# Federal Vision Attack



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 29, 2008)

Having reviewed John Otis' book Danger in the Camp, I am coming under increasing attack from Federal Visionists. Steve Schlissel and others have landed on my blog, and this strange site: Whilin' Away the Hours has complained that I am misrepresenting them.

However, I count it a privilege to suffer reproach for the sake of the gospel, as it is the very gospel of free grace (not me) which is really under attack here.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Feb 29, 2008)

Praying that you defend the Gospel well against this attack.

Ephes. 6:10 
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 29, 2008)

The "strange site" has been one of the biggest pro FV blogs for years and the owner (Barb Harvey) has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of the FV for years there and in other forums. 

One of the commentators on your blog, Gabe Martini, used to belong to the RPCNA and was a prolific poster on the PB (often harshly criticizing the FV) until he went FV himself and had to leave. 

I'm not so sure about it "not being a woman's place" however. Our newest moderator here, Anne Ivy, (gryphonette) has argued against the FV for years. So I suppose based on your reasoning that she should cease her activities and relinquish her moderatorship here as well since it is not limited to the Tea Parlor. 

I seem to recall that Jenny Geddes didn't shy away from theological controversy!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 29, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> The "strange site" has been one of the biggest pro FV blogs for years and the owner (Barb Harvey) has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of the FV for years there and in other forums.
> 
> I'm not so sure about it "not being a woman's place" however. Our newest moderator here, Anne Ivy, (gryphonette) has argued against the FV for years. So I suppose based on your reasoning that she should cease her activities and relinquish her moderatorship here as well since it is not limited to the Tea Parlor.
> 
> I seem to recall that Jenny Geddes didn't shy away from theological controversy!



Fair point...though there is an air of disrespect when a woman challenges a soundly Reformed person in the manner that this lady did. I don't mind Anne and Jenny Geddes throwing stools at heretics.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Feb 29, 2008)

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> Praying that you defend the Gospel well against this attack.
> 
> Ephes. 6:10
> Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 29, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > The "strange site" has been one of the biggest pro FV blogs for years and the owner (Barb Harvey) has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of the FV for years there and in other forums.
> ...


"Villain! doest thou say mass in my lug?" 
Put ol' Jenny after Barb. Or Anne will do lacking a time machine.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 29, 2008)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > Pilgrim said:
> ...



 I remember giving a lecture once on Social Covenanting at a Covenanter Youth meeting in Dromara and I quoted Jenny's words; the whole place nearly came down with laughter.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Feb 29, 2008)

Welcome to the party.

If those cats are after you then you're probably doing the right thing.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 1, 2008)

R. Scott Clark said:


> Welcome to the party.
> 
> If those cats are after you then you're probably doing the right thing.



BTW I have started reading Covenant, Justification and Pastoral Ministry, and enjoyed your opening essay, but since I only plan to read one article each Lord's Day, it will be a while before I get to the review.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 1, 2008)

They are at it again; note that one commenter says I need to guard my tongue for saying their view of justification is damnable heresy; this is ridiculous:

Whilin' Away the Hours


----------



## AV1611 (Mar 1, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> BTW I have started reading Covenant, Justification and Pastoral Ministry, and enjoyed your opening essay, but since I only plan to read one article each Lord's Day, it will be a while before I get to the review.



I lent my copy to our curate who whilst is FV sympathetic is not unorthodox.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2008)

This is an apt blog post from Against Heresies


> Wednesday, February 27, 2008
> "They just don't get it" or the dynamics of dismissing critics
> 
> Ever wondered what to make of the complaints that critics fail to even understand what they are criticizing? Ever been amazed when those critics can be counted in double figures and teach at a pretty high level? Ever thought that there is something quite fishy in the response that says "they just don't get our position"?
> ...


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 1, 2008)

Barbara made a remark that she wished that FV critics would get emasculated and that I was part of some neo-Puritan Taliban; however, she has since removed it. My last comment on that strange blog responds to the "emasculation" allegation.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Mar 1, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Barbara made a remark that she wished that FV critics would get emasculated and that I was part of some neo-Puritan Taliban; however, she has since removed it. My last comment on that strange blog responds to the "emasculation" allegation.



Let me get this right: the judaizers are calling for Paul's emasculation?


----------



## Zenas (Mar 1, 2008)

Wow. I have consistently seen the worst from FV proponents. Their reaction to criticism is not what I would attribute to learned theologians responding to critics of their view, but more akin to something else of a less mature manner. 

I would think it would be best not engage a proponent of FV directly, and let them flap in the wind while you address the meat of the issue. There's no point in arguing with these people as their ears appear to be closed; it's much better to just argue against their view and show the falsity inherant therein. They appear to want to sidetrack discussion by being disrepectful and hateful, in order to draw attention away from criticizing their skewed theology. From there, they claim you're being uncharitable and mean and not addressing the issues.

I've had kinder treatment from non-believers, honestly.


----------



## Poimen (Mar 1, 2008)

I agree with Andrew. For the most part it is a waste of time to even interact with them. If you listen to the original lectures that started this whole mess you will hear that they were never interested in the 'conversation' that they so boldly state they have wanted. However you will hear much arrogance and condescension in those lectures.

For yourself, just be charitable and open to correction. This is difficult to do when it does not come in a spirit of love but is nevertheless a requirement.

And remember that not all 'FV' supporters are truly FV. Some are just caught up the cult of personality, although one wonders if this is any better than the theology itself.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 1, 2008)

R. Scott Clark said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > Barbara made a remark that she wished that FV critics would get emasculated and that I was part of some neo-Puritan Taliban; however, she has since removed it. My last comment on that strange blog responds to the "emasculation" allegation.
> ...



 That's rich!


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Mar 1, 2008)

SemperFideles said:


> R. Scott Clark said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...




If nothing else, it is certainly a "New Perspective."


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 1, 2008)

Hey Guys,

Help this ignorant Baptist understand. The FV fits quite nicely (hand in glove?) with the NPP? Since the NPP is such a seductive draw in the academy with NT exegetes genuflecting to Tom Wright left and right, won't this also tend to fuel the popularity of the FV among Reformed folks as their pastors come through the "system" where Wright is honored? Yet, I read on PB that at least some of you believe that FV has peaked and is losing popularity. Would someone please reconcile these seemingly contradictory strands for me? Thanks.


----------



## Poimen (Mar 1, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> Help this ignorant Baptist understand. The FV fits quite nicely (hand in glove?) with the NPP? Since the NPP is such a seductive draw in the academy with NT exegetes genuflecting to Tom Wright left and right, won't this also tend to fuel the popularity of the FV among Reformed folks as their pastors come through the "system" where Wright is honored? Yet, I read on PB that at least some of you believe that FV has peaked and is losing popularity. Would someone please reconcile these seemingly contradictory strands for me? Thanks.


 
The FV and NPP are complimentary but not identical. NPP is more of an academic movement that focuses narrowly on the issue of justification and Gentile inclusion, whereas the FV is more popular and broader, focusing on the covenant and its implication for the church and the Christian faith.

Both movements, however, tend to be critical of systematic theology and are largely ignorant, and in some cases arrogant, towards historical and confessional theology. They also tend to downplay the role of justification in the life of the believer, and, in some cases, lean towards a more synergistic view of the righteousness by which we are justified. 

Some FV have been willing to criticize Wright and others (such as Doug Wilson) whereas men like Steve Schlissel have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. 

So you are correct: FV may be a channel for the NPP to grow in Reformed circles, but they should not be understood as compatible at all points.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 1, 2008)

R. Scott Clark said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > Barbara made a remark that she wished that FV critics would get emasculated and that I was part of some neo-Puritan Taliban; however, she has since removed it. My last comment on that strange blog responds to the "emasculation" allegation.
> ...



It is truly a perverse situation.


----------



## Zenas (Mar 2, 2008)

Hmm, some of them are amazingly unskilled and dull when it comes to the nuances of Justification. That Chris fellow apparently missed the boat on Protestant Justification 101.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 2, 2008)

I think this has run its course. If you want to engage Barb or her commentators, do so on her site. We don't need commentary here. Please note the forum rules. 
The Puritanboard strictly prohibits the practice of "board wars" and references to specific forums or blogs to post disparaging comments regarding the site or responding to disparaging comments about this site.​


----------

