Comments on: The Nature and Function of the Bible http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/ A biblioblog Wed, 20 Aug 2008 23:10:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: James Rinkevich http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-24039 James Rinkevich Tue, 03 Jul 2007 00:48:33 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-24039 The Bible provides for such an authority, calling in the pillar and foundation of the truth--the Church!! And the Church fathers when attempting to decide important issues, like whether the Patriarch of Alexander has primacy over certain districts, yet could find no written document for such, referred to the tradition of one See, the See of Peter, the Roman Bishop, whose custom was that the Patriarch did have that authority. The Bible cannot be an authority as it does not have any title to do so save that it is the tradition of that same See, that See of Peter, which holds the Tradition handed on by Sts. Peter and Paul. The Scriptures have the authority of the Roman Bishop when they are interpreted according to the Apostolic Tradition handed on to the Roman Bishop. As St. Augustine would have it: save for the Catholic Church, (vested in the authority of the Roman Bishop,) he would not believe the Scriptures. The (Roman Bishop) appeal results being final, the case is concluded. The Bible provides for such an authority, calling in the pillar and foundation of the truth–the Church!! And the Church fathers when attempting to decide important issues, like whether the Patriarch of Alexander has primacy over certain districts, yet could find no written document for such, referred to the tradition of one See, the See of Peter, the Roman Bishop, whose custom was that the Patriarch did have that authority. The Bible cannot be an authority as it does not have any title to do so save that it is the tradition of that same See, that See of Peter, which holds the Tradition handed on by Sts. Peter and Paul. The Scriptures have the authority of the Roman Bishop when they are interpreted according to the Apostolic Tradition handed on to the Roman Bishop. As St. Augustine would have it: save for the Catholic Church, (vested in the authority of the Roman Bishop,) he would not believe the Scriptures. The (Roman Bishop) appeal results being final, the case is concluded.

]]> By: John Hobbins http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-22643 John Hobbins Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:40:56 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-22643 I agree with James that a text is authoritative irrespective of whether someone recognizes it as such. But it is interesting to look at how the Bible actually functions as authority in the life and practice of those who cherish it. You might want to join in the discussion on canon taking place. Check out my blog. John Hobbins www.ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com I agree with James that a text is authoritative irrespective of whether someone recognizes it as such.

But it is interesting to look at how the Bible actually functions as authority in the life and practice of those who cherish it.

You might want to join in the discussion on canon taking place. Check out my blog.

John Hobbins
http://www.ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com

]]> By: James Pate http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-22595 James Pate Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:06:45 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/the-nature-and-function-of-the-bible/#comment-22595 Thanks for addressing my question. :) I took a class this last semester on Text and Theory at Hebrew Union College, and one topic that arose was the foundation of morality (Is there a foundation?). Someone suggested that there may not be a foundation (as in a thus saith the Lord), but a community can decide to live a certain way, a way that is just. Would this be relevant to seeing the text as functionally authoritative? Personally, when I read the biblical text, I see in it the idea that the text (or the message that came to be in the text) is an authority in reference to all people, whether they accept it as authoritative or not. It is an authority in the sense that it is God's message and should be followed. The prophets say that those who disregard their message will be punished. Jesus and Paul have the same attitude toward those who reject their message. Indeed, the text is authoritative in a special way to those who actually recognize its value, but those who do not recognize the text as authoritative are still under the text's authority, the same way that those who disobey the law of the State are under the State's authority. Thanks for addressing my question. :)

I took a class this last semester on Text and Theory at Hebrew Union College, and one topic that arose was the foundation of morality (Is there a foundation?). Someone suggested that there may not be a foundation (as in a thus saith the Lord), but a community can decide to live a certain way, a way that is just. Would this be relevant to seeing the text as functionally authoritative?

Personally, when I read the biblical text, I see in it the idea that the text (or the message that came to be in the text) is an authority in reference to all people, whether they accept it as authoritative or not. It is an authority in the sense that it is God’s message and should be followed. The prophets say that those who disregard their message will be punished. Jesus and Paul have the same attitude toward those who reject their message. Indeed, the text is authoritative in a special way to those who actually recognize its value, but those who do not recognize the text as authoritative are still under the text’s authority, the same way that those who disobey the law of the State are under the State’s authority.

]]>