# Report on the PCA GA FV/NPP report



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 13, 2007)

On the HB now.

The report passed. I'm uncertain the exact status of the report.

rsc


----------



## wsw201 (Jun 13, 2007)

As David Coffin noted its up to the various Presbyteries to use it.


----------



## Machaira (Jun 13, 2007)

wsw201 said:


> As David Coffin noted its up to the various Presbyteries to use it.



That being the case, I would imagine that more FV proponents will slip through the cracks. I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## wsw201 (Jun 13, 2007)

One thing you can do Jim is get on the committee that examines new pastors in your Presbytery.


----------



## Machaira (Jun 13, 2007)

That sounds like an excellent idea.


----------



## sotzo (Jun 13, 2007)

How about this?

"TE R. C. Sproul speaks against the motion. The issue is imputation. The purity of the PCA is at stake. He said that he cannot understand the hesitancy. He spoke against adding a minority on the ground that it's like adding the accused to the jury. Applause and laughter. Before the moderator could gavel them down, R C said, "shame on you brothers for your righteous applause." 

Appropriate response from him to both sides. Just as bad to be laughing and applauding by the FV opponents as FV itself. The Gospel is at stake!


----------



## polemic_turtle (Jun 13, 2007)

It was interesting watching it all happen. When they first tried to make and push their motion to wait another year, I was inclined to agree. That is, I was until they stressed the fact that they had been asked originally to ascertain whether the NPP or FV was agreeable with the WCF, rather than to supply the detailed exegesis which they had conducted behind the scenes.

One thing I wonder: is the spirit of levity appropriate here? Somehow it doesn't seem Puritanical to me. Any thoughts?

P.S. This is my first year to attend a GA and I've already shook the hands of Drs. R C Sproul and Joel Beeke! I've also got a lunch ticket for meeting Dr. Cal Beisner for a Q & A over the FV! WOW! I wondered if Dr. Beeke was truly the man who thrust a newsletter into my hands while talking to someone else. He gave me a special deal on 'a Brakel's "Reasonable Service" and his "Meet the Puritans". WOW!


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jun 13, 2007)

Was Dr. Beeke at PCA GA? Faternal relations maybe? OTOH, it is the biggest conservative denom gathering so, prime spot to move some wares (speaking as a Reformed book maker  ).

On the matter in general, it is not surprising I guess, but the bitter words are flowing freely from the FV side tonight.


----------



## turmeric (Jun 13, 2007)

NaphtaliPress said:


> On the matter in general, it is not surprising I guess, but the bitter words are flowing freely from the FV side tonight.



Must be doing _something_ right.

I'm glad the report was adopted!


----------



## Gryphonette (Jun 13, 2007)

Tomorrow morning's the SJC report, isn't it? Something to do with Wilkins?

Doubtless it's obvious to a blind man I'm not totally clear on what is going to happen, and what are the possible ramifications of whatever it is that actually _does _happen.

Could someone clue me in, please?


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Jun 14, 2007)

Anne, I was told that it was not until later in the year.


----------



## polemic_turtle (Jun 14, 2007)

Dr. Beeke said it was his first year here. As you said, he was out in the aisles, aggressively moving books. It works, too: he sold me $100 worth!


----------



## Casey (Jun 14, 2007)

polemic_turtle said:


> Dr. Beeke said it was his first year here. As you said, he was out in the aisles, aggressively moving books. It works, too: he sold me $100 worth!


----------



## Romans922 (Jun 14, 2007)

Leithart today turned this into his stated clerk of his presbytery:

http://www.leithart.com/archives/003074.php


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr (Jun 17, 2007)

So what exactly is the report about?


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr (Jun 17, 2007)

sotzo said:


> How about this?
> 
> "TE R. C. Sproul speaks against the motion. The issue is imputation. The purity of the PCA is at stake. He said that he cannot understand the hesitancy. He spoke against adding a minority on the ground that it's like adding the accused to the jury. Applause and laughter. Before the moderator could gavel them down, R C said, "shame on you brothers for your righteous applause."
> 
> Appropriate response from him to both sides. Just as bad to be laughing and applauding by the FV opponents as FV itself. The Gospel is at stake!



How so?


----------

