I don’t see how the Obama quote has anything to do with the article link I posted.

second, #170
Paul didn’t have good things to say about people who went around saying “they are of Christ” in the Corinthian Church. They were probably the worst of the fractious lot…trying to take the “high minded” route.

PB, you would do well to take note.

Wrights view: Only those who refuse to live in the purchase of justification that Jesus made for them…

Certainly not because of sin, or of lack of repentance…but a refusal to live in the reality (as Bell puts it) of being reconciled.

This is real close to universalism, if not Christian Universalism.

I am of Christ.

You attack Him, thats when I will get upset (though I know He can defend himself)

How is this at all anything like Christ? We’ve all seen what you do when you get upset and try to defend the living God. You go on the offensive and try to destroy the individual even if it means twisting and lying about them. But, even if your words weren’t inherently dishonest the entire spirit of what you do is that of the world. You attempt to flex your power in order to destroy (just as you do in real life ala your claim that you would run Bin Ladin down with your car if you could). Other than the obvious difference in scale, how are you not like Caesar?

I’m not a big fan of Rob Bell’s glasses.

Boy, thats a harsh critique if I ever heard one… LOL!

1. Will there be anybody in hell?

2. Will there be anyone in heaven who did not believe in Jesus before he died?

Having read some of Wright’s quotes I cannot consider him a universalist. Having listened to Paggit explain what happens to a devour Muslim after death, his explanation seems self invented at best.

It is amazing….when one questions Christ, there is not nearly the clamor on the level of when one questions the pet teachers of this age.

That’s because no one has actually questioned Christ.

For example, I’m not a big fan of Wright’s understanding of hell.

I’m not a big fan of Rob Bell’s glasses.

I think McClaren is a theological nut job.

The problem is that it’s not up to me. I try to debate theological ideas, and they are all only ideas, without assuming a person is going to hell because their idea doesn’t equal mine. This is the problem, John. And it’s a real, significant, problem.

But I’ll say this about Wright: For the most part, he on target.

I used to get angry when people would mock some of my favorites or criticize their teachings or theological underpinnings. Then I learned to read critically. You know what? DA Carson is not right about everything–as far as I am concerned. But his rightness does not depend upon my opinion.

For example, I am right. But that doesn’t mean anything as far as your opinion is concerned. It means that before God, I am free.

It’s called grace. And dudes like Wright, Bell and McClaren all have to stand under that same grace and before the same judge.

I am not of MacArthur, Piper, Calvin, Arminius, or even Freuh.

I am of Christ.

You attack Him, thats when I will get upset (though I know He can defend himself)

Anyone can make Wright say things he doesn’t say when one reads bits and snippets and doesn’t read him in his entirety.

Exactly.

Taking a few paragraphs out of context from an interview to back up a conclusion you’ve already come to is next to meaningless.