tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post287609483579907680..comments2024-03-21T10:33:24.876-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: "In Essentials, Unity; in Non-essentials, Liberty; in All Things, Charity"David Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-35848095117366562022014-08-25T16:26:29.831-07:002014-08-25T16:26:29.831-07:00Hi Steve,
Thanks much for dropping by and informi...Hi Steve,<br /><br />Thanks much for dropping by and informing me of the needed correction. Have been very busy of late with family, and chores in and around the house, but will make the correction in my opening post sometime later this week (the Lord willing).<br /><br />Thanks again and God bless,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-82532596133808749022014-08-20T00:18:36.554-07:002014-08-20T00:18:36.554-07:00You cite the Georgetown site without noticing that...You cite the Georgetown site without noticing that it cites me citing H. J. M. Nellen to the effect that *not* Peter Meiderlin but the renegade Catholic bishop Marco Antonio De Dominis, writing in 1617, about nine years before Meiderlin, is the current best candidate for originator of the maxim. See http://liberlocorumcommunium.blogspot.com/2010/03/in-necessariis-unitas-in-non.html.<br /> Steve Perishohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05422656717551961275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-25212649348622175702010-12-12T09:57:41.781-08:002010-12-12T09:57:41.781-08:00Hi Reginald,
So good see you back. As you, I too ...Hi Reginald,<br /><br />So good see you back. As you, I too have some difficulties with the issue of “perspicuity”, which is directly related to the “essentials” and “non-essentials” debate. To be totally honest, at this time in my walk of faith, I just don’t have a ‘good’ answer to the multiple divisions among Christians, which troubles me much more than so many of our Evangelical brothers—schism is a grave sin, and yet Paul states that there must be “schisms”…got to get going, may have more to say on this issue this afternoon, the Lord willing.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-33176437881681071312010-12-12T09:42:14.798-08:002010-12-12T09:42:14.798-08:00Hello Ken,
Thanks for responding; in your post yo...Hello Ken,<br /><br />Thanks for responding; in your post you wrote:<br /><br />>>It would be better to use the phrase for "essentials in the gospel and salvation issues", for some aspects of baptism and some aspects of the details of the Lord's supper and eschatology and alcohol use are not "essential to the gospel issues".>><br /><br />Me: Two ‘problems’ with the above: first, the list of “essentials” was much broader in the 16th-18th centuries; and second, even among conservative, present-day Prots, important differences exist over the “essentials”.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-62613476384271247412010-12-12T09:31:43.480-08:002010-12-12T09:31:43.480-08:00Hi SH,
You asked:
>>So, do you agree with ...Hi SH,<br /><br />You asked:<br /><br />>>So, do you agree with him?>><br /><br />Me: Yes and no—yes, in that SS demands that there can be no outside authority apart from Scripture that determines faith and practice, which suggests to me attempts to make a concrete distinction between essentials and non-essentials are suspect; no, in that reason suggests distinctions, in some sense, do exist—is not the sin of idolatry much more ‘serious’ than gluttony?<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-63030384928325147092010-12-11T00:06:13.910-08:002010-12-11T00:06:13.910-08:00Hmm…now, what was it that we were saying about the...Hmm…now, what was it that we were saying about the erroneous Reformed doctrine of perspicuity just last month…?<br /><br />think think think…<br /><br /></sarcasm><br /><br />Thanks for the reminder, David :-)<br /><br />RdPFred Noltiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10203885485191808284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-69276954467128757302010-12-10T10:48:24.519-08:002010-12-10T10:48:24.519-08:00You and Cloud are right on the fact that the state...You and Cloud are right on the fact that the statement comes not from Augustine, but from the Lutheran Meiderlin, and the historical context of the 17 Century, the 30 years war, and the dis-unity that began with the Prostestant Reformation.<br /><br />I also think that part of the overall historical context (even if not in Meiderlin's mind, I don't know) is not only between the Lutherans and Calvinists at that time; but also the other groups of Protestant groups that started (especially the Anabaptist tradition). <br /><br />I looked at Cloud's statement of faith - there are several things that they put up on the "essentials" list:<br /><br />1. JKV only; textus receptus Greek text only. <br />2. Pre-Millennialism<br />3. Pre-Tribulationism<br />4. Separation from other groups who disagree on these issues.<br />5. Probably alcohol drinking (at all) is included in this.(Under separation from the world.)<br /><br />Your point, it seems to me, is trying to say that Sola Scriptura does not work, along with the "unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials" saying, because Protestants mostly use it against Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and yet so much disunity inside of Protestantism, etc." <br /><br />Certainly it took a while for the Christian world to work things out and stop killing each other any more. <br /><br />I, for one, think the Fundamentalists Baptists like Cloud go too far in exalting KJV onlyism, (The NASB, NIV, and ESV are good Bible translations); Pre-Trib, and Pre-Mill, and all alcohol drinking as essentials. (there maybe other things also)<br /><br />It would be better to use the phrase for "essentials in the gospel and salvation issues", for some aspects of baptism and some aspects of the details of the Lord's supper and eschatology and alcohol use are not "essential to the gospel issues". <br /><br />Although I disagree with infant baptism and Theonomy, and Pre-Mill and pre-tribultionism as dogmatic, for example, I still consider advocates of those positions true believers and valid churches. <br /><br />The Gospel Coalition and "Together for the Gospel" are good coalitions of unity over the essentials of the gospel, but liberty in issues of some aspects of baptism and eschatology and church government, for example.Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-7911428146423592642010-12-10T05:36:39.898-08:002010-12-10T05:36:39.898-08:00So, do you agree with him?So, do <i>you</i> agree with him?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com