The fruit of the Federal Vision?

[Redaimie]

http://web.mac.com/eleysium/iWeb/Site/Elysium/B2DD1BE0-5928-451C-AA6B-21E9A823B95E.html

article by James Jordan

Should Anyone Trust the Orthodox Presbyterian Church?

by James B. Jordan

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church publishes a monthly magazine called "New Horizons." The February 2007 issue was devoted to essays on justification, on the "New Perspective on Paul," and on the "Federal Vision."
All of the articles left the impression, when they did not state outright, that there are people around the Reformed and Presbyterian world who are attacking the historic doctrine of justification by faith alone.
This is a lie. No one has questioned the
historic Reformed doctrine in any way, shape, or
form. Nobody connected with the "New Perspective
on Paul" and nobody connected with the "Federal
Vision" has in the least compromised the
historic, Reformed, confessional doctrine of justification.
Nobody has done so. To assert or to imply otherwise is to lie.

I repeat: It is to lie.The editors and authors in the February "New Horizons" have lied to their readers, by implication at least.Now, the question is this: Are these men lying because they are wicked and evil, or
because they are stupid and uncomprehending, or
because they are lazy and incompetent and simply
choose to repeat lies they read from 20-somethings in internet blogs? I don't know. I'd like to believe it is because they are lazy and incompetent.

But when they say that those who disagree or would like to express things differently are "not Reformed" or
are "denying justification" or are "borderline heretics," they are committing an enormity for which they will answer before God at the last day.

Is calling the entire OPC liars fruit? Are they so sure of themselves that they can claim the wrath of God on all who say they are wrong.
What is the Christian response to this?

 

[fredtgreco]

Any one who listens to Jordan is a fool. His fruit - found in the crushed lives of congregants that he and others lorded it over - speaks for itself for decades. His commentary, as usual, is laughable. Oh, what a burden to be so much smarter than everyone else.

 

[wsw201]

Looks like we just heard from the peanut gallery!

Gotta go with Fred. Jordan is clueless.

 

[JKLeoPCA]

So from Jordan the current FV rebuttal is a, "Liar, liar, pants on fire," defense?
Seems a bit of a far cry from a theological defense of what was written in the New Horizons articles, but then maybe he was too lazy to write that sort of rebuttal. Look like a lot of smoke screen stuff to me. Reminds me of the Wizard of Oz,.. "Ignore the man behind the curtain!"

 

[NaphtaliPress]

If someone is going to call a denomination like the OPC a bunch of liars, they should probably have a good testimony in keeping the ninth commandment themselves. People in glass houses, etc.
http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_articles/tyler_update.htm

 

[blhowes]

Just to get a little background, who is James B. Jordan? Is he one of the 'key players' in the FV debate?

 

[blhowes]

A number of years ago, in the early 1990s, I attended several presbytery meetings of the local OPC presbytery. To my amazement, all the worship events consisted of singing camp songs and children's choruses out of a little pamphlet. There were no psalms, metrical or chanted. There were not even any hymns. There were only childish droolings, sung in a stoned
mystical fashion. Now, if this cultivated infantilism is characteristic of the OPC as a whole, I can understand why they are no longer capable of theological discourse.

In the debate world, is there a special term used when the debater resorts to this kind of an argument to prove his point?

 

[fredtgreco]

Just to get a little background, who is James B. Jordan? Is he one of the 'key players' in the FV debate?

Bob,

Go to Chris Coldwell's link for background. Jordan lives in a cellophane house. He is one the most prolific writers of teh FV and one who lays the theological foundations with his (generally crazy) exegesis. If you were to pick up the book the Federal Vision, or other such books, the footnotes would be full of Jordan.

(Now awaiting the incessant whining about to begin on various blogs...)

 

[DTK]

Just to get a little background, who is James B. Jordan? Is he one of the 'key players' in the FV debate?

Bob,

He is in the background, sorta behind the scenes, but who many regard as one of the architects, if not the architect, of the FV. There is a great deal about Eastern Orthodoxy that he seems to emphasize. He is very out-spoken and radical. He is not a pastor, but many of the FV pastors take their "cue" from him.

DTK

 

[DTK]

In the debate world, is there a special term used when the debater resorts to this kind of an argument to prove his point?

The illustration he gives comes close to the informal fallacy of "Converse Accident," which is committed when one moves haphazardly from an individual case to a generalization. But in this case, Jordan suspends his remarks on the word "if," and thereby avoids direct application of this fallacy to his argument. These people are in big error, but they're not stupid.

DTK

 

[tewilder]

Just to get a little background, who is James B. Jordan? Is he one of the 'key players' in the FV debate?

Jordan is the conveyor belt from Meredith Kline's crazy symbolic theology and hermeneutics to the Federal Vision's application of this theology. The heart of it is worship and liturgy, which is why Jordan picks up on the OPC's evangelical infantilism in this area. He could have said the same about the PCA.

Everything depends on doing the right rituals in the right way in order to manipulate the symbolic connection between the upper story and the lower story. That is why the Federal Vision is hermeticism.

Also, as I keep emphasizing, the justification issues are derivative in the Federal Vision theology. Worship and liturgy are the heart. The critics keep claiming that the derivative doctrines are the only issue. Partly because some of the critics share the same Klinite errors.

 

[JKLeoPCA]

In the debate world, is there a special term used when the debater resorts to this kind of an argument to prove his point?

Here is a fun, resource listing of fallacious argument tactics

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#selective

as was already mentioned, see "Argument By Generalization", or as an "Argument By Selective Observation" from the list. You site a negative observation about your opponent, and ignore any positive, and apply it as the focal point of that group. Or just the opposite, site a positive observation about your own group, and ignore the negative, and apply that as the focal point of your group. Yet both arguments fit the post above.

 

[Jon Peters]

Also, as I keep emphasizing, the justification issues are derivative in the Federal Vision theology. Worship and liturgy are the heart. The critics keep claiming that the derivative doctrines are the only issue. Partly because some of the critics share the same Klinite errors.

Can you elaborate on how Klinite errors are affecting the critics?

 

[Poimen]

Jordan and his friends are bullies (as someone else has written elsewhere). What do you do with a bully? You stand up to him!

Here is what you do. Claim that the Federal Vision men are heretics even if their soteriological teachings are not heresy.

The word 'heretic' as used in scripture does not only refer to doctrinal aberrations but is also used specifically in reference to causing division.

Galatians 5:19-21 "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

Titus 3:10 "Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition."

As Dr. Pipa has noted:

"Here again is a place where proponents of the Federal Vision have erred. They ought to have circulated papers for theological discussion amongst ministers, elders, and theologians. They chose to preempt this procedure with public conferences that have greatly disturbed the church. The theological discussion has occurred after the fact.” The Auburn Avenue Theology: Pros & Cons, page 281

This, of course, was published four years ago (in August 2003). Has anyone seen these men turn from their ways of division and schism in the church of Christ? Do they care for anything except the following of the seemingly endless parade of young men and woman who stream to their 'cultural centers' for indoctrination?

May Christ protect His Church from these heretics. May God turn their hearts to repentance to be saved from themselves.

 

[javajedi]

Can you elaborate on how Klinite errors are affecting the critics?

I'd like to learn more about this as well. Please include an elaboration of what you meant by "Meredith Kline's crazy symbolic theology and hermeneutics"

Thanks

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Jordan and his friends are bullies (as someone else has written elsewhere). What do you do with a bully? You stand up to him!

Here is what you do. Claim that the Federal Vision men are heretics even if their soteriological teachings are not heresy.

The word 'heretic' as used in scripture does not only refer to doctrinal aberrations but is also used specifically in reference to causing division.

Galatians 5:19-21 "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

Titus 3:10 "Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition."

As Dr. Pipa has noted:

"Here again is a place where proponents of the Federal Vision have erred. They ought to have circulated papers for theological discussion amongst ministers, elders, and theologians. They chose to preempt this procedure with public conferences that have greatly disturbed the church. The theological discussion has occurred after the fact.” The Auburn Avenue Theology: Pros & Cons, page 281

This, of course, was published four years ago (in August 2003). Has anyone seen these men turn from their ways of division and schism in the church of Christ? Do they care for anything except the following of the seemingly endless parade of young men and woman who stream to their 'cultural centers' for indoctrination?

May Christ protect His Church from these heretics. May God turn their hearts to repentance to be saved from themselves.

 

[javajedi]

Wow.

Is this guy serious?

These are great articles and document many things including the rejection by some (Shepard & NT Wright included) of the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Not to mention the eqivication they make between faith and fathfulness [works].

How can he say none of this effects the doctrine of justification by faith alone??

BTW, the articles are on-line here.

Its interesting that John Robbins says the OPC is done for because we somehow allow this teaching and Jordan claims we're all liars because of the strong stand these articles take against it. Guess that means that the OPC is actually in the right place [not perfect - and more needs to be done. Part of that is open discussion and training/teaching what this stuff is and where it leads.].

 

[tewilder]

Can you elaborate on how Klinite errors are affecting the critics?

Some of them are Klinites. So that have to ignore that whole aspect of things when they go on the warpath against the Federal Vision.

 

[Archlute]

Knucklehead wrote:
...they are lazy and incompetent and simply choose to repeat lies they read from 20-somethings in internet blogs?

Sweet. I'll let VanDrunen know that I'm onto him now - having to troll the Internet for all that stuff he feeds us in class

 

[wsw201]

Sweet. I'll let VanDrunen know that I'm onto him now - having to troll the Internet for all that stuff he feeds us in class

He's probably getting from that Heidlblog done by that Clark guy

 

[Poimen]

He's probably getting from that Heidlblog done by that Clark guy

 

[jenney]

This is a lie.

"This is not true" would be a fair thing to say (though I can't say I agree with it, at least it is fair). To use the pejorative word "lie" is to suggest that one knows the heart intent in a case where he has not presented any evidence of intent to deceive. If he said, "I wrote the editor three times asking for a demonstration of...none of the articles offered any quotes to support the idea that the accused are denying sola fide..." etc it would be fair evidence for, at least, "they aren't telling you the whole story." This just demonstrates that he has no substance in his argument and must therefore resort to ad hominem.

No one has questioned the
historic Reformed doctrine in any way, shape, or
form.

Except when they have.

I love (hate?) reading some of the FV folks who say, "I'm not denying the WCF, but I'm saying we've misrepresented it!" and then go on to deny it. But they say they aren't denying, only clarifying. Then they deny it again.

It reminds me of my three year old who says, "the sky is yellow," and when I say, "it's blue," she replies, "that's what I said. It's yellow."

Are these men lying
because they are wicked and evil, or
because they are stupid and uncomprehending, or
because they are lazy and incompetent and simply choose to repeat lies they read from 20-somethings in internet blogs?

or because they have stopped beating their wives?

It makes me really angry.
And I'm not even Presyterian.

jenney

 

[tewilder]

I'd like to learn more about this as well. Please include an elaboration of what you meant by \"Meredith Kline's crazy symbolic theology and hermeneutics\"

Thanks

Look here, for example:

Amazon.com: God, Heaven, and Har Magedon: A Covenantal Tale of Cosmos and Telos: Books: Meredith G. Kline

It could have been written by Jordan himself as far as the methodology goes. And Jordan learned his schtick from Kline's Kingdom Prologue, and Images of the Spirit.

The Table of Contents of the book, May 26, 2006

God, Heaven, and Har Magedon (A Covenantal Tale of Cosmos and Telos) - Meredith G. Kline

[293 pages; with an author's preface]

PART ONE: GOD AND HEAVEN
I - NAMING THE METAWORLD
1. Heaven and Cosmos
2. Heaven: Glory-Temple
Conclusion

II - ALPHA RADIATION: THE CREATION OF HEAVEN
1. The Big Blaze
2. The Endoxation of the Spirit
3. The Spirit and Filiation

III - OMEGA APOCALYPSE: THE CONSUMMATION OF HEAVEN
1. Consummation and Glorification
2. Consummation and Cosmology

a. Prophecies of a Cataclysmic Finis
b. Hypothesis of Basic Cosmic Continuity
c. Hypothesis of Radical Cosmic Restructuring
d. Conclusion

PART TWO: HEAVEN AND HAR MAGEDON
IV - EARTHLY REPLICAS OF HEAVEN
1. Glory Replication
2. Replication in the Genesis Prologue

V - MOUNTAIN OF GOD

1. Eden as Replica of Heaven
2. The Mountain of God in Eden
a. Mount Zaphon and Mount Zion
b. The Original Zion in Eden
c. Sacramental Icon of Heaven

VI - HAR MAGEDON: THE MOUNT OF ASSEMBLY
1. The Meaning of Har Magedon
a. The Hebraisti Clue in Rev 16:16
b. Har Mo'ed, Mount of Assembly
2. Har Mo'ed - Mount Zaphon/Zion - Har Magedon
3. The Gathering Against Zion

Conclusion

PART THREE: HAR MAGEDON WARFARE: AN ESCHATOLOGICAL MEGASTRUCTURE

VII - ERUPTION OF THE HAR MAGEDON CONFLICT
1. Sabbath, Eschatology, and Covenant
2. Covenantal Proposal of Sabbath Grant
3. Covenant and Har Magedon Conflict

VIII - MESSIAH: THE COMING VICTOR OF HAR MAGEDON
1. Decretive Inauguration of Redemptive Holy War
2. Eternal Covenant of the Father and the Son
3. The Lord's Covenant of Grace with His People
4. The Har Magedon Pattern in Premessianic Typology

IX - ARARAT: OLD WORLD TYPE OF HAR MAGEDON
1. The Ark Covenant
2. Righteous Noah, Covenant Grantee
3. Covenant Community in the Interval
4. Antichrist Crisis
5. Parousia-Judgment and Gathering
6. Kingdom Consummation on Ararat

X - ZION: NEW WORLD TYPE OF HAR MAGEDON
1. The Abrahmic Covenant
a. Introduction
b. From Ararat to Abraham
c. Covenant of Promise
d. Two-stage Fulfillment

The King
The People
The Land

2. Obedient Abraham, Covenant Grantee
3. Covenant Community in the Interim
a. The 430 Years
b. Pilgrims and Good Neighbors
c. Continuing Remnant
d. Covenant Family Polity
e. Altars and Divine Presence

4. Antichrist Crisis
a. Pseudo-Har Magedon at Babel
b. Pharaonic Antichrist

5. Divine Judgment
a. Parousia
b. Redemptive Judgment
c. Gathering of the Kingdom People to Mount Zion

6. Kingdom Consummation: Inauguration of the Typal Kingdom at Sinai
a. Introduction
b. Covenantal Constituting
c. Enthronement of the Covenant Lord
d. Re-creation

7. Kingdom Consummation: Culmination of the Typal Kingdom on Zion
a. Introduction: Sinai Covenant and Abrahamic Promise
b. Occupation of the Kingdom Land

Prophetic Victory Hymn
Moses-Joshua: Conquest Phase
Judges: Consolidation Phase

c. The Theocratic Monarchy
The Promised King
Conquest and Victor's Palace
Davidic Covenant
Temple Construction, a Re-creation
Enthronement of the King of Glory on Zion

XI - HAR MAGEDON IN THE MESSIANIC FINALE
1. Danielic Preview
a. Introduction
b. Daniel 2
c. Daniel 9

2. Christ, Covenant Grantee and Guarantor
a. Introduction: Covenant Theology
b. Har Magedon Setting
c. Defence of Har Magedon
d. Conquest of the Dragon
Revelation 12
Revelation 20
e. Lord of the New Covenant

3. New Covenant Interim
a. Introduction
b. The 3 1/2 Years Symbol
Daniel 9
Daniel 7
Daniel 12
Daniel 2
Revelation 11
Revelation 12
Revelation 13

c. The Interim and Millennialism
d. The Millennium Symbol (Rev 20:1-6)
Millennial Nomenclature
Church Age Millennium
Pre-Kingdom Millennium
e. Conclusion

4. The Battle of Har Magedon
a. Introduction
b. The Antichrist Crisis

Global Challenge
Satan and Antichrist
Gog of Magog and the Apocalypse
Millennial Implications

c. The Parousia Day
Origins
Day of Covenant Judgment
Sabbatical Symbol
Day of Christ
Revelation 1:10 and the Sabbath
Octave Day Assemblies

d. Har Magedon Gatherings
Pre-Parousia Gatherings
Dual Parousia Gathering
Gathering of the Elect
Gathering of the Reprobate

5. Consummation of the Har Magedon Kingdom
a. Catharsis
Ethnic Cleansing
Deconstruction of Human Culture
Decontamination of the World of Nature

b. Pleroma
Glorification-Metamorphoses
Ekklesia Pleroma
Parousia Pleroma
Christ: Mediator of Pleroma Union
Final Epiphany: The Theanthropic Principle

6. The Gospel of Har Magedon
APPENDICES

Appendix A: Space and Time in the Genesis Cosmogony
Appendix B: Har Magedon: The End of the Millennium
Appendix C: Death, Leviathan, and the Martyrs: Isaiah 24:1-27:1

-----------------

What this sort of thing does is that it tips the typology axis.

Instead of having shadow and fulfillment on the axis of time with the work of Christ being shadowed (past) and fulfilled (afterwards), you have an upper story/lower story with the axis being vertical, with symbols in creation and the realities in heaven. What this does is promote static theologies, favoring monocovenantalism with its covenant leveling.

Then once you flatten out covenant change, then you need to explain all the change language in the Bible some other way. That is what the New Perspectives on Paul is about. It gives an alternative way of explaining covenant change as simply an inclusiveness that allows the gentiles to join together with the removal of the excluding covenant boundaries markers.

Also, this upper story/lower story typology axis promotes ritualism. If the typology is not about the foreshadowing of future realities, which are now accomplished and so the role the types if finished, but is instead an imaging in creation of the permanent things above, the representational role of the types and symbols of the things above remains. And so the types and symbold continue to do what they always did and the ritual use of them is permanently valid, and must be recovered in worship today.

That is why Federal Vision theology of worship turns on such things recapitulating the Tabernacle. That it was it takes the form of Covenant Renewal services.

Now, Klinites like the people at Westminster Seminary California like this Federal Vision worship, and so we get a strange idea about the Federal Vision from them that it is only the derivative doctrines, such as the recasting of justification, that are the bad FV stuff. But it really starts here with symbol and ritual.

The Federal Vision people have not done much more than take elements that were already around in the OPC and put them together in new ways:

1) Attack on the covenant of works because the language is not in Genesis: John Murray

2) Attack on the visible/invisible church distinction because the language is not that of the Bible: John Murray

3) A generalized playing off of the language of the Bible against the ideas of the Bible as organized in the Confessions: this is an extension by Norman Shepherd of what Murray started.

4) Playing up paradox in theology, so that logical contradictions to the Confessions are a mark of truth: Van Til

5) Engaging in typically Arminian exegesis of Biblical passages to promote the contradiction and paradox: Van Til

6) Conflating faith and works: Van Til

7) A vertical axis typology and wild symbolic theology: Meredith Kline.

What the Federal Vision did was push these pieces around together with some other old ideas from Dutch Reformed churches until they started to work as a new system, much like those Trasformer toys that change between trucks and robots.

The Federal Vision is the legitimate firstborn child of the OPC, and its deviant theologies that have been tolerated throughout the entire existence of the denomination.

 

[javajedi]

Thanks tewilder, I'll have chew on this for a bit...

 

[Theoretical]

Look here, for example:

http://www.amazon.com/God-Heaven-Ha..._bbs_sr_1/104-5108754-8139923?ie=UTF8&s=books

It could have been written by Jordan himself as far as the methodology goes. And Jordan learned his schtick from Kline's Kingdom Prologue, and Images of the Spirit.

The Table of Contents of the book, May 26, 2006

God, Heaven, and Har Magedon (A Covenantal Tale of Cosmos and Telos) - Meredith G. Kline

[293 pages; with an author's preface]

PART ONE: GOD AND HEAVEN
I - NAMING THE METAWORLD
1. Heaven and Cosmos
2. Heaven: Glory-Temple
Conclusion

II - ALPHA RADIATION: THE CREATION OF HEAVEN
1. The Big Blaze
2. The Endoxation of the Spirit
3. The Spirit and Filiation

III - OMEGA APOCALYPSE: THE CONSUMMATION OF HEAVEN
1. Consummation and Glorification
2. Consummation and Cosmology

a. Prophecies of a Cataclysmic Finis
b. Hypothesis of Basic Cosmic Continuity
c. Hypothesis of Radical Cosmic Restructuring
d. Conclusion

PART TWO: HEAVEN AND HAR MAGEDON
IV - EARTHLY REPLICAS OF HEAVEN
1. Glory Replication
2. Replication in the Genesis Prologue

V - MOUNTAIN OF GOD

1. Eden as Replica of Heaven
2. The Mountain of God in Eden
a. Mount Zaphon and Mount Zion
b. The Original Zion in Eden
c. Sacramental Icon of Heaven

VI - HAR MAGEDON: THE MOUNT OF ASSEMBLY
1. The Meaning of Har Magedon
a. The Hebraisti Clue in Rev 16:16
b. Har Mo'ed, Mount of Assembly
2. Har Mo'ed - Mount Zaphon/Zion - Har Magedon
3. The Gathering Against Zion

Conclusion

PART THREE: HAR MAGEDON WARFARE: AN ESCHATOLOGICAL MEGASTRUCTURE

VII - ERUPTION OF THE HAR MAGEDON CONFLICT
1. Sabbath, Eschatology, and Covenant
2. Covenantal Proposal of Sabbath Grant
3. Covenant and Har Magedon Conflict

VIII - MESSIAH: THE COMING VICTOR OF HAR MAGEDON
1. Decretive Inauguration of Redemptive Holy War
2. Eternal Covenant of the Father and the Son
3. The Lord's Covenant of Grace with His People
4. The Har Magedon Pattern in Premessianic Typology

IX - ARARAT: OLD WORLD TYPE OF HAR MAGEDON
1. The Ark Covenant
2. Righteous Noah, Covenant Grantee
3. Covenant Community in the Interval
4. Antichrist Crisis
5. Parousia-Judgment and Gathering
6. Kingdom Consummation on Ararat

X - ZION: NEW WORLD TYPE OF HAR MAGEDON
1. The Abrahmic Covenant
a. Introduction
b. From Ararat to Abraham
c. Covenant of Promise
d. Two-stage Fulfillment

The King
The People
The Land

2. Obedient Abraham, Covenant Grantee
3. Covenant Community in the Interim
a. The 430 Years
b. Pilgrims and Good Neighbors
c. Continuing Remnant
d. Covenant Family Polity
e. Altars and Divine Presence

4. Antichrist Crisis
a. Pseudo-Har Magedon at Babel
b. Pharaonic Antichrist

5. Divine Judgment
a. Parousia
b. Redemptive Judgment
c. Gathering of the Kingdom People to Mount Zion

6. Kingdom Consummation: Inauguration of the Typal Kingdom at Sinai
a. Introduction
b. Covenantal Constituting
c. Enthronement of the Covenant Lord
d. Re-creation

7. Kingdom Consummation: Culmination of the Typal Kingdom on Zion
a. Introduction: Sinai Covenant and Abrahamic Promise
b. Occupation of the Kingdom Land

Prophetic Victory Hymn
Moses-Joshua: Conquest Phase
Judges: Consolidation Phase

c. The Theocratic Monarchy
The Promised King
Conquest and Victor's Palace
Davidic Covenant
Temple Construction, a Re-creation
Enthronement of the King of Glory on Zion

XI - HAR MAGEDON IN THE MESSIANIC FINALE
1. Danielic Preview
a. Introduction
b. Daniel 2
c. Daniel 9

2. Christ, Covenant Grantee and Guarantor
a. Introduction: Covenant Theology
b. Har Magedon Setting
c. Defence of Har Magedon
d. Conquest of the Dragon
Revelation 12
Revelation 20
e. Lord of the New Covenant

3. New Covenant Interim
a. Introduction
b. The 3 1/2 Years Symbol
Daniel 9
Daniel 7
Daniel 12
Daniel 2
Revelation 11
Revelation 12
Revelation 13

c. The Interim and Millennialism
d. The Millennium Symbol (Rev 20:1-6)
Millennial Nomenclature
Church Age Millennium
Pre-Kingdom Millennium
e. Conclusion

4. The Battle of Har Magedon
a. Introduction
b. The Antichrist Crisis

Global Challenge
Satan and Antichrist
Gog of Magog and the Apocalypse
Millennial Implications

c. The Parousia Day
Origins
Day of Covenant Judgment
Sabbatical Symbol
Day of Christ
Revelation 1:10 and the Sabbath
Octave Day Assemblies

d. Har Magedon Gatherings
Pre-Parousia Gatherings
Dual Parousia Gathering
Gathering of the Elect
Gathering of the Reprobate

5. Consummation of the Har Magedon Kingdom
a. Catharsis
Ethnic Cleansing
Deconstruction of Human Culture
Decontamination of the World of Nature

b. Pleroma
Glorification-Metamorphoses
Ekklesia Pleroma
Parousia Pleroma
Christ: Mediator of Pleroma Union
Final Epiphany: The Theanthropic Principle

6. The Gospel of Har Magedon
APPENDICES

Appendix A: Space and Time in the Genesis Cosmogony
Appendix B: Har Magedon: The End of the Millennium
Appendix C: Death, Leviathan, and the Martyrs: Isaiah 24:1-27:1

-----------------

What this sort of thing does is that it tips the typology axis.

Instead of having shadow and fulfillment on the axis of time with the work of Christ being shadowed (past) and fulfilled (afterwards), you have an upper story/lower story with the axis being vertical, with symbols in creation and the realities in heaven. What this does is promote static theologies, favoring monocovenantalism with its covenant leveling.

Then once you flatten out covenant change, then you need to explain all the change language in the Bible some other way. That is what the New Perspectives on Paul is about. It gives an alternative way of explaining covenant change as simply an inclusiveness that allows the gentiles to join together with the removal of the excluding covenant boundaries markers.

Also, this upper story/lower story typology axis promotes ritualism. If the typology is not about the foreshadowing of future realities, which are now accomplished and so the role the types if finished, but is instead an imaging in creation of the permanent things above, the representational role of the types and symbols of the things above remains. And so the types and symbold continue to do what they always did and the ritual use of them is permanently valid, and must be recovered in worship today.

That is why Federal Vision theology of worship turns on such things recapitulating the Tabernacle. That it was it takes the form of Covenant Renewal services.

Now, Klinites like the people at Westminster Seminary California like this Federal Vision worship, and so we get a strange idea about the Federal Vision from them that it is only the derivative doctrines, such as the recasting of justification, that are the bad FV stuff. But it really starts here with symbol and ritual.

The Federal Vision people have not done much more than take elements that were already around in the OPC and put them together in new ways:

1) Attack on the covenant of works because the language is not in Genesis: John Murray

2) Attack on the visible/invisible church distinction because the language is not that of the Bible: John Murray

3) A generalized playing off of the language of the Bible against the ideas of the Bible as organized in the Confessions: this is an extension by Norman Shepherd of what Murray started.

4) Playing up paradox in theology, so that logical contradictions to the Confessions are a mark of truth: Van Til

5) Engaging in typically Arminian exegesis of Biblical passages to promote the contradiction and paradox: Van Til

6) Conflating faith and works: Van Til

7) A vertical axis typology and wild symbolic theology: Meredith Kline.

What the Federal Vision did was push these pieces around together with some other old ideas from Dutch Reformed churches until they started to work as a new system, much like those Trasformer toys that change between trucks and robots.

The Federal Vision is the legitimate firstborn child of the OPC, and its deviant theologies that have been tolerated throughout the entire existence of the denomination.

Very interesting and thoroughly disturbing to consider. I'm not sure what to make of these things, to say the least.

 

[Theoretical]

Very interesting and thoroughly disturbing to consider. I'm not sure what to make of these things, to say the least.

Could this be partly why the URCNA pastors on the Sinners and Saints podcast http://www.start.urclearning.org/category/content-type/sinners-and-saints/ are rather critical of WSC?

I'm not trying to start a bad fight here - I'm just seriously wondering.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Wow! This is going to be an interesting discussion to say the least...

 

[Pilgrim]

Wow! This is going to be an interesting discussion to say the least...

 

[Jon Peters]

4) Playing up paradox in theology, so that logical contradictions to the Confessions are a mark of truth: Van Til

5) Engaging in typically Arminian exegesis of Biblical passages to promote the contradiction and paradox: Van Til

6) Conflating faith and works: Van Til

Thanks for your response but could you elaborate a bit on these?

 

[fredtgreco]

Thanks for your response but could you elaborate a bit on these?

Easy.

1. Van Til = ruiner of the faith, author of all evil, etc.

2. Clark = always right.


When in doubt about #2, consult #3, which is:

3. Robbins = always right.