Pauline Interpretation of
Christianity:
ROMANS
Div/Rel 3162
Jan 11, 2011
Today’s Schedule




4:00-4:50 Presentation of the
Semester
4:50-5:00 Div/MTS Preparing Your
reading of: Rom 1:1-7
4:50-5:00 PhDs Organization
5:10-6:30 Roundtable Discussion:
getting to know you, the form, and
reviewing syllabus.
Interpreting Scripture always
matters

Christians live by this teaching….

It affects people positively or negatively;
brings forgiveness or condemnation;
comforts or hurts;
includes or excludes;
liberates or oppresses;
brings good news of love or destructive news of hate;

gives life or kills-literally.






It Is Essential To Assume Responsibility For Our
Interpretations
Pauline Interpretation of
Christianity: Romans

Studying Paul and Paul’s interpretation of
the gospel he received, and also




More on this next week
Studying your/our own interpretations of
Paul and Romans
YOUR INTERPRETATIONS ARE ONE OF
THE TWO MAIN TOPICS IN THIS CLASS
Each of your interpretations will be
respected:
Your interpretations will be
respected because:

I expect you have insights into the text and its
significance for believers that the rest of us do
not have; and that we need to learn from you;






ALL OF YOU ARE TEACHERS IN THIS SEMINAR… Yes we
are many, and next week more will be here, but we will
work as a seminar.
Roundtable… everybody is equal
Do not worry: I also have something teach you!
I will learn from you by appreciating what is
different in your interpretation
Your interpretation will be deemed to be
legitimate, plausible, and valid, until proven
otherwise ,
and not vice-versa.
But, this is not Critical Biblical
Studies, is it? Yes, it is!

What I taught for many years (note past tense!)



Exegesis (Gk. "leading out of" [the complexity of a
text]). Detailed exposition, explanation and
interpretation of the texts of Scriptures


and what was my view until it slowly changed from1975
to 1990 ….
And possibly what is your view
“Establishing what the text meant” Krister Stendahl “Biblical
Theology” IDB =the task of biblical scholars
Hermeneutics. Exposition of “what the text means”
for people today, on the basis of “what the text meant” .
Krister Stendahl “Biblical Theology” IDB = the task of theologians,
homileticians, preachers, etc
Accordingly, A class on Romans
should teach you




What Paul truly taught in Romans, through
a detailed exposition, explanation and
interpretation of “what the text meant”
(Exegesis)
So that you can figure out on this basis
“what the text means” for people today, on the
basis of “what the text meant” (Hermeneutics)
Yes. This is What I taught for many years.
No. It is NOT what I will teach you in this
class
Because, I discovered in 1990

That what I taught for many years




Exegesis “Establishing what the text meant”
Hermeneutics. Exposition of “what the text means”
for people today, on the basis of “what the text
meant”
Is neither critical, nor ethically
responsible …
A hard lesson to learn… from someone whom I
could not but take seriously
CONTEXT: South Africa, Dinner September 1990

The man across the dinner table asked me what I was
doing in South Africa:


How to teach the Bible in Seminary and Universities in a
Post-Apartheid Society?




Consultant for the SA ministry of Education: Invited by Professor
Bernard Lategan, Stellenbosch University.
I explained as simply as I could (Biblical studies was clearly not his
field).
My answer: It is essential to use a multiplicity of critical methods, and
identify among many possibilities the teaching most helpful in SA
This man listened patiently, asking questions about the methods.
With a kind but sad smile, he finally told me:
CONTEXT: South Africa, Dinner September 1990

“You still exclude all truly African interpretations of the
Bible… you know, those of the Independent
churches”


I did not know…
“The interpretations in the many African Initiated
Churches”
 Zulu Zion Christian Church 7 million members
 African Independent Church in Southern Africa 13 million
 and he went on talking about oral cultures, and
how “oral reading” is different from reading with
the eyes. Mentioning books on this by Walter Ong.
 Books I had not read….
CONTEXT: South Africa, Dinner September 1990


I was amazed.. What a well educated person!
I was unsettled… Yes, he was right I would not accept
the readings of these African Christians in my
classroom



They cannot be valid; they are often so fanciful…
It took me a long time to grasp what he had said to
me
I later understood, he had gently shown me that my
teaching was condoning & promoting apartheid

… I was silenced
CONTEXT : South Africa, Dinner September 1990




The tall man across the table,
who earlier had greeted me
with a cordial handshake,
taking my hands in his very
callous hands;
Who had talked about political
and economic issues all
evening long with other
guests,
And yet knew a lot about
literature, cultural studies
had gently shown me that my
teaching was condoning &
promoting apartheid
Western Readings Are not the Only
True Readings of the Bible




He taught me in no uncertain terms that
Claiming that in order to be a faithful reader of
the Bible one needs
to read the Bible according to Western critical
standards,
is adopting a racist, colonialist, imperialist
attitude -This is what I learned the hard way in South Africa,
when I was gently told by my interlocutor that my
teaching of the Bible was promoting apartheid.
White Male Readings Are not the
Only True Readings of the Bible







I realized that it was the same thing I was being
taught by
Vincent Wimbush,
Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza
Ana Maria Isazi Diaz
Fernando Segovia
Mary Ann Tolbert
At a meeting that I had called earlier the same year
following the confrontation we had with African
American students at VU in 1989 who claimed that we
were excluding the reading from the Black Churches
Scholarly Readings Are not the
Only True Readings of the Bible





They taught me in no uncertain terms that, in the
North Atlantic contexts in which we are,
That we should bring the readings by actual
believers in the class room
Because their readings of the Bible are also true
readings
Excluding common believers’ readings as simply
wrong, is marginalizing them
And it is failing to learn from them
Stendahl’s view of Critical Biblical
Studies is up-side down




NOT: 1) Exegesis “Establishing what the text meant”
2) Hermeneutics. Exposition of “what the text means” for people
today, on the basis of “what the text meant” BUT
1) Hermeneutics… what the text means for
people today … the readings of believers…
including African believers, etc.
2) Critical assessment of this hermeneutical
interpretation (including close examination of
the text)… involves learning from all these
readings.
Up-side Down Critical Biblical
Studies =




1) Exegesis “Establishing what the text meant”
2) Hermeneutics. Exposition of “what the text means”
for people today, on the basis of “what the text meant”
VERSUS 1) Hermeneutics… what the
text means for people today … for
believers…
2) Critical assessment (= exegesis of
these interpretations -- including close
examination of the text)… involves
learning from all these readings.
Traditional Critical Biblical Studies
Scientist as a model


Exegesis: “Establishing what the text
meant”:
Task: Overcoming the problem of
MISUNDERSTANDINGS of the text= posed
by (religious, doctrinal, etc.) “preunderstandings”

Scholarly task: overcoming pre-understandings by
using strict critical methods… historical critical
methods, philology, form criticism, redaction criticism,
literary criticism, ideological criticism, etc.
How most Scholars study a Biblical
Text = Contextual & Theological

Goal: provide the “true” & right interpretation by showing that

Read the Biblical tehxt
everybody else is wrong YET IT IS HIGHLY CONTEXTUAL & THEOLOGICAL


Identify in it Theological or Ethical themes




Use a critical method that focuses the attention on its most
significant features = Analytical Frame = A CHOICE
“Traditionally misunderstood”
Seeking to correct these misunderstandings
Acknowledge a Problem: Potential pre-understandings “to be
overcome” = Hermeneutical/Theological frame = CHOICE
Reject any anachronistic interpretation (the context is Paul’s
context). Problem? As above. Potential pre-understandings

Contextual frame = CHOICE
How a Preacher prepares a
Sermon: Three necessary steps


Preacher as Model for Critical Biblical Studies
Read the Biblical text


Identify in it Theological or Ethical themes




find most significant features of it = Analytical Frame
particularly significant for her congregation…
how they are positively or negatively related to the
congregation’s and her own religious views and experience =
Hermeneutical/Theological frame
Identify how this text might address the needs of the
congregation = Contextual frame
Nothing Wrong with this! PREACHER AS A MODEL OF
CRITICAL INTERPRETATION
How we will proceed: YOUR OWN
interpretation is our starting point

Read passage from Romans = I assume you know how to
read


Focus your reading on a Theological or Ethical theme




find what is most significant for you in it = Analytical Frame
What is particularly significant in what Paul says about this theme
for you in a particular context or situation …
how is this teaching positively or negatively related to the religious
views and experience that believers (you or someone else) have in
this context = Hermeneutical/Theological frame
Identify how this text might address the concrete needs of the
people in this situation = Contextual frame
In so doing you have begun to do a critical reading … to
be prolonged by comparing YOUR interpretation with the
interpretation by OTHERS
PEDAGOGICAL GOALS of this
class: 1) Introducing you



a) to Paul and his interpretation of Christianity (in
and for his context)
b) to the different interpretations of Paul by his
readers (biblical scholars, believers in different
cultural contexts in history and today),
By the end of the semester, you will be expected


To have gained a critical perspective on the variety of
interpretations that you will encounter as leaders in the
church and elsewhere.
To know major differences among three distinctive
scholarly interpretations of Paul
PEDAGOGICAL GOALS:
2) Learning to interpret Romans

A) In a weekly exercise you will be expected to
develop your own interpretation of Romans


by the end of the semester, you will be expected to
know the content of Paul’s letter to the Romans
B) “Some people claim to know the Bible, but
the Bible doesn’t know them,” warned a
Ghanaian preacher [quoted by Gerald West]: in
your weekly exercise you will illustrate how
believers allow Romans to know their life in their
specific life and religious contexts.
PEDAGOGICAL GOALS:
3) assessing your interpretations


Learning to do a critical assessment of your
interpretation by comparing it with other
interpretations (scholarly interpretations and
also Christian believers’ interpretations)
Analyzing the textual, contextual, and
theological/religious choices involved in each
interpretation

By the end of the semester, you will be
expected to show that you can compare
several interpretations on the basis of the
choices they made; and to assess their relative
values.
Choosing most significant features
of a text
Choosing most significant features
of a text
Choosing most significant features
of a text









Bible Works (in Library)
Go to http://www.library.vanderbilt.edu/
Find articles & databases
(find under “B” BIBLE WORKS 8
Use Beginner Mode
“View” tab click on “Choose display Versions”
English… choose several version
Greek… choose GNT
Any other language you know in the list (sorry no
Chinese, no Korean)
Choosing most significant features
of a text
Scriptural Criticism
The Preacher as Model
Acknowledge We Make three kinds
of Interpretive Choices



three frames for any interpretation (analytical;
contextual; hermeneutical/theological);
three modes of existence (autonomy, relationality,
heteronomy)
Each interpretive frame involves consciously or subconsciously choosing: any understanding-teaching of a
text is an interpretive conclusion resulting from three
choices:



analytical choices;
contextual choices—include ideological choices (power
structures)
hermeneutical/theological choices—include cultural choices as
well as religious ones
Reading Romans 1:1-7 [NRSV]
Using the Form Theme: Teaching of the way Paul
portrays his relationship to Romans


Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an
apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,
 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the
holy scriptures,
 3 the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from
David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be Son of
God with power according to the spirit of holiness by
resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through
whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about
the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for the sake of
his name, 6 including yourselves who are called to belong to
Jesus Christ,
7 To all God's beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints:
Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ.