The point: (1) I am making a claim against those traditions that posit their communion is the One True Church.
(2) If Satan's kingdom is divided against itself, it will not stand--Jesus (or Abe Lincoln)
(3) If Protestant/Evangelical pastors are successful in evangelism and church growth, then there is the likelihood that they are leading people away from the One True Church (™).
(4) However, it is well-known that Evangelical pastors have been attacked by demons who opposed their churches (Wagner 1992).
(5) Demons do not attack their own outposts (Modus Tollens, 2).
(6) Demons, therefore, attack Christian outposts (or Kingdom outposts; I like that one better).
Therefore, one must conclude,
(7) Evangelical communions--some, anyway--are Kingdom communions and Christian churches.
Therefore, the position entailed by (1) is false, that only certain anchoretic communions are in fact One True Church (™).
The nicer adherents within those denominations will say,
(7') "We've never said the Spirit isn't working in Evangelical communions; He may be working but we are the One True Church (™)).
That is very kind of them, but it is really hard to square with (1) and (2). To prove this we have to advance the next argument:
(8) The Spirit doesn't work counter to the Spirit.
If the Spirit is supposed to build up the Church, and the Church is defined as a specific institution of which Evangelicals are not a member, then the Spirit can't build up--and therefore lead away--those other communions.
An anchorite could respond with
(8') The Spirit can't be judged by human logic.
There is a truth to (8') but I think if applied consistently it is an epistemological acid drip. Along with (8) we must also say,
(9) The Spirit doesn't work contrary to Christ (The Filioque really helps at this point, but I suppose it isn't necessary to the argument).
(10) If (8) and (9) hold, then we cannot really have no grounds for denying that Evangelicals are members of Christ's body, heirs of God and fellow-heirs with Jesus Christ.
(2) If Satan's kingdom is divided against itself, it will not stand--Jesus (or Abe Lincoln)
(3) If Protestant/Evangelical pastors are successful in evangelism and church growth, then there is the likelihood that they are leading people away from the One True Church (™).
(4) However, it is well-known that Evangelical pastors have been attacked by demons who opposed their churches (Wagner 1992).
(5) Demons do not attack their own outposts (Modus Tollens, 2).
(6) Demons, therefore, attack Christian outposts (or Kingdom outposts; I like that one better).
Therefore, one must conclude,
(7) Evangelical communions--some, anyway--are Kingdom communions and Christian churches.
Therefore, the position entailed by (1) is false, that only certain anchoretic communions are in fact One True Church (™).
The nicer adherents within those denominations will say,
(7') "We've never said the Spirit isn't working in Evangelical communions; He may be working but we are the One True Church (™)).
That is very kind of them, but it is really hard to square with (1) and (2). To prove this we have to advance the next argument:
(8) The Spirit doesn't work counter to the Spirit.
If the Spirit is supposed to build up the Church, and the Church is defined as a specific institution of which Evangelicals are not a member, then the Spirit can't build up--and therefore lead away--those other communions.
An anchorite could respond with
(8') The Spirit can't be judged by human logic.
There is a truth to (8') but I think if applied consistently it is an epistemological acid drip. Along with (8) we must also say,
(9) The Spirit doesn't work contrary to Christ (The Filioque really helps at this point, but I suppose it isn't necessary to the argument).
(10) If (8) and (9) hold, then we cannot really have no grounds for denying that Evangelicals are members of Christ's body, heirs of God and fellow-heirs with Jesus Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment