Category Archives: Biblical interpretation

Why some people don’t like educated preachers

25 Replies

Diploma and mortar boardIn thinking about how people love “quick and easy” Bible study, as we discussed yesterday, it’s easy to see how an anti-intellectual spirit can grow in our churches.

Joe Churchmember reads “Abstain from all appearance of evil.” (1 Thessalonians 5:22), and he can understand it: don’t do anything that looks bad. Then new preacher Dr. McSmartypants comes in and says that passage is talking about testing the spirits (holding onto what’s good, avoiding every form of evil) and Joe Churchmember feels like Dr. McSmartypants is taking a simple passage and making it confusing. He may even say, “I shouldn’t have to have a college degree to understand your sermons!” [Interesting note: my spell checker flags “Churchmember” but not “McSmartypants”]

I think that also explains the popularity of topical preaching. In a topical sermon, the preacher can string together “easy” verses, not having to wrestle with context, culture, linguistics or any of those other things. He can say, “We put money in the collection plate EVERY Sunday because 1 Corinthians 16 says ‘Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him'”, and the whole congregation will nod in agreement.

When I was in college, one of my friends told of having been rebuked by an older member for not using the King James Version. The reason? “We didn’t lose arguments back when we used the King James.” Says something about the strength of the reasoning behind those arguments.

So how do we convince people to have the patience to do serious Bible study? How do we encourage them to read the Bible, while still saying, “You can’t always take a text at face value”? How do we make the Bible accessible to the masses while maintaining intellectual integrity?

Any suggestions?

Photo by Mary Gober

So how’s your list of widows coming?

6 Replies

Continuing yesterday’s discussion (thanks for the comments!), I want to give a good example of how our conversations are shaped by our current situation. Churches of Christ are part of the stream of belief that is called the Restoration Movement. The Restoration Movement flourished in the United States in the 19th century, and many of the doctrines that we hold were shaped around what was and wasn’t practiced in churches in general at that time (particularly Presbyterian and Baptist).

I know that idea is distasteful to many, which is why I want to offer an example. My colleague, Steve Ridgell, is doing a series of blog posts on gender roles in churches of Christ. Yesterday he brought something that is rarely discussed: the list of widows, as described in 1 Timothy 5.

“Honor widows who are truly widows.” (1 Timothy 5:3)
“Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years of age, having been the wife of one husband, and having a reputation for good works: if she has brought up children, has shown hospitality, has washed the feet of the saints, has cared for the afflicted, and has devoted herself to every good work.” (1 Timothy 5:9–10)
“If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are really widows.” (1 Timothy 5:16)

So there was to be a list of widows that would be honored and cared for by the church. (Context shows that this care includes financial support) These women were to be active in the church, and there seems to be an implication that they will be expected to continue to serve. Seemingly, according to verse 12, they made some sort of pledge of devotion to the church.

Do you know of any congregation that does this? Do you know of any congregation that has seriously discussed how to fulfill this?

My thought is that we are quick to dismiss this passage because it hasn’t been a part of our practice nor that of churches around us. We may talk about it out of curiosity, but few seek to practice it in any way, despite it meeting all of the standards that command-example-inference hermeneutics would demand.

Some would argue that the lack of clarity on the exact practice is what limits us, but shouldn’t that merely be a call for further study and investigation as to what Paul is talking about?

We don’t practice it because nobody practices it. Which means our beliefs come less from the Word than from the beliefs of those around us.

Or am I missing something?

photo by Ariadna on www.morguefile.com

Victims of our worldview

4 Replies

Feeling particularly uninspired, I thought I’d share an article that I found interesting, which combines two ideas we’ve looked at recently:

  • how our worldview affects our interpretation of the Bible
  • the need to read the Bible looking for broad themes, rather than isolating individual passages

Found over at The Relentless Monk, the article is called “Are We ALL victims of our worldview?”

A few interesting quotes (for those lacking the time or patience to read the article):

  • “The problem is that we are all trapped in our presuppositions. Had my friend, or I, or the fundamentalist pastor down the street, been born in a different culture with different presuppositions about how the world works, what we see as the ‘plain meaning’ of anything would be different.”
  • “As I thought more about it, I realized that my friend was assuming that how he understood the text was, in fact, the way the author intended the text to be understood. From his perspective, things like symbolism, repetition, and literary structure were secondary, and few other people would notice them. He was assuming that what he saw as the plain meaning of the text was, in fact, it’s meaning. He was saying what we all say—that his presuppositions are the right ones.” (author’s emphasis)
  • “At the same time, however, my western worldview requires that what I believe be logical and consistent, and, in a general way, make sense.” (author’s emphasis)
  • “As I have learned more about the Bible, I have identified and rejected many of my past preconceptions, but I cannot imagine not holding Scripture to some standard of inherent logic. Is that logic some universal aspect of how humans understand truth, or is it, too, just a transient characteristic of my culture that is so ingrained that I will never be able to get out from under it?”

Interesting thoughts. Tell me what you think.

Finding the Wisdom in Wisdom Literature

6 Replies

Having effectively quashed all discussion on this topic, I’ll move forward. In the general discussion of how to interpret the Bible, interpretation of wisdom literature warrants special attention. It’s just not as straightforward as some would make it out to be. When was the last time you heard a sermon on the evils of winking? (Prov 6:13; 10:10; 16:30) Read a tract on the dangers of sleep? (Prov 6:4-11; 20:13; 24:33-34) Posted on your Facebook wall the wonderful news that money is the answer to everything? (Eccl 10:19)

Wisdom literature requires special handling. I shared a bit yesterday from Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart. Let me this thought from Leland Ryken (with his son Philip and with James Wilhoit):

Because the wisdom writers primarily observe life, their utterances are not phrased with the same kind of divinge authority that the statements of the prophets have. The prophets speak the voice of God to people. The Bible’s wisdom teachers speak a word of testimony and observation to their fellow humans. (Ryken’s Bible Handbook, p. 271)

What we come down to is this: it seems difficult if not impossible to take every word of wisdom literature as having proceeded from the mouth of God himself. We have the long human speeches in Job, the contrasting viewpoints in Ecclesiastes, the elements in Proverbs and Psalms that seem to espouse viewpoints different from those provided in other biblical books. Can an inspired book contain human teachings? How do we separate them out from the divine proclamations?

In other words, how are we supposed to read wisdom literature?

Here’s my proposal, open for discussion and debate: I’m satisfied with seeing wisdom literature as a faithful telling of the reflections of godly men on God’s truths. Their place within the canon leads me to give them a weight that other human writings don’t have, but their humanness makes me evaluate every teaching in light of the rest of Scripture.

Is that fair?

Working with wisdom literature

Leave a reply

We’re talking about wisdom literature this week. Some helpful discussion yesterday. Hopefully we can continue to thrash through some of this.

Keith said in a comment:

As I understand it, the Middle Easten (especially ancient) view sees scripture as a series of propositions to be discussed, negotiated, haggled over. The thinking is that iron sharpens iron, and by debating scripture’s meaning, we get closer to the truth about God and us — rather than completely comprehending it.

It’s helpful to remember that the Jews had a very different opinion than ours as to the inspiration of the Old Testament. It was believed that the Torah, the Pentateuch, was delivered via plenary inspiration. God dictated every jot and tittle. Other writings were inspired, but their degree of inspiration was judged by comparing them with the Torah.

So books like Proverbs and Ecclesiastes were a step above the rabbinical commentaries on the Torah and on life, but they were not on the same level as the Law itself.

Frank mentioned Fee and Stuart’s How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth, which is one of those must-read books when approaching biblical interpretation. These authors talk about wisdom literature as “suggestive truth.” They state:

So it is with Hebrew proverbs. They must be understood reasonably and taken on their own terms. They do not state everything about a truth but they point toward it. They are, taken literally, often technically inexact. But as learnable guidelines for the shaping of selected behavior they are unsurpassed. (p. 196, emphasis in the original)

Fee and Stuart also offer the following hermeneutical guidelines for interpreting Proverbs:

  • Proverbs are not legal guarantees. That is, the stated blessings of following the suggested course of action are likely to follow. Proverbs does not teach automatic success.
  • Proverbs must be read as a collection. (I’d say that for Ecclesiastes, as well)
  • Proverbs are worded to be memorable, not to be theoretically accurate. That is, they are not written as complete statements of truth. Their goal is offer advice that can be remembered (like “Look before you leap!”).
  • Some proverbs need to be “translated” to be appreciated.

Those are their thoughts. I’ll share a bit from Leland Ryken tomorrow. All of this is to spur the conversation along about how to understand wisdom literature. I’d like to hear your ideas as well.

(I’ll also mention that Jerry pointed out that Patrick Mead is continuing the series I referred to the other day. It’s very worthwhile reading, though I’m not in full agreement with all that’s said there.)