This is exceptionally well said. One can catch the homely wisdom of James, the evangelistic scholarship of Paul, the compassionate researcher that is Luke, the visionary that is Ezekiel, in their words -- and yet God's Word shines through their words. I once heard a preacher say, "The Bible is not 'God's word'; it conveys God's Word to us." And I like very much what that says.
We cannot 'know God' the way we can Euclidean geometry; we can only know Him the way we know a very close and trustworthy friend. He is both immanent, close as one's skin, and transcendent, infinitely above us.
Even as an unbeliever I can appreciate what you and ProdigalSeeker have said. May I suggest that if I were looking at this from the persepectrive of a
believer, what Mr. McKellan is attempting to tear away (and in the case of a friend of mine: burn) is the very human, imperfect one-sidedness that is inherent in human language and not adequately expressive of that which is ineffable
even in the hands of the Divine. I don't know Mr. McKellan's mind or even if this story is true of his actions, but what might be seen on the one hand as disrespect may on the other hand represet a frustrated respect for the Perfect Thing that cannot be conveyed even by scripture and that shows itself to be imperfectly conveyed by scripture inasmuch as it prompts others by its influence to treat him as if he were less than they, open game for cruelty, and even somehow short of fully human.
I think that is a reasonable yardstick.
I often (heart-piercingly often in fact) find certain passages of scripture to be opposed to the Gospel as I can best understand it according to the "better angels of my nature." It does absolutely no good to be reassured, as I have been by some, that this is merely due to my short-sightedness as a time-bound human being lacking an eternal perspective. It does less than no good to suggest, as some have, that I fail to accept these apparently lesser passages due to atheist stubbornness and, what's more, that I actually know better on some level. To say such is insulting and nothing more. There are passages of scritpure that offend, not my selfish and self-serving side, which I do have, but my most selfless self and most basic moral compass.
If I were to stop listening to these deepest promptings of my conscience, I would no longer have any means whatsoever by which to accept or reject anything beyond the most prosaic facts (which we atheists are already accused of worshipping).
There are tares in the fields, even in the scripture themselves. Perhaps given the confines of human language it could not be otherwise. The Gospel shines best in simple stories, koans and parables that convey, as stories can, a sense of truth that
emerges in the telling, in the rich stew that is language, imagination and experience, the conscious and the unconscious, all coming together to form something in us that transcends any one.
Amen to that, and thank you.