>>434
>信仰の拠り所が聖書だから「聖書に書かれたこと=真実」の原理主義に陥りやすいのだろう

キリスト教を聖書だけ読んで理解するというのは浅学も良いところだ
最低でもアウグスティヌスのNPNFを読んでないなら、外部のものがキリスト教を理解したと言うべきではない
宗派によらず王政から共和制等への変遷があっても変わらず使われ続け、時代や常識が変わっても影響を与え続けているからだ

アウグスティヌス
In matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision, even in such as we may find treated in Holy Scripture,
different Interpretations are sometimes possible without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such a case,
we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search
of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it. That would be to battle not for the teaching of Holy Scripture
but for our own, wishing its teaching to conform to ours, whereas we ought to wish ours to conform to that of Sacred Scripture. – Genesi Ad Litteram

アウグスティヌス
I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture:
of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error.
And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth,
I do not hesitate to suppose that either the [manuscript] is faulty, or the translator has not
caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it. (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 1:350)

聖典に明らかな誤りがあると認めるなら、誤っていると理解するだけですむ。聖書は古代人の散文的な表現が多いため、
完全な理解を得ようというのも無駄だと諦めるかのいずれかということになる