Comments on: Who mimics who?

By: pentamom

pentamom — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:08:22 +0000

He’s failing to make the distinction between mimicking (that’s where the k goes, it doesn’t go in mimicry, though) the world’s stupidity, (i.e. stupid video games and worldly politics) and doing genuinely good things that the world does, regardless of who was “first.” Of course, this is all mixed up with a strange version of two-kingdoms stuff that somehow wants to make Jesus’ commands to serve others to be of the earthly kingdom if it has a strongly physical manifestation (i.e. food, medical care, perhaps visiting orphans and widows?) and so garbage in (a strange view of earthly vs. spiritual), garbage out.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:35:57 +0000

Ugh. “Panic” confuses me also. The URL will attest I spelled it right at first. But then I thought it didn’t look writes For some reason the title bar in my control panel doesn’t seem to register with my spell checker.

By: Mom/Ruth

Mom/Ruth — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:30:46 +0000

Obviously all the astute comments have been made, so to continue in the nit-picking vein, you might want to drop the k and go with mimics (as in mimic (mimics), mimicked, mimicking). I could agree with the grammar punch, but not sure the same thing holds for spelling? And you know I love you.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:10:37 +0000

Sort of like the dairy industry having an ad campaign with the phrase, “Have milk?” :-)

By: Steven W

Steven W — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:49:46 +0000

Uh, dude. That AC/DC song IS lame.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:41:19 +0000

I know, but this is a case where proper grammar just doesn’t pack the same punch.

Think how lame the AC/DC song would be.

By: Pastor TA

Pastor TA — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:19:59 +0000

I don’t mean to pick nits, but i just had to make sure you knew the phraseology. Just remember that English has an objective case, and you’ll do fine. So, that’s “Who Mimicks WHOM?” As in, “Joe Pagan mimicks HIM,” (not “Joe Pagan mimicks HE”).

By: Evan Donovan

Evan Donovan — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:18:17 +0000

I can see why Horton’s article is problematic; however, at the same time, I find his attitude understandable as a reaction to evangelical politics.

I find it funny though that he would quote Bonhoeffer, who certainly acted on the belief that it is a Christian duty to transform the civic order.

Not to mention that he seems to think that creation is sustained on the basis of something besides the Cross.

Still, I think that’s it’s unfair to say that Horton doesn’t believe the Bible is important. He does; he just reads it strictly through Lutheran lenses.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:25:07 +0000

That is interesting Joel because I just wrote an entry saying that creational grace ran out with the Flood. Of course, I’m addressing things at another level than you and Hodge are (and you’re both right!), not that I expect anyone to understand such things anymore.

By: garver

garver — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:20:11 +0000

Sorry for the outburst/tirade earlier. That was basically my initial verbal vomit after ingesting the article.

I suspect that the basic issue boils down to this:

With A.A. Hodge (and, I think, the bulk of Reformed theologians before him), I believe that since the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus “all that happens to the human race…is part of the consequences of Christ’s satisfaction as the second Adam.” Or as John Murray put it, “all the good dispensed to this world is dispensed within the mediatorial dominion of Christ…he is given this dominion as the reward of his obedience unto death (cf. Phil. 2:8, 9), and his obedience unto death is but one way of characterizing what we mean by the atonement.”

Horton doesn’t believe this. For Horton all of the benefits and good things experienced by the human race and created order are “common grace” rooted back in God’s initial creation, in pure nature and law, apart from God’s gracious purposes for the renewal of all things through Jesus.

Much more to be said in unpacking all of that, but when all is said and done, I think that’s the key difference here.