How Paul Read His Bible

If you have ever talked with someone about the infallibility of the Bible, you likely heard that person quote the verse, “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” (2 Timothy 3:16) Again and again, conservative Christians come back to this verse for justification that the entire Bible should be accepted literally as the word of God. Given its importance, it is helpful to take a closer look at what the Apostle Paul, or one of his disciples, meant by these words.

For Paul, “scripture” was not the Bible as we think of it but the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament. The New Testament had not yet been written. Throughout his letters, Paul quotes from the Old Testament, either directly or in subtle references. Looking at one particular reference can give us a sense of how Paul interpreted scripture, and it might surprise you how Paul used the Bible.

In Galatians 4:21-31, Paul references the story of Sarah and Hagar from the book of Genesis. Sarah was the mother of Isaac, one of the patriarchs of Israel. Hagar was the mother of Ishmael, who became the father of his own people. In Galatians, Paul argues that those who abide by the Law, that is, those who insist that you must follow the Old Testament literally, are children of the slave girl Hagar. Yet those like Paul, who claim you can be Christian without following the whole Old Testament law, are children of Sarah and therefore heirs of the promise.

At first glance this argument seems to make sense, but when you think about, you realize how odd an interpretation Paul is attempting. Jews are obviously children of Sarah, both by genetic descent and by embracing the covenant, and in particular circumcision. But Paul uses an allegorical reading of the text to claim the exact opposite. Paul does not rely on a “literal” reading of the Bible, and he argues against the obvious historical meaning of the text. What on earth is going on here? By any contemporary perspective, Paul is playing fast and loose with the Bible. He is twisting the passage to make it say something that he wants. What are we missing?

Many scholars have wrestled with Paul’s use of the Old Testament and have tried to make sense of it. Probably the best account is Richard Hays’ Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. Hays convincingly shows that Paul does not use any consistent method of interpreting the Hebrew Bible. Instead, Paul relies on his experience of Jesus Christ to re-read the Old Testament in ways that address specific concerns in the early Christian churches. It is Paul’s direct experience of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and not some static interpretation of the Bible, that are determinative for how the community should live.

This has profound implications for Christian churches today. So often, Christians rely on “what the Bible says” about one topic or another. They refer to the “literal” reading of the text or try and place the text in its historical context. This provides a stable guide for behavior. But that is not what Paul did with the Bible. For Paul, his experience of God in Jesus Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit were the most important factors in biblical interpretation. Liberal Christians, like myself, try to follow a model of interpretation similar to Paul’s. The primary questions are, “Where is the Holy Spirit today?” and “How does my experience of Jesus lead me to read the text anew?” This leads liberal Christians to ordain women and to advocate full inclusion of gays and lesbians in spite of texts that can be read opposing these views. As Christianity moves into a new era, perhaps we should learn from the early church and recapture the use of allegory and other nuanced readings of the Bible. In doing so, we will be more like Paul and therefore more biblical.