Comments on: The Humility Zone http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:41:53 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Ken http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-242556 Ken Thu, 22 May 2008 16:09:53 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-242556 <i>It occurs to me lately that the ambiguity in the scriptures is intentional. We’re supposed to have to work out these things through prayer and study, rather than having them handed to us.</i> --BobD If you HAVE to have your Scriptures completely unambiguous, with everything spelled out in exact detail and handed to you, what are you doing following Christ instead of Mohammed? It occurs to me lately that the ambiguity in the scriptures is intentional. We’re supposed to have to work out these things through prayer and study, rather than having them handed to us. –BobD

If you HAVE to have your Scriptures completely unambiguous, with everything spelled out in exact detail and handed to you, what are you doing following Christ instead of Mohammed?

]]> By: Joe http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-242389 Joe Thu, 22 May 2008 02:15:27 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-242389 A wonderful exposition of the Holy Spirit on the Net. Thank you all for being open to Grace and making us more the Body of Christ. I especially agree with Terry Hull. There are many truths presented in the Bible, and when they seemingly conflict, we cannot minimize one of them. We believe in one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe in justification by faith, but faith isn't as great as love. We are given salvation as a free gift, but we are carrying this Cross and have given our lives to Christ. We now have access to the gifts of wisdom, but are fools for Christ. A wonderful exposition of the Holy Spirit on the Net. Thank you all for being open to Grace and making us more the Body of Christ.

I especially agree with Terry Hull. There are many truths presented in the Bible, and when they seemingly conflict, we cannot minimize one of them. We believe in one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe in justification by faith, but faith isn’t as great as love. We are given salvation as a free gift, but we are carrying this Cross and have given our lives to Christ. We now have access to the gifts of wisdom, but are fools for Christ.

]]> By: Jon Spadino http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-242186 Jon Spadino Wed, 21 May 2008 15:12:25 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-242186 Very good post. I posted on one BLOG a link to the lcms differences with the calvinstic TULIP model. The lcms terminology is well thought out and well written. The LCMS is reformed but not necessarily 5 pointers and my point was just to make the BLOGGERS re-think about how absolute they were in their own thinkology by just pointing to a FAQ on the LCMS web-site. It did not go over too well on that BLOG. Here are the two links I posted. http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2241 http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2242 and I actually belong to a CRC Church. If there was a 6th point of calvinism the CRC would follow it. Dave said, I’ve found that persons who are dogmatic about particular doctrines are often trying to fill a void in their hearts with something they’ve received from man. Well said Dave. We should not use the rightness of our beliefs as a way of looking down on others. In Christ only do we gain our rightness. Jon Very good post.

I posted on one BLOG a link to the lcms differences with the calvinstic TULIP model. The lcms terminology is well thought out and well written. The LCMS is reformed but not necessarily 5 pointers and my point was just to make the BLOGGERS re-think about how absolute they were in their own thinkology by just pointing to a FAQ on the LCMS web-site.

It did not go over too well on that BLOG.

Here are the two links I posted.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2241
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2242

and I actually belong to a CRC Church. If there was a 6th point of calvinism the CRC would follow it.

Dave said,

I’ve found that persons who are dogmatic about particular doctrines are often trying to fill a void in their hearts with something they’ve received from man.

Well said Dave. We should not use the rightness of our beliefs as a way of looking down on others. In Christ only do we gain our rightness.

Jon

]]> By: Disciple's Journal http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4952 Disciple's Journal Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:20:23 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4952 <strong>The next Thirty Years' War?</strong> . . the contentious atmosphere in the faith blogsosphere. The next Thirty Years’ War?

. . the contentious atmosphere in the faith blogsosphere.

]]> By: davebish http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4926 davebish Fri, 16 Dec 2005 08:09:19 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4926 Top post. We've been doing this in the UK for years. In the body I work for we've had this principle for at least 75 years. We hold strongly to a core of evangelical convictions about the gospel and bible - http://www.uccf.org.uk/resources/general/doctrinalbasis/doctrinalbasis.php and happily accept that we see differently on womens ministry, spiritual gifts, baptism, sovereignty etc. Humility is the key to it working. Top post. We’ve been doing this in the UK for years. In the body I work for we’ve had this principle for at least 75 years.

We hold strongly to a core of evangelical convictions about the gospel and bible – http://www.uccf.org.uk/resources/general/doctrinalbasis/doctrinalbasis.php

and happily accept that we see differently on womens ministry, spiritual gifts, baptism, sovereignty etc.

Humility is the key to it working.

]]> By: keithfulani http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4923 keithfulani Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:33:47 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4923 Excellent stuff. thank you Excellent stuff. thank you

]]> By: andy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4922 andy Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:11:06 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4922 Great article Michael! What are you thoughts of Brian McLaren's "Generous Orthodoxy"? Great article Michael! What are you thoughts of Brian McLaren’s “Generous Orthodoxy”?

]]> By: Jeremiah Lawson http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4921 Jeremiah Lawson Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:34:43 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4921 Mort, at my church a friend of mine had to explain to a couple other church members that, no, I was not a heretic for being an amillenial partial preterist. :) Incidentally, this friend is paedo on baptism and I'm not but we understand there are more important things to agree on than baptism. Mort, at my church a friend of mine had to explain to a couple other church members that, no, I was not a heretic for being an amillenial partial preterist. :) Incidentally, this friend is paedo on baptism and I’m not but we understand there are more important things to agree on than baptism.

]]> By: Transforming Sermons http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4920 Transforming Sermons Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:14:17 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4920 <strong>Scripture, doctrine, uncertainty, and humility</strong> I don't know where Michael Spencer finds time to write his long, sharp-minded posts, but he's recently put into words an idea that's been working its way, poorly phrased, through my mind for quite some time. Scripture, doctrine, uncertainty, and humility

I don’t know where Michael Spencer finds time to write his long, sharp-minded posts, but he’s recently put into words an idea that’s been working its way, poorly phrased, through my mind for quite some time.

]]> By: mort_chien http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-humility-zone/comment-page-1#comment-4919 mort_chien Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:06:12 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/?p=264#comment-4919 Well maybe now I know what has been going on in my life a little better - at least I'm not alone. My wife and I have been attending a PCA church for 6 months and I've been trying to do some serious and honest re-evaluation of the paedo-credo thing having been baptistic since our conversion 32 years ago. I've looked at the Scripture, the early church fathers, Schaff's history, literature on Jewish prostylite baptism and guess what? I find no absolutely clear descisive clincher-type arguments for one or the other. My Baptist friends (some of them) are concerned, but much to my surprise (shows how ignorant I am) the paedos have some very good points. I can no longer dismiss them as misguided, or ignorant, or semi roman catholic. A couple of years ago I did the same thing with the pre-mil, a-mil, post-mil positions. Ooo! If you try this, don't tell your Dispensational buddies in the pew next to you about it. You may get your head bit off if you admit, as I did, that the a-mils are neither fools nor deceivers and that they have some superb scholarship behind their position. You will get your head bit off if you question the whole idea behind Left Behind. It is amazing how narrow I (we?) can be. A good rule seems to be that if you cannot explain the other guy's position in sufficient detail, almost to the point of being able to advocate for it, you had better back off and do your homework. A lot of folks who are more godly and smarter than I have taken different views on these and other subjects. Resolved: Except under the most eggregious abuses (think Titus 1:10-11 and 2 Tim 2:14-18), I will try to assure that when a man or woman disagrees with me and goes away after a discussion, that they know that I do not think they are stupid or a liar. Mort Chien Well maybe now I know what has been going on in my life a little better – at least I’m not alone. My wife and I have been attending a PCA church for 6 months and I’ve been trying to do some serious and honest re-evaluation of the paedo-credo thing having been baptistic since our conversion 32 years ago. I’ve looked at the Scripture, the early church fathers, Schaff’s history, literature on Jewish prostylite baptism and guess what? I find no absolutely clear descisive clincher-type arguments for one or the other. My Baptist friends (some of them) are concerned, but much to my surprise (shows how ignorant I am) the paedos have some very good points. I can no longer dismiss them as misguided, or ignorant, or semi roman catholic.

A couple of years ago I did the same thing with the pre-mil, a-mil, post-mil positions. Ooo! If you try this, don’t tell your Dispensational buddies in the pew next to you about it. You may get your head bit off if you admit, as I did, that the a-mils are neither fools nor deceivers and that they have some superb scholarship behind their position. You will get your head bit off if you question the whole idea behind Left Behind.

It is amazing how narrow I (we?) can be. A good rule seems to be that if you cannot explain the other guy’s position in sufficient detail, almost to the point of being able to advocate for it, you had better back off and do your homework. A lot of folks who are more godly and smarter than I have taken different views on these and other subjects.

Resolved: Except under the most eggregious abuses (think Titus 1:10-11 and 2 Tim 2:14-18), I will try to assure that when a man or woman disagrees with me and goes away after a discussion, that they know that I do not think they are stupid or a liar.

Mort Chien

]]>