If I may, I'd like to address this post to the moderators.
I believe we are progressing. Sure, it appears that its the same old arguments over and over, but they are getting better and better. And some of us have a right to shout at each other a bit, because we're good buddies. I can take it if someone is a bit more than sharp with me; I know my friends on this Board mean it for my good, and our mutual benefit. This is, after all, a contentious issue, and one that could go either way and both still be right.
I think we are progressing in three areas that I just mentioned:
1. We're honing our arguments, trimming off the poorer parts, and refining the good parts.
2. We're getting serious about it, and so the contention may be a bit sharper.
3. We're growing with each other in it, so that we know that the sharpness is not at the person, but at the argument.
For myself, I would add a fourth, which is that I can see the underlying principles becoming more understood. I haven't been arguing non-EP so much as I have been trying to get us all to the underlying principles. For example, every church must, by definition, have a RPW, whether they say so or not: proclaiming to not have one is to say that that is the RPW which is held to; yet on the other hand, no church enforces a RPW as they claim to hold to: each applying it more to secondary issues more than the main point of it. I see some churches claiming to hold to the RPW slapping the wrists of their members for infractions while they themselves are worshipping their golden calf, whatever ism is going at that time. The RPW itself is nebulous in practice, whatever it may be in principle. So I see a progress toward a proper ordering of the arguments in light of present circumstances; i.e., the arguments both for and against are beginning to deal more specifically with the necessity of EP itself, and then as to whether the RPW applies, as opposed to standing EP on the shoulders of the RPW. In other words, the RPW is being addressed more in terms of what it really is, and so is EP, but each in their proper order, moreso than before. That, as I see it, is quite a progression from where we started this issue.
But my point is this: we would not have gotten this far without the give and take, and sometimes pointed give and take. We've got the people on Board who can find, colate, interpret, reason, and encourage. We just have to keep in mind not to get out of hand; we are a discussion Board, not the judges of others. The Moderators have done a good job of moderating, and that has allowed us to progress.
I will continue to pray that broken relationships over such issues can and will be healed.
[edit] afterthought:
When I refer to churches worshipping their golden calf, I am referring to those churches who claim to hold to Scripture and then sway way off into their own "perspective". Claiming to hold to Scripture is a tacit RPW, and then to add their own slant, with or without apology, is a repudiation of that same principle.
[Edited on 10-19-2005 by JohnV]
