Donations for the month of July


We have received a total of "$200" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Posts: 3,063
Joined: September 2003
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,228
Posts53,051
Members962
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,985
Tom 3,997
chestnutmare 3,063
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,814
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 19
Robin 13
Tom 10
John_C 2
Recent Posts
Mandatory Vaccines
by Pilgrim. Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:13 PM
Lying to save a life
by Pilgrim. Sun Jul 25, 2021 1:46 PM
The Imperativeness of the New Birth ~ A.W. Pink
by Rick Bates. Fri Jul 23, 2021 12:48 PM
What if...
by Pilgrim. Tue Jul 20, 2021 6:25 AM
Augustine or Athanasius
by Pilgrim. Sat Jul 17, 2021 8:40 PM
Covenant child
by Pilgrim. Fri Jul 16, 2021 6:02 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Federal Vision Question #53126
Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:03 PM
Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:03 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Would you say that the main problem of FV has to do with 'presumptive regeneration' and Paedo communion?


Tom

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Tom] #53127
Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:56 PM
Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:56 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Originally Posted By: Tom
Would you say that the main problem of FV has to do with 'presumptive regeneration' and Paedo communion?

nope Neither is close to the main problem. There are several major problems undergirding FV, e.g., distorted understanding of the Covenant, of true faith, denial of imputation of the active obedience of faith, grace+works=justification, and more.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53128
Wed Feb 15, 2017 5:59 PM
Wed Feb 15, 2017 5:59 PM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
J
JesusFan Offline
Addict
JesusFan  Offline
Addict
J
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
Doesn't it totally misunderstand Pauline Justification?

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: JesusFan] #53129
Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:56 PM
Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:56 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Originally Posted By: JesusFan
Doesn't it totally misunderstand Pauline Justification?

No, it totally rejects Pauline justification as taught by all the Reformers, Puritans, Reformed Confessions, catechisms, etc. The adherents of FV understand perfectly what all the above hold to on the doctrine of justification and they openly say it is wrong.

As I have already mentioned elsewhere, probably the best book on FV; history, proponents, doctrines and its refutation from a biblical position is Cornelis P. Venema's The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ. For those who would rather have a much simpler presentation, there is Venema's Getting the Gospel Right; paperback 98 pp. Both are published by The Banner of Truth Trust. And of course, there is Philip Eveson's The Great Exchange (out of print), but the complete book is on The Highway here: The Great Exchange. Although Eveson's emphasis is upon N.T. Wright, one of the main innovators of NPP (New Perspective on Paul), the issue at stake is the doctrine of justification. And, Wright's heresy laid the groundwork for FV and the other morphs that followed.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53140
Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:31 PM
Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:31 PM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
J
JesusFan Offline
Addict
JesusFan  Offline
Addict
J
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
They would speak more of the Lord jesus being faithful to God, and so God was then faithful to His covenant promises?

Wright denies that Jesus took the blunt of the wrath of God, correct?

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53150
Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:57 PM
Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:57 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Pilgrim
I am a little confused then. Douglas Wilson says he believes in justification, just like the Reformers proclaimed. He has even taught on issues like this at Ligonier ministries.
I was given this sermon, but I have yet to have time to listen to it. This is of course a bit old, so I have idea if Wilson still speaks at Ligonier.
I also read that while the whole FV thing was happening in the PCA, RC Sproul said he can not fathom why there is any hesitancy at rejecting Federal Vision.

Still studying this issue, something seems fishy.

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Tom] #53151
Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:03 PM
Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:03 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Just started watching James White vs Douglas Wilson.

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Tom] #53152
Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:20 PM
Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:20 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,985
NH, USA
Originally Posted By: Tom
Pilgrim
I am a little confused then. Douglas Wilson says he believes in justification, just like the Reformers proclaimed. He has even taught on issues like this at Ligonier ministries.
I was given this sermon, but I have yet to have time to listen to it. This is of course a bit old, so I have idea if Wilson still speaks at Ligonier.
I also read that while the whole FV thing was happening in the PCA, RC Sproul said he can not fathom why there is any hesitancy at rejecting Federal Vision.

Still studying this issue, something seems fishy.

Have you done any reading on the subject of FV?? scratchchin We've discussed that heresy a number of times on this board.

1. Most all heresies, including those embracing FV, REDEFINE TERMS... without disclosing they have done so. Thus, when someone speaks of "faith", for example, you insert YOUR definition while they are unknown to you using THEIR definition and thus you THINK you are on the same page and put your arms around them and call them "brother"! nono

2. In FV, there are "2" justifications. 1) You are justified in the sense that you are given a temporary 'pass' as a member of the covenant community. This is what faith means in FV. As a member of the covenant community (covenantal monism) you are under obligation to keep the laws and rules of that covenant. Now, if you are a good boy and do all that is required of you, then at the Judgement you will be deemed a faithful covenant keeper and then finally justified (aka: Roman Catholicism).

3. 30 years ago +/- Doug Wilson did some writing for Table Talk, although he had his own magazine too. He was a nutcase back then too but FV hadn't made its entrance at that time. I don't think Doug Wilson has done anything with Ligonier Ministries for many years for whatever reason.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53153
Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:40 PM
Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:40 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Just in case anyone is interested in what in the debate. I took some notes that I will put below.

James White vs. Douglas Wilson Debate
Wilson believes that seeing Roman Catholicism believes in the Trinity and seeing that they baptize in the name of the Trinity. Then they should be considered part of the true Church regardless of whether or not they have the Gospel right. He said this is because baptism is God’s statement, not mans.
He would not accept the Mormon’s Trinitarian baptism, simply because they actually do not believe the Trinity.
He used an example of a husband who is an adulterer. He does not stop being a husband simply because he is an adulterer. He says however is not talking about whether or not someone is a true Christian, rather part of the covenant.
He said that Roman Catholicism is in adultery, but they still should be considered part of the covenant. White says just because in Roman Catholic early days, they had most of the Gospel right doesn’t mean they should be considered part of the covenant now.
Confusing?
Just a note, although I get what Dr. White is saying here and I am sure if he explained his answer more, it would make more sense. However, his answer sounded like he was denying the perseverance of the saints. There were only two times in the debate I would have like Dr. White to have said more. This one and when Douglas Wilson read several Reformers on the subject. When Wilson read AA Hodge on the subject, he asked Dr. White if he agreed with Hodge and he responded “no”.
He goes onto say that New Covenant baptism, makes the person more responsible to actually have saving faith than an atheist. He explains the true Christian will be faithful to their Trinitarian baptism. Those who are not, are breaking the covenant.
He said also that those in the Papacy have the correct baptism, therefore like the Reformers such as John Knox and a few others (while quoting them) when someone who had been baptized in the RCC, they should not be re-baptised in a Protestant Church.
Douglas Wilson believes that Paul wrote Hebrews (I don’t , lol) and he also called those whom he anathematized “brothers”. Yet I think James White rightly says that he thinks Douglas Wilson is wrong to believe that Paul is actually calling apostates “brothers and sisters in Christ”. Although in general terms Paul speak to the Church, but he also talks about false brethren and false brothers and sisters. In other words when he is addressing the Church and calling them brothers, he isn’t saying there are not false brothers in attendance.
Dr. White says something that I believe is very important. He says that just because the RCC formula for baptism is correct, does not tell the whole story because salvation (sola fide) and the Trinity are tied together. We should not separate the two in baptism.
I will say something that I may need to look into more. It appeared that many of the Reformers despite the hard language they used against the Romans Catholic Church; thought of the RCC as part of the covenant. I also believe Dr. White’s statement that said the debate has just scratched the surface of the topic.
Well that took about 2 ½ hours.
Tom

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53154
Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:22 AM
Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:22 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,997
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
I will be looking through the Highway on the discussion you mentioned.
I am curious at your thoughts of the following 2 minute video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5sKcgFw5hA&feature=youtu.be

Tom

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Tom] #53161
Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:53 AM
Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:53 AM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
J
JesusFan Offline
Addict
JesusFan  Offline
Addict
J
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
Wright seems to be saying that water baptism isd the entry way into the Kingdom, and yet God has to evaluate your entire chrsitian life in order to see if you merit keeping eternal life?

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Pilgrim] #53162
Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:57 AM
Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:57 AM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
J
JesusFan Offline
Addict
JesusFan  Offline
Addict
J
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 481
Macomb Michigan
Just anything else, how we define words and terms all important...

Wright seems to be saying that the church needs to reject the reformation views on justification, and go back to early church viewed, and he also seems to have Judaism at time of Jesus a valid religious system, and he has us accept theology of the Jewish temple equal to scriptures!

Re: Federal Vision Question [Re: Tom] #53178
Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:33 PM
Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:33 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,004
Lake Park, Georgia USA
Robin Offline

The Boy Wonder
Robin  Offline

The Boy Wonder
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,004
Lake Park, Georgia USA
It's about "covenant membership" rather than God-given faith through which the elect are saved by GRACE ALONE.

The Reformed idea of the visible church (those who profess faith in Christ and their baptized children) and the invisible Church (all the elect, past present and future) is rejected in FV.


Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 40 guests, and 40 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
winslowlady, Zach, Daverogk, Dani, timothywhite
962 Registered Users
Shout Box
July
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
historyb
Popular Topics(Views)
1,272,470 Gospel truth
Page Time: 0.053s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 2.9204 MB (Peak: 3.2237 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2021-07-27 14:46:05 UTC