The best theological age ---- is now!

[Pergamum]

There has always been a "mulititude of contradictory and fluctuating statements which emerge even within the same schools of theology."

Let's test your thesis. Neo-orthodoxy -- who is the true representative of it, Barth or Brunner? Is natural theology in or out?

Modern theology is built on the primacy of individual thought; there is no theology, just an assertion of the individual's right to theologise.

Heretics are no new thing.

 

[MW]

Rev Winzer -- not all of us, you and me included, deny much of what they taught. In fact, we affirm it. And there have been many sound, orthodox, biblical teachers since the reformation who have taken the reformers work and built upon it. Personally, I think the sound, orthodox theologians along with much of the other knowledge we've gained has been a good thing, and I'm glad as I study the works of the puritans and protestant scholastics that I have four hundred years of thought and reflection upon them to further supplement it.

Is "theological knowledge" --of which it is claimed we have reached a height -- a mere accumulation of facts and non-facts, or is it that certainty of belief which begins with the fear of the Lord and ends in bringing forth fruit to His glory? If the latter, as the Scriptures themselves teach, then the only possible conclusion from a reformed perspective is that the present time is one of the "deep and darksome caves" of theological history.

 

[MW]

There has always been a "mulititude of contradictory and fluctuating statements which emerge even within the same schools of theology."

Let's test your thesis. Neo-orthodoxy -- who is the true representative of it, Barth or Brunner? Is natural theology in or out?

Modern theology is built on the primacy of individual thought; there is no theology, just an assertion of the individual's right to theologise.

Heretics are no new thing.

Those heretics are a part of the fabric of the "right now" of theological knowledge.

 

[panta dokimazete]

It's a paradigm shift called the wisdom of crowds.

 

[Pergamum]

The Gospel is more global than ever before, and more expansive. It is also advanced notmerely in territory gained but also in more sure solidness gained from the past and the present... the quality of commentaries alone should be used as proof. Also background information, manuscript evidence all exceed the past ages.

 

[Pergamum]

It's a paradigm shift called the wisdom of crowds.

No paradigm shifts for me, but only an optimism based on the Scripture that, even as we return to the past anchors of the faith, we develop those anchors deeper and our advance with the Gospel is not a mere advance in quantity but of quality.

 

[Prufrock]

I still don't necessarily entirely agree, Rev. Winzer. Even if it's simply upon the fact that it's a pretty hard claim to prove that there are fewer godly men today then there were several hundred years ago, or that less fruit is being brought forth to the glory of God.

 

[TimV]

Yes, I think missions is finally able to go forward not under the flag of the colonial powers and missionaries are no longer agents of a church/state union.

If we make a list of countries, like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Russia, Poland, Romania, Italy, Greece, Ireland, Britain, Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, Spain, France, Holland, Switzerland (insert about 100 more) in which of these countries did Christianity come under the flag of a colonial power

About Islam: No, I don't think that only American Baptists are doing the work (though the IMB is doing wonderful work). Catholic and Orthodox work among muslims has largely been ineffective.

When you crunch the numbers, or even look at a map of where Islam was the majority religion and is now no longer, you will have a different view, just as you now have a different view of

Also, I looked up your views on WWII and yes, wow it was largely a Russian war.

some other really, really basic history. History you don't get in American Arminian Baptist company.

 

[Pergamum]

Let's test your thesis. Neo-orthodoxy -- who is the true representative of it, Barth or Brunner? Is natural theology in or out?

Modern theology is built on the primacy of individual thought; there is no theology, just an assertion of the individual's right to theologise.

Heretics are no new thing.

Those heretics are a part of the fabric of the "right now" of theological knowledge.

There has always been a stream of good theology and many streams of bad theology and the bad theology of our day is a mere continuation of the bad theology of the past...but the church is overcoming it and still advancing.

 

[py3ak]

If we are further along in our grasp of doctrine, why are we further apart in terms of church unity? Perhaps there are some who have advanced from what was attained in the past; but since most have not retained what was attained, it is misleading to say that we in this era are at the height of theological knowledge. Certainly, a person with time and health and money can read more books than anyone living in previous times, and by God's grace can glean the good from those books and reject the chaff. But for every person who has advanced, how many how have rather slipped away?

The church universal is always unified in spirit.

We have done away largely with any myth of "Christendom" and not bound by the State to belong to a state church in most parts.

Also, at least evangelicals are grouping together in the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, The Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization and are signing onto statements like the Chicago statement on inerrancy that show a broad unity across denominational boundaries.

Also the reformed faith is coming back strong and there are more Christians and more reformed Christians in more countries than ever before.

However churches which are in serious doctrinal error outnumber churches that are not. There are divisions and subdivisions. If we are to come to the unity of the faith, at least in the USA and in Mexico, by and large we are going about it wrongly. There is less doctrinal agreement, and that results in practical division. And when this problem is recognized, some people think that the way to solve it is to have a non-doctrinal unity.

 

[MW]

There has always been a stream of good theology and many streams of bad theology and the bad theology of our day is a mere continuation of the bad theology of the past...but the church is overcoming it and still advancing.

Here you set the church apart from a mainstream of theology that is "now." You have countered your own claim.

 

[Pergamum]

Yes, I think missions is finally able to go forward not under the flag of the colonial powers and missionaries are no longer agents of a church/state union.

If we make a list of countries, like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Russia, Poland, Romania, Italy, Greece, Ireland, Britain, Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, Spain, France, Holland, Switzerland (insert about 100 more) in which of these countries did Christianity come under the flag of a colonial power

About Islam: No, I don't think that only American Baptists are doing the work (though the IMB is doing wonderful work). Catholic and Orthodox work among muslims has largely been ineffective.

When you crunch the numbers, or even look at a map of where Islam was the majority religion and is now no longer, you will have a different view, just as you now have a different view of

Also, I looked up your views on WWII and yes, wow it was largely a Russian war.

some other really, really basic history. History you don't get in American Arminian Baptist company.

I was not influenced by Baptist arminian company.

The Orthodox and Catholic communities among the Muslim world are largely insulated closed-off bodies of believers. The largest recent growth among the unreached Muslim groups have been from evangelicals.


The majority of professing Christians now come from the Global South to include Africa, India, etc and almost all of these had missionaries come under the flag of trading companies and national powers. Many of the European countries became Catholic or eastern orthodox because their lands became catholic or eatern orthodox.

 

[panta dokimazete]

I guess what I am trying to say is that the church, through technology advancements, is able to expand the common culture more efficiently than ever before.

 

[Pergamum]

There has always been a stream of good theology and many streams of bad theology and the bad theology of our day is a mere continuation of the bad theology of the past...but the church is overcoming it and still advancing.

Here you set the church apart from a mainstream of theology that is "now." You have countered your own claim.

Yes, I have set the "church" apart from the mainstream of errant theology (i.e. not the church)

 

[Pergamum]

I guess what I am trying to say is that the church, through technology advancements, is able to expand the common culture more efficiently than ever before.

No, I actually think that more gooder theology is going to more people moreso than at any period of the history of the world. Our "divines" are not inferiors to the theologians of the Westminster days. We are making advances not only in practice and scope of our faith, but in quality as well.

 

[MW]

Yes, I have set the "church" apart from the mainstream of errant theology (i.e. not the church)

But that errant theology is a part of the "right now" which you have have claimed to be "the height of theological knowledge."

 

[panta dokimazete]

I guess what I am trying to say is that the church, through technology advancements, is able to expand the common culture more efficiently than ever before.

No, I actually think that more gooder theology is going to more people moreso than at any period of the history of the world. Our "divines" are not inferiors to the theologians of the Westminster days. We are making advances not only in practice and scope of our faith, but in quality as well.

Right, and the advancement of our "more gooder" theology to more people is being greatly facilitated by the Internet as a knowledge resource, aggregator and disseminator.

 

[Pergamum]

So? I am talking about the height of good theologic not gathering averages. In the Reformation there was much greater popery and false belief...

 

[TimV]

The Orthodox and Catholic communities among the Muslim world are largely insulated closed-off bodies of believers. The largest recent growth among the unreached Muslim groups have been from evangelicals.

And what do Spain, Portugal, Greece, Macedonia, Hungary, Georgia, Arminia, Ossetia, Serbia, Croatia, Bulgaria and a dozen others I could name if it weren't so late?

The majority of professing Christians now come from the Global South to include Africa, India, etc and almost all of these had missionaries come under the flag of trading companies and national powers. Many of the European countries became Catholic or eastern orthodox because their lands became catholic or eatern orthodox.

So no answer?

 

[MW]

So? I am talking about the height of good theologic not gathering averages. In the Reformation there was much greater popery and false belief...

Yes, and true hearted followers of the Christian faith and life aligned themseves to the Reformation theology, not in the bewildering notion that their present offered the height of theological knowledge, but because it is true.

 

[Pergamum]

I guess what I am trying to say is that the church, through technology advancements, is able to expand the common culture more efficiently than ever before.

No, I actually think that more gooder theology is going to more people moreso than at any period of the history of the world. Our "divines" are not inferiors to the theologians of the Westminster days. We are making advances not only in practice and scope of our faith, but in quality as well.

Right, and the advancement of our "more gooder" theology to more people is being greatly facilitated by the Internet as a knowledge resource, aggregator and disseminator.

Hmmm...I am not sure thatmakesmy point though because the net (like the Roman road) is only a means to get the GOspel to others easier, but does not change the quantity of believers necessarily or the quality or surety or clarity of our beliefs to all peoples and languages.

 

[Prufrock]

I don't know: let's rejoice in the forward spread of the gospel, in the growing re-interest in orthodox reformed theology and practice, and be grateful for the understanding that we've gained from the Reformation and since the Reformation -- for the godly fear which this knowledge has taught us, the godly practice which it has produced, and the godly teachers that continue to teach us and others today. I mean, this website alone has 663 reasons (according to the members list) that I am confident about the "theological state" of today -- Christ's church will always find itself in a world of unbelief and corrupt teaching (Just think of what the apostles and their successors had to deal with!), but he is always at the head, and we should rejoice in the time in which he has placed us in the world where we, the church, can serve as his witness. There's my 2 cents.

 

[Pergamum]

The Orthodox and Catholic communities among the Muslim world are largely insulated closed-off bodies of believers. The largest recent growth among the unreached Muslim groups have been from evangelicals.

And what do Spain, Portugal, Greece, Macedonia, Hungary, Georgia, Arminia, Ossetia, Serbia, Croatia, Bulgaria and a dozen others I could name if it weren't so late?

The majority of professing Christians now come from the Global South to include Africa, India, etc and almost all of these had missionaries come under the flag of trading companies and national powers. Many of the European countries became Catholic or eastern orthodox because their lands became catholic or eatern orthodox.

So no answer?

The Catholic lands and Orthodox largely fought the Muslims but did not effectively evangelize them.

Again, the majority of beleivers are now in the Global South and their first contact with Christianity was often by traing ships of the colonial powers.

 

[Prufrock]

I think after hundreds of years of thought we can see farther than they did then; not because we're better, but because of their work.

 

[panta dokimazete]

No, I actually think that more gooder theology is going to more people moreso than at any period of the history of the world. Our "divines" are not inferiors to the theologians of the Westminster days. We are making advances not only in practice and scope of our faith, but in quality as well.

Right, and the advancement of our "more gooder" theology to more people is being greatly facilitated by the Internet as a knowledge resource, aggregator and disseminator.

Hmmm...I am not sure thatmakesmy point though because the net (like the Roman road) is only a means to get the GOspel to others easier, but does not change the quantity of believers necessarily or the quality or surety or clarity of our beliefs to all peoples and languages.

The road is broader, faster and better - but hey, it's all good, my brother.

 

[TimV]

The Catholic lands and Orthodox largely fought the Muslims but did not effectively evangelize them.

That is historically way, way off. If you start reading about the subject you will find whole population groups now at least nominally Christian who were Muslim, and in places like Russia and Spain mass baptisms of Muslim converts.

 

[Pergamum]

For those who do not think that the Gospel is always advancing, was the Teformation an advance? And do all advances end at the Reformation?

In a sense all "advance" is really getting back to the NT, but our knowlege of that era has increased this century moreso than in the middle ages under Rome and even moreso since the Reformation.

Also, the Bible is being translated into many languages. I would assert that a worldwide church of many languages is not merely an advance in quantity but also of quality. A global perspective of the Gospel is an qualitative advance over a description of the Gospel forged in Europe.

 

[MW]

For those who do not think that the Gospel is always advancing, was the Teformation an advance? And do all advances end at the Reformation?

The problem is not with the concept that the gospel is advancing, but with your criterion for determining an advancing gospel. The latter end of a timeline is not a valid criterion. Ephesus lost its candlestick. We deem that the Reformation brought the church out of darkness because it shone the light of the truth on the church, not because the sixteenth century happens to be later than the fifteenth century.

 

[Pergamum]

Are you postmil? I am assuming a victorious Gospel over the whole earth. All that "Jesus shall reign where'r the sun..." stuff.

 

[MW]

Are you postmil? I am assuming a victorious Gospel over the whole earth. All that "Jesus shall reign where'r the sun..." stuff.

When I see Jesus reigning in Christendom's theological institutions I will know that we are in a glorious age of church history.