A Pentecostal Hermeneutic
Wednesday, October 28, 2009 at 2:05PM I had the joy of hearing New Testament scholar James Alison last summer. Going to see and hear a theologian of whom you are a “fan” of is often a weird experience. You consider them a “big name.” Certainly hundreds will come to hear him/her. Usually there are ten or twenty people.
Alison is one of the most fresh and energetic Bible readers, I know. This isn’t the place to explore some of his brief allusions such as
- The Cain and Abel story as a reverse image of the Romulus and Remus myth.
- The stories of Joseph as a reverse image of the Oedipus story.
- Alison’s whimsical suggestion that “being wrong” should be one of the most identifying traits of Christians who are saved by God’s grace.
The night I saw him, Alison began with the provocative suggestion that early Israelite culture, influenced by their pagan neighbors, probably practiced infant sacrifice. The story of Abraham offering Isaac may have originally been a story of infant sacrifice. (There are still some seams and clinkers in the text that point back to its original thrust.) But like a blacksmith working and bending a piece of hot metal, the story was pressed and pushed, altered and amended until over time it is the beautifully troubling tale we have today—of God providing, the lamb in the thicket a brilliant foreshadowing of Christ. Likewise the odd story in Exodus 4:24-26, of Moses and Zipporah, may also be a remnant from the practice of infant sacrifice, where perhaps circumcision comes to replace sacrifice of the eldest son.
Agree or disagree, like it or don’t, Alison’s theories are interesting. But the possible presence of infant sacrifice in the scriptures is not his point. Instead he points to what he suggests are the comments of two biblical prophets about this terrible scandal in ancient Israel’s past. Ezekiel (20:25-26) basically seems to put these words into God’s mouth, “Okay, way back when I did give Israel some bad commandments, such as to sacrifice their first-born, but it was only so they would know that I am a fierce and demanding God.” Ezekiel defends the ugly past as ugly, but still of God. Meanwhile, Jeremiah (19: 3-6) conveys God saying, “No I never gave any such command about infant sacrifice. It would never even enter my mind. Those who attribute it to me were wrong. These are the commands of false and bloody god.”
As we wrestle with God’s word, especially some its parts that seem barbaric and bizarre, are we more to be like Ezekiel—“OK, it was pretty bad, but sadly necessary back then,” or Jeremiah—“No, I never commanded what some people said I did. It would never enter my mind”?
Alison (and Jeremiah, too) is provocatively practicing what I call a “Pentecostal hermeneutic” (hermeneutic meaning tool or method of interpretation). By that I’m suggesting that the Holy Spirit is a a key, but of course very elusive, untamed player in our interpretation of scripture. The Spirit is who makes scripture come alive, who brings up to the surface fresh streams that were subterranean in the scriptures before, who empowers us, like a skilled blacksmith to beat and bend scripture to new situations. I know this will strike some as dangerously open-ended and subjective, but I believe it is both very Reformed (equally Word and Spirit, where the Holy Spirit is the One who makes the scriptures become alive and important) and very faithful to what we see happening in scripture itself. The story of the inclusion of the gentiles in Acts 15 strikes me as the preeminent example of a Pentecostal hermeneutic. “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us…”
The other option (ironically practiced by most Pentecostals today) is what Alison calls the “Koranic temptation.” Like Muslims and their Koran, this way of interpretation, sees holy books as so fixed, so charmed, so static, as to be beyond interpretation. The reader, like Ezekiel, is always on the defensive, always protective from probing and change. While some Christians would call this a “high view” of scripture, it actually treats scripture more as a flat and lifeless fossil, where there is no role for the Spirit.
Whatever you think of Alison’s case-study on infant sacrifice, he does us good service in reminding us that scripture is alive, that the Spirit builds on (and sometimes bends, too) the old, to speak afresh and anew to every age. Moreover, while we see, and sometimes celebrate, the many ways Pentecostal Christians have influenced today’s church, adopting a truly Pentecostal hermeneutic for the Bible might be the gift we need most.
Reader Comments (10)
Steve,
Fascinating at the very least....
Recently at a Classis exam of a student one of the ministers of Classis asked ,"If you feel the Spirit telling you something other than the Bible which do you go with?" I The student answered "The Bible." I think that if the student had been to Alison's seminar it would have made for a lively examination!. The question leads me to believe that you and Alison are on to something that is on the minds of others in our denomination.
I look forward to what others have to say on your Post...
Justin Meyers
J. Phillip Newell, in his devotional book Celtic Treasure, opens each mediation by citing the Holy Spirit as the one who is the "Fire of Life." Without making too many cheesy analogies, it is interesting to note that no two fires burn alike, nor are any two lives lived exactly the same way. The Holy Spirit, who is equal in divine nature to God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, sustains us. Not only that, but She moves within the world giving life and breath to old words as they speak anew to us.
I consider it very gracious of God to allow the Holy Spirit to speak to us in new ways that we understand. If we read scripture and do not allow Holy Spirit to move and change us, to bend and mold us, then we denying the ability that God has to be a living God to all people and to all generations.
Peace be with you,
Andrew Meyers
Steve:
The Spirit's ministry in Bible interpretation does not mean it gives new revelation. His work is always through and in association with the written Word of God, not beyond it or in addition to it. The Holy Spirit and the Word operate together.
You conclude, “…scripture is alive, that the Spirit builds on (and sometimes bends, too) the old, to speak afresh and anew to every age.”
Question-how does the spirit bend and speak afresh to the following passages today?
Ephesians 2:8, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is a gift of God…”
Matthew 5:3, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”.
Matthew 10:28, “[Jesus speaking] and do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell”.
In addition, how do we know when the spirit has changed the intent of the Word He previously inspired and protected?
Thanks for helping me think through this new hermeneutic!
Jeremy Visser
I'll take a quick stab at some of your questions.
Ephesians 2:8-
This verse is found in the middle of the writers description of Christian's new identity. I believe Ephesians is breaking down the conflict between Jewish and Gentile Christians (as does much of the Pauline letters). This passage comes in a section of scripture that calls its readers to humbleness, submitting to the idea that their salvation comes from Christ, not their own identities. It is saying that their they will be raised with Christ not because of their identity in one of these groups, but because they have faith in Jesus Christ. This is immediately followed by an exhortation to not think of one group as better than the other. Paul is saying, you are no longer Jewish Christians or Gentile Christians, rather all are brought near by Christ, there is no stranger or alien anymore.
Maybe then Paul is saying in 2:8 that it is by faith that you all have been saved. Your salvation does not come from your identity as Jewish or Gentile Christian. This passage is identifying where our hope and salvation come from, but it also calls the community to unity, to stop their fighting and bickering, and to lived as unified people who can be called a "dwelling place for God"
Once we understand this context we can understand how the Holy Spirit breaths new life into our situations. Through this verse the Holy Spirit teaches us to love one another. To not consider white people superior to black people, to not consider one denomination more or less "Christian" than another, to not consider republicans to be more "Christian" than democrats, etc... The Holy Spirit allows us to understand the scripture in a new and fresh way. The Holy Spirit does not bend the idea of the fact that our salvation comes through Christ, however when we realize why the writer of Ephesians was writing this here, we see how the Holy Spirit is living through this larger passage in our world today.
Grace and Peace,
Andrew Meyes
Great discussion! I have a question. If hermeneutics is a tool for studying the Scripture how can it be called a Pentecostal hermeneutic?
It is like saying, "Here is my Pentecostal hammer. I use it to build only houses for people who speak in tongues and practice the giftings of the Holy Spirit and I have another hammer over here that I use to frame houses for people from the Reformed Church."
It would seem that the hermenutic tool remains the same for everyone. Could it be the eye of the person looking through the lens of the tool; defines what one beholds?
God bless you
KD
Thanks for the feedback. I realize this is a potentially slippery-slope, but let me try to clarify a few things.
Of course for Christians, Christ is the definitive revelation. So Spirit and Christ do not compete or contradict.
An analogy when I teach freshmen about "word" and 'Spirit" is that the word/scripture is like a stake and a long leash. The Spirit is a wild, fun-loving, curious dog tied to that leash. Spirit is often sniffing around the edges. Does the leash stretch that far? Certainly not far enough to include gentiles in the Church. But wait, the leash does go that far. Far enough to endorse the end of slavery? Obviously not, given all the passages about slavery in the Bible. Hey, but look that persistent Spirit hound found his way out to abolition of slavery. So it goes.
I would caution that these "stretches of the leash" take time and are never/rarely individual, but rather the Spirit speaks best in groups. In other words, I'm not endorsing nut cases who say, "The Spirit told me to dye my hair purple and start a new religion." The church rejected the heresey of "montanism" long ago. Sadly, this is what many would understand as "Pentecostal Hermeneutic." As I said in my original post, most Pentecostals today read and interpret the Bible the way Muslims read the Koran.
In calling it a "Pentecostal Hermeneutic" I am trying to point toward the power, creativity, boldness and innovation that the Spirit brings to the church and the way we read scripture. The inclusion of the gentiles being the best example. If the original leaders of the church and Paul had a "proof-texting contest" at the Jerusalem Council, Paul and his gospel for the gentiles would have lost. But the Holy Spirit stretched the leash farther than almost anyone thought it could go. I'm simply saying, "Keeping stretching the leash, Holy Spirit!"
Jeremy, I haven't responded to your specific verses, but this is getting too long already. I'd only say, the Spirit's role need not always be "stretching" but also refreshing, so like in the Ephesians 2 passage, in the heart of someone like Luther, by the power of the Spirit, it suddenly becomes a thunderblast from heaven about the Gospel being about grace, not self-effort.
Klaas, no doubt everyone's experiences and background shapes their own hermeneutic. Who we are affects how we read. But that isn't saying any hermeneutic is as good as anyone else's. There are ways to be trained, masters to learn from. For me James Alison is one of those people. Even more I'm saying, the Holy Spirit can do wonderful, innovative and surprising things though the scriptures.
Greetings all,
It doesn't seem to me that Paul's gospel for the Jew and the Gentile ought to be considered in the same breath as an understanding that discredits the historical accuracy of the Biblical text. After all we have in God's Word the words of Christ, the revelation that Paul received, and the revelation that Peter received all of which proclaimed salvation for peoples from every tribe, tongue, and nation through faith in Christ. On the other hand in all my reading of scripture I've never once read anything about Romulus, Oedipus, how being wrong makes one more Christ-like, or God's demanding of infant sacrifice. In fact it seems that you have misunderstood the context of the verse from Ezekiel that you use. When the Lord says he "gave" them over to laws that were not good we should see this in contrast with his good laws he had given "by which you will live". Laws which they had rejected. He did not (actively) decree new laws for them, rather he (passively) allowed them to suffer in their rebellion and follow the wicked and detestable ways of the Canaanites until he would once again return to them and bless them. I apologize if I speak too strongly but to attribute an order of infant sacrifice outside of the specific instance of Abraham and Isaac seems to be presumptuous at best.
I fear that in our desire to come up with new and more dazzling explanations and interpretations of scripture we all too often lose the basic truth of the scriptures. "Christ Jesus came to the world to save sinners, of whom I am the worst." As the worst of sinners I am humbled before the Lord, I am in need of his salvation, and I am in awe of the Lord as he has revealed himself through his Word. I am aware that I properly understand the Word only because of the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit and I am humbled before it because it is the very Word of God also through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I must ask, as Mr. Visser did, how would the Spirit clearly inspire new revelations in addition to those he has given us and to whom would he make these clear? If I am not enlightened to this newly found truth am I less of a Christian? Need I abandon 2000 years of Church history and understanding in order to profess this newly revealed absolute truth of God which has been revealed to you? What is there to convict me of this and how would I authoritatively teach this command? And why would our understanding of the gospel need to be expanded? As you can tell I am quite skeptical.
In one final note I must reject what you put forward as an either or. You say that either we fully adhere to a view of the Spirit as constantly molding and changing what the Scriptures intended to say or we accept the other extreme that the Bible is so transcendent to be beyond meaningful understanding. This is helpful for your argument because it paints your perspective as the most logical and pragmatic for the Christian life, however it does not portray an accurate set of options at hand for the Christian. In fact the orthodox Reformed have held that the Spirit is always at work in our hearts when we read the Word, but that he does not add to it nor change it whimsically. Rather, the Word was sufficient from the time it was first inspired to teach all that God desired to reveal of himself to his elect. This view maintains a doctrinal continuity while allowing the Spirit to give us an accurate understanding of the inspired text in our own day. This view is in contrast to both of the options you have given.
Rather than claim these new “revelations” I would prefer to deepen my understanding of the gospel as recorded in God's holy Word and grow eternally more humble before it. This does not mean that I won’t acknowledge past faults among Christ’s Church, but it does mean that I won’t seek to alter the scriptures in favor of an interpretation which better pleases me.
Steve,
I believe that most people have moved on toe the next blog....sex is so much more sexy than hermeneutics but I have been thinking about this since your initial post....
Calvin talks about something called accommodation...I'm sure you've heard of it...that God accommodates to us since we are unable to understand the mind of God. This means that God speaks to us in a way that we understand....to the world that we understand. Now as our world view changes...as our understanding of the world changes...wouldn't God need to change the language that God uses because we understand things better in some areas, maybe less well in others?
A pentecostal hermeneutic takes seriously this idea of accommodation and makes the Bible relevant to all generations even as each generation understands the world in a different way. The Spirit bridges the generations as God continues to accommodate to us.
Justin
Thanks Justin, and well Ben, I don't think I'm going to say things you want me to say, but I will say this:
I don't think anywhere I talked about a "new revelation." Jesus Christ is the revelation--unsurpassable. So was the gentile inclusion a new revelation or the abolition of slavery "new" or just the working of the Spirit to bring about a better, fuller understanding of the revelation of Jesus? I used the image of subterranean streams coming to surface, or I've heard it compared to notes in a symphony that previously seemed unimportant, taking on new prominence. It isn't "new". It has always been there. It is new to us.
Ben, I would agree that we should be wary when scripture only says things that please us. Maybe we should first use that to examine ourselves before making it an accusation of others. I also sense that one can use this maxim--that the Bible necessarily will say things we don't care for--as a defense to protect us from what the Spirit may be saying to us today, things that stretch us, threaten us and we don't like. Maybe we also need the maxim, the Spirit will necessarily lead and say things to us that don't want to hear.
You are right that a "Pentecostal hermenuetic" and the "Koranic temptation" are two extremes. Most Christians fall somewhere between. I called it the "Pentecostal hermeneutic" somewhat in homage to the holiness and Pentecostal groups of 1800's that did truly practice a Pentecostal hermeneutic--being on the cutting edge of the abolition movement, citing Joel's prophesy to support women in church leadership, etc.
Too many Christians have wrongly thought they can find refuge in a Koranic reading of the Bible. Having drunken the kool-aid of the Enlightenment, these Christians have sought some "objective" "impartial" and universal way of knowing. They have tried to make the Bible into this universal foundation through all sorts of contorted arguments to "prove" its absolute and objective truth. A Pentecostal hermeneutic is simply saying the Spirit is as active in the current reading and interpreting of scripture as at its writing. Not always in making giant leaps like abolition, but always in making in the Word alive today.
Kool-aid of the Enlightenment....love it!!!!!
Justin