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

The Epistles:  The Hermeneutical Questions

A teaching by Jack Haberer

based upon the book by the same title,

written by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart

October 17, 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. Review of 3rd week’s class: 

          The Epistles:  Learning to Think Contextually

          1,  2 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

          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            

                    1)  by consulting Bible dictionary

                   2)  by reading the book through in one sitting

                        and looking for all references to their situation and the                                                  writer’s attitude and points being made

                   3)  by developing a working outline (see pp. 61-62):

                        and tracing the flow of ideas/argument

     D.  TODAY:  The hermeneutical questions

          “What do these texts mean to us?”

          Frankly, this is a task that’s harder than exegesis per se.

              at least in exegesis, most people trying to do exegesis subscribe to                                    similar rules: 

                        namely, trying to decipher the original author’s intended                                                   meaning

              BUT:  everybody reading the Bible does hermeneutics with or                                           without any understanding of exegetical method          

                   Fortunately, there is some common ground in how most people                                        do do their hermeneutics

     E.  What we’re going to do is

          1.  to unpack how most people bridge the “there and then” with the                              “here and now”

          2.  AND to look at ways to improve upon those common methods

          3.  KEEP IN MIND:  THE challenge:  …how to decipher which data                                      is culture-specific vs. the data that is ultimately transcending of                                          culture

               AND in both cases to then determine what and how to apply to our                                   lives.

    

I.  Our Common Hermeneutics

     A.  When we read the Bible, most all of us bring with us the simple tool                       of “common sense”.  We recognize immediately that some things                      belong in the first century and remain there, whereas some things                           apply directly to us.

          1.  e.g., 2 Tim 4:13 – commands us to travel from Troas to carry                                 Paul’s cloak to his Roman prison.  Nevertheless, I have never                                      known anybody who has done that, nor anybody to have preached                                    a sermon that calls for us to do that.

          2.  on the other hand, many texts call upon us to do things that                                     obviously DO apply to us and apply directly just as stated

          3.  note:  Good news:  many hermeneutical issues are this                                   straightforward & obvious.

          4.  BUT:  the challenge comes in the texts that are not that                                            straightforward

              a.  without intending to do so, we bring our denominational biases,                                   our theological biases, our cultural (modern American) biases,

                   our intellectual biases, our political biases, etc. to the text and                                       read through those filters without realizing that we are filtering                                                the text.

              b.  For example:  1 Tim 5:23: “Stop drinking only water, and use a                                    little whine because of your stomach and your frequent                                                     diseases.”

                   How apply? 

                        Many Christians, tea-totallers:  doesn’t apply today

                             …or argue that it wasn’t fermented à bogus!

                        Most Christians:  doesn’t apply to children

                             …except when traveling in foreign countries

                        What about that?

              c.  What about long hair being wrong for men (I Cor. 11:14) and                                       women being instructed to grow long hair and to cover it in                                          worship (vs. 15)?     

                        Some require the same of men but let women cut theirs short

                        Most don’t require women’s heads covered, but Mennonites                                                DO        

     B.  The Basic Rule:  as stated in 1st week:

          “A text cannot meant what is never could have meant to its author or                                his or her readers.” (p. 74)

     C.  The Second Rule:  “Whenever we share comparable particulars                         (i.e., similar life situations) with the 1st century hearers, God’s                             word to us is the same as his Word to them” (p. 75)

          --this gives text their sense of immediacy: 

              “The Bible says it.  I believe it.  That settles it.”

     D.  PROBLEMS (4)

          1.  The problem of extended application

              I Cor. 3:16-17 - 16Do you not know that you are God’s temple and                                   that God’s Spirit dwells in you? 17If anyone destroys God’s                                        temple, God will destroy that person. For God’s temple is holy,                                         and you are that temple.”

              When I was a teenager:  this text à smoking, drugs & alcohol

                   but original exegesis:  “All you all are God’s temple…”

                   and destruction = damaging the church’s unity

              What about applying it to smoking, drugs & alcohol?

                   NOT OK.  p. 76 (bottom):  “…when there are comparable                                                situations and comparable particulars, God’s Word TO US                                                   in such texts should be limited to its original intent.”

                   EVEN if an alternative application seems true, it is not legit to                                            use such a text to make the point …FIND SOME OTHER                                                    TEXT that says what you want to say if you intend to make                                                   the argument from a biblical perspective.  

          2.  The Problem of Particulars that are Not Comparable

              a.  2 other situations:

                   1) texts that speak to 1st century issues that have no 21st century                                            counterparts

                   2) texts that speak to problems that COULD arise in the 21st                                             century but are not likely to do so.                                  

              b.  3 examples of the first situation in I Cor. 8-10:

                   1) Christians arguing for the privilege of joining their pagan                                                neighbors at feasts in idol temples

                   2) the Corinthians’ questioning Paul’s apostolic authority

                   3) food sacrificed to idols and sold in the open market

               c.  Paul’s response to them:

                   1) they are forbidden to go to idol temples

                        -a) stumbling block principle

                        -b) such eating is incompatible w/ life in Christ at his table

                        -c) and such gatherings imply participating in the demonic

                   2) Paul defends his right to financial support as an apostle, even                                        tho he has relinquished such funding

                   3) Idol food sold in the marketplace may be purchased and                                              eaten, and even in the home of a pagan, as long as the pagan                                                  doesn’t make any issue about it, i.e., if it doesn’t become a                                               stumbling block to the pagan or anybody else present.

              d.  Add:  texts that MAY apply to 21st century but are not likely to                                    do so:  e.g., the Christian son having sex with mother AND                                          arguing that that is legit.

                   --or forcing circumcision upon Gentile converts

               e.  What to do?

                   1) (p. 78) – We must do our exegesis with particular cars so that                                       we hear what God’s Word to them really was.  In most cases                                           a clear principle has be articulated, which usually will                                                          transcend the historical particularity to which it was being                                                       applied.”     

                   2)  “The ‘principle’ does not now become timeless to be applied                                      at random or whim to any and every kind of situation.  We                                                    would argue that it must be applied to genuinely comparable                                            situations.”

              d.  FOR example:

                   1)  staying away from pagan festivals MAY à Mardi gras

                   2) à staying away from spiritism, witchcraft, astrology

                   3)  compensating clergy for service to God à appropriate

                   4)  re., ok to eat food bought at pagan feasts? 

                        it’s a matter of indifference to God and to Paul

                        …but may not be indifference to some present

                        comparable today:  serving wine for communion

                             truly biblical way:  WINE

                             BUT:  out of defference to recovering alcoholics:

                                  grape juice

          3.  The Problem of Cultural Relativity

              a.  4 steps

                   1) Epistles are occasioned by specific situations in the 1st                                                  century

                   2) Many specific situations have no comparable situations in                                             our time

                   3) Other texts are situation specific but they do contain in them                                         principles that can be translated into our setting

                   4) Some texts appear to have comparable particulars, but they                                           really are different and need to be translated into our                                                              situations in ways that are not immediately obvious.    

              b.  What to do (6 things to do):

                   Accept the reality of cultural differences as valid

                        We don’t need to emulate 1st century lifestyles per se

                    1) Distinguish between central core of message of Bible and                                              what is dependent on or peripheral to it.

                             e.g., Book of Confessions                           

                   2) Distinguish between what the NT itself sees and inherently                                             moral and what is not.

                             e.g., sexual immorality, thievery, greed, etc. are always                                                          wrong

                             BUT: footwashing, exchanging a holy kiss, Paul’s                                                                 preference for celibacy, eating market place food:                                                                 not inherently moral or immoral

                   3) Make Special note of items where the NT has a uniform                                                witness and of items in which it sends mixed signals.

                             consistent:  love of neighbor, nonretaliation in personal                                                     ethics, wrongfulness of hatred, murder, stealing, etc.

                             inconsistent:  role of women in church leadership,

                                  the retention of one’s wealth, eating food offered to                                                     idols, church structure of elders, deacons, bishops, etc.

                   4) Distinguish between principle and application                                                                    When speaking of women’s hair and men’s hair:

                                  seems to be calling to not bring disgrace upon the                                                       church by appearing to be a gathering of prostitutes                                                              and pimps

                             Today:  actual dress and hairstyles to be avoided are                                                        different, but the principle still holds

                   5) Note circumstances that offered the NT writers only one                                               option vs. multiple options à and note how they responded

                             e.g., in dealing with slavery:  only one option available to                                             them, so they worked within that structure

                                  …in later years when multiple options became                                                                  apparent, the church took a direct approach to                                                                 working for change

                   6)  Exercise charity when walking in this area.

                       

              4.  The Problem of Task Theology

                   The ultimate need for us is to develop and live out a systematic                                    understanding of our faith.  One that is logical, consistent, and                                          principled, and reflective of sound exegesis and hermeneutics.

                   THEREFORE:

                   a.  We need to exercise humility:  to state what we know                                                   clearly, AND to acknowledge what is not so clear.

                   b.  We need to acknowledge as Paul does in I Cor. 7:10 – that “I                                      don’t have a word from the Lord on this matter, but it seems                                                 best to me that…”

    

NEXT WEEK:  OT narratives                 

 

Return to Clear Lake Presbyterian Church Home Page