• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Francis A. Schaeffer

truthnluv

Active Member
Jul 12, 2004
118
4
✟273.00
Faith
Non-Denom
mjdancefreak said:
Hey
Just a question I'm interested in. If you think that's stupid, close this thread.
Does anybody of you know Francis A. Schaeffer? What do you think 'bout him (his books) ??

I don't think I'm the only one who knows'em. I'm just wondering....

thx...
I have a seven volume set called Systematic Theology. Schaeffer is the author. He's good overall. I don't agree with everything He says... For example: His teaching of "hypostatic union." This asserts that Christ was fully man(body soul and spirit) and fully God though this fact was not acted upon or acknowledged fully." So, in effect He had two spirits... one that was a man's spirit and one that was God's spirit and He simply chose to ignore the God part while he lived His life here on earth. Uhhhh, ...I don't think so.

Christ was God in the form of sinful flesh(Phil.2:6-8). He was simply God in a man's body. He grew in wisdom because wisdom is the application of knowledge not because He actually needed to learn. He asked questions in order to reveal ignorance and then to give the truth, not because He didn't know.

But overall Schaeffer is good, in my opinion. It has been said his books are a difficult read requiring a good dictionary to be kept handy.

truthnluv
 
Upvote 0

truthnluv

Active Member
Jul 12, 2004
118
4
✟273.00
Faith
Non-Denom
truthnluv said:
I have a seven volume set called Systematic Theology. Schaeffer is the author. He's good overall. I don't agree with everything He says... For example: His teaching of "hypostatic union." This asserts that Christ was fully man(body soul and spirit) and fully God though this fact was not acted upon or acknowledged fully." So, in effect He had two spirits... one that was a man's spirit and one that was God's spirit and He simply chose to ignore the God part while he lived His life here on earth. Uhhhh, ...I don't think so.

Christ was God in the form of sinful flesh(Phil.2:6-8). He was simply God in a man's body. He grew in wisdom because wisdom is the application of knowledge not because He actually needed to learn. He asked questions in order to reveal ignorance and then to give the truth, not because He didn't know.

But overall Schaeffer is good, in my opinion. It has been said his books are a difficult read requiring a good dictionary to be kept handy.

truthnluv
Sorry,.... I think my set is by Lewis Sperry Chafer. My mistake.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
67
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
For a while I like him, and he even got me to think a little. Unfortunately his bite sized distortions of philosophies he doesn't like are good ways to send your thinking backward not forward. He's basically like all fundamentalists: his thinking is based on a rationalistic view of truth as opposed to a much broader and less Comtean view. It's interesting that Comte actually founded a religion on the idea that all truth had to be factual; I think his heirs include Francis Schaeffer and most fundamentalists.

I think he led the fundamentalists up the garden path, frankly; and it was only when I began to read deeply in the philosophy of religion that I realised how shallow and hollow his thinking was.
 
Upvote 0