Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Consequnces
Jonathon Leeman @ 9Marks:
This is more than a semantic distinction. Yes, doctrine guides us on the path to how to live, but it is not the thing.
The pragmatism Leeman is concerned about does invariably compromise a move on how to live because as sinners we do not want to live as we should. Living as Christ is inherently not pragmatic.
Thus we can conclude that holding doctrine is as much of a problem as pragmatism. We need to hold to life.
Technorati Tags:dotrine, life, pragmatism
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
The question I want to think about can be posed like this: is there something endemic not just to megachurches, but to post-1950s-evangelicalism as a whole that, over time, tends to undermine the very doctrinal convictions which makes us evangelicals? More specifically, does our doctrine of the church inevitably tend in a pragmatic direction, such that we will eventually leave the gospel and other core theological convictions unguarded?Boy, right on the verge of the most important question facing the church today. The problem is, I am not sure "doctrine" is the thing that has failed us. After all, did Christ spend a lot of time teaching the apostles doctrine? Not that we know of, we seem to see them working that kind of stuff out in Acts. Jesus taught them how to LIVE! - how to be more like Him.
This is more than a semantic distinction. Yes, doctrine guides us on the path to how to live, but it is not the thing.
The pragmatism Leeman is concerned about does invariably compromise a move on how to live because as sinners we do not want to live as we should. Living as Christ is inherently not pragmatic.
Thus we can conclude that holding doctrine is as much of a problem as pragmatism. We need to hold to life.
Technorati Tags:dotrine, life, pragmatism
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
