What I think about his attitude:

It could use some improvement. However, who can say their attitude doesn't need improvement at times. This is especially true when we are debating something that we believe is a critical doctrine. That being said, he seemed to come more and more unglued each exchange.

Is he modelling Christ? No. Are any of us? Like I said, his attitude could use a more humility/humbleness/respect. He believes this is a key issue, I understand how hard it is to demonstrate the fruit of the spirit on these matters, especially if he's just gone through a major theological shift.


What I think about the issues he raises:

I have often wondered about the reasons the updated "Americanized" WCF deletes the "Pope == AntiChrist" part.

It is definately worth further study.

I somehow have the impression that modern day USA evangelical Arminians who are on the "road to Rome" in doctrine will re-join the Roman church in spirit welcoming the Pope/Anti-Christ.


It may just be me, but I had a hard time following exactly who wrote what in the e-mail exchange. Maybe you can color code, or bold your words versus his so it is easier to follow.


Something else to consider is if Keith expected these e-mails to go public. I know I'm usually more careful about what I write on forums than in an e-mail I consider private.

He questions aren't unreasonable, but his attitude is troubling. If you discount the attitude based on the info above, his questions seem legit.

Why is the modern WCF changed?


[Edited on 4-26-2004 by humble_soul]

__________________
Chris Lilly
Member
Midway Presbyterian Church - PCA
Powder Springs, GA
[url]http://www.midwaypca.org/[/url]