Season 5, Episode 7: Reading the Bible
Something that I mentioned in the last episode is that our continuing relationship with the Bible and Prayer is dependent on our specific experiences being affirming and positive. We actually need to feel good about the time we spend doing these activities, to ever want to do it again. And so that is my goal - to help you have good experiences when you read the Bible, so that you will want to continue in this journey. For some, the only satisfaction derived from a quiet time with God is feeling like a good Christian because you did it. The task completion is the only enjoyment. No different to the endorphins experienced when you tick off your to do list. But how is that helpful if the process is utterly confusing? Eventually the meaninglessness of the process is going to override the temporary satisfaction of having done the task. Let me give you an example. I’ve just started having a multivitamin everyday, to help improve my immunity and energy levels. I have a task management system that I use, called Todoist, where I have set up a reminder everyday to take the multivitamin. Now I enjoy ticking off that task each day. It’s an easy win! When I start the day with 10 tasks, and I am able to quickly reduce it by taking my multivitamin and a few other tasks that are easily ticked…I feel good. But in several months time, if that multivitamin is not making any difference or not adding any value or meaning to my life, I won’t hesitate to take it off my task list regardless of how good it makes me feel. Because I could easily do so many other things to experience that same kind of satisfaction…But if that multivitamin actually makes a massive difference to how I experience life, the reminder won’t be the greatest satisfaction I derive from this process, will it?
The same goes for Reading the Bible. My streak on the youversion app isn't going to be enough to sustain my relationship with the Bible…if the process is not meaningful.
Ok, I think I have adequately explained why this is important. Because we all know the Bible is important…I don’t think that’s what we struggle with. We all want to engage with the Bible more…but the stats tell us quite convincingly that our intention in the church does not match our execution.
So the really big question that I think lurks under the surface for all of us, that we don’t always know how to give voice to…is “What is the goal?” What are we actually trying to do when we read the Bible? When I was an 18 year old just starting to take my faith seriously, I would read the Bible thinking that the goal was knowledge accumulation. I would hear other people talk so intelligently about the scriptures, and I would marvel at how much they remembered and think to myself “Wow I want to be able to do that”. But then I realised that this wasn’t really a God-centred way of approaching the Bible. I was more concerned about how I would be perceived. In another season of my life, I read the Bible trying to find what I needed to change in myself. Which is not an entirely ridiculous reason to read the Bible. But with time I was so overwhelmed by how much I needed to change, and without much direction as to how to change them…that I actually broke down in a very emotional heap one day. Disgusted with my unworthiness, and engulfed with shame. With maturity, I came to realise that this couldn’t be what God intended.
So there are a few frameworks of thinking about the Scriptures that have revolutionised how I approach my time in the word. The first is this…the Bible is God’s self-revelation. Ok, what’s that mean in English Mel? It means that the Bible exists as God’s method of revealing Himself to His people. It is the primary way that we are able to know Him as He intends for us to know Him. And even what the authors record, demonstrates the manner in which God reveals Himself to His people throughout history. First to Abraham, who knew nothing about the God of creation at that point, besides the voice that came to him with a promise and an instruction to leave his family. God continues to reveal himself, demonstrating the kind of God He will be, through the life of Isaac and Jacob. And then, Joseph. But of course, God reveals Himself significantly through the deliverance of the Israelite people from slavery under the Egyptians. This is not the kind of God that is removed from His creation. He does not forget His promises and is faithful beyond comparison. Even just the interplay between Moses and God reveals much about God, and precisely what kind of God we can expect to engage with. When we fast-forward, God’s self-revelation culminates in his son Jesus Christ where we discover the depth of the love that God has for this world. A love that is self-sacrificing.
So how has this changed how I approach the scriptures? Well it changed what I am looking for when I read the word. Instead of just reading in hopes that something comes up, which sometimes it does, I am searching to find what God is revealing about himself through the text. If God has created this text to reveal himself to us, the goal of reading the scripture is to discover Him. So that’s the answer to our first question. I’ll share more about how that looks in practice later. But the principle here is that, if you see the scriptures as the way to discover God, your experience with the text will be far more positive and affirming. And of course, you get closer to God the more you know about Him especially when what we see is Oh so good!
The second framework that has also been very influential in my reading of the text in recent times, is a statement that I read in one of my textbooks for College. Keep in mind this is a text about the Old Testament, but it still applies overall. Here’s the quote from Old Testament Today by John H Walton & Andrew E Hill:
“If we had to identify the most pervasive theme in the Old Testament, it would probably be “The Presence of God.” The Garden of Eden was defined by God’s presence. When sin brought expulsion from the garden, the greatest loss was the loss of the privilege of being in God’s presence. God’s presence was again made possible through the covenant and realized in the tabernacle and temple. Through God’s abiding presence, the Israelites experienced God, related to him, and learned of his nature and attributes. The program of revelation was intended to make him known and thereby make a relationship possible. This was done by Christ, who, as Immanuel (“God with us”), represented God’s presence in our midst, and who has also made it possible for us to enter into God’s presence once and for all.
So not only is the Bible, God’s self-revelation…it also demonstrates God’s determination to remain present with His creation despite the world’s response to God. So how does this impact how I engage with the word? So it doesn’t necessarily change what I am looking for, but it does reframe some of the most significant events that we read about in scripture. Even the seasons where there are simply prophecy after prophecy of doom coming to the Israelite people, can be understood as God’s presentness. At no point, does He give up on the Israelite people and simply turn away. In the case of Jeremiah, God is communicating the coming difficulties for 70 years. When we read those texts we can often look at it at face value, thinking that God is an angry God that seeks to punish. But when you put it into context, that He is warning them with the intention of having them repent and turn away from the coming destruction…we see that God is actually very merciful. He keeps trying, he keeps trying to insert himself into the time. He is present.
So if the goal of reading the Bible is to discover God, what are the realities that complicate this goal?
Whether we like it or not, and whether we desire it to be or not, human beings are highly interpretative individuals. At every corner, we are in the practice of interpreting. We interpret our circumstances. We interpret what’s being said to us. We interpret the world around us. It’s not a mechanism we can switch off. And we bring this interpretative nature to the scriptures. The complexity with the Bible is that we are often bringing an already developed interpretative framework to a text that existed outside of our day, many thousands of years in fact, outside of our culture…and even within the text cultural changes were occurring. The text begins in the ancient near eastern culture landscape. But by the New Testament the culture surrounding the text was heavily influenced by Hellenistic culture, whilst also being under Roman rule. That is not a culture that we are naturally familiar with. There are three different languages in the text, Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. There are so many factors that are removed from our modern day, that often people might conclude that this makes the text irrelevant. But as believers we know that this is simply not true. The text is very relevant, we just have to find ways to understand it in a way that respects and considers these various factors. When we don’t consider these things, and the complexity of interpreting the text, we actually don’t give the scriptures the honour it deserves. When we take a very surface level reading of it, we don’t honour the God that still demands awe at the mystery of His being. Because if the Bible is the revelation of God, its job is to reveal God, how could we expect it to be so plain and easy to understand? That would imply that God is plain and easy to understand too…which is simply not true. So it means care is necessary when we are interpreting the Bible. Because is there any point reading the Bible if we come to understand God incorrectly? And how would we know? We will explore this more in due course. But I just want to give this short preface about reading the Bible….
Today, it is commonplace to use the term ‘quiet time’ or ‘devotional time’. I take it you know what this means - it could be the reason you are listening to this episode. The quiet time or devotional time is the practice of individually seeking God. It involves prayer and time reading the word. It's a marvelous thing and I have been participating in this habit for many many years. What you need to know about this idea though, is that it is a relatively modern phenomenon. It’s difficult to isolate it to a specific date or location, but it’s generally considered an early 20th Century idea. The idea of daily meditation over the scriptures, with prayer was mentioned by John Wesley and Charles Spurgeon in the 18th-19th centuries. But it didn’t really achieve its mandated status until the 1950’s-ish. If we jump back to the early church, we must remember that whilst some would have had access to the Septuagint, which is the Greek version of the Old Testament…the letters that we now read were scribed and copied by the church communities. It is highly unlikely that you would have had your own personal copy of those letters to study and peruse at your leisure, like you do today. These letters were usually read out to the congregation and addressed the people of God, and you would hear what it said when you were together. So what does that mean? Many people find it difficult to read the word. We like to attach guilt to this and assume its because they don’t make time for it, or its not a priority…but actually sometimes its because its difficult to understand. In the early church, it was not expected that you would be a scribe or scholar at understanding scripture…the priority was living it out. And you relied on others to teach you well. Now the apostles taught the word boldly and they did not let the intellectual capacity of the listeners or the ‘seeker’ define what was taught. They taught the complex aspects of the word well. Complex ideas like atonement, resurrection, salvation…and people were saved in spite of this complexity. But the idea that the average believer had to be able to draw these ideas out of the scripture for themselves? That wasn’t an expectation. Now, am I saying that the idea of the devotion is not good or not necessary? No, I’m not. I think the concept of the devotion has had to exist since preachers and church leaders are often not teaching such deep ideas that are critical for the people of God to understand. I think its also important in the absence of the community nature that the early church so frequently participated in. We just don’t live alongside each other anywhere near what the early church accomplished, so you have to have some way of maintaining focus without your brothers and sisters in Christ. BUT, the important takeaway here is that if you struggle to read the Bible, don’t think you have to be a hero and go it alone trying to read and interpret it yourself. In fact, I would suggest that there isn’t enough connection between personal devotion and the broader body of Christ. The Jewish people used to study the Old testament scriptures in community! This ensures that our interpretations are sound too.
I’m just saying you don’t need to feel shame and guilt for struggling with doing something that our spiritual ancestors never did. And it certainly didn’t define whether they were a Christian or not. I’ve sat in discipleship discussions before that were like - how do we know if someone is a Christian? Well they have a devotion time…um, well. That’s not what history tells us. Now if we are talking about the prayer aspect of a quiet time? Well thats totally different! Prayer has existed for thousands of years, and we see that in scripture. And this was often done personally and corporately. But that’s for next episode.
So the best comment that I have ever heard made about reading the Bible, was from a previous interviewee of this podcast, which is Edwina Blair. And I’m sure she doesn’t own the statement. But she made a comment that the Bible can be read academically or devotionally. Up until I started my study I had always read the Bible devotionally, and probably didn’t know to label it that way. But once I started studying, the goal was to understand the Bible academically. I am going to define for you, to the best of my ability, the difference between both. But make sure you get this: THE CHURCH NEEDS BOTH. There is no point knowing a lot about the word, but it has no impact on how you personally live. But it is also very negligent to read the word devotionally without having some basic but an ever-growing understanding of the historical factors inherent in the text. Because without this, we might conclude things devotionally that are just totally misguided.
So the Church needs both. We need both.
So what’s the difference?
So when academics study the word, a big part of their process is exegesis. Now, in truth, I would hope that preachers would also use good exegetical practices to formulate their messages…but sadly they don’t and the body of Christ misses out for it. So let me explain exegesis. The word literally means “leading out of” or “drawing out of”. Therefore exegesis is the process of drawing out of a passage, the intended meaning. So it really focuses on a passage, and allows the passage to reveal. It often involves various hermeneutical approaches. So what’s hermeneutics? I’ve heard a few preachers stuff this one up in recent years, so I am going to make sure you get this. Hermeneutics is the umbrella term we give to the various methodologies of interpretation. So you could even call it the science or philosophy of interpretation. An example would be historical criticism. Historical criticism is one hermeneutic that endeavours to understand the historical factors or the historical context behind a passage. So for instance, the historical criticism would involve researching the Roman empire and their practices to understand what was meant when Jesus said “Give to Caesars what is Caesars". It might involve understanding the history of the Ninevites, in order to grasp why Jonah was so against prophesying repentance. Historical criticism helps us understand these factors that are often left unexplained in the text. And there are brilliant people out there that study these historical contexts for the benefit of the church. So that’s one type of hermeneutic or methodology. There is also narrative criticism, form criticism, source criticism. Now I won’t go into detail about what each of these are, because it’s not really the point. But, it is important to know that to academically study the word means to be investigating a passage, and allowing the passage to speak for itself whilst using various methodologies to gain that deeper insight. Now some think that exegesis ought to be the way all believers read the word, but I don’t really agree. I don’t think being a Christian requires us to be technical in our approach. There are many examples where believers have been unable to read or write, and this doesn’t prohibit them from living a full and deep faith. But I think the accountability is really on preachers to teach very deeply and robustly.
Alternatively, to read the Bible devotionally, the goal is not necessarily to engage in rigorous exegetical process. The goal is to gain revelation. So what’s revelation? It’s interesting, we were only talking about this recently in a small group. Revelation is revealed knowledge. It’s a Holy Spirit driven process, where a truth or direction or inner reflection is mad real and revealed through the Spirit’s illumination. It is usually personal. It is usually showing you the deep love of God maybe in a way you haven’t experienced before. It’s revealing the compassion of God. Or the patience of God. Or it might be God’s correction to you personally. Or encouragement. There is a tangible experience to this. It can be like a mental block has been removed. Or a sudden click, where something makes sense and you see something you didn’t see before. We need this revelation, it keeps us growing. We might get this revelation through academic exegetical work, but it actually doesn’t rely on that. Sometimes God reveals something to you personally, that’s not even really the subject of the passage. And that’s ok. And of course, revelation can happen outside of reading the word. It can happen from a friend saying something, or a song. Or a circumstance.
But that’s what a devotional reading of the Bible entails - revelation.
I would say that academic study of the Bible is very much for the church. It’s often the academic study of the Bible that has led to doctrine. It’s where we come to understand God’s stance on various issues in the church, and therefore the church has established that position as doctrine or policy for a movement. I think many denominations would argue that their dealing with present day social matters like gay marriage or abortion, have come academic study of the Bible’s position on these matters. Therefore, the academic study has produced policies for various movements and denominations, to establish how they will react and therefore Christians in their denominations ought to react to such matters. When it comes to devotionally reading the Bible, the revelation is for the individual. Which is why many Christians may differ on what they have convictions about, since revelation is individual. And God addresses things with us at different times, according to what He wants to speak into your life. Christians often get frustrated by that, but unfortunately we can’t convict people…only God can, and that usually happens through personal revelation.
I’ve already mentioned that with academic study of the Bible, the accountability is really high to do it well. And I would argue that any person who teaches the word, at church or in a college, ought to be very diligent to do it well. Sometimes I hear that a preacher wrote the message the night before, and that’s ok. That happens sometimes. But often I can hear the clunky methodology and assumptions that have been made in presenting a Biblical thought or passage. I can hear the lack of preparation because of the connections they make ideologically. Look that is what it is, and they aren’t accountable to me. But with devotionally oriented reading, encountering God in the scriptures is far more important. We aren’t necessarily trying to understand the intricacies of the word and context, and all that…we are just trying to find God and encounter who He is in a passage.
Academic study of the word is very involving. You certainly wouldn’t understand a passage simply by reading it once. Often theologians and scholars might stay in one passage for most of their academic careers. You could study and study and study and still find that there is still so much you don’t know. It’s hard work in a sense. To become a theologian or Biblical scholar is an extensive process, and often you might specialise in certain aspects of the text. And whilst prayer is important to this process, it is maybe nowhere near as critical because of the reliance we have on the Spirit with matters of revelation and encounter, than prayer with devotion. Devotional reading of the Bible is accompanied by prayer and reflection or meditation, and discussion between God and others. We read, we pray, we listen, we reflect, we pray, we read, we listen, we think, we examine our hearts. It's a dynamic process between the heart, the spirit and the word.
Now as I said the Church needs both. And the world needs the church to have both.
But what are the downsides or problems inherent in each approach? Well starting with academically. Often when you delve into the various academic opinions on a passage or a book, you realise that there are a lot of things that we still can’t be absolutely certain about. Now, the reality is, many believers engage in the academic study of the Bible because they want clarity…but sometimes you come away with even more possibilities, and less clarity. I think many believers have been turned off study because of that. Which is sad. Academic study is needed in the church. Sidenote, I kind of think clarity can be overrated. But sometimes, study clarifies what the word definitely can’t mean…but not necessarily what it definitely means. I mean that’s still progress. But for some that’s not enough. They want the black and white answer, but in reality, when you really examine the scriptures that is not so easily deduced. So at best, preachers and teachers can mainly tell you what is likely to be meant by a passage. And that likelihood can be with a high level of confidence. But a good preacher will tell you how confident they are about their conclusion. For that reason, I am often very weary of preachers and teachers that will tell you with absolute confidence what a passage means. Especially if that passage is notoriously difficult.
The downside of reading the Bible devotionally though, is that as much as we would like to tell brand new Christians to simply pick up the Bible and read…the fact is that you do need to have at least a basic knowledge of God's story. I am often a bit shocked about how little background we can give to new Christians. I know the Spirit is powerful and could absolutely enable a new believer to comprehend things that are conceptually difficult. But I mean let’s go with a common analogy right - we often refer to new Christians as babies or newborns. So imagine giving a baby, a newborn baby a piece of food to hold and eat? They can’t even sit up! Either that baby is going hungry, or the eating process is going to go terribly and dangerously wrong. So as much as we can all read the Bible, and I’m grateful we have access to the scriptures to do so, the fact is it would be remiss to not seek to learn at least the basics of the biblical narrative. And in truth, we all as believers should take every opportunity we can to learn a bit more throughout our journey - it can only enhance our engagement with the scriptures.
The only other challenge of reading the Bible devotionally, is realising that there is danger in universalising some of the revelations God gives you in that process. I think this is by far the most dangerous part of devotional reading. And I’ve seen it happen all too often. So I’ll give you an example, but I can’t say its the best one. I was reading a book recently that was all about Revival. In the book, the author made a comment about how Moses heard God’s word and then shared that word with the people of God to enact. His conclusion, which admittedly was a sidenote, was that this is how it should be in the church. The Pastor should hear from God, and the congregation simply listen and obey. Now there might be some that listen to that and agree. But an academic examination of this passage would probably nullify such a basic conclusion pretty quickly. There are so many factors that haven’t been considered in these passages. This was at a time when the Holy Spirit only anointed one individual. The modern church is not in that condition anymore. Was this passage even about this? If we were to exegetically examine this passage, what would be the truths we would draw out? Considering how obscure a thought it is, I would hazard a guess that this isn’t the case. Unfortunately we don’t have the time to go into it. But this could have been a revelation for that specific writer regarding the way the Lord wanted Him to lead his church for a season. Instead, he has universalised a pretty controversial idea. The most dangerous universalisations of devotional thoughts that I’ve observed relate to the Old Testament. It doesn’t appear to be something that is well understood, the way in which we are to treat the Old Testament. It could be a topic of its own, because its quite large. But the kind of misunderstandings I see, is the failure to recognise that the Old Testament is that the understanding of the Israelite people was progressive. We often make comments about the Old Testament as though the beliefs were static for that entire period of however many hundreds of years the Old Testament covers. But even if you were to take an overview, it is obvious that ideas were developing. So for instance, by the time we arrive at the New Testament, the following ideas have emerged that aren’t discussed in the Old Testament:
The Synagogue
The Rabbi
Baptism
The Pharisee
The Sadducee
The Sanhedrin
Many of these ideas were developed as a result of the People of God’s return from exile and their zeal to be obedient to the scriptures and prevent ever being ruled over or exiled again. An earlier episode with Edwina Blair discussed the fact that in the Old Testament the concept of the afterlife, was not really a thing. By the time we get to the New Testament the Pharisees and Sadducees are in hot debate over this topic. This was a period of 400 years where the theology of the Jewish people developed rapidly. Imagine the progression from Abraham's covenant of circumcision to the establishment of the law. And then 600 plus rules that the Jewish leaders added post-exile. There is a development process that we can observe in scripture, with regard to the Jewish belief system. Even the concept of the Sabbath was dramatically different when given to the Israelite people in the time of the Exodus, to the time of the Jewish leaders pre-Jesus’ entrance onto the scene. So the problem with universalising ideas found in the Old Testament, is the denial of the progression. At times these deductions made in a devotional reading of the Bible, are actually regressions to former ways.
Secondly, Jesus' entrance into the Biblical story renders some things obsolete. Not all, of course. So don’t panic. But probably the most classic example is the focus on the temple. With Christ, the temple no longer has any relevance. That is why we don’t offer sacrifices anymore. But also, the temple is no longer the central place of our worship because not only can worship still occur without the temple, which was not the case in the Old Testament ideology of the temple, but worship is now done in Spirit and in truth. Worship is now a lifestyle of honouring God wherever we find ourselves, all day, everyday. We often make this connection between church and temple, using them synonymously …as though they are one and the same thing. But this is an error. The church is not a building. The idea of a building is superfluous to the church. The word church is a german term that was a pretty inaccurate rendering of the Greek word Ekklesia. The word Ekklesia means gathering or assembly. It highlights the people of God, not the building. Whilst church means ‘the place’. It highlights the location. There is even more the word Ekklesia. The word Ekklesia was a political term, a Greek concept. Representatives of the community would be elected to participate in the Ekklesia to make decisions. They represented the citizens and the city, and was a outworking of democracy that met four times a year. Now we don’t know to what extent the political framework was to effect how Jesus saw the church functioning, but it is important to note that this has absolutely nothing to do with a place, or a building. The primary focus is the assembly. Therefore, the temple and the values surrounding the temple are now obsolete with the coming of Christ, except for maybe understanding how sacred the Body of Christ is when Paul describes us as the temple of the Holy Spirit.
Ok, I want to tell you what my process is for reading the Bible. I’m not at all implying that my process is the right process, but I think its just helpful when all of us share how we practice our engagement with the scriptures. It would have been cool to have some others jump on this podcast to share their methods for engaging with scripture personally, and devotionally. And maybe I will do that down the track. But for now, you got me.
So I used to follow the SOAP method. The SOAP method is an acronym that stands for - Scripture, Observation, Application and Prayer. I always pray first, but then I read the scripture that I have assigned for myself. I have done various different formats over the years for what I read. Sometimes I just have an interest in a particular book, and I’ll read that. Or I might be following a Bible Reading plan, which there are so many of on the YouVersion Bible App. But other times I have just gone through the Bible from Genesis through to Revelation. For new Christians, I usually advise them to start in the gospels so that the focus is on Jesus…because the Old Testament can be confusing without someone to guide them. But yeah that’s generally how I have worked out what book to read. I’ve never done a shred. Or a Bible in One Year, but I can see how this would help get a broader overview of the Bible. Although the Bible in One Year doesn’t really just go from Genesis through to Revelation in chronological order. Some people write the scripture out or the passage. I don’t. So whatever works for you. But then you move onto, Observation. In observation, it's as the word implies. You are noting what stands out to you. You are noting the situation. With narrative type texts, you might be noting the characters, the plot, what’s happening, what's the tension. What do they repeat? This is the part where you hope the Holy Spirit is highlighting something, and guiding what you notice. Then you move onto Application, which is basically, ‘what do you learn?’ out of the passage. And then you pray that God would help you with that application. SOAP is a great method, and is especially helpful for people who are new to reading the Bible. You could do SOAP for the rest of your life and you would be pretty sweet. Where I have deviated with the SOAP method is application. Yes there are times where a scripture is meant to apply to us and how we are to live. But if you remember, the scriptures ultimate goal is to reveal God to us. Which means, that the primary goal is for us to learn about God, and therefore how we are to live. So, in most cases I will ask myself, what does this passage show me about God? What does it reveal? Now, there is one thing that is really important. What it reveals to you about God ought to be consistent with what we already know with God. I think that’s where interpretation can be a problem right. We read one passage and deduce that God loves to punish, but actually that is not consistent with what we see overall in scripture. I still ask whether there is something in the passage that is instructive of how I am to live. Some of the letters in the New Testament make it real easy, its very obviously an instruction or an encouragement about how we are to live in light of Christ. A classic example is David. When I was a kid, I read that story thinking I have to be like David bold to strike Goliath. Now boldness doesn’t go astray, but the reality is that story is more like a foreshadowing of Christ. Read a book like Jonah, cause its short, and ask yourself ‘what does this reveal about God?’ and you will be blown away, rather than the typical conclusion we were told as kids - which is don’t disobey God. True, but not actually the point of the book.
So whilst i do still do a less structured version of SOAP, because ultimately SOAP is great at developing a habit for how you approach the scriptures…there are a few major differences today in how I read the Bible to how I used to.
So for starters, I read several translations. Not every time, but most of the time. I usually read the English Standard Version, which is what you would call a word for word translation. So the primary goal of the translators were to translate accurately each word, with less attention being paid to the overall meaning of the sentence. AND I read the NLT (the New Living Translation). I used to read the NIV (New International Version) pretty much my whole Christian life, but in the last 5 years I have read the NLT just for a change. It’s a great translation. These versions are more what you would call thought-for thought. They are trying to make the sentence make sense. Now you can understand why I would use the both. Now if I get to a really meaty passage or something I just want to go deeper on, I will read multiple versions. I’ll read the NIV, the CEB, the NRSV. I’ll look at it from many angles. I’ll also jump onto the blueletterbible and read what the original greek or hebrew words are. Are there any translations I definitely don’t use? YEP! I don’t use the King James Version. If for some reason, I was in a circumstance where I didn’t have any other version accessible, I would confidently read the KJV. But since I have never been in that position I will opt for another version. The KJV was translated from the best manuscripts available in the 1600’s, but since that time more manuscripts have emerged including the Dead Sea scrolls that allow for better textual evidence when translating. It’s also not super user-friendly for newer Christians or young people, because of its old-ish phrases…which doesn’t vouch well for the thinking that the Bible is archaic and obsolete. Now just so you know, I’m not just opinionated on this…theologians and scholars generally voice the same opinion. It’s a generally well accepted that the KJV is a secondary recommendation to other translations. It’s respected, but not really recommended as a first point of call.
Ok moving on. In most cases, which some exceptions…which is usually dependent on the size of the text…I will read the whole book first. I may even read it several times in one sitting first, again depending on the size. Why do I do this? It’s important to see how the parts fit into the whole. When we open the Bible we may see the numbers and the verse numbers. But these were additions, not seen in the original manuscripts. So yes the Jewish scribes did add verse numbers to the Old Testament around the 6th-10th century AD, but chapters were supposedly added by around the 1200’s, credited the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time. And the New Testament had verses added in the 1500’s, supposedly by Robert Estienne. Now chapter numbers and verse numbers are so ridiculously helpful. They help us locate passages, they help with memorisation. But they don’t allow us to read the passages the way the author intended. That’s why in most cases, I try to read the whole book first and then the parts so I get how the parts fit into the overall narrative. After that point, I often read the book quite slowly. I don’t always read a chapter a day. Sometimes I might stay in one chapter for several days. I take my time with it. When I read Ecclesiastes in the last few years, I think I stayed in the book for about 3 months, even though it only has like 12 chapters. Other times, I’ve read 2 chapters. I don’t make hard and fast rules about it. Just sometimes I can sense that there is a deeper revelation God is wanting to give me, and I’ll take my time to allow him to reveal that.
Lastly, when I read I am constantly asking: “Whats the point? Why did they include that detail? You know how sometimes the Bible includes incredibly obscure details. Like in Jonah, it keeps mentioning the plight of the animals in Nineveh. In that case, it's included to highlight the incredible mercy of God that he is even concerned about the animals in Nineveh. The point is those random details, that seem to make no sense, are usually revealing something deeper. Other questions I frequently ask are "What's the theme here? What do they keep revolving around? What keeps coming up?” The Bible is just like other texts, it uses literary techniques like repetition to convey its message.
So I have two more things to say. If you really want to level up your devotional time, invest in some resources. Thankfully these days it doesn’t cost a lot to access resources because of the internet. But whatever you invest will pay great dividends for you in learning. Firstly, a good Bible Dictionary. Bible Dictionaries are so useful in explaining some of the terms that would have been unique to that time. For instance, money terms and weights. Then there’s just the general theological concepts of salvation, atonement. All of that will be in a good Bible Dictionary. If you can’t afford one, find someone who owns one and ask if you can borrow it. Have a look at a commentary every now and then, find out what it says. NT Wright has some fantastic ones that are for the plebs like us that are looking to study the Bible but aren’t academics. If you can, try and read more than one, when you’re looking at a passage. Get a few different opinions about the text. So I pay for a library source called Perlego, which was provided by our college when I was studying. But I like it so much I have a subscription. I am constantly in Perlego looking at Bible Dictionaries and Commentaries. Then there are just great books out there about reading the Bible. I mentioned in the last episode “How to Read the Bible for All its Worth” by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart. I think they have another one about reading the Bible book by book. I highly rate the book by Marty Solomon who has appeared on this podcast called “Asking Better Questions of the Bible”. I would listen to any podcast episode by Shane Willard about reading and understanding the Bible - he did one just this year with the 2 Pastors and a Mic podcast called “How to read scripture without missing the point”. And he did one on the early Morning Bible Club in 2023 called “How to Approach the Bible”. And of course if you really want to go deeper, go do some study. We need more people studying the Bible! It’s a great thing.
To close this episode though, I want to share one more thought for the people listening who might fall into the category of neurodivergency. I have family members that are neurodivergent and it affects every aspect of life, including the devotional life. And in all honesty, if the church really wants to excel in the future, due consideration ought to be given to how neurodivergent people learn…just like they are doing in schools and educational institutions. In the past, churches have often harped on about reading the Bible like it's a sin not to. It's often been a very legalistic thing. But for neurodivergent people it's difficult to organise yourself to even be in front of the Bible everyday, let alone being able to focus at a level that makes reading the Bible fruitful. So this is my encouragement to you. God has never made Himself only accessible to the few who can study, who can sit down and read calmly and with focus. So don’t feel like you are going to be disadvantaged in the things of God because you struggle with those activities. The real proof of the Bibles impact is how much a person lives by it, not how much they have read or memorised. Remember that. The pressure to read the Bible daily as devotional behaviour is a cultural modern expectation, and it may not be the most helpful method for you. Now I’m not saying we don’t engage with the text, but we have to find different ways to engage with it that encourages our relationship with God. Maybe it is a Bible reading plan. Maybe its a Bible reading plan with friends! For my family members, it has been podcasts. This one family member in particular has struggled all their life to read the Bible and form any kind of habit about it. Then they discovered a great podcast, and they obsessively listen to the podcast. It often encourages them to go and read the text for themselves. Another family member can’t sit down long enough to read the Bible, and gain any real insight from it, but they are constantly learning from other people and growing especially spiritually. Again, be at gatherings, for example - church, youth, bible study as much as you can because you are more likely to learn from others in community and relationship. They are much more helpful motivators for a neurodivergent person, than simply being still and reading. And make sure you pray. Next month I will focus on prayer specifically, and give the neurodivergent people out there some thoughts on how to improve your prayer life also. I’m looking forward to that.
But otherwise I hope this episode has been practical and helpful. Until next time!