Author Topic: Nuclear Family  (Read 13228 times)

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42404
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #195 on: September 27, 2020, 04:03:50 AM »
The Hebrew word ahad is used to describe the “love” that David and Jonathan had for each other.  The same Hebrew word is used to describe the love that all Israel had for David (see 1st Samuel 18:16).  The Hebrew word ahad in these and similar contexts has the meaning of the Greek word  philía which describes a dedicated brotherly or family love (unlike the Greek word érōs which describes romantic or sexual love).


I note that in the LXX ἀγαπάω, φιλέω, ἐράω and related words are all used for אהב. It can be used for friendship, for self-giving love, and for romantic or sexual love.

So what?  I am not a Jew.  This history has no bearing on me.  If we really want to talk about love we should be looking to the New Testament not the Old, in this case.


OK. the Gospel of John uses ἀγαπάω and φιλέω interchangeably. Both are used of the disciples whom Jesus loves. Both are used in Jesus' questions to Peter.


Lowe & Nida in their Lexicon make this comment about the words:

There is, however, one significant clue to possible meaning differences in at least some contexts, namely, the fact that people are never commanded to love one another with φιλέω or φιλία, but only with ἀγαπάω and ἀγάπη. Though the meanings of these terms overlap considerably in many contexts, there are probably some significant differences in certain contexts; that is to say, φιλέω and φιλία are likely to focus upon love or affection based upon interpersonal association, while ἀγαπάω and ἀγάπη focus upon love and affection based on deep appreciation and high regard. On the basis of this type of distinction, one can understand some of the reasons for the use of ἀγαπάω and ἀγάπη in commands to Christians to love one another. It would, however, be quite wrong to assume that φιλέω and φιλία refer only to human love, while ἀγαπάω and ἀγάπη refer to divine love. Both sets of terms are used for the total range of loving relations between people, between people and God, and between God and Jesus Christ.

I will also add that the commands "to love" are more about acts that help the neighbor than they are about having warm, fuzzy, inner feelings towards others. We are to love our enemies. That doesn't mean that we have to become best friends, but it means we do what we can to help our enemies and their needs.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42404
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #196 on: September 27, 2020, 04:47:06 AM »
Oh yes ... he really blessed the relationship with Bathsheba ... the result of that illicit relationship ... a child that died at a rather early age.

Yes, the child becomes a type of Christ. He dies for the sins of others. The prescribed punishment for committing adultery was the death of both parties. God was gracious to David and Bathsheba by allowing another to die in their place. (This certainly doesn't mean that the parents didn't grieve the loss of their son.)
And this foolishness is supported by which Bible passages .. supported by which church fathers ... or is this wild speculation from the as yet unsupported, undocumented, unwritten, unpublished Stoffregen-esque faux commentary?


Apparently this forum is used to float new unfounded radical ‘doctrines’ in vain hopes of promoting his faux commentary.


Not new with me.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitutionary_atonement#:~:text=Substitutionary%20atonement%2C%20also%20called%20vicarious,%2C%20'instead%20of'%20them.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #197 on: September 27, 2020, 07:58:49 AM »
Well, maybe our lysis is the lessening of the “dis-ease” inflicted by the presence of people who would hold us back and the osmotic pressure is doing for us what it does for water - filtering out some of the crap.
The church will change even more in the decades ahead and the ELCA and LCMS will survive, but in different forms. We will be glad, B Hughes and hyper-Missouri preservationists, that we said “no, thanks” (several times) to your efforts to “save” how you thought we should be.
Same to you fella. We parted company about half a century ago and been tracking in different trajectories. Many of us are glad that we said, "No thanks" to your efforts to save us from the horrors of traditional Lutheran theology.


Some of us believe that we have recaptured the essence of traditional Lutheran theology by removing it from much of its cultural trappings.

And some believe that Mrs. Clinton won the last presidential election.  But it ain't so.  In either case.

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #198 on: September 27, 2020, 08:01:00 AM »

Some of us believe that we have recaptured the essence of traditional Lutheran theology by removing it from much of its cultural trappings.

Do you support the "naked and unashamed" movement in the ELCA which seeks to remove the cultural trapping of marriage for sexually active clergy?  Why or why not?

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #199 on: September 27, 2020, 08:07:22 AM »
I actually thought, way back, Pastor Fienen, that we could help save each other. I remember a long dinner conversation with Arthur Carl Piepkorn and a couple of others on just what the different parts of Lutheranism in this country could give to each other.
But things happened.
Now, though our witness in both church bodies seems strong and energetic, our numbers are declining at about the same rate.

"I remember a long dinner conversation with Arthur Carl Piepkorn"

That would have been intriguing. My instinct, having known him, is that he would deplore the divided Lutheran family we witness today.

Missourians condemn all others, failing to recognize that our support of a conservative confessional position would have contributed decisively to a strong united American Lutheranism. We Missourians who insisted on retreating to our past glory are partially at fault for the weakened Lutheran bodies we see today. Of course those in the former ALC and LCA (and AELC) who all along coveted the glories of the mainline are just as guilty. Now in our hard fought for division we are all delighted but greatly diminished, close to the point of collapse.

Missouri "self claiming confessionalists" would do well to study Piepkorn and try to contort their positions with his well known highly conservative stance on the Lutheran Confessions. Neuhaus spoke of the, "Perverted Piepkorn Party" with appropriate derision.

Peace, JOHN

1. Who DOESN'T deplore the divided Lutheran family we witness today?  The problem is how to unite it.  You have your preferred solutions, I have mine.

2. No, Missouri does NOT "condemn all others".  First of all, she is in fellowship with quite a few church bodies.  Secondly, she condemns the false teaching of other church bodies.

3. Retreating to past glory?  Yes, I agree that some here DO that in their elevation of the Seminex days (and those that led to that mess). 

4. I would prefer to study the Confessions and Luther -- even Pieper -- than Piepkorn.   

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #200 on: September 27, 2020, 08:18:37 AM »
Oh yes ... he really blessed the relationship with Bathsheba ... the result of that illicit relationship ... a child that died at a rather early age.

Yes, the child becomes a type of Christ. He dies for the sins of others. The prescribed punishment for committing adultery was the death of both parties. God was gracious to David and Bathsheba by allowing another to die in their place. (This certainly doesn't mean that the parents didn't grieve the loss of their son.)
And this foolishness is supported by which Bible passages .. supported by which church fathers ... or is this wild speculation from the as yet unsupported, undocumented, unwritten, unpublished Stoffregen-esque faux commentary?


Apparently this forum is used to float new unfounded radical ‘doctrines’ in vain hopes of promoting his faux commentary.
Not new with me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitutionary_atonement#:~:text=Substitutionary%20atonement%2C%20also%20called%20vicarious,%2C%20'instead%20of'%20them.
So Wikipedia and its unvetted sources has been given commentary status ... back to the topic at hand ... Christ died once for all ... the fact that all you can cite to backup your “this child becomes a type of Christ” crap is Wikipedia pretty much says it all.😫
 

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 16828
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #201 on: September 27, 2020, 08:34:50 AM »
The effort to remove the liturgy from its cultural trappings will itself be seen as a quaint, early 21st Century cultural trapping in short order.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #202 on: September 27, 2020, 09:54:47 AM »
Pastor Bohler:
I would prefer to study the Confessions and Luther -- even Pieper -- than Piepkorn.   
Me:
Does that mean you would simply not read Piepkorn or that you would rather not read him?
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #203 on: September 27, 2020, 09:57:27 AM »
Pastor Bohler:
I would prefer to study the Confessions and Luther -- even Pieper -- than Piepkorn.   
Me:
Does that mean you would simply not read Piepkorn or that you would rather not read him?

Neither.  Read what I wrote again.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #204 on: September 27, 2020, 10:07:18 AM »
Word games. OK. You “prefer” those others.
I can infer what you think of those you do not “prefer.”
Or I could ask a simpler question: do you ever read Piepkorn?
😸
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #205 on: September 27, 2020, 10:08:09 AM »
Word games. OK. You “prefer” those others.
I can infer what you think of those you do not “prefer.”
Or I could ask a simpler question: do you ever read Piepkorn?
😸

 Well ... do you?

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #206 on: September 27, 2020, 10:15:23 AM »
I did when I was in the parish or checking something in the “evangelical Catholic“ line of thought.
You?
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #207 on: September 27, 2020, 10:55:44 AM »
I did when I was in the parish or checking something in the “evangelical Catholic“ line of thought.
You?

Just checking as you scolded him for his grammar, but didn't give an answer. I thought maybe it was to sidestep a theological conversation.

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #208 on: September 27, 2020, 12:01:30 PM »
Word games. OK. You “prefer” those others.
I can infer what you think of those you do not “prefer.”
Or I could ask a simpler question: do you ever read Piepkorn?
😸

The only word games are coming from you, Rev. Austin, in your attempt to make me say something I did not say.  And yes, I have read (and sometimes still do read) Piepkorn.  For instance, his "Conduct on the Service" is within easy reach of my desk as a standard reference work.


Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10358
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: Nuclear Family
« Reply #209 on: September 27, 2020, 01:40:30 PM »
I did when I was in the parish or checking something in the “evangelical Catholic“ line of thought.
You?

Just checking as you scolded him for his grammar, but didn't give an answer. I thought maybe it was to sidestep a theological conversation.

I suggest that you consider whether this kind of comment is necessary. You might review the discussion on the deterioration of discussion here.
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS