tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post7420231224359858197..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: HeidelbogRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-63078881371699035622011-02-22T17:00:38.715-05:002011-02-22T17:00:38.715-05:00“It did so by rejecting theocracy, which was not e...“It did so by rejecting theocracy, which was not essential to the Reformed confession.”<br /><br />There is no anti-theocracy language per se in any of the (revised) Reformed confessions. How are these modifications to be taken as a “rejection?” They simply broadened the tent.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14452838440776937724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-38888879597402098472011-02-21T23:49:05.234-05:002011-02-21T23:49:05.234-05:00ps. As I said on another post just as I have said ...ps. As I said on another post just as I have said that Mr Murray's experiment in revising covenant theology should have been tested in the courts of the church perhaps MGK's later views should have been tested too?<br /><br />I really don't believe that I'm being partisan here. The OPC had 50 years to charge MGK and they never did it. That may say something about the relative weakness of the case against him, I don't know. His views did develop over the years.<br /><br />It also seems a little unfair to use Lee Irons' posts to get at MGK. If the concern is with his theology, shouldn't you be dealing directly with him? It's not as if he never published anything.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-73443165449780217452011-02-21T23:30:40.449-05:002011-02-21T23:30:40.449-05:00Look, this is silly,. Yes, Reformed theology has d...Look, this is silly,. Yes, Reformed theology has developed. It did so by rejecting theocracy, which was not essential to the Reformed confession. What was essential was (and remains) that the civil magistrate is God's minister for justice in the civil sphere. What is essential is the basic distinction between the civil and spiritual spheres or kingdoms under God's sovereign providence. <br /><br />The same is true of creation. Most Reformed theologians have matured beyond the views held in the 17th century but we still confess that God sovereignly spoke into nothing. <br /><br />The essence of the confession hasn't changed. Baptism is essential to the Reformed confession. Theocracy isn't.<br /><br />Why don't you read RRC? I tried to make the case there that not everything is equally important but that there is a core. <br /><br />Seems to me that if we never revised any of our views, then you would attack as unreflective traditionalists. But, when the churches get together and revise the confession, as in the case of BC 36, which is amenable to the 2K (see Danny Hyde's commentary on the Belgic Confession) then you accuse us of being unstable. You miss the point.<br /><br />The point is that the churches are reading God's Word together, using a common hermeneutic and reaching substantially the same conclusions now that we did in the 16th and 17th centuries but we do see a few, non-essential things, differently. We no longer think that Paul wrote Hebrews or that some books are commonly called Paralipomnon. That's hardly a defection from what was confessed originally.<br /><br />If I didn't know better I'd say that some fellows on this blog are just looking for things to criticize. I'm sure that's not true but one could hardly blame someone for thinking that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-88299526799708275992011-02-21T14:14:28.561-05:002011-02-21T14:14:28.561-05:00I think Baptists aren't Reformed because they&...I think Baptists aren't Reformed because they're more particular...I think that's what Clark is saying.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12439562999391090405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-20505143903580583642011-02-21T14:10:47.957-05:002011-02-21T14:10:47.957-05:00"Either you think Kline, despite his contraco...<i>"Either you think Kline, despite his contraconfessional positions, was still Reformed–in which case you need to explain why his contraconfessional positions remains within the bounds Reformed identity while the (allegedly) contraconfessional positions of a Baptist who, lets us say, subscribes to the LBCF, are out of bounds with Reformed identity,"</i><br /><br />Didn't you discuss this horn of the dilemma with your post titled "Selective Confessionalism"?Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-2681406203913641472011-02-21T12:24:53.216-05:002011-02-21T12:24:53.216-05:00Except that Clark is defining Reformed identity in...Except that Clark is defining Reformed identity in terms of historic 16-17C creeds. Once you allow for common sense qualifications, Clark is shooting blanks instead of silver bullets at the Reformed Baptists.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-69642274797036690902011-02-21T11:14:39.092-05:002011-02-21T11:14:39.092-05:00Steve: The revisions to the WCF (on statecraft) do...Steve: The revisions to the WCF (on statecraft) do involve a sudden change, owing to the aftermath of the American Revolution.<br /><br />Vytautas: The Revolution did not happen over night and neither did American revision of theocratic/erastian sections of the WCF. The definition of Reformed is not absolute, but it drags along the drift of historical circumstance.Vytautashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563655929016752682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-44180788515880885272011-02-21T10:46:28.973-05:002011-02-21T10:46:28.973-05:00I'd add that beyond formal revision, you also ...I'd add that beyond formal revision, you also have nonenforcement. Take the fact that denominations like the OPC and PCA don't enforce the Westminster Standards on the creation days. That's a de facto revision, even if they didn't actually rewrite the terms of the creed. <br /><br />Right now I'm not debating the merits of the case–either on statecraft or creation. Just discussing the internal tensions generated by Clark's position.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-75570916519134303962011-02-21T10:41:31.985-05:002011-02-21T10:41:31.985-05:00I'dd add that even the Dutch church's reje...I'dd add that even the Dutch church's rejection of article 36 of the Belgic <i>still</i> isn't congenial to 2K statecraft. Darryl Hart says it's not something a theonomist would like, <i>but neither</i> is it something a 2ker should like. So Clark still has a Confessional problem, or maybe he can correct Darryl Hart.Maul P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15227129983621069565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-59053482071350167162011-02-21T09:56:29.431-05:002011-02-21T09:56:29.431-05:00The revisions to the WCF (on statecraft) do involv...The revisions to the WCF (on statecraft) do involve a sudden change, owing to the aftermath of the American Revolution.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-20085485672273876432011-02-21T09:49:56.786-05:002011-02-21T09:49:56.786-05:00Steve: So your confessional grounding is viciously...Steve: So your confessional grounding is viciously circular and relativistic. <br /><br />Vytautas: The circle seems large. What the Reformed churches confessed happened during periods of time, over amounts of space, and among different nations. This buffer does not allow for sudden changes.Vytautashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563655929016752682noreply@blogger.com