At Home in a Strange Land

Using the Old Testament in Christian Ethics

Sloane, Andrew

• Verlag: Baker Academic
• Jahr: 2009
• ISBN:
  9781441232847
• Thema: Theology & Religion
• Thema: Biblical Studies

The Old Testament is a problem for many Christians. Some find it puzzling, or even offensive; others seem to glibly misuse it for their own ends. There are few resources aimed at enabling ordinary Christians to understand the OT and use it in their lives as followers of Jesus. In this book At Home in a Strange Land: Using the Old Testament in Christian Ethics, Andrew Sloane seeks to address this need. He outlines some of the problems that ordinary Christians face in reading the Old Testament as part of Christian Scripture and provides a framework for interpreting the Old Testament and using it in Christian ethics. He identifies some of the key biblical texts of both the Old Testament and the New Testament that both inform Christian ethics and challenge us to live as God's people. Using the paradigm of learning to travel in unfamiliar places, Sloane seeks to equip the reader with tools for understanding many of the puzzling and difficult passages found in the Old Testament. In sum, the book aims to "rehabilitate" the Old Testament for ordinary, even skeptical, twenty-first century Christians. While many of the issues have been covered elsewhere, there is very little that seeks to bring together questions of interpretation and "ethical application" in one book aimed at lay people. The book would also be valuable in a college course on Christian ethics.

CHAPTER 1

EQUIPMENT FOR THE JOURNEY

WHEN OUR DAUGHTERS WERE LITTLE we lived for six years in Melbourne, on the southeastern tip of Australia, but our families lived in Sydney, over five hundred miles to the north. So every year, for six years, we would make the trip to Sydney to have Christmas with the family—a twelve-hour car ride in the middle of an Australian summer, with three daughters crammed into the back seat, and then twelve hours back again. As much as they loved their grandparents, every year at least one of the girls (and sometimes my wife) would ask, “Do we have to go?” And yes, we did. Every year. These car trips are not, I must say, among my fondest memories. These were trips to be survived and endured, not enjoyed. Survival, in fact, was the best that we could hope for. What made survival possible for me and my wife (and for our kids) was careful planning. We made sure that we were well equipped for the journey. We had all our stops mapped out, snacks and little presents to give out every hour, story tapes to play, strategies for ignoring “Are we there yet?,” and on and on. And every year we got there and back again safely, family intact. It was all about preparation, making sure that we knew where we were going, how we were going to get there, and what we would need along the way. It’s the same for our journey to the strange land of the OT. That’s what this chapter is about. I will give you a map of the territory (a framework for understanding the OT and its ethics) and say something about how to get there (look at basic issues in interpreting the Bible). But first, I should deal with my daughters’ question, “Do we have to go?”

Many Christians would answer, “No, we don’t.” In fact, they would say we that shouldn’t, that the OT is too strange, its ethics too far from us and our circumstances, too contaminated by violence and misogyny, to be of any benefit. And after all, they might add, we are Christians, and Christ is the end of the law (Rom 10:4). A second group would disagree vehemently, arguing that the OT is God’s word, and that is all that matters: “God said it, I believe it, that settles it.” Unless Jesus or the apostles have told us otherwise, everything in the OT Scriptures is binding on us as Christians. A third group takes a mediating position, maintaining that although the OT is Christian Scripture, we need to think carefully about what it meant then and how we use it now. Yes, this is a journey we need to go on, but it’s a more complicated one than some might think. (I guess it’s fairly obvious which is my view.) Clearly, these three views differ on whether this is a journey that we should undertake and, if it is, what route we should take. So, before we head off on our journey, let’s first make sure that we have to go and think a bit about how we might get there.

THE MORAL AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

The idea that the OT has no bearing on Christians, that the God of the OT is not really the same God as the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, has a long pedigree going back to the second century A.D. The Christian theologian Marcion believed that the God of the OT was an inconsistent, violent, repressive being. While acknowledging the creator god, Marcion believed that this god did a poor job of creating the world, and that the fractured nature of current reality reflected the nature of this god. He also saw this god as harsh and judgmental, as imposing contradictory and burdensome rules on people and ruthlessly punishing them for any breaking of the rules. Marcion’s solution was to propose a radical distinction between Yahweh, the creator and lawgiver of the OT, and the one true God revealed in the person of Christ. Christ, in fact, was seen as the one who redeemed us from the power of the second-class OT god and showed us a different God, a God of mercy and grace. As a result, Marcion and his followers rejected the OT outright (along with most of the NT, other than some of Paul’s letters and his own version of Luke). According to Marcion, the OT had no role to play in Christian life and faith. Some of this may sound familiar; it certainly is echoed in many comments that I hear today about the OT and its relation to Jesus and the NT. It is a view, however, that was rejected by the early church, which excommunicated Marcion for his teachings.

Marcion’s views have reappeared periodically in Christian history and are reflected, in my view, in the work of the eighteenth-century German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher and his followers. Admittedly, Schleiermacher was not an avowed Marcionite (as those who accept Marcion’s teachings are known). However, he very clearly distinguished Christian faith and theology from anything related to Judaism, including its Scriptures. His reasoning was careful and intricate, but the details need not detain us here. What is clear is that for Schleiermacher, the proper subject of Christian theology (and so ethics) is Christian faith and experience, as distinct from any other religion. That, in turn, meant that he rejected not only all OT Scriptures as an authority for Christian faith and theology but also anything in the NT that merely reflected Jewish (i.e., OT) ideas. It was, after all, only what was distinctly Christian that was relevant for Christian theology and ethics.

Others take a radically different line. For them, the authority granted to the OT by Jesus and the authors of the NT means that it must be authoritative for us. If it was God’s word then, it is God’s word now, and only the author has the right to change it, only the lawgiver is entitled to bring in a new law. Jesus himself stated very clearly that he came not to abolish but rather to fulfill the law (Matt 5:17–19). This means that the only OT commands that are not binding on us are those specifically superseded in the NT. Thus, for instance, we are no longer bound by the food laws outlined in the OT (e.g., Lev 11), since Jesus has rendered all foods clean (Mark 7:1–23; cf. Acts 10); we no longer have to sacrifice animals (e.g., Lev 1), since Jesus’ once-for-all sacrifice has made the old sacrificial system obsolete (Heb 7–10). Other OT laws, however, are fully binding and are to govern a Christian’s conscience and practice.

The theonomist (or Christian Restoration) movement is a current example of this line of thinking. Theonomists argue that the law of God ought to be the law of the land. Old Testament law, except where clearly negated by later NT teaching, ought to be the basis of our civil and criminal law. Thus, adultery, homosexual practice, and so on ought not just be considered morally wrong; they ought to be illegal. Furthermore, OT law gives us the basis not only of legislation but also of punishment, including capital punishment where relevant. So, for instance, certain sexual crimes ought to be punishable by death (although blasphemy should not, given theonomist belief in the NT’s teaching of freedom of religious conscience). Here I need to stress that theonomists do not seek to impose this law on a reluctant populace; rather, they seek to bring people to faith in Christ who will then voluntarily adopt the theonomic ideal. Nonetheless, according to theonomists, we should not just travel to the strange land of the OT; we ought to take up residence there.

Theonomic Reformed Approach to Law and Gospel

God’s holy and good law is never wrong in what it demands. It is “perfect” (Deut. 32:4; Ps. 19:7; James 1:25), just like the Lawgiver himself (Matt. 5:48). . . . Two premises about the law of God are thus abundantly clear if we want to be faithful to the infallible testimony of Scripture: (1) The law of God is good in what it demands, being what is natural to the Creator-creature relationship. (2) The demands of God’s law are universal in their character and application, not confined in validity to Old Testament Israel. . . . In short, it is the civil magistrate’s proper function and duty to obey the Scripture’s dictates regarding crime and its punishment. . . . The Bible stands squarely against the personally chosen starting point of those who recoil from the penal sanctions of God’s law. The Word of God insists that “the law is good” (1 Tim. 1:8–10). According to its infallible teaching, it is necessary to execute civil penalties against criminal behavior (Prov. 20:2, 8; 1 Pet. 2:14), and to do so without exception or mercy (Deut. 19:13, 21; 25:12).[1]

Both of these views are, however, fatally flawed. The first, which we could call the “total rejection” viewpoint, is difficult to reconcile with what NT authors say and how they say it. For them the OT clearly functioned as Scripture, as God’s authoritative word, as can be seen in, for instance, the frequency with which Paul quotes the OT in Romans. The second viewpoint, which we could call “total acceptance,” also fails to do justice to the way in which NT authors used the OT, as well as how the law worked in the OT itself (we will see more on this later).

Here it is worth noting that although NT writers refer frequently to the OT, they never speak of it as binding on governments or use OT law as the basis for new forms of government. Paul, for instance, would have had a perfect opportunity to do so in Rom 13; it is striking that he doesn’t. Whatever role the OT plays in Christian ethics, there is no evidence that NT authors saw OT law as binding on the state. Furthermore, Paul seemed to see Christians as free from the constraints of the law so as to be bound to a deeper obedience to God in the power of the Spirit (e.g., Gal 5:1–15). That, surely, rules out all forms of legalism. There are other points of view that, though less extreme, cluster around the poles of total rejection of the OT as a source of Christian ethics (e.g., classical dispensational theologies) or total acceptance (e.g., some, more legalistic, versions of Seventh Day Adventist tradition). In my view, they are subject to criticisms similar to the ones that I have outlined here. So, we should neither abandon the journey (total rejection of the OT) nor seek to emigrate (total acceptance); rather, we should prepare to visit this strange land. Shortly, we will look at what we should do when we get there; for now, however, we need to think about the journey itself. It is time to think about the task of biblical interpretation and related ideas regarding the nature of Scripture.

HERMENEUTICS: HOW DO WE INTERPRET THE BIBLE?

The issues that we have looked at so far are, broadly speaking, issues of hermeneutics. “Hermeneutics” is one of those words that “insiders” in the game of biblical studies like to bandy around and that completely mystify “outsiders.” Perhaps that’s the point of some of the jargon that we use. Let me demystify the word. Hermeneutics, simply put, is the task of understanding how people communicate and discern meaning (especially in texts). Admittedly, what most of us are concerned with is practical exegesis—getting the meaning out of a text by reading a passage and understanding it. Hermeneutics of Scripture is a theoretical discipline but one closely related to the practicalities of reading and interpreting texts. In fact, I suggest, all interpretation assumes a hermeneutic, be it explicit or implicit. Hermeneutics guides what questions you put to a text, what answers you think it can give, and so on. Theory shapes practice (and vice versa).

But, you might say, surely we can do without hermeneutics. You’ve been reading your Bible for years and only just heard the word. On the other hand, you might say that looking into hermeneutics means that you’ve been doing it all wrong, that what you’ve been doing with the Bible is naïve and illegitimate. Or you might feel that you need to have a university degree to read your Bible correctly. Some writers in the field certainly seem to imply that without a lot of specialized knowledge and access to tools of biblical criticism, our readings of Scripture are questionable at best. I am not one of them (I am neither a hermeneutician nor the son of a hermeneutician [apologies to Amos 7:14]). As I see it, hermeneutics is not about throwing away everything you already know and all you currently do; rather, hermeneutics is about seeking to understand how and why your current method and practice work and perhaps learning to improve upon them.

Let me draw an analogy: the relationship between hermeneutics and interpreting a text is like the relationship between (civil) engineering and building a bridge. Bridges can be built by people who have never studied engineering, and frequently they have been—what’s more, these bridges stay up. People learn what to do by a process of trial and error (if it collapses, clearly you need to try something different) and by being taught by others who knew what they were doing (this one fell, and that one stayed up, so do it that way). The problem is that some designs work only in particular circumstances: a simple arched bridge made of stone may work over a stream; you can even use a series of arches to cross a large river. This method won’t work, however, if you want to cross Sydney Harbor. For that, you need a completely new kind of bridge. Engineering helps you know not only what design to use and where—experience can do that—but also why a particular design works. This means that if you are faced with a problem that you or your teachers haven’t encountered before, you can go back to first principles and figure out a solution. It can even help you improve on an old design, eliminating faults and streamlining the design. So it is with hermeneutics. People can and do read their Bibles and understand them without ever having studied hermeneutics or even knowing the word. (You are now among the blessed elite who know the term and what it means!) Knowing a little about hermeneutics can help you understand how and why particular interpretations work and give you skills to deal with texts and issues that you have not encountered before and ones that you have not adequately dealt with in the past.

I admit that hermeneutics can get fairly involved, given the nature of some of the issues that it has to deal with. But engineering can get fairly complicated too. My engineering friends at university used to regularly curse something called “statics,” a mind-bending subject dealing with the rules governing the forces producing an equilibrium between material bodies way beyond the capabilities of a mere medical student such as I was at the time. Hermeneutics looks at issues related to the nature of meaning: where it resides (if anywhere); whether it is fixed and, if so, how and by whom; whether it is created in the interpretive process or inscribed by authors and discovered by readers; how the things that we already believe (our presuppositions) influence both how we read texts and what meaning we find there. We’ll need to look at some of these issues as we go along; others we can happily ignore.

Nonetheless, hermeneutics is an important matter for us to consider, given that it deals with something central to Christian life and faith: reading the Bible. There are many legitimate ways that we as Christians use the Bible. We use it in our worship services, shaping our communities and their underlying values; we use it to shape our prayers and our imaginations; we use it for guidance; we allow God’s Spirit to use it to challenge and enrich us. The philosopher Nicholas Wolterstorff has argued that one of the most important things we do with the Bible (something, I suggest, that informs or should inform most of our other uses of the Bible) is to read it for what he calls “divine discourse”; that is, we read the Bible so as to understand what God is saying to us by way of it. That, I suggest, is one thing that lies behind our calling the Bible “God’s word.” But now things get a little bit complicated, for the Bible doesn’t come to us as a word from on high, untouched by human hands (or lips); rather, the Bible is God’s word to us through human words. That means two things: first, we need to understand what the human authors were saying; second, we then have to understand what God was and is saying through them. We will look at each of these in turn.

When looking at the role of the human author, we should recall what texts are and why people write them. Texts are linguistic objects, produced by persons in particular contexts, addressed to other persons in order to achieve particular purposes. Let me unpack that. Texts are particular instances of human use of language; they are a species of communication. People use language with particular purposes in mind, generally involving other people and their actions or beliefs. Even if the purpose is simply to entertain, language has a point, a personal purpose. People do things with words. Generally, for these purposes to be achieved, the language needs to successfully communicate; messages need to be received as well as sent. But also, texts are different from other kinds of communication: they are not just language; they also are objects. I can pick up my copy of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and look at it, read it, give it to my daughter, and so on. (That is true even with electronic texts. They may not have the same physical presence that a book has, but somewhere electrons are configured in such a way as to produce words on a screen. They are, so to speak, virtual objects.) What does the idea of texts as linguistic objects mean for the task of biblical interpretation?

We need to keep in mind that the Bible is a text or, more properly speaking, a coherent collection of texts. This collection of texts was produced by persons (including God) in particular contexts and was addressed to other persons (again, including God) in order to achieve particular purposes. These purposes include promises (e.g., Gen 12; John 14), warnings (e.g., Deut 8; Heb 5:11–6:12), relationships (e.g., Exod 19:5–6; John 21:25), praises (e.g., Pss 146–150; Eph 1:3–14), instructions (e.g., Deut 6; 1 Thess 4:13–5:11), and truth claims (e.g., Isa 44:9–20; Acts 2:14–36). All these are things that people did with these words. Now, you may be puzzled by the idea that the Bible speaks to God. Is it not, after all, God’s word to us? Is it not God speaking to us? Yes it is. But it is also a record of human beings speaking to God. Think, for instance, of Psalms, or large sections of Job, or important bits of Paul’s letters, or, for that matter, Jesus’ own prayers in John 17. All of these passages are addressed to God. Is that not what prayer is about? They are, nonetheless, God’s words to us, for they are prayers that God has endorsed for our use. These are prayers to which, if y...

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Introduction: Neglected, Despised, and Abused—The Strange Land of the Old Testament
• Chapter 1: Equipment for the Journey
• Chapter 2: Getting Going
• Chapter 3: Avoiding Pitfalls, Hacking through the Jungle
• Chapter 4: Exploring the Territory
• Chapter 5: Bringing the Old Testament Home
• Appendix A: The Geek Zone (a.k.a. Annotated Bibliography)
• Appendix B: Further Travels in the Geek Zone (a.k.a. For Further Reading)
• Notes
• Index of Modern Authors
• Index of Subjects
• Index of Scripture References