I really like the act 5 analogy, and I agree with a lot of what you just said. I don’t know if the Bible intends to represent itself as the sole answer (I doubt it), but my criticism is more for the hardliners who interpret it as such. It may seem like a caricature, but I have met literally hundreds of people who are even more extreme in their dogmatic view of Biblical authority than I have even hinted at.

I may have to check into this NT Wright.

Although you do portray a bit of a caricature, I think you’re on the right track in critiquing a fundamental understanding of the bible; there is a more subtle way at looking at the authority of scripture. You write “the Bible itself cannot be the ultimate authority on every moral question.” This is, I think, misrepresenting what the bible is intending to communicate.
The bible invites its readers into a story—a story about the world, identifying who we are, where we are, what is wrong, what is the solution, and what time it is. In other words, when we read the pages of scripture, we come into the narrative world—the metanarrative of God’s story for his creation. God intends his people to embody this story and to live it out, to improvise in today’s world.
NT Wright is helpful here. He describes the “authority” of the bible as similar to the “authority” that the first four acts of play has for those acting out the fifth act. For example, NT Wright explains, if a number of actors were assigned to perform the fifth act of a Shakespearean play– with the 5th act, however, missing from the pages of the script, then the performers would wrap their minds around Acts 1 through 4, learning the storied world of its characters in order to improvise in accord with the controlling narrative of the previous 4 acts.

NT Wright at length: “This model could and perhaps should be adapted further; it offers in fact quite a range of possibilities. Among the detailed moves available within this model, which I shall explore and pursue elsewhere, is the possibility of seeing the five acts as follows: (1) Creation; (2) Fall; (3) Israel; (4) Jesus. The New Testament would then form the first scene in the fifth act, giving hints as well (Rom 8; 1 Car 15; parts of the Apocalypse) of how the play is supposed to end. The church would then live under the ‘authority’ of the extant story, being required to offer something between an improvisation and an actual performance of the final act.” (How Can The Bible Be Authoritative? http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Bible_Authoritative.htm )

I infer that this is what George Lindbeck had in mind when he wrote, “To become a Christian involves learning the story of Israel and of Jesus well enough to interpret and experience oneself and one’s world in its terms” (The Nature of Doctrine, 34). This is precisely what the scriptures do for us, they locate us in the stories that shape our praxis, the narratives that control our lives.

I also doubt that you would argue that the Bible doesn’t contain anything useful or anything that helps point toward truth and deeper understanding. Along with a lot of other sources, and filtered through the intellect and reasoning of critical people, of course the Bible can add something to the discussion.

As for the religion stating “that it knows absolute truth” – that seems to be what religions do. Maybe they do that a bit too much without examining the foundation for their absolute truth assertions? But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t truth in religion.

Everything is all so relative and conditional. For a religion to state it knows absolute truth is a bit absurd. Furthermore, to state that it holds the word of “God” (whoever that may be) is as equally perplexing as a fundamental premise.

It’s ok to hold on the the vestige of your childhood and upbringing, David; it is only natural. I know you’re trying to reconcile rationality, philosophy, and literature with religion. The only problem is, you can’t, really — it sort of all become very convoluted, if it isn’t already.

Jesus did not start the Catholic Church in 33 c.e., he set up His church.

And David, I don’t know what to say about your post. It is, as always, challenging and very well written. Please do keep up the great work.