|
“ Interesting Q & A! ”
Ron Hanko's response to his first question reveals an inconsistency in his interpretive principle. David Silversides, in his first talk, quoted Psalm 145 v 9 as a 'proof text' for the doctrine of the Lord's common grace toward Mankind. Psalm 145 v 9 reads, The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works. Rev Hanko, in disputing Rev Silversides position, in HIS first talk, said that 'all' in the first clause of v 9 is to be understood as meaning 'all His works' from the 2nd clause. Rev Hanko, in his first talk, said that 'all his works' referred to God's creation, something which he further defined in that talk as excluding Mankind, for no good reason that I can fathom. Verse 10 reads, All thy works shall praise thee, O LORD; and thy saints shall bless thee. So then, in this Q & A Rev Hanko now says that 'Thy works', in verse 10, is to be interpreted as meaning 'Thy saints' and, further, that v 10 supports his position in the debate. So, God's 'works' are to be defined differently in two adjoining verses? Is that a sound exegetical principle? |
