“The missionary goes out to men of other faiths and of no faith, not to argue, not to make comparisons, never to claim a superior knowledge or revelation, but to tell of a glorious deed, of the New Creation that has occurred and of the New Being that has appeared and into which men may enter. This is testimony, the apostolic testimony, and this, with the energy of love, is the missionary motive. The insistent task of missionary education and responsibility is to engender this motive throughout the Church, a task that can only be accomplished as men are confronted anew with the message of the Bible and with its supreme and central story, the story of the cross.”
… Douglas Webster (1920-1986), Local Church and World Mission, New York: Seabury, 1964, p. 71-72
Can you speak more to the issue of cultural relativity(80)? I read through the section in the book, but I find it hard to actually translate the principles mentioned when I am reading the Bible on my own.
On page 56, the authors say that “the most important hermeneutical issues are raised here”–in the epistles. Which hermeneutical issues do you believe are the most relevant to us now?
on pages 60-62 it seems like the book is just giving us a bunch of rules to follow when reading the bible. to me, it seems like trying to attempt all these things would make the bible just like another textbook/homework assignment. this would greatly effect the excitedness in reading it…you know? i know thats not even close to the authors intentions with this book, but the question still remains for me…how do we not let the bible become just another textbook/homework assignment? how do we make it not just another thing we should do every morning when we get up?
What does it mean when it says the epistles themselves are not a homogeneous lot? pg. 56
what does the author mean by theological treatise? (57)
On pg 64 the authors discuss the importance of thinking in paragraphs. Were paragraphs a part of Greek writing organization. If not when Biblical interpreters separate Paul’s letters into paragraphs doesn’t this distort the whole point of thinking in paragraphs.
Why do we need to use so many different tools to understand what the bible is saying?
On page 56 in the Nature of the Epistles the new testament is broken down into two sects. The “real letters” and the epitles. I realize that there is a difference in the audiance that they were being written to, but for us should we come to them with a different way to interpret them? Like should there be a major difference to how we approach them?
Page 56 talks about how Adolf Deissmann made a distinction between the “real letters” and the epistles, and says that the epistles were written more artisticly. Can’t you still write a letter to someone/a group of people that is artistic in its style; wouldn’t that just depend on the author and their own personal writing style?
Sort of along the lines of what Anna said. How do we know when to apply the principles related to “cultural relativity?”
I mean, doesnt there have to be a method to it? Otherwise we’re just using it whenever we want, which could lead to all sorts of misinterpretations of the Bible.
How do we really know what “only applied to them?”