Category: Issues

various issues within fundamentalism specifically or evangelicalism as a whole

Amazing Grace and a Contest

~ fundyreformed ~ 2 Comments

The History & Theology of CalvinismI haven’t yet featured this excellent resource on the study of Reformation Theology. Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism is a first-class video production and a resource second to none.

I have not yet actually purchased and viewed it, but I have enjoyed the several video clips of it that are available online. We plan on purchasing it sometime, and asking some of our relatives who are somewhat biased against Calvinism, to at least watch this DVD presentation.

The reason I am bringing this up now is that there is an opportunity to win a free copy of this DVD. Rhett Kelly has a contest running over at his blog, and promises to award the winner a free copy. I didn’t win, but perhaps one of my readers will. So go over and check it out.

Also, Rhett made me aware of a special sale price of 14.95 for the DVD through the NiceneCouncil.Com. This price is so good that it beats Monergism.Com’s longstanding sale price of 17.95! The DVD usually retails for $30.

So try your hand at Rhett’s contest, and if you lose, purchase that copy from NiceneCouncil.Com. Or for 2 dollars more total (with shipping and handling), support Monergism.Com, and order through them.

Calvinism — Categorized Scripture List

~ fundyreformed ~ 9 Comments

My friend Nathan Pitchford posted a categorized Scripture list of the doctrines of grace recently a few weeks back. It is the best such list I have found.

It lists the 5 points of Calvinism along with some sub-points and brief explanatory notes, then it merely cites Scriptural references which support each of the points. Although the list is simple, being primarily Scripture references, it is quite thorough. It was designed specifically for those unfamiliar with Calvinism, yet it will prove a handy reference tool for those who from time to time still debate the issue with non-Calvinist friends.

Nathan’s posting on his blog includes hyperlinks to all the verse references; so you can easily click on most of the reference and read them online. He also will kindly email you a copy of the list with all the verses typed out in full. Monergism.com has also posted the full version of the list, if you prefer.

This list is definitely worth checking out, even for you non-Calvinists. It clearly lays out the abundant Scriptural case for Calvinism, which should help others understand just why we adhere to Calvinism.

Thanks, Nathan! I’m sure this clear and simple list will be a great help to many believers.

Sam Storms on Traditionalism, Fundamentalism, Unity, and More

~ fundyreformed ~ 5 Comments

Recently, I read a fascinating interview of Sam Storms  concerning an upcoming Baptist Conference on the Holy Spirit, which Sam will be speaking at. Sam Storms is best known for his non-cessationist position on miraculous gifts (learn more at his website EnjoyingGodMinistries.Com). However, he is also an advocate of conservative Biblical theology, Calvinism, complementarianism, and the centrality of the Word in worship. He’s also a Dallas Seminary grad, so as you can see, Dr. Sam Storms is an interesting person to interview.

The interview did not just focus on spiritual gifts, however. Since the conference is being hosted by a prominent Southern Baptist church, the interview (conducted by 12 Witnesses) asked Storms what he thought about the current issues facing the SBC. In his responses, he touched on issues central to the purpose of this blog. He touched on problems with fundamentalism and traditionalism, and the need for unity. So I thought I would reproduce some of his comments here for my readers, and encourage them to check out the interesting and informative full interview over at 12 Witnesses.

Question: Within the Southern Baptist landscape right now, what issues do you see driving our mutual discussion? Is there an overarching issue that relates to all of the things abuzz in the Convention? If so, what is it?

Answer: The issues are much the same as they’ve been for generations. The things Christians disagree and argue about are fairly constant: the sovereignty of God and human responsibility, especially as it relates to evangelism and missions; the role of the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts in particular; the role of women in ministry and leadership; eschatology, spontaneity vs. liturgy in worship, etc. These and a few other issues are almost always at the center of debate, not just among Baptists but across denominational lines.

The one thing these issues have in common is that none of them is central to the gospel itself. They are all, at best, secondary doctrines, or doctrines on which Christ-exalting, Bible-believing Christians can and often do disagree. Sadly, some question the evangelical credentials of anyone who might dare to differ with their view on Calvinism or whether miraculous gifts occur today or the timing of the rapture or the nature of the millennium.

But there is something else that is even more disturbing, and that is the angry and divisive dogmatism that is emerging over behavioral issues on which the Bible is either silent or leaves one’s decision in the realm of Christian freedom. Perhaps the greatest threat to unity and acceptance in the Church is the tendency to treat particular life-style and cultural preferences as though they were divine law. To be even more specific, it’s the tendency to constrict or reduce or narrow the boundaries of what is acceptable to God, either by demanding what the Bible doesn’t require or forbidding what the Bible clearly permits.

My experience has been that this is typically driven by one of three things: either an unjustified fear of being “spiritually contaminated” by too close contact with the surrounding culture, or an unbridled ambition to gain power over the lives of others, or a failure to believe and trust in the all-sufficiency of Jesus Christ (or all three combined).

I’m concerned that in certain segments of the Convention there is a mindset reminiscent of the old “fundamentalism” that is characterized by isolationism, separatism, anti-intellectualism, cultural withdrawal, and a generally angry and judgmental attitude toward all those who dare to differ on these matters that quite simply don’t matter; at least they don’t matter nearly as much as whether or not you believe in the deity of Christ, his substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection, and salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

Whereas conservative evangelicalism has typically drawn the line on theological essentials, this more recent fundamentalism draws the line ever more narrowly on issues such as total abstinence vs. moderation in the use of alcohol, the degree of freedom and the role of affections in public worship, the legitimacy of so-called “private prayer language,” etc. Sadly, when one’s commitment to Christ and the authority of Scripture is judged on the basis of this latter group of issues, rather than the former, the situation is bleak indeed.

Question: How do you see the debate over moderation concerning the consumption of alcohol? Do you see a disparity in the approach to the alcohol issue and other issues under debate?

Answer: Honestly, I’m weary of this debate. Certainly anyone who embraces the authority of Scripture must denounce drunkenness. But I’ve never been persuaded in the least by the alleged “biblical” arguments for total abstinence. Having said that, I think total abstinence is a perfectly honorable and permissible practice to embrace. Any Christian is free to abstain from alcohol. But they aren’t free, in my opinion, to insist that others do the same. They are even less free to accuse those who drink in moderation of being sub-Christian. Abstinence per se is neither a sign of spiritual weakness nor of spiritual strength. Neither is one’s choice of moderation in the use of alcohol a sign of weakness or strength. Whether one totally abstains or drinks in moderation is simply irrelevant to Christian spirituality.

Question: What are your thoughts on the Traditional church, the Missional church and the Emergent church?

Answer: …My primary concern for the Traditional church is that its customs, rituals (yes, even Southern Baptist’s have rituals; they just don’t call them that), habits, and accepted patterns for ministry and worship are so deeply entrenched in the spiritual psyche of a people that the Bible itself is not allowed to critique what is done or provide direction for new expressions of life as the body of Christ.

There is also the potential threat of a Traditional church losing touch with the surrounding culture. They can often create a “fortress” mentality, circle the wagons, hunker down so to speak, and rarely engage with the developments in society or the unsaved who populate it.

Too often, in the name of tradition, freedom in worship is stifled, the power of the Spirit is suppressed, age old “doctrines” are immune from biblical scrutiny, and what makes people “feel comfortable” is the decisive factor in evaluating fresh proposals or efforts to reach the lost and more effectively communicate with the saved… [note he does go on to criticize the Emergent church as well]

Emphasis was added in the above excerpts. Be sure to read the whole interview. And please let me know if you think Storms is off on some of his assessments here.

A Wise Perspective on Limited Atonement

~ fundyreformed ~ 14 Comments

I can’t quite remember how I stumbled across this article last night, but I thought I would share it anyway.  

The Nature of the Atonement: Why and for Whom Did Christ Die? By Phil Johnson

I’m not excited about the article because he agrees with my position on particular redemption, even though he does. I’m excited because he brings a wise perspective on the debate. Calvinism in the past and in the present allows room for varying positions on this debate. Not all Calvinists agree on each text. Most however would agree that Jesus died for the elect in a special sense for which he did not die for the non-elect.

This article is similar to some comments by Wayne Grudem that I highlighted in the context of a recent debate on the topic. In all our (speaking to fellow Calvinists here) defense of particular redemption, let us be careful not to deny that Christ’s atonement applies to all men in some sense. And let us not be quick to judge others on the basis of our strong stand on the issue, all the while we remain ignorant of many wiser Calvinists of old who would caution us against such a tactic.

The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 7

~ fundyreformed ~ 7 Comments

Note:this is another post in a series exploring how the Bible impacts the KJVO Debate. For all of the posts to date, click here.

Review

As we pick up this series, again, let me review where we are and how we got here. This is a series dealing with how the Bible directly impacts the KJV Only debate. We started by giving a review of how KJV Onlyists often claim their position is supported by the Bible. We then moved on to discuss what the Bible says about inspiration briefly, and moved on to the topic of preservation. That is where the series has bogged down.  

There is not much exegetical discussion out there on the passages often cited by KJV Onlyists as teaching perfect preservation (the view that each word of the original Bible text is preserved perfectly down to today in a generally accessible form to most believers). So I have been trying to take pains to be very clear as to what the text is actually saying, and how exactly it applies to a doctrine of preservation. So far we have concluded that a few verses seem to teach a basic doctrine of preservation, but the doctrine has not been specifically expressed or explained much yet. This post will deal just with Is. 59:21. There will be two more posts on passages which touch on the doctrine of preservation. Then we will bring all the passages together and discuss the Scriptural doctrine of preservation before moving on to some additional posts on this topic (which I am really excited about).

Isaiah 59:21

“And as for me, this is my covenant with them,” says the LORD: “My Spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your offspring, or out of the mouth of your children’s offspring,” says the LORD, “from this time forth and forevermore.”

This verse often gets overlooked in discussions about preservation. It is somewhat obscure, so perhaps that is why. The verse closes a dark chapter with a hope filled promise. The chapter starts by detailing Israel’s sins and God’s anger over them. However, in God’s dealing with the sin of His people, he causes them to fear Him (v. 19). And he promises a Redeemer will come for those who turn from their evil (v. 20).

“You”

Who is the person or group addressed as “you” in this verse? It could be Isaiah, the prophet. But is God promising something specific about his own personal offspring? For this and other reasons, most conservative scholars conclude that the “you” refers either to the Messiah (the “Servant” so often addressed in this part of Isaiah) or to the godly  remnant of Israel (and by extension God’s people in all ages).

In favor of the view that the Christ is in view, it is mentioned that God’s words were put in “his” mouth. This phrase hearkens back to Is. 51:16. Both at that verse and with regard to our text, J. Alec Motyer makes a convincing case that the “Servant” (or the Messiah) is in view [1]. If it is the remnant of Israel, why is the Spirit mentioned as being upon them in 59:21? Also, a parallel can be seen with Is. 61:1ff. where the Spirit is upon the Messiah and the Messiah is given a message to preach.

“Them”

The covenant or promise is made with “them”. This evidently is the godly remnant of Israel. Keil & Delitzsch point out

In the words, “And I, this is my covenant with them,” we have a renewal of the words of God to Abram in Gen 17:4 , “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee.” [2]

I have read some dispensational commentaries which try to force this verse to apply only to Israel and not to the church. Most commentaries I read don’t do that, however. The seed of the Messiah, points back to the seed of the woman in Gen. 3:15. And in Gal. 3 all believers are Christ’s seed and thus heirs of Abraham. It seems fairly obvious this is a promise for God’s people, however it may be yet future from Isaiah’s perspective — as in once the Messiah arrives on the scene, the promise will be fulfilled.

“Words”

What is meant by “my words that I have put in your mouth”? To help me finish this post I’m going to survey the landscape here. I will provide some quotes from other commentaries on what they think “words” refers to. I will pick up the discussion on the other end of the quotes.

…the Lord will assist his Church, and will take care of it, so as never to allow it to be deprived of doctrine… for we must be supported and upheld by the word and the Spirit, of which the Lord declares that we shall never be left destitute. “” John Calvin

The Targum interprets this of the words of prophecy; and the Talmud of the law not departing from the disciples of wise men; but it is best to understand it of the Gospel not departing from the disciples of Christ, and the seed of the church. “”  John Gill

…it seems… to refer to the truth of God in general which he had revealed for the guidance and instruction of his church. “”  Albert Barnes

The same doctrines which Jesus preached, all his faithful ministers preach; and his seed “”genuine Christians, who are all born of God , believe; and they shall continue, and the doctrines remain in the seed’s seed through all generations-for ever and ever.   “”  Adam Clarke

The Spirit will be accompanied with certain “words” which will be put into the Church’s mouth; and these words will remain unchanged and pass on from mouth to mouth, age after age, for ever. The “words” intended are probably those of the entire Bible “” “all God’s revelations” (Cheyne) “” which the Church will maintain as inspired truth through all ages. “”  Pulpit Commentary (Exposition section)

The word of Christ shall always continue in the mouths of the faithful… The word shall never depart out of the mouth of the church; for there shall still be a seed to speak Christ’s holy language and profess his holy religion. “”  Matthew Henry [3]

We must acknowledge that “words” can refer to something other than the words of Scripture. I made the point in this post, that we need to establish from the context clearly whether “word” or “words” refers to Scripture or not. This is especially true today, when most Christians read Scripture any time they read “word”. Seeing the parallel with Is. 61:1ff., “words” could very well refer to a specific message Christ was given to declare. As John Gill said above, it could refer to the Gospel message, which Christ first brought, and which his disciples have disseminated throughout the world in the years following Christ’s advent.

As you can see above, others have taken this phrase to refer to doctrines or truth in general. And certainly God has promised that his church would remain with the truth to all ages. Others have taken it to refer to the words of the whole Bible. That may well be, as well.

Before we draw a conclusion, let us ponder what it means for the words to be “in your mouth”. Again, let me provide some quotes in discussing this.

The word in the mouth may suggest personal reading (cf. Josh 1:8), for completely silent reading is a product of a more sophisticated society; or it could suggest that the word given and appropriated is now to be proclaimed. “”  Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah  (Geoffery W. Grogan) [4]

“Shall not depart out of thy mouth.” This phrase probably means, that the truth of God would be the subject of perpetual meditation and conversation. “”  Albert Barnes

…the comforting saving words of God are not only the blessed treasure of its heart, but the confession of its mouth which spreads salvation all around.   “”  Keil & Delitzsch (Matthew Henry likewise draws a parallel with Rom. 10:9 and words being in the mouth) [5]  

Conclusion  

Whatever else this verse teaches, it clearly promises that God’s people will be preserved through all generations. It declares that they will possess God’s Spirit and God’s words. Clearly this would be the Gospel message and the truth of Christianity which will consistently be in the mouth of God’s people. John Calvin captures what I am trying to express here, well: “Hence we infer that this is a most valuable treasure of the Church, that he has chosen for himself a habitation in it, to dwell in the hearts of believers by his Spirit, and next to preserve among them the doctrine of his gospel.”

Since the Gospel is contained in specific words, and depends upon the authority of Scripture, and since “words” is the term used here, I think it would be reasonable to infer that a promise of preservation for the words of Scripture is in view here. As in previous passages, however, the preservation promised is not expounded upon. We are not told how this promise will come about. We are not told where to look to find the written words. The promise specifically applies to words on your mouth, not necessarily on paper. Further, does the phrase “my words”, necessarily imply “all my words”?  

The text is not specific enough to warrant a dogmatic conclusion that each and every word of God must be on the tongue of each and every child of God throughout all time. Given the nature of the verse and the prophecy in Isaiah, there are a variety of possible interpretations of it. The main point seems to be very clear, God promises His word will be present among His people and that they will always exist as His people. The finer points of the textual debate are not addressed by this passage.

————————————————–
Footnotes

[1]    Below is a quote on Is. 59:21.

The situation, however, is parallel to the covenant references, equally unheralded, in 42:6; 49:8; 54:10; 55:3. All these are directly related to the Servant and his work. According to 49:8 and 54:10, it is through the Servant that the people of Jacob/Zion enter into the blessings of restoration and peace; according to 42:6 and 55:3, blessings are covenanted world-wide through the Servant. The singular you thus stands in a Servant position. Divine action has secured a world-wide reverential people and a company of penitents in Jacob, and there is a person whom we may call the Anointed One, for the Lord’s Spirit is upon him, through whom their relationship with the Lord is eternally secure. Like the Servant (53:10), those to whom he secures these covenant blessings are his “˜seed’.

“” J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary(Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1993), the electronic version (copyright 1996 by J.A. Motyer), accessed at biblecentre.net (March 30, 2007).

See also his discussion at 51:16, where he states: “This verse describes the equipment, security, and task of the Servant.”

[2]    Keil & Delitzsch’s commentary on Isaiah, accessed at biblecentre.net (March 30, 2007).

[3] All these commentaries were accessed online at biblecentre.net (March 30, 2007).

[4] Geoffrey W. Gohan, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan)  online version, accessed at biblecentre.net (March 30, 2007).

[5] Commentaries accessed online at biblecentre.net (March 30, 2007).