biblicism

[DT1138]

I find Biblicism the single greatest challenge to taking Christianity seriously as a way of life- it's especially difficult to intellectual engage a Christian who is a biblicist without being dismissed as just not one of the flock/elect if there is disagreement Biblicism is not an isolated mentality but runs through most Protestant churches to various degrees; its the insistence that the Bible's meaning is plain, perspecuitous and univocal. And it underlines the problems with rational debate in the culture wars. IMO, the only real solutions to it are the Liberal Protestant tradition, but here, being clearly articulated in the Latitudinarians and Cambridge Platonists in the Anglican world. However, liberal Protestants can't seem to actually win hearts and minds, and represent a tiny fraction of the Christian world.

[Metacrock]

I find Biblicism the single greatest challenge to taking Christianity seriously as a way of life- it's especially difficult to intellectual engage a Christian who is a biblicist without being dismissed as just not one of the flock/elect if there is disagreement Biblicism is not an isolated mentality but runs through most Protestant churches to various degrees; its the insistence that the Bible's meaning is plain, perspecuitous and univocal. And it underlines the problems with rational debate in the culture wars. IMO, the only real solutions to it are the Liberal Protestant tradition, but here, being clearly articulated in the Latitudinarians and Cambridge Platonists in the Anglican world. However, liberal Protestants can't seem to actually win hearts and minds, and represent a tiny fraction of the Christian world.

you should read Models of Revelation by Avery Dulles. He was the son of Eisenhower's secretary of state, John Foster Dulles. Avery was made a cardinal by JPII shortly before he (JPII) died.

the books is a classic and one of the best overall discussions of the alternatives to that sort of inerrency model that Bibilcalism runs on.

read my pages about Biblical revelation on Religius A priori. they are based upon Dulles' ideas. they will give you a partial summary of his book and what it's about.

http://religiousapriorijesus-bible.blog ... ation.html

[DT1138]

One reason years ago I went for Eastern Orthodoxy, in the process of exploring the meaning and relevance of Jesus Christ was I felt that Orthodoxy dodges biblicism... and mostly this is true. And I'd imagine this is true of Roman Catholicism as well. In the end, however, the cost of dodging biblicism is authoritarian anti-intellectualism to various degrees, wheather it's an appeal to a so-called consensus or to the pope. Sadly, I think the truth of the matter is that most religion appeals to a common human weakness: fear and anxiety in the face of ambiguity. And this is why biblicism is so popular: it pretends to take a very complex issue and make it very simple.

[KR Wordgazer]

There is a group, very loose-knit, calling themselves "post-evangelicals." I consider myself one of them. We reject biblicism, but also the Magisterial tradition that maintains that only a group of leaders can interpret the Bible for everyone else. We favor a scholarly emphasis on discovering the cultural/historical paradigms out of which the texts developed, in order to determine authorial intent/original audience understanding.

[Metacrock]

One reason years ago I went for Eastern Orthodoxy, in the process of exploring the meaning and relevance of Jesus Christ was I felt that Orthodoxy dodges biblicism... and mostly this is true. And I'd imagine this is true of Roman Catholicism as well. In the end, however, the cost of dodging biblicism is authoritarian anti-intellectualism to various degrees, wheather it's an appeal to a so-called consensus or to the pope. Sadly, I think the truth of the matter is that most religion appeals to a common human weakness: fear and anxiety in the face of ambiguity. And this is why biblicism is so popular: it pretends to take a very complex issue and make it very simple.

why do you think atheists are so afraid to be subjective? why do you think they demand that one can't believe something unless it's totally proved, and that there is no from of knowledge other than science?