14863[Covenanted Reformation] Re: Why I am Not a Theonomist.......
- Jul 3, 2006Hi Tim,
I think I'm seeing this differently to you, though don't disagree with
the below. The major fact, the ONLY fact is the question of if he was
right or not, which is a long way from being accepted by most
Calvinists. The truth whether 300 years ago or today, is not likely to
change, and looking for new truths, is always a dangerous thing to do.
I'm sorry I don't think it was courageous, I think it was audacious. I
do agree that one man and the truth makes a majority, but as it stands
we have one man's opinion and not a fat lot else.
You can see in other areas of the church what happeend when certain
denoms started to dispense with certain areas of the WCF, and if it was
true 300 years ago, then it cannot change just cos the world does and
our often shifting opinions along with it. (ISTSM)
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "timmopussycat"
> --- In email@example.com,
> reformed_wild_child no_reply@ wrote:
> > Same subject, different context, but I think it takes brass for
> > (whomeverso they maybe) to stand up publically and say, oh yeah..
> > westminster assembly were surely wrong on such a point, we know
> > It took 300 years or so for someone to find a crucial flaw in their
> > work!! I don't know however they managed to achieve all they did
> > without folks in this groups help!! ;-)
> > |Deejay
> Tim comments-It was not Bahnsen who said the WCF men were wrong, but
> his mentor Rushdoony. What Bahnsen did do was advance an
> interpretation of one point of the WCF that conflicted with how that
> had been understood by just about every major commentator on the
> confession from Dickson to Hodge. And while doing that takes a
> certain amount of courage, if he had been right, his boldness would
> have been irrelevant since even one man plus the truth makes a
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>