\n<\/p>\n
My last two books The Bible Tells and So<\/a><\/em> and\u00a0The Sin of Certainty<\/em><\/a>\u00a0deal a lot with (spoiler alert) interpreting the Bible\u2014namely what I think the Bible says about certain topics and how I think the Bible should be read.<\/p>\n Of course, this has generated some questions, like:<\/p>\n \u201cPete, what exactly is your problem? No, seriously.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cDid you take a hermeneutics course with Satan, because that\u2019s the only explanation I can find for why you do on page \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cSomeone somewhere must have hurt you very badly and you carry those scars around in your writing.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cHow can we pray for you (besides praying that you break your hands and can\u2019t type anymore)?\u201d<\/p>\n I\u2019ve also gotten some very nice and supportive questions from non-crazy people who are genuinely helped by what I am trying to do as\u00a0they\u00a0work through their own paradigm shifts on their journey of Christian faith.<\/p>\n So in an effort to clarify for both crazy and non-crazy readers alike, here\u00a0are 5 words that summarize my\u00a0approach to biblical interpretation, in no particular order.<\/p>\n (That\u2019s technically two words, but the hyphen makes it one.) The Bible, like anything that has ever been written, can be classified according to genre\u2014many genres, in fact (letters, laws, wisdom<\/a>, apocalyptic, prophecy, story, parable, etc.). Recognizing what\u00a0genre you are in is key to sound biblical interpretation (i.e., don\u2019t expect a parable to relay historical information; don\u2019t read proverbs as if they were laws).<\/p>\n Recognizing the various\u00a0ancient\u00a0<\/em>genres of our\u00a0ancient<\/em>\u00a0Bible is greatly aided by our ability to\u00a0compare and contrast\u00a0<\/i>the Bible with similar\u00a0writings from the ancient world, i.e., by \u201ccalibrating\u201d the Bible against ancient analogs and thus learning to adopt ancient expectations for interpreting biblical literature rather than imposing alien, modern conventions of reading.<\/p>\n So, Genesis 1-11<\/a> is best understood when compared to other ancient origins texts rather than expecting something along the lines of modern science; the Gospels are best understood alongside ancient Greco-Roman \u201cbiographies\u201d rather than contemporary biographies or historical accounts.<\/p>\n That sort of thing.<\/p>\n Proper genre recognition is a key pillar of modern biblical scholarship, and for me is a non-negotiable element of reading the Bible well\u2014though that does not mean this approach is all there is to do when reading the Bible, which brings me to \u2026<\/p>\n By this, I mean that Christ is the t<\/em>elos<\/i>\u00a0of Israel\u2019s story\u2014from the Greek word meaning \u201cend\u201d or \u201cgoal.\u201d<\/p>\n The Old Testament story does not come to a climax \u201cnaturally\u201d in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Nor does the Old Testament \u201cpredict\u201d Jesus of Nazareth in any conventional sense of the word \u201cpredict\u201d (\u201cHey, Israel, gather round and let me tell you something that is going to happen 1000 years from now that you\u2019ll never be able to verify and that will have no meaning for you\u2014in case you\u2019re wondering.\u201d)<\/p>\n Rather, a crucified and risen messiah is a surprise ending<\/em> to Israel\u2019s story.\u00a0The faith of the New Testament writers is seen in their conviction that Christ is deeply connected to Israel\u2019s story while at the same time grappling with the\u00a0surprise, counterintuitive development of the\u00a0gospel.<\/p>\n To forge a connection between Jesus as a surprise ending and Jesus as nevertheless deeply connected to the Old Testament, the New Testament writers re-read, i.e., transposed, Israel\u2019s story to account for the surprise ending.<\/p>\n In other words, they read the Old Testament creatively, not bound by what the ancient Israelite authors were trying to say for their<\/em> time, but shaped by what they believed\u00a0God was doing in the present time.<\/p>\n In other-other words, their faith that\u00a0Jesus was the telos<\/em> of Israel\u2019s story was their starting point and governing principle<\/em> for\u00a0how they read their Bible.<\/p>\n This is why\u2014as many Bible readers already know\u2014New Testament writers, when quoting the Old Testament, typically \u201ctake it out of context,\u201d meaning the context of the original utterance. The\u00a0gospel\u00a0requires<\/em>\u00a0creative re-framing of Israel\u2019s story.<\/p>\n The tendency toward \u201ccreative\u201d (i.e.,\u00a0midrashic) readings of Scripture<\/a>\u00a0in Judaism in general at the time is the proper hermeneutical backdrop for understanding this \u201cChristotelic\u201d hermeneutic (another instance of\u00a0genre-calibration<\/strong>).<\/p>\n The incarnation is the grand mystery of the Christian faith and provides an apt and ancient analogy<\/a> for understanding how the Bible can be embraced as God\u2019s word while at the same time unequivocally displaying the mundane properties, cultural infusions, and simple human\u00a0imitations\u00a0of any text, ancient or modern.<\/p>\n As Jesus, the \u201cGod-man,\u201d is\u00a0fully<\/em>\u00a0part of the culture in which he lived, the Bible in every aspect reflects fully the varied cultural contexts in which it was\u00a0written. In other words, the Bible is not a heavenly document dropped down by divine parachute, nor is it something kept at a safe distance from the messy world of the human drama.<\/p>\n An incarnational model of scripture accounts better for the Bible\u2019s own properties than do various\u00a0inerrantist\u00a0models, which at some point all need to tame or corral biblical\u00a0phenomena that do not sit well with certain doctrinal needs.<\/p>\n I use this term in the broadest sense, meaning wisdom and insight for interpreting the Bible can and does come from anyone, not limited to Christians alone, or Protestants alone, and most definitely not to particular Protestant tribes.<\/p>\n Genuine and deep insight into the nature of the Bible and its interpretation comes from Judaism, the Roman Catholic, and Orthodox traditions, from agnostics, atheists\u2014even Calvinists.<\/p>\n Further, insights concerning the Bible come to us from all sorts of unexpected, less cerebral places, like the world around us\u2014which is God\u2019s world.<\/p>\n This ancient metaphor for describing the Christian faith as a whole is also apt\u00a0for describing the\u00a0interpretation\u00a0of the Bible. Our understanding of the Bible always has a provisional dimension to it, and we should expect our views to change over time<\/a> as we all change and grow as human beings.<\/p>\n I do not think now as I did half a lifetime ago when I started seminary. I had better not. Nor do I think that my current thoughts are now free from the need for future refinement, change, or even abandonment.<\/p>\n Pilgrimage is a metaphor for humility. Pilgrimage encourages us to let go of the need to have final certainty on how we understand the Bible and be less prone to put up walls of division because we are more willing to discuss, explore, and change rather than proclaim, conquer, and defend.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nGenre-Calibration<\/h2>\n
Christotelic<\/h2>\n
Incarnational<\/h2>\n
Ecumenical<\/h2>\n
Pilgrimage<\/h2>\n