General Principles of Biblical Interpretation

Christ as the Central Theme of Biblical Interpretation

The fundamental principle of biblical interpretation is that Jesus Christ is the center of the Bible. He serves as the unifying thread that connects the Old and New Testaments. As established in $Luke\,24:27$, after the resurrection, Jesus began with Moses (the Pentateuch) and all the prophets to interpret the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures. This demonstrates that the overarching theme of the entire Bible is about Jesus.

It is essential to understand that the Bible is not primarily a book of morals. While it contains moral instruction, morality itself does not save; rather, the Bible is a narrative about the promised Messiah, his historical arrival, and his future return. While not every individual passage is directly and explicitly about Jesus in a literal sense, every passage relates to him in some capacity. When interpreting any text, the interpreter should seek to relate it to the person and work of Christ.

The Perspicuity and Clarity of Scripture

The doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture asserts that the Bible is clearly written and accessible to the average person. This principle, which was a cornerstone of the Reformation, posits that the common person can understand the central message of the Word of God without the necessary mediation of tradition, scholars, or a special class of people. Martin Luther championed this by translating the Bible into German, believing that everyone should have access to the Scriptures in their "heart language."

This principle is tied to the "priesthood of all believers," where individuals have direct access to God through Christ and can discern the truth of the Scriptures for themselves. However, perspicuity does not mean that every single passage is equally clear. Some passages are difficult and subject to debate, such as $1\,Corinthians\,15:29$ regarding "baptism for the dead." In this instance, Paul raises a question to prove a point about the resurrection rather than commanding the practice. While details may be debated, the core message of salvation and faith remains clear enough for even a child to comprehend.

The Analogy of Faith: Scripture Interpreting Scripture

A critical hermeneutical rule is the "analogy of faith," which states that the Bible is its own best interpreter. If a passage is difficult to understand, it must be interpreted in light of the rest of Scripture. For example, the command for women to be silent in the church found in $1\,Corinthians\,14$ must be balanced with $1\,Corinthians\,11:5$, where Paul acknowledges women praying and prophesying. One must look at the whole epistle and the whole Bible to find a harmonious interpretation.

The New Testament writers modeled this by quoting, echoing, and alluding to the Old Testament, using prior revelation to interpret their current experiences. A related sub-principle is that clear passages should be used to interpret less clear passages. In $1\,John\,3:9$, it is stated that "no one born of God commits sin." This might seem to suggest sinless perfection, yet a clearer passage in the same letter, $1\,John\,1:8$, states that if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. Therefore, the interpretation of $1\,John\,3:9$—informed by grammar and context—is that a believer does not "continually or deliberately" live in a state of sin. Furthermore, no major doctrine or practice should be established on the basis of a single, obscure text.

The Internal Consistency of God's Word

The Bible is consistent within itself because God's word does not contradict itself. Apparent contradictions usually have simple explanations upon closer study. An example is the command regarding "hate" in $Luke\,14:26$, where Jesus says one must hate their father and mother to be a disciple. This appears to contradict $1\,John\,2:9$, which states that anyone who hates his brother is in darkness.

The resolution is found in the parallel passage of $Matthew\,10:37$, which clarifies that "to hate" in this Hebraic idiom means "to love less." Jesus is emphasizing that the disciple's love for Him must be so great that all other loves seem like hate by comparison. Another example is found in the Greek word $peiradzo$. $James\,1:13$ says God does not "tempt" ($peiradzo$) anyone, yet $Hebrews\,11:17$ says Abraham was "tested" ($peiradzo$) by God. The distinction is in the intent: to "tempt" is to lay a trap to cause sin (an act of Satan), while to "test" is a trial for a person’s ultimate good (an act of God).

Distinguishing Between Practice and Principle

Interpreters must distinguish between temporary cultural practices and permanent biblical principles. A classic example is Jesus washing the disciples' feet in $John\,13$. While Jesus performed the literal practice because their feet were physically dirty, the underlying principle is humility and servanthood. Replicating the ceremony today might miss the point if it is done artificially; the principle is to be a leader who performs humble acts that others might avoid.

Similarly, the Bible commands believers to greet one another with a "holy kiss" ($Romans\,16:16$, $1\,Peter\,5:14$). The principle is hospitality, affection, and welcome, but the cultural expression of that principle can change from a kiss to a handshake, a bow, or a fist pump depending on the context. Additionally, one must distinguish between "description" and "prescription." Just because the early church cast lots to replace Judas in $Acts\,1$ (a description of an event) does not mean the modern church is commanded to use lots for decision-making (a prescription).

Literal and Literary Interpretation

To interpret the Bible literally means to interpret it according to the author's original intentions. The Bible is not a mystical code containing secret meanings. Interpretation requires attention to context and literary genre. Different genres require different rules: poetry often uses personification (e.g., hills singing or trees clapping hands), whereas historical narrative is meant to be taken as a factual account (e.g., Balaam’s donkey literally talking in $Numbers\,22$).

Interpreters should distinguish between types of language:

1. Referential Language: This is the "language of the head." It is descriptive, informational, and non-emotional, much like an owner's manual.

2. Commissive Language: This is the "language of the heart." It is emotional, poetic, and designed to evoke feelings. For instance, when the Psalmist says his "tears have been his food" in $Psalm\,42:3$, he is not speaking literally but is expressive of deep grief.

Understanding these distinctions—especially in metaphorical language like "I am the door" or "the tongue is a fire"—prevents over-interpretation and ensures the reader captures the true intent of the biblical author. These six general principles provide the necessary framework for interpreting all of Scripture accurately.