LECTURE 2
Hansie Wolmarans
[This talk is loosely based on the second chapter
of
Borg, M.J. 2001. Reading the Bible Again for the
First Time. New York: Harper One]
Introduction
Christians
believe that there exists a close relationship between the Bible and God. Most
religions view their sacred books in the same way. We can discuss this
relationship in terms of the following: (a) The Bible as a human response to
God; (b) The Bible as sacred scripture; (c) the Transformative Power of the
Bible (d) the Bible as the Word of God.
• The Bible is Human Response to God
• We have seen in our previous talk that literalists
regard the Bible as inspired by God. They argue that the words of Bible come to
us like a fax from heaven, or more indirectly, as a divine message clothed in
human language. Therefore, we passively receive commands from God about how we
should behave, what we should believe, and how we can be saved.
Those who argue for a contextual reading, views it
as a human product. The Old Testament was produced by Ancient Israel, and the
New Testament by various Early Christian Communities. Some of the authors of
the books of the Bible had some or other spiritual experience. They talked
about it using the tools of human language, like stories, metaphors and
symbols. The Bible therefore contains the record of how these ancient
communities interpreted the will of God, how they prayed to or praised God, how
they experienced the human condition, how they saw salvation, how they
worshipped, and according to what norms they lived together in a society. Of
course there are those who argue that God does not exist. This contradicts the
experience people have of being touched by something greater than themselves
which we could call the divine or the Spirit or God.
If we view the Bible as a human book written in response to experiencing God,
it has implications for how we interpret it. Let’s look at a few examples. In1
Corinthians 11, Paul commands that women should worship with their heads
covered. Literalists would take it at face value. Contextualists would say the
veil indicates that the woman is owned by a father or husband. The creation
stories of Genesis would be viewed as such, i.e., as stories, and not as
history. Therefore contextualists would tend to not use Genesis to argue for
creationism against evolution, or that the world is only 6000 years old.
The same holds true for the laws of Leviticus.
Chapter 18:22 states, ‘You shall not lie with a man as with a woman.’ The death
penalty is prescribed (Lev. 20:13). Should we argue that this prescription is
for all times and seasons, then it lands us in a difficult situation. How about
the prescription that we should not wear garments made of two kinds of cloth,
or plant two kinds of seeds in the same field (Lev. 19:19)?
In 1 Timothy 2:9-15, women’s behaviour and duties are prescribed. They are not
to wear braided hair, gold or pearls. They are also not allowed to teach,
because that would imply superiority to men. It is argued that Eve was only
created as Adam’s helpmate, and that she has a curse on her, because she was
deceived by the snake. The only way for her to be saved is through
childbearing. Again, contextualists would argue that these prescriptions come
from a patriarchal societal structure. Today we do not accept any of these any
more. Therefore, most Protestant churches do allow women to teach and to wear
make-up and adornments. Galatians 3:28 clearly states that there is no longer
male or female in Jesus Christ.
Literalist readings of the Bible, in the past, led to many stupidities and
atrocities. Some versions of Christianity regard birth control as sinful, due
to the story of Genesis 38:8-10. Based upon Exodus 22:17, women were burnt on
the stake as witches (done by both Protestants and Catholics). In Matthew 19:12
it is said that there are eunuchs ‘who have made themselves eunuchs for the
sake of the kingdom of heaven.’ For this reason, castration was practised for
centuries in the church. Alessandro Moreschi (1858-1922) performed in the
Sistine Chapel. He was castrated as a child to retain a high pitched voice and
became a very famous singer. Luckily, he was the last castrato.
It does not make sense to see the Bible as a mixture of the human and the
divine. It is either the one, or the other. What criteria are we going to use
to separate the ‘divine parts’ from the ‘human sections’? Suppose we argue that
the Ten Commandments are clearly divine, then the tenth commandment provides a
problem. There a man’s wife is counted amongst his other possessions like his
house and animals. The rest of the commandments (about theft, adultery, murder
and bearing false witness) are found in all societies to assist people in
living together in a community. In analysing any passage of scripture we
therefore have to ask: ‘What did an author or a community want to say to
audiences about two thousand years or more ago? What were their circumstances?’
Our next question would be whether the situation and circumstances of a modern
audience would be the same.
• The Bible as Sacred Scripture
The
‘sacredness’ of the books included in the Bible developed over a period of
time. The first five books of Old Testament acquired ‘canonical status’ around
400BCE, the Prophets around 200BCE, and the Writings around 100CE when the
canon of the Hebrew Bible was completed. The books of the New Testament were
written before 100CE. The first list that mentions all of them is from 367CE.
For Christians, the Bible is sacred due to its effect not its origins: that it
defines who we are in relation to God, who we are as a community and as
individuals, and that it forms the foundation of our religion and civilisation.
The authority of the Bible is therefore not top-down and linear (The Bible
says: I do). Its authority is discovered in conversation and dialogue. As the
Bible is viewed as the foundation of our civilisation and society, this
conversation is bottom-up and cyclical. (We read, we think, we construct
meaning, we read…). Therefore we will relativize certain parts of the Bible.
When Paul prohibits the eating of sacrificial meat, it is clearly not
applicable to us (1 Cor. 8:4-13). Other parts of the Bible we will
definitely not put into practice, for example to kill the men woman and
children of a conquered enemy (genocide, e.g. Num. 31:7-19).
• The Transformative Power of the Bible
• There are many examples from history of the lives
of people that have been changed by reading the Bible. From the prisoner who
said, ‘I thought I was reading the Bible, and then I realised, the Bible was
reading me’, to Martin Luther who, battling with the do’s and the don’ts,
discovered the concept of grace. Many people find that by meditating on, or
contemplating certain passages of the Bible, they experience the divine.
• The Bible as the Word of God
• When we affirm that the Bible is the Word of God,
we do not mean that God wrote the Bible, using God’s Holy Spirit to inspire
human authors. We mean it in the following ways: (a) The Bible is about God.
(b) Through contemplation or meditation the Bible may have a positive effect on
our lives (the Word of God is therefore and event). (c) The Bible connects us
with God through contemplation or meditation. Therefore, if the Bible is
instrumental in helping us to bring some order into the chaos of our inner
lives, or in our relationships with others, or in our connection with nature,
then it is the Word of God as an effect and event. The Bible is like a finger
pointing to the moon. It is not about believing in the finger, but rather being
invited into a relationship to which the finger is pointing.
•
