Protestantism in Action

On a Catholic-Evangelical Internet discussion group, the following definition of "evangelical" was earnestly offered in all seriousness in paragraph form. I have done nothing but take each sentence in the order in which it appeared and put it in the form of a list. I submit that when read in succession, these statements only serve to define the confusion that exists within Protestantism, evangelical Protestantism in this case. The emphasis added is mine.


"Modern evangelicalism comprises a plethora of doctrinal positions (mostly on secondary issues) and doctrinal traditions:

Covenant Theology (R.C. Sproul, James White, George Eldon Ladd, Kenneth Gentry, Robert Morey, Robert Strimple)

Dispensational Theology (Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, Robert Thomas, John MacArthur, Norman Geisler, Zane Hodges)

Neo-Theist (Gregory Boyd, Clark Pinnock) and others (although Boyd and Pinnock's reconstruction of the doctrine of God borders on heresy and places them on the edge of evangelicalism).

They hold differing eschatalogical positions On the fringe edges of evangelicalism are such televangelists as Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland and others, who mix their theology with that from metaphysical cults such as Christian Science, Unity School of Christianityand other Mind Science cults. For example, Copeland teaches that faith is a 'force' and words are the containers of that force and that man is able to speak whatever he wants into existence. According to the broad definition of evangelical as used today, Copeland and other televangelists are still considered evangelical because they *do* still (albeit still laced with error on occasion) teach things which are distinctive to evangelicalism alone.

Many counter-cult and discernment ministries such as Banner of Truth, The Christian Research Institute and Watchman Fellowship place such belief (and rightly so) outside the borders of evangelicalism because of this."
So, exactly how is it possible that an evangelical, with a straight face, claims doctrinal coherency?


More excerpts from Protestant dialogues that underscore the confusion that sola scriptura causes:
Protestant # 2 "I don't think there is confusion on how to run our churches. I feel absoultely comfortable, believe it is biblical how the church I attend is run. Truly, if I felt confused or believed it was run in a way that would go against Scripture -- where confusion abound, I would leave."

Protestant # 3:"At the Church of Christ (COC) we basically disagreed about whether we are saved by grace through faith apart from works or whether we are saved by grace though faith and works. I guess, COC has some similarity with RC theology; I believed (and still do) that human "works" do not play a part as the means to being saved. When I was at the COC I was preaching once a month. At the height of the controversy, the preachers actually had alternating debates and the audience was confused. Despite our other dialogues we could not resolve the issue.Because the leaders said, I could not preach on this issue, my wife and I decided to leave [emphasis added by me].
|back|