Owen and Petto agree with c.t.

It amazes me how Reformed theologians can't grasp the fact of the republication of the Covenant of Works. Or it has amazed me. I'm convinced now that it is fought against because it cuts sacramentalism off at the legs.

Here is the correct view as I wrote it out in Jan. of this year.

It now appears that John Owen had the same take in his day, and he wrote a forward to a book by Samuel Petto who spelled it all out in on-the-mark fashion. Here's a review of that book.

What am I saying? I'm saying c.t. is able to be on-the-mark with orthodox doctrine. I can discern what it is. Five solas, doctrines of grace, classical covenant theology, Federal Theology, without the sacramentalism and the clericalism and the moralism and the formalism, all based on the foundation of the pure and whole Word of God, the traditional text (in English) Authorized Version, 1611.

The Reformed types so want their Romanist man-authority and ritual that they can't see orthodox doctrine.

I, c.t., also know why orthodox doctrine is as it is. That is rare. Most are left to accept it in all its anti-intuitive grandeur, which is what I do too, but I have understanding the church level doesn't have. I know the why and the how of God's Plan, and I also am honest enough to know that it plays out in scales of time human beings can't perceive (which enables me to not harbor secret doubts about it all, i.e., those who secretly don't believe in an eternal hellfire for their unsaved father who just died but publically proclaim a belief in it so as to appear 'orthodox')...

God's Plan is an epic, royal lived drama and adventure from eternity to eternity. The pactum salutis, or Counsel of Peace, itself, as the basis, lends enough power and romance to it all to awaken the most stump dumb in the churches, or should. The entire aspect of active sanctification after regeneration, all that is portrayed in general revelation by such art as grail romance or the pure and powerful inspired Homeric epics is entirely lost to the 'churchmen' (who seem to exist not only to keep themselves in chains of ignorance and cowardice but to make sure they can keep as many others there as well).

What is the difference? The fear of God vs. the fear/reverence of man. 'Churchmen' fear man more than they fear God; and they enforce the fear of man wherever you find them in positions of leadership or influence. They are pure death. A Christian fears God and God alone. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. You can't get wisdom when you fear and reverence man. This is why the churches are so shallow and dead.

Listen to c.t. I have the Spirit, and the Spirit of Discernment. By the grace of God. (I also am the only elect of God you can't defeat. That is why you all ban me when I merely say 'hello.' To fear only God and not man makes one a dangerous influence in the lives of the tame slaves of the devil and the devil's kingdom...)