Tue Apr 2 14:48:22 1996

From majordom  Tue Apr  2 14:48:22 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA10631; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 14:48:22 +0500
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 14:46:08 -0500
From: HuldrychZ@aol.com
Message-Id: <960402144606_262304959@emout09.mail.aol.com>
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: autographs versus archetypes
Content-Length: 946
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

In a message dated 96-04-02 12:35:27 EST, you write:

>This is interesting indeed and from a purely human point of view would be
>accepted without reservation. BUT...doesn't this theory necessarily
>presuppose the denial of even the possibility of the THEOPNEUSTOS?

The notion that the Biblical writers were somehow possessed by the Divine
Spirit, losing their humanity and becoming automatons drives against the
grain of serious Biblical interpretation.  To inisit that God emptied them of
their humanity (which is the logical conclusion of your implication) is to
repeat the error of Docetism- this time not in the area of Christology, but
in the area of something far less.

The Biblical writers did not know they were writing Scripture- they were just
writing theology, like Barth or Schleiermacher or Schaffer, or the like.
 Their works were and are treasured because they are meaningful, not because
they are inhuman.


Jim West

Jim West

Back