A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine was made to deal seriously with scriptural teaching. (4) Universalism—the view that all will be saved regardless of faith, religion, or moral condition, became standard doctrine. (5) World history was interpreted in Marxist terms, superficially glossed with traditional Christian vocabulary. (6) Left-wing offenses against human rights and human freedom were seldom noted, and rarely rebuked. By contrast, right-wing oppression was made a cause célèbre; and the council actively opposed efforts to further human rights and political democracy in the Marxist countries. In 1984, at its sixth assembly at Vancouver, the WCC attempted to woo Evangelicals. Christianity Today reassessed the council at that time and concluded that its theology still fell far short of biblical truth in five major areas: 213 192 1. Its equivocal stand on the deity of Christ. . . . 2. Its failure to diagnose the predicament of mankind [human sinfulness]. . . . 3. Its wrong diagnosis surely leads to a wrong remedy. . . . In the WCC study volume prepared for the Vancouver assembly, John Paulton lists as one unlikely option, that “only those calling upon Jesus as their personal savior, can be saved.”. . . 4. Its almost exclusive concern for the horizontal dimension of salvation . . . communal salvation, one that leads to a new humanity and a restoration of society rather than to personal faith in Jesus Christ, a right relationship to God, and the new birth. . . .
Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy 5. Its religious pluralism. . . . Its official preassembly study guide [said], “In the end the great communities of faith will not have disappeared. None will have ‘won’ over the other. Jews will still be Jews; Muslims still Muslims; and those of the great Eastern faiths, still Buddhists or Hindus or Taoists. Africa will still witness to its traditional life view; China to its inheritance. People will still come from the east and the west, the north and the south, and sit down in the Kingdom of God without having first become ‘Christians’ like us.”. . . [A] stern warning [was] presented by World Council official D. C. Mulder against evangelizing because it imposed an obstacle to dialogue with other religions. Moreover, the World Council study guide on the Bible stated: 214 There are diverse literary traditions in the biblical writings. . . . Some of these traditions may be contradictory. The church is in dialogue with Scripture, but has been fed from many sources, in the light of which, biblical statements may have to be declared inadequate, or erroneous. . . . We are not to regard the Bible primarily as a standard to which we must conform in all the questions arising in our life. In 1998, the WCC held its eighth assembly in Harare, Zimbabwe. It faced considerable dissent from Orthodox bodies, which make up about 30 percent of the membership and are concerned about the increasingly liberal drift of the organization. Christianity Today reported, “Both Orthodox and 193
- Page 142 and 143: A History of Christian Doctrine Hol
- Page 144 and 145: A History of Christian Doctrine two
- Page 146 and 147: A History of Christian Doctrine fre
- Page 148 and 149: A History of Christian Doctrine goi
- Page 150 and 151: A History of Christian Doctrine bat
- Page 152 and 153: A History of Christian Doctrine All
- Page 154 and 155: A History of Christian Doctrine A f
- Page 156 and 157: A History of Christian Doctrine tod
- Page 158 and 159: A History of Christian Doctrine The
- Page 160 and 161: A History of Christian Doctrine add
- Page 162 and 163: A History of Christian Doctrine vie
- Page 165 and 166: 6 Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy In c
- Page 167 and 168: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy relati
- Page 169 and 170: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy orphan
- Page 171 and 172: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Word o
- Page 173 and 174: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy must h
- Page 175 and 176: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Barth
- Page 177 and 178: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy and or
- Page 179 and 180: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy and po
- Page 181 and 182: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy presen
- Page 183 and 184: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Only h
- Page 185 and 186: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Evalua
- Page 187 and 188: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Since
- Page 189 and 190: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy nous C
- Page 191: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy God an
- Page 195 and 196: validity is not very intense at thi
- Page 197 and 198: Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy Patter
- Page 199 and 200: 7 Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism
- Page 201 and 202: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism p
- Page 203 and 204: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism r
- Page 205 and 206: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism A
- Page 207 and 208: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism A
- Page 209 and 210: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism s
- Page 211 and 212: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism t
- Page 213 and 214: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism g
- Page 215 and 216: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism m
- Page 217 and 218: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism C
- Page 219 and 220: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism T
- Page 221 and 222: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism T
- Page 223 and 224: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism m
- Page 225: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism c
- Page 228 and 229: A History of Christian Doctrine Des
- Page 230 and 231: A History of Christian Doctrine exe
- Page 232 and 233: A History of Christian Doctrine pro
- Page 234 and 235: A History of Christian Doctrine sta
- Page 236 and 237: A History of Christian Doctrine tha
- Page 238 and 239: A History of Christian Doctrine res
- Page 240 and 241: A History of Christian Doctrine mat
A <strong>History</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Christian</strong> <strong>Doctrine</strong><br />
was made to deal seriously with scriptural teaching.<br />
(4) Universalism—the view that all will be saved<br />
regardless <strong>of</strong> faith, religion, or moral condition,<br />
became standard doctrine. (5) World history was<br />
interpreted in Marxist terms, superficially glossed<br />
with traditional <strong>Christian</strong> vocabulary. (6) Left-wing<br />
<strong>of</strong>fenses against human rights and human freedom<br />
were seldom noted, and rarely rebuked. By contrast,<br />
right-wing oppression was made a cause célèbre;<br />
and the council actively opposed efforts to further<br />
human rights and political democracy in the Marxist<br />
countries.<br />
In 1984, at its sixth assembly at Vancouver, the WCC<br />
attempted to woo Evangelicals. <strong>Christian</strong>ity Today<br />
reassessed the council at that time and concluded that its<br />
theology still fell far short <strong>of</strong> biblical truth in five major<br />
areas: 213<br />
192<br />
1. Its equivocal stand on the deity <strong>of</strong> Christ. . . .<br />
2. Its failure to diagnose the predicament <strong>of</strong><br />
mankind [human sinfulness]. . . .<br />
3. Its wrong diagnosis surely leads to a wrong<br />
remedy. . . . In the WCC study volume prepared for<br />
the Vancouver assembly, John Paulton lists as one<br />
unlikely option, that “only those calling upon Jesus<br />
as their personal savior, can be saved.”. . .<br />
4. Its almost exclusive concern for the horizontal<br />
dimension <strong>of</strong> salvation . . . communal salvation,<br />
one that leads to a new humanity and a restoration <strong>of</strong><br />
society rather than to personal faith in Jesus Christ, a<br />
right relationship to God, and the new birth. . . .