The Skeptical Bible

In the Sunday lectionary the Book of Job comes up only twice every three years, and Ecclesiastes only once.  Why are these books not very popular with the lectionary committee? Could it be because they are the skeptics of the Bible?


The Book of Job questions the tradition belief that God rewards the faithful and punishes the unfaithful. It portrays life to be more complicated than that. It undermines the 'system' of thought that makes things simple.


Ecclesiastes has some nice passages, like 'For everything there is a season...' But the author is basically unorthodox. He doesn't seem to believe in an afterlife, saying that humans are no better than dogs in that regard. His eschatology is: When you're dead, you're dead, and that's it. Period. So, we might as well 'eat, drink, and be merry.' He keeps saying, 'Vanity, vanity, all is vanity.' Which is to say: It's all futile. Not your Easter Sunday Sermon text.


Alice Camille calls Job and Ecclesiastes the "two minority reporters" of the Bible (U.S. Catholic magazine, August 2007, p. 39f.) Job in its original form was probably edited to make the story come out better (a prologue and epilogue added on). Ecclesiastes almost didn't pass the rabbis' test for inclusion in the canon. But there they are. In our Bible. Making us think. Asking serious questions about faith. Skepticism has its place in the conversation about faith. We have to ask honest questions. We can't place our faith in make-believe truths. Pious platitudes and pithy promises are pernicious. 

I like the title of Camille's article that I referenced above. It is: "Don't Believe Everything You Believe."