<\/span><\/h2>\n“These things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Holy Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual things.”<\/em> (1 Corinthians 2:13)<\/p>\n<\/span>Introduction<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\nBiblical texts convey a single meaning\u2014that is, a communicative intention that must be sought within the text itself, its context, and the unity of Scripture. Therefore, it is mistaken to read the Bible under the pretext of \u201cspiritualizing\u201d what is written, as if there were a separate plane of meaning beyond the text. Scripture is, by nature, spiritual; thus, it makes no sense to speak of \u201cmaking spiritual\u201d that which is already spiritual.<\/p>\n
When we encounter denser passages, prophetic images, or allegories that are difficult to understand, the difficulty does not lie in the Bible itself, but in human limitation before the depth of the biblical witness. Overcoming this limitation requires a responsible path: careful reading, comparison of texts, consideration of historical and literary context, and, above all, allowing Scripture itself to illuminate Scripture.<\/p>\n
Thus, seeking the meaning of prophecies, symbols, and figures does not mean abandoning the literal sense of the text in order to reach some hidden or underlying meaning; rather, it means recognizing that biblical language employs its own genres and resources, and that its meaning is clarified by internal and coherent criteria. It is within this framework that we will present principles and methods of interpretation\u2014biblical hermeneutics\u2014the theological discipline devoted to correctly interpreting, understanding, and applying the Word.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Biblical Interpretation: A Skill<\/span><\/h2>\nConsidering Paul\u2019s exhortation to Timothy, it becomes clear that biblical interpretation is not an occasional improvisation, but a skill developed throughout the Christian life\u2014especially in those called to ministerial service. The Christian is saved by the grace of God manifested in Christ: a divine act that rescues him from subjection to sin\u2014which brought death to all humanity\u2014and introduces him into a new condition: a child of God and co-heir with Christ (1 John 3:1\u20132).<\/p>\n
Timothy himself had been reached by this same grace when he believed the gospel. However, having been called to pastoral ministry, he needed to present himself to God as approved, free from anything that could bring him shame (2 Timothy 1:8; Romans 1:16; 1 Peter 4:16), and equipped with a specific competence: rightly handling the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15)\u2014a word that is a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Greeks.<\/p>\n
This aptitude is decisive because the worker, properly speaking, must be teleios (mature, complete, fitted for the task), especially with regard to mastery of the content that shapes his message (James 3:2; Romans 6:17; Ephesians 4:14; 1 Timothy 4:16). One who stumbles in the word\u2014that is, who cannot handle it accurately\u2014is not qualified to defend and edify the faith, even though, as a Christian, he may stumble \u201cin many things\u201d in daily life.<\/p>\n
This does not imply license for moral laxity. On the contrary, the worker must maintain a good conscience and cultivate a continuous disposition to \u201clive honorably in all things\u201d (Hebrews 13:18). The point is that ministerial qualification does not consist merely of general moral conduct; it includes, indispensably, the ability to serve the gospel with fidelity and clarity\u2014that is, to rightly handle the Word.<\/p>\n
A common misunderstanding is to suppose that biblical interpretation is a spiritual gift identical to those listed in Romans 12:6\u20138. Paul was appointed apostle to the Gentiles, and Peter apostle to the circumcision; these callings involved obligation and stewardship (\u201cwoe to me if I do not preach the gospel,\u201d 1 Corinthians 9:16). Yet every steward, every minister, regardless of function, depends on the same foundation: the capacity to serve the new covenant and communicate the gospel (2 Corinthians 3:6). The issue is not who \u201chas the gift,\u201d but how ministry can be sustained without failing in its essential foundation: the Word.<\/p>\n
This ability is not acquired through extended periods of devotional practice treated as substitutes for study\u2014as if prayer, fasting, vigils, or meditation alone produced exegetical precision. Scripture points to another path: remaining in what has been learned, reading, hearing, learning, comparing text with text, and, within this discipline, the Holy Spirit guides into truth and brings to remembrance what has been learned. In this sense Paul writes:<\/p>\n
\u201cAll Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work\u201d (2 Timothy 3:16\u201317).<\/p>\n
Biblical narratives themselves reinforce this principle. Cornelius was a man of prayer, yet to know the gospel it was necessary for Peter to proclaim it to him. The Ethiopian eunuch, even after worship at the temple, required Philip to explain the Scriptures. Faith comes through hearing, and hearing through the Word; it is through contact with the sacred writings that God makes a person wise unto salvation.<\/p>\n
Thus, upon believing, the Christian receives the \u201csword of the Spirit,\u201d that is, the Word of God; and by handling it daily, he develops discernment and maturity. This continual practice is indispensable, especially for those entrusted with defending the gospel (Philippians 1:16; Jude 1:3), because ministry demands more than sincerity\u2014it requires fidelity in content and precision in expression.<\/p>\n
In Timothy\u2019s case, there was an additional concern: he was to avoid false teachings\u2014\u201cprofane and old wives\u2019 fables,\u201d referring to Judaizing doctrines\u2014and to exercise himself in godliness, that is, in alignment with the gospel (1 Timothy 4:7\u20138). The \u201cgift\u201d received through prophecy and the laying on of hands referred to his ministerial charge\u2014the responsibility of pastoral oversight he already exercised, particularly in Ephesus (1 Timothy 1:3; 1:18).<\/p>\n
For Christians generally, Paul exhorts them to be \u201cfilled with the Spirit,\u201d which expresses itself through the communal circulation of the Word in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:18\u201319; Colossians 3:16). Thus, fullness of the Spirit is not disorderly ecstasy, but a community saturated with the gospel\u2014teaching, exhorting, and orienting itself according to Christ rather than being led astray by doctrinal influences that produce confusion and division.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Hermeneutical Principles<\/span><\/h2>\nAs already stated, it is a distortion to interpret Scripture under the pretext of \u201cspiritualizing\u201d its narratives, parables, or teachings, as if the text required elevation to some higher plane in order to make sense. Scripture is spiritual by nature. To say that Scripture is spiritual does not mean that it contains hidden mystical meanings accessible only through esoteric keys; rather, it means that its origin, purpose, and efficacy derive from God.<\/p>\n
The New Testament is spiritual because Christ himself declares: \u201cThe words that I speak to you are spirit and life\u201d (John 6:63). This connects directly with Isaiah\u2019s prophecy that the Spirit of the Lord would rest upon the Messiah (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:17\u201321), fulfilling the promise that God would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh (Joel 2:29), through the one promised to Abraham: \u201cin you all the families of the earth shall be blessed\u201d (Genesis 12:3).<\/p>\n
A fundamental hermeneutical principle is recognizing that even when Scripture employs symbols, parables, metaphors, or typologies, these point to objective truths grounded in reality. They do not authorize arbitrary multiplication of meanings. Differences in interpretation often arise not from the text itself, but from the interpretive lens applied to it.<\/p>\n
Jesus addressed precisely this issue when He rebuked those who searched the Scriptures believing they possessed life in them, while failing to recognize that the Scriptures testified of Him (John 5:39). The promise to Abraham referred not to many descendants collectively, but specifically to one\u2014Christ (Galatians 3:16).<\/p>\n
Thus, faithful Christian theology seeks the meaning intended by Scripture itself. The events described are presented as real: Eden, the ark, the crossing of the Red Sea, the resurrection of Christ. Faith rests not on symbolic invention, but on trust in what God has revealed.<\/p>\n
For example, the term \u201cfruit\u201d may refer literally to agricultural produce (Deuteronomy 1:25) or figuratively to the \u201cfruit of lips,\u201d that is, words of praise or confession (Hebrews 13:15; Isaiah 57:19). The meaning is determined not by arbitrary imagination, but by biblical usage and context.<\/p>\n
Similarly, when Paul uses the allegory of Sarah and Hagar, he does not dissolve history into metaphor, but uses the allegory to clarify a present reality: those born according to promise face opposition from those who rely on the flesh. The allegory clarifies reality; it does not replace it.<\/p>\n
Thus, the central question of interpretation is not how many meanings can be extracted, but how faithfully the interpreter reads\u2014according to the text, its context, and its intended purpose.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Metaphors, Hyperbole, and Allegory<\/span><\/h2>\nBiblical writers made extensive use of figures of speech, especially metaphor. A metaphor establishes an implicit comparison, transferring meaning from one term to another based on perceived similarity, thereby making the message more vivid and memorable.<\/p>\n
For example, when Psalm 23 states, \u201cThe Lord is my shepherd,\u201d the metaphor communicates an objective truth: God\u2019s care and guidance. Likewise, when Jesus says, \u201cI am the door\u201d (John 10:9), the metaphor clearly communicates that He is the only access to God.<\/p>\n
Literal interpretation does not mean crude materialism; it means discerning the author\u2019s intended meaning, whether expressed through narrative or imagery. Even when the language is figurative, the truth communicated is real and grounded in historical and theological reality.<\/p>\n
When Paul writes that \u201cfaith came\u201d (Galatians 3:23\u201324), he uses metaphor to describe the historical manifestation of faith through Christ\u2019s coming and the revelation of the gospel. The figure strengthens the argument, but refers to an actual historical event: the incarnation and inauguration of the new covenant.<\/p>\n
Another important point: the Bible does not set out to be a treatise in modern scientism. Expressions such as \u201cthe four corners of the earth\u201d are not intended to debate the planet\u2019s geometry, but to communicate\u2014within the linguistic horizon of ancient readers\u2014the idea of \u201cthe whole extent,\u201d \u201call directions.\u201d If the author were to employ future scientific language, it would be imprecise for his audience. In the same way, laws concerning impurity and foods do not presuppose microbiology; they deal with separation, worship, and a pedagogical order within the economy of the covenant.<\/p>\n
For this very reason, an allegorical method\u2014understood as attributing hidden meanings to narrative details, often beyond (or against) the author\u2019s intention\u2014tends to generate errors. To assign \u201cspiritual\u201d significance to Naaman\u2019s immersions, the cloak of the healed blind man, the tree Zacchaeus climbed, or the stone at Lazarus\u2019s tomb, as though every detail were a code, is not interpretation; it is invention when the text itself gives no warrant.<\/p>\n
When Scripture uses allegory legitimately, it typically controls the meaning. In Matthew 16, for example, Jesus speaks of the \u201cleaven of the Pharisees,\u201d and the text clarifies that He meant their doctrine; the symbol is not left unanchored. The same holds in apostolic allegories: the meaning is given, not projected.<\/p>\n
One may ask why biblical texts resort to allegories and parables instead of limiting themselves to a strictly denotative grammar. In many cases, such linguistic resources are employed to produce impact, to aid the retention of teaching in the hearers\u2019 memory, and to condense complex truths into simple, striking images. This helps explain, as well, how the message could be preserved and later recorded faithfully, as in the Gospels.<\/p>\n
Moreover, in certain contexts figurative language also functions as a way of preserving the integrity of what is transmitted: what is not immediately understood is less easily distorted, instrumentalized, or attacked by those who reject the message. Thus, allegory does not replace truth; it communicates it more effectively\u2014and often more protectively.<\/p>\n
For example, the book of Proverbs, attributed to Solomon, is composed of wisdom sayings that at first glance seem merely to gather moral lessons and practical counsel for life. Yet, upon closer examination, one may perceive that behind this pedagogical form the text also sustains a denunciation of apostasy and religious deviation.<\/p>\n
In this sense, Proverbs employs recurring figures\u2014such as the na\u00efve young man and the adulterous woman\u2014to represent, at a deeper level, the dynamics of spiritual seduction. The adulterous woman need not be read only as a literal character, but also as a portrait of unfaithful religiosity that installs itself \u201cin the city,\u201d seeks adherents, and captures consciences through persuasive words. In Proverbs 7:14, for instance, the mention of \u201cpaying vows\u201d introduces a vocabulary of worship and religious obligation, suggesting that the text is not dealing merely with carnal desire, but also with a corrupted form of religious service that attracts the unsuspecting through rhetoric and an appearance of piety.<\/p>\n
This reading does not amount to an arbitrary allegorization, as though it were legitimate to assign hidden meanings to any detail whatsoever. Rather, it is a matter of recognizing internal evidence and thematic coherence that point to a precise critique of false religion\u2014a critique so well crafted that it can go unnoticed precisely by those who reduce the book to a manual of moral advice. Moreover, this line of reading is consistent with the prophetic pattern of the Old Testament, in which Israel\u2019s spiritual unfaithfulness is denounced through the imagery of prostitution: \u201cHow the faithful city has become a prostitute!\u201d (Isaiah 1:21), and Ezekiel\u2019s extended metaphors of the \u201cwoman\u201d who corrupts herself (Ezekiel 16:35) reinforce the same symbolic register.<\/p>\n
In other cases, a book gathers multiple figures to portray a truth on a broader scale. In the Old Covenant, Israel is often presented as a flock in need of the Shepherd\u2019s care, while hostile peoples are described as beasts of the field\u2014lion, bear, leopard\u2014images that convey threat, oppression, and predation. Revelation, in turn, concentrates this kind of language into dense visions: the figure of the prostitute and the beast (Revelation 17) forms a symbolic tableau in which an apostate reality leans upon a wide political power\u2014a conglomerate of nations\u2014and for a time feels secure under its protection.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Interpreting the Scriptures<\/span><\/h2>\nWhat the interpreter must seek is the author\u2019s original intention\u2014that is, the meaning the text aims to communicate within its context. A clear example of this principle appears in Christ\u2019s temptation. The tempter challenges Jesus to turn stones into bread and then to throw Himself from the pinnacle of the temple as \u201cproof\u201d that He is the Son of God, quoting Scripture (Psalm 91) as though it authorized a spectacular and presumptuous act.<\/p>\n
Jesus\u2019 response is decisive for hermeneutics: He does not \u201cspiritualize\u201d the text nor contradict it; rather, He interprets it in the light of other Scriptures, correcting the abusive use of the Psalm. Hence His words, \u201cit is also written\u201d\u2014\u201cMan shall not live by bread alone,\u201d and \u201cYou shall not put the Lord your God to the test.\u201d In this way, Jesus shows that correct reading does not consist in isolating a verse to justify an action, but in understanding Scripture by Scripture, honoring its purpose and its limits.<\/p>\n
To interpret, therefore, is not to strain the text to serve one\u2019s own aims. Jesus could indeed have turned stones into bread; yet doing so there would have meant using power to evade ordinary human conditions, whereas the established principle is that human life is sustained along the common path\u2014\u201cby the sweat of his face.\u201d Likewise, God promised protection to Christ, but to provoke the need for that protection by presumptuous initiative is not trust; it is self-endangerment. And Scripture offers no support for such a posture.<\/p>\n
There is, then, a difference between being kept in the course of obedience and forcing a promise to justify recklessness. Jesus promised authority \u201cover serpents and scorpions,\u201d and Paul was preserved when, in a simple necessity (gathering firewood), he was bitten by a viper. But this is very different from deliberately taking vipers in one\u2019s hands while invoking protection to demonstrate \u201cspiritual power.\u201d In that case, it is not obedience but spectacle\u2014promise turned into pretext.<\/p>\n
The same applies to certain \u201chighly personal\u201d readings of narratives. Peter walked on the water because he was called to it by Christ in a specific circumstance. To turn that episode into a rule for \u201cproving\u201d authority or spirituality is to displace the text from its purpose and use it as an instrument of self-affirmation. It replaces biblical logic\u2014obedience, dependence, sobriety\u2014with the logic of display.<\/p>\n
Even miracle narratives must be read with a didactic purpose, not as an automatic promise of protection from life\u2019s afflictions. When Jesus mentions the widow of Zarephath and Naaman the leper, He is not teaching a \u201ctechnique\u201d for obtaining miracles or offering a shortcut around suffering. He highlights the pedagogical meaning of the text: God\u2019s sovereignty to act where He wills, and the reality that \u201ca prophet is not accepted in his own hometown\u201d (Luke 4:24\u201327). The focus is not the wonder itself, but the instruction communicated by the wonder within its context. Therefore, to use such texts as a basis for promising miraculous interventions at every hardship is to divert the narrative\u2019s purpose\u2014especially since Scripture itself affirms that \u201cin the world you will have tribulation.\u201d<\/p>\n
Within this framework, it is important to note that neither Jesus nor the apostles were authorized to \u201cinvent\u201d meanings. As the Son, Jesus spoke only what the Father had commanded Him:<\/p>\n
\u201cFor I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment\u2014what to say and what to speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me.\u201d (John 12:49\u201350)<\/p>\n
Likewise, Paul states that he did not set out to innovate with novelties, but to proclaim what had already been announced \u201cin the Law and the Prophets\u201d (Acts 26:22\u201323). And when he says he dealt with \u201cspiritual things,\u201d this does not mean that he received daily private instructions as though God whispered new phrases into his ear. The core of what he preached was the testimony of Christ: the Corinthians were \u201cenriched\u201d with \u201call speech\u201d and \u201call knowledge\u201d of the gospel, so that \u201cthey lacked no gift\u201d (1 Corinthians 1:5\u20136). Though Paul possessed extensive education and the resources of human wisdom, he resolved to proclaim nothing but Christ crucified\u2014an offense to Jews and folly to Greeks\u2014so that his message would be a \u201cdemonstration of Spirit and power,\u201d that is, an attestation of Christ, the life-giving Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:4).<\/p>\n
Therefore, when Paul says that he spoke \u201cin words taught by the Holy Spirit,\u201d he also clarifies the method: comparing spiritual things with spiritual things. If the words of Christ are \u201cspirit and life,\u201d and if the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets testify to these same realities, then the safest way to learn to interpret Scripture is to let Scripture govern its own meaning, keeping the text within its purpose and unity:<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.\u201d (1 Corinthians 2:13)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
When we encounter denser passages, prophetic images, or allegories that are difficult to interpret, the difficulty does not lie in the Bible itself, but in human limitation before the depth of the biblical texts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":325,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[91],"tags":[92,93],"class_list":["post-324","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interpretation","tag-biblical","tag-interpretation"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=324"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/325"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudobiblico.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}