Comments on: Shall the Reformed Rockers Win?

By: D Hart

D Hart — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 12:44:26 +0000

Scott, you know the guys who blog at the site representing some of the most conservative thinkers in the PCA. At least Frame had the sense not to promote the Rolling Stones.

By: Zrim

Zrim — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 18:13:13 +0000

As a 20-year-newbie to Christianity, an even newer newbie to American evangelicalism and an even newer newbie to American Reformed and Presbyterian religion, I always feel remiss to pass up commenting on what a chuckle I get from this back and forth on substance use. If one isn’t busy showing his piety by his cleanliness another is doing so by his liberty. I tend to prefer the approach I experienced last week at a family reunion with Birmingham WASPs and Wixom Catholics where all sorts of liquids were flowing–even, gasp, O’Douls and Diet Coke. The music was so-so.

When it comes to “forms of leisure,” sorry, give me the WASPs and Catholics; when it comes to getting from this world to the next still give me a Presbyterian, but most preferrably the one smoking.

By: Reformed Smokers, Rockers, and Air Supply « Heidelblog

Reformed Smokers, Rockers, and Air Supply « Heidelblog — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:53:25 +0000

[...] 30, 2008 in Uncategorized DG takes the occasion of a comment by John Frame about smoking to lauch a salvo against “Reformed [...]

By: R. Scott Clark

R. Scott Clark — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:47:19 +0000

DG,

Don’t you mean the Reformed “soft” rockers?

After all “Shine, Jesus Shine” has more in common with “Lost in Love” than it does with Who’s Next? or the Badlands. I think the Reformed Rockers would sit down for a smoke with you, wouldn’t they? They might not be able to hear you well and it’s an open question as to what they might be smoking, but they would smoke wouldn’t they?

What puzzles me about the soft-rock, worship chorus singing lot, is that they are so latitudinarian about the 2nd commandment and so legalistic where there is no commandment.