Darryl G. Hart to Mark Van Der Molen:
Mark, you mean the overture written by some who accused Westminster California of Pelagianism?
(Of course, Hart thinks that it is absurd to suggest that Westminster California might be guilty of Pelagianism, so this is his attempt to portray the authors of the overture as kooks.)
Mark responds to DGH:
Darryl, would you supply some evidence that some ministers made this accusation?
(Rather than rushing to judgment, Mark asks Hart for the evidence.)
DGH to Mark:
Mark, are you looking for more evidence or are you taken aback that this charge would be made? I’m reluctant to give you another flawed source to quote against ministers in your denomination.
Anyway, I thought you knew more about the criticisms than I did.
(Notice that initially Hart defers. Of course, he gives a reason for his deferral, but see what happens.)
Mark to DGH:
No, Darryl, it’s neither of those things.
To put it in your terms, I’m just calling your bluff.
So where’s your evidence of an OPC minister accusing WSC of Pelagianism?
(Attorney Van Der Molen clarifies his request.)
DGH to Mark:
Mark, I thought you thought I didn’t know what was going on in the OPC. Why don’t you stick to the URC and leave Presbyterianism to us Gentiles?
Here is an excerpt from the lengthy Kerux (http://www.kerux.com/pdf/Kerux.24.03.pdf) review of The Law Is Not of Faith
(it culminates a lengthy introduction to a bloated review that puts the entire book in the context of coming down on the wrong side of Augustine vs. Pelagius):
“This is unwitting Pelagianism (calling it “typological” does not alter its essential and substantial character) and Augustinian Calvinists are correct to see it as a threat to sola gratia as Augustine saw it 1600 years ago.”
I guess this just proves that no one reads Kerux.
Of course, saying that a particular author is committing unwitting Pelagianism is quite a bit different, from having “accused Westminster California of Pelagianism,” but wait – there’s more!
Mark to DGH:
Darryl, I asked for evidence that the authors of the overture I mentioned had accused WSC of Pelagianism.
You answer with the Kerux article who argued that theology that says sinners can “merit” God’s reward is “unwitting” Pelagianism.
None of the authors of the Kerux article were authors of the overture.
So, where’s the evidence?
(Mark notices the key problem with Hart’s evidence. Hart’s evidence isn’t from the pen of one of the authors that Hart was defaming.)
Mark continuing:
For the readers’ {and Darryl’s} benefit, here’s the overture:
http://theaquilareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5975:overture-proposed-to-opc-presbytery-seeks-study-on-republication-of-the-covenant-of-works-in-the-mosaic-covenant&catid=50:churches&Itemid=133
Notice that Mark provides evidence.
DGH to Mark:
Mark, so let me get this straight. WSC is guilty of infidelity for the slightest infraction of departure from the glories of neo-Calvinism. But if an overture originates from a presbytery where a seminary is located whose founder has a journal that makes complaints about a book similar to those of the overture, it’s only coincidence?
Once again, your slipperiness is astounding. Just be honest and above board in your disagreements. Make a case that this view is outside the standards of our churches. Don’t simply traffic in innuendo.
At least the 2kers are upfront about their disagreements. Your complaint seems to be no more than they disagree with what you’ve always thought. I wonder where you would have come down on Calvin and Luther.
————————–
Rather than apologizing for his defamation, Hart accuses and defames Mark of “slipperiness” and suggests that Mark is dishonest. Then, without batting an eye, Hart accuses and defames Mark, suggesting that he not “simply traffic in innuendo.”
One wonders whether Hart’s presbytery is aware that this is how Hart acts on the Internet.
________________
All this from a exchange at Green Baggins.
This post cut and pasted from Turretin Fan’s Blog.
I imagine his scholarship is, or at least at one time was, better. But still …
Which is why I said, “If.”
Pelagianism is a badge of honor. Anyone accused of it should know they are doing their job. As it says is Wisdom (and yes I know that’s in the Apocrypha) “Let us slay the righteous, for he is constantly upbraiding us with our offenses against God’s law.” Those who accept the apocrypha take that as a prophecy about Jesus and why they crucified him. Everyone else just sees its the attitude of wicked men, and the wise know that this is the attitude of the faith-onlyist against the Pelagian. Let’s destroy the Pelagian, since he makes me look bad for cheating on my wife.