To Interpret or Not To Interpret, That is The question

Larry Swain swainl at rocky.edu
Fri Jul 3 15:20:22 EDT 1998


It is with some dismay that I read the responses to my attempt to clarify 
issues.  So let me again attempt to set things straight.

First, as to context-my original remarks were addressed to a line where 
someone was apologizing for making a request about the meaning of a passage 
and was concerned that it was "theological".  My remarks were intended to 
let that person and any others know that almost every question we ask and 
address on this list in some way touches "theology" and interpretation, and 
that there was no need to apologize or be wary of asking such questions.  
Rather as long as the discussion centered on the Greek text, we were fine.
That was my intent, it seems to have the opposite affect.

Second, Ward, to you directly, I envy you.  If you have had such positive 
experiences then sir, my hat is off to you.  It is what I would want this 
list to be (and by and large is).  However, I have been on the Internet 
before there was an Internet, 13 years now, and I have seen a lot of 
wounds.  I have seen lists and newsgroups in the early days fall apart over 
discussion of a theological issue.  I have seen people doubt their faith 
and their church and end up giving up both sparked by an online discussion. 
 I have seen people not contribute to lists in fear of being flamed.  And 
as Carl may recall about 3 years ago I was guilty of borderline behavior on 
this list as well.  Gracefully, he called me on it.  So my concern is that 
in the discussion of items such as the role of women in the church (our 
Timothy passage) that once we stop discussing whether ANHR and GUNH can or 
should be translated as husband/wife rather than generic man/woman and 
begin discussing instead historical-critical models of the church, the role 
of women in the early or modern church and so on, when those issues are 
broached we have strayed away from the meaning of the Greek text to the 
application of the text and open the way for hammer and tongs debate.  
Because the major discussants on that issue are gracious, mature, academic 
kind of folk, the Scylla and Charibdis danger was avoided and my fears 
allaid.

Third, what does it mean to discuss the Greek text and its meaning?  At 
what point does that discussion become the doing of theology?  That's a 
gray area that can only be defined on a case by case basis and is going to 
be difficult.  But, the shift in the FAQ from NT studies in general to 
specifically the import and meaning of the Greek text means that the focus 
of this list is the Greek text.  When dealing with a text, as we all know, 
several other disciplines come into play-historical-critical, text 
critical, redaction, social history, etc that are important to interpreting 
a text and as Jonathan has remarked, they don't really belong on a list 
which deals with the Greek of the Bible.  9.9 times out of 10 the original 
question asked is fine, it is the later discussion of it that gets out of 
hand.

As I reread this, I debate whether to post it.  I hope to clarify, perhaps 
by way of discussion, the issue we face-it is very grey at times and 
perhaps the staff needs to discuss this online to try and get a sense for 
when lines should be drawn.  But I fear that just as my last post on this 
list, my remarks will result in further obfuscation rather than 
enlightenment.

Larry Swain



More information about the B-Greek mailing list