It's a gimmick.

It's makining up a new phrase to make what you believe look more special, because people of other beliefs have had the incredible audacity to think they can use the English language to desribe their faith.

It's similar to the oft quoted used car slogan....

"It's not a religion, it's a relaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaitionship".

Meaningless religious rhetoric.

 While Steven is obviously right, from context i would think that Jae is talking about sharing a Word from God as the God-Word. 

Well yes and no.  If a phrase is only meaningful to the user has it become meaningless rhetoric when used in a conversation?  I would suggest that in the long run much of our religious verbiage has started to become, for many, meaningless religious rhetoric.  The question is how do we respond to that?  Do we give it up or do we reclaim and share its meaning and why we use it?

Hi Crazy Heart--unfortunately, the monkies headed off to the local bar for G&Ts last night to "discuss it" they said.  They didn't get in until 4 a.m  and by that point, had completely forgotten the question.  (Although it turned out that Eustace got "God Word" tattoed on her under regions).  They were still in bed when I got home from work and the only words out of their  mouths have been requests for tylenol and ginger ale. 

But!  in the meantime you have gotten some great replies from decent people who obviously don't spend their evenings (and early mornings) carousing in tattoo parlours....I am very sorry for any trouble they may have caused....

GordW wrote

"Well yes and no.  If a phrase is only meaningful to the user has it become meaningless rhetoric when used in a conversation?  I would suggest that in the long run much of our religious verbiage has started to become, for many, meaningless religious rhetoric.  The question is how do we respond to that?  Do we give it up or do we reclaim and share its meaning and why we use it?"

That is exactly what Marcus Borg and Greta Vosper were talking about at the ASTE at Truro in June.  Marcus Borg says that we need to reclaim the language.  Greta Vosper implied that we need to get rid of it.  (I'm not sure what she would replace it with though.)

I'll echo the thought here that it's probably a Jae-ism, and I won't ascribe meaning to his word in his context; but if I were to use it I would probably use it fairly synonymously with 'logos', the idea of enlightenment and understanding of the divine/holy.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty much in a post-Christian position already and I agree with Borg more so than Vosper. She will make a good UU minister someday, though .

Mendalla

Just checking in as one who prefers the theology of Marcus Borg.

Jae,

you used the term repeatedly in the sermon thread and talked about preaching as sharing the God-Word.  Does that mean preaching is only reading Scripture or does it mean the exposition and reflection on Scripture is also the God-Word or was I misreading your intent?

So why not just say Word of God, or the Holy Bible? Why invent a new, more stentorian phrase?

No problem brother.

RevSteven -  Words are meant to convey meaning, information, ideas.  I recently delivered a sernon on that very topic - that the words of the Bible and the words we use when talking about our faith need convey meaning.  We need to be clear what we mean when we say a particular word or phrase - and we need to know that the other understands the meaning of that word or phrase. 

This thread has indicated that many people do not understand what Jae means by this new term.   Reading his explanation I'm not sure that he knows what he means.  God-word?   He claims that by God-word he means the Word of God, the Holy Bible, but he also claims that his pastor preaches the God-word.    It gets confusing:  does God-word have two meanings?  Is the Holy Bible the God-word?  Or is what his pastor has to say about the Holy Bible the God-word?  

And neither is the meaning that the phrase "God-word' conveyed to me when I first heard it.  I thought that the writer might be searching for a way to refer to God, rather than the Bible.

I must confess, when first I saw the phrase 'God-word' I thought it meant something along the lines of  'C-word', 'L-word', etc.  Now that I know what it means, I still don't know what it means.

Actually, if you do a search for "God-Word" you find the various threads in which Jae has used the phrase, and it seems he's defined it relatively clearly, so there really shouldn't be any confusion. For example, in the thread "Original Sin" he states that "the Bible is the objective God-Word."  In the thread "Where Do Prophets Arise From" he says that prophets are "people who have been supernaturally gifted with the ability to expound the God-Word for the today-audience." In "Preaching From The Pulpit" Jae states that a preacher "is not to share any ideas, opinions, or philosophys of his own which run counter to the God-Word. I believe that if he does so he has failed God in performing the task at hand. Since I believe the sermon is to be the God-message to the people delivered to the people via the Pastor." There's a clear distinction here between "God-Word" (Bible) and "God-message" (sermon.) That's all pretty understandable to me, although I agree that I'm not sure why he wouldn't just use the word "Bible" or "God's Word" instead of "God-Word" which has obviously led to confusion. He seems to be somewhat enthralled with the hyphen: "God-Word," "God-message," "today-audience." However, it's Jae's choice, and since it is understandable if one takes the times to really look at his posts, I leave it to him to decide his "God-language."

Putting it all together, where I would ask for clarification from Jae is his comment in the thread "Here Starts The First Lesson," where he says "I believe that [Jesus] is the second person in the Holy Trinity, the God-Word made flesh." To be consistent with pretty much everything he's written, Jae is here saying that Jesus is the Bible made flesh, whereas I don't accept a one to one equation between the Word as described in the Prologue to John's Gospel and the Bible as a whole. So - claification on that point, Jae?

Otherwise, I think I get where you're coming from with that phrase pretty clearly.

We may need to get you a badge witch!