Difference between revisions of "Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics/pt"
(Created page with "== Artigo 2 == ") |
(Created page with "== Artigo 25 == ") |
||
| (22 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
We deny that the humble, human form of Scripture entails errancy any more than the humanity of Christ, even in His humiliation, entails sin. | We deny that the humble, human form of Scripture entails errancy any more than the humanity of Christ, even in His humiliation, entails sin. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 3 == |
We affirm that the person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible. | We affirm that the person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
We deny that any method of interpretation which rejects or obscures the Christ-centeredness of Scripture is correct. | We deny that any method of interpretation which rejects or obscures the Christ-centeredness of Scripture is correct. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 4 == |
We affirm that the Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture acts through it today to work faith in its message. | We affirm that the Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture acts through it today to work faith in its message. | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
We deny that the Holy Spirit ever teaches to anyone anything which is contrary to the teaching of Scripture. | We deny that the Holy Spirit ever teaches to anyone anything which is contrary to the teaching of Scripture. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 5 == |
We affirm that the Holy Spirit enables believers to appropriate and apply Scripture to their lives. | We affirm that the Holy Spirit enables believers to appropriate and apply Scripture to their lives. | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
We deny that the natural man is able to discern spiritually the Biblical message apart from the Holy Spirit. | We deny that the natural man is able to discern spiritually the Biblical message apart from the Holy Spirit. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 6 == |
We affirm that the Bible expresses God’s truth in propositional statements, and we declare that Biblical truth is both objective and absolute. We further affirm that a statement is true if it represents matters as they actually are, but is an error if it misrepresents the facts. | We affirm that the Bible expresses God’s truth in propositional statements, and we declare that Biblical truth is both objective and absolute. We further affirm that a statement is true if it represents matters as they actually are, but is an error if it misrepresents the facts. | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
We deny that, while Scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation, Biblical truth should be defined in terms of this function. We further deny that error should be defined as that which willfully deceives. | We deny that, while Scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation, Biblical truth should be defined in terms of this function. We further deny that error should be defined as that which willfully deceives. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 7 == |
We affirm that the meaning expressed in each Biblical text is single, definite and fixed. | We affirm that the meaning expressed in each Biblical text is single, definite and fixed. | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
We deny that the recognition of this single meaning eliminates the variety of its application. | We deny that the recognition of this single meaning eliminates the variety of its application. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 8 == |
We affirm that the Bible contains teachings and mandates which apply to all cultural and situational contexts and other mandates which the Bible itself shows apply only to particular situations. | We affirm that the Bible contains teachings and mandates which apply to all cultural and situational contexts and other mandates which the Bible itself shows apply only to particular situations. | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
We deny that the distinction between the universal and particular mandates of Scripture can be determined by cultural and situational factors. We further deny that universal mandates may ever be treated as culturally or situationally relative. | We deny that the distinction between the universal and particular mandates of Scripture can be determined by cultural and situational factors. We further deny that universal mandates may ever be treated as culturally or situationally relative. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 9 == |
We affirm that the term hermeneutics, which historically signified the rules of exegesis, may properly be extended to cover all that is involved in the process of perceiving what the Biblical revelation means and how it bears on our lives. | We affirm that the term hermeneutics, which historically signified the rules of exegesis, may properly be extended to cover all that is involved in the process of perceiving what the Biblical revelation means and how it bears on our lives. | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
We deny that the message of Scripture derives from, or is dictated by, the interpreter’s understanding. Thus we deny that the “horizons” of the Biblical writer and the interpreter may rightly “fuse” in such a way that what the text communicates to the interpreter is not ultimately controlled by the expressed meaning of the Scripture. | We deny that the message of Scripture derives from, or is dictated by, the interpreter’s understanding. Thus we deny that the “horizons” of the Biblical writer and the interpreter may rightly “fuse” in such a way that what the text communicates to the interpreter is not ultimately controlled by the expressed meaning of the Scripture. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 10 == |
We affirm that Scripture communicates God’s truth to us verbally through a wide variety of literary forms. | We affirm that Scripture communicates God’s truth to us verbally through a wide variety of literary forms. | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
We deny that any of the limits of human language render Scripture inadequate to convey God’s message. | We deny that any of the limits of human language render Scripture inadequate to convey God’s message. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 11 == |
We affirm that translations of the text of Scripture can communicate knowledge of God across all temporal and cultural boundaries. | We affirm that translations of the text of Scripture can communicate knowledge of God across all temporal and cultural boundaries. | ||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
We deny that the meaning of Biblical texts is so tied to the culture out of which they came that understanding of the same meaning in other cultures is impossible. | We deny that the meaning of Biblical texts is so tied to the culture out of which they came that understanding of the same meaning in other cultures is impossible. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 12 == |
We affirm that in the task of translating the Bible and teaching it in the context of each culture, only those functional equivalents, which are faithful to the content of Biblical teaching, should be employed. | We affirm that in the task of translating the Bible and teaching it in the context of each culture, only those functional equivalents, which are faithful to the content of Biblical teaching, should be employed. | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
We deny the legitimacy of methods which either are insensitive to the demands of cross-cultural communication or distort Biblical meaning in the process. | We deny the legitimacy of methods which either are insensitive to the demands of cross-cultural communication or distort Biblical meaning in the process. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 13 == |
We affirm that awareness of the literary categories, formal and stylistic, of the various parts of Scripture is essential for proper exegesis, and hence we value genre criticism as one of the many disciplines of Biblical study. | We affirm that awareness of the literary categories, formal and stylistic, of the various parts of Scripture is essential for proper exegesis, and hence we value genre criticism as one of the many disciplines of Biblical study. | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
We deny that generic categories which negate historicity may rightly be imposed on Biblical narratives which present themselves as factual. | We deny that generic categories which negate historicity may rightly be imposed on Biblical narratives which present themselves as factual. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 14 == |
We affirm that the Biblical record of events, discourses and sayings, though presented in a variety of appropriate literary forms, corresponds to historical fact. | We affirm that the Biblical record of events, discourses and sayings, though presented in a variety of appropriate literary forms, corresponds to historical fact. | ||
| Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
We deny that any event, discourse or saying reported in Scripture was invented by the Biblical writers or by the traditions they incorporated. | We deny that any event, discourse or saying reported in Scripture was invented by the Biblical writers or by the traditions they incorporated. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 15 == |
We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text. | We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text. | ||
| Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support. | We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 16 == |
We affirm that legitimate critical techniques should be used in determining the canonical text and its meaning. | We affirm that legitimate critical techniques should be used in determining the canonical text and its meaning. | ||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
We deny the legitimacy of allowing any method of Biblical criticism to question the truth or integrity of the writer’s expressed meaning, or of any other scriptural teaching. | We deny the legitimacy of allowing any method of Biblical criticism to question the truth or integrity of the writer’s expressed meaning, or of any other scriptural teaching. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 17 == |
We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter. | We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter. | ||
| Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
We deny that Scripture may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that one passage corrects or militates against another. We deny that later writers of Scripture misinterpreted earlier passages of Scripture when quoting from or referring to them. | We deny that Scripture may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that one passage corrects or militates against another. We deny that later writers of Scripture misinterpreted earlier passages of Scripture when quoting from or referring to them. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 18 == |
We affirm that the Bible’s own interpretation of itself is always correct, never deviating from, but rather elucidating, the single meaning of the inspired text. The single meaning of a prophet’s words includes, but is not restricted to, the understanding of those words by the prophet and necessarily involves the intention of God evidenced in the fulfillment of those words. | We affirm that the Bible’s own interpretation of itself is always correct, never deviating from, but rather elucidating, the single meaning of the inspired text. The single meaning of a prophet’s words includes, but is not restricted to, the understanding of those words by the prophet and necessarily involves the intention of God evidenced in the fulfillment of those words. | ||
| Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
We deny that the writers of Scripture always understood the full implications of their own words. | We deny that the writers of Scripture always understood the full implications of their own words. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 19 == |
We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it. | We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it. | ||
| Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself, such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism. | We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself, such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 20 == |
We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, Biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extrabiblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations. | We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, Biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extrabiblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations. | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it. | We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 21 == |
We affirm the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of Biblical teaching with the facts of nature. | We affirm the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of Biblical teaching with the facts of nature. | ||
| Line 129: | Line 129: | ||
We deny that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture. | We deny that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 22 == |
We affirm that Genesis 1–11 is factual, as is the rest of the book. | We affirm that Genesis 1–11 is factual, as is the rest of the book. | ||
| Line 135: | Line 135: | ||
We deny that the teachings of Genesis 1–11 are mythical and that scientific hypotheses about earth history or the origin of humanity may be invoked to overthrow what Scripture teaches about creation. | We deny that the teachings of Genesis 1–11 are mythical and that scientific hypotheses about earth history or the origin of humanity may be invoked to overthrow what Scripture teaches about creation. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 23 == |
We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin. | We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin. | ||
| Line 141: | Line 141: | ||
We deny that all passages of Scripture are equally clear or have equal bearing on the message of redemption. | We deny that all passages of Scripture are equally clear or have equal bearing on the message of redemption. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 24 == |
We affirm that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of Biblical scholars. | We affirm that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of Biblical scholars. | ||
| Line 147: | Line 147: | ||
We deny that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by Biblical scholars. | We deny that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by Biblical scholars. | ||
| − | == | + | == Artigo 25 == |
We affirm that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God. | We affirm that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God. | ||
Latest revision as of 14:35, 2 September 2020
ARTIGOS DE AFIRMAÇÃO E NEGAÇÃO
Artigo 1
We affirm that the normative authority of Holy Scripture is the authority of God Himself, and is attested by Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Church.
We deny the legitimacy of separating the authority of Christ from the authority of Scripture, or of opposing the one to the other.
Artigo 2
We affirm that as Christ is God and man in one person, so Scripture is, indivisibly, God’s Word in human language.
We deny that the humble, human form of Scripture entails errancy any more than the humanity of Christ, even in His humiliation, entails sin.
Artigo 3
We affirm that the person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible.
We deny that any method of interpretation which rejects or obscures the Christ-centeredness of Scripture is correct.
Artigo 4
We affirm that the Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture acts through it today to work faith in its message.
We deny that the Holy Spirit ever teaches to anyone anything which is contrary to the teaching of Scripture.
Artigo 5
We affirm that the Holy Spirit enables believers to appropriate and apply Scripture to their lives.
We deny that the natural man is able to discern spiritually the Biblical message apart from the Holy Spirit.
Artigo 6
We affirm that the Bible expresses God’s truth in propositional statements, and we declare that Biblical truth is both objective and absolute. We further affirm that a statement is true if it represents matters as they actually are, but is an error if it misrepresents the facts.
We deny that, while Scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation, Biblical truth should be defined in terms of this function. We further deny that error should be defined as that which willfully deceives.
Artigo 7
We affirm that the meaning expressed in each Biblical text is single, definite and fixed.
We deny that the recognition of this single meaning eliminates the variety of its application.
Artigo 8
We affirm that the Bible contains teachings and mandates which apply to all cultural and situational contexts and other mandates which the Bible itself shows apply only to particular situations.
We deny that the distinction between the universal and particular mandates of Scripture can be determined by cultural and situational factors. We further deny that universal mandates may ever be treated as culturally or situationally relative.
Artigo 9
We affirm that the term hermeneutics, which historically signified the rules of exegesis, may properly be extended to cover all that is involved in the process of perceiving what the Biblical revelation means and how it bears on our lives.
We deny that the message of Scripture derives from, or is dictated by, the interpreter’s understanding. Thus we deny that the “horizons” of the Biblical writer and the interpreter may rightly “fuse” in such a way that what the text communicates to the interpreter is not ultimately controlled by the expressed meaning of the Scripture.
Artigo 10
We affirm that Scripture communicates God’s truth to us verbally through a wide variety of literary forms.
We deny that any of the limits of human language render Scripture inadequate to convey God’s message.
Artigo 11
We affirm that translations of the text of Scripture can communicate knowledge of God across all temporal and cultural boundaries.
We deny that the meaning of Biblical texts is so tied to the culture out of which they came that understanding of the same meaning in other cultures is impossible.
Artigo 12
We affirm that in the task of translating the Bible and teaching it in the context of each culture, only those functional equivalents, which are faithful to the content of Biblical teaching, should be employed.
We deny the legitimacy of methods which either are insensitive to the demands of cross-cultural communication or distort Biblical meaning in the process.
Artigo 13
We affirm that awareness of the literary categories, formal and stylistic, of the various parts of Scripture is essential for proper exegesis, and hence we value genre criticism as one of the many disciplines of Biblical study.
We deny that generic categories which negate historicity may rightly be imposed on Biblical narratives which present themselves as factual.
Artigo 14
We affirm that the Biblical record of events, discourses and sayings, though presented in a variety of appropriate literary forms, corresponds to historical fact.
We deny that any event, discourse or saying reported in Scripture was invented by the Biblical writers or by the traditions they incorporated.
Artigo 15
We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support.
Artigo 16
We affirm that legitimate critical techniques should be used in determining the canonical text and its meaning.
We deny the legitimacy of allowing any method of Biblical criticism to question the truth or integrity of the writer’s expressed meaning, or of any other scriptural teaching.
Artigo 17
We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter.
We deny that Scripture may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that one passage corrects or militates against another. We deny that later writers of Scripture misinterpreted earlier passages of Scripture when quoting from or referring to them.
Artigo 18
We affirm that the Bible’s own interpretation of itself is always correct, never deviating from, but rather elucidating, the single meaning of the inspired text. The single meaning of a prophet’s words includes, but is not restricted to, the understanding of those words by the prophet and necessarily involves the intention of God evidenced in the fulfillment of those words.
We deny that the writers of Scripture always understood the full implications of their own words.
Artigo 19
We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it.
We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself, such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism.
Artigo 20
We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, Biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extrabiblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations.
We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it.
Artigo 21
We affirm the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of Biblical teaching with the facts of nature.
We deny that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture.
Artigo 22
We affirm that Genesis 1–11 is factual, as is the rest of the book.
We deny that the teachings of Genesis 1–11 are mythical and that scientific hypotheses about earth history or the origin of humanity may be invoked to overthrow what Scripture teaches about creation.
Artigo 23
We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin.
We deny that all passages of Scripture are equally clear or have equal bearing on the message of redemption.
Artigo 24
We affirm that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of Biblical scholars.
We deny that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by Biblical scholars.
Artigo 25
We affirm that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God.
We deny that the preacher has any message from God apart from the text of Scripture.
