We are group of young Adventists interested in questions of Biblical hermeneutics, particularly as they relate to current controversies and discussions within the Adventist church. If you're a fan of the Storying Life podcasts, you already know Dale and David. We've invited our friend Ethan along for this ride. What follows are brief statements of our personal interest in and involvement with this topic.
Ethan
As someone who has spent their thirty-something year long life in and around Christianity, specifically Seventh-day Adventism, I have become increasingly aware of the importance of Biblical hermeneutics. In my own understanding it is how we study and understand the Bible. Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Belief #1 presents a very high regard for the Bible, calling it the “Holy Word of God”. The statement goes on to say “the Holy Scriptures are the supreme, authoritative, and the infallible revelation of His will” and “ the standard of character, the test of experience, the definitive revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God’s acts in history.” This description of the Bible sounds both grand and comforting as a kind of magical talisman and panacea. It also seems to be loaded with hermeneutical assumptions.
When faced with a difficult question, I have heard the platitude many times from other Christians, “Well, what does the Bible say?” Yet in practice, I’ve found that more often than not we arrive at disparate understandings of things so seemingly fundamental as the will and character of God and beliefs about good and evil. If the Bible is so authoritative, definitive and infallible, why do we struggle so much with interpreting it correctly?
My interest in Biblical hermeneutics is primarily about better understanding the fundamental nature and definitions of right-doing and wrong-doing, morality and immorality, and sin. I am intrigued by survey data that suggests that Christians have different perceptions of right –doing and wrong-doing than non-Christians, while other studies suggest that actual (im)moral behavior does not differ. I am curious what role hermeneutics play in shaping our perceptions of what is right and wrong, and how that is related to behavior and how we relate to the world.
As a lifelong and multi-generational SDA raised and educated within the denominational system, I feel like the perspective that I bring is one very much from within the faith tradition. Yet at the same time, approaching these questions and interacting with other Christians (including SDAs) often makes me feel like a stranger in a foreign land. It is my hope that studying these documents will help me better understand my own personal biblical hermeneutic and also allow me to better understand others who differ from me.
David
I have a strong personal interest in hermeneutics, or textual interpretation. Although the technical term "hermeneutics" is relatively new to me, I have been interested in questions of interpretation for most of my life. Growing up Adventist, I was regularly exposed to differences of interpretation and understanding, which I have sought to understand. My English MA thesis began with a question of hermeneutics--about why we interpret stories in different ways and what to do about that. Since then I have continued studying this topic with interest.
My MA thesis began with a story. The story begins with a book--Jon Krakauer's Into the Wild. As Krakauer summarizes it, "In April 1992, a young man from a well-to-do East Coast family hitchhiked to Alaska and walked alone into the wilderness north of Mount McKinley. Four months later his decomposed body was found by a party of moose hunters" (Author's Note). That young man's name was Christopher McCandless. In the book, Krakauer attempts to uncover and comprehend the events leading to McCandless' death. Although I was somewhat familiar with the story--it was big news when it broke--I didn't actually read the book until the final year of my BA in English.
McCandless' story was widely controversial. Indeed, part of Krakauer's telling was an attempt to address the strong reactions the story provoked. Nonetheless, I was entirely surprised when our class erupted into the most polarizing debate of our entire time together.
To put this in perspective, there were maybe fifteen students in the English department. We had nearly all our classes together, and spent much of our free time together, as well. Most of us were older students and had begun in other departments. We had a lot in common and appreciated that.
However, in this case, we reacted from entirely different experiences and understandings. On the one hand, some students, presumably with strong family relationships, attacked McCandless for the pain he had caused his family by cutting ties and disappearing when he set out on his adventure. In some sense, his death was the fair retribution for his selfishness and lack of respect for the basic bonds of kinship. One the other hand, those of us with more complicated family situations, celebrated McCandless' decision to strike out on his own and leave behind an obviously unhealthy and harmful family environment. His death was a sad turn of events, and if anyone was to be blamed, it was his family. The argument reached such a pitch that the teacher suggested we take a break to cool off and collect our thoughts.
What astounded me was that my friends and classmates, with whom I shared so many values in common, could so completely and viscerally disagree with my understanding of the book. Briefly put, what I discovered in writing my MA Thesis was that the core of the disagreement was competing narratives of family, community and identity. These competing narratives led to radically different interpretations of the same books and stories. Because of different hermeneutics, we arrived at different interpretations. (I must point out that hermeneutics can include both particular methods of interpretation and the philosophical assumptions (and/or frameworks) which guide interpretation.) For my class, the difference was not as much methodological as it was philosophical--a difference of foundational narratives.
Since that event, I have continued to explore hermeneutics, especially in relationship to foundational narratives. I see the same kinds of visceral disagreements within the Adventist church and other communities--both Christian and otherwise. Even when we read the same concrete text (with the same methods), we arrive at radically different interpretations. I believe that unless we begin identifying and discussing the differing foundational narratives that inform our interpretations, we are destined for conflict and damaged relationships. I hope this study will help bring some clarity and understanding to our differences and help us find a way forward, together--as Adventists, as Christians, and as human beings.
No comments:
Post a Comment