Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Is the Bible More Human or More Divine?

If we explain inspiration to someone, and we say that the Word is both divine and human, is one of the two parts more prominent than the other? Is the Bible more divine than it is human or is it more human than it is divine? If we say one or the other, how could we support our arugment? What would be the downside of either belief?

2 Comments:

At 1:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

**I reserve the right to recant if my view is heretical : )

If I understand it correctly, this question involves both agancy and means. God is the agent which composes the Bible, and man is the means. Just as a homerun is hit by the batter (agent) with a Louiville Slugger (means).

As to which is more prominent--I'm not sure either needs to be more prominent than the other. If agency overrides the means, then the means is unnecessary. But the very fact that the agent uses a particular means instead of another gives importance to that means. By ananlogy: the batter prefers a Louiville Slugger to get the job done.

Likewise, if the means is more prominent than the agent, this implies that anyone could swing the bat to hit the homerun. But we know, not just anyone could hit a homerun even if he uses Babe Ruth's bat. The Bible's agent is of utmost importance.

So, my answer: considering the Bible's composition, both divine and human roles are necessary. God could have chose another means to reveal Himself, but then it wouldn't be the Bible as we know it. Therefore, neither role is more prominent.

 
At 7:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

it is neither. The Bible was writen by humans. The Bible is inspiried by God. The Holy Spirit guided the writers to write the words. The Bible is about God, The Son and the Holy Spirit. The Bible is about God who is Divine and about God's Son who was both human and God. The Bible is also tells about The inspiration and the Endewlling of the Holy Spirit.
Michael

 

Post a Comment

<< Home