No Compromise Episode 1 is now available [49 minutes].

Phil Johnson, Carl Trueman, Mike Abendroth, and James White in a “elephant room” ;P

Heresy and a Call for Humility


The current climate shows that we need to relearn the ability to care about right doctrine and have earnest doctrinal disagreements without proclaiming “Heresy!” over every point at which we disagree. We need a more restrained definition of heresy drawing on the early church creeds. The Nicene Creed is a historic, globally accepted ecumenical creed that encapsulates the good news of the gospel into a short and rich summary. It covers the basic essentials of 1) who God is, 2) what God is like, and 3) how God saves.

If a believer authentically holds to the Nicene Creed, we should not call them a heretic, no matter how strongly we believe they are gravely in error on the details or on other doctrines. A good shorthand for heresy, then, is to ask, “Can they say the Nicene Creed and mean it without their fingers crossed?” If the answer is yes, they may still be wrong, and they may be heterodox, but we cannot call them heretics, because they fit within the bounds of historic Christianity.

This is ironic, given the leader of this group just affirmed and sat with a “false teacher” (Mark Driscoll’s own words based on anyone teaching “Prosperity Theology”… *cough*  T.D. Jakes  *cough* or at least what he says behind his back).

Don’t take my word for it, he said it himself.

There is still an elephant in the room…

Furthermore, the Nicene Creed should not be the stopping point. Do we not care about justification by faith alone anymore? Groups like the Roman Catholic Church which say that holding to “faith alone” is a heresy (that holding to it will damn you) and ultimately believe they will be saved, in part, by their own merit… uh, they hold to the Nicene Creed so that just gives them a pass?

Sorry, please don’t fall for this “mere christianity” stuff. It sounds humble but is it Biblical?

Someone asked me this week what I thought about James MacDonald having T. D. Jakes at the Elephant Room. Well, to put it simply, I think it was great!… [T.D. Jakes] has also, on several occasions over the past few years, stated that he no longer holds a “Oneness” or “modalistic” view of God and now believes in the doctrine of the Trinity. This he clearly articulates once again at the Elephant Room… but to say that those who hold this (modalistic) view are not Christians is in my opinion going too far. Granted, it is an incorrect view regarding the nature of God, but it is not like other anti-trinitarian views that deny the full deity of Christ. I personally do not think you can put those who hold Oneness doctrine in the same category as a Jehovah’s Witness or a Mormon. I might be wrong, but that’s the way I see it at this point…My hat is off to James and to the others who came together with T. D. Jakes for a time of honest dialogue and fellowship in Christ at the Elephant Room. The church desperately needs more of this kind of thing.

- Brian Brodersen (soon to be leader of Calvary Chapel)

Add Calvary Chapel to my list of disappointments regarding this Elephant Room fiasco.

Reading the responses to the T.D. Jakes / Mark Drisoll / James MacDonald / Elephant Room fiasto, let me just say I am disappointed in all the defense I am seeing from Acts 29 folk (haven’t seen one raise a concern yet, granted I don’t read TOO many) and disappointed in the high level Southern Baptist that are approving of Jakes (like Ed Stetzer and Jack Graham, whose been Jakes prayer partner for the last 10 years!) Yes, yes, I know this doesn’t mean all Acts 29’rs or all Southern Baptist but WOW, just WOW!

Best Response yet…


I love the Trinity and affirm the Athanasian Creed.

“Whosoever will be saved before all things, it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith, which Faith unless everyone do keep undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.And the Catholick Faith is this, That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost, but the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, such is the Holy Ghost.The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, the Holy Ghost incomprehensible.The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal; yet are they not three eternals, but one eternal. Also there is not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated,and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, the Holy Ghost Almighty, yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, the Holy Ghost is Lord; yet are they not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian Verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholick Religion to say there be three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son, neither made nor created, nor begotten but proceeding.

So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost,not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none are afore nor after another, none is greater or less than another, but the whole three Persons be coeternal and coequal. So that in all things as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.”


To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union