28 Apr '15 12:41>
I am wondering on what grounds Christians here think any particular bible is authoritative. Obviously even in antiquity there was substantial variation in scripture - not only were different scriptures authoritative, but even texts that Christians agree are authoritative were often heavily interpolated by ancient scholars, as we see in the Qumran finds. So it seems that Christians must decide both what books of the bibles are authoritative and what versions of those books are authoritative. Some people here would deny that Maccabees or Esdra are authoritative; some might believe that they are authoritative but then have to deal with massive divergences between Greek and Hebrew versions. But even more so, there is the problem of translation and faithful rendering, and the Christian must also decide what translation is the right one.
So I am wondering what happens before 'sola scriptura'? How do you know any bible is the word of god? Do you need some ecclesial authorisation? Or do you rely on circumstantial/prudential criteria (i.e. this translator has scholarly credentials/is a good Christian)? Or might you deny the authority of any particular bible and just imagine that the authority of god resides in some abstract bible that can only be imperfectly realised in the various published editions?
It seems that even before reading the bible, the Christian must make a lot of assumptions about the transmission and canonicity of the bible in order for it to be authoritative. It seems that there can never be sola scriptura as Luther imagined because there is always the intermediary stage of textual recension, redaction, editing and translating.
So I am wondering what happens before 'sola scriptura'? How do you know any bible is the word of god? Do you need some ecclesial authorisation? Or do you rely on circumstantial/prudential criteria (i.e. this translator has scholarly credentials/is a good Christian)? Or might you deny the authority of any particular bible and just imagine that the authority of god resides in some abstract bible that can only be imperfectly realised in the various published editions?
It seems that even before reading the bible, the Christian must make a lot of assumptions about the transmission and canonicity of the bible in order for it to be authoritative. It seems that there can never be sola scriptura as Luther imagined because there is always the intermediary stage of textual recension, redaction, editing and translating.