Contradictions in Scripture are rarely textual; they are almost always relational. When readers meet apparent clashes—say, “I will raise it up” (John 2 : 19) versus “God raised Him” (Acts 2 : 24)—the reflex is to treat every verse as if it spoke from the same vantage point. This “flat proof‑text” habit persists from reverence (no‑one wishes a canon‑within‑the‑canon) and from the caution famously voiced by Warfield and later echoed in many evangelical statements of inerrancy. The net result, however, is doctrinal fog or appeals to mystery where Scripture offers clarity.
This essay proposes the Axiom of Relational‑Constraining Exegesis (ARCE) as a remedy. ARCE honours plenary inspiration without erasing the God‑ordained hierarchy Scripture itself displays—Father → Son → Spirit → creation. By granting interpretive priority to relationally primary agents, ARCE lets derivative voices speak in context, dissolving tensions while preserving every text.
ARCE refines classic hermeneutics such as analogia Scripturae (“Scripture interprets Scripture”) and analogia fidei (“in harmony with the rule of faith”). It stands on the relational‑ontological ground laid in Appendix A —substantive onto‑homogeneity (Son shares the Father’s kind of being) and distinct onto‑relationality (Son’s role is functionally subordinate). With that foundation in place, we now articulate the axiom and trace its reach.
Axiom. When multiple inspired statements address the same event, act, or truth‑claim from differing relational vantage points, the witness of ontologically and relationally primary agents (e.g., the Father) constrains—i.e., governs and contextualises—the statements of derivative agents (e.g., the Son, the Spirit, angelic messengers, human authors).Rule of thumb: Let ontological primacy set interpretive priority.
Primary vs Derivative. Primary agents possess auctoritas essendi and auctoritas instantiandi—authority of being and of enactment. Derivative agents act within that delegated domain.
Scope. ARCE applies across both Testaments, all genres, and every doctrinal locus where agency attribution varies.
Outcome. Apparent tensions are harmonised without flattening distinct voices and without resorting to speculative dual natures.
The Father alone is portrayed as possessing underived life (John 5 : 26) and as originating every decisive redemptive act (Acts 2 : 24; 1 Cor 15 : 24–28). The Son shares the kind yet receives life, judgment, and kingdom from the Father (John 5 : 22; Luke 1 : 32–33). The Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son (John 15 : 26; Acts 2 : 33). ARCE simply lets this ontological cascade guide exegesis.
Key Text Cluster – John 5 : 19–26; John 14 : 28; Acts 2 : 24–33; 1 Cor 15 : 24–28; Heb 1 : 1–4.
Biblical writers already privilege divine speech over creaturely experience. Qoheleth laments randomness (Eccl 9 : 11), yet Proverbs 16 : 33 asserts hidden providence. Gospel writers let the Father’s baptismal voice frame every later Christological claim. ARCE is therefore an explicit articulation of an implicit biblical habit.
Analogia Scripturae affirms Scripture interprets Scripture—ARCE specifies which voices hold veto power. Analogia fidei maintains harmony with the rule of faith—ARCE supplies the ontological logic behind that harmony. Canonical reading recognises unity—ARCE guards order within that unity.
ARCE does not diminish the Son or the Spirit; it honours their roles by reading them as Scripture presents them—relationally subordinate yet ontologically divine. Nor does it create a “canon‑within‑the‑canon”; every verse remains fully authoritative, though interpretive control follows revelational order. This alignment respects the Father’s exclusive prerogative to initiate and authorize:
“Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?” (Lamentations 3:37)
Causality is never presumed apart from divine command—preserving harmony, not hierarchy collapse.
Christological clarity – Avoids modalism and Nicene flattening.
Coherent doctrine of providence – Marries human phenomenology with divine causation.
Exegetical consistency – Replaces proof‑text ping‑pong with principled hierarchy.
Pastoral guidance – Clarifies prayer, worship, eschatology, authority.
Pedagogical simplicity – One heuristic usable from devotionals to undergraduate hermeneutics classes.
Ontological equality affirmed – No Arian slide.
No radical sub-ordinationism – Son’s obedience magnifies His glory (Phil 2 : 9–11).
Canon‑within‑canon critique answered – Hierarchy is descriptive, not imposed.
ARCE offers one clarifying lens: interpret from the top down—the Father (The One True God), the only begotten Son, the Spirit, creation. By respecting Scripture’s relational order, the axiom preserves every verse and resolves apparent contradictions.
“Let ontological primacy set interpretive priority.”
May this principle guide your reading and teaching this week—and may the contradictions shrink.
