"It is simply unbelievable that you didn’t see a huge negative reaction coming."
Don Johnson responds to Northland President Matt Olson’s “Open Letter to Friends in Ministry” addressing recent pulpit and classroom invitations
- 70 views
[Alex K.] to believe your analysis would be credulity.I don’t think you are using the word right there… but whatever.
There are several who don’t agree with my view of the changes at Northland who nevertheless say that my analysis of the letter is correct. FWIW (see Bob Bixby for one)
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
if you have to appeal to others thinking, this does not inspire confidence.
all i know you may be right on the politics part, you have not proved it though.
generally would disagree with your pot of stew clicheman.
all i know you may be right on the politics part, you have not proved it though.
generally would disagree with your pot of stew clicheman.
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[Alex K.] if you have to appeal to others thinking, this does not inspire confidence.
all i know you may be right on the politics part, you have not proved it though.
generally would disagree with your pot of stew clicheman.
Alex, I’m not necessarily among those who agree with Don in this matter, but you don’t appear to understand some of the words he’s using or the arguments he’s making. And your sarcasm doesn’t help (“clicheman”??? “Straining credulity” is an expression, but I don’t think it’s a cliche.)
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
[Greg Long]credulity is the disposition or state of believing too easily. if you want to have an expression that says: ” to stretch credulity” you may, but to me it doesn’t make sense. in every day talk among English speakers “credibility” is the choice of word to use to express the point Don Johnson was making. Don Johnson is not a brain surgeon, and i’m no dummy. i know what i’m talking about Greg.[Alex K.] if you have to appeal to others thinking, this does not inspire confidence.
all i know you may be right on the politics part, you have not proved it though.
generally would disagree with your pot of stew clicheman.
Alex, I’m not necessarily among those who agree with Don in this matter, but you don’t appear to understand some of the words he’s using or the arguments he’s making. And your sarcasm doesn’t help (“clicheman”??? “Straining credulity” is an expression, but I don’t think it’s a cliche.)
the analysis i was talking about was more Don’s treatment of the whole situation: “impressionable young people”, “expect drop in enrollment” not merely whether Olson was playing politics or not.
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[Alex K.] credulity is the disposition or state of believing too easilyNo it isn’t. You are misreading the definition. The word refers to believability. It is commonly used in the phrase “stretching credulity to the breaking point” which means that even if you give someone the benefit of the doubt, without investigating all the details carefully, his statement isn’t believable.
Greg is right that you seem not to understand what I am talking about. Whether that is deliberate or genuine ignorance is open to question.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
[Don Johnson]yes, i have never heard of this usage as you describe it. i say it is archaic. why not focus on clear communication rather than obscure speech? my everyday speech is Hawaiian Creole English (pidgin) not flowery highfalutin verbiage.[Alex K.] credulity is the disposition or state of believing too easilyNo it isn’t. You are misreading the definition. The word refers to believability. It is commonly used in the phrase “stretching credulity to the breaking point” which means that even if you give someone the benefit of the doubt, without investigating all the details carefully, his statement isn’t believable.
Greg is right that you seem not to understand what I am talking about. Whether that is deliberate or genuine ignorance is open to question.
i did not respond to cause trouble in any way that you are implying. i have better things to do. count me out of this discussion.
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[Alex K.] i say it is archaicHey, Alex, just because you aren’t familiar with it doesn’t mean that it is archaic. I gave you a link where it was used by someone else as recently as 2007. Is 2007 archaic? If you search the phrase on Google, you will find it in current use.
Perhaps you would do better to ask for clarification of terms you don’t understand and accept the explanations offered. Why be combative over words you don’t know?
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
[Greg Long]the catch phrase that i was referring to was “pot of stew” which i thought the self-professed “walking cliche” would get not the one about credulity.[Alex K.] if you have to appeal to others thinking, this does not inspire confidence.
all i know you may be right on the politics part, you have not proved it though.
generally would disagree with your pot of stew clicheman.
Alex, I’m not necessarily among those who agree with Don in this matter, but you don’t appear to understand some of the words he’s using or the arguments he’s making. And your sarcasm doesn’t help (“clicheman”??? “Straining credulity” is an expression, but I don’t think it’s a cliche.)
i do not have the time to get bogged down on forums until the week of Christmas as my calendar is full until then.
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[Don Johnson]try googling “stretching credibility” and you will find more hits.[Alex K.] i say it is archaicHey, Alex, just because you aren’t familiar with it doesn’t mean that it is archaic. I gave you a link where it was used by someone else as recently as 2007. Is 2007 archaic? If you search the phrase on Google, you will find it in current use.
Perhaps you would do better to ask for clarification of terms you don’t understand and accept the explanations offered. Why be combative over words you don’t know?
i know the word but questioned its usage in your phrase. also, it may be best not to use as your authority how someone used a word on the internet.
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[a famous Fundamentalist]… a[nother] stunning example of how and why fundamentalist debates always seem to miscarry …
The length to which the rabbit trail has been pursued by Don and Alex stre…
nevermind.
:D
nevermind.
:D
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
[Greg Linscott] The length to which the rabbit trail has been pursued by Don and Alex stre…I am shaking my head at it myself. I keep saying, “why bother?” But then I think maybe one more post will help him see the light…
nevermind.
:D
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
i concede Don used the expression correctly on his blog upon further reflection.
the “walking cliche” has taught me a new rhetorical phrase.
however, credulity still means: a disposition to believe too easily. while credibility refers to believability.
on the other hand, how can an oxgoad be a blunt instrument? the whole idea of a goad is to pointedly poke the ox. doesn’t it need to be sharp?
the “walking cliche” has taught me a new rhetorical phrase.
however, credulity still means: a disposition to believe too easily. while credibility refers to believability.
on the other hand, how can an oxgoad be a blunt instrument? the whole idea of a goad is to pointedly poke the ox. doesn’t it need to be sharp?
Give to the wise and they will be wiser. Instruct the righteous and they will increase their learning. Proverbs 9:9
[Greg Long] Where do you disagree with Jay’s church’s doctrinal statement?
That was the whole point for posting the DS of my church…I don’t think he can :D
To further my argument, I should note that:
1. My current pastor is not only affiliated with IFCA Intl, but he’s also a TMS grad.
2. His son has attended TMS as well.
3. Pastor been on the Executive Committee of IFCA Intl in the past and has also served as the President of the Northeast Region
4. Finally, he lead the church through a complete revamping of said Consitution and Doctrinal Statement for our church over ten years ago. Neither document has ever been Scripturally challenged by anyone else since then.
Bob’s argument seems to be that Lordship theology is heretical, and since the church I go to teaches Lordship Theology, I wanted Bob to come out and specifically point out the error in what we preach and teach, since it’s articulated in the GBC DS with plenty of Scriptural support. Since it’s now been just under six months, and Bob has not yet done that (although I’m sure he will object to something now that this zombie thread has revived), I think that it’s safe to assume that his objections are more of objections to John MacArthur and/or Phil Johnson in particular than they are about any real Scriptural substance.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Discussion