Return to Main Page
Site Index

Trouble with drop box click here for help     Printing Instructions for Articles
Back to Index to Gillespie Discussion

Discussion of George Gillespie's Wholesome Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty
GWS-2 Questions for thought 
Subject: GWS-2 Questions for thought
From: Richard Bacon 
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 08:42:07 -0500

When GG says that the magistrate has a responsibility to
both tables of the law, he is clearly referring to the first
four commandments as opposed to the last six, or "our relation
toward God."  He says that the magistrate ought to preserve
Christ's ordinances from "violation."  What kinds of violation
might we expect he is talking about?

Later in the same paragraph GG refers to the white devil of
"heresy and schism, under the name of tender conscience."  How
might heresy disguise itself as a tender conscience?  What is
the difference between the conscience and the will?  What does
that question have to do with the subject at hand?

Who might GG mean by those "who draw factions after them?"  Is
this an identical term for those who "resist reformation?"

In the second paragraph of this section GG "gets down to it."
He refers to the coercive power of the magistrate.  Is it possible
to have law without coercive power -- or is law without sanction
merely advice?  In mentioning "degrees" of offence and danger, does
GG imply that there might be degrees of response on the part of
the magistrate?

How can the limits of toleration be known?  Is it possible to
tolerate some differences without tolerating all differences?  Is
there "room" for differences in fundamentals, non-fundamentals,
etc.?

Blackwood made the statement that some things may be punished because
"everybody else is punishing it."  Does that follow?  Is there any law
of jurisprudence that allows for such an interpretation of the
light of nature?


Dick Bacon
I'm your moderator, not your mother.