tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post4217291227415006351..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: Inerrancy 2 (Authority of God)Ken Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-60426100783045778542013-01-16T07:06:14.797-05:002013-01-16T07:06:14.797-05:00Thanks for this series!Thanks for this series!Martin LaBarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14629053725732957599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-85061982359886737992013-01-15T14:16:05.171-05:002013-01-15T14:16:05.171-05:00Dick Norton,
That is your particular understanding...Dick Norton,<br />That is your particular understanding of theology.<br /><br />Authority has been the question, hasn't it, since the Enlightenment and Reformation? Both were foundational to the American Revolution and the establishment of our society's value of liberty. <br /><br />Today, we believe that the "rule of law" doesn't allow for authoritative dictates to individual preferences/choices. But, "political correctness" might limit particular preferences, mightn't it? <br />"Political correctness" is a matter of political survival for one's particular ends....as a leader. At least, this is what it seems to have come to with a compliant media or subversion/subterfuge of information!<br />Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-67278195577166947372013-01-15T12:16:25.492-05:002013-01-15T12:16:25.492-05:00My main objection to sensus plenior is that it giv...My main objection to sensus plenior is that it gives too much latitude to people trying to do hermeneutics. We REALLY know what God spoke in the OT (for instance) when we do careful exegesis of its passages. Does God speak to us today through the OT? Yes, of course! We hear his message to the people of olden times through the prophets, and then we understand that message in our own particular situations if there are applicable parallel circumstances. God does indeed speak to us through the OT because the human condition has not really changed that much over the years. You and I probably have grown up in church settings where an OT passage was read and then immediately turned into a metaphor for the Christian life, with all the truths coming from NT references, and almost NO consideration given to the message of God in the original context. That is unhelpful preaching! It makes for good emotional messages, but very little learning for the congregation in how to read, exegete, and apply the Scripture. My plea, Ken, is that you rethink sensus plenior. It is not necessary for understanding the Word of God, and it sets no thoughtful rules for hermeneutics. I appreciate that you are trying to resolve issues of NT use of the OT, and apparent errors of fact here and there. I hope that Christians can approach such issues with the default position that the Bible IS the Word of God, and therefore truthful, rather than approaching the issues with the default position that the Bible is unreliable in many of its statements. I have used the former default position, and have found it intellectually satisfying, because the hard work of solving some of the statements has brought me a greater appreciation for the Bible's unity of message. I still have a few (very few) issues that need to be resolved, but I have learned over the years that God is faithful,and the Bible is reliable, and that I am merely human in my understanding.Dick Nortonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-75685300021268790572013-01-15T10:34:32.052-05:002013-01-15T10:34:32.052-05:00If one begins with a premise, then, it is possible...If one begins with a premise, then, it is possible to "prove" just about anything. This is what "social conditioning" is about.<br /><br />The premise that Scripture is "God breathed", "God ordained" or "the authority of God" is such a premise. How does one KNOW this premise is so? Faith. <br /><br />Those that choose not to believe such premises on "faith" seek another avenue to "truth". "Social conditioning" does not prefer critical thinking, because such thinking is considered a "lack of faith".<br /><br />One believes because one is told, or one is taught (conditioned)to do so, by one's family, community, or by Scripture itself. That doesn't seem to breed critical thinking, but compliance. <br /><br />Though "order" is something that is important to any society, our laws protect the individual's right to dissent, question, investigate, ponder and probe. It is the value of "free speech" (free thought) and we should not give that right up for anything!Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-86965490462309752642013-01-15T07:54:04.813-05:002013-01-15T07:54:04.813-05:00Thanks for your faithful push back. I agree that i...Thanks for your faithful push back. I agree that it is completely appropriate to venerate Scripture, as long as we don't worship it!<br /><br />Your comment on 1 Peter is exactly the right push back. All I can say is that I am not creating the issues here, only trying to find some resolution to them. As you know, I am not questioning YHWH speaking through the prophets. I'm suggesting he spoke doubly through the prophets and that he can speak anew through them today.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-1601914197442913092013-01-15T07:16:56.179-05:002013-01-15T07:16:56.179-05:00The prophets (I Pet. 1:10-12) did not know the &qu...The prophets (I Pet. 1:10-12) did not know the "person" or the "time" of the things God predicted through them. But they absolutely knew that the predictions involved the "sufferings of Christ" and the "subsequent glories." You have set up a "straw man" when you suggest that the prophets didn't understand the content of their prophecies. You want the words of the prophets to have a "fuller meaning" than the prophets understood. You have worried that believing in inerrancy "tends toward idolatry." I would suggest that twisting the words of Scripture for one's own purposes tends toward heresy. If the Lord Yahweh spoke the words through the prophets, I find no problem in cherishing, loving, and believing them. To give exalted status to His words is the right response to His Exalted Status! It's not the business of the believer to judge God's words for accuracy, but to seek to understand them in context, to enjoy them, and to obey them.Dick Nortonnoreply@blogger.com