SUMMARY:
Church. If we do not stand here, we will not be able to stand anywhere.” I totally agree. If we do not stand on the straightforward, literal (and scientifi cally sound) history of Genesis, then we will not be able to stand anywhere. We know that liberal theology has already gained control of the church when its leaders compromise the authority of Scripture to accommodate fallible man’s theories about the past.
IN an article *1 published on the “Anglican Mainstream” website, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen continues his struggle against the tide of liberalism threatening to engulf the Anglican Church.
In the article Jensen challenges the secularists and the theological liberals on their view of human sexuality and in doing so calls the Church back to the authority of Scripture.
Concerning liberal attitudes towards homosexuality, he observes, “We are on a slippery slope.
Sin is being redefi ned through this issue of human sexuality.
If we weaken on the nature of sin, we weaken on the nature of the identity of the saviour from sin.”
Jensen is quite correct to identify the root problem of liberal theology as being a rejection of the authority of Scripture.
As he says, “The issue before us is the concrete form of the question of God’s authority ... It is therefore about the authority and clarity of scripture which is the way God exercises his authority over His church.”
It is therefore both ironic and sad that the observation has to be made that Jensen himself is guilty of rejecting and undermining the authority of Scripture in an area that is foundational to the gospel and to our understanding of the nature of sin.
However unkind it may sound, it must be said that until he returns to orthodoxy in his understanding of Scripture then he will remain part of the problem rather than part of the cure.
All his good work in challenging theological liberalism will ultimately fail unless the foundational problem is addressed. *2
Peter Jensen is a theistic evolutionist.
In an interview *3 in The Bulletin magazine he claims that faith and evolution are compatible.
He says he has “friends that are scientists, who are what you might call theistic evolutionists.
They believe that God has created the world using the evolutionary process.”
He criticises those of us who believe in a literal Genesis saying that “There are those that take that point of view,” he says, “and I respect them, but I think they are wrong ... they are not reading the Bible correctly, and they do not need to come to the conclusion that they have come to.” He even says that he’d be concerned if intelligent design were taught in the Anglican sector schools, at least in science classes. Even the reporter observes that Jensen’s approach on the creation/evolution issue is “positively liberal”!
Why should the world (or for that matter theological liberals) listen to a church that says that we must understand biblical passages dealing with human sexuality literally, but that we should not believe the Genesis history as literal?
How can Jensen defend the nature of sin when the compromised theory of theistic evolution completely undermines the foundation of sin?
How can he appeal to the “clarity of Scripture” whilst claiming those of us who adhere to a clear meaning of Genesis are “not reading the Bible correctly”?
In the “Anglican Mainstream” article Jensen concludes with the comment that “the efforts of liberal theology to gain control of the church have now gone too far and in human terms is endangering the whole gospel enterprise of the Church.
If we do not stand here, we will not be able to stand anywhere.” I totally agree.
If we do not stand on the straightforward, literal (and scientifi cally sound) history of Genesis, then we will not be able to stand anywhere.
We know that liberal theology has already gained control of the church when its leaders compromise the authority of Scripture to accommodate fallible man’s theories about the past.
Archbishop Jensen would do well to carefully consider the following insightful observation by R.C. Sproul:
We have seen countless examples of universities, colleges, and seminaries charted with a strong commitment to orthodox Christianity, only to erode fi rst into liberalism and ultimately to secularism.
Why did this happen?
There are multiple, complex reasons for the apostasy of such institutions, but one key factor is the desire of professors to be intellectually recognised in the academic world.
A slavish genufl ection to the latest trends in academia seduces our leaders into conformity.
One apologist once described this pattern as the “treason of the intellectuals”.
If the secular establishment ridicules such tenets as the inspiration of the Bible (and this includes the Genesis Creation account), then insecure Christian professors, desperate to be accepted by their peers, quickly fl ee from orthodoxy, dragging the colleges, seminaries, and ultimately the churches with them.
It is a weighty price to pay for academic recognition. *4
Footnotes:
1 “Is the issue of human sexuality as signifi cant as we are saying?” http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/Jan06/ jensen310106.html
2 By teaching the Bible undermining theory of theistic evolution, Anglican seminaries are ensuring the next generation of Anglican church leaders are susceptible to liberalism. ISCAST (Institute for the Study of Christianity in an Age of Science and Technology) a vocal theistic evolutionary organisation have held conferences at Moore College in Sydney and Ridley College in Melbourne.
3 “The Genesis code” The Bulletin magazine, October 19, 2005
4 R.C. Sproul, “Evangelical Lap Dogs,” Tabletalk, Nov. 2002.
About the Author...
Found this information useful?
Web Site by
S & R Cope in association with
Appeared in Issue 36 CETF 12.2 NR June 2006
"...contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" -- Jude v3
© Copyright 2006 Christian Witness Ministries, except where noted. All rights reserved
|
|
|
|
|
-Last revised-
Monday, October 09, 2006
