Otis-Schlissel Debate

Discussion in 'Federal Vision/New Perspectives' started by Reformed Covenanter, Dec 12, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    :luther::knox:

    This may have been posted before, but even if it has it will do no harm to put it up again. Anyway, here is a link to a debate on the Federal Vision:

    John Otis - Steve Schlissel Debate on the Federal Vision

    This is highly valuable, because in listening to Steve Schlissel you get what Federal Visionists believe (or at least some of them) straight from the horses' mouth. It pains me to say it but Rev. Schlissel is proclaiming another gospel - if you don't believe me listen to the debate. Moreover, he constantly misrepresents Reformed theology and then does not allow John Otis to correct him. Indeed, he even tried to stop John from quoting from Romans and Galatians in order to prove the Protestant view of justification...I wonder why/ :think:
     
  2. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Thank you for posting this Daniel.

    It's interesting to listen to Steve again; he seemed to have dropped off the FV radar for the last few years.
     
  3. Josiah

    Josiah Puritan Board Senior

    Thanks for the link Daniel, I look forward to listening to this. I realize this might be an odd question, but who is Steve Schlissel? I have not heard of him. :scratch:
     
  4. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Seriously?

    In light of the FV controversy, Steve was one of the original speakers at the Auburn Avenue Pastor's conference (2002) that started this whole mess.

    He also wrote two chapters in "The Auburn Avenue Theology: Pros & Cons".

    His website is: Rev. Steve M. Schlissel
     
  5. py3ak

    py3ak They're stalling and plotting against me Staff Member

    I thought Schlissel had been distancing himself from FV lately? Of course, that was a vague impression not anything definite.
     
  6. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    It would certainly make sense judging by his current silence on the issue. But what led you to believe this was the case?
     
  7. wsw201

    wsw201 Puritan Board Senior

    At the AAPC conference, Schissel was way out there! He was, and I assume he still is, one of the biggest advocates of NT Wright. He had bought into Wright's NPP hook, line and sinker.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  8. Josiah

    Josiah Puritan Board Senior

    :oops: I had heard of him, but never made the connection the FV
     
  9. py3ak

    py3ak They're stalling and plotting against me Staff Member

    It was the paedocommunion issue, I believe. That and some rumors of tensions made me think that Schlissel might be following his own path.
     
  10. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    The paedocommunion issue makes sense.
     
  11. py3ak

    py3ak They're stalling and plotting against me Staff Member

    If paedocommunion is of the esse of FV, that would rule him out. If it's only of the bene esse then the umbrella might cover him.
     
  12. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    I think that paedocommunion is consistent with FV and therefore Mr. Schlissel is very inconsistent with his theology.

    I would therefore still put him under the FV banner.
     
  13. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    If he has moved away, that would be excellent. He was such a gifted speaker, so it is with great sadness that I listened to his comments.
     
  14. Poimen

    Poimen Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    No what I meant was that he was not being mentioned by FV supporters and has not been speaking at their conferences.

    But since I see no repentance on his part for this fiasco. He still links to his original lectures. Messiah's Media
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  15. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    That is a shame. May God have mercy on his soul.
     
  16. Southern Presbyterian

    Southern Presbyterian Puritan Board Doctor

    This debate took place just this past Summer. So if Schlissel has moved away from the FV it must be a recent developement.
     
  17. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    That is interesting to know, because Steve Schlissel's comments in that debate prove that FVers have not been misunderstood.
     
  18. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    He got bogged down in some unrelated inner-church adjudications (or some word like that). Yes, he did back off the issue but not for theological reasons, as I recall. He had other things to do.
     
  19. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    He is an awesome speaker. I have been stunned and overwhelmed by his messages in the past. I haven't listened to him in a while, though.
     
  20. Reformed Musings

    Reformed Musings Puritan Board Freshman

    Schlissel isn't speaking at this years conference according to this site. I don't think he's distanced himself from FV, but FVers have distanced themselves from him. He's even farther out than Lusk, which takes some effort.
     
  21. Gryphonette

    Gryphonette Moderator

    James Jordan? They're sticking with *him*?

    Mercy Maud, the man revealed himself to be a theological loon during the DeRegnoChristi debate. If he's still within the FV pale, but Schlissel isn't, the latter must be truly strange.

     
  22. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    That is worrying; I am reading John Otis' book at present, and he documents Lusks' heresies - which are a clear denial of justification by faith alone - perhaps Steve Schlissel is a more honest man than the rest of them.
     
  23. Robert Truelove

    Robert Truelove Puritan Board Sophomore

    I just listened to the MP3. While I am opposed to FV and have went on record saying I believe it is outside of the boundaries of the Westminster Confession and should therefore not be tolerated within Presbyterian churches, I have been very slow to apply the 'H' word.

    Listening to this partial debate...to hear Schlissel go head to head with Otis (if only briefly) when Otis is presenting justification by faith alone...I'm not sure if all the FVers are where Schlissel is, but what he is arguing against is the gospel, and what he is affirming is heresy. His comments were clear and set in the context over and against what Otis had presented (the gospel).

    It was clear that these men have two different gospels (as there were clearly two different views of justification presented). For Schlissel to be asked at the end if he saw Otis's camp as claiming to be a different gospel and answer, "No...Jesus himself is the gospel, as long as they are representing the proper Christ, then they have access to the proper gospel" is just asinine. Paul wrote to the Galatians, 'Christ will be of no advantage to you', if they pursued their false view of justification. The issue at hand was not the person of Jesus, but the gospel as it relates to justification. There is no hint at all that the Galatian heresy had anything to do with the nature of Christ. Simply believing in the proper view of the Trinity is not enough. Schlissel's comment would include Roman Catholicism as also being a true witness of the gospel.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2007
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  24. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    :ditto:

    Well said brother, even if there are people in the FV movement who disagree with Steve Schlissel, Norman Shepherd and Rich Lusk on justification, then they should clearly distance themselves from these men. However, there continued unwillingness to do this makes me suspicious. Mr. Schlissel is NOT proclaiming the gospel in this debate, the logic of his position would have us believe that anyone who acknowledges Jesus as Messiah, and lives a life of "Covenantal faithfulness" is a Christian - this is damnable heresy (Gal. 1:6-9). And no amount of filibustering or double-talk can get round it.
     
  25. Stephen

    Stephen Puritan Board Junior

    Thanks, Daniel for the link to the debate. I am anxious to listen to it. Steve Schlissel is all over the board. I am not sure he knows what he believes. Schlissel still is a hyper-covenantalist like Lusk and the others. He has not changed his stripes. I believe he is not connected to a denomination or even Presbyterian. He has an independent congregation in New York. Unfortunetly, he is connected with Chalcedon and was involved with R. J. Rushdooney, before his glorification. I wonder what Rushdooney would think if he was still here on earth? Where does Mark Rushdooney fit into all this?
     
  26. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Chalcedon, as far as I am aware, rejects the Federal Vision as Joe Morecraft was speaking at the recent Chalcedon Conference - if it had any links with the FV Joe M would not be there.
     
  27. Southern Presbyterian

    Southern Presbyterian Puritan Board Doctor

    :agree:
     
  28. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    For anyone wanting to know what R.J. Rushdoony would have thought of the Federal Vision, read his commentary on Romans & Galatians.

    Just as he opposed the heresy of societal salvation by Statist "grace" (i.e. law), so he opposed the heresy of personal salvation on account of good works.

    I have an appendix in the back of my forthcoming book A Conquered Kingdom: Biblical Civil Government , which distances Christian Reconstruction from the Federal Vision, and I quote from Rush (among others) to prove my point.
     
  29. Stephen

    Stephen Puritan Board Junior

    Who is the publisher of your forthcoming book? The title sounds like something I may be interested in reading. I used to subscribe to Chalcedon and appreciated much of Rushdoony's work, although I certainly would not agree with him in some areas. I have read some of Joe Morecraft's material and agree that he rejects this FV nonsense.
     
  30. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Stephen

    I am self-publishing it and will keep you posted. Like yourself, I would not agree with Rush on everything, but appreciated his work. Interestingly, it was John Otis who insisted that I write an FV-disclaimer (John has written a foreword, as has PB member Doug Comin).

    Here is a link to a sermon which introduces my book: SermonAudio.com - Theonomic Reconstruction
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page