From The Student Room

TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > A Level Religious Studies Revision Notes > Scripture

---

Contents 1 The Authority of the Bible 2 The Bible as Propositional Revelation: The Literalist Approach 2.1 Strengths 2.2 Criticisms 3 The Bible as Propositional Revelation: The Traditionalist Approach 3.1 Strengths 3.2 Criticisms 4 The Bible as a Non-Propositional Revelation: The Liberal View 4.1 Strengths 4.2 Criticisms 5 The approach of members of other faiths to the Bible 6 Comments

The Authority of the Bible

All Christians believe that the Bible is in some way their book. It tells the story of God’s dealing with the world through the creation the sin of humanity. It tells of the triumphs and failures of those who try to follow God’s commands and how to live.

There are 3 ways of interpreting scripture:

The Bible as Propositional Revelation: The Literalist Approach

Literalist believe that the bible is God’s direct word of God and is inerrant as there can be no theological historical or cultural error. They would therefore stay clear of any form of biblical criticism, believing that it contains univocal language. The bible is dictated as each word was deliberately inspired by God through the Holy Spirit’s guidance of the writers.

However most literalist groups will accept that the bible does not simply contain history-it also contains poetry and allegory. But where a text can be interpreted as recording history a literalist will always view it as such.

Also bible literature was written 2000yrs ago and assumes some of the values of 2000yrs ago. Biblical literalists have to decide whether to re-interpret certain statements in the light of today’s commonly held assumptions. This has lead to radical differences in practice in practice. Some literalist Christian groups, for example refuse to adopt modern culture at all including modern technology.

Strengths

• People never have to rely on their own interpretation and judgment and so there can be no danger that the bible might be misunderstood
• Moral decision present fewer problems
• It is clear and so some extent consistent
• It provides some security for adherent
• It is a good starting point for explaining the faith of non-adherents
• It takes seriously the integrity of the bible as historical record

Criticisms

• It is very fragile. Only one demonstrable inconsistency or error in either the Old or New Testament is enough to shake this position.
• It encourages sloppy interpretation.
• Why for example if the Bible has been literally dictated by God, are there four Gospels instead of only one.
• There is a tendency towards anthropomorphism
• Some writers such as James Barr argued that fundamentalist approach often distorts the original intention and meaning of the biblical writer
• Problems with verification and falsification
• It is inconsistent in application

The Bible as Propositional Revelation: The Traditionalist Approach

A traditionalist would argue that the Holy Spirit, God’s gift to the Church, inspired both the people who wrote the canonical books and those who discerned which books had been intended by God to be canonical.

Therefore a traditionalist view of the inspiration of scripture is that it is inspired by God but written by humans. Its words are not always self-evident in their meaning and the Church has the authority to define and interpret its words.

They see some language as symbolic and analogical, accepts some rationalisation and interpretation but only within the confines of tradition which has been handed down by the Apostles. They accept mediation, take the literal sense, use reason to interpret the bible but are also more interested in the inerrancy of the text

Strengths

• There is an acceptance that the Bible require understanding and interpretation
• There is room for discussion as to the meaning of certain passages, their context and application
• The inspiration of the Bible does not depend on its word for word historical accuracy, but the assent of the Church. It is thus compatible with scientific theory

Criticisms

• Christian groups have sometimes upset others by choosing to add or disregard instructions in the Bible
• It allows for a pick and choose attitude to some less easy Biblical principles
• Can lead to radical differences in belief and inconsistency
• When the Church takes it upon itself to interpret the Scriptures they can ignore obvious meaning and impose more spiritual ones
• This approach does not define which texts are central truths and which are less significant
• This difficulty of knowing whether certain passages are absolute and others less so causes considerable divisions amongst Christians

The Bible as a Non-Propositional Revelation: The Liberal View

The liberal view is that the Bible records the experiences of people seriously seeking after God in their own lives, situations and cultures. They are not inspired and authoritative in themselves and neither are they inerrant. Indeed, a liberal theologian would feel free to make judgements on the practice and attitudes found in the Bible. Therefore they believe that the bible must be interpreted and that it cannot contain facts. However they do believe that it is meaningful and does correspond to an objective reality.

It is the duty of individuals to weigh what is found in the Bible and apply it, if appropriate, to their own lives as they seek in their path after God. The essential difference between this view and the last two is that there is no perceived need for a total community response (e.g the church) to all parts of the Bible. The assumption is that the individual response is what counts.

Strengths

• There is no obligation to refer to any ‘given’ method of viewing the passages of Scripture, and it is therefore possible to personalize one’s response, making the words more meaningful to the believer.
• Errors or inconsistencies of theology, fact or history need present no major problem for the believer, as they recognise that the words may reflect human error and inconsistency
• It is possible to disagree over interpretations of, and even the value of certain passages of the Bible, without resorting to splitting churches or calling one’s opponents unbelievers (or worse!)
• Liberal views allow people to maintain their religious faith without having to believe stories which, intellectually, they find impossible
• Liberal views are more readily accommodated into modern scientific understanding of the world
• Sees revelation as universal which can be found in other cultures

Criticisms

• The Bible can cease to become an effective instrument for teaching and discipline, as it is the believer that decides the value of individual passages.
• People may discard bits of the Bible that they don’t like, for the wrong reasons
• People ‘sit in judgement’ on the words of the Bible rather than truly allowing their lives to be held up against the ‘scrutiny’ of the Bible’s teaching.
• Liberal interpretation has destroyed the whole point of the bible and its authority. If concepts such as a virgin birth, miracles and even the resurrection are taken to be other than historically accurate (which Bultmann argues we should do), the whole essence of Christianity is removed.
• Real problem of antinomianism and eisegesis (read from my own bias)
• Very subjective

The approach of members of other faiths to the Bible

Jews: Quite a lot of Jews really rather resent the use that Christians have made of their scriptures. The New Testament is considered interesting by some Jewish scholars, some of whom actually admire Jesus and feel that his death was unfortunate. For many Jews, though, it is the beginning of a group that broke away from and distorted Judaism, and they have little or no interest in it.

Muslims regard the Bible as ‘the Book’ which tells the stories of Allah’s attempts to reveal Himself to the world through prophets, Nuh (Noah), Ibrahim (Abraham) Musaf (Moses) and not least, Isa (Jesus). However, they believe that the Bible is flawed in many ways, and that, for example, the accounts of the death and resurrection of Jesus are wrong, because God would not allow a prophet to die like that.

So that while the Bible is helpful and records God’s dealings with the prophets, it is not inerrant and not authoritative

Atheists and humanists would find much Biblical moral teaching valuable, but would interpret it as being the product of human wisdom and experience, rather than divine revelation. They may also look to events in the lives of important Biblical figures, such as Jesus, for inspiration and education.

Comments

This is specifcally revision notes for the scripture as part of the Philosophy module in the OCR Religious Studies exam. However this can be used for other purposes as well.

This was created by Chrisateen