Cultural

Whenever anyone visits a culture radically different than their own, they usually experience “culture shock.” Everything from language to food to clothing to music to literature to coinage to social norms to societal values to governmental policies to religious expressions – it’s all drastically different. The same is true of the Bible, especially for those of us who live in the western world. Every time we open the Bible, we’re engaging in a cross-cultural experience. Thus, the goal of this CULTURAL section is to understand what life was like for these biblical people as best we can.
Aside from the language piece (which will be addressed later), this CULTURAL section deals with all of these aspects of culture and more. Since this is a massive subject, I’ll simply introduce you to a handful of significant CULTURAL components coloring the biblical story.
-Honor and Shame: these are two of the most significant values shaping behavior because they determine a person’s identity and social status. Thus, impacting every facet of one’s life. Contrary to the western world’s application of “shame” (primarily an internal feeling), “shame” as well as “honor” were external realities that the larger community would either affirm or deny, making everything public. These two values are so prevalent in the Bible, they’re virtually never mentioned, but they’re influencing everything, particularly in the Jewish setting throughout the Old and New Testaments.
-Hellenism: the cultural values and customs of the ancient Greeks (spread throughout the world by Alexander the Great), and thoroughly adopted by the Romans (thus known as the “Greco-Roman” context). The values and customs of Hellenism couldn’t have been more polar opposite than that of the Hebrew people. Since the majority of the New Testament is set within the Roman world, it’s important to understand how the message of Jesus, rooted in a Hebraic-Jewish context, had to be applied to a Greco-Roman context. This is why Paul’s writings are so different than the rest of the Bible. He’s writing to a different cultural context, and therefore has to present the Scripture in a way that resonates with his distinctive Greco-Roman audience.
-Tribal Society: among its many features, relationships reign supreme, family/clan/tribe affiliation is everything, and community takes precedence over the individual (individualism didn’t exist in the Jewish setting, but was rampant in the Greco-Roman setting). Ironically, most of the “you’s” in the Bible are plural (especially in the New Testament). Yet most of us read “you” and immediately think singularly (or individually) because our western world is steeped in a Hellenistic context, and we completely miss
the communal instructions and implications of what’s being communicated.
-Agrarian Society & Village Life: significant portions of the Bible (including the Gospels) take place in an agrarian society where farming and village life is the norm. Understanding how farming communities functioned (agricultural cycle, dry/wet season, tenant farmers, property lines, etc.) and what village life was like is key to unlocking a plethora of stories.
-The Temple was the Center of Jewish Life: there is no separation between “church” and “state” for the Hebrew people in the Bible. For them, economics, politics, nationalism, military, religious expression – they’re all tied into the same “institution” of the temple. Can you see why the religious elite were irate when Jesus overturned the money changers and critiqued the temple?
-Rabbinical World: Jesus was a Jewish rabbi functioning in a Jewish world, utilizing rabbinic hermeneutics (study techniques) and teaching practices

(Such as remez ( Hebrew word meaning “hint,” and it’s the practice of mentioning a keyword or phrase
in a teaching that would “hint” at a passage from the Hebrew Scriptures and import that context into the current teaching moment to add greater significance and clarity to the teaching.)

and the use of parables) to reach the audience of his day,
and raising up disciples to carry on his mission. Without an understanding of this foundational cultural piece, I can’t begin to express how much of Jesus’s message and actions are lost upon the modern reader.
Speaking of Jesus and parables, let’s conclude this section by demonstrating how the depth and richness of this CULTURAL lens impacts his parable of the Prodigal Sons (yes, that’s intentionally plural) recorded in Luke 15:11-32.8

• Inheritances weren’t granted until after a father’s death. When the
  younger son asks for his share of the inheritance, he’s essentially saying to his father, “I wish you were dead.”
• Upon such a disgraceful request, a father is expected to beat his son
  or perhaps cut off his inheritance. The father does neither. To the
  absolute shock of the community in the story (nothing is private in
  a village context), the father divides the property. Furthermore, the
  father grants his youngest son disposition (the right to sell) as the inheritance in this time isn’t money, but property (land and animals).
• We’re told the father has two sons. When the younger son asks for his inheritance, the older son should openly refuse receiving his portion of the inheritance in protest to his brother’s disgraceful request. And yet he says nothing. Furthermore, the older son is expected to step into the role of the reconciler. Meaning, when a relationship fractures, a third party (chosen on the closeness of their relationship to each side) steps in to attempt healing of the relationship.
• Again, the older son says nothing. His silence is as shocking as his brother’s request. And because we’re told the father divided the property “between them,” the older son gets his share as well, which would’ve been twice as much as the younger brother since the eldest son customarily received a double portion.
• When the younger son returns home, the father runs to meet him. No dignified man runs and exposes his legs in this culture. It’s considered shameful and humiliating. And yet the father does it. Why?
  This is an agrarian setting. People didn’t live in homes next to their fields. They lived in a village and went out to work their fields. The son coming home isn’t a moment being shared by father and son, but by the larger village community as well. And they’re furious at the sight of the younger son. Remember, this is an honor and shame culture where every action brings honor or shame upon you and your extended community. When the younger son asked for his inheritance, he not only shamed his father, but the community as well. When the older son remained silent, neither refusing his inheritance nor stepping into the role of the reconciler, he shamed his father and the
  community as well. This whole story is laced in shame. Thus, when the younger son returns home, and the fathers runs to embrace him, he’s not only shaming himself in order to reach his son more quickly, but he’s racing to absorb his son’s shame and shield him from the wrath of the village community. That’s how shockingly extravagant the father’s love is for his lost younger son.
• And the story ends with the older son shaming his father by refusing to join the party of his younger brother. And in his extravagant love for his lost eldest son, the father again shames himself by leaving the party (something a host never did in that culture). He does so to remind his son how much he loves him and that everything he has is his and extends an invitation for his son to join the celebration.
  This deepens the story, doesn’t it? The father is a depiction of God in this story, and this is how Jesus conveys God’s love for lost and broken people who are desperately in need of reconciliation. It’s no wonder that Jesus, who was the exact imprint of God (see Hebrews 1:3), demonstrates his love for people in a similar, “shameful” way. Crucifixion was the most shame filled way to die in the ancient world (the shaming was as significant as the execution itself). And yet Jesus conquered death, sin and shame by becoming sin for us (see 2 Corinthians 5:21) and dying on the very symbol of shame in order to bring us life and freedom.
  
  Questions to ask:
• ¨ Is this a Jewish context? Roman? Egyptian? Babylonian? Etc.?
• ¨ How is the context (Jewish, Roman, etc.) impacting the story?
• ¨ What cultural clues are given explicitly in the passage?
• ¨ What cultural aspects are sitting below the surface?
• ¨ How are values, such as honor and shame, influencing the story?
• ¨ What assumptions are we making based on our own cultural lenses
• that may or may not be accurate in the story?
  
  This kind of cultural depth is everywhere in the Bible