BiAS 7 – The Bible and Politics in Africa
literary take the OT commands as they have their own specifics or par-
ticularity. ‘They are not so much universal absolutes, designed to be
applicable in any circumstances, as specific enactments made in particu-
lar historical, social, and cultural situations, and designed to function in
those particular situations.’^34 These commands are not only independent
of each other but they also directly address a historical and cultural situa-
tion which is very different from that of the African readers. Goldingay
reiterates that we live in a particular historical situation which raises for
us sharp ethical questions which the Bible does not directly address. He
notes that ‘It does not envisage the questions of a technological society,
of a world that is becoming overcrowded and of life sciences which lay
before men new possibilities of genetic decision-making. The speci-
ficness of biblical commands to their context raises the question of what
guidance we have for the specific issues we have to face.’^35 This position
may lead us not to listen to what the Bible may be speaking to us today.
We must realize that God remains consistent and the conditions of
human life today are not totally discontinuous with those of the biblical
cultures. The problem of specificness and particularistic is followed by
that of diversity in the OT standards. As Africans we will be guided by
which issues are relevant to us and investigate what guidance the Bible
offers.
The hermeneutical approach taken by most proponents of the Bible as a
tool to advance pluralism and democracy in Kenya has been that of read-
ing and interpreting the Bible as a whole following the canon. They see
it as two testaments with one testimony. They believe that reading the
testaments together involves taking hermeneutical as well as theological
positions which means that ‘the God who raised Jesus from the dead is
the same God who brought Israel out of Egypt.36 This does not mean
that they do not recognize the problem created by diversity of themes in
the testaments as raised by Walter Brueggemann who holds that the
canon represents a collection of such widely diverse ideas that all at-
tempts to perceive a coherent theological message results in interpreta-
tive violence and reductionism (Theology of the Old Testament, Dispute,
Advocacy; Minneapolis, 1997). Many proponents, in our case, as evident
(^34) Goldingay, Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation, p 51.
(^35) Goldingay, Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation, p 52.
(^36) K.J. Vanhoozer. Exegesis and Hermeneutics, in T.D.Alexander and Brian S. Rosner
eds New Dictionary of Biblical Theology; InterVarsity Press, Leicester,2000. 52-64.