Perspective Digest

Volume 14 Issue 3 Summer Article 2

2009

Hermeneutics and Culture

Lael Caesar Andrews University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd

Part of the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons

Recommended Citation Caesar, Lael (2009) "Hermeneutics and Culture," Perspective Digest: Vol. 14 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/2

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Adventist Theological Society at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Perspective Digest by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture BY LAEL CAESAR* their vision of what it is to be fully more, rather than less, than some- human.”2 thing else as human as culture. So we Culture is everything. It is “the wonder aloud: Could Scripture, as a integrated pattern of human knowl- part, be greater than the whole called edge, be lief, and behavior that de- culture? Is there a single scriptural HERMENEUTICS pends upon man’s capacity for interpretation that may be determi- learning and transmitting knowl- native for all behavior, when inter- edge to succeeding genera tions.”3 preters and “behavers” come from Culture may also be described as and operate in cultural contexts as “the customary beliefs, social forms, varied as New Delhi, New Guinea, AND CULTURE and material traits of a racial, reli- New York, and New South Wales? gious, or social group.”4 Hence, cul- The question seems legitimate even ture as concept embraces what we within Adventism’s unified church believe, how we behave, and what we body. Given its representation from Despite the vast differences of human cultures, possess. hundreds of cultures, whose criteria should define the social forms that whether dramatic or subtle, God has revealed Himself to The Scope of the Problem are truly typical of Seventh-day Ad- all of humanity through His Word. Because of distinctive practices ventism? Whose theorizing unifies demarcating the global phenome- and har monizes the distinct philo- iblical hermeneutics and hu - Defining Culture non of Seventh-day Adventism sophical outlooks born of this plu- man socialization are a signifi- Biblical hermeneutics refers to the (worship, diet, and even dress), this rality of mental sets? cantly uncom fortable pair. In- science, such as it is, of the interpre- particular denomination provides a These several questions are all va- Bdeed, it is only natural for tation of Scripture. But what is particularly intriguing context for rieties of a single, urgent query. culture and hermeneutics to be meant by “cul ture”? What does the the discussion of culture. Eve rything Stated in just three words, it asks: in con stant contention, yet they are idea of culture embrace? It could a conventional Seventh-day Ad - Whose biblical hermeneutics? In an forever in company with one an- also be appropriately asked: What ventist does seems to be dictated by earlier time, theo logical open-mind- other. They seem to claim the same does culture not embrace? some fundamental belief of the edness already signified sensitivity to level of authority for determining Culture has been defined as, “The church, all of which, it is claimed, is the existence of Latin Ameri can, human behavior. While a believer study of people’s beliefs about the founded on Scripture. Yet, despite African-American, South Korean, may hold that God and His Word are meaning of life and about what it the all-encompassing nature of this Indian, and other theologies, na- everything, that very same believer, means to be hu man.”1 It is “the theology, any one of the foregoing tional, ethnic, or gender based. Nei- as anthropologist or sociologist, world of human meaning, the sum definitions helps to show that our ther the misguided but resilient idea knows that culture is everything. total of a people’s works that express faith in Scripture’s transcendence is of race nor the notion of distinct de- This is be cause, despite our faith in in objective form their highest be- itself only part of our total social mi- nominational identity may effec- the Holy Scriptures as authoritative, liefs, values, and hopes—in short, lieu. tively protect us from the issue infallible, and prescriptive of con- Our spiritual instincts may not raised in these three words: Whose duct, no one has ever experienced *Lael Caesar, Ph.D., is a Professor of take kindly to such an acknowledg- biblical hermeneutics? Scripture outside of a hu man social Religion at Andrews University, ment. We may object on the convic- Nevertheless, worship practices at context. Berrien Springs, Michigan. tion that God’s Word should be the local level suggest that the ques-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews24 University, 2009 1 25 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 BY LAEL CAESAR* their vision of what it is to be fully more, rather than less, than some- human.”2 thing else as human as culture. So we Culture is everything. It is “the wonder aloud: Could Scripture, as a integrated pattern of human knowl- part, be greater than the whole called edge, be lief, and behavior that de- culture? Is there a single scriptural HERMENEUTICS pends upon man’s capacity for interpretation that may be determi- learning and transmitting knowl- native for all behavior, when inter- edge to succeeding genera tions.”3 preters and “behavers” come from Culture may also be described as and operate in cultural contexts as “the customary beliefs, social forms, varied as New Delhi, New Guinea, AND CULTURE and material traits of a racial, reli- New York, and New South Wales? gious, or social group.”4 Hence, cul- The question seems legitimate even ture as concept embraces what we within Adventism’s unified church believe, how we behave, and what we body. Given its representation from Despite the vast differences of human cultures, possess. hundreds of cultures, whose criteria should define the social forms that whether dramatic or subtle, God has revealed Himself to The Scope of the Problem are truly typical of Seventh-day Ad- all of humanity through His Word. Because of distinctive practices ventism? Whose theorizing unifies demarcating the global phenome- and har monizes the distinct philo- iblical hermeneutics and hu - Defining Culture non of Seventh-day Adventism sophical outlooks born of this plu- man socialization are a signifi- Biblical hermeneutics refers to the (worship, diet, and even dress), this rality of mental sets? cantly uncom fortable pair. In- science, such as it is, of the interpre- particular denomination provides a These several questions are all va- Bdeed, it is only natural for tation of Scripture. But what is particularly intriguing context for rieties of a single, urgent query. culture and hermeneutics to be meant by “cul ture”? What does the the discussion of culture. Eve rything Stated in just three words, it asks: in con stant contention, yet they are idea of culture embrace? It could a conventional Seventh-day Ad - Whose biblical hermeneutics? In an forever in company with one an- also be appropriately asked: What ventist does seems to be dictated by earlier time, theo logical open-mind- other. They seem to claim the same does culture not embrace? some fundamental belief of the edness already signified sensitivity to level of authority for determining Culture has been defined as, “The church, all of which, it is claimed, is the existence of Latin Ameri can, human behavior. While a believer study of people’s beliefs about the founded on Scripture. Yet, despite African-American, South Korean, may hold that God and His Word are meaning of life and about what it the all-encompassing nature of this Indian, and other theologies, na- everything, that very same believer, means to be hu man.”1 It is “the theology, any one of the foregoing tional, ethnic, or gender based. Nei- as anthropologist or sociologist, world of human meaning, the sum definitions helps to show that our ther the misguided but resilient idea knows that culture is everything. total of a people’s works that express faith in Scripture’s transcendence is of race nor the notion of distinct de- This is be cause, despite our faith in in objective form their highest be- itself only part of our total social mi- nominational identity may effec- the Holy Scriptures as authoritative, liefs, values, and hopes—in short, lieu. tively protect us from the issue infallible, and prescriptive of con- Our spiritual instincts may not raised in these three words: Whose duct, no one has ever experienced *Lael Caesar, Ph.D., is a Professor of take kindly to such an acknowledg- biblical hermeneutics? Scripture outside of a hu man social Religion at Andrews University, ment. We may object on the convic- Nevertheless, worship practices at context. Berrien Springs, Michigan. tion that God’s Word should be the local level suggest that the ques-

24 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/225 2 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture tion is even more open today. C. Ellis ligion while, simultaneously, the in- Changes in history, alterations of time and place, Nelson accurately labels the individ- dividual self finds fuller vindication ual con gregation as “the primary so- than ever.7 matter a great deal, so much so that it is at least probable ciety of Christians.”5 Similarly, Wade that the same individual, if he or she were to live at different Clark Roof and William McKinney Cultural and Interpretive times or places, like some Connecticut Yankee in King observe that “individuals sharing a Fragmentation common outlook or behavioral style The chance or choice of psycho- Arthur’s court, would have different reactions to, and beliefs increasingly cluster around those in- logical makeup is hardly the only about, the world around him or her. stitutions . . . of which they approve.”6 factor in fluencing trends toward Not a few denominational leaders theological fragmentation and cul- have already confirmed, by personal tural pluralism.8 There are others. observation, what many contempo- 1. Changes in history. Changes in desires—that it is ideas we already as truth. Whether among biblicists rary believers know by continu ous history, alterations of time and hold that decide, in the end, what or otherwise, components of the experience: The local congregation, at place, matter a great deal, so much we will believe about the world. In mental status quo, which conditions least as much as national or inter- so that it is at least probable that the this sense, worldviews are the result the observations that lead to truth national church headquarters, is the same individual, if he or she were to of our preconceptions. On this, (conclu sions about reality) are true theology-defining, perception- live at different times or places, like Stephen B. Bevans is categorical: called presuppositions. shaping, con science- educating, iden- some Connecticut Yankee in King “Reality is mediated by . . . a meaning Presuppositions are the columns tity-giving, culture-establishing agent Arthur’s court, would have different we give it in the context of our cul- that support the chosen platform in their lives. reactions to, and beliefs about, the ture or our historical period, inter- from which the individual launches Thus, as “conservatives” cluster world around him or her. preted from our own par ticular the independent interpretation of together to reinforce their “culture 2. Difficulty of objectivity. Besides horizon and in our own particular data. They are the foundation of our of rever ence,” their psychological or the protean nature of the factors of thought forms.”11 philosophy of fact, the support for chronological opposites, labeled time and place, the objectivity of the 3. Presuppositions. The positions the worldview that governs values perhaps as “more enlightened liber- subject, as observer, is perpetually of Smith and Bevans signal the exis- and determines possibility. als,” assemble elsewhere to establish open to question. As Huston Smith tence of a mental status quo, a belief- Because presuppositions are the and affirm their own wor ship code. puts it, “Perception is a two-way determining disposition, which an- basis for our observations and con- Through this ongoing process, the process. The world comes to us, and ticipates the interplay between our clusions, Robert L. Reymond notes faith and practice of two Seventh- we go to it—with inbuilt sensors, eyes and what they will see, between that disagreements between believer day Adventist congregations of sim- concepts, beliefs, and desires that fil- our ears and what they will hear, be - and unbeliever about “biblical facts” ilar ethnic or racial composition ter its incoming signals in ways that tween our faculties of observation are not a discussion about facts at within North America may now dif- differ in every species, every social and what they will interpret. all. The unbeliever is often so labeled fer as widely as between one congre- class, and every individual.”9 Because of this mental status quo precisely because she rejects the gation from North America and an - As he goes on to state, Smith is or mindset, people either believe or Bible as a reliable source of facts.12 other from West Africa. here concerned with how “our con- disbelieve based on what they ob- John Naisbitt and Patricia Abur- cepts, beliefs, and desires affect serve. Particularly among biblicists, Presuppositions and Biblical dene’s paradoxical vision in Mega- worldviews.”10 Note the suggestion the end result of that interplay be- Hermeneutics trends 2000, in letter if not in spirit, in Smith’s words that worldviews are tween observing faculties and the re- In biblical interpretation, the role is now reality, as crowds seek re - modified by concepts, beliefs, and alities of the biblical text is spoken of of presuppositions can hardly be ex-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews26 University, 2009 3 27 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 tion is even more open today. C. Ellis ligion while, simultaneously, the in- Changes in history, alterations of time and place, Nelson accurately labels the individ- dividual self finds fuller vindication ual con gregation as “the primary so- than ever.7 matter a great deal, so much so that it is at least probable ciety of Christians.”5 Similarly, Wade that the same individual, if he or she were to live at different Clark Roof and William McKinney Cultural and Interpretive times or places, like some Connecticut Yankee in King observe that “individuals sharing a Fragmentation common outlook or behavioral style The chance or choice of psycho- Arthur’s court, would have different reactions to, and beliefs increasingly cluster around those in- logical makeup is hardly the only about, the world around him or her. stitutions . . . of which they approve.”6 factor in fluencing trends toward Not a few denominational leaders theological fragmentation and cul- have already confirmed, by personal tural pluralism.8 There are others. observation, what many contempo- 1. Changes in history. Changes in desires—that it is ideas we already as truth. Whether among biblicists rary believers know by continu ous history, alterations of time and hold that decide, in the end, what or otherwise, components of the experience: The local congregation, at place, matter a great deal, so much we will believe about the world. In mental status quo, which conditions least as much as national or inter- so that it is at least probable that the this sense, worldviews are the result the observations that lead to truth national church headquarters, is the same individual, if he or she were to of our preconceptions. On this, (conclu sions about reality) are true theology-defining, perception- live at different times or places, like Stephen B. Bevans is categorical: called presuppositions. shaping, con science- educating, iden- some Connecticut Yankee in King “Reality is mediated by . . . a meaning Presuppositions are the columns tity-giving, culture-establishing agent Arthur’s court, would have different we give it in the context of our cul- that support the chosen platform in their lives. reactions to, and beliefs about, the ture or our historical period, inter- from which the individual launches Thus, as “conservatives” cluster world around him or her. preted from our own par ticular the independent interpretation of together to reinforce their “culture 2. Difficulty of objectivity. Besides horizon and in our own particular data. They are the foundation of our of rever ence,” their psychological or the protean nature of the factors of thought forms.”11 philosophy of fact, the support for chronological opposites, labeled time and place, the objectivity of the 3. Presuppositions. The positions the worldview that governs values perhaps as “more enlightened liber- subject, as observer, is perpetually of Smith and Bevans signal the exis- and determines possibility. als,” assemble elsewhere to establish open to question. As Huston Smith tence of a mental status quo, a belief- Because presuppositions are the and affirm their own wor ship code. puts it, “Perception is a two-way determining disposition, which an- basis for our observations and con- Through this ongoing process, the process. The world comes to us, and ticipates the interplay between our clusions, Robert L. Reymond notes faith and practice of two Seventh- we go to it—with inbuilt sensors, eyes and what they will see, between that disagreements between believer day Adventist congregations of sim- concepts, beliefs, and desires that fil- our ears and what they will hear, be - and unbeliever about “biblical facts” ilar ethnic or racial composition ter its incoming signals in ways that tween our faculties of observation are not a discussion about facts at within North America may now dif- differ in every species, every social and what they will interpret. all. The unbeliever is often so labeled fer as widely as between one congre- class, and every individual.”9 Because of this mental status quo precisely because she rejects the gation from North America and an - As he goes on to state, Smith is or mindset, people either believe or Bible as a reliable source of facts.12 other from West Africa. here concerned with how “our con- disbelieve based on what they ob- John Naisbitt and Patricia Abur- cepts, beliefs, and desires affect serve. Particularly among biblicists, Presuppositions and Biblical dene’s paradoxical vision in Mega- worldviews.”10 Note the suggestion the end result of that interplay be- Hermeneutics trends 2000, in letter if not in spirit, in Smith’s words that worldviews are tween observing faculties and the re- In biblical interpretation, the role is now reality, as crowds seek re - modified by concepts, beliefs, and alities of the biblical text is spoken of of presuppositions can hardly be ex-

26 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/227 4 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture The influence of ahistoricist presuppositions in the recent dismiss the discovery of authorial himself may be from the reader: intention as impossible, as well as “You, the reader,” he writes, “do not world of hermeneutics is easily documented. Their propo- others who think we can do no bet- know me, the author. The text of this nents include some who dismiss the discovery of authorial in- ter than focus attention “on the final book does not truly reflect my per- 15 sonality. That is, of course, obvious; tention as impossible, as well as others who think we can do form of the text itself.” For this rea- son, it seems appropriate, both from the question, however, is whether it no better than focus attention “on the final form of the text a hermeneutical and a cultural per - adequately reflects my thoughts on itself.” For this reason, it seems appropriate, both from a spective, to discuss the role of his- the possibility of meaning. Can you toricism and its proper relation to as reader understand my opposition hermeneutical and a cultural perspective, to discuss the role our subject. to polyvalence, or is this text au- of historicism and its proper relation to our subject. tonomous from my views? At this Importance of Historicism in moment I am writing in the library Biblical Hermeneutics of the theology faculty of the Uni- “An essential aspect of herme - versity of Marburg. Certainly many aggerated. By way of example, fa- This skepticism about historicity neutics,” Grant Osborne states, “is of the professors here, schooled in mous 20th-century New Testament in the Bible and other literary texts the effect of cultural heritage and the existential or historical-critical scholar Rudolf Bultmann made clear (par ticularly ancient texts) may be world view on interpretation.”16 Ear- approaches and having grown up in that his biblical studies depended referred to as an ahistoricist herme - lier comments on the prevalence of the German culture, will read these upon a specific and indispensable neutic. The words of Hollywood an ahistoricist mindset in the field of arguments from a quite different presupposition. He maintained that filmmaker John Ford open a win- literary criticism permit us to ac- perspective. The question is not “the one presupposition that cannot dow on the reasoning be hind this knowledge ahistoricism as not only whether they will agree but whether be dismissed is the historical method hermeneutic that characterizes so an influential factor with literary they can understand my arguments. of interrogating the text.”13 much of our modern literary cul- theorists, but also an important ele- I will not be around to clarify my Though Bultmann’s use of the ture: “When faced with the fact or ment of the culture of our times. points, so certainly this written com- term presupposition deserves further the legend, print the legend.”14 Not Francis Schaeffer’s practical pro- munication lacks the dynamic of examination, his message is clear: To that myth and legend are inherently posal confronts the ahistoricist oral speech. Moreover, those readers judge by his categorical language, bib- immoral. Within reasonable bound- mindset on its own ground. Accord- without the necessary philosophical lical her meneutics at least involves aries, expressions of fantasy honor ing to Schaeffer, human beings con- background will definitely struggle some convictions on the part of the the God who endowed human be- tradict their own claim that life is ir- with the concepts herein. interpreter. These convictions range ings with powers of imagination. rational by attempting to live in an However, does this mean that no from a conservative faith that the But applied to the Bible, an ahistori- organized manner, follow programs, amount of clarification can im part message of the text’s historical author cist hermeneutic disallows the possi- and rely on public transportation the meaning that I seek to commu- can be recovered, to a deconstruc- bility that in Scripture we have ac- schedules.17 nicate in these paragraphs? I think tionist insistence that this is impossi- cess to proposi tional truth, given to And Osborne shows how this re- not?”18 ble; from the belief that this is neces- humanity by God. spect for comprehensibility may be Osborne’s tongue-in-cheek re- sary, to a postmodern affirmation The influence of ahistoricist pre- applied to reading, specifically, to marks not only settle the argu ment that it is irrelevant, since the reader’s suppositions in the recent world of understanding the message and in- of intentionality and confirm the response is the meaning, or, at any herme neutics is easily documented. tention of an author through his reasonableness of historicist herme - rate, the meaning that matters. Their proponents include some who text, however distant the author neu tics, but also demonstrate the ef-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews28 University, 2009 5 29 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 The influence of ahistoricist presuppositions in the recent dismiss the discovery of authorial himself may be from the reader: intention as impossible, as well as “You, the reader,” he writes, “do not world of hermeneutics is easily documented. Their propo- others who think we can do no bet- know me, the author. The text of this nents include some who dismiss the discovery of authorial in- ter than focus attention “on the final book does not truly reflect my per- 15 sonality. That is, of course, obvious; tention as impossible, as well as others who think we can do form of the text itself.” For this rea- son, it seems appropriate, both from the question, however, is whether it no better than focus attention “on the final form of the text a hermeneutical and a cultural per - adequately reflects my thoughts on itself.” For this reason, it seems appropriate, both from a spective, to discuss the role of his- the possibility of meaning. Can you toricism and its proper relation to as reader understand my opposition hermeneutical and a cultural perspective, to discuss the role our subject. to polyvalence, or is this text au- of historicism and its proper relation to our subject. tonomous from my views? At this Importance of Historicism in moment I am writing in the library Biblical Hermeneutics of the theology faculty of the Uni- “An essential aspect of herme - versity of Marburg. Certainly many aggerated. By way of example, fa- This skepticism about historicity neutics,” Grant Osborne states, “is of the professors here, schooled in mous 20th-century New Testament in the Bible and other literary texts the effect of cultural heritage and the existential or historical-critical scholar Rudolf Bultmann made clear (par ticularly ancient texts) may be world view on interpretation.”16 Ear- approaches and having grown up in that his biblical studies depended referred to as an ahistoricist herme - lier comments on the prevalence of the German culture, will read these upon a specific and indispensable neutic. The words of Hollywood an ahistoricist mindset in the field of arguments from a quite different presupposition. He maintained that filmmaker John Ford open a win- literary criticism permit us to ac- perspective. The question is not “the one presupposition that cannot dow on the reasoning be hind this knowledge ahistoricism as not only whether they will agree but whether be dismissed is the historical method hermeneutic that characterizes so an influential factor with literary they can understand my arguments. of interrogating the text.”13 much of our modern literary cul- theorists, but also an important ele- I will not be around to clarify my Though Bultmann’s use of the ture: “When faced with the fact or ment of the culture of our times. points, so certainly this written com- term presupposition deserves further the legend, print the legend.”14 Not Francis Schaeffer’s practical pro- munication lacks the dynamic of examination, his message is clear: To that myth and legend are inherently posal confronts the ahistoricist oral speech. Moreover, those readers judge by his categorical language, bib- immoral. Within reasonable bound- mindset on its own ground. Accord- without the necessary philosophical lical her meneutics at least involves aries, expressions of fantasy honor ing to Schaeffer, human beings con- background will definitely struggle some convictions on the part of the the God who endowed human be- tradict their own claim that life is ir- with the concepts herein. interpreter. These convictions range ings with powers of imagination. rational by attempting to live in an However, does this mean that no from a conservative faith that the But applied to the Bible, an ahistori- organized manner, follow programs, amount of clarification can im part message of the text’s historical author cist hermeneutic disallows the possi- and rely on public transportation the meaning that I seek to commu- can be recovered, to a deconstruc- bility that in Scripture we have ac- schedules.17 nicate in these paragraphs? I think tionist insistence that this is impossi- cess to proposi tional truth, given to And Osborne shows how this re- not?”18 ble; from the belief that this is neces- humanity by God. spect for comprehensibility may be Osborne’s tongue-in-cheek re- sary, to a postmodern affirmation The influence of ahistoricist pre- applied to reading, specifically, to marks not only settle the argu ment that it is irrelevant, since the reader’s suppositions in the recent world of understanding the message and in- of intentionality and confirm the response is the meaning, or, at any herme neutics is easily documented. tention of an author through his reasonableness of historicist herme - rate, the meaning that matters. Their proponents include some who text, however distant the author neu tics, but also demonstrate the ef-

28 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/229 6 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture fectiveness of communication across Transcultural Truth: The Bible as Besides its revelation of “the culture of heaven,” cultural lines. This general truth Textbook holds particular importance for Sev- The Bible itself has much to say the Bible’s value in such study relates to its remarkable close- enth-day Adventists today, given the about truth’s comprehensibility and ness to so much in so many of the cultures of earth. multiplicity of nuances that divide proper interpretation across cul- Particularly, in relation to the times of its own composition, it and subdivide the church’s cultural tures. The better our herme neutics units and subunits from one an- can relate to the culture of Scripture, is forever wedded to local culture. The languages of other. the better we may apply our bibli cal Scripture reflect the language of daily life in Bible lands Acknowledging this once more, hermeneutics to today’s cultures. we may also derive instruction from Bible stories of human beings during the biblical epoch. Osborne’s persuasive words as we re- who successfully access, compre- flect on the intersection between hend, accept, practice, and transmit hermeneutics and culture. Neither divine truth are a testimony to the ences between biblical culture and communication of God’s Word. It the polar opposition between his most dramatic transcultural com- that of other societies has led to a may yet be the best source of insights and the German views, nor the very munication of all. However ax- misguided exaggeration of the diver- into how a proper inter pretation of different academic and religious cul- iomatic, it bears restating that the sities. In listing a number of “cultural God’s message is accessed and trans- tures that they represent, prevents distance between the culture of universals” of constant biblical recur- mitted from culture to culture. him and his detractors from under- heaven and any human culture since rence, they state compellingly: “In a Besides its revelation of “the cul- standing each other, however much the Fall is infinitely greater than that sense the Bible is the most translat- ture of heaven,” the Bible’s value in they might disagree with one an- between any two human cultures. able religious book that has ever been such study relates to its remarkable other. The fact of their disagree- Analysis of these stories bears in- written, for it comes from a particu- closeness to so much in so many of ment, of the detractors’ rejection of struction for those who seek to un- lar time and place (the western end the cultures of earth. Particularly, in his views, argues strongly in favor of derstand the “how” of sound inter- of the Fertile Crescent) through relation to the times of its own com- their ability to understand what he pretation and effective transmission which passed more cul tural patterns position, it is forever wedded to local means. of God’s Word. They are divinely and out from which radiated more culture. The languages of Scripture For Osborne, this is the first documented narratives of just such a distinctive features and values than reflect the language of daily life in question in play: Can we know process, preserved for our study, for has been the case with any other Bible lands during the biblical epoch. “what another person meant in a our extraction of principles, for our place in the history of the world.”20 Biblical Hebrew belongs to the Ca - written account?”19 There is little if encouragement toward success in A comparison of the culture traits naanite branch of the Northwest Se- any reasonable doubt that both the divine program of which both of the Bible with some 2,000 signifi- mitic language family, instead of to friend and foe can grasp what Os- they and we are a part. cantly different people groups in some alien speech form completely borne means in the preceding quo- The work of Eugene Nida and 1981 would have shown, claim Nida removed from the Canaanite culture tation. William Reyburn offers us a valuable and Reyburn, “that in certain re- it so negatively portrays. A second question then follows: com plement to this recommendation spects the Bible is surprisingly closer Aramaic passages first report im- Is it important to know that original on the Bible as a textbook of stories to many of them than to the techno- perial business in Daniel because of in tended meaning? In relation to the guiding us in the method of gospel logical culture of the western the popularity of the language issue of Holy Scripture as God’s interpretation and transmission. world.”21 The Bible is a scarcely among Nebuchadnezzar’s tribespeo- Word, the response must be an un- These respected Bible translators con- mined treasure of case studies on ple. The prophet’s continued use of equivocal Yes! tend that the many striking differ- valid interpretation and transcultural the language (beyond Daniel 2) ei-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews30 University, 2009 7 31 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 fectiveness of communication across Transcultural Truth: The Bible as Besides its revelation of “the culture of heaven,” cultural lines. This general truth Textbook holds particular importance for Sev- The Bible itself has much to say the Bible’s value in such study relates to its remarkable close- enth-day Adventists today, given the about truth’s comprehensibility and ness to so much in so many of the cultures of earth. multiplicity of nuances that divide proper interpretation across cul- Particularly, in relation to the times of its own composition, it and subdivide the church’s cultural tures. The better our herme neutics units and subunits from one an- can relate to the culture of Scripture, is forever wedded to local culture. The languages of other. the better we may apply our bibli cal Scripture reflect the language of daily life in Bible lands Acknowledging this once more, hermeneutics to today’s cultures. we may also derive instruction from Bible stories of human beings during the biblical epoch. Osborne’s persuasive words as we re- who successfully access, compre- flect on the intersection between hend, accept, practice, and transmit hermeneutics and culture. Neither divine truth are a testimony to the ences between biblical culture and communication of God’s Word. It the polar opposition between his most dramatic transcultural com- that of other societies has led to a may yet be the best source of insights and the German views, nor the very munication of all. However ax- misguided exaggeration of the diver- into how a proper inter pretation of different academic and religious cul- iomatic, it bears restating that the sities. In listing a number of “cultural God’s message is accessed and trans- tures that they represent, prevents distance between the culture of universals” of constant biblical recur- mitted from culture to culture. him and his detractors from under- heaven and any human culture since rence, they state compellingly: “In a Besides its revelation of “the cul- standing each other, however much the Fall is infinitely greater than that sense the Bible is the most translat- ture of heaven,” the Bible’s value in they might disagree with one an- between any two human cultures. able religious book that has ever been such study relates to its remarkable other. The fact of their disagree- Analysis of these stories bears in- written, for it comes from a particu- closeness to so much in so many of ment, of the detractors’ rejection of struction for those who seek to un- lar time and place (the western end the cultures of earth. Particularly, in his views, argues strongly in favor of derstand the “how” of sound inter- of the Fertile Crescent) through relation to the times of its own com- their ability to understand what he pretation and effective transmission which passed more cul tural patterns position, it is forever wedded to local means. of God’s Word. They are divinely and out from which radiated more culture. The languages of Scripture For Osborne, this is the first documented narratives of just such a distinctive features and values than reflect the language of daily life in question in play: Can we know process, preserved for our study, for has been the case with any other Bible lands during the biblical epoch. “what another person meant in a our extraction of principles, for our place in the history of the world.”20 Biblical Hebrew belongs to the Ca - written account?”19 There is little if encouragement toward success in A comparison of the culture traits naanite branch of the Northwest Se- any reasonable doubt that both the divine program of which both of the Bible with some 2,000 signifi- mitic language family, instead of to friend and foe can grasp what Os- they and we are a part. cantly different people groups in some alien speech form completely borne means in the preceding quo- The work of Eugene Nida and 1981 would have shown, claim Nida removed from the Canaanite culture tation. William Reyburn offers us a valuable and Reyburn, “that in certain re- it so negatively portrays. A second question then follows: com plement to this recommendation spects the Bible is surprisingly closer Aramaic passages first report im- Is it important to know that original on the Bible as a textbook of stories to many of them than to the techno- perial business in Daniel because of in tended meaning? In relation to the guiding us in the method of gospel logical culture of the western the popularity of the language issue of Holy Scripture as God’s interpretation and transmission. world.”21 The Bible is a scarcely among Nebuchadnezzar’s tribespeo- Word, the response must be an un- These respected Bible translators con- mined treasure of case studies on ple. The prophet’s continued use of equivocal Yes! tend that the many striking differ- valid interpretation and transcultural the language (beyond Daniel 2) ei-

30 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/231 8 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture It is well to acknowledge that Bible truth may, for a tural access to saving truth. Ruth the Moabitess turning to the Familiar ideas, settings, and ac- God of Naomi, or Peter, Paul, and while, have constituted something of a non sequitur to some tions in Ancient Near Eastern life other New Testament gospel preach- of the participants in the Bible narratives. Yet, in the end, yield results quite out of keeping ers persuading Gentiles to become it is clearly possible to know what God means. with societal norms or even the ex- Christian, Abraham, the south Mes - pectations dictated by the narratives’ opotamian, seems to pre sent to his- Equally, Abraham’s response, as described below, clearly human participants. Analyses of mi- tory a case study on God’s specific shows that for some it is not only possible, but lieu need not be out of place. More and successful infusion of a hu man often than not, recognizable local culture. important to know what God means. culture sets the stage for biblical nar- Both Noah’s son Shem and Esau’s rative, and local color casts its hue twin brother Jacob, later called Is- on that narrative. However, re covery rael, hold some claim to being the ther signals his own royal home erary conventions, wise sayings, etc. and understanding of settings in original ancestor for whom God’s training, the discipline of Neb- At the same time, divine revelation local life, sensitivity to the nuances special people were named. Remem- uchadnezzar’s court school, or a is clearly hostile to much of the cul- of local color—these do not explain bering them as Semites, we credit combination of both. Ezra’s usages ture to which it is wedded and in resultant revelation, which, more Shem. If as Israel, we acknowledge occur because at the time of his which it is embedded. Despite its en- often than not, contradicts their ex- Jacob. But it is with Abraham, rather writing, Aramaic was the lingua tanglement with local culture, the pectations. than with either of these, that the franca of the Persian Empire. Be- saving truths of revelation differ un- It is well to acknowledge that story of salvation seems to resume yond his readiness as Jewish priest mistakably from many of the ideas Bible truth may, for a while, have after the Flood. and scholar of the Torah, Ezra was prevailing at the time of its divine constituted something of a non se- Two common stories from the versed in the language of his society. revelation and in our time. Yet for all quitur to some of the participants in Ancient Near East turned to uncom- New Testament Greek is the lan- this, human beings, grounded in the the Bible narratives. Yet, in the end, mon endings by God’s active partic- guage of first-century A.D. love let- cultures of their times, were able to it is clearly possible to know what ipation find their historical setting ters, bills of payment, receipts, and access and understand, accept and God means. Equally, Abraham’s re- in the call of Abraham. Study of the other everyday transactions of the transmit Scripture’s message, provid- sponse, as described below, clearly first, of Abraham, a primary charac- heart and the mar ketplace. ing us with an opportunity to study shows that for some it is not only ter in salvation his tory, answers two Indeed, this basic linguistic com- not only the truths of Scripture, but possible, but important to know major questions: (1) Is it possible to monality with its local environ- also the contexts of their disclosure. what God means. It should produce know what God means? (2) Is it im- ment, repre sents only one step of a By scrutinizing these intersections be- better preparation to address the portant to know? It illustrates God’s multileveled affinity between the tween God and ancient people, we issue of truth’s transcultural inter- commitment to reveal Himself Bible’s ancient authors and their may see them for what they are: doc- pretation in our own time. equally to all cultures. Further, that cultural associates and neighbors. umented interconnections be tween His Word is comprehensible in, Below and above the level of lan- human culture and divine revela- Cultural Grounding, transmissible to, and useful for any guage were common geography, tion. Our scrutiny may well improve Supernatural Difference culture. clothing, housing, social organiza- our response to the question of Abraham is a proper choice for tion, modes of travel, and a multi- sound biblical interpretation as it re- this study because he is “the father of Abraham’s Call From God tude of mores and folkways that are lates to culture, specifically as sound all who believe” (Rom. 4:11, NIV). “‘The God of glory appeared to reflected in surviving law codes, lit- interpretation relates to cross-cul- Also, because, more explicitly than our father Abraham when he was in

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews32 University, 2009 9 33 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 It is well to acknowledge that Bible truth may, for a tural access to saving truth. Ruth the Moabitess turning to the Familiar ideas, settings, and ac- God of Naomi, or Peter, Paul, and while, have constituted something of a non sequitur to some tions in Ancient Near Eastern life other New Testament gospel preach- of the participants in the Bible narratives. Yet, in the end, yield results quite out of keeping ers persuading Gentiles to become it is clearly possible to know what God means. with societal norms or even the ex- Christian, Abraham, the south Mes - pectations dictated by the narratives’ opotamian, seems to pre sent to his- Equally, Abraham’s response, as described below, clearly human participants. Analyses of mi- tory a case study on God’s specific shows that for some it is not only possible, but lieu need not be out of place. More and successful infusion of a hu man often than not, recognizable local culture. important to know what God means. culture sets the stage for biblical nar- Both Noah’s son Shem and Esau’s rative, and local color casts its hue twin brother Jacob, later called Is- on that narrative. However, re covery rael, hold some claim to being the ther signals his own royal home erary conventions, wise sayings, etc. and understanding of settings in original ancestor for whom God’s training, the discipline of Neb- At the same time, divine revelation local life, sensitivity to the nuances special people were named. Remem- uchadnezzar’s court school, or a is clearly hostile to much of the cul- of local color—these do not explain bering them as Semites, we credit combination of both. Ezra’s usages ture to which it is wedded and in resultant revelation, which, more Shem. If as Israel, we acknowledge occur because at the time of his which it is embedded. Despite its en- often than not, contradicts their ex- Jacob. But it is with Abraham, rather writing, Aramaic was the lingua tanglement with local culture, the pectations. than with either of these, that the franca of the Persian Empire. Be- saving truths of revelation differ un- It is well to acknowledge that story of salvation seems to resume yond his readiness as Jewish priest mistakably from many of the ideas Bible truth may, for a while, have after the Flood. and scholar of the Torah, Ezra was prevailing at the time of its divine constituted something of a non se- Two common stories from the versed in the language of his society. revelation and in our time. Yet for all quitur to some of the participants in Ancient Near East turned to uncom- New Testament Greek is the lan- this, human beings, grounded in the the Bible narratives. Yet, in the end, mon endings by God’s active partic- guage of first-century A.D. love let- cultures of their times, were able to it is clearly possible to know what ipation find their historical setting ters, bills of payment, receipts, and access and understand, accept and God means. Equally, Abraham’s re- in the call of Abraham. Study of the other everyday transactions of the transmit Scripture’s message, provid- sponse, as described below, clearly first, of Abraham, a primary charac- heart and the mar ketplace. ing us with an opportunity to study shows that for some it is not only ter in salvation his tory, answers two Indeed, this basic linguistic com- not only the truths of Scripture, but possible, but important to know major questions: (1) Is it possible to monality with its local environ- also the contexts of their disclosure. what God means. It should produce know what God means? (2) Is it im- ment, repre sents only one step of a By scrutinizing these intersections be- better preparation to address the portant to know? It illustrates God’s multileveled affinity between the tween God and ancient people, we issue of truth’s transcultural inter- commitment to reveal Himself Bible’s ancient authors and their may see them for what they are: doc- pretation in our own time. equally to all cultures. Further, that cultural associates and neighbors. umented interconnections be tween His Word is comprehensible in, Below and above the level of lan- human culture and divine revela- Cultural Grounding, transmissible to, and useful for any guage were common geography, tion. Our scrutiny may well improve Supernatural Difference culture. clothing, housing, social organiza- our response to the question of Abraham is a proper choice for tion, modes of travel, and a multi- sound biblical interpretation as it re- this study because he is “the father of Abraham’s Call From God tude of mores and folkways that are lates to culture, specifically as sound all who believe” (Rom. 4:11, NIV). “‘The God of glory appeared to reflected in surviving law codes, lit- interpretation relates to cross-cul- Also, because, more explicitly than our father Abraham when he was in

32 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/233 10 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture Mesopotamia, before he lived in acknowledged: Genesis 11:31 cites Diminished political order at the level of the city-state Haran, and said to him, “Leave your God’s specified destination as the country and your relatives, and caravan’s stated objective. But what- fueled increased political and economic independence among come into the land that I will show ever the importance Terah may have the populace, who could now own land and cattle instead you.” Then he left the land of the attached to his son’s supernatural of themselves being owned by temple and king. A desire to es- Chaldeans and settled in Haran. summons, the biblical account shows From there, after his father died, Abraham as settling in Haran (vs. 31; cape the political confusion in his homeland and the God had him move to this country Acts 7:4). Whether journeying or set- negative impact of salinization on wheat and barley crops in which you are now living’” (Acts tling, Abraham lived under his fa- 7:2-4, NASB). ther’s aegis. offer realistic explanations for Terah’s exit from Ur at the When, in answer to God’s call, There is no unanimity on the bib- head of the caravan bearing Abraham, his wife, and others Abraham left Chaldean Ur, he did lical chronology, even among those toward the land God had assigned. not travel alone. Nor did he journey who fully trust the Bible’s historicity. directly to his stated destination. Options for Abraham’s birth range Nor was he recog nized as the leader from 2166 to 1952 B.C. Paradoxi- of his caravan. The Bible reports that cally, one reason for this uncer tainty Their stopover in Haran may also may further illuminate the context “Terah took Abram his son, and Lot is the appropriateness of the patriar- have been motivated by material of Terah’s immigration. The city of the son of Haran, his grandson, and chal narratives to a specific ANE so - consid erations. Haran was an im- Mari prospered during the patriar - Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son cial setting that prevailed for several portant caravan city in the north, in chal period until its destruction in Abram’s wife; and they went out to- centuries. Still, some insight into this a valley of fertile pastureland, likely the first half of the 18th century B.C. gether from Ur of the Chaldeans” part of Abraham’s life story may be of sparse population, and offering From excavations there, we learn of (Gen. 11:31, NASB). drawn from the times of Mes - “fine possibilities for in creasing the a “social structure and daily man- When Terah led the exodus from opotamia’s Isin-Larsa period, at the wealth of the family before they pro- ners of the time, which are reminis- Ur of the Chaldeans toward Haran collapse of Ur III in 2004 B. C. At that ceeded on to Canaan.”22 Socio - cent of a number of phenomena de- in the north, he could hardly have time, diminished political order at economic considerations, along with scribed in the book of Genesis.”23 acted from the same pure motiva- the level of the city-state fueled in- Terah’s advancing age, may have Both Genesis and the Mari docu- tions as did his son Abraham. For creased political and economic inde- played their part in his move. ments attest the presence of royalty, one thing, Joshua names Terah as an pendence among the populace, who Terah’s leadership of the clan, in- on the one hand, and, by contrast, example of Israel’s heathen ancestry could now own land and cattle in- cluding Abraham, Haran’s economic semi-nomadic agriculturists and (Joshua 24:2). Also, the accounts of stead of themselves being owned by importance as a caravan city, its raisers of livestock. The society Abraham’s call involve a separation temple and king. A desire to escape greater po litical stability relative to “seems to have been subdivided, or- between son and father, through the the political confusion in his home- Ur, and Terah’s advancing age com- ganized into households . . . , clans . death of the latter, before Abraham land and the negative impact of bined to detain Abraham in the land . . and tribes, where the tra ditional moves on to Canaan in accomplish- salinization on wheat and barley of his earthly father’s choice, while authorities, the elders . . . played an ment of his original assignment. crops offer realistic explanations for his heavenly Father’s call waited for important role.”24 Consistent with There can be little doubt of the im- Terah’s exit from Ur at the head of final answer. this picture from Mari, Terah, in pact of Abraham’s spiritual commit- the caravan bearing Abraham, his Information derived from Mari, a Genesis 11, wields his own authority ment on his father’s life. At a mini- wife, and others toward the land God city south of Haran, but still part of over son Abraham, daughter-in-law mum, Abraham’s wishes were initially had as signed. the northern Mesopotamian region, Sarah, and grandson Lot, leading his

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews34 University, 2009 11 35 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 Mesopotamia, before he lived in acknowledged: Genesis 11:31 cites Diminished political order at the level of the city-state Haran, and said to him, “Leave your God’s specified destination as the country and your relatives, and caravan’s stated objective. But what- fueled increased political and economic independence among come into the land that I will show ever the importance Terah may have the populace, who could now own land and cattle instead you.” Then he left the land of the attached to his son’s supernatural of themselves being owned by temple and king. A desire to es- Chaldeans and settled in Haran. summons, the biblical account shows From there, after his father died, Abraham as settling in Haran (vs. 31; cape the political confusion in his homeland and the God had him move to this country Acts 7:4). Whether journeying or set- negative impact of salinization on wheat and barley crops in which you are now living’” (Acts tling, Abraham lived under his fa- 7:2-4, NASB). ther’s aegis. offer realistic explanations for Terah’s exit from Ur at the When, in answer to God’s call, There is no unanimity on the bib- head of the caravan bearing Abraham, his wife, and others Abraham left Chaldean Ur, he did lical chronology, even among those toward the land God had assigned. not travel alone. Nor did he journey who fully trust the Bible’s historicity. directly to his stated destination. Options for Abraham’s birth range Nor was he recog nized as the leader from 2166 to 1952 B.C. Paradoxi- of his caravan. The Bible reports that cally, one reason for this uncer tainty Their stopover in Haran may also may further illuminate the context “Terah took Abram his son, and Lot is the appropriateness of the patriar- have been motivated by material of Terah’s immigration. The city of the son of Haran, his grandson, and chal narratives to a specific ANE so - consid erations. Haran was an im- Mari prospered during the patriar - Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son cial setting that prevailed for several portant caravan city in the north, in chal period until its destruction in Abram’s wife; and they went out to- centuries. Still, some insight into this a valley of fertile pastureland, likely the first half of the 18th century B.C. gether from Ur of the Chaldeans” part of Abraham’s life story may be of sparse population, and offering From excavations there, we learn of (Gen. 11:31, NASB). drawn from the times of Mes - “fine possibilities for in creasing the a “social structure and daily man- When Terah led the exodus from opotamia’s Isin-Larsa period, at the wealth of the family before they pro- ners of the time, which are reminis- Ur of the Chaldeans toward Haran collapse of Ur III in 2004 B. C. At that ceeded on to Canaan.”22 Socio - cent of a number of phenomena de- in the north, he could hardly have time, diminished political order at economic considerations, along with scribed in the book of Genesis.”23 acted from the same pure motiva- the level of the city-state fueled in- Terah’s advancing age, may have Both Genesis and the Mari docu- tions as did his son Abraham. For creased political and economic inde- played their part in his move. ments attest the presence of royalty, one thing, Joshua names Terah as an pendence among the populace, who Terah’s leadership of the clan, in- on the one hand, and, by contrast, example of Israel’s heathen ancestry could now own land and cattle in- cluding Abraham, Haran’s economic semi-nomadic agriculturists and (Joshua 24:2). Also, the accounts of stead of themselves being owned by importance as a caravan city, its raisers of livestock. The society Abraham’s call involve a separation temple and king. A desire to escape greater po litical stability relative to “seems to have been subdivided, or- between son and father, through the the political confusion in his home- Ur, and Terah’s advancing age com- ganized into households . . . , clans . death of the latter, before Abraham land and the negative impact of bined to detain Abraham in the land . . and tribes, where the tra ditional moves on to Canaan in accomplish- salinization on wheat and barley of his earthly father’s choice, while authorities, the elders . . . played an ment of his original assignment. crops offer realistic explanations for his heavenly Father’s call waited for important role.”24 Consistent with There can be little doubt of the im- Terah’s exit from Ur at the head of final answer. this picture from Mari, Terah, in pact of Abraham’s spiritual commit- the caravan bearing Abraham, his Information derived from Mari, a Genesis 11, wields his own authority ment on his father’s life. At a mini- wife, and others toward the land God city south of Haran, but still part of over son Abraham, daughter-in-law mum, Abraham’s wishes were initially had as signed. the northern Mesopotamian region, Sarah, and grandson Lot, leading his

34 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/235 12 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture Given the economic decline in southern Mesopotamia, erty secured by figurines like those cator most clearly demonstrates the Rachel later stole from Laban (Gen. potential success of transcultural contrasting prosperity in the north, and familiar religious rit- 31:19). He may or may not have em- gospel communication. Added to uals, Terah’s migration to the north may well have made ulated his neighbors in offering daily this, God as model presents the per- more sense to relatives and acquaintances than Abraham’s food to his household god, visiting fect ideal. the temple prostitutes to ensure fer- Abraham’s call exemplifies both subsequent travel from Haran to Palestine. Haran’s tility, and giving attention to the ideal and non-ideal responses to the principal god, Sin, was the same moon god Terah would messages of dreams and omens. presentation of the divine Word. It Abraham’s message from Yahweh shows how one may either fail or have worshiped in Ur. would likely have occurred to him as succeed in the peculiar enterprise of one more such message. Whatever hermeneutical sharing. Talk of po- the means Yahweh employed to tential failure should not be read as clan out of their homeland, and set- principal god, Sin, was the same speak to Abraham, for Terah it pessimistic. It does not refer to some tling them, even against the best moon god Terah would have wor- would be neither the first nor the inevitable rejection of truth by the wishes of his adult son, in the shiped in Ur. Also, Haran was at the last sign or omen from the gods. perverted many who would seek the spreading pasturelands of Haran. border of northern Mesopotamia. Later attitudes on the part of the broad way. Success and failure here Only after his father’s death did Due west was Anatolia, to the south- clan that followed Terah out of Chal - address the matter of comprehensi- Abraham begin to function as head west, Syria and Pal estine. Continued dean Ur make clear how counter- bility. Persuasion is an altogether of his own independent family unit. migration would take Terah beyond cultural it was for Abraham’s choice separate issue. The question is not of At this time, in obedience to God’s his comfort zone. And because he is to be Yahweh’s vassal. Nothing in the agreement, but of understanding. original and now repeated call, he said to have settled in Haran, is preceding genealogy predicts Abra- Quoting Paul Tillich: “The ques- took “Sarai his wife and Lot his tempting to believe it was an act of ham’s acceptance of a way so differ- tion cannot be: How do we commu- nephew, and all their possessions choice rather than of coincidence. ent from and hostile to the prevail- nicate the Gospel so that others will which they had accumulated, and For the rest of his family, if not ing practice and customs of his tribe. accept it? For this there is no the persons which they had acquired for the aging Terah, Haran was a method. To communicate the Gos - in Haran, and they set out for the choice for the status quo instead of Learning From Abraham’s Call pel means putting it before the peo- land of Canaan” (12:5, NASB) in ful- for the new, for comfort instead of for Abraham’s call involved consider- ple so that they are able to decide for fillment of his first commission. sacrifice, for self instead of for God. able challenge. It also illustrates the or against it. The Christian Gospel is In addition to subjection to the comprehensibility of transcultural a matter of decision. It is to be ac- Further Implications of multiple eco nomic, political, socio- com munication between God and cepted or rejected. All that we who Abraham’s Call logical, and other elements of Abra- lost humanity. Too, it implied the communicate this Gospel can do is Given the economic decline in ham’s time, his polytheistic father promise of boundless success that to make possible a genuine decision southern Mesopotamia, contrasting would have lived in fear of a world would, inescapably, attend a positive . . . based on understanding.”25 prosper ity in the north, and familiar swarming with menacing supernat- response to the divine initiative. The Failure, then, would be failure of religious rituals, Terah’s migration to ural agents, demons that could at- dis tance between all human cultures the exegete to properly understand, the north may well have made more tack on the incitement of his neigh- and the culture of heaven is infi- or of the communicator to properly sense to relatives and acquaintances bors’ witch craft. To the extent he nitely greater than that between any transmit, such valid understanding. than Abraham’s sub sequent travel reflected the norm, his house would two human cultures. A model fea- The present discussion is concerned from Haran to Palestine. Haran’s have been protected and his prop- turing God in the role of communi- with avoiding such failure.

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews36 University, 2009 13 37 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 Given the economic decline in southern Mesopotamia, erty secured by figurines like those cator most clearly demonstrates the Rachel later stole from Laban (Gen. potential success of transcultural contrasting prosperity in the north, and familiar religious rit- 31:19). He may or may not have em- gospel communication. Added to uals, Terah’s migration to the north may well have made ulated his neighbors in offering daily this, God as model presents the per- more sense to relatives and acquaintances than Abraham’s food to his household god, visiting fect ideal. the temple prostitutes to ensure fer- Abraham’s call exemplifies both subsequent travel from Haran to Palestine. Haran’s tility, and giving attention to the ideal and non-ideal responses to the principal god, Sin, was the same moon god Terah would messages of dreams and omens. presentation of the divine Word. It Abraham’s message from Yahweh shows how one may either fail or have worshiped in Ur. would likely have occurred to him as succeed in the peculiar enterprise of one more such message. Whatever hermeneutical sharing. Talk of po- the means Yahweh employed to tential failure should not be read as clan out of their homeland, and set- principal god, Sin, was the same speak to Abraham, for Terah it pessimistic. It does not refer to some tling them, even against the best moon god Terah would have wor- would be neither the first nor the inevitable rejection of truth by the wishes of his adult son, in the shiped in Ur. Also, Haran was at the last sign or omen from the gods. perverted many who would seek the spreading pasturelands of Haran. border of northern Mesopotamia. Later attitudes on the part of the broad way. Success and failure here Only after his father’s death did Due west was Anatolia, to the south- clan that followed Terah out of Chal - address the matter of comprehensi- Abraham begin to function as head west, Syria and Pal estine. Continued dean Ur make clear how counter- bility. Persuasion is an altogether of his own independent family unit. migration would take Terah beyond cultural it was for Abraham’s choice separate issue. The question is not of At this time, in obedience to God’s his comfort zone. And because he is to be Yahweh’s vassal. Nothing in the agreement, but of understanding. original and now repeated call, he said to have settled in Haran, is preceding genealogy predicts Abra- Quoting Paul Tillich: “The ques- took “Sarai his wife and Lot his tempting to believe it was an act of ham’s acceptance of a way so differ- tion cannot be: How do we commu- nephew, and all their possessions choice rather than of coincidence. ent from and hostile to the prevail- nicate the Gospel so that others will which they had accumulated, and For the rest of his family, if not ing practice and customs of his tribe. accept it? For this there is no the persons which they had acquired for the aging Terah, Haran was a method. To communicate the Gos - in Haran, and they set out for the choice for the status quo instead of Learning From Abraham’s Call pel means putting it before the peo- land of Canaan” (12:5, NASB) in ful- for the new, for comfort instead of for Abraham’s call involved consider- ple so that they are able to decide for fillment of his first commission. sacrifice, for self instead of for God. able challenge. It also illustrates the or against it. The Christian Gospel is In addition to subjection to the comprehensibility of transcultural a matter of decision. It is to be ac- Further Implications of multiple eco nomic, political, socio- com munication between God and cepted or rejected. All that we who Abraham’s Call logical, and other elements of Abra- lost humanity. Too, it implied the communicate this Gospel can do is Given the economic decline in ham’s time, his polytheistic father promise of boundless success that to make possible a genuine decision southern Mesopotamia, contrasting would have lived in fear of a world would, inescapably, attend a positive . . . based on understanding.”25 prosper ity in the north, and familiar swarming with menacing supernat- response to the divine initiative. The Failure, then, would be failure of religious rituals, Terah’s migration to ural agents, demons that could at- dis tance between all human cultures the exegete to properly understand, the north may well have made more tack on the incitement of his neigh- and the culture of heaven is infi- or of the communicator to properly sense to relatives and acquaintances bors’ witch craft. To the extent he nitely greater than that between any transmit, such valid understanding. than Abraham’s sub sequent travel reflected the norm, his house would two human cultures. A model fea- The present discussion is concerned from Haran to Palestine. Haran’s have been protected and his prop- turing God in the role of communi- with avoiding such failure.

36 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/237 14 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture Analyzing the Story elation. Human nature complicates Abraham’s intention that his servant Eliezer be his heir In the story of Abraham’s call, at response to truth. Ignoring this fact least three different groups of indi- may sometimes lead us, despite our illustrates how closely the patriarch’s thinking followed pre- viduals remain within the cultural sincerity, to make a farce of the vailing norms. In that time, continuing the family’s name and fold, while two groups violate those gospel, out of eagerness to be rele- wealth were imperatives, to be accomplished, if norms and their own natural expec- vant or appreciated. tations to become a part of a new, Those who seek to overcome cul- necessary, through adoption. The adoptee would inherit the separated group of God’s followers. ture barriers to gospel commu - adopter’s possessions, in exchange for which he would care Some relatives of Abraham prob- nication must beware of judging ably choose to remain in Ur. Nahor, success by apparent acceptance. for them until the end of their lives and be responsible for for example, is not mentioned as Human acceptability, lists of con- their burial when they died. journeying with Terah’s caravan, verts, establishment of Christian though he is later named in that lo- beachheads—these are no guarantee cale. A second group migrates to that saving truth has been commu- His intention that his servant ness, humanity’s only source of hope Haran but goes no further. A third nicated and comprehended. Higher Eliezer be his heir (Gen. 15:2, 3) il- for virtue or salvation. Perhaps the group is exposed to Abraham’s principles should govern such a con- lustrates how closely the patriarch’s chief instruction of this dialogue in teaching while he lives in Haran, but clusion. thinking followed prevailing norms. Genesis 15 lies in its evidence of finds it unacceptable. In Abraham’s time, continuing the how God dis closes Himself to hu- Over against these three groups Abraham’s Covenant With God family’s name and wealth were im- manity within the awkward frame- are (1) the group that leaves Ur and Enlightening insights from exca- peratives, to be accomplished, if nec- work of our culture-bound think- persists until it reaches Canaan in vations at Nuzi, in northern essary, through adop tion. The ing. obedience to a divine order; and (2) Mesopotamia (1925-1931 B.C.), are adoptee would inherit the adopter’s A second incident from Genesis those from Haran who learn of instructive for our second story, de- possessions, in exchange for which 15 (vss. 7-21) complements and ex- God’s command through Abra ham spite the fact that its tablets date to he would care for them until the end pands the first episode’s instruction. and Sarah’s witness during their so- the Late Bronze period (15th cen- of their lives and be responsible for The account features God engaged journ in Haran and join them in tury B.C.), several hundred years their burial when they died. in a treaty-making action with His their southern pilgrimage after after Abraham’s death. In the world When God promises Abraham vassal people in the person of Abra- Terah’s death. of the Bible, custom dies hard. Dated that he will become a great nation, ham. In the normal ritual that estab- The variety of attitudes reflected political realities suggest the time of Abraham assumes that God will ef- lished such a treaty, a number of an- in these individuals and groups Abraham’s movement across the fect this through Eliezer. But he imals were slaughtered, cut in pieces, again brings to the fore the ques- Fertile Crescent, but the normal be- learns a crucial spiritual lesson in and the portions arranged in two tions on understanding: Is it possi- haviors encoded in society’s laws choosing to rest his future in the rows with an aisle between. Parties ble to know what God means? Abra- persist for centuries and millennia. guarantee of God’s promise: “He be- to the treaty passed down the aisle ham believed it is. Is it important to Twenty-first to 20th century B.C. po- lieved in the Lord, and He accounted between the rows “while taking an know what God means? Abraham litical disruptions suggest the particu- it to him for righteousness” (Gen oath invoking similar dismember- believed it is. His response of faith, lar historical context for Abraham’s 15:6, NKJV). ment on each other should they not and its contrast with other re- migration. On the other hand, legal Here for the first time in Scrip- keep their part of the covenant.”26 sponses, also demon strates that not norms of long duration suggest his ture, explicit mention is made of the The biblical account differs from all everyone responds identically to rev- social behaviors in a number of eras. saving truth of imputed righteous- known accounts in that God alone

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews38 University, 2009 15 39 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 Analyzing the Story elation. Human nature complicates Abraham’s intention that his servant Eliezer be his heir In the story of Abraham’s call, at response to truth. Ignoring this fact least three different groups of indi- may sometimes lead us, despite our illustrates how closely the patriarch’s thinking followed pre- viduals remain within the cultural sincerity, to make a farce of the vailing norms. In that time, continuing the family’s name and fold, while two groups violate those gospel, out of eagerness to be rele- wealth were imperatives, to be accomplished, if norms and their own natural expec- vant or appreciated. tations to become a part of a new, Those who seek to overcome cul- necessary, through adoption. The adoptee would inherit the separated group of God’s followers. ture barriers to gospel commu - adopter’s possessions, in exchange for which he would care Some relatives of Abraham prob- nication must beware of judging ably choose to remain in Ur. Nahor, success by apparent acceptance. for them until the end of their lives and be responsible for for example, is not mentioned as Human acceptability, lists of con- their burial when they died. journeying with Terah’s caravan, verts, establishment of Christian though he is later named in that lo- beachheads—these are no guarantee cale. A second group migrates to that saving truth has been commu- His intention that his servant ness, humanity’s only source of hope Haran but goes no further. A third nicated and comprehended. Higher Eliezer be his heir (Gen. 15:2, 3) il- for virtue or salvation. Perhaps the group is exposed to Abraham’s principles should govern such a con- lustrates how closely the patriarch’s chief instruction of this dialogue in teaching while he lives in Haran, but clusion. thinking followed prevailing norms. Genesis 15 lies in its evidence of finds it unacceptable. In Abraham’s time, continuing the how God dis closes Himself to hu- Over against these three groups Abraham’s Covenant With God family’s name and wealth were im- manity within the awkward frame- are (1) the group that leaves Ur and Enlightening insights from exca- peratives, to be accomplished, if nec- work of our culture-bound think- persists until it reaches Canaan in vations at Nuzi, in northern essary, through adop tion. The ing. obedience to a divine order; and (2) Mesopotamia (1925-1931 B.C.), are adoptee would inherit the adopter’s A second incident from Genesis those from Haran who learn of instructive for our second story, de- possessions, in exchange for which 15 (vss. 7-21) complements and ex- God’s command through Abra ham spite the fact that its tablets date to he would care for them until the end pands the first episode’s instruction. and Sarah’s witness during their so- the Late Bronze period (15th cen- of their lives and be responsible for The account features God engaged journ in Haran and join them in tury B.C.), several hundred years their burial when they died. in a treaty-making action with His their southern pilgrimage after after Abraham’s death. In the world When God promises Abraham vassal people in the person of Abra- Terah’s death. of the Bible, custom dies hard. Dated that he will become a great nation, ham. In the normal ritual that estab- The variety of attitudes reflected political realities suggest the time of Abraham assumes that God will ef- lished such a treaty, a number of an- in these individuals and groups Abraham’s movement across the fect this through Eliezer. But he imals were slaughtered, cut in pieces, again brings to the fore the ques- Fertile Crescent, but the normal be- learns a crucial spiritual lesson in and the portions arranged in two tions on understanding: Is it possi- haviors encoded in society’s laws choosing to rest his future in the rows with an aisle between. Parties ble to know what God means? Abra- persist for centuries and millennia. guarantee of God’s promise: “He be- to the treaty passed down the aisle ham believed it is. Is it important to Twenty-first to 20th century B.C. po- lieved in the Lord, and He accounted between the rows “while taking an know what God means? Abraham litical disruptions suggest the particu- it to him for righteousness” (Gen oath invoking similar dismember- believed it is. His response of faith, lar historical context for Abraham’s 15:6, NKJV). ment on each other should they not and its contrast with other re- migration. On the other hand, legal Here for the first time in Scrip- keep their part of the covenant.”26 sponses, also demon strates that not norms of long duration suggest his ture, explicit mention is made of the The biblical account differs from all everyone responds identically to rev- social behaviors in a number of eras. saving truth of imputed righteous- known accounts in that God alone

38 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/239 16 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture In this context, God is simultaneously text and ally making possible. In the phrase, their congregation, their culture “The Lord said to Abram” (12:1, and that of their audience, their ex- communicator, comprehensible message and competent NASB), the Lord as speaker hints not perience and the experiences of messenger. Humans who accept the gospel commission only at His interest in a shared un- those with whom they wish to share are simultaneously exegete and missionary. The roles of inter- dertaking, but also, the value placed that which to them is pre cious. Di- on Abraham as object of His initia- vine incarnation and human adapt- preter and communicator, while distinct, both involve the tive, respect for his intellectual facul- ability, physical relocation and same agent and an identical set of operating rules. ties, and assumption of Abraham’s every other evidence of sensitivity, interest. are expressions of this mutuality When Stephen Bevans speaks of whose counter productive antithesis “contextual theology,”27 he is refer- is encountered in inflexibility and passes between the pieces, pledging These rules derive from observ- ring to this mutuality which takes arrogance. His own dismemberment should the ing the di vine self-revelation in call both speaker and hearer, preacher 2. Authority. God’s speech in covenant be breached. In the bind- and covenant. In Genesis 12 and 15, and audience, missionary and “na- Gen e sis 12 gives expression to the ing of Isaac (Genesis 22) He drama- God is the text’s explication as well tive,” into responsible and respectful principle of authority. As the histor- tizes His offer of a sub stitute for as its communicator. Similarly, the consideration. So is Leonora Tubbs ical nature of the critical method has doomed humanity. But nowhere biblical exegete cannot distinguish Tisdale when she speaks of preach- undermined authority in biblical in- does prophecy explicate more dra- between some theoretical commu - ing that not only exegetes texts, but terpretation, so cul tural anthropol- matically God’s becoming a curse nication of ideas and an experience gives “equally serious at tention to ogy has dealt some blows to the con- for us and paying the price it de- of shared life. Whether in the most the interpretation of congregations cept of missiological authority. mands, than when God Himself cerebral or the most affective of and their sociocultural con texts.”28 Dar winian evolutionary thinking passes alone between the pieces of cultures, communication is self- Preachers who disregard the socio- led to a theory of Scripture as “a col- those slaughtered animals and in- sharing. However well conceived an cultural realities of their congre - lection of historical documents vokes His own dismemberment for inter pretation, interaction with an- gations are not practicing the princi- whose truth could not be under - the violation of a covenant He never other culture is imperative if that ple of mutuality. They are not stood apart from such matters as au- breached. understand ing is ever to be commu- listening. And preachers who cannot thorship, dating, circumstance of nicated. listen ought themselves to be kept writing, and relationship with previ- Principles for the Interpreter and The following principles, exem- silent. ous oral and written material.”30 Communicator plified by God, apply to the process Nida and Reyburn’s warning Much of biblical scholarship In this context, God is simultane- of interpretation as well as to the ex- against “noise” in translation also came to see the collection as ex- ously text and communicator, com- perience of sharing. addresses this principle.29 The bibli- pounding a variety of ideas not nec- prehensible message and competent 1. Mutuality. This is a presump- cal exegete, as much as the gospel essarily consistent or compatible messenger. Humans who accept the tion of participation. Whereas coer- com municator, must believe in mu- with each other. Bevans asserts, “The gospel commission are simultane- cion is alien to God’s nature, partic- tuality. As exegetes, students respect Bible literally means ‘books’ (biblia), ously exegete and missionary. The ipation in the salvific enterprise, both God’s mind and their own, and the Bible is a library, a collection roles of interpreter and communica- whether in interpretation or in both their scholarly inclinations and of books and consequently of the- tor, while distinct, both involve the transmission, requires a mutuality to the divine initiative of revelation. As ologies. These theologies are all dif- same agent and an identical set of which God Himself is committed, communicators, preachers and teach - ferent, sometimes even contradic- operating rules. and which His initiative is perpetu- ers value equally their message and tory of one an other.”31 The Bible

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews40 University, 2009 17 41 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 In this context, God is simultaneously text and ally making possible. In the phrase, their congregation, their culture “The Lord said to Abram” (12:1, and that of their audience, their ex- communicator, comprehensible message and competent NASB), the Lord as speaker hints not perience and the experiences of messenger. Humans who accept the gospel commission only at His interest in a shared un- those with whom they wish to share are simultaneously exegete and missionary. The roles of inter- dertaking, but also, the value placed that which to them is pre cious. Di- on Abraham as object of His initia- vine incarnation and human adapt- preter and communicator, while distinct, both involve the tive, respect for his intellectual facul- ability, physical relocation and same agent and an identical set of operating rules. ties, and assumption of Abraham’s every other evidence of sensitivity, interest. are expressions of this mutuality When Stephen Bevans speaks of whose counter productive antithesis “contextual theology,”27 he is refer- is encountered in inflexibility and passes between the pieces, pledging These rules derive from observ- ring to this mutuality which takes arrogance. His own dismemberment should the ing the di vine self-revelation in call both speaker and hearer, preacher 2. Authority. God’s speech in covenant be breached. In the bind- and covenant. In Genesis 12 and 15, and audience, missionary and “na- Gen e sis 12 gives expression to the ing of Isaac (Genesis 22) He drama- God is the text’s explication as well tive,” into responsible and respectful principle of authority. As the histor- tizes His offer of a sub stitute for as its communicator. Similarly, the consideration. So is Leonora Tubbs ical nature of the critical method has doomed humanity. But nowhere biblical exegete cannot distinguish Tisdale when she speaks of preach- undermined authority in biblical in- does prophecy explicate more dra- between some theoretical commu - ing that not only exegetes texts, but terpretation, so cul tural anthropol- matically God’s becoming a curse nication of ideas and an experience gives “equally serious at tention to ogy has dealt some blows to the con- for us and paying the price it de- of shared life. Whether in the most the interpretation of congregations cept of missiological authority. mands, than when God Himself cerebral or the most affective of and their sociocultural con texts.”28 Dar winian evolutionary thinking passes alone between the pieces of cultures, communication is self- Preachers who disregard the socio- led to a theory of Scripture as “a col- those slaughtered animals and in- sharing. However well conceived an cultural realities of their congre - lection of historical documents vokes His own dismemberment for inter pretation, interaction with an- gations are not practicing the princi- whose truth could not be under - the violation of a covenant He never other culture is imperative if that ple of mutuality. They are not stood apart from such matters as au- breached. understand ing is ever to be commu- listening. And preachers who cannot thorship, dating, circumstance of nicated. listen ought themselves to be kept writing, and relationship with previ- Principles for the Interpreter and The following principles, exem- silent. ous oral and written material.”30 Communicator plified by God, apply to the process Nida and Reyburn’s warning Much of biblical scholarship In this context, God is simultane- of interpretation as well as to the ex- against “noise” in translation also came to see the collection as ex- ously text and communicator, com- perience of sharing. addresses this principle.29 The bibli- pounding a variety of ideas not nec- prehensible message and competent 1. Mutuality. This is a presump- cal exegete, as much as the gospel essarily consistent or compatible messenger. Humans who accept the tion of participation. Whereas coer- com municator, must believe in mu- with each other. Bevans asserts, “The gospel commission are simultane- cion is alien to God’s nature, partic- tuality. As exegetes, students respect Bible literally means ‘books’ (biblia), ously exegete and missionary. The ipation in the salvific enterprise, both God’s mind and their own, and the Bible is a library, a collection roles of interpreter and communica- whether in interpretation or in both their scholarly inclinations and of books and consequently of the- tor, while distinct, both involve the transmission, requires a mutuality to the divine initiative of revelation. As ologies. These theologies are all dif- same agent and an identical set of which God Himself is committed, communicators, preachers and teach - ferent, sometimes even contradic- operating rules. and which His initiative is perpetu- ers value equally their message and tory of one an other.”31 The Bible

40 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/241 18 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture cannot be a source of much author- warnings about ethnocentrism, the Even in combination, a commitment to mutuality, ity for those who see in it such a con- missionary now feels nervous, and fused plurality. rightly so, when using sin language along with a position of authority, is inadequate to effect the A similar decline of authority is to speak to people of another cul- change transforming sinners into saints and children of 34 observable in gospel communica- ture.” darkness into children of the Light. The God who speaks in tion. Commenting on this phenom- Lest Priest’s references to “an- enon, Robert J. Priest traces the in- other culture” and traditional con - Genesis 12 and 15 does not hedge on His investment in Abra- fluence of such celebrated authors as cepts of the missionary cloud the ham. In promising as He does, He makes His integrity the Herman Melville (Typee, Omoo), issue, it must be remembered that Somerset Maugham (“Rain”), and experiencing cultural pluralism no condition for His command and invitation. James Michener (Hawaii) upon longer requires passports and border current popular attitudes to biblical cross ings. Specifically, Carson’s third authority. The cited works contrast definition of pluralism, with its rightful authority, the supernatural investment in Abraham. In promis- tolerance for the “social other” mandated rela tivism, brings another is accorded its rightful transcen- ing as He does, He makes His in- (South Sea Island innocents), with culture home, producing a new kind dence, and miracle is legiti mized tegrity the condition for His com- images of life-denying missionaries, of missionary steeped in “respect,” over the finitude of natural logic. mand and invitation. Those who are “pinned like butterflies to the frame the primary lesson of cultural an- Working such miracles, the Spirit privileged to transmit God’s mes- of their own morality.”32 thropology. of God is free to bring conviction of sage to their own and other cultures Similar sentiment dominates the As Priest puts it, we now have two sin, righteousness, and judgment need an equal commit ment to in- discipline of cultural anthropology, kinds of missionary: “One kind has (John 16:8). Scripture’s interpreters tegrity. sentiment clearly expressed in the learned the anthropological lesson and transmitters must never forget Priest reminds us of the impor- words of Walter Goldschmidt’s pres- well, that we must respect culture that the weapons of our warfare are tance of this ingredient with his cri- idential address to the 1975 Ameri- and try to understand it, but feels spiritual (2 Cor. 10:4), that the tique of well-known recruitment can Anthropology Association: uneasy using the biblical language of strongholds they seek to pull down strategies focusing most often on sit- “Missionaries are in many ways our condemnation and a call for repen- are not cultural differences, but ob- uations of need in the mission field. opposites; they believe in original tance from sin. . . . And then there stacles that separate humanity from Preferable, according to Priest, sin.”33 are those who reject the anthropo- God. Their confidence is that—the would be “regular in tellectual dis- The work of their professional logical lesson, who unflinchingly humility of mutuality notwithstand- courses . . . designed to inform, in- colleagues is not lost on evangelical speak with the concepts of Scripture, ing—those who speak for God speak struct, and stimulate the minds of anthro pologists. Priest, himself a but whose insensitivity and refusal within a context of supernatural au- colleagues or others.”37 Christian anthropologist, explains: to seek cultural understanding are thority. Charades of sacrifice, flip pancy “We are culturally ethnocentric. We destructive of genuine moral and 3. Integrity. Even in combination, about unfulfilled promises, and the do judge in terms of our own cul- spiritual change.”35 a commitment to mutuality, along cautions of convenient commitment tural norms. Crossing cultural lines Priest is unequivocal. Evangelical with a position of authority, is inad- decidedly militate against the credi- with a gospel implying judg ment anthropologists must “give the con- equate to effect the change trans- bility of both God and witness, for and condemnation makes it all too cept of sin back to the missionary.”36 forming sinners into saints and chil- they undermine the principle of in- easy for the missionary to confuse When the concept of sin is returned dren of darkness into children of the tegrity. They also counteract the pre- his or her own culture with the to the missionary, then the biblical Light. The God who speaks in Gene- vious principle of authority. For all gospel. As a result of anthro pological exegete has returned to God His sis 12 and 15 does not hedge on His such proofs of our natural selfish-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews42 University, 2009 19 43 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 cannot be a source of much author- warnings about ethnocentrism, the Even in combination, a commitment to mutuality, ity for those who see in it such a con- missionary now feels nervous, and fused plurality. rightly so, when using sin language along with a position of authority, is inadequate to effect the A similar decline of authority is to speak to people of another cul- change transforming sinners into saints and children of 34 observable in gospel communica- ture.” darkness into children of the Light. The God who speaks in tion. Commenting on this phenom- Lest Priest’s references to “an- enon, Robert J. Priest traces the in- other culture” and traditional con - Genesis 12 and 15 does not hedge on His investment in Abra- fluence of such celebrated authors as cepts of the missionary cloud the ham. In promising as He does, He makes His integrity the Herman Melville (Typee, Omoo), issue, it must be remembered that Somerset Maugham (“Rain”), and experiencing cultural pluralism no condition for His command and invitation. James Michener (Hawaii) upon longer requires passports and border current popular attitudes to biblical cross ings. Specifically, Carson’s third authority. The cited works contrast definition of pluralism, with its rightful authority, the supernatural investment in Abraham. In promis- tolerance for the “social other” mandated rela tivism, brings another is accorded its rightful transcen- ing as He does, He makes His in- (South Sea Island innocents), with culture home, producing a new kind dence, and miracle is legiti mized tegrity the condition for His com- images of life-denying missionaries, of missionary steeped in “respect,” over the finitude of natural logic. mand and invitation. Those who are “pinned like butterflies to the frame the primary lesson of cultural an- Working such miracles, the Spirit privileged to transmit God’s mes- of their own morality.”32 thropology. of God is free to bring conviction of sage to their own and other cultures Similar sentiment dominates the As Priest puts it, we now have two sin, righteousness, and judgment need an equal commit ment to in- discipline of cultural anthropology, kinds of missionary: “One kind has (John 16:8). Scripture’s interpreters tegrity. sentiment clearly expressed in the learned the anthropological lesson and transmitters must never forget Priest reminds us of the impor- words of Walter Goldschmidt’s pres- well, that we must respect culture that the weapons of our warfare are tance of this ingredient with his cri- idential address to the 1975 Ameri- and try to understand it, but feels spiritual (2 Cor. 10:4), that the tique of well-known recruitment can Anthropology Association: uneasy using the biblical language of strongholds they seek to pull down strategies focusing most often on sit- “Missionaries are in many ways our condemnation and a call for repen- are not cultural differences, but ob- uations of need in the mission field. opposites; they believe in original tance from sin. . . . And then there stacles that separate humanity from Preferable, according to Priest, sin.”33 are those who reject the anthropo- God. Their confidence is that—the would be “regular in tellectual dis- The work of their professional logical lesson, who unflinchingly humility of mutuality notwithstand- courses . . . designed to inform, in- colleagues is not lost on evangelical speak with the concepts of Scripture, ing—those who speak for God speak struct, and stimulate the minds of anthro pologists. Priest, himself a but whose insensitivity and refusal within a context of supernatural au- colleagues or others.”37 Christian anthropologist, explains: to seek cultural understanding are thority. Charades of sacrifice, flip pancy “We are culturally ethnocentric. We destructive of genuine moral and 3. Integrity. Even in combination, about unfulfilled promises, and the do judge in terms of our own cul- spiritual change.”35 a commitment to mutuality, along cautions of convenient commitment tural norms. Crossing cultural lines Priest is unequivocal. Evangelical with a position of authority, is inad- decidedly militate against the credi- with a gospel implying judg ment anthropologists must “give the con- equate to effect the change trans- bility of both God and witness, for and condemnation makes it all too cept of sin back to the missionary.”36 forming sinners into saints and chil- they undermine the principle of in- easy for the missionary to confuse When the concept of sin is returned dren of darkness into children of the tegrity. They also counteract the pre- his or her own culture with the to the missionary, then the biblical Light. The God who speaks in Gene- vious principle of authority. For all gospel. As a result of anthro pological exegete has returned to God His sis 12 and 15 does not hedge on His such proofs of our natural selfish-

42 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/243 20 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture The call of Abraham teaches lessons both about a continuing intention on his part to Adam’s line through Seth, Enoch, carry out that order. It seems some- Methuselah, and Noah, in antedilu- God and about humanity. Its lessons on interpretation and what awkward to conclude that it vian times, and through Shem’s lin- communication benefit those who must play a part for was reluctance or disobedience that eage thereafter. God in the study and dissemination of the Word. Its lessons kept him back. It appears that at the The possible validity of this inter- time of his original call he had al- pretation does not elevate Abra- on humanity may teach how to respond to God. They may ready been found faithful. Why else ham’s con duct toward his father to also suggest the kind of individual who is more positively would he be called to be the father of the stature of universal paradigm. It God’s peo ple? should first be seen as the heritage of disposed toward the gospel. Again, not only did he leave his own culture. Still, modern gospel home in response to the call, but communicators should not overlook once detained in Haran, he persua- this principled action by “the father ness mock our claims to supernat- would be His friend (James 2:23). sively witnessed for his convictions of all who believe” (Rom. 4:11, ural authority, converting them to The open-mindedness of mutuality (as indicated by Ellen White’s com- NASB). It may already have been too pathetic posturing. permitted Abraham to be the friend ments on Genesis 12:5): “He was de- long overlooked. of God and of strangers everywhere. parting from the land of his fathers, One may wonder how much Principles for the Respondent It enabled him to settle with his fa- never to return, and he took with more might be done for proclaimed The call of Abraham teaches ther in Haran, far north of his origi- him all that he had, ‘their substance truth through a better understand- lessons both about God and about nal homeland (Gen. 11:31), and later that they had gathered, and the souls ing of the significance of traditional humanity. Its lessons on interpreta- to uproot again and move beyond that they had gotten in Haran.’ family units in some cultures and tion and communication benefit his cultural comfort zone, to sojourn Among these were many led by the divine preference for preserving those who must play a part for God in the land of Canaan (12:5). It is the higher considerations than those of rather than destroying them. Abra- in the study and dissemination of kind of relocation that may have re- service and self-interest. During ham’s continuing devotion to his fa- the Word. Its lessons on humanity quired adaptations in dress, groom- their stay in Haran, both Abraham ther suggests that total commitment may teach how to respond to God. ing, diet, and even some aspects of and Sarah had led others to the wor- to God’s will does not presuppose They may also suggest the kind of social order. Mutuality enabled him ship and service of the true God. that every man be against his father- indi vidual who is more positively to share his home with individuals These attached themselves to the pa- in-law, every daughter-in-law disposed toward the gospel. from a variety of cultures and to see triarch’s household, and accompa- against her mother-in-law, and that Alternatively, the actions of Abra- nothing but good in bequeathing his nied him to the land of promise.”38 internal hostility reign in every ham and others around him suggest riches to the Syrian Eliezer (15:2). It Then, at his father’s death, he re- household (Luke 12:51-53). what kind of behavior might be ex- endowed him with the grace to give sumed and completed his journey. 3. Sincerity. Just as divine mutual- pected from those who may make an the best of his land to Lot, his Evidently, Abraham’s stay in Haran ity finds its complement in human affirmative response to the gospel. nephew and junior (13:5-11). related more to respect toward his mutuality, and divine authority 1. Mutuality. All of God’s sharing 2. Respect. Despite the material heathen father than to any re - finds its complement in human re- with fallen humanity is an expres- blessings to which he was privy in luctance to obey God. Most likely, spect, so divine integrity must be sion of unde served grace. It is never- the region, Abraham’s days in Haran Abraham did not interpret his defer- complemented by human sincerity. theless true that God’s call to Abra- could not have been entirely serene. ence to ward his earthly father as in- God’s authority relates to human ham produced results because, in God had ordered him to move to compatible with his role as inheritor respect in the same way that divine Abraham, God found one who Canaan. Subse quent action suggests of the sacred legacy bequeathed by integrity relates to human sincerity.

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews44 University, 2009 21 45 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 The call of Abraham teaches lessons both about a continuing intention on his part to Adam’s line through Seth, Enoch, carry out that order. It seems some- Methuselah, and Noah, in antedilu- God and about humanity. Its lessons on interpretation and what awkward to conclude that it vian times, and through Shem’s lin- communication benefit those who must play a part for was reluctance or disobedience that eage thereafter. God in the study and dissemination of the Word. Its lessons kept him back. It appears that at the The possible validity of this inter- time of his original call he had al- pretation does not elevate Abra- on humanity may teach how to respond to God. They may ready been found faithful. Why else ham’s con duct toward his father to also suggest the kind of individual who is more positively would he be called to be the father of the stature of universal paradigm. It God’s peo ple? should first be seen as the heritage of disposed toward the gospel. Again, not only did he leave his own culture. Still, modern gospel home in response to the call, but communicators should not overlook once detained in Haran, he persua- this principled action by “the father ness mock our claims to supernat- would be His friend (James 2:23). sively witnessed for his convictions of all who believe” (Rom. 4:11, ural authority, converting them to The open-mindedness of mutuality (as indicated by Ellen White’s com- NASB). It may already have been too pathetic posturing. permitted Abraham to be the friend ments on Genesis 12:5): “He was de- long overlooked. of God and of strangers everywhere. parting from the land of his fathers, One may wonder how much Principles for the Respondent It enabled him to settle with his fa- never to return, and he took with more might be done for proclaimed The call of Abraham teaches ther in Haran, far north of his origi- him all that he had, ‘their substance truth through a better understand- lessons both about God and about nal homeland (Gen. 11:31), and later that they had gathered, and the souls ing of the significance of traditional humanity. Its lessons on interpreta- to uproot again and move beyond that they had gotten in Haran.’ family units in some cultures and tion and communication benefit his cultural comfort zone, to sojourn Among these were many led by the divine preference for preserving those who must play a part for God in the land of Canaan (12:5). It is the higher considerations than those of rather than destroying them. Abra- in the study and dissemination of kind of relocation that may have re- service and self-interest. During ham’s continuing devotion to his fa- the Word. Its lessons on humanity quired adaptations in dress, groom- their stay in Haran, both Abraham ther suggests that total commitment may teach how to respond to God. ing, diet, and even some aspects of and Sarah had led others to the wor- to God’s will does not presuppose They may also suggest the kind of social order. Mutuality enabled him ship and service of the true God. that every man be against his father- indi vidual who is more positively to share his home with individuals These attached themselves to the pa- in-law, every daughter-in-law disposed toward the gospel. from a variety of cultures and to see triarch’s household, and accompa- against her mother-in-law, and that Alternatively, the actions of Abra- nothing but good in bequeathing his nied him to the land of promise.”38 internal hostility reign in every ham and others around him suggest riches to the Syrian Eliezer (15:2). It Then, at his father’s death, he re- household (Luke 12:51-53). what kind of behavior might be ex- endowed him with the grace to give sumed and completed his journey. 3. Sincerity. Just as divine mutual- pected from those who may make an the best of his land to Lot, his Evidently, Abraham’s stay in Haran ity finds its complement in human affirmative response to the gospel. nephew and junior (13:5-11). related more to respect toward his mutuality, and divine authority 1. Mutuality. All of God’s sharing 2. Respect. Despite the material heathen father than to any re - finds its complement in human re- with fallen humanity is an expres- blessings to which he was privy in luctance to obey God. Most likely, spect, so divine integrity must be sion of unde served grace. It is never- the region, Abraham’s days in Haran Abraham did not interpret his defer- complemented by human sincerity. theless true that God’s call to Abra- could not have been entirely serene. ence to ward his earthly father as in- God’s authority relates to human ham produced results because, in God had ordered him to move to compatible with his role as inheritor respect in the same way that divine Abraham, God found one who Canaan. Subse quent action suggests of the sacred legacy bequeathed by integrity relates to human sincerity.

44 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/245 22 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture If God will offer all, then humans those promises depend on human In the story of Abraham’s call and covenant, God must respond with all. Abraham’s trust. If we will not trust enough to sincerity permitted him to act “as the surrender to His will and power, presents Himself as the ideal model of the communicator who Lord has spoken” (Gen. 24:51, then He cannot act on our behalf. understands the truth about salvation and must share that NASB), rather than as he chose to Trust counts as evidence of things truth with a culture incompatible with his. Abraham’s represent the Lord as speaking. not seen. Without trust it is impossi- Abraham’s tarrying in Haran ble to please Him. response to God's call illustrates several principles of attitude could easily be interpreted as proof and conduct facilitating divine success in the business of of lack of full sincerity. So inter- Two Major Challenges to the preters who seek to share what they Gospel Today transcultural gospel communication. have heard of God’s voice may en- Effective gospel sharing across counter frustration when hearers do cultures today is challenged by ahis- not respond in precisely the way toricist hermeneutics and the ty - It is also a valid historical record of and missionaries. Respondents who hoped for. But this gives no license ranny of cultural relativism. The how God has bridged the gap be- follow Abraham’s example will be to discredit anyone’s sincerity. In the ahistoricist mindset prevents the tween the two most alienated cul- guided by principles of mutuality, final analysis, sincerity, like every- reader from accessing an author’s tures of all, those of earth and respect, sincerity, and trust. thing else in salvation, is a matter be- original intention because he or she heaven. Regarding mutuality, the student tween God and an individual. Spiri- does not believe it is possible to do In the story of Abraham’s call and of the Word must be willing to share tu ally minded representatives of so. With regard to Scripture, this covenant, God presents Himself as with the God who has shared Him- God will show patient respect for the means it is not possible to know the ideal model of the com - self in revelation. Then, as commu- mystery of the Spirit’s working in what God meant when He spoke, if municator who understands the nicator, the speaker must value the the lives of their hearers. indeed He did speak, as reported in truth about salvation and must hearer as God values Abraham and 4. Trust. The principle of trust Scripture. Relativ ist presuppositions share that truth with a culture in- all humanity, enough to share with closely resembles but differs from do not privilege one people’s self- compatible with his. Abraham’s re- them the treasure of Himself. Such sincerity. It is one of the two polar expressions above another’s. But sponse to God’s call illus trates sev- communication finds the hearer options sincerity permits: skepticism human dissembling notwithstand- eral principles of attitude and where he or she is. The God who and faith. Trust is the willingness to ing, an author’s in tentions, whether con duct facilitating divine success in knows Abraham’s name, identity, believe rather than the sincere suspi- to be factual or fictitious, stern or the business of transcultural gospel and location would guide those who cion of all belief. Trust allows for silly, cerebral or emotional, can be communication. His response also speak on His behalf, that they may growth. In the end it is a better op- known. Notions of scholarly dis- supports belief that obstructive pre- know who and where their hearers tion than a skepticism that prevents agreement and rejection of an oppo- suppositions notwithstanding, God’s are. Hearers, when they listen, give gullibility or the disinterested benev- nent’s point of view support the be- Holy Spirit, the Author of sacred evidence of the same spirit of shar- olence of a friend. lief that a literary text can reveal its Scripture, is ever present and com- ing, the same mutuality that moves God, as our friend, puts His cred- author’s intention and function as mitted to making Scripture both God to reach out to humanity and ibility on the line. His integrity is no disseminator of his or her ideas. avail able and comprehensible to led Abraham to respond positively theoretical abstraction. God opens The Bible, with God as author, is alien cultures. Principles of attitude to God. Himself to criticism by making an such a text. In it, He has revealed and conduct include mutuality, au- Regarding authority, God is not invita tion and offering guarantees Himself and set forth in comprehen- thority, and integrity on the part of altogether like humanity. Lis tening pledged in blood. Yet the rewards of sible fashion His will for humanity. God and His representative exegetes and the multiple expressions of mu-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews46 University, 2009 23 47 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 If God will offer all, then humans those promises depend on human In the story of Abraham’s call and covenant, God must respond with all. Abraham’s trust. If we will not trust enough to sincerity permitted him to act “as the surrender to His will and power, presents Himself as the ideal model of the communicator who Lord has spoken” (Gen. 24:51, then He cannot act on our behalf. understands the truth about salvation and must share that NASB), rather than as he chose to Trust counts as evidence of things truth with a culture incompatible with his. Abraham’s represent the Lord as speaking. not seen. Without trust it is impossi- Abraham’s tarrying in Haran ble to please Him. response to God's call illustrates several principles of attitude could easily be interpreted as proof and conduct facilitating divine success in the business of of lack of full sincerity. So inter- Two Major Challenges to the preters who seek to share what they Gospel Today transcultural gospel communication. have heard of God’s voice may en- Effective gospel sharing across counter frustration when hearers do cultures today is challenged by ahis- not respond in precisely the way toricist hermeneutics and the ty - It is also a valid historical record of and missionaries. Respondents who hoped for. But this gives no license ranny of cultural relativism. The how God has bridged the gap be- follow Abraham’s example will be to discredit anyone’s sincerity. In the ahistoricist mindset prevents the tween the two most alienated cul- guided by principles of mutuality, final analysis, sincerity, like every- reader from accessing an author’s tures of all, those of earth and respect, sincerity, and trust. thing else in salvation, is a matter be- original intention because he or she heaven. Regarding mutuality, the student tween God and an individual. Spiri- does not believe it is possible to do In the story of Abraham’s call and of the Word must be willing to share tu ally minded representatives of so. With regard to Scripture, this covenant, God presents Himself as with the God who has shared Him- God will show patient respect for the means it is not possible to know the ideal model of the com - self in revelation. Then, as commu- mystery of the Spirit’s working in what God meant when He spoke, if municator who understands the nicator, the speaker must value the the lives of their hearers. indeed He did speak, as reported in truth about salvation and must hearer as God values Abraham and 4. Trust. The principle of trust Scripture. Relativ ist presuppositions share that truth with a culture in- all humanity, enough to share with closely resembles but differs from do not privilege one people’s self- compatible with his. Abraham’s re- them the treasure of Himself. Such sincerity. It is one of the two polar expressions above another’s. But sponse to God’s call illus trates sev- communication finds the hearer options sincerity permits: skepticism human dissembling notwithstand- eral principles of attitude and where he or she is. The God who and faith. Trust is the willingness to ing, an author’s in tentions, whether con duct facilitating divine success in knows Abraham’s name, identity, believe rather than the sincere suspi- to be factual or fictitious, stern or the business of transcultural gospel and location would guide those who cion of all belief. Trust allows for silly, cerebral or emotional, can be communication. His response also speak on His behalf, that they may growth. In the end it is a better op- known. Notions of scholarly dis- supports belief that obstructive pre- know who and where their hearers tion than a skepticism that prevents agreement and rejection of an oppo- suppositions notwithstanding, God’s are. Hearers, when they listen, give gullibility or the disinterested benev- nent’s point of view support the be- Holy Spirit, the Author of sacred evidence of the same spirit of shar- olence of a friend. lief that a literary text can reveal its Scripture, is ever present and com- ing, the same mutuality that moves God, as our friend, puts His cred- author’s intention and function as mitted to making Scripture both God to reach out to humanity and ibility on the line. His integrity is no disseminator of his or her ideas. avail able and comprehensible to led Abraham to respond positively theoretical abstraction. God opens The Bible, with God as author, is alien cultures. Principles of attitude to God. Himself to criticism by making an such a text. In it, He has revealed and conduct include mutuality, au- Regarding authority, God is not invita tion and offering guarantees Himself and set forth in comprehen- thority, and integrity on the part of altogether like humanity. Lis tening pledged in blood. Yet the rewards of sible fashion His will for humanity. God and His representative exegetes and the multiple expressions of mu-

46 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/247 24 Caesar: Hermeneutics and Culture tuality are not all. God still is au- REFERENCES cal Interpretation (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter- 1998), p. 103. thority. When He speaks, humanity 1 Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “The World Well Varsity, 1991), p. 401. 27 Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 17 hears the voice of authority. The Staged,” in D. A. Carson and John D. Wood- Francis Schaeffer, The God Who Is There op cit. bridge, eds., God and Culture: Essays in Honor (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1968), pp. 126- 28 Leonora Tubbs Tisdale, Preaching as Spirit who gave the Word is uniquely of Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids, Mich.: 130. Local Theology and Folk Art (Minneapolis: authorized to express its meaning. Eerdmans, 1993), p. 7. 18 Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Fortress, 1997), pp. 32, 33. And we speak with authority when 2 Ibid., p. 9. Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Inter- 29 Nida and Reyburn, Meaning Across Cul- we speak in His name. Those who 3 See http://www.yourdictionary.com/cgi- pretation, op cit., pp. 376, 377. tures, op cit., p. 11. 19 30 yield to the Spirit’s impressions bin/mw.cgi (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Ibid., p. 377. Edgar V. McKnight, The Bible and the 20 Eugene A. Nida and William D. Rey- Reader: An Introduction to Literary Criticism choose the path to a saving knowl- Dictionary). 4 Ibid. burn, Meaning Across Cultures (New York: (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), p. xiv. 31 edge of truth. 5 C. Ellis Nelson, Where Faith Begins Orbis, 1981), p. 28. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 21 Integrity on God’s part requires (Richmond, Va.: John Knox, 1967), p. 183. Ibid. op cit. 22 32 sincerity and inspires trust in re - 6 Wade Clark Roof, William McKinney, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commen- Peter Matthiessen, At Play in the Fields of spondents. Abraham’s sacrifice of his American Mainline Religion: Its Changing tary (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald the Lord (New York: Random House, 1965), p. Shape and Future (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rut- Publ. Assn. 1978), vol. 1, p. 291. 312; in Kevin J. Priest, “Cultural Anthropol- son revealed most clearly of all the 23 gers University Press, 1987), p. 69. Amihai Mazar, Archaeology and the ogy, Sin, and the Missionary,” in D. A. Carson total ity of his sincerity and the depth 7 John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene, Land of the Bible (New York: Doubleday, and John D. Woodbridge, op cit., p. 90. 33 of his trust. God’s passing between Megatrends 2000 (New York: William Mor- 1990), p. 225. Walter Goldschmidt, “Anthropology 24 the pieces (Gen. 15:17) and provi- row, 1990). André Lemaire, “Mari, the Bible, and the and the Coming Crisis: an Autoethnographic Northwest Semitic World,” Biblical Archaeol- Ap praisal,” American Anthropologist, vol. 79, sion of a substitute for Isaac (22:13, 8 See three usages of the term pluralism of- ogy, vol. 47, p. 103. p. 26; quoted in Kevin J. Priest, ibid., p. 86. fered by D. A. Carson, “Christian Witness in an 14) prove for all time and for all peo- 25 Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture (New 34 Kevin J. Priest, ibid., p. 101. Age of Pluralism,” in D. A. Carson and John D. ples, that human sincerity will never York: Oxford University Press, 1964), p. 201 35 Ibid., p. 102. Woodbridge, God and Culture: Essays in Honor (italics in the original). 36 Ibid. surpass His own integrity, and that of Carl F. H. Henry, op cit., pp. 31-66. 26 Alfred J. Hoerth, Archaeology and the 37 Ibid., p. 103. His integrity is worthy of absolute 9 Huston Smith, Why Religion Matters: Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 38 Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 127 trust. The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Dis- Those who speak on behalf of belief (San Francisco: Harper, 2001), p. 205. 10 God and who have already sworn Ibid. 11 Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual total allegiance may be assured that Theology (New York: Orbis, 1992), p. 2 (italics through their life and voice, as supplied). Those who speak on behalf of God and who have already through that voice which Abraham 12 Robert L. Reymond, The Justification of heard 4,000 years ago, He will con- Knowledge: An Introductory Study in Christian sworn total allegiance may be assured that through their life and tinue to breach the barriers of alien Apologetic Methodology (Philadelphia: Pres- cultures. In place of the alienations byterian & Reformed, 1976), p. 71. voice, as through that voice which Abraham heard 4,000 years ago, 13 Rudolf Bultmann, Existence and Faith: that separate humanity, He will cre- Shorter Writings of Rudolf Bultmann (New He will continue to breach the barriers of alien cultures ate that oneness with Himself in York: Meridian, 1960), pp. 290, 291. which there is neither Jew nor 14 Jane Ammeson, “The Lens of Time,” Greek, slave nor free, male nor fe- WorldTraveler 34:1, p. 43. 15 male, because all are in Him, Abra- Brevard Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, ham’s descendants, inheritors all of 1979), p. 73. the promises of eternity (Gal. 3:28, 16 Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical 29). Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Bibli-

Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews48 University, 2009 25 49 Perspective Digest, Vol. 14 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 2 tuality are not all. God still is au- REFERENCES cal Interpretation (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter- 1998), p. 103. thority. When He speaks, humanity 1 Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “The World Well Varsity, 1991), p. 401. 27 Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 17 hears the voice of authority. The Staged,” in D. A. Carson and John D. Wood- Francis Schaeffer, The God Who Is There op cit. bridge, eds., God and Culture: Essays in Honor (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1968), pp. 126- 28 Leonora Tubbs Tisdale, Preaching as Spirit who gave the Word is uniquely of Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids, Mich.: 130. Local Theology and Folk Art (Minneapolis: authorized to express its meaning. Eerdmans, 1993), p. 7. 18 Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Fortress, 1997), pp. 32, 33. And we speak with authority when 2 Ibid., p. 9. Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Inter- 29 Nida and Reyburn, Meaning Across Cul- we speak in His name. Those who 3 See http://www.yourdictionary.com/cgi- pretation, op cit., pp. 376, 377. tures, op cit., p. 11. 19 30 yield to the Spirit’s impressions bin/mw.cgi (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Ibid., p. 377. Edgar V. McKnight, The Bible and the 20 Eugene A. Nida and William D. Rey- Reader: An Introduction to Literary Criticism choose the path to a saving knowl- Dictionary). 4 Ibid. burn, Meaning Across Cultures (New York: (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), p. xiv. 31 edge of truth. 5 C. Ellis Nelson, Where Faith Begins Orbis, 1981), p. 28. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 21 Integrity on God’s part requires (Richmond, Va.: John Knox, 1967), p. 183. Ibid. op cit. 22 32 sincerity and inspires trust in re - 6 Wade Clark Roof, William McKinney, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commen- Peter Matthiessen, At Play in the Fields of spondents. Abraham’s sacrifice of his American Mainline Religion: Its Changing tary (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald the Lord (New York: Random House, 1965), p. Shape and Future (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rut- Publ. Assn. 1978), vol. 1, p. 291. 312; in Kevin J. Priest, “Cultural Anthropol- son revealed most clearly of all the 23 gers University Press, 1987), p. 69. Amihai Mazar, Archaeology and the ogy, Sin, and the Missionary,” in D. A. Carson total ity of his sincerity and the depth 7 John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene, Land of the Bible (New York: Doubleday, and John D. Woodbridge, op cit., p. 90. 33 of his trust. God’s passing between Megatrends 2000 (New York: William Mor- 1990), p. 225. Walter Goldschmidt, “Anthropology 24 the pieces (Gen. 15:17) and provi- row, 1990). André Lemaire, “Mari, the Bible, and the and the Coming Crisis: an Autoethnographic Northwest Semitic World,” Biblical Archaeol- Ap praisal,” American Anthropologist, vol. 79, sion of a substitute for Isaac (22:13, 8 See three usages of the term pluralism of- ogy, vol. 47, p. 103. p. 26; quoted in Kevin J. Priest, ibid., p. 86. fered by D. A. Carson, “Christian Witness in an 14) prove for all time and for all peo- 25 Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture (New 34 Kevin J. Priest, ibid., p. 101. Age of Pluralism,” in D. A. Carson and John D. ples, that human sincerity will never York: Oxford University Press, 1964), p. 201 35 Ibid., p. 102. Woodbridge, God and Culture: Essays in Honor (italics in the original). 36 Ibid. surpass His own integrity, and that of Carl F. H. Henry, op cit., pp. 31-66. 26 Alfred J. Hoerth, Archaeology and the 37 Ibid., p. 103. His integrity is worthy of absolute 9 Huston Smith, Why Religion Matters: Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 38 Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 127 trust. The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Dis- Those who speak on behalf of belief (San Francisco: Harper, 2001), p. 205. 10 God and who have already sworn Ibid. 11 Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual total allegiance may be assured that Theology (New York: Orbis, 1992), p. 2 (italics through their life and voice, as supplied). Those who speak on behalf of God and who have already through that voice which Abraham 12 Robert L. Reymond, The Justification of heard 4,000 years ago, He will con- Knowledge: An Introductory Study in Christian sworn total allegiance may be assured that through their life and tinue to breach the barriers of alien Apologetic Methodology (Philadelphia: Pres- cultures. In place of the alienations byterian & Reformed, 1976), p. 71. voice, as through that voice which Abraham heard 4,000 years ago, 13 Rudolf Bultmann, Existence and Faith: that separate humanity, He will cre- Shorter Writings of Rudolf Bultmann (New He will continue to breach the barriers of alien cultures ate that oneness with Himself in York: Meridian, 1960), pp. 290, 291. which there is neither Jew nor 14 Jane Ammeson, “The Lens of Time,” Greek, slave nor free, male nor fe- WorldTraveler 34:1, p. 43. 15 male, because all are in Him, Abra- Brevard Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, ham’s descendants, inheritors all of 1979), p. 73. the promises of eternity (Gal. 3:28, 16 Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical 29). Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Bibli-

48 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol14/iss3/249 26