Slaves, Women & Homosexuals

Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis

William J. Webb

• Éditeur: IVP Academic
• Année: 2009
• ISBN:
  9780830876914
• Sujet: Theology & Religion
• Sous-sujet: Biblical Studies

In Slaves, Women Homosexuals William J. Webb tackles some of the most complex and controversial issues that have challenged the Christian church--and still do. He leads you through the maze of interpretation that has historically surrounded understanding of slaves, women and homosexuals, and he evaluates various approaches to these and other biblical-ethical teachings. Throughout, Webb attempts to "work out the hermeneutics involved in distinguishing that which is merely cultural in Scripture from that which is timeless" (Craig A. Evans). By the conclusion, Webb has introduced and developed a "redemptive hermeneutic" that can be applied to many issues that cause similar dilemmas. Darrel L. Bock writes in the foreword to Webb's work, "His goal is not only to discuss how these groups are to be seen in light of Scriptures but to make a case for a specific hermeneutical approach to reading these texts.... This book not only advances a discussion of the topics, but it also takes a markedly new direction toward establishing common ground where possible, potentially breaking down certain walls of hostility within the evangelical community."

Part One

---

TOWARD A HERMENEUTIC OF CULTURAL ANALYSIS

1

---

THE CHRISTIAN & CULTURE

Most of us are oblivious to the culture around us. Like the air that we breathe, it is invisible and we simply take it for granted. It has been said that human culture is much like the relationship between a fish and water. One could ask the question of a fish, “Is your nose wet?” You and I, of course, know that the fish’s nose is wet. Yet, we do not know what a fish actually thinks about the water around itself.1 If fish were scientists, probably the last thing they would discover is water! So it is with us. We live and move about in the culture with which we are closely and invisibly enmeshed.

What awakens us to culture is contrast. In our global village, the media readily project images of different cultures around the world—from the tribal groups living in the African rain forests to the elite business community who reside in New York’s gleaming towers. The contrast becomes even more vivid through travel. Travel allows someone to see, taste and touch different cultures. Yet, the people who are most aware of culture are those who have lived in different parts of the world. This level of contrast leaves a more lasting impression. Those who have lived in different settings begin to actually feel the impact of alternative cultures. During my own life, the years spent in Alberta on an Indian reserve, in cosmopolitan Toronto, in the politically charged city of Ottawa, in a remote village of the Northwest Territories, in Baltimore during the racial riots, in the deep south of Texas, etc., have all left their mark. My own awakening to culture has come about quite by accident—through living in these dramatically different cultures.

However, one does not have to leave home to discover culture. There is another way to see culture right where one lives. Mind you, contrast is still the key. But this time we look for differences within one particular location—differences that often occur over time. This awakening to culture comes from viewing changes in our society so that we see an “old” culture and a “new” culture side by side. We can discover culture simply by looking at the changing attitudes, laws, rituals and behavior around us. For example, the electronic highway of the Internet is radically changing the way that people relate to other people within our country and around the world. The youth of today will form quite a different impression of political, intellectual and community boundaries than those of former days. Along similar lines, think about what the last generation was taught in school about the environment. Compare that to what this new generation is learning. The contrast is overwhelming. The changing values and attitudes of our culture provide yet another way to access what is otherwise invisible, or so heavily camouflaged that we never really see it.

The Christian Challenge

As the winds of culture blow, Christians are often faced with incredible challenges. We inevitably encounter difficult choices. Should we endorse the changes in our culture or should we challenge our culture? The question of cultural/transcultural assessment is essentially a very practical one: as I stick my finger into the air and feel the winds of culture blowing, how should I respond? Should I act counterculturally or paraculturally in my life? Should I go against my culture or move with my culture? That is the crucial question with which we all wrestle.

So how does a Christian respond to cultural change? Our initial answer is quite simple: It is necessary for Christians to challenge their culture where it departs from kingdom values; it is equally necessary for them to identify with their culture on all other matters. This axiom reflects the thinking of the apostle Paul, who often acted very pragmatically when it came to cultural issues. For example, Paul’s response to the Corinthians eating meat offered to idols is insightful. The apostle challenges his culture by not eating at public ceremonies held in pagan temples, where such an action would violate the participant’s covenant with God (1 Cor 8:10) and potentially destroy the faith of others (1 Cor 10:14-22). However, he sides with his culture whenever he is eating at a non-Christian’s house, outside of a cultic context. In that setting Paul would eat meat offered to idols, whether it had been sacrificed by the host or simply purchased at the market as a post-temple special (1 Cor 10:27). The apostle’s Magna Carta of cultural sensitivity might be found in his words, “I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor 9:22 NRSV, emphasis added). Paul viewed culture as a mixed bag. If something is worth making an issue out of, then challenge culture on the issue. Yet, if something is not terribly important and does not violate one’s faith, then utilize it for the sake of the gospel!

Most of the time it is easy to determine where our culture departs from kingdom values. On negative issues such as pornography, abortion, murder, theft and rape, the Christian community generally has very little doubt about its response. We want to challenge any ambivalence within society on these matters and initiate counteraction. Likewise, on positive issues such as care for the elderly, environmental concerns, compassionate health care, community spirit in helping the poor, political freedom, and fair and equitable justice, our response should be clear. We want to applaud our community, speak an encouraging word and lend a hand.

However, sometimes the hardest part is trying to determine what our kingdom values are. Fortunately, these cases are the exception, not the norm. On certain occasions the biblical text is not entirely clear. In part, the lack of clarity may be due to the fact that Scripture itself adopts what we might call “kingdom values” (those which transcend any culture and time) as well as “cultural values” (those which are locked into a particular place and time). Within the text of Scripture we find portions that are transcultural (e.g., love for one’s neighbor) and portions that are cultural, or more accurately, portions that contain significant cultural components (e.g., slavery texts). For the original readers these two entities—cultural and transcultural—were not necessarily antithetical. In all likelihood, the distinction between the two would have gone unnoticed for the original readers. Only in the context of a different culture would the distinction be readily seen, due to the principle of contrast mentioned above.

As part of our interpretive task, then, we must distinguish between kingdom values and cultural values within the biblical text. With every change in our culture we have to reevaluate our interpretation of Scripture to determine what our perspective should be. At first glance, one might think that this would be an easy task. But it is not. When we arrive at the doorstep of Scripture, we encounter a text which itself was written within a particular cultural grid. It was not written in a vacuum, nor created for some theoretical and utopian society. Not only were the authors influenced by their own cultures, but the text itself was transmitted through various cultural forms, known as genres. Also, the people who first received the text read it within their assumed cultural grid.

If we are to speak to our world today, we must first evaluate the role of culture in the biblical text. It would be a travesty to proclaim to our world a theological position without exploring its cultural/transcultural status. In this venture, we want a balanced approach. We do not want to make something that is transcultural into something that is culturally bound. On the other hand, we do not want to make that which is a cultural non-absolute into an absolute for every culture.

Definition: What Is a “Cultural-Component” Text?

Before moving along too far, we must start by defining our terms. In one sense all of Scripture is cultural. Inasmuch as the biblical text reflects various cultural forms in its making (genres) and addresses different sociological structures in its message (for example, marriage, society, religion, work, politics) it is inextricably bound to culture. In this respect, even the transcultural elements in Scripture have a cultural component. However, this is not what is usually meant in biblical studies by the term cultural (or cultural-component) when it is used in contrast to transcultural. This contrastive usage of the term cultural is much more limited in its meaning and is generally a shortened form for various equivalent expressions such as cultural confinement or cultural relativity or culturally bound. When we talk about a text that has a “cultural component” within it, this designation highlights the issue of application between cultures. For our purposes the expression cultural component and its various equivalents may be defined as “those aspects of the biblical text that ‘we leave behind’ as opposed to ‘take with us’ due to cultural differences between the text’s world and the interpreters’ world as we apply the text to subsequent generations.” In a sense, cultural confinement/relativity is the gap between the world of the text and that of the interpreter, which requires a reapplication of the text.

More helpful than a definition might be a sketch of what is meant by cultural and transcultural through a series of graphic contrasts. For the Christian who is interested in applying the tex...