:: Ryan Thomas ::

This content come from Mere Christian Hermeneutics. Vanhoozer, K. Zondervan. 2024.

Dr. Vanhoozer notes that there are two traps one might fall into when reading-interpreting Scripture. The first is that of pride. This happens when the reader comes to Scripture to search for support of pre-conceived beliefs. The second is sloth. This happens when the reader fails to attend to the way Scripture presents itself – or when the reader does not respond to what is read. (18)

Both of these traps lead to what he calls “hermeneutical arteriosclerosis.” It stems from the concept of being heart-hearted, clogged up as it were. The prideful reader gets h.a. when he clings to false gods of narrow doctrine. The slothful reader gets h.a. when he uses “simple habits” – i.e. bad hermeneutics.

One interesting point that Dr. V. makes is that one can tell a lot about reading-interpretive processes by the type of reader they produce (fruit being known by its tree). It’s not hard to see how the pride / sloth approach perpetuates prideful and slothful readers. You might almost think that the reader was that kind of person before reading. And perhaps they were. But a major topic of this book is the concept of reading cultures and how they produce cultural residents who keep unhealthy cycles spinning. So, it becomes important to consider the reading culture that one grew up within, in order to understand if that culture has overly influenced the reader into perpetuating the interpretive practices that lock the reader into pride or sloth.

My life is a perfect example. I wrote about it more extensively here. I grew up in a reading culture that only considered a particular way of interpreting Scripture. It was more or less literal (face value = by the letter), but it took no consideration for original languages or contexts. Modern, western lenses were forced upon the text. The easiest example is that of Genesis 1 & 2. The reading culture prioritized coming to Scripture to find ontological realities. Proving biblical stories through archeology and history was crucial. Whole ministries evolved (all pun intended) to prove that God created the world in six, consecutive 24 hour periods. If God grabbed a handful of clay and sculpted a man, that’s exactly what happened. 

A different reading culture – one I was introduced to in seminary – is that of the ancient Hebrew. Once I understood why it was important to consider context, then I found that the ancient Hebrew reading culture was exceedingly more important that my 20th century American Fundamentalist Protestant one. Upon thinking through the Hebrew context, I found the literalist, post-Enlightenment reading culture to be laughable as a viable interpretive framework for Genesis 1 & 2.

So, ironically I was both prideful and slothful in my former reading of the Creation story. I came to the story thinking I knew how it was to be read. I am so grateful that I was proven wrong.

Dr. V. says that we have been given pre-formed interpretive virtues, and we go on to produce more of our own. These virtues shape how we look at the text and what we look for. It comes back down to what we think the purpose of the reading is. Biblical reading, theological reading is to achieve communion with God. One of the most important virtues then in that kind of reading is humility. Cultivating humility when coming to the text is paramount to receiving life-transforming words. It rubs against every broken inclination within us to fight for our own way. 

And to be honest, this kind of humility requires the death of self-assurance. That, in and of itself, is quite terrifying at times. I’ve occasionally found myself asking myself, “Am I being heretical? Am I too quickly abandoning what millions of others have affirmed?” It’s not easy. It’s not simple. It’s not always clear. But I can say that it brings an ultimate kind of peace that you’ll never find anywhere else. It’s resting in the Spirit of God to offer you exactly what he means to offer you.