Biblical interpretation is cyclical
As I’ve matured, one of the ambiguities I’ve learned to accept is the journey of interpretation.
When I was younger, I expected that a full and complete grasp of the Bible was a matter of time and effort. Now that I’m a little wiser, I realize that I am on a journey of discovery that has no final end nor milestones to mark progress. The best I can claim is that I understand a part of the whole and part of any one page, and that’s true for every person I’ve met.
This uncomfortable ambiguity produces, at my best, peace over the incomplete understanding of those who have only recently begun their journey and respect for those further along the journey with whom I disagree.
I’m going to take you on a discovery journey. Together we’re going to attempt an interpretation of Romans 14:17 using only the letter’s context and inductive reasoning. My hope is that, by performing this live, you will have confidence to also glean understanding and critique interpretive mistakes.
First, read Romans 14:17.
Romans 14:17...
For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
Here’s my first swing at an interpretation without further context.
💬
The writer makes a dichotomy between the physical realm and the spiritual realm. "The kingdom of God," the writer says, "is not a matter of earthly practices like eating and drinking, but is a matter of the inner feelings, like peace and joy, and the good actions (righteousness) of Kingdom participants. Therefore, I (the reader) should be a kind person and seek personal peace and joy over the accumulation of material food and drink."
That sounds pretty good, doesn’t it? Most folks I know agree that being a nice person and having personal peace and joy is superior to eating a steak dinner. Well, at least in the long term 😉.
We can honor the writer better if we try to grasp the writer’s context and intent, so let’s take a swing at the immediate context. Read it along with me.
Romans 14:13-19...
Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.
Now how would I summarize this portion? Here’s my best shot.
💬
The writer wants his audience to stop passing judgment on others in their community; specifically what they do or don’t eat. Some are eating “unclean” food that others feel strongly isn’t okay to eat, and both sides are condemning the other. Perhaps one party says, “we can eat anything, for Jesus has made it clean. Stop being a stickler,” and the other party says, “what do you know about clean food? It is disgraceful to eat what’s unclean, and it pains me to see you disregard what’s obviously wrong.”
The writer addresses the party who eats, “technically you’re right, you can eat, but you’re missing what’s more important. This other party is your family, and you need to consider their needs instead of defending your behavior with a technicality (I’m not saying you’re wrong about eating "unclean" food, only that your priorities are disordered). True service to Jesus seeks to benefit your community and keep peaceful relationship with them. This behavior is acceptable to God, and even to your neighbors. But instead you provoke others in your community by flaunting your right to eat “unclean” foods and in so doing cause them harm. Seek peace and right relationship in your community more than maintaining your rights, for that’s what God’s kingdom is about.”
Phew, there’s a lot there! For your sake and my own, though the therefore is highly suggestive that we’re missing important context, I’m not going to further summarize the chapter, the whole letter, or the Biblical story (though feel free to do so; you’ll discover even more).
Was I mistaken in my first interpretive attempt? Perhaps. Might I be equally mistaken without a chapter, letter, or Bible context? Perhaps. But was the discovery process fruitful and possible for anyone with a Bible and a desire to learn. Definitely.