Tuesday, 13 March 2012

NEW LITERARY CRITICAL READINGS


THE POST-MODERNIST PHASE OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION
NEW LITERARY CRITICAL READINGS: NARRATIVE AND READER RESPONSE.

                                                                                                                                      - Laldanmawia
…………………………………………………………..

Introduction:
The Bible is written and produced by different people who encountered with God through which they received God’s inspiration and by which they wrote the books and letters. The books and letters are accepted later on as the Holy Scripture by the people of God. It is all known that the book and letters were written almost by men from Jewish patriarchal society. Because of that people from different culture and society got some inconveniences to acknowledge and to understand the real meaning of the Texts. Then the problem raised the new readings of the Texts from different angles and perspectives, and the texts are explained again and again to meet the people’s understanding, that is called the Interpretation. Thus the Biblical interpretation is meant to make it clear the meaning and significance of the Scriptures to be understandable for the readers of different backgrounds, cultures, places and times. We interpret the texts till these days by drawing out the meanings which are near to our situation. When the Bible texts are interpreted, it may express the deeper sense to the readers.

The topic ‘New Literary Critical Reading’ is one aspect of the Post-modern Biblical Interpretation, under which narrative and reader-response are to be dealt with in this paper by drawing the meanings and concepts.

1. Post-modernist Phase of Biblical Interpretation:
From the 17th Century the modern world turned into Post-modern world. In the phase of post-modernity, it is accepted that there are many cultures, different peoples, different opinions and different acceptations. The concept of universal truth, universal uniqueness etc which are mainly controlled by the western philosophy and culture are dismantled.[1] Everything is organized by mutual acceptance of who, what and where the people are. Individual freedom of expressions, right and duties are given to the people.

Interpretation of the Bible is to be related to the people of their culture and their individual liberty. That is one of the intentions of Post-modern biblical interpretation, by giving respect to the readers’ situation and by which people read the Scripture in order to make it sense. So the meaning of Post-modern Biblical interpretation is reading and explaining the texts from individual perspective and perception, from social outlook and from community point of view, for gaining the concept of the texts to be acceptable from their side. It sets out the notion from the universal acceptance to individual acceptance which is not to be influenced by others’ philosophies and cultures.



2. New Literary Critical Reading:
In the latter half of the 20th Century, there was upcoming method for the reading of the Bible for the purpose of literary study. The Bible is viewed as a virgin soil for employing literary critical theory, giving rise to the movement called Bible as Literature.[2] So Literary critical reading or literary criticism could be explain as the study or criticism of the Bible from its literary form or from its literature in order to make clear the literal meaning of the Scriptures.

The origin of new criticism appeared in 1940’s and 1950’s by secular literary critics by explaining what new literary criticism is:

New literary criticism distinguished literary history, which answers historical questions    concerning author and composition, from the proper business of literary criticism, which is the study of the literary object itself.[3]

According to them the literary history of the author and the composition are analyzed using the new literary critical method. Indeed it is the study of those phenomena, as well as it studies the literary genres and the literary languages which present the new meaning beyond the texts say.
              
2.1. Narrative:
Narrative criticism or narrative critical reading is one of the modern forms of literary criticisms. It treats the texts as a unit and focuses on narrative structure and composition, plot development, themes and motifs, characters and characterization.[4] It is a method of studying narrative, emphasizing as well as the role of the readers. It assumes that the story does not exist autonomously within the text, but comes into being through the interaction between the text and the readers.

Some biblical verses are bearing a narrative story. In the story there exist a literary entity to be found which is not same as the real author, but his/her character could be found which would express who he/her is. But at the same time, he/she is not real author in a sense that, in his/her other books or letters, another entity different from the first could be found. For example- the letter of Paul 1 Corinthians and Galatians could give different character of the author, but are the same author.[5] So, the narratives of the texts are read and reflected in this way in which the reader interacts within the texts.

2.2. Reader Response:
Another division of Literary Criticism is the reader response. The main purpose and meaning is reading the Bible as literature to retrieve it from the museum and to relate it to the life of the contemporary situation of the readers.[6] The meaning of the literature of the Bible is dedicated by the interaction between the text and the readers. Full meaning is possible only when the Bible is read as literature, where the Bible is reimaged by the readers in the sense of readers’ own world.[7] The reader response criticism is more or less related with the previous in a sense called interactive of readers and the texts.

According to Randolph Tate,

Reader-response critics view literary meaning as bipolar. Meaning is produced through the interaction between a text and a reader. Until a reader picks up a text and begins ready it, a literary works does not exist.[8]

This means, to make the texts meaningful, two things have to interconnect –readers and the contents of the texts. The literary works or literary contents of the Bible are not so consequential until and unless people are reading it and taking it to relevance to their context situation. According to the response given by the reader, the text has meaning in one way or another.

Conclusion:
The Bible is the sacred book of Christianity, because of which we try to find out the reasons and particular texts which would influence and would teach us how to do and what to act in relation to our own situation. That is the reason why we try to use it and regulate it in a meaningful way. So to do this we have to interpret the texts. The interpretation processes may be different again according to the conditions of the people. Besides all these things what important and aim of Biblical interpretation is ‘what is the texts mean to you and mean to your culture and society’.







BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Bray, Gerald. Biblical Interpretation: Past and Present. Illinois: Interversity Press, 1996.

Tate, W. Randolph. Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach. Massachusetts:
               Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1997.


Bray, David, Kenneth A. Matthews and Robert B. Sloan. Foundations for Biblical
 Interpretation. Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994.

Shimray, Shimreingam L. Introducing Theological Ethics. Ukhrul: Phingyo Baptist Church,
               2011.

(14/07/2011)







[2] David Bray, Kenneth A. Matthews and Robert B. Sloan. Foundations for Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994), 206.

[3] David Bray, Kenneth A. Matthews and Robert B. Sloan, Foundations for Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994), 212.

[5] W. Randolph Tate, Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1997), 219.


[6] David Bray, Kenneth A. Matthews and Robert B. Sloan, Foundations for Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994), 219.

[7] David Bray, Kenneth A. Matthews and Robert B. Sloan, Foundations for Biblical Interpretation  (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994), 220

[8] W. Randolph Tate, Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1997), 217.

Friday, 9 March 2012

Sadhu Sundar Singh


Sadhu Sundar Singh (1889-1929)

                                                                                                                  - Laldanmawia
Introduction
Sadhu Sundar Singh, one of the most well known Christians in India may not be qualified to be known as one of the systematic and academic theologians that India had produced. However, he is one of the most famous Indian Christians, who expressed Christianity in an Indian way. Sadhu Sundar Singh’s way of expressing and propagating Christianity was different from those of his contemporary. He gave Christianity an Indian meaning.

1. His life;
Sundar Singh was born on 3rd September, 1889[1] and brought up in a devout Sikh wealthy family at Rampur in Punjab.[2] Singh received an excellent religious instruction from his mother. Even though they are Sikh by faith, his mother trained him in the Bhakti-tradition of Hinduism as well as of the Sikh religion. He was taught Gita, the Upanishads, and even the Koran. At the age of seven he learned by heart the Bhagavadgita.[3] During his adolescent period Singh was very much against Christianity which was thought in his days as a foreign religion, he even burned the Bible. His mother wanted him to be a Sadhu.

Sundar Singh, though, well trained in the Bhakti-tradition as well as in the Sikh religion, find no real peace in his heart. He, therefore, decided to commit suicide if God did not did not show him the way of salvation. Early in the morning on 18th December, 1904, he lay down on the railway line in his attempt to commit suicide. However, Jesus Christ met him there and he began to embrace Christianity. He was baptized in September 1905 and became a Sadhu not as a Sikh, but as a Christian. In 1910 he left his preacher’s license for Lahore Diocese under the Anglican Church and started pursuing his preaching ministry to all the churches who welcome him. He followed his master till death at the age of 39. In 1929, he died a martyr’s death on his journey to Tibet. His famous work includes At the Master’s Feet, Reality and Religion, and The Spiritual World etc.   

2. The Nature of His Spiritual Experience;
Sundar Singh based his theology on his personal experience of Christ through constant communion with Christ through prayer. Like many Hindu mystics his ecstatic experiences played a vital role in his spiritual life besides God’s revelation through scriptures. However, one must keep in mind that all his ecstatic experiences were in harmony with the Bible. In fact, the Bible was his primary standard. Sadhu mostly uses the New Testament[4] and his first preference was the Gospel of John, for him John seems to have loved Christ more than other Apostles.[5]

Suffering was the hallmark of his spiritual experiences. He bears witness to the love, grace and mercy of his master Jesus Christ through sufferings, hardships and pains. He often speaks of the joy of sufferings and marked a life union with Christ as ‘Heaven upon Earth’.[6]

3. Method of Teaching;
The method of teaching that Sadhu applied was that of Parables, short stories and analogies just as Jesus Christ applied during his earthly ministry. For Sadhu, systematized and academic theology does not find taste, he was more interested in simple and clear analogies and stories which being backed by a continuous communion with Christ carries a definite and clear theology in it and are having a stable articles of faith. It is worthy to point out that though he does not attempt any theological treatises, his teachings carries a profound streams of stability and accountability in Christian theological formulation and deals with a number of subjects.

4. His Theology;
Sundar Singh is always Christocentric in his thought, and his theology begins from his experience of Christ rather than from any theistic considerations.[7]  Jesus Christ was the central theme of his life and teachings. Here we quote his testimony;

Christ is my Savior. He is my life. He is everything to me in heaven and earth… His presence gives me a Peace which passed all understanding, no matter in what circumstances I am placed… Nothing can take away the joy I have found in my Saviour.[8] 
                                                                                                                                                   
Christ for him is a fully God and that knowing Christ is to know his divinity. The Sadhu considers Christ as God becoming flesh and he does not differentiate between incarnation and avatara, he used the term interchangeably.[9]

5. Sin and Karma;
Sadhu Sundar Singh retained the doctrine of Karma as was in Hindu teachings, however, the originality of his teachings on sin lies in the fact that he does not believes in Samsara, the cycle of birth in order to work out one’s sin. Thus, he gave more emphasize on the love of God as was written in the Gospel According to John, for this very reason he prefers John’s Gospel and favored most among the New Testament’s books.  He believed that loving God will not give punishment to his loving creatures eternally. However, he opined that God judges us in our everyday life. For him, sin does not have its independent existence and is predominantly within human being. He holds that we human beings are sinful by nature and only through Jesus, we can obtain the love of God, because our sin judges us to be punished and God’s love through Jesus however saves us from hell.

6. The Work of Christ:
According to Sadhu, human soul can not be saved by world jewels and other precious ornaments; rather it is saved by the surrender of the soul of Christ.[10] God reveals His love through Christ’s death on the Cross which gives human salvation from sins. Redemption is not obtained from human’s deeds but is fulfilled by the works of Christ. God’s love is suffering love and self sacrificing love and that love has power to convert and to transform the sinners.                                                              

He gave an example that a mother works to earn money to pay for releasing her son from prison; toils all days carrying stones even shedding blood. At last she could release him and he will say I was saved by my mother’s hard work, by the wound of her body, by her blood. He will not do commit sin which made his mother to suffer. Likewise, those who realized God’s incarnation and shedding of blood to save from sins will not commit sins but will have life work out by Christ.

7. The Life in Christ:
Sadhu speaks more of the Life in Christ rather than life given at the Cross, more of sanctification than of justification of forgiveness. For him forgiveness of sin is only a part of salvation; full salvation includes freedom from sins.[11] The one who is saved should have new life in Christ or he/she would be a new creation in Christ. If Christ lives in us. Our whole life will become Christ like. Those who live in spiritual communion with God have a share in Christ nature and he becomes transformed into His likeness. Cross bearing life is what his dominating feature; that is according to him the life in Christ, live for the sake of Christ and others.

8. Church and Sadhu:
Eventhough he was baptized through Anglican Church, he later left his preaching license to it and preached wherever he was invited.[12] He was not interested in the church as visible organized institution as he says, “I belong to the Body of Christ, that is, to the true church, which is no material building, but the whole corporate body of true Christians”.[13] When he was asked to which church he belonged; he replied ‘To none’ ‘I belong to Christ. That is enough for me’. He rejects the authority of the church and gives first place to the revelation which he himself receives in a state of ecstacy.[14]


9. His Attitude towards Hinduism:
Sadhu’s attitude towards Hinduism is clear in his saying,

Christianity is the fulfillment of Hinduism. Hinduism has been digging channels. Christ is the water to flow through these channels.[15]

Every man Christian or non Christian received Christ revelation according to his needs, and he breaths in the Holy Spirit even when he knows it or not. He did not totally reject Hinduism as he said it fulfills Christianity. But he rejects all kinds of marga of Hinduism from where they believe to get salvation. Only on the Cross one obtains full salvation.

Conclusion

To conclude, we may say that Sadhu Sundar Singh is the most famous among Indian Christians. He is a man with full commitment to his master Jesus Christ. His preaching and teaching, though devoid of systematic arrangement in terms of academic exercise in theological discourse, can not be overlooked in dealing with Indian Christian Theology. He is the one who best expressed Christianity in an Indian way.

Bibliography:
Boyd, Robin.An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology. Delhi: ISPCK. 1975.
Stephen, M.A Christian Theology in the Indian Context. Delhi: ISPCK, 2001.

Sumithra, Sunand.Christian Theology from an Indian Perspective. Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 1990

Sugirtharajah, R.S.  and Cecil Hargreaves,eds. Readings in Indian Christian Theology. Vol. 1.   Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.
Thompson, Phyllis.  Sadhu Sundar Singh. Secunderabad: Authentic Media, 1997.






[1] Phyllis Thompson, Sadhu Sundar Singh (Secunderabad: Authentic Media, 1997), Preface.
[2] Sunand Sumithra,  Christian Theologies from an Indian Perspective (Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 2002), 96.
[3] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology (Delhi: ISPCK, 1969), 92.
[4] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theologies from an Indian Perspective…, 99.
[5] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology…, 96.
[6] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology (Delhi: ISPCK, 1969), 95.
[7] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology…, 98.
[8] R.S. Sugirtharajah and Cecil Hargreaves, eds., Readings in Indian Christian Theology, vol. 1(Delhi: ISPCK, 1993), 74.
[9] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theologies from an Indian Perspective (Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 2002), 100.
[10] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology (Delhi: ISPCK. 1975), 102.
[11] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theology from an Indian Perspective (Bangalore:Theological Book Trust, 1990), 100.
[12] M. Stephen, A Christian Theology in the Indian Context (Delhi: ISPCK, 2001), 45.
[13] Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian…, 105.
[14] M. Stephen, A Christian Theology….
[15] M. Stephen, A Christian Theology….