16810[Covenanted Reformation] Re: Federal view of imputation
- Jul 5, 2009I would agree, Edgar. It is precisely because NT is trying overturn
reformed orthodoxy that he decries its defense. He can't afford an
appeal to the confessions. (NT and Wilson, I know, but who is Campbell?
Alexander? Church of Christ?)
And while I don't think an appeal to his statement was justified in the
recent controversy, I don't really care. More to the point, if anybody
does leave the forum because of the discussion, they ought not to fool
themselves by blaming it on somebody else.
But that again, is just my personal and obnoxious opinion.
In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Ic Neltococayotl"
> You bring up a good point regarding NT Wright's jab at people being
> "self-appointed guardians of orthodoxy". Nothing against Ben for
> quoting him, my volley of artillery is against NT Wright.
> Are not ministers of God, appointed by God to shut up the mouths of
> gain-sayers and those that speak errors and lead God's people astray??
> If his jab is against ministers being "self-appointed guardians of
> orthodoxy", then he should really re-read the New Testament where it
> talks about ministers guarding the Truth against such teachers of
> and heresy. NT Wright is such a person, i.e. a teacher of errors. Sois
> the ministers that speak out and warn the flock are doing their GOD
> appointed (not self-appointed) duty of guarding the Truth. NT Wright
> trying to perform a sleight of hand here by saying such rubbish.ourselves
> We lay people are also called to close our ears and not allow
> to be lead astray by wolves in sheep's clothing. Therefore we too arethen?
> to warn our brethren to flee men like Campbell, NT Wright, and Douglas
> Wilson, deniers of established Christian doctrines. That is God's
> command to us...on what Biblical basis does Wright's critic stand
> Maybe he found it elsewhere in 1 Hesitations 3:5 perhaps?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>