John Gerstner has recently been exposed as an incipient Federal Visionary and a heretic. The evidence appears in footnote 798 on page 211 of this dangerous book.
Regarding Norman Shepherd's paper, "The Grace of Justification," Gerstner wrote these disturbing words: "This paper is very clear evidence of his sola fideism to which only an antinomian could take exception."
Only an FVer/heretic could make such a statement. Unfortunately, Gerstner actually read Shepherd's paper and came to his own conclusions. Apparently, he did not get the memo that Shepherd was to be lynched without a proper trial.
Of course, Gerstner did speak rather prophetically by predicting that only an antinomian would find Shepherd offensive. The entire Anti-Federal Vision movement could be summed up as antinomian. Our goal is to redefine sola fide as antinomianism.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
Trust and DISobey: An AFVSB Book Review
Federal Visionists love Norman Shepherd, which, of course, automatically makes them all heretics. As everyone knows, Shepherd was fired with cause from Westminster Theological Seminary for the heresy of denying the biblical truth of Sola Fide.
Amazingly, Ian Hewitson has just published a book, Trust and Obey: Norman Shepherd & The Justification Controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, that attempts "to remove suspicion from Shepherd and to restore to him that which is more precious to him than silver or gold - his good name." Of course, this would be tantamount to renouncing our faith in Luther. Me genoito!
Trust and Obey marshalls a ton of evidence to implicate WTS of injustice. The first half of the book proves that WTS "did not have adequate grounds to remove Shepherd." The second half of the book demonstrates that WTS "also had no grounds theologically to remove" Shepherd.
Whether or not the author is correct is irrelevant; expedience is our catapult. In the end, God's will was done, and the heretic was removed. Who cares about justice and integrity? The gospel is at steak! We are ordained to use whatever means necessary to preserve our theological paradigms.
Rest assured, we did not actually read Trust and Obey, as we need to guard ourselves against the schemes of Satan. Just a cursory skim of the book reveals an ungodly obsession with details and a constant footnoting of source documents. Do not let this pseudo-scholarly enterprise fool you into Sympathy for the Devil. God is not in the details.
Here's a howler from the conclusion to Trust and Obey: "Shepherd must be held in high esteem for his solid commitment to Scripture and for his insistence that every generation must continually revise dogmatic formulations in light of the Word of God."
Obviously, the FVers have learned from their godfather, as this is a classic FV ploy: suggesting that the Confession should be revised in light of the scriptures. Don't they know by now that an appeal to sola scriptura is never going to faze us? We read the scriptures in light of the Confessions, not the other way around. We are not interested in getting into a "whose bible interpretation is correct" debate.
Therefore, we at the AFVSB are issuing this grave warning: under no circumstances should you read Trust and Obey. We have worked hard at circulating half-truths and outright lies about Norman Shepherd. A dangerous book like this could undermine all of our efforts. Soli Deo Gloria!
Amazingly, Ian Hewitson has just published a book, Trust and Obey: Norman Shepherd & The Justification Controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, that attempts "to remove suspicion from Shepherd and to restore to him that which is more precious to him than silver or gold - his good name." Of course, this would be tantamount to renouncing our faith in Luther. Me genoito!
Trust and Obey marshalls a ton of evidence to implicate WTS of injustice. The first half of the book proves that WTS "did not have adequate grounds to remove Shepherd." The second half of the book demonstrates that WTS "also had no grounds theologically to remove" Shepherd.
Whether or not the author is correct is irrelevant; expedience is our catapult. In the end, God's will was done, and the heretic was removed. Who cares about justice and integrity? The gospel is at steak! We are ordained to use whatever means necessary to preserve our theological paradigms.
Rest assured, we did not actually read Trust and Obey, as we need to guard ourselves against the schemes of Satan. Just a cursory skim of the book reveals an ungodly obsession with details and a constant footnoting of source documents. Do not let this pseudo-scholarly enterprise fool you into Sympathy for the Devil. God is not in the details.
Here's a howler from the conclusion to Trust and Obey: "Shepherd must be held in high esteem for his solid commitment to Scripture and for his insistence that every generation must continually revise dogmatic formulations in light of the Word of God."
Obviously, the FVers have learned from their godfather, as this is a classic FV ploy: suggesting that the Confession should be revised in light of the scriptures. Don't they know by now that an appeal to sola scriptura is never going to faze us? We read the scriptures in light of the Confessions, not the other way around. We are not interested in getting into a "whose bible interpretation is correct" debate.
Therefore, we at the AFVSB are issuing this grave warning: under no circumstances should you read Trust and Obey. We have worked hard at circulating half-truths and outright lies about Norman Shepherd. A dangerous book like this could undermine all of our efforts. Soli Deo Gloria!
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
James 2:24
"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).
Federal Visionists love this verse because James allegedly says that justification is by works and not by faith alone. They talk about the "whole counsel of God" (whatever that is) and how this passage ought to inform our definition of justification. They babble on about "Biblicism." They love to appeal to Sola Scriptura and all that rot. Let me show you a more excellent way.
First, Biblicism is a dangerous error that threatens our Modern Reformation. Biblicists are the reckless sort of people who attempt to read the Bible and take it seriously. The Bible is holey book that can only be handled by men who have been trained how to escape the plain meaning of the text.
Second, while we Anti-Federal Visionists feel that Sola Scriptura is a decent slogan, we must warn against its abuse. Anyone who invokes Sola Scriptura is simply trying to appeal to the Bible as our highest authority. However, this grossly misunderstands what Sola Scriptura means. Historically, Sola Scriptura means that our highest authority is how the Reformed church has interpreted the Bible.
For this reason, the Truly Reformed have always favored Sola Fide over Sola Scriptura. No one could argue with the truth that Sola Fide is more foundational to our cause. In fact, if forced to choose, we would pick Sola Fide over and against Sola Scriptura. In all fairness, we would be fine if we just changed the slogan from Sola Scriptura to Sola Traditiona.
Federal Visionists love this verse because James allegedly says that justification is by works and not by faith alone. They talk about the "whole counsel of God" (whatever that is) and how this passage ought to inform our definition of justification. They babble on about "Biblicism." They love to appeal to Sola Scriptura and all that rot. Let me show you a more excellent way.
First, Biblicism is a dangerous error that threatens our Modern Reformation. Biblicists are the reckless sort of people who attempt to read the Bible and take it seriously. The Bible is holey book that can only be handled by men who have been trained how to escape the plain meaning of the text.
Second, while we Anti-Federal Visionists feel that Sola Scriptura is a decent slogan, we must warn against its abuse. Anyone who invokes Sola Scriptura is simply trying to appeal to the Bible as our highest authority. However, this grossly misunderstands what Sola Scriptura means. Historically, Sola Scriptura means that our highest authority is how the Reformed church has interpreted the Bible.
For this reason, the Truly Reformed have always favored Sola Fide over Sola Scriptura. No one could argue with the truth that Sola Fide is more foundational to our cause. In fact, if forced to choose, we would pick Sola Fide over and against Sola Scriptura. In all fairness, we would be fine if we just changed the slogan from Sola Scriptura to Sola Traditiona.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)