So we have the bucket theory, which really sits as the backbone to the owner’s manual for life approach to scripture; something we already said we have to get rid of. The bucket theory has been asking this question for decades “what is in the eternal and relevant bucket and what is the in the cultural and irrelevant bucket?” While most people and/or pastors would never articulate this as their approach, a bit of probing reveals that for most this is hoe they figure out how to live, what to obey and what the rules of engagement are. This is how we end up using the text as “an owner’s manual for life. Two big problems, intractable, impossible-to-get-around problems arise with this question.
First, we have stuff jumping buckets! Stuff that used to be in the eternal, important and ever relevant bucket over time has jumped to the cultural bucket. So…concubinage, in the Old Testament, apparently ok at one time, somewhere along the line is dis-affirmed as allowable. Slavery far from being condemned in the New Testament is now considered a violation of civil rights. Women being silent in the church gatherings, once a mainstay in the early church, in most denominations is now considered outmoded discrimination (and we haven’t even talked about woman preaching or ordination). I only offer a couple obvious issues that could be countlessly multiplied. At one point in time scores of injunctions, once thought to be in the eternal rules and regulations bucket mysteriously jumped to the “no longer applies because that was a cultural and now irrelevant” bucket.
So why is that a problem? It is enormous. What rules and regulations – standards we currently hold – are actually not biblical eternal bucket injunctions at all but merely in that bucket because social evolution hasn’t yet progressed that far? Whether you are talking about evolution in science and the de(con)struction of the geocentric worldview of Joshua 12 with the advent of Copernicus and Galileo, or the abolition of slavery in American history or apartheid in South Africa (both using the Bible for support) – stuff in the eternal bucket over time jumps buckets. To put it crassly, over time the eternal truth bucket is shrinking and the cultural conditioned bucket is growing.
So the question arises what is currently in the “eternal bucket” that 5 years 10 years 20 years from now has switched teams?
Second, and this is the biggest issue, who said the two bucket theory is the way we should approach the biblical text? Who says this is the right lens for reading the biblical text? Who taught us this? Why? Who says? Why is this the guiding question for most in conservative churches, bible schools and seminaries? Why are we looking for the eternal versus cultural distinction?
Let’s start thinking out loud about these two questions. We will probe this second issue in the next post.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Very thought provoking. I’m actually kinda dumbfounded on this and have no real oppinion about it accept that I see everything your saying and want to know what a different way of reading the bible would look like. However, for myself, I have three buckets, the eternal, the cultural, and the “WHAT THE HECK THAT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE” bucket lol. But i’m looking forward to seeing it in a different way. Can’t wait til the next post.
As we continue to move in this journey, we are leaning more toward one bucket – simply called ‘life’. It is more of a ‘present’ view of living that is certainly influenced by culture and eternal realities, but not defined by them. Ron’s teaching on the evolution of scripture has been very helpful in this area.
You guys that is a neat idea. A hermeneutic of “life.” We need to read scripture in life giving ways. Lots of room for conversation on this one.
Guys & Gals,
I really love this topic & discussion…especially since I preached a bit on it this past Sunday. Man, what a mixed reaction I got!! I was looking at a couple of scriptures by Paul and gender roles. Stuff like 1 Tim 2, Col 3, Ephs 5, etc. I then asked the question: what do we do with texts that contradict each other like this? Do we just “believe” all of them, i.e. more faith? Or, is there maybe another way of reading these difficult (to modern readers) texts? I propsed the following: reading the Bible (hermeneutics) through the lens of Christ and the Prophets, more specifically, their non-violent resistance and non-violent ways of establishing peace and reacting to “the ways of the world.” Maybe then we are able to discern what is “Christ-like” and what isn’t? Interesting note: am I correct in saying that Jesus NEVER quotes the Kings, but that He regularly quotes the prophets? Does that help us with our questions?
What do you say to that?
Wynand, thanks for weighing in my Nambian friend. Suggestion worthy of consideration. I think the point of dialogue would be how do we determine the canon within the canon we are going to use as lenses. So your suggestion is Christ, the Prophets and non violence. There are probably people out there that would say how about truth to power, liberation and feminist readings. Or others suggesting inclusion and pluralism be the lens. I hear your suggestion and actually like it, but I think we are always challenged to figure out how we would justify any lens over another. This is one of the reasons why the meta-question becomes so important. The two bucket theory is a meta-question we put on the text. It has a defined and circumscribed set of possible answers. But a different meta-question will yield a different set of possibilities.
Ron, as a pastor, I’m particularly guilty of this, teaching people to “find principles” underlying scripture. On this point, I found your book, The Bible as Improv, very useful in your discussion about the bible as a classic (in the David Tracy sense). Rather than picking the bible apart verse-by-verse (literally), we ought to read it in complete books/letters or at least in large chunks and learn from the overarching gospel and salvation themes. I’ve been trying this to some extent in a bible study I’ve been leading on the book of Acts. I’ve been referring to it as a discussion-based learning time rather than a bible study. We read entire narrative units and discuss the themes and interconnectedness of Acts. Very different (for me and my group, at least), but very worthwhile.
Jeremy, this is a massive shift. And I confess, as you know I did in the book, I was guilty of this most of my ministry life, but without a shift of the David Tracy sort or something else like it we will propogate this pick and choose. I am thrilled you are doing the “read big blocks” and looking for larger themes and discussion based learning. Brilliant Bro brilliant. I think this is part of the way forward.
Hi,
Thanks, the art of hermeneutics is at the root of all our denominational division and our constant ethical dilemmas. The most current is the same sex debate and whether this is in the cultural bucket or it is in the eternal bucket. I think there should also be a “confused & angst ridden” bucket for those of us who are trying to manage this one in our congregations.
I like your bucket suggestion David I am with you. And I think you raise the hot one in the current bucket debate. I am currently working with two churches who as elders and staff are reading my new book “The Bible as Improv,” because the current buckets solutions seem…well….as you said confusing and angst producing. Though my book never even mentions the same sex debate it is clearly one of the current ethical issues being debated.
{ 1 trackback }