A trailer for SOP released today that names many contributors to the project. Among them are many egalitarians (like Du Mez and Barr), slanderers of the brethren (Moore), proponents of CRT (Anyabwile), and various confessional P&R ministers. (2/10)
My question is Paul’s from 2 Corinthians 6:14: “What fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?” (3/10)
The cause of anti-Wilson is not so righteous that it justifies sin and doctrinal compromise along the way. The truth will not be vindicated by mixing it with falsehood. The sheep will not be protected by confusing them, misleading them, or exposing them to false teaching. (4/10)
What kind of sin and compromise am I talking about? Here is SOP (presumably Bell) promoting what is a direct attack on biblical and Reformed church discipline, which demands that accusations of sin be proven in church courts (which necessarily consist of qualified male elders). (5/10)
These folks can’t be confessional and Reformed while promoting ecclesiastical anarchy. Discipline is the third mark of the true church, and a core biblical and confessional doctrine (see Matt 18, 1 Cor 5-6, Belgic 29-32, WCF 24 and 30, the various BCOs and member vows) (6/10)
In a related development, Nick from Bell's former podcast Guilt Grace Gratitude (sort of) responded to me on Saturday, claiming that GGG has nothing to do with Bell or anything else related to this matter. (7/10)
I appreciate hearing from him on this. The problem is that Bell (both in May and now) has claimed that Nick was the one responsible for GGG representing Bell as a pastor, and also that Danny Hyde and OURC had his credentials. (8/10)
Either GGG was/is involved, or Bell is not telling the truth, but both cannot be true. So far there has been no further clarification from Bell or GGG. It would be nice to clear this up. (9/10)
In summary, we have more problems and questions now than we started with. SOP seems to be speeding towards release with no brakes but we still don't know the truth and men who should know better and could do something don't appear to be taking action. (10/10)
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm going to watch this. I might even comment on it.
5:00ish
I get not wanting to call it R (for Radical) 2K but there's also a need to reckon with why that nomenclature has caught on and is so popular. I say this as someone who does not prefer it--I like E (for Escondido) 2K.
7:00ish
But for whatever definition problems E2K has, CN has vastly more, as it seems to be a much more broad movement. George's is pretty good, I just wonder how many in the "camp" are content with it.
Happy Windows 10 death day to those who celebrate.
If you've been caught up in Microsoft's latest planned obsolescence scheme, before buying a new computer (bad), workaround hackery (worse), or running an unsupported system (worst), maybe try Linux.
Mint is a good distribution for beginners. linuxmint.com
Mint is what I started with and is what I still run on my work laptop. I now run CachyOS on my home desktop () which is a bit more complicated but offers a bit more power and customization.cachyos.org
You might be surprised to learn that many modern Reformed and Reformed-adjacent folks reject or at least seriously doubt @james_d_baird's premise #1, "Government must promote the public good." (a 🧵, 1/13)
While this seems to be a fairly clear idea derived from texts like Romans 13 and has been maintained consistently in our confessional documents (even under American revisions), the modern two kingdoms paradigm casts doubt upon it. (2/13)
I first ran into this in a journal article by David VanDrunen (one of the major movers behind modern 2K) some years ago (before I was even his student). He makes similar arguments in Politics After Christendom, his 2020 book. (3/13)
Peter quickly turned what was supposed to be a project about Wilson and the CREC into a smear campaign against the OPC (7 episodes of it). Is this because I and others in the OPC tried to hold him accountable for things which he has now essentially admitted are true?
I'm noticing over the last few days a lot of attempts from within the PCA to justify DeYoung's actions in the name of "decorum" and adherence to Robert's Rules. I'm not buying it. A 🧵. 1/12
The thing with assembly decorum and Robert's, they are not good ends in themselves. This might sound semi-blasphemous from a Presbyterian, but hear me out... 2/12
RRO and the decorum it and other rules require of ecclesiastical assemblies are tools. Like any tools, their value and goodness depends on what they are used for. They are not, for instance, morally binding in themselves. They are "good servants , but terrible masters." 3/12