Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Been a while

Well it's been some time since I last posted on this blog. I've had a lot going on the last several months, and time has been a premium. Of late, I've been posting comments on several other blogs having to do with some issues facing my home church. One of the main concerns of mine and some others is the PDC, PDL, seeker senstive movement. I have to admit I was surprised a couple of years ago, when the pastor of my church led us as a congregation through the 40 days of Purpose of the PDL book. At the time many churches across my city, and indeed across the nation were jumping on board with the PDL program. The thing I found particularly surprising in that is the seeming ecumenical nature of the program. What I mean is, how could a book by an SBC pastor have such appeal across denominational lines? I'm talking Baptists, Methodists, Seventh Day Adventists, Presbyterians, Independents....the whole gamut. The conclusion that I came to is...there couldn't be much that is doctrinally distinctive in it's contents. Upon examining the book I noticed that the author used some 15 different translations of the scriptures to support his thesis...some of which are very loose paraphrases. Maybe I'm just picky, but that alone is suspect to me...it smacks of an eisogetical approach to the scriptures...coming up with a thesis then turning to scripture to pull, out of context, passages...or only parts of passages (partial verses in some cases) to support the thesis. Not very sound in my view. But sound or not, it has obviously gained a foothold in evangelicalism..and in particular the SBC. It is way more than just another program...it is a worldwide movement. While no one I think would criticize the motive (reaching lost souls), methods do matter...because doctrine matters. Anytime we start tinkering with methods, we run the risk of compromising doctrine. No matter how well intended at the start...the temptation to begin to tinker with Biblical doctrine...in order to acheive the desired outcome, will inevitably come into play...which in the end, has just the opposite effect than what was originally intended. The whole idea of "seekers" to begin with is unbiblical. Rom. 3:10-12 makes this clear: "As it is written: 'There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God (italics mine). All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.'" So then what is the answer to this dilemma? As the scriptures ask ..."can a leopard change his spots?" No it cannot...nor can a sinner who seeks not God change his own disposition. Nor can any methodology, cajoling, or emotional/psychological manipulation open blind eyes, and deaf ears to hear the truth. It is a work of God. Our mandate is to faithfully preach the gospel of Christ as revealed in Holy Scripture to every man....only God can convert a soul. Am I straining at gnats? Consider this....faithful exposition of the Word=sound doctrine=solid conversions=right belief=right practice=God being glorified in His church. Make sense to you?....comments welcome.

5 Comments:

At 10/26/2006 9:09 AM, Blogger westtnbarrister said...

Amen brother!

Eisogesis is dangerous yet it is the norm in some circles. With 34,000 verses to pick from you can find support for nearly any any nutty idea.

WTB

www.cafekudzu.com

 
At 10/27/2006 9:53 AM, Blogger Evan said...

In general, I agree, but I have a critique of your formula at the end. Faithful exposition=sound doctrine--that works for me. Sound doctrine=solid conversions--for the most part, I agree, but you can have faithful exposition and sound doctrine with no or poor conversions as well. Solid conversions=right beliefs=right practice--this is where I depart. I noticed your links to some reformed sites, so let us take Calvin for example. I would dare say he was a faithful expositor, solid doctrinally, and a solid believer. Do I believe he totally botched paedobaptism, was confused on the spiritual presence of Christ in communion, and misapplied a combination of church and state? I sure do. Luther missed it too on consubstantiation and some other points. All that to say, the formula is not a sure fire way to reach the end result. We must approach each point with honesty and a commitment to God's Word.

 
At 10/27/2006 10:13 AM, Blogger allofgrace said...

Evan,
Thanks once again for your thoughtful comments. I admit my "formula" is painting in broad strokes. And of course..though I have no problems calling myself a Calvinist..Calvin wasn't right about everything..neither was Luther..nor you and I for that matter..we still "see through a glass darkly"..until we get home it will always be a matter of the finite attempting to comprehend the infinite. What I mean by "solid conversions"...is people being truly converted in the first place...can we see into someone's heart and know with 100% certainty if that's true?...no..only God can..but I also feel that if we preach a faulty/reductionist gospel...what gospel are they believing?...is the Christ they are turning to the Christ of scripture?..have we faithfully proclaimed repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ?..or has salvation been reduced to an "act" of walking an aisle...answering a few questions, being led through prayer..then given assurance based on what THEY "did"?..I'm not being hypercritical here...but the number of REbaptisms that take place and the thousands of "members" who can't be accounted for kinda raise my eyebrows and cause me to question.

 
At 10/27/2006 10:58 AM, Blogger Evan said...

Allofgrace,
You make an excellent point about the reductionist gospel. If we do not preach the whole counsel of God's Word and a gospel of justification by grace through faith, then we are setting ourselves up for having unregenerate church members. If you read my post, on Sumo Theologica at http://theopop.blogspot.com/2006/08/
regenerate-church-membership-why-we.html, then you probably noticed my desire to see a resolution on regenerate church membership at the next SBC convention. We need to have that conversation sooner rather than later.

The one good thing about rebaptisms (we'll just consider those folks to be true anabaptists) is that they now understand that walking an aisle does not save a person. That is one reason that pastors should address that issue.

 
At 10/27/2006 12:04 PM, Blogger allofgrace said...

Evan,
I wholeheartedly agree that the rebaptisms are great in the sense that these souls have come to a knowledge of the truth. I'm sensitive to this issue because I'm numbered among those rebaptisms...I "professed" at about age 9...I was 37 when I "possessed". I grew up under a "decisionistic" gospel...I began to struggle with the issue of my salvation as a teenager..and would often go around "praying the prayer" a dozen or so times a day...the message I got was that there was some "magic" in that canned prayer...I finally gave up in frustration and anger, feeling that I had been sold a hoax. I never darkened the door of a church for the next 20 yrs..now as a Calvinist..I'll tell you that I believe that was all in God's foreordained plan..but also, as a Calvinist, I'll tell you that those whose preaching I sat under are responsible for the message they preached...neither of these facts negates the other one....I believe God chose the day, the hour, and the circumstances in which I would be saved..but He also chose the means to those ends.."...through the foolishness of preaching to save them which believe." I believe with all my heart God is sovereign in salvation..just as strongly as I believe we are responsible...I don't try to reconcile those 2 truths..I just simply accept them both AS truth.

I hope your resolution makes it to the floor of the convention. It is indeed an important issue.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home