The Federal Vision
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 07. 2018
- This video is part of a series called, "The Theology Video Encyclopedia," which overviews various theological topics in a short explanatory format. This video is on the subject of the Federal Vision movement.
One of the clearest explanations of an issue that defies easy explanation.
This is easily the most coherent explanation of the FV controversy on the internet.
Just a minor correction to make note of - FV proponents (to my knowledge at least) do NOT deny the Covenant of Works.
I've read their statement. They hold to an understanding of a "covenant of life", rather than a covenant of works.
The Covenant of Life is the Covenant of Works, one needs to read the Westminster standards as a whole to realise that both CoL and CoW are speaking about the same thing.
@@acaswell84 thanks. I noticed that many think they all hold monocovenantalism. It seems like it's more of an argument and confusion of terminology.
Yeah some may but from what Doug Wilson says he doesn’t. He makes a clear distinction and separation between the two covenants.
Thanks . pretty good summary of FV . i had completely forgotten about it until a friend asked for more info . You did a good job pointing out the highlights . you were very polite in not pointing out what a train wreck it has become . Thanks
Thanks for helping us understand some of these 50 cent theological terms. God's peace be with you
Thank you for explaining it so clearly
On my first exposure to the Federal Vision my first impression is that is an attempt to reconcile the effective nature of infant baptism vs. those same infants that grow up and reject the faith. I think it attempts to answer the question, "What happened to them?" This is now my third source in my exposure to this topic. Thank you for your informative and concise video on this topic!
Thanks so much! Your presentation was a very helpful summary.
This is great, thanks. I couldn't quite work out the Theophilus Institute but this has made it clear.
Still clear as mud. ;-)
Federal vision is sacramental theology with extra steps
I appreciate the fairness with which you're treating this. Given covenant theology (since you said that they continue to work within that theological framework), wouldn't their monocovenantalism be incompatible with the Lutheran law/gospel distinction?
Right, the FV view is certainly not consistent with a Law-Gospel distinction.
In your opinion, would that cause problems for their doctrine of justification?
Chris- FV advocates have a doctrine of continual justification. It’s ... complex
@@LoneWolfRanging I know I am late, but aren't some who used to be FV (like Doug Wilson) appear to be monocovenantal but simply use different terminology. Wilson vehemently denies the idea he holds to a single covenant view. He says he simply doesn't like the term covenant of works.
@@LoneWolfRanging Lutherans don’t? You see justification as just a past tense event?
I enjoyed this. Thanks.
Dr. Cooper, could you present Mercersburg Theology in this series?
Very informative!!
Great information.
Thank you!
I’m a Federal Vision man. Thank you for not hating us.
Also called Covenant Vision. I think "someone" wanted to kill us .
Very useful. Thanks
Thanks!
7:20 Reformed baptist here, and that’s just what i was thinking!
Nt Wrights work on a more “community” and “covenant people” view of the church seems to jive with the Federal vision to some degree. Though we all understand they are bot the same
I'll leave this here:
God certainly has made no promises either of eternal life, or of any deliverance or preservation from eternal death, but what are contained in the covenant of grace, the promises that are given in Christ, in whom all the promises are yea and amen. But surely they have no interest in the promises of the covenant of grace that are not the children of the covenant, and that don't believe in any of the promises of the covenant, and have no interest in the Mediator of the covenant.
- Jonathan Edwards, 1742
To say that someone is part of the Church because they were baptized is very shaky.
Except it’s been the historical church position for 2000 years and held by many reformers for 500.
They are part of the visible church
..
While the Sadducees and Pharisees and self proclaimed priests argued, Jesus stepped in and made it all simple , calling us to be as little children., proclaiming the way to salvation. Have we again lost our way?
Well that was adorable!
The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.
(Deuteronomy 😉)
@@taylor3101 John 13:34 (New Testament by the way)
What approach or solution do you propose regarding the Federal Vision, then?
@@cullenkenneth5980 All that is needed to know is in the Scriptures....yesterday, today and tomorrow.
It doesn't have to be complex.
@@cullenkenneth5980 Jesus came at a time when men had become entangled in the letter of the law.
He came to give the New Testament to revive men's errors. He taught the spirit of the law over the letter and legalism......and those who did not want to hear what he had to say crucified him. And out of his sacrifice, men changed.
And they still change to this day. If you believe in what the New Testament says, you will well understand.
It seems that the Church has once again become entangled in a lot of nonsense and lost the spirit as well as the truth of what was being taught. And so, as was required 2,000 years ago, it seems we are again in need of a very deep shake up....as all has been clearly predicted. As we look around, it's quite evident that is exactly what's happening. While many will cower and hide in bunkers and arm themselves because they think they are the ones in charge, those who hold on to the spirit of the truth, the heart of the matter, the One who is actually in control, will know there is nothing to worry about. I'm sure you may well disagree. Which is fine. We must all make our choices.
did you have a cold in this video
Lol
Forgive me, but this movement sounds like a bunch of Calvinists who don't really want to be strictly Calvinist. As if they want to "have their cake and eat it too." Regardless, why is there even a need for such a movement? Why not simply join the Reformed Episcopal Church and be done with it? Smh....
I'd just say these men have never been lost and needed free grace also they everyone says they but like Luther UN till they read the rest of his theology how about some bondage of the will free grace is the only hope we have
I wonder if Reformed theologians think that if Jesus returned and saw that they had devoted countless hours and entire careers to arguing extremely arcane points of theology he would say, "Yes, exactly, this is what I had in mind and this is what I commanded you to do when I said there are three things you must do to get to heaven: love God, love your neighbor, and determine whether opponents of the objectivity of the covenant rely on an outdated ontological view of individual personhood. Good job! Keep it up!" I think he would, too, but it would be sarcastic...and followed by a slow clap.
What a ignorant comment. Your shallow Christian faith, if there’s even genuine faith there, is sad.
@@Texasguy316 thank you
This comment is a cop out. Theology matters.
Atheist speaking…
The Christian church is composed of maybe 90% nominal Christians. If you say basketball is your favorite hobby, and you truly believe this…and yet you’re never seen playing and the last time you dribbled the ball it bounced off your foot…then you truly don’t understand what a hobby is, and can’t differentiate between your sentiment and reality. The natural product of spiritual devotion (cognitive integration) to a philosophy is behavior that manifests the devotion. People who love the hobby of basketball…play basketball. The overwhelming majority of Christians…aren’t actually practicing Christianity. They’re practicing slogans. They belong to a club whose entry fee is a sentiment and slogan…not an integrated belief.
This is precisely why the radical left exists…and is precisely why they hate Christians. If 90% of all people who are basketball superfans don’t play basketball and don’t watch basketball, then basketball itself will come to be seen by the world as a fake interest and slogan club for people who like feeling athletic, and like surrounding themselves with athletic sentiment in order to accomplish this.
This isn’t just about infant baptism. It’s about people not knowing the difference between sentiment and belief. If you NEED to get to work on time, and you BELIEVE that getting there on time requires getting up earlier and managing your time…that’s what you will do. That’s LITERALLY what everyone does who maintains a job. Conviction in “Truth 301” produces “Truth 301” Action. Strongly agreeing with that sentiment but then continuing to be late means that you don’t believe organization will help, or that you don’t think you need to. Cognition precedes action. Action follows cognition. If you do not act on a set of premises…then you don’t actually hold those premises.
The church is overrun by a tidal wave of yoga mat Christians (people who treat Christianity the way a soccer mom “studies” hinduism: starbucks, a yoga mat, and 30 minutes of boneheaded stretching). Christians…aren’t actually Christian.
What you think is a waste of time is actually the Christian cultural subconscious waking up to the fact that 90% of Christianity is dead because they’ve conflated faith with sentiment.
Jesus WOULD simplify it…and DID. He said whoever believes in him will have eternal life. But he also said something else: don’t just clean the outside of the cup.
Christianity has become a pseudreligion of posers who only clean the outside of the cup. They feel sentimentally inclined…and call it faith. Everything that’s been happening in our culture is a product of Christianity becoming a moral club whose entry fee is, “Oh, sure, Jesus saves. That sounds nice.”
Can you become a practicing blacksmith by saying, “Oh sure, yeah, I really respect those blacksmith’s, count me in”? Umm…are you going to DO any blacksmithing? “Hey! Don’t start in with your fancy theological arguments!”
Okay…but you’re not a blacksmith just because you feel good about blacksmithing. If you are pedaling a bike, it will go. If the bike isn’t going…it’s because you’re not pedaling.
You’re defending the very hypocrisy that gives birth to radical leftism. You’re teaching the secular world that your faith…is EMPTY. And I 100% believe you: you think sentiment makes you morally superior. You are not a practicing Christian. You’re a slogan-waver.
The overwhelming, 90% majority of “Christians” can’t tell me the beatitudes, let alone tell me where they’re found in the Bible. The overwhelming majority of Christians don’t know which books constitute the gospel! This an absolutely INSANE level of yoga-mat soccer mom poser stupidity.
You should be defending Christ. Instead, you’re doing the very thing you say you’re not doing: you’re defending the club. The club can be wrong. The club is not the gospel. The club is not YAHWEH. The club is not Christ.
Your club is bankrupt. You should be grateful for the people in your club who have the good sense to question what’s become of “faith,” if faith is just a sentiment. Even I, an atheist, know that you weren’t called to “feel strongly about Christ.” You were called to take up your cross. That’s not code for, “Chant moral slogans and tell leftists they’re going to hell.” It’s actual words that mean “Take. Up. Your. Cross.”
But sure, enjoy your sentiment.
Modern evangelical bologna theology... a mile wide and an inch deep 😅😅😅...
I think that it could probably be traced back earlier than 2002. Norman Sheppard was teaching a form of this in 1978.
Also, the URCNA statement on Federal Vision was a sin against the 9th commandment. Terrible document.
Just a few minutes in and I'm not seeing much difference between this and Mormonism.
“Tell everyone you understand absolutely nothing you’ve heard without telling them…”
@@winstonsol8713 I understand absolutely everything I've heard.
Sounds like Mormonism.
Almost. At least when it comes to their view of Grace. They definitely don't fully affirm irresistible Grace.
(Nephi 25:23)....for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, AFTER all we can do.”
It seems Federal vision's view of what they're calling "final salvation" is somewhat akin to this concept.
More students of the Bible, less Theologians. More exposition, less labels. More of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel less of Calvin and Luther. More of Jesus and less of the myriad of theological controversies that go nowhere while the Devil is ransacking our churches and culture.
I love when guys like you act like being super faithful to the Bible involves theological ignorance.
@@franklinbumgartener1323
I never said being faithful to scriptures involved theological ignorance. But much of the study of Theology is the study of theologians in the past and what they have said, which is irrelevant or at least secondary to the study of scripture itself, which most lay people and many pastors, teachers, and supposed theologians don’t have a clue about.
The study of Theology per se is not identical to the study of scripture. Many supposedly informed people, Lutheran and Reformed in the church don’t understand the gospel of John but they have countless opinions about the latest theological trends in the church even though they couldn’t expound a single passage from John or any of the gospels.
Most of the “reformed theologians”, mentioned in this video have little more than cult following, their views are incidental at best. While they propound their idiosyncratic views and impress their followers with their personalities and insights into mostly minor and sectarian dogmas, their followers are not really growing in their understanding of God’s Word or how to interpret it and understand it.
This video does not mention or expound a single passage that sheds light on what it means to be a covenant mediator or “federal head” and representative of a covenant people therefore i found it largely a waste of time. If it benefitted you to listen to a bunch of name dropping and generalizations about “theologians”, that will be footnotes in future
Church history works then good for you.
I have a 4 year degree in Bible that includes 2 years of Koine and I have read hundreds of Theological works by Reformed, Critical and to a lesser degree, Evangelical and Lutheran Theologians. This was not a waste of time but pales in comparison to the time I have spent the last 5 years in God’s Holy word.
God bless, Dan.
ah yes, being ignorant of consistent theology = more faithful
theologians are students of the Bible, you're creating a ridiculous false dichotomy
This entire system of Theology sounds absolutely nonsensical! The God of Calvinism is certainly DIFFERENT from the God the Bible describes!