Evangelicalism vs. the Reformed

[Semper Fidelis]

They don't need the Church. They have their books and their brains to guide them into all Truth. They don't need the Confessions. They know Latin and Greek and they'll listen to their favorite Reformed individuals from the past and patch them together into a quilt of their own liking.

This is not unique to FV in my experience.

I agree.

Creideamh: Christ ALONE - (The one they wouldn't publish)

Good article.

 

[DMcFadden]

They don't need the Church. They have their books and their brains to guide them into all Truth. They don't need the Confessions. They know Latin and Greek and they'll listen to their favorite Reformed individuals from the past and patch them together into a quilt of their own liking.

This is not unique to FV in my experience.

I agree.

Creideamh: Christ ALONE - (The one they wouldn't publish)

Good article.

Yes the article was quite good. But, the comment is even better. The individualism, arrogance, and patch-quilt quality of the independent spirit is exactly on target. This IS our problem.

 

[cih1355]

I found a statement of faith on the Web called, "The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration".

Here is the link: The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration

Here is one paragraph from that statement of faith:

"The Father sent the Son to free us from the dominion of sin and Satan, and to make us God’s children and friends. Jesus paid our penalty in our place on his cross, satisfying the retributive demands of divine justice by shedding his blood in sacrifice and so making possible justification for all who trust in him (Rom. 3:25-26). The Bible describes this mighty substitutionary transaction as the achieving of ransom, reconciliation, redemption, propitiation, and conquest of evil powers (Mt. 20:28; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 3:23-25; John 12:31; Col. 2:15). It secures for us a restored relationship with God that brings pardon and peace, acceptance and access, and adoption into God’s family (Col. 1:20, 2:13-14; Rom. 5:1-2; Gal. 4:4-7; 1 Pet. 3:18). The faith in God and in Christ to which the Gospel calls us is a trustful outgoing of our hearts to lay hold of these promised and proffered benefits."

I don't like some of the wording in the above paragraph. There is one sentence that says that Christ's payment of the penalty of sin makes justification possible for all who trust in him.

 

[elnwood]

Also, the ranks of Reformed Baptists tend to stay pretty small because there is an inherent tension that they get all their Systematic theology from others and then just "correct the homework" on the Covenant theology aspect. It's kind of a shoehorn effect. I know it "works for them" and I know that many are honestly and Biblically convinced but there's always a pretty steady stream of "defectors" if you know what I mean. At least in American circles where there's been more exposure, cross-pollination, and debate, it always seems like the conversions are from the credo- to the paedo- side.

"All their systematic theology from others" seems like an overstatement. There are plenty of covenantal baptist systematic theologians -- J. L. Dagg, J. P. Boyce, John Gill, A. W. Pink in the past, and Wayne Grudem and Millard Erickson's works may be the most well-read systematics today. Perhaps this indicates a willingness of the Baptists to draw from the Presbyterians and not as much the other way around.

For what it's worth, I know a lot of "defectors" from covenant paedobaptism to credobaptism. This includes an associate pastor of a church I attended, a friend who grew up in the URC, and my best friend, just to name a few.

 

[DMcFadden]

I found a statement of faith on the Web called, "The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration".

Here is the link: The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration

Here is one paragraph from that statement of faith:

"The Father sent the Son to free us from the dominion of sin and Satan, and to make us God’s children and friends. Jesus paid our penalty in our place on his cross, satisfying the retributive demands of divine justice by shedding his blood in sacrifice and so making possible justification for all who trust in him (Rom. 3:25-26). The Bible describes this mighty substitutionary transaction as the achieving of ransom, reconciliation, redemption, propitiation, and conquest of evil powers (Mt. 20:28; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 3:23-25; John 12:31; Col. 2:15). It secures for us a restored relationship with God that brings pardon and peace, acceptance and access, and adoption into God’s family (Col. 1:20, 2:13-14; Rom. 5:1-2; Gal. 4:4-7; 1 Pet. 3:18). The faith in God and in Christ to which the Gospel calls us is a trustful outgoing of our hearts to lay hold of these promised and proffered benefits."

I don't like some of the wording in the above paragraph. There is one sentence that says that Christ's payment of the penalty of sin makes justification possible for all who trust in him.

The problem with most evangelical theology is that it IS a patchwork of often inconsistent elements. A consistent Arminian would need to deny the substitutionary atonement, at least in terms of its penal nature. If Christ truly "paid" the price of our sin, you inevitably fall into the problem Owen artiuculated in his Death of Death. Either you end up a universalist, in despair, or with a particular atonement. Consistent Arminians should only say that Christ suffered for our sins, not that he paid the price of our sins.