If you see this, you've responded to my invitation and I appreciate it. When last we "tangled", I tried to find a venue other than somebody else's blog comment stream so our debates could follow their own course without hijacking someone else's blog.
Right now I've got to take some meds and hit the sack. Don't let the fact that I'm shrivelling and sickly stand in the way of a full throated dialogue!
I hope to find a response when I check in in the morning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
charles,
what is it that would cause you to say that i was in my own reality? and, i hope that you are in reality as well. :)
david
Hey! Let the rest of us voyeurs know what you guys are going to be debating! Where did the discussion start?
David, I'm SO disappointed that you've forgotten our little row over women in ministry over at Wades' blog back in January. It was about the time you quit commenting over there for a while.
You really got under my skin using the terms deaconette and preacherette. I even wrote a whole blog article about you...you can see by the title that I was under the impression you were a seminary student...which you may be...I'm really quite unsure...you're such an enigma to me. Check this link: http://blogitch.blogspot.com/2007/01/shedding-tears-for-frightening-example.html
charles,
after reading your former post about me, i disagree with just about everything you wrote on that post..including the erroneous belief that i was a seminary student. i am the same age as you, and i have been out of seminary for years and years.
also, you were wrong about me telling my name after wade told me to do it. i had told wade often that i would reveal who i was at the bic at union u. i quit going to wade's blog for a while because certain people were just attacking me and attacking everything i said. so, i just quit going there for a while. i had other blogsights that i felt more welcome at. and, if the truth be known, i told everyone who i was due to some words from les puryear. and, i told everyone who i was after that....it had nothing to do with wade. thus, you were wrong about that as well.
i dont feel bad about using words like preacherette and deaconette. i think they clearly show the ridiculousness of people who wont abide by the Word of God.
that's the reality of it, bro.
david
ps. you have a lovely daughter, and i pray that the Lord will give her a very special and blessed birthday.
I found out after the fact that the lack of clarity in identification and the fact that I could not communicate with you directly because you choose to hide your email address led me to confuse you with a David who is currently a student at Southern Seminary. It is a hazard of the blogworld when so many are not as forthcoming with their identity as some of us.
The reality is, there is probably very, very little you and I will agree on...except maybe that we love Jesus.
Though you might ask, "How can you really love Jesus if you won't say that the Bible is 'inerrant'?" Or, "How can you really love Jesus if you believe women can be preachers and deacons?"
Am I right?
By the way, thanks for your kind comments about my daughter. She IS lovely...in spite of her ole dad.
if the bible has errors in it, then its all just a history book with some theology in it. and, christianity is no better than islam and buddhism. if the bible is not God's inerrant Word, then i will quit wasting my time preaching and teaching and going to church. i will go back to living in the sins i used to live in. and, i will die with no hope as all others will.
that's how important it is that our bible be the inerrant, infallible, inspired Word of God.
david
The problem is the general agreement among inerrantists is that inerrancy applies only to the original autographs...and they no longer exist.
The other problem seems to be that too many who claim to believe the Bible is inerrant are also incredibly sure that their understanding of how to interpret it is equally inerrant.
By the way, do you think it's possible that I love Jesus as much as you?
i wish that i loved Jesus more. and, once again, how do we know that Jesus loves us, or how do we know if we love Jesus, if we dont have a trustworthy bible that tells us about God?
david
ps. Jesus said that if you love Him, you will keep His commands.
You ask, "how do we know that Jesus loves us, or how do we know if we love Jesus"
I answer, "The same way I know that I love my wife and she loves me. I have a relationship with her. The fact that it's not written about it would not make it more or less true."
It seems to me that you might prefer the "know" of modernity -- intellectual knowledge and proof -- over the "know" of scripture -- intimacy, relationship. Where you demand certainty...I am at home with assurance.
Is your Jesus a figure only of history written about in a book with no mistakes or is he alive and real to you today?
charles,
how do you know that a Jesus even existed? without the written Word of God we would not know about Him, nor who He was. how do you know that your emotions are true? when talking about having a relationship with Him? i mean, your wife and daughter are there, in physical form.....Jesus is not. so, how do you know that your emotions are not fooling you?
how? because of the written Word of God.
how can you be sure in your heart that you know God? and, that heaven is waiting on us in the future? how? without the written Word of God we could never know these things. thus, if i cant believe genesis 1, or if i cant believe 1 tim. 2:12, or if there are errors in the scriptures; then how can i believe john 3:16? or, romans 10:9-13? or, john 14:1-6?
it's either all true, or none of it can be trusted. and, if the bible has errors in it then we are all fools for believing it and living by it.
david
Your parents must have saved lots of money...they only had to buy you two colors of crayons -- black and white.
I've got so much more I want to share but I have company coming tonight.
Post a Comment