Scripture interprets Scripture

[Lampo]

That is what I was told by a non-Catholic in an e-mail exchange. I had asked if he was an official interpreter of Scripture, meaning that his interpretation was 100% accurate. He told me, “The first and most important interpreter of Scripture, is Scripture itself.” He is a pastor of a church and told me that he tells his congregation, “'Don’t take my word for it; look it up for yourself, I could be wrong” This is how we learn from each other."

Is this the same thing as the perspicuity of Scripture?

 

[JustaServant]

There is a sense in which that is correct. Paul made much use of the Old Testament, interpreting many Messianic passages. The entire book of Revelation have either actual quotes from the OT, or at the least ‘echos’ from those sacred books. Certainly Jesus made much use of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.
However, one can easily take that principle to an illogical conclusion. There are simply passages in the Bible which cannot interpret themselves. This is where outside interpretation comes in.
Then the question becomes whose interpretation is the correct one?
Protestantism has 30,000 different answers.

 

[Newbie2]

I don’t know about the perspicuity of Scripture, but the notion that Scripture interprets itself is…lemme see, how can I say this nicely…sopomoric, at best. Such a notion merits little, if any serious discussion.

 

[Spencerian]

That is what I was told by a non-Catholic in an e-mail exchange. I had asked if he was an official interpreter of Scripture, meaning that his interpretation was 100% accurate. He told me, “The first and most important interpreter of Scripture, is Scripture itself.” He is a pastor of a church and told me that he tells his congregation, “'Don’t take my word for it; look it up for yourself, I could be wrong” This is how we learn from each other."

Is this the same thing as the perspicuity of Scripture?

Hi, Lampo.

Based on my quick research, you’re correct. Scripture was guided by the Holy Spirit and it is God’s teachings. However, a book is a book and does not “interpret” itself any more than my socks can put themselves on my feet merely because they are socks.

In my opinion, a faith with durability and infallibility not only knows its authority, but also knows its limits in what it cannot do–not because that faith’s leadership doesn’t want to, but because the tenets that define the faith gives it that limit. A classic example of that is why there can only be male priests. The Church wasn’t given that authority to change that practice since Christ himself set the precedent.

The person you spoke is a classic sola scriptura adherent. I pray he doesn’t lead too many astray by such a relative attitude.

(Note: My source link is from an otherwise-interesting wiki for Biblical Christianity…only I should’ve read the liner notes. Theopedia is a Protestant-Calvinist resource. Ick.)

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Hi, Lampo.

Based on my quick research, you’re correct. Scripture was guided by the Holy Spirit and it is God’s teachings. However, a book is a book and does not “interpret” itself any more than my socks can put themselves on my feet merely because they are socks.

In my opinion, a faith with durability and infallibility not only knows its authority, but also knows its limits in what it cannot do–not because that faith’s leadership doesn’t want to, but because the tenets that define the faith gives it that limit. A classic example of that is why there can only be male priests. The Church wasn’t given that authority to change that practice since Christ himself set the precedent.

The person you spoke is a classic sola scriptura adherent. I pray he doesn’t lead too many astray by such a relative attitude.

(Note: My source link is from an otherwise-interesting wiki for Biblical Christianity…only I should’ve read the liner notes. Theopedia is a Protestant-Calvinist resource. Ick.)

Well, in some sense it does. The OT is constantly clarified in the NT. There are also seemingly contradictory statements throughout that serve to give us a better understanding of the overall context. This is an important part of understanding scripture, but not the only one. It’s important that we also use the other tools at our disposal.

 

[Kay_Cee]

That is what I was told by a non-Catholic in an e-mail exchange. I had asked if he was an official interpreter of Scripture, meaning that his interpretation was 100% accurate. He told me, “The first and most important interpreter of Scripture, is Scripture itself.” He is a pastor of a church and told me that he tells his congregation, “'Don’t take my word for it; look it up for yourself, I could be wrong” This is how we learn from each other."

I can’t help wondering where you’re supposed to “look it up for yourself.” Does the Bible say “The first and most important interpreter of Scripture, is Scripture itself”?

 

[MarcoPolo]

I agree with the others and can’t help but point out yet ANOTHER person who says “My authority is Scripture” and cannot through blind eyes see that he merely follows what he decides Scripture says.

 

[AmericanJosiah]

.

Christianity if full of little, catchy phrases that really aren’t too helpful…

TECNICALLY, Scripture can’t “interpret” anything - obviously. But this is refering to a HERMENEUTICAL principle that I think is better expressed by the way Lutherans put it, “Scripture clarifies Scripture” (well, TECHNICALLY… but it’s better).

This is used in all hermeneutics - not just Scripture. If I’m reading one of Mark Twain’s books and we come across a theme or interesting phrase or concept - and I reasonably as, “What does this mean?” ONE sound approach would be to look elsewhere in book (or in Twains’ other books) where that is also raised. Mark Twain himself may shed some valueable light on the issue - if I see the “whole witness” that he brings to this, rather than just considering this one sentence. THAT is what this principle is about. Catholics use this hermeneutical principle all the time, for example in referencing John 6 to help us understand the Eucharistic texts.

The same is used in Law, btw. It’s possible that an issue may not be clear in a single law. Other laws on that same issue are often studied, to see what those issuing the law intended. It’s the same basic idea.

It’s just a HERMENEUTICAL principle, one of many. But I’ve found it to be very helpful. And yes, it is often how Protestants address things. It’s rather common for us to “bring to the table” a plethora of Scriptures related to the subject - and together see if the corpus helps to bring understanding to an issue raised in one verse in review. It’s often (but not always) helpful.

.