Adding things not prescribed by Scripture to worship is not wise.

THE CONFESSING BAPTIST Reformed Resources from a 1689 Perspective About Contact Guidelines | T&C | FAQ Podcast Interview Headlines Book Review Categories News Theology Culture Audio Video Events Bapti-Bot Roundup CATEGORY: THEOLOGY POSTED ONMARCH 11, 2015 What’s a Reformed Baptist? Can there be such a thing? Tom Chantry answers capitol reformed baptist churchTom Chantry: Before we can answer whether Reformed Baptists exist, we must first identify what that designation means. “Reformed Baptist” is a term – albeit a compound term – with a definition and a history. Understanding that history is necessary if anyone is going to understand what the first word in the term means. While a number of useful brief definitions exist, I intend to address the question from the standpoint of history. Read “Defining ‘Reformed Baptist’ (again)” POSTED ONMARCH 4, 2015 C.Jay Engel & Brandon Adams’ in-depth analysis of ‘The Theonomy Debate’ McDurmon v. Hall [25 Page PDF | HTML] + forthcoming Reformed Libertarian publications mcdurben hall theonomy debate Over at ReformedLibertarian.com, C.Jay Engel & Brandon Adams have prepared and written an in-depth analysis of the McDurmon v Hall ‘Theonomy Debate’. ReformedLibertarian.com ReformedLibertarian.com Table of Contents: Intro and Overview The Classic Threefold Division Rutherford, the WCF, and Practical vs. Hermeneutical Theonomy General Equity vs Particular Equity William Perkins and General Equity Old Covenant Abolished Are They Just? Particular Baptist Theonomists? Conclusion C.Jay Engel C.Jay Engel Here are some snippets from their conclusion: In conclusion, we strongly agree with Hall when he said, “By what other standard? By God’s standard alone. That statement alone does not make you a theonomist. It just makes you a Christian with a biblical worldview.” …Our position that God’s revelation is the standard should be more than obvious… In all the above, there was no comment on whether McDurmon or Hall outperformed the other. We express no official statement about whether they could have done better or been better prepared or whether one was “ready” to meet his opponents arguments. That is up for the viewer to decide. What we wanted to do was detail our own understanding of the debated issues and demonstrate where we think the theonomist position is weak. There is so much about theonomy in general that we did not have the space to address… Brandon Adams Brandon Adams [I]t is our prayer that both sides of this debate would take the time to understand the nuances in the opposing camp, and look for opportunities to better comprehend the precise nature of their critic’s position, rather than rely on inaccuracies and misleading statements that have been previously written in earlier decades. At this point in their conclusion they announce some upcoming publications that they are working on: 17 century booksThe question that often comes after it is stated that we reject the theonomic understanding of the mosaic civil law is: “if not theonomy, then what?” What other civil law ought we to have. This is a great question and we encourage you to read our upcoming publication entitled “The Reformed Libertarian Manifesto,” in which we, in detail, demonstrate our own positive theory on the questions of law and politics based on, of course, the starting point of God’s revealed Scripture. Following this publication, we anticipate that there will be a book sized release, on Amazon.com of our rejection of theonomy. The title of this book is “By God’s Standard: A Confessional Baptist Rejection of Theonomy.” You can sign up to receive updates on both of these books here… 25-Page PDF: Download (PDF, 266KB) POSTED ONMARCH 4, 2015 Why James White is thankful to be a Reformed Baptist Dr. James R. White Dr. James R. White James White: I am thankful to be a Reformed Baptist for many reasons. Today, being an elder in a Reformed Baptist church means I get to mt and minister with some of the best preachers and teachers I know, men like Jim Renihan, Richard Barcellos, and Sam Waldron. I have the honor, and the privilege, of ministering in sister churches all across the landscape, and our unity of spirit and faith is encouraging. But the main reason I am thankful to be a Reformed Baptist comes from the work to which the Lord has called me. Over the past nearly two decades now I have engaged in over sixty formal, moderated public debates with the leading apologists representing Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostalism, and of late, Islam. Those debates have forced me to engage objections to the Christian faith on every level, from biblical sufficiency to the Trinity to the cross to justification and everything in between. And that is why I am thankful to be a Reformed Baptist. Why? Because of the consistency of our faith. One’s apologetic can be no stronger than the consistency of the faith it defends… So the next time you eye the big fancy church down the road on your way to your Reformed Baptist church, consider this: the value of the consistency of divine truth, the treasure of having a firm foundation upon which to live a God-honoring life, is truly priceless. Read “I am so thankful to be a Reformed Baptist”. POSTED ONMARCH 4, 2015 What is the Relationship of Anabaptists to Baptists? [Ask A Reformed Baptist] Drowning of [Anabaptist] Maria von Monjou, 1552. Drowning of [Anabaptist] Maria von Monjou, 1552. A common question that comes up is, “What is the relationship of Anabaptists to Baptists?” Paedobaptists will tell you Baptists are Anabaptists. and it doesn’t help that some Arminian Dispensational (SBC) Baptists will trace their roots to Anabaptists. On a surface-level view it would be easy to think they are one and the same – but a simple look at history and doctrine reveals otherwise. Phil Johnson Phil Johnson From Phil Johnson’s, “The Anabaptists“: Many Anabaptist ideas made invaluable contributions to the Reformation. For example, these five tenets might be identified as Anabaptist distinctives: Sola Scriptura—Anabaptists were sometimes more consistent than the Magisterial Reformers in their insistence on biblical authority for certain practices in matters of church polity and worship. Separation of Church and State—Anabaptists correctly saw the church as the assembly of the redeemed, antithetical to the world and sometimes antagonistic to society as a whole. For this reason they advocated separation of church and state. Freedom of Conscience—because of the Anabaptists’ convictions about the role of the secular state, they believed that the ultimate remedy for heresy was excommunication. They steadfastly opposed the persecution that was so characteristic of their age. They denied that the state had a right to punish or execute anyone for religious beliefs or teachings. This was a revolutionary notion in the Reformation era. Believers’ Baptism—The anabaptists were the among the first to point out the lack of explicit biblical support for infant baptism. Most of them made no issue of the mode of baptism, and practiced affusion (sprinkling), however, so they were not true baptists in the modern sense of the word. Holiness of Life—Anabaptists gave much emphasis to spiritual experience, practical righteousness, and obedience to divine standards. They had no tolerance for those who claimed to be justified by faith while living unfaithful lives. Anabaptists pointed out that Scripture says, “Faith without works is dead” (Jas. 2:20). On most of those points we would strongly agree with the Anabaptists’ thrust (though not necessarily with the extreme conclusions they sometimes came to). Nevertheless, there is very good reason to approach the Anabaptist movement with a healthy dose of caution. While acknowledging our very real debt to the Anabaptists on the matters enumerated above, we must also recognize an unhealthy tendency in Anabaptist doctrine: Anabaptists rejected the Reformed understanding of justification by faith alone. They denied the forensic nature of justification and insisted that the only ground on which sinners can be acceptable to God is a “real” righteousness wrought within the justified person. For further reading on Anabaptist theology see the recommended resources (links) on Phil Johnson’s site. Also at Phil Johnson’s Spurgeon.org is Chris Traffanstedt’s piece, “A Primer on Baptist History: The True Baptist Trail“: Burning of [Anabaptist] Anneken Hendriks, Amsterdam, 1571. Burning of [Anabaptist] Anneken Hendriks, Amsterdam, 1571. Anabaptist Influence Most Baptists are fooled into thinking that we come from the Anabaptists just because the word “baptist” is found in their name. But we must use great caution here. We must explore who the Anabaptists really were and ask the all-important question: Are they truly representative of Baptist beliefs?Who are these people called “Anabaptist”? This group refers to a community of rebels during the Reformation period; they were considered to be the radical wing of the Reformation. Even within this group there were various views and camps. Two main separate camps can be identified: the “revolutionary Anabaptist” and the “evangelical Anabaptist.”[11] We really do not want to spend too much time on the revolutionary group for they hardly reflect a biblical approach to Christianity. They actually took on the form of a cult, holding to an extreme mystical experiential view and believing their leaders to be prophets (future-tellers). They were also quick to use violence to get their way.However, the “evangelical” Anabaptists were a movement of a different type. And it is from this group that many say the Baptist movement was born. Thus, we need to take some time to examine them. This group, first of all, rejected the orthodox Christian view of sin. Instead of holding to sin as a bondage both of the nature and actions of mankind, they held that sin was “a loss of capacity or a serious sickness.”[12] The Anabaptists, in following Rome’s view of justification, held that God makes us righteous and then accepts us on the basis of our righteousness. They also believed that Christ did not take His flesh from Mary but held to a heavenly origin for His flesh. When it came to the world, the Anabaptists believe we were to totally separate ourselves from it (although they did dip into it with a zealous evangelism on occasion). The Anabaptists rejected infant baptism and held to believer’s baptism, but their mode for the most part was sprinkling, not pouring or immersion. Their view of interpreting Scripture was that of just strict imitation which led to large movements of legalism.[13]When we look at the Anabaptists we must agree that there are some similarities with the early General Baptists, but overall these similarities are slight and not always relational. In the end, we must come to say that this group of Christians does not reflect the historical teaching of the Baptists. The large portion of Baptist history shows us that Baptists held to a strong position on sin, both in our nature and in our actions, not as just some mere sickness. Baptists have also held to a belief in the virgin birth and see that this is what points to the doctrine of the God-Man, not just some heavenly illusion. As well, Baptists have held strongly to the Reformation’s recovery of justification – that it is based upon Christ’s righteousness alone and not our righteousness because we have none. And finally, Baptists have always seen that the Scriptures are to be studied and applied to everyday life through the power of the Holy Spirit and are not to be followed just in blind imitation or by a leap of faith. So we must clearly reject, as history does, that the Baptist origins flow from the Anabaptists. The fact of history is that three “Believer’s-Only” groups arose independently of each other and with a few similarities, but even more dissimilarities. The Continental Anabaptists (who did not immerse), the English General Baptists, and the English Particular Baptists. 1644, The First (Particular Baptist) London Confession of Faith The Confession of Faith, Of those Churches which are commonly (though falsly ) called Anabaptists; [ see also “Were the Particular Baptists Anabaptists? Paedobaptists Answer”] 1644 anabaptist 1660, The (General Baptist) Standard Confession A Brief Confession Or Declaration Of Faith. Set forth by many of us, who are (falsely) called Ana-baptists… For more on Particular Baptist History, read and listen to: Baptist Symbolics Header 1689CONFESSING THE FAITH IN 1644 AND 1689 Dr. James M. Renihan – PodcastPromo007The Confessing Baptist Interview with Dr. James Renihan on Particular Baptist History – Dr. James Renihan BowtieThe Reformation and the Baptist [AUDIO] Dr. James M. Renihan – Haykin PinkWhere Did Baptists Come From? [AUDIO] Dr. Michael A. G. Haykin – So if Baptists are not the heirs to the Anabaptists, who are? The Amish, The Brethren, and the Mennonites. In 2006 the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) and in 2008 the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) apologized for the Lutheran persecution of Anabaptists. To whom did they apologize? SBC, or any Baptist group? No. They apologized to Mennonites. (see ELCA and LWF) Lyn & Erroll Hulse Lyn & Erroll Hulse I’ll end with a quote from Erroll Hulse, As Professors James McGoldrick [Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History] and Michael Haykin [Kiffin, Knollys, & Keach: Rediscovering English Baptist Heritage] have shown, historical evidence is lacking to prove a connection between the Continental Anabaptists of the sixteenth century and the English Baptists. Hulse, Erroll. Who Are the Puritans?: And What Do They Teach? Darlington (England): Evangelical Press, 2000. Print. Page 188. POSTED ONMARCH 4, 2015 Moral vs. Modern Use of the Judicial Law in the 1689 [Sam Renihan] + what Joel McDurmon said about it Sam Renihan Sam Renihan Sam Renihan: If you’re reading the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith and in 19.4 of your copy it says that the general equity of the Israelite judicial laws are of “modern” use, then you’re probably reading an edition copied from Charles Spurgeon’s 1855 reprint (found commonly in places like this). Putting aside the reasons for the change, you should know that “modern” is not the original reading. It should read “moral” instead of “modern.” Like this: moral modern judicial law 1689 You should also know that the following editions of the confession have “moral” in 19.4, not “modern”: 1677, 1688, 1699, 1719, 1720, 1743 (two different printings), 1773, 1774, 1790, 1798, 1809, 1818, 1829, 1850 (2LCF is copying the Savoy Declaration here, btw). To my knowledge and research, Spurgeon’s reprint is the first to make this change. McDurmon Hall Theonomy DebateIn the McDurmon v. Hall Theonomy Debate this was brought up, in part at the 59 minute mark, by Dr. Joel McDurmon when he said: “…it also makes a difference which one of the London Baptist Confessions you’re reading. Are you reading the original that says the general equity of the judicial is of moral use only? Or are you reading the later edition that changed it to say they’re of modern use only? Which opens the door wide open to the same Theonomic view as the Westminster Confession. And that just so happens to be the version that got picked up by Charles Spurgeon when he did his popularized version, he said it’s of modern use not merely moral use but modern use and that was the version that got published when JD Hall published his version, and I can make the case that that opens the door to Theonomy just as easily. “ Sam Renihan concludes his post: So if you’re going to make an argument from that wording, then appeal to Spurgeon and his reprint (if anything), but not any of the 15 (at least) editions of the confession that precede his. Read “Moral vs. Modern Use of the Judicial Law in the Confession of Faith”. POSTED ONMARCH 3, 2015 Error [Al Martin] + his Systematic Theology series on MP3 [AUDIO] Dr. Albert N. Martin Dr. Albert N. Martin Al Martin: Error is a dangerous and deadly thing. The Scripture teaches that what you receive in your mind as true, if it is not true, may damn you. Luther stood and said, Here I stand; I can do no other; so help me God. Luther-posting-95-theses Martin Luther He did so because he believed that the lies of Rome were damning the souls of multitudes; and that only truth could loose them from the grasp of the Prince of Darkness. In 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 we read these sobering words concerning the influence of Antichrist. With all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. For this cause God sends them a working of error, that they should believe a lie, that they may all be judged who believed not the truth. Unless you are immunized against error by a solid infusion of truth, you may be given up to believe a lie —a lie that will damn and destroy, with everlasting destruction. Not only is error deadly for unconverted people, believers can be wrenched from a course of steadfastness because of error. Peter warns of this (2 Peter 3:17-18). Ye, therefore, beloved, knowing these things beforehand, beware lest, being carried away with the error of the wicked, ye fall from your own steadfastness. How are we to be kept from that? Grow in the grace and knowledge. In other words, Be immunized against error by constant and deep exposure to, and absorption of, the truth. Read “Error” which was adapted from his series of sermons “Here We Stand”. Chapel Library: The “Here We Stand” series is a practical and systematic study of the doctrines of the Christian faith, as delivered by Pastor Albert N. Martin to his own Trinity Baptist Church in Montville, New Jeresey. It is especially designed for the laymen, and is very useful also for the theological student. Its intention is to confirm the faith to mature believers, acquaint recent converts with fundamental Christian doctrine, and inform the unconverted as to the truths of Christianity. It is suitable for either group or individual study. POSTED ONMARCH 3, 2015 Why is Denying Justification such a Serious Error? Tom Hicks Answers Pastor Tom Hicks Pastor Tom Hicks Tom Hicks: The doctrine of justification by faith alone on the ground of Christ’s imputed righteousness remains under direct attack in various quarters. As someone who wrote his PhD dissertation on the doctrines of justification in Richard Baxter and Benjamin Keach, I am convinced that modifying the biblical doctrine is a serious theological error. As a pastor of a local church, I have observed how the doctrine of justification humbles the proud, strengthens the fainthearted, gives assurance to the fearful, encourages vulnerable and motivates self-sacrificing love. To deny this doctrine is to deny the very heart and power of the gospel. May the Lord bring theological clarity on this doctrine for the sake of His own glory and for the good of His beloved bride. Scriptural Reasons Denying Justification is a Serious Error 1. To deny justification is to deny the heart of the gospel… 2. To deny justification is to stumble… 3. To deny justification is to receive the Bible’s curse… 4. To deny justification is an offense that warrants church discipline… sola_fide…In spite of all the passages cited above, some believe that justification by faith alone is a secondary or tertiary doctrine. They say, “We may be justified by faith alone, but we’re not justified by believing justification by faith alone.” Using that rationale, they go on to say a person may be saved without believing this crucial doctrine. But consider three points in response to that assertion. 1. Paul says no such thing when dealing with those who were denying the biblical doctrine of justification… 2. To believe in justification by faith alone is to believe that Christ alone saves… 3. Such an assertion undermines the faith itself when applied to any other central doctrine of Christianity… Read “Why is Denying Justification such a Serious Error?” POSTED ONFEBRUARY 28, 2015 Jeremy Walker’s “reluctant & brief” follow-up to his book “The New Calvinism Considered” in light of recent Driscoll happenings new-calvinism-front1 Jeremy WalkerJeremy Walker: Driscoll has been among the most vociferous and voluble of those sailing under the flag of the New Calvinism. Toward the latter half of 2014, significant concerns and charges began to accumulate around him… What do we make of all this? There are several things of which we must take account. The New Calvinism is far bigger and often better than Mark Driscoll, although he has epitomised or been connected with some of its biggest dangers, worst excesses and greatest failings as a movement. Visitors to the website are encouraged to make donations to help ‘support the ministry’, hosting and distributing past and promised future Bible teaching and resources, with a non-profit launch assured. But Mr Driscoll, though down, was not out. In December, he launched a new website with a very familiar design (and the Mars Hill name attached), a well-laundered resumé (containing nothing of the recent and well-attested allegations), and the vast majority of his preached and written material, all under the title ‘Pastor Mark Driscoll’. Mark Driscoll Mark Driscoll preaching during his series on the 10 Commandments at Mars Hill We should avoid tarring all with the same brush, even if some have been spattered with the muck. None of us — myself included — are in possession of every relevant fact. Most of us are not in possession of many relevant facts. If we are to speak to a matter, we must speak to what is clear and evident, and avoid imputing evil without definite evidence. Another thing to avoid is the kind of vindictiveness and viciousness that gloats in the downfall of another. No Christian should gleefully revel in someone else’s disgrace, even if you think you saw it coming. There may be a righteous sense of the vindication of God’s honour, but we do better to weep over another’s sin than wallow in our own pride. So, what principles are enforced and what lessons should be learned from this situation? We should learn the value of a robust ecclesiology We should learn the importance of maintaining biblical standards for pastoral ministry We should learn the necessity of real friends We should learn the significance of true repentance We should learn the blessing of doctrinal standards We should learn the ugliness of celebrification We should learn the worth of hearing our critics Finally, we should learn the danger of our own circumstances Read “Revisiting the New Calvinism”. – On episode #35 of our interview podcast we discussed this book with the author: PodcastPromo35 Jeremy Walker New Calvinism POSTED ONFEBRUARY 27, 2015 Advice to Young Pastors [Conrad Mbewe & Ken Jones] The Gospel Coalition ask: In addition to Scripture and sound doctrine, what should young pastors today be studying? Is that any different from what you would’ve recommended 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago? Conrad Mbewe Conrad Mbewe Conrad Mbewe answers: I would urge pastors to study one vital area (other than the Scriptures and sound doctrine). That would be church history, with emphasis on Christian biography. I find that this practice answers a number of needs. First, as a pastor you learn from others who have gone before you on how to maintain personal godliness and domestic competence in the heat of a growing and demanding ministry. Second, you learn from others how to remain faithful to your calling in the long haul, despite the weariness of the fight of faith you must maintain. Third, reading biographies gives you a wider perspective of what you’re called to do. This could relate to the current stage in the spread of the gospel and thus help you put emphasis in the right place. The wider perspective can also make you consider your own mortality. Most biographies are on men and women who have gone to their reward and have left us their legacy. It begs the question: What kind of legacy do I wish to leave behind? Ken Jones Ken Jones Ken Jones answers: There are two directions that I’m inclined to take. The first is Christ-centered preaching/metanarrative. Greg Beale’s A New Testament Biblical Theology in conjunction with works like Sidney Greidanus’s Preaching Christ from the Old Testament and Dennis Johnson’s Him We Proclaim capture the sense in which I combine these two distinct areas of theological study. Much evangelical preaching tends to be either therapeutic or moralistic, regardless of theological persuasion. A firmer grasp on Scripture’s particular underlying and overarching message—centered on the person and work of Jesus—would change the substance of what’s being preached. I see that more clearly now than I did 20 years ago. The second direction is toward material that outlines different models for Christians engaging culture. In Reformed circles we talk about Abraham Kuyper or two kingdoms as expressing what it means to be salt and light; unfortunately the differences between the camps are so fiercely debated that the substance of the positions are often lost. Granted, much of our understanding of how the church engages culture is grounded in one’s ecclesiology, but a more thorough understanding of the prevailing positions would be useful, especially in light of the cultural and social issues of the day. POSTED ONFEBRUARY 19, 2015 Can a confessional Calvinist affirm a libertarian view of free will? Dr. James N. Anderson answers James Anderson James Anderson After examining his own confession (Westminster) Dr. James N. Anderson examines the 1689 to see if it would allow for a libertarian view of free will: This is a follow-up to the previous post in which I argued that “libertarian Calvinism” (a view recently explored by Oliver Crisp in his book Deviant Calvinism) is not compatible with the Westminster Confession of Faith.Not all Presbyterians hold to the WCF, although it is arguably the most widely-adopted Reformed confession among Presbyterians in the English-speaking world. Moreover, Reformed Baptists have their own parallel confession: deviant_calvinismthe 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith. Since the WCF and the LBCF are very similar (often word-for-word identical) in their statements on major points of Reformed doctrine (see here for a side-by-side comparison) I thought it would be interesting to quote the relevant sections from the LBCF to show that libertarian Calvinism isn’t a live option for Reformed Baptists who take the LBCF as their doctrinal standard. Read “Libertarian Reformed Baptists?”. POSTED ONFEBRUARY 18, 2015 The Journal of Baptist Studies Vol. 7 (2015) Out Now [PDF] “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church” About: The Journal of Baptist Studies 6 (2014)Editors: Anthony Chute and Matthew Y. Emerson Book Review Editor: John Gill Board of Editors: John Crowley, Nathan Finn, Michael Haykin, James Patterson, Mark Rogers, Earl Waggoner, Doug Weaver The Journal of Baptist Studies is an electronic, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the study of Baptist history and thought. The journal is produced under the oversight of a Board of Editors representing numerous Baptist denominations and both religious and secular institutions. JBS does not advocate a particular theological or denominational agenda, but rather reflects the scholarship of individuals who identify with a number of positions and affiliations. The journal is available online for free and is independent of any institution. Matt Emerson: As you can see from the table of contents listed below, this edition focused on the four marks of the church from a Baptist perspective. The essays were originally presented in the Baptist Studies session of the 2014 ETS annual meeting. Table of Contents: THE JOURNAL OF BAPTIST STUDIES VOLUME 7 (2015) Editorial, p. 1 Contributors, p. 3 Journal of Baptist Studies JOBSArticles “Baptists and the Unity of the Church,” by Christopher W. Morgan, p. 4 “Baptists and the Holiness of the Church: Soundings in Baptist Thought,” by Ray Van Neste, p. 24 “Baptists and the Catholicity of the Church: Toward an Evangelical Baptist Catholicity,” by Matthew Y. Emerson and R. Lucas Stamps, p. 42 “Baptists and the Apostolicity of the Church,” by James Patterson, p. 67 Book Reviews Currid, John D. Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament, reviewed by Kenneth J. Turner, p. 83 Freeman, Curtis W. Contesting Catholicity: Theology for Other Baptists, reviewed by R. Lucas Stamps, p. 86 George, Timothy. Theology of the Reformers, rev. ed., reviewed by John Gill, p. 91 Hays, Christopher M. and Christopher B. Ansberry, eds. Evangelical Faith and the Challenge of Historical Criticism, reviewed by Matthew Y. Emerson, p. 95 Holmes, Stephen R. The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity, reviewed by Michael A. G. Haykin, p. 99 Sanders, Fred. Wesley on the Christian Life: The Heart Renewed in Love, reviewed by Christopher Bosson, p. 101 Read Online: Powered by Publish for Free PDF [source: JBS] cbulogoBaptist Studies Online is dedicated to the study of Baptist history and thought, with special emphasis on Baptists in North America. The purpose of BSO is to facilitate the scholarly study of Baptists by making available to researchers and students an online Journal, a primary source library, a comprehensive collection of Baptist history-related links, and a regularly updated list of announcements related to the field. BSO is a collaborative effort by Baptist scholars from a variety of traditions, with funding provided by California Baptist University in Riverside, California. POSTED ONFEBRUARY 18, 2015 How to Read Logos’ Baptist Covenant Theology Collection [Sam Renihan] Helpful, timely tips from one who has spent a great deal of time in these works. Sam Renihan: 17 century booksWith the release of Logos’ Baptist Covenant Theology Collection (17 vols.) I thought it would be helpful and important to offer a few tips for those who are diving into these books. If you are like me, it’s exciting to spend time in the writings of the Particular Baptists. Every now and then you feel like Indiana Jones looking for the lost Ark. There are even Nazis (Daniel Featley and Thomas Edwards) trying to kill you. This excitement and nostalgia, combined with your desire to find what you seek, may lead you astray in your reading of the sources. So, if this is your first foray into 17th century writings in general, and those of the Baptists in particular, then you should keep in mind at least the following things: 1. Keep in mind that you are from the 21st century… 2. Keep in mind the context in which the authors are writing… 3. Keep in mind that some of the authors later abandoned the faith… 4. Keep in mind that just because Baptist A held X belief, it does not mean that all Baptists, or any other Baptist held X belief… 5. Keep in mind that there are other works on covenant theology from the Particular Baptists. This is just a reminder that these works do not comprise the whole of Particular Baptist thought on covenant theology… 6. Keep in mind that some of these authors are not Baptists, though their works support Baptist principles and the Baptists appealed to them… Read “How to Read Logos’ Baptist Covenant Theology Collection” in its entirety. POSTED ONFEBRUARY 18, 2015 ‘John Owen & New Covenant Theology’ appendix from ‘Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ’ now online [HTML | PDF] by Richard Barcellos Covenant Theology From Adam to ChristOne of the appendices from the book “Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ” [from RBAP] is now available to read online (though we have featured it before on our NCT page, it is now available in HTML and an easier to read PDF). It is the appendix by Richard Barcellos, “John Owen and New Covenant Theology: Owen on the Old and New Covenants and the Functions of the Decalogue in Redemptive History in Historical and Contemporary Perspective.” If one reads some of the difficult sections of Owen’s writings, either without understanding his comprehensive thought and in light of the theological world in which he wrote, or in a superficial manner, some statements can easily be taken to mean things they do not. When this is done, the result is that authors are misunderstood and sometimes, subsequent theological movements are aligned with major historical figures without substantial and objective warrant. Two such instances of this involve John Owen and New Covenant Theology (NCT). John G Reisinger John G Reisinger John G. Reisinger claims that Owen viewed the Old Covenant as “a legal/works covenant.” He goes on and says: “This covenant was conditional because it was a legal/works covenant that promised life and threatened death. Israel failed to earn the blessings promised in the covenant. But under the New Covenant, the Church becomes the Israel of God and all her members are kings and priests (a kingdom of priests). Christ, as our Surety (Heb. 7:22), has kept the Old Covenant for us and earned every blessing it promised.” The reader of Owen’s treatise on the Old and New Covenants in his Hebrews commentary, however, will quickly realize that Reisinger’s comments above do not give the full picture of Owen’s position… Tom Wells is one of the authors of the 2002 book New Covenant Theology Tom Wells is one of the authors of the 2002 book New Covenant Theology Another NCT advocate, Tom Wells, claims that John G. Reisinger “has adopted John Owen’s view of the Mosaic and New covenants, without adding Owen’s ‘creation ordinance’ view of the Sabbath.”14 Wells also claims that Owen held a mediating position on the relationship between the Mosaic and New Covenants and that Owen’s position is substantially that of Reisinger and hence, NCT… Read the rest online [HTML] or in PDF format: Download (PDF, 655KB) POSTED ONFEBRUARY 18, 2015 Of Lent [Roundup] Re-post from last year with some additions: Aaron Hoak: And, granted, there’s no command to commemorate the birth, death, or resurrection of Christ, but the way we do those things is through ordinary worship – gathering together as the people of God to sing, pray, receive his Word, and observe the sacraments. Wonderful! But on Ash Wednesday, folks get together to do those things and smear ash on their foreheads. Jesus gave his church two beautiful gospel pictures – baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Ash Wednesday adds a 3rd picture not ordained by Jesus or commanded by God. Adding things not prescribed by Scripture to worship is not wise. Lord's Supper Ernest Kevin SpurgeonI believe it is (as many observers of Ash Wednesday and the Lent season it kicks off point out) beneficial to think on our sin and our need for repentance; to actually repent. I believe that prayer and fasting are a good way to do this (though as I noted in a post several years ago, what typically happens in Lent is not really fasting). I believe that meditating on our sinfulness and need is helpful preparation for truly appreciating the resurrection of Jesus. But I also believe that Jesus himself gave us the perfect way to do that. It is by remembering his finished work in our observance of the Lord’s Supper. Here we remember and have our faith fed by what He has done. Ash Wednesday and Lent dangerously try to reproduce in our lives what Jesus went through in 40 days in the wilderness which tends to emphasize what we do. Dear friends, Jesus underwent that experience in the wilderness so I don’t have to! He earned acceptance with the Father because I never could. Read “Ashes, Ashes, We All Do What?!” – ash-wednesdayRichard Barcellos from last year: Recently, The Gospel Coalition (TGC) site posted a blog entry entitled – “Lent Is About Jesus: A Free Devotional Guide.” No, I did not make that up… As I read the post and thought about it a bit, I concluded I would like to respond to it. So, as many of you do on various blogs, I sent a comment to that post. Before sending the comment, however, I sent copies of my response to a few friends, just to make sure I was responding correctly and clearly. They encouraged me to post my thoughts… This is not helpful to me as an individual or, especially, as a pastor. It creates more work for me. Read “To Lent or reLent? Thoughts on [last year’s] post at The Gospel Coalition” – “Putting the ‘Ent’ Back in ‘Lent.’” “Putting the ‘Ent’ Back in ‘Lent.’” Days after that post, Tom Chantry chimed in as well: It has slowly dawned on me this week that the folks at The Gospel Coalition have reached down from their lofty pinnacle to tell the rest of us that Lent is all about Jesus and that we really ought to consider celebrating it. Childish practice turns sinister when respected pastors tell me that I ought to engage in it. How should I respond? Read “The Lenten Brouhaha” – church05In the above post Jeremy Walker’s post, from a year before, was quoted: “Frankly, it seems odd to me that many of those who have proved very quick to abandon all manner of patterns and habits and convictions of Christians over decades or centuries, retain Lent, Maundy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter (Resurrection) Sunday as set in stone in the calendar, one of the high points of the Christian year (which pattern, we are informed, provides the central event in the church year – the climax of worship, expectation, and celebration, an exercise of the church’s discipline). If you’re not sold on Easter, you might be dismissed as one of the “diehard Reformed” for whom “this [Easter] Monday is like every other Monday because Easter Sunday is like every other Sunday.” To say that Easter Sunday is like every other Sunday is not to suggest an upgraded view of Easter Sunday but a downgraded view of every other one.” Read “This Lent I am giving up . . . reticence” – chocolate-truffle-no-4Three years ago Reformed Baptist Fellowship featured this one: Another unbiblical aspect of Lent is the very public manner in which it is practiced. Jesus condemned hypocrites for their outward displays of piety (Matt. 6:1-18), revealing the self-righteous nature of such gestures. Lent is very legalistic as well and Paul warns us against binding the conscience in areas which God has left free (Rom. 14:1-12). True sanctification involves the recognition that our consciences are liberated by Christ’s teachings (Mark 7:17-18) while also understanding that the corrupt, sinful heart is what separates us from God (vv. 20-23). Read “Lent and the Sufficient Work of Christ” – Jeremy WalkerJeremy Walker chimed in again last year: So, here’s a thought: how about giving up semi-Roman Catholic dogma, humanly-mandated asceticism, and empty gestures? Rend your heart and not your garments, and do so not because it is a particular time of year, but because you have a particular kind of heart with its particular manifestations of rebellion. Self-control is never out of fashion. Repentance and confession may have their particular seasons in the life of the saints, but it is worth remembering that when our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said “Repent,” he called for the entire life of believers to be one of repentance. Read “Not relenting” – Any we missed? POSTED ONFEBRUARY 13, 2015 Spurgeon vs. Spurgeon: Further reflections on the doctrine of divine impassibility [Tom Chantry] spurgeon1Tom Chantry digs deeper into Spurgeon’s dismissal of the confessional language that, as Spurgeon put it, God is “…’without parts or passions’—I think was the definition.” : Now this is curious indeed. In 1882 Spurgeon would say that he “often inwardly objected” to the confessional expression of impassibility. We can certainly take him at his word, but we now need to wonder whether he understood what that expression intended. For like it or not, Spurgeon in 1855 clearly articulated the very arguments which the confessional generation applied in favor of that doctrine. If what Spurgeon says in the above paragraph applies to the love of God – and clearly he intends it to so apply – then perhaps he did believe in divine impassibility. Is it possible that he held the view but did not understand the phrase? Read Spurgeon vs. Spurgeon. Posts navigation Previous pagePage 7 Next page Search for: Search … Search FOLLOW: *: Enter your email address: Subscribe - Subscribe to just the podcast via RSS reader, iTunes, Stitcher, TuneIn or by Email* (*email is only sent out once per day) BAPTI-BOT BLOG ROUNDUP Iron Sharpens Iron Podcast Logo September 21, 2017 Show with Jeremy Walker on “What is Repentance?” Theme: September 21, 2017: Jeremy Walker, Pastor of Maidenbower Baptist Church of Crawley in West Sussex, England, author & blogger @ Reformation 21 & The Wanderer, will address: “What […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 Iron Sharpens Iron Podcast Logo September 6, 2017 Show with Marc Grimaldi on “The Importance of Calvinism for Biblically Faithful Evangelism: What it Prevents & What it Preserves” Theme: September 6, 2017: Marc Grimaldi, a pastor @ Grace Reformed Baptist Church of Long Island in Merrick, NY, will address the theme: “The IMPORTANCE of CALVINISM For BIBLICALLY […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 Archbishop of Canterbury Can’t Answer Direct Questions, More on the I Am Sayings of Jesus Snuck a quick DL in today, covering Justin Welby’s inability to answer a direct question on the nature of sin, and then spending most of our time continuing the discussion […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 Introduction to “Getting the Garden Right: Adam’s Work and God’s Rest in Light of Christ,” coming soon from Founders Press Introduction This book, in one sense, concentrates on hermeneutics and theological method. I contend that New Covenant Theology (NCT) gets the covenant of works and the […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 Final page of last lecture for Southern California Reformed Baptist Pastors’ Conference ‘17 You can register for the conference here. Psalm 104:30 says, “You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; And You renew the face of the earth.” Here both […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 Endorsements for “Getting the Garden Right,” coming soon from Founders Press Nothing shapes how we interpret and apply the Bible as much as our understanding of covenant. Richard Barcellos offers us a helpful blend of biblical exegesis and theological reflection […] Fri, Oct 06, 2017 RECENT COMMENTS Rich Barcellos on One Thing I Did Right in Ministry… [Blog Series | Founders] Jason on ‘Honey Out of the Rock’ by Thomas Wilcox [Free E-book] Jason on What is the Importance of Believer’s Baptism? Fred Malone Answers [5 min. VIDEO] Hesbon on July 7-9, 2015 “Pathway to Power” Metropolitan Tabernacle School of Theology feat. Peter Masters + more in London, UK Kevin Schwamb on Upcoming 7 Volume Series: “Lectures in Systematic Theology” by Greg Nichols. Book one months away… Sharon thombre on “The Seven Sayings of the Savior on the Cross” by A. W. Pink [Free eBook Friday] DANA CASTALDO on What is the Importance of Believer’s Baptism? Fred Malone Answers [5 min. VIDEO] TOP TAGS 17th Century Baptist History1689 Federalism1689 Second London Baptist Confession of FaithAndrew FullerApologeticsAsk a Reformed BaptistBaptismBaptist HistoryBooksCalvinismCharles SpurgeonChurchChurch HistoryConfessionalismCovenant TheologyEcclesiologyEvangelismFounders MinistriesFree e-book FridayGospelJames RenihanJames WhiteJeffrey T. RiddleJeremy WalkerMichael HaykinMissionsParticular Baptist HistoryParticular BaptistsParticular VoicesPastoral MinistryPastoral TheologyPreachingReformed Baptist 101Reformed Baptist SeminaryReformed Theology 101Regulative Principle of WorshipRichard BarcellosRoundupSacramentsSamuel RenihanSam WaldronThabiti AnyabwileTom AscolTom NettlesVoddie Baucham Proudly powered by WordPress