All articles

From Kristos Vocabulary Booster

lsenders@hotmail.com:

> Matthew Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>> True. But please bear in mind that especially over here on
>> this side of the Pond, we have a lot of people who cannot
>> accept it as "reliable testimony" unless they believe it's
>> literal sense is true. As to _how_ it is that we have so
>> many people who approach Scripture that way, that would be a
>> topic for another (and long) post.

And that other (and long) post which I am not going to write either, at
least not now, would have to make a distinction of

- belief in the inerrancy of originals (according to various definitions
of both terms)

- belief in the inerrancy of translations (especially one of them into the
world's only important language)

- belief in the necessity to always interpret according to the most
literal meaning of the words

- belief in inspiration (according to various definitions of this term)

- belief in literal (aka "verbal") inspiration

- the sola scriptura principle (according to various definitions of this
term)

just to mention a little of the definition work which would be necessary
before starting the umpteenth thread on the topic.

> No. It's quite simple to answer in a word, the Holy Spirit.

This is a very good point--indeed, the most important one in my opinion.

It is the Holy Spirit who speaks through the Scripture as He chooses to
speak. No one can understand the Scripture without His work. Not the
erudite scholar knowing the language, the culture, and the literary genres
involved. Nor the pious man believing that every single word was dictated
and needs to be understood literally. Both are dependent on the Spirit
speaking to them while they are listening. Neither the belief in the
inerrancy of science nor in the inerrancy of the written text is a
substitute for the dependency on the Holy Spirit.

It is not enough that the Spirit testify the authenticity of the Scripture
as it was written, He has also to testify its authority as it is read.

I do *not* allege that you ("lsenders") do indeed purport a theology that
the work of the Holy Spirit consists *only* in inspiring the Scripture and
testifying its authenticity to the believer, then leaving him alone with
the infallible word. In fact, I do not think that there are many
Christians thinking like that--call it a straw-man if you will. However, I
*do* see the real danger that the strong insistence on literal inspiration
and literal understanding is a way to become independent of the Holy
Spirit by having an infallible word (the verbally inspired) and an
infallible method (the literal) for understanding.

Helmut Richter



((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))