What do you think?
Rate this book
Against the Protestant Gnostics
In this penetrating and provocative assessment of the current state of religion and its effects on society at large, Philip J. Lee criticizes conservatives and liberals alike as he traces gnostic motifs to the very roots of American Protestantism. With references to an extraordinary spectrum of writings from sources as diverse as John Calvin, Martin Buber, Tom Wolfe, Margaret Atwood, and Emily Dickinson, he probes the effects of gnostic thinking on a wide range of issues. Calling for the restoration of a dialectical faith and practice, the book points to positive ways of restoring health to endangered Protestant churches.
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1987
9 people are currently reading
186 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
May 5, 2016
This was a very helpful book, but, as some of the other reviewers have indicated, you need to sift through the garbage.
Most of his criticisms are well-founded. Although, Lee can see very clearly the gnostic tendencies within historic Protestantism, and within modern Protestantism in both its liberal and conservative branches, he is unable to perceive the leftist ideology that he unquestioningly assumes in his analysis. It's the very air he breathes. Though he lays out a clear biblical foundation for his attack on the gnostic elements in Protestantism, he'll just give a nod to Jesus' poverty in support of socialistic programs. He'll call opposition to communistic governments elitist because it denies the right poor people to have to rise up against an oppressive regime (pg. 208). Without realizing it, in arguing in this, he was representing the elitist pro-communistic zeitgeist of academia during the time when the book was written (in 1987). He also just assumes that women should be ordained to the ministry, but in order to believe that, he is following gnostic assumptions about the interchangeability of sex. Ironically, he's spiritualizing clear texts.
Overall, I would recommend it, but not without urging critical consideration.
Most of his criticisms are well-founded. Although, Lee can see very clearly the gnostic tendencies within historic Protestantism, and within modern Protestantism in both its liberal and conservative branches, he is unable to perceive the leftist ideology that he unquestioningly assumes in his analysis. It's the very air he breathes. Though he lays out a clear biblical foundation for his attack on the gnostic elements in Protestantism, he'll just give a nod to Jesus' poverty in support of socialistic programs. He'll call opposition to communistic governments elitist because it denies the right poor people to have to rise up against an oppressive regime (pg. 208). Without realizing it, in arguing in this, he was representing the elitist pro-communistic zeitgeist of academia during the time when the book was written (in 1987). He also just assumes that women should be ordained to the ministry, but in order to believe that, he is following gnostic assumptions about the interchangeability of sex. Ironically, he's spiritualizing clear texts.
Overall, I would recommend it, but not without urging critical consideration.
June 24, 2009
First, the not so good stuff. Lee is in many ways a typical liberal presbyterian. He rejects the infallibilty of Scriptures, allows for evolution, thinks women should be ordained and has numerous liberal political leanings.
Despite all of this, the book is a must read for anyone in ministry or teaching in a seminary or who just wants to how the American church got into its current predicament. Lee carefully lays out the various facets of gnosticism. Then he shows how the early church and the reformers kept from drifting into it. Then he gives a good bit of space to the rise of gnosticism in North America. Finally, he makes several suggestions as to how we can degnosticize Protestantism. Throughout he does a good job of showing how both conservatives and liberals in the church have adopted a gnostic mindset. One example he gives is the relationship between Billy Graham and Norman Vincent Peale. He asserts that despite one being a fundamentalist and the other being a self help guru, they both had gnostic underpinnings. Thus they got along quite well.
As I read I found myself re-evaluating my ministry to make sure I am not drifting into this type of mindset. I also found that the more I looked around the more gnostic our culture became. A very good read and worth the time. Just remember to filter out the garbage.
Despite all of this, the book is a must read for anyone in ministry or teaching in a seminary or who just wants to how the American church got into its current predicament. Lee carefully lays out the various facets of gnosticism. Then he shows how the early church and the reformers kept from drifting into it. Then he gives a good bit of space to the rise of gnosticism in North America. Finally, he makes several suggestions as to how we can degnosticize Protestantism. Throughout he does a good job of showing how both conservatives and liberals in the church have adopted a gnostic mindset. One example he gives is the relationship between Billy Graham and Norman Vincent Peale. He asserts that despite one being a fundamentalist and the other being a self help guru, they both had gnostic underpinnings. Thus they got along quite well.
As I read I found myself re-evaluating my ministry to make sure I am not drifting into this type of mindset. I also found that the more I looked around the more gnostic our culture became. A very good read and worth the time. Just remember to filter out the garbage.
May 15, 2016
This is one of those frustrating books where you find yourself agreeing with many of the observations and criticisms of the author, but disagreeing in detail with the proposed solutions to the problems be being addressed. The book is written late in the Reagan years, which explains many of the particulars under discussion and complaint. The Moral Majority movement has subverted evangelical church movements and the latest syncretism of church and state is in full swing. Because the country as a whole is turning to the right, adherents to a faded New Dealism are frustrated, in part perhaps because their own syncretism of church and liberal political causes is going away.
In the first half of the book it appears that any disagreement with the author will result in a person (whether preacher, layman or unbeliever) being labeled a Gnostic. There is much valid criticism of Church praxis and belief, but the charge of Gnosticism as such fails on many accounts. A better critique would have been to point out the then current failures of Christians and the Church, and to refer to Gnostic tendencies when actually applicable. Individualism and elitism are the main complaints discussed, but those do not always arise from a formal (or even informal) Gnostic world view. Perhaps like the distinction between formal Humanists (adherents to the Humanist Manifesto, version last) or practical humanists (who know nothing of Humanism as a formal position, but work out its precepts in everyday life) applies to Americans who seek self-improvement and those who believe they possess the true spark of divinity which must be recovered in the face of a failed creation.
The last part of the book contains the proposed solution to the crisis of the Church in America. The author is a Presbyterian minister and his solutions are those of the Mainline Denominations, see Mainline Protestant Denominations, such as return to formal sacraments, ritual, religious year, infant baptism, and preaching confidence in Christ. As a Baptist, the appeal to ritual feels suspect, though the appeal to communion of the saints (the Church) is valid in light of NT statements and early Church practice. The view of the Word is incomplete. Preaching the Word, under the unction of the Spirit, is essential. But the written Word, per se, carries its own weight, and is to be read and obeyed individually, as well as corporately. Appeal to a religious calendar is suspect in light of NT comments that no day is more important than another (and the early Church hostility to a formal Christmas season, for example).
The author also reflects his own smorgasbord of moral positions, which do not seem to have a common underpinning. He accepts, without discussion, women ministers, a qualified endorsement of infant baptism and liberation theology, opposition to abortion, formal church support for nuclear disarmament and saving the planet ecologically, acceptance of homosexual Christians (with no further analysis of their status), and strong defense of the family, but opposition to childless marriages. In other words, he appears to validate an even then outdated Ozzie and Harriet view of America.
Most of what Philip J. Lee advocates would benefit the Church, if coupled with a strong proclamation of the gospel, calling out from this wicked generation, persons will to follow and suffer for Christ by doing what he said, to wit, going to the poor, the sick, the dying and the prisoners with the unconditional love of Christ, and by openly declaring that the Kingdom of God is not of this world or age, but of the age to come and that human political solutions will not work and that no political party speaks for God, but most probably speak for the god of this age instead.
Only a recommended read for background for other studies. Not recommended to be read as a stand alone book.
In the first half of the book it appears that any disagreement with the author will result in a person (whether preacher, layman or unbeliever) being labeled a Gnostic. There is much valid criticism of Church praxis and belief, but the charge of Gnosticism as such fails on many accounts. A better critique would have been to point out the then current failures of Christians and the Church, and to refer to Gnostic tendencies when actually applicable. Individualism and elitism are the main complaints discussed, but those do not always arise from a formal (or even informal) Gnostic world view. Perhaps like the distinction between formal Humanists (adherents to the Humanist Manifesto, version last) or practical humanists (who know nothing of Humanism as a formal position, but work out its precepts in everyday life) applies to Americans who seek self-improvement and those who believe they possess the true spark of divinity which must be recovered in the face of a failed creation.
The last part of the book contains the proposed solution to the crisis of the Church in America. The author is a Presbyterian minister and his solutions are those of the Mainline Denominations, see Mainline Protestant Denominations, such as return to formal sacraments, ritual, religious year, infant baptism, and preaching confidence in Christ. As a Baptist, the appeal to ritual feels suspect, though the appeal to communion of the saints (the Church) is valid in light of NT statements and early Church practice. The view of the Word is incomplete. Preaching the Word, under the unction of the Spirit, is essential. But the written Word, per se, carries its own weight, and is to be read and obeyed individually, as well as corporately. Appeal to a religious calendar is suspect in light of NT comments that no day is more important than another (and the early Church hostility to a formal Christmas season, for example).
The author also reflects his own smorgasbord of moral positions, which do not seem to have a common underpinning. He accepts, without discussion, women ministers, a qualified endorsement of infant baptism and liberation theology, opposition to abortion, formal church support for nuclear disarmament and saving the planet ecologically, acceptance of homosexual Christians (with no further analysis of their status), and strong defense of the family, but opposition to childless marriages. In other words, he appears to validate an even then outdated Ozzie and Harriet view of America.
Most of what Philip J. Lee advocates would benefit the Church, if coupled with a strong proclamation of the gospel, calling out from this wicked generation, persons will to follow and suffer for Christ by doing what he said, to wit, going to the poor, the sick, the dying and the prisoners with the unconditional love of Christ, and by openly declaring that the Kingdom of God is not of this world or age, but of the age to come and that human political solutions will not work and that no political party speaks for God, but most probably speak for the god of this age instead.
Only a recommended read for background for other studies. Not recommended to be read as a stand alone book.
August 6, 2016
I bought this book on the recommendation of a friend, then it sat on my shelf for TEN years, intimidating me. I knew that once I buckled down and read it, as I finally did for my Lenten project this year, it would be worth the effort. It's actually more accessible than I expected - well organized, thoughtful, linear. Still not light reading, but doable for anyone interested in the topic.
The first section, Gnosticism in Conflict with the Faith, sets out to explain gnostic thought and practice, then clearly explains why it is heresy and a threat to orthodox Christianity. Lee then explains various ways that gnosticism has seeped into Christian belief during different times in history from the New Testament church, Catholics, Reformation, Puritans, and finally the North American Liberals.
Part Two, Gnosticism in Ascendance in North America, delves deeper into the characteristics of gnostic belief and how they manifest themselves in our theology, personally and corporately. He describes its signature attitude of despair, focus on "private, special" knowledge, posture of narcissism and elitism, and tendency to tempt its followers to deem the world worthless and seek escape.
The final section, Gnosticism within North American Protestantism: Results and Reform, is gold. Lee gives an excellent balance of "big picture" philosophy consequences of our current gnostic thinking (ex: the spiritualization of capitalism, rise of "born again-ism", our devaluing of children and people in the third world, the Church Growth movement) with specific manifestations (ex: individual shot glasses and Welch's grape juice for communion, pastors not having time to study or pray, failure to observe Good Friday, neglect of the ill and dying). He doesn't sugarcoat the severity of the problem, but it's clear that he loves the Church and his overall spirit is pastoral. The last (and longest) chapter gives many suggestions for reforming our current thinking and practice, which naturally flow from the rest of the book. I ultimately found it hopeful, even devotional, and will take many of his warnings and prescriptions to heart.
The first section, Gnosticism in Conflict with the Faith, sets out to explain gnostic thought and practice, then clearly explains why it is heresy and a threat to orthodox Christianity. Lee then explains various ways that gnosticism has seeped into Christian belief during different times in history from the New Testament church, Catholics, Reformation, Puritans, and finally the North American Liberals.
Part Two, Gnosticism in Ascendance in North America, delves deeper into the characteristics of gnostic belief and how they manifest themselves in our theology, personally and corporately. He describes its signature attitude of despair, focus on "private, special" knowledge, posture of narcissism and elitism, and tendency to tempt its followers to deem the world worthless and seek escape.
The final section, Gnosticism within North American Protestantism: Results and Reform, is gold. Lee gives an excellent balance of "big picture" philosophy consequences of our current gnostic thinking (ex: the spiritualization of capitalism, rise of "born again-ism", our devaluing of children and people in the third world, the Church Growth movement) with specific manifestations (ex: individual shot glasses and Welch's grape juice for communion, pastors not having time to study or pray, failure to observe Good Friday, neglect of the ill and dying). He doesn't sugarcoat the severity of the problem, but it's clear that he loves the Church and his overall spirit is pastoral. The last (and longest) chapter gives many suggestions for reforming our current thinking and practice, which naturally flow from the rest of the book. I ultimately found it hopeful, even devotional, and will take many of his warnings and prescriptions to heart.
November 7, 2017
Lee's thesis is that American Protestantism has become gnosticized, and has been for so long that we're saturated in it and hardly able to recognize orthodoxy from heterdoxy in many ways.
Gnosticism is a tendency, not so much a full-blown doctrine. We think and act like gnostics when we spiritualize the historic or material such that the factualness or materiality of life is either unnecessary or undesirable. For example, Lee stresses, especially toward the end of the book, that the Lord's Supper has been transformed from a weekly meal, made of a single loaf of bread and a communal cup of wine, into a token sampler of unrecognizable bread and a teetotaler's shot of juice.
The result of our gnosticized communion meal is that the power and meaning of it have been spiritualized away. How many of us don't care that we only "take communion" once a month at most? It is just stale bread and juice anyway, right? This is not as it ought to be, as Lee reminds us. There is true power and communion with the God of Heaven in this meal, and the meal has been so symbolized that there is nothing left--at least nothing to desire or transform.
We are gnostics when we transform the Word of God into a domesticated set of ideas to be believed, where the gospel is limited to the salvation of individual souls, rather than a transformed people and cosmos.
This is an important book, though it seems to me at least, insufficient. Lee is a liberal, at least in a 1988-way, as that was the date of publication. Today he'd be considered a conservative, which says more about our culture today than about Lee. Much of the book is too long on words and arguments that are not particularly compelling or persuasive.
The most important parts of the book are at the very beginning and the very end, where he makes his case for the fact of a gnosticized evangelicalism. It is a persuasive argument, and the reader realizes quickly that we are indeed gnostics.
This is an important topic that I hope others have, or will give more thought and attention.
Gnosticism is a tendency, not so much a full-blown doctrine. We think and act like gnostics when we spiritualize the historic or material such that the factualness or materiality of life is either unnecessary or undesirable. For example, Lee stresses, especially toward the end of the book, that the Lord's Supper has been transformed from a weekly meal, made of a single loaf of bread and a communal cup of wine, into a token sampler of unrecognizable bread and a teetotaler's shot of juice.
The result of our gnosticized communion meal is that the power and meaning of it have been spiritualized away. How many of us don't care that we only "take communion" once a month at most? It is just stale bread and juice anyway, right? This is not as it ought to be, as Lee reminds us. There is true power and communion with the God of Heaven in this meal, and the meal has been so symbolized that there is nothing left--at least nothing to desire or transform.
We are gnostics when we transform the Word of God into a domesticated set of ideas to be believed, where the gospel is limited to the salvation of individual souls, rather than a transformed people and cosmos.
This is an important book, though it seems to me at least, insufficient. Lee is a liberal, at least in a 1988-way, as that was the date of publication. Today he'd be considered a conservative, which says more about our culture today than about Lee. Much of the book is too long on words and arguments that are not particularly compelling or persuasive.
The most important parts of the book are at the very beginning and the very end, where he makes his case for the fact of a gnosticized evangelicalism. It is a persuasive argument, and the reader realizes quickly that we are indeed gnostics.
This is an important topic that I hope others have, or will give more thought and attention.
September 28, 2025
As other reviewers mentioned, where Lee is spot on, he’s spot on and where you can leave him, just leave him. His issues with capitalism, corporations, demanding that people be voluntold (by threat of violence) to donate their money to charity (taxes used towards social welfare), and passing that off as Christian virtue is interesting….
Where he’s good is his emphasis on leaving behind the Protestant emphasis on “religious experience”, which if taken too far you end up with Gnosticism. Sometimes I think he takes this too far…attacking some orthodox movements and at one point he comments that while scripture does mention being born again of spirit, “it only does once”, as if that negates it.
Protestantism can unfortunately have such an unhealthy, “it’s just Jesus and me” complex. “Jesus and I got this, I don’t need the church, I don’t need the body, I can read my Jesus book and the Bible and be fine.” What about the sacraments? What about the fact that Gnostics emphasized esoteric knowledge through spirituality? The Eucharist should weekly, central, and emphasized.
Where he’s good is his emphasis on leaving behind the Protestant emphasis on “religious experience”, which if taken too far you end up with Gnosticism. Sometimes I think he takes this too far…attacking some orthodox movements and at one point he comments that while scripture does mention being born again of spirit, “it only does once”, as if that negates it.
Protestantism can unfortunately have such an unhealthy, “it’s just Jesus and me” complex. “Jesus and I got this, I don’t need the church, I don’t need the body, I can read my Jesus book and the Bible and be fine.” What about the sacraments? What about the fact that Gnostics emphasized esoteric knowledge through spirituality? The Eucharist should weekly, central, and emphasized.
January 16, 2016
This is an important book. Its flaws, though not insignificant, do not take too much away from its argument. In sum, Lee persuasively distinguishes Orthodox Christianity from its Gnostic heresy, and shows that much of modern Protestantism resembles the former more than the latter. Where Lee goes wrong is 1) strangely identifying anti-Communist tendencies in the West with Gnosticism and sympathizing with Marxism, and 2) expanding his critique of Protestant Gnosticism so widely that virtually NO sin in the Church today is not made to somehow fall under the category of Gnosticism. In spite of these flaws, the basic premise of the book and its abundant evidence and analysis is enough to help any Protestant reader become more aware of his own Church's Gnostic tendencies and to prepare him to resist them.
June 3, 2014
This is an astounding book. My only complaint is that Lee is a stinking liberal. He likes Liberation Theology and Karl Marx, and thinks capitalism is evil. I can't understand his reasoning on that. All his arguments are Biblical except on that issue.
Other than that, this book is a fantastic critique of what passes for orthodoxy in our time. He shows that much of our practice and theology is driven by gnostic underpinnings. It's kind of scary to read quotes from Jonathan Edwards and Cotton Mather that make people out to be evil just because we're creatures.
Most of his solutions are sound. Except for the communism stuff. It's a great book for a liberal to have written.
Other than that, this book is a fantastic critique of what passes for orthodoxy in our time. He shows that much of our practice and theology is driven by gnostic underpinnings. It's kind of scary to read quotes from Jonathan Edwards and Cotton Mather that make people out to be evil just because we're creatures.
Most of his solutions are sound. Except for the communism stuff. It's a great book for a liberal to have written.
August 27, 2016
This book was an excellent read, Lee clearly pointed out the Gnostic influences within the Protestant Community. He approached this subject matter with concern, never did I pick up any harshness or condemnation in his argument. This book had been on my shelf for several years, but I am glad to have read it and as a result I am better informed for the daily work of the ministry. Every believer should read this book and help return the church to its original calling and emphasize.
That said, I am not saying that I agree with all that he presents nor the strong Reformed emphasize, but there is much that we can glean from his work.
That said, I am not saying that I agree with all that he presents nor the strong Reformed emphasize, but there is much that we can glean from his work.
May 23, 2013
I had to read this twice to get what Lee was saying. It's a very important book. It has opened my eyes to the Gnosticism in the Church. It's easy to see the Gnosticism in the culture--it blares at you from every billboard and Tv commercial--but we Christians are so steeped in born again theology and dispensationalist eschatology that we think its normal. It's NOT. Those ideas are historical aberrations. I wish someone would write a book like this for laymen.
September 17, 2007
Essential reading for the Protestant Mainline. Although I think his reading of Luther is unduly influenced by twentieth century Luther interpretation and less by Luther the medieval who sought to reform the Church (that is, the actual Martin Luther).
January 15, 2008
This is a remarkable book; it is the clearest and most thorough exploration of the current issues in the american church today. It will give you an opportunity to do a great deal of good, hard soul-searching about what you believe and why. Not an easy read, but a worthwhile one.
December 31, 2011
Read it twice years and years ago. Loved it.
March 2, 2020
I went in expecting this book to be one of dozens of others dissecting some problematic element of American fundamentalist culture. Instead I was pleasantly surprised to find that it is actually a more general critique of the entire development of the United States as a whole to an extent that its author seems afraid to admit himself.
The first two thirds of this book are a very clear headed attack on the rise of individualism and pseudo-gnostic views in the American evangelical mainstream. They discuss the the historical movement known as gnosticism and then trace its echoes in the theology of the medieval Cathar heresy and the eventually the non-conformist Puritans. What this book does particularly well though, is to show how the pilgrims' attitude toward the material world and their own bodies led to the American literary and economic challenges of most of our history. The struggle against authority, nature, ourselves, and even God that so pervades American culture makes so much more sense when seen as a response to our subconscious distrust of the external world. Furthermore, it was very interesting to see Lee connect this spiritualism to the rise of American Capitalism and the seeming contradictions between evangelical conservatism and the chaotic whims of the free market.
The third section of the book is largely trash. While there are some good ideas in it, somewhere around page 220 Lee just seems to lose the plot. He makes the claim that nuclear proliferation and gun rights are outgrowths of America's pseudo-gnosticism, and honestly it just seems to come out of left field. There are some fine bits here and there like his call for increased church discipline and more frequent communion, but those points are so bland that I feel like a youth group leader could have told them to me.
Altogether though, the first two thirds more than makeup for the ending.
The first two thirds of this book are a very clear headed attack on the rise of individualism and pseudo-gnostic views in the American evangelical mainstream. They discuss the the historical movement known as gnosticism and then trace its echoes in the theology of the medieval Cathar heresy and the eventually the non-conformist Puritans. What this book does particularly well though, is to show how the pilgrims' attitude toward the material world and their own bodies led to the American literary and economic challenges of most of our history. The struggle against authority, nature, ourselves, and even God that so pervades American culture makes so much more sense when seen as a response to our subconscious distrust of the external world. Furthermore, it was very interesting to see Lee connect this spiritualism to the rise of American Capitalism and the seeming contradictions between evangelical conservatism and the chaotic whims of the free market.
The third section of the book is largely trash. While there are some good ideas in it, somewhere around page 220 Lee just seems to lose the plot. He makes the claim that nuclear proliferation and gun rights are outgrowths of America's pseudo-gnosticism, and honestly it just seems to come out of left field. There are some fine bits here and there like his call for increased church discipline and more frequent communion, but those points are so bland that I feel like a youth group leader could have told them to me.
Altogether though, the first two thirds more than makeup for the ending.
January 19, 2025
This book was fascinatingly hard to categorize or pigeonhole. It covers a whole sweep of topics. It is neither conservative nor liberal. As a Lutheran, I especially enjoyed the insight into contemporary Reformed thinking.
It’s a pity this book is out of print. I would love to have a proper communal discussion about it.
It’s a pity this book is out of print. I would love to have a proper communal discussion about it.
March 7, 2017
Good read - orthodox in what's important. Orthopraxy is decidedly Calvinist.
February 20, 2021
An excellent and important read for discerning the creational disdain and Gnostic influence in Western Society and in Protestantism in particular. Without a good Creator who cares about all of his creation, we have no new resurrected bodies (finding ourselves completely "conformed to the image of the Son") nor d0 we end up in a New Heavens and New Earth. Without embracing the centrality of a covenantal/communal salvation, we have no individual salvation. Our personal salvation is not found "within me", i.e., our individualistic sin-ridden self before baptism and faith, but outside of ourselves in the objective work of Christ. We have a personal faith, but it is only found in the context of a creational and communal faith. This is orthodox Christianity and salvation.
The creational and incarnational realities of our life and salvation can never be separated from one another. Jesus came and took on the form of flesh and lived as one of us and among us to redeem us. The idea that salvation is all about being some "super-Christian" finding God in one's own "other-worldly and ecstatic" experiences, make the human person the prime focus of their life and hope. Salvation is NOT about escaping from our creational callings and vocations given as good creation by a good Creator. It is about returning through our redemption to being God-honoring and neighbor loving people who live as we were intended before the rebellion of humanity against it's Creator God. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is the answer to this rebellion.
Thus, in Christ, historic Christians have an earthy but "heavenly" faith. We engage the creational realities of our existence and salvation in our communal worship as God interacts with us through the Spirit in the preached Word and in the mystery of the physical elements of Holy Communion. In Baptism, we embrace the physical washing of water, being reborn by the Holy Spirit, and we are connected mystically to the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ - in concert with our repentance and faith (Rom 6; Col 2). The Gnostic Christians of today want to negate these historic and scriptural realities and relegate them to subjective, controllable, and industrialized forms of religion. These false beliefs and teachings must be opposed so that the greatness of our God and his character are seen as the foundations of our hope in salvation.
2nd Reading of certain sections for use in the writing of my second book.
The creational and incarnational realities of our life and salvation can never be separated from one another. Jesus came and took on the form of flesh and lived as one of us and among us to redeem us. The idea that salvation is all about being some "super-Christian" finding God in one's own "other-worldly and ecstatic" experiences, make the human person the prime focus of their life and hope. Salvation is NOT about escaping from our creational callings and vocations given as good creation by a good Creator. It is about returning through our redemption to being God-honoring and neighbor loving people who live as we were intended before the rebellion of humanity against it's Creator God. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is the answer to this rebellion.
Thus, in Christ, historic Christians have an earthy but "heavenly" faith. We engage the creational realities of our existence and salvation in our communal worship as God interacts with us through the Spirit in the preached Word and in the mystery of the physical elements of Holy Communion. In Baptism, we embrace the physical washing of water, being reborn by the Holy Spirit, and we are connected mystically to the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ - in concert with our repentance and faith (Rom 6; Col 2). The Gnostic Christians of today want to negate these historic and scriptural realities and relegate them to subjective, controllable, and industrialized forms of religion. These false beliefs and teachings must be opposed so that the greatness of our God and his character are seen as the foundations of our hope in salvation.
2nd Reading of certain sections for use in the writing of my second book.
November 7, 2015
Philip laments over the Protestant journey away from Calvin's reformation. Detailing the steps to how the North American Protestant church got to its current understanding of such an individual based notion of salvation, he then attempts to offer a way back. The question remains though, since Vatican II, why not come all the way back to the Catholic church? When should a protest movement stop protesting and recognise that the reforms it wanted have been undertaken?
May 3, 2012
Five stars on the history and identification of the problem. Two to three on the solutions. I'd like to give it a 3.75, because it was very wonderfully helpful and useful.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews