The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum The Nature of Church

But obviously you haven't since you recommended his book without having read it.

Now, this is going in the same direction as the other thread... nowhere. As I have stated numerous times, the overwhelming majority on this board are of the Reformed/Calvinistic tradition. Our view of the Church is quite well known and can be known by those who don't know by reading any of the historic Confessions, e.g., Westminster Confession. Relevant articles are clearly labeled such as Chapters XXI and XXV. These truths have been believed for centuries and more. If you believe them to be in error, then by all means show where they err, just as you would have us do to Dunn's views on the Church.

Doubt not that we will gladly respond to your critique of the historic view of the Church which again can be found in the great Confessions of the Reformation and further in detail in the various articles found on the main website. That's why they are there; to set forth that which has been believed by the Church universally so that others may read them. The Highway averages 1.5 million hits per month. Obviously there are people who value the resources and read them. Perhaps you should do likewise? Then we can discuss something other than books authored by a known heretic which none have read. We are very familiar with the references offered to you here.

But I can assure you that if this thread continues on its current course, I'll lock it.

PS. re: (if he is indeed a heretic) He IS a heretic to historic biblical Protestant Christianity on the matter of salvation, which views are everywhere to be found in the great Confessions; Westminster, Larger/Shorter Catechism, Belgic, Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dordt, Second Helvetic, French, The Waldensian, Savoy, Baptist London, and the Thirty-nine Articles. Now, it may be that you are in agreement with Dunn, Jordon, NT Wright, Auburn Avenue, Norman Shepherd, Douglas Wilson, et al who embrace NPP, FV or some form of it which holds that salvation is synergistic rather than historic Christianity's monergistic view? In that case, Dunn would not be a heretic in your eyes but then again, you wouldn't be considered Christian either.