Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | DocTrinsograce | 132251 | ||
Constructing doctrine is a very serious business. I understood your comments to indicate that extrapolating doctrine from Biblical narratives was a valid method for you in your tradition. It is not acceptable within the context of my own tradition. (Kalos knows very well the principles of which I am speaking.) Thus, when I wrote to him I started thinking about presuppositional and hermeneutic differences. Hence the phrase "faced with others who do not apply those principles." Ed, you have pastored in many churches: Don't you find that a lot of people just don't think about such things? Or they don't know how to talk about them? Or they believe things without knowing why? Sir, my feet are clay. I have probably sinned more in my lifetime than you have imagined doing in your own. There is absolutely nothing good in me that wasn't specifically put there by a God, Who, in spite of my worthlessness, chose to show mercy on me. There are so many logs in my own eyes that I would never even imagine the few motes in your own. My roots grow out of a long line of God haters; men who studiously and strenuously -- and I mean that quite literally -- sought to do all possible damage to Christianity. I am quite certain that you -- personally and professionally -- have done far more for the kingdom of God than I could have done in twice as many lifetimes. Furthermore, the doctrines of grace, if they teach us nothing else, are so incredibly humbling that they brook nothing in the way of self righteousness. If I now know anything of God and His Word, it has grown out of a walk through fire, and God's boundless mercy and grace. Sir, I do not know the root cause of your sensitivity toward me. Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth. Perhaps it comes from my screen name. Perhaps it is something else entirely. I do not know. But I do know this: your sensitivity is causing you to feel offense when none is intended. I have prayed and searched my conscience as I composed this post. In summation, therefore, let me say without ranchor or umbrage of any kind: Our struggle with sin is difficult at best. Sir, I respectfully submit that the Kingdom of Heaven is not furthered by the manufacture of more sin. |
||||||
2 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | EdB | 132257 | ||
Doc First let me say I have nothing against you other than the fact if someone even hints your off base you cry foul yet you seem to feel justified almost ridiculing those you disagree with. As to this discussion I hope nothing I said even hinted to what you suggest, “ I understood your comments to indicate that extrapolating doctrine from Biblical narratives was a valid method for you in your tradition.” I think what I said was doctrines derived by exegesis and hermeneutic if done properly will never conflict with the whole of scripture but rather will stand in complete agreement with the whole of scripture. And further it will do so without the need to reinvent definitions or explain away conflicting words or situations. Now please explain to me how that says I view extrapolating doctrine from Biblical narratives was a valid method for my tradition. I will accept your explanation for your response to Kalos, and take that to mean you weren’t twisting what I said in an effort to direct a cheap shot at me. You went on to say, “Sir, I do not know the root cause of your sensitivity toward me. Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth. Perhaps it comes from my screen name. Perhaps it is something else entirely. I do not know. But I do know this: your sensitivity is causing you to feel offense when none is intended. I have prayed and searched my conscience as I composed this post.” I respond perhaps I am too sensitive to you however I assure you as far as I can discern it is for no other reason than those you seem to provide me. Example you said, “Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth,” Does this not imply I either have or I want you to? Is that not inflammatory? Is that not an personal attack on me? You claim innocence here please explain the meaning of that statement to me. In the future I will do everything I can to lessen my sensitivity toward you. However I will not give you a free ride to put words into my mouth or treat me with less respect that you demand for yourself. EdB |
||||||
3 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | DocTrinsograce | 132421 | ||
Dear brother Ed, I most heartily forgive you. It's easy to leap to conclusions when the things we hold dear seem threatened. I hope that you know the great esteem with which I hold you as an elder in your church and a pastor of many years experience. I have great respect for you, sir. (In the following statement, there is no inuendo.) One must not equate respect for a person with respect for their doctrines. Somehow, in our society, we have lost the ability to contend over the truth without it being taken personally. That is to our shame. I, too, will do everything I can to not "push your buttons." I am what I am, however, and that by the grace of God. I am confident that you would not wish me to abandon my principles any more than I would have you abandon yours. With regard to your future behavior, I suggest you ask questions if you need clarity. After I clarify something, then you can jump all over me. How's that? |
||||||
4 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | EdB | 132427 | ||
doc Thanks for forgiving me even though I didn't think I did anything to apologize for. You said when I have a question I should ask for clarification. Okay I will again. I did ask a number of questions to clarify what you were saying but you seem to have ignored them. Perhaps if you answer them I will really understand what you mean. The first question was: I think what I said was doctrines derived by exegesis and hermeneutic if done properly will never conflict with the whole of scripture but rather will stand in complete agreement with the whole of scripture. And further it will do so without the need to reinvent definitions or explain away conflicting words or situations. Now please explain to me how that says I view extrapolating doctrine from Biblical narratives was a valid method for my tradition. The second question or series of questions was: You went on to say, “Sir, I do not know the root cause of your sensitivity toward me. Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth. Perhaps it comes from my screen name. Perhaps it is something else entirely. I do not know. But I do know this: your sensitivity is causing you to feel offense when none is intended. I have prayed and searched my conscience as I composed this post.” I respond perhaps I am too sensitive to you however I assure you as far as I can discern it is for no other reason than those you seem to provide me. Example you said, “Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth,” Does this not imply I either have or I want you to? Is that not inflammatory? Is that not an personal attack on me? You claim innocence here please explain the meaning of that statement to me. Doc if you will explain your intent in making these statements truthfully the real truth will be known by all. EdB |
||||||
5 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | DocTrinsograce | 132486 | ||
Per your demand, Brother Ed, here are my answers: 1. You accused me of sin when I was innocent of that sin (1 Peter 3:16). I misunderstood you to have asked my forgiveness for that offense (Luke 17:3). 2. ID# 132105 led me to believe that you were satisfied with a narrative basis as suitable foundation for your doctrinal position. 3. Yes. So it seems to me. I was suggesting that perhaps my old fashioned theology was one possible cause for your sensitivity. In my humble opinion and in consideration of the total of our interaction, you seem exceptionally tolerant of most things or people, yet exceptionally intolerant of things or people associated with theology stemming from church history between 500 and 400 years ago. 4. No. We are believers and ought to abide by the Word. Galatians 6:1-6, Titus 2:11-15, 2 Timothy 4:1-4. As brothers in Christ we can and ought to bind one another's conscience by the Word. After all, we are all of One Body. But we are not yet in our perfected state, so it is possible that we may make mistakes. We take it to the Lord, and if He does not convict us, then we move on. In the end, all things are open and clear before the Lord who judges us all. 5. "Claim innocence" means that I have searched my conscience and have found nothing that needs to be confessed as sin in this context. The heart is deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9) and pride is constant temptation (Romans 12:3), so this must be done coram Deo (1 Chronicles 28:9, Psalm 44:21, Psalm 139:23-24). Sir, you have demanded truthful responses from me. I have provided them to you. I have sought to answer fully, unequivocally, and without guile or duplicity. Perhaps we should just place this before the Lord. He understands us better than we do ourselves. It is in Him we find mercy, justice, forgiveness, and grace. |
||||||
6 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | EdB | 132508 | ||
Doc Please don’t cloud the issue I never charged you with any sin. Correct me If I’m wrong but no where in all this verbiage do I see an answer to my questions. You take us down some scenic roads and I must say I did enjoyed the journey but you failed to answer the questions presented to you. Sir you made two serious charges about me. One you suggested my tradition and I use less that proper exegesis and hermeneutic to discover doctrine and inferred what I ended up with something less than you have. The second charge was I was somehow involved with heresy and apostasy and that had become wedge between us. You made the statements how I ask you explain them or retract them. Once again I post your statements. Question One: You said "I(meaning me) view extrapolating doctrine from Biblical narratives was a valid method for my tradition." My question to you is what gave you that opinion? I have always and repeatedly said doctrines derived by exegesis and hermeneutic if done properly will never conflict with the whole of scripture but rather will stand in complete agreement with the whole of scripture. And further it will do so without the need to reinvent definitions or explain away conflicting words or situations. If you have no supporting evidence then I think you need to retract that statement and it is you that needs to apologize. Question Two: Here is your own word, “Sir, I do not know the root cause of your sensitivity toward me. Perhaps it comes from my inability to happily accept heresy and apostasy as suitable bed-fellows with the truth. Perhaps it comes from my screen name. Perhaps it is something else entirely. I do not know. But I do know this: your sensitivity is causing you to feel offense when none is intended. I have prayed and searched my conscience as I composed this post.” Tell me what heresy and apostasy was I trying to make you accept. Don't beat around the bush, don't tell me what I should or shouldn't do just answer the questions so it is clear to everyone your position toward me. EdB |
||||||