Blogogetics

A lot of people argue against Dogma and Orthodoxy on the grounds that the early church had neither. To answer that position, Darrell Bock points to four areas of activity in the earliest churches and their worship services. Those four areas are Scripture (i.e., the Hebrew Bible, what we call the Old Testament), Schooling (Doctrinal summaries), Singing (early Christian hymns), and Sacraments (Baptism and the Lord’s Table).

Those of you familiar with my work known that I have discussed an alternative expression of Christianity I have called “Jesusanity.” (See Dethroning Jesus) It is a view that says Jesus’ teaching is an important religious guide, but his person and work are not central to Christian teaching. Such a view also argues that there was no such thing as orthodoxy in the earliest period of the movement Jesus started. Rather there were alternative views of Jesus that were not really compatible. Part of the argument goes that in the earliest period of the development of the movement, when theology was taught orally, there was room for a great deal of theological development because there was no functioning theological authority like the New Testament in place. Part of this argument is true, because the materials we have show that the New Testament, as we know it, did not really start to emerge and be used extensively until the late second century (ie, books that began to be read as a functioning unit like the four gospels and Paul’s letters). A community might have one gospel or two but predominantly operated with a variety of oral means of passing on the teaching of the community. So was there a way to pass on theology before there was a functioning New Testament? Can one speak of a core orthodoxy or proto-orthodoxy? I think one can. Let me explain…

- Read full article

Tags: By Others by Guest Author
No Comments »

prolegomena
- the purpose of this work is to record my thoughts and study concerning the subject of women in the family and ministry and to establish our church’s stance on the subject.
- the two primary positions on this subject, within evangelicalism, are the complementarian view and the egalitarian view. the complementarian view is that men and women are different both physically and nonphysically in their makeup as human persons and that these differences are intended to complement each other in human relationships and communities. the egalitarian views is that men and women may be different physically but internally are not different in any way and that such a makeup intends for men and women to function in any role they desire.
- I knowingly enter this discourse aware that there are a significant number of Godly men and women scholars1 on both sides of this issue. due to this fact, I believe this subject ought to be approached in much humility and much charity with a fervent commitment against dogmatism.2
- I also enter into this discourse with the craving intent to allow Scripture and reason to have the first and foremost authority subjugating to their final say whatever emotions, experiences, and presuppositions i may have or have ever had. to their final say it is my prayer that I would pour contempt on all my pride and
humbly bow my head before the holy instruction of God in heaven. on any issue the whole counsel of God’s Word ought to be both our goal and commitment.
- in light of the above statements, I would also like to add that I consider this issue adiaphora, a matter of non-essentialness. essential relativity3 is a misnomer4 in matters of doctrine. I consider matters of essentialness to strictly be matters pertaining to salvation. I believe that in all areas of non-essentialness that fellowship and instruction may and ought to take place within the unity we have as the body of Christ (sometimes the common quip “to agree to disagree” and love one another is also used to describe this friendship and bond that differing Christians may have). in addition, I believe areas of non-essentialness ought never to divide or disjoin believers in Christ, but we ought always to “Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace (Eph 4:3).”
- the contour of this study appears first in the form of 37 reasons why I have been persuaded from a previous position of egalitarianism to a complementarian position, followed by 15 responses to the arguments/objections of the egalitarian position.
[Read more →]

Tags: Relationships by Duane Smets
No Comments »