Why do we think the “head-pastor” is the only one who can really teach us anything about Scripture and God?
Related Posts
Integrity in Ministry – By Dr. Akin – Part 1
A few days ago I received an email sent to all students, staff, and alumni of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. The email from Dr. Akin was an essay concerning Integrity…
Body for Life – Week 6
Ok, I was a bad boy last week. I think I actually went to the gym once last week. HEY IT WAS RAINY! Plus I ate a ton of Krispy…
Christians and Military – Part 5
Having and maintaining a military has always been very important to growing and sustaining a nation. The military allows a nation to grow and also defend itself from other nations…
Question of the Week – #7
Why do we stand up when we sing hymns?
Light-Switch Christianity
Recently I have been thinking a lot about Sunday morning meetings. In fact, I have a post coming, next week, that has to do specifically about this topic. But today…
6 Comments
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Because many people think of studying and teaching Scripture (as well as pastoring) to be a vocation.
i don’t think that so i must not be part of the group you are addressing this question to but i think that OTHER PEOPLE think that because they see the pastor just like every other professional and bible study just like any other profession. you have to be trained and they pay the guy who is trained to do it. that way they dont have to do it.
FYI, too all my readers… the “comment deleted” by author was Dan’s comment. He deleted it because on his second to last sentence he had typed, “you have to be trained and we pay the guy who is trained to do it.” (emphasis added)
This is important because Dan always gets mad at me for using “we” in my Question’s of the Week. Note how he put “OTHER PEOPLE” in all caps. This was an attempt to prove that my use of “we” is not valid.
I mentioned it to him and he deleted his comment and retyped it with “they” instead of “we.”
Thanks Dan!
Lew
all lies
Are we angry?
I think it’s a textual variant, actually, and I’m going to start an entire denomination now based on Dan’s use of the word “we” instead of “they”. It’s obvious that he changed the wording under pressure from Lew, and therefore “we” is what was actually “inspired” and in the original autograph.
Never mind that the original is now lost to us. We can construct it from the evidence and consider it completely inerrant and infallible.