12/15/04
THE DISCERNING
READER?
Back in my pre-Presbyterian days,
I was a member of
The Discerning Reader promotes and sells books that promote all sorts of heresies, some even calling for evangelicals to embrace postmodernism. (see http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/bookmark/fulllist.htm ) Its decline in theological soundness has been gradual but real. Here is an excerpt from an interview with Mr. Schlapfer, found at http://www.dannyfast.com/archives/000268.html , which indicates his current philosophy:
2. Recently you have written on the "New
Paul Perspective". Clearly you think this topic is noteworthy and have
said "We are listening to the various monologues going on with open yet
critical ears". It appears that your position is Reformed while
considering the NPP as an alternative. Do you think the NPP is worth a look? Is
it an acceptable alternative or deviation in respect to the work laid down by
the Reformers?
I believe the leading proponents of NPP,
especially Tom Wright, are much closer to understanding what Paul was getting
at in Romans, Galatians (esp.) than the Reformers. I have felt this way since
the 1980s when I was doing my own graduate work in Romans, finding Dunn very
helpful and Murray quite unhelpful. While I don't think there is a final word
on it, I think thoughtful Christians need to be aware of how much the 16th
century colors the way we read the NT. I think we should be open to listen and
learn.
What I have objected to is the divisiveness
that is being stirred up a very loud group of Reformed folk. Some of it is
downright sinful, in my estimation.
3. In a letter published with your permission to Michael Spencer you said
"We are abandoning Calvinism" and "The 16th century is over.
We're not wasting any more time with such a dead issue." I think many of
us, probably more who are Calvinists, and who enjoy the work of
DiscerningReader and ChristianCounterCulture would like you to expand on this
We need to focus on the world that is actually
confronting us today. The students we deal with have needs that are real and
cannot be helped by talking about abstract theological issues that were fought
over centuries ago. One can talk about the reality of God's sovereignty (and
all the related themes) without talking about Calvinism.
Calvinism is a great study for historical
theology. But it is not the gospel — in ANY way. For awhile I thought we could
deal with it along the periphery, all the while moving people on to being
followers of Jesus and lovers of His Word — not being "Reformed." But
most Calvinists can't do that. They have to identify with their cause. So we
are leaving it well behind. Our cause is Christ and his kingdom. Not Reformed
Theology.
4. What are your plans for www.antithesis.com ? With your comments located
in question #3 and the release date happening on the anniversary of the
Reformation it makes me wonder if there is some large scale commentary on the
way.
Not sure. Putting it off until 2005, though.
5. Why'd you take your portrait down? It was on your blog but it no longer remains
there. I enjoyed printing your picture to attach to my wall of "Internet
Friends"
I am a bit scarred from personal emails these
days. Looking to hide.
6. Because six is an awful number we need a
fun question. Guinness or Merlot?
Martini's. Shaken. Very dry.
7. Final question. In Michael's letter you said "Besides,
"Reformed" people are an embarrassment to the name of Christ."
Can you expand on this as many may have taken it as an insult.
I think I have written about this many times
over the years. Reformed people have a reputation within the Christian
community — and outside, even — that is easy to survey:
judgmental
self-righteous
arrogant
Why do you think Lance Quinn added all those
appendices to the new edition of P&Rs "The 5 Points of Calvinism"?
About a "kinder gentler Calvinism"? He wrote to tell me: it was
because Calvinists tend to be nasty, mean-spirited people. One always has to
qualify the 5 Points with some appeal . . .
The main reason we have discontinued the vast
majority of Reformed books is becasue the people who buy them are
disproportionately mean, nasty, hateful, judgmental and EMBARRASSING to the
faith. We have had ENOUGH dealing with them. I am actually a very laid-back,
easy-going guy. People who know me would tell you that. But this work has taken
my blood pressure off the charts.
There are surely many lessons that can be learned from this sad story. One lesson is that the “New Perspective on Paul” is really a very old perspective, one that heads us back towards the doctrine of Rome, and one that contradicts the Biblical gospel trumpeted during the Protestant Reformation. At least in some measure Mr. Schlapfer did not discern its dangers. We can expect that The Discerning Reader, as well as other ministries (like Steve Wilkins’ PCA church), will abet the further spread of this “New Perspective on Paul” heresy. More Protestant casualties are sure to follow. Another lesson is the need for continual vigilance against sin and error. Even twenty years ago, the Rob Schlapfer I knew was “a very laid-back, easy-going guy”, to use his own words. We should not be “laid-back” but watchful and prayerful, realizing the dangers of the world, the flesh and the devil. Finally, we should be discerning, something those associated with The Discerning Reader certainly have not been. Even in its “good days” it promoted all sorts of errors contrary to sound doctrine. These included errors in such areas as scriptural prophecy (the books sold by Mr. Schlapfer generally promoted preterism over the historic Protestant interpretation of prophecy, generally known as historicism), the text of scripture (Mr. Schlapfer effectively denied the divine preservation of His infallible word in the traditional text), and attire and entertainment (Mr. Schlapfer confused liberty with looseness). These errors gave way to greater ones.
We should not be smug about all of this, but cautionary. Given our native depravity, we too could follow in the course of “The Discerning Reader”- an empty name void of the spiritual reality.