Skip to main content

John Z: Your respond is more than passing strange since:

1. it is your proposal that Walhout and DeMoor ought to be disciplined;

2. you chose to be an arbiter of what ought go into homes subscribing to the Banner;

3. regardless of your argument to the contrary, the material you cite is primarily sourced from position #1 Young Earth Science or Creation Science; and 

4. underlying your articulation of position #1 is that it constitutes the official position of the CRCNA whereby Walhout and DeMoor are judged to be in error and therefore need to be disciplined.

Dialogue means giving people who disgree with you the space to actually disagree with you.

The people who have disageed with you have been graceful in acknowledging the diferences and have not resorted to misinterpreting or twisting what you have said. 

As I have indicated in an earlier comment it is apparent that you love your Lord and his Word, but some of your brothers and sisters have expressed in threads on this topic in the Network and Banner that you are less than charitable towards them.

Yours in our Lord and Saviour  

There are brother's and sisters in Christ in the conversation thread "Tomrrow's Theology" who neither share your "particular take" on science and scripture. 

They desire, like you, to listen carefully to everything God is saying both in his original creation and his redemptive creation.

It's one thing to have a spirited discussion, and another to declare the author and publisher to be antathema needing strong discipline in a new conversation thread "How would the go about discipling a retired pastor who suggests and promotes changing many of the core CRC doctrines?"

If Walhout is to lose his ministerial credentials and DeMoor is to fired, what is to be done to those whose opinions differ from yours in "Tomorrow's Theology?"

Where is the charity? [1 Corinthians 13] This is what makes the conversation not fruitful.

Hi Philip W: 

What is at issue is not John Z's freedom to open a discussion on discipline, but his attempt to silence all discussion on differing points of view other than his own - even to the point of disparging Augustine and Calvin.

Secondly, is the grounds for disciplinary action against Edwin Walhout, et al. John Z. lays out an argument and cites source material which is grounded in position #1 Young Earth Creation or Creation Science [see above] with the underlying assumption that this is the official position of the CRCNA.

This is not to say that there are not people who agree with the Creation Science within the CRC, like John Z.

Nonetheless, there is a large body of people who are both scripture believing Christians and work in the field of science, et al. who disagree with position #1. 

"Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda"

 

Is possible that you are reading more into what article lays out as questions of enquiry? 

For the last two hundred years sections of the church have painted themselves into a corner over what in the end is nothing more than a theory. Some christians in the 20th century, like their opponents have bought into a form of postivism, fighting over the factualism of evolution. It's no different than individuals in the field of science treating empirical data as metaphysical statements.

It's unhealthy for the body of Christ. We've lost a sense of the mystery in God's creation that He will reveal in His good time, or not.

 

    We have one collection, a cause selected by the deacons. The collection for the budget is received either at a box at the entrance to the sanctuary, automated deposit, or in the budget envelope during the collection for the deacon selected cause. 

    Wendy, as read the comments I'm wondering whether the question being asked needs some clarification:

    1. Do you mean by special collections.... Those collections historically identified as second collections in contrast to collections for the church budget; and

    2. When individuals speak of the church budget... Are ministry shares still built into the congregational budget or have they been assigned as a special collection.

    3. As a matter of personal interest... Is it still part of the liturgy to have the deacons bring these gifts forward to the Lord in the worship service in prayer?

    If the following agencies are part of the agenda of Synod:

    Disability Concerns, Office of Social Justice, Centre for Public Dialogue (Canada), Race Relations, Safe Church, ServiceLink, World Renew/CRWRC 

    they would also seem to be core to the diaconal mandate and ministry.

    Kimberly provides a good link. Best to check with appropriate state or provincial legislation in the area of Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy legislation. Signed consent forms by adults and guardians should be standard practice.

    Posted in: What Counts?

    How does this move us forward as the body of Christ in understanding those who we were to disciple and now are strangers to the flock, and the alien who resides among us for whom Christ called us to the great commission?

    If we always disagree with each other and the typical "protestant" response is schismatic, i.e. to leave, who will be left to have a conversation with let alone engage in commual worship? When we will come to grips with building bridges between differences, assuming we all belong to the body of Christ." 1 Corinthians 12: 12 – 27 

    Is it possible to still bridge differences on stewardship and gender, etc. or have we as Christ bearers unconsciously imbided too deeply at well of post-modern individualism that we have walled ourselves into gated communities.

    How we engage with those who are troubled by their experience of church, as reported by Barna and Christianity Today:

    Isolationism. One-fourth of 18- to 29-year-olds say church demonizes everything outside church, including the music, movies, culture, and technology that define their generation.

    Shallowness. One-third call church boring, about one-fourth say faith is irrelevant and Bible teaching is unclear. One-fifth say God is absent from their church experience.

    Anti-science. Up to one-third say the church is out of step on scientific developments and debate.

    Sex. The church is perceived as simplistic and judgmental. For a fifth or more, a "just say no" philosophy is insufficient in a techno-porno world. Young Christian singles are as sexually active as their non-churched friends, and many say they feel judged.

    Exclusivity. Three in 10 young people feel the church is too exclusive in this pluralistic and multi-cultural age. And the same number feel forced to choose between their faith and their friends.

    Doubters. The church is not a safe place to express doubts say over one-third of young people, and one-fourth have serious doubts they'd like to discuss.

    What have we missed in both discipleship and the great commission?

    We want to hear from you.

    Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.

    Add Your Post