tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post3641059422417294140..comments2024-01-20T16:28:46.327-08:00Comments on Wordgazer's Words: This Isn't the Way to Debate an IssueKristenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post-34843675594498147322014-03-22T15:33:44.485-07:002014-03-22T15:33:44.485-07:00It is certainly apparent that such prejudicial lan...It is certainly apparent that such prejudicial language is being used by those in favor of male hierarchy. Just today I reread an article by Sharon James in The Apologetics Study Bible (2007,Holman Bible Publishers) in which she states as one of her points:"Feminist scholars who reject the authority of Scripture simply say that the Bible is wrong on this issue." <br />There are arguably many such references within this one article, (as well as I find overall in this particular translation).<br />In my opinion, however, the debate between egals and comps unfortunately will continue to rage when such blatant bias and obvious misrepresentation is used. Gina Draker STUDIOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17560009582531766651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post-72931922326891485002014-01-31T20:17:15.445-08:002014-01-31T20:17:15.445-08:00Don - thanks for your comment! But I'm not sur...Don - thanks for your comment! But I'm not sure what you're getting at. Do you think that Peter was not making a statement about the moral status of the people he described as "twisting" Paul's words? I think he was. I think he was saying that the "ignorant and unstable" were actually actively doing something to Paul's words beyond merely misunderstanding or misinterpreting them-- something that made them morally culpable. The word "twist" connotes a deliberate action to turn something out of its normal shape. Peter said this was "to their destruction," not simply that they were confused.<br /><br />The Bible often makes statements about the moral status of people. It doesn't follow that we as Christians should use such language about one another, particularly when it's a matter of a secondary, non-essential teaching. I would be willing to use a phrase like "twisting Scripture" towards someone who was, as Paul put it, "preaching another gospel" in terms of the essentials of the faith-- but just because Peter used the word in a certain context doesn't mean we should use the word when debating a secondary issue on which Christians should be allowing for disagreement. "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty, in all things, charity."Kristenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7971820842270330168.post-34052759556929805952014-01-31T13:26:33.130-08:002014-01-31T13:26:33.130-08:00"Twisting Scripture" is a reference to S..."Twisting Scripture" is a reference to Scripture (I think you know this).<br /><br />2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, <br />2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. <br /><br />So Peter was willing to say that some people "twisted Paul's writings, which are Scripture".<br /><br />My take is the comp paradigm is buttressed by fear and those fears are very real for its adherents, which is why such arguments tend to keep the comp tribe comp and since they work, they get used.Donald Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07904992652259586383noreply@blogger.com