 |
| 
archive
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516
| Posted 6/27/2001 5:44 AM (GMT -6) |   | Message Go To Page 2 >>
might-be-don
01/18/01 1:59 PM
WWJD - WWJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lion-Lamb,
Your PS. in the reply to G-D-G was interesting. Thought I'd start this topic instead of taking the other thread on a tangent.
"P.S. I made no appeal to WWJD. If only you knew my true thoughts about WWJD. My appeal was to WDJT (What did Jesus teach?)."
In my experience some folks appeal to WWJD at a emotional level to provide a quick "gut level" idea of what they "think" Jesus would do, rather than searching the Word for WDJT .
Would you like to share your thoughts on WWJD?
don
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/18/01 4:39 PM
WWJD - WWJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I only went through the book once, but I found it to be instrumental in my thinking about "grace" and "law," which I think has a great bearing on the question of WWJD. It is by Richard Longenecker and is called, "Paul, The Apostle of Liberty." It seems the unfortunate thing about WWJD is that many people have so many opinions of what Jesus would do. This need not necessarily be a bad thing though. We don't need to get caught up in a legalistic trap.
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/18/01 11:34 PM
RE: WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don,
Though I could say much more about WWJD, I restrict my comments to two.
WWJD (What would Jesus do?) has been profaned as a fad by marketing. Thousands of people who make no claim to be Christians sport WWJD bracelets and other paraphernalia. I have observed in action countless people wearing WWJD gadgets. Their behavior betrays the fact that they have little interest in the Jesus of the Gospels or of the gospel.
”What would Jesus do?” is not exactly a correct or helpful question for at least two reasons.
First, it misdirects the proper questions we must ask in ethical decisions because it basically requires speculation. Isn’t that the very nature of the question? “What would Jesus do?” projects a fundamentally hypothetical question that cuts itself free from scripture that tells us what Jesus did. “What did Jesus do in a situation like this?” would be reasonable, for it asks a question about things revealed, not about things unrevealed. The question redirects our focus upon what God has disclosed and focuses upon a speculative imagination concerning what Jesus would do if he were facing the situation I now face.
Second, then, how do I know what Jesus would do in lots of decisions I have to make? To ask the question is to ask the wrong question, for I face many decisions and responsibilities that Jesus did not encounter for himself. Consequently, it’s really a rather silly question, IMHO.
Consider a discussion I had some months ago on this very question. I was in a group discussion, much like this one. The topic was discipline of children. One outspoken man equated spanking children with child abuse. Any form of corporeal punishment as far as he was concerned is child abuse. Try as I might, I could not convince him, even though I copiously used Scripture (e.g., Prov 13:24; 22:15; 23:13-14). (BTW, this gentleman said he was a pastor.) He resorted to the WWJD question. He said,
Let me ask you this; Do you think Jesus would spank His children? Or, would He use another method? The word Christian does mean CHRIST-LIKE. It is my opinion that Jesus would NOT strike a child. [direct quote]
Here’s the response I offered him.
Actually, I don't think that your question--"Do you think Jesus would spank His children?"--is really helpful or the correct question to ask. Allow me to explain.
First, I don't think that the question is helpful because Jesus did not have physical descendants. Jesus does however have spiritual descendants, for Hebrews 2:13 says, "Here am I, and the children God has given me." And we do know that the Lord does "spank" (discipline) his children, metaphorically speaking, as Hebrews 12:4-11 indicates quite clearly. His punishment and discipline brings about pain (12:11). Hebrews makes no attempt to pretend that earthly fathers do not physically spank their children, and such discipline is analogous to the Lord's discipline of his children.
Second, I don't think that your question is the correct one. There are many things that are not parallel between my life and Jesus' life. So, the now famous WWJD is not the standard by which we should regulate our own conduct in everything. I should regulate my behavior by what is revealed in scripture, not by what I might surmise that Jesus would have done if he had faced my situations. It does no good to speculate what Jesus would have done in situations that he never faced. It really does little good to wonder whether or not Jesus would have spanked his children, if he had children. I can hear Jesus' words now. I hear him say, as he so frequently did, "What do the scriptures say?" Well, the scriptures speak candidly about laying the rod to the bottom side of a child to discipline the child for disobedience. So, do I think that Jesus would have spanked his children, if he had children? Yes, I do believe so, for the scriptures instruct parents to do so, as do the many proverbs I've already noted. However, my response would be quite different if you had asked me, "Do you think Jesus would strike a child?" My response to you, then, would have been, "Definitely not!"
So, I'm not very keen on being asked WWJD. If Jesus Christ is the one who is to govern our ethics, it seems to me that the question must be "What does Jesus teach?"
Disciplined by Christ,
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Wislawa
01/18/01 8:24 PM
RE: RE: Faithfully Adhering Daily to Scripture
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m with you 100%. Those WWJD bracelets make me lose my religion! I’ve been thinking about creating my own work of art/cultural criticism about it myself. Let me now what ya’ll think.
F.A.D.S. bracelets. (Faithfully Adhering Daily to Scripture). I figure all the bozo Christian kids will want to be the first on the block to get this new and improved witnessing tool. It slices, it dices, it covers embarrassing bald spots, and it will convert your pagan friends or your money back!
Plus all of the non-Christian kids who get the joke and hate the WWDJ’s will want to get them too. At $1 a pop I’d have enough money to pay for school and set up a retirement fund for my folks.
Wislawa
fight the good fight. Work out your salvation with bracelets and car ‘fishes.’ As the good old hymn states: “They will know we are Christians by our WWJD bracelets.” Faith with batteries [nor love] not included.
Posted Originally From: Open Theism Information Site
BBBCanada
01/19/01 3:51 PM
WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as the fad thing of christian bracelets and trinkets, etc. Don't you LL and Wislawa think you are being a tad bit intolerant? I'm no fan of christian paraphenelia (sp?) either. But I seem to be a bit more tolerant of it than you guys are. Franky Schaffer wrote his book, "Addicted to Mediocrity" and that has guided alot of my thinking on "christian art" and "christians making art." This stuff is mostly for evangelistic purposes, and not for enjoyment of art. That being the intended purpose, I say that God can "use broken vessels" no matter how inadequate. Do I rely on it and break it down to this dichotomy of, "Hey, if he is using it, don't bash it?" I don't want to go down that road either. I just have this belief that God can "use" even the most lamest of things to bring people to Him.
LL, as far as WWJD as opposed to WDJT, I think you are correct on some things. Like, there are many questions that are raised in the 21st century that were not even questioned back 2000 years ago. And I agree that we should ask, WDJT, first. But even after having determined what Jesus taught, we are still not always clear on what He would do, and then in affect what we should then do. I think a good example of this would be taking both Ron Sider's work and Ron Schneider(name?) who teaches at Calvin College in Grand Rapids Michigan who wrote the book, "Godly Materialism" and figure out how we are to think "christianly" about riches and material things. I still say that it is not always clear how we are to live our Christian lives out. And of course this will be different for another generation.
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Wislawa
01/19/01 4:44 PM
RE: mediocrity blues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah you may be right but I just need to vent every once and a while.
As far as Franky Schaffer's "Addicted to Mediocrity" I have to balance out your thumbs up with a thumbs down of my own. I agree with the general sentiment of the work but it struck me as mediocre itself. He made it clear early on that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to art and just look at the cover design and layout of the text!!! Nothing could be more emblematic of the mediocre aesthetic efforts he was writing about! But that’s my opinion and you are certainly entitled to yours.
Wislawa.
Posted Originally From: Open Theism Information Site
Lion-Lamb
01/19/01 11:03 PM
RE: WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBBCanada,
I don't understand what I said in my note that gave you the idea that I was being too intolerant. I'm puzzled what Franky Schaffer has to do with anything I said. I don't believe I said anything at all about Christian art and Christians making art. Following is all I said concerning WWJD bracelets and other WWJD paraphernalia.
Thousands of people who make no claim to be Christians sport WWJD bracelets and other paraphernalia. I have observed in action countless people wearing WWJD gadgets. Their behavior betrays the fact that they have little interest in the Jesus of the Gospels or of the gospel.
Note carefully that I spoke to the fact that the whole movement was little more than a fad, and that granting the greatest significance conceivable to WWJD, it remained meaningless to a whole lot of people who wore the paraphernalia. (Don't you love that word?)
Concerning your second paragraph, I stand by my comments. The question we ought to ask is simply: "Given that God has spoken, what must I do?" Speculating what Jesus would do disconnects and distracts us from what God has said. There is ample teaching from Christ and throughout God's Word that addresses what I must do concerning riches and material things. Speculating what Jesus would do will not help, apart from knowing what God's Word instructs us to do.
Enjoying the wealth God has graced me with,
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/20/01 11:45 AM
RE: RE: WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LL said;
"Enjoying the wealth God has graced me with,"
You know that the U.S. has a new quarter don't you? Yeah, it's called the Canadian dollar.
Living at the busiest border crossing in North America, you don't know how much that is rubbed in. If God ever lays it on your heart to bless me with some of your wealth (American at that if you are in the States), you just go ahead and be obedient.
LL, I may have mispoke when I asked if you were being "a tad bit" intolerant. But it was a real question, of which you didn't answer. But it seemed to me from the general spirit of what you think of "WWJD" (we should ask what did Jesus teach) that I can't see you as being all that and more over WWJD paraphernalia. It is true when you say,
"Thousands of people who make no claim to be Christians sport WWJD bracelets and other paraphernalia. I have observed in action countless people wearing WWJD gadgets. Their behavior betrays the fact that they have little interest in the Jesus of the Gospels or of the gospel."
However, when you say,
" Concerning your second paragraph, I stand by my comments. The question we ought to ask is simply: "Given that God has spoken, what must I do?" Speculating what Jesus would do disconnects and distracts us from what God has said."
again I would say that what Jesus said and how we make application of that is not all that clear. Go ahead. Ask "WDJT." But if I end up applying it differently...
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/20/01 12:50 PM
RE: RE: RE: WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBBCanada,
The wealth to which I referred in my signature, of course, greatly exceeds the kind the new U.S. quarter represents.
Oh, I don't doubt for a moment that you and I and others may not agree on how to interpret Jesus' teaching at various points. However, our disagreement on that will hardly be resolved by appealing to the speculative WWJD. Right? That's what I was saying from the beginning. What Jesus taught is substantive. What Jesus would do in hypothetical situations we may pose is utterly fleeting unless grounded in what he taught.
Lion-Lamb
P.S. To quote the words of former President Gerald Ford, "Our long national nightmare is over." We at long last have a new President, a man of honor, integrity, decency, respect, and one of character. Praise God! I hope you Canadians will rejoice with us.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Mephi2K
01/20/01 1:00 PM
An Aside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lion said:
"To quote the words of former President Gerald Ford, "Our long national nightmare is over." We at long last have a new President, a man of honor, integrity, decency, respect, and one of character. Praise God! I hope you Canadians will rejoice with us."
Mephi:
Heh. I'd say that we got the lesser of two losers myself...but that's just me. But God is in control. God help us all.
Da Meph Man
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/20/01 1:07 PM
RE: An Aside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mephi,
Ah! But you need to remember that I am in the habit of seeing the glass half full!
Seeing the bright side,
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/22/01 1:29 PM
WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LL said:
"That's what I was saying from the beginning. What Jesus taught is substantive. What Jesus would do in hypothetical situations we may pose is utterly fleeting unless grounded in what he taught."
I think that really is the gist or intent of what the "WWJD movement" was trying to get at. I don't think they were implying that we should not be "grounded in what Jesus taught." Not having my copy of Sheldon's book at hand, (at the moment-one long moment by the way) this is why the Rev. posed the question in the first place in the beginning of the book. Based upon what Jesus taught, what would Jesus do and in affect, what should we do in following his example?
I think you contradict yourself somewhat when you say in one place:
“What Jesus would do in *hypothetical situations* we may pose is utterly fleeting unless grounded in what he taught.”
And yet, in #2 of your post you say:
“Isn’t that the very nature of the question? “What would Jesus do?” projects a fundamentally hypothetical question that cuts itself free from scripture that tells us what Jesus did. “What did Jesus do in a situation *like this*?” would be reasonable, for it asks a question about things revealed, not about things unrevealed.”
Yet you go on to say in the second part of #2 where you may admit we might not know what Jesus would do in some specific situations.
“To ask the question is to ask the wrong question, for I face many decisions and responsibilities that Jesus did not encounter for himself (like this situations emphasis mine)”
It seems to me, granting hypothetical situations as you do, we can ask, “What *did* Jesus do in a situation *like this* yet because of the many situations that he did not encounter then we would have to ask WWJD? Of course, as you say, not ungrounded in his words and what he taught. Maybe the book or paraphernalia should say, “WDJT-WWJD.” Of course there is the question of WJDD-What Jesus Didn’t/Did Not Do. And should we follow Him in his “silence” as well, even if only secondarily?
Brandon
P.S. I may have to concur with Meph on Bush being the lesser of the two losers, although I probably wouldn't use quite as strong of language. Man of "honor, integrity, decency, respect, and one of character?" We shall see won't we? I guess that depends on not only his personal life but his political (policies) as well. WWJD...umm, er...I mean, WDJT? I *hope* we *CAN* rejoice with you.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/24/01 2:16 PM
WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LL I thought about this yesterday morning. But I think you contradicted yourself or were not consistent with your WDJT. You said:
""What did Jesus do in a situation like this?” would be reasonable, for it asks a question about things *revealed, not about things unrevealed.*" and then you give an example of spanking. You said:
"Actually, I don't think that your question--"Do you think Jesus would spank His children?"--is really helpful or the correct question to ask. Allow me to explain.
First, I don't think that the question is helpful because Jesus did not have physical descendants. Jesus does however have spiritual descendants, for Hebrews 2:13 says, "Here am I, and the children God has given me." And we do know that the Lord does "spank" (discipline) his children, *metaphorically speaking*, as Hebrews 12:4-11 indicates quite clearly. His punishment and discipline brings about pain (12:11). Hebrews *makes no attempt to pretend that earthly fathers do not physically spank their children*, and such discipline is analogous to the Lord's discipline of his children.
I suppose when you say that the Lord disciplines us, he is using circumstances to do this. Is this correct(there is a point to this question further down in my abortion example)? However you seemed to have contradicted yourself when move from what is *explicitly* revealed or taught by Jesus to your metaphorical analogy. This, to me, seemed to be a theological slight of hand. Let me ask you these questions.
1. By what criteria do you make this move? Jesus'?
2. What do we do in situations that are *NOT* like this? But are far removed?
3. When you say, "makes no attempt to pretend that earthly fathers do not physically spank their children" are you not more or less arguing from silence than from what is explicitly taught, what is revealed?
Aside from it being an apparent contradiction, the many practices could be justified would be many. Take abortion for example. My good friend Rob Brow over at the www.brow.on.ca website asks this question.
"It is significant to me that God has his own quality control to discard at least thirty percent of all fertilized ova if they do not suit the body's purpose. If we call an overnight pill murder, what do we say about God?"
If God disciplines us using circumstances, (which I don't doubt, it would seem to me to be more a matter of what you sow is what you reap) God's quality control (metaphorically speaking), could we not justify abortion in at least some instances?
Bob makes an important point when it comes to the politics of abortion. I may view abortion as murder in the ninth month of pregnancy (one end of pregnancy). And those who push for partial birth are definitely extreme. I think the general population reflects this. The general population also reflects that those of us who believe that calling abortion murder or that the fertilized ovum is a human from the first few seconds to the first couple of weeks (no cell replication and no brain wave activity, the other end of pregnancy) are extreme as well. I *may* not see it as extreme, but the general populace does. And you don't win *culture wars* on extremes. So the question becomes, where should we be placing our energy? Some where in the middle? WDJT and WWJD?
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/24/01 2:38 PM
WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I said:
"P.S. I may have to concur with Meph on Bush being the lesser of the two losers, although I probably wouldn't use quite as strong of language."
I misspoke. My bad. I did use strong language.
I noticed in another post that you believe in "sola scriptura."
Can't remember which one. Oooo...generally speaking, I believe that scripture should be primary, not exclusive. Because of there is sooo much that the Bible doesn't speak to, other legs should come to bear upon such questions. Tradition, reason and experience?
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/24/01 2:45 PM
RE: WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon,
I don't think I contradicted myself. Perhaps I'm not understanding your point. Perhaps we are talking past one another, in a sense. For I have found time and again that when I move between two realms--God's actions toward us and our actions toward one another--that some people do scratch their heads and wonder how I say what I say. Is that the rub in this situation. Please help me understand your point, for at present it's not clear to me.
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/25/01 12:46 PM
WWJD - WDJT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically what I am asking and/or saying is that you say that God metaphorically "spanks" us. Actually, the discipline is real. So I really don't like the word "spank" or thinking of God's discipline toward us as metaphorical. Then your grounds for "spanking" children, are not grounded in what Jesus *explicitly* taught, but in a "metaphor."
Whether one veiws it as a metaphor or not, I don't see how you still make the colossal leap from a "metaphor" to the practice that one should spank their children!? Especially on the basis of Heb 12. There seem to be major differences there between the Lord's discipline of us and our discipline of our children. As a matter of fact, it seemed to be the opposite in Heb 12. The writer uses a human metaphor or analogy to describe how the Lord disciplines us and not the other way around.
Then I asked. If God disciplines us, how does he do this? Hebrews says through hardships. Jesus was "disciplined" through men who opposed him. Could I assume that our hardships will be no different? Could some of those hardships include any number of circumstances or chastisements that God uses to discipline us with, (especially if there is a known continuous sin)?
Then I asked,
“If God disciplines us using circumstances, (which I don't doubt, it would seem to me to be more a matter of what you sow is what you reap) God's quality control (metaphorically speaking), could we not justify abortion in at least some instances?”
That is, if God uses circumstances, such as a miscarriage (God’s quality control, this could possibly be a chastisement or a disciplinary action for a unconfessed sexual sin or lifestyle) could we not, then, justify from this “metaphorical spanking” the practice of abortion? If God “aborts” could we not abort as well?
We don’t have *explicit teaching* regarding abortion in the Bible(probably because it was a given that it was wrong, other documents such as the Diadache tell the Jews not to abort), however if we use the Bible as our only source of authority then we will fail in to come to grasp what to do in such a situation. This is why I asked if you abide by the “sola scriptura” principle. Other sources of authority can be brought to bear to help us develop a “Christian viewpoint” as to how we should deal with one of the most pressing issues of our time. So my questions.
1. By what criteria do you make this move? Jesus'?
2. What do we do in situations that are *NOT* like this? But are far removed?
3. When you say, "makes no attempt to pretend that earthly fathers do not physically spank their children" (I would think that was a given)are you not more or less arguing from silence than from what is explicitly taught, what is revealed?
Let me ask this one as well? Speaking of metaphors, which should be the guiding biblical metaphor for governing ourselves? The crucified Christ or the Risen Christ? The Lion or the Lamb? WDJT-WWJD?
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/25/01 2:01 PM
RE: Hebrews 12 and God revealed in human form & likeness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon,
The problem you are having with my discussion is the same you have had with my whole discussion of biblical anthropomorphism. For me to explain my statements concerning Hebrews 12 would require me to reiterate my numerous statements ad infinitum ad nauseam. I am becoming quite dubious concerning the nature of discussions on web fora such as this. After extended discussion of God's self-revelation in human form and likeness, the only ones who truly have a grasp of what I have said are those who already either had an understanding of it or had sufficient sympathy with the concept to grasp it. I'm sorry, but I'm not interested, presently, to take time to make another go at it to explain the whole idea again. Please, ponder all that I have already said. Perhaps then it will become plain to you.
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/25/01 2:57 PM
Hebrews 12 and God revealed in human form & likeness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well slap me naked and hide my clothes!
I thought this was a place of learning...something. I don't see how the biblical anthropomorphic thread had much to do with your metaphorical use of Heb. 12 or my questions. Forgive me for not grasping it, maybe you could help me. That is what this is suppose to be all about. Oh well, next time.
Brandon
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Lion-Lamb
01/25/01 4:23 PM
RE: Hebrews 12 and God revealed in human form & likeness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon,
Of course this forum is designed as a place for learning . . . something. So, let me see if I can make this brief.
Here's the deal. The difficulty you are having with my point of view is essentially a failure to recognize that the metaphorical portrayal of God as Father in Hebrews 12 is also inseperably bound up with the entire biblical portrayal of God as if he were a human. I have been calling that anthropomorphism. Are you with me? Do you agree with my reasoning, thus far?
Now, since God's self-revelation to us as if he were a human is inextricably bound up with his having created us in his own image, as I have argued repeatedly, we bear his image; he does not bear our image. Thus, God is the original Father; earthly males who procreate after their own likeness, derive their father identity and role from God. Thus, earthly fathers are earthly shadows of the Heavenly Father. Thus, we who are fathers on earth are to discipline our children in the likeness that God disciplines his children. Comprende? God is the Heavenly Father--this is the original reality. Human males who beget children--this is the derived reality and thus the earthly shadow of the heavenly.
Ponder Ephesians 3:14-15. Take note of the verses in Greek and in English transliteration of the Greek verses Paul wrote.
Toutou carin kamtw ta gonata mou proV ton patera, ex ou pasa patria en ouranoiV kai epi ghV onomazetai
Toutou charin kamptô ta gonata mou pros ton patera, ex ou pasa patria en ouranois kai epi gçs onomazetai
What is the significance of Ephesians 3:14-15? Note the play on words Paul writes: For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth takes its name. What does this mean? It means that God has loaned to his creatures the designation father. Fatherhood is not a category or idea that derives from human experience. Rather, fatherhood is a category or idea or designation that derives from God himself. We are like he is; he is not like we are. Any human male who begets children is properly called father, for by procreating children after their own likeness, they are imitating their own Creator who made them in his likeness. Have you ever wondered why Jesus said: And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.? I think you should now know.
Lion-Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
BBBCanada
01/26/01 2:07 PM
Hebrews 12 and God revealed in human form & likeness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LL said:
"Here's the deal. The difficulty you are having with my point of view is essentially a failure to recognize that the metaphorical portrayal of God as Father in Hebrews 12 is also inseperably bound up with the entire biblical portrayal of God as if he were a human. I have been calling that anthropomorphism. Are you with me? Do you agree with my reasoning, thus far?"
Yes and no. I agree that God termed as "Father" may be metaphorical and therefore anthropomorphic. However, I don't see that as being the case for other areas of so called "anthropomorphism." I think this was persuasively argued on the anthropomorphic thread by Greg, Shine150, and G-D-G. I am just not prepared to go back into that discussion again.
Even if you view God as “Father,” which again, the analogy in Heb. 12 was using a earthly reality to describe an heavenly reality, not using a heavenly reality to describe a earthly reality as you did, still one cannot justify “spanking” on the basis Heb. 12 or Eph 3:14-15. I guess I am looking for something that *explicitly* states that spanking is something we can practice based on WDJT-WWJD. You are still falling into the same trap.
When you say,
“Thus, we who are fathers on earth are to discipline our children in the likeness that God disciplines his children. Comprende?”
I think this is the point I am driving at amigo. I did not say that we should not discipline our children. However I am trying to see how you justify "spanking" on the basis of this very non-specific metaphor? I mean, this gets at the crux of what I am asking. If you can justify "spanking" on this basis, what other forms of "punishment," (discipline) can we justify on this metaphor as well? The way I see it, your talk of anthropomorphism has very little to do with the question at hand. You are moving from revelation to application, without justifying why you are doing it.
The bottom line in all of this is not "spanking" per se, but is moving from revelation to application in all of our endeavors to live out the Christian life. So in the famous words of Keaneau Reeves:
"What will you do?"
Brandon
| | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:36 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|