Federal Vision Theology Equals Roman Catholic Theology

[Robert R. Higby]

A link for your consideration.

http://cantuar.blogspot.com/2007/05/...al-vision.html

Comments?

[Highlyfavored]

In the last paragraph of the article the author says:

Ultimately, I think that younger Presbyterians will gravitate toward what the Federal Vision offers. Many will sink their teeth into it and many will find it wanting. Many will discover that the Catholic Church is their true home, and many will discover her in a great moment of joy. This Federal Vision is really only a peek into the keyhole of the Catholic Church. The Federal Visionist has a vision of the beautiful things inside, but they have not yet appreciated the warmth of a true home.

I think this is an astute observation on his part.

As for his observations on the adherants to the Federal Vision he is correct. The thing is is that those who are reformed and do not subscribe to Fed Vision are as lost in the muck as the Fed Visionists and the Catholics. They may suscribe to TULIP, but in the end their god is only as sovereign as their traditions allow.

Interesting article Bob.

[Robert R. Higby]

Agreed, those Presbyterians who see something wrong with the FV, because of the traditions they are bound to defend, cannot successfully oppose it or have a strong conviction of all-pervading gospel truth in contrast to it.

This thing has already stole the hearts and minds of the majority of clergy and elders in the PCA and OPC denominations. The false teaching it is based on rages unchecked in their seminaries. The stand taken against it by the PCA General Assembly is a 'dog and pony' show that is going nowhere; the young and ascending sages 'in the know' chuckle in their smirking smarts that the GA statement is a last desperate attempt of a bunch of dying theolgians to stop the FV revolution. Here in the Missouri Presbytery, anyone 'clergy' or 'laity' opposed to the FV is a silenced third-class citizen in the churches who dare not speak up.

The Catholic author of this article is correct; neither sides have a home at all in the present controversy. The FV proponents will only have a home when their view becomes the predominant and only acceptable position; those who disbelieve FV have no firm grounding in the advances of gospel truth and thus nowhere to take a stand.

[Highlyfavored]

The FV proponents will only have a home when their view becomes the predominant and only acceptable position; those who disbelieve FV have no firm grounding in the advances of gospel truth and thus nowhere to take a stand.

I would be surprised if it takes longer than 20 years for the FV position in the reformed churches to become the predominate view. It does indeed seem that all roads in the "church" lead back to the whore eventually.

[Saint Nicholas]

I would be surprised if it takes longer than 20 years for the FV position in the reformed churches to become the predominate view. It does indeed seem that all roads in the "church" lead back to the whore eventually.

After reading the article, I was in no way shocked that such a view could be embraced by protestants.

These are judgements against protestants and evengelicals.

With the infiltration, acceptance, and success of the charistmatic movement [neo-Roman Catholic mystical spirituality], in many protestant circles, it would not take to long, and not be unlikely, for protestants and evengelicals to embrace just about anything that comes their way.

This FV movement will succeed because God has blinded the non-biblical clergy, along with their laity.

There has also been another movement brewing and afoot for the past 20 years or so, called the "syncretist" movement. This movement promulgates the notion that ALL wordly religions have the truth, and are paths to God.

For religio/politico reasons these movements are neccessary for one world control of the masses. The utopian thinkers have it all planned out. This utopia not only profits world bankers and their puppet politicians, but the clergy will also benefit in adding people to their membership roles, and money to their coffers.

The children of the reformation never fully removed the Roman heresies from their midst. These heresies like cancerous leaven have grown and ripened. Thus these are judgements upon them.

The main cancers are sacramentilism,...Clergy/laity distinctions,...infralapsarian...sabbitarianism... off course there are more.

And true, it all leads back to the great whore. False Christianity will evolve into a cage for every foul and unclean bird. Every human being can be called a child of God.

Nicholas

[Robert R. Higby]

I agree, Nicholas. I think that some people's view of the great apostasy (in my estimation, the equivalent of the great whore as you all know) is tied mainly to the RCC. That is a GROSS distortion of the facts AT BEST. The apostasy started over 900 years before the RCC even existed (around 1000 A.D. when the East-West split took place).

These men today do not want to join the RCC, they don't like some of the EXTERNAL RULES (i.e., no married priests) and SUPERSTITIONS. But their theology of salvation is the same. Plus they absolutely love a theology of worldly glory and church growth instead of the truth of the gospel; numeric prosperity in terms of wealth and increased church membership will win over the gospel every time! The only way to support such an agenda is to re-invent the false gospel of the apostasy espoused by Rome, Eastern Orthodoxy, cults, and free-will nonconformists.

In the Missouri Presbytery here, the FV is ALREADY the predominate view! Dissenters who speak out against it are third-class citizens in the 'church' AT BEST! Ditto for California, Louisiana, and certain Presbyteries in the eastern U.S. And I may be too limited in my view of how much has been swallowed up by this opiate of churchianity!

These are indeed judgments of God against churches and leaders who love their own earthly advancement more than the truth. And there is no repentance possible; it has all gone too far. God is going to prosper them in the wrong things but snatch what is left of the gospel from them.

[Saint Nicholas]

[quote=Robert R. Higby;53756]

I agree, Nicholas. I think that some people's view of the great apostasy (in my estimation, the equivalent of the great whore as you all know) is tied mainly to the RCC. That is a GROSS distortion of the facts AT BEST. The apostasy started over 900 years before the RCC even existed (around 1000 A.D. when the East-West split took place).

Correct Robert. The great apostasy cannot ONLY be tied to the RCC, because Pre-Christ Israel was a great whore also.

The great whore is inclusive of Apostate Israel and Apostate Christianity, including all forms of Christianity that rebel and reject the true Gospel of Grace Alone. One does not need be literally tied to the Roman Church to be part of the Great Whore.

[Eileen]

The main cancers are sacramentilism,...Clergy/laity distinctions,...infralapsarian...sabbitarianism... off course there are more.

Nicholas,
I often get too emotional when the ‘whore’ is discussed because I still go to a reformed church and I always take these things to heart and flee the discussion. Then it takes me some time to think on them and when they continue to bother me I know it is time to understand instead of flee. If anyone has a mind to discuss them with me I have a few questions.

I understand the cancers that are spoken of above but I wonder if there could be some expansion on the Clergy/laity reference because that is the one that I don’t understand. Is it the traditions of the ‘church’ in regards to the pastor and that some of those traditions run along the same line as the pope distinction that is the cancer? That one man has rule, that one man has the authority over the sheep? How do we distinguish what are the God given gifts of teachers, pastors, elders, etc. from the abuse of those gifts? How do we bring the whole idea of the NT ‘ekklesia’ into today and use the whole idea of those men given to the ‘ekklesia’ for our edification?

Is that where there is basic abuse, in that those roles have assumed authority and power where it is not God given and if so could someone draw that out a bit?

I think that some people's view of the great apostasy (in my estimation, the equivalent of the great whore as you all know) is tied mainly to the RCC. That is a GROSS distortion of the facts AT BEST. The apostasy started over 900 years before the RCC even existed (around 1000 A.D. when the East-West split took place).

Bob,
Would you explain the great apostasy and what East-West split that you are talking about? Most today simply do teach that the great whore is the RCC and leave it there, which is certainly what I have always been taught. Why do we say that when people want to depart the truth that the road always leads back to Rome? Was that the pinnacle of the apostasy?

I think of Acts 20:29 and Paul’s saying that after his departing grievous wolves would enter in, not sparing the flock. I guess the great apostasy would be the beginning of grievous wolves distorting the simplicity of the Gospel, changing it, adding to it in any way. So in this instance the FV would be yet another facet of that apostasy which continues to plague the institutional ‘church’. I know this has been discussed many times but I find it a difficult area because of the traditional teaching I have had for 20 years nevertheless, the Lord continues to cause me to question and to search.

Eileen~

[Robert R. Higby]

On the falsehood of the clergy/laity distinction, here is a link:

http://www.ntcommunity.com/HTML%20Pa...aminister.html

In other areas, Jon is unreliable on the truth of the absolute sovereignty of God in his purposes of grace and wrath transcendant of any supposed 'fall'--but this article is very good.

Bob,
Would you explain the great apostasy and what East-West split that you are talking about? Most today simply do teach that the great whore is the RCC and leave it there, which is certainly what I have always been taught. Why do we say that when people want to depart the truth that the road always leads back to Rome? Was that the pinnacle of the apostasy?

I think of Acts 20:29 and Paul’s saying that after his departing grievous wolves would enter in, not sparing the flock. I guess the great apostasy would be the beginning of grievous wolves distorting the simplicity of the Gospel, changing it, adding to it in any way. So in this instance the FV would be yet another facet of that apostasy which continues to plague the institutional ‘church’. I know this has been discussed many times but I find it a difficult area because of the traditional teaching I have had for 20 years nevertheless, the Lord continues to cause me to question and to search.

Acts 20:29 and Paul's statement in Thessalonians on the mystery of iniquity do explain the apostasy. Since the first manifestation of the whore, apostate Judaism, had already entered the Jerusalem Way (Acts 15:1ff, Gal. 1 & 2), Paul stated that the mystery of iniquity was already at work. The Judaizers were already tormenting gospel believers with a FALSE gospel of entire obedience to the Old Covenant as a condition of salvation.

The first major doctrine of the apostasy outside of the Judaistic heresy (though rooted firmly in it) was neo-Nomism. The so-called 'church fathers' are the defenders of this gospel-denying falsehood. It has always reared its ugly head throughout history and continues to this day; the FV teaching is full of it. Basically, it is a teaching of assurance of salvation grounded in obedience to a NEW law--not Judaism but a system of justification by law and character that replaces it. One of the greatest false prophets and enemies of God of all time, the Shepherd of Hermas, made this heretical teaching sacrosanct in the minds of professed believers in the first few centuries after Christ. He was the greatest of the false prophets; the so-called 'fathers' of the 'church' believed he was a holy sage and true prophet of God.

The fruit of the early Pharisaic and Judaistic heresy was ultimately Islam; it is the most severe manifestation of the great apostasy--far more than Eastern Orthodoxy or RCC.

The fact that the Roman Catholic Church did not exist until around 1000 is a matter of history; that is when the bishop of Rome and his followers split from the Eastern 'church' and formed the doctrine of a single pope (mentor) ruling all of organized 'Christianity'. But the false doctrines of the apostasy had already been present for over 900 years at that point!

I hope this helps to clarify; we can discuss more later. --Bob

[Whammer]

Eileen, another real good article by Jon is also here http://housechurch.org:johnzens/ST_Z...ldingBody.html
This is on the clergy/laity distinction, and I like his ecclesiology, but as Bob rightly said, there are the other areas like God's sovereignty, duty faith and the universal call that are too great to ignore as false doctrine. I like Jon's idea of "community" and despite some of the really weird housechurches out there, that concept is the most scriptural in my opinion.

[Highlyfavored]

Nicholas,
[COLOR=black]I often get too emotional when the ‘whore’ is discussed because I still go to a reformed church and I always take these things to heart and flee the discussion. Then it takes me some time to think on them and when they continue to bother me I know it is time to understand instead of flee.

Eileen, I think it's great that you still question things even though it's not always comfortable.

My wife and I went to churches with reformed doctrine for a long time. What we found over and over again was that they where not biblical. This got us looking into what truths the church actually embraces. What we have found is a distinction where high grace is substituted for the pastorate/elders to maintain a position of control instead of following the truth at all costs.

Most today simply do teach that the great whore is the RCC and leave it there, which is certainly what I have always been taught. Why do we say that when people want to depart the truth that the road always leads back to Rome?

"All roads lead back to Rome" IMO is just a figure of speech that simply states if one is within the church, the road they are on leads back to the whore (the ellect are exempt from this). Rome is so blatantly visible that it shouts, "I am the standard of falsities."

Was that the pinnacle of the apostasy?

I think that within the reformed church there exists the belief that Rome is the culprit. Obviously, from statements made by Paul about grievous wolves and by John about antichrists, it looks as though the very foundation that was laid for the church was being gulped from within and destroyed. I don't believe there is a pinnacle of apostacy, I think it has existed, does exist and will continue until the end of the age.

I think of Acts 20:29 and Paul’s saying that after his departing grievous wolves would enter in, not sparing the flock. I guess the great apostasy would be the beginning of grievous wolves distorting the simplicity of the Gospel, changing it, adding to it in any way. So in this instance the FV would be yet another facet of that apostasy which continues to plague the institutional ‘church’. I know this has been discussed many times but I find it a difficult area because of the traditional teaching I have had for 20 years nevertheless, the Lord continues to cause me to question and to search.

Eileen~

As I look at the reformers: Calvin, Luther, etc., I believe none of them went far enough. They should have pitched the baby out with the bath water. Instead, they went back to Rome for their standards: robes, pulpits, monologue sermons with no dialogue, an "us" and "them" between clergy and laity. This was blatantly stupid. However, revelation is progressive and it is my contention that all who are elect should and will eventually leave the organized church because it is all part of the whore.

[Whammer]

One of the greatest false prophets and enemies of God of all time, the Shepherd of Hermas, made this heretical teaching sacrosanct in the minds of professed believers in the first few centuries after Christ. He was the greatest of the false prophets; the so-called 'fathers' of the 'church' believed he was a holy sage and true prophet of God.

--Bob

I hadnt read this "shepherd of hermas" since a number of years ago, I just read a portion of it again, talk about trampling the blood of Christ, what garbage!

[Robert R. Higby]

Right Brian! Yet I have not read even ONE well-published Protestant scholar in all history who will admit this! This fact shows us that their reverence of the 'fathers' is SO sacrosanct and so all-absorbing to their understanding of 'church history' that they can't see the truth on this matter if it knocked 'em in the face with a big stone!

I lit on this fact in my seminary class on Patristic Theology clear back in 1980. The class yielded my best grade of all seminary classes that I took over two years, only because the famine of gospel teaching in the 'fathers' caused me to study like I never had before in all my life!

[Eileen]

Thanks to all for the responses!

Bob,
It certainly makes much more sense when you see it from the beginning and understand what we are discussing. Apostasy was a scary word that I had to get past but I see that we are talking about Truth and the apostasy under scrutiny is when the Gospel/Grace is distorted in doctrine! Do you include erroneous ‘church’ practices under the terminology of apostasy too or just doctrine! That, of course, means that people are certainly apostate in their own beliefs, not only the organized ‘church’. I see why then that you encourage us to measure everything by the Gospel.

I read some Shepherd of Hermas also and was literally blown away by the focus on law and character and see why you called him one of the greatest of the false prophets and enemies of God. Wow, I was stunned! This is called The Way, would that be the same reference you made to The Jerusalem Way?

Clergy/Laity

I read both articles (the link to yours Bryan doesn’t connect but I found it at the site) and I find that both articles reveal the way that the ‘church’ operates today, be it reformed or not, much of it not found in Scripture. We at least do have a question/answer time after sermon but it is very limited and if you get out of line (*smile*) or too intense (which is my propensity) there is much nervousness and you are cut off rather quickly.

The articles give a glimpse into what ‘assemble’ truly can and should mean to the whole body and that the whole body is sadly neglected in their God given gifts and their wisdom in the organized church of today. I found the solutions to be clearly outlined but I know without a doubt that will never be in an ‘organized’ institution, certainly not the one I attend, but I specifically liked the following from ‘What is a minister’?

Begin a new methodology of truth-seeking and truth-speaking. Instead of "clergy" spoon-feeding the "laity," study important issues together from the Word with a view toward finding Christ’s will and acting upon it.

Adopt a teaching style where dialogue occurs and questions/insights from others are encouraged.

I personally love to hear the word preached rightly but have never known it to be the learning tool used by God in my life, which has come by personal study; it is simply the joy of hearing the Word together with the saints, the body! And that was the focus of Bryan’s article “One man or One another” which was focused on the priority of the body and not the one man! Oh how often the sheep are neglected in that very way grieves me.

Rome is so blatantly visible that it shouts, "I am the standard of falsities”…
However, revelation is progressive and it is my contention that all who are elect should and will eventually leave the organized church because it is all part of the whore

I agree Greg that so often eyes are blinded at the similarities between Rome and Reformed and I agree that we have yet to come as far as needed. I’m obviously not fully convinced that the answer for me is to leave the organized church, I find to assemble is something I need and there isn’t another option at this time. Perhaps the Lord will bring some likeminded saints to have a house church, I would be most willing.

Eileen~

[Robert R. Higby]

To answer this question of Eileen:

Do you include erroneous ‘church’ practices under the terminology of apostasy too or just doctrine!

This would certainly depend on the practice under discussion. All error does not cross the line into apostasy in and of itself. If you have specific examples of particular traditions of external 'law' or practice I can respond to those. --Bob

[Eileen]

To answer this question of Eileen:

Do you include erroneous ‘church’ practices under the terminology of apostasy too or just doctrine!

This would certainly depend on the practice under discussion. All error does not cross the line into apostasy in and of itself. If you have specific examples of particular traditions of external 'law' or practice I can respond to those. --Bob

The first thing that popped into my mind was the practice that only a minister could serve the Lord's Supper.

I guess the same could be asked of baptizing too.

Or the practice of the invocation and benediction can only be done by an ordained minister.
Those are a few that came to mind.

Eileen~

[Robert R. Higby]

These practices are 'symptoms' of false teaching but I would not call them apostasy just because of what they are. Can many of the apostate doctrines we have talked about lead to such practices--YES. And they did. --Bob

[Dans la Musique]

Just as a response to some of the thoughts expressed here:

My problem with the standard worship service is that it does not promote commune or unity. It would appear so in that everyone is doing the same things at the same time, singing, reading, communion, etc.
The reason why it hinders unity is because individual believers are given no room to share the Spirit. The practices of worship are all directed and planned by select, entrusted individuals. This makes it very difficult to hear an original and personal confession from the other people in the congregation. Even communion doesn't leave room for true commune. Usually I don't know the people sitting around me, and I rarely get a chance because people will rarely spontaneously talk about the gospel without supervision and direction by a clergy.
A typical conversation I have with someone clergy or laity goes like this:

Hi, whats your name?
How long have you been coming to church?
Do you go to school/work?
Nice to meet you.

End conversation.

[greatfulgrace]

Just as a response to some of the thoughts expressed here:

My problem with the standard worship service is that it does not promote commune or unity. It would appear so in that everyone is doing the same things at the same time, singing, reading, communion, etc.
The reason why it hinders unity is because individual believers are given no room to share the Spirit. The practices of worship are all directed and planned by select, entrusted individuals. This makes it very difficult to hear an original and personal confession from the other people in the congregation. Even communion doesn't leave room for true commune. Usually I don't know the people sitting around me, and I rarely get a chance because people will rarely spontaneously talk about the gospel without supervision and direction by a clergy.
A typical conversation I have with someone clergy or laity goes like this:

Hi, whats your name?
How long have you been coming to church?
Do you go to school/work?
Nice to meet you.

End conversation.

Well I am smiling because that is my experience of so called fellowship.

[greatfulgrace]

Regarding "Federal Vision Theology" could someone please be so kind as to point me in the right direction, with a link perhaps, so that I may familiarize myself with this particular theology.

No need with RC Theology as I am extremely well read on that subject - heaving bookshelves an all!

Thank you,

greatfulgrace