In Paul J. Achtemeier’s book, Inspiration and Authority, he offers an alternative view on the inspiration and authority of Scripture than that of the liberals and conservatives. He maintains that the inspiration of Scripture did not cease with the close of the canon but that it is ongoing due to new traditions developed out of an ever changing culture. To accomplish this, he looks at both the liberal and conservative view in detail, discusses how we obtained our Scripture and then briefly concludes with the implications of his theory and how it relates to the authority of Scripture. In his chapter on the locus and mode of inspiration, Achtemeier discusses the three loci of inspiration (individual authors, the actual words, and the meaning that the authors intended to communicate) along with varying levels of inspiration such as Origen’s belief that Scripture is a combination of inspired material but also is partly made up of the author’s opinions. He also touches on differing beliefs on the mode of …show more content…
It is through this process that new biblical traditions were developed. The writers of the Gospels told Jesus’ story based on the audience for whom the Gospel was intended. He writes that “the word of God is a dynamic reality which does new things in new times and which is therefore not bound to the past” (p. 74). This dynamic reality allows us to truly understand the word of God and that conservatives’ attempts to harmonize away supposed discrepancies “lose the dynamic witness of the Scriptures” (p. 77). His view of Scriptures is one in which the form we have “is the form used and shaped by the community as it struggled with its own traditions” (p. 78) and we must understand Scriptures in the light of ongoing inspiration as we struggle with our
The contents of the Bible have dealt with controversy in regards to its inerrancy since publication, and will surely continue to. Historians progress to learn more about biblical stories in order to provide evidence for the reliability of information. Many believers today understand that not everything in the Bible has been factually proven. An outstanding topic many scholars pay attention to lies within the four gospels. The three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, replay essentially the same story with minor inconsistencies, while John portrays Jesus in an entirely different way. The differences in each gospel are due to how each gospel entertains different portrayals of the life and understanding of Jesus himself, in order to persuade
Carson, D. A. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.
According to David M. Carr, the history of Scriptural interpretation indicates that religious texts are popular candidates for reinterpretation and, as such, are spaces wherein the personal identity of the reader frequently inscribes itself at length:
At the time of Edwards’ sermon, the height of the great awakening to Christianity had peaked (Farley ). Considering this period and his audience, Edwards use of the Bible as evidence for his arguments is practical. His cla...
N.T Wright (2008) stated that “When we read the scriptures as Christians, we read it precisely as people of the new covenant and of the new creation” (p.281). In this statement, the author reveals a paradigm of scriptural interpretation that exists for him as a Christian, theologian, and profession and Bishop. When one surveys the entirety of modern Christendom, one finds a variety of methods and perspectives on biblical interpretation, and indeed on the how one defines the meaning in the parables of Jesus. Capon (2002) and Snodgrass (2008) offer differing perspectives on how one should approach the scriptures and how the true sense of meaning should be extracted. This paper will serve as a brief examination of the methodologies presented by these two authors. Let us begin, with an
Within his article on “Tradition,” Williams attempts to define tradition and appraise whether or not tradition is normative, sustainable (through the Holy Spirit) or if it is corruptible. Williams starts by trying to define tradition, where he identified that there are several problems with defining tradition. In this article he determines that it is difficult to define what tradition is because the church has relied both on the oral and written traditions when constructing scripture. However, Williams identifies the possible definition of tradition lies in the church’s scriptural reformulation and interpretation through the lens of the church’s teaching. Williams continues to explore the problems with tradition because the early church did
Metzger, B. (1997). The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. New York.
The term Wesleyan Quadrilateral is a theological method used to study scripture. It was believed that theologian John Wesley studied scriptures in the Bible using three lenses, hence where the Wesleyan Quadrilateral gets its name. These three lenses are tradition, reason, and experience. While quad means four and tradition, reason, and experience are only three terms, they each communicate a way that scripture can be studied, therefore the term scripture completes the quadrilateral. It is important to study scripture using the Wesleyan Quadrilateral because Wesley was known as being a relevant theologian and his views on scripture have lasted over two centuries. The Wesleyan quadrilateral is still relevant today as it provides a method for discovering the things of God, ourselves, and lets us know who God really is. For the purposes of this reflection paper I would like to summarize the four components of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral and then reflect personally upon each term as how it relates to the Christian theologian.
The Bible is read and interpreted by many people all over the world. Regardless, no one knows the absolute truth behind scripture. Walter Brueggemann, professor of Old Testament, wrote “Biblical Authority” to help people understand what he describes as six different parts that make up the foundation to ones understanding of scripture. He defines these six features as being: inherency, interpretation, imagination, ideology, inspiration, and importance. As Brueggemann explains each individual part, it is easy to see that they are all interconnected because no one can practice one facet without involuntarily practicing at least one other part.
Authority of Scripture reconciles the community with God and can transform our lives. To participate in the fuller blessing of understanding, it is important to view Scripture with historical and literary sensitivity, interpret theocentrically, ecclesially, and contextually. I realize each of these can be overwhelming to the average person who is seeking direction for a specific concern in their life. Therefore, Migliore reminds us, interpreting Scripture is practical engagement in the living of Christian faith, love, and hope in a still redeemed world. When we listen carefully to the voices of the past, from a worldwide culture, and guided by the Holy Spirit, we will open ourselves to those transformational opportunities.
For centuries now Christians have claimed to possess the special revelation of an omnipotent, loving Deity who is sovereign over all of His creation. This special revelation is in written form and is what has come to be known as The Bible which consists of two books. The first book is the Hebrew Scriptures, written by prophets in a time that was before Christ, and the second book is the New Testament, which was written by Apostles and disciples of the risen Lord after His ascension. It is well documented that Christians in the context of the early first century were used to viewing a set of writings as being not only authoritative, but divinely inspired. The fact that there were certain books out in the public that were written by followers of Jesus and recognized as being just as authoritative as the Hebrew Scriptures was never under debate. The disagreement between some groups of Christians and Gnostics centered on which exact group of books were divinely inspired and which were not. The debate also took place over the way we can know for sure what God would have us include in a book of divinely inspired writings. This ultimately led to the formation of the Biblical canon in the next centuries. Some may ask, “Isn’t Jesus really the only thing that we can and should call God’s Word?” and “Isn’t the Bible just a man made collection of writings all centered on the same thing, Jesus Christ?” This paper summarizes some of the evidences for the Old and New Testament canon’s accuracy in choosing God breathed, authoritative writings and then reflects on the wide ranging
Spanning fifteen hundred years with over 30,700 manuscripts, extensive archaeological evidence and 2000 prophecies that have been fulfilled, the Bible is God 's word to us. (Yohn, 2013). In the Bible, the Father is essentially giving us a picture of the history of the world and is also leading us to a place where we must make a decision that involves whether we choose to accept his son or reject him and remain guilty. Additionally, the Word of God tells us what happened that caused this breach between us and God, the result of this and how God has rectified it through the blood of his son. In fact, from the beginning of the Bible (written 1400 B.C.) to the last book (A.D. 96), God is showing us why we need Jesus and how to find him. Just as a plant’s root system propagates and occupies the pot that encloses it, Jesus permeates the entire Bible. Therefore, the motif of the Bible is the story of the redemption of mankind and it all points to Jesus as the messiah and savior who secures this for all.
The nature of Scripture and the authority of Scripture are two characteristics carefully entwined in such a way that creates an impossibility for them to not affect each other. They directly influence each other. Evangelicalism, Liberalism, and Neo-Orthodoxy all have differing views of the nature and authority of Scripture. Evangelicalism takes up the view that the Bible, Scripture, is infallible (Lane, 2006, p. 255). Scripture is God’s word and is therefore fully truth (Lane, 2006, p. 256). People under Evangelicalism equate Scripture with God’s spoken word, and they believe that though God and humans are both authors, the human author was divinely prepared by God to write out His word (Lane, 2006, p. 257). They believe that “the Bible is the supreme authority for faith and practice” (Bingham, 2002, p. 162). Liberalism takes a different view on the Scripture. In Liberalism, religion is “nothing but feeling and experience” (Lane, 2006, p. 238). This reduces the authority and value of Scripture. Scripture is not seen as God’s word or His revelation but as a written record of the experiences of humans, which takes away from its divinity and authority (Lane, 2006, p. 239). Schleiermacher, the father of Liber...
Answering these questions is the purpose of this essay. I begin by arguing that the Bible cannot be adequately understood independent of its historical context. I concede later that historical context alone however is insufficient, for the Bible is a living-breathing document as relevant to us today as it was the day it was scribed. I conclude we need both testimonies of God at work to fully appreciate how the Bible speaks to us.
“Douglas, J. D., and Merrill C. Tenney.” “Authority.” NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible. Grand