Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from April 18, 2010
I just wrote an e-mail to a friend, and the last line caused me to stop and cry for several minutes. What was the word, the thing freighted with so much meaning to cause me so much pain? "Family." We throw around the phrase "church family" in such a buzzwordy fashion that it doesn't mean what the words mean. God help me, I may love my church family more than my own blood. My pastors, my elders, and everyone else are somewhere between brothers and sisters, and fathers and mothers. I joined another church nearer where I live as an associate member, and I love them too, but it's nowhere close. No disrespect. Nearly every post here for about a year has been about the open and frank investigation of Roman Catholicism*, even if not stated. Provoked in me by an (apparent) inability of Sola Scriptura to provide definitive doctrinal guidance, to settle disputes, to silence heretics. And as a person who desires/desired to minister in the Reformed tradition, I was trou
5 Random, Disconnected Thoughts for Today 5. I wonder if she likes fruit smoothies; she's not Econ Girl, but she's nice* enough. 4. Good job, Wainwright, and good job Brad Penny last night. 3. Nathan Hall should know that he owns the prize still, for the funniest thing ever written on my blog. It's been 7 years; congratulations. 2. Go Royals?!? 1. I cannot stand in judgment of revealed truth; if being a creedal Christian (read: explicitly, intentionally creedal) is better than non-creedal, the creeds cannot be assented to because they agree with my interpretation of Scripture, for two obvious reasons: 1. I, you, and most other normal people* [Sidebar: We shall call the abnormally qualified exegetes the Collins/Wenham/Feingold Exception] are not good enough to interpret Scripture by themselves, thus making most claims subjecting creeds to Scripture preposterous. And 2. they would have no real authority, hence my realization, "Derivative authority is a sham.&q