Scripture's Role in Interpreting Non-Biblical Examples Theologically
Theological interpretation of non-biblical examples is fundamentally shaped by the Christian understanding of Scripture as divinely inspired and authoritative [4]. The Bible is considered "God-breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16), meaning its origin is from God's own speech, though it involved human authors [4]. This divine origin establishes Scripture as the primary lens through which all other phenomena, including non-biblical examples, are to be understood.
The concept of sola Scriptura, prominent in Reformed traditions, emphasizes that Scripture is the ultimate and sufficient rule for faith and life [6]. This does not necessarily mean that non-biblical examples are irrelevant, but rather that their theological significance is always assessed in light of biblical teaching. John Calvin, for instance, while engaging with philosophical concepts like the faculties of the soul, insisted that a definition of the image of God "ought to rest on a firmer basis than such subtleties," referring to the clearer, simpler divisions found in Scripture [6]. This illustrates a principle where extra-biblical ideas are evaluated against, and sometimes subordinated to, biblical revelation.
Scripture itself provides examples of how to interpret events and experiences. Jesus frequently appealed to the written word, saying, "it is written" when confronting temptation or explaining theological truths [5]. He taught out of the Scriptures and sanctioned their authority by appealing to them [1]. This practice suggests that even divine actions and teachings are presented in continuity with, and as an interpretation of, existing revelation.
When considering non-biblical examples, interpreters often employ a method of "comparing spiritual things with spiritual" [3]. This approach, as described by Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, involves expounding Spirit-inspired Old Testament Scripture by comparing it with the Gospel revealed by Jesus through the same Spirit, and conversely, illustrating Gospel mysteries by comparing them with Old Testament types [3]. While this specific interpretation focuses on comparing different parts of Scripture, the underlying principle of seeking coherence and divine intention can be extended to non-biblical examples. These examples are not seen as independent sources of theological truth but as phenomena that require interpretation through the established framework of biblical revelation.
The scope of divine activity extends beyond what is explicitly recorded in Scripture. John Gill, commenting on John 21:25, notes that "there are also many other things which Jesus did" that are not recorded in the Gospels, suggesting that if every detail were written, "the world itself could not contain the books that should be written" [2]. This acknowledges a vast realm of divine action and experience that exists outside the biblical text. However, the theological meaning and significance of these unrecorded or extra-biblical events are still understood to align with the character and purposes of God as revealed in the Bible. The Bible provides the interpretive key, not an exhaustive catalog of all divine acts.
The authority of Scripture stems from its divine inspiration. It is "given by inspiration of God" and "by inspiration of the Holy Spirit" [1]. This means that the words of Scripture are not merely human words but are God's own words, breathed out by Him [4]. This understanding elevates Scripture to a unique position as the norming norm for theological reflection. Therefore, any non-biblical example, whether a historical event, a cultural phenomenon, or a personal experience, must be evaluated for its theological meaning in light of this divinely revealed truth.
The early church fathers also engaged with the interpretation of non-biblical elements. John Chrysostom, for example, was part of the Antiochian school, which emphasized a more literal and historical interpretation of Scripture, contrasting with the allegorical methods sometimes employed by other schools [7]. While his focus was on biblical interpretation, the principles of seeking clear meaning and avoiding speculative interpretations would apply to how non-biblical examples are handled. The goal is to understand how such examples might reflect or illustrate biblical truths, rather than to derive new theological doctrines from them.
The process of interpreting non-biblical examples theologically involves several steps. First, identifying the example and its context. Second, discerning relevant biblical principles, narratives, or doctrines that might speak to the example. Third, applying these biblical insights to understand the theological implications of the non-biblical example. This is not about finding direct parallels for every modern phenomenon, but about using the comprehensive worldview and ethical framework provided by Scripture to make sense of the world. For instance, while the Bible does not explicitly mention modern technologies, its teachings on human responsibility, stewardship, and justice can be applied to evaluate their ethical and theological implications.
Sources
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Scriptures, The — Given by inspiration of God -- 2Ti 3:16. Given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit -- Ac 1:16; Heb 3:7; 2Pe 1:21. Christ sanctioned, by appealing to them -- Mt 4:4; Mr 12:10; Joh 7:42. Christ taught out of -- Lu 24:27. Are called the Word. -- Jas 1:21-23; 1Pe 2:2. Word of God. -- Lu 11:28; Heb 4:12. Word of Christ. -- Col 3:16. Word of truth. -- Jas 1:18. Holy Scriptures. -- Ro 1:2; 2Ti 3:15. Scripture of truth. -- Da 10:21. Book. -- Ps 40:7; Re 22:19. Book of the Lord. -- Isa 34:16. Book of the law. -- Ne 8:3; Ga 3:10. Law of the Lord. -- Ps 1:2; Isa”
- John (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on John 21:25: And there are also many other things which Jesus did,.... Which refer not to his doctrines and discourses, his sermons and prayers, and the conversation he had with his disciples, and others, on different accounts; but to the signs, and wonders, and miraculous operations, which were done by him, that are neither recorded in this, nor in any of the evangelists: the which, if they should be written everyone; with all the particular circumstances relating to them: I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. The Arabic versi”
- 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:”
- 2 Timothy (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on 2 Timothy 3:16: 3:16-17 These verses elaborate on 3:15 by explaining Scripture’s effectiveness, its source, and the ways that it gives wisdom to live out our salvation. Paul was speaking of the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), but his statement can now apply to all Scripture, including the New Testament (see, e.g., 2 Pet 3:15-16). 3:16 The fact that Scripture is inspired by God (literally God-breathed, breathed out by God’s own speech; see also Heb 4:12-13; 2 Pet 1:20-21) does not negate the active involvement of the human authors. But it does affirm that God is fully re”
- 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”
- CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1 (Gen 1-23), section 5.31: and fourteenth books on the Trinity, also the eleventh book of the “City of God.” I acknowledge, indeed, that there is something in man which refers to the Father and the Son, and the Spirit: and I have no difficulty in admitting the above distinction of the faculties of the soul: although the simpler division into two parts, which is more used in Scripture, is better adapted to the sound doctrine of piety; but a definition of the image of God ought to rest on a firmer basis than such subtleties. As for myself, before I define the”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew: between the Godhead and Manhood in Christ, his opinions respecting the final restoration of mankind, which were almost equivalent to a denial of eternal punishment, were reproduced mainly by Theodore.” 2 2 Stephens St. Chrysostom , p. 31; comp. pp. 27–32, on Diodorus. On the Antiochian School, see Schaff , Church History , III. pp. 935–7; Reuss History of the New Testament , II., pp. 542–6, American edition. While the influence of the Antiochian school seems transient, it has achieved much in stating more clearly the correct principles of interpretation; i”