Charlie Ray offers his fair and even-handed review. http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2010/08/youtube-r-scott-clarks-attack-on.html.
This scribe places little credence in Collier's review. We are High Churchmen at Reformation Anglicanism.
Charlie Ray offers his fair and even-handed review. http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2010/08/youtube-r-scott-clarks-attack-on.html.
This scribe places little credence in Collier's review. We are High Churchmen at Reformation Anglicanism.
8 comments:
I call this cat "the learned Beetle" because anyone who has spent 5 minutes at the Heidelblog or read any of my books knows that this is ludicrous.
He's reacting to an expression that is contained in both the Westminster Confession AND the Belgic Confession.
Were I the sacerdotalist he says, why should I have spent the last 10 years refuting the federal vision and defending the Reformation.
Why would a high church Anglican give airtime to this cat's lunacy?
Dr. Clark, a good point, to wit, giving airtime to this cat. Noted.
I do post some loons here not because of support for them (we've posted some Benny Hinn materials too), but to expose them.
I've read HB routinely and followed the FV issues and understand your point.
Let the readers take note that this scribe concurs with Dr. Clark.
Didn't pay much mind to Collier nor should any reader.
RA has an high view of the Church, the Word read (alot, e.g. Cranmer), the Word sung (as in Psalms, canonical canticles), the Word preached (e.g. like R.C. Sproul or Jim Boice), the Word prayed (as in the 1662 BCP, essentially) and the due and right administration of two Dominical Sacraments. Dr. Clark is "Reformed" as in the Three Forms of Unity. This scribe has no issue here with Dr. Clark.
This is a legitimate hit from Dr. Clark for airing this poor hit-piece by the "learned Beetle." Dr. Clark is correct. From one perspective, posting it was "giving him airtime." From another perspective, we inspect the Bug.
In fact, when we reviewed and posted the "Beetle," we didn't even use anti-bug spray. We felt it un-necessary, given that the "little bug" was like a "beetle on a mountainside." In defense of RA, we did summarily dismiss the Bug.
The reader is best advised to follow Dr. Clark's blog and read his books. Dr. Clark is routinely read here--favourably--and is on the bloglist to the right side of RA.
There have been several visits to this post. We leave it in place.
Having said that, we stand behind Dr. Clark's complaint fully.
Buy Dr. Clark's books for a scholarly review of Reformed Theology.
Date 16 Nov 2010 and our earlier caveats stand. Again, buy and read an excellent scholar, Dr. Clark, not this "red bug" illustriously self-identifying as the "Red Beetle."
I have my differences with Scott Clark, but "Red Beetle" is being slanderous in this video, like MANY others. "Red Beetle" or "Monty Collier" is a real enemy of all that is good and righteous. He attacks many theologians (including myself, Clark, Piper, etc). He is a slanderous man who calls himself a Reformed Christian, but his fruit is that of an accuser of the brethren.
I encourage all who hold to truth to not only ignore him, but warn the brothers of his slanderous ways.
Clark is not a Jesuit, he's just a bit dim regarding biblical doctrine, and so he defaults to Romanist, sacerdotal lines of thought.
Concur, not impressed by Mr. Beetle.
As to Dr. Clark reverting "to sacerdotalism," I find him to be consonent with Westminster on the sacraments, thoughtfully and sagely so.
I've had my dealings with MC. Then exposed him publicly and form that point on he ignored me.
The letter which I referred to on video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBVKll5yVrI
Post a Comment