WrittenFromUtopia
Puritan Board Graduate
Let's hear it. What's so bad about it? Why is it not such a big deal as everyone is making it out to be? Who is at fault? Who's in error? Why?
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.
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Read The Federal Vision (the book). If you don't know what is wrong then, take a systematics course. Or read Tractarian stuff, or Medieval sacramental stuff. It's all the same.
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Read The Federal Vision (the book). If you don't know what is wrong then, take a systematics course. Or read Tractarian stuff, or Medieval sacramental stuff. It's all the same.
I've read a lot of their writings and I firmly believe they are in error on many subjects. I also find their attitude towards stirring up controversy to be, at the very least, immature.
I have taken 2 systematic courses already, thank you. Not to mention, I've read a few full Systematic Theology volumes and 1/4 of Institutes in my spare time. Not to boast, but I feel like you find me to be ignorant on many issues, when I am not. I simply posted this thread to see people's reasonings behind either liking or not liking the FV position, while I myself am personally already opposed to it from the reading I have done concerning it.
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Gabriel,
I did not intend to say you were ignorant. What I meant was if someone read that material and did not find blatant errors, it would be because of a lack of understanding of systematics. My post was a "general" comment, not directed at you.
I guess the other reason is that I have probably written 400-500 posts on the Federal Vision/Auburn theology on the board, and don't really have time now to rehash them. If you do a couple of searches, you'll have reading material for a week or more.
doulosChristou:
I don't understand what all the fuss is about.
Originally posted by Ianterrell
Greg,
Most people would call Wilson erroneous and not heretical though they would not spare other FV members the razzie.
Originally posted by wsw201
One thing I keep hearing though is that they are looking at Scripture from a Historical/Redemptive viewpoint vs ??????
Originally posted by Ianterrell
I would not condemn Wilson as a heretic based on the writings I have read and statements he has made regarding his theology. Besides Paedocommunion and the RPW I'm not sure that Wilson and I disagree on much beyond the terminology we might employ.
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
Let's hear it. What's so bad about it? Why is it not such a big deal as everyone is making it out to be? Who is at fault? Who's in error? Why?
Originally posted by luvroftheWord
Originally posted by wsw201
One thing I keep hearing though is that they are looking at Scripture from a Historical/Redemptive viewpoint vs ??????
Now, neither disciplines (BT and ST) are wrong in and of themselves. But the key is to utilize both. BT can enlighten us on Biblical themes that are sometimes missed when employing a strictly Systematic study of theology, while ST helps set the limits as to where BT can go. I really think that if the FV's would keep in mind that logic and systematics are NOT evil, but are God's gifts to the church, they would realize why some of the things they teach are so troubling (I have in mind particularly Norman Shephard here).
[Edited on 25-1-2005 by luvroftheWord]