RE: Biblical Interpretation Reconsidered

There is only one thing that defines a Christian and all else is secondary. If people want to create sects on secondary issues, so be it. Where in my post do I mention anything about "God fools us…."? "But the Lord answered and said to her, 'Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things; but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.' " Luke 10:41-42.

Moorad

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Jan de Koning [mailto:jan@dekoning.ca]
        Sent: Sat 12/20/2003 11:28 AM
        To: Alexanian, Moorad
        Cc: asa@calvin.edu
        Subject: RE: Biblical Interpretation Reconsidered
        
        

        Please, modify your language, Moorad. You are talking to a Christian
        brother. If we all told each other what we think of each other
        Christianity would be broken up in thousands of sects. It is difficult
        enough to talk to each other when we disagree, but trying to say that God
        fools us when He created the earth in a way which indicates millions of
        years of history is just as bad as accusing Howard. BTW what you said is
        not even what you wanted to say. Our Lord Jesus was a man as well.
        Jan de Koning
        
        At 10:44 AM 20/12/2003 -0500, Alexanian, Moorad wrote:
>Howard’s questioning of Scripture indicates that his faith lies
>elsewhere. "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the
>life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.' "John 14:6. Any human
>creature who claims to be The Truth is an excellent candidate for the
>mental asylum. Only the Son of God Himself could utter such words. I love
>the simplicity of Lewis’ prose and the profundity of his writings.
>
>
>
>Moorad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Howard J. Van Till
> Sent: Sat 12/20/2003 10:15 AM
> To: William Hamilton
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: Biblical Interpretation Reconsidered
>
>
>
> Bill gave us the following quotation from C.S. Lewis:
>
> > A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus
> said would not
> > be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a
> level with the
> > man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil
> of Hell. You
> > must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of
> God; or else
> > a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool,
> you can spit
> > at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and
> call Him
> > Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense
> about His
> > being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us.
> He did not
> > intend to.
>
> With all due respect for C.S. Lewis, I believe he did Christianity a
> disservice by posing the above dilemma. The two stark choices he
> poses are
> not the only two that could reasonably be posed. There are others
> based on
> differing assumptions and judgments about the character of the
> N.T. text.
> (When was it written? By whom? For what purposes? Does the text
> give us
> exact quotations of words actually spoken by Jesus? How does
> Lewis come to
> know Jesus' intentions so clearly?)
>
> Howard Van Till
>
        
        
        
Received on Sat Dec 20 17:03:41 2003