I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to take this one in parts, largely because I don't have a huge amount of time now. But two things I do want to address here.<br><br>1. There is no disagreement between what I am proposing (or at least, trying to coherently present) and Augustine's expression. I believe the Spirit does teach via the written word. Also the spoken....<br><br>2. As far as my illustration goes, the fact that men were moved by the Holy Spirit doesn't change anything. The end result, as I understand it, in literal, verbal, plenary inspiration of the scriptures requires that the exact words be used. REGARDLESS of who penned the words, the resulting thoughts in the minds of the readers will be different UNLESS there is more to the word that is given. This is the importance of inspiration. Again, the variety of expression in the gospels just goes to show that the expressions of the Holy Spirit HAVE to go, at least, beyond a specific group of words - and even to something that may transcend words if necessary. THAT is what I see as setting Divine inspiration apart from lesser inspiration - the working of the Spirit of God through the work written. God is more powerful than to have to have a given set of words. At least that's how I see it.<br><br>3. My apologies for misattribution. And as far as fatalism goes, I use that to apply only to one's approach to the Christian life. Such an attitude of apathy seems to be a natural outflow of following Barthianism to the letter (grin). While it is true that God knew exactly the outcome of Isaiah's message to the hearts of the hearers (and, I believe, intended it that way), that doesn't absolve the hearers. Yet, it may be easier for them than Jerusalem on the Day of the Lord. That's in His hands. And, finally, as to the historical Jesus - I believe that unless one is drawn by the Father to Jesus, that he won't come. The Holy Spirit's work is in judgement, conviction and comfort - all of which draw a man to Christ. The historical propositions of Christ won't do that. So as far as that goes - no, I don't believe the historicity of Jesus has much (if any) of an effect on faith.<br><br> I will respond further as I can. I would like to do so tomorrow, but am not sure if I will be able to.
