Why I *do* think "covenant member" = "elect"
Pondering this some more, I can see entirely where the confusion arises.
Pondering this some more, I can see entirely where the confusion arises.
And there's more
"Confusing this 'union with Christ' with visible membership in the body of Christ through outward profession or sacramental expression is a serious error and endangers our church's faithful testimony to the Gospel essential of justification by faith alone." (lines 24-27, page 2214, of PCA on FV).
The force of the argument seems to be that we must not give the sacraments to those who are not elect. But the only way to avoid this, with no risk of false positives, is to give the sacraments to nobody at all. It's back to God's secret counsel again.
But the NT clearly does not say that we don't treat anyone as elect for risk of getting it wrong. At this point, covenantal objectivity is one way to go, and there have been others suggested. But if it is paramount to avoid treating someone who is not decretally elect as though they were, we're stuck with a null church.
I’m really struggling reading the report by the PCA on the Federal Vision. I know that many others have already posted their views on this report, but the misunderstandings in it are so fundamental it’s hard to keep quiet.
2 pleas so far
1. Please realise that there is a difference between saying
Can someone help me with this?
In Rev 20:8 the final rebellion is described. Granted, we are not told how long this rebellion will last - and it could be momentary. If it were momentary, there would be no conflict with the idea that the sweep of history is the story of the gospel's progress.
But: Why does the rebellion come from "the nations" qua nations. To stress the point, this is the nations at the four corners = every nation (without exception?). Why do we suddenly find nations - the Father's gift to the Son according to Psalm 2 and Matthew 28 - becoming the proponents of a last-ditch Satanic rebellion?
Comments please!
James Cary is very helpful on the importance of refusing false choices between evangelism and other kinds of work.
Thanks Jam.
Today is Ascension Day, when we celebrate Jesus’ return to his Father, the completion of his work on earth, and the fact that he is now Lord of all the kingdoms on earth.
Yesterday I listened to Doug Wilson’s third talk from the Auburn Avenue Pastors’ Conference. Less content than the first two of his talks there, but very worth listening to. His main point was that we don’t see, on the ground, a world ruled by Jesus Christ. And then made the point that we are better at
Now that Sunday has passed, and our church members at St James Audley have had time to read their notice sheet, I can post this.
We have appointed Samantha Pentlow to be our next Schools and Youth Worker. She'll start working with us sometime in the summer - when she's finished her Part Time Oak Hill diploma in Youth and Children's Ministry, and finished off her youth work commitments at All Saints, Riseley, in North Beds.
Welcome to St James, Samantha! It'll be great to have you here. Many people spoke to me yesterday morning to tell me that they were thrilled to read of your appointment.a href=
I’ve just posted a comment on a friend’s blog. (If anyone is interested, here’s original post). He asks which Bible translation to use for serious study in English.
There’s no shortage of good articles tackling this subject, but I thought I’d post my response here too, just in case it helps anyone else.
Well I would say that – I went there. But not everyone is proud of institutions they attended, and it is with some envy that I look at a college that has got stronger every year. How good it would be to start over again in 2007!
In last week’s Church Times (4 May) a letter was published by a recently retired DDO of St Alban’s Diocese. She picked up on some of the critical things that Tom Wright has said about the recently published book, Pierced for our Transgressions, and concluded that Oak Hill was not fit to be an Anglican Training College. Actually, she thought Oak Hill was not fit to train for Anglican ordination long before the publication of said book, but she doesn’t show that card in her hand.