Posted by Pastor Disaster on June 01, 2002 at 16:39:25:
In Reply to: Re: the Campolos on homosexuality posted by Bob - the Alien on June 01, 2002 at 00:57:20:
: However, I noticed an interesting assumption within Tony Campolo's comments about which I would be interested to hear people's thoughts -- He states that his belief system is driven by scripture. Then he states that there are two kinds of scripture, and the 'kosher rules' within scripture were dropped when Jesus came around. So he only follows the other scriptures.
: Does anyone else see the dichotomy here? He follows scripture, unless an accepted spiritual leader says its not valid anymore? By that logic, scripture is secondary to invididual thought, (even if you limit it to the individual thought of spiritual leaders). When you take that to the next logical level, scripture should be analyzed and evaluated for its 'appropriateness' in today's society (again, even if only by accepted spiritual leaders). But he claims that is exactly what he does not believe.
I think you misunderstand. First off, Tony is talking about the rules of proper hermeneutics and biblical exegesis, which are paramount to correct biblical application. There are MANY issues involved in this, which I learned over years of study, and consequently will not try to condense in a paragraph here. Suffice to say that Tony does not pick and choose based on his own whims or on the basis of what other "leaders" think for him. (Nor do I.) He is famous for resisting all efforts to coerce him into the currently "acceptable" view on anything.
The next issue is the effect of the New Covenant in Christ on the Old Testament Hebrew law, which is a doctrine taught throughout the New Testament, and is not just something Tony made up to justify ignoring Old Testament scriptures or to apply them only as he sees fit. Methinks perhaps you have a predisposition to try and find fault in some areas?
I will not go further on this issue, because there is not a sufficient foundation I can build on here. I only ask that you please don't be insulting of our faith or try to devalue what we believe. I have not debated with you on anything to date, and was not planning to. It seems that a bit of clarification might be in order, though...
I do not agree with your idea of salvation ("we will still be forgiven if we acted in an honest attempt to live an ethical life") because it does not agree with what Jesus said in any fashion, and I don't think Jesus is a liar or a lunatic. I personally have chosen to trust him with my destiny, because I believe every word he said. My hope of salvation is based on his sacrifice and on his righteousness applied to me, which alone makes me worthy to come before God. He has revealed himself to me in power, shown me his love, and changed the course of my life. This I cannot deny. I love him.
I agree with unconditional love, forgiveness, grace, acceptance, and every other ideal we have talked about. But the origin of my views on these issues is my understanding of who Jesus is, who I am in Him, the work He has done, and the work I should do to honor him.
I offer this info not as a challenge, but in an effort to perhaps clarify the foundation of what we believe. We can love those who don't agree with us, and we do. But you probably won't find much support here if you should go on to try and invalidate the teaching of Jesus or his apostles.