Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Amos Long, This One Is For You

SOMETHING IS EATING COMMENTS! I did read them. In fact, my reply is right where you intended to leave yours.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is not infallible, obviously. It never claimed to be. And it is not consonant with the teachings of holy mother Church, so in those respects, it cannot be true.

I do, however, accord it the respect of being the confessional standard for the balance of the English-speaking Reformed world, even if its authority is "derivative" (and that's not a principled distinction, anyway).

However, I do believe that men ought not content themselves with a general repentance, but to repent of particular sins particularly. That's Catholic truth, if I ever heard it. And so, you put this chapter together with XI--read it real close--and then go, "Wut?" because it's a dilemma. If the Father can't see our sin, per chapter XI, he can't mete out consequences for failure to persevere in XV. I think antinomianism is the most logical position to take, given Sola Fide and imputed righteousness. The fact that a good Reformed Christian would reject the most logical position is proof that the doctrine is false.

No comments: