Good interview I agreed with most of it, BUT yall are wrong on an important point: The 25 Articles and EUB Confession and the proposed combination of the two by the GMC. I know through the "grapevine" as a GMC person myself why leaders and thinkers in the GMC proposed that in the WCA Rough draft and later in our Book of Discipline to begin with: 1. Thomas Cranmer was a straight white man (And so was Wesley). A certain strand in the GMC is really big on Multiculturalism and Globalism. They insist that our Creed or Confession be written by a racially diverse group of people and have women contributors as well. So in other words Cranmer's Articles fails the DEI Test 2. The 25 Articles are offensive. There is a certain strand in the GMC that insists on only positive thinking, positive messages. Thus they have a disdain about fire hell brimstone preaching and any statements about rejecting X Y or Z. They insist on positive statements only. Thus our 25 Articles are denounced as "Anti-Catholic" and not ecumenical. They don't want any statements about what we reject, only statements about what we support. 3. Eastern Orthodoxy and Anglo-Catholic Obsession. There is a growing de-protestantization among Methodist scholars (the legacy of Billy Abraham and even Tom Oden). The Anti-Catholic Articles stand in the way of their pro-Anglo-Catholic/Eastern Orthodox agenda. 4. Making Room for Changes. The EUB Confession was written by liberal scholars under the influence of Neo-Orthodoxy in the 1960s. Thus the original Confession that the EUB had at its formation in the 1940s was changed, namely the affirmations of Depravity, Bible the Word of God and Christ the Only Way, were all dropped. By slight changes in word order, slight changes in sentence structures, by dropping a word here or there, radical changes were made. Thus the proposal to "combine" (i.e., change) the 25 Articles the GMC has opened the Pandora's Box to make Methodism whatever they themselves want it to be. Again, we have a Restrictive Rule that allows for the adoption of new Confession of faiths, so long as they agree with the trio of doctrinal standards established by Wesley himself, but instead the GMC leadership decided to ignore the Restrictive Rule all together and open the door to make Methodist theology whatever they want it to be, unrestrained by Wesley's previously established doctrines. 5. Wesley's Standards Sermons and NT Notes were made "Normative Standards" as a temporary category since GMC leadership does not know if they even want to keep them as doctrinal standards or not. Again, there are many of us, myself included, who are very conservative and are hoping for a more conservative direction for the GMC. But we do have a uphill battle to climb. As of now, the GMC ranges from everything from Inerrantists (like myself) to people who are basically UMC 2.0 but minus gay marriage. Again, that Reformational heritage yall spoke about, Arminianism and Reformed Theology, are all under threat of disappearing in the GMC if a certain more liberal faction has their way....
@andymilleriii I stand by my original proposal (see my article on the Society of Evangelical Arminians, "Harmony of the Arminian Faith" by Andrew (V.) Sullivan). That being said I know my proposal has no chance whatsoever. On a more practical level, we should follow the Restrictive Rule and replace the EUB Confession (as its own precedence allows for) but whatever this new Confession may be, must agree with the 25 Articles and be kept along side it, as per the Restrictive Rule.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
I am a calvinist 😂, but i enjoyed greatly the interview. God bless
Good interview I agreed with most of it, BUT yall are wrong on an important point: The 25 Articles and EUB Confession and the proposed combination of the two by the GMC. I know through the "grapevine" as a GMC person myself why leaders and thinkers in the GMC proposed that in the WCA Rough draft and later in our Book of Discipline to begin with:
1. Thomas Cranmer was a straight white man (And so was Wesley). A certain strand in the GMC is really big on Multiculturalism and Globalism. They insist that our Creed or Confession be written by a racially diverse group of people and have women contributors as well. So in other words Cranmer's Articles fails the DEI Test
2. The 25 Articles are offensive. There is a certain strand in the GMC that insists on only positive thinking, positive messages. Thus they have a disdain about fire hell brimstone preaching and any statements about rejecting X Y or Z. They insist on positive statements only. Thus our 25 Articles are denounced as "Anti-Catholic" and not ecumenical. They don't want any statements about what we reject, only statements about what we support.
3. Eastern Orthodoxy and Anglo-Catholic Obsession. There is a growing de-protestantization among Methodist scholars (the legacy of Billy Abraham and even Tom Oden). The Anti-Catholic Articles stand in the way of their pro-Anglo-Catholic/Eastern Orthodox agenda.
4. Making Room for Changes. The EUB Confession was written by liberal scholars under the influence of Neo-Orthodoxy in the 1960s. Thus the original Confession that the EUB had at its formation in the 1940s was changed, namely the affirmations of Depravity, Bible the Word of God and Christ the Only Way, were all dropped. By slight changes in word order, slight changes in sentence structures, by dropping a word here or there, radical changes were made. Thus the proposal to "combine" (i.e., change) the 25 Articles the GMC has opened the Pandora's Box to make Methodism whatever they themselves want it to be. Again, we have a Restrictive Rule that allows for the adoption of new Confession of faiths, so long as they agree with the trio of doctrinal standards established by Wesley himself, but instead the GMC leadership decided to ignore the Restrictive Rule all together and open the door to make Methodist theology whatever they want it to be, unrestrained by Wesley's previously established doctrines.
5. Wesley's Standards Sermons and NT Notes were made "Normative Standards" as a temporary category since GMC leadership does not know if they even want to keep them as doctrinal standards or not.
Again, there are many of us, myself included, who are very conservative and are hoping for a more conservative direction for the GMC. But we do have a uphill battle to climb. As of now, the GMC ranges from everything from Inerrantists (like myself) to people who are basically UMC 2.0 but minus gay marriage.
Again, that Reformational heritage yall spoke about, Arminianism and Reformed Theology, are all under threat of disappearing in the GMC if a certain more liberal faction has their way....
Thanks for sharing here. What do you propose for the GMC in this regard?
@andymilleriii I stand by my original proposal (see my article on the Society of Evangelical Arminians, "Harmony of the Arminian Faith" by Andrew (V.) Sullivan). That being said I know my proposal has no chance whatsoever. On a more practical level, we should follow the Restrictive Rule and replace the EUB Confession (as its own precedence allows for) but whatever this new Confession may be, must agree with the 25 Articles and be kept along side it, as per the Restrictive Rule.