Re: [asa] Why couldn't you write your d*mn book more clearly?

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Thu Mar 13 2008 - 19:21:14 EDT

MessageMinimal requirements for someone who expects to be listed to by Christians include (a) that that person understand him/herself to be persons of the church, responsible to the Christian community, & (b) that the doctrinal and ethical traditions that the church has developed over the centuries (which of course are not monolithic) be taken seriously - which is not to say, accepted uncritically. Those who claim special revelations should generally be regarded with great scepticism. On those grounds I think White & Anderson (not to mention Joe Smith) fail to pass muster.

Traditional interpretations of scripture, especially when they imply claims about the world which are open to scientific test, are not immune from criticism. It's true that some Lutherans resisted heliocentrism much longer than made sense. In his 1924 Christliche Dogmatik the LC-MS theologian preferred geocentrism as supposedly biblical & (at least in the English translation - I can't find it in the German but don't have the index volume) appealed to relativity for this. But if I'm not mistaken, geocentrism was never the official teaching of the Missouri Synod.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: David F Siemens
  Cc: ;
  Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:09 AM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Why couldn't you write your d*mn book more clearly?

  There are several conflicting magisteria, like Ellen G. White, prophetess of the Seventh Day Adventists; Herbert Armstrong who had headquarters in Pasadena, CA. There are other theological traditions that are held within the several denominations, including the now abandoned Missouri Synod anti-Copernicanism. Since serious Bible students differ on the Eucharist and Baptism (back to the time of the Reformation), where will you find this magisterium? The fact is that, when we stand before the Lord, we'll have things to unlearn, even among those of us who are certain they are right.
  Dave (ASA)

  On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:29:25 -0400 "John Walley" <> writes:

    I agree with you wholeheartedly on this one and this same conclusion has been my key takeaway from my recent OEC-TE journey. The church needs more of an emphasis on what are reasonable and allowable interpretations of the Bible (after getting it right first of course) and that would diffuse a lot of this "private interpretation" nonsense that leads to this disaster and others.

    I think we need the office of the Majesterium restored to the church and that was one unfortunate casualty of the Reformation and we are suffering as a result of it. Ironically, I think the closest thing that I have found that approaches this function in the church today is this list. There may be better examples out there cloistered away in church hierarchy somewhere but not easily accessible to the general seeking public to my knowledge.

    Today's Protestantism is afflicted with the intellectual equivalent of moral relativism in our culture. We have intellectual or spiritual relativism where every idea is equal including YEC and it is politically incorrect and unacceptable to correct it. This denies the truth that there is an absolute right and wrong and that we should have it or be looking for it and have a way to know it when we do find it.

    I think it will take a removal of all the complicit pastors from their roles and it will take a new generation of leadership in the church but I am hopeful that we will see it soon as I feel that is what the Holy Spirit is trying to do.



To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Mar 13 19:23:43 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 13 2008 - 19:23:43 EDT