More Nationalistic Hermeneutics

I know that I can always count on the "local Bible store in the mall" for some wonderful Christian tchotchkes and some fantastic examples of the Bible handled poorly. My issues with this banner are: 1) It totally ignores the context and the historical situation of Numbers 10. 2) This exercise of prooftexting is done in the service of an unapologetically American nationalistic theology. 3) It reduces the message of scripture down to mere sloganism - as if the purpose of scripture was to supply us with endless witty sayings for our T-shirts, church signs, and decorative wall art. 4) If a cult group did this with scripture we would be justifyably indignant and the "local Bible store in the mall" would never dream of selling it.

Trayvon Martin and the media's tribalistic hermeneutic

(This brief video clip shows both the edited and the unedited versions of the 911 call of George Zimmerman on the night that Trayvon Martin was shot and killed. The producer of the NBC segment has recently been fired as a result.)

Hermeneutics from everyday life. It is getting more and more difficult to get to the truth of any matter due to the rampant politicization of every event (be it tragic or sublime). The tribalistic hermeneutic drives the media's (and therefore also our own) interpretation and understanding of virtually everything. There is no truth. Only spin. So Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman become useful pawns to support whatever narrative we would like to protect. (It needs mentioning that both the left and the right are equally guilty of this.)

And of course what is true of the Trayvon Martin case is also increasingly true of biblical hermeneutics in a tribalistic society as well. We choose or interpret the data in ways that support our narrative. Interpretations are politicized and weaponized against those outside of our tribe. What gets lost in the process? The voice of the Other speaking (often very uncomfortable and often very liberating) truth into our lives and into our communities.

More Nationalistic Interpretations

Where do you even begin with a picture like this? The shocking equivalency of an American soldier to Jesus Christ? The misunderstanding and oversimplification of why and what Jesus died for? The in-your-face nationalism? I am a fan of this nation (much of the time) and of the American military (in general). I don't think there is anything necessarily wrong with citizens of the Kingdom desiring the well-being of the nation that they happen to live in. I also don't think that fighting on behalf of your nation in the military is necessarily wrong and can be praiseworthy. I have several very good friends who are in the military and whom I admire greatly for their service and also for their faithfulness to Christ. But this is just ridiculous and border-line offensive.

The importance of historical hermeneutics

To ignore what can be learned by attending to scriptural interpretation for most of church history--including, if not especailly, by broadly orthodox Christians who were not American evangelicals--is foolish and arrogant. One need not be bound to accept every biblical interpretation rendered in every age of the church to nonetheless benefit enormously from the long experience and possible insights of Bible-reading, theologically reflecting believers across two millennia.

Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011), 155.

heremeutical trajectories

Although the Bible is clear on central matters of the faith, it is flexible in many matters that pertain to the day-to-day. To put it more positively, the Bible sets trajectories, not rules, for a good many issues that confront the church...Different [people] in different contexts will enter into these trajectories in different ways and, therefore, express their commitment to Christ differently. This flexibility of application is precisely what is modeled for us int he pages of Scripture itself.

Peter Enns in Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011), 141.

Is the doctrine of inspiration deistic?

Of course the Bible as described above is the primary testifying, mediating witness to Jesus Christ. Of course the Bible comes to the church in writing and therefore enjoys a durability and some level of material objectivity over time (leaving aside the problems of copying and translating). But something is nevertheless wrong with the idea that all presence, communication, fellowship, exchange, and commerce between God and humans always and only transpire somehow through the paper and ink of the Bible. That is an overly rationalistic, modern approach to faith and life. John Webster rightly notes, "Accounts of scriptural inspiration are not infrequently curiously deistic, in so far as the biblical text can itself become a revelatory agent by virtue of an act of divine inspiration in the past."

Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011), 119

Luther and christocentric reading

...this Christocentric view of scripture was a hallmark of Martin Luther's approach to the Bible. Luther insisted that "the source" of scripture is the "cross of Christ," to which, when the reader is led, "then he will surely strike the center." Bloesch notes that Luther also spoke of certain biblical passages as hard nuts whose shells had to be cracked by throwing them against the rock of Christ, which would then produce their "delicious kernel." According to Luther, "Christ is the Lord of Scripture." And again, "Scripture is to be understood...for Christ. Hence it must either be referred to him, or it must not be held to be true Scripture." Yet again, Luther declared: "The whole scripture is about Christ alone everywhere, if we look to its inner meaning, though superficially it may sound different."

Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011), 106.