Interpretation

Thank you to everyone for your comments. I think David raises an interesting point about interpretation, the technical term is hermeneutics. How does hermeneutics work with an ancient text? how can we know what it means today?

There are many literature classics on my bookshelf. One example is Emma by Jane Austen. I quite like Austen, I like the tweeness of the situations and the pictures and characters she creates who have a touch of authenticity sorely lacking sometimes in writing today. But. It was written an awful long time ago which means that some of the meaning is lost on me. The cultural symbols and references are alien to me unless I know what they mean or represent. So my copy of Emma has a running commentary of footnotes to explain to the perplexed what on earth is going on sometimes. It enhances my enjoyment as it means that some sections aren't incomprehensible.

How much more the New Testament? Written to an alien culture 2000 years ago to a group of people trying to make sense of where their beliefs sit in the grand scheme of things. How do we bridge that 2000 year gap? There are broad strategies for doing this and I'll highlight two of them.

Using the example of 1 Timothy 2:11. 'Women should learn quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly'.

This little statement is deeply controversial, so what do we do with it today?

Option one: It says what it says, don't read anything into it and carry out this instruction now as it was then, therefore women shouldn't be in an authority position in the church.

Option two: Try and understand the culture. Up until the time Paul wrote women weren't even allowed to be taught the Law and the Gospel has given them enormous freedom. They are abusing that newfound freedom so their enthusiasm has to be curbed. Today, this is actually a teaching about putting new believers in leadership and teaching positions.

It's not easy, option one is very direct and culturally ignorant but at least it's clear, option two is wishy washy. Even more so for Revelation, I wonder how it should be read today?

Left Behind

I remember in 1996 going to a Christian bookshop in Armagh, Northern Ireland and buying an interesting looking novel called 'Left Behind'. It tells the story of how Christians will be raptured by Christ so that believers don't have to face all the catatrophes waiting for humanity as described in Revelation. I remember thinking that there would be a sequel. I own all 11 sequels.

The Rapture is a particular interpretation of Revelation called Premillennial Dispensationalism, there are many others. If PreDip is correct then what are the implications for witness, evangelism, Christian living? Does it motivate us to share our faith or does it get us off the hook because Jesus will sort it? Also think about why such thinking is popular in Western culture and not as popular in areas where Christians are persecuted?

Responses and Rapture

I've been away for a wee while and I hope people don't mind if I respond to their comments with a post all its own.

Sonja - Your Dad is right that 'rapture' is a relatively recent doctrine, 1827 with John Nelson Darby although some believe that early fathers like Augustine and Origen were actually the first to do so, this is of course disputed.

John - Excellent questions.

Firstly I don't think a complex message like that in Revelation can be summarised in a Tweet. 140 words can't do it justice. I think perhaps 'This is the true identity of Jesus. Some of you can be encouraged and some should be scared because the Empire is truly evil. God knows this.'

Secondly John was using Apocalyptic imagery taken straight from Daniel and others in the OT. The only change is that the OT was now being interpreted as having its fulfilment in Jesus. At the start of my series I'll be covering who, why, where and what so that's all I want to say for now on this blog if that's alright.