Tuesday, September 21, 2010

"Binding interpretive authority"

NICK SAID:

Infallibility is incompatible with Sola Scriptura by definition, since it carries a binding interpretive authority.

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/09/33000-protestant-denominations.html#961343326784094817

Aside from his knee-jerk recasting of truth-claims as authority-claims, there’s another problem. The Bible itself contains binding/authoritative interpretations. The OT contains binding/authoritative interpretations of God’s redemptive/judicial deeds in OT history. The OT contains binding/authoritative interpretations of God’s redemptive/judicial deeds in future history. The NT contains binding/authoritative interpretations of God’s redemptive/judicial deeds in OT history. The NT contains binding/authoritative interpretations of God’s redemptive/judicial deeds in NT history. And it also contains binding/authoritative interpretations of God’s redemptive/judicial deeds in future history.

And if he’s going to say that’s insufficient, because we need binding/authoritative interpretations of binding/authoritative interpretations, then the Magisterium is likewise insufficient, for the demand is regressive. Binding interpretations of binding interpretations of binding interpretations as far as the eye can see.

The only way to avoid the vicious regress is to admit the possibility of binding/authoritative interpretations which can stand on their own two feet–which brings us back to sola scriptura.

2 comments:

  1. To wit I would offer a some verses that confirm it:

    1]Pro 1:23 If you turn at my reproof, behold, I will pour out my spirit to you; I will make my words known to you.


    2]Pro 16:20 Whoever gives thought to the word will discover good, and blessed is he who trusts in the LORD.


    3]Act 20:32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

    ReplyDelete