A different gospel

[Carbon]

Here is another I posted elsewhere a couple years ago.

N T Wright denies some important doctrines.
Two for now:
He denies Adam as being historical.
He denies a crucial component of justification, namely imputation.”

I think he teaches a different gospel.

Thoughts from both Arminians Calvinists are appreciated?

 

[makesends]

From what I can tell, he's an "innovator" of Christian Doctrine, which, from the outset, is already somewhere south of trustworthy.

He may as well discard authority of Scripture, too. He seems to think of it in the liberal sense, of, "it is subject to my authority", instead of the other way around. Fast and loose, philosophical, abstract, 'spiritualized', good for us to think about, instead of, as Moses said, "these are not just words for you—they are your life".

 

[Carbon]

From what I can tell, he's an "innovator" of Christian Doctrine, which, from the outset, is already somewhere south of trustworthy.

He may as well discard authority of Scripture, too. He seems to think of it in the liberal sense, of, "it is subject to my authority", instead of the other way around. Fast and loose, philosophical, abstract, 'spiritualized', good for us to think about, instead of, as Moses said, "these are not just words for you—they are your life".

Yes, he is out of control. I read he made the statement that Jesus didn't actually realize that he was God.

 

[Carbon]

N. T. Wright: "I do not think Jesus 'knew he was God' in the same sense that one knows one is tired or happy, male or female. He did not say to himself, 'Well I never! I'm the second person of the Trinity!'"​

 

[Carbon]

R. C. Sproul called his teachings heresy.

 

[Hazelelponi]

R. C. Sproul called his teachings heresy.

Definitely a good category for them from what I heard