An Excellent Comment
This is an extremely well-written and thoughtful analysis that the Reformed church should contemplate because this much is certain: the Fearless Leader and his terrorist organization the CREC do not intend to go away. Indeed, they plan to continue their harassment of the Church by spreading false doctrine and raiding congregations for doug-booty, primarily because the Reformed church prematurely accorded credibility to the Great Protector without ever testing him, which credibility he now exploits to advance his kingdom and build his empire:
The notoriety of a Doug Wilson is an indictment against the entire Reformed community. Even before the FV hoopla, DW found a market in the Reformed community for his wares. He found a community more interested in separation than evangelism, (faithfulness to God requires pulling kids from public education), found men desiring priestly headship over servant-hood (Federal Husband), found a community more interested in political victory than reaching the lost (post-mil theonomy), found ministers desiring the priestly authority of the Old Covenant, as well as ministers willing to compromise sola fide (FV), and found a community open to family idolatry (paedocommunion, God guarantees faithful children if parents obey). All these represent a return to the Old Covenant, to its blessings and curses for obedience, its separation from unbelievers, its dominion theology, its male dominance, and its priestly regulations, all which have been fulfilled in the New Covenant.
Why else would anyone take seriously a self-ordained man with no seminary education who writes books as an expert on ecclesiology, American history, slavery, marriage, Reformed theology, culture, education, etc. . . . if there wasn’t already a market for his Old Covenant take on things? Why else would people who claim to love the Bible allow a man to so easily twist a few Scriptures? (Deut. 6 as a manifesto on who can teach math to your child; II Cor. 10:5 wrenched completely out of context to support his political worldview; Matt 28:19, which obviously commands the church to be an instrument of evangelism and sanctification to individuals from every nation — to a manifesto to teach political entities the laws they must obey to govern.)
In other words, if the Reformed community was busy obeying the Lord’s command to love and reach the lost, and teach the Bible accurately, they would never have taken a man like DW seriously. But as long as there is a propensity among the Reformed to return to the typology of the Old Covenant law, DWs will arise and find a hearing among us. I only admire DW for one thing — the same I admired Bill Clinton for — he is a great marketer — too bad we are the gullible market.
Todd Bordow
Thank you.
6 comments:
IMHO, his first point is incorrect. Coming out of the secular public education system is hardly unreformed! The Dutch and Continental Reformed have a long tradition of private Christian schools. However, what Wilson preaches is "excellence" in Christian education through Latin-based classical schools in the tradition of the medieval Roman Catholics.
Wanda
Hi Wanda,
I will not speak for Pastor Bordow, but I believe his first point was “separation vs. evangelism,” which he illustrated by citing Wilson’s divisive stand on public education.
Regarding Wilson’s concept of “excellence,” my neighbor pulled his children out of Logos School after he took a second look at the curriculum. Originally he assumed it was based on the classics as you suggest, but he yanked his children the moment he saw Wilson’s revisionism. There’s nothing excellent about lying to children under the pretense of education. In fact, I recall a text about millstones.
Was Todd's comments one of those Keister derided as coming from one of the "wackos" he mentioned on that thread?
Hi Sean,
When I read Lane’s “whacko” comment, the first thing I did was think that he had me in mind. Then I thought again and remembered all the downright crazy stuff that James Jordan, Mark Horne, and a few other FVists regularly post on GB and quickly vindicated myself, at least in my mind.
I could be wrong in my interpretation, but I thought it was a shrewd move for Lane to remind Wilson that nut jobs frequent his blog, but Lane didn’t finish the thought by noting that Wilson clearly encourages reckless and irresponsible comments from these nut jobs. He let Wilson finish the thought. That’s why Wilson didn’t come back with a word from Sinai, instructing Lane what he should do. Lane caught him.
And for what it’s worth, I believe that there’s a lot more of this happening in their exchanges than first meets the eye, including the whole JBFA debate.
I believe that there’s a lot more of this happening in their exchanges than first meets the eye, including the whole JBFA debate.
I was under that impression once too. As I mentioned to another person recently, Keister has effectively handed Wilson a badge that he will wear as a shield.
Keister has approved the notion that one can be a Christian, even a Christian minister, and teach a two-tiered scheme of justification beginning with baptism and maintained by works (done by faith of course).
Keister was lead by the nose by Wilson throughout his entire “review” of RINE. What’s worse, Keister believes his assessment of Wilson is correct on the vitals of the faith. Why? Because he says Wilson agrees with him. Unbelievable.
The real crime is that Keister is held up as an authority of some note concerning the FV, that’s why he was tagged to help the prosecution in the LAP case.
Further evidence that the PCA is a lost cause.
I think Keister has done untold damage in trying to rid the church of false teachers like Wilson, because, per Keister, Wilson is not a false teacher only an ambiguous one.
You need to familiarize yourself with the Kinnaird trial Mark. The transcripts are at the Trinity Foundation site. Keister has repeated the error of the OPC. Thankfully Keister's blog is not a church court, but I don't hold out much hope for the PCA anyway.
I was under that impression once too. As I mentioned to another person recently, Keister has effectively handed Wilson a badge that he will wear as a shield.
This started when Wilson overstated Lane’s position by saying Lane found nothing that put Wilson outside the pale of Reformed orthodoxy. Lane never said that but he never called Wilson on it. He’s picking his hills well. But you’re correct, Wilson will get lots of miles out of this.
Keister has approved the notion that one can be a Christian, even a Christian minister, and teach a two-tiered scheme of justification beginning with baptism and maintained by works (done by faith of course).
I think this is an overstatement. Lane called Wilson on his shortcomings without picking a fight. One of the differences here is that you and I are sons of thunder — we want fire from heaven; Lane, however, is not like us — he’s a son of consolation and he has the patience of Job. But this does not make him weak or compromising. I really believe that he has an end game in mind and I am certain that he has Wilson cornered.
Keister was led by the nose by Wilson throughout his entire “review” of RINE. What’s worse, Keister believes his assessment of Wilson is correct on the vitals of the faith. Why? Because he says Wilson agrees with him. Unbelievable.
I know that Wilson is playing Lane for a fool and I suspect that Lane knows the game isn’t over. I think he has a couple aces up his sleeve.
The real crime is that Keister is held up as an authority of some note concerning the FV, that’s why he was tagged to help the prosecution in the LAP case.
I think you have to give this time. Lane isn’t done yet and this controversy is far from over.
Further evidence that the PCA is a lost cause.
The PCA, like all denominations, has its problems.
I think Keister has done untold damage in trying to rid the church of false teachers like Wilson, because, per Keister, Wilson is not a false teacher only an ambiguous one.
This is an overstatement. Lane has identified Wilson’s inconsistencies and his ambiguity as problematic, and he did not declare him orthodox. Let’s watch how he proceeds.
You need to familiarize yourself with the Kinnaird trial, Mark. The transcripts are at the Trinity Foundation site. Keister has repeated the error of the OPC. Thankfully Keister’s blog is not a church court, but I don’t hold out much hope for the PCA anyway.
I will read the case, but the OPC’s failure to discipline Shepherd started this mess and they still have a lot of men who are sympathetic to Shepherd in their ranks. They have a different set of problems than the PCA — but the PCA has drawn a line and for this I am thankful.
Post a Comment