Craig

Thanks Gengwall for your “little rant” @84. I can understand that there are dangers, but I don’t think this approach needs to go where you are warning against.
Let me give an example. Say you have a friend who believes we should wash each other’s feet, because Jesus told us to. Each time you go to his place, he insists on washing your feet, out of obedience to Jesus’ command.
You may actually agree with your friend that Jesus was giving his disciples a command to wash each other’s feet. But you may have reasons for believing that although it was an appropriate command for the culture at the time, it is not applicable in exactly the same way today. You may believe that the universal principle behind this command was to do with servanthood and love, and that there are more appropriate ways of expressing this today. You may believe that your friend washing your feet actually has the reverse effect to what Jesus intended by this command.
Does this mean Jesus was leading his disciples astray, or that Jesus is untrustworthy? Does it mean the scriptures are not inspired? Does that mean you are on a slippery slope? Does it mean that Jesus’ command is worthless for us today?
Could it not mean that that Jesus command was a very appropriate command for the cultural situation and a wonderful example of servanthood and love? The principle of servanthood is universal but the specific application of it regarding foot washing would only apply to us today if we all still walked around on dusty roads with bare feet or sandals.
If you agree with me, then you could use this “hermeneutical” argument in debating with your friend about the need for foot washing today. You would not need to use an “exegetical” argument, trying to convince your friend that Jesus really wasn’t saying that the disciples should wash each other’s feet. And you would not be a “liberal” even though you may not be obeying the “plain reading” of Jesus’ command.
I think this is the way Webb sees patriarchy. There may well be some problems with his approach, but I don’t think it can simply be dismissed because of the dangers of liberalism.