Tony Campolo calls for Revolution in Baptist Churches.

Here is Campolo's full quote again.

I guess some of us can't get past how he uses the words objective and subjective without thinking heresy to see that he is encouraging Christians to develop their spiritual lives by being more intimate with Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Why is our understanding of heresy tied to how folks use the words objective and subjective? When did ideas about these words become "core doctrines". How recent was this development? When did feelings and experience become equated with evil?

 

Feelings and experiences are important and not inherently evil. What bothered me the most about TC's statement was this: “We do not need an objective description of the Cross..." That's a pretty clear recommendation from Mr. Campolo.

I'll give Mr. Campolo the benefit of the doubt, but I listen with caution after I hear a statement like that.

 

Feelings and experiences are important and not inherently evil. What bothered me the most about TC's statement was this: “We do not need an objective description of the Cross..." That's a pretty clear recommendation from Mr. Campolo.

I'll give Mr. Campolo the benefit of the doubt, but I listen with caution after I hear a statement like that. </font>[/QUOTE]I believe he is commenting on how our understanding of Christianity is mostly about trying to stuff objective head knowledge into our brains while excluding subjective experiences from being placed in our hearts. I believe this is a product of the rationalistic/reductionist modernism of the Enlightenment that has strongly influenced parts of Christianity, particularly protestant, North American liberal/evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity.

 

One other thing to note about relational/experiential views of Christ. Jesus never told his followers to know about him or read about him. He told them to follow him, know him.

How do you know someone or follow them? Reading about them and trying to get objective views of them help. But to truly know and follow someone, you need to experience life with them. Share joys and sorrows with them, dialogue with them.

 

Tony Campolo - American Baptist Churches USA, Eastern University.
I rest my case.

 

From what I've read about TC and this prayer business in a nutshell is this.

In essence he is saying what we know of Christ from the Bible is not enough. One of the Holy Spirit's job is to illuminate our minds with the teaching of Scripture not take us on a some kind of "spiritual trip" to reveal to us who Jesus "really is" or how Jesus "really felt" The Holy Spirit is never going to reveal to a person something that can't be found in scripture. Nor will He enlighten you with some new insight that is not in Scripture. When people begin to experience those kinds of things they may be filled with "a spirit" but not the Holy Spirit.

His line of thinking undermines the Bible in being the absolute authortity to becoming just "another way" to learn about God.

I suppose the Bible illuminated by the HS is insufficent? People need to seed "signs and wonders"

 

So now you are limiting God to a particular denomination...... great....... consider this:

"Debby from Philly. I rest my case"

 

If you look at the history of religion in America, you would see this is nothing new. Worship styles have changed and you see offshoots of Biblical Christianity everytwhere. Just closely observe what these worship styles have spawned. The problem with evolving worship styles today is that most are more about what pleases me than what pleases God! Selah. Think about it.

 

Debbie from Philly,

American Baptist long ago went down the tubes doctrinally. There may be individuals who are saved who remain in a AB church but its pretty common knowledge that as a denomination they are pretty liberal minded in their thinking.

I don't know why some folk get ill when names are associated with what might be false teaching,heresy or questionable teaching. I mean how does a doctrine good or bad take hold without people, institutions, churches spreading it. These places and people have names don't they.

Apple trees don't produce oranges.
Liberal schools, denominations produce liberal thinkers who in turn produce false doctrine.

 

Well, what are the consequences of not befriending them? You tell me. Perhaps they will feel accepted and comfortable in their sin because you befirend them. They may never be motivated to repent and be saved; they may go to Hell because you befriended them. How do you know they won't?

On the other hand, if you dispise and rebuke their sin, they may be ashamed and repent. They may be saved. On the one hand, we do not need to abuse and ridicule them but on the other we do not need to condone and coddle them either. We must stand for righteousness and rebuke sin. Would you have a problem rebuking Geo. W. Bush if he was caught doing dirty tricks in politics? Then, why would you have qualms about rebuking the homosexual in his vile sin?

What are the consequences? You don't know fer sure! It's all speculationg and my imagination is just as good as yours.

 

I totally agree! Most homosexuals I've had contact with that had problems with Christians is that they weren't accepted for who they were (more or less they wanted their sin accepted.) As Christians we cannot accept the homosexual act.

Well, what are the consequences of not befriending them? You tell me. Perhaps they will feel accepted and comfortable in their sin because you befirend them. They may never be motivated to repent and be saved; they may go to Hell because you befriended them. How do you know they won't?

On the other hand, if you dispise and rebuke their sin, they may be ashamed and repent. They may be saved. On the one hand, we do not need to abuse and ridicule them but on the other we do not need to condone and coddle them either. We must stand for righteousness and rebuke sin. Would you have a problem rebuking Geo. W. Bush if he was caught doing dirty tricks in politics? Then, why would you have qualms about rebuking the homosexual in his vile sin?

What are the consequences? You don't know fer sure! It's all speculationg and my imagination is just as good as yours. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

This is vintage Campolo. Ole Tony has tried to be hip on everything new since the 1970's generation. One only needs to go back and read his early drivel to realize how ridiculous he appears now. He’s an aging religious hippie who flows with the current religious stream. Tony strains so hard to be relevant that he’s going to get a hernia.

This is humanism, pure and simple. We fuss and cuss about the secular humanism but this religious humanism ain’t no any pleasing to God. The bottom line of this whole business is man—and that’s basically humanism. In other words, religion has become the new source of positive feelings and meaning for man. Man has God on a chain to jerk when he needs Him. One cannot hang out too long in the post-modernist and existential culture without cashing in his chips. Since man cannot exist in a purely secular world, as he thought he could a generation ago, he is coming back to religion—any kind of religion—for meaning and purpose.

Guys who have always been on the fringe of Christianity (i.e. empty, liberal, culture-dictated Christianity) are experiencing a revival of interest in their anemic, watery theology. It is so diluted of Biblical doctrine that anyone can accept it without offense or burden. It would be difficult to find real Biblical teaching in ppb. Tony, an intellectual guru of a smaller liberal Jesus freak type movement of the 70’s, is now gaining new prominence among the secular seekers who have embrace the diluted, insipid, experience-oriented religion. This new religion with it experiential worship is every bit as satisfying as TM or yoga but not nearly as potent as smoking Mary Janes.

One interesting connection here is spiritual formation with the spiritual ideas of Carl Jung, the psychologist. I think these are birds of a feather—just different colored feathers. Any takers?

 

Sounds like a mantra--a Hindu technique.

 

Does this justify bringing in shamanistic and mystic techniques for so-called spirituality? Spiritualist and demonic influence are infiltrating the church through these new methods used to swell the numbers. When did old fashion evangelistic preaching and conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit stop working? The problem is that we are not using the Biblical methods of praying, teaching, and preaching. We are too wrapped up in the new methodology. In God’s work, preaching God’s Word and conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit cannot be replaced by man’s methods.

[ June 07, 2005, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: paidagogos ]

 

Bro. ShannonL, thou hast a goodly gift for understatment.

 

And what are your qualifications? Are you an Apostle? A psychologist? A seer? I am still wondering how you determined that Joseph had a narcissistic attitude. How did you know that? Hmmmm....I missed that one.

 

So, how do you know this? Do you use this technique to put down anyone who doesn't agree with you?

 

Ben W. I read your post that referred back to my post about consequences of a homosexual's actions.

You keep putting words in my mouth. What makes you assume just because I think what homosexuals practice is unatural and gross automatically makes me unable to interact with them on normal basis like I would with a hetro?

You can be disgusted by homosexual behavior without being considered homophobic. I have worked in close quarters with gay folk on more than one occasion. I didn't think I was gonna get cooties or something. I witnessed to them. I shared with them how their lifestyle was sinful. They respected me for it we got along fine.

We should win homosexuals to Christ we should also stand up against the homosexual agenda that is trying to be shoved down our throats.
I personally by God's grace can minister to the homosexual while at the same time confront a liberal agenda that wants to make their practices to be accepted as okay. So quit trying to paint me out to be a gay basher between the lines of what you post.

 

For those of you who think Spiritual Formation is the domain of more liberal leaning folks like Campolo, here are some links.

Dallas Theological Seminary : Department of Spiritual Formation and Leadership

Fuller Theological Seminary : Christian Spirituality Cohort

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary : Spiritual Formation for Ministry Resources

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School : Spiritual Formation

 

I see a false dichotomy here that is becoming more and more popular, especially in introducing some of the mystical techniques. I posted more about this on the Objective View of Christ thread.

We know Christ both objectively and subjectively at the same time. Knowing God's word is not just objective (though it is objective) because when we have the relatioship with Christ, it is also subjective. I think they come together.

What people are doing is trying to divide them and they subtly undermine the Bible by saying you need to evoke experiences to have a subjective "heart" knowledge because the Bible is just "objective." But the OT word translated as "heart" means mind, because Hebrew often used the word for heart to mean the mind. The idea of the heart being a special subjective thing is a more modern concept, not a biblical one. I have a long paragraph on that in my article on Contemplative Prayer which I already posted a link to.

Heb. 4.12 is a good verse that goes against the idea the the Bible is just related to our minds.