From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jan 08 2003 - 13:34:06 EST
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 12:52:52 -0700 (MST) gordon brown
<gbrown@euclid.colorado.edu> writes:
>
> Anyone who believes that predestination and human freedom are not
> contradictory probably has no problem in accepting that the
> inspiration of
> individual words is not the same as dictation.
>
This represents a common belief. In its simplest form it confuses knowing
with causing, usually with the tacit assumption that the deity is
temporally restricted because we are. A good analysis of part of the
problem is found in Dorothy Sayers, _The Mind of the Maker_.
A similar problem is the argument that the deity can't be omnipotent
because the universe was not created in final form instantaneously. (This
stupidly equates "can" and "must".) There was a medieval doctrine that
the effect must be equal to the cause, but I don't recall anyone who
applied this notion to creation.
Additionally, I do not think most fundamentalists held that the
"individual words" represented inspiration. They held that the language
was that of the prophet who was kept from error by the Spirit. Only thus
could they allow for the obvious personal element in scripture while
holding to "plenary verbal inspiration."
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 09 2003 - 20:01:31 EST