INTRODUCTION
The Text
This post is the first in a series of posts that reports the results of my exegesis of Acts 2:38. Although baptismal regenerationists commonly cite only Acts 2:38, I believe the better textual unit comprises Acts 2:37–47 (NASB95), which reads:
37 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 “For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.” 40 And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation!” 41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.
42 They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles. 44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; 45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. 46 Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.
Those Who Use Acts 2:38 to Support Baptismal Regeneration
On pages 43-63 of his book Baptism – Biblical Study (College Press Publishing, Joplin, MO (1989) [7th printing in 2006]), Dr. Jack Cottrell uses Acts 2:38-39 to support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. On pages 62-63, Dr. Cottrell writes [emphasis added]:
We have seen that Peter’s response included a promise of a “double cure” from the “double trouble” of sin; forgiveness to remove their guilt, and the indwelling Holy Spirit to give them a new birth to new spiritual life. His response also included the conditions for receiving these blessings: repentance and baptism.
We have discussed in some detail the connection between baptism and forgiveness as stated here in Acts 2:38. … Thus, the very purpose of baptism is to bring about forgiveness or justification.
Finally, we have discussed the connection between forgiveness and the Holy Spirit. , emphasizing that baptism is a clear precondition for receiving the gift of the regenerating and indwelling presence of the Spirit.
Dr. Cottrell’s attempt to dismiss the mountain of Scriptural evidence against baptismal regeneration reads:
Passages in Acts with separate baptism from the gift of the Spirit are deliberately unique exceptions or are not talking about the saving presence of the Spirit in the first place.
Acts 2:38 is a foundational verse for a denomination such as the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI) that teaches the necessity of water baptism for salvation. The UPCI website reads [in part] (see link: Oneness Pentecostalism – upci.org) [emphasis added]:
Ultimately, each of us is accountable to God for our response of faith. The Bible is the sole authority for salvation; the basis of salvation is Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection; salvation comes only by grace through faith in Jesus Christ; and the application of grace and the expression of faith comes as a person obeys Acts 2:38, thereby receiving the new birth promised by Jesus.
It is interesting how the UPCI tries to couch salvation in terms of faith by grace, yet, requires works (i.e., water baptism, for the new birth, i.e., salvation.
Summary of What is Ahead
Posts 22-26 will present my exegesis of Acts 2:37-47 in the context of the issue:
Does Acts 2:38 support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration?
As will become apparent from the development of the posts, the answer is enthusiastically in the negative. The evidence against Acts 2:38 teaching baptismal regeneration is overwhelming! Anyone who studies Acts 2:38 and yet remains an adherent of baptismal regeneration is NOT listening to Scripture.
A brief roadmap of what follows is below.
(1) I attempt to practice the hermeneutical principles in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics, and especially ARTICLES XVII and XXIII.
(2) In Posts 22A and 22B, I report the results of my consideration of the relevant literary contexts which comprise: (a) the substance of the Pentecost event (Acts 2:1-4) and Peter’s Pentecost sermon (Acts 2:14-36), (b) the close connection between the Pentecost event and Jesus’ promise of what became the Pentecost event brings (Acts 1:4-8), and (c) the substance of John the Baptizer’s baptism (i.e., Matthew 3:1-12, Mark 1:1-8, and Luke 3:1-20).
(3) In Post 23, I report the results of my observations about Acts 2:37-39. Acts 2:37, 39 do not appear to impact my analysis. Acts 2:38 reveals a grammatical issue some call The Syntactical Interpretation that connects repentance and forgiveness of sins so as to bypass water baptism as a requirement for salvation.
(4) In Post 24, I report the results of my observations of Acts 2:40-47, especially verses 40-41, 44, and 47. None of these verses support baptismal regeneration. In fact, verses 40-41 argue against the validity of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
(5) In Post 25A, I discuss the results of my analysis of selected passages in Acts, John and 1 John in light of the doctrine of analogy of faith. Post 25A identifies a vast number of passages that teach with clarity that salvation is by faith alone in Jesus Christ with no mention of water baptism having salvific efficacy.
(6) In Post 25B, I discuss the impact of The Syntactical Interpretation that connects repentance and forgiveness of sins so as to bypass water baptism as a requirement for salvation. I also discuss how it appears the grammar connects repentance with the receipt of the Holy Spirit. Post 25B reflects what I believe to the single correct interpretation of Acts 2:38.
(7) In Post 26, I apply Acts 2:38, as properly interpreted, to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. The only logical conclusion is that Acts 2:38 does not support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
As a final comment, I am not alone when I say that to cite Acts 2:38 in support of baptismal regeneration is heresy. In the AFTERWARD of an article by Lanny Tanton entitled “The Gospel and Water Baptism”, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 12, Pastor Tanton writes [emphasis added]:
[p. 86] Thus, all efforts to explain Acts 2:38 in such a way as to maintain the purity of the gospel of grace by rejecting the idea of salvation occurs either because of, or, at the time of, one’s baptism, is to be highly commended. A gospel that does not require Christ’s cross is heresy.
[p. 87] First, I commend all who, in their writings on Acts 2:38, endeavor to maintain the purity of the gospel of God’s grace by rejecting a salvation of faith and works. It is my studied opinion that a false gospel of faith and works inevitably marginalizes or ignores the work of Christ on His cross—much like modern theological liberalism or ancient Pelagianism—and is, to be candid, no Biblical gospel at all.
MY APPROACH TO EXEGETE ACTS 2:37-47
Hermeneutical Principles
For the purpose of this analysis, the more relevant hermeneutical principles from the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics are ARTICLES XVII and XXIII, which read:
ARTICLE XVII – We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter.
ARTICLE XXIII – We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin.
APPENDIX A is a repetition of my comments in Post 4 about the analogy of faith. It is worthwhile to keep in mind that ARTICLE XVII requires that the interpretation of Acts 2:38 must be consistent with the entirety of Scripture regarding the requirements for salvation. Also, ARTICLE XXIII requires that the interpretation of Acts 2:38 be clear, especially with respect to issues of salvation.
Literary Contexts
Acts 2:38 (NASB95) reads:
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Peter’s call to action brings into consideration a number of other passages in proximity to Acts 2:38. First, the fact that verse 38 is Peter’s call to action in response to his sermon brings the substance of the Pentecost event (Acts 2:1-4) and Peter’s Pentecost sermon (Acts 2:14-36) into consideration.
Second, the close connection between the Pentecost event and Jesus’ promise of what became the Pentecost event brings Acts 1:4-8 into play.
Finally, Jesus’ promise of the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts (1:4-5) brings the substance of John the Baptizer’s baptism into my analysis. The Synopic Gospels record the relevant events at Matthew 3:1-12, Mark 1:1-8, and Luke 3:1-20.
Post 22A discusses the impact the events connected with John the Baptizer’s baptism have on my study. Post 22B discusses the impact the events comprising the pre-Pentecost events, the Pentecost event, and Peter’s Pentecost sermon have on my study.
John the Baptizer’s Baptism
Acts 1:4–5 (NASB95) records Jesus’ promise of the baptism with the Holy Spirit:
4 Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”
Jesus’ promise brings the events connected with John the Baptizer’s baptism into consideration. The first text is Matthew 3:1–3, 6-8, 11 (NASB95) [emphasis added], which reads:
1 Now in those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, 2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” 3 For this is the one referred to by Isaiah the prophet when he said, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make ready the way of the Lord, Make His paths straight!’ ” … 6 and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins. 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 “Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance; … 11 “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
The most relevant expression is “I baptize you with water for repentance.” The NASB95 translates the Greek preposition eis as “for.” In his commentary on Matthew 3:11, Blomberg (Blomberg, C. (1992). Matthew (Vol. 22, p. 79). Broadman & Holman Publishers) opines that eis should be taken as “because” [emphasis added]:
The phrase “for repentance” could suggest that one must be baptized to be saved, but this interpretation flounders on New Testament teaching elsewhere (e.g., Acts 3:19; Rom 3:23–24; Eph 2:8–9). Interestingly, even Josephus recognizes this (Ant. 18.5.2) when he writes that John taught that his followers “must not employ [baptism] to gain pardon for whatever sins they committed, but as a consecration of the body implying that the soul was already thoroughly cleansed.” A venerable tradition of Baptist interpreters has seen the “for” (eis) as actually meaning because here, but more recent grammatical analysis makes this unlikely. Probably the term simply should be taken as in reference to. Baptism in reference to repentance thus distinguishes John’s baptism from other religions’ ritual washings which do not symbolize turning away from sin.
The second text is Mark 1:4–5, 8 (NASB95) [emphasis added],which reads:
4 John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins. … 8 “I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”
The most relevant expression is “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” The NASB95 translates the Greek proposition eis as “for.” The NET Bible (Full Notes Edition) explains this expression (p. 1853):
A baptism for the forgiveness of sins was a call for preparation for the arrival of the Lord’s salvation. To participate in this baptism was a recognition of the need for God’s forgiveness with a sense that one needed to live differently as a response to it.
In reference to the expression “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins,” France (France, R. T. (2002). The Gospel of Mark: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 65). W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press) writes that John’s baptism was a symbol of repentance [emphasis added]:
Mark summarises the whole focus of John’s mission in the condensed phrase κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. This condensation might suggest that the βάπτισμα was itself the object of his preaching, but it is clear from all the accounts we have of John both in the NT and in Josephus that his focus was rather on repentance in the face of the threat of divine judgment, and his object was not simply to get people baptised, but to call together the repentant and restored people of God for the imminent eschatological crisis. Baptism was a symbol of repentance and of belonging to the true remnant of the people of God. But Mark singles it out as the focus of this thumbnail sketch, since it was the most distinctive feature of John’s ministry, and the one by which he had come to be popularly known.
In Robertson’s commentary (Robertson, A. T. (1933). Word Pictures in the New Testament (Mk 1:4–5). Broadman Press) on Mark 1:4, which he references in Luke 3:3, he explains that “with reference to” is probably is a good translation of eis:
Unto remission of sins (εἰς ἀφεσιν ἁμαρτιων [eis aphesin hamartiōn]). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of εἰς [eis] which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in Matt. 10:41 and 12:41. Probably “with reference to” is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Rom. 6:4), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people.
The third and final text is Luke 3:3, 8, 16 (NASB95) [emphasis added], which reads:
3 And he came into all the district around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins; … 8 “Therefore bear fruits in keeping with repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. … 16 John answered and said to them all, “As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
The most relevant expression is in Luke 3:3 and it reads, “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” This expression is the same as in Mark 1:4.
Stein (Stein, R. H. (1992). Luke (Vol. 24, p. 128). Broadman & Holman Publishers) comments on Luke 3:3 by saying that baptism does nothing by itself [emphasis added]:
Baptism is not to be isolated from the repentance mentioned here. Nor is it to be isolated from faith.10 Josephus (Antiquities 18.5.2; 18.116–19) also stated that John’s baptism required a “cleansed soul,” and the baptism-washing at Qumran [1QS 3:3–12; 5:13–14] was likewise understood as doing nothing by itself.
In reference to John’s baptism in general, Beasley-Murray (Beasley-Murray, G. R. (1962). Baptism in the New Testament (pp. 34-35) Paternoster) opines that John’s baptism did not save:
But we must pause. What was the relationship between ‘conversion’ and baptism in John’s preaching? Did the baptism symbolize the conversion, marking its actuality in the life of the baptized, or did it effect it? … This coincidence of language used in respect of the preaching of John and the preaching of Jesus is very significant; the demand made both by the Forerunner and the Messiah on the nation is summed up in the term, ‘Repent—Turn to God!’ It is not feasible that either Jesus or John meant by that word, ‘Come to baptism that God may turn you!’ That Matthew did not so interpret John is plain from his report of the Baptist’s insistence that only the truly repentant should come to his baptism; John rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees, lest their repentance, expressed in their desire for baptism, be without due seriousness.
Green (Green, M. (1987). Baptism: Its Purpose, Practice and Power (pp. 21-22). Paternoster) says that John’s baptism did not confer forgiveness, but was a preparatory rite [emphasis added]:
John’s baptism was clearly designed ‘for the forgiveness of sins’ (Mark 1:4). It went far deeper than ceremonial defilement, for which the Jewish sacrifices were designed. It went to the heart. The heart of man was wicked, and it needed cleansing and forgiveness. That is what the water indicated. It is a universal symbol of cleansing. And that is what everyone needs, if they are to have anything to do with a holy God. We are not told that John’s baptism conferred forgiveness. It was, as we shall see below, a preparatory rite. But it was all about the possibility of forgiveness: it was eis aphesin hamartiōn ‘with a view to the forgiveness of sins. … John was under no illusion that water could convey forgiveness of sins. In common with the desert community of sectarian Jews at Qumran, who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls (a community with which he seems to have had some links), John saw washing with water as the preparatory rite, looking forward to the great cleansing and gift of the Spirit which lay in the future (1 QS 9–10, and 4:24).
The accounts about John the Baptizer’s water baptism in Matthew 3:1-12, Mark 1:1-8, and Luke 3:1-20 do not support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
CONCLUSION
The events connected with John’s baptism point in the direction that water baptism did not confer forgiveness of sins. Rather, the relevant verses about baptism (i.e., Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:4, and Luke 3:3) support the position that water baptism has no salvific efficacy.
VERY IMPORTANT IF YOU BELIEVE IN BAPTISMAL REGENERATION
Finally, let me quote gotquestions.org (link: https://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Mark-16-16.html ):
If you believe in baptismal regeneration, you would do well to prayerfully consider whom or what you are really putting your trust in. Is your faith in a physical act (being baptized) or in the finished work of Christ on the cross? Whom or what are you trusting for salvation? Is it the shadow (baptism) or the substance (Jesus Christ)? Our faith must rest in Christ alone. “We have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace” (Ephesians 1:7).
Please read and take to heart what I write in the section entitled “IF YOU ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN.”
IF YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT YOUR SALVATION
If you are unsure about your salvation, you need to check out my book The Salvation Meter: Biblical Self-Diagnostic Tests to Examine Your Salvation and Spiritual Growth (book link at Xulon Press: https://www.xulonpress.com/bookstore/bookdetail.php?PB_ISBN=9781662828638 ). At Amazon the book link is https://www.amazon.com/Salavation-Meter-Biblical-Self-Diagnostic-Spiritual/dp/1662828632 . I also have a website in which I am updating the content in the book. The link to my website for the book is https://thesalvationmeter.com .
IF YOU ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN
… please (1) read through “God’s Plan of Salvation” so you can understand what God did for you through His only unique Son, Jesus Christ, and (2), from the bottom of your heart, pray the “Sinner’s Prayer” meaning every word. If you do, you will be reconciled to God – saved – through Jesus Christ.
God’s Plan of Salvation
In the beginning, God, who is holy, created the entire universe. As a part of His creative actions, He made humans in His image to know Him. For a while, everything was right between God and our ancestors, Adam and Eve. But Adam sinned, and his sin was passed down to all of humankind whereby we became separated from God. Nothing we could do on our own could bridge that separation so that without God’s intervention, hell would be our eternal destination.
Fortunately for us, in His great love and mercy God provided humankind with the only means of salvation, which is through Jesus Christ who is God’s only unique Son. While retaining His deity, God the Son became a man in Jesus, lived a perfect life, and died on the cross, thus fulfilling the law Himself and taking on Himself the punishment for the sins of all those who would ever repent and trust in Him for their salvation. Jesus rose from the dead, showing that God the Father accepted Christ’s sacrifice and that God’s wrath against us has been exhausted. He now calls us to repent of our sins and trust alone in what Christ did to save us.
If we repent of our sins and completely trust in Christ alone that He died for our sins and rose to life from the dead, we are born again into a new life, an eternal life with God.
Scripture References: Genesis 1:1, 27, 31; Habakkuk 1:13; Genesis 2:7, 18, 21-25; Genesis 3:1-7, 23-24; Isaiah 59:2; Romans 3:19-20, 23; 5:17-19; Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 6:23; John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Corinthians 15:3; 1 John 4:10; John 3:16-18; Mark 1:15; Romans 1:4; 4:25; John 3:5-8; 1 Peter 1:3.
“Sinner’s Prayer”
Lord, Jesus Christ, the only unique Son of God, thank You for Your free gift of eternal life. I know I’m a sinner who cannot save myself no matter what I do, and I deserve to spend eternity in hell. But, I know that because You loved me so much, You voluntarily died on the cross for me taking my sins upon Yourself, and You physically bodily rose from the grave showing that Your sacrificial death was sufficient payment to give me eternal life in Heaven. I now repent of my sins and trust alone in what You did for my eternal salvation. Please take control of my life as I now receive You as my Lord and Savior. Thank You so much for saving me. I am now Yours forever! (Scripture references: John 1:1-4, 11-14; John 3:16; Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 3:21-26; Isaiah 53:4-6; Mark 1:15; Acts 16:31; Acts 4:12; Romans 10:9-10, 13; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4; John 10:27-29).
Upon your salvation, you must find a spiritually solid Bible-believing church that (1) teaches that the sixty-six books of the Bible are the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God, (2) believes in the doctrine of the Trinity, which means that there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct Persons — the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – and each Person is fully God, and (3) teaches that salvation is by grace through faith and not by works (e.g., water baptism by immersion).
ONE CAUTIONARY POINT. Please do not make the mistake of thinking that once you become a Christian, your life will become easy. Most likely, it will become more difficult. God’s blessing of salvation and life’s difficulties are not mutually exclusive. Jesus told His disciples, “If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first.” John 15:18 (NLT). Always keep in mind that you have an eternal home in heaven waiting for you per John 14:2–4 (NLT):
2 There is more than enough room in my Father’s home. If this were not so, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you? 3 When everything is ready, I will come and get you, so that you will always be with me where I am. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”
.
NOTICE OF PERMISSIONS
I am mindful of and respect the rights other authors and/or publishers possess in their works. I thus try my best to not violate any copyright rights other authors and/or publishers possess in their works. The below copyright permission statement is the result of my best efforts to understand that limited usage or “fair use” is available and/or to secure direct permission for specific works. The quotations from commentaries are considered to be “fair use.”
Scripture quotations marked “ESV” are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version) copyright 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture marked “NASB95” are taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®, Copyright © 1960,1962,1963,1968,1971,1972,1973,1975,1977,1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.”
Scripture marked “NCV” is taken from the New Century Version. Copyright © 1987, 1988, 1991 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.”
The Scriptures marked “NET” are quoted are from the NET Bible® http://netbible.com copyright ©1996, 2019 used with permission from Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. All rights reserved”.
Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2007, 2013, 2015 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
Scripture marked “GW” is taken from the God’s Word Bible that is a copyrighted work of God’s Word to the Nations. Quotations are used by permission.
APPENDIX A
The Exposition of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics reads [in part]”
Interpretation should adhere to the principle of harmony in the biblical material. Scripture exhibits a wide diversity of concepts and viewpoints within a common faith and an advancing disclosure of divine truth within the biblical period. These differences should not be minimized, but the unity which underlies the diversity should not be lost sight of at any point. We should look to Scripture to interpret Scripture and deny as a matter of method that particular texts, all of which have the one Holy Spirit as their source, can be genuinely discrepant with each other. Even when we cannot at present demonstrate their harmony in a convincing way, we should proceed on the basis that they are in fact harmonious and that fuller knowledge will show this.
R. C. Sproul (Knowing Scripture at page 51) describes the “analogy of faith” to mean [emphasis added]:
The analogy of faith is the rule that Scripture is to interpret Scripture: … This means, quite simply, that no part of Scripture can be interpreted in such a way as to render it in conflict with what is clearly taught elsewhere in Scripture. … This principle rests on the prior confidence in the Bible as the inspired Word of God. It is, therefore, consistent and coherent. Since it is assumed that God would never contradict Himself, it is thought slanderous to the Holy Spirit to choose an alternate interpretation that would unnecessarily bring the Bible in conflict with itself.
Kay Arthur in her book How to Study Your Bible (Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR (1994)) writes at page 62:
The best interpreter of Scripture is Scripture. Remember, all Scripture is inspired by God; it is God-breathed. Therefore, Scripture will never contradict itself. If it appears to, then your interpretation of at least one passage is incomplete or wrong.