homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Scripture ALONE

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.    
Source: (consider it) Thread: Scripture ALONE
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I listened to an explanation of the "Protestant" approach (by very conservative evangelicals) to the Canon today, Apparently we know that the bible in its current form is the word of God & it is the ultimate authority and not subject to anything else like tradition or the authority of the church because:

The early church accepted these texts, they were written by the apostles/had apostolic authority and they're the oldest texts. This was strongly differentiated from the RC position that puts the authority of the church above the bible by claiming that the church determined the canon. I'm lost the evangelical explanation above is relying on tradition and the church -surely-even though they say they're not.

Then we get to another interesting point. It is that the bible is self-authenticating. When we read the bible the Holy Spirit convicts us that this is the word of God. By this stage I"m like whoa, so we've changed from conevos to Pentes. Surely this is about personal experience and/or are we accepting the tradition or authority of those church authorities /fathers who were convicted and then tell us that these particular scriptures are God's word and nothing else.

Am I missing something in the explanation or are evangelicals relying on tradition and church authority to define what is God's word?

Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:

Am I missing something in the explanation or are evangelicals relying on tradition and church authority to define what is God's word?

In a word: yes. But they'd likely not admit to this and instead try to make out that there is a "correct" reading of scripture that one can discern for oneself under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I'd say the most conservative Evangelicals wouldn't recognise the importance of church history and authority on the bibles that they now hold as being inerrant.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think that is right if you are thinking of fairly conservative Evangelicals. But I think a lot of Evangelicals aren't like that and would recognise - at least to a degree - the place of tradition and church history in the way they read Scripture. (I get a bit worried when folk lump all Evangelicals together as one definitely can't do that).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
*Leon*
Shipmate
# 3377

 - Posted      Profile for *Leon*   Email *Leon*   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Evangeline: I think you need to find yourself a more logically consistent bunch of ConEvos to be taught by. The argument I've heard is to prove that liberal interpretations of the bible all involve circular reasoning (straw men are useful for this bit), and therefore since everyone does it there's clearly nothing wrong with circular reasoning.

Having argued that, you can go on to prove that the bible is infallible because 2 Timothy says so (infallibly) and it contains exactly the right set of books because it would be fallible if it contained the wrong books.

Of course I don't believe a word of this (including the proof that the liberal interpretation involves circular reasoning). However, it is possible to argue the ConEvo position in a way that is logically consistent, is genuinely sola scripture, and which can't be disproved within its own terms.

I take it you didn't dare put your hand up to ask about a friend of yours who read the bible and wasn't convinced by the Holy Spirit that it was the word of God.

Posts: 831 | From: london | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Trudy Scrumptious

BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647

 - Posted      Profile for Trudy Scrumptious   Author's homepage   Email Trudy Scrumptious   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I put more or less this question to a seminary professor in my own denomination (Seventh-day Adventist) some years ago, asking him, "Aren't we accepting the authority of church tradition when we accept the Biblical canon, since the church determined which books were in the canon." He said it was a very good question and that our official position was that God, through the Holy Spirit, determined which books were in the canon, and that the church merely confirmed this.

I didn't find this an entirely satisfying answer.

--------------------
Books and things.

I lied. There are no things. Just books.

Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
*Leon*
Shipmate
# 3377

 - Posted      Profile for *Leon*   Email *Leon*   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It occurs to me that if you start arguing that the early church in some sense determined, received or confirmed the canon, you end up with a problem (assuming you're looking for standard ConEvo answers) that the early church obviously accepted the deuterocanonical books. I wonder how these arguments fit with the 'there aren't any deuterocanonical quotes in the NT' argument.
Posts: 831 | From: london | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We had a half semester class in seminary on revelation (the concept, not the book) which was fascinating. I think most of us concluded at the end of it to stop thinking about scripture and tradition as separate fonts of knowledge, but to think about the foundational Christ-event being handed on (tradition-ed) in various ways, including through a collection of writings which have been deemed to constitute a standard (canon). This was at a Catholic university, but we read Barth and Tillich as well as Catholic thinkers.

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I think that is right if you are thinking of fairly conservative Evangelicals. But I think a lot of Evangelicals aren't like that and would recognise - at least to a degree - the place of tradition and church history in the way they read Scripture. (I get a bit worried when folk lump all Evangelicals together as one definitely can't do that).

Definitely. In particular, Wesleyan evangelicals such as myself would favor the Wesleyan Quadrilateral: Scripture, tradition, reason & experience.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649

 - Posted      Profile for Raptor Eye     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Definitely. In particular, Wesleyan evangelicals such as myself would favor the Wesleyan Quadrilateral: Scripture, tradition, reason & experience.

While jettisoning the label, I too subscribe to the quadrilateral.

As someone who began with scripture and experience, was brought to experience Church and reason too, and who has found that all are essential for the progression of Christian pilgrims of all flavours, whether we like it or not.

--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10

Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks all for the responses so far,

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I think that is right if you are thinking of fairly conservative Evangelicals. But I think a lot of Evangelicals aren't like that and would recognise - at least to a degree - the place of tradition and church history in the way they read Scripture. (I get a bit worried when folk lump all Evangelicals together as one definitely can't do that).

Definitely. In particular, Wesleyan evangelicals such as myself would favor the Wesleyan Quadrilateral: Scripture, tradition, reason & experience.
Amusingly the approach I describe was defined as the "Protestant one"-so not just Evangelical but all Protestants according to this person. As I said in the OP it was a lecture by a very conservative evangelical.

Leon, my friend would have been declared to have been predestined for eternal damnation, no problemo at all.

[ 07. March 2016, 20:25: Message edited by: Evangeline ]

Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We can at least be grateful s/he only described it as the Protestant approach and not The One and Only Christian approach

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LOL but that would be tautology. [Biased]

Oh and it was definitely a "he", women aren't allowed to teach-well they are sometimes but only if a senior man is there.

Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
LOL but that would be tautology. [Biased]

Oh and it was definitely a "he", women aren't allowed to teach-well they are sometimes but only if a senior man is there.

Hey, don't need to tell me-- I'm an evangelical.

Though the only time I really encountered that was teaching in a Bible college on the mission field, when hubby was required to be in the classroom whenever I was teaching as "covering." I'm not sure what he was doing there in the back on the computer, but I'm pretty sure it was not listening to my lesson and spot-checking it for heresy.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
I put more or less this question to a seminary professor in my own denomination (Seventh-day Adventist) some years ago, asking him, "Aren't we accepting the authority of church tradition when we accept the Biblical canon, since the church determined which books were in the canon." He said it was a very good question and that our official position was that God, through the Holy Spirit, determined which books were in the canon, and that the church merely confirmed this.

I didn't find this an entirely satisfying answer.

It isn't satisfactory. But, IME, it is the standard conservative evangelical approach - basically that the inspiration of Scripture not only covers the authors choice of words being dictated by the Spirit but also the choices the Church made in deciding which of those texts to consider Scripture were controlled by the Spirit. Some might even go as far as saying that the translators (of the Authorised King James Bible) were similarly controlled by the Spirit. A very reluctant nod to the idea that, on this one point, Tradition got it right.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
]It isn't satisfactory. But, IME, it is the standard conservative evangelical approach - basically that the inspiration of Scripture not only covers the authors choice of words being dictated by the Spirit but also the choices the Church made in deciding which of those texts to consider Scripture were controlled by the Spirit. Some might even go as far as saying that the translators (of the Authorised King James Bible) were similarly controlled by the Spirit. A very reluctant nod to the idea that, on this one point, Tradition got it right.

So long as you acknowledge that the scriptures derive their authority from the Holy Spirit acting through the church that's ok. That wasn't what was being taught here, sadly this particular institution seems to be jumping the shark with their scripture alone view.

[ 08. March 2016, 01:40: Message edited by: Evangeline ]

Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
LOL but that would be tautology. [Biased]

Oh and it was definitely a "he", women aren't allowed to teach-well they are sometimes but only if a senior man is there.

Hey, don't need to tell me-- I'm an evangelical.

Though the only time I really encountered that was teaching in a Bible college on the mission field, when hubby was required to be in the classroom whenever I was teaching as "covering." I'm not sure what he was doing there in the back on the computer, but I'm pretty sure it was not listening to my lesson and spot-checking it for heresy.

So how did you feel about that and do you still feel the same?
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
LOL but that would be tautology. [Biased]

Oh and it was definitely a "he", women aren't allowed to teach-well they are sometimes but only if a senior man is there.

Hey, don't need to tell me-- I'm an evangelical.

Though the only time I really encountered that was teaching in a Bible college on the mission field, when hubby was required to be in the classroom whenever I was teaching as "covering." I'm not sure what he was doing there in the back on the computer, but I'm pretty sure it was not listening to my lesson and spot-checking it for heresy.

So how did you feel about that and do you still feel the same?
On the mission field I choose my battles. It was a patriarchal culture-- the college even less so than the culture at large. So, as an outside guest, it wasn't something I felt prepared to challenge. As a female evangelical pastor in the US I feel no such reservations. But another person in the same situation may feel differently, and might be quite right.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Agnostic Believer
Apprentice
# 18566

 - Posted      Profile for Agnostic Believer   Author's homepage   Email Agnostic Believer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Bear with me; this being my first post from my ship which flounders in an ocean far from the continents of Bibliolatry.
Is there not a ‘Bigger Picture’?
Is there not a God who cares equally for those who have died, and will yet do so, without ever seeing a canonised Bible, or hearing what so many call “The Gospel message”?
If there isn’t then I would have to conclude that is no God at all, which personally I am reluctant, nay ‘unable’, to conclude.
For the vast myriads of mankind that I have in mind ‘Text Book’ Religion is either non-existent or, as is an apparent human propensity, they will have established one of their own imaginings (man creating God in man’s own image).

--------------------
Saying what I think I might know, helps me to know what I ought to think.

Posts: 22 | From: Holt, Norfolk, UK | Registered: Mar 2016  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Agnostic Believer:
Bear with me; this being my first post from my ship which flounders in an ocean far from the continents of Bibliolatry.
Is there not a ‘Bigger Picture’?
Is there not a God who cares equally for those who have died, and will yet do so, without ever seeing a canonised Bible, or hearing what so many call “The Gospel message”?
If there isn’t then I would have to conclude that is no God at all, which personally I am reluctant, nay ‘unable’, to conclude.
For the vast myriads of mankind that I have in mind ‘Text Book’ Religion is either non-existent or, as is an apparent human propensity, they will have established one of their own imaginings (man creating God in man’s own image).

Friend, welcome.

These are interesting questions, but I'm not sure we can do them justice in this discussion. I'd have thought they might do better in a new thread in Purgatory?

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002

 - Posted      Profile for Evangeline   Email Evangeline   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Agnostic Believer:
Bear with me; this being my first post from my ship which flounders in an ocean far from the continents of Bibliolatry.
Is there not a ‘Bigger Picture’?
Is there not a God who cares equally for those who have died, and will yet do so, without ever seeing a canonised Bible, or hearing what so many call “The Gospel message”?
If there isn’t then I would have to conclude that is no God at all, which personally I am reluctant, nay ‘unable’, to conclude.
For the vast myriads of mankind that I have in mind ‘Text Book’ Religion is either non-existent or, as is an apparent human propensity, they will have established one of their own imaginings (man creating God in man’s own image).

They are interesting questions. I used to worry about the "exclusivity" of Christianity in a world where millions never heard or will hear "The Gospel Message", I felt God say to me but YOU have heard it what are you going to do about it. My personal experience and no doubt unsatisfactory but I have heard the Gospel and I want to proclaim it and to think upon its truth.

Somewhere Jesus says "Who are you to judge another man's servant?" and I think this is true when thinking about those who have never heard the Gospel-that is God's call and I trust in His mercy.

Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Agnostic Believer
Apprentice
# 18566

 - Posted      Profile for Agnostic Believer   Author's homepage   Email Agnostic Believer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I’m not one for Biblically text proofing my thoughts, but those who believe God to have spoken to them via the Bible would do well to remember that their ‘Bible’ itself explains that God doesn’t ‘not speak’ to those who have no Bible.
“The invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they (with no Bible?) have excuse if they worship the evident creator rather than images made in the likeness of corruptible things.”

[ 08. March 2016, 11:10: Message edited by: Agnostic Believer ]

--------------------
Saying what I think I might know, helps me to know what I ought to think.

Posts: 22 | From: Holt, Norfolk, UK | Registered: Mar 2016  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I often get ribbed here for suggesting that almost everything is 'both/and' rather than 'either/or' and I think that applies in this case too ...

[Biased]

I agree with Baptist Trainfan that there are broader and more nuanced evangelical perspectives that do take into account the role of tradition - whilst still adhering to the standard evangelical Quadrilaterals - in the Bebbington sense - and a high view of scriptural inspiration in the 'Sola Scriptura' sense ...

Personally, I struggle with 'Sola Scriptura' as it so easily becomes a mantra or a banner ... and I do take the point made by those evangelicals - and Protestants more generally - who maintain that Sola Scriptura isn't the same as SOLO Scriptura ... and I suppose that 'Prima Scriptura' might be a better term ...

But then, I'm fairly ambivalent about evangelicalism and indeed Protestantism itself these days ... (shock horror) due to influences I've imbibed from some of the more sacramental and Catholic traditions ...

It isn't that I'd want to repudiate what lies at the heart of evangelicalism - or even Protestantism as a whole for that matter - but it is to say that I find the way these things are framed within many evangelical - or generally Protestant circles - to be unsatisfactory.

That said, I can't pretend to have read or imbibed that much material from the more nuanced end - and like many Shippies am probably reacting to a certain extent to what I've seen and come across at the less nuanced end of the evangelical spectrum ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Agnostic Believer
Apprentice
# 18566

 - Posted      Profile for Agnostic Believer   Author's homepage   Email Agnostic Believer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I may be guilty of not reading the guidelines specific to this Board; having made assumptions based on the titles and contents of threads.
My apologies if I have been out of order (Newbie's folly)

--------------------
Saying what I think I might know, helps me to know what I ought to think.

Posts: 22 | From: Holt, Norfolk, UK | Registered: Mar 2016  |  IP: Logged


 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools