 » Site Navigation | | | | » Online Users: 103 | | 38 members and 65 guests | | 21st Century Calvinist, Abd_Yesua_alMasih, Anton Bruckner, Backwoods Presbyterian, Beth Ellen Nagle, Blue Tick, calgal, christianyouth, Christusregnat, Curt, Gesetveemet, Grace Alone, kennicon, Mayflower, PuritanBouncer, py3ak, Quickened, regener8ed, rescuedbyLove, sastark, Scott Shahan, Solus Christus, Southern Presbyterian, Superstu, TaylorOtwell, Theoretical, TimV, victorbravo, Webservant, Wes White, Zenas | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | | 
05-22-2008, 09:13 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 4,811
Thanks: 580
Thanked 2,189 Times in 869 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark  I don't dispute that there are differences, but if anyone says that the Reformed don't say that "do" is law and "done" is gospel, I say that one doesn't know the sources or the history of the doctrine. | Prof. Clark, Have you had the opportunity to read Samuel Rutherford yet?
__________________
Yours sincerely, 
"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."
Last edited by armourbearer; 05-22-2008 at 10:11 PM.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to armourbearer For This Useful Post: | |
05-22-2008, 11:12 PM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: La Grange Park, IL
Posts: 1,227
Thanks: 134
Thanked 170 Times in 107 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark I thought this dragon was slain during the FV controversy. Do we have to do it all over again? | What is the connection, specifically, between the ideas in Frame's essay and the FV? Dr. Clark, do you see this essay as upholding an inherently FV position on L/G? Quote: |
Didn't we analyze Frame's essay years ago on the PB?
| I don't remember this -- can anyone find the thread that this was discussed on? 
__________________ Casey Bessette
Westminster OPC • West Suburbs of Chicago • My Blog: Paradise Regained
"It is part of the calling of the ekklesia to learn to know the love of Christ that surpasses all knowledge and also to make known within the world of science 'the manifold wisdom of God' in order that the final end of theology, as of all things, may be that the name of the Lord is glorified. Theology and dogmatics, too, exist for the Lord's sake." — Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 46
|
05-23-2008, 01:32 PM
| | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: La Grange Park, IL
Posts: 1,227
Thanks: 134
Thanked 170 Times in 107 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark As to John Frame, he's never identified himself completely with the FV . . . | So, do you see FV ideas in this article by Frame?  I'm looking forward to a response to my above post. Thanks, Dr. Clark.
__________________ Casey Bessette
Westminster OPC • West Suburbs of Chicago • My Blog: Paradise Regained
"It is part of the calling of the ekklesia to learn to know the love of Christ that surpasses all knowledge and also to make known within the world of science 'the manifold wisdom of God' in order that the final end of theology, as of all things, may be that the name of the Lord is glorified. Theology and dogmatics, too, exist for the Lord's sake." — Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 46
|
05-24-2008, 01:37 AM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 1,744
Thanks: 2
Thanked 328 Times in 122 Posts
| |
Casey,
do YOU think there are any FV ideas in Frame's article?
You clearly care about it more than I do!
Why don't you teach me? I have very little interest in re-reading this piece. Life is short and getting shorter. I'm all eyes.
rsc Quote:
Originally Posted by CaseyBessette Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark As to John Frame, he's never identified himself completely with the FV . . . | So, do you see FV ideas in this article by Frame? I'm looking forward to a response to my above post. Thanks, Dr. Clark. |
__________________
R. Scott Clark, D.Phil
Professor of Church History and Historical Theology 
"For Christ, His Gospel, and His Church"
Associate Pastor Oceanside URC The Heidelblog |
05-24-2008, 02:24 PM
| | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: La Grange Park, IL
Posts: 1,227
Thanks: 134
Thanked 170 Times in 107 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark Casey,
do YOU think there are any FV ideas in Frame's article?
You clearly care about it more than I do!
Why don't you teach me? I have very little interest in re-reading this piece. Life is short and getting shorter. I'm all eyes.
rsc | With all due respect, why are you posting on a thread that is intended to interact with this specific article, if you won't read it?
And on top of that, you suggest a connection with the FV and are unwilling to explain yourself? 
I don't understand the reason for the apparent abrasiveness of your response. Was there something inappropriate about my question to you?
__________________ Casey Bessette
Westminster OPC • West Suburbs of Chicago • My Blog: Paradise Regained
"It is part of the calling of the ekklesia to learn to know the love of Christ that surpasses all knowledge and also to make known within the world of science 'the manifold wisdom of God' in order that the final end of theology, as of all things, may be that the name of the Lord is glorified. Theology and dogmatics, too, exist for the Lord's sake." — Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 46
|
05-24-2008, 05:43 PM
| | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: La Grange Park, IL
Posts: 1,227
Thanks: 134
Thanked 170 Times in 107 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristianTrader Dr. Clark,
It seems to be your view that either we accept your view of law and gospel or we might as well go ahead and embrace FV and/or go back to Rome?
Am I reading you correctly?
CT | Perhaps your (our) question was already answered on another thread? (see red bolded part) Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark Are we in a time warp? Have the last 8 years not happened? Have the OPC, URCs, and PCA not spoken with one voice on this (not to mention the OCRCs and the RPCGA)?
Why are we starting from scratch, as if there were no books, articles, and denominational documents on this matter?
Note to the Mods: I thought the PB had some sort of official position contra the FV and its promulgation on the site? Has there been a policy shift?
It seems that the law/gospel distinction is up for grabs, so perhaps the FV is back on the table again. If so, I'd like to know about it. |
__________________ Casey Bessette
Westminster OPC • West Suburbs of Chicago • My Blog: Paradise Regained
"It is part of the calling of the ekklesia to learn to know the love of Christ that surpasses all knowledge and also to make known within the world of science 'the manifold wisdom of God' in order that the final end of theology, as of all things, may be that the name of the Lord is glorified. Theology and dogmatics, too, exist for the Lord's sake." — Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 46
|
05-24-2008, 05:54 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,026
Thanks: 933
Thanked 272 Times in 180 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Staphlobob Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnOwen007 Lutheranism:
Law = commands (imperative)
Gospel = promise (indicative)
Reformed
Law = covenant of works ("do then and live" - commands and then promise)
Gospel = covenant of grace ("live and then do this" - promise and then commands)
One crux is whether the gospel contains commands. For example, does the gospel call us to repentance? For Lutherans no, for the Reformed yes. But it is a repentance that arises from being justified (not to be justified).
The gospel commands repentance out of reconciliation with Christ. But my actual repentance is not the gospel.
| Thanks for the post. I was a Lutheran pastor for about 18 years, but became Reformed several years ago and came to the same conclusions regarding the law/gospel distinction. I forget where the question is, but I was asking for any kind of linkage between law/gospel and covenant theology. However, I do think the imperative/indicative distinction to also be quite valid.
I also think it very significant to note that "repentance arises from being justified (not to be justified)." This sheer grace is what people so often react - negatively - towards when they first encounter it.
Thanks again. | Marty, what you have stated does not convince we there is a difference between the Lutheran and Reformed understanding of the law/gospel.
__________________
Stephen Welch
PCA Teaching Elder
Nova Scotia :cheers:
|
05-24-2008, 06:33 PM
| | Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: LA
Posts: 9,871
Thanks: 860
Thanked 769 Times in 476 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Scott Clark has a great chapter on the law/gospel in his book Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry. On page 340 he rejects the idea that the distinction is Lutheran and not Reformed. If you take the time to read his book it is apparent that the FV does reject the Reformed understanding of the law/gospel hermeneutic. I found this chapter to be very helpful. | We know that. We know what RSC's position is. We are simply stating that one can disagree with RSC and still be Reformed.
__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College
|
05-24-2008, 06:54 PM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,750
Thanks: 122
Thanked 198 Times in 114 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivanhoe Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Scott Clark has a great chapter on the law/gospel in his book Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry. On page 340 he rejects the idea that the distinction is Lutheran and not Reformed. If you take the time to read his book it is apparent that the FV does reject the Reformed understanding of the law/gospel hermeneutic. I found this chapter to be very helpful. | We know that. We know what RSC's position is. We are simply stating that one can disagree with RSC and still be Reformed. | Nope, if I am reading this thread properly; the discussion is whether RSC's position is in fact reformed or antinomian?
__________________
Hermonta Godwin
Christ The King PCA
Raleigh, NC
|
05-24-2008, 06:57 PM
|  | Puritanboard Professor | | Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 5,258
Thanks: 1,846
Thanked 791 Times in 545 Posts
| | |
Well if that is the discussion it merits its own thread not hijacking one on John Frame
|
05-24-2008, 07:08 PM
| | Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: LA
Posts: 9,871
Thanks: 860
Thanked 769 Times in 476 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Backwoods Presbyterian Well if that is the discussion it merits its own thread not hijacking one on John Frame | It is not hijacking. Frame explicitly disputes the "Luthero-Reformed" view. Clark defends it.
__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College
|
05-24-2008, 07:20 PM
| | Puritanboard Professor | | Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 5,258
Thanks: 1,846
Thanked 791 Times in 545 Posts
| | |
I agree but the discussion has moved away from how Frame describes it and to how RSC does.
|
05-24-2008, 07:27 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Leduc, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,923
Thanks: 154
Thanked 473 Times in 261 Posts
| | | MODERATOR VOICE ON
Far enough guys (everybody). Let's stick to discussing the article by Frame. Anything else is off limits for this thread. If you want to talk about Dr. Clark's views etc. start a new thread.
MODERATOR VOICE OFF
__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA Church Blog
"there is no creature, either in heaven or on earth, who loves us more than Jesus Christ" Belgic Confession, Article 26
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? |
05-24-2008, 07:30 PM
| | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,750
Thanks: 122
Thanked 198 Times in 114 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Poimen MODERATOR VOICE ON
Far enough guys (everybody). Let's stick to discussing the article by Frame. Anything else is off limits for this thread. If you want to talk about Dr. Clark's views etc. the thread has been cited here - follow that up if you will.
MODERATOR VOICE OFF | Don't you have to unlock the other thread first?
CT
__________________
Hermonta Godwin
Christ The King PCA
Raleigh, NC
|
05-24-2008, 07:33 PM
| | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Leduc, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,923
Thanks: 154
Thanked 473 Times in 261 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristianTrader Quote:
Originally Posted by Poimen MODERATOR VOICE ON
Far enough guys (everybody). Let's stick to discussing the article by Frame. Anything else is off limits for this thread. If you want to talk about Dr. Clark's views etc. the thread has been cited here - follow that up if you will.
MODERATOR VOICE OFF | Don't you have to unlock the other thread first?
CT | Hey man you don't have to make me look like an idiot! 
If a thread has been locked down I am hesitant to open it. Just start a new thread with the appropriate title then.
*I have edited the original post for graphic display of ignorance.*
__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA Church Blog
"there is no creature, either in heaven or on earth, who loves us more than Jesus Christ" Belgic Confession, Article 26
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? |
05-24-2008, 08:31 PM
| | Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Saintfield, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
Posts: 6,568
Thanks: 2,062
Thanked 1,124 Times in 740 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Poimen MODERATOR VOICE ON
Far enough guys (everybody). Let's stick to discussing the article by Frame. Anything else is off limits for this thread. If you want to talk about Dr. Clark's views etc. start a new thread.
MODERATOR VOICE OFF | Just wondering, has this discussion got confused because Dr. Frame drastically overstated the case in slamming the law/gospel distinction in the OP?
__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)
|
05-24-2008, 08:40 PM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Northern Virgnia
Posts: 12,428
Thanks: 1,090
Thanked 2,527 Times in 1,189 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie Quote:
Originally Posted by Poimen MODERATOR VOICE ON
Far enough guys (everybody). Let's stick to discussing the article by Frame. Anything else is off limits for this thread. If you want to talk about Dr. Clark's views etc. start a new thread.
MODERATOR VOICE OFF | Just wondering, has this discussion got confused because Dr. Frame drastically overstated the case in slamming the law/gospel distinction in the OP? | Perhaps. What this is coming down to is really a matter of who's view of the Reformed Confessions is idiosyncratic.
I will be the first to admit that Dr. Frame writes and says some things that I don't believe are Confessional but that doesn't make it a maxim that every critique he utters is, a priori, false. I actually believe there is a kernel of truth to what he states and you don't have to become a neo-nomian to agree with the critique as far as it goes.
It doesn't really help the case of truth when those in error see a large crowd of those who reject their views and a small percentage are actually orthodox but a vast majority are criticizing them because they clash with their own idiosyncratic views. It doesn't give the FV any excuse for their own error but I imagine it must be galling when you are condemned for being un-Confessional and a great number of those raising their hand represent Churches where the charge of being un-Confessional could strike them from another corner. There are many more warts than the FV on the hide of NAPARC congregations.
| | The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Semper Fidelis For This Useful Post: | |
05-24-2008, 08:44 PM
|  | El Tirano | | Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 3,721
Thanks: 123
Thanked 753 Times in 488 Posts
| | |
Semper Fidelis, I thank you for this useful post.
|
05-24-2008, 08:46 PM
| | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Leduc, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,923
Thanks: 154
Thanked 473 Times in 261 Posts
| | Moderator voice on
Okay I have created a new post to deal with the issue that some would like to continue to discuss. Please take it up there. What is the Reformed view of Law/Gospel?
If I missed a post that you think is relevant to the issue please let me know and I will be happy to ignore your pleas for help. Moderator voice off
__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA Church Blog
"there is no creature, either in heaven or on earth, who loves us more than Jesus Christ" Belgic Confession, Article 26
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? | | The Following User Says Thank You to Poimen For This Useful Post: | |
05-24-2008, 09:24 PM
| | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 1,744
Thanks: 2
Thanked 328 Times in 122 Posts
| | |
What exactly is useful about this essay? What do we learn from JMF here that we can't or haven't learned from those who are not pluralist when it comes to the doctrine of justification?
Am I intolerant of the FV? You bet I am. I just spend 8 years doing little else but dealing with the academic and ecclesiastical consequences of the FV.
The FV is a profoundly dangerous movement because it corrupts the gospel and corrupts Reformed theology. I think John is dangerous because I think he's a sort of theological gateway drug to moralism. Like the moderates (e.g. Charles Eerdman) at Princeton leading up to 1929 John is a facilitator. He may be personally orthodox but he's quite critical of confessionalists like me who insist that everyone in our churches be orthodox.
In the long run i | |
