Sola Scriptura Vs CCEF Integrationism

[churchmouse]

Recently, I have been attending a small PCA church. Sunday sermons are pretty solid and their worship leans toward traditional hymns and some modern songs (blended) which is good.

Our Sunday evening studies have to do with a video series from CCEF.org (ie., Paul Tripp and David Powlison). I conjunction with the video we are also instructed to read the book "Instruments in the Redeemer's Hands". This book seemed pretty good in the first couple chapters (deals with the condition of man and his depravity) and then goes on to discussing how God uses His people for His purpose (a sober look at our role rather than Warren's attempt).

However, as I listened to Powlison, his opening comments were to the effect "doctrine doesn't matter, practical application does". So I proceeded to watch the video, we worked with a pictorial diagram with a sun (or heat) at the top, a good tree on the left, a cactus (bad fruit) on the right and the cross at the bottom. So we proceeded to ask "what is our specific problem" (ie., the heat) and depending how we respond (good fruit / bad fruit) has to do with our consequences. This sounds all fine and good for grade school children, but there were adults listening and discussing this issue.

So in my attempt to find out more about who David Powlison is, I found out that he's an integrationist of the likes of Larry Crabb, et all. Psychology and human philosophy is integraded with the Bible because after all "All truth is God's truth" :confused:

From my studies, CCEF provides psychological services to Christians whereby their issues are labeled and treaded by licensed psychologists. An interesting article resides at: http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/ccef.html

I thought that the PCA for the most part was strictly Sola Scriptura? Why is the gospel being dumbed down? Why are practicing psychologists calling themselves "Christian" and fleecing the sheep of Christ?

Could someone shed some light on this abomination in the Church?

[Brandan Kraft]

The PCA is just another apostate organization...

I hate evangelistic "tools" and I hate any "doctrine" that says "doctrine is unimportant." That's the very thing people are lacking! Besides, how can anyone "practically apply" anything unless they know proper doctrine?

Here's a good article on the modern love of dumbing down doctrine: http://www.evangelica.de/The_Dumbing_Down_of_Doctrine.htm

The Gospel alone is the power of salvation.

[wildboar]

The problem I faced in the PCA church I attended was the acceptance of various philosophical ideas over and against the teachings of Scripture. Both your problem and the problem I faced have a deeper root however. The problem is the acceptance of the doctrine of common grace. Many who accept the idea of some type of cultural common grace find no problem looking to the world because they believe the world is capable of doing true good.

[Robert R. Higby]

I renounced non-profit corporation membership in the PCA in January, 2001--after being a member for many years prior. Of course, in their view, external membership is everything. I wrote a detailed letter to the Session explaining all of my doctrinal differences (many of which I had earlier minimized, in the interest of 'unity'--which turned out to be a most cruel and horrible joke). After I left, false rumors abounded to the level of ridiculous nonsense. In spite of my explicit statement for the reasons of my leaving, the non-profit corporation members were determined to promote the notion that I left for stupid and irrelevant reasons--that I was opposed to disciplinary measures against obviously false professors that the Session had taken 'too little and too late'; which I was absolutely not.

The PCA has gone off into an acceptance of Reconstructionism--as promoted by the Auburn Avenue PCA church of Monroe, LA. Not all accept it yet, but they will be forced to eat this human waste and conform to it in the end. Enough said. If history is any indicator, they will totally embrace this false teaching in the same way that Baptists embraced dispensationalism (condemning all earler valiant belivers opposed to the doctrine) in the early 20th century. A full embracement of hyper-Preterism (which is not contradictory in its essence) will follow.