Using Non-Biblical Examples in a Way Consistent with Scripture
Using Non-Biblical Examples in a Way Consistent with Scripture
The use of non-biblical examples in Christian teaching and preaching is a practice that has been debated among various Christian traditions. The Bible itself provides guidance on the use of illustrations and examples in teaching. For instance, Jesus used parables, which are comparisons or similitudes, to convey spiritual truths [1].
The biblical basis for using examples, whether from Scripture or elsewhere, lies in the principle of illustrating spiritual truths through relatable analogies. Jesus' use of parables demonstrates this principle. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says, "The kingdom of heaven is like..." and proceeds to give an example from everyday life (Mt 13:24, 31, 33, 44-45, 47) [5]. This method of teaching is rooted in the understanding that truth can be conveyed through various means, not solely through direct biblical quotation.
One tradition interprets the biblical mandate to teach and preach as allowing for the use of non-biblical examples, provided they are consistent with Scripture. one commentary tradition on 1 John 3:8 notes that one becomes a child of the devil by imitating him, not by proper birth, highlighting the importance of actions and behaviors in illustrating spiritual conditions [2]. This suggests that examples, whether biblical or not, can be used to illustrate spiritual truths.
The Protestant academic commentary on Romans 1:18 emphasizes that God's anger is a necessary response to sin, illustrating a theological concept through a principle that can be observed in human justice systems, even though the specific examples are not from outside Scripture [3]. This implies that the principle behind using examples is to make theological concepts understandable.
Some Christian traditions have used non-biblical examples in their teaching. For example, Puritan and Nonconformist writers often used everyday life and natural phenomena to illustrate spiritual truths, drawing on the created order to explain aspects of the Christian faith [4].
However, the use of non-biblical examples must be done in a way that is consistent with Scripture. The Baptist/Reformed commentary on Matthew 4:4 notes that Jesus cited Deuteronomy 8:3, illustrating how biblical teaching can be grounded in and supported by other parts of Scripture [5]. This supports the idea that non-biblical examples should be used in a manner that aligns with biblical teachings.
Sources
- Smith's Bible Dictionary “Smith's Bible Dictionary: Parable — (The word parable is in Greek parable (parabole) which signifies placing beside or together, a comparison, a parable is therefore literally a placing beside, a comparison, a similitude, an illustration of one subject by another.--McClintock and Strong. As used in the New Testament it had a very wide application, being applied sometimes to the shortest proverbs, (1 Samuel 10:12; 24:13; 2 Chronicles 7:20) sometimes to dark prophetic utterances, (Numbers 23:7,18; 24:3; Ezekiel 20:49) sometimes to enigmatic maxims, (Psalms 78:2; Proverbs 1:6) or metaphors expand”
- 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”
- 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”
- Romans (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on Romans 4:23: In the close of the chapter, he applies all to us; and, having abundantly proved that Abraham was justified by faith, he here concludes that his justification was to be the pattern or sampler of ours: It was not written for his sake alone. It was not intended only for an historical commendation of Abraham, or a relation of something peculiar to him (as some antipaedobaptists will needs understand that circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of the faith, Rom 4:11, only to Abraham himself, and no other); no, the scripture did not intend hereby to describe some”
- Matthew (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Matthew 4:4: But he answered and said, it is written,.... The passage referred to, and cited, is in Deu 8:3 the manner of citing it is what was common and usual with the Jews; and is often to be met with in the Talmudic writings; who, when they produce any passage of scripture, say "as it is written". The meaning of this scripture is; not that as the body lives by bread, so the soul lives by the word of God, and doctrines of the Gospel; though this is a certain truth: or that man lives by obedience to the commands of God, as was promised to the Israelites in the wilderness, and in”