The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Old Testament Laws under New Testament grace?

Colin,<br><br>At the risk of feeding your obsession with Reconstructionism I'll answer but a couple of your fractured comments:<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]But if you want to call the puritans "extremists", perhaps you should write a letter to the Banner of Truth and inform them of that.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Please cite where I have ever made a summary judgment upon the Puritans wherein I called them all "extremists"! Your typical distortion of what people have written in opposition to Reconstructionism and your demeanor in its defense can be clearly seen here (and myriad other places) for these are my exact words, which you yourself quoted:<blockquote>Cromwell is well-known also for his extremism <span style="background-color:yellow;">in certain practices</span>.</blockquote> As everyone who can read can plainly see, my comment was in regard to one man, Oliver Cromwell and qualified to "certain practices". This can hardly be construed as a sweeping charge of "extremism" of Puritanism. <blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]No Reconstructionist has ever "ignored the uniqueness of the nation of Israel". That is a typical strawman accusation no different than the one raised by the typical Arminian who falsely claims that Calvinism "ignores" evangelism or human responsibility.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Thanks for making one of my points in my latter assessment of some of the protagonists of Reconstructionism, you in particular. Everything in objection is nothing but a strawman, despite your list of those who you say have given a fair critique of Reconstructionism. I have read Frame's critiques and his is somewhat "sympathetic" to your cause. No doubt the others have similar comments and thus this would explain their making your "okay guys" list.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Where did I ever say that the "vast majority of Calvinists" are "worse than Dispensationalists"??</font><hr></blockquote><p>You said that in this reply to Joe where you wrote:<blockquote>But modern Calvinist's contempt for the judicial laws of the Bible only rivals the contempt that modern Dispensationalists have for the Decalogue itself. In this, modern Calvinism and Dispensationalism are the secular humanist's best friends, since all three groups are strong opponents of God's judicial laws for today.</blockquote>As everyone can plainly see, your castigation is actually far worse than what I stated it was!<br><br>In reply to one of my "assessments" where I wrote:<blockquote>3. Everyone who does not embrace this theology is in serious error.</blockquote>You responded with:<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]And what do you say about those who do not accept Calvinism or covenant theology?</font><hr></blockquote><p>Another favorite tactic you are known to use is seen here. Are you serious? Would you have us believe that those who reject the perpetuity and binding obligation to keep the Mosaic civil/judicial laws on par with those who reject the doctrines of sovereign grace? That's just plain fanaticism.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]I've never called you or anyone else "ignorant" or "unread", or "backslidden". The latter term was used by me only to describe the System of Amillennialism and not the person who holds to it.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Oh really? Here are a few of your remarks posted on this Board:<blockquote>Joe, I really think you should stop trying to pretend that you know what you are talking about. Its obvious that you have very little knowledge of what Reconstructionism actually teaches. You have about as much knowledge of Reconstructionism as Dave Hunt has of Calvinism. [from this message]</blockquote><blockquote>[written to Joe here] One thing is quite obvious, you certainly do not behave like you've read anything by Sinclair Ferguson or the Puritans he seeks to emulate.</blockquote>There were a few similar statements but I really didn't have the motivation to try and track them down. As to the latter remark re: backslidden, I find that almost humorous. I have yet to see a doctrine backslide as opposed to those who espouse it. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/igiveup.gif" alt="igiveup" title="igiveup[/img]<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]BTW since you have publicly called Cromwell an "extremist", when are you going to do the moral thing and contact Sprinkle Publications . . .</font><hr></blockquote><p>I've already exposed your misquoting and/or twisting of what I actually wrote above. So your comments are null.<br><br>In His Grace,