If you aren't familiar with the word "hermeneutics", it's just fancy talk for the study and interpretation of the Bible.
In his book, Webb outlines 18 separate criteria which can be used to judge how culturally bound any particular passage of Scripture might be. And there is no question about it - culture is an important consideration when interpreting the Bible.
I have long been fascinated by culture - the differences in food tastes, holidays, and clothing. But it wasn't until my family and I moved overseas that I got a good understanding of just how deeply we are shaped and influenced by our own cultures. Food and clothing are only surface aspects - there is a whole world going on beneath that surface.
Anyway, the tricky part of bringing culture into the conversation about Biblical interpretations is that it is so easy to go off the rails if you lean too far in either of 2 directions:
1) "This command is purely culture bound - we can completely ignore it."
Or
2) "This needs to be obeyed absolutely literally - culture had nothing to do with it."
Progressive Christians tend to go overboard with #1. The result is a Bible stripped of authority whenever it stands at odds with current culture - like the issue of the sinfulness of homosexuality.
Calvinists and other joyless fundamentalist types go off on #2. I had a Calvinist online admit that he believes God hates the vast majority of human beings - all the "reprobates" who are hell bound. Why? Because God said, "Jacob I loved and Esau I hated" (in Romans 9). And he had no interest in cultural idioms or historical context. The "plain meaning" of the text was enough for him.
We will never come to 100% agreement on the culture question when interpreting the Bible on the hot topics like women's role in ministry or the sinfulness of homosexuality, but the question IS there and it should inspire 2 things:
1) Deep, meaningful conversations
And
2) A little more humility in our stances on difficult questions.
(Webb concludes his book with a chapter entitled "What If I Am Wrong?"! And I loved it. We could use more of that kind of humility.)
I haven't read Webb's book but Thomas Schreiner's review of it made me less eager to read it. https://equip.sbts.edu/publications/journals/journal-of-theology/sbjt-61-spring-2002/william-j-webbs-slaves-women-homosexuals-a-review-article/
ReplyDeleteIt's not surprising that an egalitarian from a Reformed background would find ample reason to disagree with Webb's approach. At least Schreiner is civil - Grudem wrote about the book and was a bit more savage. (But Grudem and Piper are briefly examined in an unflattering light in Webb's book.) I agree with Schreiner's point that Webb doesn't say enough about the NT being the final word on matters and how that fits with a "redemptive history" approach. Still, even Schreiner agrees with my main take away: Webb's ideas are worthy of discussion and thought.
ReplyDelete