Talk:David Pawson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
There are comments in the articles which I do not believe are fully accurate. I have made changes which I explain thus:
- It is not true that Pawson is " very strongly Arminian, and thus extremely critical of Calvinism,". I have read nearly all of his books and listened to virtually all of his recordings over the last twenty five years (I purcahsed his entire back catalog) and sometimes visit his former church in my home town of Guildford. On a number of his tapes, he addresses the matter of Arminianism and Calvinism and he takes a middle line, believing that truth is to be found in both of them. He does not hold to one of the streams to the exclusion of the other. He has regularly quoted in his sermons an incident where someone at his church heard him preach over a period of time and eventually came to him asking him whether he was Arminian or Calvinist. Pawson asked him what he himself thought seeing as he had been hearing him preach for a period of time. The reply was that he sometimes thought that Pawson was Calvinist and sometimes thought he was Arminian! To that, Pawson said it was true - he believes in both! I have heard David say on several occasions that he is happy to believe in both even if they might appear contradictory to his (and our) limited human understanding.
- I disagree that he holds to a "Catholic emphasis on the sacrements". That's not quite accurate. On the back cover of the Normal Christian Birth, it actually says "the 'sacremental' on baptism" which is really rather different! What he's arguing is that baptism is a normal part of a Christian conversion experience: he's not asking for a return to Catholic sacrements as a basis for salvation!
- I disagree that his idea of salvation "must incorporate the liberal emphasis on works". Again the actual wording is "the liberal emphasis on repentence". (note it says "repentence", not "works") Again, that's a little different. While he emphasises works, he does so in the sense that James chapter 2 does, not in the way that some liberals might. His point is that repentance is important, just as liberals believe.
- "He contended that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, a distinct experience in which the believer receives the Holy Spirit, was a necessary part of becoming a Christian and becoming saved" This is untrue. His book, The Normal Christian Birth, argues that Baptism in the Holy Spirit is a NORMAL part of the Christian birth, not a "necessary part of becoming a Christian." He himself did not receive his baptism until he was a serving pastor: he had a been a committed Christian for many years. His book, Jesus Baptises in One Holy Spirit also discusses this. While he thinks that Baptism in the Holy Spirit should be a normal experience, he does not argue that it is a requirement for salvation.
- Regarding the Normal Christian Birth and "This book has probably been his most influential." This is debatable soince Unlocking the Bible has been a big seller since its release. Also, When Jesus Returns, The Road to Hell, Once Saved Always Saved? and Jesus Baptises in One Holy Spirit have all been big sellers so I think it should be removed.
- I expanded the bit about Leadership is Male. He has often comlained that "Leadership is male" is his most talked about and least read book and this entry had exemplified the problem. It's not just about leadership being for men but much more about men being cowardly and not taking their responsibilities seriously. I have changed it accordingly.
- "Pawson teaches that leadership is a role given by God only to males, a position he derives from the teachings of the apostles Peter and Paul." Again, not quite true. In his book, Leadership is Male, he looks at the matter from many angles, not just Peter and Paul. For instance, he discusses Old Testament norms (many more kings than Queens, and also the Patriarchs) and also ther New Testament aspects (e.g. that Jesus had 12 male dsiciples).
- His thoughts on the eternal punishment of Hell are not really related to having a literal eschatology. The two are quite different and not especially linked. You can be an amillennialist and still have the same view as Pawson. Likewise, you can be a dispensational premillennialist and believe in annihilationism. I have, however, added in a new section on his eschatology.
>D6032e
