Learning How to Read #3
I was recently watching a show on the training required to be a U.S. Marine Corps scout/sniper. As one would expect, there was lots of grueling physical training and training in marksmanship. I was struck by one particular drill, however. The trainees were lined up with spotting scopes and told to look downrange where they were told there was an instructor. Their job was to focus intently on everything they saw, the slightest movement, the slightest unnatural color, the slightest unnatural silhouette. The well-concealed instructor couldn't be spotted until he had fired his own weapon twice because the trainees weren't careful enough. The difference in combat would have been the difference between life and death.
The same diligence in carefully looking at what really is and isn't there is vital in reading and interpreting the Bible. Assumed knowledge leads us to skim over passages that we think we know, and also to read things into passages. We can be reading through Luke get to the famous parables like the Good Samaritan or Prodigal Son and then almost skip over them because we already think we know them. This assumed knowledge prevents us from allowing oursleves to pore over the text and really reflect on it. When we do this we, just like the sniper trainees, miss things that are really important. Sometimes we really do need to read something again for the first time.
A related danger is not actually reading what the text says. We all assume that the Bible describes a climactic "Battle of Armageddon" in which the cosmic forces of good and evil duke it out in a future cataclysm. Even a History Channel show I saw last night described it. The reality, when you actually read the last chapters of Revelation, is quite different. Likewise, there is lots of discussion of who the "antichrist" is when the word does not appear in Revelation.
The gospels are likewise full of pitfalls for us as we read. Because events are frequently described in all three synoptic Gospels we assume that the accounts are the same in each one. One of the best examples of this is the "Beatitudes" from Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. Many of you who read this will recognize them: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven; Blessed are those who mourn...Blessed are the meek...Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness... etc. The casual reader who is somewhat familiar with these Beatitudes who then comes across Luke's version of them in his Sermon the Plain might assume that they are identical. Luke, however, doesn't say "blessed are the poor in spirit," he says "blessed are you who are poor." Likewise, he doesn't say "blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness." Instead, he says "blessed are you who are hungry now." The difference is striking, and the difference is critical in understanding what Luke is saying.
For those of you who venture in the historical writings in the Old Testament you will find numerous traps in Kings and Chronicles. These books cover approximately the same historical material, so many of the same people and events are described. The reader must be careful not to assume that the two say the same things. The reality is that they don't. The books render different judgments/assessments on people on many occasions. Some events are described differently, some names are spelled differently. The really important part of interpreting is spotting the differences and then pondering over what those may mean.
What it boils down to my friends, is simply that we need to stick to what is there in the text and also to be aware of what is not there. Happy reading!
The same diligence in carefully looking at what really is and isn't there is vital in reading and interpreting the Bible. Assumed knowledge leads us to skim over passages that we think we know, and also to read things into passages. We can be reading through Luke get to the famous parables like the Good Samaritan or Prodigal Son and then almost skip over them because we already think we know them. This assumed knowledge prevents us from allowing oursleves to pore over the text and really reflect on it. When we do this we, just like the sniper trainees, miss things that are really important. Sometimes we really do need to read something again for the first time.
A related danger is not actually reading what the text says. We all assume that the Bible describes a climactic "Battle of Armageddon" in which the cosmic forces of good and evil duke it out in a future cataclysm. Even a History Channel show I saw last night described it. The reality, when you actually read the last chapters of Revelation, is quite different. Likewise, there is lots of discussion of who the "antichrist" is when the word does not appear in Revelation.
The gospels are likewise full of pitfalls for us as we read. Because events are frequently described in all three synoptic Gospels we assume that the accounts are the same in each one. One of the best examples of this is the "Beatitudes" from Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. Many of you who read this will recognize them: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven; Blessed are those who mourn...Blessed are the meek...Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness... etc. The casual reader who is somewhat familiar with these Beatitudes who then comes across Luke's version of them in his Sermon the Plain might assume that they are identical. Luke, however, doesn't say "blessed are the poor in spirit," he says "blessed are you who are poor." Likewise, he doesn't say "blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness." Instead, he says "blessed are you who are hungry now." The difference is striking, and the difference is critical in understanding what Luke is saying.
For those of you who venture in the historical writings in the Old Testament you will find numerous traps in Kings and Chronicles. These books cover approximately the same historical material, so many of the same people and events are described. The reader must be careful not to assume that the two say the same things. The reality is that they don't. The books render different judgments/assessments on people on many occasions. Some events are described differently, some names are spelled differently. The really important part of interpreting is spotting the differences and then pondering over what those may mean.
What it boils down to my friends, is simply that we need to stick to what is there in the text and also to be aware of what is not there. Happy reading!
Comments
Post a Comment