Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Capitalize
In an earlier post I noted as an aside that the historic use of the pronouns in relation to Jesus or God was to capitalize them. Yet in a number of quotes I used the "christain" authors chose not to capitalize those pronouns when referring to Jesus. This practice has continued as things move through the comment threads. Yet we see the terms; "Jesus' Way of Grace", "Way of Grace" capitalized. One must wonder why those terms which never appear in the Bible, do not have any sort of actual recognized specific definition., are never ever used by Jesus are capitalized as if they are somehow some codified biblical doctrine. This is especially curious in light of the failure to capitalize pronouns referring to Jesus. One has to wonder is the use of capitalization is intended to send a message about the author's view of Jesus, as opposed to his views of an unbiblical "doctrine".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Speaking only for myself, I sometimes capitalize He when speaking of Jesus and sometimes not. Nothing is meant in either sense. I seriously don't think God cares a whit about a capital H. God, as I understand God, is much bigger than that.
I often, but not always capitalize Grace or Way of Grace when I'm speaking specifically of Jesus' teaching, to differentiate it from simple grace, as in "graceful" or "gracious..." But there again, nothing is intended specifically with either the capital or lower case G or W.
In short, no great mystery or serious intent involved. Don't look for insults where none are intended.
I was wondering about this some time ago. Turns out it's primarily an issue of the changing English language and writing rules. The ESV Bible, for instance, doesn't capitalize any of the pronouns for God while the NAS does. Not a matter of insult. Just a change in writing.
Stan, that's interesting. I suspect that in many cases that folks use capitalization as a way to subtly try to diminish the divinity of Christ.
Dan, your response might more sense had Jesup actually spoken of a singular "Way of Grace". The problem you have is that you seem to be trying to elevate your personal subjective construct into something more than just your subjective hunch.
But that's just my opinion based on how you write.
I suppose you know that one of the earliest names for the group of Jesus' followers was those who follow in The Way (see Acts 9 and Acts 24). What is this "Way..."? Why were they called that?
They were called that because they were followers of Jesus' TEACHINGS, his Way of life found in his teachings. Agree or disagree?
At any rate, I can't imagine you object to me calling on Jesus' teachings as The Way, as it is an entirely biblical phrase. Am I correct that you have no objection to this?
Then carrying on, returning to the reasonable question, Why were they called that? What was this Way? When they referred to the Way of Jesus, do you suspect that they were referring to the Way of Blood Sacrifice? If so, well, fine, but we'd disagree. I don't see any basis to hold to that theory, reasonable or biblical.
Do you think they were referring to the Way of Atonement? Well, maybe so, I don't have a problem with that, if one is speaking of God making us At One with God's Realm or God's Self. But how does God do that? By God's grace, I'd say is the Christ-ian teaching. We are saved by God's Grace, after all, according to orthodoxy.
Agreed so far?
So then, it would not seem that you should have any opposition to the notion of being a follower of the Way of Grace, in the title itself. It's very biblical and apt, I would think we could agree.
Now, you know, I am sure, that the term "grace" hardly comes up directly in Jesus' teachings, any more than the term "atonement" does. On the same page on that? Paul and the disciples offer up the grace as term, much more directly than Jesus does, right (and, to a lesser degree, "atonement")?
But perhaps you and I can agree that Grace IS a good way of summing up Jesus' teachings, but maybe not. You tell me. Do you think Jesus' teachings are NOT ultimately a teaching of Grace? God's Grace towards humanity and the world? If so, again, it would seem we would agree that those who follow Jesus are following the Way of Grace.
But what does it mean to be a follower of Jesus and this "way..."? Does it mean merely to assent that Jesus is God or the Son of God? I think you and I would agree not. "Even the demons believe" that much, right? So, it is not merely an intellectual assent to Jesus' divine nature. No, it means to EMBRACE or ACCEPT Jesus' Way of Grace, Jesus' teachings that we are not saved by works, not by sacrifice, but by love, by forgiveness, by Grace.
I just don't see what you find objectionable in this phrase. But maybe you can tell me.
Yet we see the terms; "Jesus' Way of Grace", "Way of Grace" capitalized. One must wonder why those terms which never appear in the Bible, do not have any sort of actual recognized specific definition.
As you know, we never see Penal Substitutionary Theory of Atonement appear in the Bible, nor Trinity, nor Virgin Birth. Nor Sola Scriptura.
I could go on with other human theories. Why is this an issue? You look like you're just looking for something to fight about.
The difference between your pet hunch and the others you mention is that yours is simply an unsupported hunch you've chosen to try to elevate by capitalizing it, while the others have significant Biblical support
I have no desire to argue necessarily, I'm just exercising my ability to express my views and opinions.
Nice job, trying to suggest that what you really meant was "The Way" instead of something you've concocted.
Now if you really suggesting that Jesus is actually The Way despite the implications of exclusivity, and the implications that there actually is one identifiable discernable way, then you might be on the right track.
In the interest of fairness I will not delete any of your comments on this thread. However any further comments will be deleted until you can muster an unqualified apology for your misrepresentation.
I apologize if this is a problem but I feel it is important to do what I say I will do and be consistent. Although , I feel that it would be an expression of grace to not delete these comments because of my poor judgement.
In the interest of fairness I will not delete any of your comments on this thread. However any further comments will be deleted until you can muster an unqualified apology for your misrepresentation.
I apologize if this is a problem but I feel it is important to do what I say I will do and be consistent. Although , I feel that it would be an expression of grace to not delete these comments because of my poor judgement.
No unqualified apology, no comments
Oh, and there's been no misrepresentation of your position.
After you apologize you can define this "way of grace", show me where in historic Christian theology it first appeard, and provide Biblical support for salvation through feeding the hungry and building the realm of God.
Post a Comment