Interpreting Non-Biblical Examples Without Compromising Scripture's Authority
Interpreting non-biblical examples without compromising the authority of Scripture involves a careful approach to understanding both the biblical text and external sources. The Bible itself is considered the ultimate authority for faith and life [8]. Therefore, any external information or example must be evaluated in light of biblical teaching.
One aspect of maintaining scriptural authority is recognizing the Bible's unique origin. The apostle Paul, for instance, speaks of "comparing spiritual things with spiritual," which some interpreters understand as expounding Spirit-inspired Old Testament Scripture by comparing it with the Gospel revealed by the same Spirit, or illustrating Gospel mysteries by comparing them with Old Testament types [12]. This suggests an internal consistency and divine origin for the biblical text that sets it apart.
When engaging with non-biblical examples, it is crucial to understand the nature of biblical interpretation itself. John Calvin, a significant figure in Reformed theology, was known for his meticulous verbal criticisms and his emphasis on the importance of Scripture [9]. Similarly, Adam Clarke, a Methodist commentator, argued that while guidance can be helpful, the Scriptures can be understood by any "simple, upright" person where the Gospel has been published, without needing an "authorized interpreter" [8]. This highlights a Protestant emphasis on the perspicuity of Scripture, meaning its clarity in essential matters of salvation.
The challenge arises when non-biblical examples seem to offer insights or perspectives that might appear to contradict or go beyond biblical teaching. For instance, early church fathers like John Chrysostom, while influential, sometimes made use of verbal suggestions in the Greek Septuagint that did not have a warrant in the Hebrew text, or amplified and diluted passages, occasionally interpolating material [10, 11]. This demonstrates that even respected historical interpreters could, at times, prioritize linguistic or rhetorical considerations over strict adherence to the original biblical languages or textual integrity. Such instances underscore the need to critically evaluate all interpretations, biblical or non-biblical, against the original biblical text.
A key principle in this evaluation is to ensure that non-biblical examples do not introduce concepts that undermine core biblical doctrines. For example, the Bible consistently teaches about universal sinfulness. Paul delays exploring the theme of righteousness through faith until after he establishes that both Gentiles and Jews are "equally under sin’s power and cannot find favor with God by any action of their own" [6]. Psalms also states that "all human beings are born sinners" [1]. Proverbs describes "vanity" as "all sorts of sinful acts" [2]. If a non-biblical example were to suggest that humanity is inherently good or that sin is merely a social construct, it would directly contradict these foundational biblical teachings.
Furthermore, the Bible distinguishes between different types of sin. Deliberate sins are characterized by an "insolent or arrogant attitude" and are seen as rebellion [5]. The first sin of Adam and Eve is described not merely as eating an apple, but as "a love of self, dishonor to God, ingratitude to a benefactor, disobedience to the best of Masters—a preference of the creature to the Creator" [4]. Even after conversion, individuals can commit "actual sins," and acknowledging this is crucial; denying it would be to "make him a liar" [7]. Non-biblical examples should not obscure these distinctions or diminish the gravity of sin as understood biblically.
Another area where non-biblical examples must be carefully handled is in understanding the nature of evil and its origin. The apostle John states that "He that committeth sin is of the devil," contrasting this with those who "doeth righteousness" [3]. Augustine, commenting on this passage, clarifies that while one can become a "child of the devil by imitating him," the devil does not "beget none, nor does he create any" [3]. This distinction is important: evil originates from the devil's influence and human choice, not from a divine act of creation or generation by the devil. Non-biblical narratives or philosophical systems that attribute evil to a co-equal opposing force to God, or that deny human responsibility for sin, would conflict with this biblical understanding.
Sources
- Psalms (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Psalms 58:3: 58:3 All human beings are born sinners (see 51:5); however, whereas the wicked indulge their sinful nature, the godly fight against it (Rom 7:19-23; Jas 4:1-10).”
- Proverbs (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Proverbs 30:8: vanity--all sorts of sinful acts (Job 11:11; Isa 5:18).”
- 1 John (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 John 3:8: He that committeth sin is of the devil--in contrast to "He that doeth righteousness," Jo1 3:7. He is a son of the devil (Jo1 3:10; Joh 8:44). John does not, however, say, "born of the devil." as he does "born of God," for "the devil begets none, nor does he create any; but whoever imitates the devil becomes a child of the devil by imitating him, not by proper birth" [AUGUSTINE, Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Homily 4.10]. From the devil there is not generation, but corruption [BENGEL]. sinneth from the beginning--from the time that any beg”
- Genesis (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Genesis 3:13: beguiled--cajoled by flattering lies. This sin of the first pair was heinous and aggravated--it was not simply eating an apple, but a love of self, dishonor to God, ingratitude to a benefactor, disobedience to the best of Masters--a preference of the creature to the Creator.”
- Psalms (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Psalms 19:13: 19:13 An individual who commits deliberate sins does so with an insolent (86:14) or arrogant (119:21, 69) attitude. • The great sin is rebellion (see 32:1).”
- Romans (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Romans 1:18: 1:18–3:20 Paul delays exploring the theme of righteousness through faith (see 3:21) until after he first teaches about universal sinfulness. Gentiles (1:18-32) and Jews (2:1–3:8) are equally under sin’s power and cannot find favor with God by any action of their own (3:9-20). 1:18 God’s anger is not a spontaneous emotional outburst, but the holy God’s necessary response to sin. The Old Testament often depicts God’s anger (Exod 32:10-12; Num 11:1; Jer 21:3-7) and predicts a decisive outpouring of God’s wrath on human sin at the end of history. While Paul usually de”
- 1 John (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 John 1:10: Parallel to Jo1 1:8. we have not sinned--referring to the commission of actual sins, even after regeneration and conversion; whereas in Jo1 1:8, "we have no sin," refers to the present GUILT remaining (until cleansed) from the actual sins committed, and to the SIN of our corrupt old nature still adhering to us. The perfect "have . . . sinned" brings down the commission of sins to the present time, not merely sins committed before, but since, conversion. we make him a liar--a gradation; Jo1 1:6, "we lie"; Jo1 1:8, "we deceive ourselves"; worst of al”
- Acts (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on Acts 8:31: How can I, except some man should guide me? - This is no proof that "the Scriptures cannot be understood without an authorized interpreter," as some of the papistical writers assert. How could the eunuch know any thing of the Gospel dispensation, to which this scripture referred? That dispensation had not yet been proclaimed to him; he knew nothing about Jesus. But where that dispensation has been published, where the four Gospels and the apostolic epistles are at hand, every thing relative to the salvation of the soul may be clearly apprehended by any simple, upright”
- CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1 (Gen 1-23), section 1.5: more recently been subjected. Still his verbal criticisms are neither few nor unimportant, though he lays comparatively little stress upon them himself. 5 5 The reader is referred, for full information on this subject, to a small volume entitled, “The Merits of Calvin as an Interpreter of the Holy Scriptures,” by Professor Tholuck of Halle. To which are added, “Opinions and Testimonies of Foreign and British Divines and Scholars as to the Importance of the Writings of John Calvin.” With a Preface by the Revelation William Pringle. ”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew: Owing to his ignorance of Hebrew, Chrysostom was not properly equipped for the work of expounding the Old Testament. He treats the LXX. as though it were of final authority, save in a few instances where the variations of other Greek versions have occasioned discussion. Frequently he makes use of verbal suggestions of the Greek that have no warrant in the Hebrew text. Yet, where he is not thus misled, his comments on the Old Testament present the same characteristics as those on the New. The most marked peculiarity of Chrysostom as an exegete is his compar”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts & Romans: oftener still amplifies, or rather dilutes: and interpolates matter which sometimes is demonstrably borrowed with little disguise from the Catena (see p. 113, note 1; 279, note 3; 280, note 2); or which, when it is his own, is little worth. In short, he has thought more of sound than of sense, and if he could make a passage run smoothly to the ear, has given himself little concern whether St. Chrysostom was likely to have so thought, or so expressed himself. The notes appended to our Translation will abundantly substantiate this censure. To have note”
- 1 Corinthians (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Corinthians 2:13: also--We not only know by the Holy Ghost, but we also speak the "things freely given to us of God" (Co1 2:12). which the Holy Ghost teacheth--The old manuscripts read "the Spirit" simply, without "Holy." comparing spiritual things with spiritual--expounding the Spirit-inspired Old Testament Scripture, by comparison with the Gospel which Jesus by the same Spirit revealed [GROTIUS]; and conversely illustrating the Gospel mysteries by comparing them with the Old Testament types [CHRYSOSTOM]. So the Greek word is translated, "comparing" (Co2 10:”