My new signature

[Marsha Lynn]

I was reading in the The Interpreter's Bible (from 1955) this morning about the "heresy" addressed in the book of Colossians. The exposition by G. Preston MacLeod included this quote from Doctrine in the Church of England. The Report of the Commission on Christian Doctrine Appointed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in 1922 (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1938), p. 25.
"If God is love, it is only among people animated by mutual love that understanding of him can be advanced. To admit acrimony in theological discussion is in itself more fundamentally heretical than any erroneous opinions upheld or condemned in the course of discussion."

It's an interesting observation. Apparently, NazNet is not the first place where acrimonious discussions of theology have developed.

;)

Marsha

[Dana Grant]

That is a great quote. Saving that one. Thanks.

[Billie Goodson]

To admit acrimony in theological discussion is in itself more fundamentally heretical than any erroneous opinions upheld or condemned in the course of discussion."


Since admit has two popular usage definitions, I guess we can go a couple of different ways here.

# declare to be true or admit the existence or reality or truth of; "He admitted his errors"; "She acknowledged that she might have forgotten"
# allow to enter; grant entry to; "We cannot admit non-members into our club building"; "This pipe admits air"

So, one way would be that we could "deny" that we have acrimonious discussions. The other way would be that we should not allow acrimonious discussions. I am voting that we don't admit to them (technically "deny they exist"). This would allow us to preserve our moral high ground and maintain that all heresy only exists in others...

[Billy Cox]

\It's an interesting observation. Apparently, NazNet is not the first place where acrimonious discussions of theology have developed.

So you're saying that NazNet didn't invent theological bickering? I can sleep eaiser now that I have a clear conscience. :D

[Billy Cox]

Since admit has two popular usage definitions, I guess we can go a couple of different ways here.

# declare to be true or admit the existence or reality or truth of; "He admitted his errors"; "She acknowledged that she might have forgotten"
# allow to enter; grant entry to; "We cannot admit non-members into our club building"; "This pipe admits air"

So, one way would be that we could "deny" that we have acrimonious discussions. The other way would be that we should not allow acrimonious discussions. I am voting that we don't admit to them (technically "deny they exist"). This would allow us to preserve our moral high ground and maintain that all heresy only exists in others...

I understood the definition to be admit, as in allowing entrance.

[Shea Zellweger]

I understood the definition to be admit, as in allowing entrance.

particularly given that confession of wrong is a biblical mandate, and therefore could not possible be viewed as heretical.

[Marsha Lynn]

So you're saying that NazNet didn't invent theological bickering? I can sleep eaiser now that I have a clear conscience. :D

Hey, this revelation goes far beyond that. Not only did NazNet not invent theological bickering but neither did Al Gore invent it when he invented the internet It predates internet forums!

(Side snicker. Did you hear what Dan Quayle said during the joking about Al Gore inventing the internet? He said, "If Al Gore invented the internet then I invented spell check." -- and that's no joke.)