Every so often in Scripture one of its writer's on the human side of their/the Spirit's equation will be observed agreeing with a truth spoken by someone from outside said Scripture writer's faith.
Now that is true objectivity.
Here is a statement - from a book - that I agree with only because it is objective regardless of who wrote it:
“The basis of salvation is always the death of Christ; the means is always faith; the object is always God (though man’s understanding of God before and after the incarnation is obviously different); but the content of faith depends on the particular revelation
God was pleased to give at a certain time. These are the distinctions which the dispensationalist recognizes, and they are distinctions necessitated by plain interpretation of revelation as it was given” - Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism, pgs 117-120 (Moody, 1995)
And I post my agreement with Ryrie on that well aware of my disagreement with him on various issues (which is why I hold to an Acts 9 Dispensatioalism, in contrast to his Acts 2).
If one is truly objective, one does not over rely on the writings of men for one's overall objectivity.
Just as, if one is truly objective, neither the source of, nor agreement with another's objectivity, matters.
Case in point - the Apostle Paul's agreement with the momentary objectivity of a pagan source, at the same time that he reveals his unwillingness to allow himself to rely on such sources - where they are off-base:
Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
In contrast, by the consistent ilogic of most, the Apostle Paul had no business siding with such an individual's momentary objectivity because of who said individual was and or what said individual had held to in general as to faith.
Keep that in mind the next time some one voices their notion that Mid-Acts is not objective, is man made, and or is the result of another man's hand me down.
Now that is true objectivity.
Here is a statement - from a book - that I agree with only because it is objective regardless of who wrote it:
“The basis of salvation is always the death of Christ; the means is always faith; the object is always God (though man’s understanding of God before and after the incarnation is obviously different); but the content of faith depends on the particular revelation
God was pleased to give at a certain time. These are the distinctions which the dispensationalist recognizes, and they are distinctions necessitated by plain interpretation of revelation as it was given” - Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism, pgs 117-120 (Moody, 1995)
And I post my agreement with Ryrie on that well aware of my disagreement with him on various issues (which is why I hold to an Acts 9 Dispensatioalism, in contrast to his Acts 2).
If one is truly objective, one does not over rely on the writings of men for one's overall objectivity.
Just as, if one is truly objective, neither the source of, nor agreement with another's objectivity, matters.
Case in point - the Apostle Paul's agreement with the momentary objectivity of a pagan source, at the same time that he reveals his unwillingness to allow himself to rely on such sources - where they are off-base:
Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
In contrast, by the consistent ilogic of most, the Apostle Paul had no business siding with such an individual's momentary objectivity because of who said individual was and or what said individual had held to in general as to faith.
Keep that in mind the next time some one voices their notion that Mid-Acts is not objective, is man made, and or is the result of another man's hand me down.