From: Debbie Mann (deborahjmann@insightbb.com)
Date: Mon Apr 28 2003 - 13:55:39 EDT
Hold the presses. Please quote me in context, but don't wildly paraphrase.
jiminy.
As far as my position on the Bible - it is only in the last year or so that
I have allowed myself to have questions. Many still remain unanswered. My
search for answers led me to this group. I still consider myself a 2 in your
ranking. Regardless of that, however, I still generally take the position of
a modified reducto ad absurdum. Or at least, "for the sake of argument let's
take the liberal view point." Specifically, my point with Jim was "it is not
false. There are incredible verifications for substantial portions. It is
totally illogical to reject it in totality, no matter how many pieces and
parts may be subject to doubt due to a variety of factors."
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of igevolution@earthlink.net
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 12:06 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Perceiving God
Burgy wrote:
Yet, many of us are quite aware of having been grasped (Tillich's term) by
the divine, and that contact, being part of our personal knowledge, must be
part of our religious stance. See Polyani's book PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE for an
exposition of how such knowledge is neither subjective nor objective, but is
of a different kind.
The Bible, which is a record of persons in the past speaking about their own
understanding of the divine, is, of course, a key document to the Christian
faith. Yet millions of people have lived and died as Christians w/o ever
reading it. Yes, there are some who regard it as sort of a "manufacturer's
handbook," and think that within its pages they can find all the ethical and
moral knowledge they will ever need. And some, even on this list, regard
it as "inerrant." I can't understand that myself, any more than I can
understand the YEC position. But YECs, and inerrantists, and many more will
someday enjoy the heavenlies, for it is the relationship with the divine
that counts, not the accuracy of one's beliefs.
Debbie wrote, in part:
You're getting exercised over the wrong thing here. What is Scripture but
a witness to personal experiences of one sort or another? The personal
experience doesn't have to be mine or yours, although it can include that as
well. To be valuable for the Christian community the experience must only
be one that the community accepts as valid and useful.
"True theology" really is different for everyone who thinks about it. The
only people who don't have their own theology are presumably those who give
it no thought and just accept what someone else tells them.
_____________
I find myself rather polarized to the responses I've received, quoted above,
and I think we've finally found the basic difference between my position and
yours. I actually believe that the Bible is inspired and inerrant. You do
not. The activity of theology is not quite the same as science. In
science, we work by moving through increasingly more accurate approximations
of reality. We can't really know the absolute truth about the physical
world because we are always a part of that perception. Nature does not have
its own voice. It is not self-revelatory. We must work at its discovery in
at least three regards: 1) We must think of the questions to ask; 2)we must
ask the questions and experiment to discover the answers; and 3)we must
interpret the answers to construct meaningful theories. In all three steps,
we are subject to the limitations of our minds and the errors that may
arise.
Theology is similar, yet utterly different. In theology, mankind is
involved in only one aspect of the process. In theology, the steps look
like this: 1) GOD decides what may be known about Him; 2)GOD reveals this
knowledge to us perfectly and without error; 3) Mankind transcribes this
knowledge through the guidance of the Holy Spirit into text that we call
"scripture." Here, mankind is only free to err in the last step, since this
is the only step with which he is at all involved. Among evangelical
theologians, there are three ways to see the effect that man's limitations
have on the inerrancy of scripture:
1) Literal or plenary inerrancy: Every word that is written in
scripture is given by God and is therefore without error. The actual word
choice and syntax are of divine authorship.
2) Full inerrancy: The meaning of scripture, as understood in its
proper historical and grammatical context, is free of error. Actual word
choice was left up to the author, but the Holy Spirit so superintended the
activity as to make incorrect meaning impossible.
3) Limited inerrancy: The meaning of scripture was perfectly revealed
to the author, but the author's limitations with regard to comprehension or
language expressed themselves in the text, so that, while the inspiration
was without error, the text might possess errors due to the author.
I would place myself in the second category, while I believe many on
this list would fall into the third. The first category is where YEC's
would doubtless land. I do not belong to that group, since a study of the
greek manuscripts of the New Testament reveals obvious telling vocabulary
and syntax. You can tell a pauline section of scripture simply from its
language use. Other NT authors similarly leave their mark in the text.
However, I believe that the meaning of scripture is without fault and
completely true. I cannot comprehend another position.
Lastly, I would like to respond to Burgy's comment about the importance
of simply knowing the divine. I agree that it is important to know God, but
this importance is not nearly as weighty as accurate knowledge. Accurate
knowledge is what separates me from Islam and Judaism, both of which claim
to worship the same God. The unique and saving aspect of Christianity is
the knowledge of the nature of Christ (fully God; fully man), his atonement
(as a substitutionary payment for my sin), and that my penalty is removed
completely by the action of God, not my own doing. This accurate knowledge
is what counts. Please remember that, in the parable of the sheep and the
goats, there are many who cry out, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophecy in your
name..." and yet will go into everlasting torment. Even the Demons believe
there is one God and tremble at His name. Do you know the real Christ?
This is the question for admission to heaven.
Jason
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 28 2003 - 13:51:40 EDT