The main rule for interpreting Scripture is a simple one.
Scripture never contradicts Scripture.
Period. If you run into an apparent contradiction, then examine your context clues to resolve it. Let's look at an example.
Paul says in Romans 4:5 "But to him who does not work, but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness." But then James 2:14 says, "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?" It looks like Paul says if you have works, you can't be saved, while James implies you can't be saved without them.
I won't take the time to go through all the verses here, but I encourage you to read Romans and James to what I say. However if you take a step back and read the verses in the bigger context, you'll see that Paul and James are talking about two different things even though they use the same word.
(We do this too. I could say, "He even rode his bike to work." Did I mean a bicycle or a motorcycle? Without context, there's no way to tell. However, if you'd heard the sentences before, it would be easy to tell. "He's really proud of that Harley." Vs. "He's trying to save money.")
Back to Paul and James- reading the verses in context, you find out that Paul is talking about what folks to merit salvation rather than relying on Gods grace alone. If you aren't trying to work your way to heaven, but trust solely on God, then that faith saves.
James is talking about the things we do after we're saved that give evidence of that change. (Jesus uses the idea of "fruit" for the same concept.) James' point is that faith that doesn't produce anything may not be genuine faith after all.
Have you run into seeming contradictions? What was the resolution?
