<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Michael Horton on the Young, Restless, and Reformed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ryanlwentzel.com/2010/04/23/michael-horton-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ryanlwentzel.com/2010/04/23/michael-horton-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 13:44:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://ryanlwentzel.com/2010/04/23/michael-horton-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 19:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanlwentzel.com/?p=412#comment-30</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unfortunately most of the discussion is taking place on Facebook. Maybe I&#039;ll copy and paste some of it into the body of the post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately most of the discussion is taking place on Facebook. Maybe I&#8217;ll copy and paste some of it into the body of the post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer</title>
		<link>http://ryanlwentzel.com/2010/04/23/michael-horton-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spencer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanlwentzel.com/?p=412#comment-29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BTW a correction on my post I meant to say &quot;I am NOT absolutely married to the term reformed&quot; :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW a correction on my post I meant to say &#8220;I am NOT absolutely married to the term reformed&#8221; <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer</title>
		<link>http://ryanlwentzel.com/2010/04/23/michael-horton-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spencer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 14:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanlwentzel.com/?p=412#comment-28</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I find it interesting to see his distinction there. I guess I feel like I am absolutely married to the term Reformed so Evangelical Calvinist works just fine. The problem I see though is that he the covenantal groups that he speaks of don&#039;t all agree on the Lord&#039;s Supper or even the effects of baptism (Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians). I guess the fact that they hold the same form puts them in the same camp but if he&#039;s seeking a much deeper solidarity of theology to be able to be called Reformed (and thus exclude Baptists for example) then I think he&#039;d have to say that Lutherans who believe in baptismal regeneration and consubstantiation are holding a different position than he is. For the most part I can agree with Presbyterians on everything except the mode and somewhat the meaning of baptism and their form of church government. Granted within each group you&#039;re going to find people who hold to calling themselves one thing while what they actually hold to on any particular issue may vary to one degree or another. So I think people who hold to the tenants of the protestant reformation have every right to call themselves Reformed in the tradition of the reformation, I mean, if you qualify to the Nth degree, you end up with a slogan like the US Army..... a theology of ONE ;) After all, I&#039;m not a dispensationalist!

Those are my ranting and raving, and I love Horton BTW great guy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it interesting to see his distinction there. I guess I feel like I am absolutely married to the term Reformed so Evangelical Calvinist works just fine. The problem I see though is that he the covenantal groups that he speaks of don&#8217;t all agree on the Lord&#8217;s Supper or even the effects of baptism (Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians). I guess the fact that they hold the same form puts them in the same camp but if he&#8217;s seeking a much deeper solidarity of theology to be able to be called Reformed (and thus exclude Baptists for example) then I think he&#8217;d have to say that Lutherans who believe in baptismal regeneration and consubstantiation are holding a different position than he is. For the most part I can agree with Presbyterians on everything except the mode and somewhat the meaning of baptism and their form of church government. Granted within each group you&#8217;re going to find people who hold to calling themselves one thing while what they actually hold to on any particular issue may vary to one degree or another. So I think people who hold to the tenants of the protestant reformation have every right to call themselves Reformed in the tradition of the reformation, I mean, if you qualify to the Nth degree, you end up with a slogan like the US Army&#8230;.. a theology of ONE <img src='http://s1.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  After all, I&#8217;m not a dispensationalist!</p>
<p>Those are my ranting and raving, and I love Horton BTW great guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

