Professional Documents
Culture Documents
people who wrote it. In Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes E. Randolph Richards
and Richard James help the reader to do precisely that. They help to grasp one aspect of
Ancient Eastern societies, namely, their collectivism. Western modern societies are
Scripture, which is a series of books produced by collectivist cultures. Richards and James
acknowledge that categories such as individualist and collectivist are generalizations, and
they are not always precise. However, generalizations are usually helpful. In their book, they
argue that there were some foundational elements in all the societies in which the Bible was
written. They explore six basic social structures and tools of collectivist societies: kinship,
patronage, brokerage, honor, shame, and boundaries. And in doing so, they bring the world
of the Bible closer to the modern reader, and the modern reader closer to the Bible.
A culture is like the ocean for a fish. A fish does not wonder what is the ocean, a fish
just lives in the ocean because it is the world it knows. In the same way, a culture is the water
in wish people live. Thus, there are many important social structures and tools that usually
go without being said. A culture operates in the background. That is why many times western
modern readers misinterpret Scripture. The biblical text does not always say everything
going on in the narrative. The text does not have to say everything because there is a high
level of shared information between the author and the audience. For those of the biblical
world those gaps are filled with their cultural features. However, when the modern reader
fills in the gaps with their own cultural features the meaning of the text is violented. Since
we do not share a common culture with the societies in which the Bible was written we need
to understand their culture. Richard and James help us do so by exploring how collectivist
societies work.
One of the main differences between individualist and collectivist cultures is what
Richards and James call “me versus the we”. Individualist think in terms of the individual and
collectivist think in terms of the group. For example, individualists tend to read the story of
Joseph in Genesis as the story of how one individual succeeded in spite of many different
obstacles in life. Whereas collectivists read the story as the tale of how a family was brought
together and the group was saved. As individualists, we might read this as a tale of success,
when originally it was intended to be a story of reconciliation. One way to describe the
difference is in the following terms: in individualist societies the community is the sum of
individuals, while in collectivist societies the individual is the sum of the community. People
in collectivist societies define themselves according to their community and live their lives
oriented to their group. For example, in biblical times it was very important for the family to
choose a right spouse for their sons. In our individualist societies this is unthinkable. But
Since collectivist societies are oriented to the group, kinship is one of the most
important values. For individualists, biblical genealogies are just boring. But they actually
are telling something important. Being part of a family is a crucial element of one’s identity
in collectivist societies. Their family history is their identity. There are three ways to become
part of a family: birth, adoption, and marriage. And being part of a family was not an
individual matter but a group matter. It had to do with inheritance, land, survival, protection,
transcendence, etc. In that sense, marriage was something very different from what modern
individualist westerners think. It did not have to do with romance and falling in love only (if
at all), but with the whole group. These kinship dynamics are at work all over the biblical
narrative. In order to understand correctly some stories in the Bible such as the tale of Juda
and Tamar in Genesis 38, or the book of Ruth, it is crucial to understand kinship dynamics
individualists friendship is a matter of choice, affections, and giving without expecting back,
for collectivist friendships are a matter of mutual dependency and reciprocity. In collectivist
societies there are high expectations of friends. Collectivists understand themselves as being
part of a group that depends on one another. People give to others and expect others to give
back. Moreover, western modern individualists value treating everyone equally, whereas
collectivists value treating everyone differently depending on their social status or group.
Nevertheless, relationships between people from different social status still require
reciprocity. Scholars call this kind of relationships patronage. Patron-client relationships are
reciprocal relationships between unequal partners. Patrons give help to their clients and
In collectivist societies gifts have string attached and that is good. For individualists,
who value giving without expecting something back, this seems very odd. However, this is
the way in which collectivist societies work and it benefited them in many ways. Gifts create
a relationship, a friendship of mutual dependency that help people go through life. Moreover,
the Bible uses this as a metaphor for the relationship between God and his people. Charis
was a term used to refer to the gifts from the patrons to their clients. And pistis was a term
used to refer to the loyalty that clients were expected to give back. Thus, the benefits from a
patron were called grace, and it was considered a virtue of dignity to be a good benefactor.
On the other side, clients were expected to honor their patrons and be loyal to them, to be
faithful. Paul uses patronage and its terms to speak about salvation. When we accept the
grace of God in Jesus Christ we become part of his household. We are now his children and
we enter in a relationship with him. His gifts are by grace alone, but we are expected to
Patronage is a technical term that scholars use today. In biblical times they did not
use this term but other words and images. Some of those images are father, shepherd, and
king. The Bible uses these metaphors to speak about the role of a leader and, specially, the
relationship between God and his people. They work to express not only what God is and
what a godly leader is but, most importantly, how they act. It is a about actual care and
as negative in itself. Of course, there are patrons that abuse their power; however, it is a
matter of bad patrons and not the system in itself. Patronage is just a cultural structure and
biblical writers used it to illustrate who is God, a good patron who offers grace to all whether
broker is a mediator who seeks justice for those who could not gain it otherwise. Brokers are
the bridges that link people and, sometimes, networks of people together. When people have
a problem, they look for someone who can mediate. This is just the way things work in
collectivist societies. Again, brokerage is a technical term to describe a reality that went
without being said. Some of the terms collectivists use for this kind of relationships are
friend, older brother, and relative. Brokers have connections with two parties and mediate
between them. They build relationships between people and help restore them when a
fracture happens. There are many examples of brokerage in the Bible; however, the most
important and beautiful is the image of Jesus Christ as the mediator between God and
humanity. Moreover, in the gospel of John the Holy Spirit is portrayed as a broker. The word
Kinship, patronage, and brokerage are some of the values of collectivist societies. And
there are some ways in which they reinforce their values. Richards and James call these ways
“tools”, although they acknowledge it is not a perfect metaphor. Some of these tools are
honor, shame, and boundaries. Honor is hard to define. But it is clear that collectivist cultures
honorable. Some of the words related to honor in the Bible are glory, praise, respect, weight,
reverence, reputation, esteem, a good name, etc. There are different kinds of honor. Ascribed
honor is the one people get only for being themselves. This kind of honor is not gained. Honor
could also be achieved in two common ways, by performing honorable deeds and through
honor contests. Understanding honor might be hard, especially because although all
collectivist societies used honor to enforce their values not all of them had the same values.
However, in order to understand Scripture, it is important to note that honor very often
Another tool collectivists use to enforce their values is shame. For western
societies shame can have a positive use. As readers of Scripture we need a more biblical
understanding of shame. In collectivism, shame is connected with doing the right things and
is used to help people stay within the lines. It works like an alarm bell, the community’s
conscience, to shape behavior. Of course, shame could be used to condemn someone, but it
is also used to restore. It all depends on how it is used. In the New Testament, Paul shames
people so that they might repent and be restored in the community (e.g. 2 Cor 2:5-11). Shame
used properly creates a path for restoration, its goal is bringing the person back to the group.
Honor and shame are hard to understand for western individualists. Partly because
shame and honor are collective tools, they have to do with a group that is distinguished from
whereas for a collectivist they mean protection and belonging. There are different cultural
elements that distinguish a people from another: food, language, clothes, traditions, beliefs,
lifestyle, etc. These are boundaries that define the identity of the group and serve to know
who is within our group and who is an outsider. Boundaries define identity, without them
there is no community. This is a very important theme in Scripture. In the Old Testament
Israel is called to be a particular kind of people, and so are Christians in the New Testament.
They are to be distinguished from other people in the way they act. One of the most
important boundaries is the fact they only worship one God. In sum, defining, enforcing, and
Richards and James’ book truly brings the reader closer to the Biblical world. Of
course, categorizing people as individualists and collectivists is not precise and they
of documents that were produced in a very different context from our own. This book is also
challenging because it stirs the reader to know not only the culture of the biblical writers but
also to be aware of their own culture. For example, reading this book made me wonder in
received influence from both sides. I live in the west and my country is very influenced by
the American society, but the roots of my culture are found in a mix of Mediterranean and
native American societies which are collectivist. So, I am thinking that my culture is more a
hybrid one. Nevertheless, one of the best insights I found in this book is the fact that God
works wherever we are. God works in our culture, in spite of it and through it. The theme of
community is all over Scripture. God is our father, we are his children, and we are all a family.
For individualist this is a challenge because we do not always understand the importance of
community, and for collectivists this is a challenge because it redefines boundaries. The
gospel of Jesus speaks to us in whatever culture we are and challenge us to new ways. The
Holy Spirit uses our language, context, and cultural tools. And God adapts to our world in
order to reveal himself, speak to us, and shape our life into godlikeness.