I hope that all the pieces I was inspired to write below do not make me a preacher.
The point is to separate Christianity from Wordism. Every professional theologian wants to make Christianity into Wordism. He wants to tell that he should have money and power because all that matters is his words.
Jesus was deadly serious about his words. But his words offered us nothing but the fact that he offered us salvation.
But everybody who makes a living off religion wants us to PAY for that salvation.
And whom, pray tell, are we going to pay?
You don’t castrate yourself or destroy your race to follow Jesus.
To follow Christ, you do what is good. The white race is good, to say the least.
But the theologians want their words to be everything. They offer universal brotherhood if you follow their words and sacrifice your race and every kind of identity.
That is what every Wordist offers.
Wordists offer us Jesus versus the survival of our race.
Christ offer us salvation for doing what is good.
It so happens that the greatest theologian under heaven is Satan.
For me, what is good is important. Theology is not.
#1 by joe rorke on 11/10/2005 - 9:37 pm
Nothing is more generous with itself than nonsensical blabber. Theologians engage in (along with most college professors) nonsensical blabber. Blabbering into the wind about things they claim to have knowledge of, all the while having no more knowledge of it than you do.
#2 by Richard L. Hardison on 11/11/2005 - 10:10 pm
Theology is simply the study of God. All Christians are theologians, like it or not. The question is, are they balanced and have they tried to acquire a balanced view of the nature of God? Too many major in the NT or OT thinking they can ignore one side of God and still be balanced spiritually.
Origen was an example of an unbalanced teacher taking warped views of large portions of scripture. Augustine and Calvin are other examples whose outworking we saw in the New England morons we call Puritans, whose legacy we still have in the warped politics of the left (a complete 180 degree turn, but still of a piece because of the attitudes that Puritanism generated).
The problem I have with professional theologians is the elitist idea that one can understand theology only with long years of study in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German, and French. I’ve never seen any basis to change one doctrine on the basis of any language study, and every cardinal doctrine can be confirmed scripturally with knowing any of the dead languages or modern foreign language.
#3 by Peter on 11/13/2005 - 6:57 pm
The reason to know the original Greek and even Latin, too, is to read the original the way the author wrote it without relying on what the translator thought he meant.
The problem is that those who take the languages still only read the Bible or the patristic fathers, etc in translation. So the language skill is wasted on them.
To read an original work in its own language takes a whole lot more than Strong’s numbers. You have to know all the connotations, and how a word is used in other works. For example, those few who can read the Bible in Greek, think it’s alright only to know koine. They forget that the koine was just a simplified international Greek (like “international” English), and to understand the Bible’s vocabulary fully, one must read classical works like Homer and Plato.