Friday, November 06, 2009
Frank Turk and the Concession Speech
This article by Frank Turk on the gospel is worth the 2-3 minutes it takes to read it (link). I'm not saying I agree with every last jot and tittle of what he writes, but the main points he makes are the main points that need to be made, especially to the folks with whom he's dealing. He's responding to some extent both to Broad Path Evangelicalism and to Roman Catholicism in the same post.
3 comments:
Comment Guidelines:
1. Thanks for posting a comment. Without you, this blog would not be interactive.
2. Please be polite. That doesn't mean you have to use kid gloves, but please try not to flame others, even if they are heretics, infidels, or worse.
3. If you insult me, I'm more likely to delete your comment than if you butter me up. After all, I'm human. I prefer praise to insults. If you prefer insults, there's something wrong with you.
4. Please be concise. The comment box is not your blog. Your blog is your blog. If you have a really long comment, post it on your blog and post a short summary of it here.
5. Please don't just spam. It's one thing to be concise, it's another thing to simply use the comment box to advertise.
6. Please note, by commenting here, you are relinquishing your (C) in your comments to me.
7. Remember that you will give an account on judgment day for your words, including those typed in comment boxes. Try to write so you will not be ashamed if it is read back before the entire world.
8. Stay on topic. If your comment has nothing to do with the post, email it to me (my email can be obtained through my blogger profile), or simply don't post it.
9. Don't post as "Anonymous." If you are going to post anonymously, at least use some kind of recognizable "handle," so we can tell you apart from all the other anonymous folks. (This is moot at the moment, since recent abuse has forced me to turn off "anonymous" commenting.)
10. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; and abstain from doing to others what you would not wish upon yourself.
I suppose the usage of the word shibboleth comes from here?
ReplyDeleteJdg 12:4 Then Jephthah gathered all the men of Gilead and fought with Ephraim. And the men of Gilead struck Ephraim, because they said, "You are fugitives of Ephraim, you Gileadites, in the midst of Ephraim and Manasseh."
Jdg 12:5 And the Gileadites captured the fords of the Jordan against the Ephraimites. And when any of the fugitives of Ephraim said, "Let me go over," the men of Gilead said to him, "Are you an Ephraimite?" When he said, "No,"
Jdg 12:6 they said to him, "Then say Shibboleth," and he said, "Sibboleth," for he could not pronounce it right. Then they seized him and slaughtered him at the fords of the Jordan. At that time 42,000 of the Ephraimites fell.
I would need a little help connecting the dots after reading the article and using that as a standard here? I don't see the biblical connection as it is being used in the article with this requirement as their standard in Judges 12?
Can you explain that for me?
thanks
Good question, NatAmLLC. His usage does seem a little off. My best guess is that Mr. Turk was just referring to the term as it has come to be a part of the mainstream vocabulary.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, though. The passage you provided is whence the word "shibboleth" derives.
What is Mr. Turk trying to say? When he wrote, "we want to use the name of Jesus as the shibboleth of our point of view," I think he meant something like "we want to consider everyone who says 'I believe in Jesus' to be Christians." But if they cannot say "I believe in Jesus," then they won't be considered Christians.
I am not disputing here. I am saying the argument weakens even more for me because demons believe Jesus is the Christ and tremble and they ain't no Christian! :)
ReplyDeleteI do see your explanation and thought as much as that might be the standard.
Both points are well taken and I am glad, to say the least, there are souls such as yours to be sharpened by!
Thanks for answer my question, TF!