How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth, Session III

The Epistles:  Learning to Think Contextually

A teaching by Jack Haberer

based upon the book by the same title,

written by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart

September 19, 2004

 

ANNOUNCEMENT:  BOOK PURCHASE

          How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth - $16

              AND

          How to Read the Bible Book by Book - $17

          Discount:  $15 each …both for $30

 

INTRO:

     A.  REVIEW of 1st week’s class

          1.  the need to interpret:

              whenever we read anything:  we are interpreting as we go

                   …common sense kicks in to tell us to take poetry one way,

                             scientific journal articles another way

          2.  Goal of interpretation:

              NOT:  originality

              RATHER:  to get to the plain meaning of the text

              …so we can hear what God wants us to hear in it

          3.  Working definition of scripture:

              “The Bible is the Word of God, expressed in human words in history.”

          4.  2 essential tasks of interpretation

              a.  exegesis:  deciphering what it meant there and then

                   “What was the intended meaning of the original writers to their original audiences?”

              b.  hermeneutics:  bridging from the there and then to the here and now

                   “How does the original meaning apply to us?”

     B.  Review of 2nd week’s class: 

          1.  the need for a good translation

               Basic, unavoidable reality:  every translation is an interpretation

          2.  approaches of translators:

              a.  formal equivalence – keeping as close as possible to the form of                                  the Greek or Hebrew; hence trying to be as literal as possible

               b.  functional equivalence – keeping meanings as equivalent as                                          possible, but changing words and idioms to better match present day meanings

                   – as in today’s sermon:  from bowels to heart

              c.  free translation – keeping ideas consistent but not worrying about using exact words

          3.  My vote:  Functional Equivalence

              Because it makes better understanding of the original intent

                   …it is the most logical approach to take

          4. Recommendation

              a.  first text:  TNIV (best functional equivalent)

              b.  second text:  NRSV (best formal equivalent)

     C. TODAY:  The Epistles:  Learning to Think Contextually

          1.  A good place to start:  the Epistles appear to be so easy and straightforward to interpret

              a.  Since these are letters from distinct persons to distinct audiences, it is a bit easier to

                   decipher the original intent of the writer—although there are glaring exceptions to that.               b.  The hermeneutical application of the text can get much more confusing, though. 

                   …and we will be dealing with these next week

                        guest leader:  Amy Leon

 

I.  The Nature of the Epistles

     A.  The epistles are not homogeneous

          1.  Adolf Deissman:  made a distinction between true letters & epistles

              a.  letters:  written by individuals to individuals for specific purposes and with no thought to

                   having a continuing audience or legacy

              b.  epistles:  written to groups with broader purposes and with an eye to a continuing

                   influence and legacy

               c.  example:  2 Peter and I John

                   are much more like epistles than anything written by Paul

              d.  then again, even within Paul’s writing:

                        Philemon vs. Romans

                   1) Philemon:  much more personal

                   2) Romans:  much more general and sweeping in its points

          2.  NOTE the FORM of ancient letters:

              6 parts:

              a.  name of the writer (e.g., “Paul”)

              b.  name of the recipient (e.g., “to the church of God in Corinth…”)

              c.  greeting (e.g., “Grace and peace to you from God our Father…”)

              d.  prayer wish or thanksgiving (e.g., “I always thank God for you…”)

              e.  body of the correspondence

              f.  final greeting and farewell (e.g., “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you.”)

          3.  Those pieces of correspondence that lack some of these, esp. a.-c.

                   or f., generally are considered to be epistles not letters

          4.  Indeed, I John has none of the formal elements of a letter

              BUT:  that letter is clearly written for a specific group of people

     B.  NO matter how we may subdivide the overall group,

          two things they all have in common:

              a.  They all are “occasional documents”= arising out of and intended for a specific occasion

              b.  AND they all are from the first century

          NOTE:  From now on, I will not use the term “epistles” in the narrow sense that

           Deissman did, but for all the letters and epistles of Paul, John, Peter, etc.

          1.  The occasion usually was something on the recipients’ side

              e.g., behavior problems, or doctrinal error, or some other misunderstanding on their part

               that needed to be redressed.

          2.  OUR problem in interpreting the epistles:

              a.  we are hearing the answers without first hearing the questions

                   we’re hearing only one side of a conversation

              b.  We have to cautiously try to reconstruct whatever it was that occasioned Paul, or

                    someone else, to write as he did                  

          3.  One other thing to note:

              The epistles are not theological treatises

                   …not a set of theological propositions.

              It is always “task theology”, i.e., theology being written for or brought to bear on the task at

               hand.

              The epistles are loaded with theology, but the were actually written as “theology applied to

              or directed toward a particular need” (p. 59)               


II.  Historical Context

     A.  “The first thing one must try to do with any of the epistles it to form a tentative but informed

              reconstruction of the situation that the author is speaking to.” (p. 59)                 

          e..g.:

          1.  What was going on in Corinth that caused Paul to write I Cor?

          2.  How did he come to learn of their situation?

          3.  What kind of relationship and former contacts has he had with them?

          4.  What attitudes do they and he reflect in this letter?

     B.  How?

          1.  Consult a Bible dictionary OR introduction to your commentary

              to find out as much as possible about Corinth and its people

               e.g., Corinth: 

                   a relatively young city:  94 years old at the time

                   but due to commerce:  had grown quickly

                   was cosmopolitan:  a cross between NYC, LA & Las Vegas

                        --not a small, rural town

          2.  Read the book through in one sitting

              a.  Just like you would read a letter from a friend, so too, do the same here                                       There is no substitute for doing so.

                   “It is the big view that counts first.” (p. 60)

              b.  As you do so, jot down a few notes with references

                   1) what you notice about the recipients themselves

                   2) the writer’s attitudes

                   3) any specific things mentioned as to the specific occasion of the letter

                   4) the letter’s natural, logical divisions (changes in topic)

              c.  e.g., I Corinthians

                   1) they are chiefly Gentile, but some Jews are included

                        they love wisdom and knowledge

                        they are proud and arrogant, and even judge Paul as inferior

                   2) Paul’s attitude fluctuates…

                        between rebuke …and

                        appeal …and

                        exhortation

                   3) the occasion: 

                        he has been informed by people from Chloe’s household (1:10-12)

                        they have written him (cf., 7:1)

                        letter brought by Stephanas, Furtunatus, and Achaicus (16:17)

                   4) a working outline (see pp. 61-62):

                        1) chapters 1-6 – responses to things reported to Paul

                             1:10-4:21 – problem of division in the church

                             5:1-13 – problem of the incestuous man

                             6:1-11 - problem of lawsuits

                             6:12-20 – problem of fornication

                        2) chapters 7-16 – responses to things written by them

                             …with a few exceptions (11:2-16; 11:17-34; 15:1-58)

                             7:1-24 – about behavior within marriage

                             7:25-40 – about virgins

                             8:1-11:1 – about food sacrificed to idols

                             11:2-16 – the covering of women’s heads in worship

                             11:17-34 – the abuse of the Lord’s Supper

                             12-14 – about spiritual gifts

                             15:1-58 – the bodily resurrection of believers

                             16:1-11 – about the collection   

                             16:13-24 – concluding exhortations and greetings

              d.  NOTE:  most of Paul’s letters are not so neatly divided into separate topics, except I

                   Thess. 4-5  Most of his letters are an extended argument on a particular topic.

              e.  Also NOTE:  this is a tentative outline, not a final one       

[[WE are focusing on the practice of reconstructing a situation that brought about the writing of a letter, SO for that purpose, the writers now focus on a section of I Corinthians, namely, chapters 1-4]]

     C.  The historical context of I Corinthians 1-4

          1.  read pp. 62-64

          2.  basic conclusions, p. 64:

              a.  On the basis of 3:4-23, it is clear that the Corinthians have seriously misunderstood the

                   nature and function of leadership in the church

              b.  Similarly, on the basis of 1:18-34, they seem to have misunderstood the basic nature of

                   the Gospel

              c.  On the basis of 4:1-21, they also are wrong in their judgments on Paul and need to

                   reevaluate their relationship to him.     

II.  The Literary Context

     A.  The next step in studying the Epistles is to learn to trace Paul’s                                    argument as an answer to the problem tentatively set out above.

          1.  This is the crucial task:  we want to know what the original author was saying to and

              directing the original audience to believe and do.

          2.  If introduced as an assignment:

              a.  might assign:  read I Cor 1-4

              b.  in the process, break into paragraphs

                   and write a simple summary statement about each paragraph

              c.  explain how each paragraph moves the argument forward and ties to the rest

     B.  IT is CRITICAL that we THINK PARAGRAPHS!!

          1.  Thinking “VERSES” is a modern error! 

              …original had no chapters nor verses

          2.  If we want to know, “What’s the point?”

              …we’ve got to follow the line of reasoning

              …and we understand that best when we think paragraphs

          3.  Best way:  For each paragraph:

              a.  Write sentence:  what is the content of the paragraph?

              b.  Write 2nd sentence:  why do you think Paul says this at this point?                 

          READ:  pp. 64-67

          4.  Summary: 

              a.  the exegetical task is mostly self-contained:

                   the process or reconstructing the literary context comes from reading what’s there  

              b.  everything in the text contributes to the flow of the argument

               c.  all of the work makes sense

     C.  PP. 67-68 – authors take us to Philippians to do a similar exercise

 

III.  The Problem Passages

     These passages tacked so far are ones any diligent believer can decipher

     However, there are some passages that baffle most of us.

          e.g., “because of the angels” – I Cor 11:10            

          e.g., “baptism for the dead” – I Cor 15:29

          e.g., Christ preaching to the “spirits in prison” – I Peter. 3:18

          e.g,. “the man of lawlessness” – 2 Thess. 2:3

     What about them?

     What about them?

     A.  Remember these were not written to us.

          Original author and his readers are on a wavelength that allows the author to assume a great deal

          We can take as a truism:

              What God wanted us to know God has communicated to us; 

                   what God has not told us may still hold our interest, but our                                                       uncertainty at these points should make us hesitant about being dogmatic. (p. 69)

     B.  Nevertheless, the main point of such passages is usually within our grasp.

          e.g., baptism for the dead:  point: they were doing some ritual that implicitly demonstrates their

               own belief in the resurrection, even while they were denying that there is a resurrection.    

     C.  One needs to distinguish between aspects of a text that can be known and understood for

           certain…

              …and those aspects that can be known without such certainty.

     D.  On such passages one needs to consult a good commentary

          Good commentaries will outline the possible conjectures, with reasons for and against.

          Keep in mind that if there are 4 or more options, then the commentators are really into

           guesswork, too.

 

CLOSING:

     A. Today:  we talked about exegesis of epistles:

          How to determine what they said then and there.

     B.  Next week:  hermeneutics of epistles:

          How to apply them here and now.

 

Return to Clear Lake Presbyterian Church Home Page