Author Interview
William Webb, author of Slaves, Women & Homosexuals
IVP: I have a hunch it was not just "out of the blue" that one day you just sat down and started writing Slaves, Women & Homosexuals. What prompted you to begin writing this book?
William Webb: It started about five or six years ago when my
dean and friend (Jim Cianca) walked into my office and we
began talking about ethics from a non-Christian perspective.
He had been reading a book on secular ethics by Paul
Kurtz. Kurtz does a masterful job of trashing a Judeo-
Christian ethic with many difficult passages related to slavery
and women in the Bible. In somewhat of a joking manner,
Jim tossed Kurtz's book on my desk and said, "You're
the exegete. You figure it out!"
Reading Kurtz and other secular ethicists was a shock
to the system. They raised a lot of biblical texts that are
never preached--the kind of texts
that get passed over by most conservative
Christians even in the scholarly or
academic world. I came to something
of a crossroads. I had to either abandon
my faith in a Judeo-Christian God
and the authority of Scripture or
change the way that I understood the
Bible (my hermeneutic). The answer
that eventually emerged for me was to
look at Scripture through the grid of a "redemptive movement"
hermeneutic--this is the core of my book.
IVP: The title is certainly provocative. I believe it's the one you suggested to us. What led you to this title?
Webb: I did not intend for the title to be provocative. It just happened that way! My intent is to say something about the methodology within the book. Several chapters develop a grouping of eighteen different criteria for doing cultural/transcultural analysis. These chapters are devoted to sorting out how we determine what components in a biblical text are cultural and what components are transcultural. I derive each of the criteria for cultural/transcultural assessment first from "neutral" examples--examples where there is a greater degree of consensus among Christians--before moving to more debated issues. Slavery is one of a grouping of over fifty-plus neutral examples that I work with in order to formulate the various criteria. Then, after establishing the criteria on lessdebated grounds, I move within each particular criterion to the more debated issues of women and homosexuality.
IVP: For many of our readers your title will be reminiscent of the well-known hermeneutics text by Swartley, Slavery, Sabbath, War and Women. Did that book contribute to the idea for your present book?
Webb: I am very much indebted to Swartley. But the connection between my work and his is more at an inspirational level than at a content level. I suppose in a very limited sense one could say my work is "a Swartley book for a new generation." After all, it uses a case-studies approach to hermeneutics and engages the reader with the women's issue and the homosexual issue now in tandem. The truth of the matter is that Swartley's work continues to add something to the discussion that my work does not attempt to do. Its historical perspective is invaluable.
IVP: Okay, so how does your work differ from Swartley's book?
Webb: Where Slaves, Women & Homosexuals departs from Swartley is far more telling. For instance, SWH introduces a new "suitcase full" of biblical examples. My work brings in under the domain of "neutral examples" a larger cluster of biblical texts and subjects--it is not as limited in its sampling of biblical examples. Obviously, I have also added the major "hot topic" of homosexuality to the mixture. Furthermore, my focus is purely on the argumentation for a particular hermeneutic, not on a historical development of that argumentation. While indebted to Swartley in specific places, the eighteen criteria for cultural/transcultural analysis within SWH go well beyond Swartley. Finally, I argue for a "redemptive movement" hermeneutic that both egalitarians and patriarchalists can and should embrace. Swartley's approach tended to polarize the hermeneutic along egalitarians- versus-patriarchalists lines. My approach splits or polarizes within the patriarchal camp and then develops a greater affinity between certain patriarchalists and egalitarians. In this respect alone, my work has the potential for a new type of dialogue between egalitarians and proponents of patriarchy.
IVP: Attempts to account for cultural factors in the formation and interpretation of biblical texts have often stirred up some controversy. What has motivated you to take up the challenge to address these factors?
Webb: I do not think anyone in biblical studies
can escape the reality of trying to determine
what is culturally bound within a text and what is
trans-cultural. We must to do this in order to
apply biblical texts in a credible and cogent fashion.
But then, why me? First, I love teaching
hermeneutics. So in some respects this was a natural
outgrowth of my interest in that area. Second,
the need for credible answers in these difficult and
perplexing issues had become very intense in my
own life. In our modern culture (and especially our
Canadian culture) no Christian can ignore the
interpretive issues surrounding women and homosexuals
in the Bible. Third, I simply could not find
(in one volume) what I was looking for on the
hermeneutical end of things. As I have read the literature
for some twenty-plus years, it dawned on
me that Christendom does not have a well-developed
set of hermeneutical guidelines for doing cultural/
transcultural analysis. Furthermore, many of
the cultural/transcultural arguments made by both
conservatives and liberals are very poorly constructed.
Thus I ultimately pursued the development of this
book--its eighteen criteria and its broader
hermeneutic--in order to figure out my own position
on these issues.
IVP: Have your views on this changed somewhat over time? What insights have led you to believe that taking up cultural/transcultural assessment is compatible with a high view of Scripture?
Webb: When teaching hermeneutics, I sometimes
challenge my students with this statement:
"The goal of interpretation is the pursuit of truth,
not the preservation of our preunderstandings."
Yes, my views have changed over the last ten years.
But that is bound to happen if a professor tries to
follow even part of the advice that they give their
students.
However, through the change my commitment
to the authority of Scripture has grown
rather than diminished. If I take you back in our
interview to the incident about Kurtz's ethics text
being "tossed on my desk," I think you'll understand
at least part of the puzzle. You see I came to
a major crossroads in my life as I studied what the
Bible said about slaves, women and homosexuals.
Numerous secular ethicists (and radical feminists
alike) in their critiques of a Judeo-Christian ethic
were saying, "We can create a social ethic that
exceeds Scripture!" As one trained in exegesis, I
read their materials and realized that much of their
critique was anachronistic. But yes. In certain
respects I had to agree with them. You could put
together a social ethic that exceeds Scripture. So I
was caught in a dilemma. It took me several years
of reflective "cocooning" (and the writing of SWH)
in order to sort through a credible answer. As I
emerged from that time, I developed a much
greater appreciation for Scripture and its authoritative
role in my own life. But something had to
change. I had to change the way I understood how
Scripture communicated its meaning. There was
an important component of meaning to which I
was not listening. That journey ultimately lead me
to embrace what in the book I call a redemptive
movement hermeneutic.
IVP: I was wondering if the present socio-political situation in Canada, where there seems to be a high sensitivity to any kind of perceived discrimination against anyone, has contributed to this project and more generally to teaching in a Christian institution in Canada?
Webb: An interesting question. For many years Canada has been listed as one of the top places in the world to live in terms of social ethic, the caring treatment of people and human rights. If one compares Canada and the States without any regional qualifications, Canada is far more sensitive to social discrimination issues than the States. Perhaps it has intensified the need for answers in this setting.
IVP: At the end of the book, you have a very unusual chapter entitled "What If I Am Wrong?" Is that any way to end an academic book? What on earth led you to wrap things up that way?
Webb: I like the way you worded the question,
"What on earth . . ." Let me first say this--
yes, I think it is academic. In fact, I think it is the
most responsible kind of academics there is. Surely
the academic community best knows that
hermeneutical and interpretive outcomes never
achieve 100 percent certainty. At most, we can
speak of "reasoned probability" about all of our
findings. If this is true, then I am doing a scholarly
service for my readers by revealing the levels of
conviction (corresponding to the amount and
weight of evidence) about my conclusions.
More important, however, I am trying to
accomplish something on a very practical level. I
am trying to say to my patriarchal readers, scholars
and friends, "Please don't throw the whole book
out the window--only certain pages!" If they can't
accept the entire book, that is okay with me. I
understand. (I have that
same response on some days.) But I would
hope no one would dismiss the whole thing
but find that the evidence supports (at least)
those conclusions found in my last chapter,
"What If I Am Wrong?" In a sense I draw a
line in the sand and say, "Please--at least come
to this point."
IVP: How do you hope that your book will contribute to the ongoing discussion and debate?
Webb: I do have some hopes and dreams.
On the women's issue, I hope in the short term
that the book will cause patriarchalists to ask
themselves the question, "What kind of patriarchalist
am I?" Hopefully, they will begin
valuing their answer to that question more
than the fact that they are patriarchal as
opposed to egalitarian. Any future progress in
the debate depends upon our working from the
same hermeneutic.
On the homosexual issue, I hope to see the
nature of the dialogue regarding cultural/transcultural
analysis begin to move to an entirely
different level. For those conservatives
impressed by slippery-slope arguments on the
women's issue--that a less-restrictive approach
to the women's issue leads to accepting homosexuality
--hopefully my work will shed some
light on the differences between the women's
issue and the homosexual issue.
Finally, for the broader area of hermeneutics
it is my hope that Slaves, Women &
Homosexuals will generate a new enthusiasm
within colleges and seminaries to train leaders
who know how to apply Scripture in a cogent
and convincing fashion. I hope it will fill something
of the void in terms of what is needed for
a rigorous approach to the application process.
That's it--just a few minor hopes and
dreams.