Trey Uncomfortable: have you ever told a lie?
Person on the street:...Yes!
Trey Uncomfortable::What does that make you?
Person on the street:..... A Liar!
Have you ever used the Lords name as a cuss word?
Person on the street:..... uh yeah.
Trey Uncomfortable: That's called blasphemy it is a serious sin. Would you use your mothers name as a cuss word?
Person on the street:..... uh No.
Trey Uncomfortable: What do you want to call someone who steals?
Contents
Preamble
I. Another Man's foundation
II. Historic Illegitimacy of Reformed Baptists
III.
Historic Tradition of Radical Reformation and Baptist Faith
IV. Separate Baptist are true Ancestors of SBC
V. Confessional Hypocrisy
VI. Baptist Reformation?
VII. The March Back to Rome
VIII. War
IX. Resolution
Preamble
As a Baptist, I identify my ideology as New Testament Christianity. By this I mean that while my worldview is Biblical(incorporating the New and Old Testament) My religion is actually based in the New Testament. I do not blur the lines between Christ and Moses, but also that I do not add any form of sacred tradition to my faith either. Likewise the systematic theology of other Christians may be informative and perhaps helpful but never binding upon my conscience.
"
Prop. II The New Testament is the constitution of Christianity, the Charter of the Christian Church the only authoritative code of ecclesiastical law, and the warrant and justification of all Christian institutions. In it alone is the life and immortality brought to light, the way of escape from wrath revealed, and all things necessary to salvation made plain; while it's messages are a gospel of peace on earth and of hope to a lost word,"
The New Directory for Baptist Churches Edward T. Hiscox Ch.1
A fellow NT Christian may agree or disagree with me over issues of interpretation, provided that they have converted in a theology of believer's baptism and regenerate church membership. So for instance, though I reject, "TULIP" theology for what I believe are strong biblical reasons. I would not reject a New Testament Christian who affirms these ideas even though we disagree so long as we adhere to the foundations of NT Christianity.
In recent years of Baptist life there has grown a movement of reformed theology that is decisively "not true" to the values of New Testament Christianity and at times, not true to the values of even the reformed theology for which it produces hyperdulia.
It is my contention that this movement has set out to put the reformation backwards. Especially in the case of Baptist life. Endorsing a robust Catholic theology and eliminating all anti-Catholic interpretation. This movement is working in a form of syncretism that is capturing conservative Christianity into a web of conservative Catholicism that inevitably gives way to a New Age antichrist system.
Here is one facebook groups summary, though they would not be exclusively Baptist is pretty close to what the reformed Baptist were espousing, except for the Augsburg confession and 39 articles.
"
The Administrative team affirms Reformed theology in its fullness, which is Creedal, Confessional, and Covenantal. The major Confessions affirmed by the admin team are as follows: Three Forms of Unity, Westminster Confession of Faith, London Baptist Confession of Faith, Augsburg Confession, and/or 39 articles. The Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds are also affirmed. This leads to a profoundly high view of God, as well as an exceedingly high view of scripture"
I have noticed a movement of "Reformed Baptist" who are not bound by that specific denomination and in at least 2 conventions seemed intent to argue their narrative as a means of usurping ministries.
I am suspicious of the ethics and motives of this movement as a result.
"
Baptists relate the individual to Christ in a free spiritual way. The teaching concerning Christ is not a dogma imposed by authority. It is not subscription to a creed. We accept the deity of Christ along with His humanity, not by authority, but by discovery. We find Him as Savior from sin and freely exalt Him as lord of our lives. His lordship is a great formative principle in our thinking. But it is a lordship which has come to us by way of experience of his grace working in us."
E.Y. Mullins Why I am a Baptist, The axioms of religion pg. 270
I. Another man's foundation
Romans 15:16 that I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God. 18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, 19 through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. 20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation: 21 but as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand."
Paul's apostleship to the Gentiles is implicitly prescriptive to the rest of the Christian churches. Paul's mission to the gentiles is not to "build upon another man's foundation". So the Christians should not "build upon another man's foundation". Now in the context we are not concerned with proselytizing other believers, but focused on evangelizing the lost and heathen. This is the point of the great commission!
Romans 16:16 Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. 19 For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil. 20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen."
However, in counter to this proposition we must mark those who are causing divisions in opposition to scripture. And what to we do? It says"avoid them", it does not say "take them over by force" it is telling us to separate.
Revelation 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans,
which thing I hate."
"The name “Nicolaitans” is derived from the Greek word nikolaos, a compound of the words nikos and laos. The word nikos is the Greek word that means to conquer or to subdue. The word laos is the Greek word for the people. It is also where we get the word laity. When these two words are compounded into one, they form the name Nicolas, which literally means one who conquers and subdues the people. It seems to suggest that the Nicolaitans were somehow conquering and subduing the people."https://renner.org/who-were-nicolaitans-what-was-doctrine-deeds/
1Peter 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: 2 feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; 3 neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."
Matthew 15:
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."
1 Cor. 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. 14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 I
f any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."
The point of New Testament Christianity is the fact that the pattern of the New Testament was perfect, we have to build our ministries on that perfect foundation otherwise it will be destroyed.
Matthew 7:24
Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house;
and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."
II. Historical illegitimacy of the 1689 Reformed Baptist
Ezekiel 16:28 Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied. 29 Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied herewith."
Reformed Rejection
Augsburg article 8:"
3]
They condemn the Donatists, and such like, who denied it to
be lawful to use the ministry of evil men in the Church, and
who thought the ministry of evil men to be unprofitable and
of none effect. "
Article 9:
3]
They condemn the Anabaptists, who reject the baptism of children,
and say that children are saved without Baptism.
Belgic confession Article 34: and so we call down a solemn curse upon this error of Anabaptists, who not only have not been content in receiving Baptism once and for all, but who also damn the baptism of the children from the faithful"
Reformed theologies rejection of Baptist Calvinists.
"What then, do we mean by Calvinism? I will let one answer who has gained the right to answer, and than whom no one is better qualified to answer - the Rev. Dr. Archibald Alexander Hodge.
He says: “ ‘Calvinism’ is a term used to designate, not the opinions of an individual, but a mode of religious thought or a system of religious doctrines of which the person whose name it bears was an eminent expounder. There have been from the beginning only three generically distinct systems of doctrine, or modes of conceiving and adjusting the facts and principles understood to be revealed in the Scriptures: the Pelagian, which denies the guilt, corruption and moral impotence of man, and makes him independent of the supernatural assistance of God. At the opposite pole is the Calvinistic, which emphasizes the guilt and moral impotence of man, exalts the justice and sovereignty of God, and refers salvation absolutely to the undeserved favor and new creative energy of God. Between these comes the manifold and elastic system of compromise once known as Semi-Pelagianism, and in modern times as Arminianism, which admits man’s original corruption, but denies his guilt; regards redemption as a compensation for innate, and consequently irresponsible, disabilities; and refers the moral restoration of the individual to the co-operation of the human with the divine energy, the determining factor being human will”"
"...... Their organic connection might be easily traced, and their natural affinity easily shown, did it come within our present purpose. But there are other connections and affinities of these doctrines which demand our present consideration. Each of these two systems, Calvinism and Arminianism, has an organic connection and a natural affinity with a distinct form of church government - the Calvinistic with the presbyterial and independent form, and the Arminian with the prelatical or episcopal form."N. S. McFetridge Calvinism and the Church http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=81
"[sic}¿½Those Baptists who seriously adhere to that system of soteriology which has been traditionally designated as �Calvinist� are currently and increasingly being drawn into a rather distressing dilemma.� This statement by Dr. Kenneth Good forms the opening line of chapter one of his 1986 treatise entitled Are Baptists Reformed? As a preacher, pastor, teacher, and author who has been involved in various aspects of the emerging Sovereign Grace or Calvinist Movement among Baptists in the United States, Dr. Good is committed to both Calvinism and the Baptist tradition. His book, however, derives from his conviction that, although the revival of Calvinism among Baptists has brought them back to their soteriological roots, it has also adversely affected them. Baptists, argues Good, have sacrificed some of their Baptist distinctives by imbibing doctrines in the Reformed or Calvinistic tradition which are both inconsistent with Baptists historically and destructive of Baptist theology"
...."Are Baptists Reformed is Dr. Goodeïs attempt to demonstrate that, although there is an area of doctrinal agreement between the Baptists and the Reformed (principally in soteriology), there are nevertheless essential doctrinal points upon which they disagree. �Baptist convictions,� writes Good, �are incompatible with the Reformed positions in a number of significant areas such as their view of the Word of God, their view of the church, and their view of history.� Given this disparity between the Baptists and the Reformed, Good�s contention is that the former should not refer to themselves as �Reformed� since this is both misleading and contradictory. Good�s conclusion is that Baptists are not Reformed, despite their Calvinistic soteriology."
Michael L. Czapkay Are Baptists Rational?http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=194
So essentially reformers reject the Baptist faith intrinsically. Man is not by nature able to respond to the gospel and so infant baptism's violation of the will is not only accepted but indeed prescribed.
1689 Baptist and hypercalvinism
"Hyper-calvinism was developed in one section of the particular churches and everywhere proved a blighting doctrine. The London Association, formed in 1704 delegates from thirteen churches deemed it necessary to condemn the Antinomian perversion of Calvinists- regarding it's action, however, not a judicial decision, but the deliberate opinion of a representative body of Baptists. The ablest and most learned of the body of Baptists at this time, John Gill, cannot be absolved from responsibility for much of this false doctrine"
…"Doctor Gill's body of Divinity," published in 17690 was a great Treatuse of the rigid supralapsarian type, and long held it's place as a theological textbook. This type of Calvinism can with difficulty be distinguished from fatalism and antinomianism. If Gill did not hold, as his opponents charged that the elect live in a constant state of sanctification (because of the imputed righteousness of Christ), even while they commit much sin, he did hold that because of God's election Christians must not presume to interfere with his purposes by inviting sinners to the Savior, for he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and on no others. This is practically nullifying the Great Commission; and in consequence of this belief, Calvinistic Baptist Preachers largely ceased to warn, exhort, and invite sinners; holding that, as God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, when he willed he would effectually call an elect person, and that for anybody else to invite sinners people to believe was useless, if not an impertinent interference with the prerogatives of God."
H.C. Vedder A Short History of the Baptist pg. 239-241
So if Man is incapable of responding to God, and yet is expected repent, then it must not be by a volitional process. "Soul winning" is a volitional process and violates the Augustinian motiff which makes regeneration a process through mysticism.
Galatians 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now."
What is mysticism?
"Underlying it is a philosophy exemplified by the neo-Platonists and especially Plotinus. God is pure being, one, indivisible, unchangeable, and is utterly opposite to this finite and changing world. There is in man a divine spark, a bit of reason, an "apex" or "fund" or center of the soul opposed to this world in which it is immersed and belonging to God. The mystical experience is "the flight of the alone to the Alone." the soul leaving the world of sense, of time and change, of thought and effort, of human relations, to lose its individual being in unity with God." Harris Franklin Rall Christianity: chapter 9:The way of mysticism pg.167-168
colossians 2:18Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
Consider this primitive Baptist catechism[a hyper-calvinistic sect]
"4. What is their position on predestination?
Answer: They believe that God has predestinated a great number to be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:28-30). While some object to this doctrine because they say it is unfair, Primitive Baptists rejoice in it, for they see that had it not been for predestination, the whole human family would have been lost forever. Predestination is not the thing that condemns a man, or puts him in a ruined condition, but the very thing that gets him out of such a state. Predestination concerns not "what" but "whom." It is the great purpose of God to lift a people up from sin and corruption and make them like Jesus Christ. That's glorious!
5. Did not Jesus die for the whole human race?
Answer: No, the Scriptures will not support that idea. Jesus said He came into the world to do the will of His Father, and that will was that He should save all who were given Him (the elect) even before the world began (John 6:37-39). Jesus came to save HIS PEOPLE from their sins, and He did it (Matt. 1:21; Rom. 8:33,34). He died for His sheep, not for goats (John 10:15). He died for sons, for the sanctified, for the brethren, for the church, and for the children (Heb. 2:9-15). He saw the travail of His soul and was satisfied (Isa. 53:10-12) .
6. Do Primitive Baptists deny that Christ died for the world?
Answer: No, they believe that the world for which He died was the world of His elect. The world of souls for which He died do not have their trespasses imputed to them and therefore cannot be condemned (ll Cor. 5:18-19).
7. How do you know that all of the elect will respond to the call of the Spirit?
Answer: All of the called are justified, so all who were called were called effectually (Rom. 8:30). Jesus said all that the Father giveth me SHALL come (John 6:37).
8. Do you not then teach that some might want salvation but could not have it because they are not one of the elect?
Answer: No, the man who wants salvation already HAS it. The man who hungers and thirsts (desires it) after righteousness is a blessed character (Matt. 5:2-6). The alien sinner doesn't want salvation, he doesn't fear God, and he doesn't love God; therefore we conclude that the man who wants salvation, fears God and loves God is a subject of grace (Rom. 3:11,18; I John 4:10).
9. Why then do you preach, if you are already sure that all of the elect are going to be saved in Heaven?
Answer: For the comfort and instruction of the Lord's people (Isa. 40:1-2,9; Eph. 4:11-16).
While comfort and instruction of God's people is a good and true motivation. Preaching is obviously tied to the great commission.
10. Don't you believe that the preaching of the gospel is God's ordained means of bringing eternal salvation to the sinner?
Answer: No, only by the direct operation of the Holy Spirit can eternal life be brought to the dead sinner (John 3:6-8). The gospel brings life and immortality to light but doesn't produce life (ll Tim. 1:10)."http://www.marchtozion.com/commonly-asked/60-what-do-primitive-baptists-believe?fbclid=IwAR0GLOI9W9Rgw8T-lUMiMwOEfW6ukOddjM1ppwWpXB2-F68Ul453gLXYMyw
"12. Why is it that Primitive Baptists do not send out missionaries?
Answer: First, they believe that since preaching is not designed to make people ready for a home in Heaven, it is not necessary to send men across the seas in order to "save souls."...."
"20. Do Primitive Baptists actually believe they are the only ones going to Heaven?
Answer: Absolutely not; in fact they allow for a larger number being in Heaven than most religious societies. Ideas like this have been started by the enemies of the church and not by her friends. Jesus is the firstborn among MANY brethren. There will be a people in Heaven out of every nation on earth (Rev. 5:9-12). No one will be there because of what he believed, but many will be there in spite of it. One's doctrinal views or church affiliation has nothing to do with his destiny."
Do you see how these next logical consequences result in a neo platonism? It should also be noted that neo-platonic mysticism is a foundation for New Age philosophy.
"... the deepest level of communication is not communication, but communion. It is wordless. It is beyond words. and it is beyond speech, and it is beyond concept" Thomas Merton (The asian journal of Thomas Merton, 1975edit. p. 308)
I refute these teachings here.....
http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2018/12/augustines-ghost-and-the-spector-in.html
http://www.bristolblog.com/deism.html"What few people know is there are two deisms, the atheistic and religiously hostile deism of the French Revolution, and the more amicable deism of America and England. They posit two differing worldviews on issues of liberty and tolerance. English Deism and Freemasonry became the foundation of the American Revolution while the Enlightenment French Humanism became the basis of the bloody French Revolution and later Marxism and its offshoots."...
"What is called radical deism today is better called deistic Humanism. This is a philosophy, not a religion. We find at its head Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, the mass murderer Maximilian Robespierre, and the radical Jacobins. The Humanist French Revolution sought to destroy all traditional European institutions including Christianity, seeking to replace this with "enlightened" philosophy and reason as a basis for society. Oh yes, being led by 'enlightened' despots."
"To quote the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
'English Deism entered France, where, however, only its materialistic and revolutionary phases were seized upon, to the exclusion of that religiosity which had never been lost in England (and America). French Deism stood outside of theology...
Their moral theories...lost all connection with the position of Deism, which became for them a mere armory of weapons for the destruction of all religion with its consequences, intolerance and moral corruption. French Deism was anti-religious and shaded into atheism, pantheism, and skepticism."...
"In England, Deism was critically concerned with the origins of religion, but positive in moral and religious affirmation. Early English Deists believed that the Bible contained important truths, but they rejected the concept that it was divinely inspired or inerrant. They were leaders in the study of the Bible as a historical (rather than an inspired, revealed) document. Lord Herbert of Cherbury (d. 1648) was one of the earliest proponents of Deism in England. In his book "De Veritate," (1624), he described the "Five Articles" of English Deists:
belief in the existence of a single supreme God
humanity's duty is to revere God
linkage of worship with practical morality
God will forgive us if we repent and abandon our sins
good works will be rewarded (and punishment for evil) both in life and after death."
"Looking at Washington's theological beliefs, it is clear that he believed in a Creator God of some manner, and seemingly one that was also active in the universe. This God had three main traits; he was wise, inscrutable, and irresistible. Washington referred to this God by many names, but most often by the name of "Providence." Washington also referred to this being by other titles to infer that this God was the Creator God. This aspect of his belief system is central to the argument about whether or not Washington was a Deist. His belief in God's action in the world seems to preclude traditional deism. Washington believed that humans were not passive actors in this world. However, for Washington, it was also improper to question Providence. This caused Washington to accept whatever happened as being the will of Providence."https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/george-washington-and-religion/
When we consider that British Deism grew from the Calvinist Anglicans and their strong emphases on providence leads us to the conclusion that deism is a product of Calvinism.
Zephaniah 1: 12And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The Lord will not do good, neither will he do evil.
III. Historic Tradition of Radical Reformation and Baptist Faith
One point of contention that we see in these "New Calvinist" Reformed Baptists is their understanding of the historic nature of the church. They see themselves as the descendants of the catholic church. They believe that their original church father outside the New Testament was Augustine. ( some may argue for earlier fathers as closet monergists but most reformed scholars point here.) That the Catholic church did not get totally perverted until about 1200AD. Thus they can incorporate the 7 ecumenical church councils into their lineage. They Start with the 1689 LBCF so that the Westminster Confession may be their parentage. From their they may argue all Baptists are their children and need to return home to their doctrine. Thus they see those "New Testament Christians" as a bizarre sect of "landmark Baptists" that popped up out of the late 1800's and are just another manifestation of "crazy fundamentalists". Under Augustine they believe that the local church is a subset of the vast invisible church of the elect. They are simply enlightened as to this truth and are militant against the heretics who oppose their message.
But what is the real history?
The New Testament church comes from the New Testament it was a literal organization, established by Christ and would be preserved upon the earth for the propagation of the gospel until the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. The kingdom of heaven is assembled in Heaven and it reigns upon the hearts of the saints. But it is a spiritual entity while the body of Christ is a local entity. The local entity is a body of born again believers locally assembled under the teaching of the apostles.
Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 18: 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Ephesians 3:20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, 21 unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.
1 Timothy 3:15 but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
The Kingdom is in heaven
Joh 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
The church is here on earth
Joh 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Tit 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
So I argue this as factual in the history of the church here.....
http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2010/03/who-is-new-testament-church.html
and here.
http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2010/03/case-for-waldenses-ancient-origin.html
Regardless, is there any connection between the Anabaptists and Baptists and do they have this ideology?"
First. Observe concerning baptism:
Baptism shall be given to all those who have learned repentance and amendment of life, and
who believe truly that their sins are taken away by Christ, and to all those who walk in
the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and wish to be buried with Him in death, so that they
may be resurrected with Him, and to all those who with this significance request it
[baptism] of us and demand it for themselves. This excludes all infant baptism, the
highest and chief abomination of the pope. In this you have the foundation and testimony
of the apostles. Mt. 28, Mk. 16, Acts 2, 8, 16, 19. This we wish to hold simply, yet
firmly and with assurance.
Second. We are agreed as follows on the
ban: The ban shall be employed with all those who have given themselves to the Lord, to
walk in His commandments, and with all those who are baptized into the one body of Christ
and who are called brethren or sisters, and yet who slip sometimes and fall into error and
sin, being inadvertently overtaken. The same shall be admonished twice in secret and the
third time openly disciplined or banned according to the command of Christ. Mt. 18. But
this shall be done according to the regulation of the Spirit (Mt. 5) before the breaking
of bread, so that we may break and eat one bread, with one mind and in one love, and may
drink of one cup.
Third. In the breaking of bread we are of
one mind and are agreed [as follows]: All those who wish to break one bread in remembrance
of the broken body of Christ, and all who wish to drink of one drink as a remembrance of
the shed blood of Christ, shall be united beforehand by baptism in one body of Christ
which is the church of God and whose Head is Christ. For as Paul points out we cannot at
the same time be partakers of the Lord's table and the table of devils; we cannot at the
same time drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of the devil. That is, all those who have
fellowship with the dead works of darkness have no part in the light Therefore all who
follow the devil and the world have no part with those who are called unto God out of the
world. All who lie in evil have no part in the good. Therefore it is and must be [thus]:
Whoever has not been called by one God to one faith, to one baptism, to one Spirit, to one
body, with all the children of God's church, cannot be made [into] one bread with them, as
indeed must be done if one is truly to break bread according to the command of Christ.
Fourth. We are agreed [as follows] on
separation: A separation shall be made from the evil and from the wickedness which the
devil planted in the world; in this manner, simply that we shall not have fellowship with
them [the wicked] and not run with them in the multitude of their abominations. This is
the way it is: Since all who do not walk in the obedience of faith, and have not united
themselves with God so that they wish to do His will, are a great abomination before God,
it is not possible for anything to grow or issue from them except abominable things. For
truly all creatures are in but two classes, good and bad, believing and unbelieving,
darkness and light, the world and those who [have come] out of the world, God's temple and
idols, Christ and Belial; and none can have part with the other." The Schleitheim Confession of Faith 1527
Ridemann's Rechenschaft,
1540IV. DOCTRINE OF BAPTISM
Baptism means the entrance into the
covenant of grrace of God and the incorporation into the Church of Christ. The
"right and necessary" sequence is preaching, faith, rebirth, and baptism.
Children cannot be pabtized in the right way because they are not reborn through
preaching, faith, and the Spirit."
V. DOCTRINE OF THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE
LORD'S TABLE
The Supper is a sign of the community of
Christ's body, in that each member thereby declares himself to be of the one mind, heart,
and Spirit of Christ. It is an act of remembrance at which God's children become
aware again of the grace which they have received. Only a true member of Christ may
participate. The unity of the fellowship of the Lord's Table must already exist
prior to the celebrating."
The Dordrecht
Confession of Faith 1632
VIII. Of the Church of Christ
We believe in, and confess a visible church of God, namely, those who, as has been said
before, truly repent and believe, and are rightly baptized; who are one with God in
heaven, and rightly incorporated into the communion of the saints here on earth. These we
confess to be the chosen generation, the royal priesthood, the holy nation, who are
declared to be the bride and wife of Christ, yea, children and heirs of everlasting life,
a tent, tabernacle, and habitation of God in the Spirit, built upon the foundation of the
apostles and prophets, of which Jesus Christ Himself is declared to be the cornerstone
(upon which His church is built). This church of the living God, which He has acquired,
purchased, and redeemed with His own precious blood; with which, according to His promise,
He will be and remain always, even unto the end of the world, for consolation and
protection, yea, will dwell and walk among them, and preserve them, so that no floods or
tempests, nay, not even the gates of hell, shall move or prevail against them-this church,
we say, may be known by their Scriptural faith, doctrine, love, and godly conversation,
as, also, by the fruitful observance, practice, and maintenance of the true ordinances of
Christ, which He so highly enjoined upon His disciples. I Cor. 12; I Pet. 2.9; John 3.29;
Rev. 19.7; Titus 3:6, 7; Eph. 2:19-21; Matt. 16.18; I Pet. 1.18, 19; Matt. 28.20; II Cor.
6:16; Matt. 7:25.
VII. Of Holy Baptism
Concerning baptism we confess that ~l penitent believers, who, through faith,
regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, are made one with God, and are written
in heaven, must, upon such Scriptural confession of faith, and renewing of life, be
baptized with water, in the most worthy name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost, according to the command of Christ, and the teaching, example, and practice of
the apostles, to the burying of their sins, and thus be incorporated into the communion of
the saints; henceforth to learn to observe all things which the Son of God has taught,
left, and commanded His disciples. Acts 2:38; Matt. 28:19, 20; Rom. 6:4; Mark 16:16; Matt.
3:15; Acts 8:16; 9:18; 10:47; 16:33; Col. 2:11, 12.Declaration Of several of the People called ANABAPTISTS,In and about the CITY of LONDON.
To the forth: Whereas we are further charged with endeavouring an universal Toleration of
all miscarriages, both in things Religious and Civil, under pretense of Liberty of
Conscience; it is in both respects notoriously false. And we do before the Lord, that
shall judge both quick and dead, yea, before Angels and men, declare our utter detestation
of such a Toleration; for in matters Civil, we desire there may not be the least
Toleration of miscarriage in any, much less in our selves.
Nor do we desire, in matters of Religion, that Popery should be tolerated, the bloud of
many thousands of the people of God, having been barbarously shed, by the Professors
thereof; or any persons tolerated, that worship a false god; nor any that speak
contemptuously and reproachfully of our Lord Jesus Christ; nor any that deny the holy
Scriptures, contained in the books of the Old and New Testaments, to be the Word of God:
And yet, we are not against tolerating of Episcopacy, Presbytery, or any stinted form,
provided they do compel any others to a compliance therewith, or a conformity thereunto:
for whatever Composers of any form of worship, may possibly erre; it is derogating from
God, and his holy Word, and injurious to men, to compel any to practice thereof." This last confessional excerpt shows their attitude to more contemporary developments in theology.
"By1562 Dutch exiles on
English soil are said to have numbered 30,000; but the Anabaptist element
among these had to lie concealed, for throughout the reign of Elizabeth the
death penalty awaited any who were convicted of holding Anabaptist
sentiments. These sentiments, however, seem to have penetrated areas
of English life where Anabaptists themselves did not appear, and to have
become part of the thought-system of the people generally, coming into
expression in the radical dissent of late sixteenth and early seventeenth
century England.
It is difficult to avoid the
conclusion that the interpretation of the scriptures by certain Englishmen
concerning such matters as the doctrine of a pure church, of freedom of
conscience, of believers' baptism, of congregational autonomy, and of
separation of church and state owed something to the infiltration of
Anabaptist ideas. To this case of ideas came Robert Brown, a
congregationalist, in 1580 to make his beginning. In the Dutch town of
Norwich, Robert Brown and Robert Harrison worked out their congregational
theories without showing any conscious indebtedness to Anabaptist
influences.
His experiment failed and his
people fled to Holland where the group disintegrated, and Browne
himself later conformed to the Church of England. However, Seperatists
ideas did not cease. Two leaders of a young Separatist church,
Henry Barrowe and John Greenwood, were imprisoned in 1586, but in 1589 they
sent from prison a simple church creed called A Trve Description ovt of
the Word of God, of the visible Church. The creed did not concern
itself with doctrinal matters since the congregation was already of one mind
in holding Calvinistic views."http://www.reformedreader.org/ccc/esbc.htmAt this point we see that the Anabaptist ideas were secretly infiltrating England prior to the "official Baptist"
from the true confession(archaic English)
10 That touching his Office, heed
only is made the Mediator of the nevv Testament, even of the euerlasting
Couenant of grace betvveen God & man, to bee perfectly & fully the eProphet,
Priest & King of the Church of God for euermore.
d 1. Tim. 2, 5. Heb 9. 15. & 13. 20. Dan. 9
24. 25. e Deut. 18, 15. 18. Psal. 110. 4. Psal. 45, Esa. 9, 6. 7. Act. 5. 31.
Esa. 55. 4. Heb. 7, 24. Luk. 1, 32, 33.
16 That this Kingdom shall bee then fully
perfected vvhen hee shal thex second tyme come in glorie vvith his
mightie Angells vnto iudgment, to abolish all rule, authoritie and povvre, to
put all his enimies vnder his feet, to seperate and free all his chosen from
them for ever, to punish the vvicked vvith everlasting perdition from his
presence, to gather, ioyne, and carry the godly with himself into endlesse
glory, and then to delyver, up the Kingdome to God, even the Father, that so the
glorie of the father may bee full and perfect in the Sonne, the glorie of the
Sonne in all his members, and God bee all in all.
x Dan. 12, 2. 3. Joh 5, 22. 28. 29. Mat.
25, 31. 1. Cor. 15. 24. Mat. 13, 41. 49. 2. Thes. 1, 9. 10. 1. Thes. 4, 17. Joh.
17, 22. 23. 1. Cor. 15, 28.
[xv] 17 That in the meane tyme, bisides his
absolute rule in the world, Christ hath here in earth ay
spirituall Kingdome and ?canonicall regiment in his Church ouer his
servants, which Church hee hathz purchased and redeemed to himself,
as a peculiar inheritance (notwithstandinga manie hypocrites do for
the tyme lurk emongest the) bcalling and winning them by the powre of
his word vnto the faith, seperating them from emongst vnbeleevers, from
idolitrie, false worship, superstition, vanitie, dissolute lyfe, & works of
darknes, &c; making them a royall Priesthood, an holy Nation, a people set at
libertie to shew foorth the virtues of him that hath called them out of darknes
into his meruelous light, dgathering and vniting them together as
members of one body in his faith, loue and holy order, vnto all generall and
mutuall dutyes, einstructing & governing them by such officers and
lawes as hee hath prescribed in his word; by which Officers and lawes hee
governeth his Church, and byf none other.
y Joh. 18. 36. Heb 3, 6. and 10. 21. 1.
Tim. 3, 15. Zach. 4, 17. z Act. 20, 28. Tit. 2, 14. a Mat. 13, 47. and 22. 12.
Luk. 13, 25. b Mar. 16, 15. 16. Col. 1, 21, 1. Cor. 6 11. Tit. 3, 3. 4. 5. c
Esa. 52. 11, Elr. 6, 21. Act. 2, 40. 2. Cor. 6, 14. Act. 17, 3. 4. and 19. 9.
1.Pet. 2, 4. 5. 9. 25. d Esa. 60, 4. 8. PsaI. 110, 3. Act. 2 41. Eph. 4, 16.
Col. 2, 5. 6. e Esa. 62, 6. Jer. 3, 15, Ezek. 34. Zech. 11, 8. Heb. 12, 28. 29.
Mat. 28, 20. f Mat. 7, 15. and 24. 23. 24. 2. Tim. 4, 3. 4. Jer. 7, 30. 31. and
23. 21. Deu. 12, 32. Reu. 2, 2. & 22. 18. 19
Here we see these early Calvinists are exactly what their name meant "Separatists". This is a core distinction from the current reformed Baptists movement that does not separate but seeks to dominate.
"Church records show that in 1630 a man named Dupper withdrew from the church. He reject the validity of his baptism because it was at the hands of Anglican Clergy. He had answered the 1st question partially if only negatively. The Anglican establishment, according to the separatist was anti-Christ. Dupper concluded that the priest of anti-Christ could not possibly administer the true ordinance of Christ. Therefore he concluded, he had no true baptism and neither did any other member of the Jacob-Lathrop-Jessey church. All had received it at the hands of anti-Christ." L.Rush Bush and Tom J. Nettles Baptist and the Bible ch. 2 pg.47 (remember Tom Nettles is a staunch Calvinist professor at SBTS So he is not trying to spin this against reformers)
Is this the movement that these 1689 Baptist want to claim is their reformed heritage?? Being a separatist is the opposite of New Evangelical! Many of the "Young Restless Reformed" crowd would revere J.I. Packer as a role model, but the English separatist looked to men who were more conservative as antichrist!! This is NOT the same heritage!
Typically the British Separatist theory places John Smyth as the first Baptist.
"(5) That there is no original sin (lit;, no sin of origin or descent), but all sin is
actual and voluntary, viz., a word, a deed, or a design against the law of God; and
therefore, infants are without sin. "SHORT CONFESSION OF FAITH
IN XX ARTICLES BY JOHN SMYTH
Now how on earth can anyone claim that this person is coming from a reformed tradition! This would be instantly shot down as heresy and met with literal violence!"(12) That the church of Christ is a company of the faithful; baptised after confession of
sin and of faith, endowed with the power of Christ.
(13) That the church of Christ has power delegated to themselves of announcing the word,
administering the sacraments, appointing ministers, disclaiming them, and also
excommunicating; but the last appeal is to the brethren of body of the church. "
Here again no mention of an "invisible church". And yet the denial of an invisible church is supposed to be a rare "landmark Baptist" cult centuries later!
Most of the landmark movements views are longheld Baptist beliefs. Only some in that movement became hyper. Arguing only a certain systematic theology was the true church. Many extremes I disavow, and yet often this a term manipulated to slander others I don't label myself this because of the sheer confusion as to what it does and does not imply. For instance I do not believe the church is perpetuated by a perfect lineage of baptisms, nor does lineage equate true doctrine, true doctrine is the exposition of scripture.
1st London Baptist Confession of faith
XXXIII.
That Christ has here on earth a spiritual Kingdom, which
is the Church, which He has purchased and redeemed to Himself, as a particular
inheritance: which Church, as it is visible to us, is a company of visible(1) saints,(2)
called and separated from the world, by the Word and the(3) Spirit of God, to
the visible profession of the faith of the Gospel, being baptized into the faith, and
joined to the Lord, and each other, by mutual agreement, in the practical enjoyment of the(4)
ordinances, commanded by Christ their head and King.
1) 1 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1
2) Rom. 1:1; Acts 26:18; 1 Thes. 1:9; 2 Cor. 6:17; Rev. 18:18
3) Acts 2:37 with Acts 10:37
4) Rom. 10:10; Acts 2:42; 20:21; Mat. 18:19, 20; 1 Peter 2:5
XXXIV.
To this Church He has(1) made His
promises, and given the signs of His Covenant, presence, love, blessing, and protection:
here are the fountains and springs of His heavenly grace continually flowing forth;(2)
thither ought all men to come, of all estates, that acknowledge Him to be their Prophet,
Priest, and King, to be enrolled amongst His household servants, to under His heavenly
conduct and government, to lead their lives in His walled sheepfold, and watered garden,
to have communion here with the saints, that they may be made to be partakers of their
inheritance in the Kingdom of God. "
It is very clear that even the particular Baptist are not the same family as their later reformed Baptist pretenders.
"On June 24, 1830, the Baptist convention of New Hampshire appointed a committee to prepare and present at the next annual sessions "Such a declaration of faith and practice, together with a covenant, as may be thought agreeable and consistent with all the views of all other churches in this state." The resolution calling for this action indicates that the feeling of the body was that the known Baptist declarations of faith were not "in precisely the same language as it is desirable that they should be." In point of fact, the theological views of Calvinistic Baptists in the New Hampshire area had been considerably modified after 1780 by the rise of Free Will Baptists(later called Free Baptists) following the leadership of Benjamin Randall. The Free-Will Baptist message was welcomed with enthusiasm by the great middle class in New England and it's warm evangelism produced a revolt against the rigid theological system of some Calvinistic Baptists. The New Hampshire confession of faith sought to restate it's Calvinism in very moderate tones." pg. 360 Baptist Confessions of Faith William L. Lumkin
4. THE WAY OF SALVATION
The salvation of sinners is wholly of grace, through the mediatorial office of the Son of
God, who by the Holy Spirit was born of the Virgin Mary and took upon him our nature, yet
without sin; honored the divine law by his personal obedience and made atonement for our
sins by his death. Being risen from the dead, he is now enthroned in heaven, and, uniting
in his person the tenderest sympathies with divine perfections, he is in every way
qualified to be a compassionate and all-sufficient Saviour.
5. JUSTIFICATION
Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal upon principles of righteousness of all
sinners who believe in Christ. This blessing is bestowed, not in consideration of any
works of righteousness which we have done, but through the redemption that is in and
through Jesus Christ. It brings us into a state of most blessed peace and favor with God,
and secures every other needed blessing.
6.THE FREENESS OF SALVATION
The blessings of salvation are made free to all by the gospel. It is the duty of all to
accept them by penitent and obedient faith. Nothing prevents the salvation of the greatest
sinner except his own voluntary refusal to accept Jesus Christ as teacher, Saviour and
Lord.
7. REGENERATION
Regeneration or the new birth is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit, whereby we
become partakers of the divine nature and a holy disposition is given, leading to the love
and practice of righteousness. It is a work of God's free grace conditioned upon faith in
Christ and made manifest by the fruit which we bring forth to the glory of God." 1925 Baptist Faith and Message
It should be notticed that the 1st ever confession of the Southern baptist was made during it's arguable heyday when the construction IMB was taking place and missions were excellerated a robustly conservative confession that was altered by the less conservative 1963 edition. It should also be notticed that the succesful confession was a further modification away from calvinism. I have heard individuals calvinists admit that they could not adhere to it.
IV. Separate Baptist as the true ancestors of American Baptist
"The Separate Baptists took
their origin in Connecticut. Valentine Wightman was a grandson of
Edward Wightman, the last man burned at the stake in England in
1612. Valentine Wightman was born in 1681 and raised in Rhode
Island. He was saved and became a member of the North Kingstown
Baptist Church. In 1705 he moved to Groton Connecticut and founded
the first Baptist church in that state. He pastored there for 42
years and was succeeded by his son, Timothy Wightman. In 1743
Valentine Wightman and his church began a mission church at North
Stonington Connecticut. Waitt Palmer was the first pastor. It was
just at this time that the Great Awakening had come to prominence.
In Tolland Connecticut in 1745 a Congregationalist named Shubal
Stearns, under the influence of the Great Awakening, withdrew from
his church and organized a Separate Congregational Church. By 1751
he became convinced, by contact with Waitt Palmer, that infant
baptism was not scriptural and became a Baptist. Palmer baptized
Stearns at night in the Willamantic River because of great
opposition to his views. He then organized a Baptist church in
Tolland. ..."The Separate Baptists were dedicated to the
same old time religion that has characterized the Greer Baptist
Campmeeting and Pelham and Tabernacle Baptist Churches. They
preached a whosoever will gospel with strong gestures and tears and
altar calls during which the preachers left the platform and went
through the congregation exhorting sinners to come forward to be
saved. They preached the new birth just as we do. The entire
congregation (there were no choirs or special songs) sang the gospel
in folk tunes such as Amazing Grace was later set to. They rattled
the rafters with their songs and were free to testify in church, to
say "amen" or "glory," and to run or shout if they were moved by the
Holy Ghost. One of the reasons the Separate Baptists kept clear of
the Regular and Particular Baptists was that these other Baptists
held more "orderly" or "dignified" services. But a few Regular
Baptists, such as the Chappawomsick Church in Virginia, pastored by
Davis Thomas and Daniel Fristoe, also got in on the "new light"
revival and held services that were much like those of the
Separates. The other reason the Separate Baptists kept that name
until after the American Revolution was their obedience to 2
Corinthians 6:17: "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye
separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I
will receive you.'...Within a space of 17 years after its
organization Sandy Creek had planted 42 daughter churches, from
which 125 preachers had been called. Within 50 years it had 1000
daughter churches. Shubal Stearns organized the first daughter
churches into the Sandy Creek Baptist Association. When Stearns died
in 1771 his church had 606 members, and on his monument at Sandy
Creek are the words:"....
""From that period, when our fathers left the
land of their nativity for settlement in these American wilds, for
liberty, for civil and religious liberty, for liberty of conscience,
to worship their Creator according to their conceptions of Heaven's
revealed will, from the moment they placed foot on the American
continent, and in deeply imbedded forests sought an asylum from
persecution and tyranny, from that moment despotism was crushed; for
fetters of darkness were broken, and Heaven decreed that man should
be free-free to worship God according to the Bible. Were it not for
this, in vain have been the efforts and sacrifices of the colonists;
in vain were all their sufferings and bloodshed to subjugate this
new world, if we, their offspring, must still be oppressed and
persecuted...
In the providence of God, James Madison got a
letter from Joseph Spencer in March, 1788 telling him that Leland
was likely to win election as a delegate from Orange County. He
asked Madison to visit Leland to discuss the election. Madison came
to John Leland's home on the eve of the election, and Leland
obtained a promise from Madison that a Bill of Rights, including the
first amendment which prevented the establishment of an official
state church in this country, would be introduced in the First
Congress. Leland was satisfied and reassured and so withdrew from
the election and advised his Baptist constituents in Orange County
to vote for Madison. This news may well have passed to other
Virginia counties. Madison and Gordon won election from Orange
County. Two delegates from each county were chosen for the state
convention. The convention ratified the constitution by 187 to 168,
a thin margin of 19 votes out of 355 cast. If Leland had been there
with Patrick Henry to argue against ratification the vote might have
been against. I believe Leland would have prayed about his
withdrawal, perhaps he prayed at the close of his meeting with
Madison. I believe he was led of the Lord to withdraw, having peace
in his heart that there would be a Bill of Rights."http://sightlerpublications.com/history/SeparateBaptistRevival.htm
Separate Baptists are particularly visible in Kentucky, where a member of the denomination, Vernie McGaha of Russell Springs, served in the state senate. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_Baptists
Baptist Faith and message 1963
"IV. Salvation
Salvation involves the redemption or the
whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who
by His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer. In its broadest sense
salvation includes regeneration, sanctification, and glorification. A. Regeneration, or
the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ
Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to
which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of grace. Repentance is a genuine turning
from sin toward God. Faith is the acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire
personality to Him as Lord and Saviour. Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal
upon principles of His righteousness of all sinners who repent and believe in Christ.
Justification brings the believer into a relationship of peace and favor with God. B.
Sanctification is the experience, beginning in regeneration, by which the believer is set
apart to God's purposes, and is enabled to progress toward moral and spiritual perfection
through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit dwelling in him. Growth in grace should
continue throughout the regenerate person's life. C. Glorification is the culmination of
salvation and is the final blessed and abiding state of the redeemed. "
It should be noted that the change of view on regeneration did not start at the BF&M 2000, instead it happened in the 1963. This may come as a shock sense the thought of Hershael Hobbs and his soteriology was considered in a more free will "traditionalist" direction. Either a member of the committee was Calvinistic or they were pushing this to open the door towards inclusive salvation.
Regardless the BF&M actually scaled back the assertion in 2000.
"Salvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered
freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who by
His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer. In its
broadest sense salvation includes regeneration, justification, sanctification,
and glorification. There is no salvation apart from personal faith
in Jesus Christ as Lord.
A. Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby
believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of
heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which
the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord
Jesus Christ. Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of
grace. Repentance is a genuine turning from sin toward God. Faith is the
acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire personality
to Him as Lord and Saviour."
Now one important aspect of this reformed Baptist movement is the fact that most of the major movers of this New Calvinism movement our outside of the Southern Baptist Convention even though they concern themselves the most with the state of the SBC.
R.C. Sproul-Presbyterian, Doug Wilson-Presbyterian,J.I. Packer-Episcopalian, John Macarthur-independent Baptist, John Piper-swiss Baptist, James White-Reformed Baptist, Hank Hannengraff-calvary chapel-Eastern Orthodoxy(!) RC Sproul Jr.-Presbyterian Etc.
In contemporary history the conduit appears to be Albert Mohlar and the faculty he hires which has brought the influence into SBC life.
Now this is an important point in the fact that the 1689 LBCF is the most sacramental of the Baptist confessions.
"ch. 30:7._____ Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements
in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed,
yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon
Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood
of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present
to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves
are to their outward senses.
(
1 Corinthians 10:16;
1 Corinthians 11:23-26
) "
Now if the body and blood of Jesus christ were sacrificed and offered once for all, then how can repitition of the Lord's supper gain any more benefits of the death of Christ? All the jargon against experiential christianity flew right out the window! And you can not find this in the baptist tradition prior to this. It is an inherit rejection of essential elements to the baptist faith which are also because this is by nature ecumenical and leads us back to mercersberg theology.
"Designates the theological school of the German Reformed Church that set out to oppose the emotional revivalism of the mid-19th century by re-presenting the faith of the early reformers and by stressing doctrine, especially Christology, ecclesiology, and sacramental theology. It originated about 1836 with Profs. Frederick Rauch (1806–41), John Williamson nevin (1803–86), and Philip schaff (1819–93), all faculty members of the German Reformed Seminary at Mercersburg, Pa. Convinced that popular revivalism was not in harmony with the heidel berg catechism, they undertook a positive and historical reexamination of earlier writings in order to recover the pre-Puritan faith of the reformers and to promote a historical appreciation of the Church's past. The result was a system grounded on the centrality of Christ and the Church.The Mercersburg theologians taught that the Incarnate Word, Christ, is the primary truth of Christianity; in Him all men are regenerated and united as members of His body, a spiritual organism called the church. The Church, extending through all ages and destined to include all peoples, is ever the same, yet each age appreciates its fullness differently. From this they concluded that no doctrinal formula or organizational structure can be final, and the church must modify its teachings according to its progressive knowledge of Christian truth. While strongly upholding the general priesthood of the laity, these theologians also maintained that Christ, who is ever present in the Church, perpetuates His mediatorial mission through an order of men, all equal, who speak in His name, dispense His Sacraments, and rule His flock. The Sacraments (baptism and the Lord's Supper) are not mere signs, but "real seals of God's covenant with man" and channels of grace, made efficacious by faith. As a consequence of these teachings, the leaders at Mercersburg urged a liturgical restoration and openly attacked the then prevalent emotional revivalism. Constantly questioned and suspected, the Mercersburg professors were tried three times for heresy and acquitted. Because of disagreements with Nevin and Schaff, several congregations left the Reformed Church, but they had little influence beyond their own membership."https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/mercersburg-theology
Yet here again, we see this hatred of revivalism with it's emotions in favor of a more catholic liturgy. But this sounds a lot like the Federal Vision Movement espoused by Doug Wilson, only they go even further by blurring the lines of justification with sanctification.
"Justification by Works [sic]
The movement that calls itself the ìfederal visionî teaches justification by the obedience of the sinner. ìThe presuppositions undergirding Paul’s statement [in Romans 2:13] include the facts that the Law is ‘obeyable,’ that truly responding to the Law (the Word) in faith does justifyî (Schlissel, 260). Romans 2:13 states that ìthe doers of the law shall be justified.î Schlissel’s comment on the text, that the ìLaw is ‘obeyable,’î affirms justification by deeds of obedience to the law.
Schlissel denies that Romans 3:28 has any and all human works in view when it speaks of the ìdeeds of the lawî: ìTherefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.î Rather, the reference is only to ìJewishî deeds, that is, ceremonial works done with the motive of meriting salvation (260, 261). According to Schlissel, the apostle merely excludes ìJewishî deeds from justification. Other deeds, deeds performed by the believer in the power of true faith, are included in justification. The Apostle Paul concluded that a man is justified by faith without deeds - any deed and all deeds. Steve Schlissel concludes that a man is justified by faith with deeds - deeds performed by faith.
Peter Leithart charges the Reformation with distorting the truth of justification: ìThe Reformation doctrine of justification has illegitimately narrowed and to some extent distorted the biblical doctrineî (209). The distortion is the Reformation’s sharply distinguishing justification and sanctification and its insistence that justification is a verdict (211, 213). Leithart argues that justification in Scripture has ìa much wider scope of application than the strictly judicialî (209). In fact, according to Leithart, ìjustifying is never merely declaring a verdictî (213; the emphasis is the author’s). Justification is also the sanctifying work of God within the sinner enabling him to perform good works, which then become part of his righteousness with God, as Rome has been teaching for the past five hundred years.
Resistible Grace
The ìfederal visionî teaches that the saving grace of God in Christ is universal within the sphere of the covenant, but that this grace can be resisted and lost. Everyone who is baptized, particularly every child of believing parents who is baptized, is savingly united to Christ, although many later fall away and perish:
Non-elect covenant members are actually brought to Christ, united to Him and the Church in baptism, receive various gracious operations of the Holy Spirit, and may even be said to be loved by God for a timeÖ. In some sense, they were really joined to the elect people, really sanctified by Christ’s blood, and really recipients of new life given by the Holy Spirit. The sacraments they received had objective force and efficacy [Lusk, 288].
God truly brings those people into His covenant, into union with Christ. They are ìin Him,î to use Jesus’ words in John 15. They share in His blessings (think of Hebrews 6). They experience His love, but that covenant relationship is conditional. It calls for repentance and faith and new obedience. God’s choice was not conditional, but life in the covenant is [Barach, 37; the emphasis is the author’s].
The new covenant theology in the Reformed and Presbyterian churches teaches that election fails to save many whom God chooses. It teaches that the eternal election of Ephesians 1:4 and Colossians 3:12 fails to save many who are the objects of this gracious choice. ìAnd yet not all who are united to the Elect One, Jesus Christ, remain in Him and fulfill the high vocation that election brings with it. It is still to be seen who will persevere and who will fall away from within the elect peopleî (Lusk, 294).
Baptismal Regeneration
The movement teaches baptismal regeneration. The ceremony of sprinkling with water in the name of the triune God effects the temporary regeneration and salvation of everyone baptized. It effects regeneration by the power of the Spirit, but the ceremony regenerates and saves everyone who is baptized, particularly every infant of godly parents. This regeneration and salvation can be lost. ìThe threshold into union with Christ, new life in the Spirit, and covenant membership in the family of God is actually crossed when the child is baptizedî (Lusk, 109).
The advocates of the ìfederal visionî teach the falling away of covenant saints from saving covenant grace. They teach the falling away of saints aggressively. The falling away of covenant saints is one of their favorite doctrines:
Those who ultimately prove to be reprobate may be in covenant with God. They may enjoy for a season the blessings of the covenant, including the forgiveness of sins, adoption, possession of the kingdom, sanctification, etc., and yet apostatize and fall short of the grace of God [Wilkins, 62].
Clearly, then, Hebrews 6:4-8 teaches the possibility of a real apostasy. Some people do indeed fall away, and it is a real fall from grace. Apostates actually lose blessings they once possessed. Apostasy is so terribly heinous precisely because it is sin against grace [Lusk, 274; the emphasis is the author’s]."[sic]
"Federal Vision*" David Engelsma
http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=221
Why were so many Baptist in the 1600's Calvinists?
"In 1660 the General Baptists had already adopted A Brief Confession or Declaration of the Faith, in order to "set forth by many of us, who are falsely called Ana-Baptists to inform all men (in these days of scandal and reproach) of our innocent Belief and Practice; for which we are not only resolved to suffer Persecution, to the loss of our Goods, but also life it self, rather than do the same." With this political and theological purpose in mind, why would the Assembly, or churches affiliated with it, feel a need to establish a new document?
The answer tot his question is twofold. First was the political reason. Shortly after the presentation of the 1660 confession, under the leadership of Thomas Venner, the fifth Monarchists broke into rebellion and caused dissenters and especially Baptists to be looked upon with greater suspicion2 B.R.White suggests that "Fifth monarchy views were regarded as politically dangerous and that the authorities did not attempt to make any distinction between those who were relatively harmless Bible students and those who were potential or actual revolutionaries."3 This hazardous situation created a bond between the dissenting factions, and with the act of uniformity in 1662 adding Presbyterians to their ranks, an increased conglomerate of opposition led the Baptists to seek uniformity with other factions who were fighting not just against the Church of England but against the threat of Popery from King Charles II.5 In 1677 the Particular Baptist presented their 2nd London Baptist Confession. Then in 1678 when "an ebullition of anti-Roman wrath swept through the nation:6 the General Baptist of the midlands followed what the Particular Baptist had done the year previous sand presented a creed. The subtitle of this creed, as contrasted with the previous one, was simply, An Essay to unite and conform all true Protestants in the Fundamental Articles of the Christian Religion Against the errors and Heresies of the church of Rome/"
Unity was the main purpose of the Orthodox Creed. William H. Brackney in discussing the desire to present more mediating positions of though among General Baptists, calls it "The capstone document of mediating confessions."7 Following the form of the Westminster Confession, and subsequently that of the Particular Baptist, was not the only way in which a sense of community with other dissenters was sought in this confession. As Underwood says, "It's articles on Election, Reprobation, and Original Sin, and Perseverance were nothing like as Arminian in tone as John Smyth or Thomas Helwys would have made them."8
Southwestern Journal of Theology "British Baptists" Transcribers preface pg. 127-129
V. Confessional hypocrisy
James White is a reformed Baptist scholar, who has gained some notoriety opposing any connected to the KJVO movement. In his rejection of this movement he advocates the new evangelical view of inerracy. Which is that the Bible WAS inspired without error, HOWEVER this was in the original autographs which are forever lost; thus there is no inerrancy completely(which logical is only what inerrancy is) of any Bible on God's green earth!
One obvious example would be his rejection of 1 John 5:7
Here he is making accusations about an important Greek manuscript supporting it.
"The manuscript is highly suspect, in that it most probably was created in the house of Grey Friars, whose provincial, Henry Standish, was an old enemy of Erasmus, and whose intention was to simply refute Erasmus." James White The King James Only Controversy pg. 61
Now, the common thought is "So what? If he doesn't believe it he doesn't believe it. Well what does his preferred and advertised confession state?
"The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the
people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time
of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being
immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept
pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of
religion, the church is finally to appeal to them." 1689 LBCF ch. 1.8
The text is kept pure "in all ages" It should be pure and available to the church. Now some have argued they were preserved away from the church or even just the byzantine and not something like the comma. However the confession gives many scripture references as proof texts.
" 3._____ In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences,
the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit, of one substance, power,
and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence
undivided: the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding;
the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeding
from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore
but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but
distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal
relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our
communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him.
(
1 John 5:7;
Matthew 28:19;
2 Corinthians 13:14;
Exodus 3:14;
John 14:11;
1 Corinthians 8:6;
John 1:14,18;
John 15:26;
Galatians 4:6
) "
You will notice 1 John 5:7 is a proof text and the confession seems to borrow from the verse by putting "Word" in the formula.
Not to beat this drum exhaustively but I have seen other TR readings such as Mark 16:19 and Acts 8:37 employed as well.
Thus, White is in contradiction with his own confession!!!
So why is there such promotion of this text? Simple, He is using it's symbolic Authority to lure Calvinists into submission. The reformers are not Baptist they had a stronger hierarchical structure which they need to indoctrinate Baptists with to gain their allegiance.
The RAM affair
When Reforming America Ministries(Sonny Hernandez & Theodore Zachariades a Calvinistic ministry debated Baptist traditionalists Leighton Flowers and Jonathon Pritchett
https://youtu.be/ZXWLJxonUKY
By most standards this group which claimed degrees from SBTS was extreme. They held that Baptist traditionalists were not Christians. They even denied their stated 1689 Baptist confession of faith in terms of it's statement on free will. But instead claimed that free will did not exist. Thus while they wanted to promote this confession they had no desire to adhere to it.
John MacArthur on TBN
https://youtu.be/TPvs_psxx7Q
Now if you watch this youtube video where Kirk Cameron interviews Macarthur he gives a very noble sounding lordship salvation Gospel.
"We also teach that separation from all religious apostasy and worldly and sinful practices is commanded of us by God (Romans 12:1-2, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13; 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1; 1 John 2:15-17; 2 John 9-11)."https://www.gracechurch.org/about/doctrinal-statement?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
The pervasion of Van Til and Dutch Calvinism."What is important for our present purpose is Dooeyweerd's theory of "The Boundary." The doctrine of the Boundary is the most important way followers of Dooeyweerd emphasize the sovereignty and transcendence of God." pg. 96
"L.Kalsbeek makes clear the gap or wall that Dooeyweerdians think exists between the mind of God and the human mind.
'With our human thinking and the laws established for it, we find ourselves on the creaturely side of that boundary, unable to cross it because of the very nature, the very meaning of our thinking. We can only think about what lies on our side of that boundary. Due to the limitations of our creaturely thinking as a result of its subjection to the law, we can only engage in meaningless speculation when it comes to questions and pronouncements about whatever lies on the other side of the boundary." pg. 97
"I once asked Van Til if, when some human being knows that 1plus1equals 2, that human beings knowledge is identical with God's knowledge. The question I thought was innocent enough. Van Til's only answer was to smile, shrug his shoulders and declare that the question was improper in the sense that it had no answer. It had no answer, because any proposed answer would presume what is impossible for Van Til, namely. the laws like those found in mathematics and logic apply beyond the boundary. Van Til rejects the presumption that a person might know something about the mind of God that was not the product of special revelation. Unlike Van Til few Christians have any difficulty affirming the following three3 propositions: (a) 1 plus 1 equals 2 (b) God knows that 1 plus 1 equals 2; and (c) when a human being knows that 1 plus 1 equals 2, his or her knowledge is identical with God's knowledge of the same proposition. It makes much more sense to reject the skeptical premise of Van Til's position than it does to deny any of these three claims." Ronald H. Nash The Word of God and the Mind of Man pg. 100
How far does this rule against the knowledge of God apply?"Van Til's basic concern in the context of the incomprehensibility of God is with our understanding of scripture. Can we say that we have "fully" understood a passage when we have understood it correctly? Van Til says No. for essentially the reason that I noted above. God's knowledge, even of human language, is of a fundamentally different order than from ours. Does that mean that scripture is unclear and even unintelligible? If so we would have to say that God failed in His attempt to communicate! No, Scripture is clear enough, so that we have no excuse for disobedience." pg 34 The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God John M. Frame
But if our basic ability to reason is not in connect with God the our readings of scripture to comprehend the Bible is also off. We may know enough to be guilty but how can we know enough to do good??"It is precisely because they are concerned to defend the christian doctrine of revelation as basic to all intelligible human predication that they refuse to make any attempt at "stating clearly" any christian doctrine, or the relation of any one christians doctrine to any other christian doctrine. They will not attempt to "solve" the "paradoxes" involved in the relationship of the self contained God to his dependent creatures." Introduction to Systematic theology chapter 13 page 172
van til said these remarks in regards to His students
Let's examine the implications, if man is limited in His knowledge of God then man is limited in his knowledge of the Bible. Faith is compulsory and therefore based in determinism as opposed to faith in the scriptures. Thus the scriptures can not correct determinism because the scriptures can not be understood enough to make such a correction. The Van tillian often has n need to win your concession in a debate only to win over their own minds.
Just scrolling through reformed facebook circle you will find statements like "Calvinism is Christianity". This implies a sectarianism and mentality that insulates them from all other reasoning.
VI. Baptist Reformation?
Proverbs 20:23: Diverse weights and measures are an abomination to the LORD and a false balance is not good."
It should be noticed that the vast majority of movers and shakers among the SBC for the resurgence were not proponents of reformed theology but of Dispensationalism. W.A. Criswell, Paige Patterson, Adrian Rogers, Charles Stanley, Jimmy Draper, and a host of other popular preachers of this period were dominantly dispensational. However they simply had no grip upon the Seminary. As a result, their only viable option was found in the reformed Al Mohler. When Mohler took over it was granted to him by the non-reformed and here is why that was a grave error.
"The next challenge for Mohler and the unfolding conservative resurgence revolved around the Carver school of Social Work at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. On march 20. 1995 Dean Diana R, Garland was removed from her position as dean. According to Mohler the reason for her dismissal was her 'unwillingness to resolve policy and personnel issues within appropriate administrative structures of the Seminary' Specifically a faculty opening developed in the Carver School of Social Work, and working through her process, Garland recommended David Sherwood to the faculty.
In the school's process of hiring a faculty, the president was required to interview the candidate. As a result of the interview, Mohler said that he could not recommend him to the trustees to be added to the faculty. The specific issue revolved around Sherwood's affirmation of women as Senior pastors." Jerry Sutton The Baptist Reformation pg. 357
Now I am not posting this piece to judge Mohler necessarily over this firing. He may have had complete authority to do so. However, this move sets a precedent for how Dr. Mohler should operate in the future if he indeed wants to be consistent. The issue of women in the pastorate is not mentioned in the abstract of principles.
"XIV. The Church
The Lord Jesus is the head of the Church, which is composed of all His true disciples, and in Him is invested supremely all power for its government. According to His commandment, Christians are to associate themselves into particular societies or churches; and to each of these churches He hath given needful authority for administering that order, discipline and worship which He hath appointed. The regular officers of a Church are Bishops or Elders, and Deacons."
By the way, Mr. Sherwood was not being hired to deal with pastoral training and the 1963 BF&M does not deal with the issue of women in the pastorate either.
These means that Mohler was not constrained to refuse this candidate. The "Baptist Reformation" was famous for it's insistence on confessional integrity. So if Dr. Mohler is going to hold the more liberal Baptist to toe such a strict line, then it should be expected that his future administration would operate by the book.
Enter Mark Seifrid
Now an issue of greater importance than the sex of the pastor would be the doctrine of Justification.
BF&M 2000
B. Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal upon principles
of His righteousness of all sinners who repent and believe in Christ.
Justification brings the believer unto a relationship of peace and
favor with God. "
Abstract of Principles
"XI. JustificationJustification is God’s gracious and full acquittal of sinners, who believe in Christ, from all sin, through the satisfaction that Christ has made; not for anything wrought in them or done by them; but on account of the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith."
Now let's examine some of Seifrid's statements.
"It is fair to say that something of the ‘Christ-centred’ understanding of justification which Luther and Calvin grasped was lost in subsequent Protestant thought, where justification came to be defined in terms of the believer and not in terms of Christ. It is worth observing that Paul never speaks of Christ’s righteousness as imputed to believers, as became standard in Protestantism (Seifrid 2000, 173-174).
Interestingly it is Dr. James white who is calling out for accountability in this situation.
"I respond to this statement for one simple reason: if you can say, without retraction, that the concept of imputation is an “addition” made by “Protestant orthodoxy,” that it is “deficient,” that the distinction of the active and passive obedience of Christ in reference to that imputed righteousness is “unnecessary and misleading” and that such a misleading view arose from a “failure to grasp that Christ’s work represents the prolepsis of the final judgment and the entrance of the age to come,” and that “Protestant divines” “reduced” justification to a “present possession of ‘Christ’s imputed righteousness’ resulting in their bruising “the nerve which runs between justification and obedience,” and then say “The biblical doctrine of justification entails nothing less than the understanding that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to those who believe,” then theological discourse has come to a screeching halt, words have lost all meaning, and in the very halls of academia today we cannot say with any level of clarity just what justification involves and whether we stand clothed in the righteousness of Christ or whether we do not."http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/2004/09/04/a-response-to-southern-seminary-and-dr-mark-seifrid/
It is important to notice that James White is an avowed Lordship salvationist who decried a reformed Baptist pastor for "soul winning" with Pastor Stephen Anderson because Anderson does not hold to Lordship salvation. But He in this situation, is the voice of reason on justification!!!
Dr. Seifrid would be on staff about a decade. Is this the same approach that Mohler used for Mr. Sherwood? The only apparent observation I come away with is that "might makes right".
Albert Mohler and new evangelicals/Southern Baptist indoctrinated against fundamentalism
"When I arrived at Seminary, I quickly learned that the great goal of my ministerial life was necessary to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I was not a fundamentalist. The faculty of that day represented a generation of Southern Baptists who feared any association with fundamentalism and were doing their dead level best to prove that they were not fundamentalists. They were spectacularly successful in achieving that goal. So much so in fact, that many openly embraced liberal theology. Accepted into the theological tribe of that school, I knew that my first concern must be to prove my nonfundamentalist identity.
But problems ensued. In the first place, I began to see that an aversion to fundamentalism could ( and before my eyes did) quickly lead to an embrace of heterodoxy. All I knew were fundamentalists stereotypes, and they were easy enough to confirm when I observed many fundamentalists churches, organizations publications, and schools. I didn't want any part of that spirit, then tendency to elevate peripheral matters as central concerns, the anti-intellectualism, the kjv-onlyism, and the cultural awkwardness." R. Albert Mohler pg. 51 The Spectrum of Evangelicalism
Now the New Calvinism of Mohler is not the traditional conservatism of the fundamentalist movement he bears no allegiance to them, So he does not necessarily have to be faithful tot he political right wing either. Even though he spent a great many years garnering their support.
Mohler's connection with Matt Bevin"The Nov. 3 gubernatorial election is “good news for Kentucky that someone with Matt Bevin’s values has been elected convincingly,” R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said after Bevin’s nine-point landslide win over Democratic nominee Jack Conway.
“Matt Bevin is a man of character; he is a Christian who loves the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” Mohler said of Bevin, a businessman who has never held political office and who endowed a key missions arm of the Louisville seminary.""https://bcnn1wp.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/new-kentucky-governor-matt-bevin-has-strong-ties-to-southern-baptist-theological-seminary/
While at times especially at first such an endorsement seemed deserved as Bevin stood up for the regular conservative causes.
However, as Bevin left office, there appeared a very corrupt ending to a promising start.
"FRANKFORT — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell joined the growing number of officials criticizing former Gov. Matt Bevin's controversial pardons, calling ones for those convicted of violent crimes "completely inappropriate."
McConnell made the remarks about Bevin's last-minute pardons in Frankfort on Friday, shortly after filing his paperwork to run for reelection next year.
“Honestly, I don’t approve," McConnell said of his pardons. "It seems to me it was completely inappropriate. I expect he has the power to do it, but looking at the examples of people who were incarcerated as the result of heinous crimes, no, I don’t approve of them.”
Earlier on Friday, Democratic state legislators called for the incoming attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Bevin's pardons for possible criminal wrongdoing, particularly his pardon of the brother of a political donor serving a 19-year sentence for homicide."
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/13/mcconnell-calls-bevins-pardons-completely-inappropriate/2640602001/
As a political activist, I know the Seminary has been squeamish about getting involved in politics. Yet after Bevin gave his donations to the Missions program his Campaign was flooded with Seminary volunteers. However, actions have consequences. Bevin has been caught getting big donations from a donor whose brother he later pardoned for murder.
Mohler uses double predestination to justify a gay gene theory. "Writer Jonathan Merritt, a Southern Baptist minister and well-known social critic, quoted Mohler as saying “We’ve lied about the nature of homosexuality and have practiced what can only be described as a form of homophobia,” and “We’ve used the choice language when it is clear that sexual orientation is a deep inner struggle and not merely a matter of choice.”
“But we as evangelicals have a very sad history in dealing with this issue,” he continued. “We have told not the truth, but we have told about half the truth. We’ve told the biblical truth, and that’s important, but we haven’t applied it in the biblical way.”
“We have said to people that homosexuality is just a choice,” Mohler said. “It’s clear that it’s more than a choice. That doesn’t mean it’s any less sinful, but it does mean it’s not something people can just turn on and turn off. We are not a gospel people unless we understand that only the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ gives a homosexual person any hope of release from homosexuality.” https://baptistnews.com/article/mohler-says-baptists-must-repent-of-homophobia/#.Xe_Y5HdFx1s
So the secular world sees Mohler's attack as obvious. It is amazing to think that the a man mohler used to embraced is now being compared to that of a sex offender.
"I have known Dr Robert Oscar Lopez for several years and we have worked together on projects , articles and several conferences. He has a powerful testimony of deliverance from homosexuality and from having been raised in a lesbian household in an Ivy League ,achievement driven, family. Dr. Lopez is a writer, educator, thinker, speaks 8 languages and is Yale educated. He does not shy from the truth about his past or his conversion to faith in Jesus and has paid a price for standing up in secular academia for the Gospel . One such stand left him embattled and jobless in California. In the heat of this battle and aftermath Dr. Lopez was contacted and offered the chance to teach at SWBTS in Ft Worth by then President Paige Patterson who himself was destined to become the target of progressive forces in his own Southern Baptist Convention .Once Paige Patterson was forced out of office at SWBTS in the Spring of 2018 Dr. Lopez and his closest friends all knew he was now in a perilous place with his employment. From all outside appearances it was the #MeToo movement and the secular press who “caught “Paige Patterson “covering up” a long history of abuse. But once the new administration for SWBTS came on line it was fairly clear that the power behind Patterson’s removal was Albert Mohler as his “team”, including Randy Stinson (who became SWBTS new Provost), were moved into place to complete the Mohler machine take down and take over of the Ft Worth Seminary.
LIFE IN THE MOHLER CROSSHAIRS The day after Thanksgiving 2019 Dr. Lopez finally received “official notice” of his termination from SWBTS. Supposedly he was “laid off” because curriculum changes eliminated his position when in fact Mohler’s people, including Stinson, had been targeting and intimidating Lopez for months. They called him into meeting after meeting with the Dean and the Provost – demanding he not do interviews or write on issues related to LGBTQ and his testimony without gaining permission from a new young staffer Colby Adams. who was also from the Mohler camp as Mohler’s Producer for his program”The Briefing” producer."
https://thirtypiecesofsilver.org/2019/12/05/why-albert-mohler-is-responsible-for-swbts-problems-with-dr-lopez/"Finally, although Dr. Lopez’s position is being eliminated due to changing program needs of our college, our decision was undergirded by his own actions, which included his failure to comply with basic administrative policies, his being the subject of regular complaints from students and faculty colleagues, and, in the end, his refusal even to attend meetings with his supervisors. While it is unfortunate when any institutional position must be eliminated, I am confident this decision is in the best interests of the students we are educating for Gospel ministry and this institution." https://swbts.edu/news/releases/statement-southwestern-seminary-s-commitment-biblical-sexuality/
It is hard to believe Randy Stinson for the simple fact that if Lopez was removed incidentally he would not be impugning the man's character."
Dr. Lopez’s testimony of deliverance from homosexuality and full restoration to heterosexual norms is counter to Albert Mohler’s ownership of the myth of “unchanging homosexual orientation ” which he embraced in 2014 at the ERLC conference on “The Gospel. Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage”."ibid
The founders go under the Bus!
"That was an historic act in which the Southern Baptist Convention also declared to the public, “we apologize to all African-Americans for condoning and/or perpetuating individual and systemic racism in our lifetime; and we genuinely repent of racism of which we have been guilty, whether consciously or unconsciously and we ask forgiveness from our African-American brothers and sisters, acknowledging that our own healing is at stake. That was more than twenty years ago. I was honored to be part of the small working group of both white and African-American Southern Baptists who drafted that historic statement. Then, as now, I was president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. At that time, I think it is safe to say that most Southern Baptists, having made this painful acknowledgment and lamenting this history, hoped to dwell no longer on the painful aspects of our legacy. That is not possible, nor is it right. It is past time that The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary—the first and oldest institution of the Southern Baptist Convention—must face a reckoning of our own. Since our founding in 1859, at no moment has the history of this school been separated, by even the slightest degree, from the history of the denomination. What is true of the Convention was and is true of her mother seminary. We share the same history, serve the same churches, cherish the same gospel, confess the same doctrine, and bear the same burdens."
https://www.sbts.edu/southern-project/
Now on the surface level this sounds all well and good. James P. Boyce and Southern Baptist theological Seminary started in South Carolina and apparently they were the proto-typical southern slave owners.
But deeper inspection finds this bizarre and crooked.
A. Mohler took power in SBTS based upon the charter confession of those slave owners, it was he who "cleaned house" in the institution.
B. The autonomy of Southern Baptists contradicts the idea that we are in agreement with Southern Baptist on issues outside the Baptist Faith and Message so we never endorsed slavery as a bible doctrine and so the guilt of slavery or racism is one upon the individual or churches guilty in that generation.
C. The SBTS is not necessarily the make up of the SBC. Obviously there are several SBC Seminaries and schools ands more importantly the churches are autonomous from them. The point of the Baptist Reformation proves this beyond a shadow of doubt.
D. The makeup of the SBC is not the make up of the SBTS of the 1800's either. This whole enterprise is based on racial assumptions that the SBC is by nature racially white for one, This Author was Baptized in the SBC by a man of color from a church that did not exist in the 1800's in a state that was neutral at that time. How does this "white guilt" doctrine work?
The thesis many would conclude is that the SBTS under Mohler is dominated by a particularly ultra-European upper middleclass faculty where these assumptions can be made.
VII. The march back to Rome
In his book "The gospel According to Jesus" John Macarthur appeals to the Roman Catholic Church Father Augstine to support 'Lordship Salvation"
"Augstine writing in 412 AD, described works of righteousness as an inevitable proof of the operation of the Holy Spirit in one's life."
However, Augustine was not an evangelical! Augustine believed in purgatory and works based salvation. He did not argue for imputed righteousness or penal substitution.
"Augustine of Hippo, who, scarcely one year after his death, was called "one of the best teachers" of the Church by my distant predecessor, St. Celestine I,(1) has been present ever since in the life of the Church and in the mind and culture of the whole western world. In a similar fashion, other Roman Pontiffs have proposed the example of his way of life and the writings that embody his teachings as an object of contemplation and imitation, and very many Councils have often drawn copiously from his writings. "......
"I too have added my voice to those of my predecessors, when I expressed my strong desire "that his philosophical, theological and spiritual doctrine be studied and spread, so that he may continue...his teaching in the Church, a humble but at the same time enlightened teaching which speaks above all of Christ and love."(5) On another occasion, I urged in particular the spiritual sons of this great saint "to keep the fascination of St. Augustine alive and attractive even in modern society."...….
"Contemplating the Church as body of Christ, given life by the Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of Christ, Augustine gave varied development to a concept which was also emphasized in a special way by the recent Council: that of the Church as communion.(138) He speaks in three different but converging ways: first, the communion of the sacraments, or the institutional reality founded by Christ on the foundation of the apostles.(139) He discusses this at length in the Donatist controversy, defending the unity, universality, apostolicity and sanctity of the Church,(140) and showing that she has as her center the See of Peter, "in which the primacy of the apostolic see has always been in force."(141) Second, he speaks of the communion of the saints, or the spiritual reality that unites all the righteous from Abel until the end of the ages.(142) Third, he speaks of the communion of the blessed, or the eschatological reality that gathers in all those who have attained salvation, that is, the Church "without spot and wrinkle" (Eph 5:27).(143)…...
Another theme dear to Augustine's ecclesiology was that of the Church as mother and teacher, a theme on which he wrote profound and moving pages, because it had a close connection to his experience as convert and to his teaching as theologian. While he was on the path back to faith, he met the Church, no longer opposed to Christ as he had been made to believe,(144) but rather as the manifestation of Christ, "most true mother of Christians"(145) and authority for the revealed truth.(146)".
Pope John Paul II https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_letters/1986/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_26081986_augustinum-hipponensem.html
Obviously the catholic popes actively use Augustine as a tool for proselytizing and the reformers are venerating him at the same time!
"Now all Faith is redemptive. James 2:14-16 says faith without works is dead and cannot save. James describes spurious faith as pure hypocrisy(v.16) mere cognitive assent(v.19), devoid of any verifying works (vv.17-18)- no different from the demons belief (19). Obviously there is more to saving faith than merely conceding to a set of facts. It will not save"
The gospel According to Jesus" John Macarthur pg. 186
Now could this interpretation ever square with the teachings of Luther?
"
That by the coming of Christ into the world by His Gospel, by which grace is offered, but not works required."
Luther Bondage of the Will section 74, page 123
Of course Luther regarded the revelation of James as straw. All the more reason to realize that Macarthur's interpretation is traditionally heterodox to reformed exposition.
The epistle of James was the chronologically the 1st epistle of the New Testament written to jews.
James 1:
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."
The topic is laid out in ch. 1
James 1: 26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain. 27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." So this is a letter written to Jewish Christians before the Apostle Paul came on the scene. This is important as Paul will have revelations which will revolutionize the course of the New Testament.
Ephesians 3:
2 if ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: 3 how that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: 7 whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. 8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;"
Meanwhile, James qualifies his teaching of faith.
james 2:2 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.
Religion being the discipline of man in relation to others, and faith in respect of persons as opposed to Paul's theme of our faith in relation to God.
2:
6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? 7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? 8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9 but if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors."
The jewish Christians were giving preference to the rich, even though the rich oppressed them and God had given a spiritual place to the poor Christians. This is mentioned in light of Jewish law.
2: 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty"
Once again notice that these are laws respecting the relationships of people amongst each other.
2:
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? " Now in light of the context: "save him" is focused not on exchatology but on daily living as is the previous context focused.
2:
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. 19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? "
So now it is obvious that we are relating our faith to each other and justification is a topic towards each other as opposed to Paul's topic of justification before God. Abraham was imputed righteousness before God previously but his faith has been revealed to man in his willingness to sacrifice his son.
John Piper and Rome
W.O. Cloud comments on John Piper's connections with Rick Warren.
"Consider John Piper. He is another bridge to the heresies in the “broader evangelical church.” In April 2011, Piper conducted a Desiring God conference at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church, and in June he preached at the annual Southern Baptist pastors conference, again joining hands with Rick Warren. When you get into Rick Warren’s sphere, you are within reach of all sorts of heresies and fables. These are treacherous waters, indeed. Warren preaches the heretical “judge not” philosophy; turns the church into a rock & roll entertainment center complete with pelvic thrusts; says God won’t ask about your doctrinal views; continually and approvingly quotes from heretics in his writings and preaching (such as Roman Catholic universalists Mother Teresa, Henri Nouwen, and Thomas Merton); promotes Catholic contemplative mysticism; likens Christian fundamentalists to Islamic terrorists; calls for unity between Baptists, Roman Catholics, Pentecostals, Anglicans, etc.; promotes the exceedingly liberal Baptist World Alliance; yokes together with New Age practitioners; says that believers should work with unbelievers and pagan religionists to build the kingdom of God; and presents Roman Catholic one-worlder Tony Blair with a peace prize (March 2011). For documentation see http://www.wayoflife.org/database/warrenheader.html " https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/path_from_ib_to_shack_rome.html
"In the video, Piper says he is “ticked” with Christian seminary classes that turn “mainly” to the “mystical Catholic tradition in order to find this kind of depth and this kind of personal connection with the living God that is both rational and supra-rational and very mystical in its communion.” He adds, “You don’t have to embrace bad theology, namely Roman Catholic historic bad theology, in order to find amazing representatives of those who’ve known God at this level.”
The obvious question that was not answered in this snippet is whom does Piper believe are some of these “amazing representatives” who can teach us about “good” contemplative prayer? Thanks to our keen-eyed reader, who sent us a link to Piper’s church’s bookstore, we found that answer, at least in part--none other than Richard Foster, whose book Prayer: Finding the Heart’s True Home is being sold on the Bethlehem Baptist Church’s bookstore website. Prayer: Finding the Heart’s True Home is one of Foster’s primers on contemplative prayer. In that book, Foster tells us: “You must bind the mind with one thought” (p. 124). Foster’s advice echoes mystics such as Anthony DeMello as Ray Yungen points out in A Time of Departing (p. 75). Yungen warns that this binding the mind (getting rid of distractions and thoughts) is no different than classic Hindu meditation." https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/john%20_pipers_contradictory_position.html
"Apprising Ministries has been warning for years concerning the evil effects of the neo-liberal in the Emerging Church aka the Emergent Church.
It’s an incontrovertible fact that right from its hatching in hell corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM), such as that taught by Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster along with his spiritual twin and Southern Baptist minister Dallas Willard, was a core doctrine.Spreading as a spiritual cancer throughout apostatizing evangelicalism, we even see that it’s slithered all the way into the New Calvinst neo-reformed camp e.g. as in Acts 29 Network And Reformed Counter Reformation Spirituality? One of the fruits of CSM is a blurring of doctrinal lines, which is particularly dangerous in this time of postmodernism and growing spiritual blindness.".....Moore’s admitted practice of some form of CCP, which is actually divination, has opened her up to even receive direct revelation and visions from God. Below from a 2002 series called Believing God, available right now at Lifeway’s website, Moore describes a vision God gave her concerning His Church.Sounding not too unlike Word Faith wingnuts she tells us God took her into some kind of dimension where she was able to see the Body of Christ as Jesus sees it:Apparently the Protestant Reformation was really some sort of horrible mistake because Moore’s Jesus sees the Roman Catholic Church as another Christian denomination. This becomes clear below as Moore demonstrates what she saw in her vision from God:Yet despite this obviously false vision ten years ago, there was Beth Moore preaching to thousands alongside New Calvinists John Piper and Francis Chan. I guess we really should expect this because Piper has told us before: “I’m Happy To Learn From Beth Moore.”"http://apprising.org/2012/01/06/beth-moore-and-john-piper-lead-lectio-divina-lite-at-passion-2012/
But Piper would definitely be different in his soteriology from Rome correct?"Yet
I am hesitant to call Jesus' obediance in life and death a fulfillment
of a 'covenant of works'. This term generally implies a that 'works'
stand over against 'grace'. and are not the fulfillment of faith in
grace. Thus works implies a relationship with God that is more like an
employer recieving earned wages than in a son trusting his father's
generosity." Future Grace pg.413
Here Piper is breaking away from Reformed Covenant theology. But this is not just leaving Calvinism. By doing this He is altering his view of justification in a way different from evangelicalism."When the Old Testament says that covenant keeping is the condition
for recieving God's loving kindness, that's what it meant ... All the
covenants of God are conditional covenants of grace-both the old and the
new covenant. They offer all sufficient Future Grace for those who keep
the covenant. But what it does say is that all future blessings of the
Christian life are conditional on our keeping." Future Grace pg. 249
So then in defiance of evangelical Justification Piper says that we must fulfill conditions to receive grace."It is faith alone which justifies, but the faith which justifies is never alone." Future Grace pg. 21
Notice the lack of clarity in the motto. If faith in the sense of justification is never alone, it can not be alone.
The place of Christ in Piper's soteriology is incredibly diminished.
It is the works of the Father and the spirit, which allows the sinner to
be more righteous. While Christ only offers a conditional covenant by
which if they are faithful then they may recieve future forgiveness.
the act of salvation is then mixed with the act of man.
"It
is sufficient for salvation, for it necessarily produces good works of
love just as a good tree necessarily produces good fruit. Protestants
and Catholics agree on this. The Pope even told German Lutheran Bishops
so over a decade ago, and they were startled and delighted. the two
churches issued a public joint statement on justification, a statement
of agreement. Protestants and Catholics do not have essentially
different religions, different ways of salvation." Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli Handbooks of Christian Apologetics pg. 32, 33.
Here we see Catholic Apologists have already capitalized on Protestants redefining the faith.
"By Grace I do not merely mean the pardon of God passing over your
sins, but also the power and beauty of God to keep you from sinning. By
faith I do not merely mean the confidence that Christ died for your
sins, but the confidence that God will 'also with him freely give us all
things' (Romans8:32). Faith is primarily future oriented assurance of
things hoped for' (Hebrews 11:1)." pg.13 Future Grace
Here Piper wants to focus on the evangelistic concepts of grace and
faith, he fuses the concepts of Justification and sanctification. This
makes salvation a lifelong process just like Catholicism. This desire
to redefine terms is a classic strategy of the cults.
Do not be fooled, this is not the traditional protestant concept.
"Because
the Holy Spirit is received by faith, and hearts are renewed and put on
new affections so that they can accomplish good works. For Ambrose says
'Faith is the mother of good will and righteous action'" Augsburg Confession XX. B.
Justifying faith is first, only then through the Holy Spirit's
regeneration and sanctification are we able to produce good works. Faith
being the mother is totally independent of her "good works" children.
Piper is also known for trying to get his church to alter their confession of faith to allow for infant baptism. What is interesting is the fact that his views seem to be apprehended in part with his partnership with Doug Wilson. Doug Wilson was formerly one of the leaders in the "Federal Vision Movement".
Wilson is open in his acceptance of Roman Catholics as his "brothers and sisters" as seen in his debate with James White. https://youtu.be/jlTMsNPjBLo
James White though holding an orthodox separation view is very reveal in a recent video where he stated that Roman Catholicism did not develop till the 12th century. By implication accepting the 1st 100years of Catholicism as orthodox. https://youtu.be/NSh5vunw2yk (about the 8 minute mark).
So the march towards Rome is definitely a strong motiff in the New Calvinism.
Albert Mohler and Catholicism
"Mohler has made strongly anti-Catholic statements, but at the same time maintains that much of Catholic doctrine is compatible with his views. In spite of his public criticism of the Catholic Church, Mohler claims in his official biography to have studied at St. Meinrad School of Theology [10] (a few hours drive from the Seminary of which he is President.)"https://www.monergism.com/r-albert-mohler-jr
Saint Meinrad Seminary and School of Theology offers programs in Roman Catholic priesthood formation, theological formation for Roman Catholic permanent deacon candidates, lay degrees in theology, continuing adult education and youth leadership as part of its secondary education mission." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Meinrad_Seminary_and_School_of_Theology
Reformed self esteem? One phenomena in this culture is the idea that their theological position is the most humble and therefore reformed Christians are humble by nature. While it should not be claimed reformed Christians are or are not humble, the theology does not necessarily force humility. The reason is that one's being "chosen" over others or being loved more implies an innate value. It may be shocking but the previous generation of reformed Christians like Norman Vincent Peale promoted if not started the positive thinking movement.
“Visualize this mist High above you, around you and at your feet, cascading down like a waterfall of scintillating light.
“Then breath in the white mist, and visualize it as proceeding upward into your throat, into your nasal passages, into your brain, vitalizing, sharpening and quickening your mind, making it alive with a new power…
“I have been practicing this type of meditation for several days and I report that after using it only a half dozen times one begins to feel different. It induces a sense of vital energy; an awareness of God’s presence.
“Who is God? Some theological being? He is so much greater than theology. God is vitality. God is Life. God is energy. As you breathe God in, as you visualize his enegry, you will be reenergized!” Peale quoted from the book Beyond Seduction: A return to Biblical Christianity by Dave Hunt Peale has a story about how he developed his ideas of imaging from a Christian business man, helping him to raise money, read this excerpt carefully
“… ‘There’s a doctor downtown who will tell you that he hasn’t any money, but I’m on the finance committee at the bank and I know exactly how much he’s got. So we’re going to pray that he will give you the next five thousand dollars. We’ll not only pray, we’ll visualize him doing it. The Bible says that if you have faith even as a grain of mustard seed, nothing is impossible for you. So go downtown and see that doctor and ask for that money and get it!’ (Peale's book Dynamic imaging)
One of these popular adherents was reformed Pastor Robert Schuller.
This movement did as Schuller was infamous for bear the fruit of liberalism.
“Standing before a crowd of devout Muslims with the Grand Mufti [of Jerusalem], I know that WE’RE ALL DOING GOD’S WORK TOGETHER. Standing on the edge of a new millennium, we’re laboring hand in hand to repair the breach. ... I’m dreaming a bold impossible dream: that positive-thinking believers in God will rise above the illusions that our sectarian religions have imposed on the world, and that leaders of the major faiths will rise above doctrinal idiosyncrasies, choosing not to focus on disagreements, but rather TO TRANSCEND DIVISIVE DOGMAS TO WORK TOGETHER TO BRING PEACE AND PROSPERITY AND HOPE TO THE WORLD” (My Journey, pp. 501, 502).
“The tragedy of Christendom today is the existence of entire congregations of church members who are dominated by emotionally deprived or emotionally under-developed persons. These congregations have been accurately labeled 'God's Frozen People.' ... And they do this by EXERCISING NARROW AUTHORITARIANISM IN DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES AND BY SOWING SEEDS OF SUSPICION AND DISSENSION IN THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. ... By contrast, strong persons--self-assured personalities, whose egos find their nourishment in a self-esteem-generating personal relationship with Jesus Christ--dare to face contrary opinions, diverse interpretations, and deviations of theology without becoming disrespectful, judgmental, or accusatory” (Schuller, Self-Esteem, pp. 153-154).
Now most of the "New Calvinism movement" will process this as simply "those examples are just liberals" Part of the radical Calvinism is the fact that they assume that the local church is not organically connected because of their mystical salvation. However, they may be shocked over the close connections.
"Popular author and teacher R.C. Sproul, president of Ligonier Ministries, has spoken at Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral on numerous occasions. He spoke at Schuller's church in September 21, 1984, then at John MacArthur's church three days later. Again Sproul spoke at Schuller's church in October 26, 1986, and then at MacArthur's church on October 29."
In Search of dignity, 1982
"It
is because God has assigned worth to men and women that human dignity is established.
From his creation to his redemption, man's dignity is preserved. His origin is
significant. His destiny is significant. He is significant. The conviction that
permeates each chapter is the importance of daily respect for the dignity of other
people which requires a sensitivity to their self-esteem. We are also led to the
realization that the most fragile mechanization on this planet is the human ego."
The book was revised and renamed in 1991 The hunger for significance
"Wherever
people come together, we can help each other discover our self-worth. We can help
each other realize that we are persons of significance being made in the image
of God."
So here Sproul was working under Schuller while in fellowship with MacArthur. Now Sproul is not necessarily deceiving anybody because this information is available and his books are available.
So self-esteem has a place in the thought of the New Calvinist movement.
An example of this internal selfishness is John Pipers "Christian Hedonism"
"
And the shortest description of Christian Hedonism is God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him." https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-christian-hedonism
The glory of God is quietly transformed into our satisfaction.
"The ultimate ground for Christian Hedonism is the fact that God is upper most in His own affections. The Chief end of God is to glorify God and enjoy Himself forever." Desiring God pg. 31
Here God has self esteem and we are in his image and should have esteem as he made us to have.
I understand many would argue this point. Apologies that this would be too large a topic for this article. However, this inevitably become a self esteem doctrine because the point of hedonism is to please yourself. So even if you are pleasing yourself to the Glory of God, you are still focused upon yourself.
But Christ has revealed the character of God to us.
Phil. 2: 3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. 4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men"
Now many will connect these teachings with RicK Warren.
Warren seems to possess some visualization beliefs as well. On page 43 of PDC he introduces “The Saddleback Vision” which apparently was in Rick Warren’s 1st sermon at Saddleback. He goes through there dreams of setting up missions and ministries acquiring 20,000 and so on. Also his dream includes “at least 50 acres of land, on which will be built a regional church for South Orange County”
“I stand before you today and state in confident assurance that these dreams will become a reality. Why? Because they are inspired of God!” Now I am actually open to the possibility of private revelation, however inspiration is limited to the books of the Bible. Plus I don’t know any scripture that teaches we are guaranteed 50 acres of land a fresh garden landscapes. It is obvious that Warren is using imaging techniques to realize his dream for Saddleback church.
In a worldly church paganism can many times sneak it’s way in. On Sept 29,2005 Agape press reported “A leading publisher of youth ministry material is being accused of introducing young people to practices rooted in New Age eastern Spirituality…. Cathy Mickels, co-author of the book ‘Spiritual Junkfood: The Dumbing Down of Christian Youth’, is advising youth workers and parents to distance themselves from the conference and Youth Specialties. Mickels claims Youth Specialties teaches youth pastors to introduce students to ancient eastern spiritual practices. ‘Nowhere in God’s Word does it say to take kids on labyrinth walks, that you introduce students to yoga or to contemplative prayer practices where you say a word over and over again to put yourself in what Youth Specialties says is a ‘semi-conscious state’”… Among the featured speakers at the Sacramento conference are Mark Yaconelli, who is the director of the Youth Ministry and Spirituality Project, and Doug Fields, the Youth Pastor at Rick Warren Saddleback Church in California.” (www.wayoflife.org/fbns/fridaynews/news/2005/fridaynews051028.html)
So now, many reformed baptist are going to be just as concerned over the liberal and new age and catholic ties that we see from the seeker sensativity movement. They will assume that this is some exterior or alien liberalism creeping in and that their system is pure and undefiled from such corruption.
However, the point they have failed to truly understand is THEIR OWN IDENTITY! They ARE NOT SEPARATIST, THEY ARE CATHOLICS.
From their church father Augustine they are casting the wide catholic net in hopes of gaining power over the system.
Catholicisms wide net consists of an emperial religion under the citizenship of infant baptism.
The "new calvinists" casts the wide net of seeker sensativity and ecumenicism.
The elites in catholicism would use force and creedalism to gain authority over the empire.
The elites in Calvinism would use psychology and politics and creedalism to gain authority over religion.
The "Young Restless & Reformed" movement is a stage in the development of these contemporary evangelical structures whereby orthodoxy captures and controls ministries.
However, the entire motiff of the seeker sensative church is one coercion, which runs against the principles of New Testament Christianity."At that time, I cited to of the principle doctrines which help give shape to our polity as being:(1) the sovereignty of the local church, and (2) The priesthood of the individual believer. The first of these dealt with the rightful place of the local church in Southern Baptist Life, it being the most important organizational unit, always to be indicated as being at the top of a Baptist organizational chart. The other stresses the soul freedom of man which completely forbids coercion in matters of religion at any level, or in any area. The first forces the autonomy of the local church. The first forces voluntarism and soul freedom in a local church and in every area of the denominations life and work." pg 226 Baptist Polity As I see it James L. Sullivan
https://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2011/10/being-ambassader-of-prince-of-peace.html
SBTS flagrant denial of BF&M doctrines concerning the doctrine of peace.
I responded in a letter to SBTS concerning a sept. 2011 Towers article where they claimed that the Baptist faith was supportive of "Just War".
SBTS spent many years propagating the war in Iraq. At the time I supported the War as a consequence of the 1st war. George H.W. Bush had no reason for letting Saddam Hussein either live nor eventually get back in office. But after "mission accomplished" I felt like it was time to go. But now the war had to go on and on. Not only were there more casualties on both sides but it was taking it's toll on our troops. Homelessness and suicide became rampant upon our troops. It is an amazing thing to watch people at the very peek of their condition go through the turmoil and shock of the tours of duty. Watching them start to develop PTSD and even phisycally deteriorate beyond recognition. While I appreciate their great sacrifice I can not appreciate a government that exploits it. The SBC was especially staunch in the support of this war and was awarded a Billy Graham Idol By George W. Bush. Ultimately, Christians in Iraq became the victims and there was a mass exodus from the land. Many soldiers were more likely to become sympathetic to the Islamic religion than not. The church had no business weighing in on the matter. What witness is it to tell a non-christian across the world that God supports their families slaughter?
SBTS often referred to Augustine as the source of their doctrine of Just War. But what was Augustines views of force?
"His defense of the Catholic church in the Donatism controversy also led Augustine to support the use of force in the suppression of the rivals. Initially he was strongly opposed to coercion. But step by step he came to another view. As he saw the Donatist resistance to the governments mounting pressure, he came to accept the use of force in a religious issue. What looks like harsh actions he said, may bring the offender to recognize it's justice. Had not the Lord himself in the parable said, "Compel people to come in" Luke 14:23? Thus, Augustine's Prestige was made available for those in later ages who justified the ruthless acts of Inquisition against Christian Dissenters." pg. 128 Bruce L. Shelly Church History in Plain language
"
Once more, we must recognize that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but spiritual. Mohammedanism carries the sword in one hand and the Koran in the other and compels conquered peoples to choose between them. In the Middle Ages church and state were united in European Christendom and freedom of opinion was practically unknown. Coercion, civil and ecclesiastical, was employed to secure uniformity. The Anabaptists of the continent, and the Baptists of England and Wales, the Baptist of Rhode Island and Virginia made a heroic stand against legal coercion in religion, against resorting to the civil power to control opinion. They remembered the words of the Master: "My Kingdom is not of this world." They would turn over in their graves at the idea of bringing in the arm of the law as a means of winning spiritual victories. They knew too well that such a Christianity, pursuing such methods, was not the Christianity of the New Testament."
E.Y. Mullins Axioms of religion ch.17 pg. 219
So what do we do?
1.
What is a fair fight? If a Southern Baptist is a "Reformed Baptist"/"1689"/"new/militant" Calvinist. They have just as much liberty as any Christian and if they have been faithful in their relations to the SBC then they deserve what priveledges that entails.
But they have no heritage, or right or priveledges to try and hamper the freedoms of others. The history of our churches is not to be considered an authority like scripture!
We should not be warring with confessions or creeds like the catholics, because for the simple fact that this is an abandonment of scripture!
Matthew 23:
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! 17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? 18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. 19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? 20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. 21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. 22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon."
Matthew 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 but I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 35 nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."
From these texts, we see how corruption is conducted. By making man made documents and forcing behaviors from one another we simply abandon any real aythority from the word in favor of constructing man made religion.
Perhaps this sounds utopian, but if we forget where the ideal lies then we will not cushion our fall to the earth, if not under it.
It is fair for a pastor to indoctrinate their congregation, or a professor to indoctrinate their students. But morally speaking both should strive for objectivity. But both should know what doctrines they are teaching that are actually fundamental, and which doctrines are not only less essential, but which doctrines they are presenting both sides of and which they are knowingly omitting. Are we simply repeating someone else's tradition in hopes of blaming it on them when calamities come? Are we stealing from the work of others to put our image instead of Christ's upon it?
Do we struggle whether or not we are letting the Holy Spirit heal a soul or simply getting in the way to repeat a cycle of death and suffering?
When we cling to the traditions of men, we cling to the sins of man. Certainly the past has a right to speak against folly which has already been experimentally proven. It simply has no right to step ahead of the word of God. Maturity is knowing the scripture over tradition as well as science and rationalizations And seeking the Guidance of the Holy Spirit to fill us with needs of the day.
2. Love.
I know, right? What a disgusting answer!
The fact is that we have to work together and we have a world of devils to conquer and souls to win. It doesn't ultimately matter who is right, it matters if we will move forward or not. Can we humble ourselves to that fact?
I know that no matter how much this makes sense to me, no matter how eloquent or brutal the battle gets. We are ultimately not fighting each other. Ultimately we must strive to move forward and get the gospel to a lost world and that is not going to happen until we can humble ourselves and make the great commission the highest priority once again.
If we can not move together then we will have to part ways. But I am not giving up on this relationship without a fight.
Let's do the impossible and pray for one another and get things back on track
For Christ Sake![Literally, not at all cussin]3.
Separation Now, when I suggest this I want to say that we need not completely separate necessarily. We can do this piece by piece. we can vote and speak our minds to the local associations. Then we can vote with our dollars. We should support Baptist schools only if they are keeping in line with Baptist principles rewarding those who do and denying those who don't. The same goes with missionary societies. We need to consider this when we are looking for pastors. Also we must look at the separate Baptist who influenced through evangelism. Lets not get bogged down by those who wish to be cancerous to institutions but instead focus on the next generation. People forget that in the 1970's the SBTS was far from God and yet Evangelism was more successful among SBC Baptist than ever because they were not dependent upon the seminaries. The rate of baptisms of that period was almost twice that of today! It is time to unhitch ourselves from sacred tradition, saddle up our horses and evangelize in the wild blue yonder!
