Is the Bible Really Intended to Be Read Individually--or in community? 5 Reasons Why Communal approaches are Best

[James Nored]

As a good product of the Reformation movement, I applaud the fact that billions of people around the world have access to a Bible, should they choose to have one.

Historically, I realize that the translation of the Bible into the vernacular German, combined with the printing press, helped put thousands of Bibles into the hands of non-clergy. As people began to read the Scriptures, they saw that many practices in the church at that time were contrary to Scripture. This very much fanned the flames of the Reformation, leading to Protestantism.

And it is through this historical lens and heritage, whether knowingly or unknowingly, that we uphold the value of individual Bible study and tell people not to trust what those church leaders (insert preachers, elders, pastors) think. Read and discover for yourself the truth. The assumption is that the church is ever on the precipice of being led wildly astray, with the only thing keeping that in check is the lone individual, studying on his or her own, to keep the church/church leaders honest.

Sound familiar? This view of Scripture, which was very much shaped by the Reformation movement, was only more intensified during the Restoration Movement. In fact, we (our fellowship) often assumed that "denominitions" and denominational leaders were just insincere people who did not really believe in the Bible, and who just threw Scripture away whenever it suited their purposes. 

The stories that we seemed to love the most were of people who just picked up a Bible in isolation, read the Bible, and just came to conclusions based on "common sense" and the simple, "plain reading of the text." These conclusions, of course, led them straight to our fellowship, affirming both that they were "honest" in studying, and that we were the right church, the church found so clearly and obviously in Scripture. And they reached those decisions "on their own," not being influenced by bad church leaders.

Here is a favorite verse on this: "Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true" (Acts 17:11). If people in denominations would just read their Bibles more, then they too would see the "obvious truth" of Scripture. And if they had studied and came to different conclusions, well, then, something must have been wrong with their hearts.

Again, sound familiar? I have heard stories told of people in prison who did just the above, and concluded that we were the true church found in Scripture and none other. Stories of people who just read the Bible completely on their own, and showed up one day at a church in our fellowship saying that they wanted to be baptized. 

But is this individual approach to Bible study uninfluenced by others what the Bible teaches us to do? Is it even possible--or desirable?

1. We must remember that the biblical world did not have a printing press, and scrolls were rare and exceedingly expensive. But yet we uncritically read into texts post-printing press, post-Reformation ideas--such as that the Berean Jews in Acts 17:11 were studying off on their own, individually, with their own Bibles, rather than studying communally. There are many other passages in the Bible in which we read into them individual study, where that was almost impossible for the average person to do in those times.
   
2. The biblical world was largely an oral culture, and Scripture was passed down from generation to generation with the vast majority of the people, orally. In fact, the New Testament was not written down for decades after Christ had lived, died, risen, and ascended into heaven. 
   
3. Most of the letters of the New Testament were clearly intended to be read to the congregation, and were addressed to congregations and congregational leaders. This reading and hearing of the word in churches followed the pattern of the synagogues, in which the synagogue ruler would take out their "Bible" (the Old Testament)--a very rare and precious scroll--and read it aloud to the Jewish "congregants." 
   
   Note these Scriptures:

   
   -  "After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea" (Col. 4:16). 
   
   -  "I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers and sisters" (1 Thess. 5:27)
   
   - "Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near (Rev. 1:3). 
   
   In referring to the Old Testament and synagogue, note Acts 15:21: "For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

4. When major decisions came up or points of doctrine needed to be decided in the New Testament, we see that they were done communally. The most expanded example of this is the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, in which the apostles/missionaries and elders met to ponder the question of whether or not the Gentiles should be required to follow the Law of Moses. The gospel itself was at stake here!
   
   This is what was recorded about this decision making in Acts 15:28: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following . . . . " It was not that someone went off on their own, discovered "the truth," and then came back called people back to the light. No, this was a communal practice, in which the church leaders, congregation, and the Spirit was involved. 
   
   
5. Ironically, some of the few times in the Old Testament in which individual study was clearly intended--such as the requirement that the king of Israel write out his own copy of the Mosaic Law--points towards the importance still of leaders in discerning and upholding God's commands. This is why the bad elders are admonished in Ezekiel 34, and the elders are again warned in Ephesus in Acts 20 of wolves sneaking in among the sheep.
   
   - "When [the king] takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests.It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees (Deut. 17:18-19).
   
   " - 28 Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God,which he bought with his own blood. 29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock" Acts 20-20).
   
   Clearly in both the Old and New Testaments, there was still a great need for leadership. Other than the prophets, who directly heard from God, there is not painted the image of an untrained person, studying on his or her own, going down the true path and calling others back to this plain common sense reading.

I definitely acknowledge the power of the Scriptures. My mother read to me Bible stories every day--a practice I have sought to model in my own family with my own children. I preach from a text each week (which is a communal process). The Story of Redemption primarily followers the narrative of Scripture. As one of my former colleagues said, "Have you read this study? It is all Bible."

But it is simply not possible to read the Bible off on one's own and read it without any cultural lens or biases. Usually, as one of my professors put, when someone goes off on their own with Scripture and comes up with something completely new and unheard of before we can it heresy.

And in the first few centuries after Christ, there were people such as the Gnostics who would read into the Scriptures Gnostic thought. But it was the Christian community, who had passed down the oral sayings of Jesus and some who had heard him in person who said, no, you cannot read/hear the text that way. We were there with Jesus, and that is not what he meant. They had what came to be called a "rule of faith" in which they would compare whatever was being taught to the faith that Jesus and the apostles had taught.  In other words, Christianity--both then and now--is a historical faith, passed down from generation to generation.  

So, we should treasure the fact that we have Bibles so easily and readily available to us. But the strong evidence in Scripture is that the discernment of the Scriptures (and hearing it and following it) was and is a largely communal act. We need the interplay of the Spirit and Christians to best hear, listen to, and follow the word of God.

Where do you see the emphasis is in reading/listening to the Scriptures?

 

[James Nored]

Thank you, David! I appreciate you reading and sharing this perspective!

[David Wesley Spillman]

Great points...with nothing but scripture to back it up from historical background! Thank-you!