Reading Scripture Is Not The Ultimate Reading

Christians around the world read scripture. It is a critical spiritual disciple and one that I believe every Christian needs to engage in. The problem is that too often we think reading scripture is the ultimate “reading” - it is not. Reading scripture is important but perhaps you can see that reading scripture places the human being at the center of the action, and that is problematic.

Another limitation to reading scripture is that it is a practice that engages and is focused on the mind. When we read scripture we are seeking information. We will engage in study and research like we are doing some sort of term paper for school. It is popular to think that if you know when Romans was written, have a grasp on two source source hypothesis, and know what trito-Isaiah is then you “really know your Bible.” And you do. You know a lot of information about the Bible. Generally those who elevate orthodoxy and the mind are those who elevate reading scripture or sometimes it is expressed as “read your Bible”. This is all well and good, but limiting to the Christian life.

Many people have seen the deficiency in just reading scriptures. The argument is that it is not enough to engage the mind with reading scripture we must engage the hands. Orthodoxy is nice and all, but there is no orthodoxy without orthopraxy (right action). This group tends to elevate the morality and ethics of the Bible. The concern is less with engaging the mind than it is engaging the hands. Rather than ask people to read scriptures, you might hear this group speak about the scripture reading for the day. It is a little shift in the focus from reading scripture to scripture reading. It is not the human reading the sacred words, but that the sacred words are reading the human. it is the scripture that is doing the act of reading so that in time the human identifies the story of the Bible as their own story and not just a tale of the past.

Up until about five years ago, I assumed that this was the way to engage with scripture. I ask about the scripture reading in worship more than I ask what verses were read or quoted in the sermon. I had been one who understood the limitations to engage in the head and thought hand engagement was better. Maybe it is, maybe it is not, but five years ago it was revealed to me that scripture reading, othopraxy and ethics/morality focus is limited. Which leads me to the third way to engage with scripture.

You may know it as Lectio Divina, but this is the way that I now engage with scripture. It is not a practice where I read scripture (although passages are read). It is not a practice that demands a scripture reading (but scripture is used). Lectio Divina is Latin for "Divine Reading.” Notice the actual words and order - Divine Reading. It is not about the human reading scripture, nor is it about scripture reading the human, it is the Divine doing the reading. It is the Divine who is the main actor. It is the work of the Divine that is paramount in this practice. As such, Lectio Divina is less about information or ethics/morality as it is about formation. It is less about head or hands and more about heart. It is less about orthodoxy or orthopraxy but about orthocardia - right heart.

If you are interested to experience the difference between reading scripture, scripture reading and Lectio Divina, call your pastor and I am sure they can help. I know pastors can help because it was pastors who helped me - Nancy Allen, Bob and Judy Holloway, Estee Valendy, Jerry Hass, Rabbi Chava Bahle, Joretta Marshall, Grace Imathiu and Loyd Allen.

Passage of Scripture

Christians talk about scripture passages or, in the singular, a passage of scripture. The emphasis is on the phrase is the word scripture. And understandably so. Scripture the first authority (not the only authority) that Christians use to make sense. There is wisdom in the scriptures that often remains hidden to us until we prayerfully engage and wrestle with it. But I do not have to extol the importance of scripture, but rather I wanted to highlight the other word: passage.

Photo by Jacob Aguilar-Friend on Unsplash

Scripture offers us different passages, different ways, different paths to see and understand the world. There is the prophetic passage. The pastoral passage. The priestly passage. There are more passages of scripture than we can list here to be certain. These different passages of scripture guide and lead us. Like other passages in our lives, scripture passages also have many things to see and notice that are just as important (sometimes more so) than the destination the passage takes us to.

Most people who read the Bible tend to journey such that a set of passages are more worn than others. This does not mean the other, less journeyed passages are unimportant, only that through discernment we attempt to find the well worn paths. Jesus preferred the passages of Isaiah and the Psalms over, say passages of Numbers or Nehemiah. We all have passages we walk and make clear for others to journey with us.

Some say that we are to take each section of the Bible with equal weight. I find this almost impossible to do. Even Jesus had his preferred passages. And so, if Jesus is our teacher and he says that we will do things greater than he (John 14:12-14), then is it possible that we too will have preferred passages of scripture?

Giving up Bible Reading in 2019

Photo by Priscilla Du Preez on Unsplash

Reading the Bible is a time honored tradition in the life of the Christian and this year I think I am giving it up. I am giving up reading the Bible for scripture reading.

Reading the Bible and scripture reading are different not in content but in posture. The same words are engaged but it is a different approach. When we read the Bible we tend to look for what we can learn or what we can gain. We look for the teaching or the wisdom we need to get through the moment. We find something that can challenge us or stimulate our thinking. The vast majority of Bible studies that I have been apart are interested in expanding your thinking in order to shore up belief structures. Reading the Bible puts the reader as the protagonist (the main actor) in the process.

Reading scripture is different.

First of all, we do not read scripture - scripture reads us. Scripture exposes to us the things in our life and world that we are blind to and even need to repent of. However the primary difference is that scripture reading means that we are open to (and expectant of) an encounter with the living Christ. This means scripture reading is not an action but an event. It is a “happening”. It is a theophany.

Shifting from reading the Bible to scripture reading is ultimately differentiated by the fruit each practice bears. If we are not transformed by the words we read, then we are reading the Bible. And so, as a start consider this scripture reading:

“But if you had known what this means, “I desire mercy and not sacrifice”, you would not have condemned the guiltless. ”

— Jesus, Matthew 12:7

What was lost when the Bible was printed on paper

The advent of the printing press and the proliferation of the written word on paper was a great and wonderful advancement for humanity. The sharing of ideas, and perhaps more importantly, the ability to not have to remember everything only where to find it, was explosive. Like much of the world, I am a fan of books and the proliferation of ideas. 

But we did loose something when we printed on paper. We lost the metaphor of parchment. 

Parchment is more costly than paper but it is also more durable. Additionally, parchment is flexible and, perhaps most important to this post, is made from animal skin. 

What does it mean to have words written on a flexible and "living" medium? When scripture is written on parchment we get the impression that scriptures are living but also flexible, durable and sacrificial. The scriptures cost something and thus parchment was a wonderful metaphor for such deep truth claims. Much of this was lost when we went to paper. 

Photo by MJ S on Unsplash

Paper of course is cheap and thus easy to come by. Paper also is less durable and rips easily. While paper is more common and thus easily shared, it also is more fragile and rigid. Could it be that in our efforts to spread scriptures to the ends of the earth, we have allowed our understanding of scripture to be more rigid?

In the digital age, what does it mean that scripture is electronic? It is easily shared (even more than paper), it reclaims a sense of flexibility (even more than parchment), and it is also much more durable (especially scripture in the cloud). It is also the case that electronic scripture means it is so ubiquitous that it does not cost anything, thus scripture is cheap to come by. 

Could it be that some of our debates about the authority of scripture are bound up in the different mediums scripture comes these days?