Before Green Baggins goes on to my next chapter, he had some follow-up questions to my last response. First, law and gospel. As I said, I affirm the three uses of the law. My position is this: when the law reveals to me my need for a savior, and prepares me for the gospel proper, …
FVs, TRs at PCA GA, ASAP, Should Read . . .
I have a suggestion. FVs and TRs headed for the PCA GA, should read, as soon as possible, the subject of this post. They should do this so that we don’t wind up with any new denominations with too many Cs, Rs, and Ps in the name. There is an old blues song that starts …
More FV Clarifications
My apologies to Green Baggins for taking so long to answer his questions. I have been up to my neck in discussions with atheists. For the same reason, my answers here will be brief, and may come across like a laundry list, but I hope they will still be able to do the work of …
Ed Veith and Me
A week or two ago, you may recall we had some discussion here about a question Ed Veith had raised on his blog about my views on the penal nature of the substitutionary atonement. Well, he was doing some traveling, as was I, but we finally connected a couple days ago. We had a good …
No Real Disagreement Yet
Green Baggins is continuing his review of my book “Reformed” Is Not Enough, and he continues to do a fine job. In his review of the next chapter where I seek to establish my evangelical bona fides, he basically has one question that he wants clarified, and it has to do with my views on …
A Clarification
Green Baggins has come to the chapter of RINE where I seek to establish my Calvinistic bona fides. Some have interpreted the FV as though it were some form of Arminianism or semi-Pelagianism. So early in the book, I set aside a chapter to demonstrate that I wish that the Synod of Dort had promulgated …
Some Standard Misunderstandings
I have been on the road, and have only now had the opportunity to read the recently released PCA report on the Federal Vision. This is just an initial response; more will probably be forthcoming. First, I appreciated the response of the Bayly brothers, which can be found here. And, like Mark Horne, I greatly …
Deemphasis or Denial
I said a few days ago that I was going to say something about why I accept N.T. Wright’s assertion that he holds to penal substitution. This will be brief, and may not be adequate for those with questions, but here it is. It is a methodological issue. I am uncomfortable with assertions of what …
Judas the Christian
In his treatment of my chapter on whether or not Judas was a Christian, Greenbaggins does a good job catching the distinctions I was seeking to make. He hears my qualifications, and is willing to believe them. He says that he has no real problem with the chapter, and had just a few quibble/questions. One …
A Few More Links
I realized that I forgot to put the link to Bishop Wright’s article. Here it is now. And, for good measure, here are some other responses. There is this one, and David Field, mentioned in my post yesterday, says this. I want to draw particular attention to the grace evident in David’s last paragraph — …