Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple
The "Apologetics" types are the worse. The more well studied they are the harsher they are is my experience. The rank and file believers will side with their leaders. There are always exceptions. I still have friends among them.
|
When I attended Western Seminary my apologetics prof was Gerry Breshears, co-author (w/Driscoll) of
Vintage Jesus. We had several friendly discussions about the oneness movement before and after his apologetics class. I learned from Gerry that the NorCal campus had hired Jeff Garner as an adjunct professor. In his mind (Gerry's), the argument is mostly a
semantic one, and in fact said he has no problem with Word pre-existant prior to, during and since the incarnation of the Son in Beth-lehem. Gerry is the head of the Theology Department but I don't know for how long!
The book,
Vintage Jesus, without exception, is one of the most Jesus-glorifying books I've ever read, with the exception of an off-handed two sentence cut and paste from Walter Martin's Kingdom of the Cults slamming Oneness. I emailed Gerry about the ad hominem statement concerning (all) oneness believers, and his exact words to me were, "It should have never made it into the book", and said the biggest difference he saw with traditional pentecostal "trinitarians" and "oneness" is SEMANTICS. He asked me (this was 5 or six years ago) if I thought the two groups would ever reconcile. I expressed my doubts they would, because there are hardliners on BOTH sides.
I hope Mark Driscoll can allow a real dialogue to happen...but even if he pulls it off there will remain those trinitarian hardliners that can't shake their Dallas Theological Seminarian roots. They will attack anyone not willing to use the term
PERSON describing Father, Son and Holy Ghost as their own litmus test, much like Oneness people use Jesus' name baptism as their's.
Threaded Mode
