tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post8474743172587708104..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Open Letter to D.A. Carson & Tim KellerPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-79628129628055046662011-10-27T19:05:08.566-07:002011-10-27T19:05:08.566-07:00And, the comments are *closed*.And, the comments are *closed*.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-45633942761747374952011-10-27T19:04:51.967-07:002011-10-27T19:04:51.967-07:00OK: so I can’t let this particular crack pot have ...OK: so I can’t let this particular crack pot have the last word. Please hold it against me.<br /><br />| ...to pretend not to know the <br />| difference between *public* <br />| blogging and writing, <br />| *particularly* as this activity <br />| pertains to church leaders and <br />| laymen as models of Christian <br />| humility and modesty. <br /><br />That’s not actually a sentence in English, is it? Let’s assume Carl means, “(It is Smoke and Mirrors) to pretend not to know the difference between *public* blogging and (merely) writing, *particularly* as this activity pertains to (the work of) church leaders and laymen as models of Christian humility and modesty.” That way we can try to make sense of his complaint.<br /><br />I guess in his mind, if I just kept a journal of all this stuff, it would be unoffensive. Unlike, perhaps, the content of TGC or the content of Carl’s own comments. See: if what Carl says is true, those pastors need to live a quiet life as well. Unless he wants to say that it’s just laypeople who need to zip a lip.<br /><br />| ...or to <br />| question consistency of morals for <br />| merely commenting and warning <br />| against certain practices, as <br />| opposed to *running a public* <br />| blog outfit with one's name <br />| attached all over the public <br />| domain, inviting interaction <br />| through open comments... (while <br />| measuring one's reach and <br />| influence by the number of <br />| followers...) <br />| <br />| Smoke and mirrors. <br /><br />Again, once we translate this into an English sentence, the accusation leaves itself wide open for internal consistency check. It’s either public speech or it’s not; it’s either the quiet life, or it’s not. Just because I do it once a week and Carl has just discovered how to use the interwebs doesn’t mean Carl’s not guilty – he’s just a novice.<br /><br />| Now, if you are (sincerely) <br />| interested in talking- you can <br />| reach me on my private email - <br />| you have it attached to my post. I <br />| am happy to talk with you <br />| privately; I do consider you my <br />| brother in Christ. <br /><br />Well, not so fast. You accuse me in public and then dive into the e-mail shadows because you realize you’re doing what you decry? I actually have no interest. You could have started there, and chose not to, and that speaks for itself.<br /><br />| But please, no more wit and sly. <br />| It's juvenile for all but the fan club <br />| that is cheering you on here, many <br />| of whom fancy this somehow adds <br />| to their sanctification and <br />| maturity...<br /><br />Unlike your snide remarks and condescension? Awesome.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65735297936810945282011-10-27T18:58:43.489-07:002011-10-27T18:58:43.489-07:00He says he shows how one can do it, not that he pe...<i>He says he shows how one can do it, not that he personally believes it. Two different things.</i><br /><br />So he wrote an entire paper arguing the validity of "several" positions that contradict what he personally believes?<br /><br />The point of doing that is what now?James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-55120832083120978372011-10-27T18:19:30.705-07:002011-10-27T18:19:30.705-07:00@Frank
What is mysterious is the smoke you (& ...@Frank<br />What is mysterious is the smoke you (& Co.) kick up. No mirrors yet, but lots of smoke...<br /><br />...to pretend not to know the difference between *public* blogging and writing, *particularly* as this activity pertains to church leaders and laymen as models of Christian humility and modesty. ...or to question consistency of morals for merely commenting and warning against certain practices, as opposed to *running a public* blog outfit with one's name attached all over the public domain, inviting interaction through open comments... (while measuring one's reach and influence by the number of followers...)<br /><br />Smoke and mirrors. <br /><br />Now, if you are (sincerely) interested in talking- you can reach me on my private email - you have it attached to my post. I am happy to talk with you privately; I do consider you my brother in Christ.<br /><br />But please, no more wit and sly. It's juvenile for all but the fan club that is cheering you on here, many of whom fancy this somehow adds to their sanctification and maturity...Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07831832658477434679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9023532777525517132011-10-27T12:58:17.997-07:002011-10-27T12:58:17.997-07:00From Scott Shaffer:
Tell it to the PCA and see w...From Scott Shaffer: <br /><br /><b>Tell it to the PCA and see what happens, if you're sure you're not mistaken. <br /><br />Seeing how they apparently caved when Redeemer ordained female deacons contrary to the Book of Church Order, I wouldn't expect them to take a stand here if Keller is saying what Johnny D. thinks he's saying.</b><br /><br />Not everyone in the PCA caved; quite a few folks didn't like the idea that female deacons were installed at Redeemer (I believe that some of those concerns were addressed at the General Assembly.). If that was accepted by the PCA, this Presbyterian would have been the first to leave.<br /><br />The Original Post:<br /><br />Well-written, sir; I pray that those that needed to read it can do so with the Spirit's discernment and respond likewise.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09343806841883394937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-69644291058839812302011-10-27T11:47:00.014-07:002011-10-27T11:47:00.014-07:00Just say no to crack and pot. Both lead to bad the...Just say no to crack and pot. Both lead to bad theology. So I'm told.Merrilee Stevensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770625841767761025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-63049751949530267642011-10-27T11:08:19.404-07:002011-10-27T11:08:19.404-07:00There is just no way no how I am gonna miss this o...There is just no way no how I am gonna miss this opportunity to be called a "crackpot"!Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-12414723231825329282011-10-27T10:55:17.924-07:002011-10-27T10:55:17.924-07:00Thanks, Frank...I honestly didn't want to zip ...Thanks, Frank...I honestly didn't want to zip through that rabbit hole.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21952760765812232062011-10-27T10:51:01.025-07:002011-10-27T10:51:01.025-07:00I won't ask you if that means I should get off...I won't ask you if that means I should get off the stage or not.Jugulumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09932658890162312549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-86233439427438797582011-10-27T10:49:53.793-07:002011-10-27T10:49:53.793-07:00And we are now swirling off-topic, so I'm clos...And we are now swirling off-topic, so I'm closing the comments after I finish what's on my desk in order for the real crackpots to have the last word.<br /><br />If you're not a real crack pot, please clear the stage.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-13445504339285515702011-10-27T10:48:31.381-07:002011-10-27T10:48:31.381-07:00Johnny --
He says he shows how one can do it, not...Johnny --<br /><br />He says he shows how one can do it, not that he personally believes it. Two different things.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-64262256945369478522011-10-27T10:43:50.577-07:002011-10-27T10:43:50.577-07:00Am I going to be guilty of going off topic if I ad...Am I going to be guilty of going off topic if I add to the conversation regarding evolution vs. creation? Because I think Keller is smart enough to be able to know how and why people came up with evolution and should know better. He might not actually know that, but he should be able to if he is going to support the possibility of "theistic" evolution.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82571989599696702872011-10-27T10:01:20.338-07:002011-10-27T10:01:20.338-07:00Jugulum, yes, that's the distinction. Thanks.Jugulum, yes, that's the distinction. Thanks.James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59929883031908845142011-10-27T09:51:26.855-07:002011-10-27T09:51:26.855-07:00Tell it to the PCA and see what happens, if you...<i> Tell it to the PCA and see what happens, if you're sure you're not mistaken. </i><br /><br />Seeing how they apparently caved when Redeemer ordained female deacons contrary to the Book of Church Order, I wouldn't expect them to take a stand here <b>if </b> Keller is saying what Johnny D. thinks he's saying.Scott Shafferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03312545003301027755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-10661619844367623982011-10-27T09:31:37.946-07:002011-10-27T09:31:37.946-07:00Whoops, I forgot to say "100!". *sigh*Whoops, I forgot to say "100!". *sigh*Jugulumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09932658890162312549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24971477724513024662011-10-27T09:31:16.282-07:002011-10-27T09:31:16.282-07:00Johnny D & Frank,
Note the difference between...Johnny D & Frank,<br /><br />Note the difference between your terms. I'm seeing something that parallels the distinction between providential action and miraculous action.<br /><br />Frank: <i>You read my old blog post and Keller's article and you come away with "Keller doesn't think God <b>intentionally, specifically</b> created Adam"?</i> [emphasis added]<br /><br />Johnny: <i>This would mean he does not believe the Bible explicitly teaches the <b>direct, special</b> creation of Adam. Literal Adam, yes; special creation Adam, no.</i> [emphasis added]<br /><br />Unless I'm misunderstanding the two of you, Frank's saying that Keller does believe that God acted with the specific intention of ending up with Adam, who literally existed, and Keller believes that this can be compatible with theistic evolution. (Even if it actually ends up being internally inconsistent, theistic evolutionists <i>will</i> argue that God specifically intended Adam as He guided evolution--whether that guidance was purely providential or partially miraculous.)<br /><br />Johnny's language ("special, direct") requires that when God acted with the specific intention to create Adam, it was also direct, or immediate, or something along those lines. (It did not involve a pre-existing organism that God "upgraded", though it did involve dust that God formed & changed.) Something transparently miraculous.Jugulumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09932658890162312549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-85274775145601751852011-10-27T09:24:35.651-07:002011-10-27T09:24:35.651-07:00Think again, and carefully. Terms mean some things...Think again, and carefully. Terms mean some things and not others. "Literal" ≠ Special, direct creation. <br /><br />I'm not taking any position beyond being clear about what Keller is saying in his paper. Maybe he's right that the biblical account can be read to include previous, biological evolution leading to a literal Adam.James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7909441992931046582011-10-27T09:10:30.349-07:002011-10-27T09:10:30.349-07:00Frank,
That seems to be the shape of it! Pretty ...Frank,<br /><br />That seems to be the shape of it! Pretty silly.Jugulumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09932658890162312549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68849466117819543502011-10-27T09:08:09.663-07:002011-10-27T09:08:09.663-07:00In the unforgettable words of Inigo Montoya, "...In the unforgettable words of Inigo Montoya, "I don't think it means what you think it means."Scott Shafferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03312545003301027755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82968960632800012782011-10-27T08:52:07.982-07:002011-10-27T08:52:07.982-07:00Frank, I got it from Keller's paper. Here is h...Frank, I got it from Keller's paper. Here is his penultimate paragraph:<br /><br />"My conclusion is that Christians who are seeking to correlate Scripture and science must be a ‘bigger tent’ than either the anti-scientific religionists or the anti-religious scientists. Even though in this paper I argue for the importance of belief in a literal Adam and Eve, I have shown here that there are several ways to hold that and still believe in God using EBP."<br /><br />If one believes that, one does not believe in the special, direct creation of Adam. Whether that's acceptable in the PCA is something I can't say.James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24032837363237476612011-10-27T08:45:10.147-07:002011-10-27T08:45:10.147-07:00Sometimes a map through the mine field isn't e...<i>Sometimes a map through the mine field isn't enough. Seeing a set of footprints ahead would be nice.</i><br /><br />It doesn't help to have the footprints, though, if they lead to a blasted-out hole in the ground. Which, sadly, is what we run into with most of the half-hearted efforts that are out there.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65706583320187462192011-10-27T08:43:52.619-07:002011-10-27T08:43:52.619-07:00Juggy:
Carl has gone mysteriously silent.
To you...Juggy:<br /><br />Carl has gone mysteriously silent.<br /><br />To your point, that's laughable. In fact, I did laugh reading it. So writing as a hobby or a career is a violation of Biblical principles, but writing once is not -- and writing comments on a blog once or twice is actually virtuous.<br /><br />Awesome. Anonymous drive-by commenting has its new lease on life. Nice work.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48416813902616854132011-10-27T08:42:26.831-07:002011-10-27T08:42:26.831-07:00Sometimes a map through the mine field isn't e...<i>Sometimes a map through the mine field isn't enough. Seeing a set of footprints ahead would be nice. ~BrettR</i><br /><br />Now thats wisdom a soldier like me can appreciate.David Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17709270641017787218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-72543294865066491612011-10-27T08:41:47.777-07:002011-10-27T08:41:47.777-07:00Wow. Really? You read my old blog post and Kelle...Wow. Really? You read my old blog post and Keller's article and you come away with "Keller doesn't think God intentionally, specifically created Adam"? All of you?<br /><br />OK. Tell it to the PCA and see what happens, if you're sure you're not mistaken.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65419235714624462462011-10-27T08:18:48.454-07:002011-10-27T08:18:48.454-07:00FWIW, Keller states there are "several" ...FWIW, Keller states there are "several" ways one can believe in a "literal" Adam and also in "evolutionary biological processes." This would mean he does not believe the Bible explicitly teaches the direct, special creation of Adam. Literal Adam, yes; special creation Adam, no.James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.com