Martin Luther would have been proud of Dr. Pinnock.

I referred to Moore’s left-handed praise — he appreciated Pinnock only insofar as Clark’s early ideas meshed with Moore’s. Once Pinnock developed beyond a kindergarten-style of belief in “young-earth theories,” approval of OT genocides, harsh death penalties for observed differences of opinion (with no trials allowed), serial marriages, etc., he could no longer be allowed in the hallowed halls of the SBC governing bodies.

Expressed cetainties are the stuff of job security.

About two months ago, I felt the Lord impress upon my heart that I was to adopt from Haiti. I was SHOCKED! I told my husband and he agreed to pray if this is what the Lord wants for us. It’s been over a month and I’ve prayed and fasted for my husband to hear from the Lord. He has not and now I have two questions.

1. Could I have heard wrong from the Lord?
2. Would He not want us to adopt, even though He has a family that is willing to hear His call to do so?

I’m very confused. I would appreciate your input. Plus, I just got done with your book Adopted for Life.

In Him

Judy

Robert Marsh was a classmate of Adrian Rogers and other disciples of Pinnock at NOBTS.
His son Charles in the book Wayward Christian Soldiers discusses Francis Schaeffer’s refusal to sign the Lusanne Covenant in 74 to the chagrin of Billy Graham, among others.
And now Diarmand MacCulloch in his much celebrated book on the first 3,000 years of Christianity, on page 51, lays waste to Pressler’s inerrancy as defined by his stance against Jack Flanders in the 60’s at Baylor.
So Inerrancy is not what it is chalked up to be. To borrow a word from WA Criswell, it is a ruse. It is sad Pinnock’s disciples walked away at the 87 Ridgecrest Conference when Pinnock and Mark Noll in effect said the SBC Takeover movement was on a Fool’s Errand.

I think this generally positive commentary about Mr. Pinnock is only possible because we can look at people like Adrian Rogers in retrospect. The fact is, sadly, that Mr. Pinnock’s liberal teachings have nothing good to offer. In and of themselves, they are evil. We can only thank God Pinnock and his heretical views were used for His sovereign purposes, good purposes such as early converts who learned under him during his alleged time of orthodoxy. We have to be careful not to conflate the fact that God sovereignly and mysteriously works through, in and despite the evil of men, while NEVER endorsing the evil men commit. I think some of the positive comments here leave an ambiguous impression that the good that came out of Pinnock’s life diminishes the great harm he did to the Church. His life would have been much better served had he clung to orthodoxy, just as Saul’s life would have been far greater had he remained faithful to God as King.

Dr. Moore’s article reminds me of David’s lament for Saul (and Jonathan) in 2 Samuel 1. I am sure many in David’s army thought that David’s words about Saul were nonsense. Saul’s disobedience was serious; so serious, God rejected him as King. Yet, when David learned that Saul had died, he wrote his gracious lament that the mighty had fallen and focused on the good that Saul had done. A lesser man than David (or a man of lesser faith than David) could not have written that lament. I don’t know Dr. Moore, but it seems to me that the gracious faith that moved David so long ago helped Dr. Moore write this article yesterday.
.

I, too, am a blaspheming idolater who daily spits in the face of the God of the Bible while setting up my own pathetic “god.” Without the grace of God I would one day burn in hell. Praise Him for that grace He has shown in Christ and weep for those who forsake the word of God to follow nonsense. Strange, Jesus’ harshest words went toward people who speak much like you. But for the grace of God in holding His own, we become the next apostates.

By Biblical standards, Clark Pinnock was an apostate, a blasphemer, and an idotalter. He spat in the face of the God of the Bible, and endeavored to create his own pathetic “god” out of the imaginiations of his depraved heart. And then he did everythign he could to pullute the church with his vile teachings.

There are people burning in hell today because they forsook the Word of God to follow the Satan-inspired nonsense of Clark Pinnock. And now he has received his just due reserved for all of those of such ilk.

What I am most encouraged by in this post is that you keep us from making the assumption that the church universal is one and the same as the evangelical church. Also, you consistently remind your readers that all people, even the Clark Pinnocks of the theological world, are more complex and mulitfaceted than the caricatures we have created of them. This post is an oasis in a dry and weary land where there is very little water.

Clark Pinnock is no longer looking at a mirror dim . . . I long for that day myself.

Clark Pinnock blessed me with his generosity and humility!

awesome

Like Matt, I too appreciate the graciousness of your post. Thanks for reminding us of the importance of maintaining a balanced perspective in polemical situations like these. There is little doubt that Dr. Pinnock had a profound influence on some of the SBC’s greatest leaders and preachers of the last half century.

If I may, I would like to encourage you to write a follow up post on the life of Dr. Pinnock. In particular, you have done an admirable job highlighting his significant contributions. I believe it would be just as profitable for many conservative pastors like myself to understand how Dr. Pinnock’s theological “trajectory” deflected away from Christian orthodoxy.

If you have such insight, which I believe you do, a gracious post on what went wrong could prove to be a much needed warning to all evangelical pastors who seek to defend and proclaim the Truth of Christ and His Word in a society where orthodoxy is increasingly disregraded in favor for philosophical, moral, and theological relativism.

Many Blessings!

Thanks again!!!