Comments for Simul Justus Et Peccator http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com Beloved believer! it is a deep mystery, this of the Cross of Christ. I fear there are many Christians who are content to look upon the Cross, with Christ on it dying for their sins, who have little heart for fellowship with the Crucified One. They hardly know that He invites them to it. Or they are content to consider the ordinary afflictions of life, which the children of the world often have as much as they, as they share of Christ's Cross. They have no conception of what it is to be crucified with Christ, that bearing the cross means likeness to Christ in the principles which animated Him in His path of obedience. The entire surrender of self-will, the complete denial to the flesh of its every desire and pleasure, the perfect separation from the world in all its ways of thinking and acting, the losing and hating of one's life, the giving up of self and its interests for the sake of others-this is the disposition which marks him who has taken up Christ's Cross, who seeks to say, "I am crucified with Christ; I abide in Christ, the Crucified One." Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:56:35 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Here We Go…Again by Skids http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-246 Skids Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:56:35 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-246 Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation :) Anyway ... nice blog to visit. cheers, Skids! Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation :) Anyway … nice blog to visit.

cheers, Skids!

]]> Comment on A New Kind of Christian by kencife http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/11/29/a-new-kind-of-christian/#comment-103 kencife Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:55:35 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/11/29/a-new-kind-of-christian/#comment-103 <a href="http://ford2007.freehostia.com/ford-oakland.html" rel="nofollow">ford oakland</a> ford oakland

]]> Comment on Here We Go…Again by Shane http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-14 Shane Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:00:57 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-14 1. All of life seems like an interpretation question. Your point about if Paul's words were inspired then they must be inspired now. But the number one rule of good exegesis is that Scripture cannot mean something today that it didn't mean when it was written. So if Paul was talking to a specific situation and not to all of Christianity, then today if we interpret it as the latter, then we are incorrect. 2. Thanks for responding to my comment cause no one else stinkin' did! I agree with your point and think you understand me. What I'm saying is that if we are interpretting Genesis correctly, then we need to rethink how we interpret Paul even though we know he was just as inspired. 3. Glad you read the essay. I was amazed. And this guy is respected, not some crazy. 1. All of life seems like an interpretation question. Your point about if Paul’s words were inspired then they must be inspired now. But the number one rule of good exegesis is that Scripture cannot mean something today that it didn’t mean when it was written. So if Paul was talking to a specific situation and not to all of Christianity, then today if we interpret it as the latter, then we are incorrect.

2. Thanks for responding to my comment cause no one else stinkin’ did! I agree with your point and think you understand me. What I’m saying is that if we are interpretting Genesis correctly, then we need to rethink how we interpret Paul even though we know he was just as inspired.

3. Glad you read the essay. I was amazed. And this guy is respected, not some crazy.

]]> Comment on Here We Go…Again by Tyler http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-13 Tyler Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:07:12 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-13 Shane - That essay was incredible. I have a book of his...that I haven't started reading. I hate not having enough time in the day. Shane –

That essay was incredible. I have a book of his…that I haven’t started reading. I hate not having enough time in the day.

]]> Comment on Here We Go…Again by Tyler http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-12 Tyler Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:29:17 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-12 I disagree with the conclusion, an elaborate way of saying that it was all location/context-sensitive, BUT Sumner makes a lot of good points other than the conclusion. I can't ignore the points Paul makes here, because inspired writing should still be inspired today, correct? He does state, however, that this passage is more or less HIS pastoral advice, which to me at least is not authoritative like his statements on doctrine. Another interesting thing is his focus on grace in his other epistles, yet he explicitly dictates rules in other places. It seems like no one responded to your comment. Am I wrong? I'll respond, if it'll make you feel better; I know how fragile you are: You commented as to the original verse in Genesis refers to Eve and Adam, "who was with her." I think the issue here is not what is found in Genesis originally, but more how Paul's words in this letter are to be interpreted, since what he said is to be 'inspired.' I am probably missing the point of your comment, though, because I tend to be rather pedestrian. I am reading the NT Wright essay. I disagree with the conclusion, an elaborate way of saying that it was all location/context-sensitive, BUT Sumner makes a lot of good points other than the conclusion. I can’t ignore the points Paul makes here, because inspired writing should still be inspired today, correct? He does state, however, that this passage is more or less HIS pastoral advice, which to me at least is not authoritative like his statements on doctrine. Another interesting thing is his focus on grace in his other epistles, yet he explicitly dictates rules in other places.

It seems like no one responded to your comment. Am I wrong? I’ll respond, if it’ll make you feel better; I know how fragile you are: You commented as to the original verse in Genesis refers to Eve and Adam, “who was with her.” I think the issue here is not what is found in Genesis originally, but more how Paul’s words in this letter are to be interpreted, since what he said is to be ‘inspired.’ I am probably missing the point of your comment, though, because I tend to be rather pedestrian.

I am reading the NT Wright essay.

]]> Comment on Here We Go…Again by Shane http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-11 Shane Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:03:05 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/here-we-goagain/#comment-11 Okay, so are you saying you just disagree with the argument on McKnight's blog? I read the comment you talked about (and actually commented myself a little bit further down) and am curious as to your thoughts. Very challenging topic. Have you checked out NT Wright's paper on this? Worth a read. http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Women_Service_Church.htm Okay, so are you saying you just disagree with the argument on McKnight’s blog? I read the comment you talked about (and actually commented myself a little bit further down) and am curious as to your thoughts. Very challenging topic. Have you checked out NT Wright’s paper on this? Worth a read. http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Women_Service_Church.htm

]]> Comment on Here We Go… by Tyler http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-10 Tyler Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:11:42 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-10 I don't read Greek, I cheat with a Greek/English NT. But I'm trying to learn! I don’t read Greek, I cheat with a Greek/English NT. But I’m trying to learn!

]]> Comment on Here We Go… by Shane http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-9 Shane Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:11:09 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-9 Sure opened a can of worms with this one didn't you? :) 1. I hear ya. Your tone made it sound like you were asserting that they were not equal, that's what I asked. 2. Yeah, you're the guy who reads Greek. You'll have to tell me what he meant. I'm just curious because they seem to be different so I'm wondering if we're reading one wrong. 2a. Your question about the "second Adam" is a great one, you should research that more as I think it means something significant. Check out the second half of Romans 5. 3. Yeah, I was making a funny:) Love you man, keep digging... Sure opened a can of worms with this one didn’t you? :)

1. I hear ya. Your tone made it sound like you were asserting that they were not equal, that’s what I asked.

2. Yeah, you’re the guy who reads Greek. You’ll have to tell me what he meant. I’m just curious because they seem to be different so I’m wondering if we’re reading one wrong.

2a. Your question about the “second Adam” is a great one, you should research that more as I think it means something significant. Check out the second half of Romans 5.

3. Yeah, I was making a funny:)

Love you man, keep digging…

]]> Comment on Here We Go… by Tyler http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-8 Tyler Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:42:15 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-8 Ashley - I was hopefully not making an argument at all. I only wanted to dialog this topic because I'd like to understand it a bit better. It seems people are either completely one way or completely the other. The first verse mentioned is my interpretation of Galatians 3:28, which I take (in context) to mean merely that there is no limit to who is able to receive the free gift of justification by faith through grace. The second verse is commonly abused by conservatives, then shot down by the 'other' side, stating that it was only written in context. There is a bigger issue, however, because Paul appeals to a much earlier event than his context in v13. My third point was that I was upset that Phoebe wasn't given her due credit as a deacon in many modern translations, which is completely wrong and unfair. I would love to read that book, if I can squeeze it in. :) Ashley –

I was hopefully not making an argument at all. I only wanted to dialog this topic because I’d like to understand it a bit better. It seems people are either completely one way or completely the other. The first verse mentioned is my interpretation of Galatians 3:28, which I take (in context) to mean merely that there is no limit to who is able to receive the free gift of justification by faith through grace. The second verse is commonly abused by conservatives, then shot down by the ‘other’ side, stating that it was only written in context. There is a bigger issue, however, because Paul appeals to a much earlier event than his context in v13. My third point was that I was upset that Phoebe wasn’t given her due credit as a deacon in many modern translations, which is completely wrong and unfair. I would love to read that book, if I can squeeze it in. :)

]]> Comment on Here We Go… by Tyler http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-7 Tyler Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:36:21 +0000 http://kindofawkward.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/here-we-go/#comment-7 Shane - 1 - I am saying this doesn't prove they are; it's not valid to support an argument for their equality in context. (i am willing to be disproven!) 2 - However, it was what Paul wrote in his letter to Timothy. The question is, what did he mean by it? And why did he call Jesus the 'second Adam' if Eve was the one who became the transgressor? 3 - You asked me to look it up and I did, silly. Is this a trick question? Shane –

1 – I am saying this doesn’t prove they are; it’s not valid to support an argument for their equality in context. (i am willing to be disproven!)

2 – However, it was what Paul wrote in his letter to Timothy. The question is, what did he mean by it? And why did he call Jesus the ’second Adam’ if Eve was the one who became the transgressor?

3 – You asked me to look it up and I did, silly. Is this a trick question?

]]>