Saturday, February 12, 2005

Reactions to Report

Joel Garver makes my point for me. In his criticism of the Mississippi Valley Presbytery’s (PCA) report about the Federal Vision and New Perspectives on Paul he states that one of the major disagreements is about Theological Development. He states:

The question here is, in part, one of theological development within a tradition--some of that development looking back to parts of our heritage and confessional tradition that have been neglected, some of it trying to speak the Reformed faith to a world in which certain historically-conditioned and limited categories are no longer as meaningful, and some of it attempting to grow and develop our tradition in light of fresh insights into aspects of the biblical Gospel.


In the many discussions that will take place over the next months and maybe years, one that should take place is about theological and historical development. This underlying belief drives people to innovation in doctrine.

Here are a few other thoughts about the report from Federal Vision proponents or at least those who think the report is bad:

Mark Horne
Paul Owen
Doug Wilson
Auburn Ave. Presbyterian Church

And some who enjoyed the report:
Okay so I have not yet found any on the web. I will keep looking, and after I read this report, maybe I will comment on it. And maybe it will be positive.

3 Comments:

budpow@ureach.com said...

Lee, the implications of doctrine and its application certainly needs to grow and develop as we learn to understand the doctrines better. But the doctrine was "once for all delivered to the saints," and to say that we need to learn new doctrine is implicitly deny that Christ told us "all things." We need to preach the old faith, not innovate. Let us use our imagination and cleverness to apply it to the modern day, and make it ring in the ear of the listener.

C. W. Powell, Academic Dean.
New Geneva Theological Seminary.

Anonymous said...

I find Garver's response to be the most classic of post-modernist clap-trap you'll find. I agree that it's difficult with him to discern if he is conscious of what he is doing or is just merely an academic fool duped by the more self-consciously corrupt NPPers and FVers. Nevertheless, when a person has the Spirit of Truth in them they have discernment to see through all the fog and to see motivations and to see Truth. This same discernment is what is needed for continually finding and seeing apostolic Biblical doctrine 'through history' as the forces of darkness inevitably make their assualts on that truth in myriad ways over time. /c

Andrew McIntyre said...

Perhaps I am just naive, but I rather think that if there were any cool insights into the Gospel the apostles would have given them to us. It is simple to my simple mind. The apostles had fellowship with Christ, so I want to have fellowship with the apostles. Modern theological advocates of relevancy and innovation can stuff it. After all, when will we learn? This is the kind of nonsense we have heard from apostate liberal churches for many years. This is the kind of nonsense we hear from "seeker sensitive" churches who have abandoned any semblance of the incredibly rich Christian tradition. I realize many professors of theology and famous pastors must come up with new and controversial ideas to keep themselves employed and sell books, but, as for me, I will stick with the faith once for all delivered.

Andrew McIntyre