Comments on: The Context for Sam Duncan’s Comment on the SJC http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/ Reformed theology Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:24:56 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Ken Christian http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-48353 Ken Christian Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:40:37 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-48353 A faithful brother, who also comments here, has brought something very important to my attention. Some comments I made several weeks ago under this post were completely inappropriate. Specifically, what I am referring to are some questions I asked concerning the reasons Rev. Dominic Aquila might have had in choosing the membership of the FV study committee. The tone and wording of my questions easily could be read as accusatory. Though it was not my intention to accuse Rev. Aquila of any wrong doing, I must take full responsibility for the impression given by my poorly chosen words. I ask must ask the forgiveness of Rev. Aquila and of anyone else who may have read my questions. I am truly sorry to you all. A faithful brother, who also comments here, has brought something very important to my attention. Some comments I made several weeks ago under this post were completely inappropriate. Specifically, what I am referring to are some questions I asked concerning the reasons Rev. Dominic Aquila might have had in choosing the membership of the FV study committee. The tone and wording of my questions easily could be read as accusatory. Though it was not my intention to accuse Rev. Aquila of any wrong doing, I must take full responsibility for the impression given by my poorly chosen words. I ask must ask the forgiveness of Rev. Aquila and of anyone else who may have read my questions. I am truly sorry to you all.

]]> By: Jeff Chewning http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46889 Jeff Chewning Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:50:19 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46889 Last night in our session meeting our TE suggested that we visit this discussion so that we might get a better handle on the ongoing struggles within the PCA. I visited this particular string last night, and went to bed with some disconcerting feelings on a number of levels. This morning during my quite time I was reading in Acts and re-encountered Paul’s confrontation with those of the Council. I’d encourage you to stop and go read Acts 23:1-5 before continuing to read on. As I’ve compared the thoughts that have been expressed earlier in this string with the response of Paul to the high priest, and his quick submission and acknowledgement of his error in responding to “God’s appointed ecumenical authority” as he did, even when such authority was obviously apostate, to contrast quite strongly with many views expressed in this string relative to the moderator’s appointments. Perhaps some might suggest his response was “tongue in cheek”, but I don’t think so. As I thought about Jesus’ response before a similar council, I find His submission to “God’s appointed ecumenical authority” also very instructive. The string that precedes this seems to indicate a vastly divergent tone from that assumed by both the Apostle Paul and the Lord Jesus. I wonder if a response more along the lines of Paul’s would be more in accord with God’s desire of His under-shepherds than the continuing reviling (Acts 23:4) of those whom He has elevated. I guess I am making a call for self examination to see if some boundaries have been crossed that might be more appropriately dealt with via repentance than continued blogging. Jeff Chewning Last night in our session meeting our TE suggested that we visit this discussion so that we might get a better handle on the ongoing struggles within the PCA. I visited this particular string last night, and went to bed with some disconcerting feelings on a number of levels. This morning during my quite time I was reading in Acts and re-encountered Paul’s confrontation with those of the Council. I’d encourage you to stop and go read Acts 23:1-5 before continuing to read on.

As I’ve compared the thoughts that have been expressed earlier in this string with the response of Paul to the high priest, and his quick submission and acknowledgement of his error in responding to “God’s appointed ecumenical authority” as he did, even when such authority was obviously apostate, to contrast quite strongly with many views expressed in this string relative to the moderator’s appointments. Perhaps some might suggest his response was “tongue in cheek”, but I don’t think so. As I thought about Jesus’ response before a similar council, I find His submission to “God’s appointed ecumenical authority” also very instructive.

The string that precedes this seems to indicate a vastly divergent tone from that assumed by both the Apostle Paul and the Lord Jesus. I wonder if a response more along the lines of Paul’s would be more in accord with God’s desire of His under-shepherds than the continuing reviling (Acts 23:4) of those whom He has elevated. I guess I am making a call for self examination to see if some boundaries have been crossed that might be more appropriately dealt with via repentance than continued blogging.

Jeff Chewning

]]> By: The Comedy Stylings of the Federal Division « God’s Hammer http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46700 The Comedy Stylings of the Federal Division « God’s Hammer Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:45:52 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46700 [...] A little over a week ago, things were flying fast and furious over at the Greenbaggins blog comment box as the schismatics of the Federal Division were busy grandstanding and stamping their feet. [...] [...] A little over a week ago, things were flying fast and furious over at the Greenbaggins blog comment box as the schismatics of the Federal Division were busy grandstanding and stamping their feet. [...]

]]> By: P. Andrew Sandlin http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46617 P. Andrew Sandlin Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:49:30 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46617 Yes, Jim. I do understand. He's plainly written that baptism has no regenerative effects (I realize that the definition of regeneration is diverse). But he is not an enemy. It's simply that most of his theological concerns are elsewhere. Yes, Jim. I do understand. He’s plainly written that baptism has no regenerative effects (I realize that the definition of regeneration is diverse). But he is not an enemy.

It’s simply that most of his theological concerns are elsewhere.

]]> By: James B Jordan http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46609 James B Jordan Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:06:41 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46609 #695. Andrew, thanks. I'm not sure what the sacramentalism of the FV is, but Norman may not nuance things quite as "we" do. "Our" position on the supper is straightforward high Calvinism ("dynamic receptionism"), and I'm pretty sure he'd agree. Doesn't matter, though, since it's all a conversation among grownups anyway. #695. Andrew, thanks. I’m not sure what the sacramentalism of the FV is, but Norman may not nuance things quite as “we” do. “Our” position on the supper is straightforward high Calvinism (“dynamic receptionism”), and I’m pretty sure he’d agree. Doesn’t matter, though, since it’s all a conversation among grownups anyway.

]]> By: Leadership Lesson for Those Facing Federal Visionists « Green Baggins http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46389 Leadership Lesson for Those Facing Federal Visionists « Green Baggins Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:05:16 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46389 [...] thread on the Context of Sam Duncan’s Comment on the SJC has topped 700 comments! Yesterday I found another great thread, this one over at the PuritanBoard, [...] [...] thread on the Context of Sam Duncan’s Comment on the SJC has topped 700 comments! Yesterday I found another great thread, this one over at the PuritanBoard, [...]

]]> By: greenbaggins http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46358 greenbaggins Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:25:56 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46358 We blew out the previous record by at least 200 comments. We blew out the previous record by at least 200 comments.

]]> By: HaigLaw http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46356 HaigLaw Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:29:24 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46356 Congratulations, I suppose. Is this the first time you've exceeded 700 comments? -Dave Congratulations, I suppose. Is this the first time you’ve exceeded 700 comments?
-Dave

]]> By: reformedmusings http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46331 reformedmusings Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:41:32 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46331 This is it, #700! Whoohoo! This is it, #700! Whoohoo!

]]> By: reformedmusings http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-context-for-sam-duncans-comment-on-the-sjc/#comment-46330 reformedmusings Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:40:11 +0000 http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/?p=1240#comment-46330 Jeff, I fixed the link in #696 for you. We're within a hair of getting to 700 on this thread, but I think that we've run out of steam. Jeff,

I fixed the link in #696 for you. We’re within a hair of getting to 700 on this thread, but I think that we’ve run out of steam.

]]>