Paul Owen gives a classic example of the position (so common in NT Wright) that ecclesiology is more important than soteriology in this post on Communion Sanctorum (for those of you who don't know, it is Reformed Catholics Part II, with extra Latin)

http://www.communiosanctorum.com/?p=23

Think about the implications of this statement (yes, think about it):

__________________
Fredrick T. Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

Is he being serious???? Sorry, I haven't read it yet.

[Edited on 5-22-2005 by Solo Christo]

__________________
Since it is incomparably the greatest dignity to be introduced into the company of angels, nay, to be made the associates of Christ, he who estimates this favor of God aright, will regard all other things as worthless. Then neither poverty, nor contempt, nor nakedness, nor famine nor thirst, will make his mind so anxious, but that he will sustain himself with this consolation. "Since the Lord has conferred on me the principal thing, it behooves me patiently to bear the loss of other things, which are inferior."--John Calvin

Is he willing to abandon faith alone over the doctrine of padeobaptism? Maybe Im missing something.

__________________
Tony Dean
Chino, Ca
United Reformed Church (URC) Ontario, CA.

OK. I've read it. Is he being serious?!?!?!

Pentecostal over Baptist? Veddy significant! A closet Arminian?

P.S; Poor John MacArthur! I hope he never sees where that guy said he was influenced by him!

[Edited on 5-22-2005 by turmeric]

__________________
The man who is disposed to think of his sin as a great calamity, rather than as a heinous crime, is not likely either to reverence God or to respect His law. - John Kennedy, 1873
Meg
Blog
Member, Intown Presbyterian Church,PCA, Portland, OR

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

LOL!

__________________
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?

He is right to some extent, since the doctrine of the church has been ignored or abused in NA rather shamefully.

At the same time, I wonder if these guys ever consider the following:

After the Reformers were kicked out of the church, there was only one true church: the Lutheran and Reformed (Anglican). The only other option were the Anabaptists who were largely heretics.

So when the Synod of Dordrecht met in 1618-1619, it was an ecumenical and catholic meeting right? Other than the Lutherans, who had by this time, largely capitulated to Semi-Pelagianism, and the Arminians themselves, there were no others to be sought within the fold of the visible Christian church. So when the Synod condemned Arminianism, the Canons, in effect, became an ecumenical creed for the visible church. In a sense it is a catholic creed, one we rightly as historical Protestants, say is binding on all to believe, just like the early creeds of the Christian church.

Or am I off here? At the very least, we ought to take the Canons more seriously as the basis for our unity...

Yes he is. He is just bolder than some others in stating it.

As a friend of mine put it:


And don't think this is lost on the Papists either:

http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ47.HTM#DIA...SON%20ON%20THE

Is this where Scott Hahn fits in?

Well said. Who is your friend Fred?

Rev. Andy Webb, pastor of Providence PCA in Fayettville, and owner of the Warfield List.

I agree; he is correct, and possibly more than to a degree. I don't believe he is neccesarily abandoning soteriology for ecclesiology. He is placing ecclesiology (according to Christ) in it's rightful place. That rightful place can have a direct affect upon one's soteriology. Is there a standard for Christs church? Are those whom abandon the standard, anathema? If a line is not drawn, we must allow the house church movement it's cake. The edges have become blurred. There is either a standard or no standard at all; it cannot be both ways!

Is RC Sproul correct in his abandoning ties to the PCA and planting his independant flag? Is this not the beginning of the end?


[Edited on 5-22-2005 by Scott Bushey]

__________________
Scott Bushey
Husband to Tina, father to Nicole, Danielle and Zoe
Member First Presbyterian Church of Margate PCA

I thought of something else this morning: how can these guys want to be so friendly with Rome? Rome is ardently amillenial and they (usually) are postmillenial, and rabidly so. They shoot down any in the Reformed camp who does not believe in a golden age before the return of Christ, but are holding hands with a girl who may or may not be the whore of Babylon!

A dangerous guy! Stay away from him...

I think they like the idea of the Roman Church-State. The only unfortunate thing for them is that it will be Rome, not these ecclesiastical commandos, who will be dictating the terms of this church-state. Gandalf's conversation with Sauruman is very helpful here.

__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College

Three questions I have:

1. Can the article referred to above, or rather the sentiment of the author, be summarized by this statement?

Was that his point?

2. Is this, or the corallary reasons he states, sufficient reason to come to the conclusions he comes to?

3. Is he "blaming" opposition to paedo baptism for his own wishy-washy ecclesiological position?

If I may, a fourth question; one that expresses my concern with this article:

4. What if he really was committed to Presbyterianism, as he claims to be, and sees his options as an opposite direction instead? Namely, what if he felt it his responsibility to rehabilitate Presbyterianism? What then, if he were faced with an expulsion, in one form or another, from his Presbyterian church? What if he identified Presbyterianism more with the One True Church, (or at least respected it as such) rather than just a favourite denomination? Does this not say a whole lot more to his actual position than merely being a FV-ist, or any kind of -ist?

[Edited on 5-22-2005 by JohnV]

__________________
JohnV :detective:

John Vandervliet
Ontario, Canada
member of: Canadian Reformed Church
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are" C.S Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

John,
Thats the way I took it.............The inuendo in regards to Rome; the way I took it is that he feels that Rome is more consistant historically than the protestants are. Rome is wrong, but at least they are consistant.

[Edited on 5-22-2005 by Scott Bushey]

Scott:

Yes, that hits it, I think. He claims affinity for consistency. But I think he gives up his own dedication to the consistency of truth itself, in a fallen race which is yet a holy church. What is he really wanting to be consistent to?

Didn't Jesus say that antichrist would attempt to fool the very elect?

Now I have to modify my Hillary-is-antichrist thesis. I don't see her fooling any elect.