Featured Federal Vision Baptists?

Discussion in 'Federal Vision/New Perspectives' started by brandonadams, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:58 PM.

  1. brandonadams

    brandonadams Puritan Board Freshman

    It looks like the previous thread on this topic was just very recently closed so I could not post this there... but I recently finished a blog post on the topic for anyone interested:

    https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2019/12/03/federal-vision-baptists/

    I argue that FV is a species of neonomianism. Baptists can't be FV, but they can be neonomian. I then show very specifically where Sandlin and Wilson agree with Shepherd's neonomianism.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • List
  2. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Why does that theology to me seem to be very close to what NTWright and NPP purpose?
     
  3. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    How much does a Baptist have to agree with FV to be FV? It seems like merely semantics at some point. How close does one have to be with Wilson to be in the club? Can a Baptist be FV, I guess so but that doesn't answer the foundational questions I posed.
     
  4. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Probably if they reject some form of the law/gospel distinction, reject imputation, believe part of my justification is my spirit-wrough sanctity. These aren't semantics.

    In answer to your question, Brandon gave a very thorough link in the post.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019 at 6:47 AM
  5. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Isn't FV close to Wright in regards to Justification?
     
  6. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Don't you already know the answer to this question?
     
  7. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I was listening to James Jordan speak at AAPC in 2004. He openly denied imputation and said we had to have no patterns of thinking. He wrote a whole essay ("Merit or Maturity") which specifically attacks the Reformed view of covenant and imputation.

    This isn't mere semantics.
     
  8. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Not really, as they do not seem to be exactly the same, but seem close.
     
  9. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    No no, sorry. What I meant was, they're in conferences together, some Baptists believe this or that and it's kinda like FV so it must be (or dangerously close) FV. Thats seems like merely semantics in my book. Stretching definitions so as to needlessly capture views that are fundamentally differet.
     
  10. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    I read that it was good but, unless I missed something, didn't address those questions I'm asking. I could be wrong I'll go back and read it just to make sure.
     
  11. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    Ok what about this food for thought. The average Fundamentalist Baptist has implicitly rejected all those things in my presence for years. Sure they're big on the gospel no doubt. But they can be very legalistic and neonomian, have no real understanding of the AOC (in fact only seem to recognize the POC), and really press on right living as some sort of proof of justification (I've been told I was not saved because I love horror movies) which seems like final justification. That hardly makes them FV though. I meant no disrespect to my Baptist brothers and sisters but was referring to a strict section of Baptist culture, the Fundamentalist faction, which is not the same as a reformed confessional Baptist.
     
  12. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    What is Aoc and Poc?
     
  13. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    AOC, active obedience of Christ (his perfectly keeping the law on our behalf). POC, passive obedience of Christ (his perfectly paying the debt of our sin). Sorry I was abbreviating.
     
  14. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Jesus keeping the Law was how He qualified to be our sin bearer , so one has to hold to both per the scriptures.
     
  15. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    True but it's the doctrine of double imputation, our sin is imputed to him on the cross POC and his righteousness is imputed to us AOC. make sense?
     
  16. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    That's true, as they would probably look at FV and say "Papist!" But for a 1689 Baptist like White it is a different matter.
     
  17. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    That's exactly what I was thinking. To a Fundamentalist or a a Dispensational Baptist there would only be certian overlaps but to confessional Baptist who believes in CT there would be a problem. So perhaps the question should be restated "Reformed confessional Baptists and FV?"
     
  18. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    That's the best way to put it.
     
  19. jwright82

    jwright82 Puritan Board Senior

    Yeah I wonder what connection there is between RBCT and FV?
     
  20. PuritanCovenanter

    PuritanCovenanter Moderator Staff Member

    Probably none if they hold to the 1689 but their Cultural War stuff.

    On the same topic... I was a credo Baptist yet still a member of a few Paedo Churches. Now, the CREC had both credo and paedo churches in it. I would also rhetorically ask, "Can a Confessionally Reformed person be FV?" Not if they hold to a historically Reformed Confession is the answer.
     
  21. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Since FV redefines Pauline Justification, why should any real Christian hold to it though?
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2019 at 9:43 AM

Share This Page