The reason such questions and assessments of Bible studies are problematic is because the meaning (and elucidation of the meaning) of Scripture is made dependent upon each participant's individual interpretation of it. Instead of Scripture (aka God's word) being a text with a fixed and definitive meaning that His people are to apply themselves to discovering, it becomes a non-absolute text, subject to the interpretive whims of its readers. This is a post-modern (rather than Christian) way to read a text* (or critique an artwork), and that's to put it most bluntly.
In churches like ours, of course most of us don't actually think of the Bible this way. We're not on about subjecting it to Our Interpretations, as if we give it meaning in the course of our group Bible studies that it doesn't possess because God first put it there. But do you see how questions such as 'what's your interpretation of this verse?' or 'what do you think it means?' can subtly perpetuate that view? This is especially the case when the passage under scrutiny is unfamiliar to most of the group, and what can happen in the group situation is each member is asked to take their turn giving their opinion, and a democratic hum of 'mm, that's a good thought' ensues. By the end of the study, members have perhaps heard every other member's point of view, but are they any closer to knowing and responding to God's?
So if this is not the most helpful pattern to follow, what is? Well this is where a simple, fool-proof pattern for Bible reading can be introduced and it's one that conferences such as KYLC and BLT are at pains to teach - precisely because we can lead ourselves down all sorts of garden paths (to heresies at worst) if we don't follow it!
The first step in the three-step process is to perform the task of exegesis. (Think of your Latin derivatives and remember that ex means out of). Most simply, this means reading out of the original text (in this case, the Bible) what the original author originally intended it to mean - not what we interpret it to mean! The beginning questions to ask are thus:
What is the text saying?
Q: What does Paul say in Ephesians 2:1-10?
then What did this text mean, then and there (when it was first written)?
Q: What did Paul intend for the Ephesian church to understand by Eph 2:1-10?
Only then do we perform the hermeneutical bridging process to connect the original meaning of the text with what it should mean for us in the here and now.
Now that we know what the text meant for its original readers, what does it mean for us here and now?
Q: What does Eph 2:1-10 mean for us here and now?
NB. It doesn't necessarily mean the same thing to both sets of readers - especially when it comes to reading the Old Testament! More on that in a future post...
Only once we've understood the meaning of the text are we ready to apply it. (Trying to apply it too soon is another Subtle Bible Study Mistake!). We can first seek to recognise the original application of the text for the original readers, then put ourselves into the picture.
Based on the text's meaning, how were the original readers to apply it?
What were the Ephesians to change in their thinking or actions in response to Eph 2:1-10?
Based on the text's 'then and there' and 'here and now' meaning, how are we to apply it?
How are we to change our thinking or actions in response to Eph 2:1-10?
And there you have it: Exegesis, Hermeneutics, Application - the 3-step fool-proof process for reading and understanding and applying Scripture. It's a process that honours the text rather than the reader and his/her interpretation, which means it's a process that honours the God who ultimately authored the text - and that's good Bible study!
*Trevor Cairney blogged this on May 30 in response to media assessments of Bill Henson's controversial artwork. In particular, the following paragraph explains post-modernism's method of interpretation which helps us understand why Christians cannot subscribe to it - when reading the Bible or otherwise!
Postmodernism asserts that meaning or interpretation varies with the individual, circumstances and time. You can almost hear the postmodern art critic saying ‘the art might be offensive to you, but not for me’. In Annear's words, "it's only an interpretation". Postmodernism shifts the focus from the artist and the work to the viewer and his or her context. In a sense postmodernists would claim that we don’t go to a gallery to discover what an artist has depicted representationally, but rather to experience the artwork and to discover for yourself just what it might mean. The meaning is seen as in the knower not the work, and all such meanings or interpretations are relative.
(emphasis mine)
1 comment:
great post! a good reminder about how the bible should be studied as God's true word.
Post a Comment