Article: Christ In Me International: Emergence of a New Cult? by Rudolph P Boshoff (at this link)
Cult: Christ In Me International
Reply
Monthly Archives: September 2017
Six Ways a Church Should Use a Confession of Faith
Article by Jeff Robinson (original source here)
Particular Baptist churches planted in the tumultuous soil of 17th century England grew up and bore fruit under a nasty set of doctrinal and methodological accusations, including that they subscribed to libertarian free will, denied original sin, that their pastors baptized women in the nude, and were opponents of church and crown.
Perhaps their most virulent and colorful opponent, Daniel Featley—a separatist persecutor deluxe—derisively dismissed our Baptist forebears, writing in a venom-filled pamphlet, “They pollute our rivers with their filthy washings.” Such was Baptist life under Charles I.
These nefarious charges and numerous others arose from leaders of the state church and led to decades of grinding persecution for Baptists. Seven churches returned fire, but not by brandishing the sword of steel or by hurling theological invectives. The seven carried out their war for truth by wielding the sword of the Spirit. The product was the most comprehensive expression of orthodox Baptist theology ever written—the Second London Confession of 1689.
The signers of that venerable confession lived and moved in an age in which most local congregations wrote confessions of faith for a number of reasons, one of them to demonstrate their commitment to the historic Christian faith. Additionally, they sought to manifest their solidarity with the prevailing forms of Calvinistic orthodoxy as well as to expound the basic elements of their ecclesiology. The Second London Confession also aimed at refuting popular notions associating Particular Baptists with the radical wing of the Anabaptist movement on the continent.
Of primary importance, they saw biblical warrant for the practice of confessionalism in texts such as 1 Timothy 3:16, where the apostle Paul’s inspired pen produced a brief but beautiful display of the mystery of godliness:
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
Fast-forward to 2016 and many Baptist churches continue to have statements of faith “on the books” as a part of their foundational documents. Yet, I’ve found that many churches do not know how useful the confession can be beyond establishing subscription to certain core doctrines. This raises a fundamental question: How should a local church use their confession of faith? Here are six ways a church might use a confession of faith. I owe at least four of these to my friend Sam Waldron’s fine work, A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Evangelical Press). Confessions of faith should be used:
1. As an affirmation and defense of the truth. The church of the living God is called to be the pillar and buttress of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). It is to “follow the pattern of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13) and to “earnestly contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Insofar as a confession reflects the Word of God, it is useful for helping the church discern truth from error. Many of the great confessions in church history have affirmed biblical truths while simultaneously condemning unbiblical expressions of the same. Paul called Timothy to guard the good deposit entrusted to him (2 Tim. 1:14), and likewise, faithful Christians are called to keep a close watch over it. A part of this stewardship is clearly articulating the truth and defending it in the face of error. A more recent example of this is the Baptist Faith & Message 2000. Southern Baptists, rightly, revised their confession, adding article XVIII to address areas where feminism had begun to encroach on the church and Christian family.
2. As a baseline for church discipline. In 1 Timothy 5:16, Paul famously admonished Timothy to “Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.” As a matter of stewardship, church purity, and love to neighbor, a faithful pastor, a faithful elder board, a faithful church member must keep a close eye on the life and doctrine of those within their congregation. Church discipline (Matt. 18:15-18) is a key part of this. The confession of faith forms the baseline for determining whether or not a church leader or member has strayed from orthodox belief or orthodox living. It provides an objective standard for both accusation and restoration in church discipline.
Andrew Fuller wrote of the care that must be taken in church discipline and the role of the confession if that pursuit:
“If a religious community agrees to specify some leading principles which they consider as derived from the Word of God, and judge the belief of them to be necessary in order to any person’s becoming or continuing a member with them, it does not follow that those principles should be equally understood, or that all their brethren must have the same degree of knowledge, nor yet that they should understand and believe nothing else. The powers and capacities of different persons are various; one may comprehend more of the same truth than another, and have his views more enlarged by an exceedingly great variety of kindred ideas; and yet the substance of their belief may still be the same. The object of the articles is to keep at a distance, not those who are weak in the faith, but such as are his avowed enemies.”
3. As a means of theological triage and Christian maturity. Which doctrines must be believed for one to be considered a genuine follower of Christ? Which doctrines represent denominational distinctives? Which doctrines are tertiary and may be relegated to the category of “good men disagree?” A solid and effective local church confession takes an unambiguous stand on doctrines that should mark the genuine Christian. It also rings clear on denominational distinctives. But a wise and well-articulated church confession also avoids unnecessary sectarianism by refusing to take a hard line on so-called “third-tier” issues such as the timing of Christ’s return, specific details of the millennium, preferred English Bible translations, and those similar.
4. As a concise standard by which to evaluate ministers of the Word. The apostle Paul told Timothy to entrust the great truths of God to faithful men (2 Tim. 2:2). Faithful men are faithful to sound doctrine, faithful to the Scriptures. When calling a new pastor or a new elder, the church’s confession provides the doctrinal standard by which his fitness is to be judged. It also provides a crucial baseline by which to measure his theological solidarity—or lack thereof—with the body that is considering him for ministry.
5. As a doctrinal basis for planting daughter churches. Churches typically speak of potential offspring as “having our DNA.” A confession of faith establishes a key part of the genetic structure that is to be passed on. As a historical example, the Charleston Association used a slightly revised version of the Philadelphia Confession as the doctrinal standard for church plants across the Southeast. My family remains involved in church in north Georgia planted by Charleston under the Philadelphia Confession in 1832.
6. As a means of establishing historical continuity and unity with other Christians. The framers of the Second London Confession aimed to show that Particular Baptists were not given to theological novelties, but stood with two feet firmly planted in the historic Christian tradition. They subscribed to the Trinitarianism of the early creeds, the Christology of Chalcedon, the five solas of the Reformation, and much more that comprises evangelical orthodoxy. Local churches do the same when they proclaim where they stand on these core theological doctrines.
A healthy church is one that knows what it believes, preaches what it believes, teaches what it believes, sings what it believes, prays what it believes, confesses what it believes, and seeks, by God’s enabling grace, to live what it believes. In other words, a healthy church is a confessional church.
Responding to Critiques of Calvinism
When writing an article that finds its way to the internet, there is often feedback, both positive and negative. The process, including the negative reactions, can actually sharpen the thought process or enable things to be communicated in a better, more helpful way.
Sometimes though, someone is so irate that they call the doctrine you have espoused devilish and heretical. It is not always appropriate to respond. It can be a great time waster. However, sometimes, providing a response, while it may not help the person who first wrote, (in that they are not in any way open to receive a measured response) might be helpful for on-lookers so that they might know there are good answers available.
Way back in 2005 I wrote an article on 2 Peter 3:9 (http://www.reformationtheology.com/2005/10/understanding_2_peter_39_by_pa.php) discussing the verse in its biblical context. Today, almost 12 years later, someone named Vanessa wrote with a very critical review. I thought it worth the brief time it took to respond:
My responses are in bold (so it is easy to follow):
This argument makes the scripture redundant, and like most Calvinist beliefs, is composed of circular reasoning that is inconsistent when drawn out to its logical conclusions.
You would need to prove this point rather than simply asserting it.
Also, just because the epistle is addressed to the elect does not mean that when it says “all” it is referring only to the people the letter is addressed to. That is a faulty conclusion. Could you not write a letter to a particular someone and be talking about humankind in general? Why is that so hard to fathom? All means all. If he meant “all of you reading this”, he would have said “all of you reading this”.
All does not always mean all. Context tells us what the ‘all” means. Just as when a teacher asks “are we all here?” he/she is referring to students in his/her class, or a mother asking “are we all in the car?” she is asking about all her children, not everyone on the planet. Your argument seems to be “just ignore context, all means all, and I think it is just dead wrong to even ask the question ‘who might the “all” refer to. That just over complicates things.’
Secondly, your argument makes the passage redundant because it would be like saying “Hi everyone who God chose for salvation, God wants you to come to repentance and be saved. If everyone reading it is elect and only saved because God thought they were special, then why point out that God wants them to be saved?
Firstly, none of the elect are special, they have simply received a different measure of Divine grace and favor. Secondly, the point of the passage is to show why Christ’s second coming has not occurred as of yet, namely because God is not willing for any of His people to perish but to come to repentance. It is not redundant in any way at all to say this.
Of course He wants them saved if, according to Calvinism, they are saved through no choice of their own because God basically forced himself on them.
Straw man! – the elect do choose Christ, willingly, because of the Sovereign work of God in the heart.
Calvinism is false doctrine straight from the devil.
Well, isn’t that nice? Actually I honestly fear for you when you stand before the great I Am and find that He is every bit as Sovereign as the Calvinists have affirmed and you are called to account for your words here. For our part, “We give our hand to every man that loves the Lord Jesus Christ, be he what he may or who he may. The doctrine of election, like the great act of election itself, is intended to divide, not between Israel and Israel, but between Israel and the Egyptians, not between saint and saint, but between saints and the children of the world. A man may be evidently of God’s chosen family, and yet though elected, may not believe in the doctrine of election. I hold that there are many savingly called, who do not believe in effectual calling, and that there are a great many who persevere to the end, who do not believe the doctrine of final perseverance. We do hope the hearts of many are a great deal better than their heads. We do not set their fallacies down to any willful opposition to the truth as it is in Jesus but simply to an error in their judgments, which we pray God to correct. We hope that if they think us mistaken too, they will reciprocate the same Christian courtesy; and when we meet around the cross, we hope that we shall ever feel that we are one in Christ Jesus.” – C. H. Spurgeon)
If you draw it out to its logical conclusions it makes God into a monster who is responsible for baby rape, torture, and murder. It makes God a puppet master and a divine rapist, and makes the devil completely unaccountable by attributing the workings of Satan to God in the name of “sovereignty”.
Even in your foreknowledge view of God, He knew all that was to happen and still ordained it would come to pass, right??? so you have the same ‘problem’ to deal with. The biblical view is that God has ordained all that comes to pass including the sin that made the atonement of Christ necessary, and will work out only good and holy purposes through it all. I suggest this link for articles on this subject should you wish to know more: https://www.monergism.com/search?keywords=evil&format=All
Guess what, God is sovereign enough to give humans a choice in the matter of whether to be saved.
Sure, and I believe that, and also believe that the Bible teaches that all men will choose rebellion unless God works in their hearts. There was a Fall that has rendered all men in a fallen state, spiritually dead and unable and unwilling to come to Christ unless God draws them, and those He draws are raised up on the last day. It is Jesus who teaches us that and we take His words seriously. Seemingly, you do not (John 6:44).
That’s why CHOICE is all throughout the Bible. “Choose you this day whom you will serve.” “Behold I have set before you death and life, blessing and life, CHOOSE LIFE.”
Yes, and we embrace those verses. Do you think somehow that we have missed seeing them in our Bibles? No, we believe these verses AND we believe all the verses that teach that men are enslaved to sin, love darkness rather than light, do not seek God, etc… Therefore, I can and do call on all men to repent and believe and choose, knowing that only the elect will do so – Acts 13:48 “and all who were ordained to eternal life believed.”
We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves. But God foreknew in the beginning who would choose Him, and predestined us according to the choice He knew we would make.
Biblically, in light of the Fall which He also foresaw – All God would foresee as He looked across time would be all of humanity’s rejection of Him unless He intervened in grace. (John 6:44)
He is not linear in His view of time like we are. He is higher than we are. We must receive the Word of God as little children, as the Bible says. That means don’t overcomplicate it and read things into it that aren’t there to fit your own preconceived ideas. Every Calvinist belief requires reading things into the Scriptures that are not there, and it requires ignoring a huge list of Scriptures that contradict it, twisting the meaning and “context” to try to make it fit your idea.
Actually I would suggest that it is you who ignore and twist the Scriptures. We seek to embrace all of what Scripture teaches.
Blind people who profess to be wise! You are turning people away from God by painting Him as directly responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened to them. Bad things happen because we live in a fallen world, not because God is up there pulling every string and orchestrating chaos and evil. God is not evil, He is light and there is NO darkness in Him! The evil ideology of Calvinism is a cancer in the body of Christ that causes people to be apathetic about winning souls to the Lord.
I know you believe that. I might have said something similar years ago. I shudder though, for as I say, one day You will stand before the Sovereign One who has ordained every event in time and has promised to use it all for His glory.
If only certain people are “chosen” [as in your twisted definition of the word], then there is no point in witnessing to the lost because they are all damned to hell anyway according to Calvinism!
Actually, election is the only hope of evangelism and thankfully, it is a certain hope, for He has said He has His sheep in every tribe, tongue, people and nation and there will be representatives of all these before His throne, celebrating the redeeming work of the Lamb. The entire missionary movement, starting with William Carey, was born out of this conviction. Evangelism is the rounding up of Christ’s sheep.
“Whatever may be said about the doctrine of election, it is written in the Word of God as with an iron pen, and there is no getting rid of it. To me, it is one of the sweetest and most blessed truths in the whole of revelation, and those who are afraid of it are so because they do not understand it. If they could but know that the Lord had chosen them it would make their hearts dance with joy.” – C. H. Spurgeon (“Spurgeon At His Best” Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1988).
A quote from Mark Webb:
“After giving a brief survey of these doctrines of sovereign grace, I asked for questions from the class. One lady, in particular, was quite troubled. She said, ‘This is the most awful thing I’ve ever heard! You make it sound as if God is intentionally turning away men and women who would be saved, receiving only the elect.’ I answered her in this vein: ‘You misunderstand the situation. You’re visualizing that God is standing at the door of heaven, and men are thronging to get in the door, and God is saying to various ones, ‘Yes, you may come, but not you, and you, but not you, etc.’ The situation is hardly this. Rather, God stands at the door of heaven with His arms outstretched, inviting all to come. Yet all men without exception are running in the opposite direction towards hell as hard as they can go. So God, in election, graciously reaches out and stops this one, and that one, and this one over here, and that one over there, and effectually draws them to Himself by changing their hearts, making them willing to come. Election keeps no one out of heaven who would otherwise have been there, but it keeps a whole multitude of sinners out of hell who otherwise would have been there. Were it not for election, heaven would be an empty place, and hell would be bursting at the seams. That kind of response, grounded as I believe that it is in Scriptural truth, does put a different complexion on things, doesn’t it? If you perish in hell, blame yourself, as it is entirely your fault. But if you should make it to heaven, credit God, for that is entirely His work! To Him alone belong all praise and glory, for salvation is all of grace, from start to finish.”
Calvinism also leads to mental anguish and torment for believers who are caught in a constant state of questioning whether or not they are elect/chosen. This is not from God. God says all you have to do is repent and have faith in Jesus. There is no favoritism with Him, and He loves the whole world. He welcomes any who will come to Him in Jesus’ name.
Assurance of salvation is vital and we are told to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith. The fact that you believe this is not from God matters little to me. To the scriptures… if my faith is real and genuine it will stand up to biblical scrutiny, and I will be able to see an enduring trust in the precious Savior who indeed saves by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ Himself alone.