A few days ago, Tim Challies reviewed the new John Eldridge book "Walking with God". I know quite a few men that have been quite enthralled with his other writings. Personally, I think the guys is dangerous. Much of his past writing has strongly insinuated that God doesn't know the future (open theism). I'm sure most of you reading this, have either read some of his other books or know someone who has. This new book though, seems to have gone from just some pretty lousy theology to downright craziness. You can read Tim Challies review here. By the way, if you want some really good laughs, read some of the comments people have posted to his review.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Walking with God by John Eldridge
A few days ago, Tim Challies reviewed the new John Eldridge book "Walking with God". I know quite a few men that have been quite enthralled with his other writings. Personally, I think the guys is dangerous. Much of his past writing has strongly insinuated that God doesn't know the future (open theism). I'm sure most of you reading this, have either read some of his other books or know someone who has. This new book though, seems to have gone from just some pretty lousy theology to downright craziness. You can read Tim Challies review here. By the way, if you want some really good laughs, read some of the comments people have posted to his review.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
john, i, too, wonder what God knows and doesn't. i've moved away from the classic view of "omnipotence" but i hesitate saying that He only knows what i'm going to do once i've done it. the reason we fall into or out of camps like "open theism" is because we think it has to be one way or the other - that both can't somehow be true. and i think that's just a limitation of the Western thinking we've lived in most of our lives - and here i'm only making an assumption about you.
as i've gotten older (mayber a tad wiser) i've seen how most things exist on a continuum instead of rigid either/ors. this flies in the face of most reformed / calvinist types who want everything to fall along distinct lines and be entirely explainable. one thing we all have to keep in mind is that any attempt we have to put the Infinite in finite terms is going to be lacking, and the only thing we should try to be certain about is that we're approaching the subjects - and each other - with as much humility as possible.
i never really liked Eldridge myself, but it's more because of his style and intent to wrap every guy in fresh-killed furs and stick him in a cave (if only figuratively ... but you never know).
as for T4G and the "band of bloggers," these views of mine made them refund my money and ask me not to come, without even the courtesy of a return email. i hope you develop some better Christian characteristics in your own life.
of course, i've been banned at challies and the pyros website, and i've learned to no longer waste my time at founders, so perhaps i need to heed the advice i've given you... :)
take care.
mike rucker
fairburn, georgia, usa
mikerucker.wordpress.com
oops - i meant "omniscience" - sorry...
You need to stop whining about the band of bloggers and T4G since this post didn't even mention either of those. Your views are emergent sounding and what you are trying to prove is beyond me. With your views and knowing the views of Band of Bloggers, why you would even want to attend is also suspect.
yeah, you're probably right.
promise me, though, you'll take two minutes and go read what "ad hominem" means, before you choose to use it again in judging someone else, ok?
mike rucker
fairburn, georgia, usa
Post a Comment