I recently suggested that Roger Olson is a relic of liberal Southern Baptists. He recently confirmed my analysis
A personal, illustrative anecdote. When I enrolled in an evangelical seminary in 1975 it did not have a statement on inerrancy and, to the best of my knowledge, none of the faculty believed in biblical inerrancy. They talked about biblical infallibility but distinguished that from inerrancy. They talked about inerrancy as a fundamentalist view of the Bible and preferred to adhere to the Bible’s full authority for faith and practice. This was a mainstream evangelical seminary, not at all to the “left” or influenced by liberalism. It did have a Pietist background, however, which inclined it toward a more generous orthodoxy (not a term coined by McLaren!).
After The Battle for the Bible was published, while I was still in seminary, the denomination’s pastors pressured the seminary to adopt a binding statement of the Bible’s inerrancy in the original autographs. The faculty were asked to sign it. I noticed that several of my professors who had criticized inerrancy in class signed it to keep their jobs. One resigned and went on to a stellar career in American and Canadian Baptist seminaries. The ethos of the seminary changed. A chill came over the classrooms and student-faculty lounge and chapel. At my graduation a fundamentalist pastor and radio preacher delivered the commencement address, much to the chagrin of most of the faculty and students.
After it was published, internet Arminians used to tout Olson’s Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities, as a definitive corrective to the “lies” which Calvinists circulated about Arminianism. Olson was the authentic of true Arminianism.
"They congratulate each other and give each other pats on the back for pointing out heresy or heterodoxy where it has not yet been recognized."
ReplyDeleteI suppose it would be better to be nice and allow heretics to have their way with Christ's church. What a disgusting article.
At least Dr. Olson appears to have noticed the widespread toleration of C. S. Lewis and Billy Graham among conservative evangelicals - something I've never understood.
My Bible study group last night tackled 2 Cor 6:14. The "do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers" passage has most often, it seems, been used to talk about how Christians are not to marry unbelievers. While this is wise council and perhaps a tangential message, we realized as we studied the context that Paul was still addressing the issue with those he calls the "super-apostles": false teachers who had come among the Corinthian believers. "Don't be unequally yoked" with those, he says, indicating them to be considered unbelievers because they are not doctrinally sound.
ReplyDeleteI suppose it's no use trying to convince Olson that it is unwise to allow unbelievers quarter in the ministry of the Church since he doesn't seem to believe that the Bible is necessarily true.
Olson also speaks against separation although holiness, by definition, is a type of separation. Though again, what matter is holiness to Olson if he doesn't believe the Bible to be authoritative?