Jim Bell wrote:
>>Only for those who put human demands upon Him. What does Deut. 29:29 mean
to you? Perhaps you don't like the idea of God having "secret things." But
then that's the kind of God we have. Is that a "major problem" for you?<<
There is no problem, as I have stated numerous times, with God not telling us
things. But when something purports to be a revelation from God, and it
tells us factually incorrect things, then I have a problem with that. That
is not what Deuteronomy 29:29 is saying though. It probably would have been
better if you had quoted it fully rather than just citing it. It says,
"The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed
belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of
this law." NIV
No, this verse seems to imply that what God reveals is not what is secret.
Thus if the Bible is a revelation from God, then what he revealed is not the
secret things this verse speaks of.
You wrote:
>>Hey, we agree!<<
We do? Oh, then maybe I better rethink my position. :-)
I wrote:
<< The entire Bible is an attempt by God to "step in" and
correct our misconceptions about who and what God is, and what His plan is
for humanity. Christianity has the view that God is attempting to
communicate with fallen mankind. Thus, by definition, God IS stepping in to
correct us.>>
You replied:
>>Using your "God could have" logic, Glenn, we can easily say the following:
God could have made sure there were no misunderstandings whatsoever by
implanting in our brains all the necessary wisdom and knowledge we need.
Using human written-divinely inspired textual revelation is such a bother. We
disagree all the time, grammar is inconvenient, and all that. It seems a
good God wouldn't let us get confused this way. He should have used the
implants.
Your logic, carried to the extreme, can call into question everything about
Scriptural revelation. Where do you stop?<<
I stop where God stopped; at the written word. God chose not to have the
implants. But He did choose to try to communicate via the written word. The
point in what I wrote was that there was the suggestion that God wouldn't
step in. I merely pointed out that that was precisely what the Bible was
doing.
glenn
Jim