Tuesday, October 30, 2007

 

CATFIGHT!

Jollyblogger took a look at Christian infighting and what error is worth correcting and what is not. David is convicted on this matters through a reading of Second Timothy. David thinks:
And I am not saying we shouldn't confront error, there is still plenty of error out there that needs to be addressed. Yet I don't think we have a proper sense of what is error and what is not. My favorite example of this is to compare Paul's reaction to the envious, selfishly ambitious preachers in Philippians 1:15ff with the Galatians. He let the envious, selfishly ambitious guys off easy because they were preaching the gospel, but put the hammer down on the Galatians who compromised it.

In other words, we need a better handle on what is worth confronting and what is not. Every disagreement is not a matter of gospel compromise.
Which raises and interesting question in my mind, what is the gospel that is worth quarreling for? Particularly in light of 2 Tim 2:14 which David also quotes
2 Tim 2:14 - Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge {them} in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless, and leads to the ruin of the hearers. [emphasis added]
This contains a specific prohibition against arguing about "words." Now, I am no Greek scholar, I am just working with reference books here, but here's what Strong's Dictionary says about the word so translated:
From a compound of "logos"...
Which it then defines:
3056 logos (log'-os);

from 3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ):

KJV-- account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.
Now if I understand this correctly, what Paul is saying is that spending too much time arguing doctrine when it is transformation that matters is not productive. To borrow David's phraseology, it looks to me like correcting error in understanding is way down the list of priorities when compared to producing the fruits of the gospel in our hearers.

Which raises a more fascinating question - is ours really a "doctrinal" faith? Are we what we believe, or are we who God makes us into? We are indeed transformed by the renewal of our minds (Romans 12:2) but there are limits to that because there are limits to our minds. There are no limits to Christ's power to transform us. God will renew us in ways and through means that we cannot comprehend. In fact to try to comprehend it is to try to control it, which in the end is the REAL problem.

I do love learning things, but in the end, that is not what makes me God's man - nor does agreement on matters of our understand make or break someone else as God's person.

To put it bluntly, I'll take a graceful Catholic over a jerk of a Southern Baptist any day. (Before the hate mail arrives, not all Southern Baptists are jerks, but they seem to have a significant share)

Technorati Tags:, , , , ,
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator

|

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Feed

Blogotional

eXTReMe Tracker

Blogarama - The Blog Directory