not historians, archaeologists, or philologists—the notion that בְּרֵאשִׁית bərēʔšît (or bereshit, if you like—I don't!) at the start of Genesis is in the construct state and the verse should be translated "when God began to create &c.", for instance, is something that every theologian I know is as convinced as Dan is is universally believed by scholars, while every philologist I know (both of them!) thinks it's a neat idea but not without significant problems of its own. (At least he doesn't repeat the stronger and unambiguously incorrect claim from some of his videos that רֵאשִׁית is itself the construct state of רִאשׁוֹנָה.)
Obviously McClellan's content is generally pretty solid, though, and if you like it you'll probably like this book. I do feel it's a missed opportunity to go beyond what short-form video is capable of, but I guess it's aimed at the same kind of audience.
Obviously McClellan's content is generally pretty solid, though, and if you like it you'll probably like this book. I do feel it's a missed opportunity to go beyond what short-form video is capable of, but I guess it's aimed at the same kind of audience.
August 3, 2025
Man, I never thought in a million years that I’d enjoy a book about The Bible, but I legitimately binged this book within a couple of days. Dan McClellan is a biblical scholar, and he’s also from the Mormon church. In this book, he basically takes everything you think you know about the Bible and it’s concepts and flips it on its head. I’m an atheist, and one of the reasons I’ve never been religious is because the way people interpret the Bible has turned me off, but this author breaks down how people are either misinterpreting the Bible, using it for their own motives, or both.
Each chapter breaks down a different concept from the Bible, like what it says about topics like homosexuality, beating kids, the mark of the beast, Satan, Hell, what women should wear, and so many other concepts. He then goes through the history of different versions of the Bible, what the Hebrew and other translations actually say, what we have evidence for and what we don’t, and it’s just so interesting.
That being said, I also really dislike books that discuss history, but this one kept me interested. It was really cool learning about all the things the Bible doesn’t even say or how people twist certain things from the Bible while having no evidence that the original texts actually means what they think it means.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and I think a lot of others will, too. Whether you’re an atheist or super religious, this book will teach you some things.
Each chapter breaks down a different concept from the Bible, like what it says about topics like homosexuality, beating kids, the mark of the beast, Satan, Hell, what women should wear, and so many other concepts. He then goes through the history of different versions of the Bible, what the Hebrew and other translations actually say, what we have evidence for and what we don’t, and it’s just so interesting.
That being said, I also really dislike books that discuss history, but this one kept me interested. It was really cool learning about all the things the Bible doesn’t even say or how people twist certain things from the Bible while having no evidence that the original texts actually means what they think it means.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and I think a lot of others will, too. Whether you’re an atheist or super religious, this book will teach you some things.
May 12, 2025
Not without flaws, but it’s still the best pop-scholarship work I’ve read to this day. Dan is truly a gift to non-specialists, I can only hope more scholars will follow suit in increasing public access to these academic conversations.
May 20, 2025
Accessibly written and informative. I highly recommend this book to anyone who either is Christian or lives in a Christian-dominant society.
May 31, 2025
Physically read. Thought-provoking and informative. Loved it.
August 19, 2025
The Bible Says So: What We Get Right (and Wrong) About Scripture’s Most Controversial Issues by Daniel McClellan (2025)
v+307-page Kindle Ebook story pages 1-259
Genre: Religion/Biblical Criticism & Interpretation
Featuring: Introduction, Some Housekeeping, How Did We Get the Bible?, A Brief History of the Bible, Conclusions, The Bible Says the Bible Is Inspired, The Bible Says God Created the Universe Out of Nothing, Mistranslations, The Bible Says God Lies, Adam's Song, Micaiah's Song, Jacob the Trickster, Slavery, Asherah, Abortion, Rape Victims and Marriage, Graphics, Song Lyrics with Apogo, Pop Culture, Twitter, Satan, God's Body, Sacrifice Your Firstborn Child, There Is Only One God, You Should Beat Your Kids, Homosexuality Is an Abomination, Women Need to Cover Up, The Messiah Would Be Born of a Virgin, Jesus Is God, Ancient Southwest Aisa, Greek, Hebrew, Beware the Mark of the Beast, Double Talk, Sinners Will Be Punished Forever in Hell, Notes, Index: Scripture, Index: Subject, Index: Modern Authors
Rating as a movie: R for adult content
Songs for the soundtrack: Several pop songs that I'm too lazy to annotate
Books and Authors mentioned: YHWH's Divine Images: A Cognitive Approach by Daniel McClellan, The Invention of the Inspired Text: Philological Windows on the Theopneustia of Scripture by John C. Poirier, Jacob and the Divine Trickster: A Theology of Deception and YHWH’s Fidelity to the Ancestral Promise in the Jacob Cycle by John Edward Anderson, On The Generation Of Animals by Aristotle, Inventing God's Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi by David P. Wright, Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day by Judith Viorst; God's Monsters: Vengeful Spirits, Deadly Angels, Hybrid Creatures, and Divine Hitmen of the Bible by Esther Hamori; On the First Principles by Origen, The Widening of God's Mercy: Sexuality Within the Biblical Story by Christopher B. Hays and Richard B. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament by Richard B. Hays, Messianic High Christology: New Testament Variants of Second Temple Judaism by Ruben A. Bühner, In the Form of a God: The Pre-existence of the Exalted Christ in Paul by Andrew Perriman, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament with Scripture, Subject, and Greek Word Indexes by Daniel B. Wallace; Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity by Richard Bauckham, Caring for the Dead in Ancient Israel by Kerry M. Sonia
My rating: ⭐️⭐️⭐️½✝️⛪️✡️🕍🇮🇱🕎🔯
My thoughts: 🔖Page 19 of 307 [Chapter] 1 How Did We Get the Bible? - This is not exactly what I was expecting but I was interested until he pretty much said that even if the Bible says something he is going to go with the minority immediately on the topic. That sounds awfully biased to me. And if he's willing to manipulate that in the favor of the minority for the sake of politics I'm not sure I can trust anything else he says. I'm gonna have to sleep on this one.
🔖52 [Chapter] 4 The Bible Says God Lies - Okay so I don't agree with everything this guy is saying, but this is a very interesting historical account of how the Bible came to be so I'm definitely going to finish this book.
🔖170 [Chapter] 14 The Bible Says Homosexuality Is an Abomination - It seems he picks and chooses went to go left.
🔖191 [Chapter] 15 The Bible Says Women Need to Cover Up - It's very hard to continue this book with the author constantly doing the very thing he accuses others of. In the introduction, he promises to write a non-biased, straightforward explanation of what the Bible says but then he has gone as far as interpreting the text as he sees fit flat out ignoring what the text says stating that the text does say something but it's wrong and in other cases well it doesn't specify to this extent so it doesn't count and then of course whenever the text says something he disagrees with he just says it's not relevant today. I don't see the point of reading this book if all you're gonna do is the same thing everybody else does and interpret it for your purpose and views. Why promise a breakdown if you're just going to deliver an opinion that overrides the text based on how you feel about each topic? I have no idea how he's going to approach the next topic but I'm sure he's gonna use one of these 5 persuasive writing styles and it's starting to get on my nerves.
This book was up and down for me. In my opinion, the author did the very thing he claims he's trying to prevent others in the first place but at least he owns it in the end.
Recommend to others: Not likely but I would recommend it to my brother.
Memorable Quotes: For everyone out there who supports putting data over dogma
I love the Bible. I really do. Without denying it has inspired significant harm, I believe it has contributed to a lot of good in this world. I’m also a scholar of the Bible who makes my living combating the spread of misinformation about the Bible on social media, and a lot of this misinformation comes from Bible believers. So to an awful lot of people, it feels like I am attacking the Bible itself, and they let me know about it every single day. I go back and forth between being disappointed and being amused by this. I think the Bible is the single most fascinating, complex, and influential text that has ever existed. Beyond its role in my own faith—which is not a part of this book—I have dedicated my professional life to better understanding the Bible’s history, significance, and meaning.
I have to be willing to distinguish “the Bible” from “my interpretation of the Bible” or “what I want the Bible to be.” What the original authors and audiences of the Bible intended and understood it to say isn’t always going to be the same as what I understand it to say when I read it. I think this is one of the most exciting parts of researching the Bible. It means there’s space for the Bible to continue to surprise, fascinate, and challenge me. However, most people who approach the Bible as an authoritative text like to keep it on a pretty short leash. They maintain firm boundaries regarding what it is and isn’t allowed to say. Allowing the Bible to transgress those boundaries can raise doubts regarding deeply held beliefs that most people don’t want to see subjected to scrutiny. These are not beliefs that people adopt because they’ve been convinced by data or evidence. They’re beliefs that people choose to accept because doing so is required or incentivized within the social identities that are important to them. Sometimes these beliefs are supported by data and sometimes they are not, but what is true of all of them is that they’re not negotiable. I call this type of belief a dogma.
On my end, this requires constantly picking through my own research to try to weed out influences that might be lurking under the surface that aren’t supported by the data but that still might nudge my judgment in the direction of conclusions that serve my own interests, whether related to my religious identity, my social standing, or even my livelihood. However, if there is something that could plausibly be labeled a dogma that I’ve always and openly allowed to influence my work, it’s this: As long as all other things are equal—and that’s an important caveat—I strive to give the benefit of the doubt to the less powerful group.1 As you’re going to discover in this book, I really don’t like when people use the Bible to hurt vulnerable people and groups.
I would describe (not define) the dogma of inspiration as the belief that the folks who wrote the texts of the Bible were so thoroughly influenced by God that their compositions are in some sense the very “word of God.” While human agency is selectively given some kind of role in the articulation of the biblical texts (particularly where they’re problematic), because of the implications associated with human imperfections, that influence is carefully restricted.
Readers of the biblical texts have been arguing for more than two thousand years about what the Bible actually says, and the Christian groups that hold to the Bible as inspired and authoritative have shattered like splinters into countless different divisions because of disagreements about the Bible’s meaning and significance. Oddly enough, for most Christians today, the concern doesn’t seem to be about figuring out what the Bible actually says as much as it seems to be about convincing others of what it says. Most Christian groups feel confident they already know precisely what the Bible says, and it’s just everybody else who needs to be brought up to speed. Conveniently for most of these groups, the Bible always seems to offer surprisingly clear, relevant, and topical guidance regarding all kinds of social and political issues that didn’t even exist when the Bible was being written. The Bible always seems so conveniently to say precisely what they need it to say.
All texts are basically just codes, and we can decipher them only to the degree we know the code. Because these meanings are frequently very nuanced and complex, and because words, phrases, and clauses can be put together in countless different ways and can often mean multiple different things on their own, there are potentially numerous different meanings and shades of meaning that could have been intended by whoever wrote a given text, including the texts gathered together in the Bible. Reading a text is not a matter of excavating or extracting meaning from it; it’s a matter of creating it ourselves and trusting that we’ve come close enough to what was intended. I’m oversimplifying quite a bit, but there’s a two-stage process going on subconsciously when we read. First, our minds generate as many different potential meanings as they can that might be associated with a given linguistic expression. Then, our minds use whatever clues might be available to whittle them down to the meaning we feel was most likely intended. For experienced readers, this process is subconscious and almost instantaneous, so it seems like meaning is just being transmitted to us directly from the text. The reality is that we’re always generating the meaning ourselves, and while this process is usually good enough for communication to be successful, errors can and often do creep into both stages of this process.
I quote from a few different translations of the Bible, but the one I default to is the updated edition of the New Revised Standard Version, which I would argue is the most accurate available translation of both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament together. It’s certainly not perfect, and I’ll point out problems here and there, but it’s the most up to date and the one I think most consistently gets things right.
Until the middle of the nineteenth century CE, most Protestant Bibles also included a separate section between the Old and New Testaments called the Apocrypha, which contained fourteen additional texts: 1 and 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Prayer of Manasseh, 1 and 2 Maccabees, the additions to Esther, and the three additions to Daniel that are known as the Song of the Three Children, the Story of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon.2 Contrary to popular belief, the 1611 King James Version included the entire Apocrypha, although more compact editions of the KJV were frequently published without it. During the Second Great Awakening in the early nineteenth century CE, the American Bible Society and the British and Foreign Bible Society were pushing hard to distribute Bibles, and they began to omit the Apocrypha from their standard editions of the Bible, in part to make printing and distribution cheaper. By the time the Revised Version was published in 1885, Protestants considered the Apocrypha superfluous to the canon.
Around this same time, first Jewish and then later Christian leaders were debating the boundaries of scripture. There were certain texts, like the Pentateuch and the Gospels, which weren’t up for debate, but there were other texts around the periphery that were. Within Judaism, debates about inspiration focused on Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, while Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus) was sometimes included. Within Christianity, the book of Revelation and the Pastoral Epistles (Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy) were omitted from early manuscripts, while texts like the Letter of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas (which would ultimately be omitted) were sometimes included.
Christians who assert that 2 Timothy 3:16 is inspired—and therefore identifies all the Bible as inspired—might be interested to know that the academic consensus is that the epistles of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus were not written by Paul and were most likely written well after his death, toward the end of the first century CE or even into the beginning of the second century.4 There are a number of observations that have been raised since the middle of the nineteenth century CE that have contributed to this view, but modern scholars clearly weren’t the first to doubt the authenticity of one or more of the Pastoral Epistles.
The writing is also less sophisticated, and many themes that are very important to Paul’s other writings are either absent from the Pastoral Epistles or are represented in different ways. The retired New Testament scholar and Roman Catholic priest Raymond Collins explains,
Judging purely by the number of Christians who hop into my comment sections to judge, demonize, and condemn me, the single most awful thing I’ve ever said is that the Bible describes God lying.1 The notion that God would, could, or does lie just makes some Christians big mad. Usually, the passage that immediately gets thrown at me is Numbers 23:19, which insists, “God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of a human, that he should change his mind. Has he said something, and will he not do it? Or speak, and will he not fulfill it?” The biggest problem with quoting this passage is that it presupposes univocality to insist that every other syllable of the Bible must agree with this perspective. The biblical authors frequently disagreed with each other, so Numbers isn’t actually relevant to anything beyond the texts originating from the same authors and editors. There are multiple different authors who represent God both lying and influencing humans to lie to serve his interests. These are their stories.*
So, what this means is that the word arsenokoitai is referring specifically to men who take the insertive role in an act of same-sex anal intercourse. It’s not referring to all people who identify as homosexuals. It’s not referring to all men who identify as homosexuals. It’s not referring to all men who engage in same-sex intercourse. It’s not even referring to all men who engage in same-sex anal intercourse. It has a very narrow and specific referent. This means translating arsenokoitai as “homosexual” is a rank mistranslation for at least two reasons. First, if the word “homosexuals” is understood as a reference to anyone who engages in homosexual activity, irrespective of their sexual orientation, “homosexuals” expands the scope of the Greek word wildly beyond what was intended. It would also make the reference to the malakoi in 1 Corinthians 6:9 redundant.
So, we already have part of the answer to the question in the title of this chapter. The Bible cannot possibly be saying homosexuality as a reference to sexual orientation is an abomination because the concept of sexual orientations didn’t exist at the time in any way that remotely resembles the way we think about them today. But the Bible does have things to say about same-sex intercourse. Does it say that’s an abomination? That’s a longer discussion.
Paul’s sexual ethic is obviously based on outdated social frameworks and inaccurate concepts of human sexuality. So, is it even relevant today?
A final clarification: All of the passages I quote from the New Testament in this chapter will be from the updated edition of the New Revised Standard Version, which is widely considered the most scholarly and authoritative translation of the Bible available today. I’m doing this mainly because I don’t want readers to think I’m manipulating the way passages are translated to make them seem more helpful to my argument. In a couple of instances, though, I will explain why I disagree with the NRSVue’s translation.
Even scholars like me who choose a historical-critical approach and presume to speak more authoritatively about what the Bible “actually says” are not really excavating meaning. We’re reconstructing it just like everyone else. The difference is that we take an awful lot of time to gather data, to see what other scholars have done, and then to go about reconstructing that meaning in a way that tries to minimize the role of our own needs and interests and tries to maximize what we think the earliest authors, editors, and audiences most likely understood by these texts. The results can never be perfect, and this book isn’t remotely an exception. Some experts will disagree with my judgment on certain issues. Others will feel I’ve misrepresented the majority opinion. Others will consider the majority opinion misguided. Others will think I’m being influenced by one bias or another, either in the direction of or against a given identity. To some degree or another, each one of these criticisms is unquestionably true. This isn’t remotely an inerrant book, I’m not remotely an inerrant scholar, and the scholarly consensus is not remotely inerrant. At some point, I’ll almost certainly change my mind about an issue here or there. But what I’m sure of is that even though I’m no doubt wrong about some of these things, a better argument is going to be made in the direction of more nuance and complexity, not less. A better argument is going to move the consensus further away from—not closer to—rhetorical utility for privileged and powerful groups seeking to weaponize the Bible to serve their own interests.
v+307-page Kindle Ebook story pages 1-259
Genre: Religion/Biblical Criticism & Interpretation
Featuring: Introduction, Some Housekeeping, How Did We Get the Bible?, A Brief History of the Bible, Conclusions, The Bible Says the Bible Is Inspired, The Bible Says God Created the Universe Out of Nothing, Mistranslations, The Bible Says God Lies, Adam's Song, Micaiah's Song, Jacob the Trickster, Slavery, Asherah, Abortion, Rape Victims and Marriage, Graphics, Song Lyrics with Apogo, Pop Culture, Twitter, Satan, God's Body, Sacrifice Your Firstborn Child, There Is Only One God, You Should Beat Your Kids, Homosexuality Is an Abomination, Women Need to Cover Up, The Messiah Would Be Born of a Virgin, Jesus Is God, Ancient Southwest Aisa, Greek, Hebrew, Beware the Mark of the Beast, Double Talk, Sinners Will Be Punished Forever in Hell, Notes, Index: Scripture, Index: Subject, Index: Modern Authors
Rating as a movie: R for adult content
Songs for the soundtrack: Several pop songs that I'm too lazy to annotate
Books and Authors mentioned: YHWH's Divine Images: A Cognitive Approach by Daniel McClellan, The Invention of the Inspired Text: Philological Windows on the Theopneustia of Scripture by John C. Poirier, Jacob and the Divine Trickster: A Theology of Deception and YHWH’s Fidelity to the Ancestral Promise in the Jacob Cycle by John Edward Anderson, On The Generation Of Animals by Aristotle, Inventing God's Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi by David P. Wright, Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day by Judith Viorst; God's Monsters: Vengeful Spirits, Deadly Angels, Hybrid Creatures, and Divine Hitmen of the Bible by Esther Hamori; On the First Principles by Origen, The Widening of God's Mercy: Sexuality Within the Biblical Story by Christopher B. Hays and Richard B. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament by Richard B. Hays, Messianic High Christology: New Testament Variants of Second Temple Judaism by Ruben A. Bühner, In the Form of a God: The Pre-existence of the Exalted Christ in Paul by Andrew Perriman, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament with Scripture, Subject, and Greek Word Indexes by Daniel B. Wallace; Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity by Richard Bauckham, Caring for the Dead in Ancient Israel by Kerry M. Sonia
My rating: ⭐️⭐️⭐️½✝️⛪️✡️🕍🇮🇱🕎🔯
My thoughts: 🔖Page 19 of 307 [Chapter] 1 How Did We Get the Bible? - This is not exactly what I was expecting but I was interested until he pretty much said that even if the Bible says something he is going to go with the minority immediately on the topic. That sounds awfully biased to me. And if he's willing to manipulate that in the favor of the minority for the sake of politics I'm not sure I can trust anything else he says. I'm gonna have to sleep on this one.
🔖52 [Chapter] 4 The Bible Says God Lies - Okay so I don't agree with everything this guy is saying, but this is a very interesting historical account of how the Bible came to be so I'm definitely going to finish this book.
🔖170 [Chapter] 14 The Bible Says Homosexuality Is an Abomination - It seems he picks and chooses went to go left.
🔖191 [Chapter] 15 The Bible Says Women Need to Cover Up - It's very hard to continue this book with the author constantly doing the very thing he accuses others of. In the introduction, he promises to write a non-biased, straightforward explanation of what the Bible says but then he has gone as far as interpreting the text as he sees fit flat out ignoring what the text says stating that the text does say something but it's wrong and in other cases well it doesn't specify to this extent so it doesn't count and then of course whenever the text says something he disagrees with he just says it's not relevant today. I don't see the point of reading this book if all you're gonna do is the same thing everybody else does and interpret it for your purpose and views. Why promise a breakdown if you're just going to deliver an opinion that overrides the text based on how you feel about each topic? I have no idea how he's going to approach the next topic but I'm sure he's gonna use one of these 5 persuasive writing styles and it's starting to get on my nerves.
This book was up and down for me. In my opinion, the author did the very thing he claims he's trying to prevent others in the first place but at least he owns it in the end.
Recommend to others: Not likely but I would recommend it to my brother.
Memorable Quotes: For everyone out there who supports putting data over dogma
I love the Bible. I really do. Without denying it has inspired significant harm, I believe it has contributed to a lot of good in this world. I’m also a scholar of the Bible who makes my living combating the spread of misinformation about the Bible on social media, and a lot of this misinformation comes from Bible believers. So to an awful lot of people, it feels like I am attacking the Bible itself, and they let me know about it every single day. I go back and forth between being disappointed and being amused by this. I think the Bible is the single most fascinating, complex, and influential text that has ever existed. Beyond its role in my own faith—which is not a part of this book—I have dedicated my professional life to better understanding the Bible’s history, significance, and meaning.
I have to be willing to distinguish “the Bible” from “my interpretation of the Bible” or “what I want the Bible to be.” What the original authors and audiences of the Bible intended and understood it to say isn’t always going to be the same as what I understand it to say when I read it. I think this is one of the most exciting parts of researching the Bible. It means there’s space for the Bible to continue to surprise, fascinate, and challenge me. However, most people who approach the Bible as an authoritative text like to keep it on a pretty short leash. They maintain firm boundaries regarding what it is and isn’t allowed to say. Allowing the Bible to transgress those boundaries can raise doubts regarding deeply held beliefs that most people don’t want to see subjected to scrutiny. These are not beliefs that people adopt because they’ve been convinced by data or evidence. They’re beliefs that people choose to accept because doing so is required or incentivized within the social identities that are important to them. Sometimes these beliefs are supported by data and sometimes they are not, but what is true of all of them is that they’re not negotiable. I call this type of belief a dogma.
On my end, this requires constantly picking through my own research to try to weed out influences that might be lurking under the surface that aren’t supported by the data but that still might nudge my judgment in the direction of conclusions that serve my own interests, whether related to my religious identity, my social standing, or even my livelihood. However, if there is something that could plausibly be labeled a dogma that I’ve always and openly allowed to influence my work, it’s this: As long as all other things are equal—and that’s an important caveat—I strive to give the benefit of the doubt to the less powerful group.1 As you’re going to discover in this book, I really don’t like when people use the Bible to hurt vulnerable people and groups.
I would describe (not define) the dogma of inspiration as the belief that the folks who wrote the texts of the Bible were so thoroughly influenced by God that their compositions are in some sense the very “word of God.” While human agency is selectively given some kind of role in the articulation of the biblical texts (particularly where they’re problematic), because of the implications associated with human imperfections, that influence is carefully restricted.
Readers of the biblical texts have been arguing for more than two thousand years about what the Bible actually says, and the Christian groups that hold to the Bible as inspired and authoritative have shattered like splinters into countless different divisions because of disagreements about the Bible’s meaning and significance. Oddly enough, for most Christians today, the concern doesn’t seem to be about figuring out what the Bible actually says as much as it seems to be about convincing others of what it says. Most Christian groups feel confident they already know precisely what the Bible says, and it’s just everybody else who needs to be brought up to speed. Conveniently for most of these groups, the Bible always seems to offer surprisingly clear, relevant, and topical guidance regarding all kinds of social and political issues that didn’t even exist when the Bible was being written. The Bible always seems so conveniently to say precisely what they need it to say.
All texts are basically just codes, and we can decipher them only to the degree we know the code. Because these meanings are frequently very nuanced and complex, and because words, phrases, and clauses can be put together in countless different ways and can often mean multiple different things on their own, there are potentially numerous different meanings and shades of meaning that could have been intended by whoever wrote a given text, including the texts gathered together in the Bible. Reading a text is not a matter of excavating or extracting meaning from it; it’s a matter of creating it ourselves and trusting that we’ve come close enough to what was intended. I’m oversimplifying quite a bit, but there’s a two-stage process going on subconsciously when we read. First, our minds generate as many different potential meanings as they can that might be associated with a given linguistic expression. Then, our minds use whatever clues might be available to whittle them down to the meaning we feel was most likely intended. For experienced readers, this process is subconscious and almost instantaneous, so it seems like meaning is just being transmitted to us directly from the text. The reality is that we’re always generating the meaning ourselves, and while this process is usually good enough for communication to be successful, errors can and often do creep into both stages of this process.
I quote from a few different translations of the Bible, but the one I default to is the updated edition of the New Revised Standard Version, which I would argue is the most accurate available translation of both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament together. It’s certainly not perfect, and I’ll point out problems here and there, but it’s the most up to date and the one I think most consistently gets things right.
Until the middle of the nineteenth century CE, most Protestant Bibles also included a separate section between the Old and New Testaments called the Apocrypha, which contained fourteen additional texts: 1 and 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Prayer of Manasseh, 1 and 2 Maccabees, the additions to Esther, and the three additions to Daniel that are known as the Song of the Three Children, the Story of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon.2 Contrary to popular belief, the 1611 King James Version included the entire Apocrypha, although more compact editions of the KJV were frequently published without it. During the Second Great Awakening in the early nineteenth century CE, the American Bible Society and the British and Foreign Bible Society were pushing hard to distribute Bibles, and they began to omit the Apocrypha from their standard editions of the Bible, in part to make printing and distribution cheaper. By the time the Revised Version was published in 1885, Protestants considered the Apocrypha superfluous to the canon.
Around this same time, first Jewish and then later Christian leaders were debating the boundaries of scripture. There were certain texts, like the Pentateuch and the Gospels, which weren’t up for debate, but there were other texts around the periphery that were. Within Judaism, debates about inspiration focused on Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, while Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus) was sometimes included. Within Christianity, the book of Revelation and the Pastoral Epistles (Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy) were omitted from early manuscripts, while texts like the Letter of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas (which would ultimately be omitted) were sometimes included.
Christians who assert that 2 Timothy 3:16 is inspired—and therefore identifies all the Bible as inspired—might be interested to know that the academic consensus is that the epistles of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus were not written by Paul and were most likely written well after his death, toward the end of the first century CE or even into the beginning of the second century.4 There are a number of observations that have been raised since the middle of the nineteenth century CE that have contributed to this view, but modern scholars clearly weren’t the first to doubt the authenticity of one or more of the Pastoral Epistles.
The writing is also less sophisticated, and many themes that are very important to Paul’s other writings are either absent from the Pastoral Epistles or are represented in different ways. The retired New Testament scholar and Roman Catholic priest Raymond Collins explains,
Judging purely by the number of Christians who hop into my comment sections to judge, demonize, and condemn me, the single most awful thing I’ve ever said is that the Bible describes God lying.1 The notion that God would, could, or does lie just makes some Christians big mad. Usually, the passage that immediately gets thrown at me is Numbers 23:19, which insists, “God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of a human, that he should change his mind. Has he said something, and will he not do it? Or speak, and will he not fulfill it?” The biggest problem with quoting this passage is that it presupposes univocality to insist that every other syllable of the Bible must agree with this perspective. The biblical authors frequently disagreed with each other, so Numbers isn’t actually relevant to anything beyond the texts originating from the same authors and editors. There are multiple different authors who represent God both lying and influencing humans to lie to serve his interests. These are their stories.*
So, what this means is that the word arsenokoitai is referring specifically to men who take the insertive role in an act of same-sex anal intercourse. It’s not referring to all people who identify as homosexuals. It’s not referring to all men who identify as homosexuals. It’s not referring to all men who engage in same-sex intercourse. It’s not even referring to all men who engage in same-sex anal intercourse. It has a very narrow and specific referent. This means translating arsenokoitai as “homosexual” is a rank mistranslation for at least two reasons. First, if the word “homosexuals” is understood as a reference to anyone who engages in homosexual activity, irrespective of their sexual orientation, “homosexuals” expands the scope of the Greek word wildly beyond what was intended. It would also make the reference to the malakoi in 1 Corinthians 6:9 redundant.
So, we already have part of the answer to the question in the title of this chapter. The Bible cannot possibly be saying homosexuality as a reference to sexual orientation is an abomination because the concept of sexual orientations didn’t exist at the time in any way that remotely resembles the way we think about them today. But the Bible does have things to say about same-sex intercourse. Does it say that’s an abomination? That’s a longer discussion.
Paul’s sexual ethic is obviously based on outdated social frameworks and inaccurate concepts of human sexuality. So, is it even relevant today?
A final clarification: All of the passages I quote from the New Testament in this chapter will be from the updated edition of the New Revised Standard Version, which is widely considered the most scholarly and authoritative translation of the Bible available today. I’m doing this mainly because I don’t want readers to think I’m manipulating the way passages are translated to make them seem more helpful to my argument. In a couple of instances, though, I will explain why I disagree with the NRSVue’s translation.
Even scholars like me who choose a historical-critical approach and presume to speak more authoritatively about what the Bible “actually says” are not really excavating meaning. We’re reconstructing it just like everyone else. The difference is that we take an awful lot of time to gather data, to see what other scholars have done, and then to go about reconstructing that meaning in a way that tries to minimize the role of our own needs and interests and tries to maximize what we think the earliest authors, editors, and audiences most likely understood by these texts. The results can never be perfect, and this book isn’t remotely an exception. Some experts will disagree with my judgment on certain issues. Others will feel I’ve misrepresented the majority opinion. Others will consider the majority opinion misguided. Others will think I’m being influenced by one bias or another, either in the direction of or against a given identity. To some degree or another, each one of these criticisms is unquestionably true. This isn’t remotely an inerrant book, I’m not remotely an inerrant scholar, and the scholarly consensus is not remotely inerrant. At some point, I’ll almost certainly change my mind about an issue here or there. But what I’m sure of is that even though I’m no doubt wrong about some of these things, a better argument is going to be made in the direction of more nuance and complexity, not less. A better argument is going to move the consensus further away from—not closer to—rhetorical utility for privileged and powerful groups seeking to weaponize the Bible to serve their own interests.
July 23, 2025
I was really excited to read this book as it’s a topic I love and I have appreciated several of his videos online, but unfortunately I can’t accept very many of his conclusions. I do appreciate how he says that there is no such thing as a straight literal reading of the Bible as all who approach it have to take some parts literally and other parts not. Reading with the appropriate genre of the different sections of the text in mind is a great start to doing this well. I appreciate that he is trying to figure out what the original authors would have understood from the text. “It cannot mean to us what it did not mean to them,” is a hermetical principle I also hold to. The book is worth a read if you want to learn more about the different opinions people have on the Bible, but I honestly don’t know why anyone would read the Bible with the conclusions this author comes to. I am very willing to be wrong, and he probably is right on some things where I am wrong, and vice versa but I need much more to convince me of his views than his appeal to the specific education he has received and how that has shaped how he interprets the original words.
“I think a better translation…” is something he often says in the book. He puts his own views above those of our church forefathers who have argued it out before our generation. I deeply appreciate his hard work and academic education, but I also appreciate the hard work and academic education of all the other Biblical scholars working to wrestle with the Bible. He often references that “scholars” disagree with “fill in the blank ‘traditional view’” making it sound like all Biblical scholars think like he does. However, that is not true. Maybe I read his intentions wrong, but he seems to dismiss the arguments of the long list of Biblical scholars who disagree with him. We all come to anything with biases, and the biases from his background are evident. Something he argued against at the beginning of the book, but biases can never be escaped. As a linguist, amateur admittedly, I hesitate to dismiss all the hard work of other scholars of the original Hebrew and Greek the Bible is written in and straight away accept his opinion of these ancient languages. And he does state how his translation results are his own opinion.
Several of his conclusions are opinions not first held by him, but have been wrestled with by the church before us and determined to be heresies. A couple examples: Jesus is not God, and Jesus was not divine by nature but adopted by God. Do with that as you will, I know it is not a point that all will have contention with as I do.
I really appreciate that the author is wrestling so much with the Biblical text, and I appreciate him as a person, but I disagree with several of his original assumptions which guide him to his ideas. I did like a lot of his conclusion chapter stating that we all have biases and make errors, including himself. When someone can admit that they can be wrong it is a good sign.
“I think a better translation…” is something he often says in the book. He puts his own views above those of our church forefathers who have argued it out before our generation. I deeply appreciate his hard work and academic education, but I also appreciate the hard work and academic education of all the other Biblical scholars working to wrestle with the Bible. He often references that “scholars” disagree with “fill in the blank ‘traditional view’” making it sound like all Biblical scholars think like he does. However, that is not true. Maybe I read his intentions wrong, but he seems to dismiss the arguments of the long list of Biblical scholars who disagree with him. We all come to anything with biases, and the biases from his background are evident. Something he argued against at the beginning of the book, but biases can never be escaped. As a linguist, amateur admittedly, I hesitate to dismiss all the hard work of other scholars of the original Hebrew and Greek the Bible is written in and straight away accept his opinion of these ancient languages. And he does state how his translation results are his own opinion.
Several of his conclusions are opinions not first held by him, but have been wrestled with by the church before us and determined to be heresies. A couple examples: Jesus is not God, and Jesus was not divine by nature but adopted by God. Do with that as you will, I know it is not a point that all will have contention with as I do.
I really appreciate that the author is wrestling so much with the Biblical text, and I appreciate him as a person, but I disagree with several of his original assumptions which guide him to his ideas. I did like a lot of his conclusion chapter stating that we all have biases and make errors, including himself. When someone can admit that they can be wrong it is a good sign.
July 31, 2025
Excellent book on biblical teachings- geared toward finding the ‘facts’ about the Bible translations and time periods without relying on ‘the literal words of my Bible must be true because it says so itself’.
It’s dry! But each chapter addressing a specific Bible ‘truth’ help it feel more palatable.
Excellent prep for anybody who wants to get into some of the Bible’s current hot topics. Homosexuality, slavery, etc.
A person cannot responsibly or even faithfully believe every literal word of their favorite Bible translation without a deep dive like this.
It’s dry! But each chapter addressing a specific Bible ‘truth’ help it feel more palatable.
Excellent prep for anybody who wants to get into some of the Bible’s current hot topics. Homosexuality, slavery, etc.
A person cannot responsibly or even faithfully believe every literal word of their favorite Bible translation without a deep dive like this.
July 7, 2025
I should’ve stopped reading when he said he was LDS
June 6, 2025
This book was thought provoking, but the ideas presented were quite unlike those I'm familiar with. Without any knowledge of the sources the author referenced I was left with a feeling of unease more than interest.
Read
May 5, 2025A good resource for quick reference. If you’re a leftist Christian you’re probably aware of most discussions in here
Displaying 1 - 30 of 268 reviews