Comments on: Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/ A Blog by Jim Wallis and Friends Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:05:36 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: cubfan19 http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-111333 cubfan19 Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:24:26 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-111333 Boyd maybe address some issues that Piper was wrong, but in the points he makes he does nor really help his side either. I do not necessarily agree with Piper, but here are some things to consider.<br>His point 1: Yes the minneapolis convention center was also hit, but that was the building that the actual assembly was being held in. I was there and the exact session that the tornado hit was the session when debate and voting was being done on the issue. So if Piper is right then there it would follow that the convention center would be hit (also it is right across the street from the church.)<br><br>Point 2: Very simply, Can God control the weather? If he can then it does not matter how natural it is.<br><br>Point 3: I think Boyd missed the point that the debate was actually over the view of scripture and not just sexuality, so if one side is truly breaking away from scripture that would be a serious offense. How to read scripture not particular views of sexuality. He also asks why other churches that neglect the poor are not hit by tornadoes, the problem is that this might be the case and Piper is talking about a specific incident, not every tornado. <br><br>Point 4: If God wanted to make things plain and clear then why didn't Jesus take the Devil's temptation on the mountain and set up his kingdom on earth by openly showing all his glory and power. This is just bad theology. Even though the Bible is based upon historical evidence and facts, it is ultimately a matter of faith. Also, if you want to know what happened to people who made incredible claims about what God was saying check the prophets of the OT. Again, this is not an endorsement of Piper, but Boyd's point is weak.<br><br>Point 6: Again, bad reading of the passage. The passage does not let off the hook the guilt of the 18, but says that the rest are just as guilty. Guilt is still maintained. Was it random? Probably. Important to note, though, is that no one was hurt at the convention. At least that was the announcement to those present.<br><br>So, though Piper might be wrong, Boyd didn't do much better.<br><br>Nadia's article was better than both Piper and Boyd. Boyd maybe address some issues that Piper was wrong, but in the points he makes he does nor really help his side either. I do not necessarily agree with Piper, but here are some things to consider.
His point 1: Yes the minneapolis convention center was also hit, but that was the building that the actual assembly was being held in. I was there and the exact session that the tornado hit was the session when debate and voting was being done on the issue. So if Piper is right then there it would follow that the convention center would be hit (also it is right across the street from the church.)

Point 2: Very simply, Can God control the weather? If he can then it does not matter how natural it is.

Point 3: I think Boyd missed the point that the debate was actually over the view of scripture and not just sexuality, so if one side is truly breaking away from scripture that would be a serious offense. How to read scripture not particular views of sexuality. He also asks why other churches that neglect the poor are not hit by tornadoes, the problem is that this might be the case and Piper is talking about a specific incident, not every tornado.

Point 4: If God wanted to make things plain and clear then why didn't Jesus take the Devil's temptation on the mountain and set up his kingdom on earth by openly showing all his glory and power. This is just bad theology. Even though the Bible is based upon historical evidence and facts, it is ultimately a matter of faith. Also, if you want to know what happened to people who made incredible claims about what God was saying check the prophets of the OT. Again, this is not an endorsement of Piper, but Boyd's point is weak.

Point 6: Again, bad reading of the passage. The passage does not let off the hook the guilt of the 18, but says that the rest are just as guilty. Guilt is still maintained. Was it random? Probably. Important to note, though, is that no one was hurt at the convention. At least that was the announcement to those present.

So, though Piper might be wrong, Boyd didn't do much better.

Nadia's article was better than both Piper and Boyd.

]]> By: cubfan19 http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-96277 cubfan19 Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:24:26 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-96277 Boyd maybe address some issues that Piper was wrong, but in the points he makes he does nor really help his side either. I do not necessarily agree with Piper, but here are some things to consider.<br>His point 1: Yes the minneapolis convention center was also hit, but that was the building that the actual assembly was being held in. I was there and the exact session that the tornado hit was the session when debate and voting was being done on the issue. So if Piper is right then there it would follow that the convention center would be hit (also it is right across the street from the church.)<br><br>Point 2: Very simply, Can God control the weather? If he can then it does not matter how natural it is.<br><br>Point 3: I think Boyd missed the point that the debate was actually over the view of scripture and not just sexuality, so if one side is truly breaking away from scripture that would be a serious offense. How to read scripture not particular views of sexuality. He also asks why other churches that neglect the poor are not hit by tornadoes, the problem is that this might be the case and Piper is talking about a specific incident, not every tornado. <br><br>Point 4: If God wanted to make things plain and clear then why didn't Jesus take the Devil's temptation on the mountain and set up his kingdom on earth by openly showing all his glory and power. This is just bad theology. Even though the Bible is based upon historical evidence and facts, it is ultimately a matter of faith. Also, if you want to know what happened to people who made incredible claims about what God was saying check the prophets of the OT. Again, this is not an endorsement of Piper, but Boyd's point is weak.<br><br>Point 6: Again, bad reading of the passage. The passage does not let off the hook the guilt of the 18, but says that the rest are just as guilty. Guilt is still maintained. Was it random? Probably. Important to note, though, is that no one was hurt at the convention. At least that was the announcement to those present.<br><br>So, though Piper might be wrong, Boyd didn't do much better. Boyd maybe address some issues that Piper was wrong, but in the points he makes he does nor really help his side either. I do not necessarily agree with Piper, but here are some things to consider.
His point 1: Yes the minneapolis convention center was also hit, but that was the building that the actual assembly was being held in. I was there and the exact session that the tornado hit was the session when debate and voting was being done on the issue. So if Piper is right then there it would follow that the convention center would be hit (also it is right across the street from the church.)

Point 2: Very simply, Can God control the weather? If he can then it does not matter how natural it is.

Point 3: I think Boyd missed the point that the debate was actually over the view of scripture and not just sexuality, so if one side is truly breaking away from scripture that would be a serious offense. How to read scripture not particular views of sexuality. He also asks why other churches that neglect the poor are not hit by tornadoes, the problem is that this might be the case and Piper is talking about a specific incident, not every tornado.

Point 4: If God wanted to make things plain and clear then why didn't Jesus take the Devil's temptation on the mountain and set up his kingdom on earth by openly showing all his glory and power. This is just bad theology. Even though the Bible is based upon historical evidence and facts, it is ultimately a matter of faith. Also, if you want to know what happened to people who made incredible claims about what God was saying check the prophets of the OT. Again, this is not an endorsement of Piper, but Boyd's point is weak.

Point 6: Again, bad reading of the passage. The passage does not let off the hook the guilt of the 18, but says that the rest are just as guilty. Guilt is still maintained. Was it random? Probably. Important to note, though, is that no one was hurt at the convention. At least that was the announcement to those present.

So, though Piper might be wrong, Boyd didn't do much better.

]]> By: Perfectly Happy Not Liking Evangelicals — But Learning to Love Them - Nadia Bolz-Weber - God’s Politics Blog http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-95985 Perfectly Happy Not Liking Evangelicals — But Learning to Love Them - Nadia Bolz-Weber - God’s Politics Blog Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:54:14 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-95985 [...] not want to engage with him.  Why?  He spent an entire half hour of a radio show picking apart my sermon on the ELCA Churchwide Assembly.  I had never met him, but I don’t like him.  Yet God paid this very little attention recently [...] [...] not want to engage with him.  Why?  He spent an entire half hour of a radio show picking apart my sermon on the ELCA Churchwide Assembly.  I had never met him, but I don’t like him.  Yet God paid this very little attention recently [...]

]]> By: revmel http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-93116 revmel Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:58:25 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-93116 I'm sorry- I didn't mean to provoke, and I'm saddened, truly, that you needed to leave the ELCA.<br>However, I don't define marriage, (although I am one woman married to one man)<br>But the Bible does have lots of examples of marriage. Kings David and Solomon had hundred of wives and hundreds of mistresses. Levrite marriage was common, if your brother died, you married his wife, and added to the family. Paul thought you shouldn't even get married at all.<br>One form of "Biblical Marriage" simply doesn't exist. Check the texts.<br>That is all I am lifting up here- scripture. I'm sorry- I didn't mean to provoke, and I'm saddened, truly, that you needed to leave the ELCA.
However, I don't define marriage, (although I am one woman married to one man)
But the Bible does have lots of examples of marriage. Kings David and Solomon had hundred of wives and hundreds of mistresses. Levrite marriage was common, if your brother died, you married his wife, and added to the family. Paul thought you shouldn't even get married at all.
One form of “Biblical Marriage” simply doesn't exist. Check the texts.
That is all I am lifting up here- scripture.

]]> By: ando http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-93115 ando Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:38:12 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-93115 Okay, I guess you're the one to define marriage. How about two man and one<br>woman? Or two women and one man? How about leaving your wife to marry<br>another man? The ELCA did not approve gay marriage? What did they do?<br>What are they doing to support and uphold marriage between a man and a<br>woman? You make it sound that marriage between male and female is no big<br>deal. As if God just decided to make two sexes, not three or one, on a<br>whim.<br><br>The decision by the ELCA -- which I used to be part of -- is not surprising. Okay, I guess you're the one to define marriage. How about two man and one
woman? Or two women and one man? How about leaving your wife to marry
another man? The ELCA did not approve gay marriage? What did they do?
What are they doing to support and uphold marriage between a man and a
woman? You make it sound that marriage between male and female is no big
deal. As if God just decided to make two sexes, not three or one, on a
whim.

The decision by the ELCA — which I used to be part of — is not surprising.

]]> By: revmel http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-93114 revmel Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:04:14 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-93114 First of all, it must be clarified that the ELCA did not approve gay marriage. Our understanding of that has not changed.<br><br>What I am saying is that the mandate to be fruitful and multiply was given to Adam and Eve. God made many mandates to his people in Genesis, a book you implied we don't give enough import, and we lift up that mandate as the one we should follow.<br>What about God telling Abraham to kill his son? What about the Nephilim? The flood that killed most of the world?<br><br>There are countless texts in Genesis that tell us what we should do to follow God's will- the list above included in them.<br><br>Why do we take the Genesis 2 account and not the rest of Genesis? Why do we lift up Matthew 19 on marriage, and not the later verses on divorce? If we decide not all of it is a literal application for our lives... how can we navigate through scripture with a new perspective. First of all, it must be clarified that the ELCA did not approve gay marriage. Our understanding of that has not changed.

What I am saying is that the mandate to be fruitful and multiply was given to Adam and Eve. God made many mandates to his people in Genesis, a book you implied we don't give enough import, and we lift up that mandate as the one we should follow.
What about God telling Abraham to kill his son? What about the Nephilim? The flood that killed most of the world?

There are countless texts in Genesis that tell us what we should do to follow God's will- the list above included in them.

Why do we take the Genesis 2 account and not the rest of Genesis? Why do we lift up Matthew 19 on marriage, and not the later verses on divorce? If we decide not all of it is a literal application for our lives… how can we navigate through scripture with a new perspective.

]]> By: ando http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-93113 ando Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:45:03 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-93113 Are you trying to say that it's not God's mandate that marriage is between a<br>man and a woman? I have a hard time trying to equate marriage with<br>"fratricide, rape, prostitution, and incest among others." I don't see the<br>logic. Are you trying to say that it's not God's mandate that marriage is between a
man and a woman? I have a hard time trying to equate marriage with
“fratricide, rape, prostitution, and incest among others.” I don't see the
logic.

]]> By: revmel http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-92073 revmel Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:06:40 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-92073 Hmmm...<br>So, what if my husband and I cannot be fruitful and mulitply? <br>Are going against God's mandate?<br>What if we don't tend the earth, but rob it of resources?<br>I just think we need to be careful when we say we want to take Genesis more seriously... That book has some huge problems: fratricide, rape, prostitution, and incest among others... all as God's will? Hmmm…
So, what if my husband and I cannot be fruitful and mulitply?
Are going against God's mandate?
What if we don't tend the earth, but rob it of resources?
I just think we need to be careful when we say we want to take Genesis more seriously… That book has some huge problems: fratricide, rape, prostitution, and incest among others… all as God's will?

]]> By: canucklehead http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91871 canucklehead Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:00:00 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91871 Your sense of Christian compassion is revealing more than you know. Your sense of Christian compassion is revealing more than you know.

]]> By: FaithfulandTrue http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91865 FaithfulandTrue Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:00:10 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91865 Well, New Jersey is where all those gambling casinos are located (owned by that rich man who has been divorced several times - I can't think of his name). Virginia is where the settlers landed in 1607 and planted a cross.<br><br>Reverend Robertson has only been married one time and the casino man had had several wives (Trump - I just remembered his name). And God hates divorce. So maybe we should consider placing all of the divorced couples in one state on the East Coast. Kind of like when farmers put a lightning rod on top of their barns. Well, New Jersey is where all those gambling casinos are located (owned by that rich man who has been divorced several times – I can't think of his name). Virginia is where the settlers landed in 1607 and planted a cross.

Reverend Robertson has only been married one time and the casino man had had several wives (Trump – I just remembered his name). And God hates divorce. So maybe we should consider placing all of the divorced couples in one state on the East Coast. Kind of like when farmers put a lightning rod on top of their barns.

]]> By: canucklehead http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91858 canucklehead Mon, 31 Aug 2009 03:03:54 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91858 Thx Buckeye for the link. When I first heard of Piper's pipe-dream I was instantly reminded of Pat Robertson's claim from some years back that God had intervened and spared Virginia Beach from being pummelled by Hurricane Fairy or whatever its name was. To my knowledge, Bro Pat never did satisfactorily answer why God loved Virginians more than New Jerseyans or wherever it was that that hurricane ended up wreaking havoc. Thx Buckeye for the link. When I first heard of Piper's pipe-dream I was instantly reminded of Pat Robertson's claim from some years back that God had intervened and spared Virginia Beach from being pummelled by Hurricane Fairy or whatever its name was. To my knowledge, Bro Pat never did satisfactorily answer why God loved Virginians more than New Jerseyans or wherever it was that that hurricane ended up wreaking havoc.

]]> By: lumens http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91853 lumens Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:11:08 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91853 Boyd embraced the legitimate view (homosexuality is not God's ideal), and discredited the illegitimate view (the anti-gay tornadoes thing). <br><br>Piper's blog was reactionary and theologically unsound. It needed to be deconstructed, and after the crap Piper has put Boyd through, I don't blame him for taking the axe to it. Boyd embraced the legitimate view (homosexuality is not God's ideal), and discredited the illegitimate view (the anti-gay tornadoes thing).

Piper's blog was reactionary and theologically unsound. It needed to be deconstructed, and after the crap Piper has put Boyd through, I don't blame him for taking the axe to it.

]]> By: lumens http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91848 lumens Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:47:58 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91848 "Conservatives, not surprisingly, place their emphasis on God's law."<br><br>No. Conservatives do not see God's law to stand in opposition to his law, but rather see his law as a manifestation of his love. We have the eternal words of life at our disposal, and the conservative position is that we ought to obey them. <br><br>So your position, that God's love cannot encourage what his law forbids, is the conservative position. <br><br>Replace "allowing those in monogamous homosexual relationships to remain as clergy" with "allowing those who believe it is acceptable to show contempt for the poor" and Nadia is not going to be so excited about the dichotomy between words of eternal life and words of personal belief. Her dichotomy is thus false. “Conservatives, not surprisingly, place their emphasis on God's law.”

No. Conservatives do not see God's law to stand in opposition to his law, but rather see his law as a manifestation of his love. We have the eternal words of life at our disposal, and the conservative position is that we ought to obey them.

So your position, that God's love cannot encourage what his law forbids, is the conservative position.

Replace “allowing those in monogamous homosexual relationships to remain as clergy” with “allowing those who believe it is acceptable to show contempt for the poor” and Nadia is not going to be so excited about the dichotomy between words of eternal life and words of personal belief. Her dichotomy is thus false.

]]> By: PRAYtheREVOLUTION Posts about Holy Spirit as of August 29, 2009 http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91831 PRAYtheREVOLUTION Posts about Holy Spirit as of August 29, 2009 Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:24:01 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91831 [...] message without distracting from it. Limousine: Holy Spirit (Sweden, 1976) HT: Mockingbird Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – blog.sojo.net 08/28/2009 by Nadia Bolz-Weber08-28-2009 In John 6:56-69, Jesus is teaching [...] [...] message without distracting from it. Limousine: Holy Spirit (Sweden, 1976) HT: Mockingbird Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – blog.sojo.net 08/28/2009 by Nadia Bolz-Weber08-28-2009 In John 6:56-69, Jesus is teaching [...]

]]> By: letjusticerolldown http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91826 letjusticerolldown Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:45:04 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91826 I was aware of the back-and-forth (ongoing) between Boyd and Piper. They both have their points. Personally, I think their able minds/hearts might be put to better use by attempting to embrace/synthesize the legitimate questions/views of each other rather than deconstruct each other's arguments. I was aware of the back-and-forth (ongoing) between Boyd and Piper. They both have their points. Personally, I think their able minds/hearts might be put to better use by attempting to embrace/synthesize the legitimate questions/views of each other rather than deconstruct each other's arguments.

]]> By: Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – Nadia Bolz-Weber – God’s Politics Blog | The Daily Walk http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91820 Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – Nadia Bolz-Weber – God’s Politics Blog | The Daily Walk Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:35:07 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91820 [...] Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – Nadia Bolz-Weber – God’s Politics Blog. Share and [...] [...] Where Did Jesus Stand at the ELCA Assembly? – Nadia Bolz-Weber – God’s Politics Blog. Share and [...]

]]> By: BuckeyeDon http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91822 BuckeyeDon Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:49:24 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91822 Here's an excellent reply to John Piper's assertion regarding the tornado, from another Twin Cities area pastor (who isn't a Lutheran, BTW):<br><br><a href="http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/did-god-send-a-tornado-to-warn-the-elca/" rel="nofollow">http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/did-god-send-a-tor...</a> Here's an excellent reply to John Piper's assertion regarding the tornado, from another Twin Cities area pastor (who isn't a Lutheran, BTW):

http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/did-god-send-a-tor...

]]> By: letjusticerolldown http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91803 letjusticerolldown Sat, 29 Aug 2009 00:03:08 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91803 Truth is not found in our ethical formulations but in submission to the Truth. Her formulation of "Jesus in the Middle" was not "Jesus as Compromiser" or "Jesus as God of the Middle Ground" or "Jesus at the center of a continuum".<br><br>Our ethical commitments are formulated on our foggy understanding of God and what God has revealed to us. They become more clear as they are walked out in an obedience that is outpaced by love.<br><br>Our ethical commitments must rest in submission to the Holy One. They must be walked out. They are not walked out so much through ethical debates in which we defeat opponents--but through life's journeys of loving communities--seeking a most holy God.<br><br>The world and much of the church cannot begin to hear our ethical formulations about homosexuality (and heterosexuality) because the formulations are detached from loving communities that incarnate the truth.<br><br>Right positions--not lived--are wrong positions. Truth is not found in our ethical formulations but in submission to the Truth. Her formulation of “Jesus in the Middle” was not “Jesus as Compromiser” or “Jesus as God of the Middle Ground” or “Jesus at the center of a continuum”.

Our ethical commitments are formulated on our foggy understanding of God and what God has revealed to us. They become more clear as they are walked out in an obedience that is outpaced by love.

Our ethical commitments must rest in submission to the Holy One. They must be walked out. They are not walked out so much through ethical debates in which we defeat opponents–but through life's journeys of loving communities–seeking a most holy God.

The world and much of the church cannot begin to hear our ethical formulations about homosexuality (and heterosexuality) because the formulations are detached from loving communities that incarnate the truth.

Right positions–not lived–are wrong positions.

]]> By: wjschroeder http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91794 wjschroeder Fri, 28 Aug 2009 22:44:47 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91794 We become more like him by dying daily. We are all incomplete,mistaken and imperfect, thus the need to die daily in our walk. We incarnate love by forgiving, not excepting what they do. by helping them fix it not condoneing it becasue we fill it might offend them in some way. Jesus never spoke like that. The truth hurts and it needs to to make us see where we are at. The post was about where jesus would be and she says in the middle. though she is wrong because He said you are neither hot nor cold but luke warm and I will spit you out.... So to be in the middle is NOT were Jesus would ever be nor where he wants us to be. Sadely the lutheran church just went luke warm. There is a right and wrong the "AND" between it is nothing but luke warm. notice Jesus went on to say he would rather you be hot or cold. think about why that is. We become more like him by dying daily. We are all incomplete,mistaken and imperfect, thus the need to die daily in our walk. We incarnate love by forgiving, not excepting what they do. by helping them fix it not condoneing it becasue we fill it might offend them in some way. Jesus never spoke like that. The truth hurts and it needs to to make us see where we are at. The post was about where jesus would be and she says in the middle. though she is wrong because He said you are neither hot nor cold but luke warm and I will spit you out…. So to be in the middle is NOT were Jesus would ever be nor where he wants us to be. Sadely the lutheran church just went luke warm. There is a right and wrong the “AND” between it is nothing but luke warm. notice Jesus went on to say he would rather you be hot or cold. think about why that is.

]]> By: ando http://blog.sojo.net/2009/08/28/where-did-jesus-stand-at-the-elca-assembly/comment-page-1/#comment-91793 ando Fri, 28 Aug 2009 22:39:01 +0000 http://blog.sojo.net/?p=11204#comment-91793 From John 8:<br><br>"If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."<br><br>We aren't free to pick and choose verses that fit our point of view or feelings to fit our paradigm. Sojo makes sure we know about the passages that talk about the caring for the poor. The Bible is that, but so much more. Jesus didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. Just because we live in the 21st century doesn't mean that what was proclaimed in biblical times doesn't still ring true. From John 8:

“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

We aren't free to pick and choose verses that fit our point of view or feelings to fit our paradigm. Sojo makes sure we know about the passages that talk about the caring for the poor. The Bible is that, but so much more. Jesus didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. Just because we live in the 21st century doesn't mean that what was proclaimed in biblical times doesn't still ring true.

]]>