Ruck

disciple. husband. father @veritaslimited

[Ruck @zeroruck]

https://t.co/lmyR2yALgH

[Ruck @zeroruck]

this has been a fun convo for me too!

i've always found scripture incredibly clear to follow/understand in the major points on almost everything. hardly ever feeling the need to consult "jewish traditions". What are these areas you feel require historical aided interpretation?

when you say history what are you referring to? i don't automatically toss out all history, but i don't put it on an untouchable/unquestionable platform. greater men than I have studied the bible way longer and deeper than me, and they're wisdom is a great stepping stone/starting off point no doubt. but i will never put full faith in their wisdom over what i receive directly from the Holy Spirit.

i have a velcro like relationship with history, not a sticky one. it's good to start on but always be willing to jump ship if something is off or feels fishy

i think you'd lean the same way in practice from what you say. but there's still an endearment/respect for the old guard. while i see them more like instructors than sages.

[Ruck @zeroruck]

that original tweet is saying that something can't be right if it's been traditionally known for 1500 years. This is the ultimate logical fallacy of appealing to time.

literally shut up and listen to father time. you can't possibly be right because our ancestors "figured it out". so stop thinking and keep the tradition going. LOL

she's saying that Jesus theology upended centuries of tradition which invalidates his entire point. which he did. we can both agree that Jesus changed the game and upended tradition. whether you want to call that theology per se is besides the point being made.

i don't care about "the reformation" or anything that is tied to appeal to tradition or authority. i care about the logic of appealing to God and Jesus Christ and what he taught in the scripture and living that out. that's it, no denomination, nothing else. just the Bible

[Ruck @zeroruck]

you're using a very one dimensional partial definition of theology.

"the study of God... AND humanity's relationship to the divine."

relationship requires action and movement. you can't have a relationship via pure intellectual study.

this is the crux of Jesus' theology vs Jewish theology.

Jesus' way is holistic included the 4 branches shown here, vs the archaic Pharisee Jewish theology which was rooted and revolved around pure intellectual discourse and knowledge

you equate both of these to the be same

The poster and I know that is incorrect. She was showing Jesus' whole ethos was to highlight this difference and show people that theology was more than rote memorization and empty rituals.

Theology is also a matter of the heart not just the mind. Because if your heart is clouded by ego, power, greed (we both agree the pharisees had bad hearts) then how is it possible for the eyes of the heart which read and study the World of God to not be corrupted? you can't be a smoker and expect to have clean breath.

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@jefflintz @writeontheedg3 @adelethelaptop Is that Jesus theology or Jewish theology

[Ruck @zeroruck]

i view theology as the whole package of the talk and walk

you view theology as just the talk. seeing the walk as something else

i think splitting the walk and talk does more harm than good and opens the door to legalism and 'interpretation". and all the junk that tradition has tacked on to Christianity

vs joining them together under "theology" unifies the heart, body and mind all together. if you claim to know the truth, but do not act it out (via your heart) do you really know the truth? What good is facts and knowledge if it isn't applied.

While Jesus was specifically calling out the pharisees heart and not their knowledge. the root message is that without the heart being aligned then the armchair theology is worth less than nothing. if their hearts were correct they would have not held onto dogmatic traditions, lorded their power over others nor been corrupt. All of which are not correct theology even in the most banal unactionable theology

[Ruck @zeroruck]

Theology is being used too casually here. If you want to use it in its pure clinical sterile academic view then yes sure you are right. I view theology in a much more rigid way that actually dictates how you live. It governs soul and heart. Your view of theology is simply intellectual and information. If your worldview isn’t built upon theological principles and concepts then idk what you’re calling it. Theology is the understanding and wisdom underlying the word of God. That actually changes you and your heart and your actions as a result.

So just because the Pharisees had “intellectual theology” down it meant absolutely nothing. And their worship and focus on the dogma leads to making that their god and not worshipping the one true God

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@itisjustbill @adelethelaptop Yes I would because I study the scripture. I know what to look for and can test the fruits of their mission.

Theology is being used too casually. You don’t know what that actually means

[Ruck @zeroruck]

That’s even worse lmfaooo. Theology is not just what you KNOW. It’s what you act and live your life on. So no their actual theology was less than benign

You don’t get any brownie points for knowing the truth and choosing not to act on it. That’s actually the worst outcome. Willful and conscious rebellion against something you know is correct

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@Red_River_D @adelethelaptop Appeal to Tradition might be the lamest and weakest logical fallacy of them all

[Ruck @zeroruck]

You’re trying to whitewash this stance on technicality. Jesus did come and upend centuries of tradition. Yes some Pharisees followed him but that doesn’t take away from the fact that he arrived and changed the whole game. He fulfilled the law live.

Also the Pharisee theology is what led them to want to murder him.

John the Baptist called them a brood of vipers (Matthew 3:7)

Jesus called them the sons of Satan (John 8:44).

I think you may want to re-examine your defense of these guys lol

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@itisjustbill @adelethelaptop The fact they didn’t realize who Jesus was means they had a pretty huge hole in their theology. Because others used the same source material to figure out who he was

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@navigatinglies “How can you say, ‘We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.”
Jeremiah 8:8 ESV

The Bible literally references lying scribes who wrote the text. Think about the implications

[Ruck @zeroruck]

You missed my point entirely

The most efficient way to do something is never the best way.

If your think creating the most amount of life is the highest good, then you should be onboard with mass enslaving young women into forced breeding farms and have them birth as many babies as possible. Thats way more efficient than polyamory

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@ThoughtfulJest @thegenesisbl0ck “I think, therefore I am”
-Descartes

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@thinkingmore018 @thegenesisbl0ck Creating as much life as possible with no regard for quality or care is analogous to cancer spreading!

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@joeybeastmarket @aurorab0rea I read “from”

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@NoahRyanCo Having a family

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@JarkkoHelenius @thegenesisbl0ck Let’s see how mom and dads relationship endure with this activity

If you can’t figure out the down stream consequences of this then you’re simply an idiot lol

[Ruck @zeroruck]

This is part of why Jesus tells us to be like little children. Reading and understanding through their eyes means you read the Bible like a collection of stories. With characters, interconnected plot lines, it is the greatest story ever told

I used this conceptual framework heavily in writing this

https://t.co/TNZmg6qQij

[Ruck @zeroruck]

@JarkkoHelenius @thegenesisbl0ck polyamory of any form kills the nuclear family so while not as bad as murder, its still pretty bad