It’s quite amazing to me how these things work. Step 1: Flatten out any distinctions between people who hold vaguely similar positions.
Step 2: Respond only to the most “extreme” or off sounding who hold that position.
Step 3: Anathematize all who hold that vaguely similar position.
It’s a truly dishonest way of arguing.
So much of this controversy was an attempt to paint the whole ESS/EFS position as heretical. And it’s worked, there is a whole contingent of people that automatically write off anyone who might remotely hold to this position. Anyone who doesn’t becomes anathema as well.
This is basically what happened to James White. Disagrees with ESS and has said so publicly. Explains at length why. Makes distinctions between some of the concerning statements Bruce Ware, for example, has made and some of the more “moderate” positions out there (like that held by the Baylys) and refuses to call anyone a heretic, and suddenly you’re a compromiser who can’t be trusted, isn’t really reformed, and may be a heretic himself.
The sad thing is this tactic makes reasonable discussion and disagreement, as opposed to automatic anathemas, impossible. The whole goal is move Christian brothers outside the Overton Window.
The only correction, at least as I see it, is to refuse to move with the Window. As an example of that, apparently this is happening later today:
