Shepherd, Gaffin, and Karlberg

[DMcFadden]

Not entirely on point (but pretty close), I just finished the exchange between D. Patrick Ramsey on Kline and Karlberg's view of the Mosaic Covenant (WTJ 66:2 (Fall 2004)) and Brenton Ferry's response (WTJ 67:1 (Spring 2005)). Also, Jeong Koo Jeon's PhD dissertation, Covenant Theology: John Murray's and Meredith G. Kline's Response to the Historical Development of Federal Theology in Reformed Thought looks VERY good for helping me get the behind the behind the surface story of the Murray-Kline differences, so that is in the mail now. (An article by Tim J.R. Trumper reviewing Jeon's book in WTJ 64:2 is what tipped me off to the value of it.) The Google books preview confirmed that it is quite good and accessible for comparing and contrasting the Murray vs. Kline views.

 

[lynnie]

He tried to articulate what it means to have living faith instead of a dead faith, and to resist a subtle antinomianism that appeared to be propagated at WTS by a few men, where justification by faith was somehow separated from obedience in a way that was unbiblical ( and not confessional either).

Lynnie,

I was just wondering who were the men who appeared to be propagating a subtle antinomianism at WTS and did Shepherd ever mention them by name?

Thanks.

Keith......I could name names, and I could name OPC pastors who would tell you that some refutations of Shepherd back then were clear antinomianism. But it was 30 years ago, and the men are in positions now such that I don't want to dredge it up in public online. 30 years ago I said things I regret now too!! I don't think any of them actually were antinomian, they were just frustrated and trying to fight something, and as Ruben said, this is a typical problem. Swing too far the other way in a fight.


PC, I appreciated your comments. I don't know how much people realize how loved NS was. All these college kids saved in the great revival of the late 60s and 70s end up at WTS, and they've read Hal Lindsey about the rapture and everybody went witnessing where you pray this little prayer and get saved...no need to go to church or do anything. And they end up with NS who was the WTS guy on Covenantal theology, and they get introduced to Covenantal theology, and he was a fabulous teacher using great text books, and he was sooo loved. And he talks about living faith and being in covenant, and it all fits together, and we are not just justified, but adopted and in union with Christ and all the rest, and seminary classes are like a worship service. You don't just automatically say "oh gee, this is error" when somebody starts picking at a phrase here and there. Love is very powerful, thank God for that, and it is a good thing when people are merciful and patient and slow to rebuke. It may have to be done, but at the time it seemed like some were hasty and contentious and preaching too far the other way into a faith with no fruit. Like I said it was 30+ years ago and we've all hopefully grown up a bit. At any rate, I appreciate your kind words for Gaffin. He too was so loved by students.

 

[Theogenes]

I talked with Dr. Gaffin about that. He was not convinced at the time of Dr. Shepherd's danger. It was after that, that Dr. Gaffin came to realize how imbalanced Shepherd's position was.

Lane,
If Gaffin has changed his mind about these things wouldn't it be prudent to write a book of retractions and let the world know?
Jim

 

[greenbaggins]

I talked with Dr. Gaffin about that. He was not convinced at the time of Dr. Shepherd's danger. It was after that, that Dr. Gaffin came to realize how imbalanced Shepherd's position was.

Lane,
If Gaffin has changed his mind about these things wouldn't it be prudent to write a book of retractions and let the world know?
Jim

That would no doubt be wise. He probably thought that his defense of the OPC report coupled with his recent book on Paul would let the world know sufficiently well where he stood.

 

[chbrooking]

His defense of the OPC report and his recent book on Paul SHOULD be sufficient -- especially for so studied a crowd as the PB purports to be. I, for one, am not sure that it would be wise to dredge up the matter once again. He's made it clear where he stands. That should be sufficient.

 

[Theogenes]

I talked with Dr. Gaffin about that. He was not convinced at the time of Dr. Shepherd's danger. It was after that, that Dr. Gaffin came to realize how imbalanced Shepherd's position was.

Lane,
If Gaffin has changed his mind about these things wouldn't it be prudent to write a book of retractions and let the world know?
Jim

That would no doubt be wise. He probably thought that his defense of the OPC report coupled with his recent book on Paul would let the world know sufficiently well where he stood.

Lane, Which OPC report and what's the title of his book on Paul?
Thanks,
Jim