Unpacking the Hermeneutic Quiz

First, thanks for taking the quiz. I hope you found it interesting. I think there is much to be gleaned through such an exercise. And though pigeonholing people and painting with broad brushes tends to bear little fruit in most cases, if taken as a general starting point to understand one another, then categorizing can be helpful. With this caveat in mind, let me attempt to unpack some of the questions and responses with the goal of understanding one another’s approach to the Bible better.

The conservative response to the question of “The Bible is…” was “God's inspired words in confluence with the authors” and “God's exact words for all time.” In addition, this view tends to view the Bible as “inerrant on everything.” In other words, there is no possibility of human error or the author’s opinion making its way into the Bible. If you have this “top-down” view of inspiration, you will tend to be more literalistic – God said it, so I believe/do it. Though some original context and cultural background is taken into consideration, this view more or less takes the Bible at face value. Many Christians say they take the Bible literally – as though every story happened as recorded and every law, commandment, and exhortation remains valid for present day Christians. The underlying reason that many take this tact is, I believe, is because they are attempting to avoid defying God and God’s expectations for followers. Though people with this view tend to be dogmatic, they are basing their interpretation on a genuine desire to live according to God’s will.

The second, “moderate” option given was still literal in nature but allowed for some leeway in modern appropriation. This moderate response framed the Bible as, “God's inspired words that arise out of a community and then are written down by an author” and “God's message (instead of exact words) for all time.” The idea of a “community” takes much more of the original context into consideration. In addition, the word “message” leaves plenty of room for interpretation and application. For the most part, I think adherents to this view often choose to err on the more conservative side. As the response to question three indicates, they believe that the Bible is “Inerrant on only matters of faith and practice.” So, things like punctuation, grammar, etc. are irrelevant and unimportant. What is important is that God has the final say and overrides any bias or theological interpolation by the writer. So, though they do not believe God took over the brain and hand of the original writer, the message that God wanted to convey has been written down. This view allows for some of the author’s style, perspective, etc., but keeps the Bible authoritative and inspired by God.

The final, “progressive” option stated the following: “The Bible is words of an author who speaks out of a community's tradition, but which sacramentally lead us to God” and is “God's words and message for that time but need interpretation and contextualization to be lived today.” Basically, there is a core message conveyed and there is still application, but the modern appropriation requires more nuancing instead of a one to one direct application. My view of women’s roles in the church would probably fall into this category. In addition, the Bible is, “Not defined by inerrancy or errancy, which are modernistic categories.” I will say that I agree with the first part of this statement but not the second. The concept of “modernistic categories” is a bit of a cop out. I would say that the Bible has to more to do with conveying the journey of faith by faithful followers and therefore is truth rather than being truth by virtue of its “inerrancy.” The point of the Bible is to aid us in experiencing the fellowship of God with a community similar to the communities of the original writers.

The stream of interpretation has ebbed and flowed throughout history. Few people would align themselves completely with one camp or another. I think most believers understand that the Bible is a diverse book, containing multiple genres in a different language making interpretation a difficult process at best. At the same time, I believe we all have interpretive tendencies based on our inspirational view. I will unpack this concept in next week’s post.