J
JustaServant
Guest
I’m not saying that Gary. I gave the official definition because 7 Sorrows asked. The question is very simple and I am simply opening it up for discussion.
- Status
J
JustaServant
Guest
If being brought to tears equals supernatural, then every chick flick my wife watches is supernatural.Yes. Of course it’s supernatural. I have read passages that have brought me to tears and I’m a pretty tough guy.
Note: The Bible, being the Word of God, is authoritatively. However, the Bible cannot exert authority. That is what the Body of Christ is for.
Not sure that’s a good analogy Isaiah.
J
JustaServant
Guest
I have met many a fundamentalist who indeed do look at the Bible as a kind of “magic book”. That it has it’s own authority and “power” behind it.
Would it not make sense that the fundamentalist ends up to that logical conclusion (believing the Bible as a kind of ‘magic book’) when the starting point is ‘Sola Scriptura’?
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Good Morning Sorrows: That’s a very good question. Insofar as the idea that the universe and all things in it are in some way inspired by their source, then yes. With regard to the idea that God issued the messages in the Bible through people to serve as some sort of cogent message, I would offer only questions in reply.
All the best,
Gary
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Good Morning JustaServant: It’s good to hear from you again. I was simply stating that based on the definition you shared, it is my belief that there is nothing supernatural about the bible. Of course if I were to be totally forthcoming, I have to say that I have a problem with the idea of supernatural. I think that once something happens it becomes natural by virtue of the fact that it happened in the natural world. And if there is some other world other than the natural world we know, well that world is natural too by virtue of its existence. The word is just a problem for me, but you know me, right? I just can’t help it.
All the best,
Gary
J
JustaServant
Guest
I was trying to avoid the phrase “magic book” because even the fundamentalist would deny that, even though they practice it. Their favorite way of explaining a Book with no authority is saying “the Bible explains (or interprets) itself”.
Now, I realize this is shaky ground because the Catholic reveres the Bible as well, HOWEVER, it is not the sole rule of faith, because it requires interpretation from an authority.
A Book without authority is it’s own authority? If that is the case, does that make it a ‘supernatural’ book?
Do you see where I am going with this?
B
benhur
Guest
do you mean like paper and ink and cardboard cover, even leather ?
Is that like asking when the president or pope "speak " either on TV or before a crowd, do the oral words have authority, does the transcript of such words have authority ?
Are they authoritative only because of who speaks them ?
Are they authoritative only when transmitted by Fox News, and only there analysts view are correct ?
Do they need interpretation to be authoritative first ?
Are they only authoritative to say Americans/Catholics per my example?
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Good Morning JustaServant: I’m not sure that I understand, but let me make an attempt to paraphrase. Are we discussing the idea of the authority of the bible?
All te best,
Gary
L
ltwin
Guest
I would not say that the Bible “has its own authority.” It has authority because its authors were men who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the “author” ultimately, and it is his words that we appeal to and perfect will that we seek when we look to the Bible.
“The Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.”
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
I think I understand where you are going…
H
hasantas
Guest
The Bible is supernatural(holy scripture). But also Bible is a book which is written in speech of human. So Bible verses can be understood or interpreted in different ways. To understand Bible rightly we need practice and direction from life of Jesus because Bible was revealed to Jesus.
B
badnewsbarrett
Guest
To your first question, about it being supernatural.
I have a couple of tabs open right now, I’m looking at the definition of “holy” and “supernatural” side by side. I’m much more comfortable with the words and terms associated with “holy” than I am with the “supernatural” tab. “Holy” shows me this definition
dedicated or consecrated to God or a religious purpose; sacred.
and these related words
sacred, consecrated, hallowed, sanctified, sacrosanct, venerated, revered, divine, religious, blessed, dedicated.
Whereas with “supernatural,” I have this definition
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
and these related words
paranormal, psychic, magic, magical, occult, mystic, mystical, superhuman, supernormal; (rare) extramundane
I’m glad it says “holy Bible” and not “supernatural Bible.” “Mystical” is really the only word from the “supernatural” pile that I’m remotely comfortable with, and that’s not even really my thing. I hope that answers the first portion of the question; I’ll also add that to my knowledge, Mainline catechesis and original documents setting the Solas in place don’t make use of the word “supernatural” or proceed to comment or speculate on terms related to it. I could be mistaken, but that has not come to my attention so far.
Now to the second part of your question. Does that Bible require authority for interpretation? You do appear to be linking this to the “accepts/rejects” option with the “supernatural” thing, and I don’t think one response necessarily leads to another- I feel like these are two issues that can be handled separately, so that is what I will attempt to do.
As far as my familiarity with Reformation-era doctrine goes, a literate person who’s reading the Bible in his/her own language can understand how to be a Christian and become a child of God with God’s help but without necessarily needing the help of a Magisterium or anything remotely similar. Again, this only goes as far as I’m familiar with it, but it’s my understanding that a significant amount of Biblical knowledge beyond the basic Gospel message remain inaccessible to those without further historical, grammatical, and linguistic expertise. And I would say that these types of expertise are all that’s required to unlock whatever else you may want to discern from Scripture, but that is not necessarily the exact conclusion of any Reformer, certainly not that of the Catholic Church. But that is me.
To your later post pertaining to self-interpreting authority, that is actually a legal term. It does not mean that the Bible interprets itself as if it were a person. Let me give you a courtroom example. A self-interpreting document would be a newspaper, it has the date on it and therefore it was printed on that day. Certain kinds of contracts can be self-interpreting, these are the especially useful ones in contract law because the contract serves as proof of an agreement.
When the Bible is referred to as a self-interpreting document, it means that what it says about our past and what it says about reality- when properly understood- is all the evidence we need for that thing to be so. Like a newspaper requires no corroborating piece of evidence in order to ascertain the day on which it was printed. So if the Bible says a miracle happened, a miracle happened- some people will express doubt and say, that’s impossible, we need something besides the Bible in order to corroborate this. Those people are not treating the Bible like a self-interpreting document.
For what it’s worth, when the term is used properly, the CCC is treated by Catholics as if it were a self-interpreting document. And the Bible, to a certain extent, although the CCC is treated that way more consistently.
It can be a useful term depending on the exact situation, but it seems like most people don’t understand what it means and even when they do they prefer to see it as a term that’s only useful to a certain type of Protestant so why bother.
D
Dave_Noonan
Guest
There’s no such thing as a supernatural book.
All reading (no matter who is doing it) necessarily involves interpretation.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Supernatural simply means above-nature, which means it cannot be explained using nature as a model; i.e. scientifically. The inspiration of the authors of Sacred Scripture by the Holy Spirit was certainly supernatural in that they did not acquire this knowledge naturally. God, by his very nature is supernatural.
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
:yukonjoe:If being brought to tears equals supernatural, then every chick flick my wife watches is supernatural.
Not sure that’s a good analogy Isaiah.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
W
wmscott
Guest
So if the Bible is a supernatural book, and since the Catholic Church discerned what books were divinely inspired, compiled all of the books of the Bible and set the canon, and gave it to the world, Does that make the Catholic Church Supernatural???
J
JustaServant
Guest
M
Magdalena59
Guest
I know you are asking protestants but just wanted to say as an ex-protestant it is probably going to depend on the denomination they belong to. A mainline protestant that has a type of hierarchy, such as a council of bishops or a synod would probably say no because they will see the Bible as a book that needs interpreting by their council or synod. They might follow something similar to a Catholic, a historical/contextual viewpoint, although all of their viewpoints are different.
If you are talking to a fundamentalist protestant or evangelical you might get a yes because they do not have much of a hierarchy type denomination, no one to guide them and believe in individual private interpretation and tend to divide more and more because of their individual interpretations.
I do not know if they consider it a supernatural book, maybe, but believe that it is a book that God privately and individually speaks to them and there is no need for anyone to interpret it for them.
This is just my experience from years of church-hopping in the protestant faith.
S
spedteacherita
Guest
And the key point of all of this is that the Bible is the inerrant and inspired Word of God.
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Jesus is the Word!
- Status