Howard wrote:
<< The intended distinction was between (1) direct divine revelation,
disguised
to look like human writing and (2) human writing that benefits from an
awareness of God. Option (1) often leads to Book worship insulated from
critical evaluation, while (2) invites continuing evaluation in the light of
the totality of human experience. (1) invites the "say as they said"
syndrome; (2) invites the "do as they did" strategy that I favor. >>
How about divine revelation to and through humans that benefits from an
awareness of God? That is what I see in the way Jesus and Paul related to
Scripture. I see in them an ongoing dialog between what they read in biblical
revelation and what they hear from God and see in the world around them.
Because they "do as they did," sometimes they "say as they said;" and other
times they see beyond the cultural-rootedness of the OT In Matt 19:3-8 we
see both: Jesus sees divine revelation in Gen 2:24 but rejects the
permission for "divorce for any reason" that occurs in Deut 24:1-4. "Do as
they did" is sine qua non: "If anyone will do the will of God, they shall
know" (Jn 7:17); but, the thing they shall know is whether what was said is
something we should say.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 27 2001 - 21:36:59 EST