Quote:
Originally Posted by Amos
I doubt if anyone but a few old timers remembers this, but way back on NFCF, we discussed Dan Scott and the probablility that he would be pastor of Christ Church some day.
Some of us then tried to tell the optimists that when Dan Scott got firmly in the saddle, his fascination with things Anglican, which he was repressing at the time, would crop back out.
It looks like we were right.
|
I haven't looked at this thread today and have only caught up to page 5 but wanted to respond to this post before crying myself to sleep at the thought of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid now having bigger majorities and a partner in the White House.
I said back then and say now that you guys are mistaken in your belief that Dan wants to take the church to be a dry Anglican one.
You are confusing him not being a strong Oneness advocate with him being a liturgical Anglican.
He is more "pentecostal" than any of the other pastors that have been at CC the nine years I have been here.
The Anglican group he is ordained with is a charismatic one. He preaches and teaches at length about the need for people to have a supernatural experience with God, etc, etc.
You can legitimately gripe all day long that he is not as strong as you would like on Oneness but L.H. Hardwick gets the same rap because they don't condemn trinitarians to hell or think a different view from the godhead or baptism from the Oneness view is salvational. However it is just flat wrong to intimate DS promotes some sort of formal Anglican worship and style of church. He very much believes in the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the gifts of the Spirit, etc. Of course he also believes in the fruit of the Spirit which is something not dealt with as much in Pentecostal churches in my experience.
Threaded Mode
