tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1481633930458110395.post4020960780468849791..comments2013-02-14T09:44:37.238-08:00Comments on Reflections in Exile: Problems With Creation Science VI: Must Genesis 1 Be Taken Literally And Without Reference To Science? Part 2Baddelimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00401080005530162767noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1481633930458110395.post-67584508686915229112007-12-12T09:10:00.000-08:002007-12-12T09:10:00.000-08:00Hi Qraal,The sole instrument?What role the Holy Sp...Hi Qraal,<BR/><BR/><I>The sole instrument?<BR/><BR/>What role the Holy Spirit?<BR/><BR/>You haven't mentioned the Spirit's role once, Mark.</I><BR/><BR/>True. I've been trying to avoid any attempt at comprehensiveness in these little posts. They're a bit on the long side already.<BR/><BR/>I haven't mentioned the role of the Father or the Spirit, and Christ's role has been limited to the fact that the Word is his instrument. And it's that instrumental role that's been the focus of these posts. The Holy Spirit isn't an instrument of the Son any more than the Father is. <BR/><BR/>Nothing the Son does will be done without the Spirit, and so the Word doesn't work independently of the Spirit. <BR/><BR/>I could have, with just a different choice of words (avoiding 'instrument' like the plague) have said 'We have no other hope than that the Spirit speaks' or 'We have no other way to know God than if he reveals himself to us' and it would have been very similar in substance.<BR/><BR/>But I'd be happy to speak about the Spirit's role in these issues without feeling the need to drop the Word in to cover myself. I'm happy to do the same in reverse. I'm not aiming for comprehensivity here.Baddelimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00401080005530162767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1481633930458110395.post-21549983243845170412007-12-09T19:42:00.000-08:002007-12-09T19:42:00.000-08:00The clarity of Scripture means something more like...<I>The clarity of Scripture means something more like, “The Bible can be understood sufficiently to give people all they need for faith in Christ and to live for him”. This idea rejects the position that the Bible is so obscure as a whole that it needs an authoritative interpreter to stand between it and the reader (like the Church Magisterium as in Roman Catholicism). It holds that the Bible has a central message, a central concern, and this can be reliably ascertained by an average reader. Hence people can read the Bible for themselves, come to faith, and begin to live a life of discipleship.</I><BR/><BR/>Mark, I think this assertion requires some qualification because it doesn't adequately account for the fact that when most people read the Bible, or hear it read, there has already been mediation by a group whose task is, in some ways, to shape the ultimate interpretation of the text: the translators. It is, after all, true that "all translation is interpretation."<BR/><BR/><I>What you can offer are principles or guidelines that work by and large, like the grammatico-historico method, or the fundamentally christo-centric nature of the OT (and the New…). But these can only be after the fact (</I>a posteori<I>), and they can only be rules of thumb, not laws. We learn to interpret the Bible by listening to it first and foremost, and paying attention to what it says. It’s not a matter of ironing out an ironclad methodology that we then apply to it.</I><BR/><BR/>But surely even the ability to listen to it first rests upon an implicit set of procedures we invoke to understand any form of communication?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742562181125859847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1481633930458110395.post-29449586910755094232007-12-08T19:05:00.000-08:002007-12-08T19:05:00.000-08:00The sole instrument?What role the Holy Spirit?You ...The sole instrument?<BR/><BR/>What role the Holy Spirit?<BR/><BR/>You haven't mentioned the Spirit's role once, Mark.qraalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13436948899560519608noreply@blogger.com