Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Interpreting Scripture

Interpreting Scripture

Last updated on: November 26, 2019 at 4:34 am by Henry Karlson

Interpreting Scripture 2019-11-26T04:34:53-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Anonymous: Old Bible / pxhere

St. John of the Cross, with great wisdom, warned people against following simple explanations of any visions or locutions they (or others) might have. Even if they are authentic, which is not certain, their meaning would likely be different from what they seem to say because they express truths which transcends our comprehension, as they come from God:

Clearly, in regard to the first, not all revelations turn out according to what we understand by the words. The cause is that, since God is immense and profound, he usually includes in his prophecies, locutions, and revelations other ways, concepts, and ideas remarkably different from the meaning we generally find in them. [1]

This is especially true in regards anything which can be said to be prophetic: “We must not consider a prophecy from the perspective of our perception and language, for God’s language is another one, according to the spirit, very different from what we understand, and difficult.” [2] We must note that prophesy is not necessarily predictions about the future; rather, prophesy is anything spoken in behalf of or for God, with God’s inspiration.

The greatest prophecies can be said to be found in the divine oracles given to us in Holy Scripture. For the Christian, the authenticity of Scripture is beyond dispute. But we must not presume the meaning of Scripture is clear. It is not. The simple reading is often a distorted reading because it tries to capture the fullness of God’s truth in and through the letter of the text. Instead, taking what St. John of the Cross said, we can should accept that not even the writers of Scripture understood the full meaning of what they wrote: “We see this at every step in Sacred Scripture. With a number of ancients, many of God’s prophecies and locutions did not turn out as had been expected, because they understood them in their own way, in another very literal manner.”[3]

To be clear, the value of Scripture is not to be denied. It is central to the church’s presentation of its own beliefs. It is inspired. The writers are inspired. Contained within it are many levels of truth which can be and should be discerned. But because it is inspired, because it is prophetic (in that the writers are speaking on behalf of God), the meaning contained in it transcends the intentions and understandings of the various writers who wrote the texts contained within Scripture. We must keep this in mind when we try to interpret Scripture for our own benefit. We must be very humble, for if God could inspire the authors to write texts which have a meaning that transcends what the authors themselves intended, we must be careful and not assume that what ascertain from Scripture is either one of its authentic messages or the full intended meaning God wants us to have from Scripture.

This cannot be emphasized enough. More than any simple locution, more than any simple vision, Scripture is filled with inspired meanings which the authors themselves did not always understand. We can, and should, try to find out what the author of any particular text in Scripture wanted to explain with their words, but we must understand that the inspiration goes beyond their original intent. What each particular writer intended to write and say with their words has value; it is filled with grace, but it is of a derivative nature, so that if we try to stand on it alone, we will have only a partial understanding of the intent the Holy Spirit had when inspiring various authors to write Scripture.

Each particular author wrote from their own particular time and circumstance. Based upon the context from which they wrote, we can then begin to discern what it is they wanted to say, and see the relative truth value contained behind their intent. For they wrote according to their limited knowledge and understanding, with some having greater insight than others. What they wrote had value, and is not to be simply dismissed, but that value came from the historical reference point from which they wrote. Their text helped in the ongoing development of revelation, with each text pointing out something which needed to be stated in their time and place. Each author helped lead their audience closer to the fullness of the truth. Revelation was progressive, and so earlier forms of revelation could be seen as true, while subsequent revelation demonstrated a greater, keener insight towards the truth which can sometimes seem to contradict earlier revelation. But if we understand the intent properly we will see how they come together to point out the same truth, the same way people pointing the direction to a particular location will point differently according to where they are in relation to the location in question.What seems like contradictions must be seen as points to to used for a spiritual kind of triangulation. Christians believe that such triangulation should lead to and point to Jesus Christ, for it is in the incarnation we have the complete and perfect revelation of God to humanity.

In this way, we can understand why we can see Scripture as being inspired, pointing out a great truth which we should believe, while not accepting all the beliefs that particular authors of Scripture might have had. We are not expected to hold onto a fundamentalistic reading of Scripture, accepting without question various cultural and historical beliefs about the world which have since been overturned.

This is exactly what Paul was trying to get us to see when he discussed the relationship between the letter and spirit (cf. 2 Cor: 3:4-6). The letter is the original context of the text, with the author’s own understanding and message; the spirit is the prophetic inspiration which lay behind the author’s writing of the text. The spirit does not force the author to write in particular ways, but allows them to write according to their own understanding; the texts come out in a perfectly human form, with human thoughts and words, but those thoughts and words, the author’s intent, are all the casing for the inspiration and the transcendent message God wants us to have from Scripture. Thus, Origen tells us, the Spirit of God, working in and through human authors, gives as teachings which go beyond what we first think they mean, that is, beyond the letter and all such externals:

Then, finally, that the Scriptures were written by the Spirit of God, and have a meaning, not such only as is apparent at first sight, but also another, which escapes the notice of most. For those (words) which are written are the forms of certain mysteries, and the images of divine things. Respecting which there is one opinion throughout the whole Church, that the whole law is indeed spiritual; but that the spiritual meaning which the law conveys is not known to all, but to those only on whom the grace of the Holy Spirit is bestowed in the word of wisdom and knowledge. [4]

For this reason, when we read various viewpoints coming from different authors of Scripture which seem to contradict each other, we should have no problem. We can easily recognize that it is because the authors differed from each other based upon their own human limitations. So long as we focus on the letter of the text, we will find contradiction after contradiction develop in Scripture. But if we go beyond the letter, to the spirit which inspired the text, to the greater truth which the various authors all point to, we can see how they reconcile with each other and share with each other a truth which transcends all human attempts to delineate it through written texts.

This is not to say all Scripture is to be seen merely as a collection of riddles which offers little to nothing to the ordinary reader. The simple meaning of the text has value; it is just that we must not limit ourselves to that simple reading, nor assume that it contains the full meaning intended for us to receive; rather, it is the foundation by which we begin our journey in trying to ascertain the wisdom God would have us learn by inspiring authors with grace to write Scripture for us.

The point of all this is to help us understand why we can discern many ideas in Scripture, coming from the various authors of the texts themselves, which can be said to be Scriptural because they are found within the contents of Scripture, which we do not have to believe or accept as being the fullness of the truth. If some authors view Israel as the center of the world, and they hold an almost exclusivist view of Israel so Israel alone has a relationship with God, though there is value to this (which can be found when Israel is spiritualized), we do not have to hold this viewpoint. Similarly, if many (if not most) of the authors of Scripture view God in his relationship with humanity as a kind of exclusive relationship, we can understand this is also a part of the letter of the text, coming from the limited understanding of the authors who, being human, focus on humanity and God’s relationship with humanity. It is easy to confuse a particular relationship between God and someone else as being exclusive if that is all one knows and understands, which explains how this often finds itself in the letter of the text. Nonetheless, as we are not limited to the letter text, but seek the spiritual content which lies beyond it, we can begin to go beyond such exclusivity and into an inclusive interpretation: Israel is special, but God is not bound to that special relationship and so is also a God over all the earth, caring for and loving all humanity (which, to be sure, is hinted at in the letter of many texts within Scripture). Likewise, God cares for humanity, and has a special relationship with humanity because of the incarnation, but we must not see that as implying an exclusive relationship between God and humanity. And, if we discern carefully, even Scripture, on the literal level of interpretation, we can see implied by various texts that God is concerned not just with humanity, but all living things (is this not what we should learn from the way God covenants with all creation after the great deluge?). The exclusive viewpoint is derivative in nature, and when reified, becomes a letter that kills, but when it is understood within its context, we find we do not have to be limited to it; we can understand the sentiment while looking beyond it. This does not say Scripture is false, but it does point out how Scripture can easily be misinterpreted and lead to falsehood. For when the spirit is neglected, Origen warned, heresy develops: “Many, not understanding the Scriptures in a spiritual sense, but incorrectly, have fallen into heresies.” [5]

How, then, are we to understand the spiritual meaning of Scripture? This is not easy. The more we study, the more we learn from others, the more we will hopefully begin to discern it and be able to engage it in our own walk with God. However, as a foundation, what St. Augustine wrote is very useful: all Scripture, all interpretation of Scripture, should flow from the two-fold law of love, and not contradict it. This way, Augustine says, even if we interpret it wrong, even if we get something wrong, we are still on the right track:

Whoever, then, thinks that he understands the Holy Scriptures, or any part of them, but puts such an interpretation upon them as does not tend to build up this twofold love of God and our neighbor, does not yet understand them as he ought. If, on the other hand, a man draws a meaning from them that may be used for the building up of love, even though he does not happen upon the precise meaning which the author whom he reads intended to express in that place, his error is not pernicious, and he is wholly clear from the charge of deception. [6]

If we try to discern Scripture within the pattern and dictates of love, which is the whole of the law, we can use this to lead us to the second point, which is that Christ said that all Scripture leads to and points to him. How so? God is love, and in the incarnation, in Christ, we are given the revelation of that love. He is, in a way, the heart of God showing to us the very depth of God’s love. When we build upon love as our foundation, we build upon the revelation of love shown to us in Christ. Scripture represents that love in various ways, in the various ways God, as Trinity, interacts with creation, purifying it, lifting it up, and taking it back into himself as he deifies all creation with his love. This is the point of Scripture. This is the point Christ came to reveal to us. This is what the Spirit reveals to us through its inspiration of the prophets, the writers of Scripture. This is what we should strive for. And when we truly realize this, we can then go back to the letter of the text and begin to see how the Spirit moved the writers in that love to direct and guide people in their time and place to transcend themselves and slowly move closer to God and receive that love for themselves. In this way even in the letter of the text, the truth is revealed; and if the truth is revealed, then the text cannot be said to be “false,” even if the fullness of the truth transcends what can be learned and believed by following only the letter of the text itself.

[1] St. John of the Cross, “The Ascent of Mount Carmel” in The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, OCD and Otilio Rodriguez, OCD (Washington, DC: ICS Publications, 1991), 213.

[2] St. John of the Cross, “The Ascent of Mount Carmel,” 216.

[3] St. John of the Cross, “The Ascent of Mount Carmel,” 213.

[4] Origen, De Principiis in ANF(4): 241.

[5] Origen, De Principiis, 355.

[6] St. Augustine, “On Christian Doctrine,” in NPNF1(2):533.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

Previous Post

November 25, 2019

Accepting Ambiguity

Next Post

November 27, 2019 Trump, War Criminals and the Nuclear Option

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz