tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post1776924690937237149..comments2023-06-19T01:01:06.019-07:00Comments on Fœdero Schism: “Spaceship Moscow”Mark T.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09673762599798493263noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-71749304135711164032008-02-27T15:04:00.000-08:002008-02-27T15:04:00.000-08:00Welcome Dr. Roche.Welcome Dr. Roche.Mark T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09673762599798493263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-19763291434989005952008-02-24T18:01:00.000-08:002008-02-24T18:01:00.000-08:00I am saddened to see what has happened to Jim Jord...I am saddened to see what has happened to Jim Jordan in the nearly 8 years since I wrote the essay in question. He was a bizzaro interpreter for years before that, but still an orthodox reformed teacher, in the main (despite certain errors such as paedocommunion), and he was quick to condemn as 'apostates' various men such as Franky Schaeffer and others who had left evangelicalism conscientiously to embrace Byzantium or Rome. Sadly, it appears his current 'Fed Vis' teaching is openly works-righteousness Romanism in all but name. That is not good. And it may well account for the change in his behavior-- apostasy has over-all negative effects on a man, does it not?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-75027071347338222012008-01-17T05:50:00.000-08:002008-01-17T05:50:00.000-08:00CIB,Yes, you are completely right and I completely...CIB,<BR/><BR/>Yes, you are completely right and I completely missed it. The man is a menace to the Church, as witnessed by his latest rant, and his views are dangerous, as witnessed by the fruit of his teaching.Mark T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09673762599798493263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-77664171614710232612008-01-16T18:16:00.000-08:002008-01-16T18:16:00.000-08:00Mark,You've got the right quote. I was thinking pr...Mark,<BR/><BR/>You've got the right quote. I was thinking primarily of this part: "and his views are not dangerous."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-9568140719052833542008-01-15T17:46:00.000-08:002008-01-15T17:46:00.000-08:00CIB,I’m curious if you’re talking about this quote...CIB,<BR/><BR/>I’m curious if you’re talking about this quote:<BR/><BR/>“All this is not to say he is a bad guy; indeed, he is one of the most gracious and personable characters in the theonomic and related orbits, and his views are not dangerous, even when, as in his <I>Sociology of the Church</I>, or <I>Failure of the American Baptist Culture</I>, they are bizarre or even incompetent.”<BR/><BR/>I ask because I red flagged this line but for different reasons. I didn’t understand it to mean that Dr. Roche believes Jordan harmless. I read it to mean that he sees him as “gracious and personable.” And I red flagged it because when I called my attorney to obtain legal counsel after Jordan threatened me with legal action, my attorney told me that years ago he was friends with Jordan and that at that time Jordan was an incredibly kind and gracious man. So Dr. Roche’s testimony corresponds with my attorney’s. And both witnesses are consistent relative to the point in time when they spoke of Jordan’s demeanor and neither says anything about the man in the present.Mark T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09673762599798493263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9097408555576085021.post-6877397362375566582008-01-15T16:50:00.000-08:002008-01-15T16:50:00.000-08:00Fascinating read. I do think he's wrong about Mr. ...Fascinating read. I do think he's wrong about Mr. Jordan, though. Jordan is not harmless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com