Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There also appears to be a general belief in our final justification or judgment by our works, but not meritoriously, for these works are the gifts of God’s grace, produced by his Spirit in those who have faith in the Son of God, which is, after all, God’s new covenant promise to his people, writing his laws on our hearts and causing us to walk in his ways. judgment on the basis of what we have done in this life, is after all, what the New Testament says -see for example Revelation 20.12. The place our good works have is taught in (among other passages) John 15.1-8: the Father looks at the branches (the disciples) of the vine (Christ) for fruit and if they don’t bear fruit, they are cut off and thrown away into the fire. The disciples bear fruit because they abide in Christ, and apart from him they can do nothing. By bearing much fruit, the disciples prove to be Christ’s disciples.
Two of my friends who like the FV wound up going Anglican, as the FV fits nicely within its doctrinal parameters.
To be honest, however, considering all the problems the CoE has within its ranks, the FV is fairly low on list. Might even be an improvement for some theologians in it, which is an unnerving thought.
You know, the FV really hasn't caught on in Baptist circles that I can tell. Maybe I'm just not looking in the "right" areas. Obviously it's a Presbyterian thing but I'm sure it has legs and is only a time before it makes it's way to some Reformed Baptist Churches. Does anyone know whether that's already happened?
Two of my friends who like the FV wound up going Anglican, as the FV fits nicely within its doctrinal parameters.
To be honest, however, considering all the problems the CoE has within its ranks, the FV is fairly low on list. Might even be an improvement for some theologians in it, which is an unnerving thought.
The highlighted bit is damnable heresy. Just because they say they do not believe in merit does not mean that they do not believe in merit. This is clearly implying that good works are of the essence of faith - not the fruit of faith. On this basis, we are ultimately saved by our works of covenantal obedience, and not by the imputation of Christ's active obedience.
You know, the FV really hasn't caught on in Baptist circles that I can tell. Maybe I'm just not looking in the "right" areas. Obviously it's a Presbyterian thing but I'm sure it has legs and is only a time before it makes it's way to some Reformed Baptist Churches. Does anyone know whether that's already happened?
Given FV's major emphasis on paedobaptism and covenant theology, it is doubtful you will see many FVers in Baptist churches. Despite the boogeymen erected on Reformed blogs, it really is only a tiny subset of the Reformed church.
You know, the FV really hasn't caught on in Baptist circles that I can tell. Maybe I'm just not looking in the "right" areas. Obviously it's a Presbyterian thing but I'm sure it has legs and is only a time before it makes it's way to some Reformed Baptist Churches. Does anyone know whether that's already happened?
You might see former baptists go from credo immediately to FV...but I don't think there's much chance of it spilling into Baptist circles.
One of my best friends went from baptist to paedo...based partly on discussions I had with him...but mostly from the writings of FV (James Jordan especially)...and now he's Roman Catholic.
You know, the FV really hasn't caught on in Baptist circles that I can tell. Maybe I'm just not looking in the "right" areas. Obviously it's a Presbyterian thing but I'm sure it has legs and is only a time before it makes it's way to some Reformed Baptist Churches. Does anyone know whether that's already happened?
Given FV's major emphasis on paedobaptism and covenant theology, it is doubtful you will see many FVers in Baptist churches. Despite the boogeymen erected on Reformed blogs, it really is only a tiny subset of the Reformed church.
If there are genuine dangers then I would not want to deny them. However, I have seen some people list FV as the number one threat to Christian faith today.
Are his initals "J.B."
In some denominations or churches, the FV is simply not a problem, but there might be a significant attack on the veracity of Scripture, or the divinity of Christ, or His physical resurrection, or the nature of the atonement ("cosmic child abuse"?).If there are genuine dangers then I would not want to deny them. However, I have seen some people list FV as the number one threat to Christian faith today.
Well, we shouldn't be party to being extreme in either direction. Just because it is an overstatement to state that it is the biggest threat to Christianity does not imply the only alternative is that it is merely a "boogeyman".
Despite the boogeymen erected on Reformed blogs, it really is only a tiny subset of the Reformed church.
The highlighted bit is damnable heresy. Just because they say they do not believe in merit does not mean that they do not believe in merit. This is clearly implying that good works are of the essence of faith - not the fruit of faith. On this basis, we are ultimately saved by our works of covenantal obedience, and not by the imputation of Christ's active obedience.
So you feel it's an entirely different gospel, then?
If one believes that view of justification, then they believe another gospel.
If one believes that view of justification, then they believe another gospel.
I read their writings and see your point. Otoh, I have friends in their camp who I think don't get it the way it's taught, and probably are true believers. So I exercise charity.
Sorta like I view Dispensationalism as heresy, but I was in dispensational churches my first 8 years as a believer, 1969-77, before I discovered the Reformed Faith and the PCA, and it was just all over my head. Once I "got it," I quickly left it. I believe there are sincere believers still in it, who still don't get it, but believe what the Holy Spirit has put in their hearts, rather than what C.I. Scofield's heretical footnotes try to teach them.
It's just another example of the wheat and the tares, growing side by side until the final reaping -- In my humble opinion.
I visited Auburn Avenue last night (in Monroe on business) and I have to ask- Can someone please explain to me how the weight of the Federal Vision took off and caught the Reformed world by storm? I counted 100 people there last night. How does this size of a church have so much influence? Curious.
You know, the FV really hasn't caught on in Baptist circles that I can tell. Maybe I'm just not looking in the "right" areas. Obviously it's a Presbyterian thing but I'm sure it has legs and is only a time before it makes it's way to some Reformed Baptist Churches. Does anyone know whether that's already happened?
Given FV's major emphasis on paedobaptism and covenant theology, it is doubtful you will see many FVers in Baptist churches. Despite the boogeymen erected on Reformed blogs, it really is only a tiny subset of the Reformed church.
Our understanding orthodoxy is in the reality of how we have come to understand who Christ is, what the churchs purpose is, and how we are to treat one another. How we come to understand these truths is by the words we accept as defining that truth. So that wisdom is being able to make every word that we speak as being the evidence of what we love the most, and is true of our inner character. So that our words effect the purpose we are determined to live out in the presence of those who we are worshipping with.
I am going to move on here,Tom,
I seem to be a bit short in comprehension skills this morning (esp. since it's Monday). Would you care to elucidate your meaning in the context of this discussion?
Cheers,
Adam
Our understanding orthodoxy is in the reality of how we have come to understand who Christ is, what the churchs purpose is, and how we are to treat one another. How we come to understand these truths is by the words we accept as defining that truth. So that wisdom is being able to make every word that we speak as being the evidence of what we love the most, and is true of our inner character. So that our words effect the purpose we are determined to live out in the presence of those who we are worshipping with.
I am going to move on here,Tom,
I seem to be a bit short in comprehension skills this morning (esp. since it's Monday). Would you care to elucidate your meaning in the context of this discussion?
Cheers,
Adam
Our understanding orthodoxy is in the reality of how we have come to understand who Christ is, what the churchs purpose is, and how we are to treat one another. How we come to understand these truths is by the words we accept as defining that truth. So that wisdom is being able to make every word that we speak as being the evidence of what we love the most, and is true of our inner character. So that our words effect the purpose we are determined to live out in the presence of those who we are worshipping with.
I believe in justification by faith alone. We are declared righteous in the court of heaven when we are justified. Since our sins were imputed to Christ account, and not only our sins, but the guilt and the punishment of our sins as well. Christ righteousness was imputed to our account. So that we stand as completely righteous by faith alone and not by our works.
Our good works are not able to be acceptable to Gods standard of righteousness. First because we are corrupted in all of our parts. Gods standard of righteousness is perfection. Since we are corrupted the only good act we can do is the act Christ has done on our behalf. Our part of the work is corrupted. In this way we reckon ourselves as wicked in order to have an understanding of the truth of our righteousness being acceptable to God by faith. This reckoning is essential for us to have an acceptable trust in the cause of our goodness only coming from Him.
Now , this is very important in the application to ones experiencing a trust that is essential in understanding our veiw of God and ourselves in lite of thinking in the indicative. That is how we define who we are in the way we understand liberty of the will. Since we do not live in a world of having a righteousness by the amount of resistence we can produce in keeping us from sinning. For every effect there is a cause. Since to will is the mind being pleased with one thing over another. Because the will causing the good choice has no reason to exist, for to will is to choose one thing over another. How can a will cause a will to choose? If the will is the cause of the choice then each choice is the cause of the next choice. So that if we go back to the first choice, then there is no cause. And if we define liberty of the will as existing between two equal objects without any inclination to one or the other, that is no will at all.
So we define liberty as the will having a cause to choose. Which brings me back to thinking in the indicative. There is no violation of a mans choosing by having a causal desire as being necessary for him choosing with complete liberty. There is no loss of liberty in being declared righteous as the cause of a man being pleased with that good object. In fact the more desire that springs from an understanding of doctrine of justification by faith apart from works is the cause of a man growing in sanctification.