Friday, November 25, 2005

Spiritual check-kiting

“I'll take 'Barthian' as a complement, since Steve Brown declares Barth to have been the most profound and influential theologian of the past century.”

“If Steve Hays thinks he's going to convince me to correct my views, he's heading perfectly in the wrong direction.”

“Please, Steve, Phil, Mr. Turk, et al, do us a favor: tell your "flock" not to read this blog, pronounce us anathema and go your merry way. The TR following is a tiny portion of the blogosphere.”

Jim Nicholson http://www.boarsheadtavern.com/

Hell is full of brilliant men. Hell is full of trendsetters. There’s no correlation between brilliance or influence and piety or orthodoxy. (Cf. 1 Cor 1-3.)

BTW, I just the greatness of a thinker, not merely in terms of raw IQ, but in terms of whether he gave the right or wrong answers to the big questions.

Karl Barth was much smarter than St. Mark. But Nicholson will have to forgive me if I prefer to follow the roadmap of St. Mark to the blind alley of Karl Barth.

Even on his own grounds, his statement is self-refuting, for if the “TR” following is a tiny portion of the blogosphere, then how much smaller is the Barthian following of the blogosphere?

I had no intention of convincing Nicholson of anything. Notice, thought, that said nothing to rebut my criticism.

Nicholson’s problem is simple enough: he has an unscriptural doctrine of Scripture. His doctrine of Scripture is at odds with the self-witness of Scripture. The logical position is either to believe the Bible on its own terms or else to disbelieve the Bible on its own terms.

Nicholson doesn’t believe in the Bible. Rather, Nicholson believes in himself, and forges the Holy Spirit’s signature to his counterfeit theology. For my part, I’ve never been of the opinion that spiritual check-kiting is one of the theological virtues.

It’s fine with me if Nicholson would rather be a Barthian than a Christian. I’ve never cared for theological moderates or middle-of-the-road denominations.

I prefer it when fence-straddling churches go liberal. I prefer maximum polarity, maximum exposure. I prefer it when closet unbelievers come out of the closet. That way there’s no confusion.

1 comment:

  1. he has an unscriptural doctrine of Scripture. His doctrine of Scripture is at odds with the self-witness of Scripture. The logical position is either to believe the Bible on its own terms or else to disbelieve the Bible on its own terms.

    Could you explain this? I'm not sure if I understand exactly where Barth's view of scripture contradicts the self-witness of scripture. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete