I was recently listening to a lecture series on world cultures and customs and there was a very interesting section on how our culture affects the way we interpret scripture.
A New Testament scholar name Mark Powell conducted a study where he asked evangelical ministers about the parable of the Prodigal Son, which is recorded in
Luke 15.
To paraphrase the parable, a young son comes to his father and says he wants his inheritance early. The father gives him his inheritance and the son takes the money and he goes off and he spends it wildly. And before long, the young man ends up in a pig pen.
Mr. Powell asked ministers from Russia, Tanzania, and the United States, "Why is it that the Prodigal Son ended up in the pig pen?"
The Russian pastors said, "That's easy. It's obvious. He ended up in the pig pen because there was a famine in the land."
The Tanzanian pastors said, "That's obvious. It's because noone gave him anything to eat."
The US pastors said, "It's because he squandered the money that he had inherited."
This was mind-boggling to me. The US pastors gave the answer that I thought was obvious. How could it be that the pastors from the other countries could be so wrong about the parable?
It turns out that they were not. The Americans read verse 13 and see the Prodigal Son's personal responsibility for the consequences of his decision.
13 And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living.
The Russian pastors focused on verse 14 and emphasize the circumstances the young man found himself in because of the natural disaster.
14 And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want.
The Tanzanian pastors looked at verse 16 and what the implications were on the community's responsibility to help him.
16 And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.
All are valid interpretations of the parable. This makes me wonder if we have a blind spot in our understanding of the scriptures because of our culture. How would we read and understand certain passages of scripture differently if we read them with a different perspective? Do we read additional meaning into certain passages that are not part of the original intent, or that distract from what the main intent of the Savior may have been?
This also made me wonder what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would look like if the restoration of the gospel had taken place in another country. The church is heavily influenced by western, protestant traditions. What would the church be like if it had been restored in Japan, India, Uganda, or Mexico?
Having the church meetings be uniform throughout the world also makes it very nice and comfortable for we Americans traveling abroad, but would adapting the church more to the local culture be of more benefit to the locals?
