My wife and I were taking with a woman at church the other day (she was actually the mom of one of the pastors) and our conversation turned political. My fault. When she said isn't it nice that people can disagree and still go for a cup of coffee, I said no, it isn't. We can disagree about policy and pineapple on pizza, but not basic human rights. Not about people's right to exist. Not about racism and hate. Not about women's rights, which then led to a discussion about reproductive rights and how the government and the church have no place in a women's right to choose. That is strictly between a woman and her doctor (and God, if she's a believer). She then mentioned the scripture in Psalms (139) that is used to justify her anti-abortion stance. So I told her that she was wrong and that verse actually has nothing to do with abortion and that the verses have to be understood in the context of the chapter and book as well as the culture at the time. She interrupted me and said that the culture didn’t matter because scripture was the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. (Keep in mind that this is one of the pastor’s mom). I looked at her in disbelief and I told her no. Scripture is not the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If you study scripture, you realize it has changed many, many times over the last couple thousand years. Even today, how many different translations do you have? Each one interpreting the original material slightly differently.
As a side note, I think our whole exchange highlights one of the most prevalent issues with the evangelical church today, it became very clear to me that this woman not only hasn't studied scripture but probably hasn't even read the whole Bible, only the verses that are spoon-fed by the evangelical right. So I then asked her if she supports slavery because there is scripture talking about slaves obeying their masters, at which point she said "well, you know, if you're working and you have a boss, then…" and that's where I cut her off and said that's not what the scripture says. In fact, scripture elsewhere addresses work relationships, but this verse is specifically talking about actual slavery, so do you support slavery? She never gave me an answer and at that point remembered that she had someone waiting for her and toddled off to meet her friend. But even if we look at that scripture about slavery and use it to talk about work relationships, we are still understanding that the scripture was written in a specific culture at a specific time and the literal interpretation of the verse is not appropriate. We are applying it metaphorically to our culture and time.
Therefore, when we are reading scripture, and particularly when we're using scripture to defend or reinforce an opinion, we must understand and interpret it through the lens of the three C's:
Context: examining and understanding the focus and substance of the full text in which the scripture occurs.
Culture: what was the cultural norms and customs of the time when the book was written and how does it differ from our culture?
Christ: what does Jesus say about the scripture and how would He view it?
So as a test case, let's look at that verse in Psalm 139 and what it really is talking about. The verse is Psalm 139:13 - "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb." There are two perspectives we need to use to understand this verse: the first is context and the second is culture.
If we look at the full context of the Psalm, we will understand what David is actually talking about. The Psalm begins "You have searched me, Lord, and you know me." This sets the stage for what is to follow. We read through the Psalm and we see a person crying out to be known. The entire Psalm is focused on knowing that God knows you. You cannot hide from God. Over and over again David calls out rhetorical questions about God finding us no matter where we go or how we try to hide. The intimacy of God's love for us is shown throughout the Psalm: we cannot hide from God! So in the context of this chapter, verse 13 (and really, through verse 16) is about God intimately knowing us. Keep in mind that David is writing as someone who is already born. This is not a statement about the unborn, this is a statement about God knowing us as a living, breathing, person. The verse about our mother's womb is a metaphorical image, just like the imagery in verse 8: "If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths [hell], you are there." David is creating images that reinforce his theme throughout the Psalm: God know us and will always find us. So these verses, taken in context of the whole chapter, point not to the unborn, but to being known as who we are now and being known more deeply and intimately than we can even know ourselves.
The second consideration we need to take into account is the culture of the day when the scripture was written. We need to remember that the Bible is not a single book. Rather, it is a collection of books, letters, and oral traditions that were written over thousands of years and in a myriad of different cultures. As I mentioned above, we look at a scripture about slavery and we can't take it literally. In the culture it was written, slavery was normal. But today, we understand that slavery is an abomination and breaks the heart of God. Therefore, we interpret the scripture based on that knowledge and we don't condone slavery. Similarly, with Psalm 139, there are two aspects of the culture that we need to understand in order to really understand the scripture. The first is the language. Contrary to what some evangelicals may believe, the Bible wasn't written in English. The Bible was written in at least three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek (the common language of the new testament period). Therefore, we have to take into account the original language and the translation to English. In this case, the original Hebrew word used in this verse is "cakak". This word is usually translated as "to cover, to hedge, to protect, to overshadow" but can also be translated as "to weave". So this is where some bible translators have chosen to use the word "knit", and hence, it's plugged into the anti-abortion propaganda. However, this doesn't fit with the common translation and, in fact, the inference of the "weave" translation is actually "to entwine as a, screen, to fence in, cover over, protect". So again, it's not referring to God creating us, but rather God covering us and protecting us in ways we don't even know.
This also is consistent with the cultural concepts of the time. In ancient Near Eastern cultures, the concept of protection and covering was significant. The imagery of God as a protector who "covers" His people is a recurring theme throughout the Old Testament. For instance, "cakak" is used in Exodus 25 in the context of the tabernacle and the cherubim's wings over the mercy seat highlighting the sacred and protective presence of God among His people. The same word is used in Exodus 33 when God is speaking to Moses and says that He “will put you [Moses] in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by.” Because no one can see the Face of God and live, God covers (cakak) Moses with His hand to protect him.
Another part of the cultural piece that we need to understand is the belief of when life begins. In the Hebrew culture, life begins when God breathes life into a person, which is at the first breath. This is tied to the creation story in Genesis 2:7: "Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being". The verse uses the word "nefesh" for "living being" and this word can be translated as "soul," "breath," or "life-force". So to the Hebrews of the time, the idea that the fetus was already a formed soul in the womb would never have even entered their mind. Therefore, with this understanding of the cultural belief, we can again see that David is speaking metaphorically about a living, existing person rather than a literal unborn person because such a thing didn't exist in their world view.
Now that we've looked at the context of the verse within the full Psalm, and explored the cultural understanding of the day, we can clearly see that this scripture has nothing to do with abortion, or pro-life vs. pro-choice, but has been co-opted and taken to mean something that it was never intended to mean. But the reality of what this verse means is so much more powerful and impactful: we are known and we are loved. When we take the time to really understand scripture, it can speak truth to us more deeply and significantly than we can imagine.
Of course, there's one more lens that we need to use, so let's look at the final one, Christ. As we explore the bible, all scripture must be viewed and interpreted through the lens of Christ and his teachings. Remember, the bible isn't just one book. It's 66 books written over thousands of years. But throughout the entire bible; all those books with all those authors over all those years, there is one, consistent theme. It all points to Jesus. As a follower of Jesus, we can see the Old Testament speaking prophetically about His coming and the New Testament describing His life and impact on our lives. For us, Jesus is the central figure in our faith and life. Therefore, we must use Jesus as our lens when looking at scripture and understand it from His perspective. So what is Jesus' perspective? One simple word: Love.
In John 13, Jesus says "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” When asked the greatest commandment, Jesus replied "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. ' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself". Further, He also said "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you". So we are to love our neighbors, and love our enemies. Who is our neighbor? Anyone who isn't our enemy. Pretty simple, eh? So in light of knowing Jesus' perspective, we need to use that when we explore scripture and we need to ask the question: "does this interpretation cause me to love?" If not, then maybe it's not in line with Jesus' perspective.
Finally, I want to leave us with this quote from Rich Mulllins:
"... that's why it always cracks me up when people say, "Well, in 'du du du du du du du duh, it says..." You kinda go, "Wow! It says a lot of things in there!" Proof-texting is a very, very dangerous thing. I think if we were given the Scriptures, it was not so that we could prove that we were right about everything. If we were given the Scriptures, it was to humble us into realizing that God is right, and the rest of us are just guessing."
Comments