The article reviews and critiques an essay that attacks Presbyterian ordination. The reviewer points to logical and textual flaws in the argument, indicating the author’s incompetence.
6 x 9
This article is a response to an essay which claims Presbyterian ordination is invalid. The reviewer comments on the writer’s myopic view of Presbyterian beliefs and misrepresentation of facts. The writer claims minor figures as major authorities to attack. The reviewer critiques the writer’s lack of biblical evidence. When using logic, the writer fails considerably, especially in regards to his use of Timothy and Titus. The reviewer uses biblical evidence to disprove the writer’s claims. He cites sources on the material for further support. The author mostly relies on evidence from the fathers, but the reviewer finds the presentation highly biased and pretentious. The author’s attacks on source material are weak. Much evidence is presented to challenge the writer’s interpretation of Jerome and Calvin. Furthermore, if bishops are unquestionably required, why did the Reformation almost unilaterally replace them with elders? The reviewer follows the writer’s logic to its illogical conclusions.