Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Two or More Are Gathered
- Gus wrote:
>>> And I will go one step further. I have talked to some of theexcommunicated privately. They have been savagely hurt. If these men
do not repent of what they have done, they are doomed for hell. NO
MINISTER OF CHRIST ever acts in such an arrogant and high-handed
fashion. If they do so, they repent, they do not justify their
behavior. They are then masquerading as ministers of righteousness, and
are merely following the angel of Light. I am praying for their
Gus, might I suggest the end of the story is not known yet?
When it became known that I was attending a non-covenanter church with
my husband and children, the comment was made, "Well, so much for her
so-called convictions!" I will admit, that hurt deeply, because I have
been a Christian for more than forty years, and have walked faithfully
with Him all throughout that time, sometimes against great odds. To
suggest that all that was for nothing because I have responded to
ecclesiastical execution at the hands of this handful of men, but
turning to non-covenanter brethren for fellowship and accountability, is
a gross misjudgment.
The same can be said for the three elders in question. They have usurped
Christ's authority and engaged in extrabiblical practices which have
done a tremendous amount of damage... they are stricken with judicial
blindness and are misguided by their own carnal judgment. But over the
years they have taught much truth and led many of us into a deeper, more
committed relationship with the Lord. They are wrong in what they are
doing. But they sincerely believe they are honouring the Lord in
"weeding out the unfaithful."
On the strength of what has transpired thus far, I would never say they
are not our brethren in Christ.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, alcunius
> 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
> inductive>Tim-Granted Mr. Winzer errs in his understanding of logic and perhaps
> And at the same web board he seems to be defending the Perpetual
> Virginity of Mary
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 email@example.com, "Chris Coldwell"Winzer
> <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 firstname.lastname@example.org, Larry Bump
> > lbump@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Makes one wonder how they read these books...
> > >
> > > Indeed. And if this is an honest example of the reading
> > > 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
> > >