u/SouthernAT

I would draw a parallel that Mormonism is to Christianity what Islam is to Christianity. They affirm the scriptures, say they believe in God and Jesus, but the practice and theology is wildly different than what is held in orthodox Christianity. You can’t just use the same words and say it’s the same thing when you mean something completely different by it.

If it were not possible, we would not have so many denominations and so many different theological theories. You can be a sincere, ardent believer and still question what is taught, that’s fine. The Bible was written for our salvation, not to satisfy our curiosity. It is not a comprehensive manual into theological truth, it is the smallest window open to show us the inner life and joy of God.

My biggest encouragement is be humble in seeking truth. I’m a pastor, I hold theological positions because I believe they’re true. However, if I get to heaven and find out I was actually right in my opinions, I’ll be absolutely shocked. Too many pastors turn their theology into their idol, rather than using it to seek the truth about the God they worship.

Doubt is fine. Doubt is human. Use that doubt to fervently ask questions and seek the truth. Unshakable faith is a spiritual gift, and like all gifts, it’s not given to everyone. I have unwavering faith, that’s my gift. But I am not gifted to be a missionary, I am not gifted to be a youth pastor, I am not gifted to explore creation as a scientist. That’s all okay. People who doubt ask questions and can come to an even fuller, even richer understanding of the faith than people like me whose testimony is “I don’t doubt.”

Hope that answers your question!

Totally off the cuff, but if I remember, Glorfindel was powered up to near Miar levels, and Gandalf was powered down to appear more human and be undercover as a regular wizard. Someone please correct me with sources and spelling, best I could type while still at work.

For me, it’s currently 5:30am, but I’m going to do my best to answer with a sleepy brain. There isn’t a cumulative and collective sin of humanity, at least not in the way your referencing it I’m reading you correctly. Using the term “the world” has different meanings depending on the context in either the New Testament Greek or Old Testament Hebrew. It can refer to either the physical world, humanity as a whole, or the age in a temporal sense.

In the way in which “the world” is used that you referenced, it does mean humanity. It means all human beings, not the literal planet itself. Same thing in John 3:16, in which “the world” refers to all people/humanity.

Another theological distinction I’d want to make is that all of the world’s sins you mentioned involve people. It becomes a larger institution at scale, but each act is committed by an individual. A genocide is committed by individuals, who each sin individually as they participate. There doesn’t need to be a larger “world sin” for those kinds of things when the sin of the individual is counted to them and not unduly placed on other.

I second this. Two of the best classes I had were called “Care & Counseling” and “Pastoral Ethics.” They should absolutely be required. Too many pastors need to realize they are NOT therapists, not mental health professionals, and need to know their left/right limits of what they can handle and when someone needs to be referred out. There’s a reason chaplains require so much training, and someone with good intentions but no training can make things so much worse.

Right? I lived in a very, very liberal and progressive city, huge population (over 1 million) and I think I’ve met and meaningfully spoken to roughly 8 trans people in the last ten years. I highly doubt those people who spew hate have met or even know more than one or two actual trans people.

Just to clarify, what is ND? First few things that came to mind were non-denominational, neurodivergent, and North Dakota. I think the first two are more likely, but you never know.

Hello! Also a veteran, currently serving in spiritual care role.

My advice is finish the bachelors and be at least a little ways into your MDiv before worry about CPE. For the VA, getting a M.Div is your best, as you’ll need that for either one. Make sure you find either a mentor or a licensed chaplain, they can help you find the best route for the planning your future. The VA has some of the highest requirements for their chaplains, so you need to have a solid plan before you set on that road to smooth the process. The military and VA have wildly different requirements, so clarify which one you want first. Feel free to message me if you want to talk more.

Thanks. Fixed the link. I keep forgetting it’s plural.

Well, someone else commented on my post but has deleted it. They rightly pointed out what I was trying to talk about is called the royal argument or royal understanding of the imago dei. Didn’t get your user name, but thank you for recalling correctly what I was trying to think of.

The exact nature of what it means to be “in Gods image” (imago dei) is debated among scholars and theologians. One interpretation is rationality, but I don’t necessarily ascribe to that. A better interpretation is to take into account the ancient near eastern concept of image bearing as it relates to kings and deities. To be in something’s image is to either be its vassal or its representative. So human beings as Gods image means humanity is created to be Gods representatives in creation, to bring forth his mission as his hands and feet to physical creation. Humanity was placed at a unique apex over creation to rule and tend and guard over it. That is why when Adam, humanities corporate head, fell, all creation fell with him, as he was supposed to be bearing the image of God outward and fell.

If you want more input, you can post this to r/asktheologists. I’m one of the resident theologians there, but others could have a different take with more sources than u have access to at the moment.

The first one, chapter 1, is using a rhetorical device to make a point. The verses before and after write “if we say, if we walk, if we say, if we confess, etc.” It’s comparing and contrasting several things in succession. The second one, in chapter three, is talking about a present tense sin. The point it is getting towards is saying that those who live in him will not make sin a way of life, not that Christian’s will never sin. It’s focused on habitual sin.

Definitely God when he’s talking to Job in the end of the book. Challenging Job to prove he’s almighty and that God is not. I think it’s always an amazing thing to meditate on the sovereignty of God.

I would highly encourage you to get into scholarship if that’s where you feel called. I have two masters degrees in theology and, though the job market is bad, it’s very rewarding. One discouraging thing I’ve seen a lot of in the affirming place is a lack of scholars. There are some, but they are vastly outnumbered by conservative ones. We need to show in whatever way possibly that, just because you’re “liberal” doesn’t mean you’ve turned your brain off in favor of feelings and that we are perfectly capable of engaging in high level scholarship. But I’ll get off my soapbox now. You just touched on something very near and dear to my heart.

I think Dr. McClellan is an excellent scholar, but I don’t like him as a person. His demeanor and attitude online rub me the wrong way and he just grates on me. I blocked all his accounts so I’ll stop seeing them. Nothing at all against the man as an academic or his writings, but he just grates on me as a person.

I didn’t know he had a book, so I’ll definitely be checking it out. His articles and papers are quite good if you have the time and inclination for the scholarship.

My recommendation would be to read Tom Hollands boom “Dominion: How the Christian revolution reshaped the world.” It gives a big overview of Christianity from 33AD until the modern day and is written in a very engaging way. He may not answer your questions exactly, but will at least give you a direction of historical figures, times, and places to begin with.

I have both an M.Div in practical theology as well as an MA in Theological studies. The people who had it hardest are the ones with strict, inflexible, normally American evangelical/fundamentalist Baptist leanings. Critical scholarship, textual study, and all the very solid arguments for opinions they disagree with really hit hard. I remember one woman literally walking out of class when a professor was showing evidence for the Noah flood being local instead of global, because she wasn’t willing to even entertain the idea.

For me personally, I’m very open to admitting I’m wrong and changing my opinion if the evidence shows I’ve been mistaken, so for me it helped strengthen my religious beliefs and to help me articulate what I believe and why, instead of just relying on the “standard script.” I’ve changed denominations since undergrad because of this continual learning process.

I heard most grad school programs will do this. Dead inside during studies, a brief resurrection when the homework is over, then dead again when you look at the job market.

I’d recommend you post this to [r/a](r/acadamicbiblical)[cademicbiblical](r/acadamicbiblical) instead. Here we typically focus on theology, but over there they’d be able to help you out concerning biblical criticism, historicity, and have a more comprehensive overview of historical sources.

Jumping on to agree and upvote this. I’m one of the theologians on asktheologist, and it’s a much better place if you’re looking for a scholarly, in depth answer with sources.

Definitely a way to add crazy amounts of bloodshed right away.

Oh. That’s a good one. Super bleak.

I’m a pastor. Someone at church asked about cremation and if it makes it harder for God during the resurrection from the dead. I said “Well, he made man from dust one. I’m sure he can do it again.” Nothing wrong with being cremated.