When someone tells you, "God is bigger than doctrine," it is a good indicator that they are about to assert something that contradicts His truth.
Author: David Kowalski
David has worked as an English teacher (Abeka), high school administrator (ACE), in-school-suspension teacher (public school), Associate Pastor (two Assemblies of God churches), Senior Pastor (two Assemblies of God churches), and Bible College Professor (Global University).
I wrote the following, satirical piece a few years ago while concentrating my studies on postmodernism.
Recovery and repentance are not complementary models; they are contradictory ones. In one we see ourselves as victims of a disorder and in need of therapy from a professional. In the other we see ourselves as as willfully guilty of sin we must turn from with the power that comes only from God's Spirit.
External circumstances and problems do not harm marriages; only arguments about these things do.
Recently I was asked about my thoughts on the difference between cataphatic and apophatic theology. I expressed serious concerns about the way apophatic theology has often been presented.
Theologians are divided on whether the word "paradox" should be used in connection with Christian teaching, and the issues involved are important ones that encompass more than mere disputation about words. I say there are no real paradoxes in Scripture.
It is just not "cool" to believe in absolute, propositional truth these days, but the funny thing is non-propositionalists communicate this in propositions!
To make complete disciples we must attend to the whole Word in scriptural proportion.
The New testament is filled with reminders that sanctification is of the Holy Spirit and that the life we live is one of expressing what Christ has worked into us.
God relates to His people with the tenderness of a father toward his daughter.
Christ-like love is not seen in a momentary show of emotions.
What was once a time for teaching has largely become more of a time of fellowship falsely labelled teaching.
Princianism is a blend of semi-Calvinism, New Thought, Quietism, and Sandemanianism that falls outside the boundaries of biblical and historic orthodoxy.
The wording of the Nicene Creed has thus been a standard part of historical orthodoxy. To reject its wording is imprudent and leaves the door open for heresy. I believe the wording of the creed is both biblical and wise.
I find the portrayal of the meeting to be a microcosm of revival movements in particular and church life in general. Where would we place ourselves in the picture?