Archive for July 7th, 2007
Titus, focus on doctrine…
How would you like to try to solve church problems among perpetual liars, evil beasts, and continuous gluttons? It probably wouldn’t be the first choice that comes to my mind when contemplating future ministry. But let’s face it — God has not called us to simply teach the taught — to gospel the gospel-ed — to train the trained. The task of Titus was daunting discipleship and church organization among a shameful people — his strategy, as delineated to him by Paul, was founded upon a deep trust for God, his Scripture, and the sound doctrine which flows thereafter.
Paul uses the word, “doctrine” at least four times in his short letter to Titus. I would like to highlight the first one in this post.
First usage: 1:9
Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
Anyone have some soap for Tony’s mouth?
I can’t believe I missed this post over at Apprising Ministries. The national coordinator for the Emergent church is apparently having troubles with orthopraxy (proper practice). Apparently, TJ dropped the infamous f-bomb in reference to the Bible.
“The Bible is an ______ing scary book.”
Does anyone see it ironic that the man who insists that orthodoxy (right doctrine) is identical with orthopraxy (right practice), can’t seem to get either straight?
Tony Jones: orthodoxy = orthopraxy?
Tony Jones, national coordinator of the Emergent Village, presented this paper at a theology conference at Wheaton college.
It is not my intention to take a flame-thrower and attack a “Tony straw man.” I have read the article twice and have tried to understand what exactly he is saying. That being said, here is a quote from page 24 of his paper:
You have heard it said that the emergent church values orthopraxy over orthodoxy, but I say to you, if orthodoxy is an event, then another veil has been torn. There is no difference between the two. “Orthopraxy,” as my friend Dwight Friesen calls it, is the dialectical tension in which these two poles stand. Let me put it more boldly: there is no orthodoxy without orthopraxy. It doesn’t exist. People may talk about it, but they also talk about unicorns.
There is no song until it’s sung — just words and notes on paper. There is no strike until it’s called by the ump — “It ain’t nothing till I call it.” And there is no orthodoxy until it’s lived.
If you don’t know what orthopraxy is, that’s ok. In a nutshell, it’s proper practice, i.e. works. Read the rest of this entry »
