NPP/AA as a tertium quid?

Discussion in 'Federal Vision/New Perspectives' started by AdamM, Dec 15, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    As with the Atonement, so with all doctrines, I think we should think this way about them:

    "The necessity of such an atonement, which is the foundation of all practical piety and all Christian hopes, must therefore be firmly established, and defended against the fiery darts of Satan, with which it is attacked by innumerable adversaries."
    Turretin, The Atonement, soon to be published....
     
  2. PuritanCovenanter

    PuritanCovenanter Moderator Staff Member

    Hallelujah!

    I'm still thinking these guys want to be justified by their own faith plus works. The old lie Paul was truly exposing.

    Nothing in my hand I bring, Simply to the Cross I cling.
     
  3. l0g0s

    l0g0s Inactive User

    Well, as usual, these sorts of accusations fly without biblical support or supporting documentation. Add to that the fact that no real reputable Reformed body has significantly commented with the force and certitude of those on this board means basically that your words and claims regarding supposed heresy go beyond doubtful or suspect to absolutely incredulous.

    I suppose you could actually provide the biblical and confessional justification for such claims, but doubtless that would be too much to ask.
     
  4. Scott Bushey

    Scott Bushey Puritan Board Doctor

    Kevin,
    Click on the link entitled 'u2u' in the upper right hand corner of your screen please.
     
  5. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    Kevin

    1) Yes, I will provide justification in a formal paper both biblically and confessionally simply on Smith (whose work is utterly befuddling Law, Covenatn and the Trinity). It will be published in a journal, and posted on APM, so keep a lookout.

    2) There will be plenty of supporting documentation, and there is huge amounts of it already written, both in book form, and on exchanges done with Auburn teachers both from well known theologians, as well as theological journals. People have been refuting this "covenant confusion" for a while. I would be bewildered if you were not up on reading through all the critiques already, so its certainly not new news.

    3) The reputable reformed body in determining what to do with these men is published in two works that have already come out: "The Auburn Avenue Theology" by Knox Seminary and teh professors there, and "Justification and the New Perspective on Paul" by Guy Waters (which is very good). Both books demonstrate the Auburn theology as deviant fromt eh biblcial reciord, as well as from histroical confessionalism (both of which are not hard to prove).

    Will there be an official hearing on this publically, and with a major Reformed body? I hope so. God knows when this will be, and He is working out the times. Keep your ear to the ground...

    We are NOT going to turn this board into a war zone for Auburnites. They will simply have to use the public forum of publications to debate the issues. If they can't get published, they will have to stick to their blogs.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page