…what is wrong with this blog post. Evidently, according to Dwayna, these women are “re-imagining” God, even though that word or any variant of it is not even used in the post. I just don’t get it…

I guess a group of people getting together and discussing theology qualifies as an abomination nowadays. Who knew?

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 18th, 2007 at 1:23 pm and is filed under Dwayna, Emergent Church, ODM Responses, ODM Writers, What Can You Say?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

10 Comments(+Add)

1   Nathan    
October 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pm

I started to write a post about this one. But I could not figure out Dwayna’s logic for the life of me. My absolute FAVORITE part of the article were the “tags”: Emerging Church, Abominations, Feminism in the Church, False Teaching, Humanism, Apologetics, heresy, Knowledge of God!

WOW!

2   rwk    http://mission.squarespace.com
October 18th, 2007 at 4:49 pm

The problem I have is that they served organic soup and salad at their luncheon. No, really – if God had meant for us to eat organic vegetables He would have created them that way.

It’s a slippery slope…

3   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
October 18th, 2007 at 4:52 pm

I love Dwayna’s tag’s. I’ve actually sent a funding request letter to the government in hopes that they’ll give me 2 mill to study ODM tags.

4   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
October 18th, 2007 at 6:00 pm

The one thing that I found offensive was the furniture in that photo. Not theologically offended but aesthetically offended.

Where did they meet a baptist church youth room. J/K

Dwayna is disconnected from reality. I’m convinced now.

5   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
October 18th, 2007 at 6:32 pm

Chris,
You don’t happen to be this guy, do you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(just kidding)

6   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
October 18th, 2007 at 7:20 pm

Actually…NO PHIL I AM NOT THAT GUY! My wife enjoys watching his show. I personally can’t stomach watching all the foo foo stuff

7   Jeff    
October 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm

God is so much bigger than the box that these folks put him in……

8   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
October 18th, 2007 at 11:00 pm

Oh come on guys… she is well grounded in reality and she is top notch in her research… so far I see much more of “a” reality than at Ken’s site…

Note I am not demeaning the person as i am sure Ms. Litz is a wonderful and loving person… but as far as conspiracies and research… she is right in there in “that” reality… I am surprised she is not been on Coast to Coast with George Noory… you know Keith Noory’s uncle…

These poor women are so deceived to think that they can discuss theology (even some ideas that are controversial) and still be saved… I mean they need to “quote” theologians like Spurgeon and Calvin… and little bit of Luther (but not the Drisconian stuff with swear words).

Again, I am sure she is a sweet and loving person that loves Jesus…

Now, if she would state her position on Laurna Stratford… I think then we can get a real assessment of her research.

Be Blessed,
iggy

9   Kevin I    
October 19th, 2007 at 10:22 am

This reads like the criticsims and warnings or whatever where written in advance and then they googled for emerging women…

10   jazzact13    http://jazzact13.blogspot.com/
October 19th, 2007 at 11:56 am

What about something like this?

–One woman spoke on how she wished God was more like her father. Unlike the women who try to get away from the Father image of God, she is seeking to understand God in that way. Her own father encouraged her and told her that she could do/be anything. But it was God (or the church’s representation of God) that seemed to be restricting her. She wants to see God in the encouraging and supportive role her own father played in her life.–

A lot of it depends on what is meant by that. For example, what she means by God or the church ‘restricting her’. But the idea of God as Father has to be one of the most ways of referring to Him in the Bible, at least in the NT. I realize that many people who have had problems with their own fathers may not find that image comforting, but should we change it simply to satisfy some, or may it be that if they come to accept the image of God as Father they will find things in it that will help them?

That’s the only things I could see that would be considered re-imaging per se, though they did seem to make mention of the roles of women in their idea of EC conversation. I’m not certain Dwayna may not have seen something there, but if so she should have done better in showing what it is she saw. As it is, her rant seems too random and not even well connected to the entry she linked to.