Discussion (Module 1) Case Study The "Monday Musings" Bible study group meets each Monday at the Higher Grounds Coffee Shop for prayer, fellowship, and Bible study. The participants fluctuate from week to week, but Daniel, William, Phyllis, Sharon, and you comprise the core of the group. Each week one of the group takes the lead in Bible study, presenting the fruits of their study and leading the ensuing discussion. This week, Daniel is leading the discussion on a passage from the Letters to the Seven Churches in the Book of Revelation. The passage is the message of the Son of Man to the church of Laodicea where he tells the church that because they are "neither cold nor hot, but lukewarm," he will spit them out of his mouth. Daniel, warming to the passage, makes his pitch, "What this passage says to me is that lukewarm believers make God sick! If we're not going to be on fire for God, then let's at least not be lukewarm! God would rather we be cold-as-ice pagans than warmed-over, lukewarm Christians." Sharon interrupts: "Uh, Daniel, with all due respect, I don't think that was the point the writer was making. I did some digging in the commentaries this week on this passage and discovered that when John wrote this passage, Laodicea was one of three sister cities in the Lycus River Valley, Colossae and Hierapolis being the other two. The information I read indicated that there was a rivalry among the three cities for preeminence, each trying to exploit their natural resources to their advantage. Hierapolis was known for its hot springs which were believed to have great healing powers. People would come from everywhere to bathe in their hot springs. Colossae was known for its cold, fresh spring water, making it also a destination for travelers and tourists. But poor Laodicea had neither hot baths nor cold springs, and so they were missing out. Not to be outdone, Laodicea came up with the idea of building an aqueduct to channel the hot water from Hierapolis down to Laodicea so that they too could have hot, healing baths. But by the time the hot spring water made it down to Laodicea, a few miles away, it had cooled to the point that it was merely lukewarm, fit neither for bathing nor drinking. Your interpretation assumes that in the passage 'cold equals bad' and 'hot equals good,' but what if they don't? As the commentaries make clear, in the original context of the passage both 'cold' and 'hot' were good things. John, it appears, was not associating cold with paganism and hot with Christianity, as you assume, and I don't think John's point was that God prefers sold-out pagans to lukewarm Christians." Daniel: "Well, Sharon, that was interesting, but that was then, and this is now. Does it really matter what John meant? This is what I get from this passage, and if it makes sense to me, isn't that all that matters? Who's to say that my interpretation is wrong just because it wasn't what the original writer intended?" The conversation moves around the table with each one expressing their point of view on whether the intended meaning of the original biblical writer matters in interpreting Scripture. Finally, they come to you, "So, what do you think?"

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In interpreting Scripture understanding the intended meaning of the original biblical writer is cruc... View the full answer