The Way of Righteousness: Justification Beginning with James - Norman Shepherd - PT779
Will this be as muddled as the "Call of Grace" I wonder.
Will this be as muddled as the "Call of Grace" I wonder.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Way of Righteousness: Justification Beginning with James - Norman Shepherd - PT779
Will this be as muddled as the "Call of Grace" I wonder.
The Way of Righteousness: Justification Beginning with James - Norman Shepherd - PT779
Will this be as muddled as the "Call of Grace" I wonder.
Wayne,
Are the endorsements online? I don't want to waste my money just to see it. Van Dam also wrote a couple of articles praising a lecture Shepherd did at a recent conference...this just goes to the heart of what many of us have been saying for years: if the CanRC and URC are ever going to unite, we have to have real theological discussion.
Didn't he actually speak at one of the Auburn Avenue conferences a few years back?
The Way of Righteousness: Justification Beginning with James - Norman Shepherd - PT779
Will this be as muddled as the "Call of Grace" I wonder.
Wayne,
Are the endorsements online? I don't want to waste my money just to see it. Van Dam also wrote a couple of articles praising a lecture Shepherd did at a recent conference...this just goes to the heart of what many of us have been saying for years: if the CanRC and URC are ever going to unite, we have to have real theological discussion.
This post on Andrew Sandlin's blog has the endorsement information, as does the book's posting on Lulu.
Do you know if the Shepherd/FV teachings are being addressed in any URC-CanRC discussions?
Norman Shepard is a heretic.
Norman Shepard is a heretic.
We must be very careful in labeling someone with the "h" word. I warned someone on another thread yesterday for doing that in reference to F.F. Bruce. But we must be careful not, as private "citizens" of the church, to make such a pronouncement for something that is generally reserved for the church courts.
I don't like Shepherd one bit, nor will defend him. But be very careful with the "h" word.
We must be very careful in labeling someone with the "h" word. I warned someone on another thread yesterday for doing that in reference to F.F. Bruce. But we must be careful not, as private "citizens" of the church, to make such a pronouncement for something that is generally reserved for the church courts.
I don't like Shepherd one bit, nor will defend him. But be very careful with the "h" word.
I appreciate you wanting to warn people about using the word "heretic" flippantly, but in Shepard's case (along with all the other teachers of the FV) one does not need to wait on a church court to pronounce something heretical that is clearly heretical.
We must be very careful in labeling someone with the "h" word. I warned someone on another thread yesterday for doing that in reference to F.F. Bruce. But we must be careful not, as private "citizens" of the church, to make such a pronouncement for something that is generally reserved for the church courts.
I don't like Shepherd one bit, nor will defend him. But be very careful with the "h" word.
I appreciate you wanting to warn people about using the word "heretic" flippantly, but in Shepard's case (along with all the other teachers of the FV) one does not need to wait on a church court to pronounce something heretical that is clearly heretical.
We must be very careful in labeling someone with the "h" word. I warned someone on another thread yesterday for doing that in reference to F.F. Bruce. But we must be careful not, as private "citizens" of the church, to make such a pronouncement for something that is generally reserved for the church courts.
I don't like Shepherd one bit, nor will defend him. But be very careful with the "h" word.
I appreciate you wanting to warn people about using the word "heretic" flippantly, but in Shepard's case (along with all the other teachers of the FV) one does not need to wait on a church court to pronounce something heretical that is clearly heretical.
The danger in such an approach is the pronouncement of heresy becomes little more than individual opinion. In such a case, it does not help the cause, but rather robs the word of its meaning and significance.
We must be very careful in labeling someone with the "h" word. I warned someone on another thread yesterday for doing that in reference to F.F. Bruce. But we must be careful not, as private "citizens" of the church, to make such a pronouncement for something that is generally reserved for the church courts.
I don't like Shepherd one bit, nor will defend him. But be very careful with the "h" word.
I appreciate you wanting to warn people about using the word "heretic" flippantly, but in Shepard's case (along with all the other teachers of the FV) one does not need to wait on a church court to pronounce something heretical that is clearly heretical.
The danger in such an approach is the pronouncement of heresy becomes little more than individual opinion. In such a case, it does not help the cause, but rather robs the word of its meaning and significance.
3. Federal Vision. The Puritan Board forbids the membership of "Federal Vision" proponents on this board. Every major NAPARC body has ruled the Federal Vision to be an un-Scriptural and un-Confessional doctrinal error that fundamentally re-casts doctines that are core to the Christian religion. Those who are proponents of this doctrine should refrain from registering and any members who embrace this doctrine should have the integrity to forfeit their membership privileges. Members who violate this rule will be suspended or banned.
I fully support and affirm the declaration of the 258th synod of the Reformed Church in the United States that "the teachings of Norman Shepherd on justification by faith are another gospel"
This is part the fractured state of Protestantism. Perhaps if we would have a joint statement from NAPARC, that would go a long way to provide unity on this dangerous teaching.
I don't know as much as most of you here do about this, but what does he say that doesn't agree with what Piper says, that salvation is by faith alone but the faith that saves is never alone? I know somebody from WTS who likes him who says NS does not teach anything James does not teach- faith without works is a dead faith. I heard that back during the controversy the WTS faculty and board both voted overwhelmingly in his favor. The (WTS grads) people I know who like him will deny fervently that he is FV.
My friend Wes White (one of the most knowledgeable people on planet earth concerning Shepherd) has read the book already. He said it is pretty much more of the same. He will be writing a blog post about it soon. He says that Shepherd does not interact with any of his critics. There are approximately 2 footnotes in the entire book. It is a sign of his position that he has to self-publish, because P&R probably refused to publish him. Wes says it is the same old confusion of justification and sanctification that he has always advocated.