Featured A.W. Tozer's Mystical Influences: Julian of Norwich

He refers to himself as a "prophet". Is that a good thing? Does it encourage Berean cross-checking?

And many are quite willing to take him at his word.

"Tozer was a singular preacher in still other ways. A self-proclaimed “minor prophet,” he cried out for the church to shun materialism, consumerism, and ministry through entertainment." Source: http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/webfm_send/607

And from Tozer himself:
"Help me to remember that I am a prophet; not a promoter, not a religious manager—but a prophet." Source: http://spurgeon.wordpress.com/2008/...iritual-journey-of-a-w-tozer-by-lyle-dorsett/

 

I probably should follow through on your suggestion here, Skandelon. One of the articles I wrote on Tozer I had already posted here, so I will just give the link:
http://asterisktom.xanga.com/528878026/aw-tozer-reconsidered/

This was the first one that I had ever written on him.

I will also post two other articles that I don't think ever made it here to BB. But they will be in separate threads. I had written other articles as well, but the two I am planning to post here deal much with that very area that of mysticism, verifying the point I make about Tozer. You wanted proof of my assertions. They will be forthcoming.

 

Oh good grief. There was a famous Baptist of a century ago in Texas who fatally shot someone. Does that mean all Baptists are bad?

I said "they were an improvement", not "perfect".

 

I can live with your assessment. You are welcome to it. And, yes, you are right. Countless hours were used in my research. I feel that topics like these are very important for the church of God.

 

Martin Marprelate, do you have ECF books in your library? How about Vol 5 of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers? That would be Augustine's Anti-Pelagian writings.

But I guess Augustine was just a bitter unspiritual grump too.

And, no, I am not comparing myself with Augustine. But I am showing you a valid precedent. Augustine wasted "countless hours" whipping up on poor Pelagius. And before that he brutally worked over those Donatists and Manichees.

It only seems odd and un-Christian to some because they have forgotten what we are supposed to be about. Well, I am clear on what I should be doing. As anyone here who has read my posts knows, I do not major on writing against people. I have plenty of other issues I write about. But being critical of things that are taught are a necessary ingredient of helpful Christian writing. And one can't be vague when one is critical. Quotes are needed.

Concerning this very charge of my being hateful and critical I should probably just quote a section from my first article:

"We [Christians] are against error in principal, but are not always aware of it in particular. For instance, I could write generally against some of the errors of AW Tozer - without naming him - and get comments of agreement. But when I pin an author to these errors - and give accurate quotes - I get defensive letters from some ... and enthusiastic Amens from others.

So this is why I "attack" Tozer. I don't hate the man. I love the Truth he himself - albeit unwittingly - attacks."

 

I assume you did not read my other post on Tozer, or you would have seen that I began with this same quote. The post is here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=77723

But you see as commendation I see as cautionary. I had written on this:

1. Was this an off-the-cuff remark of Tozer's, an unguarded comment that needs to be seen in the light of other comments?
2. If not, who are these mystics to whom Tozer credits in the way of leading him to maturity in spiritual matters?
3. Are they at all similar in basic orthodoxy to the Puritans - or even to the broader spectrum of Biblical Christianity - or are they quite the opposite?

I then went on to give examples of how these confessedly mentoring influences on Tozer were actually, by their lives and teaching, quite contrary to the Gospel and foundational Christianity.

 

I have been criticized here by more than one member for always harping on Preterism. But eventually, if I am to take you seriously, Steve, I would have to do just that, seeing that you always come back to your favorite little Shibboleth.

It is a Shibboleth whose existence comes, not from the Bible, but those words of men ("These be thy Creeds, Oh Israel!").

 

Thank you very much for this, Skandelon. It speaks very well for you. And it is a reminder to me to be the same way.

As far as believing people have the ability to be sifters and strainers; I wish I could believe the same. But I just don't. I find in myself and others a tendency to contrariness and a herding or clumping instinct in believers of all stripes, all gravitating to some particular flagship authority figure.

I did the same thing. And still do, when I am not careful. When I became a Christian it was David Wilkerson and Hal Lindsay, both very popular at the time. As a Charismatist it was Otis and that guy in Oklahoma (not Roberts). When I was Pretrib it was Chuck Missler. When I became Prewrath it was Rosenthal. As a Reformed person it was Hendriksen and Sproul - and John Owen, of course. Amill was Riddlebarger. As a Partial-preterist it was Gentry and as Full-Preterist (though the term is not quite apt) it would be Don Preston and others.

These all - well, the latter ones from Hendriksen on - have much of value to say, but I see each of these have their own slants.

Ultimately we all have to be students of the Word, praying and weighing.

 

Agreed about the debating thing. Just last month, as part of my VIP session with a young college student here in China, I alternated debate topics with her. Both of us debated resolutions that we were clearly against. So, it can be done. And it is, as you said, a very good practice. I forget who said (paraphrasing) "Wisdom is the ability to understand and entertain a contrary idea without accepting it."

About the need of (correct) mysticism: I am tempted to give you a little background o just that. But it would require more time than I have now.

I have to go teach some high schoolers how to speaka some gud inglish. :thumbs:

 

This should have read "But what you see as commendation I see as cautionary." That is, something bad, not worthy of copying. A bad example to learn from, not a good one to follow after.