That 'is' what I felt I conveyed.... I oversimplify sometimes because I think that's where we as Christians err sometimes.... everything must be 'tit' for 'tat'....
I'm
not trying to go "tit for tat" with you.
I do think that oversimplification can lead to error though and that precision of language is important - especially when we are simply trying to do our best to describe mysteries. For example, some use the analogy of H2O when trying to describe the Trinity: H2O has three forms - liquid, solid, and gas. However, the problem with this is that God does not simply change forms as water does when it turns into ice; rather, God is three persons and all three persons at the same time. The heresy involved in describing the Trinity as being like water has historically been called "modalism," where God simply changes modes; Christianity affirms God in three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The language matters, and such an oversimplification can easily be prone to error. I'm sure that error was not your intent; I'm simply trying to show how more precise language can help to avoid misunderstanding - and our misunderstanding goes to prove my point.
We're over intellectualizing the Gospel sometimes to our detriments. History has taught us that and my soul yearns for the body of Christ to realize that.
I agree to an extent, but I also think that sometimes an anti-intellectual approach (I'm not saying that you're doing necessarily doing this) can lead to the dumbing down of Christianity. We are called to love God with our minds, too, and not just with our hearts. I think that history has taught that when we check our minds at the door, it's far easier for the devil to creep in. God made us thinking creatures, and using our God-given intellect can glorify him. Some seem to think that it only matters what's in the heart, but what we think of God is important, as is how we discuss God - the words that we use, the thought behind how we do our best to describe the mysteries, and so on.
