I have already made brief comment on this blog about Christ's sonship in the context of Islam, but now Wycliffe and SIL reveals a foreign worldview at work than the Scriptures in their translation of those very Scriptures.
In my mind they have been captivated by the vain philosophies of this world.
Read World Magazines fair report and a highlighting of the issues involved.
In Christ alone,
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
Sunday, September 4, 2011
There is an excellent piece in 'The New York Times' by Ross Douthat talking about an article by Ryan Lizza on Michele Bachmann's intellectual formation in the New Yorker.
Douthat correctly points out the weaknesses in the article and gives a much more balanced report on what Francis Schaeffer thought. For those interested in politics, Schaeffer's understanding in regard to Christian involvement in the world is so enlightening.
When I first read the Lizza article I was astounded he could label Schaeffer a domionist. If Schaeffer is a dominionist then every preacher who preaches on Genesis 1:26 and points out that mankind is commanded by God to have dominion over the earth would be a dominionist. However the label dominionist is a restricted theological label referring to those who say that man can work to make this world christian ready for Christ's return. And not just that but such an earthly kingdom should be governed by Old Testament law. It is a theological position best put forth by R J Rushdooney and people of his ilk like North. It seems to me that Lizza did not know the distinctions when writing his article.
Douthat rightly points out these deficiencies and in so doing gives Christians a helpful reminder of Schaeffer's worldview basis, involvement in culture and his exhortation to Christians, as well as indicating to journalists and reporters alike the importance of balanced and informed reporting.
I certainly hope more Christians will now through these articles be spurred on to reconsider Schaeffer.