
About the Reading:
Friday (Jan 25, 2008)’s reading assignment, “Scripture” was useful for me to identify the meaning of scripture. This reading assignment helped me understand some general concepts about scripture, and it also assisted me to broaden my previous knowledge about scripture.
As a Christian, I had believed that scripture or sacred scripture was one of the several names that denote the Old and New Testament. However, through this reading assignment, I learned that a word, scripture not only indicates the Old and New Testament, but also can be used to describe other religious texts from many religions and spiritual movements.
It was fascinating to see how certain qualifications can differentiate scripture from ordinary books; it was very interesting to realize that one of the qualifications that scripture should have was a community. While I was reading “As a Relational Concept” part, I agreed that no text, written, oral, or both can possibly become scripture in living, subjective relationship to persons and to historical tradition in isolation from a community; I felt that this part clearly explained why scripture, even a ‘perversely false text for another’ should be considered respectable.
About the class discussion on Friday:
I agree that scripture is, and should be, distinguished from ordinary books as I strongly believe in the power of the spoken word of scripture (in a way most religious people around the world do). However, I do not necessarily believe that the book that contains the spoken word of scripture also has the inherent power. I do not use my bible in the same way I use my text books, because I know that it contains the words of God; I use my bible differently, not because I believe that it is holy, but because I believe that the words in it are holy.
Questions on the Reading:
1. What other qualifications, do you believe, scripture should have?
2. Do you believe that it is right to equally accept any scripture (from other religions)
authentically holy?
Friday (Jan 25, 2008)’s reading assignment, “Scripture” was useful for me to identify the meaning of scripture. This reading assignment helped me understand some general concepts about scripture, and it also assisted me to broaden my previous knowledge about scripture.
As a Christian, I had believed that scripture or sacred scripture was one of the several names that denote the Old and New Testament. However, through this reading assignment, I learned that a word, scripture not only indicates the Old and New Testament, but also can be used to describe other religious texts from many religions and spiritual movements.
It was fascinating to see how certain qualifications can differentiate scripture from ordinary books; it was very interesting to realize that one of the qualifications that scripture should have was a community. While I was reading “As a Relational Concept” part, I agreed that no text, written, oral, or both can possibly become scripture in living, subjective relationship to persons and to historical tradition in isolation from a community; I felt that this part clearly explained why scripture, even a ‘perversely false text for another’ should be considered respectable.
About the class discussion on Friday:
I agree that scripture is, and should be, distinguished from ordinary books as I strongly believe in the power of the spoken word of scripture (in a way most religious people around the world do). However, I do not necessarily believe that the book that contains the spoken word of scripture also has the inherent power. I do not use my bible in the same way I use my text books, because I know that it contains the words of God; I use my bible differently, not because I believe that it is holy, but because I believe that the words in it are holy.
Questions on the Reading:
1. What other qualifications, do you believe, scripture should have?
2. Do you believe that it is right to equally accept any scripture (from other religions)
authentically holy?
1 comment:
Tony,
I think there are ways in which "other religious documents outside of ones own religion [are}...thought of as equally holy," for example, in comparative religion classes. But that's a petty limited area. As you rightly point out, universal acceptance of the holiness of other people's religious documents can be problematic does not seem very likely . I have played around with the idea of "other people's Scripture" as a category which recognizes that other communities view their sacred texts as holy in ways similar to how I view my sacred texts as holy - even though their texts are not holy to me. (See my "Jesus as Other People's Scripture," The Historical Jesus Through Jewish and Catholic Eyes [ed. by Bryan F. Le Beau, Leonard Greenspoon, and Dennis Hamm; Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000]). But paradoxically, by recognizing their holiness to other people, they do come to feel sort of holy to me. They're holy, just not mine.
As long as there is not one universal religion or one single worldwide ideological perspective, I can't see how any religious scriptures would be accepted universally as holy. But I'm not sure one universal religion is necessarily a good thing! The question that I think yours and my comment pose really is where can we find common ground for recognizing the Holy wherever it happens to appear, even outside our own religions, secular perspectives, or comfort zones?
Post a Comment