Reading in your culture
We all know about eisegesis, the dangerous practice of coming to the Bible and reading in our own preconceived ideas (as opposed to ‘exegesis’, which is reading out what the text is actually saying. ‘eis’ = in, ‘ex’ = out). We've all heard the preacher who takes a seemingly innocent verse and then uses it as a handy receptacle for his latest enthusiasm. What the verse is really saying in its context seems entirely irrelevant. The preacher wants to speak about something, and this particular verse is as good a place as any to hang his hat on.
One of my favourite instances of this was Jentezen Franklin's address at the 2006 Hillsong Conference. His theme was ‘the middle ground’, and how important it was to avoid splintering into extreme groups on the left or the right, but to claim and occupy the middle ground in interdenominational unity. His text? Exodus 25:20-22.
The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be. And you shall put the mercy seat on the top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony that I shall give you. There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you about all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel.
Where was the Lord? He was in the middle, between the two cherubim. Get it? In the middle. Neither on the extreme right nor the rabid left, but in the middle! Hilarious.
However, I want to draw your attention to a more subtle form of eisegesis that I have caught myself falling into, and which I notice others being caught in as well. It's what I call ‘Illegitimate Culture Transfer’ (following James Barr's lead).
It happens when you begin by rightly reading what is there (exegesis), but end up by importing way more of your own cultural assumptions than the actual text (and context) can bear.
An example will illustrate. In 1 Thessalonians 2, Paul reminds the Thessalonians of his ministry while he was with them—how gentle he was among them, like a mother caring for her children—how “affectionately desirous” he was of them, so much so that “we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God, but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us” (v. 8).
On many occasions (including from my own lips), I have heard verse 8 expounded as an example of Paul's relational depth in ministry. He didn't just dump the gospel on people, he got to know them. He cared for them. He developed a relationship with them. He shared his very self with them—his hurts, his weaknesses, his progress, his hopes and fears. He hung out with people and had barbeques at their homes. He let people see him in the nitty-gritty of life around the kitchen table. He opened himself up to authentic relationship with them because without that sort of open sharing, the gospel becomes just a bald message that you impart, not a relationship that you share. And so on, and so forth.
All of this stuff may well be true. It's just not what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Thessalonians 2:8. The point he is making begins in verse 5. He did not come to them trying to make money, although he could have made demands on them as an apostle. No, instead, he made no demands. He was gentle like a mother who takes care of her children, rather than demanding that the kids take care of her. And then comes verse 8, literally: “In the same way, in our yearning for you, we were pleased to share (or impart) not only the gospel of God but also our own souls (or selves or lives), because you had become beloved to us”.
What does Paul mean by “share/impart our own souls/lives”? The very next verse explains with its connective ‘for’: “For you remember, brothers, our labour and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed the gospel of God” (v. 9).
Paul is not talking at all about the depth or intimacy of his personal dealings, or about how much he revealed his inner life, or that he was ready to hang out with people and share their lives. The point from verse 5 through to verse 9 is very clear: he loved and yearned for them so much that he was prepared to work night and day making tents, rather than take any support from them while he proclaimed the gospel. This is what “share our own souls/lives/selves” means. The cost to Paul was personal. He didn't just give them the gospel; he gave them his own blood and sweat, because they were so dear to him.
I have read this passage many times and missed this obvious point, because I have seen the phrase “shared our selves/lives” and then freighted in what that phrase means in our own culture. For us, it's about caring and sharing, and exposing our inner thoughts and feelings and habits, as opposed to being cold and distant and formal. And without much thought, I have always assumed that this is what the Apostle Paul was saying as well.
But the context shows me that I was guilty of Illegitimate Culture Transfer.
Anyone else want to confess?