With a lot of help
from Derek Flood[1],
Walter Wink[2],
Walter Brueggemann[3]
and others, I've been exploring how to read the Bible as Jesus did. Basically,
Jesus applied the rabbinic hermeneutic[4] of
faithful questioning, in contrast to
the approach of the Pharisees of his day, who employed a hermeneutic of unquestioning obedience.
Ever since Christianity
first began its shameless dance with political power, the Bible has been used
primarily to maintain orthodoxy and define heresy. When Constantine marched his
army into the ocean and pronounced them “baptized”, the church began a long
history of enforcing orthodoxy with threats of death, torture, exclusion and hell fire. The record of atrocities is almost endless, from the crusades and the
inquisition, to Puritan witch hunts to slavery to basically every human rights issue.
In every case, the practitioners of barbarism viewed
their interpretation of the faith as the one and only “right” reading, and
enforced their “right” way with violent use of power. This clearly represents
the very worst of the way of unquestioning
obedience and inevitably leads to violence committed in God’s name.[5] It
is a total misreading of Scripture’s intent.
In striking
contrast is rabbinic Judaism’s tradition of faithful questioning. Rabbi Anson
Laytner makes the case that faithful questioning is typical, not only of the
Hebrew Bible, but also of the Jewish faith itself.[6] (I
have this delightful image of Tevye arguing with God in “Fiddler on the Roof.”)
Key examples
of faithful questioning are found throughout the Jewish commentaries on the
Scriptures. Instead of a single interpretation that establishes the orthodox,
“right” way of reading Torah, the commentaries typically present dissenting
views from various rabbinic sages, offered side by side like the transcript of
a courtroom trial. It may help to recall that the word, “Israel” means
“wrestles with God.”
From this line
of thought we can see that reading Scripture by faithfully questioning violence and harm perpetrated in God’s name
is not only characteristic of Jesus and Paul and the rest of the New Testament,
it’s also a deeply Jewish way to read Scripture. Remember: Jesus also was a rabbi, steeped
in that tradition.
Every culture
and every religious faith is susceptible to error. The root of the matter is
not necessarily within the particular culture or religion, but rather is the
marriage of religion and political power. This always is a poisonous
combination, and is the point at which the church diverges from the way of
Jesus.
But there
always are those anxious souls who want to nail everything down, who want
guarantees and control over their destinies, both temporal and eternal. Their
needs are such that they must live by sight, and not by faith.[7]
The harm emerges when their insecurities lead to the use—or at least the threat—of
violence to silence dissent. The greatest heresy is their belief that the use
of force is a valid example of upholding the faith.
The key difference between Jesus and the
Pharisees, and between differing groups today is in which narrative we choose to embrace, and which we choose to avoid,
discount or (as Jesus did) outright reject. The question is not whether we will choose some texts and
ignore or reject others. Even the most fundamental literalist reads the Bible
selectively, if only by emphasis and tone of voice. Rather, if we are to read
the Bible as Jesus did, the question is which
texts we choose and by what criteria!
The criterion both
Jesus and Paul used is love. I will develop that theme more in the blogs that
follow; but here is a teaser:
"While
the Pharisees were focused on strict adherence to religious rules and regulations
(the “right” or “correct” reading), the priority of Jesus was instead focused
on loving and caring for people in need. Clearly, the way Jesus understood
faithfulness to Scripture was that it should lead to love. ‘Love the Lord your
God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” and “Love
your neighbor as yourself’ Jesus said, ‘All the Law and the Prophets hang on
these two commandments’ (Matthew 22:37049).”[8]
How then can
we continue to claim that Scripture is inspired if it truly justifies hurt
and damage to people? As Christians we affirm that the Scriptures are good,
intended to lead us to love. However, as history reveals, it also can be read
in an abusive way. My teacher, the late Fred B. Craddock once said, “There is
nothing so holy that it does not have its pornographers.” Paul also wrote, “I
found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually
brought death” (Romans 7:10).
The common denominator
is love.
That’s the way
I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.
Together
in the Walk,
Jim
[1] Derek Flood, Disarming Scripture: Cherry-Picking Liberals, Violence Loving
Conservatives and Why We All Need to Learn How to Read the Bible Like Jesus Did
(San Francisco: Metanoia Press, 2014).
[2] Walter Wink, The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium (New York:
Galilee Doubleday, 1999).
[3] Walter Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony,
Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005).
[4] Hermeneutic, derived from Hermes, the
messenger of the gods in Greek mythology, is the process of transmitting the
divine message into language and concepts that can be understood by humans. In
recent generations it has become generalized to mean any process of
interpretation.
[5] Flood, op. cit., Kindle Version,
Location 1017.
[6] Anson Laytner, Arguing with God: A Jewish Tradition (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson
Inc. 1990).
[7] The direct opposite of the life of
faith described in II Corinthians 5:7.
[8] Derek Flood, op. cit., Kindle version, Location 967.
