By Greg Gibson
Full Gospel or Partial Gospel? Edified More by Preaching Than Tongues
“One such term that I increasingly find problematic and fosters the two-tiered Christianity is “full-gospel”. The term has come to be used of as an adjective for alignment with Charismatic/Pentecostal beliefs. The implications of the term is that those who don’t embrace the full continuation of gifts today have only part of the gospel…Unfortunately, I think the terminology does a disservice to the Biblical evidence of what constitutes a spirit-filled congregation. If believers are gathered together, serving this function and building each other up in love, then I would suggest that is what constitutes a spirit-filled church…The bottom line is just because a congregation embraces the continued use of all gifts, does not necessarily make a spirit-filled church nor does not embracing the continued use of all gifts make a congregation any less spirit-filled…I have witnessed countless so-called tongues and interpretations and numerous prophecies…But to be honest, what was delivered could have been easily addressed through a powerful sermon or individual exhortation. In fact, I have been more edified through good expository preaching of scripture than through my previous experience…But my plea with this post is for all who trust in Christ as savior to recognize that everyone has been given what is necessary for growth and service (2 Peter 1:3; 2 Timothy 3:17). Continuationists do not have something more nor are cessationists missing out on what they need.” Full Gospel Christianity?: A Theology of More II
Love’s Priority Above Doctrinal Distinctives
“I find that my passions and priorities have shifted. It is no longer quite so important to me to preach NCT everywhere I go. I still hold (although more loosely now) to the basics of Calvinism, but I would not identify myself as a Calvinist. One of the finest churches I’ve attended was a church that did not call itself Reformed, and yet the love that the congregation showed to each other and the world surpassed that of any Reformed church I’ve ever seen…I would still rather have good theology and a loving and gentle heart than bad theology and those. But I would rather have bad theology and a loving and gentle heart than good theology and pride and ungraciousness.” Ramblings on Theology and Love by Louise
Imputation of Christ’s Active Obedience: A 16th Century Invention
The New Testament teaches that God credits Christ’s righteousness to us through the means of faith, and on the basis of His death and resurrection-life, not alleged substitutionary Law-keeping during His earthly life. IAO is “hyper-imputation.” It undermines the sufficiency of Christ’s righteousness and death. And it fails all 4 tests for essential doctrines: 4 Tests of Essential Doctrines.
“Advocates of IAO often insist that it is integral to evangelical orthodoxy. The implication being, to reject it is to forfeit the right to the label evangelical, or at least, orthodox evangelical. Of course the burden of proof lies with those who so claim to prove their case and it appears an exceptionally hard case to prove. Indeed, from what I have read to date, it seems an impossible task…To be fair, those who argue for IAO normally date and define вЂ?evangelical orthodoxy’ from the Reformation…The evidence from the Magisterial Reformers (early reformers supported by the ruling authorities) is mixed…In summary, Luther taught imputed righteousness but cannot really be clearly aligned with current IAO orthodoxy. Calvin is much more closely aligned but IAO does not have in him the emphasis it has in later formulations and present orthodoxy. He often identifies forgiveness of sins through Christ’s righteous death as the sum of justification in a way that few IAO advocates would today. Zwingli tended to moralism in justification…The case for IAO as orthodoxy in the first fifteen centuries is virtually non-existent. The case for a hard and fast IAO as a uniform part of orthodoxy among the initial reformers it would appear is far from compelling…Though it is entirely absent from the previous LBC of 1644…The truth seems to be that while many Reformed folks in the C16/17 (to say nothing of Evangelicals outside the confessionally Reformed side of Protestantism) affirmed IAO, a significant number did not and the early divines were not inclined to make the differences of the substance of the faith IAO was not considered a matter of orthodoxy thus confessions allowed for differing views on the subject…Again the case for insisting on IAO as a matter of historical evangelical orthodoxy is seen to be weak, indeed found to be wanting.” imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-5/ and imputed active obedience (IAO), a must or a misdirection? (6) by John Thomson
The Meaning of Singleness
“How many times have you heard someone say, ‘He’s such a great guy, how is he still single?’ Or, ‘She’s such a catch. When will she get married off?’ The implication behind such questions is that great men and women get married, and those who are not great do not. For many, being single imprints upon them a meaning that touches their very identities: They are defective, second-rate, somehow less than others who marry. In response to this message, Scripture teaches that single Christians are not defined by their singleness, but by their union with Jesus Christ. Singleness, like marriage, is a God-given calling, not an identity…First, we must remember that Christians are not defined ultimately by their calling. Singleness is a calling, not an identity…Second, the meaning of singleness will be seen in the struggle for contentment in God. Singleness is uniquely designed to showcase the sufficiency and superiority of God, because singles are called to find in God what those who are married often find in one another…
Finally, the meaning of singleness is seen when the single Christian is actively involved in service to Christ and the church.” Singleness with Purpose by Brooks Waldron
Visitors Are Looking for Independent/Non-Denominational Churches
Mega-Churches are independent/non-denominational more than any denomination. Mega-Churches in America Chart by Jeff Young and Complete List of Mega-Churches in America by Jeff Young
History of Denominations Chart
Do you know the historical roots of your denomination? Great Chart on Denominations by Jeff Young
NIV, TNIV, and NIV 2011 Comparison Stats
Here’s a summary of the changes from the NIV (1984), TNIV, and NIV (2011)
“NIV2011 verse same as 1984: 18,666 = 60.02%
NIV2011 verse same as tNIV: 9,726 = 31.27%
NIV2011 rejected tNIV, reverted to NIV1984: 269 =.86%
NIV2011 verse verse is new: 2,440 = 7.85%
NIV2011 words same as 1984: 356,610 = 91.37%
NIV2011 changed words: 33,666 = 8.63%
NIV2011 removed words: 32,863
NIV2011 added words: 34,469″ NIV2011/NIV2010 Changes by John Dyer
55 Free, Online Books by John Piper
Read John Piper’s books free online, including “Finally Alive,” “Don’t Waste Your Life,” and “Fifty Crucial Questions About Manhood and Womanhood.” Online Books by Title by John Piper
The Church’s Mission: 7 Book Reviews
See 7 book summaries and one book excerpt. Book Reviews on the Mission of the Church by 9Marks
How to Know God’s Will: 5 Book Reviews
Wondering about a major decision? 5 Great Books on the Will of God by Tim Challies
Christians and Politics: 3 Book Reviews
Bible Inerrancy and Authority: 10 Book Reviews
Politics—According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture by Wayne Grudem
Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative by Carl R. Trueman
City of Man: Religion and Politics in a New Era by Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner. Three Books on Politics by Andrew David Naselli and Charles Naselli. And see 10 book summaries on the Bible as God’s Word by D.A. Carson and Robert Yarbrough
Tags: Bible Inerrancy and Authority, Christian Singles, Full Gospel, Imputation of Christ's Active Obedience, Independent/Non-Denominational, Mission of the Church, Politics and Christians, TNIV
Trueman is always interesting. I don’t always agree with him, but his critique is always worth listening to. Americans need to listen to people from outside the United States. We’re rather blind when it comes to trying to examine our own situation. I like Trueman because he’s not partisan, but is trying to sit back and reasonably look at the issues.
If anything he’s still too conservative….from my standpoint anyway.
If you go over to Christ the Center, there’s a programme where Trueman is interviewed regarding his book, as well as another show where he engages in a friendly debate with Peter Lillback…who I think is just awful if not heretical. With Lillback you get Americanism instead of Christianity.
Welcome to the 21st century Church in America….lots of America, precious little of the Biblical Church.