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

Dissolution of the RPNA(GM)

Expand Messages
  • bob_suden
    Greetings, It was recently pointed out to the undersigned, that the formal dissolution of the RPNA court has been alluded to in the opening paragraphs of a
    Message 1 of 43 , Jan 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Greetings,
      It was recently pointed out to the undersigned, that the formal dissolution of the RPNA court has been alluded to in the opening paragraphs  of a sermon Dec. 23, '07, on Prov. 22:28   entitled "Moving the Landmarks".   
      Further previous  comments on that court's censurable policy of secrecy/communication can be found at
      . . . . And In Secret Have I Said Nothing, with hopefully more to come DV on the  sermon above.
      Thank you,
      Bob S
    • John Hackler
      Mr Suden, It s my understanding that much of the support for the court from Mr. NS is founded in the idea that he(and maybe others) where junior/future
      Message 43 of 43 , Feb 17, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Mr Suden,
         
        It's my understanding that much of the support for the court from Mr. NS is founded in the idea  that he(and maybe others) where junior/future members of the court and they were looking out for their own best interest. I know on a very personal level that information shared with the court found its way to certain people, and very swiftly I might add...
         
        John Hackler Jr.

        bob_suden <bsuden@...> wrote:

        --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, John Hackler <sparenoarrows@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > Mr. Suden,
        >
        > Thank you for clarifying.
        >
        > John Hackler Jr.
        >

        Mr. Hackler,

        While for a lot of people, it might be redundant,  further clarification would mention that Mr. NS is our brother that is responsible for   Principium 1643,  an apology at great length for the RPNA(GM)'s court. (It can also be found  here as originally posted 7/8/07.)     In  defense of his chief  proposition that it is not necessary for the officers of a presbytery to actually "brush shoulders" with the members of the church, he not only touts "mercy" as an essential quality of the court, he also takes  an ad hominem poke or two at Edgar, which is why they are not quite best buddies at the moment.
        In my opinion, the crux of the argument though,  as mentioned 11/8/06  or as recently as  2/12/08, if not in the 8/20/07 reply to P1643  More Non Sequiturs from Mr. NS,  is whether or not,  along with "mercy",  the personal presence of the officers  is necessary to the constitution of a court. Is that presence  'ben esse' and does it only concern the well being of the court -  or is it 'esse', of its essence and without which a court cannot exist?  The RPNA(GM) and Mr. NS obviously think it 'ben esse' and that officers may attend via the internet or telephone, while at least the undersigned thinks it 'esse'.
         
        Regardless, two things can still be said even if the RPNA(GM) position is correct.

        One,  Mr. NS is not a lawful teaching elder and it is negligence on the part of the "lawful spiritual eldership"  of the RPNA(GM) to assign, if not tacitly designate  Mr. NS to instruct one and all, which they have not been willing  themselves to do in response to the material questions and criticisms of the heart of their position (if it is not the throat of its error).

        Two, even if the RPNA(GM) position is correct, the elders still have yet to construct a reasonable and valid argument for their court.  Implicit faith, tacit consent and the superficial and erroneous arguments of the PPSA, some of which appeal to courts with a plurality of ministers,  are hardly persuasive regardless  if the Tattoo Paper has set the precedent for its confusion in reasoning.
         
        Thank you,
         
        Bob S
         



        Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.