|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
|
[Poll]
|
Dude?!??!?!?!?!?!
|
| Offensive. |
|
| Makes no difference to me. |
|
| Not offensive. |
|
Total Votes : 75
|
(last vote on : 9/2/2008 12:31:49 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/21/2008 1:36:29 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SusieD
quote:
Actually, due to transportation issues, I haven't been able to go to church at all since the beginning of June. However, there have been those who've been willing to give me a ride to this Bible study.
Why isn’t anyone “willing” to give you a ride to church? That sounds like a bigger problem than the pastor calling Jesus Dude in his prayer.
Because nobody lives near. Also, I'm still newish in the area and still church-shopping.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/21/2008 2:19:01 PM
|
|
|
blue1914
Posts: 407
Joined: 6/21/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
Abraham told God he was wrong and Jesus partied? Are we reading the same Bible?
Genesis 18:23-25
23 Then Abraham approached him and said: "Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked?
24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it?
25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?"
Sounds like about as civil a tounge lashing as one can give to the creator of the universe-will (He) not "do right"-and of course, what is the opposite of doing right (apparently what He was not doing per the verses above)? That would be wrong-apparently what Abraham believed God to be doing.
John 2:1-10
Jesus Changes Water to Wine
1On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there,
2and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding.
3When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine."
4"Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come."
5His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you."
6Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.
7Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim.
8Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet."
They did so,
9and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside
10and said, "Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now."
Mark 2:15, 16
15While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.
16When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"
Luke 5:36-39
36He told them this parable: "No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old.
37And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined.
38No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins.
39And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, 'The old is better.' "
These are merely a few of the many examples from the New Testament which speak to Jesus drinking, eating and "partying" 1st century style with sinners and tax collectors (an even higher class of sinner for that time period).
How do you interpret those verses?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/21/2008 2:55:33 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
Abraham spoke to God with the upmost respect. David - a man after God's own heart - got about as personal as one can get with God and still addressed Him with respect. I never said that Jesus didn't drink wine, but you'd have stretch those verses pretty far imply that He got drunk. He went to a party and performed His first recorded miracle. Not quite the same as partying.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/21/2008 3:30:57 PM
|
|
|
blue1914
Posts: 407
Joined: 6/21/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
Abraham spoke to God with the upmost respect. David - a man after God's own heart - got about as personal as one can get with God and still addressed Him with respect. I never said that Jesus didn't drink wine, but you'd have stretch those verses pretty far imply that He got drunk. He went to a party and performed His first recorded miracle. Not quite the same as partying.
While I don't know that you have actually disagreed with anything that I have said, to your last sentence (Not quite the same as partying), I guess it would all depend on your definition of partying-for me, "partying" is the state of being one is in when they attend a party. I have "partied" (by my definition) but I have never been drunk in my life. If you define "partying" as getting drunk, then yes, you are correct there is no evidence that Jesus ever got drunk-though again, I will note that what I said did not imply drunkenness at all (by my own definition)-I did not ever mean to say that Jesus got drunk, if you interpreted that from what I wrote, then that is clearly a misunderstanding of what I meant.
As for Abraham and respect-you again make the point I'm saying-yes, Abraham did speak to God with respect-he also told Him that He was wrong (but he did so respectfully-and forcefully if you read the dialog in context). That is something only a real friend would do-and regardless of how respecfully you dress up a rebuke, a rebuke is a rebuke-only a very clear friend would give one and only a very clear friend would receive one graciously. THAT'S who Abraham and God were-clear friends-and as clear friends, Abraham stepped out in a status of familiarity that really was far to close when addressing the true and living God-I would go so far as to say that the tenor of the conversation the two were having is in some ways tantamount to speaking coloquially with someone.
Picture it-you get the nerve to QUESTION the God of the universe, and not only do you QUESTION Him, you SCOLD Him-I mean of course he would have to put respecful language around it but think of the familiarity involved with the act in the first place-it's mind boggling. Because of the inflated American sense of our own importance, we often skip over the incredible audacity of this interaction but really-to take one's own CREATOR to task and imply that He was doing the wrong thing-that's beyond calling someone dude, that's FAMILIARITY-and instead of being struck down for it, God HUMORS and HONORS the "spunk" of this young upstart. He doesn't (though He could have rightly) strike the man dead for even questioning Him, instead He plays through his ridiculous game of cat and mouse KNOWING in the end what the outcome will be. In American theology today, we are told that it's OK to question God (and we see from Abraham, Moses, Job and so many others in the Word that it's true) but we rarely look at what that means-the Creator of the Universe has to LOWER himself to look upon his creation-He is so holy, that He has to "dumb himself down" to even interact with us. The act of even coming to Him in prayer is not only familiar, it was impossible for many centuries for many people-again because He was so holy. That's why Jesus had to come in the first place-to create a conduit to Him. If we fully understood the magnitude of the greatness of God and what it even means to interact with Him, much less question Him, we would realize that whether we call him "dude" or "MOST WORSHIPFUL GOD OF ALL CREATION" we are no closer to accurately describing His greatness than when we started out, so instead of getting caught up in what we call Him (because whatever we call Him is far from adequate to describe Him), we might be better served in getting to KNOW Him.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/23/2008 2:54:55 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
I don't think that Abraham was scolding God- more like questioning Him.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/23/2008 3:41:27 PM
|
|
|
blue1914
Posts: 407
Joined: 6/21/2005
Status: offline
|
You know the wonderful thing about God? He looks deeply within each of our hearts and UNDERSTANDS us. He knows what you mean when you address Him.
I'm certain that He is pleased with the fact that you are so zealous for the sake of His name that you have created this thread and have contended so vigorously for the sake of respecting that name (and none of this is sarcasic at all, I know the printed page is a bad medium but I mean this in all sincerity).
God's Best to you!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/23/2008 5:21:49 PM
|
|
|
slushie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/30/2006
Status: offline
|
You know what i think? I know that in my church the teens use that affectionately. I can understand how some people would feel offended, though.
If it was bothering you and the other lady, he should take note of that.
_____________________________
Testify to Love
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/23/2008 5:27:49 PM
|
|
|
FurGodWurLivin
Posts: 954
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
|
Of all the trivial matters we could argue.....................................
The title of "dude"ness is something that bears different connotations based on where you are, where you were raised, and what subculture you are a part of. In some groups, dude simply means "guy". In others, "dude" means beach bum with a surfboard. Now, I think Jesus probably looked a bit like a surfer in a robe, but that is my personal heresy.
I think the only thing you can really indict on this is either (A) the pastor for not being sensitive to his audience, or (B) people who are too easily offended. When I'm talking to 'brothahs" from "tha hood", dude is anything but offensive... lets face it, they call each other names that are farrrrrrr worse. If I'm talking to white collar people on the ritzy side of town... I probably got lost somewhere, but I still put my "ghetto-speak" on the DL. Honestly? I think is probably one of the least important things to get huffy about. Nothing can be added to God or taken away, so I don't think caling Jesus a "dude" is going to somehow make Him less God. Let God defend Himself... He is much better at it anyway.
Adam
_____________________________
I am hyena, Jesus is my Mufasa...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 12:10:05 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
I am with Adam's most recent post on this.
I generally don't say "dude", except in jest.
But I would also venture to ask, how formal should we be when addressing the Lord of creation?
If I were given an opportunity to present myself to Queen Elizabeth II or to the President, I would address them formally.
My mom and dad, I respect and love. But I would address them informally, because they are familiar. But even with them, there are things I do not share with them.
Also, I happen to speak standard English (or whatever it is actually called) in business and academic settings, and colloquial English (or, to be more accurate, AAVE) in private settings. This isn't because I try to put on airs in public; it is because I recognize that it may not be best to ask on a job interview, "What that position entail?" When I am at mom's, though, you might well hear me say, "The coffee...aint no more. But lemme make some tho."
My Savior, he knows me inside and out. So I am not opposed to (on occasion) use less-than-standard English when talking to the Lord. Is this also considered disrespectful by some?
_____________________________
‡ Brian ‡
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 12:14:51 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bgwill3
My Savior, he knows me inside and out. So I am not opposed to (on occasion) use less-than-standard English when talking to the Lord. Is this also considered disrespectful by some?
When you know for a fact that it's going to offend someone, yes.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 2:04:56 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: bgwill3
My Savior, he knows me inside and out. So I am not opposed to (on occasion) use less-than-standard English when talking to the Lord. Is this also considered disrespectful by some?
When you know for a fact that it's going to offend someone, yes.
I hear you,
I don't try to find ways to offend other believers, and I don't think others should do this. I don't know about the pastor in question, and whether he knew "for a fact" that his words would offend. Considering his flock, and their generation, it's presumable that he knew "for a fact".
But I wouldn't think that use of colloquial English would "offend" any brother or sister, unless that brother/sister took offense where he/she shouldn't.
Truth is, some preachers don't speak standard English in their everyday lives. So, for them, and presumably their congregants, an average Sunday's sermon might be filled with nonstandard, colloquial English. If I am visiting, and notice that a pastor doesn't speak correctly with regard to English grammar, and I choose to take offense, that was my choice.
Once in college, an acquaintance took offense when he saw me underlining a portion of Scripture in the Bible and writing in the margins. He said that I should not deface the holy, infallible Word of God. I apologized for having offended him. But it had always been the norm for preachers, ministers, and laypersons in my church to mark in their Bibles, and I certainly never believed that God would take offense at such a practice. If I were "defacing" the Bible in order to disrespect the Lord, then that's inexcusable. If I am underlining to make something stand out, or jotting something in the margin to remind myself of some new depth of understanding, I think (and hope!) that God understands the difference, and would judge my actions accordingly.
But back to the "dude", as many have stated repeatedly, it means different things for different people; some use it, others don't. If I know it offends you, I won't use it in front of you. (Again, I don't use "dude" generally, but the point has been made.)
This all has me wondering though, whether some people would "take offense" at some of the more graphic passages in the Bible. Just this Sunday, I heard a sermon on Joshua's conquest of Ai in Joshua 8. We stood as the pastor read portions of the chapter aloud (standing has become the norm when the Word is read aloud, out of reverence). When we got to verse 29, there were a few audible gasps, and one woman let out "Gracious!", at the treatment of the king of Ai.
And I have heard of more offensive language in church. There is a video on the net, of a Baptist pastor, who took upon himself the burden of explaining the phrase found in 1 Samuel 25:22, and tying it into a greater theme about the corruption of moral society based on a man's posture (I don't want to be graphic. I don't want to offend anyone, truly). I am not offended by it; I just think he's not being as effective as he could be. I just pray for the folks involved and the folks who witnessed it.
But then again, are we supposed to feel comfy and cozy with everything we are taught as children of God? Some have tried (to no avail, I think) to take this OP as an opportunity to share their familiar relationship with the Lord. To call him daddy, to call Jesus our "big bro", for some this practice means a lot to them, because that is how they relate to the Savior. This should be a cause for joy! Yet we, all of us Christians here, we have managed to find something else to be divided over. "I'm offended!" "Well, don't be offended, I didn't mean it that way." "I don't care how you meant it, you offended me! Shame on you and your ilk!" "You're such a Pharisee!" "No I'm not, but you are a blasphemer!" It is sad.
I visited a church on Mother's Day 2007, in which one of the older saints declared, "Some of our mothers have gone on to be with the Lord, but how many know that God can be a mother to us too!" I don't fault anyone for relating to God in such a way, even if someone else may have been thoroughly offended, and even if it would seem to grate against Scripture, which doesn't ever call God a "mother" (that I can recall).
_____________________________
‡ Brian ‡
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 2:11:39 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
This was not a Sunday morning service. It was a Wednesday evening Bible study. The pastor knew that he would offend his mother when he used the word "dude."
quote:
ORIGINAL: bgwill3
I visited a church on Mother's Day 2007, in which one of the older saints declared, "Some of our mothers have gone on to be with the Lord, but how many know that God can be a mother to us too!" I don't fault anyone for relating to God in such a way, even if someone else may have been thoroughly offended, and even if it would seem to grate against Scripture, which doesn't ever call God a "mother" (that I can recall).
I think in Psalms there is a passage that refers to God as protecting us or shielding us as a mother bird does. There is also another OT passage that goes something along the lines of "can a mother forget the baby at her breast? I will not forget you." Something similar to that.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 2:58:33 PM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
This was not a Sunday morning service. It was a Wednesday evening Bible study. The pastor knew that he would offend his mother when he used the word "dude."
What kind of pastor does that?? That's unfortunate!
I'm not him, so I can't argue for him. I think others, though, have gone through the reasons as to why they may occasionally use "dude" when speaking to the Lord. If he did it with the intent of disrespect to God and offense to you, or for sensationalism, or some such, that's unfortunate. But you seem to thoroughly reject the idea of anyone using the word "dude", in public or private, in prayer to the Lord, which is different, IMO, than the situational usage that was described in the OP.
"Sir" or "Lord" is the way to go if you relate to God in his unapproachable awesomeness. Some folks relate to God more as friend, and are ok with calling him by his name; some others may object to this. As we know, in Jewish culture, to avoid profaning his name, they wouldn't speak it, and would veil it in texts (HaShem, Adonai).
Veil... that makes me think of 2 Corinthians 3, and the veil that remained for some who did not receive the Lord Jesus.
"I am a friend of God, he calls me friend." Some recoiled at such language, insisting that Jesus came to save our souls, not to be our friend. Moreover, "all flesh is grass", and our life is but a vapor compared to the awesomeness of God. How dare we approach the Creator of everything in such a way!
"I'm in love with Jesus." This, and a host of other phrases that are common in churches, would seem to offend some. But it's how others relate to the Lord, sincerely and respectfully. All of us relate differently, because Jesus answers different needs for different people. I don't have a problem with that.
I have no argument with you though, or anyone else here. I won't say "dude", or eat meat, or even wear white after Labor Day, if it really would cause my sister in the Lord to stumble. What more can I say than what has already been said by others?
< Message edited by bgwill3 -- 6/25/2008 3:23:50 PM >
_____________________________
‡ Brian ‡
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/25/2008 8:18:10 PM
|
|
|
Heavendweller
Posts: 576
Joined: 12/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
Abraham told God he was wrong and Jesus partied? Are we reading the same Bible?
Well now, we gotta be careful. He probably didn't mean what most of our culture means when they talk about "partying." Of course, if I hear 17 yr. old students talk about how they "partied" the night before, I have a good idea about what they mean.  But let's hope our fellow forum member didn't mean "party" in that sense. 
Problem is, the trend in our society is to strip words of their meaning, or to change the definition of what a word means. For example, it looks as though the definition of "marriage" might soon take on a different meaning in our society. Just like the definition of "family" has changed. And I'm pretty sure we could add a few more words to the list.
So, if one feels ok about calling Jesus "dude," then why not call Jesus a host of other hip, casual names? I think when it comes to addressing the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, the Great I AM, the Alpha and Omega, the Creator of the universe, I would rather stick with names from Holy Scripture. After all, on most of the threads in the Theology section, I can't help but notice how often people ask "Where is that in Scripture?" or "Can you show me why you believe that from Scripture?" So, with that said, I think it wise to use the ABUNDANCE of names we are given in Holy Scripture when addressing God.
I'd rather be on the safe side. Ya know what I mean?
Heavendweller
_____________________________
See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. I John 3:1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/26/2008 7:46:33 AM
|
|
|
cajunhillbilly
Posts: 164
Joined: 5/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Jesus is not a "dude". He is Lord of lords and King of kings. That would be very offensive to me.
_____________________________
"A Stargate. You know, kind of a ring thing. Comes with a dialer. You hit some symbols. The lights come on. It spins around. And then it flushes sideways" Jack O'Neill on Stargate SG1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/26/2008 5:56:13 PM
|
|
|
1love1God1way
Posts: 2403
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bgwill3
"Sir" or "Lord" is the way to go if you relate to God in his unapproachable awesomeness.
The awesomeness of God is much in his approachability. . .
_____________________________
love.ben
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/27/2008 9:11:54 AM
|
|
|
bgwill3
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1love1God1way
quote:
ORIGINAL: bgwill3
"Sir" or "Lord" is the way to go if you relate to God in his unapproachable awesomeness.
The awesomeness of God is much in his approachability. . .
True that. My point exactly.
But others here might disagree.
_____________________________
‡ Brian ‡
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/28/2008 4:06:03 AM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6991
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
This post is not aimed at post #194 directly. It's aimed at several posters.
So "dude" is a completely acceptable way to address the Almighty?
If I am offended by it, then I need to lighten up. We want new people to feel comfortable in our churches. We don't need to worry about the people who've been saved for a long time. Its OK to step on their toes. As long as the newbies are completely comfortable.
Did I get it right?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/28/2008 10:30:14 AM
|
|
|
blue1914
Posts: 407
Joined: 6/21/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
This post is not aimed at post #194 directly. It's aimed at several posters.
So "dude" is a completely acceptable way to address the Almighty?
If I am offended by it, then I need to lighten up. We want new people to feel comfortable in our churches. We don't need to worry about the people who've been saved for a long time. Its OK to step on their toes. As long as the newbies are completely comfortable.
Did I get it right?
Maybe the answer to your question lies in the answer to a more pertinent question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address the name of the Lord?
What I mean is this-"dude", "YHWH", "Adonai" are all incomplete references to the greatness and glory of the one true and living God. It appears that in your opinion, the term "dude" is more incomplete than some of the others, but a quick perusal of the Word of God will make it clear that any title we use is woefully inadequate (even the ones in there!). Therefore, the use of a title is really for OUR edification instead of that of God-His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him-if we spend our whole lifetime saying words to express His greatness.
That brings me back to my question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address God? Are you looking for those around you to approve of what you are doing and/or are you looking to approve of what they are doing? Are you, instead, communicating with the lover of your soul?
If someone deliberately offends, that is wrong-be it by name calling or eating meat. If this pastor did this because he KNEW it would offend others, then yeah, that's the offense. If, on the other hand, he was freely expressing how he communicates with God, I guess I wonder-was that even really your business?-he wasn't talking to you, he was talking to his Daddy.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/28/2008 11:27:33 AM
|
|
|
makarizo
Posts: 3006
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline
|
One of my 6th graders let me know that God is a Spiritual dude.
now I know!!!!
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/28/2008 11:46:50 AM
|
|
|
1love1God1way
Posts: 2403
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doer
One of my 6th graders let me know that God is a Spiritual dude.
now I know!!!!
At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.
Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
"Do you hear what these children are saying?" they asked him.
"Yes," replied Jesus, "have you never read,
" 'From the lips of children and infants
you have ordained praise'?"
_____________________________
love.ben
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Dude?!??!?!?!?!?! - 6/28/2008 1:32:22 PM
|
|
|
Heavendweller
Posts: 576
Joined: 12/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blue1914
Maybe the answer to your question lies in the answer to a more pertinent question-what do you hope to accomplish when you address the name of the Lord?
Accomplish? Perhaps, we should start with a scriptural understanding of the names of God and why the Bible gives God these names, and no other. IOW, I don't see "dude," "hey you," "man in the sky," "old man," "comrade," "yo," "y'all," "you's guys," "hey man," "home boy," or any of the myriads of other "hip" names that we use in our culture, used in Holy Scripture as names for God.
quote:
What I mean is this-"dude", "YHWH", "Adena" are all incomplete references to the greatness and glory of the one true and living God. It appears that in your opinion, the term "dude" is more incomplete than some of the others, but a quick perusal of the Word of God will make it clear that any title we use is woefully inadequate (even the ones in there!).
Dude is most definitely inadequate. But the other names, which God has penned through Holy Writ, incomplete and woefully inadequate...according to whom? You? So, therefore, since you deem Holy Scripture as woefully lacking in giving us names that signify who our God is, therefore we can, according to you, use ANY name we deem as sufficient in expressing who God is? Therefore, since Holy Scripture is so deficient, we can take it upon ourselves to call God whatever we please?
So where you see Holy Scripture as lacking, you can just "fill in the blanks?" Wouldn't it be wiser to trust that the names God has chosen to give Himself are the names He desires we call Him, instead of going beyond Holy Scripture and taking liberties upon ourselves?
With your line of thinking, we can "fill in the blanks" in other areas of our theology where Holy Scripture is lacking. The Bible doesn't say anywhere literally that smoking pot is wrong. Marijuana isn't even mentioned in the Bible. So, if I want to get high, on something that is in God's natural creation, what's wrong with that? BTW, I've heard people argue for all kinds of things because the Bible isn't definitive on a particular matter. (in their minds)
quote:
Therefore, the use of a title is really for OUR edification instead of that of God-His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him-if we spend our whole lifetime saying words to express His greatness.
Really, and where did you get this idea from? Do you mean to tell us that the names which God has given to Himself in Holy Scripture are not meant to give Him glory? Do you mean to imply that Holy Scripture is lacking and God somehow by default, forgot to include all the names by which we should understand His nature? Is it only all about us and how we perceive Him? Then why, pray tell, did He go through the trouble of giving these names to Himself in Holy Scripture if it's only about our edification?
His greatness is so incomprehensible that we couldn't begin to properly address Him???? Where in the world did you get that idea from? God's precious Word has been given to us to teach us how we should reverence Him, how we should worship Him, how we should adore Him and how we should addre | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
Love it! Just brings to mind Bill and Ted! 
