anotherDan

My position on the matter is "whatever." It's a matter for Grease Spots.

Wonderful stuff to consider, and substantive. I just read through the earlier thread, and as good as it was, it didn't directly deal with some of the substantive issues. To me, questions of "ministry" and "speaking" must conform to the NT proposition that in Christ there is neither male nor female, bond nor free, etc. AND YET, particularly within the marriage arrangement, the divine order should be respected, and adhered to. This does NOT mean that the man is always right. (My experience has patently shown otherwise!) But ultimately God's "order" in a marriage context requires the same obedience as in any other context. The infamous verses in 1 Cor.14 about women keeping silence in the church had to do with the current cultural norm.... men had religious training, and women did not. This is not necessarily so today. The point of Paul's reasoning was that the fellowship was not to be disrupted or unedifying because of those who had questions that could be answered "at home." Today's culture is different, but the heart of God is to "all generations." The "divine order" has thrown out distinctions of class, nationality, gender, and so forth. A man or a woman who has "a word" must NOT "keep silence" in the church nor anywhere! The examples are too numerous to mention. (Though Wordwolf might be capable of innumerating them; it's not my gift.) Deborahs and Phoebes and Lydias abound, as the Lord adds to the Church, and oh, how our hearts should rejoice as their voices are heard! And what of the men? Remember the old song, "Rise up, o men of God...."? All of us, ALL of us, by God's grace, may we "rise up" and proclaim his story, his message, "as the Lord gives the utterance"!

chockfull, thanks for sharing..... good stuff

I used to start doctrinal threads.

Thanks, HAP, it was in: GreaseSpot Cafe > General > Archive > Religions, Churches, and Doctrines rather than "Doctrinal" --- no wonder I couldn't find it. There was a lot of discussion. There are times when women should keep silence in the Church.... like when they are about to say something stupid. On the other hand, as it has been pointed out, that rule ought to apply to men as well! There have been many times that I would have wished the men would have kept silence in the Church. Speaking of which, I spent my Sunday morning last worshiping with Quaker "friends." We spent an hour together, in silence. No one said a word.

Rhino, he would trade "Eli, eli, why has thou forsaken me?" at Easter time.

It may have been started by Watered Garden

Geisha, your points are well-made, and I too am glad you're here. Tom, your earlier posts really struck a chord with me, and I'm glad to see you "around" again. I for one would like nothing better than for you to simply tell your POV of who Jesus is, the nature of the Christ.

I'm weak in the fiction department, unless it has to do with sailing. (Lucky break for me that Jack London was included.)

Welcome, brother (sister). I hope all is well with you!

I used to have some early literature from the Way, and DrW was Trinitarian then. I agree with Socks that by the time the class was filmed, he was not Trinitarian. The Way It Was for me was a staunchly anti-Trinitarian stance, despite the "Lord God Almighty" statement (good synopsis on that, Socks). DrW was hard to put in a box.... I believe there used to be a copy of a letter by him on Waydale in response to a letter that asked about Jesus being prayed to, that was pretty revealing. Something that endeared me to him was his reply several times in the AC to questions (mostly lame questions) of "I don't know." But he did seem to take audacity lessons from Emerson, who he recommended.

Yeah, the name-calling thing again! I've been around long enough to know who the cool people are. And it's hard to forget the pictures of the Texas gathering.

RG, I think you're right about all that stuff ((((( you ))))))))) edit: You appear to be right about registration, even though the page says the following: strange

RG, I didn't register.... haven't tried it yet, but the first page said no registration was required to listen. Didn't you start a thread on this topic several months ago?

I'll try to tune in... was just talking about this with some friends.... that would be 8:15 pm Eastern, I guess. Care to share some points that spoke to you, Wrds? or should you ask your husband at home? :unsure:

see? that's what I'm talkin' about edit: MAYBE we could debate "sensible" but "dear" is my call alone. If I say you are dear, then you are!

Jim, I didn't see the whole thing, but what I saw was impressive, and more than a glimpse of how they see themselves, and how they want to project their image worldwide. I feel I understand them better, and yet, like you, I know that the Spin is not the thing.

Rhino, you did handle it pretty well, though you did pass the bigot baton to DrJ :P According to Ab, that might be OK, since he's a bit more of a "public figure." Anyway, thanks for being thick-skinned. "Rhinos are like that." "Yeah, they are." Bigot is a pejorative term. The term "cult" has become so, though that was not its earlier meaning. Sc*mbag? hmmm Abi, I suppose that's part of The Rules. I'll try keep a lid on the name calling -- even those who are dead or public or not a part of our little community. I appreciate your taking the trouble to educate me.

Rhino, I think maybe Superman. The idea of "my god is bigger than your god" (shades of Elijah and the 450 prophets of Baal) has had some seriously ungodly results throughout history. Is He not only the God of the Jews? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles too! I want to apologize for the "name calling." I should play nicer with others. I got a PM from a concerned fellow-citizen. Apparently, however, it's OK to call Joel Osteen a "scumbag" and VP Wierwille a "rapist," for various reasons. But we mustn't namecall a fellow greasespotter, like calling them a "liar." I don't mean to dilute my apology. I really could have made my point in a more civil manner, and I should have. I regularly enjoy what you bring to the table, Bill.

bfh: you got it The work is called The Varieties of Religious Experience A great read. His philosophy is call Pragmatism.

oops, "Dooj, you're a good cook, and a sensible and dear soul."

THE prophet of the Jews was Moses. THE prophet (yea, and more than a prophet) of Christians is Jesus. THE prophet of Muslims was Mohammad. I'm with Jesus. I'm convinced. Others are convinced by their own prophet or philosopher, or they go their own way, and have their own beliefs. I believe the truth is that God is in fact One. So do Muslims and Jews. Many make much ado that their God is not the Muslims "god," Allah. But as I got to know my Muslim neighbors, I think that they were as surprised (and delighted) as I was when we connected on fundamental truths. They recognized the presence of God in our home. They saw the love and devotion we had to God, and they felt the same love and devotion to God, the One God. The God of Abraham, and of Jesus and of Mohammad. I never pushed Christianity on them, but never backed up on my faith in Jesus. One of them presented me with a Quran (in English translation, with commentary) and I read it from cover to cover. Mohammad felt called to speak against polytheism. He believed that there was One God. "Allah" is the word for God in Arabic. It's not a name (according to Islam, He has many names, such as the Magnificent, the Merciful, etc.). I ate at their home, (take from the plate with the right hand only!) and they ate at mine, after which I played guitar for them and sang them a song I wrote called Saved by Grace. One of them asked me afterward what we Christians mean by being "born again." (A line in the song uses those words.) And I explained to them what I thought it means. They didn't convert, and neither did I, and I'm fine with that. Now that I've moved away, I miss them. I would have liked to see how our relationship would have played out over the long run. Their fasting, prayers, and almsgiving are remarkably similar to biblical practices, and like waysider said, it is a way of life (and yes, Abi, Christianity should be, too. It is for some!) The point by one poster is well taken: "Christians" have been terrorists in a big way, and some are still, today. But I don't blame Jesus for that, I blame the terrorists.

Cynic, you're close on the first author. He was Carl Jung. (His first conversation with Freud lasted about 13 hours.) For you curmudgeons, his last name is pronounced very much like "Young." The second author's book, from which I've been snipping, has seen very wide use in seminaries ever since it was written. He was a philospher. His brother was also quite famous as an author of fiction. another snip:

hint: this second author's work is a book derived from a series of lectures he gave, I believe at Harvard University. Surely someone here has read it.

Doojie, you're a good cook