Reading strategies

Question

In your reading and scholarly engagement with the Bible, what are the strategies and methods that you would recommend for a reader? This is a general question, which I think all readers grapple with.

Answer 1

Here are my suggestions for studying the Bible:

• ALWAYS ask for the guidance of the Holy Spirit when reading and studying the Bible (John 16:13)
• Read the Bible (I have to mention this because so many do not actually read the Bible.)
• use lots of different versions/translations of the Bible
• Discuss the Bible with as many friends who love the Bible as you can find. Engage in healthy constructive debate. Avoid ignorant and ill-informed debate.
• Do not ignore apparent contradictions - these are often the key to understanding something new. I have personally found that contradictions only exist where either the text is wrongly translated, OR, my understanding or assumptions were incorrect. Some contradictions may take years to resolve.
• If it is possible, try to learn some of the original language of the Bible.
• Try to learn something of the customs, culture, idiom and history of the Bible times - this greatly helps see things in their original setting and often puts some matters in perspective.
• Recall that the Bible is a book about God and His character of love (1 John 4:8, 16), graciousness, kindness, mercy, creativity (Ps 33:6, 9) and justice (Ps 85:10). Anything (whether reading of interpretation) that does further this is simply wrong. Thus, the Bible is about God and how He deals with His creation.
• When studying the Bible, try to trace its themes by keeping lists of verses about various topics

Answer 2

Paul tells us to "rightly divide" the gospel of our salvation when studying (Eph 1:13, 2 Tim 2:15). Miles Coverdale offers good clarification on this as explained also by the Maranatha Bible Society:

Maranatha Bible Society

Miles Coverdale was born in 1488, received the Bachelor of Canon Law degree at Cambridge University in 1531, and his Doctor’s degree from Tubingen and Cambridge a few years later. He began translating the Bible into English and he had a great deal to do with the preservation and ultimate translation of the Word of God. His labors were taken over by William Tyndale and their various editions continued up until (and even beyond) the translation and publication of the King James Bible in 1611.

Miles Coverdale wrote this statement which has enabled many to correctly understand the Scriptures. It reads:

"It shall greatly help you to understand Scriptures If thou mark not only what is spoken or written, But of whom, and to whom, with what words, at what time. Where, to what intent, with what circumstances, Considering what goeth before and what followeth after."

The Bible is a progressively revealed book. It is the Book of God’s revelation of Himself to mankind … first to mankind in general, then to the chosen nation of Israel, and lastly to “the church, which is His Body.” Because of these various entities we cannot take all of the Bible as TO US. We cannot take what God gave to Israel, as a nation, and make it to us today. What was revealed to one group at one time, cannot necessarily be interpreted to another group at another time. For instance, what the earthly Christ told the disciples to do in the Gospels was not what the risen Christ in glory told Paul to do in his epistles. The message of the twelve was to Israel, and concerned the kingdom of heaven and their Messiah; whereas the message of Paul had nothing to do with Israel, but concerned “the church, which is His Body.”

We know that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness,” and that the O.T. Scriptures are written for our example and learning. What we cannot do is take all that is written “for us,” and make it “to us,” who are members of the Body of Christ. To do so is to end up in hopeless confusion. Therefore we ask the questions which Miles Coverdale set forth in his method of study whereby we can discern the interpretation, the application, or the implication.

This is in obedience to the admonition given to us, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15)."

Answer 3

Read in context

Read in context, especially the NT letters. Letters are meant to be consumed as a whole not to be read in chunks, and you’re likely to get confused or make mistakes if you artificially break up a passage. Unfortunately this is how we usually read the Bible and it harms our understanding, especially of the NT letters. Don’t be afraid to read all of e.g. Galatians, or Ephesians, etc. in one sitting. You’ll be surprised what you missed by not getting a high level view. And you’ll be consuming it the way the original hearers (it was most likely read aloud) would have consumed it. Hebrews in particular makes a lot more sense when read this way. Also don’t neglect the OT—read it through. You can’t understand the NT fully without it.

Reading in context also means in the social context of the original recipients of God’s word. You can make mistakes by projecting your own cultural context onto the Scriptures. For example many of the cultures in Biblical times were polytheistic. If you’ve only ever know monotheism as a Christian and you see a non-Israelite in the Bible mention God or Lord, you’re likely to assume they’re monotheistic but they might not be, and probably aren’t unless there’s some reason to suspect they are. Especially if God or Lord is in small caps—-they they’re likely saying Yahweh which as polytheists they’d likely to interpret as one of many gods (there were times when it seems God opened the eyes of a non-Jew to see that he is the only God, but that’s not my point here). They’d be wrong of course (he’s the only God), but still it is important to realize that your culture was not their culture. Same thing with idolatry: when the NT warns against idolatry it’s not primarily talking about things you love too much but rather worshipping statues as images of pagan gods. That’s not obvious of you grew up in the church in the US for example. Learn what the culture of the people in the Bible was like so you avoid errors from projecting your culture on the Bible.

Read in faith

Read trusting God that his word is true. You really aren’t going to learn about and from God (barring mercy on his part) if you don’t trust God.

Read daily

I can’t over stress how important it is to know God’s word as a Christian. The best way to fill your mind with his word is to read it regularly. Make it a daily habit.

Live it

Reading the Bible is important, but putting it into practice is so important for more reasons than I have space to discuss, chief among them is a desire to please God. But taking the Bible seriously enough to put it into practice helps you truly learn it deeply, leading to more changes in your life in a virtuous cycle.

Cherish it

The Bible is God’s word! Delight in it! You get to hear form God whenever you want by simply opening the Bible or listening to it! That is amazing! Don’t take it for granted!

Go to the source

Devotionals can be helpful. Books about the Bible can be too. But you need to read God’s word—-don’t spend all your time reading about God’s word; read God’s word!

Avoid paraphrases

Paraphrases (e.g. the Message) are fashionable, edgy, and maybe fun depending on how you view Scripture (I don’t think this but some might), but they are not translations and thus are not the Bible. They are at best commentaries formatted to look like the Bible, and worst a brazen ransacking of God’s word. Note there’s a continuum here. The better ones may be written with good intentions but they’re still not the Bible, they’re commentaries that mix Bible passages with author commentary indiscriminately. Commentaries are fine but they are not a replacement for the Bible. You need to know what God’s word says. If you read a paraphrase there’s a good chance you won’t know that for sure.

Some paraphrases are marketed as restoring the edginess of the original languages, but that’s a false claim. Or that they capture the emotion of the Scriptures to help you connect with God’s word in a fresh way. But you don’t connect with God’s word in a fresh way if what youre reading isn’t God’s word.

Read commentaries but not as a crutch

Commentaries are not the answer key in the back of the book, they’re one (hopefully born again) person’s interpretation of the Scriptures. That can be very valuable in understanding a difficult passage. I find commentaries helpful to understand the range of common interpretations for difficult sections. But it’s important to remember that commentaries are not Scripture. And as I said don’t treat them like the answer key in the back of the book, so if you have a question about something that doesn’t make sense to you, don’t look it up in a commentary and say to yourself “ok cool now I know the answer” and not give it another thought. Instead pray about it, meditate (ponder) on it, read commentaries, talk to mature Christians about it, read other related passages, etc. Commentaries are a tool but only a tool, not the answer.

Use the original languages correctly or not at all

Learning Koine Greek or Biblical Hebrew to enhance your study of the Bible is fantastic if you’re willing to put in the considerable (years and years) of effort required. It won’t help you solve all the major translation conundrums in the Bible (likely not any of them), but it will give you a much deeper appreciation for how Bible translation works and why there are variants and why there are translation challenges. That said a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing here. If you’re not up for a multi-year deep dive into a Biblical language, resist the urge to pick up an interlinear or lexicon and do a word study. You are far more likely to make mistakes than you realize and honestly there’s very little extra knowledge to be gleaned through this type of endeavor—-what extra knowledge you might extract is only really feasibly done by a language expert, not someone with zero knowledge of the language. I know a good bit of Biblical Greek and have spent many many hours in the relatively small community of self-studiers of Biblical languages, and I have seen first hand how fraught with peril the use of these languages is. For example did you know that Biblical Greek has no real concept of word order? Do you know that in a lexicon the senses of a word are all the senses ever encounter anywhere, not all the senses possible any time the word is used anywhere? In short, either truly learn the Biblical languages and use them with deep humility or leave them to the experts. There really is no good middle ground here.

Read multiple translations

In line with the previous point, if you’re not reading directly in the Biblical languages (and even if you are), make sure you’re reading from multiple translations so you see how different translations render a passage and don’t overemphasize the specific wording in a section where there is a lot of variation among translations.

Answer 4

While we normally deal with uncovering the meaning of a text by using Hermeneutical principles, I think this is an important and foundational question.

For me, the goal of interpretation is coherence. It's an Epistemological assumption I make. That is, we know truth as truth by the fact that it coheres within itself. Picture a spider web the whole of which appears simple, and yet the connections reveal complexity, but an elegant, organized complexity, not a chaotic one. One of my favorite expressions is:

A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth.

So, I'll read a large unit in a single sitting...over and over and over again. A large unit is something like the entire letter to the Ephesians, or all of James, or even all of Romans. I'll start to take notes on specific details, but the notes need to cohere with the whole.

The whole molds and massages the details; the details support the whole.

My understanding must, over time, move towards coherence. So, I should say here that the text, relative to my thinking, remains in the authoritative position. My mind needs to change towards its mind (if you grasp what I'm saying). So, a fundamental principle is the text has the authority over me.

The goal is to become mindful of:

• Topics and Themes
• Discourse structure (structure above the sentence level)
• Information flow (how the author builds the topics and themes)

For example, I head for something like the following.

I want to answer the question: What does 2 Peter mean?

An answer might be:

Christ Jesus is the core definition of our identity. Building my life around who he is and what he's done will enable me to be productive. There are several witnesses to who Jesus is and what he's done. I must take their witness as authoritative. However, there are many false teachers who pretend, knowingly or not, to give the prophetic message. These people are dangerous. Withstanding their deception is difficult. I must learn to differentiate who is who. Peter and other eyewitnesses, Paul, and the Old Testament witnesses are core. By adhering to this core, I'll be firmly established in the truth.

I've typed this right off the top of my head, so I would probably make editorial changes over time. But, that's kind of my point. The goal is to be able to "think through an entire document" without needing to look up verses. Fully coherent is a long, editorial process--lasts a lifetime.

Ideally, and I haven't got this in place yet, one should be able to summarize each paragraph within the overall text in a sentence or two. And then, when the sentences are read like a paragraph, that paragraph will summarize large sections of the overall text. For example, James has 14 paragraphs. One should be able to divide a text into paragraphs. If you can't make paragraphs, then you haven't grasped the flow of thought, yet.

Obviously, Isaiah is impossible to read through in a single sitting or to summarize in a paragraph. Even Romans is quite difficult with several paragraphs. But, the goal is a coherent paragraph (or more). Re-reading the text should not offer any surprising, "Well now, that doesn't fit" surprises to my summary paragraph(s).

My current favorite is Romans 3:28-29

...we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29 Or...

The 'or' that starts verse 29 is very interesting. What do we think that 'or' would say? We don't expect,

Or is God the God of Jews only?

Paul's argument is that we're not justified by the law because we're not all Jews, the Gentiles are included, too. That's an unexpected argument. So, there's something we don't understand correctly. I'll just leave that there. :-)

I look for structuring techniques the original author used. Things like Inclusio, Chiasma, Chain-interlocks, and topic seams. Since I feel somewhat comfortable with Greek, Greek's discourse markers are quite important.

Context is important. And by 'context' I'm referring to things like Honor-Shame culture and their Collective culture, as well as the historical socio-linguistic elements that people would have used to interpret the text as it was delivered to them. In the same way, I constantly ask myself, "What context am I bringing to the text? I want to set that aside (this is hard). But, here I'm referring to my very, highly Individualistic culture as well as our honor-less and shameless culture which informs our interpretive framework. In other words, I try to always be aware of the lenses I use through which I understand the text.

So, sentences like:

being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus. (NIV)

immediately jump out at me as wrongly translated. The 'in you' should be 'among you' since the 'you' is plural. Another is Philippians 2:12

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;

...work out your own salvation? Really? Right after Paul directs us to "have this attitude among yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus"? An attitude of self-sacrificial service. In this case, I believe that is translated wrongly. Hint: "your own" is plural and therefore very commonly means the same as the reciprocal pronoun (See Smyth's grammar). To explain further would take some explanation. My point here is to be sensitive to surprising changes in topic; it may indicate a wrong translation decision.

Sudden shifts in the topic should jump out and they indicate basic misunderstandings of the text. Contrary to many commentators, Paul has no senior moments. He's very highly coherent. Dibelius, perhaps the most often cited commentary on James, views James much like the book of Proverbs, a loose set of wisdom. My research, and other more recent research, suggest a very coherent letter.

Lastly, I steer far afield from what I call the "connect the dots" approach. That is, I'm not interested in connecting unconnected verses--one verse to another verse to another verse like those connect-the-dots pictures we did as children. The text is a text; it's not an unsorted daily devotional. God didn't write his book that way. The reason is that those connections I've made are those that are formed by the context within my own mind. So, it's impossible to keep from re-formulating the text according to my thinking. It feels like it coheres, because I've made it do that. I want the text to always remain authoritative. However, to balance this, I also look for topics developed by different texts that connect in some way. The whole Bible is a coherent whole.

One other thing that is somewhat out of scope, but very important. 1 Corinthians 12-14 (all three chapters) makes it clear that loving, clear communication across multiple languages, cultures, and people is critical to obtaining the truth. So, just like the text needs to cohere, so do the people. A fractured group of people can't be trusted as a group, though individuals within such a group, based on how they treat others, should stand out as teachers. James 3 (the whole chapter) should also be consulted in this regard.