Scot McKnight weighs in on the Neo-Reformed movement (or what his friend refers to as fundamentalists in nicer clothing).
He says, "The NeoReformed movement of which I speak is an attempt to capture evangelicalism, redefine it by some clearly-defined doctrines that are Reformed, and kick the rest of us -- and there are lots more "of us" than the NeoReformed -- off the village green."
And then he says this which I thought was extremely accurate:
"Furthermore, the NeoReformed have come to equate the meaning of "gospel" with Calvin's "Reformed theology." And those who aren't Reformed are somehow or in some ways denying the gospel itself. When gospel is equated with double predestination, often said in harsh terms, we are seeing a good example of the spirit of a NeoReformed approach. This leads, inevitably, to seeing what they call the "doctrines of grace" as defining both "gospel" and "evangelical."
I just read a fellow student's blog asserting the exact thing last week!
In any case, here are the posts.
Post #1
Post #2
And then, for fun Roger Olson joins the discussion.
These are relevant for me as I am a non-Calvinist/non-Reformed pastor in a seminary setting that is heavily populated with those of the neo-reformed persuasion. This can be very agitating as the smugness and the sureness they exude is enough to smother most people. I will say this, my air supply is running out.
To be honest, I don't really believe in "systems" of theology. I find that most times people simply resign to believe in a complete system when they get weary of the tension that they read throughout Scripture. Finally, one day they give up and just say, "Fine, I'll just be a Calvinist", or "I'll just be an Arminian." I'm not sure this describes everyone who believes strongly in a system of theology, but I imagine it includes many. Who knows, maybe one day I'll join them. But not today.
3 comments:
great post.
after years of inching towards geneva i've also settled on a theology that is more an expression of tension than a product of system.
i'm more than willing to partner with and serve beside the neo-reformed, but i find their constant stumping for certainty and elevation of non-essential issues such as women in ministry a little troublesome.
well d-bag. thanks for your thoughts and such.
and may i say, i personally am extremely pissed at many of these "neo-reform" folks because i happen to have calvinist leanings, and i've found myself being roped in with this hard-headed, hard-hearted brand of determinism whose members seem to disregard the MEANING of the cross in an effort to line up all their theological ducks
i'm going out on a limb and saying...mark driscoll is a dick. a dick who loves Jesus, sure. but a dick none-the-less. he also just so happens to be charismatic and well-spoken enough to be the face of this movement. that means a lot of young guys who sympathize with the reformed doctrine feel like they have to be dicks too. they don't have to be, but apparently its cooler if they are.
i call these men driscoll-ites. or dicks. either way.
Post a Comment