D
Depleted
Guest
No, he's not. There is logic to what he's saying, but you just leaped into "he's got to be wrong" simply because you have yet to understand what he's saying.
Think of it this way. Have you ever chosen to take a course in school? (Chosen, vs. being forced to take the course because it's the curriculum you need to graduate.) How much did you look into the background of the teacher, or did you just assume all teachers have no authority because only Christ does? I never looked into the background of teachers to see if they were qualified to teach, simply because that school they were teaching in looked into their qualifications and wouldn't hire them, if they weren't qualified.
Same deal we reformers do. We don't need to check out the creds on our teachers, because we know what they had to do to pass to become a teacher. (And, to us, the teacher is the one who does the sermons. Pastors are something else.) You don't get to become a teacher unless you pass the classes, then get the degree (and we're talking Master's degree minimum), and THEN you have to answer questions publically in a crowded church full of other teachers and elders about first what you know, and then more important, what you believe. The what you believe part tells the examiners if you can ever teach in our churches. Because you HAVE to believe in the God of the Bible, the trinity, that Jesus is the only Savior, that God chooses "whosoever will believe" and everything down the list of true, important doctrine. They may ask you if you believe in deaconess too, but that answer doesn't matter other than if you're being truthful. (Meh, my denomination can't seem to agree on deaconess, so some churches have them and others don't. Same thing with tongues. But that's not the doctrine that has to be agreed on. That's just the fun stuff to endlessly debate on. lol)
We had a Baptist go for the challenge of passing the qualification test once. In a Presbyterian church, this is like having a Roman Catholic going for the qualification. There's enough wiggle room that yes, he could make it through that qualification, but also there are issues that he'd have to go against his denomination in belief (not just thought, but truly believing it) where no one knew if he would be willing to give up his long-held belief. (A long time ago, so vague memory on this story. But whatever doctrine it was, it was sort of like asking someone who believes that homosexuals can be teachers, and everyone thought he'd have to agree they could. It wasn't homosexuals, but I can't remember what it was.) To everyone's amazement, he did denounce his Baptist upbringing and did tell the teachers he believed as they did. The only man in decades who got through that examination process by LYING! Within two years, he decided his particular church would accept that not-in-our-denom doctrine. And within two years and one month, he was no longer a teacher. Not even a member.
He's the only one in modern times to pass that examination by lying. We are THAT strict on who becomes our teachers, so I don't have to worry any given Sunday if the guy teaching me God's word has a clue on God's word. They have to understand it, or they aren't teachers. AND they have to believe it! THAT's what "magisterial reformers" means to those of us in reformed circles.
Not that they have equal authority with Christ. That they know enough and trust enough to give their lives to THAT authority in Christ.
Try not to go with knee-jerk reaction when coming up with new concepts. It really is all about Calvinsx is talking in words most of us don't clearly understand.
And, I don't clearly understand either, because he's from the Anglican side of reformed, and I'm more from the German/Dutch side. Same family, but we moved away so long ago we don't even use the same language anymore.
