Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

People want scripture, not theology
Winnipeg Sun ^ | 2008-03-22 | Joseph Quesnel

Posted on 03/22/2008 9:24:07 AM PDT by Clive

Fidelity to revealed truth and historic Christianity should trump unity in the debate surrounding schism within the Anglican Church.

This contrasts sharply with the views of Rev. Paul Gibson, a liberal Anglican theologian who garnered attention for his essay recently on the Anglican Church of Canada website, in which he said schism is "not a catastrophic event" and is preferable to placating those who do not treaty "gays as equal" simply for the sake of unity.

This statement neatly ignores the reality one can treat gays with dignity and respect without necessarily condoning their behaviour or defying clear Scriptural teachings on homosexuality. In fact, the church is called to reach out to such people. This is the message of Jesus, who went out of his way to show unconditional love for everyone, but never retreated from identifying sin as sin.

Since the start of this year, eight Anglican parishes out of 2,000 have formally left the national church and have affiliated with conservative bishops who honour the Scriptures. The issue on the surface is performing blessings on same-sex couples. But this is only a symptom of a larger problem occurring in many denominations. Like many mainline Protestant denominations, the Anglican Church (at least in North America) has embarked on a more liberal direction.

This involves ignoring cardinal doctrines of the faith, like the Resurrection of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the deity of Jesus Christ. In other words, many have denied what makes Christianity sacred and unique among faiths.

Looking at the Episcopal Church in American (this is the American version of Anglicanism), one can see figures like Bishop John Shelby Spong who has built his theological career on denying every single supernatural element of the Christian faith to the point where one wonders why he calls himself Christian.

In such a spiritual vacuum, why bother to attend church at all, many conclude.

Thus, is it any surprise congregations that hold to historic Christianity find themselves increasingly alienated from church leaders who deny every traditional doctrine at every turn? I strongly believe the dominant theological seminaries are largely to blame for this mess.

Ministers emerge from these places with only doubts about the Bible and traditional doctrines. They also have learned a "social gospel" devoid of any spiritual content that has more to do with trendy leftist politics than with the original Gospel of Christ.

What happens is these ministers are steeped in this indoctrination and then are shocked to find their older congregations actually want to hear about the truth of the Bible or desire to deepen their relationship with God. Statistics bear out the fact churches that hold to traditional doctrines and relevant spiritual teachings, like evangelical denominations, are the ones that are growing. The older Protestant denominations that have embraced liberal theology and left-wing politics are the ones selling off church properties because their congregations are shrinking.

People are clearly hungry for spiritual truth in this age of post-modernism and moral relativism. They don't hate gays, or anyone else, as these liberal theologians claim. They just want their churches to teach them what is right and wrong.

Until they do, expect only more schism.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: anglican; christians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 03/22/2008 9:24:07 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; albertabound; AntiKev; backhoe; Byron_the_Aussie; Cannoneer No. 4; ...

-


2 posted on 03/22/2008 9:24:32 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
Photobucket
3 posted on 03/22/2008 9:25:46 AM PDT by GVnana ("They're still analyzing the first guy. What do I have to worry about?" - GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

I seriously believe many of the ranks of the “preacher crowd” both in the traditional and televangilist fad practices are literally atheist priests who are just selling a product for their own personal gain. They don’t give a rats posterior about god, faith, or anything devine. They just want money.


4 posted on 03/22/2008 9:27:10 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
We had some good "scripture" today. My rabbi, in a sort of off-hand remark, compared and contrasted the two Jeremiahs. (One of the today readings was from Jeremiah.) The Jeremiah of the Bible gave sharp, angry messages to his people too. But his criticism was directed toward the people who were listening to him. His modern namesake reserved his vitriol for people who weren't in the room.

ML/NJ

5 posted on 03/22/2008 9:31:10 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

It either is true or it is not. One cannot take what one wants and disregard the rest.

Try as one might, arguing with the Bible is fruitless. It always leads to unbelief.


6 posted on 03/22/2008 9:31:11 AM PDT by txzman (Jer 23:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

“We had some good “scripture” today.”

I enjoy reading Jewish teaching on the Old Testament (your present testament :) - the Jewish history of thought, reverence and focus on God often takes my breath away.

Although we believe differently, I cannot help but wonder that a true love for God wins over all. (Yes I know I am bordering on Chritian heresy... but I’ll take that up with Him).


7 posted on 03/22/2008 9:34:36 AM PDT by txzman (Jer 23:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: txzman
When Jesus was confronted by satan, all of His responses relied exclusively on quoting scripture.

It is written . . .

8 posted on 03/22/2008 9:36:11 AM PDT by Hoodat (Bull Moose Party Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

“I seriously believe many of the ranks of the “preacher crowd” both in the traditional and televangilist fad practices are literally atheist priests who are just selling a product for their own personal gain. They don’t give a rats posterior about god, faith, or anything devine. They just want money.”

I agree with you and why we don’t bother to go to church. There is one we will attend from time to time but we don’t go regularly because it is a bit of a commute. Other than that the others are like Oprah shows with entertainment driven feel good musak. It’s drifted away from Scripture - in fact Scripture is not highlighted at all. It’s dusgusting what the orangized church has evolved to - “seeker friendly” at the expense of serious meat shoppers ... not wanting to offend so they offend God with watereing down messages etc..

2Tim.4:3

[3] For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
I suppose it is expected:

This is where we are at (the above SCRIPTURE VERSE).


9 posted on 03/22/2008 9:42:38 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
This is exactly the point I made to my other half last week when one article posted on freeper was penned by an author equating Wright with a modern day prophet equivalent to the prophets of old who were rejected for their off-putting commentary. To me the very suggestion is an abomination, because as you so aptly put it, any criticism of a segment of society by the old Jeremiah [i.e. Old Testament] was directed straight to the offenders, whilst the current would-be prophet Jeremiah Wright is safely preaching to a clapping crowd. And to the ones he considers victims of societal woes. And what does that do? Only stir up hatred and division. I just don't see why Obama thinks he can seriously run on a platform of bringing the country together with such vitriol clearly imbedded in the man he says is his mentor.
10 posted on 03/22/2008 9:52:06 AM PDT by whitegloves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: txzman
your present testament

Is there another?!

ML/NJ

11 posted on 03/22/2008 9:54:12 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

I heard someone call these liberal “pastors”, “shoe salesmen running around barefoot.”


12 posted on 03/22/2008 9:57:14 AM PDT by Mrs.Z ("...you're a Democrat. You're expected to complain and offer no solutions." Denny Crane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Excellent point. Must read in Jeremiah today. Thanks.


13 posted on 03/22/2008 9:59:35 AM PDT by squarebarb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clive; Ezekiel

Scripture instead of theology or religion? Now there’s a concept!


14 posted on 03/22/2008 10:01:17 AM PDT by Lijahsbubbe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

In the past, the Archbishop of Canterbury has said that he is unsure whether God exists or not - how does someone get to be head of an entire church but can’t even assent to the most basic of beliefs? Now that Episcopal churches are leaving over the gay issue, I can only wonder what took them so long.


15 posted on 03/22/2008 10:24:14 AM PDT by eclecticEel (oh well, Hunter 2012 anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Not to mention that the Biblical Jeramiah was a Prophet of God and the angry man in Chicago isn’t.


16 posted on 03/22/2008 10:25:18 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clive

I think that theology is important, as long as it supports Scripture and Doctrine/Dogma. It furthers understanding and knowledge.

HOWEVER, it can go seriously wrong, and it appears that this is happening a lot lately. We need serious orthodox theologians from all of the Christian faithful branches to stand up against the idiocy that passes for learned thinking.

Theology must serve the Christian Church, not undermine it.


17 posted on 03/22/2008 10:29:59 AM PDT by Patriotic1 (Dic mihi solum facta, domina - Just the facts, ma'am)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

This does not describe our Lutheran Church Missouri Synod Church. We are very serious about scripture and doctrine and sometimes people don’t like it.


18 posted on 03/22/2008 10:37:43 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I seriously believe many of the ranks of the “preacher crowd” both in the traditional and televangilist fad practices are literally atheist priests who are just selling a product for their own personal gain. They don’t give a rats posterior about god, faith, or anything divine. They just want money.

Too many look at it as a job and a career, rather than a calling. That's driven me from the Methodist Church I was raised in. The idea of it being a job and career brings with it the political need to get along with those you view as the "majority" - in reality those who are loudest and most aggressive about demanding that the church change, get with the times, join the modern world, etc. That's why we see ministers preaching about how earth day is the essence of honoring god, when in fact it's a pagan holiday for the earth worshipers. Too few in the ministry truly have the calling - you can tell those who do. They believe the scriptures, will tell you that the truth isn't always popular, and that not everything is condoned by God.

I've had to fall back on the Bible, the writings of the early Methodists, and the knowledge that a church is wherever two or more gather in Christ's name.

19 posted on 03/22/2008 10:38:43 AM PDT by Kay Ludlow (Free market, but cautious about what I support with my dollars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

I *think* he was under the impression you were a Jew, ergo “your” testament (what is referred to as the “Old Testament”), and the Testament of Jesus Christ (the “New Testament”).

I’m certain no slight was intended.


20 posted on 03/22/2008 10:42:02 AM PDT by Don W (My ingrown toenail has more acting talent than Will Farrell, Jack Black and Queen Latifah COMBINED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson