We do not believe God has accommodated himself and his word to (as evangelical feminists see it) sinful patriarchalism, so that the “truth” of God’s word must be separated from the “sin” of patriarchy. According to this view, the biblical message is no longer sufficient but has been corrupted by a fallen aspect of the ancient biblical language and culture…
Because the Bible is God’s own chosen self-revelation, we must take seriously the language God chose to use to communicate to us what he is like. This revelation, by God’s choice, includes all the masculine God-language of the Bible, and therefore it cannot be dismissed as merely the by-product of a patriarchal cultural. To dismiss the masculine language for God in the Bible is to dismiss how God has spoken of himself, and this is a serious matter…
January 10, 2011 at 12:38 pm
I also accept the reasoning that the choice of expressions in the Scriptures are not an accident of culture or mere accommodations to the limits of our perspective. Does this suggest that the temporal references which Christ makes about having had glory and been loved by the Father “before the world was” implies that there is another time outside of our time? As the author said, to “dismiss how God has spoken of himself” is a “serious matter.”
February 22, 2012 at 8:43 am
Hi I am doing my dissertation on the work of wilhelm schmidt and discovered that you had chapters 1, 2, 17 of origin and growth.
I was wondering if you had any more of it as PDF it would greatly help my studies.
thanks and God bless
Wads
March 2, 2012 at 12:37 pm
I have the book and I can convert more if you’d like. Do you have any specific chapters that you are most interested in?