I don't know where John stands on the movie. I know he liked the historical aspect to the film. I mention it, because John is a fantastic model of presuppositional apologetics when confronting an audience that is for the most part radically secular.
It is true that we are not married to the WCF as some infallible, never to be questioned document (I know people with similar convictions who are KJV only), so he may not come down on your particular side of the fence. If that makes us "antinomian" in your mind, then I guess we will have to live with it. I do know that the word "antinomian," is one of those annoying theological buzz words followers of the WCF love to throw out at those believers who dissent from their particular understanding of covenantalism. It is similar to how democrats call republicans racist when they don't agree with democratic welfare policies.

My response to Barcellos is forth coming.


"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns