I spent 45 minutes watching Parker Williamson of the LayMAN give a history of the downfall of the Presbyterian Church, Christianity and Liberalism: The Church in an Age of Upheaval.
His talk was part of an entire weekend of superstition.
Mr. Williamson talks about how bad The Reimagining Conference was and what an apostate Dirk Ficca is. Parker asserts that we "liberals" believe in a different God and Jesus than he does. I couldn't agree more. I agree with him that the direction of the church matters. His direction is about 180 degrees backward. I wish Parker was right about how "liberal" our denomination is. We have a long way to go.
The point of his speech was that the PCUSA sucks because we didn't follow the fundamentalist path of J. Gresham Machen back in the 1930s. Machen does have followers. He started his own denomination, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), and his own seminary after Princeton decided to embrace higher criticism of the Bible.
This begs the question. Why doesn't Parker and Friends join that denomination? If over 80 years ago the Presbyterian church decided that they didn't want the denomination run by fundamentalists why are fundamentalists so surprised at our "apostasy?" And it isn't as though the OPC is the only choice for the superstitiously disaffected. You can be narrow in more ways than one. There are also the PCA, the EPC, and other flavors.
But, hey, if Parker likes being on the losing team, then bless him and welcome.
You know what would be fun? I would love to have a debate with him. I personally think his views on God, the Bible, and Jesus are superstitious, infantile, and wrong. Don't misunderstand. Just because I think I can make a convincing case that his views are wrong doesn't mean I think he should be out of our club. That's the difference between us. He wants the "apostates" out. I want to take the "superstitious" on.
Anyone else think that would be fun?