Well, that lady is no theological lightweight when she can speak with such passion and clarity to such an important issue of theological significance!
I give her a hearty, Amen!
Kim... this is nothing new, and I know you know this.
Just last night I had a conversation with a (female) friend along these very same lines. In a very similar way, it appears that there are some folks who think if you cannot properly form an argument based on the rules of logic, no matter what you say is simply dismissed. You are then looked down at by the band of brothers (and sisters) who seem to think that because they've studied this line of argument and know exactly what kind of language to use to make a "zinger" point, and nothing you have to offer is of any significance because you aren't up to par on "logic".
This is one of the most annoying things I've ever heard of. Of course everyone tries to be "logical" in the way they explain themselves but not everyone has had the opportunity to study in this field. Many (like myself, and my friend that I had this conversation with) do not understand most of the words or phrases that are being used in the first place, but simply point to the Scriptures and offer their insights.
To many these days, that is not good enough if your presentation doesn't include the proper amount of terms & phrases from the "logic" camp.
Anyhoo, there you have it. A clique by any other name, is still a clique.
SDG...
Actually, Carla, I was thinking of you when I read this exchange, because you post all sorts of pictures and talk about motherhood a lot, yet you are still theologically astute.
What's worse -- she probably didn't even read half of all of N. T. Wright's books!
Nor did her kids!
BTW and slightly more seriously:
RC's love to cite absurd things Luther said or did, as if they cancel out his recovery of the Gospel.
My favorite response: "Yeah, he was a real loser in a lot of ways. And just think: a 'loser' caught the Biblical Gospel, when all the fancy doctors of Rome lost it!"
So similarly, my judo-like response to Mr. I'm-all-that would be, "Yeah, maybe she isn't. But just think: a 'theological light-weight' caught what you missed!"
As Yoda might say, "How embarrassing! How embarrassing!"
What's worse -- she probably didn't even read half of all of N. T. Wright's books!
Nor did her kids!
Oh, so that's why I'm not a heavyweight! I haven't read anything by N.T. Wright. Perhaps his writings ought to form the basis of my home schooling curriculum for September. How would an 12 year old do with that?
Thanks Kim for letting this "get your goat." As a Bible teacher with a public ministry, I run into this attitude among those "who believe they know" all the time. I will forever be a "lightweight" in their eyes, and that's not right, but it does have to be O.K. in my spirit. As a "grandmother type" I don't have enough time to get all the degrees, but I do know Him and I am a constant learner of His Word through His Spirit. I am a "lightweight" in His eyes too, but those eyes sparkle with love when I know that in Him.
It is enough.
Bless you for addressing this attitude of arrogrance. That is never productive in the Kingdom -- even if it happens to be right -- and this one is off base -- doubly mistakened.
Have a good day. I enjoy reading your blog. I do not yet know how to put links on mine, but will learn and put yours there. You are a blessing.
In Jesus,
Iris
I resisted the urge to be terribly ungracious in response myself.
To be honest, the arrogance almost took my breath away.
I am really happy to have 'lightweights' on my side, and to be a lightweight myself. Because I hear God is partial to revealing his wonderful truths to the unlearned.
I am daily made aware of my own ignorance of His ways, and I can't think of a better way for an intellectual type to be kept humble.
Lord, may it always be so
I am waiting to see the man apologize for disrespecting his sister so.
Did you notice the sister's response, on Adrian's site? Very classy, very articulate, very ladylike, very Christian -- and devastating.
i want to meet that woman... and i want to meet Kim... and Libbie... and Carla... and Iris... and hey, Dan... the guy that reminds me of a modern day Spurgeon (unlike Mark Driscoll that likes to compare himself to Spurgeon).
This does irk me. "IRK" in the sense that though i am a blonde living in Arkansas, homeschooling 6 children and am likely considered a lightweight... I WANT TO KNOW this God I serve and love beyond just the surface. I do not want just a sampling of the truth... I want to live it, eat it, breathe it.
By belittling the woman but not addressing her argument, this man is guilty of committing one of the most elementary logical fallacies, arguing ad hominem - that is by personal attack. (And I probably didn't say that right, which will open me up to all kinds of insinuations that I too am an intellectual lightweight -- which I am). 
Kim says: It's comments like Mr. Kirk's that make women not want to offer their opinion.
It's exactly comments like Mr. Kirk's that women should participate. He makes sure to let people know he has an MA in Theology. He is obviously dealing with some pride, as do many who throw around their intellectual arguments. The intellectual godly women I read almost daily can post comments in a very articulate manner. Kristie's comment back to Mr. Kirk was priceless.
violet:
I was thinking to myself that Mr. Kirk had used a logical fallcy. It was indeed a rather ad hominem thing.
Lisa:
I had to laugh at your remark "a blonde living in Arkansas." That is not how I would you define you at all. I would define you as a sister in the Lord, hungry for righteousness and all the MAs in theology can't make up for a lack in that department.
Iris:
Thank you for such kind words. I like the input of the ladies in my midst who are a wiser and more experienced than I. Puts Titus 2 into a practical perspective.
candy:
I, too, think women should continue to comment. Some of the gents out there could use a little estrogen in their thinking.
Wow! Thanks for being so kind.
BTW, who's N.T.Wright? Now I'm really a lightweight, aren't I?
I haven't been following this conversation at all, so this is totally a response to what I have read on your blog, Kim. When you quoted the man who talked about the lovely pictures, I did not read that as condescending. It didn't strike me that way; it struck me as a nice thing to say. And the fact is that not everyone who is a "theological heavyweight" is holy. Or v.v. There have been plenty of theological heavyweights that would be murder to live with, whose lives do not send up the pleasing aroma of charity, who talk a lot more about God than to him
Frankly, the more I read about God killing Jesus, the more I throw up my hands at the rationalistic gymnastics of intensely Reformed theology. The scholastic niggling on a point of mystery is .... well, it's hard to understand people who say they know the mind of God. Jesus said that no one takes his life from him, but that he lays it down. These are words from the mouth of Jesus. It seems to me that rather than niggling and turning and torturing what God MIGHT have had in mind, our time would be better spent pondering the mystery of what Jesus said right out loud and did in the flesh.
And there's something about greater love hath no man in all of this.
Sorry. But my blood is boiling now. And I'm about halfway to the Orthodox church.
Let it boil Patty... let it boil so HOT that you dig yourself right into the Word of God and labour to know what you believe and why for the glory of God. Pray that the Lord will humble you and teach you HIS truth. 'kay?
oh... and work out your salvation with fear and trembling. We all have much to learn. Even the most learned theologian.
His servant for HIS glory,
Lisa
Patty:
I guess I had a different view of this. I saw the commenter as telling Adrian Warnock that his support was coming from a less than reliable source.
Perhaps I'm just a reactionary 
oopsy... one more thing....
*WARNING*
*WARNING*
*WARNING*
Patty... that is what I did. Let my blood boil, ya know. Then I dug myself into the Word of God so I could refute those "rationalistic gymnastics of intensely Reformed theologians"... and in the process, the Lord revealed HIS truth, not mine. And it was NOT what I expected.
Kim...It's funny that you mention that the gents might need a dose of estrogen...cuz when I read his comment, I was thinking to myself...these men and the whole testosterone thing! Strutting around declaring degrees like Alpha males or something. At least later he apologized...sorta.
You know that girl Kristie is sweet... and then there's me. I have to go open my big sarcastic mouth over there... here... and over yonder. oopsy.
Oh, Lisa, don't worry about it! I think you're pretty sweet yourself.
Kim, I really think you ought to apologise for posting about my original comment on 13th June without reading further down the comment thread (now over 100 comments!) to find the apology and partial retraction which I had already posted there on 11th June. Here is the relevant part of what I wrote then:
I am sorry if my comment about Kristie was misleading. I didn't mean to disparage her in any way. Sorry, Kristie. We are not all theological heavyweights. I don't claim to be myself, although I do have an MA in theology. My point was rather that the theological heavyweights we have heard quoted on this discussion, such as John Stott and even John Piper and Ligon Duncan, and of course all of the apostles, have carefully avoided saying that God killed Jesus. And whereas CJ Mahaney allegedly said it, this was as a rhetorical point rather than a careful theological statement. Those who rush in where angels fear to tread are not necessarily fools, but might end up looking foolish on this matter.
Perhaps you might like to further update your posting to quote this comment as well as my original one. You could also quote Kristie's follow up comment in which she accepted my apology.
As for pictures of kids, perhaps I am just jealous that I don't have any kids to post photos of!
Here is the comment I made on Adrian's blog.
Peter Kirk and I have blogged together for quite a while.
We share information on Bible translation and manuscript issues. It is very rare for me to find men like those on the BBB who will offer women a collegial environment in the area of Bible translation.
In fact, I would say that Peter Kirk and Wayne Leman are the first men, and frankly, the only ones, (on the internet) to welcome me as an equal in the area of Christian academic study!
I wish more men would follow their example.
Quite frankly I get quite upset about blogs like Adrian's which link to every post on how men and women should be 'complementarian' - a word which hasn't much truck in Canada for sure. Some of us just want to get on with studying the text, and how it should be translated.
Thank goodness, as a student of Bible translation I was treated as a 'functional' equal, I didn't know that equality could be divided up so nicely into 'functional' and 'essential' in those days, and I got used to that, which is what I enjoy on the Better Bibles Blog with Peter and other colleagues.
Suzanne
Bravo! That's some good stuff!
Commenting by HaloScan
