Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
As an independent reader I have reviewed Drake's post in question. He stated that it comes from a "correlation between parables".
This was interpreted by you as "an amalgam of human imagination".
"correlation between parables" means that he has inferred from the parables that the doctrine is most likely a true proposition. Drake said "I never suggested or implied such a thing. Rather, I said just the opposite", meaning, he did not imply the use of human imagination but rather deductive reasoning.
Therefore, to declare it to be "of the imagination" would be a misrepresentation of his statement. Drake did not engage in the use of imagination, but rather a logical conclusion arrived at by correlating parables by the use of reason.
|
A "correlation" and an "inference". Objectively speaking, an interpretation. Not 'truth'. Certainly not scripture. Every interpretation should be tested, if it is of the imagination (colored by ignorance, bias, and self- interest) or if it were truly of God and worthy of guiding the assembly.
To be fair, Drake said it was a construction of the human mind. To repeat, I believe this mind was not led by the Holy Spirit, but was rather at a point in religious history, and was struggling thru a Protestant dilemma (OSAS &c). Not the first to do so.
There is a reason James said, "Do not be many teachers". The hermeneutical world of LSM is case in point. (Ja 3:1) It reminds me nothing so much as the story of the old lady who swallowed the fly. But of course, that is inference. A correlation perceived by my human mind.
Hope that helps.