The Church Is Failing Women - Part 4

Let’s look at Genesis:   Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” 19 Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. (Genesis 2:18 - 20, ESV) Why are the animals not fit helpers? In part, because although created first, they are governmentally inferior to him just as Adam is to God.   As to the immanent Trinity, the only fit helpers for God are God’s own hypostases.    Strictly speaking, we are not helpers — we are honored participants in the story of eternity, not authors co-equal to God.    God has no co-equals outside Himself.   Thus, th...
Post a Comment

Iilicit Totality Transfer & Romans 1:26 - 27

 Objection:  Genesis 1:27 : 

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.


God created Adam male & Eve female.  This is the created ontology of all people, insofar as Adam & Eve represent us all.  Since God created them male & female, this text serves as a prooftext for heteronormativity. 


The disputant then imports this into the text of Romans 1:26 - 27 on the premise that what Genesis 1:27 says about the created anatomical/physiological &/or psychological state of Adam & Eve, the natural (meaning physical &/or psychological) state is what Romans 1:26 - 27 is referencing.  


The same disputant reads my own statement about the meaning of “natural” & “unnatural” as a reference to the **moral** not the **physiological/anatomical/psychological order & accuses me of committing an illicit totality transfer. 


By way of reply:  


I haven’t claimed that the term “natural” means the same thing in each & every text regardless of its context.    I fear he doesn’t understand the fallacy. 


The Illicit Totality Transfer is defined as taking the meaning — the sense or concept — from one part of Scripture and lifting that idea and wrongly applying it to another Scripture that may deploy the same words or is about the same concept or a very similar concept, when  in truth the 2 texts deploy totally different usage.


Think of it as Conceptual Incest in which a disputant maps one author’s usage onto another author’s usage & proceeds to argue accordingly.  It’s analogous to reading James use of the term “justify” in James 2 then mapping James’ usage back onto Paul’s usage.  The proper procedure is to exegete/exposit them separately then harmonize them not use one to interpret the other as if “justify” & the concept of justification in Romans & the manner in which James uses “justify” in James are one & the same.   That process is what Rome does when explaining James & Romans & winds up with justification by faith & works — th antithesis of Paul’s (& James’) understanding of forensic justification. 


The disputant describing your own interpretation in which you are using “natural” as a cipher for “heterosexual” from Genesis 1:27 then insisting that because Romans 1:26 - 27 discusses sexual behavior, the term “natural” in Genesis (as to the state of the created order) is what “natural” means here.   Genesis is referring to human bodily ontology (sex/gender).  Romans is referring to the **moral** order, the result of using the human image as a moral warrant.  


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Favorite Fallacies & Homosexuality

Thesis - The tradition bound view on homosexuality commits a number of logical, epistemic, & exegetical fallacies.  1-  Is - Ought Fallacy  - Human anatomy is said to provide    a blueprint for sexual ethics.  We examined this in my previous article.  A moral “ought” is derived from a physical “is.”  The disputant makes an illicit leap from what is to what ought to be. A classic example is the way some homosexuals defend their sexual ethics by appealing to their biology/genetics.  2 -  Vicious Circularity   - Human anatomy & physiology are raised to the status due a non-arbitrary epistemic warrant.    A non-arbitrary epistemic warrant must be necessary, reasoned, & principled.  In truth, the body is unnecessary to deduce sexual ethics. By way of contrast, God’s nature is definitionally necessary, insofar as God is a necessary being, &, since God is infinite, eternal, & unchangeable in being, w...
Read more

City Of God Study Module 2

            ✨ 👑 GALLIFREY 👑✨                       EDISON/ADONAI                           CAMBRIDGE BASTILLE & PLUME     SAGACITY & THORN                            Zodiac ICONOCLASTS LAW & ORDER         Bishop     Vanity Fair          Forge      Toymaker    Archibaptrix     Chameleon         Enigma     Governess         Corsair       Jodpurs         Sextant       Dauphin       Carnevale       Libertine           Arsenal                  Mosaic  ...
Read more

Covenant Theology In Outline Form (Part 1)

This is the general outline of a suzerain covenant. Shema/Preamble Historical Prologue General Stipulations Specific Stipulations  Renewal, Document Clause Witnesses Victory Statement This outline appears repeatedly in Scripture.    It makes for a helpful Study Guide.     We ought to pay careful attention when this outline appears, insofar as every major biblical covenant takes this form.    Here are some helpful thoughts. The Bible teaches the 3 uses of the Law (& Gospel).     Understanding the 3 uses of the Law helps us as we study Deuteronomy & the Sermon on the Mount.   As Moses delivered God’s Law from Sinai, so Yeshua reveals God’s Law with a Gospel slant from the Mount of Olives.  Deuteronomy :  Preamble (1:1-5) Historical Prologue (1:6 - 4:43) General Stipulations (4:44 - 11:32) Decalogue 5 : 1 - 21  Specific Stipulations (12:1 - 26:19) Renewal, Document Clause (27:1 - 30:20)  Witnesses ...
Read more