... critical scholars will disagree with one another, which is fine–that’s part of scholarship. But they should present evidence and careful argument for their positions: chest-thumping and penis-waving will not substitute.
... critical scholars will disagree with one another, which is fine–that’s part of scholarship. But they should present evidence and careful argument for their positions: chest-thumping and penis-waving will not substitute.
I don't know: If they can actually wave their penis, I might just throw in my towel! ;-)
ReplyDeleteSorry Sabio, I went back and checked and, lo, there was your comment, hiding in the thread under a piece of spam. I WOULD have seen it first time if it had given me a wave... ;-)
DeleteArghhhh ! ;-)
DeleteLester Grabbe said...
ReplyDelete>...critical scholars will disagree with one another, which is fine–that’s part of scholarship.<
It may be fine for scholars to disagree, but it is not fine for Christians! For the inspired words of the Chosen Vessel are these: "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment(1 Cor.1:10).
Sadly, like Dennis, Lester is a former minister of the Worldwide Church of God, who has repudiated all that he once believed and taught. Tragically, he now believes that Christ is divided, and God is th author of confusion!
Because, Tom, there is only "One TRUE Church" and you are a member of it, right? Too bad it's been whittled down to a bunch of insignificant little splinter groups that don't demonstrate any scholarship at all.
DeleteLCG, UCG, CGWA, ICG, CGI, CBCG, RCG, COGaIC, PCG, COGOM, CEG, ECG...
DeleteDivided? Confusion?? Oh surely not!
Armstrongism is a false and very toxic system that used a lying witness to spread a false gospel. The only thing that brought unity to it was HWA's iron clad rule, and legendary temper. It's silly to even speak of division or confusion, considering the wisdom of Gamaliel.
ReplyDeleteHypothetically, what some people might consider to be division or confusion is simply due to the fact that human understanding operates on multiple levels. Therefore, division and confusion can often be explained in the light of people trying to understand an amazingly complex God, and the universe which He created.
Not that I advocate looking to the Jews for our answers, but in this case, I think it's important to note that diversity of opinion at Temple is considered to almost be a Godly thing! Would any of us really respect a god who expected us to be robotic, programmed, or zombies? Heck no. God expects us to flourish in the personalities and talents which He gave to us, and to love and appreciate one another.
BB
Bob, I was with you all the way - in fact I've never agreed with you so totally - until you started telling us what God expects. Really? You know what God expects?
ReplyDeleteWas I being a big anthropomorphic? Uh, maybe so. But, my last sentence also implied a certain logic, as well as some Biblical wisdom. If God gave us individual talents, personalities, and abilities, would it not follow that He had intended that we develop and use them? Didn't Jesus and Paul teach us to love one another? What about Jesus' parable of the talents? Doesn't Paul speak of individual gifts which each of us is given to use to serve the body of Christ, and so that God might be glorified?
DeleteAs you probably know from previous posts over the past years, I believe in God-guided evolution. So, if these individual personality traits evolved, then we each still serve a good purpose just as a good Angus cow provides marvelous mouth watering steaks.
BB
Bob, thanks very much for the explanation. You position makes a lot of sense. Your sentence DOES have a certain logic. However, it seems to me the statement "God expects", really means something more like "given my understanding of God's nature and how God operates, it seems logical that what god expects is ..."
DeleteHey' it's cool. Unless the big guy communicates with you directly, what other choice do you have but to take this approach? Anyway, it's a step in the right direction that you and I are no longer Bible inerrantists.
Corky and Byker Bob, you both may me surprised to learn that this thread does not mention Mr Armstrong or anything about "the one true church." So your comments are a digression from the topic of scholars disagreeing among themselves, in contrast to the unity which is given to Christians through the gift of the Holy Spirit of truth. Apart from 1 Cor.1:10, Paul warned the Ephesians that they must, "endravour to keep the unity of the spirit in the bound of peace"(Eph.4:3).
ReplyDeleteSome people may think that the clash of opinions and endless debates are healthy, but God doesn't.
Unity is tough when a group is small but possible. Without force, striving for unity of large groups is just naive.
ReplyDeleteThe best way to get unity is to reject those who you disagree with.
Yes, Tom, you're right - YOU are the one who brought up Dennis and Lester being former ministers of the Worldwide Church of God. The OP is on critical scholars and there were none in the WCG. So, I'm not surprised at all that the original post does not mention "Mr Armstrong" or what you believe is/was "the one true church". Since you changed the original subject, you have to pay for it - send Gavin a tithe immediately!
ReplyDeleteSo there is a lot of in-house talk here. I need a program guide. So here is what I hear:
ReplyDeleteThomas Thompson & Thomas Verenna edited a book about the Historicity of Jesus, and Richard Carrier criticized Lester Grabbe's article in the book and so Grabbe called Carrier a penis-waver which was posted by Thomas Verenna. Grabbe is former WWCG.
Gavin quotes a part of Grabbe that ironically is penis-waving to criticize penis-waving.
Tom Mahon: Clearly way out there - believes Maya calendar accurately predicts disaster at the end of the year. So he is WWCG. He wants everyone to agree -- well, at least agree with his opinions.
Corky & Byker Bob: Are orthodox Christians who don't like WWCG
The Skeptic is, let me guess, a skeptic.
How is this blog connected to the WWCG issues?
I hope Gavin puts more info in his "About" tab to help!
On the "About" page I mention WCG under its current name: Grace Communion International.
DeletePrior to Otagosh I put together a website - and later a blog - called "Ambassador Watch", primarily focussing on the WCG-diaspora community. A number of the folk who followed AW now follow Otagosh.
And I, back in my salad days - decades ago now - was a WCG member. These days I prefer not to label myself because life is, well, complex...
Otagosh is NOT intended to be "in-house"... I dumped AW in part because I was sick of the ongoing soap opera and myopia - but, well, old habits sometimes die hard :-)
Sabio Lantz, Corky (that's me) is atheist.
DeleteSabio,
DeleteI'll allow Corky to speak for himself, as he's got many things in his background. As for me, I'm accused of being many things, but basically see myself simply as a non-aligned Christian who has a personal relationship with God. Because of my WCG experiences, I cannot, will not, and do not trust any man who would place himself in between myself and God. Too many "collectors" with delayed reaction agendas! The odyssey is all on me, something between myself and God.
BB
Thanx Corky and Bob: who'd have guessed that the ex-WCG world was so big.
ReplyDelete@Gavin:
Have I mentioned the evils of comment hierarchy to you? They are apparent here in this thread.
See here: http://triangulations.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/stop-comment-hierarchy/
Also, did you consider turning off comment monitoring -- it makes conversations happen more naturally.
I know I'm late to this and I don't have a dog in this fight, but Carrier responded:
ReplyDeletehttp://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1739/comment-page-1/#comment-18287