Another go-round the internet has turned up a number of links for you, dear reader, to peruse. Here, we discuss 1 Timothy 2:12-a central verse in the debate over women in the church, liberal theology, Psalms, cults, and “feminization” of the church. Check them out, and let me know what you think in the comments below. Be sure to leave them comments as well, as comments are what make we bloggers keep blogging!
NIV, ESV, and 1 Timothy 2:12– 1 Timothy 2:12 is often seen as the central verse for the complementarian position. After all, it teaches women are not to have authority over men, doesn’t it? Here, Paul Adams shares some insights from Craig Blomberg about some difficulties with translating the verse in a complementarian light, and the way this reflects in different Bible versions.
What is Liberal Theology?– I’d say it’s one of those “scare phrases” intended to throw people away from the teachings of theologians or systems which the one using the phrase wants readers to avoid. Check out this post which analyzes the term via words from Roger Olson.
Kinds of Psalms– Different types of Psalms perhaps suggest reading them differently exegetically and also for different reasons in Christian life and practice. Check out this post which discusses the different types of Psalms.
Sure Signs of a Sinister Sect (COMIC)- Here, No Apologies Allowed shares a cartoon about how to perhaps identify some less-than-sound teaching and the methods of various cultic groups.
The “Feminization” of the Church– Recently, I wrote about how many I have read have complained about this alleged “feminization” of the church. Here, the origins of this belief are assessed alongside various studies and quotes from leading approaches to the issue.
J.W. Wartick - Reconstructing Faith 
Here are blog posts by Olson himself on the matter: What Is “Liberal Theology?”, Why I Am Not a “Liberal Christian”, and What is “theological liberalism?”.
Posted by labreuer | July 4, 2014, 9:19 AMThanks for these engaging links. I read the first one and it helps clarify the issue more precisely. I’ll check out the others later.
Posted by J.W. Wartick | July 4, 2014, 6:45 PMSure! Personally, I’m inclined to go with Francis Schaeffer: do we believe in a causally closed system, or a causally open one where an infinite-personal God exists partially on the ‘outside’ (given that we can never fully define him and thus put him on the ‘inside’)? The word ‘supernatural’ just gets in the way. My understanding is that most orthodox Christians have believed in a perfectly rational God—hence the valid use of the word Logos—but this does not mean everything he does is perfectly understandable by finite minds. Indeed, Leibniz surmised that creation of the world and the Incarnation may never be perfectly understandable by finite minds.
Posted by labreuer | July 4, 2014, 7:45 PMThat feminization article is very good.
Posted by John Guthridge | July 4, 2014, 9:12 PMI agree!
Posted by J.W. Wartick | July 5, 2014, 4:56 PM