How do adherents to the maxim "clearer passages interpret less clear ones" handle cases where two sets of "clear" passages contradict each other?
score:1
I'll offer a response in 2 parts:
- A Latter-day Saint's perspective
- A historian's perspective
A Latter-day Saint's perspective
It was a similar concern that led Joseph Smith to start asking questions that the ministers of his day could not answer. In his personal history he recorded some of his feelings as he lived through the Second Great Awakening:
8 During this time of great excitement my mind was called up to serious reflection and great uneasiness...so great were the confusion and strife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was right and who was wrong.
...
10 In the midst of this war of words and tumult of opinions, I often said to myself: What is to be done? Who of all these parties are right; or, are they all wrong together? If any one of them be right, which is it, and how shall I know it?
11 While I was laboring under the extreme difficulties caused by the contests of these parties of religionists, I was one day reading the Epistle of James, first chapter and fifth verse, which reads: If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
12 Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did; for how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know; for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.
13 At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs, that is, ask of God. I at length came to the determination to “ask of God,” concluding that if he gave wisdom to them that lacked wisdom, and would give liberally, and not upbraid, I might venture. (Joseph Smith History)
Joseph Smith recognized that the same passages of scripture could be argued to support a wide diversity of doctrines. I believe this is, fundamentally, the same observation that stands behind the OP.
His response, inspired by the Biblical text, was to seek further guidance from God. The subsequent verses in his personal history describe his First Vision, and the resulting Restoration of many Gospel truths.
The experience of Joseph Smith demonstrates several additional sources that can help clarify Biblical passages that might otherwise be interpreted several different ways:
- Additional scripture that has come through the Restoration. In the context of the debate in the OP, Alma 40 and Doctrine & Covenants 138 unambiguously affirm post-mortal consciousness.
- The teachings of living prophets. We believe the Lord's church is led today by apostles & prophets who are every-bit as authoritative as Moses or Peter. For a brief, relevant example regarding post-mortality see this sermon by Thomas S. Monson
- Personal revelation. The power of the Holy Ghost is available to all who will seek it. The Gift of the Holy Ghost comes by entering into covenants executed with God's authority. Two of the features of this gift described in scripture are "that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you" (Mosiah 18:10) & "that they may always have His Spirit to be with them" (Moroni 4:3). I believe in a God who can & does answer questions, and has affirmed to many individuals what He has taught through His modern prophets: people are conscious and active in the spirit world.
A historian's perspective
The degree to which we are dependent on non-Biblical sources in order to understand Biblical texts is difficult to overstate. We have a Strong's Concordance for Greek because of the millions of words preserved in pagan Greek writings. We understand the context of the ministry of the apostles because of the writings of Roman historians.
- If we want to make a text say anything we like, we should ignore historical & cultural context
- If we want to understand what a historical writer actually meant, enlightenment from other sources is indispensable. We cannot understand an ancient text in a vacuum.
Second Temple Jewish history
The records of the culture, customs, and beliefs of the Jews, especially proximate to New Testament times, are a wealth of information regarding how the people who originally wrote & read the New Testament documents would have understood them (we have far fewer such records prior to the 2nd temple era).
In the context of the debate referenced in the OP, 2nd temple Jewish sources demonstrate a belief in post-mortal consciousness. The parable of the rich man & Lazarus in Luke 16 is an example of a teaching regarding post-mortality that is saturated with beliefs prevalent in contemporary Judaism.
--
Early Patristic Writings
The writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers represent an era when the church was not yet politically powerful. As a result, people who were already putting their lives on the line to practice their beliefs didn't have incentive to keep an Emperor (or any other political figure) happy by compromising on what they believed. These writers are within just a few generations of the apostles. They disagreed with each other all the time. But where there is a clear majority (and occasionally they're bordering on unanimous) view, this ought to be taken seriously. Did all of the disciples of all of the apostles completely lose the Gospel message that quickly? If so, why do we trust that they handed down the New Testament to us accurately?
In the context of the debate in the OP, the Ante-Nicene Fathers support post-mortal consciousness by a significant super-majority.
Conclusion
Although I take no issue generally with the idea that scripture interprets scripture, I suggest the maxim can be overdone if taken to an exclusionary extreme. All manner of sources enable us to understand scripture. We may not treat them all of these sources with the same level of authority or reliability, but we ignore them to our own loss.
A source I particularly treasure is modern revelation. I believe in a God who speaks in our time, to our knowledge base, and for our understanding. His revelation in the past is of inestimable value, but it was not fundamental to our salvation that we learn Hebrew, Greek, or history. I believe His ongoing revelation today is the most directly applicable resource for resolving ambiguity in ancient holy writ.
Upvote:2
This article on The Basics of Sound Biblical Interpretation puts the principle
Scripture interprets scripture and the less clear or plain passages of scripture MUST be interpreted in the light of the clearer passages
in its proper context within the modern hermeneutical method called Historical Grammatical which started in the 18th century 1:
- It is a principle within the theological interpretation phase, after the grammatical and historical analysis have been done for the individual verses under consideration.
- Works in conjunction with other 4 principles of theological interpretation such as sola scriptura, correspondence theory of truth, etc.
- When using this principle, there is a PRIORITY ORDER within the METHOD on how to apply this principle (see this Present Truth magazine article for details, which in turn is based on Edward John Carnell's outline of hermeneutics in the Chapter 5 of The Case for Orthodox Theology 1959 book):
- The Old Testament must be interpreted by the New
- The Gospels must be interpreted by the Epistles
- The incidental must be interpreted by the systematic
- The local must be interpreted by the universal
- The symbolic must be interpreted by the didactic
Notes:
If after applying all the principles above, it's still not clear, then God simply didn't reveal enough and believers are given options.
Another way to supplement the above principles to come up with better guidance or additional teaching is by judiciously use Tradition, Reason, and Experience. Different theological tradition will do them differently; see Wikipedia article Prima Scriptura.
Bible study is supposed to be practical: there is sufficient revelation for entering into a Christian spiritual life and for journeying to heaven. In my opinion, a believer can then decide on his/her comfort level; if you need more certainty, join a denomination that can offer more teachings than the above principles can give you.
Footnotes
1 see "The Origins of Modern Hermeneutical Practices" section of Darren Slade's paper below
Resources
- John Piper's Look at the Book index of Bible passages that he conducted interactive Bible study on, illustrating the above principles in action (he uses a virtual whiteboard).
- Darren M. Slade, Nov 13, 2016, Christian Hermeneutics: The Problem of Using Solely Historical-Grammatical Methods for Christian Exegesis which contrasts Patristic exegesis with modern Historical-Grammatical Theory and then suggests using a Contemporary-Patristic Integrative Approach.
- Chapter 5 (Hermeneutics) of Edward John Carnell's 1959 book The Case for Orthodox Theology.
More post
- 📝 On what do Catholics base their doctrine of the eternal virginity of Mary?
- 📝 Why did Jesus submit to the authority of God while Jesus was a man?
- 📝 Can seeking arguments against Christianity strengthen Christianity?
- 📝 Is there is any external source about Demas, Paul's fellow worker?
- 📝 What is the breath of life spoken of in Genesis 2:7?
- 📝 Cardinal Cajetan and Martin Luther
- 📝 Where did the idea of the Trinity come from?
- 📝 Why did Justin Martyr speak so harshly about Christians who ate meat sacrificed to idols?
- 📝 What are the Main Characteristics of Mormon Prophets?
- 📝 Is it wrong to consume alcohol?
- 📝 Bible changed? Example from Arminianism vs Calvinism
- 📝 Does the New Testament say that Christians should read the Bible every day?
- 📝 Shouldn't Mary’s genealogy be Jesus' family history?
- 📝 What is the difference between Tradition and Revelation according to Catholicism?
- 📝 Is there tradition in Judaism about seeing God through nine mirrors?
- 📝 Is it right for us to help more non-Christians people as compare to Christians? jesus sacrifice for us then more eligible christians or some ane else?
- 📝 What is the practical application of the story of the woman caught in adultery?
- 📝 Where did the trinity concept come from?
- 📝 Did everything Christ did perfectly match what was required for salvation?
- 📝 True Doctrines Or Heresies?
- 📝 What is meant by the 'Confirmation' concerning the receiving of Holy Spirit in Acts 8:5-19?
- 📝 Where does the concept of a "God-shaped hole" originate?
- 📝 Quotations from the early church fathers who support the Jewish year 6000 as significant to eschatology
- 📝 Which saint said a spiritual director should give his female directee books to read rather than meeting with her too frequently?
- 📝 Why does the Catholic Church prefer burials over cremation?
- 📝 For those who believe there was no historical Adam and Eve, how does Christianity make sense?
- 📝 If Jesus Christ is supposedly part of the trinity how come he didn't even know when the hour would come
- 📝 Why are there inconsistencies in the New Testament?
- 📝 Does God say Israel will Not be Saved?
- 📝 Why Jeremiah 10:5 was changed from palm trees to scarecrows
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 How do adherents to the maxim "clearer passages interpret less clear ones" handle cases where two sets of "clear" passages contradict each other?
- 📝 How do adherents of soul-sleep interpret the parable of Rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19–31)?
- 📝 How do non-Sabbatarians interpret passages in Acts that show that the Gentiles attended synagogues on Sabbath?
- 📝 How do Mormons interpret the warning in Revelation about adding to the book?
- 📝 Did the early Church Fathers have a complete agreement on how to interpret 1 Peter 3:18-20?
- 📝 How do Protestants interpret "baptized for the dead" in 1 Corinthians 15:29?
- 📝 How do "Sola Fide" adherents reconcile with the three aspects of faith?
- 📝 How do sola-scriptura adherents reconcile the role of the Holy Spirit as a teacher?
- 📝 How do proponents of the Prosperity Gospel interpret Matthew 6:19-21 and Luke 6:20-26?
- 📝 How do proponents of the Prosperity Gospel interpret Matthew 19:24?
- 📝 How do sola fide adherents explain The Parable of the Ten Virgins?
- 📝 How do non-soul sleep adherents interpret 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18?
- 📝 How do non-universalists account for these passages talking about the salvation of all?
- 📝 How do Christians that do not believe in inerrancy interpret the Bible?
- 📝 How do Jehovah's Witnesses interpret verses like Isaiah 9:6 which call the messiah 'God'?
- 📝 How does the Swedenborgian Church explain passages where Jesus talks/prays to the Father?
- 📝 How do Anglicans interpret the great crowd (144,000) of Revelation 7?
- 📝 How to interpret C.S. Lewis's use of magic by good moral agents in the Chronicles of Narnia to be acceptable to earth Christians?
- 📝 Does the Bible provide any passages that might help in understanding how Satan became sinful?
- 📝 How do the LDS interpret Matthew 19:12?
- 📝 How did Swedenborg interpret 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins"?
- 📝 How do Sola Fide adherents interpret 1 Corinthians 13:2?
- 📝 How do adherents to inerrancy reconcile the fact that some part of the bible were added later?
- 📝 What arguments do adherents of a global flood give for how water was able to cover the entire earth?
- 📝 How does spiritual maturity affect our hermeneutic (how we interpret the Bible)?
- 📝 How do paedo-baptists interpret the Great Commission?
- 📝 How do those who believe the Son is not Almighty God interpret Revelation 2:23?
- 📝 How do Christians who adhere to the maxim “in essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; and in all things charity” determine what is essential?
- 📝 How does the Catholic Church interpret Matthew 23:9 so as to normalize priests being called Father?
- 📝 How do the Eastern Orthodox interpret this verse from Psalm 69:3?