This is a second response to Bob Rogland's post of July 12.
It is meant for clarification of his questions.
Bob wrote (in part):
"It is a gratuitous assumption by Burgy that it involved child rape."
I said nothing about CHILD rape in my post. I specifically picked an earlier
(Deu) account of the problem so as to tighten the arguments
"I see no problem here for the notion of inerrancy."
Neither do I. When I began studying this, I though that would play a part. I
no longer think this.
"Burgy also brings up a number of other verses from Deuteronomy 22. I (and
many others) could answer them, but I suspect he would simply bring up more
I cited these as, to some extent, examples of other verses which were
problemmatical. You have a good point though, I should not have wandared off
the point. Sorry.
"I again challenge you to respond to this point, quoted again from previous
Burgy's view (if I understand it correctly) is that the biblical writers
were moved (inspired) to write down an account of God's dealings with them,
but that some of them just got God's will wrong: some of the words
attributed to God just don't jibe with the character of God as presented in
the New Testament and/or as intuited by a believer today who is indwelt by
the Spirit of God.
In this specific case, it is, indeed, my claim that Moses spoke but what
came out was not God's commands and position but his. Just as in Ps 137
where the words of the song are those of the singers, mourning, and not
"Tell us truly what you think: Were the NT writers just as prone to error as
the OT writers? Did they get Jesus wrong? Or was Jesus himself in error,
emptied full ethical wisdom by his kenosis? Have the courage of your
convictions and tell us what you really belive here!"
As I have said several times, being a physicist, I am also a reductionist,
and, so, will concentrate on the selected verses.
"And, tell us where you get the knowledge of good and evil to sit in
judgment over Moses, the psalmist, the gospel writers, and even (if the
gospel writers got it down accurately) Jesus himself. As I asked you
privately, are you conducting your one-man Jesus Seminar in Colorado? These
questions are straight and to the point. I trust your answers will be too."
My knowledge of "good and evil" is such that I know that regarding women as
property and condoning acts of rape for the armed forces is wrong, evil,
nasty and not in the character of the God Jesus portrayed. Do you have a
different view? I suspect not. Where did I get it? 71 years of living, and
40 years of being a Christian. Now you have expanded the issues from "Ps
137" (#1) and "Deu 21:11) to the NT, and asked me if I will conduct a "Jesus
Seminar" in Colorado. Yes, those questions are "straight and to the point."
But addressing them would simply take us away from the issue.
Let me leave you with this. Answer "straight and to the point" at least 3 of
the 6 questions I asked you in my earlier post today and then I'll address
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 20 2002 - 15:00:57 EDT