But it reinforces my views about how inappropriate the whole statement is. You cannot redefine the gospel to be the things that four friends agree on, ignoring the areas where you disagree and then tell everyone else that these things are now foundational requirements to be faithful to the gospel. This starts to move in the direction of the heresy of changing the canon, of deciding that the Bible should not include certain books because you can't agree on them.
I doubt seriously if the T4G folks seriously intended to write a new doctrinal statement for Christians. What it seems to be instead is to do what the conference itself did - issue a call back to the foundations on which historical, orthodox Christianity has stood for centuries. Personally, I rejoiced to read it. Reading my posts of two weeks ago will indicate why. The T4G statement focuses largely on doctrinal and practical issues that have been attacked or compromised in our day. By the response at the conference, there were 2800 church leaders who were glad to see it, and I suspect thousands more who are weary of the shifting doctrinal sands that exist within "evangelicalism" today.
I agree wholeheartedly with Adrian Warnock (no relation to David, if I am not mistaken), who wrote:
What keeps the gospel safe? I would argue two things predominantly- firstly an appropriate humble attitude to the bible itself, and secondly the presence within the church of men like Mahaney, Dever, Mohler and Duncan and many others today who preserve the apostolic foundation of doctrine through their teaching and direction of their own churches and those in relationship with them.
It would be of value to note Mark Dever's posting on today's T4G blog on the issue of complementarianism. While taking on a tough issue, he nevertheless (and I think correctly) identifies the problems that this generation faces.
- - -
Why address the DaVinci Code? It appears that once again the Christian media has jumped all over the bandwagon. Books, videos, study materials are appearing almost daily. But this time I think there is good reason.
I'm not so much interested in countering the claims of a novel. That serves no good purpose. Rather I feel it is an opportunity to teach our people some things that they might not know. I saw a video clip by Josh McDowell in which he said that the issues of the DaVinci Code are not answerable by Scripture, but by Church history. I am sure he did not mean that in the absolute sense. But I think he is right in the main. So taking the time to teach our people about things such as the formation of the canon, the Council of Nicea and Gnosticism can have a productive, faith-building/affirming result.
I was thinking of doing a parody called the Kinkade Code, but someone beat me to it (thanks to Tim Challies for the heads up).
- - -
One of the benefits I received from the T4G conference was being introduced to some wonderful cross-centered hymns. I had not heard The Gospel Song, I Will Glory in My Redeemer, or How Deep the Father's Love for Us. We've already introduced one of them to our people, and will introduce I Will Glory in My Redeemer this week, Lord willing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment