Pristine Grace
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst ... 2
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: Care to respond to this critique?

  1. #21
    Moderator Forester07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    235
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Another attack, mainly on Brandan but also mentioning Nick.

    http://puritanreformed.blogspot.com/...n-stewing.html

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    My advice is not to bring this guy's blog more traffic by attempting to respond!

    I do believe that Brandan should put a vigorous response! Make Daniel see that he needs to answer for what reason he calls Brandan a heretic:

    for believing in E.J.? Then he is rendering Gill a heretic
    for not believing in Duty Faith? then he is rendering Pink a heretic
    for believing James as Antilegumena? then he is rendering Luther and a myriad of others, a heretic!

    I think this guy is a neophyte disguised into an intellectual, akin to a parrot attempting to be Einstein.

    Again let's not give him any more traffic!

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  3. #23
    Administrator Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    18
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    15
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Maybe I missed it, or did anybody bring up the point that this guy is a jerk?
    (this was the nice way to say what I was really thinking)
    Isaiah 45:7, (KJV), I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  4. #24
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    145
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    I do believe that Brandan should put a vigorous response! Make Daniel see that he needs to answer for what reason he calls Brandan a heretic:
    When I get time! If I recall, even Clark and Hoeksema believed in Justification from Eternity.
    This is my signature.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandan Kraft View Post
    When I get time! If I recall, even Clark and Hoeksema believed in Justification from Eternity.
    He is calling you a heretic for E.J., for not believing "Duty Faith" and the Book of James; He must admit or retract calling you a heretic for these issues, because in doing so, he is also calling a heretic: Gill, Pink, Luther and a number of others!

    He needs to know that a HERETIC is one who goes against Apostolic teaching in the Christ-centric message; NOT ONE WHO GOES AGAINST OTHERS' CONFESSION OF FAITH; He must prove above and beyond shadow of doubt that, the acceptance of the 66 book canons, is, not only essential for salvation, but also essential for one to be called a Christian and quote Scripture; quoting confessions won't do it.

    I do think he is a neophyte who has not ever gone beyond studying what has been dished out to him by the mainstream reformed Confessional. In his profile he delineates the confessions he subscribes to. All are the same as I do, but I do not elevate them to the level of the Scripture and do not label a heretic any genuine reformed person (reformed being one who celebrates the Sovereignty of God and basically follows the teaching of the Reformers, without necessarily BLINDLY obeying them). Note that Baptists are heretics (at least in Europe) to Presbyterians, specially on the issue of baptism... etc. So, the term heretic has been used too loosely by some neophytes and by some more experienced brethren as well (guilty as charged) and should not be used hastily, ESPECIALLY BY SOMEONE WHO ACCEPTS JAMES AS HOMOLEGUMENA: James teaches them not to "lash others with their tongue", and Mr. Chew needs to be chewed by James because he is in direct violation of James' teaching!

    Do whatever you please, Brandan, but of course I don't need to tell you that...

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandan Kraft View Post
    When I get time! If I recall, even Clark and Hoeksema believed in Justification from Eternity.
    This is the only link I found supporting what you said above. Both Hoeksma, Kuypeer and Brine believed E.J. and their ENTIRE Protestant Reformed Church and/or the Dutch Reformed would be HERETICS according to the neophyte...

    http://books.google.com/books?id=xYm...age&q=&f=false

    I hope this LONG link helps... Read the excerpt on the lower part of page 43 and page 44.
    (You can't copy and paste... It is copyrighted material)

    (Maybe all of you want to drop the subject... if so, let me know. I will go quietly in the night...)

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    This is the only link I found supporting what you said above. Both Hoeksma, Kuypeer and Brine believed E.J. and their ENTIRE Protestant Reformed Church and/or the Dutch Reformed would be HERETICS according to the neophyte...

    http://books.google.com/books?id=xYm...age&q=&f=false

    I hope this LONG link helps... Read the excerpt on the lower part of page 43 and page 44.
    (You can't copy and paste... It is copyrighted material)

    (Maybe all of you want to drop the subject... if so, let me know. I will go quietly in the night...)

    Milt
    One more link: A great study on the issue of EJ, similar to a real debate:

    http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr2005.htm#The Doctrine of Eternal Justification in Light of the Westminster Tradition (2)

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    He is calling you a heretic for E.J., for not believing "Duty Faith" and the Book of James; He must admit or retract calling you a heretic for these issues, because in doing so, he is also calling a heretic: Gill, Pink, Luther and a number of others!

    He needs to know that a HERETIC is one who goes against Apostolic teaching in the Christ-centric message; NOT ONE WHO GOES AGAINST OTHERS' CONFESSION OF FAITH; He must prove above and beyond shadow of doubt that, the acceptance of the 66 book canons, is, not only essential for salvation, but also essential for one to be called a Christian and quote Scripture; quoting confessions won't do it.
    “For one to be properly called a heretic, it is required (1) that he be a person received by the Sacrament of Baptism into the visible church; (2) that he err in faith …; (3) that the error conflict directly with the very foundation of faith; (4) that to the error be added malice and obstinacy, in which he stubbornly defends his error, though repeatedly admonished; (5) that he stir up dissensions and scandals in the church and rend its unity." J. Gerhard, Loci theologici, XIII

    Using Gerhard's classic definition of heretic, Daniel has failed to prove his case: 1. Has Brandan Kraft even been baptized? Where's the evidence? 2. E.J., denial of duty-faith, and the omission of James from the canon are widely held catholic principles. Only Papists declare them anathema (See Council of Trent). 3. Daniel did not identify any error that touched on the foundation of faith (Christ as Redeemer). 4. Brandan Kraft was labeled heretic without being given a chance to defend his position. 5. Internet forums are not "the church" and cannot rend its unity.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    “For one to be properly called a heretic, it is required (1) that he be a person received by the Sacrament of Baptism into the visible church; (2) that he err in faith …; (3) that the error conflict directly with the very foundation of faith; (4) that to the error be added malice and obstinacy, in which he stubbornly defends his error, though repeatedly admonished; (5) that he stir up dissensions and scandals in the church and rend its unity." J. Gerhard, Loci theologici, XIII

    Using Gerhard's classic definition of heretic, Daniel has failed to prove his case: 1. Has Brandan Kraft even been baptized? Where's the evidence? 2. E.J., denial of duty-faith, and the omission of James from the canon are widely held catholic principles. Only Papists declare them anathema (See Council of Trent). 3. Daniel did not identify any error that touched on the foundation of faith (Christ as Redeemer). 4. Brandan Kraft was labeled heretic without being given a chance to defend his position. 5. Internet forums are not "the church" and cannot rend its unity.
    Excellent Dan! Thank you!

    I have repented with bitter tears for having used this term loosely in the past! I think, in cases like the views of Daniel on Brandan thoughts, it purely demonstrates the neophyte character of the one calling the other a heretic... May God grant me maturity in Him so I will not use this term loosely.

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Yes, it's very sad. Daniel Chew condemns Brandan Kraft for his view of the canon, "You are however condemned not for your view of eternal justification but for throwing James out of the Canon - let's be clear about that."

    Where have we heard that before? "But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema." Council of Trent

    Daniel follows the logic of Trent. He thereby condemns Luther, the early church fathers, and a host of Reformed and Lutheran theologians who all reject James as a canonical book on a par with other canonical books of the bible.

  11. #31
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,671
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    117
    Thanked in
    63 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Right on Dan! In all the centuries since the Diet of Regensburg, where Protestants subscribed to the high canonicity of James in order to please the Papacy, the respected teachers and theologians of Protestantism have been EQUATING the issue of the authority of scripture with the issue of the authority of James as one and the same. If one denies the latter, he/she is proposed to be aligned with the same level of heresy as those who deny the Trinity, Deity and blood atonement of Christ, 5solas, etc.

    So the truth on this issue has not been acknowledged by well-published Protestant teachers at all! It is ground into the dust as sure and certain as the gospel itself was ground into the dust by the Papacy for well over a thousand years.
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

  12. #32
    Moderator ugly_gaunt_cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    Here's my response;


    ESV: II Timothy Chapter 1
    3. I thank God whom I serve, as did my ancestors, with a clear conscience, as I remember you constantly in my prayers night and day.
    4. As I remember your tears, I long to see you, that I may be filled with joy.
    5. I am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you as well.
    6. For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands,
    7. for God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.
    8. Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God,
    9. who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,
    10. and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

  13. #33
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,671
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    117
    Thanked in
    63 Posts

    Re: Care to respond to this critique?

    This is one of the best Pauline passages on Grace from eternity and it completely harmonizes with Eph. 1. This Grace was/is MANIFESTED in time, not GIVEN in time!

    I'm thinking right now on the whole concept of 'sanctification from eternity' and will soon write about it.

    --Bob
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst ... 2

Similar Threads

  1. The just shall live by faith - from Christ's faith[fulness] to ours
    By solegrace in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-16-09, 06:55 AM
  2. False Gospel?
    By Nicholas Heath in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 05-26-06, 11:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •