We have already warned folks about these men (click here). For our efforts in speaking the truth we ended up with even more childish, ludicrous behavior out of these men at the next conference, as this picture notes:

We reported on this on the Dividing Line, playing audio sections of their inane ranting as well. Since that time, we have not wasted our time at the Conference any longer. After eighteen years of consistent witness, respectfully adorning the gospel of Jesus Christ by speaking the truth to the LDS at the Conference, we determined it was no longer a useful effort, because of the poisonous atmosphere of hatred and mockery created by these "evangelists" with no "evangel." So we have not distributed literature in Utah at the General Conference during 2003. And I was hoping that possibly these ignorant, rebellious men would tire of their activities and simply go away, allowing for meaningful ministry to take place again (though, repairing the damage done by these men's "witnessing" would take a very long time). However, as soon as I arrived in Salt Lake this October, I noted on television a report about how they would be showing up in force yet once again. They love attention, they love what they call "persecution." And I have learned that they took to desecrating LDS temple garments this year, resulting in some LDS trying to take the garments from them. This then resulted in arrests and charges of assault against one of the LDS men. I am glad we were not around. It truly looks like any meaningful witnessing will never again take place during the Conference thanks to these "evangelists" who have no interest in biblical truth. They are quite brave in groups, but one-on-one they are utterly incapable of meaningful apologetic interaction or defense. As I have said many times, they are a scourge, a plague. They may indeed be a form of judgment upon the Mormons, for their hate-filled childish behavior will be taken by many Mormons as another reason not to listen to any meaningful presentation of the gospel.

As I have been speaking a lot lately on “New Perspectivism,” I thought I would share a thought that I was developing while speaking on the subject briefly in St. Paul, Minnesota over the weekend. First, as I was flying up there, I had been giving thought to how NPism “flattens out” some of the most precious and full truths of the Reformed faith. Consistently applied it really leaves no room for such precious truths as the union of the elect with Christ, the specificity of the giving of a particular people by the Father to the Son, (John 6), etc. Even if an advocate of NPism were to claim such beliefs, the foundation just isn't there: without inerrancy and the consistency of the revelation of God en toto such doctrines are simply not tenable (which is why historic Reformed theology has held such a high view of Scripture). This then led, during the seminar, to the thought that the forcing of a monochrome, one-dimensional concept of dikaiosu,nh qeou/ (the righteousness of God) leaves it so bereft of the beauty that men have lived and died for over the past centuries. Wright's tremendously forced reading of 2 Cor. 5:21, for example, illustrates this. By insisting that the phrase can only mean God's covenant faithfulness, and cannot refer to a righteousness that comes from God (i.e., is imputed to the believer, the righteousness of Christ), Wright is forced to say that this passage is simply saying that the apostles are the embodiment of God's covenant faithfulness. Likewise, Phil. 3:9 is reduced to a statement that Paul wishes to be right with God on God's own grounds rather than on the grounds of Jewish national symbols. The rich depth of color that is the biblical concept of righteousness is forced into an artificially shallow monochrome concept that simply does not do justice to the fullness of biblical revelation.

By way of addition to this section...I recently saw an article by J. Ligon Duncan being panned on an AAPC-oriented site (notice the strange confluence again). Actually, the person was just applauding someone else who was blasting the article. As soon as I started reading the referenced article, I knew the Duncan article must be good, since I could tell the author had no idea what he was talking about. So I tracked it down and yes, indeed, it is a great article on NPism. Click here to read it