Heidelcast episode #3: A Gentle Rebuke to Brother John (pt 2)
UPDATE: added to the two Heidelcast episodes audio clips from the video linked below. § These episodes grew out of the decision Desiring God Ministries to invite the de facto leader of the self-described Federal Vision movement to speak at the 2009 DGM . . . Continue reading →
In the first part we quickly introduced the basic doctrine of covenant nomism, namely that God has established a system whereby sinners are admitted to the covenant by grace and they stay in or they retain that status or they retain the . . . Continue reading →
The Standing Judicial Commission of the Presbyterian Church in America ruled that the Missouri Presbytery erred when it failed to find a strong presumption of guilt that [Teaching Elder] Jeffrey Meyers holds views contrary to the Westminster Standards (BCO 34-5) when it . . . Continue reading →
Leila writes: “My husband and I planned, from the beginning, to send our children to private school, since we weren’t happy with the public schools in our area. Right before our oldest was ready to start kindergarten in the mid-90s, a new . . . Continue reading →
Dr Peter Leithart is a minister, a teaching elder in the PCA, who labors “out of bounds” (with permission of his presbytery) in a CREC congregation in the Moscow, ID area. He’s an explicit advocate of the Federal Vision doctrines and has . . . Continue reading →
Wes White has an update on the Missouri Presbytery investigation of Jeffrey Meyers. One of the leading Federal Visionists thinks it’s a good thing.
It’s probably a dated image but I remember door-to-door salesmen. Today salesmen are more likely to come round via phone, email, or pop-up ads. I guess they still come round but things have changed enough that it’s just a little unnerving to . . . Continue reading →
The latest episode of Office Hours is up and it is a discussion with Prof. Guy Waters about the nature of the New Perspectives on Paul and the nature of the self-described “Federal Vision,” movement. We talk about what Paul really said . . . Continue reading →
The Decrees of the Synod you have openly contemned. The interrogatories put you, you have refused to answer. Your citatory letters notwithstanding the sense of them was expounded by those who gave them, and therefore best knew it, you have interpreted as you wish, . . . Continue reading →
More good news from the floor of the synod of the URCNA. Despite the pre-synod opposition from a few sources (e.g., Nampa, ID) the justification report was not only strengthened by synod but it also passed without audible dissent. Apparently the body . . . Continue reading →
Thanks to our reporter at synod in London, Ontario we learn that the Nine Points of Pastoral Advice, adopted by Synod 2007, will remain in force. The appeal brought by the consistory of Hills URCNA (on procedural grounds) was rejected. Synod 2007 . . . Continue reading →
Heidelberg Catechism Q. 17: 17. Why must he also be true God? That by the power of His Godhead He might bear in His manhood the burden of God’s wrath,1 and so obtain for 2 and restore to us righteousness and life.3 . . . Continue reading →
The Rev Mr Arthur Kuschke is not the most well-known hero of Reformed theology, piety, and practice. There’s a high probability that you have never heard of him but despite his relative anonymity (some in the OPC and WTS will know his . . . Continue reading →
…Nampa here (inadvertently) makes the Study Committee’s point for it by presenting materials that illustrate FV ambiguities and the theological haze the FV spreads. First, we meet FV statements that report that baptism and covenantal membership constitute nothing short of divine salvation . . . Continue reading →
My URCNA ministerial colleague, Steve Swets, has weighed in on the “Nampa Critique” of the URCNA study committee report. You can read his comments here. His chief concern seems to be that if we adopt this report the costs will be too . . . Continue reading →
In order to understand the FV controversy you really need to understand the tactics of the Remonstrants. Chris Gordon gets it. The FV have become our Remonstrants. They want to turn the church courts into debating societies. The Remonstrants also tried to . . . Continue reading →
When it comes to the sorts of theological errors that the churches may legitimately subject to official adjudication, one need look no further than the “Form of Subscription”—a document to which every office-bearer in the URC affixes his name and pledges to . . . Continue reading →
It’s become clear in recent months that the FV/NPP controversies in the broader evangelical and Reformed worlds haven’t gone away. A leading congregation in the Gospel Coalition has implicitly endorsed N T Wright by having him speak to a church-sponsored gathering. There . . . Continue reading →
It is a common refrain of Federal Visionists that the orthodox, confessional Reformed ministers and churches who’ve read the FV books, articles, web pages, and blogs, just don’t understand the FV. Once more Wes White shows that just isn’t the case.