In February 2008, Jeremy Jones gave the second talk, "Renewing Theology," at the Denominational Renewal (DR) conference. The transcript is not available due to a publishing contract, but you may listen to the audio of Jeremy's talk by clicking (here).
This is the second week of a five week forum scrutinizing the five talks given at DR. For more on the structure of the five week forum at CGO on this conference, click (here).
During the week of September 22-25 we will host essays from John
Frame, Sean Michael Lucas, Howard Brown, and Michael Walker in response
to Jeremy Jones' talk. Today, September 26, Jeremy responds to
his
respondents.
We welcome discussion that is both robust and gracious. I [Glenn] will moderate all comments and those comments that exemplify graciousness and love for one's brothers and sisters will be approved. First and last name, and one's current, valid email address are required for comments. Also, please focus on Jeremy's talk and/or the response essay.
-----
Jeremy Jones is an associate pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Memphis. He was the RUF campus minister at Southern Mississippi and then Emory.
-----
Thanks
to Glenn for hosting and all the other participants for responding; it’s been
encouraging to see this discussion take place.
I want
to do two things in this response: give some context for the original
Denominational Renewal talks that may assist everyone in understanding them
better. And respond to a couple of the issues raised this week during the
discussion of my presentation.
All of
the talks we’re interacting with via Common Grounds were first given at a
conference held last spring in St. Louis. The “Conversation on Denominational
Renewal” started with an opening introduction given by Joe Novenson (based on a
brief talk given by Jeff White at Covenant Seminary earlier that day). This intro set the table and tone for the
conference and made clear our purpose: to outline a theological vision for the
future of the PCA. Our explicit
intention was not to organize as some political action group, nor did we wish
to wade into current denominational “hot button” debates (FV/NPP, etc) and
argue for one side rather than another. In our understanding, the more specific doctrinal debates within the PCA
are often the result of conflicting theological visions that exist in our
church. Until we can identify, discuss,
and debate these alternative visions, the different factions in the PCA will
keep talking past each other.
We
wanted to start a conversation at this deeper level.
Continue reading "Jeremy Jones Responds to Frame, Lucas, et. al." »
Recent Comments