SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Christian College Pulpit To Be Yielded to Heretical Teacher.

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
CJaKfOrEsT
Member



Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia

 Re:

Quote:

crsschk wrote:
Some good points Aaron.

Went and read a bit of the linked article.
I disagree though with this:



Mike,

The link I posted, was to expose Campolo's, errors. I disagree with his statments, in as much as they are equally compatable with alcholics, and pedaphiles. They wouldn't wake up one morning and choose to become one, but few would disagree that they are still to be held accountable for their sin, regardless.

Keith Daniel mentions the fact that he was seen many soundly converted, who were homosexuals, never to backslide. This testimony directly contradicts Campolo's statments.

Quote:

Husley wrote:
Campolo would save the flesh of a person but leave the soul in chains.



Jeremy,
This is an awesome statment. You hit the nail on the head.:-)

The purpose of my statements were to say, either reject both totally, or consider both's "good points", that's all.


_________________
Aaron Ireland

 2004/9/20 3:28Profile
Denny
Member



Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 199
Virginia

 Re:

"...our own "Christian" marriages are plagued with divorce. The statistics pointing out that we are by degrees even worse than the unconverted.

Where is the outcry about that?
With what kind of believability are our words going to be taken when we won't even point the finger at ourselves and take as much initiative to right our own wrongs in this area? It is a strange phenomenon that we can glibly protest so loudly about the sanctity of marriage and only give a passing, quiet murmur to the rampant divorce within that so called sanctity.

Is it any wonder that we as a whole are seen as hypocrites? It's not an either or, but a both and.
Just don't see us as having any credibility until we show the world that being a Christian is to be divorced from the world not from our mates.

When will the masses of Christendom get the point that all sin is sin? And quit elevating one above the other."

Good point on divorce. Just remember that not all Christians fall into the "accepting divorce" category. Many in the "church" accept sin as normal, but we must loudly oppose all sin in the "church" whether it's accepted or not. It is less popular to oppose divorce and abortifacient birth control (the pill, IUD, Depo-Provera, Norplant)than to oppose sodomy because most of the "church" will at least acknowledge that sodomy is sin. Let's clean the temple while never remaining silent on the sins in the world or in our fellowship. There will always be those who don't obey the Scriptures and yet say that they are Believers. the world will always point at them to attack us. Those attacks won't stick if we remain consistent and don't try to make excuses for other "christian" sins.


_________________
Dennis Green

 2004/9/20 12:25Profile
CJaKfOrEsT
Member



Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia

 Re:

Quote:

Denny wrote:
There will always be those who don't obey the Scriptures and yet say that they are Believers. the world will always point at them to attack us. Those attacks won't stick if we remain consistent and don't try to make excuses for other "christian" sins.



Amen


_________________
Aaron Ireland

 2004/9/21 4:18Profile
Agent001
Member



Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

 Re:

I wouldn't call Tony Campolo a "heretic," unless the definition of heresy is anything that is different from your own opinion.

Campolo does not endorse the homosexual lifestyle as the original post implied. However, he is compassionate towards gays and show genuine concerns for them. His is a true "hate the sin, love the sinner" approach. Many Christians can say the same thing but they have never ever visited one gay person to show their concern (and they probably never intend to).


_________________
Sam

 2004/9/22 10:18Profile
jeremyhulsey
Member



Joined: 2003/4/18
Posts: 777


 Re:

I don't think I've yet called Campolo a heretic because of his stance on homosexuality (although others may have). I think I've been quite clear though about what motivates Campolo is not a genuine Christian motivation but a humanist one. That is the point on which I would consider him heretical.

As for not caring for or making an effort to reach out to homosexuals. Some of my best friends have been homosexuals. I made it clear about my position, yet I did it in love and, although they had a problem with my position at first, they could tell my concern for them was genuine. And the TRUE gospel I shared with them had an effect.

Where Campolo would say that a homosexual will always be one and, at best, should live a celibate life, I would say that all in Christ are new creations, the former things are past away.

In Christ,
Jeremy Hulsey


_________________
Jeremy Hulsey

 2004/9/22 11:25Profile
Denny
Member



Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 199
Virginia

 Re:

Quote:
I wouldn't call Tony Campolo a "heretic," unless the definition of heresy is anything that is different from your own opinion.



I don't care if Campolo agrees with me or not. The issue is whether or not he agrees with the Scripture. He clearly does not on numerous issues. Even if you left the homosexual issue out of the equation, there would still be an overwhelming amount of evidence that Campolo is preching "another gospel."

It is no "love for the sinner" to leave them in their sins and tell them that they can not be made new in Messiah. Campolo does just this with regards to the homosexual. While ministering at "homosexual" gatherings, I have more than once had active sodomites tell me that they had great respect for Campolo and thought that he was one of the best theologians around. They could say this because Campolo will not call them to repentance in the Biblical way. They were content in their sins and felt very "loved" by Campolo. I would rather that they saw a vision of God's wrath that will be poured upon them if they don't repent and "turn from" their wicked "acts" and "desires." We can "love" the world to hell or we can preach the gospel that calls all men everywhere to repent. This is Biblical love. I don't see it evidenced in the life and teachings of Tony Campolo. Let God be true and every man a liar.


_________________
Dennis Green

 2004/9/22 14:02Profile
Agent001
Member



Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

 Re:

Jeremy,

I am well aware that you have not gone as far as calling Campolo a heretic.

Quote:
I think I've been quite clear though about what motivates Campolo is not a genuine Christian motivation but a humanist one. That is the point on which I would consider him heretical.

I understand somewhat where you are coming from, although I question the accuracy of calling his position a "humanist" agenda and associating his concern for social justice with the "social gospel" in the earlier centuries. I personally think a legitimate concern for social justice is completely different from the Social Gospel movement in substance.
Quote:
Where Campolo would say that a homosexual will always be one and, at best, should live a celibate life, I would say that all in Christ are new creations, the former things are past away.

There is no definitive study that overwhelmingly prove either of these positions. In fact, I agree with Campolo, in that I think the debate about whether homosexual inclinations are inborn (which is scientically controversial and scripturally not explicitly discussed) is not necessary at all, because even if Christians grant that there are genetic factors leading to homosexual inclinations, the only biblical option for such people, if they become Christians, is to live a celibate life.

I realise that both issues discussed here could open a whole can of worms, but I think we could at least agree that "heresy" would be too strong a word to use here.


_________________
Sam

 2004/9/22 14:58Profile
Agent001
Member



Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

 Re:

Denny,

Quote:
The issue is whether or not he agrees with the Scripture. He clearly does not on numerous issues. Even if you left the homosexual issue out of the equation, there would still be an overwhelming amount of evidence that Campolo is preching "another gospel."

I have yet to see the "overwhelming evidence" of him preaching "another gospel." Care to enlighten me? :)
Quote:
It is no "love for the sinner" to leave them in their sins and tell them that they can not be made new in Messiah.

I don't think Campolo ever said the homosexuals could stay in their sins in order to be Christians. He calls them to live a celibate life, which is an expression of the willingness to obey God's renunciation of homosexual practices. That, I submit, is a call to repentance ([i]metanoia[/i] = a change of mind, a turning away from sins to God).


_________________
Sam

 2004/9/22 15:06Profile
jeremyhulsey
Member



Joined: 2003/4/18
Posts: 777


 Re:

Quote:
There is no definitive study that overwhelmingly prove either of these positions.



2 Corithians 5:17 Therefore if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all thing have become new.

Well, I believe in the final authority; the Word of God. I'm not waiting for psychologists to say it's right ;-).


_________________
Jeremy Hulsey

 2004/9/22 15:12Profile
TheophilusMD
Member



Joined: 2003/12/1
Posts: 124
New Jersey

 Re:

Quote:
There is no definitive study that overwhelmingly prove either of these positions. In fact, I agree with Campolo, in that I think the debate about whether homosexual inclinations are inborn (which is scientically controversial and scripturally not explicitly discussed) is not necessary at all, because even if Christians grant that there are genetic factors leading to homosexual inclinations, the only biblical option for such people, if they become Christians, is to live a celibate life.



The issue here is not about genetics, bents or dents but rather of sin. If we were made new creatures then why is celibacy the ONLY biblical option. Can they not marry and live as heterosexual males? Is it impossible for God to give them a changed heart? Besides, what's the difference between a heterosexual man whose heart is full of adultery and a homosexual? It all boils down to sin. God can change both despite of our ideas to the contrary.


_________________
Rey O.

 2004/9/22 15:28Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy