Honesty?

Today, I found out randomly that one of my good French friends (let's call him M.) is supported by an American church.
Well, will you say, do you have a problem with that?

Actually, yes.

The church in question is very obviously strongly Reformed Baptist. My friend is Independant Fundamental Baptist, more Dispensationalist than the entire Dallas Theological Seminary faculty and certainly not Reformed in his understanding of salvation...In fact, Dawn and I have been members of his church for a little while, until the day a guy said from the pulpit that a Calvinist can not really preach the Gospel (I need to say that M. has never been so radical, we just agreed to disagree and parted ways).

Now, my question is: why would a church that has left its previous denomination over the issue of Calvinism support the work of a non-Calvinist (especially when national Reformed workers live in difficult conditions)? Why would a non-Calvinist accept money from a staunchly Reformed group?

Why is it so difficult for so many to be consistent with their theology?

Why is the current missions system inherently inefficient and corrupted?

I know I should not do it.

I knew I would do it one day.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please check this blog regularly if you want to read the

"Why I am not an Evangelical anymore" series.

My wife just told me that only Jesus can save. I guess she's right. Those Bible-thumping people...

Cynicism will save the world!!

At least, it's worth trying...

Thank you, thank you...

Which theologian are you?

You scored as a Karl Barth

The daddy of 20th Century theology. You perceive liberal theology to be a disaster and so you insist that the revelation of Christ, not human experience, should be the starting point for all theology.

Karl Barth 80%

John Calvin 60%

Martin Luther 60%

Augustine 53%

Anselm 53%

Jonathan Edwards 47%

Friedrich Schleiermacher 40%

Jürgen Moltmann 40%

Charles Finney 33%

Paul Tillich 20%

The (main) reasons why I still don't take the "Emerging" thing seriously

- The "Emerging" guys may be on the fringe of the Evangelical movement, but they are still Evangelicals nonetheless. I am not Evangelical. Why should I care?

-To be Emergent (or Emerging? I could never figure out what the difference is) you apparently need to be a 30-something, white middle-class, Anglo-saxon male. Not very relevant to a 30-something white working-class Gallo-roman male. Why should I care?

-I agree that anti-intellectualism is one of Evangelicalism's main plagues. The pretention to be an intellectual, however, is certainly not the cure. So far, I have not been impressed by what the EC has to say. Why should I care?

-I grew up in mailine Protestantism. I know what theological liberalism is. I know how to recognize it. And well, sorry, when I read most of the Emerging stuff, I can smell a familiar odor. I've already been there, I've already done that. Why should I care?

-It's just a fad. One more of those stinking, useless, (money-making), hollow fads. I walk daily in front of centuries-old churches, one of my ancestors helped Calvin frame the French Confession, my known ancestry goes back to the 12th Century. Why should I care?

-The EC might ask some good questions. So far, I have not been convinced by its answers. Wy should I care?

"The accent of one's country dwells in the mind and in the heart as much as in the language."

La Rochefoucauld

Maximes