Is Dennis correct? Is it possible to interpret Scripture to justify almost any belief we might harbor? Of course, most Fundamentalists would say that Mr. Diehl's position is preposterous. For them, every word of Scripture is inspired by God, and any problems which we have in interpreting those documents are of our own making. Nevertheless, many of us look at the wide diversity of opinion about the meaning(s) of various scriptures within the ranks of the Fundamentalists and wonder if Dennis might not have a point! To be fair, it does seem that various people have ascribed profoundly different meanings to the same set of scriptures (the above-mentioned posts and comments being a case in point).
Even so, I believe that these differences can be traced back to false assumptions about Scripture, and the faulty principles which have guided their interpretation(s) of Scripture. Many Fundamentalists begin with the premise that God is the real author of all Scripture, and that it is error free as a consequence of this fact. Hence, any scripture which appears to contradict another scripture is only an illusion. In other words, there has to be some way to explain and/or reconcile the apparent contradiction. For many of these folks, the Bible is like a giant jigsaw puzzle, and there MUST be only one way to put all of the pieces together and create a coherent picture.
Some years ago, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association posted a piece by Janet Chismar on How to Interpret the Bible. However, while some of the points which Chismar makes about the proper way to interpret Scripture make sense, many of the principles are based on the assumptions already noted above. To summarize, Chismar identifies six principles that Christians should employ to interpret Scripture: 1) "Remember that context rules," 2) "Always seek the full counsel of the Word of God," 3) "Remember that Scripture will never contradict Scripture," 4) "Don't base your convictions on an obscure passage of Scripture," 5) "Interpret Scripture literally," and 6) "Look for the single meaning of the passage." Now, I can get behind principles 1, 2 and 4; but I see real problems with 3, 5 and 6!
Remember those assumptions of Fundamentalists that I mentioned earlier? The fact is that Scripture was always a joint project. In other words, sure, God was doing the inspiration; but there were also a bunch of different humans (over an extended period of time) who actually did the writing, editing and deciding about what was and wasn't appropriate to include in the Bible. Hence, the Bible is a collection of different perspectives on many different issues, and that reality is reflected in its pages. The fact is that there are a number of different writing styles and genres of literature present in the collection of writings which we call The Holy Bible.
As a consequence of these facts, the various parts of the book do NOT always agree with each other. Add to all of this the fact that NONE of the human authors of the various writings which constitute our Bible had the advantage of modern scientific and historical understandings, and we begin to understand that many of those apparent errors and contradictions have an excellent chance of being real errors and contradictions! Hence, we can see that any assertion that "Scripture never contradicts Scripture" is an exercise in circular reasoning (in other words, faulty logic).
So, what do we do with this reality? Let's take a closer look at some of those principles of interpretation that make sense. If we understand that context encompasses much more than just the surrounding scriptures, we will look at things like the social, political, economic and religious circumstances which helped to shape the human author of Scripture. With this information in hand, we can often discern some of the things that probably motivated and/or influenced the author to write the things that he/she wrote. Thus, if the author has clearly contradicted some other passage(s) of Scripture, then we must take a closer look at what a preponderance of the evidence indicates within the context of the "full counsel of the Word of God."
Moreover, as we have already acknowledged the presence of very different genres within the book (e.g., prose, poetry, prophetic, apocalyptic, metaphorical, etc.), we must also acknowledge that the universal employment of a literal interpretation of any given passage will inevitably sometimes lead to a flawed understanding of the intended meaning. Also, with such a diverse and complex collection of writings, it is hoped that most of us can see that it is entirely plausible and possible for there to be multiple layers of meaning for some passages.
Finally, I would say that there is another very important principle of interpretation which most Fundamentalists never mention in their discourses on the topic: For Christians, ALL Scripture MUST be interpreted through the lens of the life, teachings, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ! In other words, for Christians, Christ's perspective MUST trump all other perspectives (Moses included). This includes everything in the Torah (e.g., laws, rituals, sacrifices/offerings, Holy Days, etc.), the Prophets, and the other Writings of the Old Testament. Now, I'm sure Mr. Diehl would tell us that "a scripture cannot mean what it was never intended to mean," but a Christian who ignores this principle is almost certain to fail in their efforts to properly interpret some passage. However, we should also note that this principle CANNOT be seen to excuse the clear misappropriation of some Old Testament Scripture by one of the human authors of the New Testament.
Now, will the application of these principles automatically result in a perfect and unanimous understanding of Scripture by all Christians? The short answer is NO. Like the human authors of Scripture, we are all imperfect. Hence, it is very important that we all acknowledge the distinct possibility/probability that we will still misinterpret some passage(s) of Scripture. In fact, even the Apostle Paul said that we (Christians) currently "see through a glass darkly." As a consequence, it is also wise to consult the conclusions which other folks have reached regarding a particular scripture. In other words, I may have missed something that someone else caught. Thus, if we allow for our own imperfections and follow the principles outlined above, we are more likely to be among those who correctly handle the word of truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment