tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post2135815595455487262..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: Why we need theology...Ken Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-89145135910541247472012-01-20T13:49:40.690-05:002012-01-20T13:49:40.690-05:00Little behind on my blog reading but loved this pi...Little behind on my blog reading but loved this piece. as a pastor so many people have asked this question and its always kindof boggled my mind that people would ask it.<br />Jonathan LightAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-56473428666629067542012-01-18T11:55:18.334-05:002012-01-18T11:55:18.334-05:00Maybe I should qualify my statement about confessi...Maybe I should qualify my statement about confessionalism, as those are Western traditions, aren't they?Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-80927555080673062012012-01-17T21:12:46.479-05:002012-01-17T21:12:46.479-05:00Let me say that some have termed the afore mention...Let me say that some have termed the afore mentioned as spiritual/emotional abuse.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-58173653231033260582012-01-17T21:11:44.255-05:002012-01-17T21:11:44.255-05:00Theology is also variant in interpretation. Libera...Theology is also variant in interpretation. Liberation theology, "bibilical theology", Covenant theology, Holiness theology, Reformed theology, Charismatic theology, Kingdom theology, ETC.!<br /><br />The "holiness" or Pietist would like to see faith illustrated in works, which believers do to substantiate "faith". The scripture "faith without works is dead" is the rule of thumb, but they fail to use "whatsoever is not of faith, is sin". If "faith is a gift of God" then how can one muster up faith? <br /><br />This where some would use discipline to strip the believer of any and all 'comforts" "for his own good",and to humble him, otherwise the soul will be in eternal danger. <br /><br />Discipline that makes the sinner repent is merciless, as it is best to save the soul from the fires of hell by purifying it from the "lust of the flesh, the pride of life and the lust of the eye...." Mentors to oversee and hold the "maturing" accountable to these human tendencies are to be the overseers of one's spiritual progress. <br /><br />Psychologically, one must be sabatoged and have no other option than "God" so s/he WILL turn back to the faith. He must be taught not to blaspheme, as there are limitations upon speech and what one is allowed to write. <br /><br /> Church authority prescribes a "scripture only approach" to help one "spiritually reform and renew the mind"! And such would believe that the believer would be "transformed" esp. if they had chosen certain "discipline" to go with it! Habit formation is of uptmost importance to bear the fruit of "real/true Christianity".<br /><br />But, then behaviorialist aren't any different, as they believe that humans are just like animals that must be trained into faith. Such traditional conditioning helps to "civilize" the "native"....It gives a good means to do easy and cheap research, too!<br /><br />There is no getting away from the diverse ways that "faith" is understood. Even the Church Fathers disagree about "faith issues"! The creeds or confessions are the only unifying factor, to or for Christian faith, other than that, it is "up for grabs"!Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-900425682349761102012-01-17T18:20:41.238-05:002012-01-17T18:20:41.238-05:00You may rightly feel that your post is fully self-...You may rightly feel that your post is fully self-explanatory, but this is something I really do wrestle with, how do we arrive at truth in a postmodern world. I realize that some insist that truth is relational just as 'holiness' is, but I am left (because I do have a fairly simple way of thinking) wondering how we can escape the possibility of living in a world where, for example--and I don't use this just to be controversial, but because this is such a divisive issue-- where everyone is affirmed but many are not truly saved, or truly Christian. <br />Still thinking aloud, how much weight do we put on dependence on the Holy Spirit to guide us into truth?John Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00060404930391236792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-15698188432425671622012-01-17T13:17:42.732-05:002012-01-17T13:17:42.732-05:00Martin,
1.)Is the study of "God" somethi...Martin,<br />1.)Is the study of "God" something that one can do? We cannot observe anything about "God" except by blind faith. Natural revelation (the creation) is "all that exists". Therefore, one could study "all that is" under the auspices that whatever is studied is "God's truth". But, one cannot study "God" directly.<br /><br />2. The Jewish tradition believed that "God" was beyond one's ability to understand and that one could not even speak about "God". This fits nicely with Eastern mystical views of "God".<br /><br />3. If God cannot be directly observed, but can only be implied, then what is studied or observed is what really matters, isn't it? If what people investigate and find in scholarship is an affirmation of man's discovery. Does man's discoverty have to be "Christian discovery"? No, as any discovery in scholarship is validated by consensus.<br /><br />Therefore, there is no "Christian worldview", or 'biblical Christianity" because every "Christianity" is defined by different interpretations/understandings. The "Christian worldview" of beginning and ending with "God", could be re-interpreted as "beginning and ending by/in faith". Faith that what is found in scholarship is "God's created order", or "partial understanding" of "all that is". Each discipline in the Academy has its own bias concerning "truth". Each of us only knows "in part".....our part.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-23934982818317307762012-01-17T12:36:43.876-05:002012-01-17T12:36:43.876-05:00Thanks. It's usually a good idea to define ter...Thanks. It's usually a good idea to define terms.<br /><br />Here's the Free Dictionary's first definition of theology:<br />1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.Martin LaBarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14629053725732957599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-48920807694581941052012-01-17T12:01:27.252-05:002012-01-17T12:01:27.252-05:00Theology is an apologetic for the Church and its p...Theology is an apologetic for the Church and its purposes. Therefore, for the Church, traditon and text are paramount. <br /><br />This view has some flaws, I believe.<br /><br />1.)It assumes authority by faith in the Church, which as John Mark points out and Bill insinuates, has to be defined, if it has any intellectual appeal at all. Otherwise it is blind faith. Are Protestants to repent from splitting the Church (catholic) and submit themselves to the Pope? even so, what about the split between the Western Church and Eastern Churches over the Trinity? or what about the sectarianism of Christianity itself from the Jewish tradition? Therefore, "Faith in the Church" has its "issues"....<br /><br />2.)Where is the personal in "faith issues"? Reason and experience are the only "contexts" that make for personal understanding. Is reason separated from one's experience in the world? or is reason subject to those experiences? and how are we to understand those personal aspects of "life"? Is "meaning" to be universalized, then by tradition and text, or is "meaning understood" within personal contexts? Even sociologists could not explain the personal, they can only describe the overal scenario of the individual's culture/society, only psychologists or neuroscientists can explain what really distinguishes the mind/brain aspect of "the personal". And that is still being studied or understood. How is theology to be understood, then? Theology seems like a "skincloth" that is attached over the "personal aspects" of life. And sometimes thdology just doesn't "fit"! This is what makes for cognitive dissonance and a quest for seeking a broader perspective than the previous dependence on what is taught and understood within a narrowed, authoritarian type mentality about the text/tradition.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-24544094610695384662012-01-17T10:46:47.994-05:002012-01-17T10:46:47.994-05:00Hmmm. 1 & 2 seem kindof circular to me, if no...Hmmm. 1 & 2 seem kindof circular to me, if not quite backwards.<br /><br />I like 3, 4 & 5. FWIW!Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-59893416308264037432012-01-17T09:58:33.315-05:002012-01-17T09:58:33.315-05:00As usual, a timely and thought provoking post. I ...As usual, a timely and thought provoking post. I wonder, how do we deal with some of the big issues that the church seems to be hopelessly divided on, such as the kinds of things that have fractured the ECUSA and the whole Anglican communion. Women in ministry is another hot button topic, as well. Is there any hope that the church catholic can corporately address these things and come to a consenus? It seems that we are more accepting of both 'higher' and 'lower' criticism of the Bible these days, and in my mind this raises issues of how the church can have moral authority on hard issues, especially when both sides think that scripture supports their positions. Do you have any thoughts about this?John Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00060404930391236792noreply@blogger.com