FORM & MEANING
Download
Report
Transcript FORM & MEANING
FORM & MEANING
Making the Gospel Language Meaningful
Cultural Forms & Meanings
Adapted from Darrel Whiteman Lectures
Asbury Theological Seminary, 2001
Meanings always expressed through
cultural forms
Cultural forms are on surface, but meanings
are beneath surface
No sacred forms, but many sacred meanings
Easily entangle evangelized in forms that have
no equivalent meaning in host culture
If you want to get the meaning right, you must
employ the proper contextual form
Cultural Forms & Meanings
Adapted from Darrel Whiteman Lectures
Asbury Theological Seminary, 2001
Language as unique cultural form
Language forms designate a distinct reality
Sapir-Wharf Hypothesis
Worlds of different societies are distinct worlds,
not just same with different labels
One's view of reality is influenced, if not
determined, by the language a person speaks
Different languages direct us to different aspects
of phenomena
Cultural Forms & Meanings
Adapted from Darrel Whiteman Lectures
Asbury Theological Seminary, 2001
Examples of language as cultural form
that shapes perceived reality
Relativity of Color Terms
How many colors in the rainbow?
Language forms impacting cultural
perspectives
Continuum vs. Opposition language
Cultural Forms & Meanings
Adapted from Darrel Whiteman Lectures
Asbury Theological Seminary, 2001
Conclusions: language as cultural form
Language is a straight jacket that fits
comfortably
Primary vehicle of culture
Language as cultural form is a loop
Contrary Hypothesis…
Language is predominate means for interpreting
reality rather than shaping reality
What is shaped is our understanding of reality, not
actual reality
THE AGENDA – DEFINING TERMS
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
Gospel
Both the whole Word of God (OT/NT) and the good
news of salvation in Jesus Christ
Contextualization
Making the message (gospel) meaningful to people
who are foreign in the ethno-cultural sense or who
subscribe to a non-biblical worldview
De-contextualization
Freeing the message (gospel) from elements of
sending culture, so intended meaning comes through
with minimum of interference
THE AGENDA – DEFINING TERMS
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
Verbal-Plenary Inspiration
Human authors were inspired by Holy Spirit in such a
way that every word they wrote (all of OT/NT)
expressed the precise thought that God intended to
communicate
THE AGENDA – DEFINING TERMS
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
In an age of relative epistemology, the
trustworthiness of the “gospel” message (the
revealed message in linguistic symbols) is vital.
If the language of the text is up for debate according
to subjective interpretations (of time / culture /
worldview), then we have no authoritative basis for
propositional truths.
- Hesselgrave
History of Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
1970’s contextualization boom
Explosion of “contextual theologies”
Evangelicals and contextualization
Lausanne Consultation on Gospel and Culture
Down to Earth: Studies in Christianity and Culture
(Stott & Coote)
Christianity in Culture: A Study in Dynamic Biblical
Theologizing in Cross-Cultural Perspective (Kraft)
History of Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
National Association of Evangelicals – 1942
Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) – 1949
Lausanne Covenant – 1974
International Council on Biblical Inerrancy – 1977
Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy
Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics
International Church Council Project (ICC) – 2003
Types of Revelation
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict
David Hesselgrave
1.
Mythological writings
2.
Enlightenment writings
3.
Knowledge of the divine mediated through personal
enlightenment experiences
Divine writings
4.
Narratives and information that binds peoples together in
common loyalties and destinies
Directly from the divine apart from human involvement – merely
mechanical stenographers of divine orations
Divinely inspired writings
God-breathed writings (OT/NT) in which God reveals
propositional truths mediated through human agency by
inspiration of Holy Spirit
Danger of Wrong Models
for Biblical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Contextualizing the Bible as mythological writing
Perspective of “deconstructionists”
Consequence: Left with the faith of various linguistic and
religious communities…Each of which relies on its own
language to describe God (functional reality).
Contextualizing the Bible as enlightened writing
Real meaning is to be found in the way words and forms
function in and among those who read them
Meaning only emerges as person enters into the texts
(making it meaning-full)
Danger of Wrong Models
for Biblical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Impact of this approach for contextualization
Formal Correspondence vs. Dynamic Equivalence
Dynamic Equivalence Premises
Focus is not on form, but meaning intended
Origins of this strategy, not in Scripture, theology, but in natural sciences
Revelation is subjective and changing
Bible is potentially the Word of God, not error-free except in its intended
teachings
Ethno-linguistic interpretation rather than grammatico-historical
Scriptural words are subordinate to insights of contemporary interpreters
who define the impact of their supposed meaning
THE DEBATABLE ISSUE:
Functional Equivalence (F.E.)
Meaning-full Translations
"The world's most influential Bible translator, Eugene Nida, is weary of
'word worship.'"
By David Neff
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/october7/2.46.html
We Really Do Need Another Bible Translation
As good as many modern versions are, they often do not allow us to
hear what the Holy Spirit actually said
By Raymond C. Van Leeuwen
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/october22/5.28.html
Danger of Wrong Models
for Biblical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Dynamic Equivalence (Functional Equivalence)
now dominant theory
Examples:
C.E.V. (1995)
TEV or Good News Version
TNIV (Today’s New International Version)
Anthropologically enlightened, but theologically
dangerous approach
Danger of Wrong Models
for Biblical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Contextualizing the Bible as divine writing
Bible sometimes mistakenly contextualized in rigid/static
manner
Dictation theories impose one cultural time-frame on the
form, and disallow any modification by time or space
Danger of Wrong Models
for Biblical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Contextualizing Bible as Inspired Writings
Affirms reality of consistent (universal) propositional truth
revealed in Scripture
Opposes postmodern “formalist criticisms”
Effective Evangelical Contextualization
Adapted from Paradigms in Conflict David Hesselgrave
Meeting of minds for “critical contextualization
Discussion is needed regarding non-negotiable
universals
Must begin with commitment to authoritative Word of
God
Tools afforded by relevant sciences then engaged as
helpful/necessary additions that enable us to understand
Scripture and communicate it meaningfully across
cultures