From the blog post:
Quote:
|
The FV movement was (and is) disparate. Some of the leaders lack formal theological education (e.g. Doug Wilson). Some have PhDs (e.g. Peter Leithart and Jeff Myers). Their original claim to be recovering historic Reformed Christianity is no longer tenable so now they generally claim to be discovering a “more biblical” form of Christianity, to be carrying on the work of Reformation. The claim to have discovered something new and interesting and to be more biblical, of course, attracts attention from, if I may be blunt, naive evangelicals who don’t know the Reformation or the history of Reformed theology and exegesis in the first place but who are perhaps attracted to the doctrine of predestination and disposed toward novelty already. |
I see the same thing happening with Hyper-preterism. People come out of Dispensationalism and are attracted to DeMar and Gentry's preterism, but because of a disposition toward novelty and a disregard for the history of Reformed theology and exegesis follow preterism to extremes. It would not surpise me to see the hyper-preterist being attracted to FV.
Also from the blog:
Quote:
|
From the late 90s there was a spate of books and before them a list of blogs (several Federal Visionists were early adopters of the medium and that did much to advance their cause), websites, and discussion lists that propagated the FV widely across the web.
|
This is a big problem with many things. Many do not understand that
anybody can post a blog. There is no authority required. There is no need for 'peer review'. I have a real problem with those shepherds who do not submit to any authority or confessional peers and go out of their way to propogate their message. Who are they trying to reach? Not their own sheep. They wouldn't need a blog for that. They are trying to reach people in my flock and yours. Notice they never say, "Ask your elders what they thinks about what you have just read." Easy access to information has its benefits and its dangers.