“There are friends who pretend to be friends, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother.”
Proverbs 18:24 RSV
“True friendship, or spiritual friendship, is not disposable. It is not friendship for friendship’s sake. It is not self-seeking for advancement; it involves collaboration for something outside us. We find true friends by being virtuous people who live for truth in community.”
“What is friendship? It isn’t just some poetic ideology. Friendship is something that we do. To be a friend, we need to exercise virtue. Friendship requires moral excellence because it is not primarily for our own benefit but is formed through our sacrifices for another. Others-centered virtue creates a friendship that enhances the souls of all participants.”
“Hence even the philosophers of this world placed friendship not among the accidents of mortal life but among the virtues that are eternal. Solomon seems to agree with them in this verse from Proverbs: “a friend loves always.” So he obviously declares that friendship is eternal if it is true, but if it ceases to exist, then although it seemed to exist, it was not true friendship.”
Byrd, Aimee. Why Can’t We Be Friends? : Avoidance Is Not Purity (pp. 96-98). P&R Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Until recently, Todd Pruitt, Aimee Byrd, and Carl Trueman were the trio that comprised the “Mortification of Spin” podcast. I must confess that the Mortification of Spin (MOS) was a podcast that I listened to quite regularly. Trueman was the sharp-witted academic of the group and seemed to take pride in the fact that he abstained from social media. He was usually good for a spot-on quote concerning the excesses of Big Eva. He formerly was a professor at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia and an OPC pastor. For reasons unclear to me, he resigned from both of those jobs and moved to northwest PA to teach undergraduate students at Grove City College.
Pruitt is a pastor in the PCA denomination. I best remember him for his lectures on the evils of social media and bloggers like me. At one time I believe he had both a Twitter and a Facebook account, and of course, the Podcast which, in my opinion, is a social media outlet, albeit devoid of any input from the rabble. Pruitt dumped his Twitter account back in June.It was probably a good move on his part as it seemed he wasn’t well suited to the give and take that is common on Twitter. (Probably a good thing Pruitt wasn’t around in Martin Luther’s day!)
Aimee Byrd was known as the Housewife Theologian and she was my favorite individual of the podcast. She strikes me as a deep thinker, is well-read, intelligent, has a good sense of humor, and doesn’t take herself too seriously. She is the type of person I would love to have as a college professor, or, (I say this at the risk of being branded a heretic), a Sunday school teacher!
Aimee Byrd’s most recently published book, “Recovering From Biblical Manhood and Womanhood” has ruffled the feathers of a group of men who call themselves the Genevan Commons, as well as some within the para-church organization called The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. (Or, as I prefer to label them, the Men are Better than Women Club!) These guys seem to think that inside every intelligent woman lurks a rabid feminist just waiting to waylay an unsuspecting conservative Christian with smooth words that will cause the dolt to abandon his or her faith. Or maybe, in the case of Denny Burk, President of the Men are Better than Women Club, he fears Byrd’s book will further damage the credibility of his organization, having already had their foundation cut from under them when it was proven that their foundational doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son is heretical. Call me cynical, but I would guess a guy like Burke pulls down a hefty salary for a job that is not very demanding. The last thing he wants to see is his organization become irrelevant.
Burk wrote a very unfavorable review of Byrd’s book. Byrd responded on her blog with this:
“A friend said something about Denny Burk’s “review” of my book that really resonated with me. I’m trying to have a conversation about discipleship in the church. In my book, I ask church officers to lead discussions as I look through Scripture, identify the struggles of men and women in the church, and explore within the bounds of our confessions. Burk dismisses all of this and wants to tell us all what to think: what to think about me, what to think about my book, and what to think about biblical manhood and womanhood.
He turns me into the Repugnant Cultural Other by using scare words from his tribe, poisoning the well by suggesting to his readers that I am a closet egalitarian feminist who is trying to lead a whole generation away from “biblical” manhood and womanhood. He completely misrepresents my writing in this, suggesting that I am part of the problem they are trying to save others from with their blessed Nashville Statement, saying that I commend “’marriage-like’ same sex friendships,” and suggesting I am pro-LGBT.
I still can’t wrap my head around how this can pass as an academic review in Southern Baptist Journal of Theology and be posted on SBTS’s website…
Christians are a confessing community. We hold to our creeds, explaining what Scripture teaches on first order doctrines. We have this standard for orthodoxy. Our denominations hold to different confessions within this orthodoxy, from which we can worship together, be discipled, and speak from in more detail about what we confess. Christians are also a loving community—it’s our greatest commandment! We are to love our God and love one another. It is how we are to be known!
So how has this all flipped upside down, where Burk can downplay our creeds and CBMW’s teaching an unorthodox position on Eternal Subordination of the Son, all the while making me a Repugnant Cultural Other? How have we moved from leadership in helping others to think within the bounds of our confessions to telling them what to think?”
Aimee Byrd, “WHEN WE TELL OTHERS WHAT TO THINK: ANOTHER REFLECTION ON DENNY BURK’S “REVIEW” July 9, 2020.
This is actually typical of how the powerful men in Big Eva operate, if they don’t like what you are saying they will attempt to silence you, although they generally choose to do so privately, through back channels. In this case perhaps Burk was so desperate to keep people from reading Byrd’s book that he felt the need to go public. Carl Trueman, himself the recipient of this type of behavior, had this to say in way back in 2014:
“What I’m not going to do is the kind of ostentatious tactics that I see the Mark Driscolls of this world pursuing and, quite frankly, I’ve experienced myself from the top men at some of these para-church organizations, where if you criticize them, they work behind the scenes to shut you down; they are going to try to make sure that you don’t have the avenues of speaking out.
I’m not going to leverage informal means of control and influence in the way that I think the “Young Restless and Reformed” culture has done so, and, which frankly has ultimately led to its invidious corruption.”
All of these establishment figures have suddenly emerged and they’re all heroically standing for the truth at this point – literally rather pathetic.
I haven’t received any apologies from the “top men” who were sending me such unpleasant emails behind the scenes and telling me to shut my trap about people like Driscoll.”
-Carl R. Trueman, “Mortification of Spin” podcast, 8-27-2014
Below is a quote from Aimee Byrd explaining the nature of the controversy her book ignited:
“My writing has aimed to examine the scriptures with the help of our confessions as we continue to see how the church is continually in need of reforming. This has dovetailed well with the mission of the Alliance. However, after the publication of my last book, Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, a blog was posted on their website asking me to answer nine questions by a group of concerned, unnamed people. I responded, expressing my confusion at the nature of the post, nevertheless answering the first question and saying I was not sure that I would answer the rest. I then received an email from the chairman of the Board imploring me to answer these same questions for the Board of Directors. I do not know who is on this Board.
After seeking counsel, I declined to answer the specific questions, directing them instead to my book itself. I replied that some of these questions are addressed in my book already. And while I expect and welcome disagreement with some interpretations and applications in it, my book is in line with the confessions in which my Orthodox Presbyterian Church subscribes. Others of the questions seemed to misrepresent my writing, suggesting I was saying things that I wasn’t. Additionally, my book does not aim to answer all of the questions that were asked. It is not about church leadership or marriage. It is not meant to be an end all book on all matters of gender. There are many other books that aim to answer those questions. My book is about discipleship for laymen and laywomen in the church. My aim was to ask serious questions about how men and women are identified and discipled in the church and to call Christians and Christian leadership to examine this against Scripture. My aim was to offer another voice, alongside other voices, as we look at scripture and life together.
During this time, I was informed by our producer that she was notified not to book new recordings at this time and that they will be airing reruns of the Mortification of Spin. Then I noticed that they’ve discontinued my credentials to log in to post blog articles. While no reference was made to my future participation in the podcast, I later received an email from the Director in which they thanked me for the work I contributed for them and said that they “will strive to be gracious upon my exit.” Technically, ACE has related to me as an independent contractor. That’s all I really know.”
-Aimee Byrd, “Byrd’s New Nest,” June 17, 2020
Christianity Today picked up on the controversy and wrote the following article:
Included in this article are the following quotes:
I am not privy to the inside information of what led to the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals to effectively “fire” Aimee Byrd from the MOS podcast, but it seems to have also resulted in the shattering of the friendship between Byrd, Trueman, and Pruitt. I am deeply grieved by that. The Christianity Today quote above states that Pruitt has publicly defended Byrd, but I have not been able to find any record of either him or Trueman publicly defending Byrd.
In fact, it seems quite the opposite initially occurred. In an article written by Pruitt but signed by both he and Trueman they apparently accused Aimee Byrd of slander. The article is titled “Coarse Joking, Doxing, and Forgiveness” and can be viewed here.
Below is a short excerpt from the article:
“June 25, 2020
In an earlier version of this post we referred to the articles by Aimee Byrd and Ed Stetzer as being slanderous. We now see that this was incorrect and that, in doing so, we had ourselves spoken wrongly. We sincerely apologize for this and have corrected the article accordingly. We should have reserved the term ‘slander’ for actions of the person or persons who had engaged in the dox and/or subsequently used the information therein for smearing the characters of those who played no role in the sinful conversations on the Geneva Commons website.”
One can imagine how much the false charge of slander by Byrd’s two good friends hurt her, yet Byrd seems to have always taken the high moral ground in this controversy.
Personally, I no longer listen to the Mortification of Spin podcast. I tried listening once but turned it off after five minutes. Aimee Byrd made that podcast great. I really miss her and it just isn’t the same podcast without her. I would guess many others feel the same as me. I doubt she will ever be brought back, but I do hold out hope that Todd Pruit and Carl Trueman will have the courage and humility to do whatever it takes to restore their friendship with Aimee. It is shameful to terminate a friendship because… why? A differing of opinions? I suppose there is more to it than that, but as I quoted Aimee at the top of this article, “True friendship, or spiritual friendship, is not disposable.”
I hope Aimee continues to speak out and to write books. We need her voice.
1
Good job, Doc. Now you can get some rest!
And they wonder why women are bailing…hello, here’s yet another exhibit.
Based on the enemies she has made Aimee seems to be a person of high quality character and integrity. May many rise up to defend her, to stand with her.
Shutting down comments in online news/opinion items is IMO a totalitarian tactic, and also deeply foolish if one is interested in wide readership. The concept of “the wisdom of crowds” is a real thing and I frequently learn useful things in comments, and generally don’t bother reading sites that don’t permit comments. Such sites often have the character of propaganda outlets.
“Come, let us reason together”
These one-way outlets will, I suspect, increasingly function solely for “crowd control” and the crowds may dwindle.
————–
I don’t know why CT departed WTS, but my perception is that there is, at times, a lot of drama there (better informed readers are welcome to correct me). Back in the ’80s-90s era I believe there was a controversy over female faculty. Prior to that, there was a controversy over justification (Norman Shepherd was teaching at WTS and promoting a view that the seminary authorities concluded was contrary to the confessional standards). More recently, a number of (beloved by students) biblical theology faculty were replaced over concerns about faculty conformity to confessional standards (I don’t know all the details; the disagreements included issues as IMO arcane as a controversy over “Christo-centrism” versus “Christo-telism” in the Old Testament.)
I believe that “Semper Reformanda” originally meant “always moving toward a more perfect understanding of what is true”, but with the crystallization of Reformed confessional system (which I think on its own terms is an admirable intellectual achievement; I just wonder how true it is), it now means “making sure that we don’t deviate from what our ancestors decided.”
On the topic of eternal subordination, Wayne Grudem has an updated Systematic Theology on sale:
https://www.zondervan.com/9780310517993/systematic-theology-second-edition/
Per the site:
“With nearly 200 pages of new content and revisions that took several years, this new edition now includes the following distinctive features, making it even better:
Updated, fuller analysis of several recent controversies within evangelicalism, including the eternal relationship between the Father and the Son in the Trinity, the question of God’s atemporal eternity, the role of women in the church, “seeker-sensitive” churches, miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, and contemporary worship music.”
In his first edition he compared The Father to a husbad who is in charge of the family, Jesus to the wife who submits to the husband, and the Holy Spirit to the children who submit to both the father and the mother. I’m interested to know if his view changed, but not interested enough to buy the book.
Great article defending Aimee Byrd and bringing facts into the light. I would imagine the kerfuffle is causing even the church power-elite’s pin feathers to turn a blazing red. Biblical manhood verses biblical womanhood?
Is this a liberty university teaching?
Poking around Grudem’s site, there is this link
http://www.waynegrudem.com/whose-position-on-the-trinity-is-really-new
which, when clicked, takes one to the cbmw.org home page
I cannot find the article at the cbmw site, nor indeed anywhere else (perhaps I’m not looking in the right places). Presumably it exists on the wayback machine in a form consistent with WG’s views on ESS.
Not sure why the article is linked under his theology articles but not accessible at his site.
Struggling with the usual communication issues (VERY big sigh), and not wanting to sound like the proverbial echo chamber: Another thought-provoking TWW OP….
I also used to listen to MOS. A few years ago in their silly banter, I think it was Carl who made a self deprecating joke about how he looked like someone with Tourette’s syndrome. Our family was suffering terribly trying to navigate our kiddo going through junior high with this disease. (That kiddo is doing great now!) But my mama bear was instantly engaged and I shot an email off to Aimee Byrd letting her know. She promptly emailed back with a genuine, sincere, loving apology. It was so strange. It was textbook how Christians are supposed to act. Strange, because although we know how Christians are to act, we rarely see it. Aimee is an example to me of what walking down the long road, becoming more like Jesus Christ looks like. I buy her books, and wish her well!
Samuel Conner,
I did my PhD class work at WTS 1978-80 so it looks like I missed thee fun. My friend and fellow doctoral student, Pete Lillback, hung in there and now is President of WTS. So glad it is him, not me. I do pray for him.
I think Semper Reformanda is the equivalent of Semper Drama-rama.
There does seem to be a terror of “slippery slope” dynamics. The OP minister at the little congregation I attended for a while spoke of members of the Presbytery on the ordination examination committee who seemed highly concerned to identify and disqualify people who were not sufficiently confessional. This may actually have been counterproductive, because he was told that to pass his exam, he should memorize the Shorter Catechism and answer every question with a verbatim quotation. People’s understanding of the meaning of the answers can’t be explored under such a rhetorical strategy.
What article? It never existed, comrade.
Ken F (aka Tweed),
LOL!
I’m definitely not a member of the Inner Party. Perhaps it was predestined.
Ruth,
Quote correct chapter & verse…
Love God, love one another …
Sometimes these don’t connect. Jesus noted the disconnect with “Beware of” & “Woe to” regarding the religious leaders of His day.
“Beware of” & “Woe to” regarding Christian leadership seem to pass the test of time & are apt in our day, too.
Winston Smith chucked it down a memory hole…
Why such a need in recent times for Jesus to wear bra and panties?
Such a premium is placed on mahood this, masculine that. But at the eternally crowning moment of Jesus’s raging, death defying manhood, he suddenly whips out the lady’s underwear and goes all effeminately gentle and quiet spirit like.
I’d have quit the podcast in solidarity with Aimee if I were them. Then again, she and I have been friends longer than Carl and Todd have known her.
The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals recruited Aimee to move her blog from her privately hosted site to theirs. This was after her second or third book, when it was clear she was gaining readership to a point that would enhance ACE’s position online. She was also invited to join the podcast around that period.
They dropped her like a hot potato when the mob at Genevan Commons went after her.
Because “as of now, It Never Existed, Comrade”?
Is Semper Reformanda anything like Trotsky’s Doctrine of Continuous Revolution?
Well, “Biblical Sex” is all too often Kinkiness “which has no name even among the Furries” or “Our Duty to The Party”.
Secret kink of the Biblical Manhood theologians?
doubleplusungood ref doubleplusunperson.
doublepluscrimethink!
i.e. Recite his Koran, like the entrance exam for the Saudi & Talibani Religious Police.
Nathan Priddis,
Jesus moment of personhood or manhood?
Reference to effeminate quiet… God spoke to Elijah in a quiet voice.
The reference to women’s undergarments?
Tim,
The lived experience of being a woman in the church is perhaps an area where women have the inside track & speak with authority although with varied experiences & voices.
Listening is good, both genders, to each other.
IMHO, over time, far more women listen to men in the church than vice versa.
The church women who speak up, IMHO, seem courageous, or maybe narcissistic (dare I say), and deserve a listen, a place at the round table.
I especially value Dee, and the theologian Marg Mowczko.
Ken F (aka Tweed),
As I recall, from my understanding of a small portion of Wayne Grudem’s first “Systematic Theology,” he used “general patterns of male leadership” as one angle of making a case for prohibiting female leadership teaching men in church.
I read a bit of this book as it was being given out years ago to the “committed” youth in the church my family was attending at the time and that went through a by-law change soon after. From the bit on female leadership that I read, he seemed, IMO, to dismiss “the few” cases of female leaders, Deborah, for example, as not to be considered much in light of the “general pattern.” But, as I thought then and now, IMO, outliers could have great positive informational energy to offer whosoever is willing to listen to them. I think Paul and early apostles referred to Jesus’ teaching, life and resurrection as not general patterns either, as a positive pattern worthy of consideration.
I am more interested in Aimee’s book/s. And I’ve loved Ellie Wiesel’s quote about friendship for a long time: “Friendship marks a life even more deeply than love. Love risks degenerating into obsession, friendship is never anything but sharing.”
Dee, This is a great post thanks for sharing. A couple points. Carl has made some comments about his move to teaching at the undergraduate level. In effect he feels it’s a better way to shape a student’s thinking. He’s commented that seminary level students tend to have already decided what they think about lots of things. At other times he made sideways comments about backstage antics with the seminary. I’m sure the combination contributed to his move.
The other curious thing to me in all this is the letter from the Alliance chairman which among things states something to the effort of having concerns about the way Aimee is perceived by their audience. This makes me wonder who the Alliance thinks their audience is. Or at least who it has become. I’m old enough to remember when it began. It was simply a way for reformed folks of various stripes to fellowship/cooperate with each other through local chapters. Some educational materials were produced. Occasional larger conference offered. there was broad appeal.
Since the big furor about Aimee came primarily from the Genevan Commons group and those from Greenville seminary- a tiny minority in the confessional reformed world- why does the Alliance treat them as a primary audience? I would love to see where the majority of donations come from. The primary audience for MoS was certainly not the Greenville crowd. It feels a bit to me like the Alliance has been hijacked by a group,with a very narrow vision.
Even more, he used the ancient heresy of the eternal subordination of the Son to justify the eternal subordination of women to men. He got smacked down pretty hard by his own tribe a few years ago, but he dug in even deeper. The fact he disappered his article (mentioned above) makes me wonder if he changed his view.
Part of the problem is the concept of the Trinity itself. I learned that there is God the Father, God the son, God the Holy Spirit, three aspects of one God.
Yet Jesus prays to God, and states no one gets to the father but through him, clearly implying they’re separate entities with Jesus in the subordinate role.
I’m not sure but it seems the Trinity idea came later to counter charges that Christianity was not a monotheistic faith. It was agreed upon at a conference and codified in a creed.
I’m not sure how much theology is discussed in evangelical churches, but my brief encounter with Pentecostalism indicated that it was fairly simplistic, with more emphasis on “experience” rather than any deeper dive into what it all actually means.
I went through my Anglican confirmation classes and didn’t get it so maybe it’s a case of throwing stones from a glass house.
But I’ve seen it mentioned here that it’s about having a “relationship” not a “religion”.
I counter without understanding the “religion” you won’t what you are having a “relationship” with.
This lack of understanding combined with biblical literalism can combine to make ESS perfectly logical. To me it makes about as much sense as the Trinity ever did.
But it’s a massive leap in logic to compare the father son relationship of God & Jesus to husband & wife. Looking at the faith like that embodies all kind of creepy vibes.
At best ESS makes me think of the start of the Andy Griffith Show, with God as Andy, Jesus as Opie and I guess the Holy Spirit as the family dog. Makes it more of an analogy that they are going fishing.
However I don’t see Andy allowing the good folks of Mayberry to crucify Opie …
Maybe I’ll leave theology to the professionals…
EngSoc rules!
Years ago in Grad school a friend and I spent a lot of time trying to help Christians recover from nonsense being forced on them from a number of parachurch organizations. After one told their students that they should start the year by “memorizing 2 more verses a day, extending their quiet time by 5 minutes a day …” we wrote a song:
You say I’ve got to have a quiet time to be the perfect Christian man
Read the Bible daily, memorize all that I can
And if I don’t go knocking on the doors around my flat
I just can’t be too spiritual. Well let me tell you what I think about that.
Chorus:
We must live by the Spirit. Follow where He leads
If He leads you one direction – well that is what you need
But please don’t go judging your neighbor. Please don’t box in me.
‘Cause if we were all ears and noses…where would the seeing be
One man observers the Sabbath, another the Lord’s Day
Another doesn’t know the difference, and doesn’t care anyway
But these are all a shadow of a vast majestic plan
Man wasn’t made for the Sabbath. No! The Sabbath was made for man.
So please don’t get us wrong – these things are all good in their way
But righteousness is not by rules, but by a still more excellent way
He’ll lead you in the paths of righteousness for His name’s sake
Just follow after God’s Spirit – not the rules some Christians make.
I will try to find a recording of it to post if anyone is interested.
The here and now:
The recent repackaging of tradition is designed to attract younger males. Females are peripheral.
But the packaging is odd. Manhood 101 discipleship groups/podcast/books/sermons, are a lot like ditch digger school. It’s just a phrase, nobody actually goes to any digging school, because its meant as a joke. CBMW? What’s there to Counsel about? That males are born with a thing in their pants? If the target audience needs reassuring about their pant load, in Jesus name, that’s not very manly.
The whole selling point of following this kind of Jesus is that he was the tough carpenter, Temple whipper, all while probably going commando under that robe.
The here after: The chief end of the works of God are to glorify himself. And how does Jesus celebrate putting his final enemies under his feet? A good roid rage? Hardly. He becomes like a wife. In fact, the need for women to submit to men is mirrored in the Father/Son interaction.
From the TWW Marquee:
Why didn’t Carl Trueman and Todd Pruitt defend their friend?
Simple, three word non-academic answer:
Because they’re cowards.
Speaking of…ahem…
9Mark Dever, the toast of the late 1970s musical stage in Madisonville, Ky:
“…passing as girls in an all-female band, Mark Dever and Kris Brady were delightful. Both were able to use the female attire to heighten the…”
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/437316411/
The show, was titled ‘Sugar’
There’s got to be photos somewhere out there of this.
When faced with a choice between Wiesel and Grudem, I’ll pick Wiesel every time.
It’s more complicated than that. The 1st ecumenical council was comprised of stubborn bishops and priests who had recently survived persecution. They would no have rolled over easily. And the concept of the Trinity was much older than the council. As hard as it is for one to accept it, rejecting it creates contradictions, so there is no easy out one way are another. There are quite a few very good sources out there that explain why it became the orthodox view. Before rejecting it, it would be worthwhile to investigate such sources to make a better informed rejection.
Ken F.
I’m wondering if there are references to a Godhead. This would simplify everything to just use the language of Ronans 1:20, and leave it at that.
I don’t remember reading use of Godhead terminology, or if I have, its not coming to mind.
Do you recall Church Fathers ever using Godhead instead of Trinity? It seems even if Godhead is used by a Christian, it is a Trinity synonym. I don’t see Godhead being a description of number, but of characteristics.
Ella,
Thanks for this quote:
Ellie Wiesel: “Friendship marks a life even more deeply than love. Love risks degenerating into obsession, friendship is never anything but sharing.”
I had never given that any thought until you asked. Here is a pretty decent article on the Trinity from an EO perspective (it’s a bit long, but worth the read). Godhead and Trinity seem to be synonyms, as you observed, and there are quotes from early church fathers affirming this.
https://www.greekorthodox.org.au/?page_id=3356
Jack,
An interesting question is — granting the validity of the historic conception of multiplicity of persons within the Divine being, does this just happen to be so, or is it in some way necessary; i.e., God could not be other than this way.
If this is a necessary “property” of God, it ought to be possible to argue toward it without need to explicitly found one’s arguments in the Scriptures, simply by starting with other things that are believed to be true about God and working out the implications of those things.
Jonathan Edwards did that in his “Essay on the Trinity”.
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/trinity/files/trinity.html
Edwards’ argument is a bit abstract, but it seems plausible to me, and the connections he makes to the Biblical text are quite remarkable coincidences if it is thought that there is not even a proto-Trinitarian theology present in the NT.
After I wrote my earlier reply I thought about Islam, which is very strictly monotheistic. I had some Muslim friends who hoped to convert me a couple decade ago, so I spent quite a lot of time learning about Islam. It turns out that maintaining strict monotheism has its own challenges because it has logical inconsistencies that cannot be explained away. For example, strict monotheism makes God completely unknowable. A good question to ask a Muslim is whether the Quran is created or eternal. They used to kill each other over this topic.
A lot of Christian men and especially leaders are threatened by strong, educated women. To keep their power base they need to control the women. They can do this partially by brainwashing as many women as they can, These women come down hard on women who will not go along the party line. If women stood up as independent thinkers , well versed in Scripture, these guys would indeed have a lot of explaining to do. I will never forget the time a Pastor told my husband to “ Get your wife under control.” Thankfully my husband has always considered me as a partner. We did not stay at that church very long.
“Even more” is right. It doesn’t get any heavier than “eternal subordination” for women/wives.
I wonder what happened with that, too. Apparently, no aftermath. What does that mean?
From the above article:
“This is actually typical of how the powerful men in Big Eva operate, if they don’t like what you are saying they will attempt to silence you, although they generally choose to do so privately, through back channels.”
Question:
What is Big Eva?
I’ve always thought of it as the Evangelical machine.
Mileage may vary.
I’m glad to hear this.
I don’t recall when I first came across the Elie Wiesel quote, but it is refreshing.
In regards to Grudem, years ago when the pushy church stuff was going on I asked some safe female friends what they thought and one of them had closer ties to a friend who knew a female pastor from another denomination. That pastor gave us a tape of Deborah Gill who warned listeners about Grudem’s view of restrictions for women. Deborah Gill also went through the few verses used to restrict women and possible interpretations and commentary I’d never heard before that time. I also was referred to CBE around that same time.
Samuel Conner,
I can’t believe “christian” people have been avoiding truth. They have ruined the world.
Holy Trinity models space for the Other Other.
As St Paul wishes the Hebrews will have more ample salvation than himself, as Jesus asks us to trade with each other with the talents, to make the other profitable.
HIS will is not separate from those things that will see my brother through on a bad day.
Yeah, that would make sense based on the article’s context.
I just wondered if ‘EVA’ was a bonafide acronym.
Here’s a very telling filmclip which graphically illustrates what Burk, Grudem, and their cohorts are all about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIUzHUOdLhM
I’m just going to point out that all the theologizing that has taken place over the last two millennia has been done by elite, literate men at the expense of non-elite men and all women. I see the Nicene-Constantinoplan + filioque creed as a primarily political document, and less a religious document that people should follow. I know the thing by heart, but I keep remembering how Jesus’ life is reduced to a blank space between “born of the Virgin Mary” and “crucified under Pontius Pilate.” Yeah, so by 325 and thereafter, what Jesus taught was not very important any more, you were judged if you had the right idea of God (who is, by definition, outside of definition) in your head.
I think the elite men of the church need to sit back for a few hundred years and let the non-elite, particularly women and people of color, have a time of doing theology. And yes, I am EXTREMELY aware of how radical a suggestion this is. But you know, I think it’s way past time.
The Evangelical Industrial Complex, with its tentacles, backscratching and strange bedfellows everywhere.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
The only way your suggestion will work is away from most media, and especially in ones and twos and threes and fours, where little of anyone’s prestige is considered at risk if we get it wrong. Otherwise we’ll have the carefully crafted ultra radical looking ones, who have conveyed how ever so ‘umble they are, getting a look in, and they are even stressing how far from wishing to overthrow anything they are, that they would be sure to perpetuate the errors of their forebears. Maybe they will have their very own freshened-up tentacles, backscratching and strange bedfellows, to reinforce their conventional / contemporvant / classical image. (I was there on many of the umpteen times it unfolded thus.)
In the Inter Varsity Press Books promotion of Mr Grudem’s Second Edition Systematic Theology, there is a brief interview with him – “Did you change your mind about anything?” is the question people often ask me about this second edition.
The short answer is, “Very little,” but there are a few changes: (1) I now affirm the doctrine of God’s impassibility in the sense of “incapable of suffering harm,” a meaning that I had mistakenly failed to consider in the first edition (chapter 11). (2) Because of substantial new evidence about the meaning of the Greek word monogenēs, I now think that this word should be translated as “only begotten” rather than simply “only” in John 3:16 (and elsewhere), and I now endorse the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son by the Father (chapter 14). (3) I now think that the scientific evidence in favor of an old earth (4.5 billion years) and an old universe (13.8 billion years) has become overwhelming, with the result that I now advocate an old earth position, though I still believe that both old earth and young earth viewpoints are valid for Christian leaders to hold today (chapter 15).”
That sounds as if he has changed his position regarding the relationship between the Father and the Son but I’m not so sure. In his first edition he wrote “The heresy of subordinationism, which holds that the Son is inferior in being to the Father, should be clearly distinguished from the orthodox doctrine that the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father in role or function:“ ……which leaves the door open for him to maintain his semi-Arian heresy. I suspect too that he is also going to use the atemporality of God to bolster his position. But as I’m not inclined to buy the second edition I’ll have to wait for others to say whether or not this is the case.
You can read a good explanation of it all here https://reformed.org/definitions/eternal_generation.html
Michael in UK,
I encountered similar reflections in Robert Jenson’s ‘Systematic Theology’, on how “binary” relationship tends toward domination of one party by the other. Having a third party in the relationship can avoid this. One could argue that something like this is going on in Eph 5, in Paul’s command for “mutual submission out of reverence for Christ”.
I don’t recall the precise wording, but Jenson suggested that the existence of a third Identity within the Divine Being could function in a similar way in regulating the relationship of the other two. It’s not that far, IMO, from Edwards’ conception, in which he identifies the HS with the mutual love of Father and Son for each other.
I concede that, at this level, one is heaping speculation on top of abstraction. “No one has ever seen God”. Thankfully, the Son has exegeted Him for us.
This wording does not adequately represent the beauty of what Jenson wrote. IIRC, the idea was that mutual submission of both parties in a “binary” relationship to a trustworthy third party would free the two to give themselves to each other without fear of exploitation or domination by the other.
Reading through Aimee Byrd’s final ‘blog-post at MoS,
https://www.reformation21.org/blog/peeling-yellow-wallpaper
the thought occurs that in addition to the “male/female” issue, there might also be a “clergy/laity” tension at work. Byrd is clearly an accomplished thinker and writer. But she is a layperson.
During my time affiliated with a small OP congregation, I encountered the view that the Scriptures were addressed to the leaders of local congregations and that it was actually a bad idea for laypeople to try to understand them on their own. The laity should rely on their ordained church leaders to interpret the Scriptures to them.
My interlocutor went so far as to affirm that he thought daily Bible reading by laity was unhelpful. I don’t know how widespread this view is.
Byrd, an influential lay writer on subjects that are at least adjacent to “doctrine”, is not only female, but a layperson, and perhaps threatens the monopoly on the shaping of lay thinking that the clergy have or perhaps reckon that they ought to have.
It’s just an hypothesis, but it helps me to understand the apparent irrelevance to her accusers of her protestations that she is exploring within the bounds permitted by OP confessional standards.
Again, it’s more complicated than that. In light of the highly patriarchal Roman culture at the time of the early Church, the Christian subculture was amazingly progressive and women had a prominent role in the church. For example, two of the most notable theologians of the 4th Century, Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa (brothers), who had a huge role inbthe 2nd ecumenical council, were trained theologically by their older sister Macrina. It seems that the role of women has been more denigrated in Westen Christianity than in Eastern Christianity, so it could be that we in the West are generally less aware of the huge impact women made on early Christianity. So while it is true that women were not as prominent then as we moderns would like them to have been, it’s not true to say they had little to no impact.
Here is an interesting article on some of the notable women from the early church:
https://www.ancient.eu/article/1409/ten-should-be-famous-women-of-early-christianity/
Your observation here hit a nerve. At two different churches now, laypeople are strongly encouraged to “be in the Word” on a daily basis. As someone who actually DOES read the Bible on a daily basis, it has felt like a guilt trip from the pulpit to me, but I’m a bit overly sensitive to those kinda of things, so I dunno. BUT, for all their encouragement of telling people to be in the Word, at both churches I’ve had leadership throw Scripture around like a weapon when they disagree with me about something, as though they are the only ones who actually read it and can interpret it. And as a woman layperson who has more Greek than the average seminary graduate, this is more than a little frustrating.
But the purpose of the creed was to define a minimum set of beliefs, not a comprehensive set of beliefs. It served as a guardrail against various teachings that contradicted the teachings passed down from the apostles. It was never intended to be the be-all of what it means to be a Christian any more than drivers today are supposed to be constantly scraping guardrails to stay on the road. The sermons from the times of the creed (a vast collection) place a huge emphasis on the life and teachings of Jesus. It’s not at all true that what he taught did not matter back then.
Wow, she’s (Aimee) certainly got the people at CrossPolitic fired up. I did a search to find her sites, and the top leading article beyond her list is “Will Someone Love Aimee Byrd?”
https://crosspolitic.com/will-someone-love-aimee-byrd/
If that guy knows anything about the love she believes Aimee should be shown, I guess I missed it in the words he wrote. Appalling!!
John Chrysostom, who was as influential in the East as Augustine was in the West, sharply disagreed. He continuously stressed the importance of lay people reading the Bible (he also opposed abuse by clergy). The OP teaching you mention shows one of the pitfalls of ignoring early church history. This is Chrysostom in his own words:
http://www.orthodox.net/journal/2011-09-08-saint-john-chrysostom-on-the-necessity-of-reading-scripture-daily.html
Isn’t that called “PRIESTCRAFT”?
500 years ago, wasn’t it also one of the Reformers’ BIG beefs regarding Romish Popery?
Definitely NOT Biblical Manhood(TM) & Biblical Womanhood(TM).
I’m perplexed by this view. If the Scriptures are sacred to them why do they leave out sections that don’t fit their view? Acts 17:11 “Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”
Just using this as an example, and this is NOT a reflection on Lowlandseer!
But please note, this is a perfect example of a privileged, educated man basically using his authority to push his theological ideas (some of which are just crazy) off on everyone else. He’s not the only one, of course but his influence among certain segments of the Evangelical community is *enormous*. But just checking Amazon, there are well over a dozen systematic theology books, written by guys whose names you would recognize. Emphasis on *guys*.
The reason I’m so strong on this is because the same groups that love them some Wayne Grudem really despise women and continually devise ways to shut us up. And as a woman, I am tired, very *tired* of this. I’d remind these guys that they would still be waiting to hear about the Resurrection from an eyewitness if they chose to discount the word of Mary Magdalene, the first witness. Jesus did not despise us.
DEVER IN DRAG???
Either that or a Fifties comedy or Eighties slobcom where “guy has to go drag as a girl for non-sexual reasons and Hilarity Ensues”.
We don’t have the writings of Macrina, so we don’t know what Macrina had to say except through her brothers. Why couldn’t Macrina speak for herself? We CAN speak for ourselves!
There are no women among the Ante-Nicene Fathers. It’s all men. The earliest text that may have been composed in part by a woman is the Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas, dated from 203. That is likely the first Christian document written by a woman, 170 years after Jesus, and there are so very, very few documents by Christian women.
Have you ever considered what it’s like to be a woman, to read what we read and hear what we hear, all through the mouths of men over the centuries, some of it quite hateful garbage and never to hear the voices of other women? You might want to think about it for a minute. Here’s a quick exercise for the recitation of the Creed at your church. Count how many times it refers to male pronouns and titles in reference to God, and then how many times it refers to female pronouns and titles in reference to God. The answer to the latter is going to be zero. It’s painful to hear the Creed recited when it’s all male-oriented. God cannot, by definition, be described, but if God is described it has to be with male titles and pronouns, otherwise the theologically literate elite will come stark staring unglued.
During my time at seminary, I encountered a lot of “educated” baby pastors who couldn’t tie their own shoes. Most of them couldn’t hold down a job while going to seminary and either took out huge loans or depended on family money or their wives to work. I also saw a parade of “famous” theologians in chapel who cared way more about their own esteem than God’s.
I’ve met local farmers who have more common sense than twenty seminary grads. And I think common sense is a lot more useful in interpreting the Bible than being spoon fed from one particular view of the Bible, like the New Calvinists do at seminaries. So I’d probably just start laughing if someone told me that ordained ministers could interpret the Bible better than laypeople.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
You make some good points.
Especially the one about wealthy church intellectuals not so concerned about what Jesus taught.
Ken F (aka Tweed),
“It turns out that maintaining strict monotheism has its own challenges because it has logical inconsistencies that cannot be explained away. For example, strict monotheism makes God completely unknowable.”
++++++++++++++++++++++
How so?
(it’s what i would have asked if we all were sitting around the Thanksgiving Table, deep into conversation with port and cigars)
——
“question to ask a Muslim is whether the Quran is created or eternal. They used to kill each other over this topic.”
+++++++++++++
what is the standard belief, there? and what is the significance/connection to the conversation at hand?
(…i would have asked this, too, really hoping i wasn’t the only one at the table who missed the significance/connection part)
ishy,
I’ll add that there are seminaries out there that are challenging people to look at different perspectives. I doubt that happens at the SBC seminaries and very conservative seminaries in other denominations. For one thing, they don’t usually teach that interpretation exists. Either something is biblical or it’s not, and they know what is biblical with absolute certainty.
I would think the view that only ordained ministers can interpret the Bible really means that they don’t think they are interpreting the Bible.
How about this one?
Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with thee…
One of the most beautiful things I’ve ever heard, and I’m not even a Catholic.
Amen. OZ never really gave anything to the Tin-Man that he didn’t already have.
David,
I skimmed the article and couldn’t find the love either. But, it seems full of emotion/fear&anger and it reminded me of another Elie Wiesel quote:
“The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.”
I wonder about all of those in that camp who can “hear” Aimee but do not come to her defense and do not reveal themselves. Maybe they do in their sphere of influence, hopefully.
Muff Potter,
Here’s something I love to hear and remember my children singing this in high school. And we’re not Catholic either:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Scl7ZYI3YE
I am not at all saying this is the way it should have been. But it was better, not worse, than the Roman culture at the time. How many notable secular writings from women exist from the same period? I am aware of some poetry from a few women, but mothing else. So it should not surprise us that there are likewise so few writings from ancient Christian women. Complaining about historical cultures based on modern norms does not seem valuable to me. Can we not be thankful for how much progress has been made and build on that?
No. Absolutley not.
The Bereans read the Scriptures to decide for themselves the truthfulness of Pauls statements. They determined it was truthful. And, they did this on their own using literacy, comprehension and a coherent.
That combination was a direct threat to the Circumcision Group. In the 21st Century, it is no different. Structured religion can not survive a significant percentage of adherents thoughtfully examining its core documents.
Yes, I have considered it and thought about it quite a lot and have been actively working to repent of any and all negative ways of thinking about it. That said, as a man I will never be able to understand what it is like to be a woman any more than you will be able to understand what it is is like to be a man. I don’t think such inherent inability to understand means that we must remain completely silent. But we do have to be careful and considerate.
Nathan Priddis,
(Typo) …coherent intellect.
That’s a useful viewpoint, thanks.
At least Gregory disclosed Macrina’s influence in his writings. I’m not sure that she could have published works by or about herself.
When I was growing up, girls were supposed to find comfort and even empowerment (although that term was not used) in the saying that “behind ever great man is a great woman.” It intrigues me that we no longer hear this saying very often. Women have far more opportunities now, but also in many places even more demands to be the silent influence. How many Gregorys are out there today documenting the Macrinas in their lives?
Ella,
Beauty and reverence know not the manufactured bounds of men.
This bit from Schiller’s Ode to Joy also expresses it well:
Joy, bright spark of divinity,
Daughter of Elysium,
Fire-inspired we tread
Thy sanctuary.
Thy magic power re-unites
All that custom has divided,
All men become brothers
Under the sway of thy gentle wings.
I think I’m interpreting Act 17:11 as you do. Maybe this is a better translation:
“These were the noblest of birth among those of Thessalonica, and received the word with all diligence of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
I’m viewing their interest in listening as positive, but even more positive is their active work to search the scriptures themselves, engage with their own minds in interpreting it and determining it was truthful.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes, Ken F (aka Tweed), Samuel Conner, ishy, Muff Potter, and David;
Thank you all so much for your comments this morning. 🙂
For me, a water-in-the-desert Sunday morning food-for-thought, links-to music, links-to-articles, etc.. 🙂 🙂
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
I totally agree. With Zondervan, IVP, The Good Book Company and Amazon endorsing it without independent scrutiny but merely quoting Mr Grudem’s words from the promotional material, he is on his way to another best seller. And his son, who produces a basic handbook for it, and study guides etc, the money will roll in.
I remember buying the first edition when it was published. The bookstore manager looked perplexed and asked me to get back to him with an assessment in a few weeks. I did and told him that it was awful in my opinion – from endorsing charismata for Calvinists, to his study/worship/praise sections – and that he was looking for the lowest common denominator. The store manager agreed.
The problem, 25 years later, is that the New Calvinists thought he was saying something new and relevant, could mletely overlooking the earlier writers who had debunked the arguments hundreds of years ago.
These are my honest opinions.
There’s different streams of Christianity, literalism & transcendental. Trinity seems to assume a more transcendental view where God is not limited to any particular role. The analogy to human relationships is mainly humans imperfectly trying understand the divine. The literalists see the scripture – whatever version they accept- as the only word on the issue – any issue. This really narrows the options down. If you read the Bible literally all sorts of nastiness emerges. Smiting & genocide. Edicts on death to certain ‘moral’ crimes. The loving saviour that says believe in me or burn. A final act of incredibly wanton destruction of creation.
All this and talking animals! One atheist I read called it ‘barking mad’
As a Christian I didn’t reject the Trinity or other more transcendental views of the faith. I would have pitched the faith much earlier otherwise.
I too had a Muslim co-worker try to convert me to Islam. The hadiths of the Koran contain massive inconsistencies. Maintaining a strict anything paints you into all sorts of corners. So when the will of your chosen deity is seen differently by your co religionists, it makes it worse than if it’s by pagan outsiders. The heretic goes to the sword. Not just a Muslim thing.
🙂 I was waiting for someone to point out the “born of the Virgin Mary” statement in the creed.
But that brings up a couple of good points–first of all, many Protestants consider this idolatry, worship of and prayer to Mary. If you listen to the entire thing, all people are asking is for Mary to pray for us at the hour of our death, but that’s a bridge too far for so many Protestants.
The other point is that in Christianity, Mary is sui generis. She, as a virgin mother, is not like every other woman on earth. In my opinion, the promotion of Mary is not helpful to women, because no woman (prior to certain reproductive technologies) could be a virgin and a mother at the same time. And holding Mary up as a pious mother of Jesus doesn’t do a whole lot for the millions of women like me who are never going to be mother, or married for that matter.
Sorry for the confusion. I’ll try to explain. I often see people reject one thing without thinking through the alternatives. In the case of Trinitarianism, as difficult as it is to grasp, it is not necessarily more difficult to grasp than other alternatives, and it solves problems the alternatives don’t. For example, if God were unitary he would have no relationships of any kind prior to creation. So his essential nature would be self love, not other centered love. Being a Trinity means other centered love is his essential nature. (I apologize for the gendered pronouns – English does not yet have a commonly accepted non-gendered personal pronoun)
In the case of Islam, God is so transcendent as to be unknowable because even associating his characteristics with him can be seen as a break from monotheism. We can only know him through his revelation in the Quran, his 99 names, and his actions in the world. So all that humans can do is to submit and obey. As for the Quran, I believe it is now correct to say that it is eternal rather than created. But that was not always this case.
I’ve heard people say there are as many as 40K different Christian denominations. I think that number is excessive, but it’s certainly more than a few. I am becoming convinced that none of them have a monopoly on the truth. It was a lot easier being ignorant. By now I have done enough investigation to be comfortable nowhere because I bristle at claims I know are not true.
I’m just going to be blunt here. As a woman, if I go to church, the God-talk is all in strictly masculine terms. God is completely referred to as Lord, Master, He, Him, His, etc. And I honestly do think that there are a lot of guys out there, who will claim to be so very, very orthodox in their teachings, but in their heads they see God as male. Moreover, some of these guys believe gender roles and subordinationism will continue into eternity, with women being continually subordinate. (I remember CBMW deep-sixed an article that pretty much spelled this out, several years ago.)
My point is that Christianity as currently constituted is shot through with notions of patriarchy and subordination. And if you don’t think this is an issue, I would point you to the crisis with child sexual abuse. If your church teaches that God is a patriarch, that men are patriarchs of their households, that these men are in charge, and then strongly hint that (for example) the government should butt out even in cases of child abuse or spouse abuse, then yeah, maybe we ought to see where that comes from, and question why it’s there.
I don’t think Jesus was all about the hierarchy and subordination that his church seems to embrace wholeheartedly.
Theology professor back in the day, “Everyone does their own theology.”
Maybe it’s Faith Formation, like everyone is trekking on a growth path (hopefully).
Brings to mind: Frontier Theology & Church, Pioneers vs. Settlers
Various websites discuss the Frontier. However, no link here since it’s undetermined who these teachers are.
Although the general view is that Pioneer is the real deal, it may now be debatable since some of the “Pioneers” (i.e. “Evangelicals” striking it out on their own) seem to be off the rails, IMHO. (Power, money, vice grabs under the banner of pioneering.)
Side note: There’s a website discussing MK child neglect & child abuse (boarding schools & such).
The MK’s running the website note that Centuries ago, the monastics or nuns or single Christians, were better suited to do missionary work and full time church work in general. Singles were highly revered with essential Kingdom work that they were able to do without destroying a nuclear family.
My personal favs when I think about this: Corrie ten Boom, Gladys Aylward, Francis de Sales, Jean de Chantal, Jean-Baptiste de La Salle, Monsignor Hugh O’Flaherty. Watchman Nee married, another fav, and they never had children.
(MSF, in the secular world, prefers just-out-of Med School doctors, or retired doctors. Less nuclear family ties & responsibilities. There’s a MSF documentary.)
YES!!!
And this is NOT Jesus, as you add, and therefore NOT the Body of Christ.
Run. The opposite direction. That is, away from.
A horse is a horse of course, of course
And no one can talk to a horse of course
That is unless of course the horse is the famous Mr. Ed!
What is MK, please?
I assume MSF is Médecins Sans Frontières, aka Doctors without Borders.
Asking for a friend, my old pal Big Eva 😉
I agree. I believe this is primarily because modern Christians have avoided way too much Christian history. By contrast, NT Wight is a recognized 1st century expert, and he teaches the opposite of what you describe. While it’s true that women did not have much voice in society back then, if the church had kept up with the trajectory of women in secular in society, they would have huge prominence in Christianity today. I think there is a reason the patriarchal types avoid early Christian history – it crushes their paradigm.
I definitely saw this as a missionary. But back here, in Baptist college and seminary, I don’t even know how many times I was told I couldn’t be a missionary without a husband to guide me and make all the decisions. And that men couldn’t be missionaries without a wife because they couldn’t care for themselves and do things like cook. I still am not sure how sharing your faith with someone is supposed to be easier than cooking, but nobody could ever explain that to me…
Interestingly enough, I just read an article written by someone in the same organization I was. I was on a very good team, but the organization was so hands off that you could be under someone horrible and abusive and nothing would ever be done about it. https://medium.com/@randallbreanna/the-demons-of-miscommunication-5d9ea9d613ef
Nor just a theism or religious thing.
From the context, I’m guessing MK means Missionary Kid.
As they say in Médecins Sans Frontières, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.” Or in Ecclesiastes 1:9, “There is no new thing under the sun.”
It just never changes. Wage-paying work supposedly destroys the nuclear family, but only when the paid worker is a woman. Magically, celibate and married men accrue power. Married and celibate women prove their worth by having no power.
Not to pick on St Macrina, but she was famous in part for virginity; if she were a learned saucy barmaid, we would know nothing of her. Singleness, childlessness, and virginity are not always choices, but often just happen to people. They are certainly not job descriptions either, but here’s the mentality: well, as long as you’re barren, you might as well run an orphanage.
David,
Well, when your church’s doctrine states the following:
7. God created men to be men and women to be women (God created both men and women in his image. Both men and women are endowed with dignity and respect. He has ,however, endowed each sex with different gifts, roles, and responsibilities. Men are given authority to lead in the church, family, and society. Women are created to give and nurture life. Furthermore, men and women are created for each other. God ordained marriage as the first and primary human relationship. Marriage is between one man and one woman. Children are a gift from God to be cherished and trained in the admonition of the Lord.)
Women, in his world, should not lead in any realm.
Funny, I was guessing Maryknoll. Hope we find out! 🙂
IOW, gender is definitive.
Thanks!
I thought I repled this afternoon, but I either did not hit the post button or it went into customs. My point in that reply is the the role of women in the church would likely be vastly improved if more church people were aware of early church history. For example, NT Wright is a well recognized expert on ancient church history and he strongly supports ordaining women. The CBMW crowd does not appear to know much early church other than Augustine, who was a misogynist. If my earlier reply does not eventually show up I will attempt to recreate it.
Maybe sometime in the future somebody will listen to men like NT Wright and start ordaining them.
Oh, that’s right. Women are ordained in scads of traditions, and also lead non-denoms. The Episcopal Church had a woman presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, from 2006 to 2015.
Question regarding missionaries. In China during the 1800’s, single women were used as missionaries, because only women could enter the home of a Chinese family to preach the gospel. There were many restrictions of a man entering the home, my understanding. Technology might be making this question a moot point, but why isn’t single or married, male or female, lined up with the customs of the country that the missionary/missionaries will be sent to? I’ve never been in that world, looking for insight.
Some churches even have those words in the name (many of which deny laity the main part of their role in spiritual gifts, following Selwyn Hughes and Arthur Wallis).
If only churches were called something like “St Vedast’s” we would know where we stand.
As for “formation”, I think rather of “congealing” or even “deformation” when reminiscing about times the word “formation” was bandied about.
Good practice. And a strong defense against this subversive effort:
” … a platform for US churches that targets the poor, the addicted and the disabled … ”
https://www.dw.com/en/us-religious-data-platform-targets-mentally-ill-vulnerable-people/a-55062013
Using data to mine & love bomb for manipulation, domination, control…
That is done in the more egalitarian agencies, but in the early 2000s, the SBC switched the definition of “missionary” to men only. Women are only allowed to be “support staff”. There are still a lot of places women have better access.
But… the SBC leadership doesn’t really believe in foreign missions and puts nearly all the money on North American missions. They fired 5,000 IMB missionaries back when, claiming that the IMB was dealing with a budget shortfall, but the next year, that budget amount showed up on the North American Mission Board’s budget. This was never allowed to go to convention to be voted on, even though the SBC exists in convention form to pool money for the sake of missions.
Why would they do such a thing? My guess is that they think they can get a whole lot more money and power from American churches than they have the desire to share the gospel.
That was the deciding factor which forced me to exit SBC after nearly 70 years, to enter the Done ranks after decades of faithful service to the denomination I was literally born into. SBC was once known around the world for its evangelistic emphasis … that “whosoever will may come.” That mission changed when the New Calvinists gained control of the SBC … their mission was to “reform” the church, rather than fulfill the Great Commission.
At the same time SBC’s International Mission Board claimed a “budget shortfall” and recalled thousands of career missionaries from foreign fields, the North American Mission Board launched an aggressive $60 million per year church planting program … to plant reformed theology in the SBC via 1,000 new churches per year. The millions of SBC members (primarily non-Calvinist) had no say in the matter regarding where available funds should be directed.
Instead, New Calvinist leaders have changed denominational priorities for SBC … they are no longer primarily focused on the harvest of lost souls throughout the world … their mission is to plant reformed theology, not Gospel churches, in North America. Church history will record that the Mohlerites successfully stripped a once-great evangelistic denomination of its purpose on earth.
(of course, SBC’s New Calvinist leaders would dispute this through fake news)
I wonder how effective such a program would be, for churches to lure in the poor, addicted, and disabled, for purposes of radicalizing them. An awful lot of churches want nothing to do with such folks. Deutsche Welle is a good news source, and the program might exist; but a lot of programs are never implemented.
Manipulative churches are also not so great at long-term planning, or at wanting to funnel their members toward outside causes such as politics writ large. Yes, they will want to take action about specific issues… but to seek out the most vulnerable to get there? I’m not so sure.
Friend,
This is where the parallel channels model comes in. The church per se can be bad – or less bad – at planning or strategy, while the church-within-a-church concentrates on the radicalising and manipulating. It’s hugely effective and stable and has gained in strength during my lifetime.
Max,
“(of course, SBC’s New Calvinist leaders would dispute this through fake news)”
Ava Aaronson,
“www.dw.com…”
++++++++++++++
so… a bit of a tangent. but we’re just sitting around the thanksgiving table enjoying the conversation & our port and cigars, right?
this topic of fake news…
I’ll get to my question:
understanding that ‘unbiased’ does not exist, can any of you recommend news sources that you feel have integrity?
i want to offer some suggestions to my husband.
.
.
now for some background:
my husband and i disagree strongly p0litically. it’s maddening – we’ve agreed that if politics must be talked about we do as objectively as possible (so, minus his insults, mocking sound effects, and our mutual heat in general)
(well, i wrote up this treaty and brokered it to help our relationship along)
my husband complains that ‘all journalists leftist and biased, they’ve all been bought up’, and he can’t trust any of it.
i said, “well, where will you get your information from, then?”
“well, maybe i can give Fox news a try.” (to which i rolled my eyes)
in the meantime, he gets his information from youtube and other conspiracy theory sites created by any ol’ person spoutin’ off with no journalistic credentials whatsoever. (i’ve watched over his shoulder).
elastigirl,
Ava Aaronson,
“www.dw.com…”
+++++++++++++
this informed my question above:
Ava, i looked up that article on the dw.com website.
per the article:
“…Charles was the special adviser to the UK’s Select Committee on fake news that started in 2017, and I wanted to make a film about fake news.”
wow – something akin to a “Secretary of Fake News Awareness” advising government.
.
.
i then read about dw on the about us section:
“We believe that independent media and responsible journalism are essential worldwide….We support the development of independent, transparent media systems, quality journalism and media expertise.”
Sound good, at least.
If (general) you substitute pretty much any secular or non-secular entity for the word “church” in the above quote, the quote would still apply in many cases.
If you have the energy, you can survey all the various outlets and try to sift wheat from chaff on a news piece by news piece basis. IMO there is increasing chaff in recent years, or even decades. I don’t pay much attention to television news any more; the business model seems to be to stoke outrage for the sake of eyeballs and advertiser $.
Alternatively, you can look for aggregators whose selection biases you understand and don’t find too objectionable. Sometimes there are specialist sites which offer only one point of view on a narrow topic, but it can be an exceptionally well-informed point of view. Example: readers of Bill McBride’s “Calculated Risk” ‘blog in the mid-2000s got good advance notice of the looming disaster in the securitized mortgage bond market.
Sometimes these ‘blogs will provide links to other sources, some of which may be gems that one would never find otherwise.
‘Blogs, whether aggregator or specialist, that permit comments are to be preferred. A good ‘blog will attract readers with interest in and often knowledge about the subject, and one can often learn useful things from what commenters write.
Which brings me to my preferred news aggregator ‘blog, which has a specialist focus on the financial system and on the California public employee retirement system …
nakedcapitalism.com
There’s a daily news roundup (twice a day on weekdays) and typically one or more original analysis pieces, either by the site principals or republished from elsewhere. Sometimes there is original reporting, as on the specialist focus on CALPERS.
This site does have a bias — perhaps one could call the curators and writers “new deal democrats”. They don’t tolerate bs in main-stream news and opinion items, and link to sites across the opinion spectrum when they think the items are worthy of attention. They don’t herd with the prevailing gale of ‘news’ flow. They were highly skeptical of some of the major media narratives of the last four years, and in retrospect were right nearly every time.
And there is a lot of insight in the comments (along with the inevitable snark and ventilating that is going to happen in any anonymous public forum; things are generally quite civil. Comments are moderated).
It’s probably not for everyone, but I’ve found it indispensable in recent years; perhaps it will give you good mileage.
Like that time I joined a biker gang, thinking we would all sit around admiring my Vespa. 😉
Friend,
that’s funny!
so, in case there’s a quiz, in order to fit in with biker gang, I should look
a) straight outta hell
b) from kitchenaid appliances
the answer’s….. a)?
(with apologies to your super cute vespa)
elastigirl,
I think I’d go with something like this:
https://images.app.goo.gl/RYyK1VhoYS37WSaF6
That’s a tough one. Some of the national news media are operatives of the Democratic party, while other outlets are operatives of the Republican party. It’s hard to find a journalist these days who has enough integrity to report in an unbiased way … their paychecks depend on them to be biased in one direction or the other. While some self-proclaim to be the most trusted news source in America, we all know better in our heart of heart.
Integrity?! Heck, we can’t find that sort of character in many pulpits in America; why should we expect to experience it on the evening news?! We all lean either left or right … I’m so right, I’m about to fall off the edge! America’s news anchors are mere reflections of ourselves. Thus, in a long-winded answer to your question: No, I can’t recommend a news source with integrity. I can’t even find it much in church, where strong moral principles and uprightness should be the standard … but are not.
Divided we shall fall.
Max,
Max, I would truly like to bolster your faith in writers. Bias is not the same as factuality; many straight news stories have elements of both. It’s fairly easy for an attentive reader to sort out the basic facts and spot the possible slant of the news organization or writer. With a little more effort, we can ask ourselves what doesn’t make sense and what’s possibly omitted. Then we can look for a different version of the story and feel our minds open, or change, or not.
A long time ago I was asked to cover a church conference about a controversial topic. I had no control over the speakers, but reported the content accurately, by making recordings and transcribing every single word. My own mother got so upset about the article that she didn’t speak to me for a month. She accused me of agreeing with the content I reported. In truth, the whole conference made me uncomfortable, but it wasn’t my job to say that. I wanted the readers to make up their own minds.
Writers are human beings. I’ve known a lot of them over the years. Most are like you and me, working in good faith, using their skills, getting through the day, trying to put food on the table.
And where would we be without them?
I recommend BBC World Service, by the way.
Friend – BBC has some good, but like Max says, are full of lies as well. Judge recently ruled they were guilty terrorist activities.
“The fact that the BBC reported the collapse of WTC 7 twenty-three minutes before it actually fell indicates that the UK was aware of the attacks on 9/11 before they actually happened. The direct implication is that they were working with the “terrorists”, all arguments as to who the terrorists actually were aside.“
https://www.globalresearch.ca/bbc-foreknowledge-of-911-collapse-of-wtc-building-seven-british-man-won-law-suit-against-bbc-for-911-cover-up/5438161
Sorry, it wasn’t a recent ruling. 2013 actually.
Friend, I’ve been so open-minded on news reports lately that my brain has darn near fallen out.
Now that’s integrity! Anybody who is brave enough to risk Mama getting mad at you by delivering unfiltered truth is OK in my book! Wish you were on the evening news!
ken,
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/ has this to say about your source:
“Overall, we rate GlobalResearch a Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy and Strong Pseudoscience website based on the promotion of unproven information such as the dangers of Vaccines and 9-11 as a false flag operation. (D. Van Zandt 7/20/2016) Updated (4/22/2020)”
Max,
Thank you for both of your comments. Both hubby and I have been limiting our news intake lately: enough to stay informed, but not enough to slide into despair. That thousand-yard stare is quite the giveaway. 😉
National Enquirer is looking better all the time by comparison.
ken,
I have a reply in customs, but let’s just say your source is lacking plausibility.
UFOs and the undead Elvis are looking better all the time. Plus all those mystery ailments that affect only one celebrity.
Friend,
I believe Ken’s been down this, or a similar, road on this blog before.
Reference sounds 9-11 Truther.
Understood. While I am sitting at my desk typing this, my wife just shouted in the living room while watching the evening news “That’s not true!” Without asking her, I’m sure her scream pertained to some mistruth or half-truth about her pick for POTUS.
Speaking of lies (fake news), Mark Twain had some wit and wisdom in this regard:
“A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
“Anybody can tell lies: there is no merit in a mere lie, it must possess art, it must exhibit a splendid & plausible & convincing probability; that is to say, it must be powerfully calculated to deceive.”
“One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.”
“You can’t pray a lie.”
I used to think so, but last week I read about some church elders consigning a member to hell for not wanting to go to their church anymore.
I hope this kind of stuff does not get traction here. It’s one of the big reasons I quit interacting with Wade’s blog.
Friend,
My apologies for the poor wording with my post. I should’ve reread my post since I was in a bit of a rush.
Seems you’re still intent on shooting the messenger and not grappling with the message which you can find on the web via various outlets.
A man got off the hook from paying a TV license due to the fact that BBC had foreknowledge of the building falling and announced it twenty some min before it happened. If he paid the license he argued he would be supporting a terrorist (BBC) and the judge agreed.
Pretty straightforwards, imo.
Such folks pray to the wrong God. Reminds me of lyrics from an old song by Truth “Living Life Upside Down”:
“You say we’ve risen to a new age of truth
And you’re calling it a spiritual Godly pursuit
But I say, but I say
What if we’ve fallen to the bottom of a well
Thinking we’ve risen to the top of a mountain
What if we’re knocking at the gates of hell
Thinking that we’re heaven bound”
Friend,
nice!
Ken F (aka Tweed),
It was officially discouraged recently, when the discussion went on for a bit longer.
*drily* I was 14 when the US Episcopal Church started ordaining women. Other traditions starting ordaining around the same time. There weren’t “scads” of traditions ordaining women. The Salvation Army was considered odd in that respect around the turn of the 20th century.
Sorry that website you posted is the home of a conspiracy theorist named Michael Chussodovsky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#Centre_for_Research_on_Globalization
According to the Wikipedia article, his website was accused by NATO in 2017 of spreading pro-Russian propaganda.
Not my website, but I think Dee ought to remove this post for simply being false on the face of it.
Sorry if it wasn’t clear I was talking about the present and the past couple of decades.
Here’s a 2018 article that covers denominations, but not the independent churches founded by women, and not the married couple co-pastor partnerships that have grown more common.
https://www.christiancentury.org/article/news/report-details-trends-us-women-clergy
” I’m the keeper of the cheese… and you’re the lemon merchant, you get it?” Ren & Stimpy
I have multiple sources for news. BBC, CBC, MSNBC, CNN, DW, Global and on occasion the Bigfoot Research Organization.
Sometimes Al-Jazeera and RT have interesting articles.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
Do you realize how many pastors have accused this website of spreading slander and propaganda regarding the Kingdom of God?
Any organization or person who is effective in uncovering lies will be accused of this – all stemming from the Accuser himself. Wear it as a badge of honor with thanksgiving.
Friend – I didn’t start this conversation. Todd did with his story of how Aimee was sent packing because she holds to different ideas and ultimately made people feel uncomfortable, and I can certainly relate to how it cost her “friendships”.
I would encourage you expand your reading horizons, especially when a few people (who actually have integrity) who were inside the very systems you currently agree with are shouting for you to be aware of the lies that drive the systems.
“There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunization of children does more harm than good. There is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza. The producers of these vaccines know that they are worthless, but they go on selling them, anyway.”
Dr. J. Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Control Officer and research virologist, U.S. FDA
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/09/gary-d-barnett/2021-the-year-of-the-deadliest-vaccine/
This will be my last post. I wish you all the best!
To all who are seeking reliable news sites:
Global is a conspiracy site with Russian leanings. RT is an actual Russian news outlet without a shred of independence from Putin’s Kremlin. Fun fact, RT stands for Russia Today.
These are not reliable, intriguing alternative sites. They are manipulative anti-American sites, designed to undermine faith in the very most basic institutions and ideas. RT is particularly insidious because it is sleek and polished.
Beware.
But Liars can Pray.
Long and Eloquent and Devout.
What happens when the BRO becomes the most reliable source?
Jack,
“and on occasion the Bigfoot Research Organization”
++++++++++
what’s the latest?!?
Man-O-Manischewitz is that ever the truth!
Twain’s detractors were many back in his day.
Mostly preachers and the literature police.
I’ll grant that RT is severely biased. Sometimes their science writing is ok – when they aren’t telling you about the asteroid of the week.
Global News Canada part of the Global Television network. It’s a subsidiary of Shaw Communications based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. For the most part I find their newcasts brief and concise with very little editorializing. If there’s a Russian Connection, I’ve never heard about…but I did feel a desire to wear a Russian hat when Shaw provided my internet a few years ago…so you never know.
Things get hairy!
Haven’t been there for a while! But they have some great links to the old Bigfoot documentaries of seventies, the one with Peter Graves from around 1976 and “In Search Of” with Leonard Nimoy – and the “Ancient Mysteries” Bigfoot episode from 1994
Thanks for clarifying. You first mentioned only “Global,” which I took to be a further reference to a Russian-connected site, also based in Canada, that another user on this thread recommended as a source of the truth about a building that collapsed on a tragic day 19 years ago.
If this seems roundabout, it’s because I can’t figure out what is causing my comments to need a behind-the-scenes inspection.
I responded, but for some reason my comment did not show up right away.
I am discouraged right now. We had a good conversation going about sizing up news sources, but baseless viewpoints keep showing up, and my challenges vanish for hours on end.
I feel like some folks are taking advantage of the hard-working authors and overseers.
Any woman who disagrees to be a doormat who bats her eyes and agrees with all the men that she is lesser is ‘a closet egalitarian feminist’ which actually sounds great and is what they are creating so good job guys!
Do feel sorry for Aimee though. Todd always seemed rude but this is still sad.
As a woman she is not allowed to become clergy in their world, so in my mind it’s still linked.
Jack,
““In Search Of” with Leonard Nimoy”
++++++++++
didn’t he have a great voice… perfect narrator for cryptozoology stuff.
by the way, regarding that fantastic footage from 1967, my reason for seeing the authenticity of it is that the sasquatch is a female.
i would speculate that pranksters at the time would have tended to be male. I just don’t see it occurring it to such a prankster to don a female costume (let alone having any desire to do so).
i.e. “Patty” as in the Patterson film.
Bigfoot is the Holy Grail of Cryptozoology.
Maybe your comments are being held in customs to savour the content of your comments. 🙂 (Compliment intended. 🙂 )
researcher,
Thanks for your sweet words. Maybe in future I’ll mention “cake with file inside” in every comment, so the comments can free themselves without anybody needing to bother. 🙂
This is so bonkers.
And this whole ‘ a woman can’t be a missionary without a man’ reminds me of Jane Eyre. Which was…a very long time ago and shouldn’t still be the way.
Friend,
🙂
Like our discussions on the Bible, context is everything. Dr. Morris had issues with the 1976 swine flu vaccine and how he felt that it could do harm and it did. Big pharma has lots to answer for (think Vioxx & Thalidomide) but then think of Jonas Salk and the polio vaccine he made public domain. Google polio in 1956. That disease does a fraction of the harm it used to.
Aimee Byrd had a different opinion than her co religionists. Key word – opinion.
“Truthers” tell us school shootings are made up, the victims aren’t even real!
Sounds very familiar.
I know that news organizations can be biased and that’s why it’s good to listen to other points of view.
Kind like the Baskin Robbins faith of Christianity. Lots of flavors. Which can be good. But too much of any one flavor could be bad, like the guy who died eating too much licorice.
True story, my wife’s five year old cousin died of diptheria. Completely preventable but her parents didn’t believe she needed vaccination.
Jack,
My earlier response to you now has its $40 and new suit, if you know what I mean. 😉
Headless Unicorn Guy,
“Bigfoot is the Holy Grail of Cryptozoology.”
+++++++++++++
maybe i’ve been approaching this all wrong.
i think i need a herring.
A muscular female at that. My wife thinks that they are “not like ours”. Her tradition is replete with spirit creatures and “white ladies”. So who knows? To each their own.
Friend,
thats funny!
This is terribly sad.
Vaccinations have been one fo the greatest public health inventions in history. There is no doubt they have on the whole done more good than harm eradicating diseases like polio. I am baffled that this is a discussion that is being had.
Friend: To all who are seeking reliable news sites:
My general rule is if something *sounds* like a crazy nuts conspiracy theory i check for multiple sources and generally check snoops as well.
Was “snoops” a typo, instead of Snopes?
Speaking of … my wife and I are getting our flu vaccinations this afternoon. For all you 65+ Wartburgers, consider getting the CDC-recommended “Fluzone High-Dose Quadrivalent” vaccine before the end of October.
thank you to those who chimed in with thoughts on news sources.
I’ll rephrase the question (if anyone’s still around on this thread):
–in your view, what one right-leaning news sources would you recommend,
–and what one left-leaning news-source would you recommend?
(for comparison purposes, and since our time is truly limited)
Fox News Opinion
CNN News Opinion
Max,
any newspapers?
I’m not baffled.
Anti-Vaxx has become another Litmus Test of your Salvation.
Cue SCRIPTURE!s about Relying on the Flesh instead of the Spirit,
1 Cor 1:25, 1 Tim 6:20, etc.
Typo/lazy typing. You know what i’m talking about obviously though so i figure it’s ok.
Max,
Oooh Max, You’re a toughie! I can’t do more than about 10 seconds of opinion on TV. My dear husband now actually asks my permission before turning it on.
One comment not approved. Could we stay away from subjects not pertinent to the post. Also, since I am a nurse, my husband a doctor, my son in law a dentist and my daughter a nurse, I am not into conspiracy theories about the medical profession. In fact, the only conspriacy theory I like has to do with aliens. ‘I beleive” ala X Files.
dee,
….so your dream is to see a UFO, too??
I love pickled herring, and it’s Kosher too.
Muff Potter,
herring…
+++++++++++
i’ve never tried it — it’s tasty?
actually, i wasn’t going to eat it. it could come in handy on my holy quest.
(but maybe i’m the only one who knows what i’m talking about… wouldn’t be the first time…)
“It can’t be done!”
left-leaning: New York Times
right-leaning: Wall Street Journal
I listen and process things … if I can hear the TV over my wife’s screams!
Ken F (aka Tweed),
!! you’re right!! it won’t work, will it!
(things are looking up already)
Jack,
what would she say about mothman? i’m genuinely interested.
Uh, you might first find out why your wife is screaming, and then watch TV. 😉
Oh, she is in the same room screaming at the biased news coverage about her favorite candidates.
elastigirl,
I think the only appropriate response is “Ni!”
Max,
Just checking. 🙂
Ken F (aka Tweed),
you’re funny!
elastigirl,
I am worrried for the people who have no idea what you and I are talking about. 🙂
Ken F (aka Tweed),
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBzJF_-cBA&ab_channel=SamtheAngelFox
My Dad had a brother who died age 16 of Measles; threw his Dad into a deep depression which adversely affected the family even more.
Friend,
I think it could be an acquired taste…
I read John Keel’s book years ago. She’d probably consider it under the term “not like ours”.
Emj (my wife – who I keep referring to without a name, which feels unnatural to me) is a very devout Christian. In keeping with the spirit (ok pun a little intended) of the post, Christians can hold a wide range of views and in some countries have added their own beliefs into the Christian pot.
As a Christian, if you feel threatened by any debate, discussion or dissent, especially within your own group then I would ask – how strong is your faith?
Christians I know (including Emj) who are secure in their beliefs do not shy away from a debate and do not fear truth when the evidence presents itself.
What we see in the post above is people defining someone else’s Christian experience. If the Gospels are to be believed, Jesus was not shy about engaging in debate, and didn’t smite dissenters.
Excellent insight! A lot of Christians (and other folks) think it’s wrong to think about another viewpoint. Others can’t discuss things calmly. But Jesus himself brought a lot of new ideas, eh?
Jack,
“if you feel threatened by any debate, discussion or dissent, especially within your own group then I would ask – how strong is your faith?”
++++++++++
Thanks for the reply.
i’d also ask, “is it your doctrine you faith in?”
considering the concept of God (bigger than the universe), it seems to me getting all tense and threatened about things that don’t fit in one’s box is a sign that one’s faith is in one’s box.
(sort of rushing here, so i don’t how well i articulated my thought,…. or even if it’s part poppycock…i know it’s not total poppycock…gotta go)
And smaller than an electron at the same time.
One comment not approved. I do not want to discuss *health care” since this is about Aimee Byrd. As a ps-my husband was tained in cardiology at Duke and was on faculty there years ago and is once again on faculty at Duke. Nuff said.
I grew up in the town of Racine on the shore of Lake Michigan in South Eastern Wisconsin (standing on the breakwater looking southward on a clear day, you can see chicago’s sears tower).
Racine has been euphemistically called “Little Denmark” on account of its immigrant history. It also has a significant Jewish population. Pickled herring is almost a staple with those two groups, so it’s only natural that the taste for it would spread.
But then again “tasty” is a purely subjective thing. I love the stuff, but it makes Mrs. Muff wanna’ barf.
I wonder if Aimee Byrd likes it?
Muff Potter,
as soon as you mentioned ‘Racine’ i planned to mention that my grandma was born in Racine and spent her early years there.
her parents immigrated there from Denmark. (but then you mentioned Denmark!). They eventually settled in Berkeley — my great grandpa needed a dryer climate for health reasons.
it’s thought-provoking to consider how all these decisions our ancestors made eventuated into us. had they not made the decision to come westward (and had many other decisions not taken place after that), i never would have existed.
(actually, that’s not how i see it – i have unorthodox views on existence and souls entering human embryos – based on anecdotal evidence…. but that’s not for this forum)
Yes, let’s ask Aimee if she like herring. this post concerns her, and i want her to know she has all our support. (whether or not she likes herring).
I too have unorthodox views on what it means to be human and how we start out.
Views which I am told I cannot harbour and still call myself a Christian.
Like I’ve commented here before, I hold to the parameters of The Apostle’s Creed as non-negotiables.
The rest of the stuff?
I pick and choose as I see fit.
Muff Potter,
well, it sure is great not wearing a straight jacket. ahhh, i feel so free i could soar with the dawn. and loop-de-loop around near the moon, too.
Then I have a (long and involved) webcomic for you: TRYING HUMAN.
https://www.tryinghuman.com/
Discovered it some weeks ago, and it hits pretty much every trope of what Chris Peebles called “the developing UFO/Alien folk mythology” while still telling a complex behind-the-scenes story. Juggling all the tropes and managing to keep all the balls in the air. Pulling off such a “Kitchen Sink School of Storytelling” is very difficult; the only other examples that come to mind of pulling off such a Kitchen Sink are the mystery/puzzle movie “The Last of Sheila” and a 2012 My Little Pony fan novel titled “The Empty Room”.
elastigirl,
One thing I’ve noticed that seems to be found in varying degrees across all the flavors of Christianity, and it’s too bad really, if not downright sad, is that all of them hate and despise human freedom.