Two weeks ago, I listed twenty commands found in the Bible and challenged you to decide whether they were meant to be applied to every culture in every time or whether they were only meant for the particular cultural context in which they were written.  As hard as that task was, I think the harder task was to provide an answer to the “why” question – if you don’t believe a command is meant to be taken literally today, why do you believe that? 

For anyone who takes the Bible seriously as authoritative for faith and practice, the “why” question is a dangerous one, because to disregard a command of Scripture is to claim that the plain meaning of the Bible is not necessarily God’s final word on a subject.  In other words, to say that we no longer need to “greet one another with a holy kiss” (1 Corinthians 16:20) is to say that God’s Word (as many Christians call the Bible) in that passage is no longer God’s word on the subject.  While we do this all the time in practice, to actually state that the words of the Bible are not always God’s final word on a subject is to open oneself up to all sorts of potential misuses of God’s Word.  For example, take 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul writes “Women should remain silent in the churches.”  Most of you probably read that and say “that can’t be transcultural (applying to all cultures everywhere).”  And that would be a reasonable and likely correct answer.  But why not?  What is a legitimate answer to the “why” question?  What about “Because that doesn’t sound like God to me” or “I can’t imagine God wanting all women to be quiet in church.”  I can’t imagine it either, but if that is a legitimate reason not to heed a command of Scripture, then what is stopping me from using the same argument to overturn Luke 12:33 – “Sell all your possessions and give to the poor” or Leviticus 18:22 – “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman.”  Certainly there are plenty of people who would argue that mandatory poverty or condemning homosexual behavior does not sound like God either.  So we have to be careful how we answer the “why” question.

Let’s look at another verse I had listed.  Leviticus 19:28 says “Do not put tattoo marks on yourself.”  So, does God still frown on tattoos today, or was that specific to the culture?  Many of you probably read that and believed it was a culturally bound passage, that certainly God couldn’t care less whether or not someone has a rose tattooed on their ankle (or better yet a cross on their arm).  But why do you believe it is culturally bound?  Perhaps your reason was that when the verse is read in its context, you find this verse directly before the one about tattoos:  “Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head, or clip off the edges of your beard” (Leviticus 19:27). And since we no longer follow that command, why should we follow the one after it?  But of course, deferring to context is just as sticky, because the verse before that one, Leviticus 19:26, says this:  “Do not practice divination or sorcery.”  And most Christians would agree that such practices are not meant to be entered into by any Christian anywhere.  So how can we heed Leviticus 19:26 while ignoring the following two verses?

The point is that we have to be careful about the reasons we give for disregarding a command of the Bible, because that same reason might be applied elsewhere in a way that might be contrary to God’s intent.  Lazy reasons such as “this just doesn’t sound like God” or “the verses around it surely don’t apply today, so this one shouldn’t either” can open up a whole mess of bad interpretations.  And more importantly, it will give license to anyone to pick and choose the parts of the Bible that they feel “don’t sound like God” or “must have been only for that culture, because it certainly wouldn’t fit in today’s culture.”  And then God’s Word truly has lost all authority, replaced by human wisdom and the prevailing cultural forces.

Fortunately, there are many principles of hermeneutics (Biblical application) that will help us choose carefully which commands were culturally bound and which ones still apply today.  One principle which we will discuss briefly in this essay is to pay attention to a text’s original intent or purpose.  If by practicing a command today one would no longer fulfill the command’s original intent or purpose, then it is safe to say that the command is culturally bound.  For example, Paul’s command to “greet one another with a holy kiss” was to encourage Christians to promote closeness and community through a gesture that was common in the Hellenistic-Roman culture.  A holy kiss was a way of accepting and welcoming someone, and therefore was certainly important in the church community.  However, if we practiced “holy kissing” today, we would likely be doing the very opposite, creating an uncomfortable environment for the majority of people visiting our church community.  Therefore, in order to be true to God’s Word, we should disregard this practice, unless we find ourselves in a culture where holy kissing would be considered a welcoming gesture.

Another passage I had listed where this principle likely applies is the verse that you were probably justifiably horrified by, Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which states “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”  As hard as it is for us to understand, in the Ancient Near East this verse was actually a step towards justice and equality.  In that time, unmarried women could not work and make a living for themselves like they can today, and so they needed to be married in order to survive.  However, if a woman had been raped, she was unlikely to find a husband, since she had already been defiled in their eyes.  This verse, therefore, was a way of protecting a woman and child from such a forgotten existence.  If the original intent, therefore, was to protect a woman and child from having no one to care for them, to enforce this command today would actually go against the original intent, since it would inflict further damage on the rape victim.  Therefore, by paying attention to not only the words but the original intent of the verse, we can be confident that disregarding the command is the best way to honor God today. 

Keep the aforementioned principle in mind as you read verses you are unsure about how to apply today.  What is the purpose behind God’s ban on tattoos?  Why did Paul write that long hair on a man was a disgrace?  What was Peter’s intent in encouraging slaves to submit to their masters?  And if we follow those commands today, would they still be in line with the original purpose?

Next week I will continue to provide some answers to how we know which verses apply transculturally and which ones are bound to the culture in which they were written.  Until then, I encourage you again that if there are Bible commands that you have wondered whether or not we are meant to interpret literally, post them in the comments so that we can do our best to deal with your specific questions.

Write a comment