tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post5244417002838265870..comments2024-03-25T13:40:30.747-04:00Comments on Faith and Theology: Voting: the worst theological inventionBen Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-14765059571537342552007-06-14T00:01:00.000-04:002007-06-14T00:01:00.000-04:00Speaking of what may be the "worst" theological in...Speaking of what may be the "worst" theological invention, what about simply the claim that one particular book or collection of books is inherently more "inspired" than all other books or collections of books on earth, ever?Edwardtbabinskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036816926421936940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-12253007980760762982007-05-01T11:13:00.000-04:002007-05-01T11:13:00.000-04:00If you are going to include biblical inerrancy in ...If you are going to include biblical inerrancy in the list, then one also has to include the historical-critical reading of Scripture. They are, as Stan Hauerwas says, two sides of the same coin.<BR/><BR/>I also suggest that one needs to consider papal infallibility as a species of ecclesial infallibility. The real question is dogma: may the Church make dogma that is rightly regarded as irreformable?Striderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07859685939890312325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-43205592919741855942007-05-01T03:48:00.000-04:002007-05-01T03:48:00.000-04:00I think you can count Catholics as supporting both...I think you can count Catholics as supporting both papal infallibility and biblical inerrancy...<BR/><BR/>Catholicism, ironically enough, has one of the highest views of Scripture around. When Vatican II speaks of the inerrancy of Scripture it says among other things that God willed the sacred authors to write "everything and only those things" he wanted them to. Moreover, that "everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit" (both quotations from Dei Verbum 11). <BR/>There are some that will argue that Vatican II limited inerrancy to faith and morals, but that view is indefensible when one looks at the evolution of the text, the Latin grammar, and the footnotes being cited.<BR/>JeremyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-81892839733558398652007-04-28T14:55:00.000-04:002007-04-28T14:55:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.W. Travis McMakenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12347103855436761304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-24304993567287141212007-04-28T08:06:00.000-04:002007-04-28T08:06:00.000-04:00What's the Problem with German Language? o.OI use ...What's the Problem with German Language? o.O<BR/>I use it every day without any problems and I love it ;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-88532327997540659342007-04-27T11:55:00.000-04:002007-04-27T11:55:00.000-04:00"with the exception of the 'prosperity gospel', wh..."with the exception of the 'prosperity gospel', which I decided to leave in the outer darkness."<BR/><BR/>Ben, i love the irony in that statement!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-17819128029030063382007-04-27T06:37:00.000-04:002007-04-27T06:37:00.000-04:00Once more (sigh): (1) Arianism isn't a denial of ...Once more (sigh): (1) Arianism isn't a denial of the divinity of Jesus, but rather a denial of the relationship between the persons of the Trinity expressed in the Nicene Creed. (2) One can perfectly affirm the complete truthfulness of God's Word without falling into the pernicious bibliolatry of inerrancy. The two aren't at all identical.The maidenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01158682036840381823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-59206750046289200682007-04-27T06:32:00.000-04:002007-04-27T06:32:00.000-04:00Do any of you Arius haters out there take the Rowa...Do any of you Arius haters out there take the Rowan Williams defence out of interest? Well perhaps I shouldn't say defence but rather affirmation of his motives? Does the motivation of a theological invention change anyone's feelings for good or for bad on these?<BR/><BR/>MattAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-64025813270544599652007-04-27T00:33:00.000-04:002007-04-27T00:33:00.000-04:00It is appalling that inerrancy is scoring higher t...It is appalling that inerrancy is scoring higher than Arianism. Biblical inerrancy is an affirmation of the complete truthfulness of God's Word. Now, you may believe that there are some errors in historical fact and , thus, disagree with inerracy but, that pales in comparison to the pernicious heresy of a denial of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-47317829146339629362007-04-26T22:34:00.000-04:002007-04-26T22:34:00.000-04:00Arianism is actively proclaimed by Jehovah's Witne...Arianism is actively proclaimed by Jehovah's Witnesses, so the idea cannot be said to be dead, though i think docetism is more widespread. <BR/><BR/>I would have voted for penal substitution had it been on the list, but since it isn't, i suppose it'll have to be biblical inerrancy, wich i take as a varient on "sola scriptura" -- did anyone mention that?Steve Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11283123400540587033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-67042100614223236572007-04-26T21:50:00.000-04:002007-04-26T21:50:00.000-04:00Okay, that was strange. I made that concept and it...Okay, that was strange. I made that concept and it listed as aufoiv, which was the letter code. Weird.<BR/><BR/>As a Protestant who has taught at a Catholic university and was a visiting prof. at a Catholic seminary, I WOULD have agreed that papal infallibility is formal and not really much in use. EXCEPT, many Catholic theologians would say that Pope John Paul II, especially in his encyclicals on sexuality-related topics (influenced by then-Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict) blurred the line between "ordinary magisterial teaching" and "extraordinary magisterial teaching" which is ex cathedra and infallible. That line was BRIGHT and strong with Vatican II. But, look at statements that Pope John Paul II made in his later years saying that the DISCUSSION of female ordination was now closed and continued advocacy put one outside the pale--as one example.<BR/><BR/>So, I am not so sure that papal infallibility is not becoming a more active Catholic innovation, again--like periodic revivals in inerrancy thinking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-47497351601343828472007-04-26T21:48:00.000-04:002007-04-26T21:48:00.000-04:00I have to say the idea that Jesus was pro-war is a...I have to say the idea that Jesus was pro-war is among the worst corruptions.<BR/><BR/>http://media.wildcat.arizona.edu/media/storage/paper997/news/2007/04/25/Opinions/On.The.Hypocrisy.Of.A.Christian.President-2879431.shtmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-53497393441039265892007-04-26T21:41:00.000-04:002007-04-26T21:41:00.000-04:00I think all of these are good candidates, though I...I think all of these are good candidates, though I am sticking with Christendom. Kim makes a good point about Arianism having no formal champions, today, but there is MUCH modern liberal theology which seems to be recycled Arianism--the Jesus Seminar's "christology" comes to mind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-17771824509776807842007-04-26T20:31:00.000-04:002007-04-26T20:31:00.000-04:00I think Kim (and Fergus Kerr) is right here: papal...I think Kim (and Fergus Kerr) is right here: papal infallibility is a highly formalised commitment that has little concrete bearing on the life of the church. And I think the parallel with biblical inerrancy is insightful: both ideas are formal (rather than material) commitments to the possibility of infallible authority; and both were generated in response to crises of certainty in the 19th century.<BR/><BR/>But undoubtedly biblical inerrancy plays a much more important role in the life of the church. While no one is really expecting the pope to make any <I>ex cathedra</I> pronouncements, the idea of textual inerrancy is having a daily impact on the belief and practice of millions of Protestants.<BR/><BR/>And besides, there's nothing "insufferably airy" about Kim: it's the pre-tribulation dispensationalists who will be both "insufferable" and "airy" when the going gets tough....Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-24535797955088617552007-04-26T20:18:00.000-04:002007-04-26T20:18:00.000-04:00Hi Macv,Here is The Concise Oxford Dictionary of t...Hi Macv,<BR/><BR/>Here is <I>The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church</I> on papal infallibility: "At the First Vatican Council (1870) the RC Church declared that the Pope was infallible when he defined that a doctrine concerning faith or morals was part of the deposit of Divine revelation haded down from apostolic tradition."<BR/><BR/>In <I>Twentieth-Century Catholic Theologians</I> (2007), Fergus Kerr comments: "In practice, papal infallibility seems as empty to most Catholics as biblical inerrancy does now to most Protestants." If it makes you happy, I'll withdraw the word "dumber" and go with Kerr's "empty". Or is that still too "insufferably, airily knowing"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-25011520778747590222007-04-26T19:54:00.000-04:002007-04-26T19:54:00.000-04:00I’d be interested to hear what the insufferably, a...I’d be interested to hear what the insufferably, airily knowing Kim Fabricius thinks papal infallibility means?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-84378559650011964042007-04-26T18:13:00.000-04:002007-04-26T18:13:00.000-04:00Hi Chris -- I couldn't help myself....Anon: sorry ...Hi Chris -- I couldn't help myself....<BR/><BR/>Anon: sorry to disappoint you! But really, I was only kidding about imposing "vetoes" on some nominations! I just tried to choose the seven things that had been mentioned most often -- with the exception of the "prosperity gospel", which I decided to leave in the outer darkness.Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-61323907563068054962007-04-26T17:33:00.000-04:002007-04-26T17:33:00.000-04:00Do I have to vote for only ONE?Do I have to vote for only ONE?Aliciahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11566205581092404455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1258338589745498742007-04-26T17:31:00.000-04:002007-04-26T17:31:00.000-04:00Oi!!Oi!!Chris Tillinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03153087287030167791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-91447012610884605242007-04-26T17:05:00.000-04:002007-04-26T17:05:00.000-04:00Based my vote entirely on a subjective decision of...Based my vote entirely on a subjective decision of which had excused the killing of the most people. Christendom has it.Peter Rohloffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15226578894549849491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-15356828541671136802007-04-26T16:43:00.000-04:002007-04-26T16:43:00.000-04:00"I voted for bibical inerrancy because it is the s..."I voted for bibical inerrancy because it is the source of so much mischief in other theological concepts."<BR/><BR/>Yeah, that says it for me, Chuck. I'm betting you've spoken for a lot of us.The maidenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01158682036840381823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-51084549348169378612007-04-26T16:31:00.000-04:002007-04-26T16:31:00.000-04:00I voted for bibical inerrancy because it is the so...I voted for bibical inerrancy because it is the source of so much mischief in other theological concepts. It is also the most common theological idea in circulation in modernity. I see exiled preachers point about Arianism, butArianism is so Fourth Century.<BR/><BR/>Great blog by the way. You are now on my feed, I will link to you on my own blog, and I plan to visit often.Chuck Blanchardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01417638725063186710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-70237820219365321522007-04-26T16:12:00.000-04:002007-04-26T16:12:00.000-04:00ben-i'm disappointed by your willing omission of c...ben-i'm disappointed by your willing omission of certain ideas b/c of your biases. <BR/><BR/>Obviously, this is your blog and you can do as you please, but it kind of makes the voting less fun if we can only vote for what you agree with. You should have just told us what you thought to begin with.<BR/><BR/>I'm probably taking this too seriously, but c'mon man.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-85893635151732412702007-04-26T15:25:00.000-04:002007-04-26T15:25:00.000-04:00Exiled Preacher: denying that the Bible is inerra...Exiled Preacher: denying that the Bible is inerrant isn't the same as denying that it's true. Nor does Arianism deny the deity of Christ.The maidenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01158682036840381823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-37503209119816323142007-04-26T14:59:00.000-04:002007-04-26T14:59:00.000-04:00I can't believe that inerrancy is ahead of Arianis...I can't believe that inerrancy is ahead of Arianism. Is it <I>really</I> worse to belive that the Bible is true than to deny the deity of Christ?Guy Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09184743462264437085noreply@blogger.com