Friday, July 10, 2009

Funny, but worth contemplating.

Quotation below- Not me, but still worth thinking upon.
As I have said before, I am neither a Van Tilian or Clarkian, but lean more to Clark and Scripturalism.
I also appreciate Bahnsen, who I personally believe was much clearer than Van Til........Tartanarmy
Although there is clearly humor here, the subject of Cornelius Van Til's heresy is deadly serious. VanTil's theology of irresolvable paradox is a heresy matrix. In my opinion, it gave birth to Federal Vision. I do not think it is any coincidence that almost all, if not all, of the proponents of Federal Vision are Van Tilians.

Gordon H. Clark tried to warn Presbyterians back in the 1940's about the heresy of Van Til, but the Orthodox Presbyterian Church wouldn't listen, even after they ruled in Gordon H. Clark's favor in what has been called the Clark / Van Til Controversy. It wasn't long before the irrationalism of Van Til made it possible for the Covenant of Works to be dismissed from Westminster Seminary, Pennsylvania.

But the Covenant of Works was not all that was dismissed from that seminary.

Norman Shepherd, another paradoxical theologian, would also be dismissed--for teaching justification by faith and works! Cornelius Van Til and Greg Bahnsen would both publicly defend Shepherd's heretical theology, but still no one paid attention.

So now we have Federal Vision, and still there are some who can't figure out what the source of this heresy might be.


Joe said...

It seems odd to me to make such a joke about what you believe to be damning. Maybe you should re-read Newtons advice

Anonymous said...

Look sir...

I have a google alert set so that whenever someone mentions Dr. Greg Bahnsen on the net, I hear about it...(at least most of the time.)

That's how I found your blog here.

As a "Van Tillian" I suppose I felt compelled to voice an opposing opinion.

As a fellow blogger, I know that it's often compelling to present forceful rhetoric like the kind you posted here...but I have to ask for a measure of grace on your part.

I strive to be as honest as possible, especially when defending the faith in the manner that I've learned from Dr. Bahnsen and Dr. Van Til.

So while I can respect your disagreements...I guess I'm just asking for a measure of grace towards your "misguided" brethren.

I have an honest respect for Dr. Clark as well, and don't mean or you any ill-will.

By way of closing, I could propose a very brief illustration in the hopes that it may highlight an interesting thought...

Is it wrong to claim that finite man can never count to the end of an infinite set of numbers? I'm still growing and learning...but for now...the Lord has lead me to the teachings of Dr. Van Til...and I can't shake that intellectually...

And that's as honest as I can be.

PuritanReformed said...

LOL... this is very funny.

Mark Farnon (Tartanarmy) said...

Joe, I freely admit I am no John Newton, but the joke/humor is just another vehicle used to point to truth, that's all.
If you care to engage the subject, I will promise to try my best to take Newton's good counsel.

I also think you ought to take counsel, as I do not damn anyone, let alone make such damning anything near the context of humor or joking.

There is nothing funny about error though.


Mark Farnon (Tartanarmy) said...

Shotgun, thanks for your comments.
I am always a bit worried when people are imbalanced theologically, and if you really do have a Google alert set up to comments made re Bahnsen, I find such behavior a little strange if not an imbalance.

Most, if not nearly all, of the people I have argued with in a variety of contexts, always seem to have this one narrow issue,a pet peeve if you will, to which they defend with their lives.
This "One trick Pony" that tends to define everything they do.

Now, I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and simply ask you to read further here on my blog, and you may be surprised at what you find!

I try to be balanced and surely fail many times, but if you read my blog here, you shall find a vast array of subject matter, and if I do lean strongly in one particular area, I suppose it would be the area of the atonement.

You will also find right here on this blog a whole series of videos from Bahnsen, whom I have a very high regard for.

Kirby L. Wallace said...

Shotgun: Is it wrong to claim that finite man can never count to the end of an infinite set of numbers?

Of course not.

It is, however, wrong to refuse to count to ten.

Mark Farnon (Tartanarmy) said...

Shotgun, if you are still around, are you serious with the gist of the following post on your site?