Something I watched today

[mizpeh]

The video I posted is not really about pacifism. It might have been touched on in passing.

[Esaias]

From Boyd's website:

http://reknew.org/2012/09/evolution-...clarification/

"When I expressed my various concerns about the rejection of “evolution” as a pastor, citizen, apologist and theologian, I was merely referring to young earth creationism, such as we find with Ken Ham’s “Answers in Genesis.” This is the only perspective I know of that dismisses the entire evolutionary paradigm of modern science. From my involvement with BioLogos — a very informative and important think tank, by the way — I’ve learned that, while the creationist movement is dismissed by the scientific establishment and the broader academic community, it is very well funded and organized, which is why it must be taken seriously by those of us who care about the credibility of the Christian faith and the future of the Church. This movement is exerting a tremendous influence on the evangelical church today, and it’s the primary reason the number of American Christians who reject the entire evolutionary paradigm is increasing, and at a rather alarming rate. For all the reasons I gave in my previous post, I believe this could, over the long haul, prove disastrous for the Church in America (and everywhere else it exerts a strong influence)."

Wow. Just wow.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Esaias

From Boyd's website:

http://reknew.org/2012/09/evolution-...clarification/

"When I expressed my various concerns about the rejection of “evolution” as a pastor, citizen, apologist and theologian, I was merely referring to young earth creationism, such as we find with Ken Ham’s “Answers in Genesis.” This is the only perspective I know of that dismisses the entire evolutionary paradigm of modern science. From my involvement with BioLogos — a very informative and important think tank, by the way — I’ve learned that, while the creationist movement is dismissed by the scientific establishment and the broader academic community, it is very well funded and organized, which is why it must be taken seriously by those of us who care about the credibility of the Christian faith and the future of the Church. This movement is exerting a tremendous influence on the evangelical church today, and it’s the primary reason the number of American Christians who reject the entire evolutionary paradigm is increasing, and at a rather alarming rate. For all the reasons I gave in my previous post, I believe this could, over the long haul, prove disastrous for the Church in America (and everywhere else it exerts a strong influence)."

Wow. Just wow.

Did you post this in the wrong thread?

I disagree with Boyd on many things like evolution, the trinity, the baptism of the holy Spirit and the doctrine of subsequence, Pacifism, but there are other things that I agree with wholeheartedly...and I rarely if ever hear preachers preach the way he does on love, the kingdom of God, love, relationships, Jesus...etc

Here's a 'manifesto' of his beliefs that he holds strongly to: http://reknew.org/about/

[FlamingZword]

Boyd is a confused person, I would not put much stock on anything he says.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Did you post this in the wrong thread?

I disagree with Boyd on many things like evolution, the trinity, the baptism of the holy Spirit and the doctrine of subsequence, Pacifism, but there are other things that I agree with wholeheartedly...and I rarely if ever hear preachers preach the way he does on love, the kingdom of God, love, relationships, Jesus...etc

Here's a 'manifesto' of his beliefs that he holds strongly to: http://reknew.org/about/

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

"Against the long-standing patriarchal mindset of the church tradition, ReKnew is passionate about encouraging husbands and wives to assume an egalitarian mindset in their marriages in which they “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21). We are convinced that the several instructions on wives needing to submit to husbands (and even to call them “lord” (1 Pet 3:6!) reflect fallen aspects of first century culture that God had to temporarily accommodate, along the lines of the instructions for slaves to submit to masters (I Pet 2:8). For the same reason we are passionate about encouraging women to pursue whatever ministry God has gifted them for and called them too."

In other words, whatever in the Bible runs counter to socialist humanist 'public policy' trends is just a temporary accomodation to 'fallen aspects of first century culture'.

You watch. Greg Boyd will come out in favor of gays. It's just a matter of time. Either him, or his immediate successors.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Whatever...be dismissive. It's your loss.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Esaias

"Against the long-standing patriarchal mindset of the church tradition, ReKnew is passionate about encouraging husbands and wives to assume an egalitarian mindset in their marriages in which they “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21). We are convinced that the several instructions on wives needing to submit to husbands (and even to call them “lord” (1 Pet 3:6!) reflect fallen aspects of first century culture that God had to temporarily accommodate, along the lines of the instructions for slaves to submit to masters (I Pet 2:8). For the same reason we are passionate about encouraging women to pursue whatever ministry God has gifted them for and called them too."

In other words, whatever in the Bible runs counter to socialist humanist 'public policy' trends is just a temporary accomodation to 'fallen aspects of first century culture'.

You watch. Greg Boyd will come out in favor of gays. It's just a matter of time. Either him, or his immediate successors.

Do you mean that eventually he will say that homosexuality is not a sin?

He is not an complementarian but an egalitarian when it comes to the place of the woman and man in the church and in marriage. You're drawing conclusions that are not there or anywhere.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Boyd is a confused person, I would not put much stock on anything he says.

What do you base these judgments on?

[mizpeh]

One of the most remarkable expressions of the all-encompassing nature of the cross is reflected in an incidental, but extremely important, comment that Paul made in his First Letter to the Corinthians. He noted that when he brought “the testimony of God” to Corinth, he hadn’t come “with eloquence or human wisdom”. He instead “resolved to know nothing…except Jesus Christ and him crucified’ (I Cor. 1:1-2). While this statement may be somewhat hyperbolic (did Paul really resolve to know absolutely nothing except Christ crucified?), it clearly implies that, for Paul, the entire gospel was found in the message of the cross. It implies that, when we understand what took place through the “foolishness of the cross,” we understand all that we need to know about God and about other humans. When you know the character of God revealed on the cross and what he thinks about us, as revealed on the cross, you’ve got the essence of all you need to know about anyone. - See more at: http://reknew.org/2016/06/nothing-ch....RtSTAEHe.dpuf


Do you disagree with these statements also?