DMIN

7310 – Proclaiming the Kingdom

Eli Gutierrez – Reading Report


E. Randolph Richards and Richard James. Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes


In order to understand the Bible, we need to understand the context and the culture of the

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

individualist; therefore, there is a gap to be bridged in order to avoid misinterpretations of

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

decision making is a group matter for collectivists.

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

and the values of collectivist societies.

Friendship is also understood differently in collectivist societies. While for

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

clients give gratitude and faithfulness back.

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

respond in a certain way, with trust, faithfulness, and loyalty.

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

protection. It is important for individualist readers of Scripture to avoid viewing patronage

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

they deserve it or not.

Another aspect of human relationships within collectivist societies is brokerage. A

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

paracletos has been found in ancient documents in reference to mediators.

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

reinforce their values by considering the possession of their particular values to be

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

explains why biblical characters acted as they did.

Another tool collectivists use to enforce their values is shame. For western

individualists, shame is seen almost always in negative terms; however, in collectivist

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.

Shame misused, when it is applied too strongly or too publicly, ostracizes.

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

others through boundaries. For an individualist, boundaries have a negative connotation,

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

guarding boundaries protects the group identity.

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

acknowledge that. But it is a helpful generalization intended to understand Scripture, a series

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

which ways I am a collectivist and in which ways I am an individualist. As a Mexican, I have

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.