tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post8306063604403889309..comments2023-12-17T16:13:06.670-05:00Comments on In a Godward direction: 09. Scripture (2): Perplexity and GuidanceTobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-25638666128835268662008-01-30T12:03:00.000-05:002008-01-30T12:03:00.000-05:00What I am suggesting is that we do as Jesus sugges...<I>What I am suggesting is that we do as Jesus suggested and look at all of the various laws through the lens he provided: in what way does the given law fulfill the command to love God and neighbor. I will be expanding on this in the next section of the essay.</I><BR/><BR/>Amen! Yes! Tobias, I found my way to looking at the whole of the Scriptures through the lens of the teachings of Jesus some years ago. I'm not sure exactly how I arrived there. It was, no doubt, a longer and more complicated process than I am aware of, but having arrived at that point, my life, as I try to follow Jesus as best I can in my very imperfect manner, has become much simpler. Thanks be to God.<BR/><BR/>This post is a keeper. I'm saving it for future reference. Thank you.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-4216059104589835112008-01-30T10:46:00.000-05:002008-01-30T10:46:00.000-05:00Dear Country Parson,Your response is so important ...Dear Country Parson,<BR/><BR/>Your response is so important I am going to elevate it to the level of a post, and add a few words of my own...<BR/><BR/>Thank you, dear brother in Christ.Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-3216035544306674512008-01-29T21:42:00.000-05:002008-01-29T21:42:00.000-05:00Tobias,Thanks for your thoughtful response. I reg...Tobias,<BR/>Thanks for your thoughtful response. I regularly read your postings and appreciate the sagacity with which they are offered. I suspect, but do not know, that my position, like many of my colleagues, is quite different because I care for a congregation that could have split and didn't. It meant entering into conversation with the "other side" with lots of questions, few answers and plenty of patience to hear people out. Some, of course, did leave, a few in white hot temper. But most stayed, and I bet that most priests in most places have faced pretty much the same in their own ways. So keep it us. Your arguments are worthy and sound. They can be a part of the cutting edge of a new direction, but they cannot do the heavy lifting required to bring the greater church along after them. That requires another kind of effort. <BR/>Your brother in Christ,<BR/>CPCountry Parsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02727241474360657192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-9591645921138317732008-01-29T10:13:00.000-05:002008-01-29T10:13:00.000-05:00Dear Confused in Califonia,I am suggesting that, a...Dear Confused in Califonia,<BR/><BR/>I am suggesting that, as the church has done beginning with Jesus, we do discern differing levels of accountability in the various laws recorded in Scripture. I think "discard" is too strong a word; certainly we can learn from the laws that no longer apply to us. What I am suggesting is that we do as Jesus suggested and look at all of the various laws through the lens he provided: in what way does the given law fulfill the command to love God and neighbor. I will be expanding on this in the next section of the essay. <BR/><BR/>I do not at all mean to dismiss narrative; to do so would be to eliminate what is ultimately of greatest value in Scripture! What I am doing here is reaffirming Hooker's maxim that it is disastrous to derive a legal position from a narrative account: thus, to use the account of the destruction of Sodom as a "condemnation of homosexuality" is a misreading of the text in several ways. (The "sin" of Sodom was antecedent to the event described, and the rest of Scripture describes it as pride, selfishness, and xenophobia; the crime in the account is rape or murder; etc.)<BR/><BR/>Parson,<BR/>I am, in this, speaking to the jury, not the prosecutor. I do not expect to convince the radical rightists among us (for the present.) I think they are correct in saying that there is a great gap fixed between us; and incorrect in thinking they represent "classical Anglicanism." I think the kind of critique I offer here is much more in keeping with the train of thought in Hooker than their rather stern attempts; and if the train were still running I think Hooker would be getting off at my station. I have checked in from time to time on Matt Kennedy's efforts to rebut this series; and he is doing a fair job of articulating his side of the argument. The problem is, it becomes immediately apparent that the disagreement is fundamental: that is, he <I>does</I> see the Scripture as some kind of seamless whole, untroubled by contradictions. Those who hold that point of view as a credendum are unlikely to be moved by the evidences I present.<BR/><BR/>Erika,<BR/>An interesting article. I have elsewhere made a similar point about the "thing of nakedness" -- which had come to be understood as "any bare thing" to allow "any cause" divorce. I suppose the main problem with the author's thesis is that Jesus and Paul generally side with the Hillelite school rather than the Shammaite. That is, of course, possible. But it does appear that Jesus is not supporting "any cause" divorce, and means to set aside the Mosaic provision, however understood, and limit divorce to cases of unchastity (in which the "covenant" has already been violated or broken.)Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-12172876235831170582008-01-29T07:12:00.000-05:002008-01-29T07:12:00.000-05:00Fr TobiasAnother truly wonderful analysis, thank y...Fr Tobias<BR/>Another truly wonderful analysis, thank you.<BR/><BR/>You say that Jesus set aside the Mosaic allowance for divorce (Deut 24:1) in favor of what he regarded as the divine order towards indissoluble marriage.<BR/><BR/>There was an article recently in the evangelical magazine Christianity Today which argues that Jesus has been misunderstood here. I wonder whether you might agree with this interpretation and whether it might affect your comments here. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/october/20.26.htmlErika Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01812376497361267014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-33165256079507402962008-01-29T00:24:00.000-05:002008-01-29T00:24:00.000-05:00It's a brilliant little essay Tobias, but it answe...It's a brilliant little essay Tobias, but it answers a lot of unasked questions, which means the answers make no sense to those who cannot or will not ask the questions. For some it's just one more "proof" of the lengths to which the liberal/progressive cabal will go to water down the authority of scripture and press their unasked for agenda on an unwilling church. So then, how would you go about entering into their sphere of conversation in some useful way?Country Parsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02727241474360657192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-57403589831287352142008-01-28T23:55:00.000-05:002008-01-28T23:55:00.000-05:00I am sure I am just a bit thick, but I am not quit...I am sure I am just a bit thick, but I am not quite sure where you come down on the applicability of the Mosaic law. Are you endorsing - with some caveats - the idea that we can extract moral laws from the text and discard the rest? Or is this whole enterprise of creating biblically-centered morality inherently flawed? <BR/><BR/>Also, I am not quite sure what you mean by narrative here. To me, some of the narratives such as the Exodus give rise to some of the most moral thinking in the entire Hebrew Bible. I suspect you agree, so I am not sure why you seem to dismiss narrative. So you must mean something different than what I am reading.<BR/><BR/>I figure I need a good Dear Abby style tag here, so I am<BR/><BR/>Confused in CaliforniaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com