Relating
his understanding of divine sovereignty and divine freedom to the
interpretation of Romans 9-11, Berkouwer wrote, "Words like
'sovereignty' ought not to be approached abstractly via a formal
concept: this can only create the impression that we are capturing our
own understanding or words in transparent definitions and then applying
them directly to God without deeper consideration, as though he
naturally fits the definition garnerd from human experience. Not
surprisingly, this abstract notion of sovereignty has a profound effect
when theologians apply it to ... Romans 9" (A Half Century of Theology,
p. 91). He asked this question: "If divine freedom explains everything
... how is it posssible that Paul ... in ... Romans 9-11 ... does not
end with a reasoned conclusion that the destiny of eveything and
everyone is sealed from eternity. Why does he, rather, end with a
breathtaking doxology" (A Half Century of Theology, p. 92 - followed by
the words of Romans 11:33).
E J Young argues that one’s doctrine of Scripture is derived from either experience or Scripture, either natural man or supernatural God. Young does speak of the human character of Scripture. It does, however, seem that the supernatural-natural dichotomy underlies his doctrine of Scripture. He turns to the Bible “to discover what it has to say of itself” (p. 40). It is questionable, however, whether his view is not grounded in a notion which tends to set divine and human activity over against each other. Young rejects a mechanical theory (p. 65). It does, however, appear that his own view is really no more than a modification of this view. His interpretation of the working of the Spirit in the inspiration of Scripture is not directly identifiable with mechanical dictation (pp. 79-80). It does seem, however, that there is a tendency to move in that direction. * Here are some statements from Young. - “Without Him (God) there could have been no Bible. Without man th...
Comments
Post a Comment