Douglas Wilson Challenges R. Scott Clark to a Debate on FV

Discussion in 'Federal Vision/New Perspectives' started by C. M. Sheffield, Jan 14, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Senior


    I'd pay to see that!
  2. CIT

    CIT Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Me too.
  3. SolaScriptura

    SolaScriptura Puritan Board Doctor

    I wouldn't pay to see a debate, but I'd cough over some cash to see a wrasslin' match!
  4. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I don't think this will happen.
  5. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Senior

    I've never investigated FV very much so I don't know a whole lot about it. Watching a debate might really help to crystallize it for me.
  6. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I would actually doubt this to be true. You would be much better off just reading the Auburn Avenue Theology: Pros and Cons book. That's actually a written debate, and still the best entry level discussion in the debate.
  7. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Senior

    Reading the book may do a great deal of good. But that doesn't mean that watching a debate wouldn't.
  8. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    "A venue of his choosing".... Is that just in case Douglas Wilson might have an advantage at a venue of his choosing? :lol:

    Quote from C.M.
    We can't wait for debates everytime we wan't to decide whether something is herasaaay or not.
  9. Marrow Man

    Marrow Man Drunk with Powder

    Doug Wilson is very skilled debater. He debated James White (another very good debater) on a similar topic a few years ago and came across as winning the debate hands down. But "winning" a debate, of course, doesn't mean one is necessarily correct on the issue.
  10. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Senior

    That's obviously not what I'm doing. To suggest that's what I meant is ludicrous.
  11. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    The kind of people who admire Wilson admire cheap rhetoric. Wilson would do something like focus in on R2K and make it seem like all opponents of the FV hold to it. He'd force Clark to defend some of the extreme (extreme defined as only a small number of Reformed people hold to it, not that it's necessarily wrong) teachings of R2K and people would eat it up. I've seen it happen. "Those NAPARC churches claim what we teach isn't Reformed, but look at what they believe! Who's got history on their side?"
  12. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Senior

    This is an excellent point. Sometimes we can do greater harm to the cause of truth by entering into such debates if we have not the faculties to competently contend with our challenger. Though I would't put Dr. Clark anywhere near that category. He can certainly handle himself.

    ---------- Post added at 11:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:36 AM ----------

    Help me out Tim, "R2K"? Is that a Reformed computer virus?
  13. Marrow Man

    Marrow Man Drunk with Powder

    Not the Tim you asked (I'm the one who likes cheap rhetoric ;) ), but R2K is "Radical Two Kingdom" theology, a position attributed to Dr. Clark and Westminster Seminary California.
  14. tcalbrecht

    tcalbrecht Puritan Board Junior

    Unfair ad hominem.

    If his purpose was to show the breath of allowable positions within Reformedom, that would not be a bad thing.
  15. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    That wouldn't be his purpose. His purpose would be to discredit any criticism of FV by pointing to an an historical school of thought held by a critic that is confessional and making it seem that the pot is calling the kettle black. And it works, for theologically ignorant conspiracy types, as well as those who long for the security of themselves and their children through works.

    I can only guess you haven't followed any of the PCA's court cases against these people.
  16. tcalbrecht

    tcalbrecht Puritan Board Junior

    Know this you do?

    Speaking of conspiracy types …

    Now we’re equivocating. First it was Wilson, now it’s “these people.” Are “these people” the same ones who “admire Wilson” per your earlier post?

    And, yes, I have been watching the court cases and I have not seen any instance of “cheap rhetoric” in cases as they have been reported.

    To the extent there has been “cheap rhetoric,” seems there’s been enough on both sides to go around.
  17. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    And in Siouxlands whining about thinking they've woken up in the OPC? Or claiming historical continuity since Bullinger said we shouldn't distinguish between the sign and the thing signified? Could you please tell me say, two of the PCA court cases you've been watching? That way we can both be specific.
  18. MarieP

    MarieP Puritan Board Senior

    I found it interesting that they ended up debating infant baptism rather than the question at hand, whether or not Roman Catholics are members of the New Covenant because of Trinitarian baptism. But then. little wonder, since they didn't agree on the nature of the New Covenant.

    ---------- Post added at 03:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:32 PM ----------

    A debate between Wilson and one of the R2K guys! Now THAT would be interesting...

    ---------- Post added at 03:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:36 PM ----------

    I'd ove to see a debate between Doug Wilson and Lane Keister...I read Reformed is Not Enough and Greenbaggins' commentary after each chapter...
  19. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    Thank you for your vote of confidence, Marie! I did debate Douglas Wilson on a variety of topics, blog to blog. I would not be comfortable debating Douglas Wilson in person.
  20. DMcFadden

    DMcFadden Puritanboard Commissioner

    Wilson is a VERY skilled debater and a quick on-the-spot thinker. My money would still go on the extravagantly gifted Rev. Keister.

    If the debate involved Dr. Clark (vs. Doug Wilson), I would NEVER bet against a man of Clark's intellect and badgeresque tenacity combined with such a keen sense of going for the jugular.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2011
  21. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    Uh-oh. Now I'm really embarrassed! :eek:
  22. SolaScriptura

    SolaScriptura Puritan Board Doctor

    In my humble and insignificant opinion, there have been enough talks, enough debates, enough reports, enough deliberations, enough decisions... what is needed now is the resolve and tenacity to take action by implementing the ruling(s) of the church courts.
  23. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    Sorry. No offense meant.
  24. Marrow Man

    Marrow Man Drunk with Powder

    Silly Ben; don't you realize that no one really understands the FV unless they actually are FV?

    In the meantime, carry on with the scheduled programming: :deadhorse:
  25. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    Hopefully you all heard that audio clip of Jordan at their Moscow school commencement ceremony saying that the Holy Spirit has confused the thinking of all the rest of us.

    Tom, I'd seriously like to hear which of those PCA trials you've followed.
  26. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member


    But not on this thread, please. . . .

  27. tcalbrecht

    tcalbrecht Puritan Board Junior

    Since I'm not presently a member of any PCA presbytery were an actual court case has been heard, I'm not privy to anything other than the official SJC or presbytery records where published. I can't recall seeing any “cheap rhetoric” in those records.
  28. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    You don't have to recall anything. Just name the court cases. We can open up another thread.
  29. awretchsavedbygrace

    awretchsavedbygrace Puritan Board Sophomore

    As far as I know this invitation was offered back in 2006. I hope Dr. Clark comes on to comment.
  30. kvanlaan

    kvanlaan Puritan Board Doctor

    It's kinda like they're Emergent; the "you don't understand my Jesus because you're not me, and He is real to me in a way you'll never understand - debate finished".
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page