Last night at the Shepherd’s Conference 2008, Dr. John MacArthur ripped into the evangelical trend of engaging in conversations and seeking common ground with false teachers.
The campus is still smoking this morning over the issue.
Just look at Phil Johnson in his sunglasses (hilarious) and in the shade over at the “Scholar’s Desk” right now (8:00-9:00 am); he is tearing apart the fallacies of The Emerging Church.
Jesus in Idaho Falls 
Where is the picture of Phil Johnson?
I wonder what LDSTalk Tim will say….
Finding common ground: Isn’t that what St. Paul tried to do in Acts 17:22-32?
Obviously, no approach is appropriate all the time. There is a time to attack heresy and a time to seek consensus (sometimes as a preliminary to attacking heresy).
LDS Anarchist, our photographer, Chris Leavell, missed the kodak moment this morning. It was classic. Phil in his limelight persona.
Yes, Brian J., your question is a valid one.
Here are heart questions that I need to pursue sometime in the future on HI4LDS
What is a false teacher? Who is the scoffer? Who is the lover of money? etc.
In application for today, who would be the religious Pharisee deserving of the greater condemnation?
What group of people did Jesus throw down the gauntlet with?
In religious conversations/confrontations, did Jesus bring to the table resentment, utter disgust, and the declaration of complete destruction to a false religious system that opposes his truth proclamation?
Greg, the message in Acts 17 did not alter. It carried the absolutes of the gospel. Paul did not tweak the essence of the message to appeal to the fallen nature of the philosophers.
Tomorrow, Phil Johnson will be using Acts 17 as the text for his general session. Mark Driscoll up at Mars Hill in Seattle, Washington goes wild with this text.
“Contexualization of the gospel” is the coffee house buzz phrase; and in American evangelicalism, it spins and swirls and steams in a hundred different directions.
Catch the live streamline internet video, tomorrow. Should be highly provocative.
Todd:
In general, I agree with that, but the reference to humanity in general as “God’s offspring” is questionable, at least, on that ground.
At the same time, the gospel can always be presented in either a more adversarial way or a less adversarial way without accomodating patent falsehood. As I stated previously, I think there is a time and a place for both.
http://fide-o.blogspot.com/2008/03/discussion-of-contextualization-at.html
I wonder if the reason that Jesus was allowed to “throw down the gauntlet” is because he was supernaturally aware of everything about his various audiences and was, therefore, a great judge of who needed a horse-whipping and who didn’t.
Since none of us can claim his supernatural powers of discernment, perhaps none of us are justified in throwing out denunciations.
Could it be?
Seth, but we can be bold and courageous with the words of Jesus in scripture.
And that would be both radical (and loving) in America’s religious climate today.