Kumbayah UPDATE!!!!...or...You got some splaining to do!!!

The author/Pastor of the original blog post entitled "Spiritual Gifts" I don't want has made a retraction...or has he? This one will leave you scratching your head. He states in his latest post that some misunderstood or mischaracterized the post, while at the same time, some yet and still agreed. I completely agree with that insomuch as I received numerous emails myself on my post in response to his blog. Many defended the author/Pastor and at the same time, many agreed with my response. The responses defending the author/Pastor were defending him on a personal basis disregarding his statements made in the original post published on his blog.. The responses agreeing with my position did so on the basis of the content of the original post. Here is where it gets a little weird.

Wouldn't you think a former blog post or statement made that caused so much discussion, dialogue and questioning would merit some clarification? If it was so misunderstood and mischaracterized by some, wouldn't it be a good idea to make it clear to the readers your original intent being that you take the time to explain what has occurred? What a concept!...Well, not going to happen. At this point, I wonder who actually understood the author's intent being there seems to be no further explanation. The author/Pastor of the blog post goes on to say in order to understand it fully, we need to know the context. Huh? Didn't we get the whole post?..or is there more we needed to make a proper assessment?

Since some seemed to agree with the post, doesn't that make their view moot since they also did not have the context needed to fully understand the message the author intended? Did we need to see the author's facial expressions to know what he actually intended to say? Did we also need to hear the author's voice to know the intent of the post? Are all of these elements necessary to comprehend the writings in a blog post, email, text message or any other form of written communication? If the manuscript lacked information needed to grasp the author's intent, that begs the question, why? Or is it just second thoughts now that the cat is out of the bag? Maybe it was not a well thought out post and this is a way to explain away what was said?

Five paragraphs into the explanation of the former blog post , there is yet to be a hint of clarification of this misunderstood post, only that we did not understand what he meant to say. I have an idea....Just say it then. In the immortal words of Ricky Ricardo..."you got some splaining to do"....don't ya think?

The Pastor goes on to compare his post with Bible studies that ask the question..."what do you think" rather than what was the author trying to communicate . Honestly, I've never heard of Bible studies that ask my two cents, it is always based upon believing the written word of God as it stands, no spin zone, allowing the Bible to say what it says to whom it says it...what a concept!.

Analogies, parables, alagories are always identified as such in the scriptures, all other scripture should be taken literally. Was the post "Spiritual Gifts" I don't want written as alagories? were they parabolic? or should they be read in the literal sense? They were not identified in any sense to be other than literal.

The Pastor goes on to compare the mischaracterization and misunderstanding over his post to the same problem people encounter when reading their Bibles. I just can't make that comparison in any way shape or form. The God that inspired the written word had His words written exactly as He meant to have them written with out as much as one mistake in them. The author of the Bible instructs us how to read and study it correctly, and it demands us to believe His words in order for them to work effectually. Reading a blog , text, email, or whatever requires no such thing. What ever is written in a blog, text, email is the full content with no other reference point in which to compare. The audience has been determined, the words are written, we read them, we process them, should we not believe them as they are written? or do we need to put a spin on them? Now that's where folks go wrong in Bible study. Instead of allowing the Bible to say what it says to whom it says it, they always find a way to fit themselves into the audience being spoken to which is an egregious error to say the least.

Since so many have misunderstood all the information provided in the original blog post, and so many have mishandled what the author's intent was meant to be, how about a new post clarifying the so plainly written statements throughout the entire post entitled "Spiritual Gifts" I don't want? Wouldn't it follow as the night to day that would be a logical next step in clearing up the original controversy? Now, let me be clear here in saying this. If you do not understand what is being discussed here ,it is because you need to read it in context....lol....seriously, you would have to read this in conjunction with the former "Kumbayah" posts to have the entire dialogue then you can also say....Lucy!, you got some splaining to do!!