Keister Vs. Rayburn

Dr. Robert S. Rayburn

Dr. Robert S. Rayburn

Lane Keister, one of the witnesses in the trial against Federal Vision heretic Peter “Reformational Catholic” Leithart, has provided an important debriefing concerning his experience at trial and his encounter with Leithart’s defense counsel, Robert Rayburn.  Some I’m sure will wonder why Lane has published this even at this late date, but I think it’s important for people to realize what they’re dealing with when they encounter Federal Visionists and the corrupt Presbyteries and presbyters  that enable and defend them.

I fell for the trick because I naively thought that a Presbytery would treat a member of another Presbytery (who was in good standing) with a modicum of respect. I was obviously wrong in that assumption. The quotation was delivered by Rayburn anonymously and out of context. In other words, it was a lie. 

Horton Vs. Keister?

Explore posts in the same categories: Heresies

23 Comments on “Keister Vs. Rayburn”

  1. Hugh McCann Says:

    What in the Hell are those PCA guys drinkin’?!

  2. Hugh McCann Says:

    So, if I am understanding Lane aright, Rayburn’s a slanderer, a liar, and a defender of a heretic?

  3. Hugh McCann Says:

    By Keister’s count, Dr (Univ. of Aberdeen) Rayburn lied about Lane six (6) times in the course of the Leithart trial. See comments section at Greenbaggins.

    If true, does that make the Rev Rayburn (MDiv, Cov’t Theo. Sem.)

    (a) merely a liar, or,

    (b) a chronic liar, or,

    (c) a pathological liar?

  4. Sean Gerety Says:

    I wouldn’t make light of it Hugh. Lane has crossed a line. I’d hate to see him become a martyr in a denomination that no longer can tell the Gospel from a “Reformational Catholic” counterfeit.

  5. Hugh McCann Says:

    Lane is indeed in a pit of snakes, and he’s bound to get bitten more than he already has. May God now fortify him to be a Luther or a Machen.

    Indeed has crossed a line and probably will be thrown to lions. I meant to make light only of the lettered Rayburn and his folly, not Lane’s serious predicament.

  6. justbybelief Says:

    “…n a denomination that no longer can tell the Gospel from a “Reformational Catholic” counterfeit.”

    This is exactly why he should exit now, though, he should have exited long ago.

  7. Steve M Says:

    (d) a good liar?

  8. Justification by Faith Alone Says:

    Sean, thanks for your work on the FV heresy. Do you know if there is a list of FV ministers? I think a lot of them have learned from Meyers to hide behind Westminster, but a list would be helpful. If a TE or RE is uncomfortable with being on the list, all they would have to do is explain justification by faith alone rather then something like, well I believe in the Standards, and then next Sunday preach the heresy again.

  9. Justification by Faith Alone Says:

    It could be a matrix with columns showing helpful data which may or may not confirm FV, e.g. PCA-style paedocommunion, high church externals, such as kneeling and raising the hands at the command of the minister (like at Rayburn’s church), effeminate colorful religious garb rather than a business suit or Geneva gown, Anglican form prayers, etc.because if it sounds like a duck and waddles like a duck, it often really is a duck.

  10. Sean Gerety Says:

    Hi JBFA. I don’t know of any list as many FV men prefer to fly below the radar, with some notable exceptions who we can identify. Unfortunately, I don’t think they all look like ducks or it would be easy. For example, there is a very pro-FV church in Va Beach where I live (New Life), but I think if you walked in there it would at first seem like any other PCA church.

    After a while these men reveal their true colors, but I think the best thing is to either avoid the PCA altogether or buyer beware. That’s not to say there aren’t faithful churches, even a couple of Presbyteries, just that a list would be helpful.

  11. Hugh McCann Says:

    Are Anglican-style prayers OK for Anglicans, but not Presbyterians?

    How about a not-too-effeminate cassock-alb (sans surplice, of course!), as long as they’re white or black; that OK?

    Is kneeling OK for Anglicans?

  12. Hugh McCann Says:

    Histoically, Anglicans stand to sing, kneel (or stand) to pray, sit to hear the readings and the sermon, and kneel (or stand) to receive communion (both types!). Some parts of the liturgy are sometimes chanted/ sung by some ministers. There is also freedom regarding the clothing of the minister.

    Having been in high & low Presbyterian and Anglican circles, I have learned that one man’s high church is another man’s orthodoxy, and that the trappings may -but not necessarily- hint at the underlying message.

    From the 39 Articles:

    34. Of the Traditions of the Church.

    It is not necessary that traditions and ceremonies be in all places one or utterly alike; for at all times they have been diverse, and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s word.

    Whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly that other may fear to do the like, as he that offendeth against common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the conscience of the weak brethren.

    Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying.

  13. Hugh McCann Says:

    These, too, soundeth sound:

    19. Of the Church.

    The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached and the sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred: so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith.

    20. Of the Authority of the Church.

    The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God’s word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.

    Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ: yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of salvation.

  14. Lauren Says:

    As Christians, we should each examine a minister’s teaching according to the Scriptures and not leave it up to a church court to determine its truthfulness. Lane’s case only confirms this need.

    I am not surprised at all at the mishandling of this case. In my case, I had several objections to the Record of the Case that were totally ignored but according to the BOC should have been addressed. My ROC was never even read by the committee – only the Table of Contents. They then ruled my complaint out of order (which it was not) but instead of dismissing the complaint, they proceeded to find me guilty without any due process.

    The goal of a church court is very often not justice or truthfulness – it seems to be political expediency. Sadly, the PCA has paid a heavy price for that political expediency.

    The one good recommendation that came out of our report was in the conclusion that encouraged both parties to forgive each others’ sins out of love and move on. We attempted to do that until a year later when the shepherding committee went after my husband and tried to “nail” him on a different charge related to the case. We knew then that our days in the PCA were coming to an end.

    I can’t say that forgiveness was an easy thing for me but I knew in my heart that it was the right thing to do. I did not want bitterness to take root. At the same time, I did not want to be a party to a false gospel. My encouragement to Lane is also to forgive and move on. And, to put your loyalty to Christ and His Word over loyalty to any leader, presbytery, or denomination. We can testify to God’s grace and faithfulness in opening new doors of ministry and providing for our family.

  15. Justification by Faith Alone Says:

    At Meyers’ church website showing particularization service photos of the congregation worshiping before a crucifix. No one had the decency to put some drapes over the crucifix alter. Well, the candles would have caught on fire. This obviously is not a recently-installed alter at Meyers’ church (another building), but I suppose the colors would match his building and his robe:

  16. justbybelief Says:

    1) “and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God’s word written”

    Amen! Codified error in church confessions is grievous.

    “neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.”

    See 1) And, this would be usefully brought to bear against Lutheran churches.

    “The one good recommendation that came out of our report was in the conclusion that encouraged both parties to forgive each others’ sins”

    Really? Should we forgive those whom the apostle anathematizes?

  17. justbybelief Says:

    Justification by Faith Alone,

    Here’s the blurb from the homepage:

    The good news of the Gospel is that the resurrection of Jesus from the dead nearly twenty centuries ago in real time and space was the inauguration of a new world—a world of peace and beauty that still awaits completion in the future return of Jesus, but is even now being brought into existence by the work of the Holy Spirit and the faithful obedience of the Bride of Christ: that is, his Church.

    Interesting that their ‘good news’ has nothing to do with the forgiveness of sins of individual believers and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to them.

  18. justbybelief Says:

    And, this is the F.V. theology that LCMS are rejoicing over

  19. Justification by Faith Alone Says:

    Thanks, Justbybelief, for that cutting edge newsflash, er, redundant text from their homepage “good news of the good news” claptrap — now send these teachers back to school. FB also has it and this as well, “living out the Gospel”. I am guessing that this is the FVision progressive justification, “living out the Gospel”, and that maybe it really smothers the Gospel message since it replaces the imputation of Christ’s righteousness and our response of gratitude to God for delivering us from all our sins and miseries.
    So, how did you do today “living out the Gospel”? Satan will tell you that today, December 17th, you failed, you loser. 1 Adam, 2 Adams, I guess I am not a very good number 3, so no hope for me in my progressive justification. Oh, but then we have the FVision warning to not examine your heart. If FVision is correct, then we are all g o i n g to H e l l.

  20. Jon Says:

    That is the problem with assurance in the Lutheran or FV sense, or according to the Wesleyan tradition. Your assurance is only good for the moment. The problem with Calvinist assurance is you’ve never really got it! What a conundrum. Then there is the assurance based upon whether you’ve once believed.

  21. The Great Heresies by Hillaire Belloc

    “all heresies are based on simplification and that is why they endure. There is one or more basic truths that are easy enough to accept. But the rest of the truths are denied. As in the case of Mohammedanism. For Mohammed kept the One essence of God and therefore made his case around that truth. But he threw out the Trinity, the Eucharist, the Sacraments and the priesthood. That is why Islam endures to this day.” Belloc, Chapter 4, pp.1-4. 1930.

  22. Bob S Says:

    What the papist Belloc doesn’t tell us Elizabeth, is that at the Reformation, Mohammed was considered the eastern anti Christ, while the pope was the western. IOW one of the great heresies/simplifications of Romanism is that the Scripture is not sufficient or perspicuous. Another would be that Christ’s death on the cross is not enough, man made masses must continue to be offered. Yet another would be salvation by faith alone through grace alone necessarily includes our works of sanctification or we cannot be justified.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: