Scripture is God’s Word in human language – a truth reflected over 2000years of Church history. Without this truth, proper knowledge of God is impossible. All human efforts to come to a true and meaningful understanding of God, lead to a variety of religious “isms.” The pluralism, post-modernism and post-Christian society of the 21st century, brings its own challenges. Words mean nothing and truth is relative. There are, however, unique resemblances with the pluralism, pre-modern and pre-Christian society of the patristic. From a historical-theological perspective, the researcher points out that these resemblances could shed light on the current burning issue around the authority of Scripture. This historic continuity with the patristic and apostolic tradition is addressed in relation to Tertullian and Augustine. Both these Church Fathers had to give Biblical answer to the burning issues of their day that sought to undermine the authority of Scripture. The patristic’s emphasis on the authority of Scripture, stems from the unique unity between the Old and New Testament. It finds expression in the Apostolic preaching – regula fidei – the rule by which sound theology and godly living is guaranteed. Their historical-literal method of Biblical exegesis reflects a Christian worldview in contrast to the secular worldview of their day. In conclusion the researcher points out the relevance of this study for Southern-Africa. The confusion within the ranks of society, and the disillusionment of hundreds of thousands in Africa concerning the role of the Church, ask for clear direction and uncompromising answers on the fundamentals of the Christian faith with the framework of the authority of Scripture. / Dissertation (MA (Church History))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Church History and Church Polity / unrestricted

Brevard Childs argues for the inner logic of scripture’s textual authority as an historical reality that gives rise to the material condition by which the church apprehends and experiences God in Christ. The church’s use of (or by) scripture thus has a larger interiority: the shaped canon of scripture, Old and New Testaments, is a rule of faith which accrues authority in the church, through the vehicle of the sensus literalis. Childs’ work has been misplaced, however. Part one locates it internationally, attending to the way it has been read in English and German and finding that it has enjoyed a more patient reception in Europe than in Britain or North America. To illustrate, Childs’ definition of biblical theology is contrasted with that of James Barr. Their differences over gesamtbiblische theology involve opposite turns toward and away from Barthian dogma in biblical inquiry. Part two examines Childs on biblical reference, introducing why intertextuality is not midrashic but deictic—pointing to the res. This coincides with an understanding of the formation of biblical literature. Childs’ argument for canonical shaping is juxtaposed with Hermann Gunkel on tradition history, showing “final form” to be a deliberate inversion of form critical principles. Childs’ interest in the Bible as religious literature is then set alongside his studious confrontation of Judaism, with implications for inter-religious dialogue. Barr and Childs are compared again in part three, which frames their respective senses of indirect and direct biblical reference in terms of allegory. Both see allegory at work in the modern world under certain rules (either biblical criticism or the regula fidei). Their rules affect their articulations of trinitarian dogma. Finally, Psalm102 highlights divergences between modern and pre-modern interpreters. If scripture comprehends the present immediately, some postures of the church toward the synagogue may be excluded.