# Federal Vision and "Moral Government" Theory



## turmeric (Jun 16, 2007)

So I was trying to explain to my Dispensational and elderly mom what happened at GA this week, and to do that, I had to try to explain Federal Vision. So I'm doing that and whan I explain how they think we've misunderstood Paul about justification, she says "So the Cross was a waste of time?".

That makes me wonder, if they really believe that by "justification" Paul really meant inclusion, not alien righteousness, doesn't that leave them with the "moral government" theory of atonement? If we don't need alien righteousness, then what was the Cross for, in their way of thinking.


----------



## turmeric (Jun 17, 2007)

bump


----------



## bookslover (Jun 17, 2007)

turmeric said:


> So I was trying to explain to my Dispensational and elderly mom what happened at GA this week, and to do that, I had to try to explain Federal Vision. So I'm doing that and whan I explain how they think we've misunderstood Paul about justification, she says "So the Cross was a waste of time?".
> 
> That makes me wonder, if they really believe that by "justification" Paul really meant inclusion, not alien righteousness, doesn't that leave them with the "moral government" theory of atonement? If we don't need alien righteousness, then what was the Cross for, in their way of thinking.



Now that the PCA has voted overwhelmingly to reject the heretical FV "theology" (I think the percentage of the vote was something like 95%-5% to accept the committee's report), I think the FVers have two choices: they can either (a) repent of their bad theology and come back to the orthdox position on justification by faith, or (2) if they can't do that (actually: won't), then they should do the next-best honorable thing and leave the PCA.

My prediction: they'll do neither. What they'll probably do is "go underground." That is, they'll teach in the churches where they already are, and stay below the radar by keeping their views off the internet as much as possible and try to grow a generation of folks who accept their views.

So, as in the OPC, PCA sessions and presbyteries have their work cut out for them. They need to be diligent to root out these folks where they find them.


----------



## eternallifeinchrist (Jun 17, 2007)

What would we look for as regular attenders? Key points?


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 17, 2007)

bookslover said:


> Now that the PCA has voted overwhelmingly to reject the heretical FV "theology" (I think the percentage of the vote was something like 95%-5% to accept the committee's report), I think the FVers have two choices: they can either (a) repent of their bad theology and come back to the orthdox position on justification by faith, or (2) if they can't do that (actually: won't), then they should do the next-best honorable thing and leave the PCA.
> 
> My prediction: they'll do neither. What they'll probably do is "go underground." That is, they'll teach in the churches where they already are, and stay below the radar by keeping their views off the internet as much as possible and try to grow a generation of folks who accept their views.
> 
> So, as in the OPC, PCA sessions and presbyteries have their work cut out for them. They need to be diligent to root out these folks where they find them.



Is not the solution to depose those that teach FV?


----------



## turmeric (Jun 17, 2007)

My question in the OP is more theoretical- does the FV view of justification and covenant-keeping on our part not require a "moral government" atonement theory rather than a substitutionary atonement theory?

The judicial committee of the PCA General Assembly will have to tell us what to do with these pastors who expouse this stuff, so far there has been no decision. It's early days yet.


----------

