A. W. Tozer

Excellent writer, although he used a number of logical fallacies in his reasoning. 
 
Recovering IFB said:
I enjoyed "Knowledge Of The Holy" by him.

Just starting that one. I hope it is as good as "The Pursuit of God"!
 
The Rogue Tomato said:
Excellent writer, although he used a number of logical fallacies in his reasoning.

Examples? Just curious what you have in mind.
 
subllibrm said:
The Rogue Tomato said:
Excellent writer, although he used a number of logical fallacies in his reasoning.

Examples? Just curious what you have in mind.

It has been a long time.  The only one I remember at the moment is his argument that if you get a divorce you cannot remarry.  He said this is true even if you were divorced when you were unsaved.  His analogy was that if you get saved while you're in jail for a crime, they don't just let you out of prison.  The law still applies. 

So what he's actually saying is that the civil law of divorce still applies even if you get saved.  And according to civil law, you are free to remarry after a divorce, which is exactly the opposite of the point he was trying to make. 

 
The Rogue Tomato said:
subllibrm said:
The Rogue Tomato said:
Excellent writer, although he used a number of logical fallacies in his reasoning.

Examples? Just curious what you have in mind.

It has been a long time.  The only one I remember at the moment is his argument that if you get a divorce you cannot remarry.  He said this is true even if you were divorced when you were unsaved.  His analogy was that if you get saved while you're in jail for a crime, they don't just let you out of prison.  The law still applies. 

So what he's actually saying is that the civil law of divorce still applies even if you get saved.  And according to civil law, you are free to remarry after a divorce, which is exactly the opposite of the point he was trying to make.

Gottcha. Thanx
 
As I recall, Tozer's collection of sermons on 1 Peter, I Call It Heresy!, was a pretty good rebuttal to an early form of no-lordship salvation.
 
Because Tozer was a Biblicist instead of just a denominational hack or addicted to only certain circles.  He was a loud voice that spoke for Biblical salvation that included repentance and Lordship before the days that "easy believism" became prominent.  He considered the Bible to have authority and it was something to be practically applied to life, not merely understood as some theological construct.  Those who believe in salvation that actually saves and changes a man will find his writings refreshing.  But the anarchists who promote their antinomian character will have none of him.

Years ago, he was part of my triumvirate reading for devotional "warming of the soul."  At least once a week, I would read a chapter from one of Tozer's books, or Vance Havner, or Watchman Nee.  Great reading material.  btw ... for a good sampling, you can get "The Best of A.W. Tozer" which will cull different chapters from his books.
 
I like reading his books. I also have a pamphlet somewhere that he wrote on proper worship.  I am sure it is probably an excerpt from a book. It is a really good analysis from a biblical perspective.  I just picked up a new biography on him the other day, and am looking forward to reading it.
 
Top