LI/1
If I hold up a Bible and say, "This is not Jesus, it tells about Jesus," everyone would wonder why I stated something so obvious. But if I hold it up and say, "This is not the word of God, it bears witness to the word of God," I would be in trouble in many circles. Yet it is just as obvious as the first statement. Biblical authors bear witness to Jesus (Jn. 5:39). When one bears witness, one gives a personal interpretation of the event they speak of. Biblical authors see events from a different perspective depending on their time and culture, and they speak accordingly.
LI/2
Any study of biblical interpretation must keep in mind the fact that we are dealing with revelation, not just the history of the Hebrew and Christian culture. There is a danger in making the Bible itself equal to revelation. The Bible does not bear witness to itself but to Jesus Christ (Jn. 5:39). The revelation of God in Christ happened in history, but that history is not itself revelation. The Bible is the history of Israel and the Church experiencing God. That history was a history of God revealing himself in historical acts. Jesus is God with us in our history, Emmanuel.
LI/3
H. Richard Niebuhr in "The Meaning of Revelation," noted the major obstacle to church unity is that "every part of disunited Christendom interprets its own past through an image of itself [as the standard] and holds fast without repentance to that image." Holding fast to an image is idolatry, and we all do it in one way or another. We must acknowledge and confess the sins of our group's history if we want to move toward the unity Jesus prayed for. Repentance in the Bible is allowing the truth to change the way you see yourself, your group and the world.
LI/4
"I am not ready to surrender Christianity to a secular future. I am not willing to abandon the Christ experience... simply because the words traditionally used to describe that experience no longer translate meaningfully into the language of our day." (Spong) This is also my position. Years ago, I said to my students, "The church of the 21st century will not be recognizable in terms of the church of the 20th century. If we are unwilling to change our way of speaking about God, we will lose what little credibility we still have." I'm still searching for words. Join me.
LI/5
Yesterday's post raised the issue of the words traditionally used to describe our Christian experience. With this we introduce the problem of language. If language were not a problem, we would all be able to communicate without being misunderstood. Part of this problem is related to the nature of language, part is related to man's estrangement from God and one another, part is self-centeredness. "Those who don't speak the way we do are wrong." People can communicate using language, they can also misstate their position. Some don't listen.
LI/6
In the Gospels the disciples were confident in their cultural understanding of the Christ. They had no doubt that Messiah would be exactly what they were taught to expect. They held those expectations firm despite Jesus' repeated statements of his coming death. They had ears, but they did not hear. Today we are in danger of the same false confidence. If we never doubt what we were taught, we can never move to the next level of personal understanding. Thomas' doubt brought him into relationship with the Resurrected Christ. Do we have ears to hear?
LI/7
Before we get too far into our discussion, we need to understand the concept of dialectical argument. Arguing here is not bickering. "Dialectics" is a dialogue between opposing opinions with both sides desiring to find the truth hidden behind apparent contradictions. Please understand, I am not arguing to prove I'm right. I know my own ability to think I found the truth only to discover I was under the influence of those who were my teachers. No human being is infallible, not even the Pope, not even the leaders of protestant groups. Not me either.
LI/8
As we pursue a resolution to the problem of the different pictures of God in the Old and New Testaments, we must clarify several issues relating to language. One issue is the nature of language as sign, metaphor and symbol. Our first challenge: language uses words; that cannot be avoided. But one's attitude toward words can be a problem. Paul Riceour has shown that the smallest unit of "meaning" is not in words, but in discourse. Even sentences must be read in the context of a larger text. Words do not carry meaning apart from a speaker's context.
LI/9
Meaning is beyond dictionary definitions. In the lexicon, words are used to refer to words which refer other words. The question is not what a word "means" but how the speaker is using his words. A speaker speaks to persons who are listening as he speaks. They live together in the same time and in the same general situation. When speaker and listener share time and place, the speaker can point or refer to situations he and the listeners have in common. That changes when the spoken word becomes a written text. Later readers do not share the same context.
LI/10
We noticed that things change when the spoken word becomes a written text. This is especially true if several centuries separate the reader from the original context. Many changes will have taken place in the way people see the world and how they experience life in their era. That means interpretation of the text is necessary for the contemporary readers. Every reader interprets as he or she reads. We can't help it. That's the way language works. The question is whether we, the readers "see" the same thing the authors saw, or do we have colored glasses.
LI/11
In the case of the biblical text, the text is for every generation throughout all time, but it is written at a particular time under specific circumstances. If we ignore the specific church problems Paul addressed in his letters, we risk serious misinterpretations. Yet we must interpret his text to our present generation which has a much different set of circumstance. The same is true of the Hebrew prophets. They were addressing specific historical situations that are quite different from our situation. As interpreters, we must speak to our present situation.
LI/12 ML/1
As we raise questions about the God of the Old Testament, we need to be clear about the relationship of language to reality. All words are either signs, metaphors or symbols. Signs point beyond themselves to the thing signified. If I say or write the word "dog," the word will not bark at you or wag its tail. Dog is a sign pointing to an animal, it is not the animal. Metaphors point to a reality beyond the natural to the spiritual. When I sing, "I come to the garden alone," I am not referring to a literal garden. But the "place" is "real," more real than a literal garden.
LI/13 ML/2
The garden of prayer (yesterday's post) is a real place in the "unseen realm" (Review our #SeenandUnseen series). The fact that I cannot point to the geographical location of that garden doesn't mean it's not real. Its reality participates in a different dimension from the natural. It is the place of close fellowship with the One who is the Source and Sustenance of all that is seen and all that is unseen. The "dew on the roses" is not actual dew on actual roses; but the words point to a freshness, newness and beauty that arrives when we enter the garden.
LI/14 ML/3
The metaphor of the garden draws attention to the nature and value of this use of language. I can never describe the garden using academic language. Metaphor allows us to present a world which is "there" (potentially) for any who will open themselves to the "beyond" of spirituality. The biblical text is intended to present a "world" which science can never discover or explain. There is a world where help is available in the worst of circumstances. But one must be open to the possibility before it will become a "lived-world" for them. That openness is called faith.
SI/15 ML/4
I was singing "Amazing grace, how sweet the sound" before I could read. That phrase (words) found a place in my "lived-world" before I knew about the "lived-world" of the one who wrote the lyrics. When I learned that he was a slave trader, it did not affect the meaning of the words in my life. They still bring tears to my eyes at times. The "world of this song" is a world where grace to help in time of need is available every hour, every day. I love that world. I would be very uncomfortable in a world where I had to do everything right to have favor.
SI/16 ML/5
The language of faith has a mysterious power to influence our "lived-world" (see yesterday's post). Some live in a world full of evil powers. Their faith is in the enemy's ability to harass them. Biblical texts that speak of Satan are interpreted as though Satan has as much power as God. Satan only has power over those who believe his lies. Our "lived-world" submits to our belief system. In the biblical world, Jesus disarmed the powers and gave authority to those who place their faith in him. In this world we have tribulation, but we overcome through Christ.
LI/17 ML/6
The "lived-world" is different from the natural world which scientists analyze and manipulate. We draw attention to this "world" to present a way of receiving the true value of the biblical text. The biblical "world" is a world of potential, that is possibilities which science can neither examine nor manipulate. Paul Riceour calls it the "world of the text." He compares it to the world created by a novelist. A romance novel, for example, presents a world where "boy meets girl, conflict arises, they work it out then kiss." Life doesn't always work out that way.
LI/18 ML/7
Yesterday's romance scenario helps us notice something about written texts we often miss. There are people who try to live in the world of the romantic novel. When they discover the conflict is not easily resolved, they get divorced. They're living in an unreal "world" created by the imagination of the novelist. That world comes crashing down. Some preachers present a "world" where God punishes those who disobey. That world is full of guilt and insecurity. Is that the real "biblical world" or have we misinterpreted the texts that seem to present that picture?
LI/19 ML/8
The Bible has stories of the God of love who forgives and restores. Those stories are different from the stories of yesterday's post. Those who live in the "world of wrath" are continually tormented with guilt and self-condemnation. Those who live in the "world of God's love" find comfort and encouragement even when things aren't going well. We all live in a story we have adopted from the many stories available. Jesus promised life abundant here and now. Stories that produce abundant life present a "new world," the "new creation" of the New Testament.
LL/20 ML/9
We introduced the concept of a "world" that exists on a plane different from the geographical world. This offers a new way to approach the biblical texts. The "world of the text" is not limited to what the author meant. The author's intention is related to his private mind. The situation he was "speaking to" is focused on the external reality he was facing. If the "world of the text" is a world where we can thrive, we begin to live there as we allow ourselves to be "taken in" by that world. The text is an invitation to enter a world of peace, joy and love.
LL/21 ML/10
It is impossible for someone who is an outsider to the "world of the Bible" to see the truth of the text. They may have valid insights into the external world of the authors, but they look at the details of that world the way a medical examiner looks at a cadaver. They may see the inner parts more clearly than others, but they are looking at a dead body. The Bible is not a living thing for those who have not entered the "lived-world" it offers. The medical examiner dissects the body he works on. The Living Word dissects the reader exposing and healing his inner man.
LL/22 ML/11
Review posts: #LanguateandInterpretation 22 #MetaphorandLanguage 11
Narratives present a world. They can be fiction, historical or mythical. Every fiction is an interpretation of "how-life-works" in the mind of the author. History is an interpretation of events of the past. The prejudice of the author colors his picture of history. Those who do not read history critically fall into the "world" of the author. Followers of Karl Marks are good examples. Jesus told parables, short fictions, because he knew the power of presenting a "world" through stories. The parables are invitations into the "world" of the Spirit.