User:A.J.A./Tohu&Bohu/Scriptures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Scriptures

Main article: Bible

Christianity regards the Bible, a collection of canonical books in two parts, the Old Testament and the New Testament, as authoritative: written by human authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and therefore the inerrant Word of God.[1] Protestants believe that the scriptures contain all revealed truth necessary for salvation.[2] (See Sola scriptura.)

The Old Testament contains the entire Jewish Tanakh, though in the Christian canon the books are ordered differently and some books of the Tanakh are divided into several books by the Christian canon. The Catholic and Orthodox canons include the Hebrew Jewish canon and other books (from the Septuagint Greek Jewish canon) which Catholics call Deuterocanonical, while Protestants consider the latter Apocrypha.[3]

The first books of the New Testament are the Gospels, which tell of the life and teachings of Jesus. There are four canonical Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The first three are often called synoptic because of the amount of material they share. The rest of the New Testament consists of a sequel to Luke's Gospel, the Acts of the Apostles, which describes the very early history of the Church, a collection of letters from early Christian leaders to congregations or individuals, the Pauline and General epistles, and the apocalyptic Book of Revelation. [3]

Some traditions maintain other canons. The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church maintains two canons, the Narrow Canon, itself larger than any Biblical canon outside Ethiopia, and the Broad Canon, which has even more books.[4] The Latter-day Saints hold three additional books to be the inspired word of God: the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. [5] The Gnostics used numerous books outside of the orthodox canon, most famously the Gospel of Thomas.[6]

[edit] Interpretation

Though Christians largely agree on the content of the Bible, no such consensus exists on the crucial matter of its interpretation, or exegesis. In antiquity, two schools of exegesis developed in Alexandria and Antioch. Alexandrine interpretation, exemplified by Origen, tended to read Scripture allegorically, while Antiochene interpretation insisted on the literal sense, holding that other meanings (called theoria) could only be accepted if based on the literal meaning.[7]


Catholic theology distinguishes two senses of scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral, and anagogical senses. The literal sense is "the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation." The allegorical sense includes typology, for example the parting of the Red Sea is seen as a "type" of or sign of baptism;[8] the moral sense contains ethical teaching; the anagogical sense includes eschatology and applies to eternity and the consummation of the world.[9] Catholic theology also adds other rules of interpretation, which include the injunction that all other senses of sacred scripture are based on the literal,[10] that the historicity of the Gospels must be absolutely and constantly held,[11] that scripture must be read within the "living Tradition of the whole Church",[12] and that "the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome."[13]

Protestants stress the literal sense or historical-grammatical method,[14] even to the extent of rejecting other senses altogether. Martin Luther advocated "one definite and simple understanding of Scripture".[15] Other Protestant interpreters still make use of typology.[16] Protestants characteristically believe that ordinary believers may reach an adequate understanding of Scripture because Scripture itself is clear (or "perspicuous"), because of the help of the Holy Spirit, or both. Martin Luther believed that without God's help Scripture would be "enveloped in darkness",[15] but John Calvin wrote, "all who refuse not to follow the Holy Spirit as their guide, find in the Scripture a clear light."[17] The Second Helvetic Confession said, "we hold that interpretation of the Scripture to be orthodox and genuine which is gleaned from the Scriptures themselves (from the nature of the language in which they were written, likewise according to the circumstances in which they were set down, and expounded in the light of like and unlike passages and of many and clearer passages)." The writings of the Church Fathers, and decisions of Ecumenical Councils, though "not despise[d]", were not authoritative and could be rejected.[18]

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture (§105-108). Catechism of the Catholic Church (October 11, 1992). Retrieved on October 9, 2006. Of the Holy Scripture Being the True Word of God. Second Helvetic Confession (1561). Retrieved on October 9, 2006. Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). Retrieved on October 9, 2006.
  2. ^ Thirty-nine Articles (Art. VI) (September 12, 1801). Retrieved on October 9, 2006. Westminster Catechism (Q. 3). Retrieved on October 9, 2006. White, James; Gerry Matatics (November, 1992). Does The Bible Teach Sola Scriptura?. Retrieved on October 9, 2006.
  3. ^ a b Bruce, F.F. (1988). The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press. The Canon of Scripture (§ 120). Catechism of the Catholic Church (October 11, 1992). Retrieved on October 9, 2006. Thirty-nine Articles (Art. VI) (September 12, 1801). Retrieved on October 9, 2006.
  4. ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament. The Bible: The Book That Bridges the Millennia. Retrieved on October 9, 2006.
  5. ^ The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Scriptures, Internet Edition. Retrieved on October 6, 2006.
  6. ^
  7. ^ J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (Prince Press, 2004), pp. 69-78.
  8. ^ 1 Corinthians 10:2
  9. ^ The Holy Spirit, Interpreter of Scripture (§ 115-118). Catechism of the Catholic Church (October 11, 1992). Retrieved on October 10, 2006.
  10. ^ Aquinas, Thomas. Whether in Holy Scripture a word may have several senses? (Ad. 1). Summa Theologica. Retrieved on October 10, 2006. c.f. Catechism of the Catholic Church §116
  11. ^ Dei Verbum (V.19) (November 18, 1962). Retrieved on October 10, 2006.
  12. ^ The Holy Spirit, Interpreter of Scripture (§ 113). Catechism of the Catholic Church (October 11, 1992). Retrieved on October 10, 2006.
  13. ^ The Interpretation of the Heritage of Faith (§ 85). Catechism of the Catholic Church (October 11, 1992). Retrieved on October 10, 2006.
  14. ^ Sproul, R.C. (1977). Knowing Scripture. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 45-61. Bahnsen, Greg. A Reformed Confession Regarding Hermeneutics (Art. 6). Retrieved on October 6, 2006.
  15. ^ a b Foutz, Scott David. "Martin Luther and Scripture". Quodlibet Online Journal. Retrieved on October 6, 2006.
  16. ^ E.g., in his commentary on Matthew 1 (§III.3) Matthew Henry writes:
    Phares and Zara, the twin-sons of Judah, are likewise both named, though Phares only was Christ's ancestor, for the same reason that the brethren of Judah are taken notice of; and some think because the birth of Phares and Zara had something of an allegory in it. Zara put out his hand first, as the first-born, but, drawing it in, Phares got the birth-right. The Jewish church, like Zara, reached first at the birthright, but through unbelief, withdrawing the hand, the Gentile church, like Phares, broke forth and went away with the birthright; and thus blindness is in part happened unto Israel, till the fulness of the Gentiles become in, and then Zara shall be born—all Israel shall be saved, Rom. 11:25, 26.
    For a contemporary treatment, see Glenny, W. Edward (March 1997). Typology: A Summary Of The Present Evangelical Discussion. Retrieved on October 10, 2006.
  17. ^ Calvin, John (January 24, 1551). 2 Peter 3:14-18. Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles. Retrieved on October 7, 2006.
  18. ^ Of Interpreting the Holy Scriptures; and of Fathers, Councils, and Traditions. Second Helvetic Confession (1561). Retrieved on October 9, 2006.

[edit] Comments

I've added two citations for the part about stressing the literal sense and made a specific mention of Martin Luther. I also added a link to the grammatical-historical method, which is a more technical name, although the article on the other end of the link is a mess.

You're right to call attention to the question of how Protestants think Scripture is suceptible to human understanding. There's really not a simple answer (and depending on your perspective, maybe not even a coherent one), but Wikipedia is not paper so I'll give it a shot later. If you read the Bahnsen link, compare Article 9 with Article 13. This will take some exposition. A.J.A. 17:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/2E/j/User%7EA.J.A._Tohu%26Bohu_Scriptures_3ea4.html"