Who Speaks for Reformed Baptists? – Part 2

Who represents us best as Reformed Baptists?  Is there a specific individual or church we can look to as our definitive model?  Leaders come and go and we have all seen the devastation that can occur when a movement follows a man.  Consider any cult and the founder will almost always be a strong male (or female) leader.

A movement which comes into being because of one leader or adopts one leader as the definitive spokesman has some inherent problems.  It is subject to the changeable ideas of the leader.  It is often destined to be relevant for one or at the most two generations.  Within the third generation the movement has generally changed enough to no longer be exactly what the founder envisioned.

The 1689 Confession is a strong defense against error.  We have witnessed men who have changed their views over time.  Others have begun to tolerate or even espouse errors they once did not hold.  There is also the problem of the “one strong leader” endorsing men and giving his stamp of approval to those who stand on the borderline of orthodoxy.  The stability of the Confession holds individual elders and entire congregations accountable to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Philippians 1:27b).

This is why I believe our Confession is the best safeguard for the local congregation and for our movement as whole.  The confession is written and the written word is powerful when it comes to giving stability and continuity.  It is not subject to the trends of the day, or the newer ideas of men.  No doubt this is why God ordained His Word be given in written form.  Of course, the confession is not inspired so I make the comparison for illustrative purposes only.  Leaders change, styles change, emphases come and go, but the confession serves a useful purpose that stands the test of time.  It functions much like the United States Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution is not inspired and it can be changed.  When it is wrong it should be changed.  Aren’t you glad that African Americans are no longer counted as 3/5 of a person?  Still there have been only 27 amendments over the years.  Ten amendments are the Bill of Rights which came as part of the original Constitution.  Two deal with instituting and abolishing prohibition, which cancel each other out.  Our massive country has gone from 13 Colonies to its present state with only 15 amendments in more than 200 years.  In that same time, however, it is estimated that more than 10,000 changes to the U.S. Constitution have been suggested in Congress!

Today we occasionally hear calls for the 1689 LBCF to be changed.  But change implies that something is wrong or lacking.  Since even small changes can make huge differences they must, of necessity, be weighed carefully.

It should be noted that our particular confession is already a modification of the Savoy and that the Savoy was a modification of the Westminster.  Appropriate changes have already been made by those who went on before us.  Our present confession gives us the privilege to sit on the broad shoulders of the Westminster divines.  Our system of doctrine has been time-tested, and more than 300 years later, still speaks with the powerful relevance that the Puritans knew.  I believe this same firm doctrinal stance can continue another 300 years into the future if God so wills.

Is our confession in urgent need of change?  I would strongly argue there is no need at this time for change.  Sound and scholarly research into the background of the confession has been and is still being done.  More is needed.  This information gives us even greater insight into the issues they faced and why they wrote as they did.   For the confession to remain relevant it must be timeless, and not get bogged down with the transient controversies of the day.  In fact when changes are made it would likely be to those few peculiarly seventeenth century issues.

Some issues may arise which are important to a particular congregation that are not specifically dealt with in the confession.  These types of issues can be dealt with by individual congregations according to their wisdom and they should not become a bar to fellowship between congregations.  Our individual churches may have a different look or feel to them, and still be Reformed Baptist.

Realistically we are in the second generation of Reformed Baptists in the modern sense.  What we do and how we do it will determine whether there will be a third, fourth or fifth generation or if those who follow us morph into something else.  Obviously, we hope and pray that coming generations will be wiser than us, more informed than us, and more in love with Christ and His truth than us.  What we can do to help them is leave a solid foundation on which to build.

Our Reformed Baptist churches need strong leaders.  I do not believe our movement is best served by one strong leader or one exemplary church.  Our confession, in its present form gives us a firm footing for ensuring doctrinally sound pastors and teachers in the local church.  It protects the local congregation from the novel ideas of men.  I would call upon us to hold it as our form of unity and labor to understand it better.

Part 1

Steve Marquedant

Sovereign Grace Reformed Baptist Church

Ontario, California

www.sgbc-ontario.us

My New Orange Tie

There is a new ministry in town that is really taking off.  I had heard that the pastor held to many truths which I myself hold dear.  They had a Saturday service so I decided to go and check it out for myself.  I found that fundamentally the church was no different from mine.  The pastor even sort of looked like me and preached a sermon very similar to the kinds of messages I preach.  The big difference was that there were many more people, maybe four or five times the size of the congregation which I pastor.

What could be the difference I wondered?  Why are he and his church attracting so many more people than my ministry?

Then I noticed it.  He was wearing an orange tie! In all my years I have never worn one.  I later found out that he wears it quite often.  It’s the only possible explanation for the difference.  I have gone online and ordered my own orange tie.  I can’t wait to see the difference that it will make!

Are you still with me?   Have I left you scratching your head again?  Have you ever been tempted to find, isolate, package, and imitate the one thing or other that you deem makes a man’s ministry prosper?  Surely there has to be some secret?  There has to be something he is doing that I am not?  It’s the music, it’s his clothes, it’s his striking good looks, it’s the building, the programs, etc.  If only I do what he does then I will have the same impact!  Sounds logical, doesn’t it?  It is interesting to note that when Spurgeon trained men for the ministry, they went and planted churches or pastored churches very much modeled on the Tabernacle.  Do you know what happened?  Not one of these men had the same impact.   Do you know what has happened to the hundreds of men who have passed through the seminary associated with John MacArthur’s church?   You guessed it, not one has had the same success.  The same is true of men like John Piper and dozens of Acts 29 churches.   If men are doing good work, then they are worthy of imitation regardless of their external results.  If they are godly, be like them.  If they challenge you with their lives of holiness or prayer, by all means follow!  If they are preaching the word—imitate them. If they cause you to be passionate about the gospel, imitate them.   But there is no orange tie that we can wear that will do the trick!  Now if you’ll excuse me, I’d better get online and cancel that order!

Jim Savastio

Reformed Baptist Church of Louisville

Selfolatry

If anyone would come after Me, let him deny himself.  If there is a challenge that biblical discipleship poses to Americans, it is self-denial.

I’ve benefited greatly from the theological sociology found in David Wells’s five book series beginning with No Place for Truth (1993) and concluding with The Courage To Be Protestant (2008).  In 1998 Losing Our Virtue (hereafter LOV), was the third book published in this series and most directly speaks to the issue of Americanism’s self-worship: selfolatry.  Self is the Zeus in the American Pantheon.  Self is the big daddy god of American pluralism.

The violation of the first commandment, that we are not to have any other gods other than the Lord God, issues into the violation of all God’s commandments.  Indeed, lawlessness is the evidence that a man, or a society, is ensnared in idolatry.  Consider this evidence of selfolatry from surveys conducted in the early ’90’s.  “While the great majority of Americans believe that they actually keep the Ten Commandments, only 13% think that each of these commandments has moral validity.  It is no surprise to learn that 74 % say that they will steal without compunction; 64% say that they will lie if there is an advantage to be had in doing so; 53% say that, given a chance, they will commit adultery; 41% say that they intend to use recreational drugs; and 30% say that they will cheat on their taxes.  What may be the clearest indicator of the disappearance of a moral texture to society is the loss of guilt and embarrassment over moral lapses.  While 86% admit to lying regularly to their parents, 75% to a friend, 73% to a sibling, and 73 % to a lover, only 11% cited lying as having produced a serious level of guilt or embarrassment.  While 74% will steal without compunction, only 9% register any moral disquiet.  While pornography has blossomed into a 4 billion dollar industry that accounts for a quarter of all the videos rented in shops, seen in the thriving hotel business or on cable, only 2% experience guilt about watching.  And, not surprisingly, at the center of this slide into license and moral relativism is the disappearance of God.  Only 17% define sin as a violation of God’s will.” (LOV, p.59)

God has disappeared because He is being displaced by the American Idol: Self.  Wells informs us of what we already know: the moral orientation of our culture has drastically changed over the last half of the 20th century.  This change in social mores is indicative of an extensive rejection of the God of the Bible and an embrace of the more popular deity: Self.  The social code of the World War II generation, yet influenced by the common grace effects of a more orthodox and vibrant Church, included self-restraint, self-control, even self-sacrifice.  No longer.  Any concern for others has collapsed into a pursuit of self-satisfaction as we exercise our individual rights.  We now look out for number one.  “Our sense that self-gratification is a right stands at the heart of this moral change.  The internal ethic of the self – what is right for me - has become the means by which all external standards, external controls, and external expectations are remitted.” (LOV, p.62)

Many temples to Self have been erected across the landscape of our culture, but perhaps the most popular shrine we’ve built has been to The Therapeutic Self.  Gone from our conversation is the vocabulary of theology.  We now engage in psycho-speak using the vocabulary of the therapist.  Our “watchwords are self-image, self-ideal, the true self, the false self, the inner self, and self-actualization.” (LOV, p.120)  Again, these statistics are a bit dated, but nonetheless telling.  “The United States has half the world’s clinical psychologists, up from 12,000 in 1968 to 42,000 in 1990, when no other nation at that time had more than 400.  We have one third of the world’s psychiatrists.  In the fifteen years between 1975 and 1990, clinical social workers increased by 320% and family counselors by 680%.  By 1990, we had two psychotherapists for every dentist and more counselors than librarians.” (LOV, p.121)

The Therapeutic Idol, as all idols are wont to do, does not satisfy and actually destroys its worshipers.  David Myers (The American Paradox , 2000) writes: “We are better paid, better fed, better housed, better educated, and healthier than ever before, and with more human rights, faster communication, and more convenient transportation than we have ever known.  Alongside all of this largesse, however, are the signs of life in pain and travail.  Since 1960, the divorce rate has doubled, teen suicide has tripled, violent crime quadrupled, the number in prison has quintupled, illegitimate children sextupled, and the number of those cohabiting has increased sevenfold.”  Hmmm… maybe its time Americans got themselves a new god?

It seems that Americans are doing just that – kinda.  We are becoming “spiritual.”  We are increasingly worshiping at the shrine of The Spiritual Self.  Jon Meacham’s April 13, 2009 article in Newsweek, “The End of Christian America” cites the rise in atheistic unbelief, but, as pointed out by Al Mohler (cf. his blog April 27, 2009), the more disconcerting thing is the shift to an individualized, self-manufactured religiosity, a spiritual potpourri arbitrarily concocted from a smorgasbord of world-views, Christianity being merely one of them.  The result is a paganized Christianity.  What Paul would call holding to a form of godliness but denying its power (2 Tim 3:5).  We are increasingly living in a Colossae-like culture with its mishmash of asceticism, angel worship, ritual, mysticism and truncated truth that effects little moral transformation of life and brings no glory to God.  Unlike the true God, the Spiritual Self receives worship from lawless people.

It is this Spiritual Self that we must not inadvertently worship.  We must not poll it, market it, appease it, accommodate it and allow it to set the agenda for our worship nor determine the content of our doctrine.  “It is an idolatry as pervasive and as spiritually debilitating as were many of the entanglements with pagan religions recounted for us in the Old Testament.  That this devotion to the self seems not to be like that older devotion to a pagan god blinds the Church to its own unfaithfulness.  The end result, however, is no less devastating, because the self is no less demanding.  It is as powerful an organizing center as any god or goddess on the market.  The contemporary Church is whoring after this god as assiduously as the Israelites in their darker days.  It is baptizing as faith the pride that leads us to think much about ourselves and much of ourselves… [God's] glory should be a matter of more profound interest to the Church than its self-satisfaction.” (LOV, p.204)

What is needed is a recovery of, a demonstration of, and a heralding of the gospel.  American selfolaters need to be told of the God who is.  They need to be confronted with His essential holiness and informed that He is our Creator, Lawgiver and Judge.  They need to be addressed as dignified but fallen image-bearers, who are innately oriented to worship and are accountable to God for their worship.  They need to experience the Spirit piercing and convicting their conscience with the Law of God.  Their conscience is constructed so as to resonate with that Law, and the Spirit alone can enable them to discover their violation of the first commandment and the lawlessness that ensues from there.  They need to be alarmed and dismayed that they are pursuing a false god, be it the Therapeutic Self or the Spiritual Self, who will only disappoint them and then bring them under the wrath of the God who is.  They need to experience their need of a Savior.  They need to see Christians who are truly saved: individuals, families, and communities of gospel grace, truth, and love.  They need to see a demonstration in our lives of orderliness, moral beauty, compassion, benevolence and grace.  They need to hear the good news concerning salvation in Jesus Christ ALONE, by grace ALONE, through faith ALONE.  They need to know what Jesus has done, what He has taught, what He accomplished on the cross and what is the significance of His resurrection.  They need to know that Jesus is the exalted and enthroned Lord who, as High Priest of the New Covenant, is willing and ready to save all who, in repentance and faith, call upon His name.  They need to know Jesus HIMSELF.  They need to know that Jesus is about to return as the Judge of mankind, and that they will stand before Him in the Final Judgment that will issue into either eternal glory in His presence, or eternal destruction in hell.  They need to be told that they, in union with Jesus, can know the true God, give Him acceptable worship, and live fruitful lives of moral beauty and peace, enjoying a good conscience and the solid hope of an eternal inheritance.

As the prophets of old, we are called to expose the lies of idolatry and call men into the service of Yahweh God.  We must graciously, patiently, lovingly summon men to become disciples of Jesus.  If any man would follow Me, let him deny himself.  Let him repent of selfolatry.

Alan Dunn, Pastor

Grace Covenant Baptist Church

Flemington, NJ

Who Speaks for Reformed Baptists? – Part 1

Soon there will be confirmation hearings on a new Justice for the United States Supreme Court.  Politics and partisanship will most likely take center stage in the hearings.  But more important than the person eventually seated will be the Constitution of the United States which they are sworn to uphold.

While Supreme Court Justices are very important, they, like Presidents, come and go, while the Constitution remains.  We can have poor justices, unwise justices, and even corrupt justices.  However, the Constitution, even when interpreted poorly (e.g. Roe v Wade), still has the role to function as an overall safeguard to our nation.

I choose this analogy, because in our Reformed Baptist churches, the 1689 Confession holds a position similar to our United States Constitution, and stands as a solid rock of doctrinal unity and stability.  While many churches claim to be Bible-believing, a congregation that sincerely holds this confession possesses a safe, well-defined, and time-tested guard against heresy.

Pastors and elders may come and go.  However, when a congregation requires that a pastor promises adherence to the confession as part of his ordination vows, with the attendant promise that an elder would voluntarily resign should he change his view, the church has a built in safeguard against error.

Differences in style may come and go.  Peripheral issues and emphases may change from eldership to eldership within a congregation.  But a church holding steadfastly to the confession, should be much the same one hundred years from now as it is today in the essential matters of the faith.

I am not aware of any self-consciously Reformed Baptist Church, in America, that has held tenaciously to the 1689 LBCF for the past one hundred years, so, we have no working model to study or examine.  There is a natural tendency for individuals and churches to change and swing, at times, like a pendulum, some more and some less.  For instance, in your own particular area, there is probably a church that tried to follow the “Willow Creek model”, moved on to the “Purpose-Driven model”, and may have now morphed into the more “missional” (see “Emergent” or “Semi-emergent”) model.  If they have a lack of success there, where will they go next?

Churches will follow a model, and there is a host of models from which to choose.  There are denominational models and trendy models.  Many of the popular models are “personality” driven, with one key figure as the leading spokesman.  One model is set forth as “cutting edge” and “revolutionary” today, and the congregation is full of excitement.  But inevitably they find themselves, maybe twenty-five years later, with a duller cultural edge and left defending their own traditions. Reformed Baptist Churches are not exempt from this pendulum effect.

Our brother, Jim Savastio, has written an excellent blog on this very site entitled “Night of the Living Bloggers”.  In it he details the natural tendency bloggers (and all of us in general – blogging just makes it quicker, easier and more publicly vitriolic) have to tear down the guy who doesn’t fully represent us, to snipe at him and pick him apart.  He is correct.

The other side of the coin is who DOES represent us as the voice that speaks for Reformed Baptists today?  Interestingly, we find ourselves as a movement that doesn’t have a well-known public “voice” like John Piper, John McArthur, C.J. Mahaney, Mark Driscoll or R.C. Sproul.  We can find major points of agreement with these men, but there are also points of disagreement we have, as Reformed Baptists, with each one.  It also should be noted that none of those men listed (and we could have listed many more) would describe himself as a Confessional Reformed Baptist.

Who represents us, as Reformed Baptists, as the quintessential pastor or ministry?  We have very capable men and some exemplary churches.  However, we haven’t had the kind of “superstar” minister that defines some movements.  Along the way, some men and ministries have been profitably followed.  At other times, we have found that imitation is not always the highest form of flattery.  In addition, as the number of Reformed Baptists has continued to grow (and this growth has been startling during the past twenty years!) we have become more and more diverse.

In my next entry, I will try to answer the question of who best represents us as Reformed Baptists, and what we can do to give our movement stability as we continue to progress into the coming decades.

Steve Marquedant

Sovereign Grace Reformed Baptist Church

Ontario, California

www.sgbc-ontario.us

Sing the Word

Christians sing!  We have good reason to sing, the God of all the living has come to us in the Person of His Son.  More, God by His Spirit indwells all His children empowering them for life and service.

Here is one of the best sermons I have heard on this grand privilege of singing.

Sing the Word

Pastor Gordon Cook of Grace Baptist church (Reformed Baptist) in Canton Michigan gives two warnings:

1. Undervaluing the place of song.

2. Overvaluing the practice of song.

Listen and have your soul enriched!

David Charles

Martydom

Authentic, biblical Christianity has always been an exclusive religion. This became apparent during the Roman Empire. When the Emperor Alexander Severus heard about Christianity, he placed an image of Christ beside the other gods in his private chapel, just to be safe. The Romans were happy to welcome Jesus into their pantheon. What the Romans couldn’t understand was why Christians refused to reciprocate. If the emperor was willing to worship Christ, why weren’t Christians willing to worship the emperor? Yet the early Christians insisted that in order to worship Christ at all, they had to worship Christ alone. They were even willing to stand up for this conviction by playing “Christians and lions” at the Colosseum.

Philip Graham Ryken

Is Jesus the Only Way? Crossway, 1999, p. 10-11.