/ Forum: TOL - Philosophy & Theology / 1Dec2001 /

 In any event, the long and error-laden legacy of the new-age scribes and pharisees has left post-modern Believers with the two dominant hermeneutical paradigms of the early 21st century. They both function as a kind of interpretive grid (for the reader) that filters the text of discordant elements, provides a well-ordered arrangement and presentation of the many and various parts of the Holy Bible, and in a sense imposes order (and meaning) to the reader's perceptions of the text so as to make the Word of God more easily digestible, more controllable, generally more simple to understand; which is to say, much more acceptable to the discriminating peculiarities of the post-modern mind. These interpretive grids are both subtle and obvious, being built into the warp and woof of modern printed bibles in various ways: translation, footnotes, introductory essays, maps, verse numbering, cross referencing, and all the other little extras placed into the Book in order to make the Word more reader-friendly.
.
 The first model is the old reliable traditional approach found among the majority of popular churches in North America (and elsewhere). These adopt an attitude of absolute ownership over the sacred scriptures which allows them to more easily bend the Word to their own particular wants and needs. They use the scriptures in a highly controlled manner for different purposes: liturgy, devotional practices, pious study, teaching (and even various forms of scholarship), and so forth. All of these various readings and practices function to embed the scriptures within the vast superstructure of the Christian religion such that the entire weight of twenty centuries of Christian traditions must appear to rest upon the authority and dignity of the Holy Book.
.
 But in so making the Bible a pliant and uncomplaining servant, the churches have also handed down to us a very tame and docile Word (ie. a Word very different from the Word of Fire that burned the ears and tongues of the prophets of old). For these mainstream believers the scriptures can offer no offense, nor hold any surprises, for all that can be known about the Bible is already well-known; and so now it's all just a matter of convincing "those other churches" of the sad errors of their misguided theologies (for the scriptures are ever in the service of their theologies, doctrines, and beliefs).
.
 The second model (or hermeneutical paradigm) also starts from a stance of ownership over the Text (implying a master-slave relationship with the Word of God playing the part of the strong and silent slave), but in light of the current plurality and multiplicity of Christian practices and theologies, these tend to take a more limited and neutral approach to the Bible as a whole, while intensely exploiting certain particular passages, themes, techniques, and so forth. In other words, all the basic attitudes and assumptions of the latest crop of proactive interpreters are basically still the same as those of everyone else (ie. those hermeneutical traditions stemming ultimately from the Christian scribes and pharisees). The only significant difference between the older and newer interpretive schemes is that the newer readings of scripture build smaller and more modest ideological superstructures upon the same old servile and beaten shoulders of the Word of God.
.
 Thus the legacy of the Christian scribes and pharisees is such that it puts most bible-readers into a fixed one-way relationship with the Sacred Text; one that is characterized by an almost absolute dependence upon external authorities and experts, such that eventually a great many things stand firmly between the eyes of the Reader and the raw printed words on the page just below them: READER (Believer) -> (authorities can include things like) catechisms, icons, dogmas and doctrines, approved or recognized classics of Christian literature (4x: the Confessions of Augustine), various saints, teachers, and heroes of Faith, certain historical documents and declarations expressing cardinal principles and beliefs (after twenty centuries there are a great many of these to choose from), and even seemingly trivial things like a preferred version or translation, etc etc etc -> TEXT (Bible).
.
 Now it may seem incredible or impossible to the average post-modern believer, but the plain fact is that while this huge cloud of authorities provides some measure of order and regularity to our various readings of the Word, it also (and at the very same time) distorts and conceals many aspects of the Text that might otherwise be visible and plain for all to see.
.
 If the Reader has followed me this far, it might seem impossible to avoid the conclusion that most Bible-readers are constantly (although largely unintentionally) engaging in many and various (mostly unconscious) abuses of the Word, even while faithfully and lovingly reading and praying the text! And this is indeed the sad hermeneutical dilemma that faces every believer each and every time he or she turns to the Word of God. This is the true legacy of the scribes and pharisees. It is a long and twisted legacy of almost sadistic dominance over the text. It is a legacy that has installed arrogance and vanity as the "normal" and standard way of reading the Word. It is a legacy that offers only lies, fabrications, and illusions as eternally authoritative and valid answers and explanations for every question or mystery within the sacred scriptures; for it would hurt them to admit that what they don't know about the Bible far exceeds what they do know!
.
 It is a legacy that has also left the believer with the baggage of uncertainty and skepticism; and entirely reliant either upon the scribes and pharisees themselves, or upon whatever meager resources the individual Reader can manage to muster. It is a legacy that has pulled the wool over our collective eyes, and kept it there! Under such conditions it is hardly surprising to see the current situation of biblical studies in general as a chaotic and discordant symphony of blindness, stupidity, and vanity. The spiritual poverty of the post-modern churches surely rests squarely on the fact of their collective disrespect for the Sacred Text that they piously use and abuse (and *still* manage to neglect) at every turn.

INTRODUCTION TO POST-MODERN HERMENEUTICS

5. On the Need for Complexity

/ Forum: TOL - Philosophy & Theology / 8Dec2001 /

 And what, you may well ask, is the solution to this pervasive, yet nebulous, hermeneutical dilemma? Is there a way through this crooked maze of discordant authorities and self-serving theologies? Well, of course you know what the most popular answer is, don't you, dear reader? Oh yes. Make it simple! Just make the Bible easy to read and understand, and the people will come a runnin! Many people seem to think that all of this variety and plurality and multiplicity of ideas and practices is nothing more than a mass of confusion best ignored in favor of the easy assurances of *my* faith and traditions (whatever these may happen to be). The common thread in all this reactionary conservatism is that the people want their Bible to be a simple and docile animal. A warm and fuzzy creature. A cute, lovable, loyal, and very servile creature. Yes. They certainly don't want the scriptures transformed into some dangerous snarling beast. Oh no, not that! And yet the plain fact remains that the Bible, like the universe in general, is anything but simple to read and easy to understand. Anything but cute and soothing!
.
 Indeed, even a casual glance through the mountains of biblical secondary literature will amply demonstrate that (far from being simple and homogenous throughout) there is complexity everywhere, and at many different levels. The Bible, it seems, is a fearfully complex library of ancient books,  poems, songs, stories, letters, myths, legends, histories, dreams, hopes, laments, etc etc, spanning many centuries, and written by many different peoples from various cultures and languages. To expect such a rich library of ancient documents to be simple and easy to read flatly contradicts the most basic assumptions of the biblical sciences.
.
 Clearly, complexity is an elemental aspect of the Word of God; and we would be very foolish indeed to deny it or ignore it. But if you, as faithful Bible readers, are willing to love and respect the Word enough to acknowledge and accept its deep mystery and rich complexity, its imperfect (and even flawed) aspects (along with its sublime power and glory), its snarling beastyness (as well as its docile passiveness), then you are already miles ahead of the scribes and pharisees. And if you can approach the text with the proper attitudes (eg. humility, gratitude, etc), and are willing to truly listen to every word and phrase and image, then (and only then) will you be in a position fit to drink deep of the cool spiritual waters of the Word of God. But even then (alas) breaking free altogether of the ludicrous legacy remains a far more problematic proposal.
.
 Thus there is indeed a way out of the current hermeneutical chaos and confusion. But it requires a lot of effort and practice and determination to daily learn from the Lord. Reading the Bible well is never easy because the scriptures are always complex, and always offer copious information at various levels of fact and meaning. Sorting through the tangled mess of fact and fancy challenges not just our faith, but our minds and hearts as well.