How are we to interpret Scriptures? There are divisions in the Church and all sides appeal to Scripture. Since all sides claim to prove their points scripturally, it would seem that Scripture can be used to say almost anything.
The problem of differing biblical interpretations is not new. For centuries the early church engaged in furious debates involving Scripture. The subject matter of these debates concerned God, whether God was one or three, how Jesus Christ could be both man and God. In these debates, all sides quoted Scripture. As a result, it soon became apparent that it was impossible to arrive at a right doctrine of God without rightly understanding Scripture. With the passage of time, the church reached conclusions on both matters, who God was and how Scripture should be interpreted. In this way, Scripture and doctrine emerged together, with each illuminating the other. The understanding of God was formulated in the Creeds which were derived from Scripture yet interpreted Scripture. Anglicans have always believed this. As Anglicans, we believe the Nicene Creed because, as the Prayer Book says, it "can be proved by most certain warrants of Scripture." (p. 869) At the same time, just as Scripture leads to the Creeds, the Creeds teach the right way of interpreting Scripture. How does this happen?
The Creeds tell us that God is three in one. Therefore, all God's acts occur as coordinated and related acts of Father, Son, and Spirit. As a result, if God's will on a matter is revealed in Scripture, it will be related to God the Father, to the Son, and to the Spirit as the revelation of one God. Biblical interpretation that fails to relate a matter to each person of the Trinity, and to their unity, is inadequate interpretation. Let me give an example.
What does Scripture teach on marriage? According to the Son, sacrificial love, the love of the cross, is the norm of all personal relationships including marriage. According to God the Father, the Creator, men and women are made for each other. As narrated in Genesis, the two become one in the joy of one flesh. According to Spirit, marriage is nourished in Christian community formed by the Spirit, for it is Spirit that creates the "one, holy, and apostolic church." To say that marriage is nothing but self-sacrifice is to deny the joy of becoming one flesh. To claim marriage as self-fulfillment alone is to deny the cross. To see marriage in isolation from the church is to deny the Spirit. The unity of the three in marriage is self-sacrificial love that fulfills the deepest longings of a man and woman in the wider context of community.
This example is, of course, greatly oversimplified. If space permitted, the relevant biblical material could be presented in three related clusters whose relations correspond to the inner triune relations of God. But the example helps make a point that Scripture can be interpreted theologically. Without a theological road map, biblical exegesis becomes fragmented. As its stands now, many conservatives simply quote Scripture or survey some of its leading ideas; the liberals frequently, in my view, ignore portions of it or interpret it from an alien perspective.
Furthermore, Scripture cannot be read to say just anything. The Greek and Hebrew worlds were vastly different. Yet the early church, operating with a Greek mind set and interpreting a Hebrew Scripture, reached consensus on matters of supreme importance. They sought to articulate the nature of God, and in the process subjected Scripture to a rigorous, exhaustive, and time consuming analysis. The results were formulated in the Creeds. Derived from Scripture, they interpret Scripture, providing a theological map by which to organize and interpret the diversity of biblical statements on any one subject.(1)
Endnote
1. This way of looking at Scripture is Anglican. (See The Study of Anglicanism, edited by Stephen Sykes and John Booty, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, pp. 91, 96.)
The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D.
August, 1994
