Lane Keister Exonerates Doug Wilson . . . and so does the Puritan Board

One of the moderators over at the Puritan Board, Meg Thomas, writes concerning Lane Keister’s pastoral assurance that Douglas Wilson is A-OK, if only a little ambiguous, on the question of justification:

Why anyone should ever have to answer charges from Gerety is more than I can understand!

Of course no one has to answer to Gerety for anything. Giving aid and comfort to the enemies of Christ will require an answer however, even if not to me.

What this moderator at the Puritan Board fails to grasp is that if Keister is correct, and Wilson is in fact sound concerning the doctrine upon which the church stands or falls, not only are Gerety and Robbins and a host of other FV critics in serious need of repentance for writing that Wilson outright denies the biblical doctrine of justification, but Puritan Board owner and administrator, Dr. Matthew McMahon, is in need of some serious and public repentance as well.

Dr. McMahon offers the following assessment of Doug Wilson’s deadly and damnable position on some key Christian doctrines, not least of which is justification:

To summarize Wilson’s heretical position:

1. He redefines “Christian” to include anyone “in covenant” with God.

2. He redefines the church invisible and visible as historical and eschatological, overthrowing the ordo salutis and the historia salutis and confusing justification with glorification.

3. He believes in corporate justification which overthrows individual justification and redefines covenant inclusion by baptism instead of faith.

4. He believes in sacerdotalism, and believes the Westminster Confession of Faith teaches baptismal regeneration (which it does not) and overthrows justification by faith alone.

5. He denies that church discipline is of the esse of the church, but the bene esse of the church.

6. He believes baptism is efficacious for salvation (baptism saves, kept in his context) apart from faith.

7. He believes good works are the grounds by which one may have assurance of salvation specifically seen in accepting baptism without question. Baptism is then assurance (assurance by works).

8. He believes that faithfulness to the covenant is justifying (which is his corporate justification).

9. He affirms that the New Perspective’s “corporate justification” theology is true.

I’ve highlighted some of the key conclusive points for Meg’s benefit. How can someone “overthrow the doctrine of justification by faith alone” yet still affirm this same doctrine? Will moderator Meg be calling for the repentance of Dr. McMahon for offering the above conclusions to his review of Reformed is Not Enough? Or does moderator Meg not recognize that Keister’s and McMahon’s reviews of RINE are mutually exclusive? In words even a moderator of Puritan Board can understand; they both can’t be right.

Seems that the moderators over at the Puritan Board are once again on the wrong side of a key issue and have sided with an open enemy in a central battle over the Christian faith. At least their owner/administrator still understands the doctrine of justification is not a doctrine open for compromise and redefinition, even if his own moderators disagree.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Doug Wilson, Heresies

10 Comments on “Lane Keister Exonerates Doug Wilson . . . and so does the Puritan Board”

  1. Darrin Says:

    Sean…I’m not a member of the Puritan Board but did anything come of this? Has moderator Meg responded? This type of response towards you seems a little disingenuous when Dr. McMahon has been an outspoken opponent of Wilson for quite some time.

  2. magma2 Says:

    I haven’t heard a thing. My guess is she didn’t see it, but then again, I am not a member and have no desire to be a member. But their attitude is typical. Plus, they fail to realize that in their admiration for Keister, that he’s not only contradicted the position of McMahon, but that Keister has effectively handed Wilson a badge that he will wear as a shield.

    Keister has approved the notion that one can be a Christian, even a Christian minister, and teach a two-tiered scheme of justification beginning with baptism and maintained by works (done by faith of course).

    FWIW Keister was lead by the nose by Wilson throughout his entire “review” of RINE. What’s worse, Keister believes his assessment of Wilson is correct on the vitals of the faith. Why? Because he says Wilson agrees with him. Unbelievable.

    The real crime is that Keister is held up as an authority of some note concerning the FV, that’s why he was tagged to help the prosecution in the LAP case.

    Further evidence that the PCA is a lost cause.

  3. qeqesha Says:

    Hi Sean,
    You wrote, “Keister has effectively handed Wilson a badge that he will wear as a shield”. First of
    all, the spotlight should immediately be on Keister when a heretic boasts publicly that ““[Keister] has not found anything that would place me outside the pale of Reformed orthodoxy . . . .” Wilson is simply hinting that, Keister holds the same beliefs as he does. Keister is a typical modern graduate of many theological seminaries, confused, incompetent to defend the faith and arrogant too! Keister ignores what other Christians have to say about RINE and why they say it teaches heresy. He arrogantly believes his assessment of RINE correct —- “because Wilson agrees with him”, and by implication, those of others which come to a different conclusion in error! One is at a loss as to what part of “justification by faith ALONE” Keister finds difficult to comprehend!
    Denson

  4. magma2 Says:

    Denson, I agree completely. I am simply amazed at the deafening and pervasive silence there has been in reaction to Lane’s public exoneration of Wilson on the question of JBFA.

    Lane has given Wilson and RINE a significant third-party and even “TR” endorsement and effectively cleared Wilson’s name as a deadly heretic who has systematically undermined the biblical scheme of salvation. At least when Peter played the hypocrite Paul publicly opposed him to his face. Lane on the other hand receives praise.

    Any differences Lane might continue to have with Wilson at this point are merely intramural.

  5. rgmann Says:

    Christian leaders more well known than Lane Keister have said basically the same thing:

    Dr. [John] Piper in your defense of the gospel against N.T. Wright have you found Federal Vision theology of Doug Wilson to be another gospel?

    P: No. No, that’s easy. Doug Wilson doesn’t teach a false gospel. I don’t think N.T. Wright teaches a false gospel, just a confusing gospel. Doug Wilson is incredibly bright, but he has people around him who are dumb. I think Doug Wilson is more consistent than some of his followers are. But I am concerned about the trajectory. Allsufficientgrace Blog

    No wonder there’s so much confusion over this issue! Unless a person takes the time to personally read through all of Wilson’s writings, who is one to believe? Rather than our church leaders giving us clarity, all we get is obfuscation.

  6. magma2 Says:

    You’re right. Wilson has snowed bigger names than Lane Keister, who is currently dancing to Wilson’s tune. Those who have been reading Trinity Review shouldn’t be surprised in the least why Piper would also gave Wilson the thumbs-up on the question of JBFA and the heart of the gospel.

    In 2002 John Robbins wrote a piece called “Pied Piper” reviewing Piper’s Future Grace and outlining Piper’s deep theological confusion on central issues of the faith. Robbins writes; “Fuller explicitly denies justification by faith alone and explicitly asserts justification by faith and works. Piper, his faithful student, arrives at the same conclusion.”

    Beside, while Wilson is bad enough. I can’t even imagine a Christian leader saying that not even N.T. Wright is teaching a false gospel? What’s wrong with these teachers? Seems to me big names and little ones are busy leading many astray. My shock is how silent the church men surrounding even the little names like Lane Keister have been. It is both sad and pathetic.

  7. daveglasebrook Says:

    Sean, you really should think before you post invective. You and other Christian bloggers use the word “lie” incorrectly. You posted that I said I couldn’t use my name on another blog. Clearly I stated that the blog software made it more difficult. So, did you lie about my post?

    Now your friend has lied about me and you are supporting his lies with your invective. As a Christian, you should think about what you saying before you blog it. Instead of supporting a fallen Christian who obviously has a problem, you should help him repent of his sin of lies. Your friend cannot and will not show anything to back up his lies against me.

    If I could contact you off line I would. However I didn’t see your e-mail address. So let all of your readers know that you are willing to take an ungodly stance against a fellow Christian because you are caught up in hating Wilson and the FV.

  8. magma2 Says:

    Hey, Dave, what can’t you restrain yourself to the blogs where you originally post? Also, if you looked in my “About” section you would have found my email address there. Next time look first or at least look harder before making yourself looks self-righteous and silly.

    FWIW I don’t hate any fellow Christians. I don’t even hate Doug Wilson. I do however hate the false gospel he unrepentantly preaches and to the destruction of many who have been taken in by his lies. If that’s what you mean by taking an “ungodly stance” I fail to see it.

    So, if you’re an authority on what constitutes lying, why can’t you identify Wilson’s? They’re very easy to identify.

    Thanks for dropping by Dave Glasebrook. As Mark T. said, do yourself a favor and get out.

  9. magma2 Says:

    Anyone want to find out more about this poor soul, Dave Glasebrook should take a look here.

    He’s evidently a very devoted and blind follower of Wilson.

  10. DieraDupevida Says:

    Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
    I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
    God will appreciate it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: