“Most of us spend too much time on the last twenty-four hours and too little on the last six thousand years.” –Will Durant

Reading is presupposed when it comes to the Bible. This, however, was not always the case.  The audience for whom the books of the Bible were written was largely illiterate.  This is true for most of the books of the Bible.  However, books like the Gospel of Luke and Acts were written for a well-educated audience.  This should cause us to think about how we read the Bible since the Bible was largely written for those who did not know how to read.

The method of the reading process can help us.  Underlying the reading process are many theories.  There is one significant theory that lines up with how students engage in the process of reading.  That is Reader-Response Theory.

Image from Pixabay

Concerning Reader-Response Theory, one researcher writes, “Every reading act is an event, or a transaction, involving a particular reader and a particular pattern of signs, a text, and occurring at a particular time in a particular context” (Rosenblatt, Creating Literacy, pg. 1063, 1994).  Another author writes, “Comprehension of texts becomes a complex activity because it involves readers negotiating their background knowledge and … elements of a text as they construct an understanding of what they read” (Lenski, Reading and Learning Strategies, 2).  Further a third author writes, “Reading is a transaction in which the reader affects the text and is affected by it” (Gunning, Creating Literacy Instruction for All Students, 9).

What this means is that the meaning of a text is affected by the reader who reads it based on the background knowledge that reader has like language proficiency, reading level, historical background, and background of ideas.  For many struggling readers a simple building of background can help them understand texts that they, without that background, would not otherwise understand.

For all these reasons, Reader-Response Theory applies to the Bible in five ways:

1. Language

There are many languages in the world, and today’s major languages did not exist at the time the Scriptures were written.  And it does not stop here, but how languages worked and what types of meaning a language’s grammar carried do not frequently make their way into translations.  For example, in the original Greek of the New Testament, what is translated as a simple command in English, “Ask and it will be given to you,” (Matthew 7:7) actually carries the idea of continuity in Greek.  The aspect (which is similar to tense) the Greek verb is in is continuous, meaning the idea behind the command is “To continually ask,” or “To keep asking.”  If we read it in simple English, we might think only to ask once.  If we understand the Greek text, then we understand to keep asking God for what we need.  This is just one example of how background affects how we understand the Bible, and in turn how that affects our worship, and this example is not one of the weightier ones either.  If such meaning is unnoticed in translation, what else may be?

2. History

Once, I was at a coffee shop with friends when a person asked us about the church at which we worship.  So, I answered only to find him beginning to preach his theology to me.  It grew into a very entertaining discussion.  Eventually we got to the topic of salvation; this person believed in the idea of “Once saved, always saved, unless you fall away, then you were never really saved” while I firmly do not, in accordance with the Scriptures and their examples of people like Judas and Nicolas the Deacon (Acts 6:5; Revelation 2:6, 15 see Nicolaitans) falling away after knowing the Lord Christ.  So, he went and cited “evidence” from the Scriptures, “They went out from us, but they were not of us” (1 John 2:19).  I replied that this did not refer to the salvation of Christians but to heretical teachers, specifically Gnostics.  He, being somewhat studious, and heading to seminary the following week, remembered this historical context, backed away, and agreed that this was the case.  The result was a change of understanding of that verse.  This is just one small example of how correct historical context for background knowledge leads to a correct understanding of the Scriptures; in the same way, lack of knowledge of historical context leads to an incorrect understanding and eventually misapplication of the Scriptures.

3. Culture

Jesus said that before the end of the world, “You will hear of wars and rumors of wars” (Matthew 24:6).  Many people interpret this from the point of view of their own culture.  So, they take their own countries, usually America, and say “Oh, we are going to three wars now, Jesus will be back soon, less than 20 years from now.”  The reality is this interpretation is faulty because of poor background knowledge on the part of the reader.  If you look at other countries like those in Africa, those countries are in real wars where the lives of many of their citizens are in imminent danger.  In addition, this is generally the most peaceful time the world has ever had when it comes to wars.  For example, World War II alone claimed the lives of between 50 to 85 million people.  Also, during the time of the New Testament and the generations after, wars were rampant and virtually non-stop crossing many countries’ borders and involving different empires.  So, how is today the end of the world if then was not?

4. Ideas

Ideas such as capitalism, middle class, business owning, a 9-to-5 job, dating, and even how music is to be played among many other ideas did not exist at the time the Scriptures were written and for more than 1,500 years after.  So, you should not read the Scriptures and think they support a modern idea just because they are silent on it.  If the Scriptures are silent, then you will not find support for your ideas in what the Scripture does not say; you cannot use silence as a solid support.  What the Scriptures support, they spell out for us clearly.

5. Community

Communities were very different.  For example, if you mention interpretation of the Scriptures to someone today, they think of opening their Bibles at home and reading and trying to understand.  On the other hand, in the Early Church, if one wanted to understand the Scriptures, that person went with others and sat with the bishop of the church where he prayed and listened to him interpret the Scriptures as he had heard from his teachers as they had heard from theirs.  This was due to the fact that most people did not know how to read, and when they did, a copy of the Bible cost a year’s salary.  An example of this continuity of interpretation is Irenaeus of Lyons (d. c. 202 AD), who heard from Polycarp of Smyrna (d. c. 150 AD), who was the disciple of John the Apostle (d. c. 100 AD).

Have you become aware of some aspects that may affect your reading of the Bible?  Is there one of the five aspects you may have to spend more time on building in order to improve your understanding of the Bible?

If you liked this blog entry, click here to like my Facebook page here OR sign up to my email list to receive my latest blog entries every week in your inboxes, and you will also receive my free eBook The Way of Christ.  Click here to sign up.