ЁЯз╡2) I have been quite appreciative of the voices I have connected with, especially here on Twitter (@robertjmonson,
@JoLuehmann, etc) that have expanded the space of interpretation I take into consideration when approaching the biblical text.
ЁЯз╡3) While one cannot be wholly objective about a text (Hermeneutics 101), it has helped me develop a stronger empathy for "interpretations from the edge," minority and philosophical interpretations. Admittedly, this also stems from my own baggage with Evangelicalism.
ЁЯз╡4) What I learned from the flavor of Evangelicalism I was exposed to in college has more or less been designed to exclude (read: ignore) other voices because of 1) its deep roots in American Imperialism and 2) its implicit ties to a passive form of white supremacy.
ЁЯз╡5) If you don't believe that, you needn't look much further than the previous presidential administration. Chris Hedges, in his book "American Fascists", connects religious conservatism to fascism, which is "a kind of colonization," according to Rev. Davidson Loehr.
ЁЯз╡6) He goes on to say that, in both fascism and colonization, there is the subtext of assimilation; an erasing of people's stories. For the #neurodivergent community, it means retraining and robbing us of our neurotype, something that is embedded within our neurophysiology.
ЁЯз╡7) This is a different struggle altogether and I want to be clear I am not equating neurotype and ethnicity. They intersect; neurodivergence exists within all sections of the population and does not discriminate.
ЁЯз╡8) That is a long way to say that my experience as a white #autistic person is not the same as someone in the #BIPOC community. When I started asking the question, "How would someone from X background understand this?" my world became even larger.
ЁЯз╡9) I can't say I've abandoned the standard historical/literary hermeneutic I cut my teeth on because I see it as a basis for all interpretation. To evade the question of original meaning is to commit anachronism, ethnocentrism, and myriad other sins of interpretation.
ЁЯз╡10) However, with that base of interpretation, I can then approach, though asymptotically, the interpretations of others of different ethnic backgrounds, genders, sexuality, political affiliation, etc. There's a world of interpretation out there.
ЁЯз╡11) At this point, I can't say I've mastered this. However, it has brought to the fore some new and exciting ways to approach the text. It's strange, it's new, and it's uncomfortable at times. But being Autistic in a neurotypical world means I am uncomfortable most of the time.
ЁЯз╡12) When you make it a practice of de-centering your faith as I have, you can more easily accept the discomfort of (Derridean) de-construction (This word is used a lot and I don't know if this is what is being referenced, so I'm being explicit for that reason).
ЁЯз╡13) Derrida never eschewed an original meaning of the text, which is how he's often characterized (and demonized) by his critics. Even if he did, that does not dismiss the value of identifying the possibility of knowing a text extremely well in its context.
ЁЯз╡14) Once I allowed myself the freedom to identify the systems of power in a text, identifying dichotomies, I found myself progressing into other interpretations beyond my admittedly limited scope. It has been a fascinating journey and I hope it continues
ЁЯз╡15) P.S. Feel free to challenge, elaborate, or comment on what I've written. I openly admit to theory of mind issues, so if I've mischaracterized others or was not clear about something, I gladly accept criticism. This was all very stream-of-consciousness. I love you all madly.
