Clarity Amid the Complexity 12.14.2023

     Last week we discussed confusion and the various contexts in which confused preaching to a confused Church leads to a confused expression of the “faith once and for all delivered to the saints”.  This week I want to discuss an issue that riffs off last week’s discussion of ambiguity. There is a seeming paradox which confronts the preacher every week. While the message of salvation itself is simple, it is embedded in the Bible which is becoming more opaque and foreign within our culture. The history of effects (interpretation) of the Biblical text teaches us that the stories we know, and love have had varied interpretations and applications both inside and outside the Church for centuries. The nature and presentation of scripture is complex, though the ultimate point is simple. Much of our problem comes from mistaking the focal application of the Gospel with the process of understanding of how that salvation story comes to be. 

    Sound Biblical interpretation requires us to navigate the treacherous road between complexity and simplicity. It can be difficult because we sometimes misunderstand complexity's role in human understanding. This misunderstanding leads to the erroneous conclusion that “real” truth is simple and that simplicity and clarity are the same thing. When this turns out not to be the case, and the exegete or congregant is confronted with textual complexity, they make the preliminary judgment that the topic in question has been made complex by preachers, professors, “experts” or unbelievers. One of the jobs of a preacher is to help people come to grips with complexity—not explain it away.

    As an example, we will consider how best to understand the life of Christ. Knowing who Jesus is, and the facts of His incarnation and presence among us are essential to understanding the Christian faith. The New Testament does not contain a “life of Christ.” There is no “biography of Jesus.” If there were, preaching would be much simpler! Instead, the New Testament exegetical preacher is confronted with Four gospels. In world literature, Gospels are sui genreris=a thing unto itself, unique. Three of the four Gospels are called “synoptics” because their viewpoint, broad outline, and “plot” are basically the same. The fourth, John is an outlier that presents a story of Jesus that is more theological and reflective.  Each Gospel tells the story of Jesus. It is the same story, differently told for different reasons. Each Gospel reflects a facet of the One Gospel of Jesus Christ. 

    One of the earliest, albeit still ongoing exegetical projects within the believing Church is “harmonizing”. A gospel harmony is an attempt to weave a single narrative structure from the four Gospels. The first of these was created by the 2nd-century Assyrian Christian Tatian. His goal was to provide in a single volume the complete, preserved contents of the four canonical Gospels in a continuous text. He may have been the first but certainly not the last. There are harmonies available in virtually every format, language, and presentation. From where I sit in my study “I spy with my little eye…4 gospel harmonies.”  Even visual media like the Chosen series you may be streaming right now tells the story of Jesus in a harmonized fashion rather than following the storyline of a single Gospel. Why? Two reasons. 1. Complexity. 2. Clarity. It can be very difficult to achieve clarity when engaging a complicated subject and for some, it is just easier to eliminate the complexity.  Thus, we circle back to the topic at hand. How do we create clarity of understanding without sacrificing what the text actually says?

    Explanation. There are times when we must explain what is going on within an individual the text, and between the various gospels. For some reason, it was God’s good pleasure to tell the inspired story of His Son this way. He has left the interpretive work, the detailed study, and the explanation to us. Exegesis should not explain away the complexity. Exegesis seeks clarity amid the complexity. Faithful preaching tells the story of Jesus Biblically. Not every story contains all the details we would like. The process of “filling in details” from parallel accounts eliminates the complexity and ambiguity that, for some reason, God wanted to be there. That kind of explanation provides a clear picture. Yet often it is not the picture painted by the gospel authors. It is a composite that they would only barely recognize. 

    Now, (and this is where the duck begins to splash around uncontrollably in the pond) if we cannot explain the scripture to Christians without simplifying it so much that we alter its character; what are our chances with a culture that does not share our assumptions? This has always been a problem, and until the last half-century a problem embraced by the Church. The New Testament compels us to live a humble, Christlike life. We defend that lifestyle by appealing to scripture. When the unbelieving world persistently asks about the reason for our hope, we connect our conspicuous behavior to a Biblically grounded belief system. This requires us to live as humble, sacrificial servants—just like Jesus. When the Church does that, it has impact and a voice for explaining and proclaiming the saving Gospel of Jesus. 

    A church that lives like that earns for itself quite a bit of latitude in explaining what it believes—however complex it might be. A church that is cantankerous, un-Christlike, unloving, and mean-spirited loses the audience before the explanation begins. Theology, History, Biblical understanding—all the elements of a robust and healthy faith require behavior that matches our belief. If we lack the former the latter has no impact. 

    Question: “HEY. I thought this was a discussion of hermeneutics! What do Theology, History, and Biblical exegesis have to do with Christian practice?  With living like loving like, and cross-carrying like Jesus?”

Answer: “Everything.”