If you are going to formulate a Christian doctrine, but you aren’t going to use the Bible except in passing, what the heck are you really doing? You’re not making any Christian doctrine except possibly coincidentally.
at West Tennessee Veterans Cemetery
Derp derp derp (at East Win Christian Church)
welp
and if any of you white people respond with “wait but I didn’t do that. that was in the past”
i need you to check your privilege
and then drink bleach if you think your hands aren’t dirty
They’re not.
Guilt doesn’t transfer from generation to generation. I am not magically accountable for something my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather MIGHT have done. Also;
>social justice blogger
>telling people to kill themselvesI love that there’s a blog called “this is white culture” that is solely devoted to bad things white people did, not their cultures at all. So I guess I can make a blog called “this is black culture” and post gang and crime records and that’s 100% okay. Or “this is Muslim culture” and make it all about terrorism.
But wait, you cry. Not all black people are criminals and not all Muslims are terrorists. That’s unfair! And racist!
WELL GOLLY GEE DO YOU THINK SO? Because saying that all white people are responsible for the Atlantic slave trade sounds pretty racist to me, given that, you know, that was between the African slaveholders and the British and Americans and had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my ancestors, who were incredibly poor farmers and serfs from Ireland and Lithuania who had to flee to America at around the turn of the century (by which time slavery had already been abolished in the US) because they were being treated like slaves. Even if they had been living in America at the time when slavery was legal they wouldn’t have been able to afford a slave; in fact they probably would have been working with them in the fields and treated about the same, since the first slaves in America were actually white serfs. But please, tell me more about how dirty my hands are because of circumstances surrounding my birth that I could not control and continue to treat me differently based on the color of my skin without actually knowing anything about my heritage, I’m sure that isn’t racist at all!
I remember when someone accused my ancestors of having slaves, which made me accountable. And then I brought my family history book to class (yes, my father has a book the size of a collection of encyclopedias about our family, the first edition - no longer existing - dating back to the founding of our surname and our direct relation to William the Conquerer). Not once did any of my ancestors own slaves (serfs, however, is another story), and while my family consisted of mostly wealthy northerners in the Americas, they had nothing to do with the slave trade and actually helped escaped slaves obtain paperwork and jobs in the north.
So, ok, I’ll check my privilege. I come from a pretty awesome bloodline that you should still be thanking for saving your sorry ass and not turning you back into the descendants of your slave owners. Check your privilege, social justice blogger.
just got told.
Goodness. Beautifully done.
Anonymous asked: (Continued) in fact, the human being cannot exist without a spirit and a soul. But the soul can be occupied by disembodied spirits, perhaps. In the same way that clones could be corpses perhaps? :?
Hmm. Interesting. Like I said, I’m not convinced of the tri-partite division. That would be an intriguing scenario, though.
Anonymous asked: I read about the empty shell theory. Woooow. Mindblown. Maybe the queation to ask is, what is the soul's function? Is the human tripartite-sprit,soul and body- and if so, what is the soul's function in regard to the body?
I would say that the soul is the directive “force” on the body. Where the body is a merely physical(, chemical, neurological, etc) thing, the soul is that which moves the body against nature, so to speak. In the soul (or the heart, as Jesus would say) are where your thoughts, emotions, aspirations, desires, fears, and hopes reside. (Don’t be thrown off by “heart”. It is the just the central, individual part of the person: including the intellect, emotions, etc.) I’m not convinced of the tri-partite person (spirit, soul, and body, if only because I have no idea where to “place” the spirit, and because I’m not sure that the Pauline statement is an ontological statement, much less a clear (or exhaustive) list of the human components.
ryannatheart asked: So when did prophets die out? prophetic meaning the uplifting spirit of encouragement stated in the Word. not the new revelation prophet.
I answered that question twice, once to an anon and another privately. I apologize for not making that clear in my public answer. The encouraging “prophet” has not died out. I’m not committed to calling that an office, but such individuals are still active today because of the continuing work of the Spirit and need of the people.
shatterrealm asked: I've been meaning to ask: Calvinists aren't fatalists, right? I'm pretty sure that not even Calvinists, the most "extreme" believers in God's irresistible will, would not say that God wills for evil to occur, or say that sin does not go against God's will. Am I correct in this assumption?
Yes, you are correct. Calvinists hold to “two wills” in God. It is correct to say that God does not will (read: effectually desire) for evil to occur, since he cannot tempt anyone for in him no darkness dwells. However, only God is able to “permit” evil to occur in a manner consistent with his perfectly righteous nature, that is to say in manner perfectly righteous. It is not an aloof indifference, though.
graciouslysaved asked: Hey! I saw what you responded to Andrew's ask and I wanted to know what you think about impassibility. :)
It’s a necessary doctrine concerning God’s ontology. Mike (mikestoleyobike) and I are in agreement on this doctrine. He would be a good resource to ask in the future.
Anonymous asked: Hi (: Don't you think that what brought some people to ruin in the old testament was that the law could nto produce Christlike righteousness? I think Piper is focusing more on the symptom of the law rather than the law itself...
I wish I could remember what this was referring to. My apologies. I know it’s from Future Grace.
hannibalsantlers asked: notunlikelee wordpress com/2012/03/11/bill-johnsons-christology-a-new-age-christ I've been looking into Bill Johnson myself, and maybe this article would be helpful...
This is a good article, and I pass it on to you guys.
Anonymous asked: Do you believe that prophets still exist? Do you think that people still hear things from God about the future? (According but aside from the Word of God already given to us)
Prophets? No. Not the office. Vestiges of the prophetic through the Holy Spirit who gives these “visions” (understood broadly) through a glass darkly which must be discerned and are not infallible, in the same manner that healings are not perfect but will still leave the person dying (even after seventy years) unless Jesus were to return.
Anonymous asked: I liked your recent post. Ignoring the anachronism, what do you think Jesus' thoughts on economics and political theory were and would be in the twenty-first century?
Jesus is King, one who helped the widows and orphans and the sick, and who ultimately was and is about reconciling men to himself.
You have today to say your farewells to me here. I’ve enjoyed my time here, and it’s been a constant for three years, but this is the end of the road.
