Quote:
Originally Posted by wsw201  Yes I did read the OP. And I attempted to answer it as best I could. But I guess I made a wrong assumption in that you not only wanted to know where these issues were taught in the Standards but some kind of explanation as to why these views that you have categorised as "WSC/Lutheran/Klinean" are actually Reformed. |
In your post, you only once quoted from the Westminster Standards. That's why I asked if you had read it. In the OP I make it very clear that I want to know if the
Standards teach these doctrines, not Shaw, and not Fisher.
Quote:
|
For instance Dr. Clarks explanation of WCF 19 is valid and his explanation in the 3 parts blog posts on re-publication are in line with the WCF as Robert Shaw points out in my initial response.
|
If you believe this, would you be willing to respond to my objections to that interpretation of WCF 19?
Quote:
|
Granted that WSC 102 does not use the term civil/spiritual. This is what I meant by "specific" language. One has to dig a little deeper to determine what the Divines meant by Kingdom of Satan and God's kingdom. This is why I quoted Fisher in regards to this concept.
|
You're right, WSC 102 does not use the terms civil/spiritual. So perhaps trying to read that particular doctrine out of WSC 102 is not appropriate. The distinction in WSC 102 is not between a civil kingdom and a spiritual kingdom (as though the civil kingdom were Satan's kingdom), but between God's kingdom (which includes all elect) and Satan's kingdom (which includes all the reprobate). In WSC 102, you are not a member of both kingdoms (as in the civil/spiritual view), rather, you're in one or the other.
Quote:
|
As far as what to call these three teachings, I would suggest you try "Biblical" or "Reformed".
|
They may or may not be "Biblical" (that's not the question of this thread, and to call it biblical is to beg the question). I cannot call these doctrines "Reformed" because I don't see them in the Westminster Standards. Anyway, if "Reformed" is defined by the confessions, then that's why I'm asking for it to be demonstrated that the Westminster Standards teach these doctrines. You don't first call the doctrines "Reformed" and then find them in the Confession; rather, you find them in the Confession, which establishes that they are Reformed.
Quote:
For as you noted a number of folks on the board see nothing unconfessional about re-publication, the Two-Kingdoms and the Law/Gospel distinction especially since Lutherans do not meet the qualifications for membership on this board.
BTW, there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking folks to look to the Standards. I wish more would actually do it.
|
Yes, there are people on this forum that don't believe these doctrines are unconfessional, which is the very reason for my asking where these doctrines are in the Westminster Standards.
