What Do You Know About Tony Campolo?

Let's see, our Lord said, "No man can come (cometh unto) to the Father but by me". Right, Jesus stated this and Mr. Campolo who claims to represent the teachings of Christ can't answer with certainty. Someone needs to take the trash out.

 

Of course, God could relieve this suffering anytime He wishes. He choses not to do so. Do you claim to know what motivates God?

 

I believe an Open Theist would say that the future does not yet exist, so not knowing something that does not exist is not really a problem.

This is my primary area of disagreement with Open Theism by the way. It seems to me that Open Theism requires that time be merely a sequence of events instead of something that currently exists past, present and future. But I also don't know enough about the nature of time to explain exactly what it is, though I suspect (for a number or reasons) that it is not merely a sequence of events where every person (including God) who exists only in the present.

Why? And is there any reason why you are suddenly using the word "absolute" to qualify the word "sovereignty" for this assertion?

I hear this criticism all the time and it never ceases to amaze me. We can trust God because of His character. Even an Open Theism affirms that God's character does not change, even though the way He may work with us may change. God is holy, God is good, God is love... These things do not change.

I believe an Open Theist would say that God already has all knowledge (of what can be known) and a very good sense of the future decisions of his creatures. Furthermore, God knows what he intends to do.

God is omnipotent and has the ability to guide history, act specifically on history and finally judge the world when He believes it is most appropriate for His purposes.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Why do you suggest that Open Theists believe that God doesn't know what to do? I've never heard an Open Theist assert anything like this. Have you ever sat down and talked to an Open Theist about their beliefs... not trying to win an argument, but picking their brains to understand their position?

What about them? God has made no promises to keep the world safe from "natural" disasters. And many of the things we can "natural" disasters are mostly created by human choices. For instance, the destruction of much of New Orleans by Katrina was the result humans insisting on living in a coastal community that is below sea level, in a politically corrupt region of a notoriously corrupt state where levee protection funds were squandered on other projects for many decades. I could go on and on about that debacle, but I grew up on the Upper Texas Gulf Coast (almost in Louisiana) and it was not secret that New Orleans would have a catastrophic flood if a moderate to strong hurricane came near the city.

That's probably because one of my former theology professors is an Open Theist and I have been able to discuss his beliefs with him in some detail. Much of the criticism of Open Theism is off-base (the same basic false charges repeated over and over) while some weightier questions and critique regarding the nature of time are ignored.

The God of Open Theism is not erratic or flighty. And His character guides and motivates his actions. It seems to be that the critics of Open Theism seem to think that the only reason God is good is that He is somehow "locked into" that mode.

Nope. God's knows what He intends to do and sets about doing it. Yet He has elected to work within a realm where He gives his creatures free will.

The "God of Open Theism" that you describe is certainly very flawed, but I don't think it has any relation to what Open Theists actually believe. Until you actually engage what Open Theists believe, you're not going to change their minds. And while I'm not an Open Theist for several reasons, most notably, the question of the nature of time, I have great sympathy for them because they are usually judged and maligned based on false claims.

 

Please note that another user who has taken the name "BaptistBeliever" has now joined this thread. I have repeatedly asked this other person to change his name so our posts will not be confused, but he has not responded.

So please keep a distinction in our discussion between what BaptistBeliever writes and what I, Baptist Believer, write.

Thanks!

 

I'm not calvinist. Buy reading Clark Pinnock and others to the left from time to time, that is what I came up with.

I could be wrong but this is part of what I've come up with in In open theism God can make mistakes because He does not know all things that will occur in the future. According to them God also takes risks and adapts to the free will choices of people. They claim biblical support for their position by citing scripture where God changes His mind Ex. 32:14, is surprised Is. 5:3-7, and tests people to see what they will do Gen. 22:12.

 

I found something on Open Theism that I had in mind from the past.
http://www.ondoctrine.com/20openth.htm

 

http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/1065.article

 

Tony Campolo is a great author, a great speaker and if you ever get to meet him one of the nicest guys you will ever speak to. In fact i heard him and met him at the BWA Youth Congress in Zimbabwe in 1993, and when i met him again about a year later he remembered me.
As for his theological stance, very liberal. He claims to believe and preach the Bible but it is saturated with a social gospel and leftist leanings.

I used to watch "Hashing it Out", the debate show with Steve Brown and always laughed when Steve would look at Tony Compolo with that perplexed look and say, "Tony, Tony, Tony...where did you get that from?"

 

I havent spent alot of time on Open theism. I spend much of my time right now on the EC Movement. But I am certainly running into alot of Open Theisits in the EC. Brian McLaren being one of them. But it appears to be a mix of humanism and Christianity. The two are incompatible.

 

You cannot deny a biblical view of the wrath of God and be a believer of a redemptive God. Which Brian does.

 

The quote that has been used to say that Tony Campolo is an Open Theist is about Campolo questioning God's omnipotence.

The claims of heresy against Open Theism is about its questioning of God's omniscience.

Campolo may be wrong about God's omnipotence, but it is pretty safe to say that the quote does not make Campolo a supporter of Open Theism.

 

Campolo has spent the last 30 years or so making a career of bashing America and peddling a baptized Marxist gospel aimed at Christian youth. He persists in his campaign against "the established wealth distribution" (Partly Right, p. 211) and our "consumer oriented society" (Wake Up America, p. 180). Consistent with his liberal, anti-free market hypocrisy, Campolo denounces capitalism and preaches the simple life, yet he lives in luxury in the nation that he despises. (Campolo discloses that he lives in an area that "has maintained its reputation for sophistication and affluence and is a place where the upwardly mobile of southeastern Pennsylvania like to live [Partly Right, p. 210].) While Campolo may admire Catholic works salvation legends such as "Mother" Teresa and Francis of Assisi, he is apparently unwilling to take things that far in his own life.Campolo is currently campaigning against what he calls the "Religious Right" in his new ecumenical book from W Publishing (formerly Word
Publishing), Speaking My Mind: The Radical Evangelical Prophet Tackles the Tough Issues Christians Are Afraid to Face. Radical? Yes. Prophet? You decide: In promotional interviews, Campolo postulates that repelling Islamic terrorism, defending marriage as a sacred covenant between a man and a woman, and protecting the unborn (historically moral planks of the Republican platform) are secondary issues, instead citing injustices to Palestinians, the plight of "born that way" homosexuals, and automobile pollution as "significant" issues that "may lead us to vote for the Kerry campaign." (Source: 9/18/04, Toledo Blade.)
- Campolo signed an article in the liberal Sojourners magazine in May 1981, which lambasted the United States and stated that Roman Catholicism was the one bright light in the dark situation in El Salvador: "The Roman Catholic church is being converted to the poor in El Salvador." This is a reference to the wicked Liberation Theology movement in Romanism, a movement which substitutes the salvation of society for the salvation of the soul. Liberation Theology is Christianized Marxism, but here we find Campolo signing a statement which called it a "bright light."
- One of Campolo's most serious errors is his confusion regarding the kingdom of God. He holds the popular "kingdom now" theology, which is sweeping through much of the evangelical/charismatic world. According to this thinking, the kingdom of God is something which is right now in this world. Campolo places the Bible promises for a future earthly kingdom into the context of this apostate hour. Thus, Campolo challenges Christians to go into the world and to transform society.
In his message at Urbana '87, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship's tri-annual youth meeting, Campolo said, "This night is a historical moment. This night God wants to raise up a generation of men and women who will enter into every sector of society as agents of change, transforming the world into the kind of world He wills it to be" (Decision magazine, 3/98). This is why Campolo says "the kingdom of God is party." According to Campolo: "The kingdom of God is a glorious and gigantic party!" (cf. Rom. 13:11-14). That is the title of one of his books and is a keynote theme which he brings into many of his messages. To prove this idea, Campolo quotes from Bible references to such things as the Old Testament Jewish festivals and wrongly applies this to our time.


http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/campolo/campolo.htm