From: Terry M. Gray (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Sep 05 2003 - 11:00:38 EDT
> >From: "Terry M. Gray" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> I think that Christian theologizing is
>> profoundly and absolutely dependent on the Biblical text (even if it
>> leads to antinomies, apparent contradictions, and apparent
>I accept that as _your_ definition of "Christian theologizing." Various
>concepts regarding the character and degree of that dependence do, however,
>lead to a remarkable diversity of Christian theologies.
>> That, if anything, is the meaning of the authority and
>> sufficiency of scripture.
>Adding the concept of "authority and sufficiency" serves to select a subset
>of the theologies acknowledged in my comment above. Your theology is in that
>> Show me from a Biblical text argument that my theology
>> is wrong and I will change my theology (at least I hope so).
>I believe you.
>> Theology that goes beyond the Bible is mere speculation.
>Show me a theology that does not contain any speculative elements that go
>beyond what is explicitly stated in the canon. :)
Notice that you've changed my wording a bit. There is a "good and
necessary consequences" aspect to handling the Biblical text that I'm
not willing to call speculative. So I'm going to reject the
"explicit" demand here. Also, I fully recognize the diversity of
theologies--although I will be the first to admit that often (but not
always) the differences that divide Christians are on subjects that
perhaps aren't so clear from the text.
I guess I'd ask you (or the group) to give me an example of what you
believe to be a speculative element within traditional evangelical
theology that is not rooted in scripture. I can't think of any right
-- _________________ Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist Chemistry Department, Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 email@example.com http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/ phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 05 2003 - 11:02:38 EDT