Discussion Questions for “Reading with New Eyes: Social Location and the Bible” Explain how Kuan uses either (a) the story of David and Bathsheba or (b) the exodus story to illustrate his point that “meaning is never imbedded in the text; rather it is the result of the interaction between the reader and the text.” What does Kuan mean when he says “social location matters” in interpreting the Bible? What does Kuan say about viewing the Scriptures as the “Word of God”? Choose one particular sentence or brief passage in this article with which you think Ron Rhodes (the author of your previous D2L reading, “Rightly Interpreting the Bible”) would especially disagree. Why do you think he would disagree with this sentence or passage? On this point, do you agree more with Rhodes or Kuan? Why? Answers Kuan uses the story of David and Bathsheba to illustrate that meaning is never imbedded in the text. Some people read the story and see it as passionate, some see the injustice in Uriah’s death and others see the injustice in Bathsheba’s rape. Here, Kuan is showing that meaning is not universal but particular to the reader. Social location matters when interpreting the Bible because it encompasses all the different components of a person and affects the meaning they construct. Kuan says that people need to be careful about equating the Scriptures with the “Word of God” and that the text is God, not the Bible. He also says that the word can come even when speaking against the text. Kuan says that if we put marginalized groups at the center of the text and this would force us to rethink our traditions and faith. Rhodes would probably be against this because it would not be looking at the text objectively or taking it literally. I think that people should put more emphasis on marginalized groups in the Bible, so not to isolate people or ignore their strife.