Re: another heresy?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vernon Jenkins" <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
To: "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>; "Robert Schneider"
<rjschn39@bellsouth.net>; "Chris Barden" <chris.barden@gmail.com>
Cc: "ASA list" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 6:30 PM
Subject: Re: another heresy?

> Michael,
>
> Thank you for acting as a spokesman for Bob; but the trouble with this
> arrangement is that none of my questions get answered - unless you are
> prepared to have a go, that is.
>
> Clearly, Luke 16:19-31 is more than _parable_; it is _revelation_
> concerning that which interests all believers. And, since it is the Lord
> himself who says "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they
> will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead." (NIV), why
> wouldn't it be fair to conclude that he believed Moses to be the author
> of the Torah? On what possible authority can Bob and yourself claim
> "Jesus' statement has nothing to do with historical facts about
> authorship."?

If I quote a line from the Iliad & refer it to "Homer" I am not committing
myself to the view that there actually was a single ancient Greek poet who
wrote the epic.

I am not claiming that Jesus understood attribution of the Pentateuch to
Moses in that way. I don't know what he, in his state of humiliation, knew
about the authorship of those books. But using the conventional name of the
author of some well known work doesn't mean one actually knows or believes
that that person is the author. Everybody refers to Brahms' "Variations on
a theme by Haydn" even though it's really a theme by a student of Haydn.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Fri Dec 9 20:21:44 2005