Kreitsauce's Musings

Tell Me a Story

by kreitsauce on Jun.01, 2009, under Bible, Doctrine, Philosophy

When I was in college, the experimental theater class would occasionally put on small productions entitled “Tell Me a Story.” They didn’t have a huge budget, but they would dress in costumes generally and spend an evening performing short dramas, usually around a particular theme. After a night titled “Tell Me a SCARY Story”, I remember watching my fellow students dart to their dorms in groups thanks to the night’s fare and thinking to myself about how drama is such a powerful method of communication.

In fact, anything involving the use of narrative seems to exert a good deal of influence over us. Perhaps that’s why so much of the Bible is made up of narrative. Some Christians believe that the Bible should be understood strictly as narrative, especially since our postmodern society leans heavily in this direction. I don’t have anything personal against my brothers in Christ, but I definitely have a problem with limiting God’s Word to a narrative whose story must be consistently reinterpreted.

On this subject, Rob Bell said in a 2004 interview in Christianity Today that he and his wife were in the process of “discovering the Bible as a human product.” In his view, the Bible is more like a member of his church community with stories to share about a variety of topics. Bell’s desire is to avoid the mistake of placing the Bible on the dissection table and forgetting to look into and be changed by “the Perfect Law of Liberty.” Brian McLaren is even more transparent when he writes:

When we theological conservatives seek to understand the Bible, we generally analyze it. We break it down into chapters, paragraphs, verses, sentences, clauses, phrases, words, prefixes, roots, suffixes, jots, and tittles. Now we understand it, we tell ourselves. Now we have conquered to text, captured the meaning, removed all mystery, stuffed it and preserved it for posterity, like a taxidermist with a deer head.”

It’s a tragedy that people would analyze God’s Word without it applying to themselves, and it happens all too often. I suspect that the emergent church is more of a reaction against modernism than it is a return to right thinking. McLaren would tell us that intensive Bible studies are the result of the Enlightenment, I would ask him to peer further back into the past. In doing so, he would see the Bereans, apostles, church fathers, Reformers, Puritans, Methodists, and Baptists all involved in this very sort of Bible study. Christians have always believed that the Word of God is worth studying by whatever means necessary.

It’s true that the Bible includes a good deal of narrative. However, the Bible is also almost entirely made of propositional statements. In his book The Post-Evangelical, Tomlinson ironically states: “Post-evangelicals are less inclined to look for truth in propositional statements and old moral certitudes and more likely to seek it in symbols, ambiguities, and situational judgments.”

One has to wonder where the animosity toward propositional statements came from. After all, we make use of them every day. Every time we state a fact, we are making a proposition. We don’t have to be right about the fact we are stating, but a proposition is made nonetheless. “The rain in Spain stays mainly on the plain.” “I love artichoke hearts.” “My cat’s name is Olivia.” Whether it’s an account of David vs. Goliath or Jesus’ assertion that He is Way, Truth, and Life or Paul’s teaching on salvation being by grace instead of works, propositional statements are all over the Bible. To be honest, I have no idea why emergent church leaders even bother writing about this. After all, their own claims and assertions are themselves propositional statements!

It seems the postmodern believers are quite fond of the “good fences make good neighbors” mantra. You must either adhere to one extreme or the other, and never the twain shall  meet. It’s either propositions or narratives, being informed or being transformed, knowing what to believe or knowing the Lord of those beliefs. The Bible doesn’t put such burdens on us, fortunately. We can boldly proclaim the truths of Scripture when they are stated outright, and we can also enjoy and learn from the narrative of Scripture.

So go ahead. Tell me a story. Just make sure you get your facts right, and make sure there’s a point to it all.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
  • Share/Bookmark
:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

2 Comments for this entry

  • DrewDowns

    I sort of agree with you except for one thing: you seem to suggest that propositional statements are not only declarative but clear or universally understood. One of these statements that you make note of in particular is a common source of conflict, which is the statement from Jesus by way of John's Gospel: "I am the way". Yes, this is a propositional statement, but it doesn't also include the following statement: "I am the way–so attend this church, believe this dogma, and reject all else." This very propositional statement is not only vague and wide open for interpretation, but is itself, ripe with story! I do agree that it is important to work with propositional and declarative statements (evidently). But I also like to look at the nature of the scripture. Virtually all of Jesus' propositional statements in the Synoptics are directly attached to a story, a parable, or a visual aid of some sort. The scripture is short on instances of "do this and this and you're fine" and long on "about that–there was this guy…"

    Your discussion of postmodernity is otherwise well-considered and I appreciate your skepticism, but I think part of "our" relative confusion about this phenomenon is that it is both a direct response to the dualistic and combative methods of modernity, while also rejecting many of its presuppositions. In other words, it is forced to be a direct response to its predecessor, while also being timeless. One of the ways this is achieved is by being a response to ancient thinking as well.

    I just thought I'd share my own thoughts. I appreciated your post.

  • kreitsauce

    I do think that it's curious that postmodernism is a reaction to modernism, since, in Christianity at least, postmoderns within the emergent church movement actually share a lot of beliefs with the modernists around the turn of the 20th Century. Rob Bell, for instance, has a lot in common with Karl Barth as you can see here: http://apprising.org/2008/08/rob-bell-and-karl-ba...

    I'm a little skeptical about reacting to movements, since reacting can also thrust me into error. I think that is what has happened to a lot of emergents and postmodern Christians. They see what's wrong with churches and preaching, and they react to the wrongness and stray to the other side of the road. Obviously, there's different degrees of postmodernism, and not everyone falls into the same category.

    Thanks for the comment!

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv Enabled

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!