tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post2452939243284405752..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Authority, infallibility, & inspirationRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-46648322139624934302009-07-04T12:14:31.814-04:002009-07-04T12:14:31.814-04:00KIM SAID:
“It's not? So why aren't you wi...KIM SAID:<br /><br />“It's not? So why aren't you withdrawing this bogus article about the implications of the Church and authority?”<br /><br />You must be dense. The question in dispute is whether one needs to be a person in authority to interpret Scripture. Not whether there are logical implications for the church depending on how you answer that question. <br /><br />“So when Paul interprets the OT, is it a matter of authority, or of your best hermeneutical interpretation the book ignoring Paul? Somehow I'll bet you toss out hermeneutics and go with Paul.”<br /><br />You’re confusing several issues, which doesn’t surprise me:<br /><br />i) A Pauline interpretation is an inspired. <br /><br />However, the two Catholics epologists I’m responding to deny that the interpretive authority of the Magisterium involves inspiration. Therefore, your comparison is fallacious.<br /><br />ii) Moreover, I never denied that some interpretations are inspired. That wasn’t the point at issue. The issue, rather, is whether a true interpretation is sufficient. By definition, an inspired interpretation is true.<br /><br />But Bryan rejects the sufficiency of a true interpretation. Over and above its veracity, it must also be authoritative. That’s the point at issue. Try to pay attention.<br /><br />iii) Furthermore, you’re driving a wedge between a Pauline interpretation and a hermeneutical interpretation, as if those must be at variance–for which you offer no argument.<br /><br />iv) Finally, we must interpret Paul’s interpretive statement, so hermeneutics is still in play. <br /><br />So you lose on all counts.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-83932794538781266822009-07-04T10:54:52.852-04:002009-07-04T10:54:52.852-04:00-----
Interpreting Scripture is not an issue of au...-----<br />Interpreting Scripture is not an issue of authority, <br />-----<br /><br />It's not? So why aren't you withdrawing this bogus article about the implications of the Church and authority?<br /><br />----<br />but using the best hermeneutical methods. Therefore, your argument from analogy is invalidated by a false premise.<br />----<br /><br />So when Paul interprets the OT, is it a matter of authority, or of your best hermeneutical interpretation the book ignoring Paul?<br /><br />Somehow I'll bet you toss out hermeneutics and go with Paul.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10424715768406800028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-26223412132812582372009-07-03T12:06:19.429-04:002009-07-03T12:06:19.429-04:00Interpreting Scripture is not an issue of authorit...Interpreting Scripture is not an issue of authority, but using the best hermeneutical methods. Therefore, your argument from analogy is invalidated by a false premise.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-77765960458622051062009-07-02T23:07:06.731-04:002009-07-02T23:07:06.731-04:00------
“The Catholic Church does not believe or te...------<br />“The Catholic Church does not believe or teach that tradition and the pope ‘have equal authority’ to Scripture.”<br /><br />That’s ambiguous. An institution may deny the implications of what it teaches, but the implications remain.<br />------<br /><br />If this is so, then the protestant implication is that individuals have equal authority to scripture, since protestants claim the right to judge what scripture is and what scripture means.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10424715768406800028noreply@blogger.com