http://disqus.com/by/whitemice/enThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:53:32 -0000(u'http://evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/2010/05/arizona-immigration-law-eo-symposium.html',%2049088201L)#comment-49088201<p>KC,</p><p>Thanks for the interesting feedback. It's much appreciated. What did you make of Lindsay's post on it yesterday? <a href="http://evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/2010/05/the-hobgoblin-of-little-ideologies.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/2010/05/the-hobgoblin-of-little-ideologies.html">http://evangelicaloutpost.c...</a></p><p>Best,</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonSat, 08 May 2010 10:54:00 -0000(u'http://www.relevantmagazine.com/current/nation/can-corporations-be-christian',%20611160630L)#comment-611160630<p>Always happy to help out! </p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 06 Aug 2012 13:27:30 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/the-existence-of-the-liberal-young-evangelical/',%20695248620L)#comment-695248620<p>Andrew,</p><p>I think the question is what that is telling of. So there's a 17% percent swing away from Obama toward Romney this time around. That's not that remarkable, given that many young evangelicals can't find work.</p><p>Best,</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 29 Oct 2012 09:12:16 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701211349L)#comment-701211349<p>Thanks, Rachel, for the kind words. I didn't expect to persuade, though I did of course hope! : )</p><p>Also, opposition is true friendship! I hope we get to meet in person someday to hash out these things "for real," as they say.</p><p>Best,</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:43:43 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701212773L)#comment-701212773<p>Elena,</p><p>Really sharp thoughts. I'm particularly interested to hear more about your final paragraph, and what particularly you think Rachel saves from her opponents. I have my guesses, but I bet your thoughts are more interesting.</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:46:06 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701213096L)#comment-701213096<p>Thanks, Hannah, for the kind words. Also, send cookies. I might need the pick-me-up when this is all said and done. : )</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:46:34 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701214978L)#comment-701214978<p>Adam,</p><p>Thanks for the kind words and interesting reflection. I should note that I really do think her writing is quite a bit stronger than my own. If EV had half the liveliness that her latest does, well, I think a few more copies might have sold.</p><p>The cultural contextualization problem is, of course, a problem. That's what makes reading fun. The question is, how much and where does it stop? That was, I think, the underlying point of your review of EV....and it's something we should all spend a lot more time thinking about.</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:49:37 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701216099L)#comment-701216099<p>Yeah, that probably wasn't my clearest moment. : ) I was writing this all at around 2 AM this morning, which is the only excuse I have. My main point there is simply that it does seem like if we disagree with how the critics have read Rachel's book, we should similarly be critical of how Rachel approached complementarians. What's good for the goose, in other words.</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:51:31 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701217237L)#comment-701217237<p>Bonnie,</p><p>Thanks for the kind feedback. I used to not blame the medium, too. But....well, it certainly makes certain responses more plausible, doesn't it? I mean, it seems like the one-sentence paragraphs are proliferating everywhere, and I'm not sure that's going to be good for how we all engage in discourse. But it also might be necessary....</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 17:53:28 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701221865L)#comment-701221865<p>Thank you, sir! Always great to hear from you. But even better when it comes in this form! : )</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 18:01:23 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701224430L)#comment-701224430<p>Eric, not sure if those "last words" will be famous, but they're pretty good all the same. I wonder, though, whether the proximity of the respective writers (Jacobs and Rachel) to a real, lively community had more to do with the controversy they engendered. I mean, maybe Jacbos' book was controversial in his own circles. I have no idea. But it's worth thinking about as an alternative hypothesis.</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 18:06:02 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701225484L)#comment-701225484<p>Derek,</p><p>Heh. I suspect it's more the 3000 word rants you find annoying. : )</p><p>Still, totally agree about rehabilitating "biblical." And I agree that we need popularizations--or at least crossover books--that get it done in a way the massive Vanhoozerian tomes do not, as excellent as they are.</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 18:07:59 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701225962L)#comment-701225962<p>Thanks, Lore, for trudging all the way through that. I appreciate it immensely.</p><p>Matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonMon, 05 Nov 2012 18:08:48 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20701582914L)#comment-701582914<p>Elena,</p><p>Right in line with my guesses. I really resonated with the domesticity part too, which is what I was trying to get at in my badly worded bit about being impressed with how hard homemaking is.</p><p>And I almost mentioned the modesty part as another section that I thought was very good.</p><p>Thanks for specifying, though. It is really very helpful.</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonTue, 06 Nov 2012 02:29:18 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703795570L)#comment-703795570<p>I kinda think Lewis is a worthy candidate for the role, but my own take it that he plays a somewhat different role.</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:37:57 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703795843L)#comment-703795843<p>Thanks, man. And do take the class anyway. This is a wonderful city to visit! : )</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:38:11 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703796711L)#comment-703796711<p>Bill, I do think there is a more enduring witness than public policy. Look at the treasures of the middle ages. It's not their governmental structure that we all value and cherish, whatever its merits.</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:39:01 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703796905L)#comment-703796905<p>It is hard to compete with Tolkien. : )</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:39:11 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703799661L)#comment-703799661<p>Bonnie, maybe I am missing the real nature of rural concerns, but I think what we're seeing is an attempt by the hipster Wendell-Berry/Front Porch Republic to at least *claim* to be thinking about "rural" matters in a distinctively urban environment.</p><p>matt</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:41:24 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/meaning-2012-election/',%20703800419L)#comment-703800419<p>Greg, lots here to agree with, including reshaping our apologetic and how to understand first and second order issues. Thanks.</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:42:00 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20703806506L)#comment-703806506<p>Hah! I totally remember that conversation. Great to hear from you again...and thanks for the overly kind words. I'm not sure I could describe any conversation with me as "delightful," but there you have it. : )</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:46:55 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20703808268L)#comment-703808268<p>Hah! I love that you took it as a challenge.</p><p>And I think your point about launching a "biblical manhood" discussion is interesting. Not sure I'm on board with it, but it's interesting.</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:48:19 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20703809545L)#comment-703809545<p>Way too kind, Laura. Thanks. : )</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:49:20 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20703812257L)#comment-703812257<p>This is a conversation that deserves more than combox contributions. The relationship between love, norms, and obligations is one that I'm spending a fair amount of time thinking about these days. That only to say, even if we *don't* end up using the language of obligation, we might still say that "love" has certain norms that we....should?.....abide by. It's hard to move away from obligation language, turns out!</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:51:32 -0000(u'https://mereorthodoxy.com/controversy-and-interpretation-biblical-womanhood/',%20703814656L)#comment-703814656<p>Thanks, John Mark. I'm not sure that moving this conversation into teh world of biblical studies is going to solve it quite that easily, but I do think that's the first place where it needs to happen.</p>Matthew Lee AndersonThu, 08 Nov 2012 03:53:32 -0000