James Jordan- The Law of the Covenant

[Mayflower]

Anyone read:

James Jordan- The Law of the Covenant ?

Thoughts ?

 

[fredtgreco]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

Me either!

 

[Mayflower]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

Why ? iam very curious to know why his theology would be a wate of dime ?
Is it heresy ?

 

[Knoxienne]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

I agree.

 

[fredtgreco]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

Why ? iam very curious to know why his theology would be a wate of dime ?
Is it heresy ?

Highly speculative, not helpful, often heretical.

 

[Anton Bruckner]

You guys are extreme, I would say be extremely careful when reading James Jordan. I bought his, "Handwriting on the Wall", whilst 70% of it is speculative and mostly outright wrong, he did bring some good historical insights into the culture of Judah just before the Babylonian Captivity.

Ralph all I can say is be very careful, nevertheless a broken clock is correct twice a day.

 

[RamistThomist]

I don't agree with many o f his conclusions today, but for different reasons than abovementioned. He actually deals with the thorny and practical issues in the Law. Parts of it are interesting. It is best to skim the book on whatever topic/verse you are interested in.

Now Jordan doesn't hold this view anymore. This book was written in his theonomic days.

If you don't want to spend the money you can read it for free.
Law of the Covenant

 

[Marrow Man]

Now Jordan doesn't hold this view anymore. This book was written in his theonomic days.

Jordan is no longer a Theonomist? When/why did that happen?

 

[Knoxienne]

Now Jordan doesn't hold this view anymore. This book was written in his theonomic days.

Jordan is no longer a Theonomist? When/why did that happen?

I didn't know that either. Interesting.

 

[RamistThomist]

Now Jordan doesn't hold this view anymore. This book was written in his theonomic days.

Jordan is no longer a Theonomist? When/why did that happen?

That happened about 20 years ago. The reasons why revolved around developments in liturgy and typology (and on a broad level I would agree with him).

WordMp3.com - Topic: Theonomy Critiqued

 

[Marrow Man]

I see. I had not even heard of Theonomy 20 years ago...

He still "sort of" hangs out with Theonomists, I think. Gary DeMar has him on his radio program. American Vision published the commentary on Daniel.

It doesn't take much to confuse me!

 

[RamistThomist]

Gary published that because Jordan's commentary was a good (implicit) critique of dispensationalism, which seems to be Gary's kick at the moment.

 

[Marrow Man]

Gary published that because Jordan's commentary was a good (implicit) critique of dispensationalism, which seems to be Gary's kick at the moment.

Good point.

 

[Jon Peters]

I would not waste a dime on anything written by Jordan.

Why ? iam very curious to know why his theology would be a wate of dime ?
Is it heresy ?

Highly speculative, not helpful, often heretical.

His speculations form the basis of some his theological constructs of the covenant. So it's not as if he speculates on this or that issue, more or less as an aside. He speculates and then builds his theology on that speculation. His theology is a house of cards.