Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Bible and authority part two
In part one I allowed NT Wright to raise three questions pertaining to the Bible and the idea of authority. In this post, and two following, I attempt to answer them from my own perspective.
(1) How can any text function as authoritative? Once one gets away from the idea of a rule book such as might function as authoritative in, say, a golf club, this question gets progressively harder.
Indeed it does! My first instinct is to resort to an argument of canon: some books are set aside as special, as having a particular level of importance or authenticity. This is fine as long as we avoid the question of who gets to decide upon the canon, but it still does not account for how the canon is considered authoritative.
If one wanted to model one's directorial aspirations after Peter Jackson, for example, the first thing to do would be to consult the source material and look for common techniques and re-ocurring motifs. Then we may wish to consult some secondary resources: documentaries, New Zealand film histories, a biography or two. But how is this 'canon' to be considered authoritative? We certainly won't gain any recognition for a re-make of Braindead, will we? The canon begins to function as authoritative when we begin to draw on this rich reservoir of materials and allow them to guide us and mould our actions and choices.
So this is my first reaction to the question, and an example that sprung to mind (we're studying Jackson's filmmaking in my media class at the moment). If reapplied to the Bible, how does it work out?
I'll assume the Protestant canon, and take that as my starting point. (These are the books that make up most Bibles; a list of those books plus the apocrypha can be found here.) The community begins to study them, finding common ground, re-occuring concepts and also disjoints, where some material contradicts the other. Finding a complex and organic source we begin to consult later writers and thinkers to help us mould an understanding of the text. Once this is shaped one begins to 'live out of' the scripts we have been presented with; the community truly becomes a "people of the book".
This conceptualization avoids two pitfalls: (a) pretending we 'understand' the Bible, or that the Bible fits our culture; and (b) turning a narrative into a golf-club rulebook. However, my answer gives us a polysemic text, one that can have many interpretations. This is dangerous, but the Bible has always been subject to abuse, I think this approach may minimize it rather than aggravate the problem.
What comes to mind when you think of an authoritative text? What dangers do you see in my answer to the question?
NOTES:
Bible and authority part one: here
Bible and authority part three: here
Bible and authority part four (a): here
Bible and authority part four (b): here
Read NT Wright's essay here
4 Comments:
[aside: Do we need to find a "balance of power" with the Bible?]
I guess I fall apart when I wonder which voice to listen to. Should I listen to the mainline voices? The near-silenced prophet? The scribe who reinterpreted something? What do I do when they disagree?
[Is it incurably romantic to answer my own questions with, "as led by the spirit"?]
I guess that's why I came up with the "protege" model. It avoids those questions -- which possibly isn't a good thing.
When they disagree one first (knee jerk) adopts the one (A) that is most congenial (which the cynic in me sees as being another name - too often - for "led by the Spirit" - but that's another can of worms ;) but if all goes well one worries at the disagreement, and comes to understand why B takes the uncongenial line that they do. In this process we grow, change and develop - and the group (both A and B) have helped shape us and have acted as "authorities".
The books and letters in the New Testament have been written in a very special way...more than we have understood until now. It has only recently been identified that the scribes who became disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament texts using a very old narrative tradition. This narrative tradition, newly named The Literary Form of the Parable, is one of the narrative traditions found in the Old Testament.
Scribes who were not disciples of Jesus would have been shocked since the use of the Literary form of the Parable made Christian writings equal in stature to the Hebrew Scriptures.
The Literary Form is well-defined and invariable. The literary form opens up the intended meaning of the writers. For example, the literary form answers how and why certain events in the gospels are used differently...it's because the writers are making different points within their narratives.
Each book and letter in the New Testament is written in "Stories", written in the Literary form of the Parable. Each Story has a particular theme. The literary form has several critical relationships that give meaning to each Story.
My dad's book/s will be out asap, so scholars can take a look at the literary form and the Stories in detail. His website and blog has more info...www.the150parables.com
Anne