Interpreting Scripture, Mission and Layers of Significance

Paul writes – Two interesting comments originating from Oxford (UK) in relation to Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat’s very recent talk there on “Subverting the Empire”. The different contexts

“…It was fun to listen to Pete Ward and Brian discussing orientations in terms of being either missiologically immersed in culture or having a separatist view that saw the reality of an Empire that holds us captive…[full post by Ian, here]…”

This would have been an interesting conversation to listen in on, particularly if it engaged with the questions James Henley asks below, particularly around the Kingdom.

“…The big thing was about Paul being subversive towards the Roman Empire through the letter - and about how he presents an alternate narrative/story to the story presented by the Roman occupation. The problem is whether in presenting an alternative, Paul's intention is to build an alternative way of living - i.e. Christendom, Kingdom of God - or simply an alternative way of living under Roman rule [full post by James Henley, here. Additional post by James, here]…”

I [Paul] have often wondered about the “problem” James alludes too, however, at present my thinking is like this:

“By subverting (or resisting or affirming or remaining neutral in relation to) some aspects of culture (cultural values, symbols & narratives) we are not building the Kingdom (missiologically we are joining in on what God is doing, i.e. God is “building”). Rather we are offering and embodying an alternative way of living humanly now in the light of the closing acts of God’s unfolding drama, i.e. our ways of living are both Christologically and eschatalogically informed…” 

James also notes the four different “contexts” [I’d probably say “lenses”] through which we interpret scripture. I quote him:

·             “Context of the Jewish scriptures/tradition.

·             The Macro-Context - Roman Empire.

·             The Micro-Context / Microcosm - e.g. in [Paul’s letter to the] Colossians the context [is] the church in Colosse.

·             Our own cultural context.”

One of the things a number of us have been doing with Steve Taylor is adapting these last three lenses as a means of reading (and listening to) our various contexts missiologically, in conversation with Scripture. Steve talks in terms of the “macro”; “meso” and “micro” “climates” present in particular contexts (see this post under “C” for “context”). Interpretatively, as James is saying, these same layers are present in Scripture. The skills required are interchangeable.

So why, if we’re good readers of Scripture, do we find it so difficult to listen too and read missiologically our own cultural and societal contexts?…