Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Towards a Doctrinal Hierarchy

This kind of thinking is necessary. I'm still chewing on these particular thoughts myself, but I'm glad to see this kind of analysis. It seems far too easy to find examples of the binary thinking and the non-thinking that Phil Johnson refers to in these paragraphs:
Some rather extreme fellows have begun a quasi-Christian cult located not far from where I live, and they actually teach that all truth is primary and every disagreement is worth fighting about and ultimately dividing over if agreement cannot be reached. Either agree with them on everything, or you are going to hell.

Others—equally extreme—argue, in effect, that "truth" isn't primary at all; relationships are, and therefore no proposition or point of truth is ever worth arguing about with another professing Christian. The latter position is gaining adherents at a frightening pace.
"Going to hell" might be a bit of a stretch, but replace those words with "a disobedient brother" and it begins to sound familiar.


Phil Johnson said...

BTW, I wasn't exaggerating when I said these guys believe you're going to hell if you don't believe everything they believe. They make the strictest fundamentalists look like gross compromisers when it comes to tolerating "error."

The lead article at their website is titled: "You Think You're Saved, But You're Not!"

If you have the stomach for it, here's their website:

a true church

And here's a website that chronicles my dealings with them:

answering the errors of "a true church"

(My website was originally an exact replica of their design. They've updated, so I need to revise it.)

Ben said...

I suppose I was projecting my experience onto yours. Or maybe assuming you were speaking a tad tongue-in-cheek. But of course you would never do that.

Ben said...

That's some pretty amazing stuff. I had no idea there was someone out there with the chutzpah to attack David Cloud for ecumenism.