1. any system of doctirnes concerning last, or final matters as death, the Judgment, etc.
or tho prax y (awr-thuh-prak-see)-noun
1. correctness or orthodoxy of action or practice.
her me neu tic (hur-muh-noo-tik) - adjective
1. of or pertaining to hermenetics; interpretative; explanatory.
How can I possibly come to the Lord with a child-like faith if I'm busy about the pursuit of knowing everything and impressing others with my magnificently scholarly vocabulary?
I noticed something today while reading 1Peter for my CBS weekly study, I noted that the verbal explanation of my hope shares with others what I believe, but it's my action, my lifestyle, my choices -- the good life of conduct that will cause others to be ashamed for slandering me when Christ appears. And God will be glorified.
As I think about committed Christians whose faith was (or is) so sure, pure and lovely that I say to myself, "I need to be sharpened by that iron!" I don't remember ever hearing them use this lingo. I can't imagine Corrie Ten Boom, or my friend, Sheryl, or Jesus or Paul using any of these words to share the Good News of Christ's work with the lost; and as far as our work on this earth is concerned, that is what it's all about it, isn't it?
13 comments:
Ouch GB. I use those terms all the time when speaking about something that is relevant to my life. My experiences. My failings. My irritations. My studies.
Would I use them when witnessing to an unbeliever? NO! Would I use them with a mature Christian? Absolutely. Would I use them with "teenage" Christians? Of course! I don't talk down to my children, I don't see why I should talk down to Christian sisters either.
For someone who understands their own internal desire to raise daughters who are not fed a diet of modern day, dumbed down music and literature - someone who appreciates the more complex and intricate works of Bach and Pachelbel and Buxtehude...vs...say...Amy Grant, it's interesting that you, in the same turn, seem to do a 180 here where a little theological vocabulary is concerned.
Should John Calvin, whose theolgoical studies have centered you in many of your core beliefs, have dumbed down his studies to the lowest common denominator so he could exhibit a "child like faith"? I would say no. I hope you would say no. So...why should we pursue less for the sake of all mankind.
This post, I have to say, seems to belittle those of us who do use bigger vocabulary words - properly and appropriately - simply because it seemingly overwhelms you.
The tone of this post is quite judgemental and critical of others who might not have the same walk as you. It doesn't make us/them/me less of a Christian or, as you seem to put it, more of a haughty Christian. And it doesn't make you less of a Christian just because you DON'T know the vocabulary.
It does, however, hurt my feelings that you think when I use words such as these that you think I'm doing it all for show.
Oh Sarah, you take this too personally; it's not really "all about you." lol.
And in my year with the choir singing the pieces of Bach and Buxtehude, I have never sung the words: eschatology, hermenuetics, orthopraxy, orthodoxy, etc., etc. Even the great masters were effectively communicating the beautiful truth of Jesus to the masses (albeit in their own language, which is not my language, but that's another point entirely).
Even my high-brow music is accessible to anyone who cares to hear it. Unfortunately, conversation filled with these elitist words (and that's what they are) are not accessible...to me or my children, or I dare say, others.
Of course, it could be argued that I am just the dumbest person on the planet, but Jesus came to save even me!
Big words don't make the user smarter; and I've not seen any evidence that they help the user to walk closer to the Lord either.
We're just going to disagree on this.
Whoa! I don't think I'm going to get into the middle of this. I think I'll keep it simple. Huge words like that simply put me off. I prefer to actually "understand" what someone is saying to me. I can't picture myself having a conversation that requires a dictionary nearby to follow what they're saying. But that's just me. Simple.
Janice, I agree completely that we need theologians and scholars. Thanks for your input.
Fine.
Smile when you say that, Sarah! 'Love you lots. (But you know that already.) *mmmmmch!*
Well, I agree with Janice that a balance is needed.
I don't use those words in everyday life and conversation, but I don't need to judge those who use them as highbrow or as trying to impress people. I know people who do use those words often who are some of the most humble and godly people I know. To use a decidedly un-highbrow expression -- different strokes for different folks. :) God saves people in all different levels of academia and all different personalities to reach those within their sphere that others couldn't.
And even if those words aren't in my regular vocabulary, what they mean and how what they mean applies to my life is important. I'm glad there are those people who can study and figure out that stuff and try to explain it to me.
I have posted my response on my blog (http://wendyclayton.blogspot.com/) since it turned out to be pretty long!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
I hope I was one of the ones you meant in your other post who extended grace, because that was certainly my intention. :) I do agree that sending out notices about meetings on "The Hermeneutics of the Eschatology of Revelation" probably is not going to attract many people. :) And I agree that we need to make the truth accessible.
What I objected to was the assigning of motives (which I've always been taught not to do) and the sweeping generalization (something else I've been taught not to do) which seemed to be expressed in your post that people who use those words are just doing so to try to impress others with their "magnificently scholarly vocabulary." That, to me, placed a valid concern over the line into a judgment call. And I was trying to convey that not everyone who uses those terms does so out of "puffed-up" motives.
As an example, my pastor, who is not of an academic theological bent, said something about hemaneutics in trying to explain why a certain intepretation of a certain passage wasn't right. He then said, "Don't be scared of that word, it just means...." and went on to define it briefly and illustrate what he meant in light of that passage. I'm sure that went over some people's heads, but I am sure it was helpful to others. Because even though we need to make the truth clear and simple -- not all of the Bible is clear and simple, and rules of hermaneutics help in Bible study. I think he struck a good balance in sharing that with those who were ready for it, but trying to make it understandable to those who weren't. But he doesn't throw words like that around just to impress people.
I see lots of people still coming to this post and reading the comments. I probably should have said this earlier, but really didn't think it was necessary. Before judging me as someone who judges because of my statement,
"How can I possibly come to the Lord with a child-like faith if I'm busy about the pursuit of knowing everything and impressing others with my magnificently scholarly vocabulary?"
Please recognize the "I" at the center of the thought. This is actually a self-reflective moment as I remember a real-life moment that occured to me a couple of years ago in a very academic church.
It is just now becoming clear to me that most everybody who thinks anything of this, is thinking the WRONG thing of it.
Grafted Branch is frank if anything. If I mean to say something sweeping about others, I'll just say it. Otherwise, let's believe the best about eachother, shall we?
I was wondering what words you would suggest using instead of orthodoxy, orthopraxy, hermeneutics, and eschatology? I use these words because they are the right words, not because I am trying to impress anyone.
You are surely welcome to use any words you want to, and I am not making an indictment on your intentions; but please know that to a lot of people (especially those who need to hear the Gospel) they come off as elitist, prideful, cliquish and inaccessible.
And none of those are in line with the exhortation Paul -- gave to become as the people (without offense) so as to be able to minister and preach the good news to them.
And btw, I'm not afraid of them either. I do know what they mean. But I didn't for a long time and it was a hinderance. They are academic words. I will use them in the context of academia, but my truer walk with Jesus is not academic -- may it never be!
I believe you are being rhetorical with your question; surely you know other words that get the same meaning across to a broader audience.
Thanks for surfing by, it would have been nice to visit your blog to see more of where you are coming from.
The beauty of the gospel is that it satisfies at so many levels. For the academian, there is depth in God's Words beyond one thousand lifetimes of study. There are intricacies and subtleties that plumb the divine personality of God. On the other hand, the gospel message is accessible enough and simple enough for even my 5 year old child to understand. And Paul understood this facet of the gospel clearly, the the Romans, he provided a deep, "legal" apologetic to his audience. To the Corinthians, he provided spiritual milk. That's ok...
I do agree howevver, that sometimes those with an academic bent need to learn the art of "teaching". The sign of a gifted teacher is one who can clarify complicated issues in a simple and insightful manner...
thanks...
Post a Comment