Within the depth-psychology corpus, the term ‘Bible’ occupies a remarkably heterogeneous position, functioning variously as sacred authority, symbolic reservoir, psychological artifact, and institutional prop. No single evaluative stance prevails. At one pole, pastorally oriented writers such as Mark E. Shaw treat the Bible as the sovereign therapeutic instrument, the exclusive locus of truth against which all secular psychological wisdom is measured and found deficient. At another pole, Edward F. Edinger and other Jungians treat biblical texts—Isaiah, Jeremiah, the Song of Songs, individual Epistles—as symbolic documents encoding archetypal processes, their authority residing not in revelation but in their capacity to mirror the psyche’s own dynamics. John Sanford’s reading of dream narratives across both Testaments reconstitutes the Bible as a compendium of unconscious breakthroughs into waking consciousness, subordinating its theological claims to psychological ones. W. R. Bion’s use of ‘bible-making’ as a group-dynamic metaphor is the most reductive: the dependent group constructs its record as a defensive fetish, a substitute leader. Otto Rank reads the biblical prohibition on images as the source of Jewish verbal spiritualization culminating in Christianity. Together, these readings reveal a central tension in the corpus between the Bible as prescriptive norm and the Bible as symbolic-psychological material to be interpreted rather than obeyed.