Presenting the issue: the search for meaning

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Spring, 2008 by David M. Bossman

Recognizing the Gospels or other biblical texts as examples of distinct literary genres carries implications for interpreters of biblical texts that go beyond foundational acceptance of the Bible as the word of God. Genres, shared expectations within distant communities, represent styles of communication that intended recipients are expected to understand. Interpreters have long identified diverse modes for interpreting biblical texts, acknowledging that all are not to be taken in the same literal sense. Modern biblical scholarship similarly differentiates meanings within contexts and in modes of communicating, recognizing as well the social distance among biblical communities as well as from peoples and cultures today. Shared expectations in reading biblical texts requires broader learning and greater interpretive skills than many readers expect to supply when picking up the Bible today to gain inspiration and guidance for their lives.

With that challenge understood, biblical theologians tread carefully especially in drawing conclusions that affect people's lives and well being. This is true when interpreting the Qur'an as well as when reading the Bible as mandating certain practices that may not benefit or even threaten people or society. Interpreters may need to back away from overly literal readings of texts in order to gain a sense of the whole message of Scripture. Religious leaders and scholars bear a special burden to ensure that their varied traditions are not captivated by extreme interpretations that pit people against one another under the guise of misguided religious zeal and self-serving group loyalty.

Toward this end, authors of articles in BTB are committed to the higher goal of fitting the pieces together for a constructive reading of the Bible within diverse communities of believers. This goal is based on accurate readings, expanded awareness, and integration of knowledge, which together help constitute a responsible biblical theology. Authority worn lightly is best in keeping with the complexity of task.

Brigid Curtin Frein revisits the question of how Luke's Gospel represents a distinctive point of view at the same time as it shares the genre of gospel. "Genre and Point of View in Luke's Gospel" helps readers gain deeper insight into how the Gospel's author shapes the genre with other available literary resources from the world of the community's experience. Frein concludes that "the genius of Luke's work is the synthesis of many different literary genres," making Luke's point of view both traditional and distinctive, a product of his dynamic interpretive imagination.

Ken Stone's article, "Bibles that Matter: Biblical Theology and Queer Performativity," integrates the discussion of Bible and homosexuality with postmodern biblical interpretation. Both the Bible and gender are explored with an awareness of social and religious pluralism familiar within postmodern perceptions. Using Genesis 1-3 as a case in point, Stone underscores the contingency of interpretations within the creation accounts, citing the history of interpretation as reflective of diverse assumptions, asking specific questions motivated by the interpreters' own contexts. Within the stories themselves, interpreters can and often do focus on alternative citations and hence elicit new meanings.

John H. Elliott returns to the pages of BTB with a masterful account of how social world criticism emerged among biblical scholars within the Society of Biblical Literature: "From Social Description to Social-Science Criticism. The History of a Society of Biblical Literature Section 1973-2005." Readers of BTB have had ring-side seats in this history of critical scholarship, with many of the scholars in the discussion publishing seminal articles in BTB, derived from their explorations within the various sections of the Society of Biblical Literature, the Catholic Biblical Association of America, and the Context Group's international forums.

Michael H. Crosby helps bring such current discussions into the ecclesial context, probing how isolated biblical texts have at times served as foundations for church governance. Utilizing critical biblical scholarship affirmed by the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Commission, Crosby cautions against a fundamentalistic reading of Matthew 16:17-19 in his study, "Rethinking a Key Biblical Text and Catholic Church Governance." He brings home the need to read a particular biblical text in relation to other texts to produce a more balanced form of governance and thereby be more authentic and accountable for the exercise of authority.

These articles are part of the ongoing exploration by biblical scholars today to seek ever deeper and more authentic readings of the Scriptures. Each of the traditions that emerge from scriptural sources requires special care not to distort the larger meanings inherent in their Scriptures by exploiting isolated readings through prejudicial interpretations.

David M. Bossman

Editor