“We may be on the same page, but using different calendars.”

Do you have a book of these sayings? because if these are original sayings, I think I’m going to start to keep track of them, just in case you ever become famous.
At any rate, they crack me up. What does that mean????

Dr. Mike,

You are always irenic as far as I can see. I think that the word itself is not being defined the same way as it is abused. When we first started using it ten years ago, it was obscure enough where the definition did not assume, as it sometimes does today, weakness.

Having said that, I think I agree with everything you have said above. We may be on the same page, but using different calendars.

Michael:

It does make sense, although that is not to say that I agree. And I know you don’t believe that, which is why I said that you didn’t.

Here’s what I think:

1. I think I will never convince you that your emphasis on being irenic is unbalanced;
2. I think you will never convince me that my view on this matter is incorrect.

Having said that, please allow me to continue this exercise in futility.

I am not advocating blasting anyone who presents false or heretical teaching. Whether they are believers or not, they need to be patiently and lovingly taught how they are in error and what the truth is (in those areas where we can be dogmatic).

I am advocating dealing firmly, strongly, and decisively with those individuals – whether believers or not – who profess heretical or unorthodox beliefs and then cling to them without warrant. Those who purpose it is to argue and be belligerent do not need to be coddled or treated like China dolls.

When someone seeks to interact for the apparent purpose of only doing harm or being divisive – think Sanballat and friends – they need to be reprimanded in no uncertain terms. They will likely cry “foul” and take offense, but that does not mean offense was given. Many took offense at what Jesus said but I don’t believe he was giving offense.

As you know, I am well aware that P&P as well as Theologica are yours and that you have the responsibility to govern them as you see fit. You’ll get no argument from me over your right to make decisions, even if I believe you are wrong. It’s between you and God, of course, and all I can do is tell a young brother when I think he’s off-track about something.

But I will respect your decisions even while I disagree.

Mike,

“Is that really what we want to communicate, i.e., that it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you’re nice? I’m sure you do not believe that.”

Mike, you know we don’t believe that. Do you really think that I give the impression that “it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as your nice?”

We exist to draw people in, no matter what you believe. If you are a seeker of truth, you are welcome here and you won’t be looked down upon or slandered. However, this does not mean that we don’t care what you believe. Just because we allow divergent beliefs does not mean we don’t care about truth. In fact, I would say that if you don’t allow differing belief or “bad theology” you are simply here to confirm beliefs. While there is certainly a place for that, this is a theology blog that seeks to challenge and encourage.

If this was a place of leadership where if you posted a comment it assumed that you are a leader, representing this site, then bad theology would be less tolerated.

Hope that makes sense.

I don’t mind heated discussions, just the overheated kind that so often get into name calling and religious elitism. I think CMP is right not to ban folks for ‘bad theology’, and don’t see it as putting being irenic above good theology.

That’s because who knows whether what someone reads here, (spoken irenically of course), might correct some false teaching they may have received, or make them want to look deeper into the word of God to see if what the author of the post has written lines up with scripture. That has certainly happened to me on several blogs. On the other hand, there are some around who know their stuff, but are quick to engage in attack dog blogging, when someone questions them.

So, in my opinion, keeping it “calm, civil, respectful” (along with coherent, courteous commenting I might add) can be a great learning experience for all concerned in a discussion, whether we agree or disagree with someone else’s theology.

I particularly enjoyed the thread on creationism, where folks from all different beliefs got a chance to present their opinions in a way that both educated and informed.

20. Lisa Robinson: …What irony

Don’t you mean “What ειρηνη”

Actually, I think its kind of funny that you guys are disputing over the validity of being irenic. What irony

Just think, Bond, James Bond. The reason why he is calm is because he knows what is up.

Calm, civil, respectful, even to your “enemies.”

I am sure that we can handle this like the mature adults we are. Isn’t that right . . . Mr. Poopy Pants!

Dr. Mike says

“Being irenic has been promoted here (and at Theologica, too) as the greater good.”

I would disagree, but I don’t follow the blog closely enough so I could be wrong on that. Only CMP could really answer that.

I still fail to see how you can correct or reprove bad theology if you don’t let it be expressed. That is what I understood you to be saying from your first post. Am I wrong on that?