Here is an excellent post. An excerpt:

…”But he contradicts himself, morphing his positions! Hard to pin down!” That’s what they say, anyway, and apparently this is so obvious a failing in me that it should be child’s play to demonstrate in a debate. Right? I would wager that the first century contained false teachers who were just as much a slippery gus as I appear to be in the eyes of some. St. Paul told Titus to do something about them. St. Paul is telling the TRs, given their premises, to do something about it also. But if they won’t debate, then they have a responsibility to ramp down the rhetoric, and to knock off calling fellow Reformed ministers “unruly and vain talkers.”

Funny, I just responded to someone who asked something about the label “TR.” It used to be a name I was glad to attribute to myself until I ran into various factions who wanted to fight over it. Now I wonder if there is any real theological meaning left to the term. I mean, as I see it, a TR who could “ramp down the rhetoric” would either cease being a TR or, if you prefer, prove that he never really was one in the first place. He would just be a Christian gentleman with Reformed convictions.