There is a lot more to go, I’ve probably lost most of my readers by now, but I think it’s important for folks (especially in Sarnia) to see the circle this is going in. There are some pretty strong accusations and assumptions based on keywords that harry hears. I entitled this post the way I did because I find it fascinating how the term ‘Emergent’ still will disqualify you from some evangelical circles and discredit anything you have to say. You’ll notice Harry almost never answers my questions, and when he does the answers are scattered and nonsensical. He starts to come around later into the conversation, but for now you’ll have to follow along.
Hi Harry, thanks for your response. There is no rush at all, and if it is easier to hand write, then by all means, please do that as well.
I look forward to a response as I feel that I have responded to every questions that you have offered and I haven’t really heard much in terms of answers to my questions.
I am glad to hear you do not speak on behalf of People’s and in the same breath, I do not speak on behalf of theStory of the Free Methodist church. I see this as two brothers challenging each other to further seek the truth in Christ not as combatant theological positions heading towards a standstill.
A few quick responses to your latest.
1. I also believe in personal sin, repentance and relationship with Jesus. I just believe there is more to it than that. I believe that sin, repentance and relationship is also an all encompassing thing as well. When you read through Romans, Paul is making an argument that is a lot bigger than personal salvation as he speaks about ‘all men’. He is tackling a larger problem. Then in Colossians, he speaks of ‘all things. So I just hope you can see salvation and the redemption of all things as a something that all of humanity can look forward to (as well as personal salvation). Afterall, one of our duties of Christians is to proclaim this good news (that all things are being brought under the Lordship of Christ).
2. I do forsake sin. I encourage others to as well. I’m not sure why you think I don’t? Sin is not of God and we are a new creation so why go on sinning? I’m not sure where you got the impression that I don’t forsake sin? I also am not offended by your message. I am trying to show you that unbelievers are offended by your message and therefore your message is not reaching the ears that it should. And that is your problem that you should strive to fix, not the unbelievers problem. Street preaching is dead and it certainly won’t work downtown Sarnia. If you truely want to see people come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ then I hope you would actually want to join us.
3. I am not disgusted by the mention of hell. The Bible is full of the word (Actually six different words) for the word hell. I am more disgusted about how you interpret the idea of hell in the scriptures. I have written a number of posts exploring hell on this blog, you can click on these links to read more if you want to know more from where my views come from. But it has nothing to do with having a dis
Here is a sermon I wrote in 2009 on hell - http://www.nathancolquhoun.
Here is some conclusions I came to afer the studying I did
Here is a post I wrote in 2007 on Hell
Here is something I wrote in 2005 on the issue
Here is the answer I give to some folks about hell from one of my favourite authors on the parables
I hope you can still explain to me why you think the Bible is the Word of God and not Jesus (as this is what the Bible says)? The Bible never gives itself the term Word of God, so I don’t know why you do. Or if you think it is both does that mean you think the Bible is God? Your logic doesn’t ine up.
In answer to your earlier questions In answer to your question.
1. I believe in Jesus as revealed in the Bible. The same Jesus as you.
2. I do believe the Bible is God breathed (in the way that Adam is God breathed), I do not believe the Bible is inerrant or infallible.
I think you and I believe in the same Jesus. I think you and I just have very different ideas of what Jesus was doing, saying and meaning when he showed up and died. I’m not sure why you would think I believe in a different Jesus? Is it only because we interpret Jesus’ actions and words differently?
Thanks Harry, looking forward to a response by hand or on e-mail.
Hi NathanSo finally here is a portion of all I want to say [ more info. in future ] concerning our theological differences.Yes, we are often using the same lanquaqe , but with differant meanings.It has all to do how we understand Scripture.You obviouly interpret it quite differently.Regarding your website, i noticed you are associated with the emergent church with the more prominent spokesperson Brian M’Laren who in most evangelical circles is known as a false teacher as he and others of your movement [to which I also noticed] distort and twist the Bible to what you all want it to say, rather then let it speak for itself.Be warned by the apostle Paul as He writes in Galatians I;6-9.Nathan there many more verses in the Bible of severe warning for tampering with God’s Word that of eternal damnation.So please Nathan and all your parishioners reconsider your belief asking God to reveal His perfect will as to what the Bible says, with a sincere teachable mind.Remember what I said you can’t afford to be wrong,if we fundamental Christian are in error like discovering there isn’t any Hell we haven’t lost a thing and still join the emergent and all the other faiths in your version God’s restored kingdom.One striking fallacy is the emergent belief that Jesus is infallible and inerrant, but not the Bible.But it’s only by the Bible that we can know anything at all about Jesus,even to His inffalibility. But according to your mistrust of Holy Writ how can you be sure He is infallible? Maybe He is fallible, since you believe the Bible can’t be trusted?How do you know what is true and what is not?What is your authorative voice,if not the Bible?How can you be so certain our gospel presentation on Christina St. is wrong and your’s right?In next correspondence I hope to explain how you can know for certain the validity of Gods Word and the assurance of all that it records beyond a shadow of doubt.Now to respond to some of your inquiries of past correspondences as to my statement that I believe also the Bible is God breathed, but not as Adam breathed to life, where Adam was released and set free to make his own choices-even to sin or not.The authors of Scriptures were not given that option but were supervised from beginning to the end of their epistle record only what God wanted.Then you raised the question how I could claim all of the Bible was accurate when the statement of 2Peter1;21 was before the New Testament was written yet.Maybe you have a point there.I’m not an apologist as a Josh Macdowell,Lee Strobel ,Norm Giesler and others of the Christian faith but might offer some rudimentary knowledge on the subject.At this time I recommend to obtain Josh Macdowell’s book ‘ Evidence that demands a Verdict’.
Nevertheless I would suspect NT are also inspired as all the authors accept a few were all eyewitness to all that Jesus did and hearers of His audible voice, and these prime witnesses recorded accurately as attested by meticulous Luke.
Then consider the continuity and how both OT and NT complement each other.
As to the command of Jesus for the young rich ruler to follow Him that was a command for him alone not applicable to all even as Jesus called each of the 12 disciples to follow Him spiritually and [different from us] physically as well.
We are not to take verses out of context but take it in balancing all of the Bible,something the emergent church fails to do.
But what Jesus does require from all of us is to repent of our sin and receive Christ as Lord and Saviour [Matthew3:2 : Luke 5:32].Repentence is a prerequisite for entering God’s Kingdom.I sense in the emergent churches repentance is more of an option.the reason I suspect that is because of your whole concept of the restoration of all things or Gods Kingdom.
Nathan could you fully explain this restoration theory? How is it brought about?What goes on in it?Who,s all included-even unrepented sinners?Are you actually advocating universalism where we will all be one happy humanity to live happily ever after,as John Lennans song ‘Imagine’-no Heaven and no Hell.If that,s the case then why would anyone need to ever get right with God or repent?
Isn’t that the exact reason the gospel according to Jesus isn’t preached in the emergent?
How do you reconcile universalism with the death,burial, and ressurection of Christ?The two don’t mix and Christ died in vain if your view is correct.
- Introduction: What To Do with Street Preachers in Downtown Sarnia
- Asking Them To Leave: Conversation With a Street Preacher Part 1
- Relationship over Preaching: My First Response to the Street Preacher Part 2
- Conversation with a Street Preacher: Part 3 And If I Can Accept The Trinity, Why Not Anything Else?
- Conversation with a Street Preacher: Part 4
- You Can't Afford to Be Wrong - Conversation With A Street Preacher Part 5
- Revealed Truth is Not the Bible, It's Jesus - Conversation With A Street Preacher Part 6
- Humans Would Never Publish The Bible: Conversation with a Street Preacher Part 7
- Street Preacher Survival Guide: A Downtown Sarnia First Friday Installation
- Part 8 - I Noticed You Are Associated With The Emergent Church
- Part 9 - Maybe We Both Can't Afford to Be Wrong
- Street Preaching Debate on Moody Radio