Hermeneutics #2: Things To Consider When Reading Your Bible

For various reasons I will be running series of posts at various times. They may not always have an immediate follow-up for a few weeks such as this one (a few months). The last time I did a hermeneutics post was in February, hence the #2. If I know I intend to add more on a topic at a later date I will number them.

Things to keep in mind when reading the Bible.

(1) It is difficult to go back and understand the cultural, historical, psychological and other contexts. In other words, when Paul lived and where Paul lived their were things that were considered cultural norms just as there are today. At any given time in history (historical context) they may have been different. We know that Paul had a "thorn in the flesh" and was imprisoned during the Prison Epistles. We see that MIGHT color Paul's thought processes, intent and even his language, especially in Philippians. We can assume that he was depressed and miserable due to being under house arrest but we would be dead wrong. He speaks of joy in the faith and the furtherance of the gospel via his imprisonment. He speaks of unity...he speaks of positive things. As such we cannot assume things based on our presuppositions and what we bring to the text. Unless the author tells you how he feels, you cannot assume how they feel. These are called mental acts on the side of the author and should not be taken into consideration unless the are explicitly stated in the text as in the case of the "thorn in the flesh".

(2) In his Prison Epistles there are many references to "doulos" or slave/slaves as Paul was a slave to the Christ and literally under house arrest during the writing of said book. We can assume being a slave was a horrible thing such as it was for African Americans during the colonial period and pre-Civil War period, but again we would be dead wrong. In many cases the abuses of the Exodus period and the 19 century period do not apply to the 1 century AD in and around Israel and Asia Minor. Many slaves of this period were actually well-to-do and in some cases affluent and power or in positions of power. We must view the word "slave" closer akin to indentured servant unless otherwise stated.

Please note that I did not say that understanding or a correct mental grasp of authorial intent in the texts are impossible. Many modern scholars would have you believe that it is impossible but it is not.

(3) Since it took place in a past time it is limited and locked into the meaning given to the symbols used to convey the message at the time of writing. In the case of Paul: Koine Greek. These meanings can never change and are limited to the authorial intent.

(4) The authorial intent is what the writer originally intended to convey to the reader. In the case of the Bible the writers were human "inspired" by God. A joint effort. what the biblical writers meant can only be interpreted in the contexts and the environment that their writing or culture provided. Outside of the willed meaning of the writer God through humans, the text/symbols such as Greek, Latin, English have no meaning.

(5) Words used outside of scripture could have a variety of meanings (this is called norms of language) but when placed in Scripture in their context they needed to be narrowed down to a single meaning (his is called norms of utterance). Meaning cannot change in the text but the text significance to a reader can be nearly limitless. Example: How do you fulfill the command in Matthew 28:19-20 (yes, its a command). Some witness to others verbally. Some do it through their actions. Some help the poor, etc.

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." Matthew 28:19-20

Postmodern philosophy that says we cannot be exactly sure is a tool to maintain ambivalence and ambiguity. It is extremely rare for terms to have duplicate or dual meanings outside of prophecy and the prophets where references to kings/King and promises often took on a dual meaning (a) one immediate meaning and (b) one distant meaning.

(6) The type of writing or literary genre must always be considered. Is it poetry, prophecy, parable? All need to be approached and read certain ways to be understood correctly. Wording them so others can understand is another level of pain all together because it requires that the reader understand it, interpret it, and put it into words and an application relevant to today's culture and society. Not always and easy task. Understanding something is a intellectual grasp of things in the Bible. Interpretation involves a verbal aspect such as what I am now doing to you the read of this post. I am interpreting what it means for someone to understand and apply hermeneutics.

(7) There are three main aspects to conveying a message in writing:
-Writing-Sending-Encoding A Message-Determines The Meaning
(a)The Sender (Author)
-In our case it would be God through human writers
(b) The Message itself-The Code
-In our case the bible.
(c) The Receiver-Decoder of The Message-Also Determines Meaning
-In our case it would be modern readers of the Bible-Us

(8) There are implications that the author didn't directly consider when writing the text but the implication is that they should be included because the items fall into Jesus', Paul's or another writer's meaning. Case-in-point: Paul said I should not get drunk with wine. So I guess its okay to get stoned on pot everyday? Wrong. The implied meaning that needs to be taken way from this text is that we are not to be abusively intoxicated or abusing things that detrimentally affect our mental acuity on a habitual basis. Medicinal use is one thing abuse is another.