Posted on 12/10/2009 10:55:18 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
Here are the main reasons I am not signing the Manhattan Declaration, even though a few men whom I love and respect have already affixed their names to it:
• Although I obviously agree with the document’s opposition to same-sex marriage, abortion, and other key moral problems threatening our culture, the document falls far short of identifying the one true and ultimate remedy for all of humanity’s moral ills: the gospel. The gospel is barely mentioned in the Declaration. At one point the statement rightly acknowledges, “It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season”—and then adds an encouraging wish: “May God help us not to fail in that duty.” Yet the gospel itself is nowhere presented (much less explained) in the document or any of the accompanying literature. Indeed, that would be a practical impossibility because of the contradictory views held by the broad range of signatories regarding what the gospel teaches and what it means to be a Christian.
• This is precisely where the document fails most egregiously. It assumes from the start that all signatories are fellow Christians whose only differences have to do with the fact that they represent distinct “communities.” Points of disagreement are tacitly acknowledged but are described as “historic lines of ecclesial differences” rather than fundamental conflicts of doctrine and conviction with regard to the gospel and the question of which teachings are essential to authentic Christianity.
• Instead of acknowledging the true depth of our differences, the implicit assumption (from the start of the document until its final paragraph) is that Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant Evangelicals and others all share a common faith in and a common commitment to the gospel’s essential claims. The document repeatedly employs expressions like “we [and] our fellow believers”; “As Christians, we . . .”; and “we claim the heritage of . . . Christians.” That seriously muddles the lines of demarcation between authentic biblical Christianity and various apostate traditions.
• The Declaration therefore constitutes a formal avowal of brotherhood between Evangelical signatories and purveyors of different gospels. That is the stated intention of some of the key signatories, and it’s hard to see how secular readers could possibly view it in any other light. Thus for the sake of issuing a manifesto decrying certain moral and political issues, the Declaration obscures both the importance of the gospel and the very substance of the gospel message.
• This is neither a novel approach nor a strategic stand for evangelicals to take. It ought to be clear to all that the agenda behind the recent flurry of proclamations and moral pronouncements we’ve seen promoting ecumenical co-belligerence is the viewpoint Charles Colson has been championing for more than two decades. (It is not without significance that his name is nearly always at the head of the list of drafters when these statements are issued.) He explained his agenda in his 1994 book The Body, in which he argued that the only truly essential doctrines of authentic Christian truth are those spelled out in the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds. I responded to that argument at length in Reckless Faith. I stand by what I wrote then.
In short, support for The Manhattan Declaration would not only contradict the stance I have taken since long before the original “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” document was issued; it would also tacitly relegate the very essence of gospel truth to the level of a secondary issue. That is the wrong way—perhaps the very worst way—for evangelicals to address the moral and political crises of our time. Anything that silences, sidelines, or relegates the gospel to secondary status is antithetical to the principles we affirm when we call ourselves evangelicals.
John MacArthur
“...sent his diciples out to preach.”
Are you saying Paul was lying?
Are you saying Corinthians was not INSPIRED by the holy Ghost?
I've got a feeling McArthur would climb into a pool filled with 'Negro' Christians...
I'd much rather go through life not knowing about your feelings about the bigot MacArthur.
P.S.: He's straight.
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." -- Matthew 15:13-14"But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
Amen.
P.S.: He's straight.
You wouldn't hear (read) a statement like that coming from a Protestant, or from a Christian for that matter...
You would and you did.
Exactly. Excellent analogy !!!!!!~
No the Bible is not God, but it is a complete revelation of Him by Him and for His glory.
If you were long separated from the one you love and then you got a letter from him/her would it not be a treasure? If in that letter your loved one revealed wondrous things you would have no way of knowing.. wouldn’t you read it over and over ?
The letter is not your loved one... but it is something that draws you closer , helps you to know them better and makes faithfulness a joy..
It doesn’t seem that complicated to me. I don’t keep trying to say I’m a Roman Catholic. I’m not. Why do they keep trying to say they’re Christians? They’re supposed to be ecstatic to be Roman Catholics, specifically and precisely.
Do you know WHY our culture is "burning down"?
Romans 1
The Righteous Shall Live by Faith 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, [5] as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” [6]
God's Wrath on Unrighteousness
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Exactly...
Scripture tells us not to be unequally yoked .
I am sure the drafters of this thing meant well, but one does not solve spiritual problems by political means.
YEP
Do you think signing it requires you to change anything in how you conduct yourself in the political world, or do you think you're pretty much okay already?
I'm not picking on you particularly by asking this, by the way. I would like to get an answer to this question from everyone who has signed it.
And they usually are, unless they're talking to Protestants, in which case they switch to calling themselves Christian.
Sometimes there's no pleasing some people. 8~)
You’ve noticed that different-talk phenomenon? When they’re talking to each other, they pray to Mary, Jude, everybody and his sainted uncle. But when talking to us, oh no no no, they’d never do something like that, it isn’t really prayer, etc.
Yep. Check out THIS THREAD to see how fervently Roman Catholics believe Mary to be the "co-Redeemer," contrary to the usual offended posture of "How dare you say we believe such a thing!"
That's not a "switch." You get a lot of mileage out of that false dichotomy, but Catholics are Christians.
Catholics are Christians. I hate to disappoint you, but you simply do not get to have the kind of power to decide who is a Christian.
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.