Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Ideas

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 AT mailhost.chi.ameritech.net>
  • To: Corpus Paulinum <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Ideas
  • Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 08:52:24 -0500



One of our members, David Amador, has been having trouble posting
messages to the List. Consequently, I am forwarding this for him.
Apologies for its lateness.

Yours,

Jeffrey Gibson

******************
Liz says:

Either he got it "of God," which to me means he thought of it himself,
it
was his own idea; or he got it from someone else, i.e,, another human =
being.
I am simply saying that people often think their thoughts are their own
(i.e., 'of God." Yet, people are not good at knowing where they get
their
ideas from. Therefore, we cannot assume that simply because he is
adamant
about not getting his ideas from a human agent (=3Dhe thought of it =
himself)
that that is indeed the case.

I query:

Um, now while I'm as skeptical as they come, and tend to question the =
validity of any assertion made by somebody that it was "of God", but...

You seem to be suggested that "of God" means "from God", and so
suggesting =
(as a good positivist would) that since "God" is an inaccessible
epistemolo=
gical datum, that "from God" means "from himself". Human agency
excludes =
the possibility that the message was "from God"

But "of God" is not "from God". It is quite possible that insights
culled =
from reading, pondering, arguing, learning (all very human acts with
human =
agents) could very well be "of God". Paul's assertion is therefore
about =
the validity of the gospel he preaches. He is not arguing so much about
=
pedigree as he is about authority and legitimacy.

-David Amador, Ph.D.
Santa Rosa, CA



--
Jeffrey B. Gibson
7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
Chicago, Illinois 60626
e-mail jgibson000 AT ameritech.net






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page