@ReallyOldLife Also worth noting that all of the divines regarded the baptists as radical anabaptists which some Reformed writers conveniently overlook for pietist reasons.
@RScottClark I think you call that narrative a sort of pseudo history. Reminds me of the landmark movement of the 19th century, where every heresy was secretly baptist in church history.
The level of historical conspiracy some of these people are on is mind-boggling, but just remember a lot of very normal people believe just as stupid things (Dan Brown history of the church etc)
Protestantism's deepest assumption is that Christianity went wrong almost immediately and stayed wrong for 1,500 years. That's not a small claim. It's the entire premise of the movement.
"Culturally rootless, anonymous, bewildered, bored, badly prepared for higher studies, other-directed, prey to fad and foible, presently duped by almost any unscrupulous or self-deceived ideologue..."
--Russell Kirk in 1978 on the plight of higher education students
Dispensationalism—by definition—is not Reformed. The Reformed tradition is confessional, covenantal, and rooted in a unified redemptive-historical hermeneutic, as expressed in the historic confessions (e.g., Westminster Standards, Three Forms of Unity, Anglican Formularies). Dispensationalism, by contrast, rests on a fundamentally different hermeneutical framework—most notably its strict Israel–church distinction and its rejection of covenant theology.
For that reason, the category “Reformed Dispensationalism” is not a meaningful theological synthesis but a contradiction in terms. One may appreciate certain doctrinal emphases (e.g., soteriology) within dispensational circles, but adopting the dispensational system places one outside the bounds of the Reformed confessional tradition.
Accordingly, The Master’s Seminary should not be described as Reformed. It neither subscribes to, teaches, nor confesses any of the historic Reformed standards that define the tradition.
Wesley was not a reformer, he lived in a different century. Zwingli taught the perpetual virginity of Mary. Calvin accepted it without a dogmatic position. It was pretty mainstream to hold this position among Lutherans and Reformed in the 16th and 17th centuries.
When it comes to the perpetual virginity of Mary, do you agree with the Catholic view or with the view of Protestant reformers Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, and John Wesley?
@agirlnamedMary@chris_calvi I think this more so highlights the issue of independent seminaries. Should seminaries be connected to a denomination is probably the real question, since men are allowed to graduate with the degree who don’t subscribe to the confessional standards.
In a recent piece I wrote for @ActonInstitute I discuss one of the forerunner of the liberal tradition from Poland in the 16th century. Check it out here!
https://t.co/oxHafhWMSz
This may be true but not in the way she thinks. Both Jonathan Edwards and Benjamin Franklin were more captive to Enlightenment rationalism than confessional/liturgical Protestantism.
Dr. R. Scott Clark, Professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Westminster Seminary been issuing warnings since 2008 on his website alone. That's nearly 20 years of "Hey folks, DW is not someone to listen to..." https://t.co/tSEQwAoLdo