Wednesday, 20th September, 2006

Asking myself some questions for the next lecture about Scripture?

Tying Gospels to Old Scripture and the parallel we see in them.

Does the fact the Gospels convey parallels in earlier scripture distract from the plausibility of the event, or did it enforce the message that Jesus was conveying to the devout Jewish community?

Jesus had a way to make contact, to open ears that may listen. Jesus’ actions in the possibly few isolated events that were documented were probably chosen for their theological content of the time.

Their Validity and Literal Interpretation

Jesus’ life as it is written on paper differs from Gospel to Gospel, as it should, from the word of mouth, re-writing and translation in those first 60 years. Much as we find it difficult to find the exact account in different newspapers reporting the same international event, we find differences and interpretations in the Gospels and books of the NT.

What is important? The events of the last few years of the life of Jesus, Gods physical interaction through Christ for humanity. If we choose to ignore the literal, looking only for meaning, then the scriptures could be argued to have no authority, they could just be deemed the result of a human philosophical need for a God.

Gods Word or Mans?

I read, in this Introductory essay that Paul’s hand in Romans was of his own interpretation from Gods inspiration and that he had not produced a transcript of Gods own words.

If we believe we have autonomy of our own actions this is almost certainly correct. As we see in Romans or the Epistles, Paul’s own personality and his experiences with others shapse his writing. If it wasn’t for Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, what would he have written at that time in his life? Would he have written at all? The fact that he had a message for humanity was a consequence of God directly impacting on his life. The essence of Gods will and message is there for us to recognize in Paul’s writings as in any scripture.