Twitter Tweets
My TweetsFollow on Facebook
Recent Comments
DBH on A (New) Suspended Middle? On D… Fr Aidan Kimel on A (New) Suspended Middle? On D… Kossa on Please Pray for Met Kallistos… Tom on A (New) Suspended Middle? On D… Tom on A (New) Suspended Middle? On D… Michael on Please Pray for Met Kallistos… Elizabeth on “Very nearly the most di… Fr Aidan Kimel on “God by nature is always… John Grinnell on “God by nature is always… johnnsw on “God by nature is always… -
Recent Posts
- Destined for Joy: Mid-August Update
- Please Pray for Met Kallistos Ware as He Prepares to Meet his Lord
- Charles Williams and the Inklings
- “God by nature is always one and alone, substantively and absolutely, containing in Himself all-inclusively the totality of substantive being”
- Was St Maximus the Confessor a Universalist?
Categories
- Alexander Earl
- Apostle Paul
- Aquinas
- Athanasius
- Basil of Caesarea
- Bible
- Book Reviews
- Brian Moore
- Byzantine theology
- Citations
- Cyril of Alexandria
- Dante
- David B. Hart
- Dionysius the Areopagite
- Dumitru Staniloae
- Eschatology
- Fiction & Poetry
- George MacDonald
- Grace, Justification & Theosis
- Gregory Nazianzen
- Gregory of Nyssa
- Herbert McCabe & Friends
- Holy Trinity
- Hugh McCann
- Humor
- Inklings & Company
- Interesting Theologians
- Irenaeus
- Isaac the Syrian
- Islam
- John Stamps
- Jordan Wood
- Julian of Norwich
- Lamentation
- Liturgy & Sermons
- Mark Chenoweth
- Mythopoeia
- Nicholas Wolfterstorff
- Paul Griffiths
- Personal
- Philosophical Theology
- Preaching
- Robert Farrar Capon
- Robert Fortuin
- Robert Jenson
- Sacraments
- Sergius Bulgakov
- Spirituality
- T. F. Torrance
- T. S. Eliot
- Theology
- Theotokos
- Thomas Allin
- Thomas Talbott
- Tom Belt
- Uncategorized
- Vincent of Lérins
- Zizioulas & Yannaras
Archives
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
I posted this today because there is a tweet storm going on right now on how the terror texts of the Old Testament are to be interpreted. So many people believe that we must believe that God commanded genocide because that’s what the Bible says. As Fr Stephen points out, that’s not how the Eastern Fathers interpreted those texts. We must not, they argued, attribute evil to God. Period.
LikeLiked by 5 people
I think that is the patristic key that opens the doorway to exegesis that leads to universal reconciliation. Once that door was open it was inevitable where it would lead. Now that it has been by great trusted authorities it can never be closed.
LikeLiked by 2 people
For an instructive Twitter conversation between Jordan Wood and Taylor O’Neill on this topic, see “God’s Goodness and How We Read the Scriptures.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks for sharing this. Having read quite a lot of Fr Stephen’s work over the last few years, it’s nice to see and hear him speak. I’ve added the longer Q&A session from which this is taken to my watchlist.
Fr Stephen does a nice job of summing up the Patristic approach to tackling such troublesome passages. He says questions as to why the text says what it says are above his pay grade. I would say (no doubt speaking above my pay grade, which is surely lower than Fr Stephen’s) the text says what it says because that’s what the authors believed at the time: they believed God was a war god who would give them victory over their foes. This is just how people understood gods in the ancient Near East. What’s remarkable about the Judaeo-Christian tradition is not that this kind of thing was once believed, but how such beliefs evolved into something so radically different.
If I’m brutally honest, I still struggle a bit with this allegorical approach to interpreting so-called terror texts. The authors did not think they were writing allegory; they thought they were writing the truth about God. I’m happy to see these kinds of depictions as unsavoury but necessary stepping stones along the way to the fuller revelation that was eventually made complete in Christ; to read them as allegory knowing they were never intended that way feels a little awkward to me. I guess this is probably down to modernist, rationalist bias.
LikeLike
I love the substance of what Fr Freeman says though I actually think historical-critical exegesis can LEAD into the allegorical. The majority of scholars would classify the stories in Joshua as the genre of “legend,” and the majority would also assign this text to more than one author and editor. Did it mean the same thing to each editor and author? Probably not. It was shaped canonically and eventually read differently IN the canon than when it was outside the canon and differently again when it was first told orally. The Alexandrians were simply doing the same things that the editors were already doing, but this time through its ultimate context, the context of the risen Christ. They were reading the beginning THROUGH the end just like the ancient Israelites read and wrote Genesis through THEIR end, exile.
Rob, I would recommend Richard Swinburne’s Revelation, https://www.amazon.com/Revelation-Metaphor-Analogy-Richard-Swinburne/dp/0199212473. Andrew Louth’s Discerning the Mystery https://www.amazon.com/Discerning-Mystery-Andrew-Louth/dp/0971748365/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=844XH8KHKI4G&keywords=andrew+louth+mystery&qid=1656962725&sprefix=andrew+louth+mystery%2Caps%2C74&sr=8-1
And Nicholas Wolterstorff’s Divine Discourse https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Discourse-Philosophical-Reflections-Speaks/dp/0521475570/ref=mp_s_a_1_8?crid=ZC968ZHFIXHO&keywords=divine+speech&qid=1656962792&sprefix=divine+speech+%2Caps%2C118&sr=8-8
These are scholarly works that argue allegory makes theological sense. It won’t feel so arbitrary and eisegetical if you engage with these works.
For an interesting historical-critical work that I think paves the way for an allegorical reading of Joshua, see Douglas Earl’s The Joshua Delusion https://www.amazon.com/Joshua-Delusion-Douglas-S-Earl/dp/1498213170/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=O3HPULD7V7ZM&keywords=douglas+earl+joshua&qid=1656963043&sprefix=douglas+earl+joshua%2Caps%2C85&sr=8-1
Or his more scholarly version of that work, Reading Joshua as Christian Scripture https://www.amazon.com/Christian-Scripture-Theological-Interpretation-Supplements/dp/1575067013/ref=mp_s_a_1_4?crid=O3HPULD7V7ZM&keywords=douglas+earl+joshua&qid=1656963043&sprefix=douglas+earl+joshua%2Caps%2C85&sr=8-4.
I see historical criticism as a discipline that an orthodox Christian can be perfectly at home with. The majority of scholars classify the gospels as “ancient biography,” which is a quite historical genre, Genesis 1-11 as ancient near eastern myth, and Joshua as legend. Fine by me. A historical Christ, a mythical Adam, and a semi-historical Joshua. This is all quite compatible with the groundwork laid by Origen, the Cappadocians and most certainly Maximus long ago.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Mark, thank you for your very helpful comment. The idea of historical criticism and allegorical interpretation coexisting as mutually enriching approaches is very appealing to me. I’ll look up the references you cited.
LikeLike
I would think your guess is right – I feel your struggle. However, the question comes to mind as to how do we know what the intention was, and furthermore why would intention be the (only) key for interpretation? There are many biblical examples of people conveying truth and meaning without knowing it themselves – for example Caiaphas’ prophesy about Jesus’ death, the soldiers’ casting lots, Pilate’s interrogation of Jesus, and so forth. And if it is true that the truth of history is the incarnation – then why would we object to the incarnation as the fulfilment of time, as the proper and only key to understanding the Hebrew Bible? The problem we have as moderns is not simply with allegory, it is with interpretation, with meaning making.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Fair comments all.
LikeLike
It makes no difference to me. It’s been longstanding in literary criticism that intentions come through an author that they not only may have not consciously intended but that they would personally abhor. But we don’t have perfect control over the spirits that inhabit and possess us (i e. Muses or the Holy Spirit). How can we not say that the holy spirit intended this meaning to come through in human rough and rumble baby talk? Perhaps it won’t convince the opposed, it may be irrefutable until the eschaton but it makes sense to me and doesn’t offend my conscience in the slightest. I have felt the presence of unknown spirits inhabit me that made me do things way above my pay grade. That cements it to me at least.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems that what Fr. Stephen Freeman is saying here is of a different spirit than what Fr. Stephen DeYoung is saying in his book GOD IS A MAN OF WAR.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Timothy, what does Fr DeYoung say about the genocide passages?
LikeLike
Just from reading Goodreads reviews it seems like he holds to the Catholic idea that we must hold together the literal and spiritual readings. Thus he seems to support the idea that it isn’t bad for God to command death since he isn’t the instrumental cause only a proximate one, it’s the humans doing the killing and their attachment to sin and death is merciful to the wicked and the just alike since it saves the one from committing too much sin and saves the other from being sinned against. I think it’s terrible reasoning but that seems to be what I gather. It’s hearsay though from reviews and through my own lens. I may be entirely wrong.
LikeLike
I recall from The Lord of Spirits podcast that he holds the genocide passages to be directed against demonically corrupt “giant” clans for whom death, even the death of children, is basically a mercy.
LikeLike
To be sure, there are problems with allegorical readings (some took it too far). And, to be accurate, there were certainly patristic voices that pushed back against it and patristic voices that had no difficulty with OT genocide, etc.
For me, it’s simply a matter of beginning with Christ. My faith rests on believing that He was raised from the dead and demostrated to be God-in-the-flesh. I do not think we can read the OT (or anything) apart from Him and through Him. As it says in John 1:18 “He [Jesus] has made Him [the Father] known” the word there being, “exegesis.” Christ is the exegesis of the Father.
So, when I read the OT, I read it for Christ, through Christ, and for Him only. I ponder the history of Israel, etc., but I ponder them in the light of Christ as made known to us. I do not try to get behind Jesus and think of God in any other way.
I recognize that I’m probably a bit of an outlier on this among modern-day Orthodox. But I rest in the knowledge that I’m not alone – there were Fathers (Nyssa, for one) who taught in this manner.
In the video, the question was about “what to do with such passages.” I explained what I do personally in the matter – providing a path of faith for someone struggling with the topic.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Thank You Fr Stephen. Lovely! 🙏
I find when I place my attention on Christ, I find God is Light. God is Love.
LikeLike
Throughout the ages, mystics had this awareness of forces of the ego against the true self, the Holy Spirit working within … this not only had a purpose of service to others but also of what they experienced as becoming One (union) with God. In the Old Testament, Saints and Prophets also (??) … and relating this to the New Testament, Christ in his humanity transcended it all, defeating death itself ( Hebrews 2:14 ). What and if this has any relevance to the topic being discussed, I have no idea!?
LikeLike