The way in which scripture is cited is somewhat different from the way Aristotle or even church authorities like Augustine are used.
But he is nevertheless still a person, still human, still a creature of God which Scripture tells us bears the very image of God in some mysterious way.
But he added: "Complementarian leaders have been real clear to distinguish between the roles in the home and church, which Scripture does clearly speak about, and roles in society," he said.
Why won't you at least entertain the possibility that the way in which scripture on this particular topic has been taught, like so many others that came before it regarding anti-miscegenation, race, slavery and women, may be flawed and tainted by archaic bias falsely cloaked under the insidious fallacy of "love the sinner, hate the sin"?
The Doctrine of the Two Books maintains that the Scriptures have primacy in matters of faith, but in areas on which the Scriptures do not speak or speak only as a concession to human limitations, it is best to read and understand God's other book, the Book of Nature.
It is in truth, throughout, a parody of the sublime language in which the Scriptures are written".
Truth appears as a living experience accessible in the communion of the church and of which the Scriptures, the councils, and theology are the normal expressions.
This conception soon created, as the German writer Gotthold Lessing described it, an "ugly, broad ditch" between the history to which the Scriptures belonged and bore witness and the eternal truths that the dogmatic systems had derived from them.
They also appear along with selections from other poet-saints (sants) Kabir, Namdev, Ravidas, and Haridas in a somewhat fluid verse anthology called Pancvani ("Five [Groups of] Utterances"), which constitutes scriptures for the Dadu Panth.
