Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:28:32 -0500 "Medina, Vincent" <VMedina AT cbcag.edu>
writes:
> Stoney:
> 
> The type of inspiration spoken of you are speaking of is not what
> theologians a generally speaking of when they discuss 
> "inspiration."
> There is a difference between the human inspiration of a poet or 
> bard,
> and divine inspiration as this is traditionally understood by 
> believers
> when they speak of scripture. While I marvel at the achievements of 
> a
> Shakespeare or Elliot, I do not put their works in the same category 
> as
> Scripture, which, I believe, has its origin in God. While the works 
> of
> poets certainly owe their inspiration to God's gift, the inspiration 
> of
> Scripture not only different in degree, but also in kind. I realize 
> that
> you may not share my rather conservative/orthodox faith commitments, 
> and
> that's fine. But I wanted to be sure we were talking about the same
> thing.
> 
> As far as the question of pious fraud being "resolved centuries 
> ago,"
> perhaps you could enlighten me. I know that many assert that the
> ancients were not concerned with such things, but I am not at all
> certain that simply asserting such a thing makes it so, or 
> "resolves" it
> to everyone's satisfaction.
> 
> chesed v shalom,
> 
> G. Vincent Medina
> Associate Professor
> Central Bible College
> Phone: 417 887-6559
> Email: vmedina AT cbcag.edu
____________

You are constructing a theory of inspiration which is of absolutely no
value.  You construct your theory then complain that anyone who disagrees
with you doesn't believe in inspiration.  The problem is that you
construct a false definition.  What does it matter if a writing is or is
not historically accurate?  History is what happens once.  The divine
word is what is ever true.  It is of no significance that something
happened once.  It's done, fini.  I am interested in what the word of the
Lord has to say to my situation.  

george
gfsomsel
___________