Calvary Baptist Seminary to host Haddon Robinson at Spring Ministry Forum
Thrilled to see our friends in Lansdale extend an invitation to Robinson. I have appreciated and benefited from his teaching over the years. I’ve appreciated his commitments to certain homilitical elements while defending a healthy variety of sermon “styles.” That is refreshing. I’ve been irritated at homilitical teachers (more often it is students, not the teachers) who believe that only one approach to preaching methodology is appropriate. I’ve noted a high percentage of these obstinate homilitcal theorists as being (1) unexperienced in any preaching ministry that has any longevity to speak of; and (2) are so miopic with an idealistic approach to preaching, they often fail over the long haul because effective preaching demands that the pulpit communicator can mix up styles of preaching for different “seasons” and/or challenges one inevitably faces in pastoral ministry.
All that to say, Haddon Robinson (in the words of my kids…..) “is the bomb!” I don’t think I can make it because of other commitments during that season, but if I lived anywhere near Lansdale, wild buffalo’s couldn’t keep me away.
Straight Ahead!
jt
ps - On a side note, I’m encouraged to see Calvary (just as they did with Dever) continue to reach out to variety of thinkers and leaders within fundamentalism and evangelicalism.
All that to say, Haddon Robinson (in the words of my kids…..) “is the bomb!” I don’t think I can make it because of other commitments during that season, but if I lived anywhere near Lansdale, wild buffalo’s couldn’t keep me away.
Straight Ahead!
jt
ps - On a side note, I’m encouraged to see Calvary (just as they did with Dever) continue to reach out to variety of thinkers and leaders within fundamentalism and evangelicalism.
Dr. Joel Tetreau serves as Senior Pastor, Southeast Valley Bible Church (sevbc.org); Regional Coordinator for IBL West (iblministry.com), Board Member & friend for several different ministries;
Fundamentalists have benefited from Haddon Robinson. I just quickly glanced at one fundamentalist university’s web site and noticed that they sold at least 2 of his books.
So would CBS be “out of line” for having a person whom fundamentalists have benefitted from, speak at a Pastor’s forum?
So would CBS be “out of line” for having a person whom fundamentalists have benefitted from, speak at a Pastor’s forum?
It is interesting when a fundamentalist institution invites a C/E as a keynote speaker
To say this is not change, is to ignore history.
Without evaluating the rightness, wrongness, or nothingness … it is change
To say this is not change, is to ignore history.
Without evaluating the rightness, wrongness, or nothingness … it is change
Not sure why having Haddon Robinson is news. I am struck, instead, by the invitation to Tim Lane of CCEF. Lane teaches a very different view of sanctification than most fundamentalists I know in his book “How People Change.” He teaches that in the same way Christ died for us as our substitute He lived as our substitute as well. If we identify with Him and contemplate sufficiently on the wonder of the Gospel we will become more and more like Christ apart from any effort on our part to obey Christ’s commands. It is a view that is commonly called Gospel Sanctification these days but it is simply a new form of old quietism. I won’t call it heresy but it is certainly less than “fundamental.”
Donn R Arms
[Donn R Arms] Not sure why having Haddon Robinson is news. I am struck, instead, by the invitation to Tim Lane of CCEF. Lane teaches a very different view of sanctification than most fundamentalists I know in his book “How People Change.” He teaches that in the same way Christ died for us as our substitute He lived as our substitute as well. If we identify with Him and contemplate sufficiently on the wonder of the Gospel we will become more and more like Christ apart from any effort on our part to obey Christ’s commands. It is a view that is commonly called Gospel Sanctification these days but it is simply a new form of old quietism. I won’t call it heresy but it is certainly less than “fundamental.”There’s just one fundamentalist view of sanctification? I had no idea fundamentalists were so united on the subject. My church uses “How People Change” and CCEF materials all the time, and I know many others who do.
Joe,
I’d like to urge a little bit more caution regarding speaking invitations. I am sure what you stated is only a partial view of the basis on which we would consider inviting somebody, but standing by itself as it does seems a bit hasty. It seems that basis needs to be more substantial than that fundamentalists have benefitted from a person’s work. I’ll apologize in advance for the hastiness of this, but here are some things that would concern me about that narrow of a reason for inviting someone:
(1) many men have provided something very good on one particular subject who nonetheless have very problematic views on a lot of very important issues. A great example of this surfaced recently with the TD Jakes issues—a number of folks pointed to a book by Greg Boyd as the best expose of Oneness Pentecostalism. That Greg Boyd’s work on that subject has benefitted many people does not eclipse the problematic views he has taught publicly on open theism, etc.
(2) many men have written excellent books early in their ministries and subsequently move on to views and positions which are anything but helpful, yet the books still are used because they were actually good. Benefit from those books and that person keep accruing simply because that is the nature of books. Certainly something has to be factored into the equation that balances older influence vs. newer influence (e.g. J. I. Packer before and after ECT).
(3) Using a book is simply not the same as inviting a speaker. Perhaps I’m on an island on this one, but I’ve never found it convincing that (a) if you use a book you’ve already established a relationship or (b) if you use a book you have no reason not to establish a relationship.
I’d like to urge a little bit more caution regarding speaking invitations. I am sure what you stated is only a partial view of the basis on which we would consider inviting somebody, but standing by itself as it does seems a bit hasty. It seems that basis needs to be more substantial than that fundamentalists have benefitted from a person’s work. I’ll apologize in advance for the hastiness of this, but here are some things that would concern me about that narrow of a reason for inviting someone:
(1) many men have provided something very good on one particular subject who nonetheless have very problematic views on a lot of very important issues. A great example of this surfaced recently with the TD Jakes issues—a number of folks pointed to a book by Greg Boyd as the best expose of Oneness Pentecostalism. That Greg Boyd’s work on that subject has benefitted many people does not eclipse the problematic views he has taught publicly on open theism, etc.
(2) many men have written excellent books early in their ministries and subsequently move on to views and positions which are anything but helpful, yet the books still are used because they were actually good. Benefit from those books and that person keep accruing simply because that is the nature of books. Certainly something has to be factored into the equation that balances older influence vs. newer influence (e.g. J. I. Packer before and after ECT).
(3) Using a book is simply not the same as inviting a speaker. Perhaps I’m on an island on this one, but I’ve never found it convincing that (a) if you use a book you’ve already established a relationship or (b) if you use a book you have no reason not to establish a relationship.
DMD
Thank you Dave. That is why I put the question out there. I agree.
Discussion