This book is clearly a derivative of Matthew Vines’ book God and the Gay Christian.The author copied Vines’ phrase “clobber passages.” He is, for all intents and purposes, a disciple of Vines’ blasphemous re-interpretation of Scripture. This shows how large an impact Vines’ book has, and why Pastors and leaders in local churches need to be ready with answers to this kind of material. At least read Vines’ book.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
….is that the church he’d pastored fired him for it. The down side of that is what we’ve got to wonder; how much nonsense did he have to preach before people caught on?
A bigger deal yet is the simple question of what he learned. He’s a Fuller grad according to his LinkedIn page, and what he’s arguing in my opinion is that the nuances of Biblical and systematic theology don’t matter to him; he can prettily talk around the “proof-texts” we like to use, instead of seeing the whole picture that starts with the very nature of God. So are we to assume that Fuller leaves the issues of Biblical theology and systematics largely untouched, then? Or did he manage to pass his coursework without apparently learning anything? Or is he ignoring what he learned because it’s expedient to him?
Discussion
NewThe Fruit of Matthew Vines
This book is clearly a derivative of Matthew Vines’ book God and the Gay Christian. The author copied Vines’ phrase “clobber passages.” He is, for all intents and purposes, a disciple of Vines’ blasphemous re-interpretation of Scripture. This shows how large an impact Vines’ book has, and why Pastors and leaders in local churches need to be ready with answers to this kind of material. At least read Vines’ book.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
NewThe bright side...
….is that the church he’d pastored fired him for it. The down side of that is what we’ve got to wonder; how much nonsense did he have to preach before people caught on?
A bigger deal yet is the simple question of what he learned. He’s a Fuller grad according to his LinkedIn page, and what he’s arguing in my opinion is that the nuances of Biblical and systematic theology don’t matter to him; he can prettily talk around the “proof-texts” we like to use, instead of seeing the whole picture that starts with the very nature of God. So are we to assume that Fuller leaves the issues of Biblical theology and systematics largely untouched, then? Or did he manage to pass his coursework without apparently learning anything? Or is he ignoring what he learned because it’s expedient to him?
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.