Reply #38: His viewpoint and his theology repelled me.

[grantcart]

First his view point: He was a cheerleader to Presidents who lived immoral lives and started immoral wars but he compartmentalized his religious views in such a way that he cherry picks his moral concerns. At a time that America faced great moral questions he turned away. In the middle of apartheid and taking children to schools with military escorts he remained quiet when even the most modest support would have had a huge impact. He wasn't tolerant or intolerant he was distant. Later on recordings he made with Nixon revealed anti-semitic comments that he made and I am sure he probably made the same about other groups that were not recorded.

His theology is repelling. The whole casting of the Christian experience as an individual relationship is completely unbibilical. The new testament is a testament of a community being called together not desparate individuals with personal relationships. The book of Acts documents it and the Greek ecclascia is a community being called. You can go back to second Isaiah and the suffering servant and the whole Judeo-Christian biblical understanding is that faith is primary experienced as a community and not as an individual experience. His emphasis of individual personal salvation is the perfect expression of Bonehoffer's "Cheap Grace".

It is also the perfect theology for a consumerist economy where activity is fueled by invidual activity.

It's not that its conservative or liberal that he has stripped it of its essential identity and as you say is constrained by the Bible from which he preaches . . .he doesn't preach from the bible he preaches into the bible projecting his personal views - it is the classic example of "eiso- gesis" and not "exo-gesis" (projecting into and not taking from)

He didn't condemn segregation and he didn't condemn the violence done by segregationist and he didn't integrate his ministry during the fight against segregation.