Though I confess I don't understand everything about the "Federal Vision" and the Auburn Avenue Controversy; I still think that Dr. James White won the debate vs. Douglas Wilson on "Are Roman Catholics our brothers and sisters in Christ?" ;
And . . .
I really appreciate Douglas Wilson's recent engagement with our culture on the homosexual issue (see below) and his debates with Christopher Hitchens (and also here in book form); and against atheist Dan Barker. Thank you for those!
Thank You, Douglas Wilson, for, in my opinion, being a real life Daniel and going into the lion's den like I have never seen before.
Wilson's 2 lectures and 2 hours of questions and answer session on the Homosexual issue is probably the best Gospel cultural engagement in today's world that I have ever seen in my life, both in content and tone.
If you have not watched them yet, I would encourage everyone to watch all three sessions.
Dr. White reviewed some of the Questions and Answers from Douglas Wilson's presentation at Indiana University on the first half of the Dividing Line yesterday, June 29.
Dr. White pointed out the bad and obnoxious behavior of the college students and pro-homosexual folks there; and the lack of a Biblical worldview and lack of ability to think logically and coherently.
The bad behavior of many of the students, and their cussing and yelling is amazing; and it has been exposed for all to see. I am glad Wilson's film crew (or whoever) took the time to film the protest outside and put that in the presentation and put their obnoxious behavior into sub-titles to fully expose them. Reminds me of Ephesians 5:11-13. But beware, if you have not seen it yet; lots of profanity and cursing and nastiness. The anger of the GLBT crowd is palpable.
Douglas Wilson did a good job, presented God's design in creation for marriage, and preached the gospel, and never got angry back at them. I don't think I would have been able to keep my cool for so long. Pastor Wilson did an excellent job of explaining that Christians are not better than anyone and that Pharisee-ism, moralism, hypocrisy is wrong.
Wilson did an excellent job of explaining Genesis and God's creation design of marriage. He also did an excellent job of exposing the world view of atheism/evolution/materialism and how that results in certain kinds of thinking and behavior; and he had a good application of explaining how the Islamic worldview of Allah as a hermit (all alone) results in lack of love and creates a culture of force and will-power-law in order to make people behave. Only the Trinity, the God of the Bible, can fill the emptiness of the heart for true love, because God is love. ( 1 John 4:8-10) The God who is eternally and by nature - lover (Father), beloved (Son), and love (Holy Spirit) from all eternity is amazing, Biblical, True, and satisfying.
I love his expression of the story line drama of the Bible: "Kill the Dragon; get the girl" = meaning "God is defeating Satan, and will win a bride, the church for His Son, Jesus Christ, the bride was a harlot, a sinner, and Christ is winning her back, cleansing her to be a pure and spotless bride." See Ephesians 5:21-33 and Revelation chapters 21- 22.
He did an excellent job of explaining Matthew 5:29-30 - your hands or your eyes don't cause you to sin - your heart causes you to sin - the gospel is that you need a heart transplant and that by repenting of your sin and believing in Christ you get a heart transplant. Jesus did not mean those things literally(pluck out your eye, cut off your hand), because one can still lust in their heart and mind, and kill with their heart and mind, and covet (steal) in their heart and mind, etc.
There is much more that I could comment on, and Lord willing, when I have time, comment on other aspects of Wilson's excellent 2 lectures and Q and A session.
I watched the Q & A last night. Well done!
ReplyDeleteAgreed about the debate with James White.
D-Wil is the man.
ReplyDeleteI listened to that Dividing Line and Dr. White's assessments of the lecture and QandA.
ReplyDeleteI watched both lectures and the just shy of 2 hours of QandA.
I review TF's blog on this.
I just read yours.
What impressed me most is the depth of this issue some came from in their questions. You could see they came well prepared with their question/s.
And D. Wilson gave us some food for thought in staying in the battle and not allow himself to be distracted and carried away into some of the rabbit trails that end in a tar pit!
One area of creation Truth in the Scriptures where I would have camped during the QandA in rebuttal to just a few of the questions is in this area:
Mat 19:3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?"
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."
Anyway, as you write James, D. Wilson did an excellent/good job handling the lions in the den presenting God's design for marriage:
"Douglas Wilson did a good job, presented God's design in creation for marriage, and preached the gospel, and never got angry back at them. ..."
Not to deny that D Wilson has his strengths, but as regards Romanism, Wm. Perkin's "Reformed Catholick, or A Declaration shewing how neere we may come to the present church of Rome in sundrie points of religion and wherein we must for ever depart from them" might be of interest. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1240407718/dealoz_us_book-20/ref=nosim
ReplyDeleteAs regards the FV, Taylor Marshall claims the FV's true home is Rome and for once I agree with him:
http://pauliscatholic.com/2007/05/the-catholic-prespective-on-the-federal-vision/
In addition to Piper and Wilson, Robt. Gagnon (PCUSA believe it or not) has also spoken up on sexuality in the Bible contra the sodomite version of reality:http://www.robgagnon.net/
cheers
RPV -
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughts and links -
I read over Taylor Marshall's explanation of the Federal Vision.
As a Baptist, I cannot understand the attractiveness of that stuff - rituals, candles, robes, reading OT ceremonies/priesthood into the NT.
This seems to be the root of what leads so many Presbyterians and Anglicans to Rome - even though they deny it, it seems like an ex opere operato view of baptism and infant baptism.
Taylor Marshall wrote there at the link you provided:
"Federal Visionists believe that the sacrament of Baptism actually accomplishes union with Christ – not in a nominal way, but in an ontological way."
Sounds like "ex opere operato" to me. One of the great mistakes of the early church from the Donatist controversy onward.
As someone who holds to that one has to first understand they are sinners and repent and believe in Christ, and then be baptized; I don't think I will ever understand why others find this Biblical or attractive or truth.
http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/01/fv-stepping-stone-to-rome.html
ReplyDeleteTurretinfan has some interesting articles on the Federal Vision and asks the question if it is a stepping stone to Rome.
What I link above is just one I found when searching at his blog under "Federal Vision".
It is a lot to understand.
I wish the Perkins material was updated into English of today -
Yes, Piper and Gagnon have excellent material on the issue of homosexuality/sodomy.
Hard to understand by Gagnon is still PCUSA given what Jack Rogers has done to the PCUSA on the issues of inerrancy and homosexuality.
What is so good about Wilson's 3 + hour lectures and Q and A is that homosexuals and those college students were exposed in their obnoxious behavior and language and Wilson never lost his cool and persevered with them seeking to hammer away at him.
He was a good model of evangelism and answering questions with some of the most obnoxious behavior that I have ever seen.
Hard to understand by Gagnon is still PCUSA . . .
ReplyDeleteShould have been:
Hard to understand why Gagnon is still PCUSA
Ken,
ReplyDeleteI don't think there is any question that FV is a stepping stone to Rome, as is arminianism, but hey, that just my opinion.
I think Gagnon is PCUSA, but I'm not sure. Neither can I figure out why he is, if he is, but sometimes the paycheck, sometimes the notion that one has to stay and fight, precludes the take of outsiders. As mentioned, the doctrine of scripture is fundamental and precedes the sexual perversion issue.
The Perkins facsimile is pretty easy to read, compared to some of the facsimiles I have got from EEBO, if you're wondering.
Will check out Wilson's lecture if
I get a chance. You have to admit 3 hours is quite a whack of time though, which is why if he printed his lecture, I'd go for that despite his sophistry defending FV and by implication, James Jordan and Peter Liethart.
cordially