imagined and poorly stated biblical text
John writes in responce:
I often write words into the text that are not intended. The above is a case in point, I am afraid. I meant to say "imagined poorly stated biblical text." Please make that correction and then comment on the statement. Barth nowhere speaks of a poorly stated text and uses this very text as THE source for his commentary. That is the point I was trying to make. That is it written by men, men of the fall, is beyond question. That God has and continues to accomplish His purposes via didache is also without question. I personally believe that inspiration of scripture is a dynamic activity of the Great God Almighty as we sit down, full of contrition, brokenness and humility, to read what these great men (apostles, prophets and friends of our God) have been given to say. The miracle of "inspiration" begins with these men of old and continues as we read. To be sure, our bias often stands in the way. To be sure, our lack of understanding in one area of thought plays a role in other venues. And so, we can read and recieve a vital message from a particular passage and years later, see (perhaps) an entirely differing point of view from the same passage .............. God working in each case, shaping and growing the part of us that demands an answer. This continuing process is exactly why Paul lifts up the relationship and cautions against over-confidence in the anaylytical word, whether written or spoken (I Cor 8:1-3).
Why does it need an explanation?
Barth is sharing his faith with us.�� He does not feel an obligation that is tied to an imagined poorly stated biblical text; rather, this text has inspired the thoughts that he shares.�� You have quoted various commentators and bloggers� --� they do the very same in their own way.��
JD
