I wanted to add that it was obvious to me that you would be  in sympathy with my views, and so I felt reasonably certain  that you would appreciate what I had to say there.

I am and I did 🙂

I also  realized that I made another reference to “Old testament” in  my reply recognizing how I had implied what you caught. Just  habit , I guess.

FWIW, it was the phrase “theological evolution” that caught my attention.

Although, I wanted you to know that my  views on how Jesus was related to God has more to do with  Jesus’ own Jewish faith, that didn’t just “fall out of the  sky”, but was , in large measure, passed on to him. I tend  to think that God speaks to us in and through community, > which, from my theology, is a pretty Hebrew view of  spirtuality as I understand Judaism.

Yup. Absolutely key. But not (as I’m sure you know) purely subject to the whims of the community, but rather tied to the text and, more important, to the interpretative tradition and its modes of practice.

 I tend to seek a lot of   sociological insight in my quest to better understand what  spirtuality means.

I also wanted to ask: Could  I post the email you sent me  along with the two replies I sent you afterward? I thought  it appropriate that I clear that point up that you called to  my attention.

I guess it’s ok. I look pretty snippy in the msg I sent you, but, what the heck. | This entry was posted in Theoblogical and tagged Theoblogical by dlatureFB. Bookmark the permalink.