That might sound strange to some folks since Silva will purport to represent the true nature of Calvinism and biblical inerrancy. However, this is why he is an idolater:
But unfortunately for Tatusko, he isn’t going to get his fight with this particular caged rat because what he says in his article has absolutely nothing to do with my correct Biblical position on the sin of homosexuality.
Both Silva's arrogation and certainty alongside of his self-justification that only his revelation happens to be indubitable reveal a harmful tendency within the brand of religion that Silva claiming for himself and demanding of others to be "Christians." I have argued the idolatry of this sort of hermeneutic in the past. This is another good moment to be instructive.
Silva's sort of understanding of things makes a worldview assumption. It is not enough to say that one's position is correct without some understanding, even elementary, of the flaws in the assumptions one is making that are inherently rooted in one's time and space. When my four year old son sees an adult he assumes that they know what he did earlier that morning. Why? In his mind since mom and dad seem to know a bit more about what things are called and how things work in the world and can generally answer his questions, most of the time. Of course the neighbor across the street may have no clue what my son did earlier that morning. But my son talks to my neighbor as if it is part of a running conversation. For my son the adult world is kind of mysterious and there is an omniscience to it.
As will all children, when he becomes a teenager, he will find out quickly that adults are not omniscient, not perfect, and often down right worse than what any kid can dish out. He will find this out because he will observe evidence from the world, synthesize that evidence, and plod on his wonderful and painful path of development and change. Our job as parents is to cultivate that development, not halt it by allowing him or his brother remain juveniles jaded by the perpetual assault of adult puerility in the world. We are there to challenge and support their adaption and change so they can reach a point when the no longer needs us to cultivate that development. In short, to get them to a point where they can think and adapt for themselves.
Development means that human beings adapt to experiences as they come to the senses. This is a process, as Piaget called it, of equilibrium. As the mind experiences new things in the world, it shapes those experiences according to the "stuff" that is already there, and in so doing becomes shaped by those experiences to achieve balance with the world.
The same is true in how we come to understand the revelation of God in the worship, discussion, service, relationships, scripture, etc. The inherently incomplete structures of our minds must adapt to new experiences that revelation gives to us as a gift. As God reveals God's self to us, if we do not bend ourselves to adapt to revelation, we are, by default, resisting revelation. This is a choice rooted in the very historical understanding of sin itself which is a misdirection or poorly aimed disposition away from God and towards anything else. The core of human sin is the propensity to make one's self relative to that which is not the revelation of God.
Refusing to adapt to revelation in all of its wondrous forms is the core of idolatrous behavior. Ken Silva's own idol is himself. His idol is his own view of the world because he is assuming he has got it right. He is assuming that everyone should have the same view of things that he does and not to is sin. This is the fundamental problem with many cults and new religious movements. It is not so much the doctrine to which they adhere; which certainly can be problematic on many levels. No, the problem is that the people place their undying faith in the person claiming an indubitable special revelation. The heart of the Reformation is that we all have access to the God's revelation without the necessity of a human mediator to legitimate it.
Silva continually derides those who do not share his understanding of the world so he simply dismisses language that he does not appear to understand namely, my own arguments favoring same gender relationships as revelatory of the love of God. Rather than adapt to God's revelation, Silva has chosen the idol of his own mind as something far greater than it actually is: a fallen, incomplete, and developing structure that could not possibly have it all right.
Scripture actually does have something to say about this by the way. Jesus said to receive the Kingdom like a little child. The term used there is paideion which has a sense of being shaped and formed – or educated. The core is having a faith that seeks understanding not an assumed understanding that shapes what faith is. Faith like a child is not to limit one's self to think like a child, but to adapt and learn like one. Silva has chosen not to approach faith this way. And like a three year old saying "NO!" to everything in an act of self-defense toward the process of adaptation, Silva has chosen to lash out at those who would dare to receive the love of God in new wineskins.
Related posts:
Never heard of this guy (and not interested in reading more about him) but he sounds like every other fundie who can't tell the difference between his own ideas and God's ideas and who are absolutely convinced of the doctrine of total depravity, except where it applies to themselves.
Pragmatism over Biblical truth. Sad. I see good writing, but no substance. You could have said "Ken Silva is a goober." and accomplished the same thing. What you didn't defend was your position, biblically.
Faith like a little child means "trusting" as a child does, without questioning. Without faith you cannot please God. Paul followed that up with us moving on from spiritual milk to solid food. The Bible (the one God wrote by inspiring men-not the one so-called Christians now want to cast doubt on) is very specific on sin (Exodus, Leviticus, I Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5), homosexuality (not male prostitution) Genesis, redemption (Romans), false teaching (Peter & Jude), God's attributes (Psalms), etc. It's foolish to believe you can modernize truth. Greater minds have tried, to their peril.
"Pragmatism over Biblical truth"
No. It's a pragmatist reading of the bible. Plenty of substance here. You just seem to refuse to listen to anything but what you have chosen to hear. I have been in exactly those shoes. More than once. You know that during the time of the Pentateuch the writers, or Moses – whichever – believed that the sky was in fact a giant dome, solid dome? That's in Genesis before the part about the first "marriage." Do you believe that too? Or have you selected something in the bible that best work within your tradition? Obviously I think you have. We all have. And that is a facet of pragmatism.
"Faith like a little child means "trusting" as a child does"
wrong. just wrong. that is not what the greek word reflects as i clearly indicated. what is your clothing made of? the bible is also clear that mixing fabrics, placing meat next to milk, what women need to do during periods, and jesus clearly id not observe the law which he chose not to abolish to fulfill. so does that mean that we can ignore the law, or only parts of it? or do we just follow the sermon on the mount which is reflection on the 10 commandments? what about the intertestamental literature that has been in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Canon for longer than any evangelical church? Read up on 2nd Esdras?
Greater minds…like Karl Barth? Dietrich Bonhoeffer? All of the biblical scholars that you will find in the ANchor Bible Commentaries? Wow. Some peril.
People don't like having their idols shown to be nothing but wood, Drew.
[...] And this foolishness would be a perfect example of what MacArthur is talking about concerning the postevangelical approach rooted, as it is, in a rejection of the final authority of Scripture and a fear of certainty. [...]
Quote: "Never heard of this guy (and not interested in reading more about him) but he sounds like every other fundie who can't tell the difference between his own ideas and God's ideas and who are absolutely convinced of the doctrine of total depravity, except where it applies to themselves."
Man you are so wrong. The very people you accuse, the "fundies" as you say, which I suppose I am too, know only too well just how depraved we are!
It's not a question of pointing fingers at anyone other than oneself, and knowing that without the redeeming blood of Christ as an atonement, I am never able to remain in the presence of a Holy and Righteous God, no matter how loving He is.
I'm not going to get into an argument about translation from the original language and the likes, for I'm pretty sure most here could tie me up in knots. However I do know that, just using my own selfish example as evidence, I am prone to attempting to justify the sin in my own life, and it is only when I read the Law of God at face value that I am convicted of that sin, and brought to a place of receiving His grace and mercy.
You can argue all you like that homosexuality is not sinful, but you may as well argue the point for thieves, murderers and idolators too, for the Righteousness of God, revealed through His Word exposes them all for what they are, and that is sinful by nature, and in need of total regeneration by His Holy Spirit.
The love of God is displayed to us by the very fact that, whilst we were still His enemies, and hated all that He stands for, He sent Christ to die in our place. The fact that He has announced in His Word that His wrath will inevitably fall like a rock on the sinners of this world at His return is not unloving, but merciful in the extreme.
You can continue patting one another on the back, and telling one another how great it is to be queer and proud. You can also preach a message from the good will of your wicked hearts, and your depraved minds, no matter how appealing and user friendly it may be, but it will never be the true Gospel of Christ. And before you remark, this does not apply to you alone, but to me and the likes of Ken Silva too, just as I'm sure he would agree if you were to ask him.
The only way you can preach the Gospel, is by conveying the Word of God according to the Scriptures, that have been inspired by God Himself for the task. If you don't believe this is true, then I suggest you give up your pretense, go about your business doing whatever in the world pleases you, for soon enough you will answer to God Almighty Himself for your rejection of His Son, and all that He died to secure for you.
At least that way you will not also be held accountable for leading others astray too.
John Dunning.
The idea that the human mind adapts to its environment is entirely correct, but to what end? Homosexuality is in its very essence maladaptive at the least, and damning at worst. Improper use of any tool, sexual or otherwise, is the brain's failure to adapt to its environment. You have defeated your own point with your own argument.
To make matters worse, failing to adapt to scripture is also a fundamental flaw in the formation of theology. The forming of one's beliefs in a bubble is akin to living in a fantasy land. You can say that God is whatever you want him to be, but if your theology stands apart from the biblical evidence already at hand, then your theology is of a fetal maturity.
Regards.
Quote: "Never heard of this guy (and not interested in reading more about him) but he sounds like every other fundie who can't tell the difference between his own ideas and God's ideas and who are absolutely convinced of the doctrine of total depravity, except where it applies to themselves."
Man you are so wrong. The very people you accuse, the "fundies" as you say, which I suppose I am too, know only too well just how depraved we are!
It's not a question of pointing fingers at anyone other than oneself, and knowing that without the redeeming blood of Christ as an atonement, I am never able to remain in the presence of a Holy and Righteous God, no matter how loving He is.
I'm not going to get into an argument about translation from the original language and the likes, for I'm pretty sure most here could tie me up in knots. However I do know that, just using my own selfish example as evidence, I am prone to attempting to justify the sin in my own life, and it is only when I read the Law of God at face value that I am convicted of that sin, and brought to a place of receiving His grace and mercy.
You can argue all you like that homosexuality is not sinful, but you may as well argue the point for thieves, murderers and idolators too, for the Righteousness of God, revealed through His Word exposes them all for what they are, and that is sinful by nature, and in need of total regeneration by His Holy Spirit.
The love of God is displayed to us by the very fact that, whilst we were still His enemies, and hated all that He stands for, He sent Christ to die in our place. The fact that He has announced in His Word that His wrath will inevitably fall like a rock on the sinners of this world at His return is not unloving, but merciful in the extreme.
You can continue patting one another on the back, and telling one another how great it is to be queer and proud. You can also preach a message from the good will of your wicked hearts, and your depraved minds, no matter how appealing and user friendly it may be, but it will never be the true Gospel of Christ. And before you remark, this does not apply to you alone, but to me and the likes of Ken Silva too, just as I'm sure he would agree if you were to ask him.
The only way you can preach the Gospel, is by conveying the Word of God according to the Scriptures, that have been inspired by God Himself for the task. If you don't believe this is true, then I suggest you give up your pretense, go about your business doing whatever in the world pleases you, for soon enough you will answer to God Almighty Himself for your rejection of His Son, and all that He died to secure for you.
At least that way you will not also be held accountable for leading others astray too.
John Dunning.
The idea that the human mind adapts to its environment is entirely correct, but to what end? Homosexuality is in its very essence maladaptive at the least, and damning at worst. Improper use of any tool, sexual or otherwise, is the brain's failure to adapt to its environment. You have defeated your own point with your own argument.
To make matters worse, failing to adapt to scripture is also a fundamental flaw in the formation of theology. The forming of one's beliefs in a bubble is akin to living in a fantasy land. You can say that God is whatever you want him to be, but if your theology stands apart from the biblical evidence already at hand, then your theology is of a fetal maturity.
Regards.