» Site Navigation | | | » Online Users: 106 | | 35 members and 71 guests | | 21st Century Calvinist, AThornquist, austinww, bconway52, Beoga, CatherineL, cbryant, ColdSilverMoon, earl40, gene_mingo, Grillsy, Honor, jambo, johnbugay, jwithnell, KMK, Knight, Montanablue, NateLanning, Pergamum, Puritan Scot, Richard Tallach, Rogerant, soakland, Southern Presbyterian, Southern Twang, T.A.G., TimV | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | 
04-20-2009, 10:26 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texarkana, Texas
Posts: 301
Thanks: 118
Thanked 64 Times in 42 Posts
| | | FV
Would someone please give me a concise definition of "Federal Vision" an it's origin, etc. I was trying to follow some of the current discussion to obtain an idea...but now I have a headache  !
__________________
Gregg
East Texas
Member Heritage Baptist Church
"I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way
be ashamed, but will have sufficient courage so
that now, as always, Christ will be exalted in my
life." Phil 1:20
| 
04-20-2009, 10:34 AM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hague, North Dakota
Posts: 3,053
Thanks: 979
Thanked 2,416 Times in 835 Posts
| |
Here is my introduction, part 1, and part 2. Then Scott Clark has an excellent introductory blog post on it as well.
| | The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to greenbaggins For This Useful Post: | | 
04-20-2009, 10:54 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texarkana, Texas
Posts: 301
Thanks: 118
Thanked 64 Times in 42 Posts
| | | Thanks
Thank you, that was helpful. No wonder it gave me a headache!
| 
04-20-2009, 10:56 AM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hague, North Dakota
Posts: 3,053
Thanks: 979
Thanked 2,416 Times in 835 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by coramdeo Thank you, that was helpful. No wonder it gave me a headache! | You should feel encouraged by being in good company. It has given countless migraines to the top theologians in the Reformed world! | | The Following User Says Thank You to greenbaggins For This Useful Post: | | 
04-20-2009, 10:59 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texarkana, Texas
Posts: 301
Thanks: 118
Thanked 64 Times in 42 Posts
| | | question
So why the name "Federal Vision" ? I did not get a connection of the topic as explained and the name.
| 
04-20-2009, 11:02 AM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hague, North Dakota
Posts: 3,053
Thanks: 979
Thanked 2,416 Times in 835 Posts
| | |
Literally, they mean that it is a new way of looking ("vision") at the covenant ("federal"). It is not really new, of course, as Klaas Schilder propounded these views before ("alles of niks": all or nothing; what is true of one member of the covenant is true of all, an undifferentiated covenant membership that included benefits normally ascribed only to the elect).
| | The Following User Says Thank You to greenbaggins For This Useful Post: | | 
04-20-2009, 11:11 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texarkana, Texas
Posts: 301
Thanks: 118
Thanked 64 Times in 42 Posts
| | | thanks again- defined
thanks again. i guess I could have know that had I first gone to one of my favorite sires- The online Etymological Dictionary.com
1645, as a theological term, from L. foedus "covenant, league" (gen. foederis), related to fides "faith" (see faith). Meaning "pertaining to a treaty" (1660) led to political sense of "state formed by agreement among independent states" (1707), from phrases like federal union "union based on a treaty," popularized by formation of U.S.A. 1776-1787. Federation is first attested 1721, from L.L. foederationem, from L. foederare "league together." Federalism (1793) was coined by Burke. Federalist "member or supporter of the Federal party in U.S. politics" is from 1787. Fed slang for "officer of the FBI" is from 1916.
| 
04-20-2009, 06:10 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 2,007
Thanks: 13
Thanked 750 Times in 265 Posts
| |
The federal visionists gave themselves the name. In so doing they implied that theirs was the truly "federal" theology because of their approach to the nature of the covenant of grace.
Here are some resources on this topic: Westminster Seminary California clark
After the "Tuning In" essay you might want to read the booklet on Covenant, Baptism, and Election The Bookstore at WSC: Baptism, Election, & the Covenant of Grace by Clark, R. Scott
and then CJPM: The Bookstore at WSC: Covenant, Justification and Pastoral Ministry by Clark, R. Scott
Best,
rsc
| | The Following User Says Thank You to R. Scott Clark For This Useful Post: | | 
04-22-2009, 12:03 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: DeMotte, Indiana
Posts: 378
Thanks: 46
Thanked 225 Times in 110 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbaggins Literally, they mean that it is a new way of looking ("vision") at the covenant ("federal"). It is not really new, of course, as Klaas Schilder propounded these views before ("alles of niks": all or nothing; what is true of one member of the covenant is true of all, an undifferentiated covenant membership that included benefits normally ascribed only to the elect). | This is a serious misinterpretation of Schilder. His phrase "alles of niks" refers not to undifferentiated covenant membership, but to the fact that in the covenant, by means of the promises sealed in baptism, God gives everything and demands everything from every baby baptized, or he gives nothing and demands nothing from no baby baptized.
__________________
Mark Van Der Molen
Immanuel URC
DeMotte, Indiana
| | The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mvdm For This Useful Post: | | 
04-22-2009, 01:07 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 2,007
Thanks: 13
Thanked 750 Times in 265 Posts
| | | MODERATOR'S NOTE:
STOP IT. Further posts like this will simply be deleted. This has nothing to do with content, but rather with the puerile exchange.
Last edited by fredtgreco; 04-23-2009 at 02:25 PM.
| 
04-23-2009, 01:19 PM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: DeMotte, Indiana
Posts: 378
Thanks: 46
Thanked 225 Times in 110 Posts
| | | MODERATOR'S NOTE:
STOP IT. Further posts like this will simply be deleted. This has nothing to do with content, but rather with the puerile exchange.
Last edited by fredtgreco; 04-23-2009 at 02:26 PM.
| 
04-23-2009, 01:58 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,187
Thanks: 700
Thanked 818 Times in 448 Posts
| | |
__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA
|  | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |