John Owen on Studying Scripture vs Studying Books

[JonC]

Both sides of the fence, not relevant, but good to read, anything more than ten years old is no good, except for sometimes???

JonC,
You are all over the place. When you spread your replies on 9 different threads, do not expect everyone to outline what you said where?
you also suggested Finney was a Reformed Calvinist, and the Y1 posted Finney in his own words denying that.

i mentioned Owen first, and you were all over it, as if i had two heads, denying i should read it at first, then when i called you on that you modified your position 9 times, to poetry, literary devices, good historyetc.
Then you came out as an Owen lover, then you said anything past 10 years is not relevant, you are all over the place JonC...go back and read your own posts for the last two weeks.
You think it makes sense, but if you took a poll on here regarding your posts, you might be surprised by the results.

Brother,

How many times have you and I discussed Mortification of the Flesh? How many times have we discussed Spurgeon? How many times have I recommended Puritian books? How many times have I recommended Calvin's Institutes? How many times have I recommended Augustine's Confessions, or reading the early church writings? How many times have I said we can gain much from reading these books?

The answer is too many for you to claim otherwise.

WE have had these conversations. You should know, from simple experience, that your claim is false.

How many times have I said that those books are relevant today in terms of Practical Theology?

The answer is zero.

I am not sure why you think a person can find value in reading antiquated books, that they can find inspiration and truths there, yet also hold those writers are not relevant in terms of Practical Theology today, without being "all over the place".

I am not sure you are grasping the concepts I am using.

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother,

How many times have you and I discussed Mortification of the Flesh? How many times have we discussed Spurgeon? How many times have I recommended Puritian books? How many times have I recommended Calvin's Institutes? How many times have I recommended Augustine's Confessions, or reading the early church writings? How many times have I said we can gain much from reading these books?

The answer is too many for you to claim otherwise.

WE have had these conversations. You should know, from simple experience, that your claim is false.

How many times have I said that those books are relevant today in terms of Practical Theology?

The answer is zero.

I am not sure why you think a person can find value in reading antiquated books, that they can find inspiration and truths there, yet also hold those writers are not relevant in terms of Practical Theology today, without being "all over the place".

I am not sure you are grasping the concepts I am using.

I tried to respond to your PM. It says I do not have permission to answer on that page? Do you want me to post it here?

 

[JonC]

I tried to respond to your PM. It says I do not have permission to answer on that page? Do you want me to post it here?

I had left the conversation.

 

[Reformed1689]

Owen's books are not relevant today in terms of Practical Theology (I used the term "Applied Theology" also, explaining the meaning).

This is just about ridiculous.

 

[JonC]

Sometimes I forget not everyone is familiar with some terms.

"Applied theology is the practice of applying religious beliefs in practical ways. Although it typically refers to the application of Christian theological beliefs lived out in the course of an adherent's normal activities . . .

" . . . It is the empirically oriented theological theory of the mediation of the Christian faith in the praxis of modern society.”

In other words, it applies Scripture and biblical truths within the context of the modern world. Men like John Wesley and John Owen cannot interact in this arena. The biblical principles they applied can apply, of course - NOT because of those books but because of Scripture.

Those who have attended a Bible school or seminary have probably encountered the term by reading required materials such as Contemporary Moral Problems.

But I should not have expected everyone to be aware that there are different "branches" or aspects of theology.

For example, Biblical Theology does not mean theology that is biblical (all theology strives to be biblical).

My apologies for not defining terms and concepts well enough.

 

[Reformed1689]

Sometimes I forget not everyone is familiar with some terms.

"Applied theology is the practice of applying religious beliefs in practical ways. Although it typically refers to the application of Christian theological beliefs lived out in the course of an adherent's normal activities . . .

" . . . It is the empirically oriented theological theory of the mediation of the Christian faith in the praxis of modern society.”

In other words, it applies Scripture and biblical truths within the context of the modern world. Men like John Wesley and John Owen cannot interact in this arena. The biblical principles they applied can apply, of course - NOT because of those books but because of Scripture.

Those who have attended a Bible school or seminary have probably encountered the term by reading required materials such as Contemporary Moral Problems.

But I should not have expected everyone to be aware that there are different "branches" or aspects of theology.

For example, Biblical Theology does not mean theology that is biblical (all theology strives to be biblical).

My apologies for not defining terms and concepts well enough.

Nope, I understood the terms and your post is still ridiculous.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Matthew 13:52. 'Then [Jesus] said to them, "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old."'