“Five words with my understanding” (I Corinthians 14:19).

The Value of Language

in Biblical Exegesis and in Liturgical Experience, as a Means of Knowing God

Dr. Dan Sandu PhD, Assistant Professor

Faculty of Orthodox Theology, Iasi, Romania

“The true power and authority, primacy and sovereignty

of God do not consist of syllables” (Gregory of Nyssa:
Contra Eunomium II, 291)

Luke and Cleopas, the first biblical-liturgical experience

The meeting of the travelling disciples with the unknown Christ on the road to
Emmaus is a defining event in the emergence of the teaching about the work of Christ in the
world, after the resurrection, and about the means of knowing God in Christianity. One of the
eleven evangelical readings read at Vespers of Sundays, the text is enlightening as to the
“understanding” of divine realities by a novice person. Initially, the discursive thinking of
Luke and Cleopas could not comprehend the meaning of the historical event. The two
disciples were consumed by an inner conflict between their expectations about the Teacher
who had just been buried and the unfolding of historical events. With each passing day, they
believed that Jesus’ promise about the restoration of the kingdom of Israel would not be
fulfilled. Subsequently, they recognise in the words of the Unknown what had been said in
“words” by the prophets. Jesus, undiscovered, could be viewed as any missionary, any
ordinary person. This knowledge by means of explanation of events remained though at the
superficial level of interpretation. It was nonetheless a step forward, yet the “Interpreter”
remained foreign to the two. We may conclude from this that understanding marks the
beginning of communion: “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over”
(Luke 24: 29). Yet there was still an incomprehensible feeling: “Were not our hearts burning
within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?” (Luke 24: 32).
The disciples were able to fully understand only when their “guest” took bread, gave
thanks, broke it and gave it to the disciples, that is, when the biblical language, which He had
used before, was objectified in Liturgy. This kind of knowledge radically changed their value
system, gave them courage and the enthusiasm to proclaim the resurrection, so they
immediately left for Jerusalem, ignoring fatigue and the dangers of darkness.
 We observe here a few key terms, essential to the process of knowledge 1 through
experience: the word of the prophets, Christ-the Word Incarnate and the liturgical word or
celebrated through fellowship. Christ the Word or the Logos is the subject of prophetic words
before and after this2, what we call supranatural revelation. Christianity is based on revelation,
the form of expression of the rationality and personalism of the Creator and the revelation is
sealed by the resurrection. Following the example of the disciples, the Church embraces the
teaching of Christ and preserves it in the form of universal unchangeable rules, founded on
the Scripture, the repository of this treasure.
The biblical account of the event leaves not place for allegorical interpretation. The
text conveys clearly the dogmatic teaching that Christ was resurrected and was seen.
Resurrection changed the attitude and life of the two; not only because they recognised Him,
but mostly because they experienced Him as they partook of the bread. The case of disciples
Luke and Cleopas is not unique. Saul had the same experience on the road to Damascus and
he went on to put into practice, in a manner applicable for ages that were to come, the entire
Christian teaching about the Resurrection: “If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not
even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so
is your faith. [...] For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if
Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.” (I Corinthians 15:
13-14 and 16-17).

The impact of biblical language on knowledge

The authority of the biblical language does not rest only on the use of discursive
principles of speech, but rather it means that the logical principles of the content of the
language are based on God’s authority. God’s logic is that which rational people use to speak
about Him. In the Bible, at the forefront is the message about independent religious realities,
expressed in concepts. During the short span of the journey to Emmaus, Jesus transmits by
concepts a supra-logical content that changes the logic of the two disciples. Language serves
only as a temporal communication tool, which can become outdated, however the concepts
retain over time their trans-logical content.

1
It is the same kind of knowledge that is referred to in the message of the Primates of the Orthodox Churches
declaring the year 2008 as the year of Saint Paul, in Istanbul: „With regard to the issue of the relationship of
Christian faith to the natural sciences, the Orthodox Church has avoided pursuing ownership of developing
scientific research and assuming a position on every scientific question. From the Orthodox viewpoint, freedom
of research constitutes a God-given gift to humanity. While affirming this however, at the same time Orthodoxy
underscores the dangers concealed in certain scientific achievements, the limits of scientific knowledge, and the
existence of another “knowledge” that does not immediately fall with the scope of science. This other
“knowledge” proves in many ways to be necessary for establishing the proper boundaries of freedom, and
utilizing the fruits of science by the restraint of egocentrism and respect for the value of the human person”.
Quoted in Viaţa Cultelor, XVI, issues 767-768, 31 October 2008, p. 41.
2
For an analysis of the terms used to address the Christ, i.e. as the Son of God, Son of Man, Jesus Christ, the
Only Begotten Son and others, see Berard Marthaler, The Creed. The Apostolic Faith in Contemporary Theology
(Mystic: Twenty Third Publications, 1993), 73-82. It is also worth recalling St. Paul’s statement in the Book of
Hebrews, 1: 1-3: “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various
ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through
whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his
being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the
right hand of the Majesty in heaven”.

2
 How does language help man to develop concepts? Words are carriers of independent
meanings, which the mind associates to develop information or thoughts about palpable
reality. Communication through language is possible as long as people share common
realities. Man is a rational being, in keeping with the rationality of the Creator. On the
superior plane, language expresses thoughts and becomes logical, provided that it expresses
logical thoughts. Even though, as dogmatic teachings state, following the fall into sin man’s
mind was darkened, man did not lose his capacity to know. Rationality became muddled, to a
greater or lesser extent, yet this does not mean that it cannot ascend to the elevated expression
of divine realities, by means of analogy.
Words express the state of things, attributes and works of divinity, but in no way the
person of God. Terms render the reality perceived here and now. For instance, a child thinks
in concrete terms until the age of 10 to 12 years. Language for him means images, feelings,
people that he is connected with emotionally, which he objectifies and keeps in his mind all
his life, even after his mind becomes conceptual and abstract. Language reflects realities that
correspond to definitions “objectified” in the human mind initially. After the young age, the
perceived realities are becoming more symbolic and language more abstract.
Due to the content of revelation, empirical language cannot fully convey the teachings
of the faith, as it is limited to expressing realities or scientifically verifiable experiences.
When terms such as “Trinity”, “salvation” or “theology” are used, language no longer acts as
a set of concepts about tangible reality, but rather such terms carry meaning by themselves.
The sentence has value not owing to the “realities” it describes, but rather to the message
shared with the sensitive, eminently spiritual structure of man. More precisely, when we say
“book”, the term leads to an immediate mental objectification, while “the Bible in Greek”
involves a higher representation of a complex reality, not merely a concept. For example, the
term “birth”, from the theological standpoint, does not carry any reference to the biological
phenomenon of bringing baby to life, rather it expresses the relationship that the Son has with
the Father: that one presupposes the other, as the begetter shares in the understanding of the
existence of the begotten.3
Thus the beginnings of theology involve a natural approach, wherein the truth
expressed coincides with the language used, which is sufficiently precise to reflect general
things. The theological output is the fruit of the human mind, it reflects what man can say
about God and His works in the world. This explains the many disputes around certain terms
intended to convey transcendent reality as truthfully as possible. 4 True theology is the
response of man as a person to God’s self-revelation. That is why theology means change,
inner experience, devotion to prayer and full confidence in the One whom man answers to,
because, by his own powers, man cannot understand, examine or express anything that God
is, unless revealed by God Himself.
Man constructs language, yet the latter too shapes man and provides him with
transformative concepts. Values are transmitted through language, written or spoken,
therefore how language is used is crucial. In the area of biblical hermeneutics and liturgical
poetic expressions language becomes a tool that communicates feelings about God, as
3
Stylianos G. Papadopoulos, Teologie și limbă. Teologie experimentală, limbă convenţională, (Craiova: Editura
Mitropoliei Olteniei, 2007), 42.
4
Specifically, the disputes during the ecumenical synods around concepts such as “being”, “hyposthasis”,
“consubstantiality”, “theotokia”, “natures”, “substance”, etc.

3
personal reality, author and reader. In everyday religious and poetic use, language is not based
on positive arguments. The language about God is analogical because it refers to realities that
transcend any concrete description. For example, anthropomorphic image help to express and
understand certain truths about God, but cannot describe His ultimate reality. This does not
mean, however, that religious language is mythological, as claimed by the propagandists of
dialectic materialism. Religious language is an instrument that has captured and rendered the
deepest reflections on the human being and on the relationship with others and with God.
Language holds a distinct role and place in the religious sphere, yet there is a tendency
to use words in so many ways and with so many meanings that they remain without sense or
the meaning becomes vague. For example, the Creed or the Symbol of faith of Nicaea and
Constantinople, which was essential for the Christian doctrine and the life of early Christians,
while it is an unimportant text for modern man, due to indifference or misinterpretation?
Language can also become the medium where dogmatics risks retreating, in an arid space of
metaphysical, philosophical and even gnostic considerations, as it seeks to be interesting
through the rigors of the rationalisation of dogma and the arguments of dogmatic assertions.
Biblical language, with special reference to the Scripture, is nowadays exposed to
desacralisation and counterfeiting. The Scripture is no longer heard “on bended knees” since
it can can be downloaded, read, personalised and commented on the Internet, and a variety of
translations are now available5. Such “freedom” of speech is stoked by not having to take
responsibility for what one has said or posted on a virtual network. The language of the Bible
thus undergoes a metamorphosis that causes concern to specialists, because Internet users
continues to “adjust” it, to make it accessible through new conventions of writing. Whereas it
took months to write a classical text by hand, modern man writes text directly on the
computer, instantaneously exchanging with peers online at the same time. This leads to a
depreciation of the text, the absence of the emotional bond between author and text, as the
latter is made to be sold, changed or counterfeited. Text becomes functional and “discipline”
in writing is lacking, as spelling and punctuation rules become superfluous in cyberspace6.

The eternal word in the words of the Scripture

If the Holy Scriptures are the actual revelation of Christ the Logos, then the language
of dogmatics must be essentially biblical and essential arguments must be derived mainly
from Scriptures, coherently and contextually, not randomly 7, or at the least through the
interpretations given by the Church Fathers. Revelation is God’s expression to people through
content and action, but does not involve the means through which He is revealed. Concern for
avoiding arid language, non-biblical and repetitive formulas, the care to make theological
message accessible is visible in the writings of Father Stăniloae, who has been celebrated as a
genuine interpreter of patristic writings for the modern times. His aim was for dogmatic
content to overcome the “time barrier, that of language and of mentality” 8, without however
circumventing the content and its importance for the individual’s spiritual life. Father
Stăniloae’s book Spirituality and Communion in the Orthodox Liturgy launched a new

5
www.theonote.ro, www.emystic.ro.
6
Mirel Bănică, “Locul celuilalt”. Ortodoxia în modernitate (Bucharest: Paideia, 2007), 122-124.
7
Cf. the paper by Fr. Ștefan Buchiu, Exigențele actuale ale Teologiei Dogmatice Ortodoxe, în vol Teologia
Dogmatică Ortodoxă la începutul celui de-al III-lea mileniu (Arad: Centrul de Studii Teologico-Istorice și de
Prognoză Pastoral Misionară al Facultății de Teologie Ortodoxă din Arad, 2006), 106 ff.

4
approach to theological discourse, based on the relationship between dogma and worship. The
new direction was adopted and developed in the theological works of his disciples and,
equally, of heterodox theologians around the world9. The history of dogma shows that they
were formulated out of the actual need of the Church to confess the true faith. This
emphasises the importance of understanding and living the dogmas in Christian life, as they
make relevant and necessary theological contents, regardless at which level they are taught, as
well as the sermon of a priest or even the individual practice of prayer.
Biblical dogmatics must also be supported by hermeneutics, which must dwell on the
importance to text content and not be confined to literary, linguistic and historical elements. 10
In his writings, St. John Chrysostom argued that the understanding of Scripture is not about
“human intellect”11, meaning that, beyond human wisdom, there is the person, i.e. the person
of God and the human, receptive person. Indeed, the Bible is essentially the history of the
salvation of persons. It uses language so that the Logos should be known not only to the
community as a mass of people, but to every person is able to experience personally and
profoundly the work of God. This concern for the impact of language on the human person,
regardless of gender, social class or public office has led to an inclusive language 12, glorified
by some and rejected and blamed by others.
The text of the Scripture represents the revelation of God’s love to the world, which is
why Orthodoxy from the beginning referreed to the “Word” as person. The Scripture can be
seen as a sequence of commands, laws, teachings given to men by an outside authority and as
as an account of the time, facts and signs of historical Jesus. The Word or the Logos, beyond
language, means the joy of returning to the original divine universe. This can be expressed in
various ways, verbal or non-verbal or experiential (Transfiguration). The language of the
Gospel is not complex, but neither folkish, has no accents of philosophical elevation, yet, at
the same time, it is the expression of the high thinking of persons inspired by the Holy Spirit.
The Gospel carries a spiritual message that can also be expressed through silence. Its
language is the key for the human person to first understand oneself, to reveal onself to the
others and to grow. Language, using terms specific to an era, can express truths that are not of
that era. The example of the unawareness and then knowledge of the disciples Luke and
Cleopas, shows that knowledge of the uncreated realities cannot be attained by using words
alone; rather, one is enlightened if one partakes of the Word. Words can say what God or the
kingdom of God are not, they help to avoid misinterpretation and confusion, but cannot fully
clarify that which is not a created reality. As St. John of Damascus argued: “It is necessary,
8
Fr. Prof. Ştefan Buchiu, op. cit., 109. In the preface to the book Iisus Hristos sau restaurarea omului
(Bucureşti, Omniscop, 1993) 8, Fr. Stăniloae argued: “Any text that aims to express the significance of Jesus
Christ for the world must be fresh, topical, speaking to any era in its language, while it must also preserve the
connection with the tradition of the Church, so that the readers can recognise in it Jesus Christ whom the Church
confesses always in its teaching and worship”.
9
Two of his major disciples are His Beatitude Daniel, the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, whose
works dwell on the close relationship between theology/spirituality/liturgy and Professor Dumitru Popescu, who
expands the focus to the dialogue of theology with science.
10
Fr. Prof. Ion Bria, Tratat de Teologie Dogmatică și Ecumenică (Bucharest: Romania Creştină, 1999), 54.
11
St. John Chrystostom, Omilii la Facere, 21, 1, PG 53, 173, in Stilianou G. Papadopoulou, op.cit., p. 79 – 80.
12
One example is the Romanian text of the Sunday sermon during Liturgy. In the past the form of address
referred to the male faithful (“credincioşilor”), while today it acknowledges male and female faithful
(“credincioşi și credincioase”). The same phenomenon has been observed by the faithful with respect to the
exclusively masculine designation of penitent (“robul”) in repentance prayers.

5
therefore, that one who wishes to speak or to hear of God should understand clearly that alike
in the doctrine of Deity and in that of the Incarnation , neither are all things unutterable nor all
utterable; neither all unknowable nor all knowable... any of the things relating to God,
therefore, that are dimly understood cannot be put into fitting terms, but on things above us
we cannot do else than express ourselves according to our limited capacity” 13.
Biblical word in the text of liturgy
Studying the sacred word is a continuous process of internal discipline for theologian
seeking to think and experience contemporary reality in the biblical spirit. From the
beginning, the study of the text was a shared concern for religious people who aimed to
decipher and understand the divine message in order to share it to many others, being able to
overcome differences easier, by staying faithful to the same authority: the Bible. History has
proven that the proper study and understanding of the divine word has contributed many times
to solving local and global issues.
As the only assurance of the unity in being of humanity, Scripture emerged as
indispensable for proclaiming the universal message of Christ, in parallel with the
development of Christian worship. The combination of the Bible with the liturgy led to
dogmatic formulations, where neither the biblical text, nor hymnography expressed any
explicit truth. Any intellectual approach based on only one of the two sources lead inevitably
to heresy, which is especially valid today, in the context of free market mentality in the
religious sphere. “The veneration of the Scriptures is the fundamental element that unites
Christians ... All that the members of Churches and the Christian communities can do is to
read the word of God and to do this together, whenever possible, because it reinforces the
bond of unity”14.
The biblical text is to be read by being honoured and honoured by reading. This
association of the Bible and liturgy enables Christian moral and Christian dogmatics that are
properly understood and transformative. Otherwise, reading the text without honouring it
leads to pietism devoid of substance, while reading the text without honouring it descends
into dry intellectualism. The most serious issues in the interpretation of the Gospel according
to the honouring-reading framework occurred 16th century, during the Reformation. The key
point of controversy was not in the least the content of Scripture, but rather the manner of
reading and honouring it. The bone of contention and the reason for controversy was the
application of Scripture to the community of the faithful. Theological dialogues are based on
Scripture, but how they are interpreted can create problems of dogma and faith.
The Holy Scripture is a text addressed primarily to the faithful soul. There are cases
where it has radically changed persons’ hearts and lives. The Sola Scriptura principle
affirmed and respected by the reformers cannot be applied to modern man who enjoys a large
and diverse quantity of visual information. 15 He builds his own universe and seeks liberation
from any dogmatic constraint, by relying on certainties, sensitivity and defining the limits of
what can be believed. Yet through its specific cultural environment, Scripture can attract not

13
St. John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book I, chapter II, Nicene and Post-Nicene
Fathers: Second Series. Cosimo, Inc., 2007, XXIV, p. 1.
14
Cf. the entry on the Bible, in Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement (Geneva: WCC Publications, 2002),
108.
15
Indeed, one must choose an “icon” to open the digital version of the biblical text.

6
only the faithful but also the non-believer 16. When reading the sacred text, modern man wants
to be free to accept or ignore the element of inspiration and, implicitly, revelation. The
community of faith or the cultural principles themselves cannot intervene to determine his
understanding and acceptance of the revealed message. Only a believer will accept that the
text presents the word of God, which he confesses and expresses in his own life, experiencing
intensely its content.
For the non-believing man, the Bible is a text that may or may not respond to
existential questions of a spiritual nature. It cannot be and is not meant to be used, as was
attempted for compromising purposes by atheistic regimes, as a treatise on biology,
astronomy, history or other scientific fields.
The sacred meaning of the biblical text, therefore, is constructed by the author, the
translator and the reader, who all work under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The three
parties give meaning to the text through language. To the faithful reader, the Old Testament
bears in itself the seeds of the Christian theology of the New Testament, thus remaining valid
even after the coming of Christ. For example, the “Spirit of God” of the Old Testament would
not be understood in the traditional Hebrew sense, but in a Christian sense, although the Spirit
appears as a person only in the New Testament. The righteous and terrifying God, whose
name the Hebrew may not pronounce, is understood by the Christian reader in the light of the
Incarnation of Christ from the Trinity. In Trinity God is “Lord”, who reveals the Trinitarian
plan to the world giving man access to knowledge through faith. Therefore, the reading of the
Old Testament in light of the New Testament is inevitable in Christian theology.
Nowadays, the essential problem of the biblical text is the way in the mind and soul of
modern man perceives it. Scripture can be read in different ways: reading out of curiosity of
man, reading by the faithful person, monastic reading, independent reading, shared reading,
academic reading or reading in the religious community. Regardless of how it is performed, it
is imperative not to obstruct the access of Christian lay persons to biblical reading; instead,
one must encourage it by all appropriate means, including computer technology, with all its
drawbacks mentioned above. This is because the text of Scripture is a permanent invitation to
dialogue. Its language, according to Mikhail Bakhtin, is “essentially a dialogue” as are the
teachings of Jesus. “It is a dialogue between believers and nonbelievers, between the sinner
and the righteous, between poor and rich, between the disciples and the Pharisees, between
the apostles and the nations.” 17 Monologue closes the text; text leaves dialogue open for any
other reading and type of understanding. Dialogic reading exceeds the denominational space.
It has a unique purpose, to make the original message known in a linguistic form accessible to
the recipient. For these purposes, it observes two fundamental requirements, linguistic and
theological, and reflects the communicative event: “what” the author “wants” to convey,
“who” spreads the message and “for whom” it is written. 18

16
Readers generally do not have access to the original languages of Scripture. While in the Italian language the
pun “traduttore-traditore” (translator-traitor) has been used to refer to the translator’s role in communicating a
text, for the biblical text we regard as welcome the formula proposed by Jacques Nieuviarts, “traduzione-
tradizione” (translation-tradition), implying that genuine translation can only be achieved in the spirit of
tradition.
17
Mihail Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoievski’s Poetics, in Caryl Emerson (ed. and transl.), Theory and
History of Literature (Mineapolis: University of Mineapolis Press, 1984), 135.

7
 The biblical text – the beginning of prayer
The first way of expressing God’s Word after Christ’s ascension was the breaking of
the bread (Acts 2: 41-42). As it is passed on the Church Tradition, Scripture cannot be
separated from Tradition and from the community. Tradition is the principle of faithfulness in
the transmission of the Word, the living witness of faith in scripture, yet it is not a source of
doctrine. The dogmatic principle of the indissoluble relationship between Tradition and
Scripture draws on the ‘given’ of the Bible and on the personal human experience. Through
Tradition, the biblical language bears fruit in the community. The two repositories of
revelation, Scripture and Tradition, are not two different messages, but the same text,
presented complementary. St. Paul is explicit as regards its content and form of expression:
“Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are
saying? You will just be speaking into the air. Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in
the world, yet none of them is without meaning. If then I do not grasp the meaning of what
someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me. So it
is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the
church. For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret
what they say” (I Corinthians 14: 9-13).
Paul challenges us to examine the principles of the relationship between the liturgical
and biblical language. First, the liturgical language is overwhelmingly biblical and the content
of Liturgy is exclusively biblical; the biblical language of Liturgy helped prevent a folk,
ritualistic or predominantly cultural development; the renewal of liturgical language entails a
renewal of the language of Scripture, which must be accessible through prayer, not only
through Bible study or homiletics. In the Liturgy, the Bible is present both through the spoken
word and the reliving of the mystical work of the Word of God for the sake of salvation. By
applying them in real life, the words of prayer accompanied by meditation and sacrament
have a transformational effect.
Liturgical language preserves the dialogical structure of the Scripture, through the
dialogue between believers and God, between the community and the officiating priest. In the
liturgical life, one proclaims that Jesus Christ, who was crucified, resurrected and ascended to
heaven, is the unchanged message and content of all Scripture and Liturgy: “but we preach
Christ crucified [...] Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (I Corinthians 1: 23-
24).

Romanian Orthodoxy has the chance to use the vernacular language in all its
evangelical activities, so that the Word can be understood, as the Apostle of the Gentiles
expected: “But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others
than ten thousand words in a tongue” (I Corinthians 14: 19). The conclusion of this section is
that no other text can prevail over the biblical text and that in the process of appropriate
reading or experience one must start from the statements of Scripture, then identify the ways
in which they develop into doctrinal formulas, liturgical developments or moral requirements
for modern man.

18
Carlo Buzzetti e Carlo Ghidelli, “Una traductione biblica italiana nell’ecumenismo”, in Salesianum, LXVI, nr.
1/2004, 55.

8
 Bible translation in the post-modern context

Translation aims to deliver the most adequate interpretation of the content of God’s
word in different contexts and cultures. It is a dynamic process, in keeping with the evolution
of languages and the discovery of new manuscripts. As to its form, translation must adapt to
most diverse situations, taking into account the phenomenon of “inculturation”. “Translating
means both adopting and creating, dying and being reborn, saving the essentials during the
shipwreck, in order to set foot on the solid ground. There lie the adventure and the risk of
translation: at once a succession of unanswered decisions which constitute its strength and
weakness”19.
Translation can lead to the loss of the holiness of the text. In the Talmudic conception
“One who translates a text literally is a fraud; one who adds something, it is sacrilegious” 20.
Translating the Word must be conducted not only with the mind but with the heart too, as part
of an “ontological reading” process. This is because every text subject to interpretation, the
word of God too, as it is transmitted from one culture and mentality to another, from an
austere language, that specialists call a dead language, to a modern language. However, the
tendency to translate as much as possible into secular language can lead to the sacred text
being assimilated with other texts in the same style, diluting its contents by adapting them to
the modern context, at the risk of turning the Bible into a book of philology. The general
tendency is to abbreviate, to transmit information in concentrated form to the detriment of
beauty, sensitivity and nuances that give a certain sense to the content.
Post-modernism, as a reaction to the modern, is more conspicuous in the humanities,
social sciences and has begun to play an important role in theology.21 Modern interpreters
have been striving to discover the meaning of the text by analysing the ideas of the author,
intentions, target, historical context, date and place of writing (fundamental for
interpretation), sources and events that prompted the writing (including through scientific
means, with supranatural causes being generally eliminated a priori by Protestant exegesis).
On the other hand, post-modernism applies methods such as distinguishing between
diachronic and synchronic (i.e. historical understanding of derivates of words and the
relationships between words that determine a certain composition). The return to the
“sources” in modern criticism is opposed in postmodernism by independent textual analysis.
Post-modernism grants autonomy to the text which, once published, can acquire any other
meaning than that intended by the author, as the source, motivation, historical context and

19
C. Rico, “La linguistique peut-elle définir l’acte de traduction?”, in J.M. Poffet (éd.), L’autorité de l’Ecriture
(Paris, Ed. du Cerf, 2002) 221-222.
20
Quoted in H. Cousin, “Les textes messianique de la Septante ont-ils aidé l’exégése apostolique? Ont-ils étè
récusé par le sages?”, in D. Marguerat (éd), Le Déchirement: Juifs et chrétiens au premier siècle, Genève, Labor
et Fides, 1996, p. 205.
21
Postmodernism, which follows in the footsteps of the modernism instituted by the Enlightenment, has gained
ground in the cultural and intellectual area. Characteristic of post-modernism is the rejection of the notion of
“objective truth”, of the role of reason and of the claims to universality of any kind of truth. Everything therefore
is subjective. Texts or symbols are accepted according to a particular understanding of truth, dependent on each
individual or on the community. The chief claim of postmodern theology is that it is rebuilding Christian
symbols, by granting them meaning based on the search for the holistic, in which any claim of universality is
rejected. Cf. Donald K. McKim, Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms (Louisville: Westminster John
Knox Press, 1996), 214.

9
purpose of the author are no longer relevant. The world and the factors that generated the text
are no longer important. What matters is the capacity of the text to meet the reader’s
expectations and concerns, now and here, and the culture or lack of culture specific to the
moment. Present and future meanings of the text are not mere repetitions from the past; they
are generated by the potentiality of the autonomous text to lead to other interpretations than
past ones, simply because of the context and the reader. Texts are therefore endlessly
plurivocal.22
The reader comes into contact with the author not through the social, historical and
cultural context, but through the text. The texts, it is alleged by post-modernists, should no
longer reflect social reality, but rather create new realities. A disconcerting aspect of post-
modernism is that it creates a gap between the word and the world. Post-modern critique
speaks of a metaphorical essence, eliminating any literal interpretation. In other words, in
post-modern criticism, the text and the reader replace or ignore the author. The future of the
text is more consequential than the context in which it was written and the meaning is subject
to endless interpretation.
 The new approach to biblical texts raises questions that ought to be answered: what is
the difference between history and fiction? Where does the truth lie? What are the criteria for
a valid interpretation and a false one? Post-modern criticism “plays” on the text, manipulates
ideas and offers the reader an imaginary autonomy so that he becomes a “creator of
meanings”, going as far as ignoring the presence of God in the revealed text. To a certain
extent, this is a transposition of the consumerist society model, of the supermarket mentality,
where one chooses off the theological or biblical shelf or creates whatever one pleases.23

Conclusion
The present paper does not seek to provide answers, but rather to challenge, to
question, to invite reflection and responsible action. Direct or indirect questions give rise to
others, to which biblical exegesis will need to respond sooner or later, and this in a spirit of
Christian fellowship: What are the milestones that the Bible provides for the relations and
communication with other religions? To what extent can one accept the inculturation of the
Bible? How can Christians live “by the Scripture” when certain elements contradict
denominational interpretation? What are the ways to eliminate “biblical illiteracy”, a growing
phenomenon among Christians, even among intellectuals?
Although progress is being made along the way to mutual knowledge among the
Churches, through the ecumenical movement, biblical theology is still directed towards
supporting ecclesial identity. Therefore, the long expected unity is difficult to achieve. It is
therefore fundamental to believe that unity can be discovered when we achieve a shared
vision of the Word of God itself as God’s gift to the world. Even in the most optimistic spirit
of Christian living, one recognises that nowadays, God’s Word, in content and experience, is
going through a difficult time. The indifference of modern man and the failure of mission to
spread faith in the Word, the alienating search for anything new, according to precepts distant
from tradition and the personal triune God, give little hope for the future. Catechesis plans are
imagined and modern ways of transmitting the Scripture are devised, yet the problem remains

22
Frances Young, “Augustine Hermeneutics and Postmodern Criticism”, in Interpretation, January 2004, 43-44.
23
Frances Young, op. cit., 45

10
essentially the same: God’s word is increasingly less relevant amid the globalising wave of
the secular society.

God’s people, “the little flock” (Luke 12: 32) finds increasingly difficult the words and
tone needed to proclaim the Word, because words change, they lose their meaning and
weight. The Word of Truth remains the same. When the apostles did not catch anything all
night, Jesus advised them to take the boat into the “deep” and it was there that they caught a
lot of fish. This is His urging: to seek values in depth, in the spirit of authenticity and of a
sincere change of heart. When God demands the impossible, He sends the means by which
one can accomplish it and that is why we must trust in Him. He suggests to mankind to live
by the Gospel and to be His chosen people. Of course, the word is in the hand of God: people
only need to make it shine and bear fruit.

Selected bibliography
(1988), L’Ancien Testament dans l’Eglise, Etudes theologiques de Chambessy, Centre Orthodoxe,
Chambessy –Geneva.
Andreicuţ, Arhiepiscop Andrei (coord.), Omagiu Părintelui Academician Dumitru Popescu,
Reîntregirea, Alba Iulia, 2005.
Bănică Mirel (2007), “Locul celuilalt”. Ortodoxia în modernitate, Paideia, Bucureşti, 2007.
Breck, John, (2005), Cum citim Sfânta Scriptură? Despre structura limbajului biblic, traducre de
Ioana Tămăian, Reîntregirea, Alba Iulia.
Cullmann, Oscar (et al.), (1967), La Bible et le dialogue oecumenique, traduit par René Virrion,
Mulhouse, Editions Salvador.
Flesseman – van Leer, Elen (ed.), (1980), The Bible: Its Authority and Interpretation in the
Ecumenical Movement, Faith and Order Paper 99, Geneva, World Council of Churches.
Hedegaard, David (1954), Ecumenism and the Bible, International Council of Christian Churches,
Amsterdam.
Jones, Douglas Rawlinson (1965), Instruments of Peace: Biblical Principles of Christian Unity,
Hodder and Stoughton, London.
McKim, K. Donald (1988), Theological Turning Points, John Knox Press, Atlanta.
Papadopoulou, G. Stilianou (2007), Teologie şi limbă. Teologie experimentală, limbă convenţională,
traducere de Pr. Prof. Dr. Constantin Băjău, Editura Mitropoliei Olteniei, Craiova.
Popescu, Dumitru şi Costache Doru (1997), Introducere în Dogmatica Ortodoxă, Libra, Bucureşti.
Popescu, Pr. Prof. Dr. Dumitru (coord.), (2001), Ştiinţă şi Teologie, XXI: Eonul dogmatic, Bucureşti.
Segretario Activita Ecumeniche (ed.), (1972), La Parola di Dio e l’ecumenismo, Editrice A.V.E.,
Roma.
Tavard, G. (1996), „The Bible in Ecumenism”, în rev. One in Christ, 32, nr. 4.
Tsetsis, G (ed.), (1983), „The role and the Place of the Bible in the Liturgical and Spiritual Life of the
Orthodox Church”, în Orthodox Thought, WCC Publications, Geneva.
Tulcan, Pr. Conf. Dr. Ioan şi Ioja Cristinel (coord.), (2006), Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă la
începutul celui de al III-lea mileniu, Centrul de Studii Teologice-Istorice şi de Prognoză Pastoral-
Misionară al Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă din Arad, Arad.
Weber, H.R. (1983), The Book that Reads Me: A Handbook for Bible Study, WCC Press, Geneva.
A treasure in the Earthen Vessels, WCC Press, Geneva, 1999.

11