News:


Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - peter_speckhard

#1
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on April 17, 2024, 08:20:40 PMAn atheist, by definition, is doing theology wrong.

Well that's demonstrably untrue as well. 
But I do think it would be disconcerting if an atheist was doing theology better than a theist. 
[/quote]
Please demonstrate. Show in your scientific way how people who who not believe in God study God better than people who do believe in Him.
#2
Quote from: John Mundinger on April 17, 2024, 10:31:29 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 17, 2024, 07:45:49 PMFor the sake of those of us who missed it, maybe you could quick list whatever civil rights you think we "normal" people want to deny to weird people.

Please note that I did not refer to you as a "normal" person.

Discrimination against people of color, women and gender nonconforming persists.  And,central to the culture wars that are rampant in our country today is the conflict between those who advocate for and those who oppose such discrimination.
In other words, there is no civil right that normal people, whoever they may be, refuse to grant to weird people. Agreed.
#3
Quote from: SomeoneWrites on April 17, 2024, 07:36:41 PM
Quote from: RDPreus on April 17, 2024, 07:26:40 PMYou surmise that God could have done it a way he didn't do it.  That's not how we do theology.  God could have done x, y, or z, and done it that way.  But that's not what the text says.  It's what you say.  It is your interpretation.  But it's not based on the text.  It's based on extra-textual considerations.  Now we may appeal to profane history to elucidate biblical history.  Sola Scriptura doesn't exclude that.  And we may appeal to how teachers of the faith have taught the Scriptures to support the correct interpretation of the same.  Sola Scriptura doesn't exclude that, either.  But to posit a mythical interpretation of the Bible requires an appeal to an extra-biblical norm that cannot be substantiated by Scripture.

I would tell you that you're doing theology wrong.  You have your assertions, and the interpretation that comes from those assertions. 
The text has 2 creation narratives.  That alone should give one pause. 
The text doesn't have to say that something is a myth for it to be a myth.  We just have to know that Jesus used parables and Jesus appealed to people based on what they knew and what would make sense to them.  That's why we have the parable of the sower, and not the parable of the geneticist.

All the same, and this isn't me being snarky,
I'd suggest the rocks indeed do cry out, and they say the Earth is old, and there wasn't a global flood. rocks don't tell lies.   

An atheist, by definition, is doing theology wrong.
#4
Quote from: passerby on April 17, 2024, 06:24:01 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 16, 2024, 12:44:08 PMRobert Benne was distraught to read my article in Forum Letter about VU. He forward me a two-part article he wrote about the catastrophic loss of Christian identity at Christian colleges and gave me permission to repost the links here.

 https://christianscholars.com/the-struggle-for-soul-in-christian-higher-education-burtchaell-was-right-and-i-was-wrong-part-i/

https://christianscholars.com/the-struggle-for-soul-in-christian-higher-education-burtchaell-was-right-and-i-was-wrong-part-ii/



A similar article by Robert Benne was in First Things. Is there something about Lutheran identity that is more difficult to transmit in universities and colleges? My feeling is that it is the churchly rather than the sect-like identity of Lutherans--anyone who has been baptized and claims to be Lutheran is accepted--that explains much. This means that all manner of ideologies and theologies find a place, some of which may have a secularizing effect, especially in today's DEI climate. LCMS and Catholic schools operate on a churchly model too, but the confessional thrust of the former and the role of the magisterium, backed up by a document like Ex Corde Ecclesiae, of the latter prevent such rapid secularization, though not inevitably. But Benne seems to be saying that is the sect-like model of the evangelical schools that ensure better survival rates.
I wouldn't call it sect-like. I would call it confessionally confident. In other words, the Christian university is a place that examines every facet of creation through the lens of Christianity, rather than a place that challenges the Christian lens and relegates Christianity from a truth claim to a personal preference.
#5
Quote from: John Mundinger on April 17, 2024, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: aletheist on April 17, 2024, 03:54:23 PM
Quote from: John Mundinger on April 17, 2024, 02:29:38 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 17, 2024, 12:56:13 PMWhat civil right do normal people refuse to grant weird people?
This country was founded by "normal"people - white, landowning, wealthy men.  "Normals" have been benefiting at the expense of the "weirds" ever since.

The current culture wars began with the passage of civil rights legislation.  As rights were granted to the descendants of slaves and others who looked like descendants of slaves, other marginalized folks - especially women and LGBTQ+ folks began to demand rights, also.  And, in response, "normals" have been working hard to turn back the clock.
Please answer the actual question. What specific civil right do normal people refuse to grant to weird people?

If you had read for comprehension, you would have have the answer to your question in what I posted. 
For the sake of those of us who missed it, maybe you could quick list whatever civil rights you think we "normal" people want to deny to weird people.
#6
What civil right do normal people refuse to grant weird people?
#7
Quote from: John Mundinger on April 16, 2024, 08:13:43 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 16, 2024, 01:47:33 PMThe whole concept of "Normal" is the oppressive thing to people. In a healthy democratic society, you are free to be as weird as yo want to be, but you are not free to force everyone else to pretend you're normal. That's the added freedom today's progressives are shooting for.

Yes, "normal" is oppressive because "normal" people refuse to accept the fact that "weird" people are created equal and because "normal" people behave as though they have the right to compromise "weird" peoples' rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  In a democratic society, that should not be the case.
Nonsense. Normal people do not refuse to accept that weird people are created equal or lack basic human rights. They simply acknowledge the truth that normal is normal and weird is weird. When construction standards are set, for example, determining codes for steps, doorways, etc. those standards take into account that normal adults are between 60 and 80 inches tall. If you are 7'9" or 4' 8", good for you, but, too bad for you, most chairs weren't designed for you because you are not normal. The right to determine norms based on what is normal is simply plain reason, not oppression. 
#8
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on April 16, 2024, 02:28:31 PM
Quote from: D. Engebretson on April 16, 2024, 10:38:06 AMSo, if I understand correctly, identifying humans as male and female, based on their biological sexual identity, as it has been practiced since antiquity going back to the beginning of time (e.g. Genesis), is an example of "an artificial norm established by a society"?
There are cultures who have not limited gender identifications with their biological sexual identities. Most Native American cultures have more than two genders.

I recently read an illustration of the issue. Suppose a can of carrots was mismarked as a can of peas. From the outside, everyone would think that it is a can of peas, but on the inside, the reality is that it is carrots.
And if someone claims a can is mismarked, you check the concrete, physical, biological contents of the can to see if it matches the label. What we have today is people taking the carrot label off cans of carrots and putting it on a can of peas and justifying it by saying, "carrots" and "peas" are just manmade labels, demanding all the recipes be changed to make carrots and peas interchangeable. It abolishes reality in the name of inclusion.
#9
The whole concept of "Normal" is the oppressive thing to people. In a healthy democratic society, you are free to be as weird as yo want to be, but you are not free to force everyone else to pretend you're normal. That's the added freedom today's progressives are shooting for.   
#10
Robert Benne was distraught to read my article in Forum Letter about VU. He forward me a two-part article he wrote about the catastrophic loss of Christian identity at Christian colleges and gave me permission to repost the links here.

 https://christianscholars.com/the-struggle-for-soul-in-christian-higher-education-burtchaell-was-right-and-i-was-wrong-part-i/

https://christianscholars.com/the-struggle-for-soul-in-christian-higher-education-burtchaell-was-right-and-i-was-wrong-part-ii/

#11
Your Turn / Re: Concordia - Ann Arbor and Wisconsin
April 15, 2024, 11:42:50 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on April 15, 2024, 09:20:13 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 15, 2024, 01:55:31 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on April 15, 2024, 01:25:20 PM"Seems punitive" is based on the facts of the opening salvo in February, the original debacle which for all intents and purposes continues to roll out.  Again as before, performed by email.  Again, shutting something down which had not been on the agenda to shut down (even more so this time as after tremendous pressure the first time stopped the effective closure of Ann Arbor to the point of saying all would remain stable going forward, until - it isn't).  Again forcing great pressure to be placed on the whole CUWAA system from the Ann Arbor side.  Again there's no indication that CUW is closing, or closing programs. 

In this instance again what seems punitive is the closure of a program that seems to have (according to Scott) student sufficiency to be self-supporting and now is effectively shut off from recruitment.

The first time was a debacle that took the complete energizing of the Michigan base of support to put the question squarely to the CUWAA board on "de-coupling"  while keeping Ann Arbor on the track based on the Strategic Plan unanimously adopted a week before the initial emails of effective closure went out in February.  I suspect the same will take place this time. 

A remaining question is what kind of hit the enrollment at CUW has taken in the "wokeism" controversy and presidential selection mess.  What are the trends at CUW that parallel Ann Arbor?

Dave Benke
I have no idea about those remaining questions. If things didn't seem different than they were, there would be no question to answer. I simply think it is an extremely serious thing even to mention it among the plausible possibilities worth considering.

Of course it is.  I don't know whether you watched those Ann Arbor Town Halls in February.  It was very clear from speaker after speaker that they were convinced Ann Arbor was being singled out for closure.  This feels to the same folks at Ann Arbor like the same basic refrain on the second verse, closure of a program that was successful.   

Why did the Michigan District have organized itself in basically thirty seconds in February to put together a plan to de-couple from CUW and run it right into the Board of Regents meeting? 

Dave Benke
But to speculate that people would shut down successful programs essentially out of spite for mere punitive reasons seems over the top to me.

My congregation on three occasions explored the possibility of couple ourselves to struggling/dying congregations to become a single, two site parish. In one case the other congregation was too far gone when we started, in one case they were not interested in doing anything differently than what they had been doing; if we wanted to pay their bills, great, but otherwise, butt out. The third time was very promising until someone started a rumor that what we really wanted was to get the deed to their acreage/property, string us along for a few years, then sell it and keep the profits for ourselves. It wasn't true, but it was hard to refute to anyone willing to believe it, and from what I've heard, it was what ended up scuttling the whole project on their end. Two of those congregations are no more and the other was thrilled to have 60 people in worship on Easter, in a growing "rurban" fringe suburb of Chicago.

It is fine to disagree with assessments, predictions, or plans. But to attribute base motives to the other guy ups the ante substantially. Tough to recover from that no matter what happens.
#12
Quote from: JoshuaMc on April 15, 2024, 06:51:07 PMPeter, it's not tautology. It's a concise read of historical choices made by real, all-over-the-place people.
They were in the mood to simplify. This is how we ended up with the Verba as the bulk of our eucharistic liturgy. 

Peace,
Josh
saying the rationale is that it is better that way is tautology. As you point out, by this telling, they were in a mood to do it that way. That is no basis for a church body. Thus, there is zero rationale for people not in a mood to simplify things to accept sola Scriptura.
#13
Saying that the rationale for sola scriptura is that it is a better theological system is mere tautology. Why is it better? Because it doesn't/can't expand? A) I don't see why that makes it better rather than worse, B) I'm not even sure it is technically true, and C) even if it were true, it would still rest on an arbitrary foundation. If that were really their rationale, they may as well have said that all truth must be normed by Phillip Melanchthon because doing so is better than listening to anyone else.
 
#14
Quote from: JoshuaMc on April 15, 2024, 03:48:33 PMRolf,

Thank you for the Luther citations and the Reu article suggestion.

I don't doubt that Luther dwelt with a contexually meaningful version of inerrancy that made sense for his experience. Of course, he could also treat scripture as less than inerrant, like he did with Revelation in 1522:

QuoteAbout this Book of the Revelation of John, I leave everyone free to hold his own opinions. I would not have anyone bound to my opinion or judgment. I say what I feel. I miss more than one thing in this book, and it makes me consider it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic.

Luther is our greatest teacher, but part of his brilliance is that he's a little all over the place. I still can't find a confessional rationale for plenary inspiration or inerrancy.

Peace,
Josh
You can't find a confessional rationale for inerrancy because inerrancy is the rationale for a confessional church body. What is the rationale for sola Scriptura? On what basis do we judge whether popes, councils, and traditions err?
#15
Your Turn / Re: Concordia - Ann Arbor and Wisconsin
April 15, 2024, 01:55:31 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on April 15, 2024, 01:25:20 PM"Seems punitive" is based on the facts of the opening salvo in February, the original debacle which for all intents and purposes continues to roll out.  Again as before, performed by email.  Again, shutting something down which had not been on the agenda to shut down (even more so this time as after tremendous pressure the first time stopped the effective closure of Ann Arbor to the point of saying all would remain stable going forward, until - it isn't).  Again forcing great pressure to be placed on the whole CUWAA system from the Ann Arbor side.  Again there's no indication that CUW is closing, or closing programs. 

In this instance again what seems punitive is the closure of a program that seems to have (according to Scott) student sufficiency to be self-supporting and now is effectively shut off from recruitment.

The first time was a debacle that took the complete energizing of the Michigan base of support to put the question squarely to the CUWAA board on "de-coupling"  while keeping Ann Arbor on the track based on the Strategic Plan unanimously adopted a week before the initial emails of effective closure went out in February.  I suspect the same will take place this time. 

A remaining question is what kind of hit the enrollment at CUW has taken in the "wokeism" controversy and presidential selection mess.  What are the trends at CUW that parallel Ann Arbor?

Dave Benke
I have no idea about those remaining questions. If things didn't seem different than they were, there would be no question to answer. I simply think it is an extremely serious thing even to mention it among the plausible possibilities worth considering.
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk