Gospel or theology?

I look after church library, and nobody really reads those fat theology books. They are only in there because the pastor doesnt know what to do with them. Im sure nobody would miss them if they were thrown in the bin. (Gasp!)

Why because they are redundant when you read all of the Bible.

What really moves people are reading peoples testimonies.

Theologians dont have testimonies, they only have theories and arguments. And tonnes of footnotes. I have tried reading a few but my conclusion is most are written by a bunch of agnostics or academic christians trying to impress their athiest friends. But why are they friends with athiests in the first place? Athiests arent the most friendly people to hang around with, especially when you tell them you are a christian. Lol

Garee I appreciate your commitment to take any question and run with it. I know your answer will always be unique, even if I don't always understand it. Not being nasty either.

Yes believers are being addressed in that passage, but anyone and everyone can read what is written there. And it is perfectly in keeping with all Gospel truth that God COMMANDS all men to believe (just as He commands all men to repent).

Thus we have this passage which has the phrase "THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH". Obedience corresponds to the commandment of the everlasting God.
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith (Rom 16:25,26)

After much thought, I would like to re-address my response to you. I am often clumsy with words with expediency as an excuse. My summations are often clear to me, but vague or lost in print; for this I apologize.

What I was getting at is basically the “will” of God. His decrees, commands and commandments (Decalogue) are simply outward declarations of His bigger aim. To summarize the “will of God” is not easy, but His Will has been achieved up to this point in history and continues.

My initial point was clumsily framed by using the term “command,” and there are several words translated as such with contextual variations. I would have been better to use the term, “The determinate will of God” to more appropriately say what I really meant. In studying the issue since I have come across an article that I think better states my assertion that the commandments of GOD must be tempered with the will of God to see the reality of God’s intentions. I hope this clarifies my original assertions; this is from an article by: Philip H. Towner


God's Will and the Plan of Salvation.
Receiving special emphasis is the place of the plan of salvation within God's will. The adoption as children ( Eph 1:5) and inheritance of the blessings of redemption (v. 11) are according to God's counsel and will. The basis of salvation, the crucifixion of God's son Jesus, is explicitly described as the outworking of God's will ( Acts 2:23; 4:28; Gal 1:4). In this way, Jesus' death becomes integral to God's plan, rather than being an unforeseen event to be fit in whatever way possible. Furthermore, the redemptive will of God, which began long ago in the promises to Abraham, has proceeded without change through each stage of the plan ( Heb 6:17). Like Abraham, others played significant roles in the outworking of God's will to save ( Acts 13:36); at each point God's will was determinative and could not be circumvented ( Luke 7:30). Paul viewed his own call to apostleship, which was to bring salvation to the Gentiles ( Titus 1:1), in precisely these terms. Nearly all of his letters emphasize that it was God's will that established him in his ministry ( 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1; cf. Gal 1:1; 1 Tim 1:1; Titus 1:1).

Does the New Testament teach that it is God's will that all be saved, and therefore none will be lost? Two passages relate God's will to the expansiveness of the salvation plan. First Timothy 2:3-4 states, "God our Savior wills (thelei) all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." Second Peter 3:9 expresses a similar sentiment: "The Lord does not will (boulomenos) anyone to perish but that everyone might come to repentance." It should be emphasized that neither text says that all will be saved regardless of their disposition toward the gospel. In the first text, "to come to a knowledge of the truth" is a formula that means to make a rational decision about the gospel, that is, to respond to the gospel message. The second text similarly relates God's will to save the all-inclusive "anyone" to the volitional element involved in repentance. Consequently, while these texts tell us that God's will to save extends to all people, and that he desires to save rather than to condemn, they do not remove the necessary element of the faith-response to the gospel.

Pilgrims progress settles most confusion over salvation.
It puts definition in our walk and foundation.
It is a marker in ones faith,so powerful that those that recieve the revelation kinda fell a kindred spirit amongst us.

At one time it was required reading at most bible colleges.

It’s a wonderful book I read a few decades back. I have passed out several copies to friends. Sadly, our snippet prone society seems too preoccupied for reading much past 1/4” worth of pages.

I often wonder why our leaders do not push its powerful influence.

I also wonder why black leaders do not push George Washington carver on the black culture.
Another book i will never forget.

After much thought, I would like to re-address my response to you. I am often clumsy with words with expediency as an excuse. My summations are often clear to me, but vague or lost in print; for this I apologize.

What I was getting at is basically the “will” of God. His decrees, commands and commandments (Decalogue) are simply outward declarations of His bigger aim. To summarize the “will of God” is not easy, but His Will has been achieved up to this point in history and continues.

My initial point was clumsily framed by using the term “command,” and there are several words translated as such with contextual variations. I would have been better to use the term, “The determinate will of God” to more appropriately say what I really meant. In studying the issue since I have come across an article that I think better states my assertion that the commandments of GOD must be tempered with the will of God to see the reality of God’s intentions. I hope this clarifies my original assertions; this is from an article by: Philip H. Towner


God's Will and the Plan of Salvation.
Receiving special emphasis is the place of the plan of salvation within God's will. The adoption as children ( Eph 1:5) and inheritance of the blessings of redemption (v. 11) are according to God's counsel and will. The basis of salvation, the crucifixion of God's son Jesus, is explicitly described as the outworking of God's will ( Acts 2:23; 4:28; Gal 1:4). In this way, Jesus' death becomes integral to God's plan, rather than being an unforeseen event to be fit in whatever way possible. Furthermore, the redemptive will of God, which began long ago in the promises to Abraham, has proceeded without change through each stage of the plan ( Heb 6:17). Like Abraham, others played significant roles in the outworking of God's will to save ( Acts 13:36); at each point God's will was determinative and could not be circumvented ( Luke 7:30). Paul viewed his own call to apostleship, which was to bring salvation to the Gentiles ( Titus 1:1), in precisely these terms. Nearly all of his letters emphasize that it was God's will that established him in his ministry ( 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1; cf. Gal 1:1; 1 Tim 1:1; Titus 1:1).

Does the New Testament teach that it is God's will that all be saved, and therefore none will be lost? Two passages relate God's will to the expansiveness of the salvation plan. First Timothy 2:3-4 states, "God our Savior wills (thelei) all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." Second Peter 3:9 expresses a similar sentiment: "The Lord does not will (boulomenos) anyone to perish but that everyone might come to repentance." It should be emphasized that neither text says that all will be saved regardless of their disposition toward the gospel. In the first text, "to come to a knowledge of the truth" is a formula that means to make a rational decision about the gospel, that is, to respond to the gospel message. The second text similarly relates God's will to save the all-inclusive "anyone" to the volitional element involved in repentance. Consequently, while these texts tell us that God's will to save extends to all people, and that he desires to save rather than to condemn, they do not remove the necessary element of the faith-response to the gospel.

I think you need to speak with some conservative theologians. In my seminary and now in my theological school, the professors are driven by the need to preach the gospel. And just because you have no clue what a scholarly paper or book is, on any subject, doesn't make the method wrong. Footnotes can add a side discussion, or point to the exact page where the article/book author found the information.Scholars will research literally 100's of papers/books, and then see how it works with the Bible.

There was a point in theology where the Bible was not mentioned. I call that time the "dark ages." I have read the Bible over 50 times in many languages including the original languages. I read and study the Bible daily. But theology comes out of the Bible, and although it is not perfect, other scholars can then correct them.

Perhaps before you criticize, you ought to try and get through a few of those books? Or acknowledge you do not have the education and background to read theology. Well, except when you are actually reading the Bible, and studying God, which is what "theology" means as I have said over and over and over!

PS I am a wannabe theologian and I have an amazing testimony, which I share with anyone that is willing to listen. Try not to be so authoritarian about something you know nothing about - ignorance may be bliss, but it is not honest or mature.

I do reconginse some of it actually is rubbish and misinformation!

If is rubbish and misinformation it is not scholarship.

I know but a lot of what gets published masquerades as scholarly. Just cos its published by IVP doesnt always mean its worthwhile.

Pilgrims Progress is a wonderfully profound christian allegory. I make sure I have it in every church library, even though is hundreds of years old.

John Bunyan wrote it in prison. He didnt have a book deal with a publisher or had to write it under duress to complete a degree. Its not quoting what other men think. Some People might complain its old fashioned, but these same people probably complain about the KJV.

The funny thing is that I found some purported christian classics to be dated, like CS lewis. He assidously removed any scripture from 'mere christianity' to make it just seem like you could boil down what christians believe to be intellectual argument that was entirely logical. Might work in oxford but oxford isnt the real world is it? Those in ivory towers still love it though.

But others are timeless like Foxes book of marytrs.

Hinds feet in high places was a kind of rip off of Pilgrims Progress, and it turned out the author had universalist ideas. This is the same with The Shack, which is why I would caution people on reading those. As for Left Behind novels. ?! Another dispensationalist rabbit trail.

Actually, I took a whole course in seminary on Pilgrim's Progress, and it was incredible.

But you know - rubbish and stuff. Must be, if I took it in seminary, right?

For someone with a Master's degree you don't seem that well educated! More narrow and judgmental. To each their own, I guess!