- graham old on Private messaging is back!
- NetherHereAfter on Emerging authority
- Andrew on Private messaging is back!
- graham old on Private messaging is back!
- Andrew on Shane Claiborne and the rich young ruler
- graham old on Shane Claiborne and the rich young ruler
- peter wilkinson on Foucault, 'the Gang of Four', and the postmoderns
- shiert on Foucault, 'the Gang of Four', and the postmoderns
- peter wilkinson on Foucault, 'the Gang of Four', and the postmoderns
- john on College professors host viewing of Expelled
- Andrew on College professors host viewing of Expelled
- john on College professors host viewing of Expelled
Response to response
Summary - and a surprising conclusion? By: peter wilkinson (23 replies) 8 April, 2005 - 18:05
- Re: Today if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. By: Alario (13/03/2007 - 00:27)
- Re: Summary - and a surprising conclusion? By: gregory (17/01/2006 - 20:18)
- Christ the Righteousness of God By: Ivan Latham (12/04/2005 - 22:17)
- Christ our model By: erlenmeyer71 (13/04/2005 - 03:17)
- Re: Christ our model By: Spiritboi (11/03/2007 - 23:15)
- Christ our model By: erlenmeyer71 (13/04/2005 - 03:17)
- Another issue By: erlenmeyer71 (09/04/2005 - 20:36)
- Re: Another issue By: Spiritboi (08/01/2006 - 02:38)
- A Post-Modern Response By: sbryan (10/04/2005 - 17:39)
- Response to summary By: andrew (09/04/2005 - 17:38)
- Homosexuality and the creation narrative By: (10/04/2005 - 01:33)
- Male and female in the image of God By: andrew (11/04/2005 - 19:33)
- The scriptural argument against homosexuality By: (12/04/2005 - 02:20)
- I actually commented on singleness briefly By: erlenmeyer71 (11/04/2005 - 22:08)
- Good point. By: Whitewave (12/04/2005 - 01:49)
- Re: Good point. By: Spiritboi (08/01/2006 - 02:36)
- Eschatological childbearing By: erlenmeyer71 (12/04/2005 - 04:04)
- Good point. By: Whitewave (12/04/2005 - 01:49)
- Male and female in the image of God By: andrew (11/04/2005 - 19:33)
- Response to response By: peter wilkinson (09/04/2005 - 20:51)
- Response to response to response By: andrew (11/04/2005 - 19:29)
- A further response . . . By: peter wilkinson (12/04/2005 - 13:33)
- passing judgment By: ericboehmer (12/04/2005 - 15:39)
- Judgements etc By: peter wilkinson (12/04/2005 - 16:04)
- the visit By: ericboehmer (12/04/2005 - 16:19)
- Judgements etc By: peter wilkinson (12/04/2005 - 16:04)
- passing judgment By: ericboehmer (12/04/2005 - 15:39)
- A further response . . . By: peter wilkinson (12/04/2005 - 13:33)
- Response to response to response By: andrew (11/04/2005 - 19:29)
- Homosexuality and the creation narrative By: (10/04/2005 - 01:33)
- Homosexuality as abnormal as left-handedness? By: (09/04/2005 - 02:16)



Response to response
Andrew - thanks you for your various comments and corrections.
You say ‘the kingdom’ is:
‘the freedom given to the church to serve him openly, acknowledge him as Lord, no longer subject to oppression.the freedom given to the church to serve him openly, acknowledge him as Lord, no longer subject to oppression.’
Are you saying that since the destruction of Jerusalem/Rome, the church has never been persecuted or oppressed?
‘koimÄ“thÄ“i meta arsenos koitÄ“n = ‘sleeps with a male the marriage bed’. You virtually have Paul’s word there: arsenokoitÄ“s.’
Thanks - this is what I was looking for.
‘I am looking for a way to understand homosexuality that recognizes: … iii) that it is not ‘wickedness’, it is not intrinsically harmful to others.’
Is this really another way of saying that we can do what we like, provided it doesn’t harm others? Download internet pornography? What are you saying?
‘But would it not be possible, in principle, whenever the need arises, for gay people to acknowledge that God originally created us to be one flesh as male and female?’
Better ask Paul! It seems reasonable to me.
‘With regard to James Allison’s argument about Romans 1-2, surely Paul’s quarrel with the Jew, if that is who he is addressing in 2:1-11, is not that they are wrong for being judgmental but that they are wrong for doing such things’
Yes - but the underlying attitude was judgementalism. The argument I think goes further - that Paul is springing a ‘trap’ on the Jew (or whoever it was, but it seems most likely that it was a Jewish perspective, in view of the way it goes later on). The argument continues that this wasn’t Paul’s position at all (and I don’t necessarily agree with that), but I think we tend to miss the point that Paul is speaking rhetorically, with an audience in view, not just summarising Christian doctrine. Also, I tend to think that Jesus had some interesting table fellowship with all kinds of people, and I doubt if Paul would have contradicted that. I mention this not as a thought-through position - I’m just intrigued by possibilities.