Comments on: The Trouble with ism’s http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/ Spreading the fame of God by reaching, building, and equipping people in the character and priorities of Christ. Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:21:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Phil http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1756 Phil Mon, 13 Mar 2006 03:48:39 +0000 116302265#comment-1756 I'm baaack, Miller, I did'nt mean to ignore you, but when I sent my comment, my computer went into the shimmy,shake,shakes and I had to do a system recoverey. I did'nt realize it even went through till Eric and I spoke this morning. I don't expect you to respond to "archives" so this is for the record. I'm sure we are all thinking on Paul's admonition to Timothy 1 Tim.6:3-5, Likely a group of esoterics that were proud of their ability to belittle unschooled men with their "high" vocabulary and intellectual "reasoning". The trappings of that tendency in reformed circles because of the deep meditation and study (along with prayer to our Lord for wisdom)that is often required to understand the meater doctrines, can sometimes lead us away from the will of God to be kind, gentle and compassionate toward the less mature disciple. That would make our fruit rotten . But I digress; during my time of silence between blog's, I've found GFC to be a friend of the weak with a desire only to build up other's in the faith. Eric's gracious reply is a good example of this when we could have "wrangeled" with each other endlessly. He gave me the benefit of the doubt, as I do him. Blessings I’m baaack,
Miller, I did’nt mean to ignore you, but when I sent my comment, my computer went into the shimmy,shake,shakes and I had to do a system recoverey. I did’nt realize it even went through till Eric and I spoke this morning.
I don’t expect you to respond to “archives” so this is for the record.
I’m sure we are all thinking on Paul’s admonition to Timothy 1 Tim.6:3-5, Likely a group of esoterics that were proud of their ability to belittle unschooled men with their “high” vocabulary and intellectual “reasoning”. The trappings of that tendency in reformed circles because of the deep meditation and study (along with prayer to our Lord for wisdom)that is often required to understand the meater doctrines, can sometimes lead us away from the will of God to be kind, gentle and compassionate toward the less mature disciple. That would make our fruit rotten .
But I digress; during my time of silence between blog’s, I’ve found GFC to be a friend of the weak with a desire only to build up other’s in the faith. Eric’s gracious reply is a good example of this when we could have “wrangeled” with each other endlessly. He gave me the benefit of the doubt, as I do him.
Blessings

]]> By: Miller http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1755 Miller Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:58:14 +0000 116302265#comment-1755 Phil, could you explain what you mean when you say, <blockquote>"The point is perhaps we should not strive over/with words for any prolonged period or we may in fact do more harm than good."</blockquote> I have some thoughts regarding what I think you mean, but want to know more first. Thanks for jumping in. Phil, could you explain what you mean when you say,

“The point is perhaps we should not strive over/with words for any prolonged period or we may in fact do more harm than good.”

I have some thoughts regarding what I think you mean, but want to know more first. Thanks for jumping in.

]]> By: Eric Farr http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1754 Eric Farr Sat, 28 Jan 2006 03:09:26 +0000 116302265#comment-1754 Phil, I mean to say that I am pragmatic in the casual sense of the word. Given two morally equivalent choices, I'll choose the one that is most likely to achieve the end I have in mind--a rough synonym for practical. By saying that I am not a pragmatist, I mean to say that I reject pragmatism as a philosophy (i.e., the ends can never justify the means). Viewing the term in its formal definition, I'd have to agree with you--I'm not technically pragmatic. As one who cares a lot about the meaning of words myself, I'll have to give you this one. :) Phil, I mean to say that I am pragmatic in the casual sense of the word. Given two morally equivalent choices, I’ll choose the one that is most likely to achieve the end I have in mind–a rough synonym for practical. By saying that I am not a pragmatist, I mean to say that I reject pragmatism as a philosophy (i.e., the ends can never justify the means).

Viewing the term in its formal definition, I’d have to agree with you–I’m not technically pragmatic. As one who cares a lot about the meaning of words myself, I’ll have to give you this one. :)

]]> By: Phil Parks http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1753 Phil Parks Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:25:34 +0000 116302265#comment-1753 "Ism's" , I agree with all of your comments from the perspective that you present. Although I don't want to be involved with a pragmatic church, particuarly "seeker" sensitive, pragmatism as an ideology does not always have to be seen from a negative point of view. There are some good and godly ways to apply this as an ideology in fundemental ways. This is probably what you mean when you say you are pragmatic. Words have meaning and these meanings can be manipulated overtime,(etymologies) even by contemporary christian culture. I've already referenced "seeker" and we know this to be a virtuous characteristic so I will move from that one to another more abstract. Existentialism would be an example of this. When embraced as a philisopical ideology in the manner it has been defined in modern age by perhaps well meaning theologins; it is heretical. However, what if being an existentialist meant: A christian who in thier worship of God, believes what is in the heart should be experienced as manifested literaly thru the flesh. i.e. Bend the knee, bow the head, lift up hands, sing praise. Anybody want to be called an existentialist now? The point is perhaps we should not strive over/with words for any prolonged period or we may in fact do more harm than good. Just thinking.... “Ism’s” , I agree with all of your comments from the perspective that you present. Although I don’t want to be involved with a pragmatic church, particuarly “seeker” sensitive, pragmatism as an ideology does not always have to be seen from a negative point of view. There are some good and godly ways to apply this as an ideology in fundemental ways. This is probably what you mean when you say you are pragmatic. Words have meaning and these meanings can be manipulated overtime,(etymologies) even by contemporary christian culture. I’ve already referenced “seeker” and we know this to be a virtuous characteristic so I will move from that one to another more abstract. Existentialism would be an example of this. When embraced as a philisopical ideology in the manner it has been defined in modern age by perhaps well meaning theologins; it is heretical. However, what if being an existentialist meant: A christian who in thier worship of God, believes what is in the heart should be experienced as manifested literaly thru the flesh. i.e. Bend the knee, bow the head, lift up hands, sing praise. Anybody want to be called an existentialist now? The point is perhaps we should not strive over/with words for any prolonged period or we may in fact do more harm than good. Just thinking….

]]> By: Jason Driggers http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1752 Jason Driggers Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:21:18 +0000 116302265#comment-1752 I thought you did. Maybe not. I thought you did. Maybe not.

]]> By: Eric Farr http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1751 Eric Farr Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:33:46 +0000 116302265#comment-1751 I did? OK. You're welcome. :) I did? OK. You’re welcome. :)

]]> By: Jason Driggers http://forgodsfame.org/2006/01/25/the-trouble-with-isms/#comment-1750 Jason Driggers Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:33:49 +0000 116302265#comment-1750 Eric, I believe that you recommended <i>Come Let Us Reason Together</i> by Norman Geisler. Thanks. Good book. Eric, I believe that you recommended Come Let Us Reason Together by Norman Geisler. Thanks. Good book.

]]>