I understand this is the sort of think which upsets you, but let me explain. Context is part of hermeneutical analysis. A person can consider the context of a text without engaging in various iterations of interpretive lenses or ideology. For example, I can discuss the context of Shakespeare naming a character Hamlet by observing Shakespeare's only son recently died--named Hamnet. That provides context without the more substantial considerations of Aesthetic or Feminist interpretation. The point of this thread is not to consider interpretive practices and trends within the religious community, but to later focus in on the question, Is it Okay to ignore parts of the Bible. That question requires a simple yes or no answer, but it would also be nice to explain why.
Ok. I get what you're saying, but as one who has studied basic, essential literary contexts of classic texts even back in high school---and being that I have a Master's in education, I, like you, can make a distinction here, several distinctions. However, when I'm talking hermeneutics, I'm mainly referring to Philosophical Hermeneutics and essential Literary hermeneutics, not Biblical Hermeneutics, and definitely not more fringe forms of hermeneutics. From my standpoint, all that was going on in my high school classes (and in some of my undergraduate college classes) was..........
a basic form of non-biblical hermeneutics, which can include a study of basic literary contexts in a literary work. I don't see the study of literary contexts as 'just literary study' and then treat it as if it is something disconnected from and not still embedded within the overall field of hermeneutics.
I could be wrong, but something like Mortimer Adler's book, "How to Read a Book" isn't esoteric and it's applicable to any text, any piece of literature.
But to your question, since that is what you're wanting to focus on: My answer would be 'no,' I do not ignore parts of the Bible; what I do is conceptualize the whole process by which I evaluate and delineate whether a part of the Bible is applicable to me. So, while I might read and attempt to understand the entire Bible, I could (and should, really, if what Jesus says is true), I also consider that certain concepts and ideas in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament, apply ONLY within certain historical or social parameters.
So, do I 'ignore' the idea of slavery in the Old Testament? That will depend on exactly what the DENOTATION of the term here is. If you're implying one sense or denotation of 'ignore,' but my whole approach requires that I refer to another denotation of that same term, then we're almost talking past one another.
See, in my view, I think it's almost a crime to read and apply the Bible ... while reading the Bible all by itself, and in an English version no less. When I then come across some awkward social issue like slavery, I'm not going to immediately import my moral and ethical notions of today into my reading. NO, I'm going to do the educated rather than the ignorant thing and vet out the place, time, culture, language, conceptual framework, and any other necessarily relevant factors, that pour into what makes Old Testament slavery its own form of slavery. I'm not going to assume it's the immediate predecessor of American Atlantic Slavery of yesteryear.
Anyway, I know you're an educated guy like I am, but you're going to HAVE to allow for the FACT that someone like me will have a ton of extra-biblical, even secular academic considerations that temper my own reading and acceptance of the Bible, and this will be the case because I'm aware of a multitude of interpretive, historical and philosophical issues that permeate these things regarding the reading of the Bible, all of which comes along side and in addition to my having empathy and compassion for people and an utter disregard for slavery as being any kind of legitimate institution today.
