"Then Comes the End" -- Promo Video

I'm looking forward to doing this.  I'll keep you posted when I get more info.

Comments

[Joe]

George,

The concept of what is "Reformed" has been confused by us Particular Baptists. It is probably much more accurate IMO for Baptists to refer to themselves as "Calvinistic" rather than "Reformed". The term "Reformed" has become so subjective that it has lost its meaning. I don't think being a five pointer is enough to call yourself "Reformed".

It has been argued by some to good effect that Baptists are inaccurate to call themselves Reformed or Calvinists, that congregationalism and their views of the means of grace necessarily excludes Baptists from these tribes. Believer's baptism changes the view of the covenants, so Baptist covenantalism is really a different category although very similar to covenant theology.

I recently had a Presbyterian friend blow my mind by saying that he believed that congregationalism was a far worse heresy than errors concerning soteriology. When I pressed him about it, he told me "Joe, if you commit adultery and are disciplined at your church, all you have to do is go down the street to the next Baptist church." That's a pretty good point too. Hard to make excommunication meaningful when there is no cooperation between congregations concerning discipline.

I'm sure I need to shut up now.

[George]

Joe -

Please don't shut up just yet - I always enjoy these kinds of dialogs.

Regarding the confusion between "Reformed" and "Baptist," - do not feel too badly about that. Lutherans have the same problems, or worse. They all still use the moniker of the great reformer, but that's about where the similarity between the various synods ends. At the most confessional end of the spectrum there's the Wisconsin Synod and a few other small ones who still adhere to confessional traditions of the Reformation, as outlined in the Augsburg Confession and the Formula of Concord (the equivalent of some of those aforementioned Reformed/Baptist confessions). Synods like the LCMS have moved from adherence to sound scriptural doctrine towards a more moderate position in recent decades (of course, this is not true of every individual congregation in the LCMS, but of many of the larger ones in urban areas, in particular, and of the higher positions in the synodical organization).

Then there's the ELCA, which consists of a series of mergers of smaller synods, many of which were very loose with their views of scripture to begin with. These mergers came to an end in the mid-80's the result of which is a very liberal church organization that seems to have a rather low view of scripture and a high view of social ministries. Individual congregations that did not like what was happening during the mergers either left for a more confessional synod or disintegrated, the individual members fleeing to churches in different synods.

Regarding church discipline - it's interesting you should bring this up because we were just discussing this issue during a small group Bible study last Friday in reference to Mat 18:15-17. Our conclusions were pretty much the same as yours; if someone is chastised for heretical error or blatant unconfessed sin, and the congregation wants to cut them off from fellowship, they often simply go down the street where some other church openly receives them. Or, worse yet, they threaten legal action, which causes most congregations to back down. It seems like the Roman church, because of its rigid hierarchical structure, is the only denomination that can get by with full excommunication nowadays and make it stick. But even they now have to deal with more liberal areas of the country where another diocese simply looks the other way.

[Rich B.]

Joe and George, what do you think of John Owen and Thomas Goodwin?

[George]

Rich - I don't know about Joe, but nothing on my end. I've never read anything by either of them.

[Joe]

Rich,

Congregationalism has it's problems wherever it is found. And I am a Baptist. The heirarchal government forms have problems too, just look at the splits and liberal downgrades that fell entire denominations. I think the better cohesive to the hierarchal government form is submission to a confession. I would like to more cooperation and mutual submission between Baptist churches, especially concerning discipline.

I think most within the Presbyterian and Dutch camps are charitable enough to share the term Reformed with Baptists. Calvinistic, confessional, covenantal, amillennial Baptists need a short and tidy distinguishing name and Reformed Baptist has a nice ring to it. Puritan Baptist might be a better name, but I'm sure somebody will balk at any shared nomenclature.

I consider John Owen and Charles Spurgeon and Jonathon Edwards and Thomas Goodwin and John Gill and George Whitefield to be both Reformed and Puritans. Others consider them to be sectarians. So be it.

I would not consider anyone to be Reformed simply on the basis of their acceptance of five points, my idea of Reformed is narrower than that. But even here you see the problem and subjectivity of it- "Reformed" is losing its meaning, or did it ever have one? I don't know, I noticed last night that Dr. R. Scott Clark has written a bit on the subject over on the Heidelblog, I would refer you to that. I need to read more about it too, especially I'd like to see how the term has developed historically.

George,

I am even more ignorant concerning Lutherans than I am other denominations. But I did read some work by the late Dr. Ted Letis concerning the ecclesiastical text. He didn't seem to like Baptists much.

[Rich B.]

Joe and George,

I share your concerns about chruch discipline not being respected by the church down the street. When it's all said and done, in these types of situations we must take comfort in Mt. 18:18. God will deal with the excommunicated, even if other local congregations won't.

Joe,

I know some RBs who prefer to phrase Covenantal Baptist over Reforemd Baptist. If you read Nehemiah Coxe (17th-cent. Partic. Bapt.), for instance, he clearly holds to a covenat of works/covenant of grace scheme. He simply works out the details different than others. Coxe is one among many PBs who did the same. Unless one argues that infant inclusion in the covenant community is of the essence of the Cov. of Grace, then Coxe is covenantal, as were other PBs in the 17th cent.

I understand Scott Clark's concerns.

[George]

Joe-
I just finished some reading over on R. Scott Clark's blog site, in particular:

http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/the-problem-of-the-minimalist-definition/

I have to say that, from a Lutheran perspective, I agree with everything he has to say here, particularly true "evangelism" defined as "...public proclamation of the gospel by ministers of the Word..." And I think this is where the one of the greatest points of contention seems to exist between American Evangelicals and more confessional denominations (Lutheran, Reformed, OPC, Reformed Baptist, etc.).

During a recent Bible study that I had to lead I made the mistake of speaking about the Office of the Keys, referenced in Matt 16:17-19 as certainly meaning a "priesthood of all believers," but also carrying a greater implication that the proper proclamation of the Gospel on a regular basis and the administration of the Sacraments are best left to those specifically called (and therefore ordained) to carry out those duties (as might be reinforced in commentaries such as 1 Cor. 12:27-31).

This brought an onslaught of criticism from the rest of the group, who saw no difference whatsoever between the duties of the pastor and the rest of the congregation. I tried to point out that later on in Matt. 18 Jesus gets into the tremendous responsibilities to be borne by those who carry out the pastoral duties in the area of church discipline and the penalties for leading people astray. The push-back to my line of reasoning, as is almost always the case in discussions like this, was in reference to the Roman church and their misuse of the Office of the Keys by tightly defining the preisthood as a select few who hold power over everyone else in a hierarchical structure.

So...that's why I like Clark's essay on the subject; he rightly points to lay evangelism and personal responsibility, with all the underpinnings of revivalism, that have been tacked onto "Reformed" by American Evangelicals. Too much emphasis on individual requirements moves the cross from center-stage and replaces it with works. It's the same old trap that has been around since the beginning of the 2nd awakening and it never seems to go away.

Confessional Reformed and Lutherans alike share the dilemma of moving forward in a rapidly transforming culture while keeping the true spirit of the Reformation alive and intact. It will never be easy and it will never be finished.