She That Is Spirtual
For further reading: He That Is Spiritual – A Classic Study of the Biblical Doctrine of Spirituality, by Lewis Sperry Chafer, D. D., LITT. D. Former President of Dallas Theological Seminary. Former Professor of Systematic Theology. Former Editor of Bibliotheca Sacra. Copyright 1918. Revised edition copyright 1967 by Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-22341-5
“She That Is Spiritual” by David Coulon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at www.koinoniaofgrace.com.
David, Goliath, and the Super-Self
Sun, Jun 15th – 2:47PM
David, Goliath, and the Super-Self: Sunday’s Message for 6.15.08
My regards in Christ Jesus,
gonzodave
The Manifesto of Evangelicalism, the Contemporary History of Evangelicalism, and Intellectual Assassination
Foreword
This is an update of a “gonzo journalism of grace” article that will be developed over time (originally posted @
http://www.articles.faithwriters.com/reprint-article-details.php?article=6314).
Sadly, too many Christians have been lulled into the idea that Christianity is the same as “being nice.” Quite to the contrary, Christianity is accepting and defending the truth of God’s Word as revealed in NT Scripture, not personal opinion. It required the writing of the NT to establish grace and salvation through the living, resurrected Jesus Christ. We learn from the Apostle Paul to be “quick to defend” God’s gospel of grace against the pride of intellectualism (i.e., vain imaginations known in the primitive church as gnosticism).
Much like Noah who “found grace” and preached for 120 years without the conversion of a single soul, it is the Christ-like effort and truth which we repeat that God accepts as credit to us for future rewards. And, as always, any success is to His credit.
“You cannot preserve a position without crusading for it.”
John E. Ashford
_________________________
1 Tim 6:20 O Timothy, guard {imperative-the gospel} and keep the deposit entrusted [to you]! Turn away from the irreverent babble and godless chatter, with the vain and empty and worldly phrases, and the subtleties and the contradictions in what is falsely called knowledge and spiritual illumination. AMP
Dear Reader,
Dr. John Ashbrook writes in “New Neutralism II (1991)”:
“In 1958 when my father finished his eight page tract on new evangelicalism, he gave it the title, The New Neutralism. His thesis was that new evangelicalism was a movement which determined to take its stand halfway between fundamentalism on the right and modernism on the left. From its beginning new evangelicalism took a position on the top wire of the fence between belief and unbelief, in the no man’s land between irreconcilable armies, and on the white line in the middle of the road. Neutrality has always been a precarious position, and precarious becomes “impossible” when the truth is involved. The title of my book indicates that it is a sequel and that I share my father’s analysis of the position. … From its inception new evangelicalism has been determined to impress the world with its intellect. It has craved the respect of academia. It has determined to earn plaudits at the fountainheads of secular learning. Why should this be a goal for the Christian? … A book could easily be written defending the thesis that Wheaton College is the educational parent of new evangelicalism. Dr. Ockenga, and a majority of the founding fathers of Fuller in particular and new evangelicalism in general, had roots at Wheaton. … New evangelicalism has a vise-like grip on most of the Christian colleges and theological schools of our day. It has accomplished an almost complete takeover of the Bible institutes and colleges which sprang up after the fundamentalist-liberal battle in the early part of this century. … To the new evangelical, the fundamentalist errs by lacking love, scholarship and a social program. The modernist errs by lacking Biblical faith. The two lacks are made to sound quite equal. As a fundamentalist I do not accept the new evangelical’s charge. I would observe that to lack Biblical faith is far more serious than to lack love, scholarship and a social program. … Mass evangelism is the exclusive province of new evangelicalism. New evangelicals such as Billy Graham and Luis Palau are the household names of evangelism. Publishers whose materials once helped establish fundamental churches now train a generation of new evangelicals. New evangelicalism owns the music publishers. The churches which once thrilled to the wholesome songs of great Christians now are satisfied with the trash of contemporary Christian music drawn from the rhythm of the same world the Lord commanded us not to love. The new neutralism is not logical; it is not Scriptural; but it is overwhelmingly popular. … It is no mistake to call him the father of new evangelicalism. Dr. Harold John Ockenga coined the name, “Neo-evangelicalism”. When the National Association of Evangelicals was born in 1942, its first President was Harold John Ockenga. As a pastor he occupied the pulpit of Park Street Congregational Church on the edge of Boston Common. When Fuller Theological Seminary was founded in 1947 its first President was Dr. Harold John Ockenga. Christianity Today, the daily racing form of new evangelicalism, had its birth in 1956 as the brainchild of Billy Graham and his father-in-law, Dr. L. Nelson Bell. … Dr. Ockenga wrote the foreword to Dr. Harold Lindsell’s book, The Battle for the Bible, published in 1976. In that foreword he said:
“Neo-evangelicalism [i.e., Karl Barth and Neo-Orthodoxy] was born in 1948 in connection with a convocation address which I gave in the Civic Auditorium in Pasadena. While reaffirming the theological view of fundamentalism, this address repudiated its ecclesiology and its social theory. The ringing call for a repudiation of separatism and the summons to social involvement received a hearty response from many evangelicals… It differed from fundamentalism in its repudiation of separatism and its determination to engage itself in the theological dialogue of the day. It had a new emphasis upon the application of the gospel to the sociological, political, and economic areas of life.”
Billy Graham is an Alumni of Wheaton (see my article “The Scales of Justice” which details the “religious humanism” of evangelicalism). Please do not be taken in by the ambiguous term and the umbrella of contemporary ecumenical EVANGELICAL tolerance. I’ve never identified myself by this term, nor have I used it in any of my articles aside from this one. Jesus Christ was not a contemporary EVANGELICAL.
If you haven’t heard about Dr. Darrell Bock’s blog articles at dts.org and bible.org concerning a “Manifesto of Evangelicalism” and an open invitation to sign-up with those who drafted this document, you will soon. It is destined to be the flavor of the month on all the Clear Channel Christian Radio stations.
The latest posting for 5.13.08 concerning this topic at Dr. Darrell Bock’s blog site may be found @ http://blog.bible.org/bock/node/371
The original posting by Dr. Darrell Bock, titled “The Point of the Manifesto Put Simply May 08.08″ may be viewed @ http://blog.bible.org/bock/node/369#comment-8126
I first began to follow comments concerning this MANIFESTO at many blog sites on Pentecost Sunday.
In the spirit of a well rounded “gonzo journalism of grace” (an oxymoron, perhaps?) I direct the interested reader to 4 pre-dated “contrary view” articles.
Firstly, “Please Don’t Call me an Evangelical” by Dr. C. Matthew MacMahon, @
http://www.apuritansmind.com/HistoricalTheology/McMahonDontCallMeEvangelical.htm
Secondly: “The Pelagian Captivity of the Church” by Dr. C. Matthew MacMahon @
http://www.apuritansmind.com/HistoricalTheology/McMahonPelagianCaptivity.htm
Thirdly, a chapter from, ” New Neutralism II,” titled “Institutions” by Dr. John Ashbrook. @
http://www.americanpresbyterianchurch.org/institutions.htm
And lastly, an excerpt from “New Neutralism II” @
www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/transformation/new-neutralism.htm
You will not be disappointed in the new perspective that will be gained through these articles.
More later and my regards in Christ Jesus,
gonzodave
______________________
Another Layman Committed to the Informed Sharing of God’s Graceful Salvation
Mr. Jonathan E. Mason, an English layman, has posted an excellent six part series concerning the “rationalized” Arminian objections that are raised against the doctrine of imputation and penal satisfaction (which are the biblical guarantee of salvation).
I highly recommend this series to be an excellent read for the average interested individual.
http://jonathanemason.wordpress.com/
Additional, more detailed reading of the underlying Greek and Hebrew Scripture by Thomas J. Ascol on imputation and justification may be read in the Founders Journal #59, at:
http://www.founders.org/FJ59/editorial.html where John Bunyan is quoted as saying:
One day as I was passing into the field…this sentence fell upon my soul. Thy righteousness is in heaven. And me thought, withal, I saw with the eyes of my soul Jesus Christ at God’s right hand; there, I say, was my righteousness; so that wherever I was, or whatever I was doing, God could not say of me, he wants [=lacks] my righteousness, for that was just [in front of] him. I also saw, moreover, that it was not my good frame of heart that made my righteousness better, nor yet my bad frame that made my righteousness worse, for my righteousness was Jesus Christ himself, “The same yesterday, today and, and forever.” …
Now did my chains fall off my legs indeed. I was loosed from my afflictions and irons; my temptations also fled away; so that from that time those dreadful scriptures of God [e.g. Hebrews 12:16 –17] left off to trouble me; now went I also home rejoicing for the grace and love of God.[14]
I hope you enjoy learning about God’s grace in Christ,
gonzodave
God Save Me From Your Followers!
by gonzodave
Savior -
Of my life,
You pipe a dirge,
They hear a jig.
They sing they didn’t,
They da-nce they did.
To glo-ry and pra-nce,
the awful dance of the wicked!
The re-sur-rect-ed Christ denied and slain,
by his fol-low-ers with His Name.
A glorified body does not bleed,
Christ is dead just the same.
The crime is hid-den!
So who’s to blame?
So who’s to know,
before they go?
We keep law!
to feed His,
sheep.
* Excerpted from an article titled, “Thus May We Gather Honey From the Weed.”
