Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. (1 Cor 13:4 NIV)
Craig invited a group of friends over for dinner to test out his new cooking skills. He put on a show. A candle-lit table, some nice wine for the drinkers (non-alcoholic wine for the non-drinkers), an entrée, mains, dessert and then coffee. Stomachs were full, eyes half shut in satisfaction. They took the candles into the living room and talked until after midnight. Finally, when the candles had almost burnt themselves out and everyone was gone, Craig slumped on his sofa and fell asleep.
The heat or the smoke woke him up.
(Please read 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 below this post or here.)
It’s said that the first step towards solving a problem is to admit we have one. And we have one. We don’t like headcoverings. In fact, we don’t like them so much, that we approach this passage of Scripture trying to find ways to avoid applying it. But if we are to give this passage a fair shake, we need to hear what Paul is saying here with a heart leaning toward obedience. So before we even get to the passage, let’s quickly turn an eye toward ourselves.
Why do we not like headcoverings? It’s not just because it is not a culturally normative thing today. Is communion culturally normative? Is baptism? Even though both of these had a wider cultural background in Biblical times, neither of them does today. We find ourselves having to explain to people what these church-specific traditions are all about yet we still practice them. Headcoverings, on the other hand, are not just culturally meaningless, they are culturally negative.
In what way?
What's wrong with reparative therapy? Sort of think this is a pendulum swing away. There is an unhelpful trend in biblical counselling of not being able to see beyond their own bibilcal interpretations and terminology. But perhaps I just don't know enough...
Israel in the Old Testament vs. IS in the present. I have written some thoughts on what I understand to be some Paul Copan arguments and posted them here.
In another blog incarnation, I pointed to a post summarising the arguments for why God, in the Old Testament, is not a "moral monster", and commented that I didn't find it overly convincing. Not, mind you, that I am saying God is a moral monster!, but that the particular argument here - and I'm thinking mainly of the explanation given for wholesale slaying of peoples in cities - does not hold up well. Instead, as I said before, I find Glenn Miller's arguments far better.
Since making that assessment, Justin Taylor blogged about a book by Paul Copan along the same lines (who was also at the conference Dr. Mariottini attended). Turns out that Paul Copan had blogged a few teasers about his book. No doubt issues will be explained in the book in greater detail, which is always a good thing. But as of now, I still have my doubts about the explanation that cities were "military people employed to defend the citadel" (to quote Dr. Mariottini) without non-combatants such as women and children, and that the phrase, "men, women and children" is like an idiom that just means "everyone in the place".
The Father’s Spirit of Sonship: Reconceiving the Trinity.
by Thomas G. Weinandy, O.F.M.Cap. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995.
When I first heard of Weinandy’s book, I was both excited and frustrated. Excited, because it spoke of the Spirit being integrally involved in the begetting of the Son; frustrated, because the very person I first heard about this book from had rejected a similar thesis I had put to them (the similarities of which were confirmed via a short email exchange)!
Ruffled feathers aside, I began to try to get myself a copy. The first problem: it is out of print. Second problem: the only (three) second-hand copies I could find would cost me over AU$250.00 if I bought the one in America, or over AU$400.00 if I bought one of the two in Britain! Finally I decided on a course of action with a fair amount of cheek – I contacted Father Weinandy himself. Fortunately for me, he thought $400 was too much for 160 pages and managed to get a copy to me for much, much less. Thank you Father Tom.
His book is far better than my thesis, and far better than any of the attempts to explain Weinandy’s views found on the internet - and that will include the present one.