How Religion and Scripture Relate to Evolution and Theology - Thesis Example

and Number of the Teacher’s Religion and Theology ANCIENT SCRIPTURE Introduction The terms ‘scripture’ and ‘scriptures’ refer to biblical writings or passages from the Bible, or to any sacred writing or authoritative statement. They are used by believers and faith communities as guidelines for living their lives, for obeisance to God and for compliance with His will (Webster 7). In the Christian faith, ancient scripture encompasses the anthology of writings that constitute the Bible, bearing witness to God’s dealings with His people. The Christian Bible is composed of two parts, the Old Testament and the New Testament. On the other hand, there is no differentiation in the Jewish Bible. It is fundamentally based on the Christian Old Testament, and consists of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, and is a tripartite canon (Anderson 2). The Old Testament of the Christian Bible is composed of “narratives, law codes, oracles, psalms, and wisdom books” (Hagen 37); while the New Testament has stories of Jesus (the four Gospels) and the early church (Acts), together with epistles by Paul and other figures, and an apocalypse (Revelation). Included in these wider literary works are smaller forms such as sayings, parables, and exhortations. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to examine how religion and scripture relate to evolution and theology, to identify the contribution of ancient Hindu philosophy and theology to Greek philosophy which enriched Christianity, to study the ancient scripture of Christianity in relation to its historical significance, and to determine the importance of canonical scripture. Further, it will be investigated whether the Old Testament should be studied as Scripture along with the New Testament. Religion and Scripture Relate to Evolution and Theology A study of the scriptures of the different religious systems of the world reveals that from “ancient times human minds have tried to trace the origin, cause, and source of this world” (Ahbedananda 100). These scriptures have documented the experiences of human beings in their attempts to resolve the problem of creation, and to know the source of the phenomena which have come into existence. The questions of primitive man in ancient times on nature’s grandeur and majesty, were the earliest of human enquiries, researches and investigations on the different aspects of the universe (Ahbedananda 100). The most ancient scripture of the world was the Rig Veda. In this, the Vedic poets repeatedly question the self-identity of “I”, who the first was, what was the origin from which grew the heavens and the earth, from where the manifold creations emerge, and who knew the secret of origin of the universe and other queries. Through the ages, scientists, thinkers and philosophers have been asking similar questions, which continue to perplex humans until today. The human mind tends to eliminate the mystery from its surroundings, and to understand all aspects of matters to their deepest core. The mind is not satisfied with only superficial perception of the environment. The question arsies on whether it is possible for a religion to have its foundations upon the theory of evolution as well as upon various truths later uncovered by modern science. Further, has there been any such religion which does not teach special creation, “but the existence through the doctrine of evolution, or the origin, growth and dissolution of the universe in the same way as modern science does?” (Ahbedananda 104). The answer to this query is an emphatic yes. Significantly, the object of religion is to discover the Truth. Science also has the same purpose, approaching it in a different manner. It is also true that there has been such a religion that promotes a theory of special creation out of the doctrine of evolution. It is stated that the supreme Source of existence, intelligence, and bliss is worshipped by all nations under different forms and names such as “Jehovah, Jahveh, Father in heaven, or Allah, or Ahura Mazda, or Christ, or Buddha” (Ahbedananda 110). The name given to the Supreme, infinite Being, or the attributes ascribed to Him do not matter, because He is beyond the reach of human mind, intellect or human conception. “India has given to the world Hinduism, a religion explaining evolution and the origin and source of the phenomenal universe” (Ahbedananda 105). Hinduism has roots in reason and a passion for truth, and not in creed or dogma. It is an ancient religion which has endured and survived the ravages of time, offering consolation to millions of disturbed souls, and providing answers to all questions in a profoundly satisfying manner. Even as early as seven centuries before the birth of Christ, scientists and philosophers in India studied the laws of nature and logically established the theory of evolution. The father of evolution theory in India was Kapila, the earliest of the scientists nd philosophers. His theories spread all over the world. Kapila’s system of philosophy was known as the Sankhya system. The idea of religion that prevailed among Greek philosophers and neo-Platonists has frequently been traced back to the impact of the Sankhya school, as a result of their interactions with India. Similarly, in ancient times the Hindu philosophers came to the school of Socrates; Plato knew some of the Indian philosophers. Alexander the Great brought with him many of these great thinkers when he returned from his conquests. Sir Monier Monier-Williams (1819-1899), the professor of Sanskrit at Oxford University, England, stated in his Hinduism and Brahminism that the “Hindus were Spinozites more than two thousand years before the existence of Spinoza” (Ahbedananda 105), just as they were Darwinians several centuries before the birth of Darwin and his theory, and they were also avid evolutionists many centuries before the doctrine of evolution had been accepted by the scientists of our time, and before the concept of evolution became known in any part of the world. In the Chistian world, Scripture is related to God’s word as presented in the Bible, and is for the purpose of benefiting mankind through kinship with God, in the living of daily life and in the execution of all duties in the various roles one assumes in one’s lifetime. As common to all religions, Christian Scripture teaches the complete knowledge on the Divine entity, to facilitate the achievement of true wisdom and godliness, knowledge on the reformation and government of the churches, instruction in all duties of piety, the confirmation of doctrines, and the rejection of all errors. Additionally, all exhortations should be according to that word of the apostle, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof”, etc (2 Tim. 3:16-17) (“The Second Helvetic Confession”: 5.001-5.003a), states Hagen (p.161). The Historical Significance of Scripture in Christianity Greek language, Greek literature, and Greek philosophy formed the basis for Christianity to express and articulate its great and essential doctrines, in the best possible form. Similarly, Roman administration and law gave the very best possible structures for incorporating the Christian religion. Those who believed that the whole of Christianity had a unique divine source, come to understand that the “greater part of the structure is human in origin, and can be explained by Greek philosophy and Roman law” (Briggs 439). It is beneficial that it is now possible to make distinctions which are indispensable for the progress of theology and of Christianity. Thus, the great fundamental doctrines of Christ and of the holy Trinity were stereotyped in the forms of Greek philosophy. Similarly, the Christian institutions were stereotyped in Roman forms. “No one can fully understand them unless he studies them in these forms” (Briggs 439). Moreover, for translation and explanation to the modern mind, it is essential that the forms should be differentiated from the substance. It is important to ascertain all that is really Greek, all that is truly Roman, all that is actually Hebrew, and all that really emerged from Jesus Christ himself, as a new formative and divine teaching. Through involvement with the Bible, Christians have experienced the processes of being judged, called and compelled to follow a fundamentally Christian faith and life. The vital role of the Bible in the life of the church is underscored by emphasis laid in the Reformed tradition to recall the importance and the effect of the Bible on the leaders of the Reformation including Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others. According to the Reformed tradition, the development and change of life takes place through involved commitment to the scriptures because of the vitality of the Bible. The scriptures closely reflect the original events that led to the development of the church. “They testify to God’s work among Israel, and especially to the life, death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus Christ” (Hagen 164). The Bible stands as witness to God’s formative activity among the people of Israel and the earliest Christians. The Bible is discerning. It confirms evidence of the profundity of Jewish and Christian perception and reflection on God’s self-revelation, in its defined expression of Israel’s and early Christianity’s beliefs and practices. Similarly, the scriptures are trustworthy. The value and effectiveness of the Bible have been established and reconfirmed repeatedly by several generations of believers, based on the scriptures’ articulation of experiences, beliefs, and practices in order to provide guidance. The scriptures are normative, providing believers with a standard by which to judge between the Spirits. The Bible provides guidance to believers in the quest for making right decisions among the competitive claims that emerge in the life of the church. According to Hagen (p.164), it is “the witness without parallel” (“The Confession of 1967”: 9.27). “Two key concepts for Christian theology are revelation and scripture” (Dyrness, Karkkainen & Martinez 758). If sinful humanity with its limitations wishes to know God, He must communicate the divine self in ways understandable to humans. Christian theology refers to this process of divine disclosure as ‘revelation’. Holy Scripture is the chief means of God’s revelation to humankind. Revelation can be perceived by coming to know God through the Old and New Testaments; because the Bible is used by God to communicate with humanity. Revelation is obtained in the history of Israel, through its narrative culminating in the person of Jesus Christ who is God incarnate, and then by the Biblical writings of the New Testament, the Christian church and Christian theology. Christianity’s Canonical Scripture The Holy Scripture or the written Word of God includes all the books of the Old and New Testaments, all of which are inspired by God to serve as guidance on faith as well as life (“The Westminster Confession of Faith”: 6.002). The canonical Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles of both Testaments are the true word of God, therefore with authority in themselves, and not the authority of men. For God himself spoke to the fathers, prophets, and apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures. And in this Holy Scripture, the universal Church of Christ has the most complete exposition of all that pertains to a saving faith, and also the guidelines on living a life acceptable to God. Therefore, it is specifically commanded by God that nothing should be either added to the Holy Scriptures, or removed from the same (Hagen 161). “The entire counsel of God in relation to all the things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either written specifically in Scripture, or can be derived or deduced from Scripture” (Hagen 161). To these guidances from God, nothing should be added at any time either due to new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. At the same time, however, the inward illumination of the Spirit of God is necessary for the beneficial comprehension of those matters revealed in the Word. The Westminster Confession of Faith: 6.006 state that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and the worship of the Church, common to human actions and societies, to be understood in association with nature and Christian prudence. These pertain to the general rules of the Word to be observed at all times. “As consolation and as warning, Scripture carried a unique authority since it was the word of Christ” (Pelikan 121). The Holy Spirit is the Supreme Judge (“The Westminster Confession of Faith”: 6.010), who provides solace and guidance to people through the Scriptures. He resolves all controversies of religion; determines all decrees of councils; examines opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and of private spirits (Hagen 161). Immediately after the death of Jesus, the New Testament did not come up as an established and complete set of books. It was several years before there was an agreement among Christians about the books that should comprise their sacred scriptures, with several strong debates over the “canon” or collection of sacred texts. This was partly because of the presence of other books also written by Christians, “many of their author claiming to be the original apostles of Jesus, yet advocating points of view quite different from those later embodied in the canon” (Ehrman 1). These differences were over greater doctrinal questions, than comparatively minor issues such as whether a person should be baptized as an infant or an adult, or whether churches should be run by a group of lay elders or by ordained priests, bishops, and pope. Although such issues still controversial among Christian churches today were important at that time as well, the alternative forms of Christianity in the early centuries of the church wrestled over larger doctirinal issues such as the number of gods there are; whether the world was created by the true god or by a lower inferior deity; whether Jesus was divine, human, or perhaps both; whether Jesus’s death brought salvation, or was not related to salvation, or whether Jesus died. “Christians also debated the relationship of their new faith to the religion from which it came, Judaism” (Ehrman 1). The subjects ranged from whether Christians should continue to be Jews; if not already Jews, should they convert to Judaism; and topics on the Jewish Scriptures related to whether they should be a part of the Christian Bible, as the Old Testament, or whether they belonged to a different religion, possibly inspired by a different God. Fundamental issues such these are not considered as problematic today by Christians. The evident solutions include the approaches that there is only one God; He created the world; God’s son Jesus is human as well as divine, his death brought salvation to the world. According to Ehrman (p.1), this was in fulfillment of the promises made in the Old Testament, which was also inspired by the one true God. The Christian Bible is composed of two parts, the Old Testament and the New Testament. On the other hand, this distinction does not apply to members of the Jewish community. The Jewish Bible is fundamentally based on the Christian Old Testament, and is a tripartite canon composed of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. Although the Roman Catholic Church is also associated with additional books and passages found in the Greek translation of Scripture (the Septuagint), there is consensus among Christians on a bipartite canon differentiating between the “old” and the “new”. However, even the terminology for describing the two parts of this canon is not distinctive to Christianity, but emerges from Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning the new covenant (Jer.31:31-34). This passage from Jewish Scripture gained great importance for the early Church’s sacramental liturgy (I Cor. 11:2326) and soteriology (II Cor.3; Heb.8:8-12; 10: 16-17) (Anderson 2). “Accordingly, when the canon of Christian writings was finally established, it included the books of the Old Covenant or Testament, and the apostolic writings of the New Covenant” (Anderson 2). The union of the two parts of the Christian canon does not hold together easily, hence their separation may appear to be the best solution. Through a long history, from the early period of the Church there has been Christian misgivings and reservations regarding inclusion of the mores of the Old Testament. Initially, the Gospel of the Cross and Resurrection were declared by appealing to Scripture, which were the sacred writings of Israel, mainly the Law and the Prophets. Thus, even complex problems in connection with the inclusion of the Gentiles, such a the issue of circumcision, could be contended with on this basis. However, when Christianity moved out into the Hellenistic world, it became prone to separation from its historical anchorage (Anderson 2). Rather than the canon establishing the self-identity of the church, it is the other way round, with the church laying out the network of familiar relations within which its scriptures are known and understood. Although this may not have been the intention of setting up of a canon, it appears to be the way in which the existence of the canon has worked, particularly in the most recent centuries. If books are canonical, though they originate from ancient times and different culture, they are constantly read, studied, expounded, and in varying degrees used in liturgy and prayer. From the same ancient times and unfamiliar cultures emerged other works may articulate the faith and religion; however they are historical monuments read only by scholars and researchers. Thus, the church provides for its canonical scriptures a process of updating through explanation and interpretation, to facilitate understanding through the frame of reference provided by the texts (Barr 43). Through the Bible, people maintain a clear and special association with their own present-day church. On the other hand, this is true only of canonical scriptures which are the word of God, as conveyed in the present-day church. It forms a special domain of its own. The books are not limited within their own original culture and history, but have a unique status. Although other books may communicate Christian beliefs more accurately, they are not read in the same way. For example, St. Augustine’s Confessions are much closer to the perceptions, concepts and culture of the modern Christian than is the Gospel of St. Mark, but the latter is read directly for the word of God it conveys. Similarly, St. Augustine for the thoughts of a man of late antiquity, who interpreted well the word of God, but one who would be read through the same process with which another book by a Christian would be read at that time (Barr 44). Contrastingly, Porter (p.122) argues that “the persuasive character of the rhetoric of the Bible is in no way unique, but of a kind with those of other sacred texts”. All communicative texts whether oral or written are persuasive in nature, and have the same techniques and constraints. The similarity of sacred texts lies in the important role of tradition and faith in the interpretation of the texts. Interpretation and communication of these texts for new contexts, situations and times can differentiate these texts from others in which rhetoric may be used, however with less authority. The concept of a ‘canon within a canon’ has important precedents in ancient times. The stepped characteristic of the Jewish Bible, has the enormous dominant feature of the Torah exercising a powerful impact on explanations of the other parts. The canon does not specify the greater importance of the Torah, its dominance is due to its religion which states that the Torah is supreme. Therefore, the stepped nature of the canon confirms the dominance of the Torah. Another fact is that the New Testament itself made no attempt at a balanced account of all the parts of the Old Testament, but focused on a highly selected set of passages, which created a far from representative selection from the total Hebrew canon. Thus, it can be stated that “the New Testament accepted an inner canon within the Old Testament” (Barr 72). Although the ancient scriptures may remain the same, the religious structure within which life was seen might change. Alternately, “the scriptures might change, but the overall religious structure stay the same” (Barr 95). Scripture being ancient material inherited from a much earlier time, it had an inertia and resistance to change and interpretative adjustments even when important transformations in approach took place. Therefore, this accounts for why scripture does not contain interpretations, but is composed of authentic ancient material. Thus a great deal of material was retained, because the scriptures’ peculiarities could not be accounted for, and it was impossible to edit them in line with modern ideas since they already stood for holy tradition. Hence, scriptures were left as they were. Thus, it is stated that the “canonical text of scripture is not a faithful index of the religious changes which affected its own development, and conversely the religion of any particular time is not exactly reflected in the scripture” (Barr 95). Most importantly, the core hermeneutical guides determining the modes of understanding scripture was not a part of the canon, but was outside it, in the religion. According to Bleeker (p.91), the Christian faith “rests on the revelation of the one God, who charged his servants to preach this message to mankind”. Hence, the word of God is a living reality, conveyed from mouth to mouth. This message which was earlier communicated orally, was put down in writing. This resulted in the development of the two collections of holy books, containing the religious literature of Judaism and of early Christianity. The two collections together: the Old and New Testaments were invested with the dignity of a canon, to function as a benchmark of orthodox belief, and to prevent heresy. Protestant theologicians consider the Bible as a source of Christian truth, and Roman Catholic theologicians are convinced of the importance of the Christian church’s tradition. Should the Old Testament be Included in the Study of Scripture? In the early second century there were several churches in which reading from Old Testament scripture was not practiced, and belief in the God of Israel diminished into pagan conceptions. With the passage of time, various attempts were made to undo the bond between the Christian Gospel and the Scripture of the Jewish people. “The best known challenge was laid down by Marcion, an influential Christian leader who was expelled from the church at Rome about 144 A.D” (Anderson 2). In Marcion’s work Antithesis, which no longer exists, he appears to have construed Paul’s contrast between Law and Gospel, the flesh and the spirit, and the old and new ages. Marcion articulated his belief that Jewish Scripture is antithetical to the revelation in Christ, proposing a list of “genuine” Christian writings which excluded the Old Testament. Before critically considering this approach as heretic, or disagreeing with established religious dogma or principle, it is essential to state an important fact of contemporary perspectives. The questions brought up by many Christians today on the Old Testament reveal their support of Marcion’s views, “whose attractive teachings gained a considerable popular following in the second century and even later” (Anderson 3). It is emphasized even today that the God of the Old Testament is a God of wrath, the stern severe Judge whose judgments strike terror in men’s hearts. On the other hand, the God of the New Testament is proclaimed as a God of love, the benevolent and merciful Father who treats his children with compassion. It is also said that the God of the Old Testament is anthromorphical with human features and qualities, and is a glorified human being. Contrastingly, the New Testament does not adopt such theological innocence and affirms that “God is a Spirit” (Anderson 3). “The God of the Old Testament is a warlike Being who satisfies Israel’s nationalistic pride by slaughtering his enemies” (Anderson 3). On the other hand, the God of the New Testament is not restricted by nationalistic issues, but is concerned for the universal brotherhood of man. In the recent past, the difference between these Old and New Testament conceptions of God were accounted for by a philosophy of growth or development. According to this approach, earlier inferior ideas of God were gradually refined in the difficult environment of Israel’s history. “The line of development ascended through the ethical monotheism of the great prophets, and finally to Jesus’ high conception of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man” (Anderson 3). Modern Christians have become the disciples of Marcion in an unknowing manner. He had insisted that the Old Testament is revelation, and not the narrative of human discovery. Marcion believed “it represented a true revelation, but not the saving revelation of the God of Jesus Christ” (Anderson 4). It is evident that he was trying to take Paul’s teaching seriously. According to Paul, the Jewish Law was holy, and was given by God. However, the Law was weak in the fact that it could not rescue man from sin and bring him into right relation with God. Deliverance from sin had been brought about not by the Law, but by God’s gracious action in Jesus Christ. Hellenistic dualism impacted Marcion’s thinking, therefore his argument was more extensive during the time of controversy. He said that the God of the Old Testament is another God, inferior to the God of Jesus Christ, thus making them two different Gods. The Old Testament God is the Creator of this world with its transient quality, while the God of Christ is the one who redeems men from the world. Similarly, while the God of this world is the God of justice; the High God is the loving Father who is apprehended only through faith in Christ. As a result of this line of thinking, the separation of the two revelations is absolute. Thus, “the Gospel fulfills Jewish Scripture only in the sense that it supersedes and abrogates it” (Anderson 4). Marcion’s expulsion from the Roman community was only a prelude to the serious struggles within the Church which lay ahead. He had proposed a list of Christian writings, composed of ten Pauline epistles and an abbreviated version of Luke. The Church had to decide on the Christian writings which belonged to the New Testament. However, the verdict was more important for the purpose, which became more obvious in the years following Marcion’s expulsion, that the Marcionite view of the Old Testament was contrary to accepted belief. After the Church decided that the Old Testament must be retained in the Christian canon, it committed itself to a most important hermeneutical problem relating to the nature of the relationship between the Testaments (Anderson 4). The Old Testament facilitates pre-understanding, quickening the historical consciousness of man and evoking his questioning spirit. From these questions grow an understanding of the New Testament, but this occurs only after the New Testament reshapes the question of the Old Testament to fit more closely with its own purpose. For example, in the medieval cathedrals of Europe, the stories of the Bible are reflected in their portals and windows. It is the Old Testament story that is dominant. “In the Sainte Chapelle the entire Old Testament seems unfolded in its windows, but the story of Christ is limited to two windows” (Anderson 62). Significantly, this ratio is fair and equitable to the New Testament because in these churches and cathedrals every Old Testament story is characterized by the inherent qualities of the New Testament. Thus, when Samson rips the gates of Gaza from their hinges or Elisha raises the widow’s daughter, the Resurrection of Christ is clearly predicted. Similarly, when Isaac carries wood for sacrifice, he anticipates Christ carrying the Cross. Ironically, from the very beginning, the Church has supported introducting Marcionism by the study and interpretation or exegetical absorption of the Old Testament into the New. “Historical criticism developed the first effective block against this exegetical deception, but provided no theological rationale for reading the Bible as one book” (Anderson 62). The ability to read the Old Testament and to understand it before being introduced to all its details, known as Vorverstdndnis to the Gospel shows one possible way to terminate creeping Marcionism in the Church. The Old Testament has the right to be represented on its own in line with its own purpose. The days before God’s covenant in Christ has to be justified for the Old Testament in a Christian setting. Samson, Elisha, and Isaac would be there in the Old Testament also, but as people in a real historical setting, “undergoing real moral crisis, real human pathos, real trust in the faithfulness of God” (Anderson 63). That is not anticipation, but pre-understanding. If it helps the worshipper to gain the message of the Cross and Resurrection, it will be in a manner free of dogmatic prejudices which adversely alter it. It will do so by introducing Gospel possibilities to life by evoking sheer humanity (Anderson 63). The biblical authority and revelations in Scripture ascertain that “the Bible is the actual word of God in propositional form rather than a witness to God’s revelation” (Hagen 139). Scripture’s self-attestation is seen in that all of the Old Testament’s writings are considered God’s words. Further, the written words of God have the same truth status as the spoken words of God; and the New Testament writings attained the same status as the Old Testament writings. These conclusions are drawn by Grudem after investigating introductory formulas and claims to authority within the biblical text. The findings are significant to support the evangelical claim to propositional revelation. Grudem’s evidence confirms that the Bible is the Word of God, and not only testifies to the Word of God. Additionally, the Bible would need to be understood in terms of its original meaning, and not only be interpreted through multiple meanings in various contexts. “This is at the heart of the evangelical view of Scripture” (Hagen 139). In Biblical scholarship, the three terms Exegesics, Criticism, and Hermeneutics are used sometimes interchangeably. However, they are distinct in themselves, which facilitates a lucid understanding of the nature of Biblical research. They also help in determining researchers’ aims and goals using particular procedures, states Schneiders (pp.122-123). Exegesics refers to the process of confirming the literal meaning of a text; contemporary source and redaction criticism focuses on the theology of the individual Gospels; and hermeneutics is interpretation culminating in understanding the full sense of the word. The three processes are crucial in the interpretation of revelatory text. Conclusion This paper has highlighted ancient scripture, and investigated the ways evolution and theology form the foundation of religion and scripture. The contribution of ancient Hindu philosophy and theology to Greek philosophy was discussed. These concepts influenced the Bible of the Christians which has its roots in Greek language, literature and philosophy. Further, the historical significance of Christianity’s ancient scripture was identified, and the vital role played in the daily life and progress of mankind by canonical scipture was discussed. The Bible including the Old and New Testaments forms the main source of knowledge about the Divine, transmitted from God verbally and later in written form. Thus, these ancient scriptures which remained unchanged over vast time spans, hold the key for Christians to live by the word of God. The evidence indicates that although the Old Testament portrays God as a fearsome figure, those writings have their own purpose, and form the basis for the New Testament. Therefore, the Old Testament denoting the period before God’s covenant in Christ should indeed be represented in the study of the scriptures, along with the New Testament. Works Cited Ahbedananda, Swami. Evolution and religion. In Attitude of Vedanta towards religion. Ahbedananda Memorial Series No.4. (July 1947). Chapter 11: pp.100-110. Retrieved on 25th September, 2011 from: http://ia600502.us.archive.org/23/items/attitudeofvedant029330mbp/attitudeofvedant029330mbp.pdf Anderson, Bernhard W. The Old Testament and Christian Faith: A theological Discussion. New York: Harper and Row. (1963). Barr, James. Holy scripture: Canon, authority, criticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (1983). Bleeker, Claas J. The rainbow: A collection of studies in the science of religion. The Netherlands: Brill Archive. (1975). Briggs, Charles A. A plea for the higher study of theology. The American Journal of Theology, 8.3 (July 1904): pp.433-451. Dyrness, William A., Karkkainen, Veli-Matti & Martinez, Juan F. Global dictionary of theology: A resource for the worldwide church. Illinois: InterVarsity Press. (2008). Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Scriptures: Books that did not make it into the New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press. (2003). Hagen, Kenneth. The Bible in the Churches: How various Christians interpret the Scriptures. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press. (1998). Pelikan, Jaroslav J. The Christian tradition: The growth of medieval theology (600-1300). The United States of America: University of Chicago Press. (1980). Porter, Stanley E. Rhetoric, scripture and theology: Essays from the 1994 Pretoria Conference. The United States of America: Continuum International Publishing Group. (1996). Schneiders, Sandra M. The revelatory text: Interpreting the New Testament as sacred scripture. The United States of America: The Liturgical Press. Webster, John. Holy Scripture: A dogmatic sketch. England: Cambridge University Press. (2003). Read More