Ive been reading this off and on a bit and Ive finally sat down to really read through the book. Ive been pretty amazingly let down by much of the material within the book. Admittedly I had, perhaps, overly high hopes for the book. His underlying argument for many objections the book aims to reconcile have the following logic it seems: 1. Gods ultimate ideal for persons is laid out in creation. 2. We are striving to return to the original ideals of creation. 3. Humans are hard of heart and difficult to change, so change must come incrementally. 4. Because of this we see advancement of moral laws as presented in The Bible. The Mosaic Covenant isnt meant to be a final, universal set of laws governing all. They, along with other laws, were meant for a specific time and place- they are in no way universal. 5. God plans to move towards the ideal situation with humans, though hes not there immediately. And Copan shows how this advances in the NT and is expected to be further perfected. He insists that its not moral relativism because the markers dont move, its just God accommodating Himself to a fallen human framework and social structure as He makes incremental gains toward the ideal. As I type out the issue I find it an easier line of reasoning to digest in theory, but some explanation is still lost when thinking on this issue. Why wouldnt the Ideal be ingrained within the text. If the ideal is that slavery shouldnt exist, why not spell that out? Then put the culturally accommodated position for Israel after that. Wouldnt that seem a more pure and holy presentation of the Law? So any better books than this to explore controversial OT issues?
Posted on: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 03:23:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015