Three-Dimensional Bible Reading

Moving Beyond Surface-Level Interpretation

Too often we approach Scripture as though it were a simple rulebook—find the relevant verse, apply it directly, move on. But this one-dimensional reading misses the rich complexity and nuance of how Scripture actually functions in the life of faith communities.

The Three Dimensions Explained

One-Dimensional Reading

One-dimensional reading takes a single verse, passage, or biblical idea in isolation. It's like looking at a photograph and assuming you understand the entire scene. This approach often leads to proof-texting—using individual verses to support predetermined conclusions while ignoring the broader biblical narrative.

Two-Dimensional Reading

Two-dimensional reading brings in context—both the internal context of Scripture itself and the external context of the ancient world. It examines how passages relate to and interpret each other. It asks questions like: What was happening historically when this was written? What literary genres and cultural assumptions are at play? What theological themes connect different texts?

Three-Dimensional Reading

Three-dimensional reading considers how different communities and perspectives receive and interpret Scripture across time and culture. It recognizes that we all bring our own context and experiences to the text. This dimension examines how various groups—divided by time, geography, culture, race, gender, and theology—understand and apply biblical passages differently.

Putting It Into Practice

Let's examine how these dimensions play out with two controversial topics:

Women in Church Leadership

One-Dimensional

• "Women should remain silent in the churches" (1 Cor 14:34)
  • Therefore: Women can never teach or hold authority in church
• Problems: Ignores context, contradicts other passages, oversimplifies complex issues

Two-Dimensional

• Examines Paul's other writings about women leaders (Phoebe, Priscilla, Junia)
• Paul plants churches with other women, calls them co-workers, and affirms the gifting of all people, regardless of gender
• Studies specific situation in Corinthian church
• Notes cultural dynamics around women's education and public speaking
• Result: Whatever "a woman must stay silent" means, it can't merely mean all women for all time can't teach or pastor.

Three-Dimensional

• Considers how different Christian traditions have interpreted these passages
• A feminist critique of Paul may point out the ways his words have been used to prop up misogyny and sexism.
• A white male reading of Paul may emphasize his more sexist-sounding passages while ignoring other passages.
• An intellectual evangelical reading may attempt to reinterpret Paul in order to maintain his status as inerrant within the canon.
• Studies how different cultures navigate gender roles
• Values women's experiences reading these texts

Intermarriage in Ezra-Nehemiah

One-Dimensional

• Ezra commands divorce of non-Jewish wives
  • Therefore: Interracial/intercultural marriage is wrong
• Problems: Misses broader biblical themes, ignores cultural context

Two-Dimensional

• Places story in post-exilic context of rebuilding Jewish identity
• Compares to other biblical perspectives on intermarriage
• Examines the book of Ruth as counterpoint
  • The Hebrew canon puts the books of Ezra and Ruth near each other, emphasizing the fact that King David will come from Ruth's line, therefore implicitly critiquing Ezra's actions.
• Notes tension between ethnic preservation and inclusion

Three-Dimensional

• An American indigenous perspective may be curious how Ezra applies to threatened populations and cultures where intercultural marriage could be an existential threat.
• A womanist perspective may challenge Ezra's decree as inherently racist.
• A Jewish perspective may put Ezra and Ruth in conversation with each other and imagine how they would interact.
• Explores modern interfaith/intercultural relationship experiences
• Talks about post-colonial readings

Moving Forward

Three-dimensional Bible reading doesn't give us easy answers, but it does give us better questions:

• What voices have historically been excluded from interpreting this text?
• How do different communities' experiences shape their reading?
• What assumptions am I bringing to the text?
• How can engaging other perspectives deepen my understanding?

This approach requires more work than simply pulling out proof-texts. But it leads to a richer, more honest engagement with Scripture—one that honors both its divine inspiration and its human complexity.

Scripture isn't meant to be a flat surface we skim across. It's meant to be a deep well we dive into, discovering new insights as we explore its depths through multiple dimensions of meaning and interpretation.