. . . is Wayne Grudem. Well, not quite true. The most annoying theologian is Peter Ruckman of the Pensacola Bible Institute, and I have read some of his stuff. I’ve also read articles by Grudem, and I wouldn’t come close to excluding him from Christianity, so I guess I have read him and he’s not the most annoying. So how about I wanted a provocative title?
When there’s someone I really don’t want to take the time to study seriously, it’s nice to have someone else, whose reading ability I’ve come to trust in the blogosphere, take a look. And that is what Dave Warnock has been doing. The first item was Responding to provocation, and the second Starting to understand connections. I am substantially in agreement with Dave on these things. It might also be a good idea, of course, to read the original interview, starting here.
Like Dave, I believe the connections can be broken at any point. I discuss inerrancy here and I have some thoughts on gender language and translation here.
Later today I will be posting on salvation and particularly on the question of who will be saved and whether we can know. I’m also going to respond to one point in the third part of Adrian’s interview with Wayne Grudem, [update] which I have now posted here. Three recent posts of mine are also relevant, The Danger of Unchanging Truth, And I’m not . . . , and Truth, Pluralism, and Absolutism. None of these respond directly to Adrian Warnock (not to be confused with Dave) and Wayne Grudem, but they do relate.
[...] Methodist Blogroll « The Most Annoying Theologian I’ve Never Read [...]
[...] Note: See my previous comments on this interview series starting here. Most of my comments are not so friendly as these. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
[...] Thoughts about conceptual idolatry have been nibbling at my consciousness as I follow the interview that Adrian Warnock is conduting with Dr. Wayne Grudem (latest entry (#7) here with links to the previous installments) along with the emphasis on male representation, the fear of “feminization” and other interesting aspects. I’ve responded to some of the points along the way (starting with The Most Annoying Theologian I’ve Never Read), but I think conceptual idolatry is the key point. [...]