Hart on Frame v. Horton

22 October 2009 by Wes Bredenhof

One response to “Hart on Frame v. Horton”

  1. Bill DeJong says:

    There’s some bad blood between Frame and Horton. Around the time of some past URCNA synod (not sure which one) I and some others met with Mike for a beer. Horton then said, “John Frame is an enemy of the Reformed Faith.” I said to him, “I imagine you don’t want that public.” He replied, “No, I do.” Soon after Frame left WSCAL.

    Frame represents a different perspective than the folks at WSCAL. He’s much more in line with 20 c. Dutch Reformed theologians like Cornelius Van Til, Anthony Hoekema and Herman Ridderbos.

    WSCAL today promotes the framework hypothesis, seemingly regards all the dichotimies and strictures of 17 c. Reformed theologians as pristine theology, promotes (for better or worse, Roman Catholic) natural law theory and (for better or worse, Lutheran) two-kingdom theology, trounces theonomy at ever chance and consigns the likes of Schilder and De Graaf to the bin of semi-Pelagians!!

    John Frame could not sign on to that agenda. Neither can I.

Leave a Reply