The rise of the printing press corresponded with a decline in community Bible study. The change wasn’t immediate, but it was a major shift. For centuries, the Bible had been read and studied in groups. In fact, the Bible was originally written to be read aloud, which is why the phrase “hear the word of the Lord” is used so often. When we arrive to the latter part of the 20th century, a large part of Bible study is carried on by individuals in isolation from others.

When the Bible was read and discussed in a community setting, individual opinions were analyzed by the group. While this did not lead to complete consensus, it did keep many strange ideas in check. A certain amount of agreement would be expected, more than what occurs when each is studying on his own.

The proliferation of Bibles that followed the printing press was accompanied by a proliferation of diverse doctrines. One can only assume that community study would have prevented some of the divisions that later occurred. As one commenter observed, while we enjoy the freedoms we have as regards Bible study, we have to recognize the negative aspects of that freedom as well.

In the centuries before Bibles could be mass produced, the Church had much control over where and when the Bible was read. Toward the end of the Middle Ages, groups like the Waldensians were promoting the use and interpretation of Scripture by the laity.

Still, the scarcity of copies of the Bible made generalized study almost impossible. It’s said that two monks working fulltime would take four years to produce a copy of the Bible; these copies were so valuable that they were chained to the pulpits in churches to keep them from being stolen.

It was only natural that individuals found themselves highly influenced by official church interpretations of the Scripture and specific congregations remained highly dependent on the church hierarchy. This was beginning to change before Gutenberg’s printing press, but his invention greatly accelerated the transformation.

It’s not coincidence that the Reformation didn’t take place until after the invention of the moveable type press.

In looking at the influence that Gutenberg’s printing press had on our view of the Bible, one of the principal things is that the Bible became a book. Well, yeah, I know… it had been gathered into book form long before. But up until Gutenberg’s day, it was still common for people to have copies of portions of the Bible (much like the Ethiopian eunuch with his copy of Isaiah).

Scriptures became Scripture. The holy writings became the holy book. And by our day, it was hard for people to think of the Bible in any other way. We sort of assume that the early Christians had a book that they carried around and read, that each congregation had the same materials available to them. It’s just not so. Some would have had some writings, others would have had others. Arguments could be based on the Old Testament, for it was the custom at that time for it to be read publicly in the synagogue each week. But we can’t assume that Peter’s readers had all read Paul, nor that John’s readers had read Luke.

Does that matter? Yes. We need to read each book in light of its own teachings first, then look to other books. For example, when we read “blessed are the poor” in Luke, we shouldn’t automatically insert “in spirit,” even though that is what Matthew quotes. Luke’s readers most likely wouldn’t have had access to Matthew. The message in Luke is a complete message that has to be understood in its own context.

When we read the Bible, we need to first think “books,” then think book. Despite of how its bound.