OPC Presbytery to consider overture on "Klinean Republication" paradigm

Status
Not open for further replies.
I for one am grateful! This has been a very enlightening subject for me for the past few years. One that has taken a lot of time for me to digest and get some kind of footing concerning Covenant Theology. Finally! Woo Hoo!
 
Can someone give the Reader's Digest explanation for this topic? When I've come across Republication, I've immediately hit on the problem that some kind of restatement of the CoW under Moses would obviate the role Jesus fulfills as the second Adam. Also, how does John Fesko fit in all this. I've really liked his preaching.
 
How will this overture effect Estelle, Fesko & Van Drunen?
" " " " " Westminster Seminary California?
What exactly is an overture anyway? And, what is the goal/purpose?
 
Last edited:
Jessica, It isn't overturn. It is overture. Overtures are proposed requests for action to look into situations or matters if I am not mistaken.

This is my short encouragement I used on my blog to encourage readers to read the booklet.

http://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/opc-pnw-overture-concerning-the-mosaic-covenant/

It appears that there has been some concern over recent writings and theological perspectives that some OPC Professors have been teaching. One noted book focused in this discussion is ‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ edited by Bryan D. Estelle, J. V. Fesko, and David Van Drunen. The teaching that is found to be troublesome is concerning the Republication of the Covenant of Works in the Mosaic.

Three Orthodox Presbyterian Ministers who are graduates from Westminster Seminary California have written a really good booklet that deals with this doctrine. It first sets out to give a little historical analysis on why ‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ was written. It discusses the motives and reasons that are stated in the book. Then it discusses the Covenant Theologies of John Murray, Norman Shepherd, and Meredith Kline because these three men are the main reasons that this issue of Republication has come to the forefront in theological discussion.

Their teachings are examined in light of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Reformed thought. In part 2 of the booklet it is noted,“When one compares the two (‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ or Kline’s view of Republication and the historical view), we believe it becomes evident that the Republication Paradigm (Kline’s view) uses traditional language and concepts, but redefines them in the service of its own paradigm. Not only do these new definitions fail to harmonize with those contained in the Westminster Standards, they may lead to other systematic changes in our confessional theology.”

The critiques in the booklet are profound and hit on doctrines that I believe are foundational. It discusses many issues but specifically pulls out teaching on merit and covenant so that the simple layman (as myself) can understand. Dr. Jack Kinneer of Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary noted in his discussion on Kingdom Theology that all aberrations go back to a faulty Christology. These Ministers proved that when discussing the Strict Obedience of Christ in comparison to the Covenant Obedience of Adam. The New Reformed Perspective (Kline’s view) concerning the Condescending of God to man is relevant when discussing the two Adam’s. He seems to deny this according to the booklet. The NRP sets both Adam and Christ on the equal levels covenantally. According to WCF 7,1 God graciously condescended to Adam in the Covenant of Works. But since Christ was God there was no Condescending. It is a Covenant amongst equals. They evidently have a problem recognizing the two different platforms from which the two Adams were placed to perform their Covenant fulfillment and what kind of merit they deserved. And that works out into their view of Creation / Covenant / Merit/ and the two Adams in a way that is not in line with the Westminster Confession of faith. This is a very enlightening booklet.

This is being presented in the Pacific Northwest Presbytery of the OPC. I encourage everyone to read the Booklet and the Overture.
 
Last edited:
Jessica, It isn't overturn. It is overture. Overtures are proposed requests for action to look into situations or matters if I am not mistaken.

This is my short encouragement I used on my blog to encourage readers to read the booklet.

It appears that there has been some concern over recent writings and theological perspectives that some OPC Professors have been teaching. One noted book focused in this discussion is ‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ edited by Bryan D. Estelle, J. V. Fesko, and David Van Drunen. The teaching that is found to be troublesome is concerning the Republication of the Covenant of Works in the Mosaic.


Three Orthodox Presbyterian Ministers who are graduates from Westminster Seminary California have written a really good booklet that deals with this doctrine. It first sets out to give a little historical analysis on why ‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ was written. It discusses the motives and reasons that are stated in the book. Then it discusses the Covenant Theologies of John Murray, Norman Shepherd, and Meredith Kline because these three men are the main reasons that this issue of Republication has come to the forefront in theological discussion.

Their teachings are examined in light of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Reformed thought. In part 2 of the booklet it is noted,“When one compares the two (‘The Law Is Not Of Faith’ or Kline’s view of Republication and the historical view), we believe it becomes evident that the Republication Paradigm (Kline’s view) uses traditional language and concepts, but redefines them in the service of its own paradigm. Not only do these new definitions fail to harmonize with those contained in the Westminster Standards, they may lead to other systematic changes in our confessional theology.”


The critiques in the booklet are profound and hit on doctrines that I believe are foundational. It discusses many issues but specifically pulls out teaching on merit and covenant so that the simple layman (as myself) can understand. Dr. Jack Kinneer of Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary noted in his discussion on Kingdom Theology that all aberrations go back to a faulty Christology. These Ministers proved that when discussing the Strict Obedience of Christ in comparison to the Covenant Obedience of Adam. The New Reformed Perspective (Kline’s view) concerning the Condescending of God to man is relevant when discussing the two Adam’s. He seems to deny this according to the booklet. The NRP sets both Adam and Christ on the equal levels covenantally. According to WCF 7,1 God graciously condescended to Adam in the Covenant of Works. But since Christ was God there was no Condescending. It is a Covenant amongst equals. They evidently have a problem recognizing the two different platforms from which the two Adams were placed to perform their Covenant fulfillment and what kind of merit they deserved. And that works out into their view of Creation / Covenant / Merit/ and the two Adams in a way that is not in line with the Westminster Confession of faith. This is a very enlightening booklet.


This is being presented in the Pacific Northwest Presbytery of the OPC. I encourage everyone to read the Booklet and the Overture.

Thank you Mr. Snyder.
(My auto-correct changed overture to overturn but I've corrected it!)
Sorry about the typo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"A Booklet on Merit in the Doctrine of Republication." at the site in the original post is excellent. Definitely worth reading alongside The Law is Not of Faith to get a handle on the situation.
 
Thank you Mr. Snyder.
(My auto-correct changed overture to overturn but I've corrected it!)
Sorry about the typo.
Computers always think they are smarter than us. Most of the time it does a great job with my misspelling. LOL. I need an editing program that would fix my grammar. I still write like I talk. I think the language I speak isn't even a language. It is just called hillybilly.
 
If this overture were to prove Kline's view of Republication & "these new definitions fail to harmonize with those contained in the Westminster Standards" and/or that they "may lead to other systematic changes in our confessional theology," then what happens? What happens to those within Orthodox/Reformed Presbyterian circles that agree with Kline, Fesko, Estelle, van Drunen etc on the issue of Republication?
 
That is for the Presbytery and the General Assembly to decide Jessica. This is an in house discussion right now. So I don't see anything being done about it for a long time if it is found to be contrary to the Standards. And that is a big "IF" probably for a lot of people at this time.
 
That is for the Presbytery and the General Assembly to decide Jessica. This is an in house discussion right now. So I don't see anything being done about it for a long time if it is found to be contrary to the Standards. And that is a big "IF" probably for a lot of people at this time.

Thanks again!
 
If this overture were to prove Kline's view of Republication & "these new definitions fail to harmonize with those contained in the Westminster Standards" and/or that they "may lead to other systematic changes in our confessional theology," then what happens? What happens to those within Orthodox/Reformed Presbyterian circles that agree with Kline, Fesko, Estelle, van Drunen etc on the issue of Republication?

If any theological construct is found outside the bounds of the confessional standards, then generally speaking the alternatives are repentance by the proponents or discipline of for those who remain unrepentant.
 
Karlberg has published his critique of the OPC report in a special edition of The Trinity Review:

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PD...r of Israel KarlbergonRepublicationReport.pdf

"What the report on republication proves is that the OPC is incapable of correction and truthtelling"

"One would hope that a newly-appointed committee of the OPC would redress the grievous wrong that has been committed with regard to this committee’s reading of the work of Kline and restate the biblical teaching pertaining to the covenants, giving priory to Scripture rather than the Confession."

Sigh.
 
Karlberg has published his critique of the OPC report in a special edition of The Trinity Review:

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PD...r of Israel KarlbergonRepublicationReport.pdf

"What the report on republication proves is that the OPC is incapable of correction and truthtelling"

"One would hope that a newly-appointed committee of the OPC would redress the grievous wrong that has been committed with regard to this committee’s reading of the work of Kline and restate the biblical teaching pertaining to the covenants, giving priory to Scripture rather than the Confession."

Sigh.

Yes. I read this last night. The way in which he wrote about Murray was troubling as well. It's sad to see this type of rhetoric. I am also likewise saddened that the OPC won't take a stronger position against Republication.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top