76 FEMINIST VIEWS THAT UNDERMINE SCRIPTURE
standards of the Bible to show him the direction he should move away
from the standards of the Bible and move toward better standards,
toward a “better ethic,” than that found in the Bible.^23
Webb still seems unaware of, or unable to represent fairly, any
responsible interpretative process that has been used by evangelicals
before he proposed his system. The only alternative to his position that
he mentions is a “static” approach that “understands the words of the
text in isolation from their ancient historical-cultural context and with
minimal—or no—emphasis on their underlying spirit”^24 or that under-
stands the meaning of the words “isolated from historical and canoni-
cal contexts.”^25 But what responsible evangelical interpreter says we
should understand New Testament commands “isolated from their his-
torical and canonical contexts”? Webb simply ignores the dominant
view of the Protestant (not Roman Catholic) churches for centuries: that
commands should be understood in light of their literary, historical, and
canonical contexts, but without seeking to go beyond the New
Testament commands to find a “better ethic.”
Before concluding this chapter, I need to respond to two arguments
Webb has put forth to defend his system. First, he argues that his sys-
tem is needed in order to show that the Bible does not endorse slavery.
Second, he argues that Christians have always used some kind of
“redemptive-movement” hermeneutic like his.
BUT DOES THE BIBLE ENDORSE SLAVERY?
With respect to the first question, whether we need Webb’s system to show
that the Bible does not endorse slavery, Webb does not seem to be suffi-
ciently aware of how Christians in the past have used the teachings of the
Bible itself (item Y in Webb’s system) to oppose and defeat slavery. They
have not used Webb’s “redemptive-movement hermeneutic” and found
their moral standards in some development beyond the New Testament.
Most evangelical interpreters say that the Bible does not command
(^23) I should also note that while Webb earlier commended Thomas Schreiner for understanding
him correctly (see Webb, “Responding to Grudem’s Concerns,” 2), Schreiner now agrees with
my critique of Webb’s system: see Thomas Schreiner, “An Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15:
A Dialogue with Scholarship,” in Women in the Church, 2nd ed., ed. Andreas Köstenberger
and Thomas Schreiner (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2005), 223n177.
(^24) Webb, “Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic,” 382.
(^25) Ibid., 383.