We tend to stick to our own side as it were until our side is proven to be wrong. This is a great way to go about things especially when we are looking for the truth.

However, are we looking for the truth or are we reading the works of people we trust like Calvin or Piper or whoever and calling their views correct because they are their views.

I am not saying that we should throw away peoples works. What I am saying is that we should not turn these points of tension into a fight where one side is wrong and the other is right, or at least not without proper evaluation.

That is what I did with N.T. Wright. Piper wrote a response to his work on Paul so I automatically assumed that he was wrong in his conclusions.

Now I see, after some study, that it is not as black and white as that. There are things that we can learn from people that we don’t whole heartedly agree with, and when we start turning issues into fight and start choosing sides we can lose some very valuble information.

So, don’t just choose a side because it is the side you want to be on, look for truth.

However, I feel that the followers of the new perspective(s) have a descent point in that reformed evangelicals tend to hold too tightly to creeds and teachings of dead theologians. Albeit that they were most likely much smarter than you and I are and had greater insight into certain spiritual matters, their writings are NOT scripture and are not devinely inspired to be “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:16b-17 ESV)

We must rely on scripture alone to interperet scripture. We must look at the teachings of the OT and the gospels to be able to interperet Pauls context and original intent. We cannot look at our own biases whether they come from Jacob Arminius, John Calvin, or Joel Osteen.

Personally, however, I am not about to turn away from the creeds of old and the teachings of tried and true theologians such as Martin Luther and John Calvin. For to do so would be foolish and short sighted. At least they would be until you could prove to me that the “New Perspective(s)” can still hold true to the gospel of Christ and the teachings of the entirety of scripture (the way the “old perspective” does) and not just some guy’s version of what he thinks Paul said or wants Paul to have said. For the teachings of Paul himself are nothing without the devine inspiration of the Holy Spirit and if they contradict the rest of scripture, then they are worthless (which of course is not true).

I’m always scared about how I will interpret things, trying not to take passages out of context… The subject is vitally important and I’m glad you’re shining light on it. Thanks for the new word!

But seriously, good move, though.

Nonetheless, this is a great step. One that is very rewarding!

It’s not fun to be in his position, and to just read the scripture, and have people call you sexist (or backward, or out of touch with the middle class).

But that’s exactly what happened every time someone has spoke the truth of scripture.