Amazon.com Widgets

Stephen Granderson

Joined: Feb. 29, 2012

No bio


Most recent posts by Stephen Granderson:     (See all of them)


No posts yet


Latest comments by Stephen Granderson:     (See all of them)


Re: Prozac, a consolation for atheism

Aug. 25 at 10:17pm | see this comment in context

I wonder if Rosenberg realizes that he is advising everyone to get addicted to drugs.  Addiction would be practically inevitable if you are taking drugs because you can't face reality.  I fail to see how this would be preferable to believing in God, even if he doesn't exist.

Re: Are wives supposed to submit to their husbands?

Aug. 12 at 10:59pm | see this comment in context

Well, I think C.S. Lewis definitely has a point in saying that, when a major disagreement arises, one or the other of the spouses must have the authority to make a final decision, and the other must yield.  Assuming, of course, that it does not involve doing something that is definitely wrong.  And if both spouses have reasonably sound judgement, such situations should be rare.

Re: Are wives supposed to submit to their husbands?

Aug. 11 at 12:10am | see this comment in context

Perhaps it would be helpful to quote the passage from C.S. Lewis.

Referring to why there must be a "head" in marriage:

"The need for some head follows from the idea that marriage is permanent.  Of course, as long as the husband and wife are agreed, no question of a head need arise; and we may hope that this will be the normal state of affairs in a Christian marriage.  But when there is a real disagreement, what is to happen?  Talk it over, of course; but I am assuming they have done that and still failed to reach agreement.  What do they do next?  They cannot decide by a majority vote, for in a council of two there can be no majority.  Surely, only one or other of two things can happen: either they must separate and go their own ways, or one or other of them must have a casting vote.  If marriage is permanent, then one or other party must, in the last resort, have the power of deciding the family policy.  You cannot have a permanent association without a constitution." (Mere Christianity)

Re: Guilty of Unprincipled Forgiveness or Model Christian?

Jul. 22 at 12:48am | see this comment in context

If I may put in my two bits again, I think that part of the problem may simply be the wording.  In reply to my earlier post, Janet said that she does not  believe that "forgiveness as an interior act is impossible without repentance," but that "reconciliation after serious wrong requires repentance on the part of the wrong-doer" and that "truth matters."  I wholeheartedly agree with those statements.  

However, I disagree with her choice of terms elsewhere when she refers to reconciliation with the wrongdoer as "true forgiveness."  I think that what she calls interior forgiveness is true forgiveness.  Reconciliation should ideally follow forgiveness and repentance, but it is an entirely separate matter, and we should truly forgive anyone who wrongs us, whether there is any repentance and reconciliation or not.  If I have truly forgiven someone who has wronged me, then I should always be open to reconciliation if they truly repent.  But the forgiveness should be there already.

That, at least, is what I gather from these posts.  If my conjecture of Janet's meaning is correct, then perhaps a better title for this subject would be "unprincipled reconciliation" (not to be confused with the sacrament).

Re: Guilty of Unprincipled Forgiveness or Model Christian?

Jul. 21 at 11:22am | see this comment in context

....That is what is meant in the Bible by loving him: wishing his good, not feeling fond of him nor saying he is nice when he is not.

"I admit that this means loving people who have nothing lovable about them.  But then, has oneself anything lovable about it?  You love it simply because it is yourself.  God intends us to love all selves in the same way and for the same reason: but He has given us the sum ready worked out in our own case to show us how it works.  We have then to go on and apply the rule to all other selves."

Stay informed

Reading circles

Lectures

Latest comments

  • Re: Everybody's a Critic
  • By: Devra Torres
  • Re: Everybody's a Critic
  • By: Patrick Dunn
  • Re: Everybody's a Critic
  • By: Devra Torres
  • Re: Everybody's a Critic
  • By: Kate Ernsting
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Matt D
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Rhett Segall
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Kate Whittaker Cousino
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: Marriage and Freedom
  • By: Kate Whittaker Cousino

Latest active posts