@mattklewis the prosperity gospel is a logical endpoint to the modern american evangelical rejection of (Catholic) redemptive suffering.
-
-
Replying to @RyanLEllis
@RyanLEllis Perhaps. As such, modern incarnation can probably be traced back to the the faith/grace vs. works debate.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mattklewis
@mattklewis if that were the case, there would have been prosperity gospels in zurich/wittenberg. but it's an american thing from <100 yrs1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanLEllis
@RyanLEllis But they would argue that Abraham practiced the prosperity gospel ..2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mattklewis
@mattklewis if one serves God (like Abraham did), his life will be rightly ordered and things will line up better. not same as P.G.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanLEllis
@RyanLEllis By calling it the PG, I'm appropriating the words of its critics. More specifically, mine is a defense of the "so-called" PG.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mattklewis
@mattklewis call it what you want, but at the end of the day it's christianity sans the cross, which is simply a new age phenomenon.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanLEllis
@RyanLEllis I guess I disagree with your premise.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mattklewis
@mattklewis ok. where's the cross in osteen's theology? how does the suffering we inevitably face factor in to his worldview?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@RyanLEllis I have stuff to say, but not sure I can have this sort of debate in 140 characters. We will probably have to agree to disagree.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.