How Do We Understand This Thing? Pt. 1

Starting in a couple weeks, I will be teaching an adult Sunday School class at UPC on the authority and interpretion of Scripture with LSU philosophy professor Dr. Jon Cogburn. The two issues are quite related. Ones understading of the authority of Scripture determines what types of questions one brings to its interpretation, while reading and interpreting Scripture impacts the way we understand its authority. Part of the argment about Biblical authority hinges on the interpretation of various texts that talk about the value and centrality of Scripture.

One of the resources we will be using is a document "Presbyterian Understanding and Use of Holy Scripture" (avalaible athttp://www.pcusa.org/oga/publications/scripture-use.pdf). It provides a pretty good introduction to Reformed principles of interpretation and the variety of opinions in the church on the understanding of authority.

One of the issues around this topic that bothers me most is the number of people who claim to take the Bible literally. The "God said it, I believe it" mentality is all too common in our culture. Regardless of whether one thinks this is the way we should understand Scripture (and I don't, but that's a seperate series of posts), it is obvious that no one does. A few examples will make my point:
1. There are parts of the Bible that are clearly metaphors, such as the parables of Jesus. While the kingdom of God is like a mustard seed, no one thinks it is an actual mustard seed that grows into a plant where birds roost. Jesus compares God to a mother hen, but no really thinks that God lays eggs. The problem arises when words are used in such a way as they can be meant either literally or metaphorically. When Jesus tells us to pray to "Our Father", does this mean God is a literal father or that God is like a father?
2. There are parts of the Bible that are clearly intended to be taken literally that no one does. While there are those who will argue that I Corinthians 14:34a ("...women should be silent in the churches") should be taken literally, very few would aruge that Paul's longer discussion of head coverings in the church (I Cor. 11:2-16) is meant to be taken literally for everyone for all time. Many of the legal stipulations in the Old Testament fall into the same category. I've known many a teenager who has cursed their father or mother, but never encountered anyone who thinks that they should be put to death for the offence (Lev. 20:9). We all realize, whether we admit it or not, that some things are (at least) applicable for some times and places but not all. Biblical precedent exists for this in the way that the early church dealt the issue of Gentile converts having to follow Jewish ritual law such as circumcision and dietyary restrictions. The question then becomes which things that are stated literally will we apply literally.
3. Everyone ultimately has a personal "canon within the canon". This is the practical application of total depravity to our understanding of Scripture. We all bring our own experiences and biases, our conflicts and our desire for justification with us when we read the text. Even when we try and think we are not doing so, the basic frailty of the human situation appears in that we are never full aware of our own motivations. The extent to which this applies to Scripture itself is a subject for a different post.

So, that just leads back to the basic question, "how do we read and understand the Bible?" That will be the subject of the class and (theoretically) future posts here.