tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079931756934339155.post1432983969614418172..comments2008-08-06T03:34:17.961-05:00Charleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11481608525537223764noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079931756934339155.post-35022958621350490622008-08-06T03:34:00.000-05:002008-08-06T03:34:00.000-05:002008-08-06T03:34:00.000-05:00Michael,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the clarification. I am still not sure I see much of a difference. Perhaps you could be more specific. What do you think preaching at a "Bible teaching" church would look like as opposed to a "Christ preaching" church?Charleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11481608525537223764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079931756934339155.post-90509281487009012342008-08-05T06:55:00.000-05:002008-08-05T06:55:00.000-05:002008-08-05T06:55:00.000-05:00Charles - thanks for the link, and your comment here. I think you may have misunderstood me here: I am pointing to a preference in evangelical culture to refer to 'bible teaching' and not 'preaching Christ', and the subtle effect such a preference in language implies. Of course, I agree that, theologically speaking, the two are overlapping or even synonomours categories. It is a false distinction: but the preference for one langauge over the other may imply an in practice difference.michael jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15379361601019023165noreply@blogger.com