In Its Cultural Context
Praise Him, highest heavens, and the waters that are above the heavens! Psalm 148:4 NASB
Above – Most of the people of Western world and those that have been influenced by the Western world as far away as China are preparing for Christmas. What almost none of these people are considering is the cultural context of Christmas. Of course, why should they? After all, Christmas is no longer the Roman pagan violent inhumane celebration it once was. It no longer calls forth images of the birth of pagan deities. It’s just a Christian tradition now, one that has been usurped by the retailers and the party-goers so as to strip it of even the Christian claims. There is little point in detailing the real history of Christmas now. Tomorrow the world will simply ignore whatever we reveal.
But there is something else to learn here; something that is important for every day with the Scriptures. No verse, not a single one, comes to us without a cultural context. Genesis comes from people recently freed from bondage in Egypt. Its images and metaphors are filled with ancient Egyptian thinking and tribal identity. No, I don’t believe it is about all homo sapiens. Kings and Chronicles come with the culture of Israel in trouble with pagan worship and pagan empires. Ruth arrives with the background of Lot and Tamar. A large part of Proverbs comes from Egyptian sages. David is no different. Whenever we turn to the words of God, we encounter the thoughts of men. God comes to us in human clothes and unless we understand the cultural ideas of the authors in their own time, we simply will not understand what they intended to communicate.
It is simply not possible to read the verses of Scripture as if they were written for us. It is equally not possible to imagine that the Spirit will somehow whisper the “real” meaning of the verse in your spiritual ear. To understand is to study—to study the meaning of the verse for the audience that first heard it and for the author who wrote it.
Consider David’s comment about praise. The “waters above the earth” are exhorted to praise the Lord. Wait a minute! What waters above the earth? Don’t turn this into a weather report. David is not talking about rain clouds. He is talking about the celestial imagery of tenth century BCE in the Near East. In ancient mythology, water was a primal element. The earth floated on the primal sea and above the stars was another realm of celestial water. Remember the Genesis flood. The waters from beneath and the waters from above contributed to covering the earth.[1] David is not presenting us with a scientific view (our scientific view) of the world. He is writing in the culture of his time. His statement about the water above is perfectly compatible with the thinking of his day. That does not mean it isn’t inspired. It doesn’t mean it isn’t what God wanted. It just means that the text comes with a culture. All of the texts come this way. Better get used to it.
Christmas is another cultural image of the day. It used to mean one thing, now it means something else. If you don’t know the history of the idea, you really don’t know much more than the tradition you inherited. That’s perfectly alright, if that’s all you want to know. But it ignores the evidence, just as ignoring the mythology of David’s time distorts David’s words. So today, as the world gets ready for Christmas, remember this: ideas have a history. To know what an idea really means is to know its history and its cultural context. Then you can determine if its something you want to believe.
Topical Index: water, above, mythology, Christmas, Psalm 148:4
[1] You might consider the article about shared cultural imagery here: http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/gre13.htm
One of the interesting things I am encountering (during this “holiday” at home) is the incongruity of those who are highly educated in physics, engineering, etc., who have no trouble casting off all the OT creation references as pagan myth only, but on the other hand will hold onto Christmas as being sacred for Christians. I found the article from Gier to be thought-provoking – not sure where my thinking is on the creation model, but I am re-examining things I thought I knew were absolute. I suspect there is still much to discover in the Hebraic cultural thought, and how it developed. Thanks for the reference. 🙂
I have Googled and heard people’s explanation about Christmas and pagan worship….I would like to know your take on it.
Start with this Jewish research piece.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm
WHOA. This is our first time not celebrating Christmas in nine years. (I was raised JW, and celebrated my first Christmas at 22.) I am thankful you posted this, lest I indulge any longing for the festivities. That is truly one of the most horrifying things I have ever read. Nothing I want to celebrate for sure. Yuck.
We didn’t completely cut off Christmas “cold turkey” this year. But we didn’t get a tree, didn’t decorate, didn’t perpetuate the Santa thing (which my older kids figured out earlier this year anyway) but we did buy some small gifts for the kids. I am trying to woo their hearts to desire pure worship, as God has wooed my heart, and been patient with me as I learn to let go of the former things and embrace “new” truth.
Skip, I am very sympathetic to what you say here about culture. But . . . there’s always a but.
If it is necessary to understand culture before interpreting Scripture, and if Scripture is our only infallible guide, how will we be able to use Scripture in order to verify that we have the correct cultural understanding?
Secondly, if we hold to the idea of sola scriptura – the scriptures alone – then it is held that the Scriptures interpret the Scriptures. How does this notion fit in with the idea that it is culture – discovered external to the Scriptures – that is to interpret Scripture? Have we not created a new ultimate authority-culture-which is to be the infallible guide to interpreting the Scriptures?
But . . . 🙂
First we would have to agree that Scripture (and by this I imagine that you mean canonized texts) is our only infallible guide. We would have to spend some time attempting to understand how “infallible” plays a role here since there are NO infallible copies of any of the original texts. So the best we have is an IDEAL of infallibility, and we have to piece it together from the copies where we can. Unless, of course, you mean to suggest that the COPIES are infallible because we say that they are (in which case, you have a new authority).
That raises the next question. Why would we have to use Scripture to verify that we have the correct cultural understanding? The canon is just one example of literature from the cultures we are interested in. Yes, it is unique is some very important ways, but it is not CULTURALLY unique. Its forms are similar to other literature of the culture. Its words are the same. Its paradigms the same. Its grammar, ideas, history and background are the same. What prevents me from looking at the OTHER cultural artifacts in order to determine the meaning of the text in Scripture? In fact, how can I even suggest that I should ignore this material? How can I interpret the US Constitution without knowing the history and culture of the Americas in the 1700’s? Even if I hold that Scripture is canon, am I barred from examining all the material I can find from the era of the authors in order to understand what they said even if that material is NOT in the canon?
I would argue that we CANNOT rely on Scripture alone in order to understand the text. Can you rely on Genesis to interpret Genesis? What is Genesis about if it is not about the cosmology of the ancient Semites?
As for sola Scriptura, that Lutheran doctrine contains a great deal of epistemological problems, not least of which is its endorsement of meaning communicated by the “whisper of the Spirit.” It might provide psychological certainty for those in need, but it is not without serious flaws. Sola Scriptura REQUIRES an additional authority, namely the reader’s deferral to the leading of the Spirit (whatever that may be). If it denies that crucial role of cultural paradigms in the writings of the authors, then we are back to the same hopeless square and Scripture becomes whatever the READER thinks it is, not what the author intended.
Back to you.
I think there may be another couple considerations, also. First, every context I have ever learned about Scripture has made it that much more accessible to me. I am deeply appreciative to Skip and all who have been so diligent. Thank you! Skip has a very good point, and I think all who read Scripture still project their own culture into it to the extent that they don’t have access to its own context. Me included. It can get so super funny sometimes when other cultures get a purchase on it and try to put it all through their own lens. BUT, it still humbles me to see that the important, saving principles can still shine through, in spite of it all. The thing that is currently astounding me, and that I simply do not understand, is how Christianity is spreading through areas of the world that lack Scripture almost completely. These people are lucky, some of them, to have heard one verse, one time, even. Some of them have heard none. But, they are getting it. They get it so much more than I think a lot of us do. How do I know that? They get it so completely they are ready to die for it, and understand what they are dying for, and they are dying. Now what did they not get? Perhaps the real question becomes at that point what are we not getting yet?
There is undoubtedly a role for the Holy Spirit to play. We must be careful to never muzzle the Spirit, for He blows where He lists, and who are we insist He come only through one lens; even the lens He chose to come through. It is obviously not the only way those Words can reach us. Let us refer to that humble cloud of dying witnesses who are all around us right now, and pause. Pause on both sides: the side that reaches arrogantly, as well as the side that reaches ignorantly. Surely there is caution and warning for both sides. May we pray for guidance, which that Holy Writ always will need BECAUSE it came through imperfect channels – even the imperfect culture that it was written in and for. May we all rightly divide the Word of Truth. And not by ourselves. I have seen that that double-edged sword can cut the careless OR unaided person who attempts to wield it.
I know I need the guidance of culture and context. I know I also need the Author’s.
But WHAT do they get? Are the “getting” the Christian evangelical conservative doctrinal recruiting membership in the church stuff? My observation around the world is the Christianity, not biblical living, is growing, especially in area where what is really happening is the spread of the Western evangelical culture. It seems to me we need to study the PARADIGMS that control HOW we read the text as well as the text, and be cognizant of our own bias and cultural leanings. The Spirit has a role, for sure, but what and how that works is a mystery, not an exegetical method.
There’s that culture thing again! (smile). I am NOT speaking up for the indubitable spread of western culture! The Christians that are dying I do not think are dying because they either desire or have or reject or lack western culture. That, from what I can tell,, is spreading without any help from religion. Any more. Mostly, the true underground Way is being propagated about the same way I think it always has. Example, coupled with conviction. Very little Word actually necessary for the Peace that passeth all understanding to pass, apparently.
What are we to make of people who know little of Scripture, let alone cultural contexts, but yet seem to have deep faith in God? As Skip has said, we in this community do not question another’s meeting and relationship with God. What we question are the institutional paradigms.
Even so, what are we to make of these people? This is a thought my wife had: Within health care, there is a growing movement of “slow medicine,” hoping to do for patients what slow food has done for sustenance. Slow medicine advocates like to treat the human body as a garden to be tended, instead of a machine to be fixed. This makes sense. We’re made, after all, of dirt.
Now what did Paul say? One sows, one waters, one harvests. Imagine believers as a collection of garden plants, all kinds, at all stages of growth. A beautiful garden. What are we to make of all these people? Gladness for them. Gratitude for God’s care and attention.
I’ve written about my opinions on this matter and I usually try to mention it when I speak, but I’ll repeat. Thomas is right. I do NOT question the experience these believers have with God. The experience is real. God comes to us in many, many different ways. What I question, and what I believe we ALL need to question, is how we interpret that experience, that is, what our own paradigms tell us our experience MEANS. Since we are subject to paradigms without challenging them, since we merely DRIFT into them, it seems to me that one of the most important activities required of believers is to know WHY they believe, and that means sorting out what they have inherited from what Scripture actually says. This is a long and sometimes disturbing process, but if we want to claim that we have a BIBLICAL faith, it is necessary, especially in times when so much of what we think we know about what God said has been distorted by centuries of anti-Semitic thought.
Unfortunately, a lot of people do not want to engage in this process. There are those whose experience with God is simply enough for them. They don’t want to look deeper. Then there are those whose experience with God has become a set of doctrines. They have faith in the beliefs rather than the person. From them, any challenge to the belief structure is viewed as an attack on their experience with God. They are unable, and unwilling, to entertain anything that might shake their foundations. This, I believe, is the result of a false sense of certainty, one that is anchored in human statements ABOUT God rather than one that is anchored in the person of God.
Finally, there are some who realize that faith is a verb, that faith grows and that their experiences with God cannot be shaken loose simply because they pursue a deeper understanding of the theology and history of their religion. Sometimes this causes enormous psychological pain and states on confusion, but God does not abandon His own and they continue knowing that God is with them in their quest. Few find this narrow gate, but that does not mean God doesn’t work with all the rest. It just means that some understand a bit more about HOW this all happened.
That is clear. May I pray always to “pursue a deeper understanding of the theology and history of my religion.” Amen. No pain is as great as the pain of ignorance. I learned that long ago.
But … 🙂
Infallibility . . . every statement which attempts to explain a ‘truth’ has an explicit or implied infallibility. Thus it is not possible to deny infallibility without at the same time attempting to make an infallible statement, contradiction of the best kind. Thus, if we don’t have an infallible Scripture in our hands today are you prepared to suggest that YHVH has handed us a ‘mixed bag’ of statements and it’s up to us to figure out what is correct and what is not correct? How would we do that without an infallible standard to guide us?
Why is it necessary to use Scripture to verify the culture? What infallible guide would you suggest that would confirm we have the correct understanding of ‘culture’? To suggest the Scripture is on the same level as the US Constitution as an historical document is merely begging the question. The Scripture itself makes some radical claims about itself and its purpose. No similar claims are made by the US Constitution, so I don’t find historical documents such as that are a valid analogy.
So if we cannot rely on Scripture to interpret the text, what can we rely on? More importantly, who can we rely on? Whose interpretation of culture is the ‘correct’ one that will become the infallible guide to interpret the Word?
If there is any problem with “sola scriptura” it is not with any notion of the Spirit. It is this: whose interpretation of the Scripture is the correct one? The Word may be written, but it is read by humans. Traditionally, it required agreement of the Church in Council to make an interpretation an “official” one. Without that, we have competing “official” pronouncements by individuals such as you or I. And if all we offer is opinions, then the best we achieve is having our opinions canceled out by someone else’s opinion or by whoever can shout the loudest and longest. As you say, an epistemological problem. Do you have a solution? 😉
Imagine my surprise at learning that the whole NT was comprised of conversations in the form of letters, of which we only have one side. Much like conversations with some people in day to day life. Their perspective is the only one that counts and that spills over into how they choose to interpret Scripture and inflict it on those around them. Add that to anti-Semitic, pro authoritarian make-me-a-king-by-divine-edict environment in which my beloved KJ was translated and we have whole different conversation.
Just saying.
If we don’t know and understand what the author’s original intent was when the letters were penned we ascribe to those letters our own assumptions, those assumptions being drawn from our (present day) cultural norms, word meanings and presumptions. This also opens the door for some crazy ‘new understandings’ upon which many of lives have been destroyed.
Just saying. Again.
However. Addressing the conversation at hand, there is, actually, some solidly based research done that addresses not only the day, but the exact hour that Messiah was born.
While the whole gamut of Scriptural references of Day of Trumpets, priestly rotations and other historically provable points, the major body of work centers around the positions of celestial bodies, using Revelations 12:1-3 as the final revealing factor.
We (Read: I) always read Revelation 12:1-3 as metaphors that applied to the church of today, but it can be read astronomically, with the names of different stars being called out in relation to where they are sitting. When read this way there is a specific day, even a specific hour that we can look to as the time and date of the birth of Messiah.
I find this intriguing and for personal reasons pretty much choose to embrace it wholeheartedly.
Find it here: http://www.askelm.com/star/star008.htm
A lot more information on this passage and the astronomical details leading up to it can be found in the book at http://www.amazon.com/The-Star-That-Astonished-World/dp/0945657889
Thanks for the link today. The material presented in the article enforces my resolve to think about and investigate any scripture I read.
I’m blown away by the things I have learned since becoming a believer. I am grateful for your input Skip and your courage to speak out on important issues. I have done some research on this Christmas issue, and I am repentant for my part in it. Thank you and continue to encourage us to go deeper.