A New Seminary

Note: Keith Throop here! Doing some blog maintenance and editing, I accidentally messed up and then had to delete my blog partner Jeff Johnson's post about the new seminary begun through the efforts of his church. I was able to post it again it myself, but, of course, I am not the pastor of Grace Bible Church of Conway, Arkansas. Perhaps Jeff can post it under his own account again later and delete this post. This means you will get yet another reminder about the seminary, but, hey, that is a good thing, right? Anyway, what follows is from Jeff!

Grace Bible Church of Conway, Arkansas, where I am privileged to pastor, is starting a church based seminary called Grace Bible Institute of Pastoral Studies. See here.

This is truly amazing. Planting the church over fifteen years ago in my living room, I never thought this would be something God had in store for us. We are thanking God for this great opportunity.

In some ways, the seminary has been forced on us. With more and more young men joining our church with a desire to minister and preach the Word, our responsibility to train them became more and more evident. I have felt for some time now that it is the local church’s responsibility to equip the next generations of pastors. 2 Tim. 2:2 teaches us that pastors are responsible to train pastors. After starting a class that would meet once a month, more pastoral students have been sent to us by God. With such a reservoir of men, and with God supernaturally supplying the financial resources, it became clear to us that we needed to start a more robust training program.

Our objective is to equip, ordain, and send out the next generation of church leaders by providing faithful men with a doctrinal education and pastoral experience within the context, oversight, and accountability of our local church. We not only desire to offer a rigorous education in the classroom, but supply practical, real-life experience under the mentorship of our pastors.

So we created a degree program that is based on four avenues of study. First, we are offering four module courses a year where we will bring in some of the leading professors in America. Over an extended weekend, our students will be able to earn 3 credit hours in a classroom setting. Second, we will provide four residential classes a year that are taught by the elders of the church—including myself. Third, we will require six credit hours of self study a year that will be guided and overseen by the Institute’s staff. Fourth, preaching and counseling practicums will be required throughout the program.

If you want to view our course list, check here.

Dr. Bob Gonzales taught our first module on the Doctrine of the Word, and Dr. Tom Nettles is scheduled to come and teach Baptist Church History next week. For more information on this, see here.

We desire to train pastors who self-sacrificially care for God’s sheep.

Though we are not currently accredited, our goal is to become affiliated and then accredited with the Association of Reformed Theological Seminaries.

If you would like to help us, we are seeking to build a robust theological library and would appreciate book donations. We are in the mist of the building construction of our new church and seminary facilities, and with limited wall space, we plan to build a 25 by 16 foot bookshelf with a spiral staircase and catwalk at the 8 foot mark. So, we need books.  

Most importantly, we could use your prayers as our goal is not to make a great name for ourselves, but to help ordain and send out laborers into the harvest.

My Journey, My Friends, and God’s Work in Colombia

As I wait for my flight back to the great state of Arkansas, I am filled with many emotions. I am here at the Bogota Airport, and I miss my family. I cannot wait to kiss and embrace my wife and swoop up my three boys into my arms. I can already see their smiles in my mind. But my anticipation is bittersweet. Though I have yet to depart, I am already missing my new friends here in this beautiful country. Let me tell you about them. Let me tell you about my journey. And let me tell you what great things God is doing here in Colombia, South America.

My Journey

My experience in Colombia begins with bouncy friends, bouncy music, and a bouncy car ride into the mountains.

I came to Colombia to teach Biblical Theology to a group of pastors. But the night before I left Arkansas, I realized that I was coming down with a cold – not a good feeling when your voice is a key instrument in teaching. So I began to pray and stock up with medicine and cough drops, for with a sore throat or not, the time of departure was upon me.

I arrived in Bogota at 9:30, but it was not until 11:00 p.m. that I exited the airport. Outside of the doors, four men greeted me. “Are you pastor Jeff?” they asked in a foreign accent. With a quick “yes,” strange names began to fly out of their mouths – names that I never heard before – “I am pastor Guillermo.” “I am pastor Jorge from Ecuador.” “I am pastor Eduardo; I will be your interpreter.” And “I am Mr. Eduardo.” They were friendly. They asked me about the details of my flight, offered me water, and grabbed up my bags as they showed me to the car.

But that is where the real bounciness began. The roads there are bumpy and curvy, as the mountains are large and steep, and the traffic is beyond chaotic. Pastor Guillermo is a skillful but aggressive driver – which I learned later is the only way you can drive in a city of 9 million people who are trying to get to the same place at the same time. There dividing lines on the road mean nothing. In fact, there don't seem to be any rules at all. Where there are two lanes, four lines of cars seek to drive abreast with motorcycles buzzing around anywhere they can squeeze in. Cars will suddenly pull out in front of you as if you are not even there, which causes knee jerking stops. It is a madhouse to say the least. Bogota reminds me of a disturbed ant-mound that has been kicked by a pesky kid – so many people group together that they are running all over each other. I have been to a lot of large cities – Los Angeles, New York, Paris, London, Rome, but no city I have ever been to can compare to the vast amount of people and vehicles that are squeezed into a single space.

So, imagine late at night that you’re in a car that is going up and down, from side to side, from top speed (as if you are in a drag race) to squelching stops. All of this on a bumpy and curvy road as the car is dodging other cars, large trucks and flying motorcycles. It did not take long before, along with my sore throat, I had motion sickness. And it did not take long before my new friends cranked up the Colombian music. The music is bouncy all right – like party music driven by an accordion. With the music rocking, my new friends began to sing, tap their feet, and move with the beat, which caused the car to rock back and forth, as we were already moving in all directions. So round and round we went.

“Two hours to our destination,” they informed me. With the news, I became hot and queasy. And it was only then that I became thankful that United Airlines no longer offered an in-flight meal. I understand that all things work together for good, and an empty stomach is preferable with motion sickness. So like a ball thrown into a blender, my journey in Colombia had begun.

Thankfully, without any unpleasant incident, we made it to the retreat center sometime around 1:00 a.m. There I was to lecture 21 times over the next four days. A Colombian meal was waiting on us and a little over 50 pastors, from all over Colombia, were already sleeping in their rooms and tents. After a good meal, I went to bed.

The next day, like the next four days, was full of food, juice, coffee, and teaching. I taught 6 times per day. My sore throat had not gotten any better, but I knew my church family in Conway, AR, was praying for me. The Lord was gracious. Not once did my voice hinder my teaching. But before I tell you about the teaching and seminary here in Colombia, let me tell you a little bit about this wonderful place.

Colombia is amazing. It is tropical and breathtaking. When I woke up, I could not believe the beauty that was all around me. Massive and irregular shaped mountains encircled the place, which caused me to understand why the roads were so crooked and steep. Flowers. Wow! Flowers of all kind were everywhere. Fruit was hanging on almost every tree. Everything was blooming, budding, and flourishing. There was fruit that I didn't even know existed. There were avocados the size of footballs. Truly, this is a land flowing with milk and honey. And birds. Wow! All kinds of birds were flying around and chirping. I woke up to a pleasant and relaxing melody of tropical birds singing to the glory of God. To top it all off, the weather was perfect. It is as if this is the place where God abides and personally sets the temperature – in the mid seventies, no humidity, and with a cool and gentle breeze keeping the air fresh. In fact, if I had to imagine the Garden of Eden, I would think it was similar, if not identical, to Chinauta, Colombia.   

My Friends

The beauty of the place was only the backdrop to the even more beautiful people. Colombians are a diverse people with a variety of skin tones. In many ways, Colombians are like Americans. They like to joke around, laugh, and play sports. But they are a little more affectionate and generous. They are a little more welcoming. Maybe it is the music, maybe it is the food and tropical climate, but whatever the case, they are an endearing people. Take these natural qualities and put Christ in them, then you have a group of people that you cannot help but quickly fall in love with. It is amazing how kindness and love can transcend any language bearer. They would reach into their pockets and give me candy, buy me ice-cream, and bring me coffee as if I was someone special. But this is how they treated each other as well. These men love each other as they love “Christo.” Being around such beautiful people makes me long for heaven where there will be people from every nation and people group of the world.

God’s Work in Colombia

My trip is almost over. Though I am headed home, I am taking much with me. I am leaving with a better understanding of the words of Christ, who said, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few.” America is saturated with the gospel and various gospel ministries. We take our access to the gospel and Christian resources for granted. We have access to many resources, books, and churches. Colombia, on the other hand, is in great need of all these things. They are hungry. They are grasping on to almost anything. Those like myself who travel here to teach are readily heard, and every book that is translated into Spanish is quickly consumed. (This is why it is important to provide solid teaching.)

I am also leaving with a greater commitment to supporting indigenous ministers and ministries. We can spend thousands of dollars in supporting American missionaries, who often need as much money to live in a foreign country as they do in America. Most American missionaries last only four years on the field. But indigenous ministers are there to stay, and they don’t need money as much as they need training.

Because they are hungry for a basic education of the Bible, I am convinced that one of the best ways to support foreign missions is not by sending American missionaries (except for the unreached people groups of the world), but to provide Biblical training to the pastors already living in those foreign lands. Colombia, for instance, is vastly Catholic, about 70%, and the Evangelical influence is mostly charismatic. The prosperity gospel, sadly, is popular there as it is in America. They need solid resources and training to combat such influences. This is something that our churches can support. This is something that I am convinced is making a huge difference.

With this in mind, I am thankful for Reformed Baptist Seminary’s support of the Biblical training program that is overseen by Guillermo Gomez, pastor of Sovereign Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Bogota. This program is called “The Marrow of Theology.” Because of limited options and a great hunger for the truth, “The Marrow of Theology” program is attracting men from all over Colombia. Afterwards, they are slowly reforming their churches or planting solid Reformed Baptist churches throughout this country. In this one ministry, hundreds of ministers are being trained and sent out across Colombia. This is changing, and will continue to change, the landscape of South America.

  

In addition to my desire to support “The Marrow of Theology” program in Bogata, I plan to start a Spanish branch of Free Grace Press. Eduardo Fergusson, who translated my teaching and preaching this past week, has agreed to assist in the translation of our English books into Spanish. Jorge Rodriguez, from Ecuador, has agreed to oversee the printing and distributing of these books throughout South America. Because the books will be translated and printed in South America, the cost will be a fraction of the expense of books printed in America. 100, 200, or 300 dollars can make a major impact. What an investment for the sake of the kingdom.  

With all of this, I am going home with a new passion for international missions. I hope to communicate this passion with my church family and friends. I am excited about what God is doing in South America…so please join me in praying for these beautiful people in this beautiful region of the world.

"The State of Theology: Theological Awareness Benchmark Study" by Ligonier Ministries

Ligonier Ministries has published the results of a survey conducted in order to assess the theological understanding and awareness of our fellow citizens. Here is the description of the survey:

It is Ligonier's desire to serve the church in fulfilling the Great Commission. This survey has helped to point out common gaps in theological knowledge and awareness so that Christians might be more effective in the proclamation, teaching, and defense of the essential truths of the Christian faith. View the infographic [pictured at right], listen to Dr. R.C. Sproul discuss these findings on Renewing Your Mind, or download the official white paper and survey with key findings.

The Executive Summary included in the official white paper goes on to state:

Ligonier Ministries is “committed to faithfully presenting the unvarnished truth of Scripture to help people grow in their knowledge of God and His holiness.” Anecdotal evidence has shown an increasing lack of theological understanding in America, both outside and inside the church. Ligonier Ministries wanted to understand with accuracy the extent of the need to improve that understanding. Ligonier Ministries commissioned a research study by LifeWay Research to measure the theological awareness of adult Americans. Ligonier Ministries identified specific doctrines and heresies that they wanted to test. LifeWay Research helped refine these questions and to conduct a survey of 3,000 Americans. Questions focused on seven key doctrinal areas and included a number of specific areas where Americans differ from historic and orthodox views.

The key doctrinal areas covered by the study include beliefs about God, beliefs about goodness and sin, beliefs about salvation and religious texts, beliefs about heaven and hell, beliefs about the church, and beliefs about authority. For those of us who are devoted to the Scriptures as our ultimate authority, who care about a correct understanding of truth, and who therefore have been paying particular attention to the disintegration of our culture and the deplorable state of professing Evangelical Christianity, many of the survey's finding will come as no surprise. However, some of the findings might surprise you, especially when the views of those identified as Evangelical Protestants are compared to the common views of Americans who are not Evangelical Protestants. For example, 64% of Americans surveyed agreed with the statement that "A person obtains peace with God by first taking the initiative to seek God & then God responds with grace" (which is not surprising), but 68% of those identified as Evangelical Protestants also agreed with the statement (which I find a bit surprising, given that even an Arminian should no better). At any rate, I thought the readers of this blog would find the study both interesting and helpful. Feel free to let us know what you think.

Doug Phillips Resigns From Vision Forum Ministries

Last Wednesday Doug Phillips resigned from his position as president of Vision Forum Ministries and discontinued his speaking responsibilities as well. Here is the official statement of resignation from the ministry's website:

With thanksgiving to God for His mercy and love, I have stepped down from the office of president at Vision Forum Ministries and have discontinued my speaking responsibilities.

There has been serious sin in my life for which God has graciously brought me to repentance. I have confessed my sin to my wife and family, my local church, and the board of Vision Forum Ministries. I engaged in a lengthy, inappropriate relationship with a woman. While we did not “know” each other in a Biblical sense, it was nevertheless inappropriately romantic and affectionate.

There are no words to describe the magnitude of shame I feel, or grief from the injury I caused my beloved bride and children, both of whom have responded to my repentance with what seems a supernatural love and forgiveness. I thought too highly of myself and behaved without proper accountability. I have acted grievously before the Lord, in a destructive manner hypocritical of life messages I hold dear, inappropriate for a leader, abusive of the trust that I was given, and hurtful to family and friends. My church leadership came alongside me with love and admonition, providing counsel, strong direction and accountability. Where I have directly wronged others, I confessed and repented. I am still in the process of trying to seek reconciliation privately with people I have injured, and to be aware of ways in which my own selfishness has hurt family and friends. I am most sensitive to the fact that my actions have dishonored the living God and been shameful to the name of Jesus Christ, my only hope and Savior.

This is a time when my repentance needs to be proven, and I need to lead a quiet life focusing on my family and serving as a foot soldier, not a ministry leader. Though I am broken over my failures, I am grateful to be able to spend more time with my family, nurturing my wife and children and preparing my older sons and daughters for life. So, for these reasons I want to let my friends know that I have stepped down as a board member and as president of Vision Forum Ministries. The Board will be making provision for the management of the ministry during this time. To the friends of this ministry, I ask for your forgiveness, and hope that you will pray for the Phillips family at this time, and for the men who will be responsible for shepherding the work of Vision Forum Ministries in the future.

Doug Phillips

Regular readers of this blog will know that I have had my disagreements with the Family Integrated Church Movement (FICM), of which Doug Phillips had been a prominent leader for many years, but I am saddened by this news. It breaks my heart whenever a pastor who has taught the true Gospel for many years succumbs to such temptation and moral failure, and my prayers are with Doug and his family.

I also hope that those who have disagreed with some of the positions taken by Vision Forum Ministries, as I have disagreed with them, will not see Doug's failure as in any way indicative of the positions he has taken or of those who have agreed with him from within the FICM. As I have looked around the internet at various reactions to this terrible news, I have been deeply troubled and grieved that some have taken this opportunity to malign the FICM because of Doug's confessed moral failure. Let us not be among such people! Let us be fair-minded and loving toward our brothers and sisters in the Lord. And, where we disagree with them, let us focus our attention on the actual points of Scriptural disagreement rather than on the moral failures of those who have failed to live up to their stated positions. After all, how many of us ever lives up to our own moral ideals as faithfully as we would like? And how many of us would not be just as easily led astray into such moral failure but for the grace of God?

Update 11 November 2013

The following announcment was posted at the Vision Forum Ministries website:

In light of the serious sins which have resulted in Doug Phillips’s resignation from Vision Forum Ministries, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interests of all involved to discontinue operations. We have stopped receiving donations, and are working through the logistical matters associated with the closing of the ministry. While we believe as strongly as ever in the message of the ministry to the Christian family, we are grieved to find it necessary to make this decision. We believe this to be the best option for the healing of all involved and the only course of action under the circumstances.

This is a reminder of the devastating fallout when a Christian leader succumbs to serious moral failure. Let us continue to pray for those involved as the aftershocks will no doubt continue for quite some time.

Update 20 November 2013

Last Wednesday Scott Brown, longtime close friend of Doug Phillips and director of the National Center for family-Integrated Churches, delivered a sermon in which he commented very wisely and Scripturally on Phillips' public fall (although he didn't mention his name). The sermon is entitled How Sin Deceives & Destroys the Soul and the comments are found a little more than halfway through the message. Scott warns about how every public sin was first a private sin for a long time and admonishes us to mortify such sin lest our own work of ministry, which we may have been building for many years, be burned to the ground around us.

Update 17 November 2014

In An Update Regarding Doug Phillips, there was a formal announcement that "the Elders of Boerne Christian Assembly have moved to excommunicate Doug Phillips from the Body of Christ. In doing so, we have sought in good faith to follow diligently the process set forth by our Lord Jesus Christ in Matthew 18:15-17. This has been a process in which BCA has demonstrated great longsuffering and patience, has offered many and earnest appeals, and has sought much counsel from men of other churches."

This story just seems to be getting sadder and sadder by the day.

Download R.C. Sproul’s Crucial Questions eBooks For Free

Today I received an email from Ligonier Ministries informing me that the entire Crucial Questions eBook series by R.C. Sproul is now being made available for free forever. Here is what the webpage announcement says:

To further help Christians know what they believe, why they believe it, how to live it, and how to share it, from today the eBook editions of R.C. Sproul’s Crucial Questions series will be free forever.

Can I Be Sure I’m Saved? (Kindle) (iTunes)
Can I Have Joy in My Life? (Kindle)
Can I Know God’s Will? (Kindle) (iTunes)
Can I Trust the Bible? (Kindle) (iTunes)
Does God Control Everything? (Kindle)
Does Prayer Change Things? (Kindle) (iTunes)
How Should I Live in this World? (Kindle) (iTunes)
What Can I Do with My Guilt? (Kindle) (iTunes)
What Does It Mean to be Born Again? (Kindle) (iTunes)
What Is Baptism? (Kindle) (iTunes)
What Is Faith? (Kindle) (iTunes)
What Is the Trinity? (Kindle) (iTunes)
Who Is Jesus? (Kindle) (iTunes)
Who Is the Holy Spirit? (Kindle)

Please share these resources with your church, family, and friends.

As you can see, most of the resources are available in two different formats.

John MacArthur Predicts a Reversal of the Reformed Revival

In this two part video interview, John MacArthur discusses the way some prominent pastors claim to be Calvinistic in their view of soteriolgy but operate in their ministries as though they are actually Arminian. He correctly questions how fully committed they really are to a Scriptural Reformed theology. Whether or not you agree with every point he has to make, his criticisms and warnings are definitely worth considering. Frankly, he raises some crucial issues that have bothered the writers of this blog for some time. Let us know what you think.

Continuing Debate Over Baptist Usage of the Word "Reformed"

Back on June 26 R. Scott Clark wrote A Gentle Rebuke to Brother John criticizing John Piper for inviting Doug Wilson to the September Desiring God Conference. Although I agreed with Scott in his confrontation of John on this point, I did not agree with everything he said in that post. I especially did not agree with his criticism of Reformed Baptists for their use of the term Reformed as a a description of themselves. Here are the specific comments with which I took exception:

Calling a Baptist “Reformed” is like calling Presbyterians “Baptist” because they believe in believer’s baptism. The Reformed churches do practice the baptism of unbaptized believers but they also baptize the infants of believers. No self-respecting, confessional Baptist should accept me as “Baptist” and Reformed folk should resist labeling anyone who rejects most of Reformed theology as “Reformed.”

You can read my response to Clark's argument in the July 2 post entitled Why I Call Myself a Reformed Baptist. But I also wanted to point out some other reading that may be profitable, at least if you don't mind wading through a lot of interaction and debate in the "comments" sections of a couple of blogs.

To begin with, R. Scott Clark has written a couple of other Heidelblog articles in which he takes exception to Reformed Baptists using the term Reformed to describe themselves. The first was posted back on July 3 and is entitled A Baptist Reads RCC and Benefits From It. And the second was posted on November 27 and is entitled Post-Thanksgiving Cartoons: A Reply to James White. The reason I suggest both articles, by the way, is not because either of them is particularly good, but because in the "comments" section of each one there are some very good arguments offered by Reformed Baptists in their exchange with Scott and other Presbyterians. Most notable among the Reformed Baptist contributors to this discussion is Robert Gonzales, who ably defends our point of view. In addition, Gonzales has posted his own article updating the status of the debate over at the RBS Tabletalk blog. That article was posted on November 28 and is entitled May Baptist Churches Use the Adjective "Reformed"? The Ongoing Debate. It is well worth reading if you have any interest at all in the discussion/debate. But I would still recommend wading through all of those comments over at the Heidelblog!

Welcoming a New Reformed Baptist Church to Central Illinois

As the pastor of Immanuel Baptist Church in Bloomington, Illinois, which has been the only Reformed Baptist church in our part of central Illinois, I was very excited (to say the least) to discover that a new Reformed Baptist church has been planted in Germantown Hills (just east of Peoria), which is only about 40 minutes away.

This new church is called Christ Bible Church, and the pastor is Kerry Miller. Here is a description of the church from the website:

Christ Bible Church was founded on June 2, 2008 as an organized church of Jesus Christ in the State of Illinois, city of Germantown Hills.

On May 18, 2008 Pastor Kerry and about 17 members and regular attendees of a local church he pastored, broke fellowship with them when it became obvious the church rejected the Word of God as plainly taught by Jesus Christ, the Apostles and the reformers, choosing rather to hold to their traditions.

With much Joy in the Lord and in answer to prayer we met later that evening and by God's grace, began to lay the foundations for Christ Bible Church.

Currently, (October 2009) we are approximately 17 in number and growing. We are looking for a new location to worship and hope to be in a new location by the beginning of 2010.

Christ Bible Church in an Independent REFORMED Baptist Church which affirms and proclaims the doctrines of Grace and the 5 Solas of the Reformation.

We are unashamedly Calvinist in our Theology and believe the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith best articulates the teachings of the Holy Scriptures.

Our musical worship is a mix of traditional and contemporary and our preaching is expositional through books of the Bible, one book at a time for both Sunday School and Morning worship.

Our weekday evening worship service is either teaching through a book of the Bible or other teaching series. Currently, we are learning the overview of the Bible through RC Sproul's DVD Series "Dust to Glory." This will be followed by RC's teaching of Reformed Systematic Theology through his "Foundations" DVD Series.

Our atmosphere is informal and relaxed and we hold to the regulative principle of worship.

We stand against the Biblical errors of:

Arminianism

Purpose drive life

Seeker sensitive church growth

Prosperity gospel

Emergent Church

If you are looking for a strong, Bible-believing church in the Peoria area, a church that is faithful to the Gospel, check out Christ Bible Church!

What is a Reformed Baptist Church?

Back in July I posted a brief defense for Why I Call Myself a Reformed Baptist. In that article I also mentioned a poll I had conducted in 2007-2008 that revealed some significant diversity among those who would call themselves Reformed Baptists. I have also previously cited a paper by Jim Savastio entitled What is a Reformed Baptist Church?, in which he summarized well the (sometimes frustrating) diversity in the usage of the term Reformed Baptist.

Today I would like to inform the blog's readers of yet another attempt to define what it means to be a Reformed Baptist. This paper is also entitled What is a Reformed Baptist Church?, and it was written back in 1999 by Andrew Kerkham, the pastor of Tauranga Reformed Baptist Church in Papamoa, Tauranga, New Zealand.

Here is the the complete text for your consideration:

WHAT IS A REFORMED BAPTIST CHURCH?

1. IT HOLDS TO HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY

It holds to the essential doctrines of the historic Christian faith as set out in creeds such as the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed.

1.1 The Bible: The Bible in its original writings is fully inspired by God, and is therefore the supreme and final authority for belief and practice.

1.2 God: God is one in essence, eternally existing in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

1.3 Jesus Christ: Jesus is the incarnate Son of God, born of the virgin Mary, and is therefore truly God and truly human; he lived a holy and sinless life, died on the cross bearing our guilt as our vicarious substitute, rose bodily from the dead, ascended into heaven, and will return personally, visibly, and in power and glory.

1.4 The Human Race: God created human beings in his own image, but Adam the first human being sinned, and through this transgression every one of us inherits a sinful nature which results in personal transgression and guilt, incurring the penalty
of death, both physical and spiritual.

1.5 Salvation: Salvation is through regeneration by the Holy Spirit (the new birth), justification by faith alone without works of righteousness, and sanctification by the indwelling Holy Spirit which produces the fruits of righteousness including good works.

1.6 The Future: There is a future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, the just to eternal blessedness in heaven and the unjust to eternal banishment in hell.

2. IT HOLDS TO REFORMATION DISTINCTIVES

It holds to the great doctrines emphasized during the Reformation as set forth in documents such as the Belgic Confession, Canons of Dort, Heidelberg Catechism, Westminster Confession of Faith, and Baptist Confession of Faith (1689). These may be summed up in the threefold statement:

Sola scriptura - Sola gratia - Sola fide

Scripture alone - Grace alone - Faith alone

2.1 Sola Scriptura: The Bible in its original writings is verbally and fully inspired by God and therefore the inerrant Word of God to the human race; it is therefore the
supreme and final authority for belief and practice. (For a modern statement see
the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, 1978). Neither human reason, experience nor the Church can be our final authority. Therefore liberal theology (which exalts the authority of human reason), the charismatic movement (which exalts the authority of human experience) and Roman Catholicism (which exalts the authority of the church) are all viewed as inadequate systems of belief.

2.2 Sola Gratia: Salvation is entirely by the grace of God. The implications of this statement are summed up in the so-called "Five Points" (TULIP):

2.2.1 Total inability (or, total depravity): Sin has affected human beings to the extent that every part of our beings—body and soul, mind will and emotions—have been contaminated by sin, so that no one is able to do anything to gain salvation. We are therefore all under the condemnation of God.

2.2.2 Unconditional election: Since we are incapable of effecting our own salvation, God in his grace has chosen to call out specific individuals from the condemned human race to be his people. This election is unconditional in that is it based entirely on God's grace and good pleasure, not on any merit, neither intrinsic nor foreseen, in us.

2.2.3 Limited atonement (or, particular redemption): If election is particular (individual) and Christ's death is a vicarious and substitutionary sacrifice, then the atonement is limited in its design or purpose to the elect.

2.2.4 Irresistible grace (or, efficacious calling): If the Father has elected specific individuals for salvation, and the Son has died a substitutionary death for them, then the Holy Spirit in time calls them irresistibly and efficaciously to salvation.

2.2.5 Perseverance (or, security) of the saints: If the Father has specifically elected us, and the Son has died specifically in our place, and the Holy Spirit has irresistibly called us to eternal life, then our salvation is secure, for (by God's grace) we shall persevere in holiness to the end and be assured of heaven.

2.3 Sola Fide: In salvation we are justified by faith alone.

2.3.1 Justification: Justification is God's forensic (legal) declaration
that a sinner is not guilty. This declaration is based entirely on the
righteousness of Christ, who himself bore the sinner's penalty of death in
his substitutionary death on the cross. Since we have no righteousness of
our own, in justification Christ's righteousness is imputed (reckoned, accounted) to the sinner.

2.3.2 Faith: Justification is effected through the instrument of faith. This faith involves various aspects, in particular, knowledge, assent and trust.

2.3.3 Faith alone: Justification is by faith alone. Justification is not on the basis of our own merit or righteousness, nor is it on the basis of baptism or penance.

3. IT HOLDS TO BAPTIST DISTINCTIVES

It holds to Baptist distinctives that distinguish it from non-Baptist churches, namely:

3.1 The Church: The Church is the whole company of those who have been redeemed by Jesus Christ and regenerated by the Holy Spirit. The local church, as a manifestation of the universal church, is a community of believers in a particular place where the Word of God is preached, the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper are observed, and scriptural discipline is exercised. It is fully autonomous, and remains so notwithstanding responsibilities it may accept through voluntary
association.

3.2 Congregational Church Government: A constituted church meeting, under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and through the guidance of the Scriptures, is the highest court of authority for the local church. Elders and deacons are chosen and lead through the common consent of the church itself. Each individual member has a right and responsibility to participate fully in the life and government of the church, particularly in the appointment of its leaders.

3.3 Believer's Baptism: Baptism is an outward sign of an individual's union with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection, and is a confession of personal regeneration, repentance and faith. Its scriptural mode is immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

3.4 The Priesthood of Believers: Each believer has direct access to God through
Christ our High Priest, and shares with him in the work of reconciliation through intercession, worship and faithful service.

3.5 Liberty of Conscience: Each believer has the right to private conscience, and has an obligation to interpret the Scriptures responsibly and to act in the light of
his/her conscience, and should not be coerced by any State, secular, ecclesiastical or religious group in matters of faith. Nevertheless, it is right and proper that like-minded believers should express their fellowship in voluntarily submitting to confessions, creeds and statements of faith.

4. THE EFFECTS OF THESE DISTINCTIVES ON PRACTICE

The effects of these historic, reformed and baptist distinctives should be seen in the life and practice of the church as follows:

4.1 Preaching: Preaching of the Word of God is the method that God has ordained for proclaiming the name of Christ and building up the body of Christ. No other methods (e.g. music, films and other art forms; debate, discussion, broadcasting or other communication forms) should detract from or replace the faithful and public exposition of the Scriptures and the preaching (proclamation) of the gospel of Christ.

4.2 Evangelism: While God knows who the elect are, we do not, so God has ordained that his church should preach the gospel (the good news) of his salvation to all people throughout the world. Evangelism is conducted with confidence, knowing that it does not depend on human persuasiveness, but on the irresistible working of the Holy Spirit. Evangelism is based on the preaching of the Word of God, and both
the message and the method of evangelism must be founded on Scriptural principles.

4.3 Worship: Worship is viewed as a serious and reverent approach to God, who is majestic, glorious and holy. Worship therefore should be free from all superficiality, frivolity and irreverence. Although worship is conducted in a serious and reverent manner, it is also joyful as we rejoice in the God of our salvation.

4.4 Godly Living: Individual believers are expected, on the grounds of Scripture and as proof of their salvation, to live godly lives in obedience to the Law of God, to seek to be holy even as God is holy, to love one another as Christ has loved them, and to do good works as an expression of the love of Christ within them.

© 1999 by Andrew Kerkham

kerkham at gmail dot com

I am in essential agreement with Pastor Kerkham, as I would imagine most Reformed Baptists are. For those who are interested, he has also penned a modern English version of the Baptist Confession of 1689.

Welcoming Dr. Richard Belcher to the Blog

Many of the blog's readers will already be familiar with Dr. Belcher (pictured at left with his beloved wife, Mary Anne), especially since I have written at least five articles in the past about him and his books. Some of the blog's readers may also know that I have prayed that the Lord will provide another contributor to this blog.

Well, I am happy to announce that Dr. Belcher, one of my professors in Bible college, and definitely the most formative influence on my own ministry as a pastor and preacher of the Word, has graciously agreed to contribute to the blog. I can't tell you all how excited I am to have any input he is able to offer! I also hope it will be a good way for him to let us all know about the books he is writing and his ministry at Covenant Baptist Church in West Columbia, South Carolina, as well as his passion for ministry to India as the head of Evangelizing India for Christ. He has faithfully preached the Word for over fifty years and has taught at Columbia Bible College for almost thirty years.

Dr. Belcher has also just finished his latest book in the Journey series of theological novels, A Journey in Heresy, and I am looking forward to reading it. Here is the description from Richbarry Press:

What is one supposed to do when he teaches in a Christian seminary, which is about to be invaded by clear and undeniable heresy? Yet, the one who is bearing the heresy is a powerful preacher and personality, who most all think is sound in doctrine, because he is a great evangelist, who can get so many “decisions” for Christ! This is the dilemma of Ira and Dink, as they try to open the eyes of others to the danger of this man and his doctrine. Dink even faces a group of the board of trustees of the seminary, who are meeting behind the scenes, to seek to fire Dink from his position at the school, so they can hire this man, who seems to be so sound in doctrine but is not.

Follow Ira and Dink, as they face this new challenge of seeking to alert others of false doctrine, when the Christians of the day, and even the preachers around them, seem more concerned and enlightened about getting decisions and numbers and large crowds, than they are about truth and doctrine.

Along the same lines, Dr. Belcher's first post to the blog, Lord willing, will be a brief article on the theology of Charles Finney, a man whose influence on modern evangelicals has been far too great and whose heretical views have been far too long hidden from them.

For more information about Dr. Belcher, visit the profile at his church's web page here.

Why I Call Myself a Reformed Baptist

Last week I linked to R. Scott Clark's article A Gentle Rebuke to Brother John, in which he took John Piper to task for inviting Doug Wilson to speak at the upcoming Desiring God Conference this fall. But, although I agree with Scott in his confrontation of John on this point, I do not agree with everything he said in that post. I especially do not agree with his criticism of Reformed Baptists for their use of the term Reformed as a reference to themselves. Here are the specific comments with which I take exception:

Calling a Baptist “Reformed” is like calling Presbyterians “Baptist” because they believe in believer’s baptism. The Reformed churches do practice the baptism of unbaptized believers but they also baptize the infants of believers. No self-respecting, confessional Baptist should accept me as “Baptist” and Reformed folk should resist labeling anyone who rejects most of Reformed theology as “Reformed.”

There are several points to be made in response to these comments, but before I list them I want to make something clear, namely that I do not pretend to speak for all who would call themselves Reformed Baptists. I have entitled this post, "Why I Call Myself a Reformed Baptist," and I hope that I may give a good, brief accounting for this in this post. But it must be said that I do not see myself as a leader of the movement, let alone one of its primary spokesmen. In fact, the movement is diverse enough not to claim any one person as the most appropriate spokesman. For example, back in 2007-2008 I conducted a poll on this blog that revealed some significant diversity among those who would call themselves Reformed Baptists.

With these caveats in mind, I will now address the above comments made by Clark. First, I do not agree at all with his assertion that "calling a Baptist 'Reformed' is like calling Presbyterians 'Baptist' because they believe in believer’s baptism." I am, frankly, surprised that Clark would make use of such an analogy when he must know that what makes the Baptist position distinctive is not that we advocate the baptism of believers (which we certainly do) but rather that we advocate the baptism of believers only. When a Presbyterian begins to assert that position, then I will accept his calling himself a "Presbyterian Baptist," even if he doesn't hold to other historically distinctive Baptist positions, such as our view of church government, which asserts the autonomy of the local church in matters of governance. But, then, the term Presbyterian so used would clearly indicate this difference, wouldn't it? And this is really no different than the way the term Baptist qualifies my use of the term Reformed.

Second, Clark's comments seem to assume the idea that there is a monolithic historical understanding of the meaning of the English word reformed. But this is simply not true. There are broader and more narrow senses in which the word may be used, and not all of these require the specific understanding to which he apparently wishes to restrict usage of the term. In addition, I see no reason why a modifier cannot be attached to the word that in effect alters and qualifies its meaning so as to rule out the kind of misunderstanding that Clark is apparently concerned about. One such modifier – as I have already noted – is the term baptist, which immediately communicates a distinctive use of the word reformed.

Perhaps it would be helpful to discuss at least three senses in which I believe the term reformed has been used, all of which have application to my own usage of the term when I call myself a Reformed Baptist. I will list three ways in which I believe I have seen the term used, beginning with the most broad sense and moving to the most narrow sense.

First, the term reformed can be used in a broad sense to describe that which is changed for the better, and in our discussion it refers to the changes that were made by Protestants in their efforts to reform the Roman Catholic Church in accordance with Scripture. In this sense it could refer to any person or group that seeks to be consistent in reforming the church in this way. I believe John Quincy Adams had in mind this usage of the term in his famous little book Baptists: The Only Thorough Religious Reformers, and this is one sense in which I intend the word to be taken when I describe myself as a Reformed Baptist. It communicates my commitment to the principle indicated by the slogan semper reformanda ("always reforming"), and it declares my conviction that it is the Particular Baptists who have been more faithful reformers than their Presbyterian brothers, especially with regard to the issues of church government and baptism, as indicated above. Indeed, in this sense I think we have more right to use the term than they do.

Second, the term reformed can refer to the broader Protestant tradition characterized by principles held by most of the early Reformers, and not just those in Geneva, for example. These principles may be summed up by the five Reformation precepts often referred to as "the solas." These include the principle of sola scriptura (that Scripture alone is our ultimate authority), the principle of solus Christus (that we are saved by Christ alone), sola gratia (that we are saved by God's grace alone), sola fide (that we are saved through faith alone), and soli Deo gloria (that all is to the glory of God alone). Thus when I call myself a Reformed Baptist I mean to indicate that I wholeheartedly embrace these distinctive principles of the Reformation.

Third, I agree that there is a more narrow use of the term as Clark affirms, namely to refer to those who follow the traditions that have come particularly from Calvin's reforming work in Geneva. This would include not only the Swiss Reformed, but also the Scottish and Dutch Reformed and the numerous Presbyterian groups that have followed from each of these traditions. I also agree with Clark that we do not want to confuse Baptists with these Reformed groups. However, this is precisely why I call myself a Reformed Baptist. The term Baptist clearly qualifies my use of the term Reformed. And when I use the terms together this way, I do not think I am doing anything essentially different than did those English Baptists who based the Baptist Confession of 1689 largely upon the Westminster Confession of Faith. They clearly wanted to identify themselves as in the mainstream of the Reformed tradition in one sense (particularly with regard to Calvinist soteriology and Covenant Theology), while at the same time distinguishing themselves in ways that demonstrated how they had reformed more thoroughly than had their Presbyterian brethren. This – together with the reasons already listed – is precisely why I call myself a Reformed Baptist.

I hope this post has helped to briefly clarify and defend my usage of the appellation Reformed Baptist to describe myself, and, despite Clark's objections, I believe I have every right to use this description.

Modern Version of the Baptist Confession of 1689 Complete

This blog's regular readers may remember that I informed you back in January of the ongoing effort of Stan Reeves, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Auburn University and an elder at Grace Heritage Church in Auburn, Alabama, to modernize the Baptist Confession of 1689. Well, earlier this month he posted the final chapter of the confession here. I assume he may still want to do some editing, especially as he receives feedback from those who visit his blog. So, if you can, visit the site and weigh in with questions or suggestions. He has been posting it in a blog format for this very reason.

Thanks again, Steve, for taking on this important and helpful task for the churches!

Disappointed in John Piper's Judgment About Doug Wilson

Note: I have updated this article a couple of times since it was first published, so be sure not to miss the additions.

I want to begin by saying how much I like and appreciate John Piper and how difficult it is, then, for me to write this post. Although I do not know John well, I was greatly helped by his fatherly advice when I was involved in the debate over Openness Theology (or Free-will Theism) in the Baptist General Conference some years ago. He offered perspective, wisdom, and even some needed confrontation of me on a few points. I was going through a very difficult time in my life and ministry while at the same time caught up in a denominational debate I would rather not have been a part of, and John was a helpful guide for a young and troubled pastor. I don't know if he would even remember me now, but I will always be grateful for the time he took to offer some much needed guidance and concern.

Anyway, I have prayed about whether or not I should write this post, and I have thought about it off and on for most of the day today, but I just couldn't avoid weighing in on one recent matter that has surprised, perplexed, and disappointed me with regard to John's judgment. It has to do with his questionable discernment regarding Doug Wilson as an adherent of Federal Vision theology. I was, in fact, quite surprised when I recently found out that John Piper and the Desiring God ministry had chosen to ask Doug Wilson to speak at the upcoming Desiring God Conference in September. I heard about it from George Drye, a fellow elder at Immanuel, who was more than a little concerned about it, especially since he and I have had to confront some Federal Vision issues in our own congregation. As for John's reasoning in deciding to include Wilson in this year's conference, here is the video explanation that was posted at the Desiring God website (but has apparently since been taken down):

Clearly John believes that Wilson himself "gets the Gospel right." But I have some real doubts about this, especially, as I have already noted, given Wilson's adherence to Federal Vision theology.

I first found out about this aberrant theology when I attended a 2002 (or 3?) pastors' conference at Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church in Monroe, Louisiana. I was invited to go – and in fact driven there – by a man who attended our church at the time, but who had previously been a member at Auburn Avenue. Doug Wilson was one of the primary speakers at that conference, and that is where I first discovered who he is.

Frankly, I was shocked at some of what I heard coming from a PCA church (or at least what was a PCA church at the time, because they have since left that denomination, no doubt due in part to the PCA's rejection of Federal Vision theology as unacceptable). For example, I heard men espousing baptismal regeneration and asserting that those who have been properly baptized are saved thereby and possess all the saving benefits of Christ. They also said that such saved persons can apostatize and reject the Christian faith and no longer possess the saving benefits of Christ. But then, out of the other sides of their mouths, they claimed to hold to the Westminster Confession of Faith in its teaching on the perseverance of the saints.

When I had lunch with Doug Wilson and asked him how he could say such things and still claim to hold to the Westminster Confession's position on the perseverance of the saints, he told me that there is a difference between those who are elect and those we must regard as saved from our point of view. When I asked follow-up questions, such as whether or not regarding a person as saved meant also regarding that person as elect, I just got a lot of what I considered to be double-speak in response. Needless to say, I never went to another pastors' conference at Auburn, and I left with a decidedly negative view of Wilson's theology, however likable I found him to be on a personal level.

But I am disturbed by the fact that John doesn't seem to see this double-speak for what it is. As the following video demonstrates, he appears instead to be enamored by Wilson and therefore misses what are obvious and unbiblical inconsistencies in Wilson's position.

Notice how John speaks of Wilson as being "very complicated" for saying completely illogical and truth-distorting things. How, after all, can one speak logically – let alone Biblically – about an "unregenerate elect" person, or an "unregenerate regenerate" person as Piper agrees that Wilson does? This is not saying the same thing as one would say who agrees that there may be professing Christians who turn out to be unsaved in the end, as John assumes. It is speaking in a very confusing way about fundamentally important matters, but John prefers to call it "very complicated" instead, while he reminds us how "bright" Wilson is. And then he goes on to talk about how Wilson "gets a bad wrap from a lotta PCA guys who aren't careful in the way they think."

This just reminded me of how sick I have become of the Federal Vision guys constantly complaining about how "misunderstood" they have been and blaming everyone else for misrepresenting them when the real problem is their constant redefinition of historical theological terms and categories while at the same time claiming to believe in the historical meaning of those same terms. I don't think they are being misunderstood at all. I think they are being called on the fact that they are deliberately playing all kinds of language games. And even if they are being misunderstood, who's fault is that!? Isn't it their own fault? I mean, how can the rest of us be blamed for thinking that the laws of logic should still apply to theological discussion?

Anyway, I am surprised at and disappointed in Piper's not seeing the problem and calling Wilson on these kinds of things. After having met Wilson and spoken with him for a while – as I indicated above – I can testify as to how charismatic and winsome he is. After speaking with him, you kind of want to agree with him just because you like him. And he is just as bright as John says he is, which is why it is so hard not to hold him accountable for his strange and inconsistent assertions about key doctrines. Could it be that Piper has been won over by the strong and engaging personality of Wilson? It sort of looks that way to me, even if he has "only met him once."

As for the dangers of Federal Vision theology, here is what New Horizons, the magazine of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, has to say in an article entitled Understanding the Federal Vision:

Twenty errors that are held by one or more advocates of the Federal Vision are listed in the conclusion of the report of the OPC's Committee to Study the Doctrine of Justification:

1. Pitting Scripture and Confession against each other.

2. Regarding the enterprise of systematic theology as inherently rationalistic.

3. A mono-covenantalism that sees one covenant, originating in the intra-Trinitarian fellowship, into which man is invited, thus flattening the concept of covenant and denying the distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace.

4. Election as primarily corporate and eclipsed by covenant.

5. Seeing covenant as only conditional.

6. A denial of the covenant of works and of the fact that Adam was in a relationship with God that was legal as well as filial.

7. A denial of a covenant of grace distinct from the covenant of works.

8. A denial that the law given in Eden is the same as that more fully published at Mt. Sinai and that it requires perfect obedience.

9. Viewing righteousness as relational, not moral.

10. A failure to make clear the difference between our faith and Christ's.

11. A denial of the imputation of the active obedience of Christ in our justification.

12. Defining justification exclusively as the forgiveness of sins.

13. The reduction of justification to Gentile inclusion.

14. Including works (by use of "faithfulness," "obedience," etc.) in the very definition of faith.

15. Failing to affirm an infallible perseverance and the indefectibility of grace.

16. Teaching baptismal regeneration.

17. Denying the validity of the concept of the invisible church.

18. An overly objectified sacramental efficacy that downplays the need for faith

and that tends toward an ex opere operato [automatically effective] view of the

sacraments.

19. Teaching paedocommunion.

20. Ecclesiology that eclipses and swallows up soteriology.

No wonder R. Scott Clark, Professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Westminster Seminary California, has issued A Gentle Rebuke to Brother John for the remarks he made in the above video. Clark does see the Gospel as being corrupted by Wilson and other Federal Vision advocates, as a number of the above listed issues demonstrate. Of course, Wilson may not hold to every aberrant position as listed or stated here, but he does hold to enough of them to warrant genuine concern that the Gospel is being at best distorted and confused by him. Given such issues, I am glad that John at least says that he is "worried" and "concerned" about the "trajectory" of the views Wilson holds. I just wish this concern had led to his steering clear of Wilson rather than essentially endorsing him by involving him in the Desiring God Conference.

Update 27 June 2009

Last night I listened to all three hours of the "grilling" John referred to of Doug Wilson by the CREC presbytery. After listening to the exchanges, I can understand a little better why John doesn't see Wilson as being quite as dangerous in his adherence to Federal Vision theology as so many in Presbyterian circles do. Wilson is quite a bit more measured and careful in his statements to the presbytery than he has been at other times and in other venues. It is a bit easier to see how John can say that Wilson is wrong, "but wrong in the way that you would expect a Presbyterian to be wrong." To be sure, even in the exchange with his presbytery, Wilson said some things that I find quite disturbing, but he did avoid some of the more extreme kinds of things I have personally heard him say before or that I have seen written in documents such as the 2007 A Joint federal Vision Statement.

So, the problem here may be that John simply has limited knowledge of Wilson's actions and assertions, and rather than listening closely to what those who have had to deal head on with the problems of Federal Vision theology in their own churches have to say, John just asserts that Wilson "gets a bad wrap from a lotta PCA guys who aren't careful in the way they think."

I am disturbed by this the more I think about it, because John simply dismisses the collective judgment of many of those who may know Wilson and his crowd best. Again, as I noted previously in this post, I know that Wilson and others in the Federal Vision camp frequently like to claim that they are being misunderstood, and John may believe this claim with respect to Wilson. But I still assert that they aren't being so misunderstood at all; they are just being challenged for – at the very least – speaking of important doctrines in such a way as to distort their meaning. But, again, even if they are at times being misunderstood, I think it is almost entirely their own fault for speaking in consistently equivocal ways.

So, again, after listening to the whole exchange between Wilson and the CREC presbytery as John suggested, I am still no more certain as to what Wilson really believes about some things, because I don't think he has been consistent in what he has said on various occasions. Could it be that Wilson has backed off of some things or corrected his views at some points? Perhaps, but I would like to see clear evidence of that before being convinced, and I still think it is a very bad idea for John and the Desiring God ministry to invite him to their conference.

But this leads me to another matter, which is why John feels it necessary to include such a controversial figure as Doug Wilson in the first place. I mean, aren't there a number of much less controversial figures who could have spoken at the conference on the topic of "The Sacred Script in the Theater of God: Calvin, the Bible, and the Western World”? In fact, aren't there some even better choices regardless of whether or not Wilson is a controversial figure? What about a guy like R.C. Sproul? Or Michael Horton? Or Robert Peterson? If he wants a Presbyterian to talk on this subject, surely there are many others to whom he could have looked.

Update 1 November 2009

I thought it only fair that I include yet another video by John Piper in which he seeks to explain himself further with regard to his inclusion of Doug Wilson in the Desiring God Conference back in September. I do not doubt John's sincerity, of course, but I am still a bit disturbed when he describes Wilson as "really consistent and really clear" and then also admits that Wilson uses language "that causes a lot of trouble for people" because it describes people as Christians who are not Christians, who are elect but going to hell, etc. This just doesn't seem either consistent or clear to me, nor to many others who have judged Federal Vision theology a danger to the faith, in part precisely because of such lack of clarity on crucial doctrines.

Anyway, I thought the many people who have been reading this post would appreciate hearing John explain himself further. I also want to reiterate that I have great respect for John even when I disagree with him, as I do on this issue.

Free Copy of John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology

Reformation Trust Publishing is making available a free copy of the book Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology. They are charging $5.00 for shipping and handling, but this book is a steal at that price!

Here is a description of the offer from the Ligioner website:

Dear Pastors,

John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology is a
winsome portrait that dashes stereotypes about Calvin and the theological system that bears his name. In answer to why it is important for laypeople to study John Calvin's writings, Burk Parsons explains:

"First of all, the people of God should be wholeheartedly engaged, first and foremost, in the daily study of God's Word. Second, as God's people study God's Word in depth they will quickly understand the necessity of interpreting Scripture with Scripture, and that is precisely what Calvin helps us to do -- to the end that we might know and proclaim the whole counsel of God. Third, John Calvin was not an ivory-tower theologian who was out of touch with the real-life struggles of God's people. Not only did he struggle himself, but he knew well the plight of his people in his congregation. He could empathize with their afflictions and so shepherded them in preaching, praying, writing, and counseling. Calvin was, first and foremost, a pastor of God's people."

A small shipping and handling charge of $5.00 will be included. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.

Disclaimer: This offer is limited to full-time pastors and church leadership. One copy per church.

I jumped at this opportunity, especially since I am reading through Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion this year. As always, I am happy to inform the blog's readers of any such opportunities I find.

2009 Band of Bloggers Meeting

In case you haven't heard yet, the 2009 Band of Bloggers meeting will be held in conjunction with this year's Gospel Coalition Conference. It will be held on April 22. Here is the description for this year's meeting from the Band of Bloggers website:

This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.~ 1 Corinthians 4:1

From generation to generation, God has faithfully raised up and empowered His people to be servants of Christ and stewards of the Gospel. What is unlike generations in the past is the ability through technology to literally impact the entire world. For the past 5-10 years, the advent of blogging and social media has afforded followers of Christ to personally broadcast the good news of Jesus Christ while developing a web of relationships that has formed a gospel-centered community seeking to leverage whatever means possible to spread the fragrance of the knowledge of Christ everywhere–both in person and on the web.

Band of Bloggers is an informal fellowship of gospel-committed writers seeking to encourage faithfulness in what is spoken of Christ while raising the standard of discourse to reflect the character of those called to blog worthy of the gospel to which
we have been called.

This year, we are excited to announce that Band of Bloggers is partnering with The
Gospel Coalition Conference to host the 3rd Band of Bloggers Fellowship in conjunction with their national conference in Chicago, IL. On Wednesday, April 22, 2009, from 12:00-2:00 p.m., we will be hosting a lunch and fellowship at the Rosemont Conference Center. The theme of the conference is “Servants & Stewards” (building off of 1 Cor. 4:1), which expresses a two-pronged approach in faithfulness as servants and effectiveness as stewards. As servants, we want to make much of our Savior in not just what we say but how we say it. As stewards, we want to collectively labor to leverage all available means to propagate and publish the Gospel in our increasingly technologically-literate culture.

To do this, Band of Bloggers has sought the instruction and encouragement from well-known evangelical bloggers to addresses various issues. Taking a slightly different approach than in years past, we are given each person one question to answer in 5-7 minutes and then diving into Q&A/discussion. Here’s what we have in
store for 2009:
_______________
1. Servants and Stewards: Maximizing your blog in service to Christ (Timmy
Brister)
2. How can we blog for the glory of God? (Justin Taylor)
3. Improving usability: How to write so people can read (Mike Anderson)
4. How can you use your blog for the edification of the church? (Tim Challies)
5. How can you make your site more accessible and visible? (Eric Johnson)
6. Why should pastors blog? (Tullian Tchividjian)
7. What is the place for art and culture in Christian blogging? (Steve McCoy)
8. How can bloggers steward the teaching of the young, old, and the dead? (Tony Reinke)
______________
One of the highlights of Band of Blogger fellowship is the opportunity to meet people you may have encountered on the Internet and network together with people of kindred spirit who share a common passion for the glory of Christ and the advancement of His Gospel. Together with The Gospel Coalition National Conference, this will be a week that you will not want to miss!

Lord willing, I will be attending both of these gatherings this year. Hope to see many of my fellow bloggers there as well!