Thanks Rose. I hear what you are saying. But I have a question on that though. But I would first like that thanks Pastor for considering to leave the video up in understanding of context. As well as the other mods, amen.
Before I ask my question Rose, I would like to preface something about that though here at this time. The general way I look at the reformed world is certainly going to be understandable for some, and not so much by others. And on that point though too, I would respect either view (because there is some level of difficulty or sensitivity in relation to the issue I believe). As for the America Reformed Church i would consider it in general to be in deep significant error. However in that there is all manner of degrees. I do consider the American Reformed perspective in general as under the umbrella of true believers for the most part. But the way in which that denomination has steered toward in America has become on the high end of abuse and distortion. So there is a bit of quagmire in that. Because on one hand I would see severe danager there. While on the other hand, quite a range of those up in all that to have super wide variety and nuance.
SOME BACKDROP
It has been far more demonstrated on the JDF how deeply opposed I am to the American Reformed Camp. Where I had gone into grave detail about the mutation of ministry at super high crimes level contained within that camp. Prior to that, I had been on a pretty heavy message board that was steeped in tribal warfare. Between the Reformed and non-reformed. It was not a forum for the weak hearted. It was rather vicious. But I was there because it had huge outreach and many from the American Reformed Camp would be certainly drawn to the deep radioactive controversy emitted from that message board on a weekly unending basis. My role there was not to defend the wiles of the Reformed Church. Quite the opposite. I was far more interested in helping those from the reformed camp to see the otherside's view without going to war with them. The forum was primed for hostile confrontation. It shocked and rocked the Reformed world. On that forum there were times I would have been seen as too middle of the road for some. Because I used that message board as an opportunity to help the audience of the America Reformed camp come to terms with some of the grave trauma operating in their camps. It needed to be exposed. And boy was it. But at such hostile levels it would hardly provide tame and reasonable conversation over it.
So the problems I saw there on that forum was that it was too harsh toward the Reformed audience. Because I was one of them before. I know their world intimately and deeply. And I understand how that forum coming at them would be processed liked. It was not primed for helpful conversion. It was almost like the moderater wanted to take down all the reformed leaders. Whereas the reformed leaders are too entrenched in their world to likely be reached. But their audience, to me, was the target. Because those folks could be reaoned with. So it was noticing the heavy high handed practice of the message board as not helpful to the American Reforemd Audience they hoped to reach, where I knew the forum would get a lot of attention, but it would not be actually engaging at a ministry level because of the levels of hostility. That message board platform has been down now for 4 years. So it had its moment. And what it helped to disclosed I believe is still very helpful for the American Reformed Camp to consider. To the extent they could get past the violent drama by which it was served...lol.
So coming from shark tank ministry background, and having said much thereafter of my concerns on JDF, I have just tried to find more missionary and biblical approaches to be helpful to the audiences of some of those ministries in the reformed world...by the time I got to our CCF. I haven't been as high octane as I was in the shark tank or at JDF because hands down what resonates most with the reformed world is coming at them from a biblically sound "orthopraxic" way -- that our living conversation with them be heavilyg steeped in our walking in the spirit. Which tends to yield far more patience, longsuffering, and consideration (as much as clear and unashamed biblical insights, amen). So through my journey that is kind of where I am today on that...as background.
. . . . .
QUESTION
I hear what you are saying Rose. But is there something on that video that was false teaching? I don't believe though there was anything in what the video presented that was coming from bad doctrine. Which is possibly why I would not have stated what I did perhaps stronger. If it had bad doctrine in it, I would likely not even post it even if it were helpful in other ways though. What my brief disclaimer was, was this:
"The irony of sorts here is that Gavin is reformed. A world i came out of that i felt could be unduly harsh in dogma (and then of course there is their whole bad theology thing going on there)."
So I realize this is a very downplayed disclaimer. But I suppose it was not more so because there was nothing in the video that was presenting bad theology even if it has ties to the Godspel Coalition. Gavin does not really promote them all that much. Or at least in the videos I come across of him i've never seen that. However in the video he does spam for his series on Augustine. From an academic standpoint though, there are studies on Augstine that can be helpful. He is a part of church history. I would imagine Gavin would have some things in that line up that I am sure I would not see as sound. But I would think there are things about Augustine insight that could be helpful in terms of understanding church history, or ways in which some form doctrine based on some aspects of Augustine's teachings. I mean I would understand being concerned about what that might all be about though. So I understand warning and concern.
I guess my struggle would be more in the sense of what we might gain through understanding differing perspectives as healthy. I realize new or weak believers could be tossed a bit by understanding doctrinal concepts that come from other denominations. But by posting that video it was not meant by it to entertain the arguments of the Reforemd though. I apologize if it might look like that...lol. Wow. That is pretty bad if it might have. But it was just an encouragement meant by the points Gavin was making. In that, dear sister, might be some of the "rhetorical" value in kind of like the point likely I was hopeful more to make. Like for example, there are those on this forum that may not listen to JD Farag for example. And if someone's convictions are to not to, amen. But there are some things, for me, about JD that I like. And keep open to. Admittedly it has far more to do with my own eschatological concerns. And for me JD is a helpful sample for me of the sociological arenas the church finds herself in. And along the way, there are some things I actually like in what God is showing me in JD's ministry that actually related to his ministry. Although, this is not easy for me. Because my levels of contrary sensitivity are like super high in regards to JD. But for me, in so doing, I would in contrast to where I might give him more the benefit of the doubt just because I am severaly so differently wired in consideration. In that I am not suggesting that others have to do the same. JD is not everyone's cup of tea. But even though I know JD will have what I would see as auto-tropes where I know where he may go with things. Still I try and look like for other things going on with the man's ministry where I might benefit. I mean its not like I would entertain him with super suspicious eyes. Even though my differences with him are super high.
So just saying all that to suggest that I do kind of see it as important in the church to have a certain amount of effort and striving (above and beyond where our biases might otherwise tend to lull us into) at considering the views of others more from a standpoint of trying to relate to where people are at as much as graciously is possible. Because in general the trajectory of the church can tend to come from tribal places satifisied with bias. Like in the case of Gavin if the thing we walk away with from my video = Gavin bad / Gospel Coalition bad. And that is stronger for us than what he is saying...well...this is the kind of thing I am most hopeful to consider to overcome. The prevention of echo-chamber motifs in the church. This is much different than being ecumenically reckless. Although dear sister I do understand your shared concern. It is a valid one. But in what I am saying here, does this make sense though too? That a way to rule out what someone may say in where they are coming from becomes perhaps in ways greater than the Spirit's moving in the body of Christ organically understanding one another as creations in Him, though containing problematic dogma with them. That we are as discerning to glean the values of the signal "not the noise" as we are to dismiss because of problematic doctrines.
Well I hope in what I am asking it makes sense. And it is fine we can be on different sides of this issue or concern. In my enterest to further the deeping of consideration toward others in the church, of course, yes, there comes with that the needed disclaimers, safety nets, and red flags as well. Amen. But I am just hopeful where I am coming from on this might make some sense though too. Thanks again dear sister. And blessings
I am responding to your comment and please understand that this is my own personal response and isn't implied that anyone has to agree with me, but as I do respond, please know that this response is not meant to demean your views nor as a rebuke to what you have said.
This is going to be long and I may get push back for what I say, but I don't mean this to upset anyone and nobody has to agree with me.
Much of this is from the Bible, and from history that anyone can look into for themselves.
That said, this is how I feel about your assessment that you have provided:
First of all, you often use the term, Reformed church, or Reformed camp.
I am not a Bible scholar and I have not had in depth education in theology or religion. I read my Bible and consider that everything God wants us to know is in there.
I like to read. I have done a lot of reading over the years and most of it in subjects that get my attention and when I want to know more, I search and I read.
I like to understand how things came about and the origins of some things.
I think history was my favorite subject in school.
While there's Always been a remnant of true believers in the church, as a remnant of the church, it was a minority, and faced a lot of persecution because of their faith.
The Roman Emperor Constantine was not a good person but he had some sympathy for the Christians at the time and wanted to find a way to alleviate the persecution of Christians, but while allowing the church to have the freedom to practice their faith, he wanted to include his own pagan religion into the practice of Christianity.
The Roman Catholic Church was given birth to under the Roman Empire.
The RCC had a combination of Christianity and paganism.
The true remnant church still held on to the faith and continued facing persecution because they took the stand for the truth. Persecution has always existed for Christians from the founding of it.
The RCC had the support of the Roman Empire. The oppression and persecution continued against the remnant church. While forcing Catholicism on everyone.
Then comes a Catholic Monk named
Martin Luther. He was a Catholic but many of the practices under the Roman Catholic Church disturbed him.
He could see something not right in the RCC and it drove him to break away from it. He was a student of the Bible, so he did have some knowledge of the truth of what is in the Bible.
Martin Luther had a very good intention to restore biblical truth and did a good thing to break away from the RCC.
He began to teach from the Bible and speak against the RCC and it's embracing of paganism and false teachings. He did have intentions to restore biblical teachings.
The movement Luther started was a Reformed church, Reformed because Luther wanted to change the way the RCC practiced religion.
That reformation produced the Protestant church.
Protestant comes from the word Protest. The Reformed church protested the RCC and it's teachings, and it's complacency to the oppression and persecution of Christians that continued even after the fall of the Roman Empire.
Out of the Reformation and Protestantism came Denominations.
In the Protestant church there are several denominations and while many have the same foundation of theology, there's a little difference between them because all of them have a little difference in how scripture is interpreted and is why there are the different denominations.
The problem that came with the Reformation that produced the different denominations is that while Martin Luther broke away from the RCC with good intentions, he still took some, not all, but some of the beliefs in the RCC with him and those different beliefs still exist in many denominations today.
For example this is why things like cessationism exists in some churches, while other churches still believe in the spiritual gifts today. Luther was a cessationist and he also didn't believe God still has a plan for His Covenant people Israel and believed in replacement theology.
His beliefs continued being followed with some denominations up to this day.
Leaving denominations out of the picture, there has always been a remnant church and there is a remnant church today who has The Holy Spirit Who keeps The Church going to complete the great commission given by Jesus.
There are some of these remnant Believers within many of these denominations. Bible grounded believers.
Different denominations have some slight differences in interpretation of scripture but if the Bible doesn't support what is taught we don't have to just accept it as fact or truth.
Misunderstood theology doesn't necessarily mean it's a false religion, but it's always important that we take responsibility to look into the scriptures ourselves to see whether what we hear is true, just as the Bereans did with Paul's teachings.
I've heard some Pastors say that they had understood scripture a certain way and later found it wasn't accurate and changed their views. I wouldn't think they changed their views because of what someone else said, but by doing further examining of scripture their views changed.
We're always learning. Even schooled theologians are always learning. God is good to always help us understand when we seek Him for answers.
Something to consider is that the Bible doesn't change. Jesus teachings don't change. He's the same, yesterday and today and forever.
Scripture interprets scripture and the Bible makes things clear when we know what it says.
When we aren't sure about a teaching, or don't grasp the understanding of scripture, we can pray, and ask God to give direction, understanding, and discernment of scripture.
Jesus said if we who are evil know how to give good gifts to our children, how much more will God give good gifts to those who ask of Him?
I respect many good Pastors and teachers who don't always agree in theology. But what I look for is whether what they say is in The Bible.
Prophecy is in a class of theology of it's own. Fulfilled prophecy is simple to look at scripture and know if it's been fulfilled.
Future prophecy, unless Scripture is clear on it, we just don't know until it happens, when it's fulfilled prophecy, and all we can do is speculate, but speculation doesn't mean that it's a fact if scripture isn't clear on how those prophecies will happen or when they will happen. Taking things in consideration as a possibility isn't accepting it as a fact.
The Church is The Church, not Reformed, nor is it identified by Denomination or religion.
The Remnant church has never been non existent, it's always been, and The Church is identified by following the teachings of Jesus. We who stay grounded in Scripture and the teachings of Jesus as His disciples are the Church.
Jesus used the scriptures in his teachings and usually said
"It is written" referring to scripture.
While we can listen to what Pastors or teachers have to say, and it's very helpful in our learning, it's The Bible with the final Authority as being Truth.
There's a reason for the incident mentioned in the book of Acts of Paul teaching in Thessalonica and the Bereans were Commended, for searching the scriptures to see whether what Paul was saying was true.
This was the Apostle Paul, Holy Spirit inspired, and yet his listeners still checked scripture to make sure.
Their being commended shows that it's an example we should follow.
If we aren't sure about something and we aren't familiar with the Bible, we can hear someone's views, but we still want to look into scripture to see whether it's there to support those views.
It's important to know the Bible.
The Christian has been given The Word of God for everything we need and that God wants us to know that's beneficial to us. 2 Timothy 3:16
If we are aquatinted with scripture, we won't have to wonder what denominations are correct in theology. The Bible tells us what we need to know. Unfortunately there's a problem with biblical illiteracy because too many Christians only depend on who they listen to to get all of the teaching and don't read their Bible.
Our teachers and Pastors teach us and it's a spiritual gift given to them, but it's up to us individually to get into God's Word and allow the Holy Spirit to teach us too, yes even the deep things of God.
1 Corinthians 2:10
We can choose to listen to whoever we want to learn from, and go to church services to learn and be edified, but we must always be sure what we are listening to is from The Word of God, and not just take it for granted that it's from the Word of God. If we don't use the Bible how will we know?
It's our responsibility to make sure what we are taught is from God.
If it's not in the scriptures, we can conclude it's an opinion or speculation and not an absolute support from scripture, and leave it as consideration for a view, but we don't want to place our complete trust in an opinion based view. But how do we know if we don't read the Bible?
We want to Trust The Word of God.
God's Word is The Authority.
I said this was going to be long but didn't expect it to be this long.
This is my response. I hope it wasn't complicated and is helpful in some beneficial way.
www.youtube.com
• Why I Left Christianity - Rhett McLau... Gavin's book on Augustine: https://www.amazon.com/Retrieving-Aug...Truth Unites (https://truthunites.org) exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth. Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) is President of Truth Unites, Visiting Professor of Historical Theology at Phoenix Seminary, and Theologian-in-Residence at Immanuel Nashville.
)
