Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Two or More Are Gathered

Expand Messages
  • Walt Bre
    Larry, Fortunately, as a member of the RPNA (GM) I am able to balance both sides of the controversy. I read everything that is posted on Bob s site, as well
    Message 1 of 38 , Jun 28 7:39 AM

      Fortunately, as a member of the RPNA (GM) I am able to
      balance both sides of the controversy. I read
      everything that is posted on Bob's site, as well as am
      still mostly copied on most of the comments directed
      toward the Elders. It is understandable that people
      believe those of us left in the RPNA (GM) don't fully
      understand all the problems that took place, and that
      is why I do read all the posts on Bob's site as well
      as those documents that come through to the Elders.

      As I've said many times, and gave as my primary reason
      for withdrawing from multiple heated discussions on
      this forum, is that seeking a public trial for or
      against our Elders is not in my interest. It makes
      for good controversy, but I know that I will never
      prevail (or win as you say) in changing minds on this

      Further, I have stayed away from the forum until Bob
      posted what I thought was directed at me alleging
      something I did not believe was accurate. I just
      wanted to address him on the forum where he posted it
      because one person wrote me saying it was here and
      asked if I was the one he referred to in the email.
      If that person thought he was talking about me, I felt
      others might also get the same impression so rather
      than let is grow into a conspiracy of sorts, or let
      people think I was behind the emails, I wanted to
      address it immediately.

      Indeed, if one believes the controversy of an
      extraordinary session is ever going away, and unity
      will come to the Presbyterian church through the
      RPCNA, then great. I've read a lot of various RPCNA
      websites and it seems that most are open to differing
      doctrines as defined locally. I think that is just
      fine, and the way you folks have all local, ordinary
      Sessions is wonderful. I hope the RPCNA continues to
      grow as it appears it has been over the years, and
      that your national leadership can continue to uphold
      the standards that our forefathers have set.

      We unfortunately have dealt with lots of issues
      ranging from degrees of modesty, lawfulness of
      tattoos, headcoverings, common cup vs. individual
      cups, occasional hearing, birth control, marriage of
      related parties and obviously the distinctions of
      whether an Presbytery (RPNA) or Session (RPNA-GM) can
      be lawful outside of local boundaries. Additionally,
      due to the strong personalities in our church, we
      require our Eldres to generally write everything and
      publish it so the world can see how all these issues
      need to be dealt with one right after another.

      Obviously, we have failed miserably and this public
      forum is a good place to come and see just how we have
      not met expections. Fortunately, in the minds of
      some, I suspect they can have comfort in knowing that
      Tyrants will come and go in the church, and look to
      the RPCNA, OPC and other churches that don't publish
      their positions on alot of these more complex issues.

      Larry, may I ask you if you have published anything on
      any rulings with your local church that I could read?
      I've got to believe your Session has dealt with
      various issues and that your opinions have been
      published, and are open for inspection by your
      Presbytery and congregation. Would you be able to
      provide me with any of these decisions so that I could
      read them for myself?

      The reason I posted the question below was because I
      think the question Bob has identified is a good one.
      From my research, it has never been dealt with in the
      Presbyterian church outside of what Pastor Price
      quoted in the Grand Debate. Bob has a contrary
      opinion and there is absolutely nothing wrong with a
      contrary opinion. Bob sources Scripture and so does
      Pastor Price. I'm sure you have your own opinion as a
      Ruling Elder, and although not of direct impact on
      your local congregation since you are ordinary and
      fixed, I posed the question because it is at the core
      of our controversy. Or, at least one of the cores, as
      we know there are many cores to this controversy, but
      this is one I personally find interesting to me.

      So, I direct the question to you as a Ruling Elder.
      Your are called to testify and teach us church
      government in Christ's church. As a ruling Elder you
      have been given grace beyond myself in your calling
      and I ask you what is your scriptural opinion on the
      question. Share it with me if you like.

      I for one would love to hear your opinion.

      Your brother in Christ,

      --- Larry Bump <lbump@...> wrote:

      > humbled.learner wrote:
      > > I would like to have the opinions of anyone
      > OUTSIDE the RPNA (GM), or
      > > those who were excommunicated, to provide any
      > additional reference
      > > material using scripture, history or reason, as to
      > what the word
      > > "gathered" means.
      > Why do you keep posting questions or challenges to
      > this list? Every
      > time, as you begin to lose the argument, you state
      > that you won and will
      > no longer respond to our messages. So, given this
      > history, why do you
      > bother?
      > Larry

      ____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat?
      Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
    • Tim Cunningham
      ... thread. ... t=20844&highlight=deductive+i ... t=20844&highlight=deductive+ ... Tim-Granted Mr. Winzer errs in his understanding of logic and perhaps in
      Message 38 of 38 , Jul 13, 2007
        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, alcunius
        <no_reply@...> wrote:
        > It does not seem that clear to me by what Winzer wrote.
        > This same Matthew Winzer that your speaking of seems to have some
        > confusion on Deduction and Induction at the same Board different
        > http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php?
        > nductive
        > <http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php?
        > inductive>
        > And at the same web board he seems to be defending the Perpetual
        > Virginity of Mary
        Tim-Granted Mr. Winzer errs in his understanding of logic and perhaps
        in his understanding of whether or not Mary remained virgin after the
        birth of Jesus, but these errors are irrelevant if one is questioning
        his readings of the Divines he cites.

        Why do you think Winzer does not make his case?


        > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Coldwell"
        > <naphtali@> wrote:
        > >
        > > This has been a problem for some time. For instance, Matthew
        > > clearly demonstrates a problem in Barrow's CRD in comprehending
        > > Rutherford (and others) correctly, specifically on the "being" vs.
        > > "well-being" of the church.
        > > http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php?t=14397
        > > Sincerely,
        > > Chris Coldwell
        > > Naphtali Press http://www.naphtali.com
        > > The Confessional Presbyterian journal http://www.cpjournal.com
        > > Member Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA)
        > >
        > > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Larry Bump
        > > lbump@ wrote:
        > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > > Makes one wonder how they read these books...
        > > >
        > > > Indeed. And if this is an honest example of the reading
        > comprehension
        > > > and exegesis they apply to books in order to come up with a
        > > self-serving
        > > > argument, one must wonder if that "style" may have been applied
        > > > elsewhere, as well.
        > > >
        > > > Larry
        > > >
        > >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.