Jordan. Thanks for your videos! I have been a calvinist for years... but relatively new to reformed cofessionalism. Your vidors are helpful. Blessings.
Thank you for this. I think it applies to more than religion. If we could disagree with each other and still be kind to each other afterwards i think the world would be a better place.
Yes, the analytic theology tradition is like the analytic philosophy tradition; they say "Hard on ideas, soft on people." The last quarter century of pop discourse has been the Eternal September of the analytic traditions.
Old Christian proverb from the middle ages: Is it possible for theologians to be saved? St. Bonaventure often said this to himself to keep his head screwed on right,
As the bible is more like a library than a single chapter book, the church is more like a university with its various departments and administrative bodies and intellectuals and students. The church is a big tent like a university is like a small city. Disagreement is inevitable but war and fighting and infighting don't have to be. Human beings are going to be wrong most of the time about most ideas because they only have a 3 pound lump of brain tissue in their head and not an infinite pound lump. For example, I think modern human beings tend to have a bit of scholarly hubris about knowing history and saying the word "fact" in regard to pre-historic, ancient, and classical history. A scholarly historian worth his salt would warn you to be careful even about medieval history (and about the word medieval to boot). Anyway, I don't want to ramble.......
Jesus is not the friend of everyone; 'But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! ... He was willing to talk shit to those he theologically disagreed with.
I don't think you are right in what you say and are approaching things from the wrong place. You are very wrong to look to the creeds and statements of faith because those come from men and your whole approach is man centred. Rather we are to seek to know God for ourselves and hear what He says. That of course requires hearing Him through His word, the Bible. First of all we are to hear Him and only as He shows us are we able to say anything. Of ourselves we can do nothing. We speak as He shows us. Christ said and did nothing of Himself but only what the Father showed Him. We can do no better. We do not know what is suitable for anyone. We need to deny self, take up our cross daily and follow Him. The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned.
@@thelondonlyceum That is a fair point. That is why I direct any and all to God to receive from Him. Men can be and often are deficient but God is perfect and knows best what is needed for any individual.
Absolutely correct. Disagreement is standard - the Null Hypothesis is the default, and until the burden of proof for a given claim is met, the Null Hypothesis remains - that there is no substantial, rational cause to believe in a deity.
@@BennyAscent Moral awarenes refutes you by simple reason for those able to reason. Moral awareness informs and proves punishment for wrongdoing. That judgement can only be final at the end of life which both proves a Judge and an afterlife. We all have moral awareness so there is no excuse for any.
@cliveadams7629 There is plenty of evidence. Look at the central truth of Christ. If the Resurrection be true then that necessarily refutes Krishna and Allah. None has ever been able to give a reasoned or reasonable denial of the Resurrection from the evidence. Of course many give an ignorant refusal because of the obvious implications and they prefer to live as they want to. If a reasoned or reasonable denial of the Resurrection from the evidence cannot be made then no one has any excuse.
@@Must_not_say_that There is no evidence so it's not true. It's the xtians who can't give a reasoned argument because they have no evidence. In fact the real historians, not the biased apologists who make sht up for Jebus, provide evidence and reason why the bible cannot be correct. Hence, your argument fails.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Jordan. Thanks for your videos! I have been a calvinist for years... but relatively new to reformed cofessionalism. Your vidors are helpful. Blessings.
Wow, thank you! That's really kind! ~ Jordan
Thank you for this. I think it applies to more than religion. If we could disagree with each other and still be kind to each other afterwards i think the world would be a better place.
I enjoyed this. I would like to argue better and with more grace... and your voice is very easy to listen to. 👍
good video
Yes, the analytic theology tradition is like the analytic philosophy tradition; they say "Hard on ideas, soft on people."
The last quarter century of pop discourse has been the Eternal September of the analytic traditions.
Thank you for this.
Old Christian proverb from the middle ages: Is it possible for theologians to be saved? St. Bonaventure often said this to himself to keep his head screwed on right,
That is perhaps the most valid taxonomy of doctrinal hierarchy I've seen.
As the bible is more like a library than a single chapter book, the church is more like a university with its various departments and administrative bodies and intellectuals and students. The church is a big tent like a university is like a small city. Disagreement is inevitable but war and fighting and infighting don't have to be. Human beings are going to be wrong most of the time about most ideas because they only have a 3 pound lump of brain tissue in their head and not an infinite pound lump. For example, I think modern human beings tend to have a bit of scholarly hubris about knowing history and saying the word "fact" in regard to pre-historic, ancient, and classical history. A scholarly historian worth his salt would warn you to be careful even about medieval history (and about the word medieval to boot). Anyway, I don't want to ramble.......
Jesus is not the friend of everyone; 'But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! ... He was willing to talk shit to those he theologically disagreed with.
I don't think you are right in what you say and are approaching things from the wrong place.
You are very wrong to look to the creeds and statements of faith because those come from men and your whole approach is man centred.
Rather we are to seek to know God for ourselves and hear what He says. That of course requires hearing Him through His word, the Bible.
First of all we are to hear Him and only as He shows us are we able to say anything. Of ourselves we can do nothing. We speak as He shows us.
Christ said and did nothing of Himself but only what the Father showed Him. We can do no better. We do not know what is suitable for anyone. We need to deny self, take up our cross daily and follow Him.
The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned.
Why should I think you are right since you are a man too? ~ Jordan
@@thelondonlyceum
That is a fair point. That is why I direct any and all to God to receive from Him. Men can be and often are deficient but God is perfect and knows best what is needed for any individual.
Easy to disagree. It's all nonsense until there's some evidence. If you think I'm wrong then disprove Krishna or Allah.
Absolutely correct. Disagreement is standard - the Null Hypothesis is the default, and until the burden of proof for a given claim is met, the Null Hypothesis remains - that there is no substantial, rational cause to believe in a deity.
@BennyAscent Except Odin. He was definitely real, they made a film about him.
@@BennyAscent Moral awarenes refutes you by simple reason for those able to reason.
Moral awareness informs and proves punishment for wrongdoing. That judgement can only be final at the end of life which both proves a Judge and an afterlife.
We all have moral awareness so there is no excuse for any.
@cliveadams7629
There is plenty of evidence.
Look at the central truth of Christ.
If the Resurrection be true then that necessarily refutes Krishna and Allah.
None has ever been able to give a reasoned or reasonable denial of the Resurrection from the evidence. Of course many give an ignorant refusal because of the obvious implications and they prefer to live as they want to.
If a reasoned or reasonable denial of the Resurrection from the evidence cannot be made then no one has any excuse.
@@Must_not_say_that There is no evidence so it's not true. It's the xtians who can't give a reasoned argument because they have no evidence. In fact the real historians, not the biased apologists who make sht up for Jebus, provide evidence and reason why the bible cannot be correct. Hence, your argument fails.