Author's note: These rules come directly from Dr. Lynn Cohick, a scholar, professor, and academic dean at Northern Seminary. While we're using Dr. Cohick's phrasing and organization, the underlying principles are widely used and accepted. That said, the explanations of them are mine - so please blame me for things that are unclear.

The second rule for Biblical interpretation is "Recognize Social Location." (The first, as a reminder, is "Distinguish between prescriptive v. descriptive statements.)

To implement this rule, we need to first understand the term "social location." Social location helps us consider how different factors impact not only a person's experiences and perceptions, but also how that person is perceived by others.

To start, let's think of some of the factors that define an individual's identity. These are things like occupation, education, ethnicity, race, language, gender, income, family status, age, geographic location, language, sexuality, and personal passions. As you can imagine, there are a lot of layers to consider when thinking about an individual's social location.

Applying this principle in Biblical interpretation might be thought of as the personal factors that are put under a larger umbrella of "context." If we're being precise, it might be best to say that context is about the world and culture surrounding (for example) an event. While the factors that you might consider when trying to understand a person's experience of that event are the factors that define social location.

For example, my daughter recently turned 10. To celebrate, she wanted to go to one of those hyper-stimulating trampoline parks that involve children flying all over the place, special socks, exuberant physical activity & only a slight chance that the day will end with broken bones. After considering, I told her that, yes - we could do that, and that she could also bring along 2 friends. For her, the news that 2 friends could be invited was a little disappointing while I felt like I was being a good sport (and kind of a big-spender) by letting her invite 2 friends in addition to her two siblings (the ever-inevitable other invitees).

(newsletter readers, continue from here)

I bet you can fairly easily understand why she & I might have different perceptions of the 2-friend plan. The reasons? To name a few, the differences in our ages, practical experiences with budgeting and money, and roles in the family all play a part. At the end of the day, I'm the mom and this precious child is just entering the double digits. That means the balance of power in financial decision making is mine, totally. And while I invited her input and requests regarding the plans for celebration, I ultimately, get to decide what will and will not be permitted.

However appropriate that may be, that fact and its implications are key factors when trying to understand her response and perception. You might say that by considering her "social location," you and I are better able to understand and empathize with her position. In reality, there are situations in which a consideration of social location is fairly natural and expected in our everyday lives.

Let's say she were to use this example to write an essay at school, and were to paint a bleak picture of her own emotional disappointment and desolation. In truth she was only mildly disappointed, and after a short explanation, was then focused on the excitement of the event. But, if she'd written a sad story for you to read, I'm guessing that your reaction would NOT be "Wow, that Marina is so mean. What a terrible person. Look! Her daughter is disappointed! Villainy!" One reason (aside from the fact that most normal people don't use the term "villainy" in their every day thoughts) is that since you're reading my words here, it's likely you are not a 4th grader, and therefore your own social location is likely to be more similar to my own - at least in some key areas.

I bet that you'd be able to intuitively guess at some of the factors going into my decision, even if her essay was your only exposure to the story. You'd know that things like setting expectations for future celebrations, balancing money spent on activities v. gifts, overall budget, and the energy required to manage a larger group of kids in that environment might all be probable or possible factors in the parameters I set up for her. And that would make sense to you; it might even seem reasonable or "right" to you.

Similarly, if you were to read her hypothetical essay, you probably wouldn't finish it and think, "Well, that kid is mystifying. How could she NOT understand that her hope to invite half the city is unreasonable?" You'd get it. You'd know, without even having to think about it, that as a 10 year old and dependent child who has never planned a birthday party, it makes sense that she might hope to invite a crowd.

Here's where we're going with this: your understanding of both my position and hers is dependent on your understanding of each of our social locations.

So, to bring this all back to the Bible...

Each and every person that is a part of everything you read in the scripture also has his or her own individual social location. Think about Mary & Joseph. When Matthew tells us about Joseph's internal upheaval as he considers what to do with the news that his intended bride is "with child," it makes a lot of sense. Joseph, as a man, is one of the parties who has decision-making power in regards to whether their marriage is dissolved or consumated. We don't get any information about what Mary's thoughts are on that particular piece of the story. This might because, as a 1st century Judean woman, she wouldn't necessarily get to weigh-in on the question of her legal marital status. What we're looking at there is the difference in Mary & Joseph's social locations.

Let's take it a step further. For argument's sake, let's pretend that new documents are unearthed that show that in her extremely unique situation, Mary was given a choice about how to proceed legally. Well, if that were the case, why wouldn't it be included in Matthew's gospel? Or another of the gospels? In reality, no such document has come to light (or is likely to, given the social customs of the time), but if it did... there are certainly people who might voice that exact question. If it happened, why isn't it in the narrative? It's a fair question! Luke gives us a fairly deep window into parts of Mary's experience, so why not part? Some might even say this is "evidence" that the newly found (imaginary) documents are forgeries.

Well, even though this is a fake scenario, there probably wouldn't be a clear "answer" to the question about why it wasn't included in any of the gospels. It would fall under the under-utilized heading of "things we just don't know." BUT, it would also be reasonable AND responsible to consider the fact that all four of the gospel accounts were written by men. Is it reasonable to theorize that their omissions about Mary's (fake) experience could be attributed to the fact that, as men, they might not have had much awareness or knowledge about Mary's decision making processes. Or, it might simple be rather unimportant to them. Remember, social location impacts not only how you perceive and understand the world around you, but also how rest of the people out there perceive and understand you.

There is, of course, an unending list of details and descriptions that are NOT in the Bible. One thing that certainly explains this in some cases is the social location of the author. In other cases, the social location of the person being described may be the deciding element. It depends, and most often it's probably some indefinable mix of both of those things - along with about 200 other factors - that would account for the "why" behind some of those omissions. The same is true in considering the details and seemingly small facts that are included. 

This is why the rule doesn't read "Decide based on social location" or "Allow social location to dictate your conclusion." To whatever extent we can define the social location of a person who lived thousands of years ago in a foreign place and extinct culture, it's still only one layer in our contemplation and understanding. But it is a crucial layer, and there are more than a few misguided ideas floating around out there that could be easily shifted and corrected if social location were given its proper place as one of the elements required for responsible interpretation.