a bible, theology, politics, news, networking, and discussion site
David Zierenberg's Discussions
Need Help Understanding Verbal Plenary
Replied 4 hours ago
Need Help Understanding Verbal Plenary
Replied 14 hours ago
Need Help Understanding Verbal Plenary
Replied 23 hours ago
David Zierenberg's Page
Gifts Received
David Zierenberg has not received any gifts yet
Latest Activity
OK, if we say it is evident in the writings themselves, what is that evidence?
Also, I want to elaborate on my point about "God-breathed." If Paul was going to coin a term, he could have coined "God-spoken," but he didn't. So what's the differenc...
David -
I, too, liked CMP's post about common misunderstandings of heaven. It's not always easy. But I believe the ultimate goal is God bringing His kingdom to earth, hence a restored heavens and earth here for us to enjoy.
I covered that early on in this discussion, Jack. That verse can be used to argue for "plenary," but says nothing about "every word." "God-breathed" does not necessarily mean "words." Do you say words every time you breathe? As I have said, Paul d...
I don't think a "no error" stand means "no human element".
No, that's not what I'm saying. I don't think a human element requires error. It's possible for humans to be inerrant, just not consistently. If I say "I posted a reply to Ralph's thread,...
Some will disagree, but I think Paul identifies some of his own human input in 1 Cor 7:7 - a personal wish, verse 12 - a command from Paul himself, with a disclaimer that it's not from the Lord and verse 40, where he states that he is offering his...
Scott, I'm not questioning the new heaven and earth, just reevaluating my understanding of heaven. Almost all our imagery of heaven comes from John's description of the city - streets of gold, pearly gates. CMP posted on P&P recently about common ...
David -
As I understand you, Scott, you're taking a figurative approach, but I'm a little confused by taking the city as figurative, but the new heaven and earth as (apparently) literal.
Well, maybe you would see me as trying to have my cake and...
Yes, Damian, I've looked at other concepts. The one I like best, and where I was ending up in my own thinking anyway, is what Roger Olson calls dynamic inspiration. I think Erickson uses the same term, but doesn't buy into it fully. Anyway, it's m...
Phil! Nice thought, brother. Thanks.
Holy of Holies - that's interesting. Thanks.
Neither one of the prior responses (no matter how boldly they're printed) really go to verbal (meaning God determined every single word), though the 2 Tim. passage speaks to plenary. I see those passages as arguing for inspiration in general. I th...
David, the Holy of Holies was a cube.
The special presence of God with his people has extended out from the heart of the temple, beyond the temple grounds until the city itself becomes the sanctuary of God.
I'm more or less going to chime in along the same lines. Revelation conains a very literal description of a very image-heavy vision. The description of what John sees is, I think, indeed what he did see, but it seems highly unlikely that he is see...
Sorry, Phil, but I'm not following that at all. I don't know what was "once limited to a small cube shaped room."
As I understand you, Scott, you're taking a figurative approach, but I'm a little confused by taking the city as figurative, but the...
I'm with Scottl. You've come across this particular geometric description in scripture before, David.
When God is finished, the entire city will be what was once was limited to a small cube shaped room.
Revelation is filled with Jewish apocalyptic imagery. John saw visions - prophetic imagery that spoke of something greater.
The writer to the Hebrews said we have already come to Mount Zion and the heavenly (or new) Jerusalem (Heb 12:22)
Paul sa...
Profile Information
- How would you describe yourself theologically?
- Evangelical
Comment Wall (16 comments)
- At 6:29pm on October 1, 2009,
xulon said… - Thanks for the birthday greetings, David.
- At 1:47am on September 30, 2009,
Char said… - I don't have much time these days so sorry this is a little late.
You didn't offend me. If you were telling the ugly truth, then so be it. I mean I can take that on the chin.
It's not like my feelings were terribly terribly hurt by PJ either-I'm used to that kind of junk from him. I do get tired of his veiled attacks and call him on them though. And he knows I'll do it. It's a thing with us. See there's history there-I offended him at some point early on or something and he's been trying to repay the favour ever since. Now I am not someone who looks for offence in other people's words or actions. But I am aware when someone intends it, even subconciously. It may surprise you that I have tried to get along and virtually every attempt I have made has been snubbed. So yeah. I'm not carrying the grudge here.
I elaborate on that not to go on the defensive, but because it's the perfect example of what I'm talking about. The one who thinks he is wronged must forgive for the perceived slight or there is no relationship, regardless of whether there is an apology or not. Can two walk together unless they be agreed? Many times the right hand of fellowship may be extended, but if it is never taken there will never be fellowship. Period. This is why I say it's a problem for the offended rather than the offender-there is nothing the offender can do if the offended decides he will remain offended. I don't mean it in the sense of "it's not my problem so whatever".
That said, I've been in situations where saying "I'm sorry you were offended" is not enough because the offended wants an admission of intentional or meanspirited wrongdoing-but to admit to this would be dishonest. Can't do it in that case. There's one of my character flaws.
You know the saying from Sherlock Holmes that false modesty is as much a departure from the truth as arrogance? I am in line with that thought. I don't think it's a virtue to pretend. That said, Sherlock Holmes was a brilliantly rational prick. So there's that.
Do stick around.
- At 1:43am on September 23, 2009,
Char said…
- You really shouldn't have laid awake. Who wants to be tired on their birthday??
Seriously I thought I should give an explanation on that. I own that I am a sinner because I am not sensitive to people's feelings, but if I apologize I want it to mean something both to me and to the other.
My sense of humour gets me into trouble more than it helps I'm afraid.
- At 8:18pm on September 21, 2009,
H said… - Not by you, but it's OK. Doesn't matter. I really don't have a horse in this race. ;)
- At 10:40am on September 21, 2009,
Jack said… - Happy Birthday, David. I'm glad you are contributing to our site!
- At 8:57am on September 21, 2009,
H said…
- Happy Birthday, David. I see I was zinged for apologizing to any whom I may have offended on Rata...whatever's thread (spelling)...but I didn't mean it as an act of hypocrisy, simply because I often do not know my own heart - how desperately wicked it is, and how easily deceived I am by its intent. I am a sinner, and I sin as a result. I may have given offense and it may have been unknowingly done, or I may only THINK it was unknowingly done. In any event, I see no harm in owning up to that fact.
- At 7:13am on September 21, 2009,
Kim said… 
- At 2:07am on September 21, 2009,
Ray Nearhood said… - Happy Birthday
- At 11:56pm on September 20, 2009,
Char said…
- David,
In that thread you may have noticed I kept asking something that no one ever answered. I'd be interested if you would like to answer. Who is at fault when no offence is intended, the offender or the offended?
I asked because I think the person who takes offence when none is intended is the one with the problem. They are the one who must get over it in order for there to be a relationship. Excepting trolls (I own that I am mean to them) and my sarcastic nature, on the occasions I have intended insult, I have apologized-to the person whom I wronged directly, not all and sundry. I have apologized more for taking offence where none was intended however. If someone did not intend to insult me, how are they sinning? If they explain themselves, whose problem does it become? That is the rub.
I see blanket apologies as false and promoting of a pretend sort of nicety rather than actually mending relationships in a genuine manner. That would simply cheapen the apology to meaninglessness so that you never know if I am really sorry or if I'm just saying it to placate you. So no I do not do this because I see it as hypocrisy. It would be dishonest for me to do this.
The thing that I find interesting is that you think this is ungracious. That's part of my point exactly-not everyone thinks this way. I don't think such apologies are a sign of graciousness. I think they are meaningless.
If I have offended you, come and tell me what was so offensive (this is what I find particularly odious about the thread-it was transparently attacking about 4-5 of the most regular posters without saying so nor coming to us first). Here's the thing-if I intended offence, you will get an apology. But if didn't mean to offend, you probably won't-what I will do is explain to you what I was really saying and how it was not intended to be what you think it was. One thing I can say is that I will never ever lie to you.
All that said, I find that people very frequently read sub-texts into my posts that are quite surprising, and even after I make efforts to word them in a non-offensive manner, still take offence and then proceed to insult me. I understand that they are upset and I forgive them for that, but I am not waiting for some apology to do it. I simply understand that's how that person is. Thing is, I am a rational person. I really don't know what will set off the more sensitive than I. About the only thing I can change is my sarcasm. But I can word my posts as best as possible and then there is nothing else I can do short of lying. As I said, I won't do that. Perhaps that is wrong, but I think lying to people shows less love and respect than anything.
- At 2:45pm on September 18, 2009,
H said…
- Hey,
Don't go!!! We need you!
Peace & grace,
Holly
About
Sponsors
Birthdays
Birthdays Tomorrow
Linkologica
Theology
Reclaiming the Mind Ministries
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Council of Biblical Manhood and Womenhood (complementarian)
The Center for Bibical Equality (Egalitarian)
Evangelical Theological Society
Society of Evangelical Arminians
Center for Reformed Study and Apologetics
Church History
Christian Traditions
Apologetics
Bible Study
IVP New Testament Commentaries Online
Online Bible and Theology Education
Theology and Bible MP3s
263 Theology Questions and Answers
Theologica Chat Rooms
Badge
Get the Widget
Sponsor
© 2009 Created by Michael Patton on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
