# Heretics seldom call themselves such...



## SEAGOON (Dec 11, 2007)

I was reminded by Anne's post of an excellent quote from the _Against Heresies_ blog, that we seem to forget that those introducing error into Reformed denominations have always called themselves Reformed and for the most part confessional. Even the Auburnites argued they believed the teaching of the Westminster Standards as they hideously reinterpreted the meaning of those standards to fit their own beliefs. As I mentioned on Greenbaggins, the tack we are seeing with the FV (including calling us strict and sectarian) is nothing new:

Arminius and his disciple Episcopus were both teachers at the Reformed seminary at Leyden. They always saw themselves as bringing further reformation to the Reformed Church in Holland by bringing them to a more perfect understanding of Scripture. They also argued for their liberty to teach the “truth”, while making it quite clear that once their views became the majority the old views would have to go, in other words “tolerate us until we are strong enough to force you out.” Generally speaking all of the movements that have introduced error into Reformed denominations have taken the same tack saying that they were arguing for greater fidelity to scripture, greater love to the brethren, a broader and more catholic Christianity, and anti-sectarianism (sound familiar?).

For instance the gradual introduction of Arminianism, Neo-Nomianism, and eventually Arianism eventually destroyed the English Presbyterians (who after the Restoration were all known as Dissenters) in the 17th century. The introduction of those elements was opposed by what would have been called the “TRs” of their own day who argued for fidelity to the confessions and the discipline of those introducing error. Those advocating “tolerance” for the errorists of their own time argued in the manner of the following quote by John Taylor of Norwhich. It could have been lifted from any one of the modern pleas to tolerate the FV - just replace “Dissenters” with “PCA”:

“If the Dissenters stand firm on liberty and love… if they refuse all party schemes and stand upon the basis of universal Christianity; if they allow the free study of the Bible and encourage the labors of their honest and learned men; if they are steadfastly determined to establish their faith, practice, and worship on the Word of God alone, as it shall from time to time be made known to them… then they will act to their own true principles… But if ever they abandon liberty and love; they stiffly adhere to party names and schemes; if they discourage the honest and learned men that would throw in more light and truth among them, they will become weak and dwindle into nothing.”

So yeah, they always feel they are doing the Reformed world a service and bringing us greater reformation. You’d think after over 300 years of the same approach we’d learn to say “No thanks” to old errors in new clothes.


----------



## Amazing Grace (Dec 11, 2007)

SEAGOON said:


> So yeah, they always feel they are doing the Reformed world a service and bringing us greater reformation. You’d think after over 300 years of the same approach we’d learn to say “No thanks” to old errors in new clothes.



Andy:
It is much longer than 300 years. Nothing new is under the sun. Since the birth of "the way' an apostacy from all truth emerged immediately. Every once in a while an obvious heresy pops its ugly head. But the fact remains that the false Gospel presented by some ALWAYS has a shred of truth in it. At face value, it does not look much different, therefore many succumb under its influence. Just like the wheat and the tares who grow together unnoticed unles examined closely, the false is mingled with the truth so carefully that if one does not know the truth exactly how it should be, you can be persuaded in the wrong direction. WHile I commend the approach at times to begin anew in some areas and not remain frozen in the 16th and 17th century, unles led by the Spirit it will result in faliure. I may have mentioned this before, but a very good friend of mine works for the govt conterfeit recognition team in DC. The way they are taught to recognize the conterfiet is to study the "true bill" without end. To know ver jot and tittle. Thats how we shoudl approach the Scriptures. Our energies should be spent on the truth more than heretic hunting


----------



## Thomas2007 (Dec 11, 2007)

SEAGOON said:


> Arminius and his disciple Episcopus were both teachers at the Reformed seminary at Leyden. They always saw themselves as bringing further reformation to the Reformed Church in Holland by bringing them to a more perfect understanding of Scripture. They also argued for their liberty to teach the “truth”, while making it quite clear that once their views became the majority the old views would have to go, in other words “tolerate us until we are strong enough to force you out.” Generally speaking all of the movements that have introduced error into Reformed denominations have taken the same tack saying that they were arguing for greater fidelity to scripture, greater love to the brethren, a broader and more catholic Christianity, and anti-sectarianism (sound familiar?).



And the liberals introducing a new public religion so that we may be more loving and tolerant of differing opinions said, "You can't legislate morality;" the Christians in America shrinked away because they errantly accepted the proposition that a disestablished Church had no public confession of faith established in the body politick. A few years later they got control and the Judicial Branch of government redefined our First Amendment and said, there must be a "Separation of Church and State", with a new meaning before unknown finding that Bible and Prayer in public are an illegality of the highest order.





SEAGOON said:


> For instance the gradual introduction of Arminianism, Neo-Nomianism, and eventually Arianism eventually destroyed the English Presbyterians (who after the Restoration were all known as Dissenters) in the 17th century. The introduction of those elements was opposed by what would have been called the “TRs” of their own day who argued for fidelity to the confessions and the discipline of those introducing error. Those advocating “tolerance” for the errorists of their own time argued in the manner of the following quote by John Taylor of Norwhich. It could have been lifted from any one of the modern pleas to tolerate the FV - just replace “Dissenters” with “PCA”:
> 
> “If the Dissenters stand firm on liberty and love… if they refuse all party schemes and stand upon the basis of universal Christianity; if they allow the free study of the Bible and encourage the labors of their honest and learned men; if they are steadfastly determined to establish their faith, practice, and worship on the Word of God alone, as it shall from time to time be made known to them… then they will act to their own true principles… But if ever they abandon liberty and love; they stiffly adhere to party names and schemes; if they discourage the honest and learned men that would throw in more light and truth among them, they will become weak and dwindle into nothing.”



If election has passed from eternity into time, as they argue it has in their "Federal Vision of the Covenant," then they must seek establishment of their Church, and you'll soon find that they are concealed matoids bringing in damnable doctrines that will lead many into a political revolution, as well as theological. Ideas have consequences.




SEAGOON said:


> So yeah, they always feel they are doing the Reformed world a service and bringing us greater reformation. You’d think after over 300 years of the same approach we’d learn to say “No thanks” to old errors in new clothes.



What is the Church to do? In the California Farmer 257:7, of November 6, 1982, p 29, RJ Rushdoony says this:

"Soon after Oliver Cromwell came to power, a group of London clergymen came to him with a complaint. These men, who until recently had been persecuted by the Church of England, now charged that these Anglican divines were stealing their congregations away from them. "After what manner do the cavaliers debauch your people?" asked Cromwell. "By preaching," the deputation replied. "Then preach back again," said Cromwell, and dismissed them. 

Because those men had forgotten the power of faithful preaching, they were looking to the power of the sword to replace the power of the Word and the Spirit. Paul tells us, "[F]aith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17). Not man's word but God's Words give hearing, faith and power. Hence, Paul tells Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season" (2 Timothy 4:2).

When the church forsakes the faithful ministry of the whole Word of God, it forsakes power, and it loses hearing and hearers. Then not only do churchmen trust too much in political action above the power of the Word, but the people do as well. The state grows strong, because people believe more in its power than in God's.

Cromwell's Commonwealth ended with his death. The deputation of London ministers suggests why. The very men who should have proclaimed the Word of God looked to the power of the sword to hold their congregations. By downgrading the power of God's Word, they had forsaken it."

The problem I see in all of this, is this: the Church is talking a lot about it, but it's about man's word adjudicating it wondering what is to become of them and of us. Preach back Church, Preach back! Bear down on profanity and immorality of every kind, improve your character and those of your people, Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season, for the Glory of God fulfilling your chief end.


----------



## timmopussycat (Dec 11, 2007)

Thomas2007 said:


> What is the Church to do? In the California Farmer 257:7, of November 6, 1982, p 29, RJ Rushdoony says this:
> 
> "Soon after Oliver Cromwell came to power, a group of London clergymen came to him with a complaint. These men, who until recently had been persecuted by the Church of England, now charged that these Anglican divines were stealing their congregations away from them. "After what manner do the cavaliers debauch your people?" asked Cromwell. "By preaching," the deputation replied. "Then preach back again," said Cromwell, and dismissed them.
> 
> ...



 and


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Dec 11, 2007)

Thomas,

An interesting post that I can largely agree with but very  Not every topic on the PB, I hope, is going to be an injection point for some political commentary.

The issue at hand concerning a disturbance of the peace within the Church. While what Cromwell told other ministers who wanted him to use the political power of the sword to put down another Church is interesting but that discussion properly belongs to the sphere of the role of the Civil Magistrate.

When heresy breaks out within the Church, however, the Church not only has the authority but must use its authority to remove the destructive influence within her midst.

Pastor Webb makes an excellent point that people will always lead with the idea that they're the real Reformers. False teachers don't announce themselves as false teachers because they don't think they're false teachers. Christ's under-shepherds need to be wise enough to recognize the folly and deal with it. A minister within a Presbytery cannot be satisfied that his congregation is receiving sound preaching while a sister Church's sheep are being destroyed by a false shepherd.

It's not either-or, it is both-and.


----------



## Thomas2007 (Dec 11, 2007)

Hello Rich,

My point was to interject a frame of reference that most everyone is familiar with, outlining the same tactics, and magnifying the excellent point by Pastor Webb, whereby the outcome is not merely a localized isolated event. 

I chose this because it is an extreme representation of the outcome of the same tactics, the Bible and Prayer became illegal, in the toleration of of a religious heresy. Christianity public witness as a whole fell in the United States, that is my frame of reference.

I agree wholeheartedly , that it is not "either-or, it is both-and," to suggest I was not, is to misinterpret my intention, and I'm certainly sorry if my poor wording or subject matter caused that. 

I hoped to demonstrate the principle that a little leaven, leaventh the whole lump. Hence, my reference to the sword of the civil magistrate in the quote was not intended to be discounting the adjudicatory process of the PCA.

The only reason for the argument of toleration advanced by Federal Vision is so that it can expand and enlarge itself, which it is doing. That is what Pastor Webb is warning us of. Other denominations, from my perspective, are sitting and watching the spectacle while the leaven is still being sown, even in their own congregations.

These men are publishing and have been for a long time, the leaven is sown and it is leavening. If we think the adjudicatory process is going to put this down, we are mistaken, I've experienced this "Federal Vision" starting to leaven even from a small mustardseed.

This is not merely a threat to our theology, it is a threat to Protestantism as a whole, they are one small step away from the Priestcraft. Rich, I am a very broader thinker, so it was not my intention to be "off topic." From my point of view the Protestant Church has already been sown with many seeds of popery, and Federal Vision is "Miracle Grow" unto them all!

We cannot sit back and watch, we must Preach and put this down now everywhere.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Dec 11, 2007)

Antidote to heresy..... Confessional Biblical Subscription by solid denominations.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Dec 11, 2007)

Thomas,

Noted. Thank you for the explanation. I'm not sure that anyone who has been around American Presbyterianism for very long is under any illusions that our problems disappear once this is adjudicated. The sword must always be at the ready.

Suffice to say that I share concerns with many that there are extremely troubling trends that contribute to this problem and that it is symptomatic of a larger problem.

Nevertheless, many here are "...very broader thinkers..." but not every thread can be very broad because then the topical utility of certain threads is destroyed. Hence, I use my powerful gavel and wig  to make sure we keep the discussion focused so we don't go down all the rabbit trails in every thread.

Blessings!

Rich


----------



## Thomas2007 (Dec 11, 2007)

Dear Rich,

Thank you for the admonition, I will attempt to speak more narrowly in the future. However, I think like a lawyer, so it's hard for me not to do that.

I agree with your statement that it is symptomatic of a larger problem. From my analysis, Federal Vision is just a doctrinal expression of the departure from the historical Reformed Orthodox definition of Sola Scriptura (WCF 1:8).

This is an Authority issue merely being expressed in doctrine. The Church has been uprooted in the United States, and these men are uprooted from Sola Scriptura, they are trying to figure out how to sink roots back into history. In order to do that, they've created a heresy.

I believe they are genuine believers, with sincere but misguided intentions and simply ignorant of their real error, and it will be impossible for the PCA to correct them, since they are in fundamental agreement in their departure from Sola Scriptura. In fact, they will convert many before its over and make shipwreck that Church.

Brother Snyder is right on in his statement, all that is needed to destroy Federal Vision is to hold them to: "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones." Ephesians 5:30 Their view of election evaporates and cannot stand without the critical text it is derived from.

Cordially,


Thomas


----------



## MW (Dec 11, 2007)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Antidote to heresy..... Confessional Biblical Subscription by solid denominations.



Spot on. You can't give children the freedom to sow weeds in your garden and then blame them when the weeds grow and start choking the life out of your prized flowers.


----------



## Thomas2007 (Dec 11, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> > Antidote to heresy..... Confessional Biblical Subscription by solid denominations.
> ...



The axe must be set to the root as pruning the wild branches only
accomplishes the perpetual upsetting of the peace and good order
of the Church. Because of the curse the thorns and thistles will
always outgrow the prized flowers if the root is not dealt with.

I long for the day when when we can return to being a Reformed
and Reforming Church instead of a Reformed Kindergarten playing
Church.


----------



## KMK (Dec 11, 2007)

The hyper-preterists call themselves 'Reformed'. They may be next in line.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Dec 12, 2007)

I've posted this quote before but its relevant here too. Cyprian had the same view of heresy long ago. 



> 3. But, beloved brethren, not only must we beware of what is open and manifest, but also of what deceives by the craft of subtle fraud. And what can be more crafty, or what more subtle, than for this enemy, detected and cast down by the advent of Christ, after light has come to the nations, and saving rays have shone for the preservation of men, that the deaf might receive the hearing of spiritual grace, the blind might open their eyes to God, the weak might grow strong again with eternal health, the lame might run to the church, the dumb might pray with clear voices and prayers—seeing his idols forsaken, and his lanes and his temples deserted by the numerous concourse of believers—to devise a new fraud, and under the very title of the Christian name to deceive the incautious? He has invented heresies and schisms, whereby he might subvert the faith, might corrupt the truth, might divide the unity.Those whom he cannot keep in the darkness of the old way, he circumvents and deceives by the error of a new way. He snatches men from the Church itself; and while they seem to themselves to have already approached to the light, and to have escaped the night of the world, he pours over them again, in their unconsciousness, new darkness; so that, although they do not stand firm with the Gospel of Christ, and with the observation and law of Christ, they still call themselves Christians, and, walking in darkness, they think that they have the light, while the adversary is flattering and deceiving, who, according to the apostle’s word, transforms himself into an angel of light, and equips his ministers as if they were the ministers of righteousness, who maintain night instead of day, death for salvation, despair under the offer of hope, perfidy under the pretext of faith, antichrist under the name of Christ; so that, while they feign things like the truth, they make void the truth by their subtlety. This happens, beloved brethren, so long as we do not return to the source of truth, as we do not seek the head nor keep the teaching of the heavenly Master.


Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, Ante-Nicene Church Fathers Vol. 5, pg. 422. 
ANF05. Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian, Appendix | Christian Classics Ethereal Library


----------

