Re: another heresy?

> 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."?
>

I see, since Baruch wrote serveral portions of Jeremiah, therefore
since it was not written __by__ Jeremiah, we must reject Jeremiah as false?
And I would guess that Moses would at least have had difficulties describing
his own death at the end of Deuteronomy.

But seriously, even in this passage you refer to from Luke, Jesus is talking
in generalizations. We all understand it as "the message of Moses", and
whether Moses actually wrote all the words, or some of the words, the man
and his actions clearly stood for something that we all understand, as God
fearing people. If Jesus put authorship all under the umbrella of Moses,
it's clear that "the message from God" was what he was determined to get
across. Let's not forget that we are all blessed to have this writing to
learn
from.

I would not strictly adhere to any JEDP view, but seeing the bible as having
different sources does make sense. Even Moses would have had to use
some kinds of sources. Authors after him would have used his writings
as sources, and so on.

by Grace alone we proceed,
Wayne
Received on Sat Dec 10 05:31:47 2005