Customer Reviews

73 Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura - The Easy Button Bible - LIST PRICE REDUCED from $14.95 at Lulu.com. You SAVE 55%

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I tell the my world history students something that is asserted in this book. When the Bible was put into the hands of the people to interpret for themselves, the Roman Catholic warnings that it would fragment the Church turned out to be true. So there is a sense in which this author is correct. There will be no unity in the church as long as there is a huge difference of opinion on certain theological interpretations of Scripture.
But I do not leave my students there. I ask them which is better. Is it better to leave Biblical interpretation to some authoritative structure such as the magisterium, or is it better to allow open discussion of the texts of the Christian faith in their grammatical-historical context?
The message of this book seems to be to me that Protestants ought to just shut off their minds and bow to the authority of the Catholic magisterium which throughout history has sought to win arguments by merely asserting its own authority rather than dealing with the texts in an open discussion. Luther would have accepted a Pope who actually sought to be a theologian and discuss the issues rather than merely assert his authority and rule over the church. Discussion and debate was seldom something the magisterium was willing to do throughout history. The Pope regularly used the tools of excommunication and interdiction (forbidding the administration of the sacraments in certain realms) as a way to manipulate kings and kingdoms into doing his own bidding.
Jesus, in his own sojourn on earth, certainly believed in discussing the texts, and diverted from the official teachings of the accepted rabbis. He challenged the teachers of the law to really consider what the texts mean. He showed that their rabbinical interpretations often circumvented the true meaning of the law of God, and He did this in open discussion and debate. The apostle Paul went into the synagogues "reasoning" with the Jews from the Scriptures. So why didn't Rome encourage open discussion? Why did they merely try to supress Protestantism and censor it with things like the Index of forbidden books? They did because they know that papal authority was on shaky, not solid ground.
This book is correct in one point. There will not be total unity as long as we can read and interpret for ourselves. But there will be a large agreement on many issues that are central and core to the Christian faith. Rome can't even claim absolute unity on every doctrine. Some Catholic doctrines don't have the status of being required things to accept, but are deemed only "worthy of belief." Not accepting them is not damnable in the Catholic church. The belief in Marian apparitions is one of those beliefs. Catholics are not required to believe in them.
But I still think it is better for Christianity to read the Bible for oneself and listen and participate in the open discussion. Shutting your mind off has far more dangers.