This is part II of a post<\/a> begun a week and a half ago in response to a devotional lecture<\/a> given by Terry Ball, dean of the BYU college of religious education. That discussion centered on what I argued to be the problematic connection Ball makes between the pre-existence, Isaiah 28, and mortality. This post focuses on the scriptural aspects of his argument.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Ball begins by discussing a \u201cgrand experiment\u201d undertaken by CES when he began his career as a seminary teacher, which \u201cemphasized teaching each book of scripture sequentially, from beginning to end,\u201d and was designed to \u201chelp students better know and love the scriptures.\u201d Now, decades later, Ball conducts at the beginning of his talk a little exercise in order to assess the fruits of this experiment: He has the students in the Marriott Center audience finish the scriptures he begins. \u201cI will go________,\u201d \u201cThis is my work and _________,\u201d etc., to show that this experiment worked. When the hundreds (thousands?) of voices are generally able to quote back to him these (\u201cScripture Mastery\u201d) verses, he reflects, \u201cIsn\u2019t it wonderful, isn\u2019t it wonderful to be part of a people that know and love the scriptures.\u201d<\/p>\n Ball then goes on to take up the theme of his talk, (secular) learning and (gospel) knowledge. He argues that with 1) faith in true things, 2) obedience, and 3) an observant mind, one can reap blessings from higher education. In discussing point number 3, Ball attempts to show how his learning has informed his faith by presenting an interpretation of the end of Isaiah 28 that draws on his BYU training in Botany.<\/p>\n This passage is a parable of a farmer, who knows when to plow, when and where to plant, and which techniques to use in harvesting different types of produce. Ball says, \u201cI believe Isaiah wants us to liken the farmer to our Heavenly Father, and the seeds to ourselves,\u201d and goes on to say that this is evidence that Heavenly Father has put each of us in different parts of the earth according to our premortal agency and nobility so that we could \u201cmaximize his harvest of redeemed souls.\u201d In the last post I argued that this is highly problematic from a theological standpoint; in this one, I will argue that it is highly problematic from a textual standpoint.<\/p>\n First of all, in the verses he quotes (28:23-29), there is absolutely no hint that we\u2019re talking about the foundation of the world here. There is no indication of pre-existence or anything that could be construed as such.* Second, it is clear that the farmer is not God. In verse 26, for example, God is teaching the farmer, and in verse 29 the Lord of Hosts is dictating the harvest to the farmer.<\/p>\n Some may say that this is splitting hairs, because the farmer is an agent of God, and divine investiture of authority allows us to equate the two. Fair enough. The real difficulties for Ball\u2019s interpretation, however, come because he has dislocated the parable from its setting in the rest of Isaiah 28. This chapter is clearly not related to any pre-existence. It is an oracle of judgment and destruction given to Ephraim (Samaria) and to Judah (Jerusalem). Ephraim will be \u201churled with force to the ground\u201d and \u201ctrampled underfoot,\u201d and the remnant (Judah), who have made a \u201ccovenant with death,\u201d will smitten by hail and flood: \u201cYour pact with Sheol shall not endure \/ When the sweeping flood passes through \/ You shall be its victims.\u201d These oracles conclude with a threat: \u201cFor the Lord will arise \/ as on the hill of Perazim, \/ he will rouse himself \/ as in the vale of Gibeon, \/ to do his work\u2013 \/ strange is his work! \/ \u2026 \/ Therefore refrain from mockery \/ lest your bonds be tightened. \/ For I have a decree of destruction \/ from my Lord God of Hosts \/ against all the land.\u201d** And the parable immediately follows.<\/p>\n In such a context, the parable appears to be more about the abilities of God to mete out destruction differently to different groups. He causes the farmer to plow, then to plant, allow to grow, and then teaches the farmer exactly how to harvest different types of seeds. Some are threshed, some are beaten with rods. In the context of chapter 28, then, I think this parable plays on the plowing and harvesting as metaphors of violence and destruction. It appears to underscore the different treatments Ephraim and Judah will receive in their own due times.<\/p>\n Some might raise the objection to this, that I myself have<\/a> at times raised<\/a>, that context doesn\u2019t matter. The text has no meaning outside of its readers. We can\u2019t look for original intent. So I can\u2019t accuse Ball of anything because his interpretation is as valid as the next. Well, not so fast. Not all interpretations carry equal weight, especially when Ball began his exegesis with \u201cI believe Isaiah wants us to\u2026\u201d. In this mode, at the very least, his interpretation is deeply flawed.<\/p>\n However, even removing his opener does not salvage the interpretation. Not all interpretations are created equal. As Paul Ricoeur says,<\/p>\n If it is true that there is always more than one way of construing a text, it is not true that all interpretations are equal. \u2026 The text is a limited field of possible constructions. The logic of validation allows us to move between the two limits of dogmatism and skepticism. It is always possible to argue for or against an interpretation, to confront interpretations, to arbitrate between them, and to seek for an agreement, even if this agreement remains beyond our reach. [From Text to Action <\/i>(trans. K. Blamey and J.B. Thompson; Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1991), 160.]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In any case, leaving aside the fact that I\u2019m not sure exactly how his botanical training really changes or affects the understanding of this passage and therefore how illustrative an example it is for his paper, Ball\u2019s is not a good example of scripture mastery. Or maybe it\u2019s a perfect example of Scripture Mastery, as it it known in the Church. As his opening \u201cquiz\u201d showed, Latter-day Saints are proficient at wrenching scripture from its context in order to prooftext or to reinforce some moral or ethical message. We are not alone in this, of course, but we are gravely mistaken when we think that this constitutes mastery, or scriptural knowledge, as Ball calls it.<\/p>\n Ball\u2019s type of interpretation is an imposing obstacle to real scripture mastery. Most of my trouble reading the scriptures growing up, besides the highly problematic<\/a> King James Version<\/a>, came from trying to read the interpretations my church leaders, seminary teachers, and BYU religion instructors taught me back into<\/i> the scriptures. Try, for example, extending the Christ=Immanuel equation beyond verse 14 in Isaiah 7 (try even just v. 15). This is not scripture mastery, and, in my opinion, leads almost inevitably to gross confusion and deep frustration with the scriptures.<\/p>\n Then again, Religious Education is self-admittedly not geared toward helping students to know<\/i> the scriptures in the sense of being able to deal with them responsibly as texts. The departments of Church History and Doctrine and Ancient Scripture are, at least from the administration\u2019s perspective, about proper homiletics, or how to get the scriptures to mean something that will help students to behave properly. In this latter sense, Dean Ball has provided a fitting example.<\/p>\n ___________<\/p>\n * Not surprising, given that very little in the Hebrew Bible can be construed as informing a pre-existence.<\/p>\n ** All translations from the New Jewish Publication Society Version.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This is part II of a post begun a week and a half ago in response to a devotional lecture given by Terry Ball, dean of the BYU college of religious education. That discussion centered on what I argued to be the problematic connection Ball makes between the pre-existence, Isaiah 28, and mortality. This post […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":453,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27,4,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-556","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bible-scripture","category-byu","category-scripture"],"yoast_head":"\n\n