RE: THE PRESERVATION OF THE ...

From: Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Date: Thu Dec 07 1995 - 11:38:22 EST


Jim Beale wrote;
>I'll just say that for me, the presupposition of inerrancy of the
>autographs forms the basis for my worldview. It is not appropriate, IMHO,
>to approach Scripture with the philosophical presupposition of errancy.
>That sets the human mind over the Biblical revelation, in deciding which
>sentence, or clause, or jot or tittle is inspired, and which is not. I
>would be willing to defend the claim that this leads to pure subjectivism.

Jim,
The next to the last sentence just won't hold up. This speaks as though
the person who sees an inconsistency in the text decided where that
inconsistency was going to be. The text itself determines where such
problems are located not the person who points them out. I had nothing to
do with the fact that Stephen said (in the power of the Spirit) that
Abraham left Haran _after his father died_ and that this is at odds with
Gen. 11 and 12. I didn't decide one day that this problem existed, I found
it in the text. In honesty I must point it out and if my presupposition
about Scripture won't stand in the face of it, I will change my
presupposition not the text. My faith is not dependent upon my being able
to explain away this text for I know God can use human beings who do not
always get it right to get his message through. Stephen's message still
stands in spite of several historical problems in his Spirit inspired
sermon.

Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:34 EDT