Reflection by Pastor Shawn:
Last week’s midweek reflection considered how to read the Bible. I discussed the two main steps: exegesis, where we discover what it meant for the original audience “then and there”, and contextualization, where we apply what it means for us “here and now”.
This week I’d like to look at one specific genre of the Bible. Genres are important to consider when interpreting because the genre sets how each part of the Bible communicates. Scripture is written in different literary genres—historical narrative, Hebrew poetry, the prophets, gospels, epistles, and others. Let’s focus in on how we interpret and apply the epistles.
Some key questions with interpreting an epistle: what is the historical context? Why did the author write the letter? What was happening? How does the author learn about the situation? What was the author’s relationship with the recipients? What was their history? Answering these questions is a good start to figuring out what’s going on in the letter. Then, read the whole letter! That’s how we read letters today, and that’s how we should read epistles in the Bible. Try to get the big picture. Only then should you focus in on a smaller passage to try to figure out its meaning.
Contextualizing an epistle might seem easy at first, but looks can be deceiving. We all (should) ask, “what does this mean for us, here and now?” When it comes to epistles, the biggest question is this: what in the passage is only for the particular culture of the author and the recipients, and what in the passage applies to them in their culture and to us in our culture?
Now, sometimes it’s obvious. For example, no one think the Bible is telling us, today, to go to the city of Troas so we can bring Paul’s cloak from Carpus’ house to a Roman prison (2 Tim. 4:13). Or consider 2 Tim 2:3, which says that we should join in suffering, like a good soldier of Christ Jesus—something all Christians should do.
The tricky part is when it is not obvious. We need to be consistent—we need principled reasons why do some parts apply directly to us, while others only apply indirectly, and others only apply to the 1st century. Added to the difficulty is that we all bring to the text our theology, our church traditions, our culture, and our existential concerns. These often help us, but sometimes they can mislead.
One of the biggest challenges is when the situation in the 1st century is very different than the 21st century. For example, consider 1 Cor. 11:17-22. At the church in Corinth, the rich were abusing the poor during their meetings and were excluding them from the bread and the wine of the Lord’s Supper. They would get drunk and full of food. The poor were left out. This doesn’t happen today. So what does this passage mean for us?
A helpful consideration is if there are any principles that might apply to us, even if the particular situation is different than ours. So with our example, the principle is that Lord’s Supper is about unity, not about indulging: everyone is an equal at the table.
Another challenge is to discover when what is written in an epistle applies directly to us and when it doesn’t. Here are some guidelines. First, we need to put this passage in the perspective of the central message of the entire Bible. Women wearing head coverings (discussed in 1 Cor. 11) is not a main theme is God redeeming us through Jesus Christ. Similarly with speaking in tongues, for example. Second, it is often helpful to distinguish between what the Bible sees as inherent moral issues and what it does not. Inherently moral issues apply to all cultures;—things such as sexual immorality, adultery, idolatry, drunkenness, greed, abuse of the poor, etc.—these are always wrong. But things like foot washing, holy kisses, women’s head coverings, women teaching in the church, etc—these are not inherently moral issues. Third, if what is being said in an epistle is not uniform with what is said elsewhere in the New Testament, that’s usually a clue that it is limited to that particular situation. Examples of uniformity: the demand that Christians always love; Christians cannot seek revenge or retaliation; strife, murder, stealing, sexual immorality are wrong; we should be humble; etc. Some examples where the New Testament is not uniform: women’s ministries in the church (Phoebe is a deacon, Junia is an apostle, Priscilla is Paul’s co-worker; but in some places women are forbidden to speak in church); if Christians can keep their wealth (in some places they are told to give it all away, but in others it seems like there were rich Christians in the churches). Fourth, we must consider the cultural options available to the New Testament writer. With some issues, there were different options in the culture, and yet the New Testament writers always take one position. For example, having a mistress was very common in the 1st century Gentile cultures, but not accepted in Jewish culture. But the New Testament is very clearly against adultery. However, with some issues the culture only presented the author with one option, and that means we cannot assume that the author would always support that option in every time and place. A good example is slavery. Paul does not try to overthrow the institution of slavery—that was not an idea really anyone had at that time. That was not an option for Paul. However, what he says about the equality that we all have in the gospel does prepare the way to get rid of slavery.
When it comes to interpreting and applying the epistles, like all of Scripture, we need humility. This is a challenging task, and we can be wrong. That does not mean we should give up—we must have conviction, but we also must be open to being corrected. Also, we need each other. To contextualize, we need to hear from other perspectives and cultures. We need lots of different voices in the conversation.