The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Changes to the WCF

Sorry about the loaded questions, Joe. I hope none of them are deemed inappropriate. It's just that that's what I've been thinking about. . .

Joe said:

"IMO there should be a year set to go forward from and then begin there. For instance beginning in 1900 and forward ….. This would cover the last hundred years or so and give some needed context to many of the problems—i.e. post modernism, etc. AS needed, and since error tends to repeat itself in different forms and names, the previous years (prior to 1900) could be added over time, as needed."

I really like this idea. Not only does it set parameters, it allows the examiners to follow the related threads and the developmental trends of the various issues being examined and addressed.

Joe said:

"As far as doing this denom by denom it would pose many problems as there would be multiple entries for each false doctrine. Of course, uniting all these denoms is not without its problems as well … However, the focus should be on a unified apologetic of the Christian faith that is Reformed in its theology."

I see the strengths and the problems with both approaches but I am with you that the focus should be on a unified apologetic of the Christian (Reformed) faith. That would sort of reflect the intents and focus of the Westminster magisterium, wouldn't it?

I'll have to go back and look at the brochure again. There were many names I was familiar with and there were several I had never heard before.

BTW, are you going to be able to attend? I sure hope someone from the Highway gets to go; wouldn't it be cool if someone could do nightly updates, a la Tim Challies and Doug McHone at the Shepherd's Conference?