Two Peoples of God?
Just a blogspotting note. Here is the first of a series of answers to the questions of the post “A Few Qs” of September 13. I won’t continue to post a link here each time the author answers his questions, but wanted to let folks know of the answers being listed over there. Please check it out here: Two Peoples of God? by Nathan White.
Labels: blogspotting, eschatology
posted by Anonymous at 2:44 PM
4 Comments:
No one wants to comment?
Regardless of where anyone stands on these things, I think we can all learn something from Nathan's approach to them. I would say up front that I am not suggesting he is perfect in his approach, but that I admire the direction he seems to be walking in when he discusses these matters.
By that I mean, he is clear about the scope of his discussion, that is, when he fails to follow a rabbit trail, he is clear that his point is not to prove by proof text, reason, and argumentation that what he is presenting is in fact the one and only truth, but instead leaves room for the truth itself to instruct the reader.
There is much humility, I think, in presenting truth without insisting upon it, and whatever else Nathan says or teaches, I hope he continues to give instruction with a gentle hand.
September 20, 2007 1:00 PM
Daniel,
I think that's about the highest compliment one can give - and I don't mean that in a man-centered flattery way re: Nathan's approach.
Not unlike your own blog - I appreciate an author positing a position/possibility and encouraging the reader search the Scriptures, and from there the discussion can ensue.
I am learning (albeit slowly) that use of proof texts seems prone to fallibility. That is, anyone can prove any particular position by lifting a verse or two or five and presenting them.
I'm glad you commented. Perhaps next time, I'll "pull a Daniel" and be the first to comment on my own post, just to get things started, ay?
Btw, I was kind of looking forward to your wrapping up that first post of yours. You didn't want to put a fence around the discussion at a certain point, so I was thinking that you were going to kind of tie it all together with your own thinking on the matter at some point. Maybe in another upcoming post?
September 20, 2007 5:13 PM
Susan, you be sure to keep on linking us to Nathan's posts as you did here.
September 21, 2007 6:56 AM
Ok, Mark. I will then.
Thanks.
I actually wanted to do so, but thought that maybe folks would tire of seeing a link to each answer -
I'm guessing they'll be one a week or something like that.
Since it's bad form to just lift his posts and place them here (as I did with his questions, asking his permission - retroactively :-), I wanted to just blogspot.
Thanks for encouraging my doing so - for this particular series.
September 21, 2007 11:07 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home