Comments on: Testimonials vs Scriptural Arguments http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/ Fear God and keep His commandments; for this is the whole duty of man - Ecclesiastes 12:13 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:07:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-35 gymbrall Sat, 02 Dec 2006 04:01:22 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-35 I do, it should be in the sidebar now. You can get it at: http://gymbrall.wordpress.com/comments/feed I do, it should be in the sidebar now. You can get it at: http://gymbrall.wordpress.com/comments/feed

]]> By: gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-1257 gymbrall Sat, 02 Dec 2006 04:01:00 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-1257 I do, it should be in the sidebar now. You can get it at: http://gymbrall.wordpress.com/comments/feed I do, it should be in the sidebar now. You can get it at: http://gymbrall.wordpress.com/comments/feed

]]> By: Ariel http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-34 Ariel Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:42:05 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-34 Hey, I don't suppose you have an RSS feed for comments, do you? Hey, I don’t suppose you have an RSS feed for comments, do you?

]]> By: Ariel http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-1256 Ariel Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:42:00 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-1256 Hey, I don't suppose you have an RSS feed for comments, do you? Hey, I don’t suppose you have an RSS feed for comments, do you?

]]> By: Ariel http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-33 Ariel Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:20:04 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-33 The alien norms thing: yeah, it's a theological phrase. And if I'd REALLY been awake in theology class that day, I'd remember who coined it. Personally, I like the action/adventure flavor it brings to questions of doctrine. ;) The alien norms thing: yeah, it’s a theological phrase. And if I’d REALLY been awake in theology class that day, I’d remember who coined it. Personally, I like the action/adventure flavor it brings to questions of doctrine. ;)

]]> By: Ariel http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-1255 Ariel Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:20:00 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-1255 The alien norms thing: yeah, it's a theological phrase. And if I'd REALLY been awake in theology class that day, I'd remember who coined it. Personally, I like the action/adventure flavor it brings to questions of doctrine. ;) The alien norms thing: yeah, it’s a theological phrase. And if I’d REALLY been awake in theology class that day, I’d remember who coined it. Personally, I like the action/adventure flavor it brings to questions of doctrine. ;)

]]> By: Molly http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Molly Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:58:45 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-32 Yes, I know what you're saying, I think...I wonder if that's something Christians in every age struggle with--defining God in ways that they can understand, in ways that compliment the values of their own culture. How else could the Crusades have happened, or the Inquisition, etc, etc, etc? But I guess that's kind of my whole point...that we can't think we are somehow immune to reading into the Scriptures our own cultural assumptions, including our ability to pendulum AWAY from our cultural assumptions and *still* read wrongly because we are reading in reaction. I'm not meaning to be depressing and suggest that we can't know anything about God, mind you, and I'm a huge fan of the study of doctrine, etc... But I guess my only point is that it must come with a great degree of humility, this "knowing God" business. On the woman question, as we were discussing over at Scot's jesuscreed blog, this subject is one of the main reasons I refused to listen to the "other side's" arguments. I was convinced they were pro-women simply because they were making God who they wanted Him to be, that they were taking their cultural values into Scripture and twisting the Bible to make it fit into their prior assumptions. Whereas I just wanted to do/be whatever God wanted for me---and if that was to be silent, with a headcovering, then so be it! I still agree, btw, that arguments based on assumptions one brings IN to the argument, are still shaky, at best. But what began to change my mind in regards to women in the church wasn't my decision that God oughta be fair, but was simply the Scriptures themselves. THEY started messing with my black-and-white views...Pauls list at the end of Romans, for example...what's up with that? And so on...and then I started doing some more researching---things like the Roman Household Code, etc...man, it was as if a bomb was planted and blew up everything I thought...I was in COMPLETE fear and trembling, and that is no joke...so afraid that God was saying that my world was going to be bigger than being the silent helpmate... Now, I am doing cartwheels out here in the open, but at first, it was as if someone died. I am now at a place where I am convinced that women are not what I thought they were, that Piper and Grudem et all are well-intentioned, but have it dreadfully WRONG, and I have not come to that conclusion because I am a closet feminist, but exactly the opposite...I feel like the Spirit dragged me into this kicking and screaming... :) Yes, I know what you’re saying, I think…I wonder if that’s something Christians in every age struggle with–defining God in ways that they can understand, in ways that compliment the values of their own culture. How else could the Crusades have happened, or the Inquisition, etc, etc, etc? But I guess that’s kind of my whole point…that we can’t think we are somehow immune to reading into the Scriptures our own cultural assumptions, including our ability to pendulum AWAY from our cultural assumptions and *still* read wrongly because we are reading in reaction. I’m not meaning to be depressing and suggest that we can’t know anything about God, mind you, and I’m a huge fan of the study of doctrine, etc… But I guess my only point is that it must come with a great degree of humility, this “knowing God” business.

On the woman question, as we were discussing over at Scot’s jesuscreed blog, this subject is one of the main reasons I refused to listen to the “other side’s” arguments. I was convinced they were pro-women simply because they were making God who they wanted Him to be, that they were taking their cultural values into Scripture and twisting the Bible to make it fit into their prior assumptions. Whereas I just wanted to do/be whatever God wanted for me—and if that was to be silent, with a headcovering, then so be it!

I still agree, btw, that arguments based on assumptions one brings IN to the argument, are still shaky, at best. But what began to change my mind in regards to women in the church wasn’t my decision that God oughta be fair, but was simply the Scriptures themselves. THEY started messing with my black-and-white views…Pauls list at the end of Romans, for example…what’s up with that? And so on…and then I started doing some more researching—things like the Roman Household Code, etc…man, it was as if a bomb was planted and blew up everything I thought…I was in COMPLETE fear and trembling, and that is no joke…so afraid that God was saying that my world was going to be bigger than being the silent helpmate…

Now, I am doing cartwheels out here in the open, but at first, it was as if someone died. I am now at a place where I am convinced that women are not what I thought they were, that Piper and Grudem et all are well-intentioned, but have it dreadfully WRONG, and I have not come to that conclusion because I am a closet feminist, but exactly the opposite…I feel like the Spirit dragged me into this kicking and screaming… :)

]]> By: Molly http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-1254 Molly Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:58:00 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-1254 Yes, I know what you're saying, I think...I wonder if that's something Christians in every age struggle with--defining God in ways that they can understand, in ways that compliment the values of their own culture. How else could the Crusades have happened, or the Inquisition, etc, etc, etc? But I guess that's kind of my whole point...that we can't think we are somehow immune to reading into the Scriptures our own cultural assumptions, including our ability to pendulum AWAY from our cultural assumptions and *still* read wrongly because we are reading in reaction. I'm not meaning to be depressing and suggest that we can't know anything about God, mind you, and I'm a huge fan of the study of doctrine, etc... But I guess my only point is that it must come with a great degree of humility, this "knowing God" business. On the woman question, as we were discussing over at Scot's jesuscreed blog, this subject is one of the main reasons I refused to listen to the "other side's" arguments. I was convinced they were pro-women simply because they were making God who they wanted Him to be, that they were taking their cultural values into Scripture and twisting the Bible to make it fit into their prior assumptions. Whereas I just wanted to do/be whatever God wanted for me---and if that was to be silent, with a headcovering, then so be it! I still agree, btw, that arguments based on assumptions one brings IN to the argument, are still shaky, at best. But what began to change my mind in regards to women in the church wasn't my decision that God oughta be fair, but was simply the Scriptures themselves. THEY started messing with my black-and-white views...Pauls list at the end of Romans, for example...what's up with that? And so on...and then I started doing some more researching---things like the Roman Household Code, etc...man, it was as if a bomb was planted and blew up everything I thought...I was in COMPLETE fear and trembling, and that is no joke...so afraid that God was saying that my world was going to be bigger than being the silent helpmate... Now, I am doing cartwheels out here in the open, but at first, it was as if someone died. I am now at a place where I am convinced that women are not what I thought they were, that Piper and Grudem et all are well-intentioned, but have it dreadfully WRONG, and I have not come to that conclusion because I am a closet feminist, but exactly the opposite...I feel like the Spirit dragged me into this kicking and screaming... :) Yes, I know what you’re saying, I think…I wonder if that’s something Christians in every age struggle with–defining God in ways that they can understand, in ways that compliment the values of their own culture. How else could the Crusades have happened, or the Inquisition, etc, etc, etc? But I guess that’s kind of my whole point…that we can’t think we are somehow immune to reading into the Scriptures our own cultural assumptions, including our ability to pendulum AWAY from our cultural assumptions and *still* read wrongly because we are reading in reaction. I’m not meaning to be depressing and suggest that we can’t know anything about God, mind you, and I’m a huge fan of the study of doctrine, etc… But I guess my only point is that it must come with a great degree of humility, this “knowing God” business.

On the woman question, as we were discussing over at Scot’s jesuscreed blog, this subject is one of the main reasons I refused to listen to the “other side’s” arguments. I was convinced they were pro-women simply because they were making God who they wanted Him to be, that they were taking their cultural values into Scripture and twisting the Bible to make it fit into their prior assumptions. Whereas I just wanted to do/be whatever God wanted for me—and if that was to be silent, with a headcovering, then so be it!

I still agree, btw, that arguments based on assumptions one brings IN to the argument, are still shaky, at best. But what began to change my mind in regards to women in the church wasn’t my decision that God oughta be fair, but was simply the Scriptures themselves. THEY started messing with my black-and-white views…Pauls list at the end of Romans, for example…what’s up with that? And so on…and then I started doing some more researching—things like the Roman Household Code, etc…man, it was as if a bomb was planted and blew up everything I thought…I was in COMPLETE fear and trembling, and that is no joke…so afraid that God was saying that my world was going to be bigger than being the silent helpmate…

Now, I am doing cartwheels out here in the open, but at first, it was as if someone died. I am now at a place where I am convinced that women are not what I thought they were, that Piper and Grudem et all are well-intentioned, but have it dreadfully WRONG, and I have not come to that conclusion because I am a closet feminist, but exactly the opposite…I feel like the Spirit dragged me into this kicking and screaming… :)

]]> By: gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-31 gymbrall Tue, 21 Nov 2006 15:40:28 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-31 Molly (or should I say "Molly" - if that is your real name ;) Thanks for the thoughtful comment (I'm sensing a trend as I read your comments elsewhere) I definitely agree with you about the value of personal experience, but I am beginning to think less and less that are there two disparate sides that desperately love Jesus. More and more I see people taking modern values of fairness and kindness and retconning God. Take the average Christian's definition of love and if you apply it to John 3:16 it's clear the God loved the world but he must have hated his son (by sending him to suffer and die.) I guess what I'm saying is that God holds us accountable for how we see him (I'm thinking of all the verses where he talks about having eyes but seeing not and ears but hearing not) It's definitely something that I'm still chewing on. Anyway, thanks again for the read, Charles Churchill Molly (or should I say “Molly” – if that is your real name ;)
Thanks for the thoughtful comment (I’m sensing a trend as I read your comments elsewhere) I definitely agree with you about the value of personal experience, but I am beginning to think less and less that are there two disparate sides that desperately love Jesus. More and more I see people taking modern values of fairness and kindness and retconning God. Take the average Christian’s definition of love and if you apply it to John 3:16 it’s clear the God loved the world but he must have hated his son (by sending him to suffer and die.) I guess what I’m saying is that God holds us accountable for how we see him (I’m thinking of all the verses where he talks about having eyes but seeing not and ears but hearing not) It’s definitely something that I’m still chewing on.

Anyway, thanks again for the read,
Charles Churchill

]]> By: gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2006/11/20/testimonials-vs-scriptural-arguments/comment-page-1/#comment-1253 gymbrall Tue, 21 Nov 2006 15:40:00 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=13#comment-1253 Molly (or should I say "Molly" - if that is your real name ;) Thanks for the thoughtful comment (I'm sensing a trend as I read your comments elsewhere) I definitely agree with you about the value of personal experience, but I am beginning to think less and less that are there two disparate sides that desperately love Jesus. More and more I see people taking modern values of fairness and kindness and retconning God. Take the average Christian's definition of love and if you apply it to John 3:16 it's clear the God loved the world but he must have hated his son (by sending him to suffer and die.) I guess what I'm saying is that God holds us accountable for how we see him (I'm thinking of all the verses where he talks about having eyes but seeing not and ears but hearing not) It's definitely something that I'm still chewing on. Anyway, thanks again for the read, Charles Churchill Molly (or should I say “Molly” – if that is your real name ;)
Thanks for the thoughtful comment (I’m sensing a trend as I read your comments elsewhere) I definitely agree with you about the value of personal experience, but I am beginning to think less and less that are there two disparate sides that desperately love Jesus. More and more I see people taking modern values of fairness and kindness and retconning God. Take the average Christian’s definition of love and if you apply it to John 3:16 it’s clear the God loved the world but he must have hated his son (by sending him to suffer and die.) I guess what I’m saying is that God holds us accountable for how we see him (I’m thinking of all the verses where he talks about having eyes but seeing not and ears but hearing not) It’s definitely something that I’m still chewing on.

Anyway, thanks again for the read,
Charles Churchill

]]>