View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:01 PM
NaphtaliPress's Avatar
NaphtaliPress NaphtaliPress is offline.
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 8,028
Blog Entries: 19
Thanks: 888
Thanked 845 Times in 532 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbaggins View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress View Post
I guess Lane is an optimist and I'm a pessimist. Lane thinks there's a pony in there and all I see is ....; well, this is the Puritanboard so I'll leave it at that. Seriously. My dollars will stay in my pocket instead of supporting a guy to whom the church surely should not be listening.
I can certainly sympathize with this reasoning. After all, there are commentaries I read through which it is a constant exercise in gritting one's teeth. Westermann on Genesis was certainly one of those. But if conservative scholars should read liberals to know what they're saying, then shouldn't we also read FV commentaries to know how they are (ab)using Scripture?
I agree that ministers of the Gospel should, yes.
__________________
Chris Coldwell, Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian Journal
• The Blue Banner Archive

The Regulative Principle: Samuel Miller gives a succinct statement of this principle when he writes that since the Scriptures are the “only infallible rule of faith and practice, no rite or ceremony ought to have a place in the public worship of God, which is not warranted in Scripture, either by direct precept or example, or by good and sufficient inference.”

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? Joining PB's Politics & Government Forum
Reply With Quote