"What is a Reformed Baptist?" Poll Results

Although I had planned to run the poll for an entire year, I have discovered that Blogger's poll feature began to lose votes after it passed 100. It seemed to work fine, in fact, until it got up to 114 votes, after which votes began to disappear and the number began to fluctuate up and down. Since I or my wife checked it every day, we are certain that the last update was accurate (at that time consisting of 109 votes), but cannot be certain of the exact figures after that date.

So, I am closing the poll and listing the results after running it for approximately six months.

Well over half of those responding (62%) did not think strict adherence to the Baptist Confession of 1689 is necessary to being a Reformed Baptist. Here is the breakdown of the poll as the Blogger poll feature listed it on January 17:

20% thought that one only had to be a Baptist who held to Calvinistic soteriology.

34% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to Calvinism and Covenant Theology.

38% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to the 1689 Confession.

6% thought that one must hold to the 1689 Confession for the most part, but thought that this should not have to include adherence to the Sabbath requirement.

You may have noticed that the figures actually add up to a total of 98% rather than 100%, but this appears to be due to Blogger's having rounded numbers up or down rather than having given more precise results. So these numbers will have to do. But they reflect pretty well what the trend was for the poll as I watched it over a six month period, with roughly 60% of the votes consistently falling into one of the categories that does not regard strict adherence to the Baptist Confession of 1689 as necessary to regard oneself a Reformed Baptist.

The two most common responses ran roughly neck and neck over the six months of the poll. The predominant response was that a Reformed Baptist is one who holds to the 1689 Confession (38%), with a pretty close second being that a Reformed Baptist must at least hold to Calvinism and Covenant Theology (34%). Together these constitute a significant majority of those who responded (72%).

This result really doesn't surprise me given my own experience in Reformed Baptist circles. I am not surprised that most thought that a Covenantal perspective was necessary, thus ruling out those Calvinist Baptists who are Dispensational. Nor am I surprised that, among those who would define the term Reformed Baptist more narrowly, there was a pretty even split among those who did not see a close adherence to the Baptist Confession of 1689 as necessary. This of course reflects the historical fact that not all of those who have called themselves Reformed over the centuries would necessarily adhere to the English confessions written in the 17th century. For example, there are many Reformed of a Presbyterian stripe that would not adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith (the many Dutch Reformed and those springing more directly from this background come to mind). So it should not be surprising that many Reformed Baptists should similarly regard the 1689 Confession, which so closely reflects the Westminster standard, as being too narrow a definition of the term Reformed as applied to them.

In other words, the poll results for the most part are well within the limits of what one should expect, at least if one has a fair knowledge of Reformed history as well as the modern development of what has become the Reformed Baptist movement. The former indicates more flexibility in the use of the term Reformed than with reference strictly to the Westminster tradition, and the latter indicates more flexibility in the use of the term Reformed Baptist than with reference strictly to the 1689 Confession.

With regard to the modern term Reformed Baptist, Jim Savastio has summarized well the (sometimes frustrating) diversity of its usage. Here are his remarks from a paper entitled What is a Reformed Baptist Church?:

The answer to the question, “What is a Reformed Baptist church?” is difficult for two reasons. In the first place, it is difficult to answer because the terms Reformed and Baptists are often seen to be at odds with one another. Many theologians, both Reformed and Baptist, would say that such a title is a misnomer. Some claim that it is not possible to be both Reformed and baptistic! Though Baptists have been and can be Calvinistic, it is said, they are not and cannot be Reformed. The reason for this charge is simple: Reformed theology is almost always associated with paedo-baptism (infant sprinkling). Many who are Reformed in their theology view this perspective as the sine qua non of the Reformed Faith.

Secondly, the subject is difficult because there exists an ever-widening gulf between churches that call themselves Reformed Baptists. The term has not been copyrighted and, thus, there exists no definitive statement regarding who can lay claim to the title. You will find that no two Reformed Baptist churches walk in lock-step. Some churches call themselves “Reformed Baptists” when all they mean by that is that they hold to the so-called "Five points of Calvinism" and that they immerse believers. Other “Reformed Baptists” hold to the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 in its entirety, while yet a third group of “Reformed Baptists” hold to but a few of the articles. And although most Reformed Baptists hold to a Biblical and Puritan view of the Lord’s Day Sabbath, there are some who reject the doctrine as legalistic. In addition, Reformed Baptists churches differ in regard to their understanding of the exact application of the Regulative Principle of worship (the conviction that the Bible alone dictates the worship and life of the church), in regard to who is invited to the Lord’s table, to Bible translations, hymnals, the structure of prayer meetings, ministerial training, the nature of the pastoral office, denominations, and associations, etc., etc. [Note: The copy of the paper linked above is from the site of The Reformed Baptist Church of Louisville, where Jim Savastio is a pastor, but there is also a copy at the website of Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.]

As I see it, there has been a movement under way for some time among many Baptists to get back to their Biblical - i.e. Calvinistic - roots. This seems to have been going on for about thirty years at least. During this time, there have obviously been many for whom the term Reformed Baptist quite naturally suggested itself as a good description of their views. For example, I have a recollection of the way I and a few of my friends at Columbia Bible College began to call ourselves Reformed Baptists about eighteen or twenty years ago, and we actually thought we were coining the term. I have since discovered that there were others using the term even before that time.

The term thus arose with varied connotations among a variety of people and churches, who until recently were relatively unaware of each other's existence. But, especially since the advent of the internet and its increasingly common usage, these men and groups have begun to find one another and to discover both what they share in common and where they differ. As the smoke clears, however, there seems to be a pretty strong majority who would think that a Reformed Baptist must at a minimum hold to a Calvinistic and Covenantal perspective. At least this is what both my experience and the poll results would seem to indicate.

As always, I welcome comments from the blog's readers.

Band of Bloggers Fellowship Open for Registration

This week I recently received this email from the Band of Bloggers:

Registration Opens Today

Posted: 17 Feb 2008 10:01 PM CST
2008 Band of Bloggers

“The Gospel Trust”

Tuesday, April 15, 2008 :: (11:30 -1:30)

The Galt House (Louisville, KY)

Tim Challies, Justin Taylor, Thabiti Anyabwile, and Mark Lauterbach

After a long process of working out the details, the 2008 Band of Bloggers fellowship is open for registration! The window of registration will be from February 18-March 31, 2008 (a total of six weeks). So be sure to help us get the word out to all the bloggers attending T4G this year.

A few things to note:

1. $15 for Registration

The Galt House (where the T4G conference was held in 2006) has agreed to host this year’s meeting and will be catering the attendees with a boxed lunch. Those of you who have been around downtown Louisville know how difficult it is to find a place to eat, moreover, a place that is affordable. We are committed to making the cost as affordable as possible, but given that we are working with no budget or any outside financial support, a small registration fee is required. Included in this cost is lunch and other treats TBA. If you plan to attend and cannot afford the $15, please email us at thegospeltrust@gmail.com.

2. Limited Capacity

The current conference room will allow us to seat approximately 150 people. Therefore, it is important that you register early. If perchance, we exceed this capacity in short order, we will pursue the possibility of a larger meeting room. We would like to make this open to as many as possible, so please do not procrastinate in signing up!

3. Location, Directions, and Time

The Galt House is located just one block away from the Kentucky Convention Center and can be accessed indoors (less than a five minute walk). For those traveling from the airport, I have created a Google Map and have pin-pointed the locations for both the Galt House and Convention Center. For those of you concerned that you will miss the first session of T4G, it does not begin until 2:30, and Band of Bloggers is scheduled to end at 1:30 p.m. that afternoon.

The purpose of this event is to provide all attending bloggers of the 2008 Together for the Gospel conference an opportunity to meet, fellowship, and engage in a fruitful, gospel-centered discussion with some of the leading bloggers today. It is our desire that you to be refreshed personally, connected corporately, and fueled Christocentricly. May the Lord use this time to burn in our hearts a love for the gospel and for one another.

Lord willing, I will be in attendance, and perhaps I will meet some of you there.

John Piper on False Teachers

In his Epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul warned the early Christians to watch out for false teachers:

NKJ Romans 16:17-18 "Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple."

I recently ran across a video of John Piper explaining Paul's meaning in this passage, in particular verse 18, and I thought the blog's readers might appreciate it as much as I did.

Downloads at PastorThroop.com

Hello to all the blog's readers! I just wanted to let you all know that I have uploaded all of the resources I had previously made available at my old website to the new PastorThroop.com site. I have also added many new resources, including PDF files and e-Sword Topic Notes files. These include many Reformed materials, from systematic theology texts to sermons.

Recent additions include "Christian Apologetics - An Introduction," "The Relevance of Christianity: An Apologetic," and "Blaise Pascal: An Apologist for Our Times," by Rick Wade of Probe Ministries. In addition, I recently added Basic Christian Doctrine from Curt Daniel, pastor at Faith Bible Church in Springfield, Illinois, as a Topic Notes file. So, check out my Downloads page if you are interested.

Global Bible Reader Beta

Logos has introduced their own Bible Reading software program called Global Bible Reader Beta. It looks to be a pretty good little program, but, then, I am for any program that will help people read their Bibles more. Here is some information from the website:

What Is It?

Global Bible Reader helps you stay on track with your daily Bible readings by onnecting you to a community of people all following the same reading schedule. Global Bible Reader presents you with today’s reading, keeps track of your progress, and lets you communicate with everyone else who’s reading with you.

How It Works

Once Global Bible Reader is installed, it displays an icon in the taskbar notification area (near the clock). Double-click that icon to open Global Bible Reader. Browse the available schedules by selecting them from the drop-down list (with a purple book icon) in the upper-left. The calendar icon (in the top-middle of the window) allows you to look at previous and upcoming readings in your chosen schedule.

For those interested, their is actually a Bible Reading tool included in e-Sword as well, with which you can set up a daily Bible Reading Plan for the whole Bible or just for a particular book or part of the Bible. But this doesn't sit in your system tray to remind you. Nor does it help involve you with a wider community of readers. But, on the other hand, since it doesn't sit in you system tray, it also doesn't use any resources until you tell it to.

John Piper on Dialog Between Christians and Muslims

Most of the blog's readers are no doubt already aware of the open letter entitled A Common Word Between Us and You, which was issued by a group of Muslim leaders back in October. This was later followed by a full-page advertisement in the New York Times, entitled Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to A Common Word Between Us and You, which was written by several scholars at Yale Divinity School's Center for Faith and Culture and was signed by over 300 Christian leaders and scholars.

Well, not surprisingly, this "Christian" response left a lot to be desired, and John Piper has done a great job in the above video explaining why. I couldn't agree more with John on this issue, and I am indebted to Justin Taylor of the Between Two Worlds blog for bringing his response to my attention. Justin also offers another great recommendation for those who would like to hear more from John on these issues, a 2002 article entitled Tolerance, Truth-Telling, Violence, and Law: Principles for How Christians Should Relate to Those of Other Faiths.

Thanks, John, for you typical candor, common sense, and commitment to Scripture in your response to this increasingly important matter.

e-Sword Update Released

The latest update to e-Sword (v7.9.4) was made available just a few days ago, on January 19. I apologize to the blog's readers for my tardiness in posting the information here.

For those who already use e-Sword and may be interested, here is a list of recent updates taken from the e-Sword website Downloads page (Click on 'View Update Changes' in order to see a list of these and all previous version changes):

e-Sword version 7.9 changes from 7.8
User files are now stored under the Windows user's "Personal Folder" directory on 2000, XP, and Vista. Due to Windows permissions issues this change was necessary. This also makes backing-up user files easier as these files are isolated to this
directory.

This version has a new Sermon Illustrations feature.

Stronger Strong's implementation throughout the program. Popup ToolTips now in commentaries, dictionaries, notes, etc.

Alternate dictionaries keyed to Strong's numbers can be selected for display in popup ToolTips. Select "Options, Strong's # ToolTip..." from the e-Sword menu. All dictionary modules tied to Strong's numbers have been updated to accommodate
this new feature.

Multiple monitors fully supported.

Antialiasing algorithm available in Graphics Viewer. This provides a clearer display image when shrinking under 100%. Select "Options, Antialiasing" from the Graphics
Viewer menu to toggle use.

Fixed some Vista display issues.

Some of you may recall my earlier post about e-Sword, that included a link to a nice review. If you have yet tried this terrific - free - Bible study software program, I highly recommend it.

Monthly "What is a Reformed Baptist?" Poll Update

It is the sixth month running this poll, and there continues to be well over half of those responding (62%) who do not think strict adherence to the Baptist Confession of 1689 is necessary to being a Reformed Baptist. Here is the breakdown thus far (found at the bottom of the page):

20% thought that one only had to be a Baptist who held to Calvinistic soteriology.

34% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to Calvinism and Covenant Theology.

38% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to the 1689 Confession.

6% thought that one must hold to the 1689 Confession for the most part, but thought that this should not have to include adherence to the Sabbath requirement.

The sample from which this is taken is getting larger - with 109 responses so far - but I remain hopeful that I may be able to get several hundred responses to the poll over the course of its one year lifespan. There are 182 days left, so if you haven't responded yet, scroll down to the bottom of the page and weigh in.

P.S. Some of you may have noticed that the percentages Blogger lists don't always add up to 100. This appears to be due to Blogger's rounding the numbers up or down. But the tallies still give us a pretty good idea where things are. At the end of the year, I will try to figure the percentages more accurately.

Bible.org: Improved

Bible.org is one of those sites I use constantly, and now it has been completely redesigned and is easier to use than ever. It has so many helpful articles and Bible study tools that it would be hard to list them all here. I am especially fond of the way I can have it list all their articles according to the Scripture passage I am currently studying.

I also find the 'Pastoral Helps' (under 'Communities') section very worthwhile. It has a wealth of information, from various preaching and teaching aids for special occasions (such as weddings or funerals) and holidays to administrative and organizational aids. I also use their database of sermon illustrations (under 'Study Tools') on a regular basis. You can search for illustration by topic or Scripture passage. Long-time blog readers may remember that I recommended this feature of Bible.org in an old article entitled Online Sources for Sermon Illustrations. Well, I haven't changed my mind, it is still one of the best and easiest to use online resources available.

Reformed Baptist Theology Isn't Perfect....

I remember one of my professors as Covenant Theological Seminary declaring in class one day that "Reformed theology isn't perfect; it is just the best we can do." Well, of course he was referring to Reformed Presbyterian theology, so I cannot agree that it is the best we can do. But I would say the same thing about my own Reformed Baptist theology. It is not perfect, but it is indeed the best we can do.

The reason it is not perfect is that it is our human attempt to systematize the various doctrines taught in Scripture and – as long as it is us doing the systematizing – we must humbly admit that it cannot be perfect. And we must also humbly admit, I think, that our system of theology has its problem passages just as does any other system of theology. But I would argue that our problem passages are much fewer in number and that we have much better answers for them than any other system of theology.

Our forefathers in the faith, the writers of the Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689, knew that the only perfect source of knowledge about God is found in the Scriptures, which is why they emphatically asserted that...

[t]he supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved. [1.10]

This means, of course, that the Baptist Confession of 1689 itself – and the system of theology contained therein – is also not to be elevated to a place of authority over or equal to Scripture. Reformed Baptists, then, with their strong commitment to the principle of Sola Scriptura and to the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture, should of all people recognize the danger of allowing our confessions and traditions to take on an authority they do not and cannot ever possess.

Yes, we should respect our heritage and the teachings that have come down to us by the grace of God, but the best way to do that is by remaining humble before Scripture and recognizing that Reformed Baptist theology isn't perfect, even if we believe it is the best we can do.

"New Year's" Resolutions or New Life Resolutions?

The USA.GOV website lists these thirteen as the most popular New Year's resolutions: 1) lose weight, 2) pay off debt, 3) save money, 4) get a better job, 5) get fit, 6) eat right, 7) get a better education, 8) drink jess alcohol , 9) quit smoking now, 10) reduce stress overall, 11) reduce stress at work, 12) take a trip, and 13) volunteer to help others.

When I read these I couldn't help thinking that many of them would be good things for Christians to resolve to do, but I was also reminded of what one notable Christian man - Jonathan Edwards - resolved to do in his own life, and it makes most of these common New Year's resolutions seem trite at best. This is why I have chosen to post his resolutions here for any of the blog's readers who may not already be familiar with them. You will quickly see as you examine them, that Edwards was not interested in fleeting resolutions to be quickly forgotten, but rather wanted to make resolutions that would help him to keep Christ at the center of all of his life. They were resolutions that required whole-hearted dependence upon God and a burning desire for His glory. Rather than calling them New Year's resolutions, we might instead call them new life resolutions. Anyway, here they are for your consideration:

BEING SENSIBLE THAT I AM UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT GOD' S HELP, I DO HUMBLY ENTREAT HIM BY HIS GRACE TO ENABLE ME TO KEEP THESE RESOLUTIONS, SO FAR AS THEY ARE AGREEABLE TO HIS WILL, FOR CHRIST' S SAKE.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remember to read over these Resolutions once a week.

1. Resolved, that I will do whatsoever I think to be most to God' s glory, and my own good, profit and pleasure, in the whole of my duration, without any consideration of the time, whether now, or never so many myriads of ages hence. Resolved to do whatever I think to be my duty and most for the good and advantage of mankind in
general. Resolved to do this, whatever difficulties I meet with, how many soever, and how great soever.

2. Resolved, to be continually endeavoring to find out some new contrivance and invention to promote the aforementioned things.

3. Resolved, if ever I shall fall and grow dull, so as to neglect to keep any part of these Resolutions, to repent of all I can remember, when I come to myself again.

4. Resolved, never to do any manner of thing, whether in soul or body, less or more, but what tends to the glory of God; nor be, nor suffer it, if I can avoid it.

5. Resolved, never to lose one moment of time; but improve it the most profitable way I possibly can.

6. Resolved, to live with all my might, while I do live.

7. Resolved, never to do anything, which I should be afraid to do, if it were the last hour of my life.

8. Resolved, to act, in all respects, both speaking and doing, as if nobody had been so vile as I, and as if I had committed the same sins, or had the same infirmities or failings as others; and that I will let the knowledge of their failings promote nothing but shame in myself, and prove only an occasion of my confessing my own sins and misery to God. July 30.

9. Resolved, to think much on all occasions of my own dying, and of the common circumstances which attend death.

10. Resolved, when I feel pain, to think of the pains of martyrdom, and of hell.

11. Resolved, when I think of any theorem in divinity to be solved, immediately to do what I can towards solving it, if circumstances do not hinder.

12. Resolved, if I take delight in it as a gratification of pride, or vanity, or on any such account, immediately to throw it by.

13. Resolved, to be endeavoring to find out fit objects of charity and liberality.

14. Resolved, never to do any thing out of revenge.

15. Resolved, never to suffer the least motions of anger towards irrational beings.

16. Resolved, never to speak evil of anyone, so that it shall tend to his dishonor, more or less, upon no account except for some real good.

17. Resolved, that I will live so, as I shall wish I had done when I come to die.

18. Resolved, to live so, at all times, as I think is best in my devout frames, and when I have clearest notions of things of the gospel, and another world.

19. Resolved, never to do any thing, which I should be afraid to do, if I expected it would not be above an hour, before I should hear the last trump.

20. Resolved, to maintain the strictest temperance, in eating and drinking.

21. Resolved, never to do any thing, which if I should see in another, I should count a just occasion to despise him for, or to think any way the more meanly of him. (Resolutions 1 through 21 written in one setting in New Haven in 1722)

22. Resolved, to endeavor to obtain for myself as much happiness, in the other world, as I possibly can, with all the power, might, vigor, and vehemence, yea violence, I am capable of, or can bring myself to exert, in any way that can be thought of.

23. Resolved, frequently to take some deliberate action, which seems most unlikely to be done, for the glory of God, and trace it back to the original intention, designs and ends of it; and if I find it not to be for God' s glory, to repute it as a breach of the 4th Resolution.

24. Resolved, whenever I do any conspicuously evil action, to trace it back, till I come to the original cause; and then, both carefully endeavor to do so no more, and to fight and pray with all my might against the original of it.

25. Resolved, to examine carefully, and constantly, what that one thing in me is, which causes me in the least to doubt of the love of God; and to direct all my forces against it.

26. Resolved, to cast away such things, as I find do abate my assurance.

27. Resolved, never willfully to omit any thing, except the omission be for the glory of God; and frequently to examine my omissions.

28. Resolved, to study the Scriptures so steadily, constantly and frequently, as that I may find, and plainly perceive myself to grow in the knowledge of the same.

29. Resolved, never to count that a prayer, nor to let that pass as a prayer, nor that as a petition of a prayer, which is so made, that I cannot hope that God will answer it; nor that as a confession, which I cannot hope God will accept.

30. Resolved, to strive to my utmost every week to be brought higher in religion, and to a higher exercise of grace, than I was the week before.

31. Resolved, never to say any thing at all against any body, but when it is perfectly agreeable to the highest degree of Christian honor, and of love to mankind, agreeable to the lowest humility, and sense of my own faults and failings, and agreeable to the golden rule; often, when I have said anything against anyone, to bring it to, and try it strictly by the test of this Resolution.

32. Resolved, to be strictly and firmly faithful to my trust, that that, in Proverbs 20:6, "A faithful man who can find?" may not be partly fulfilled in me.

33. Resolved, to do always, what I can towards making, maintaining, and preserving peace, when it can be done without overbalancing detriment in other respects. Dec. 26, 1722.

34. Resolved, in narrations never to speak any thing but the pure and simple verity.

35. Resolved, whenever I so much question whether I have done my duty, as that my quiet and calm is thereby disturbed, to set it down, and also how the question was resolved. Dec. 18, 1722.

36. Resolved, never to speak evil of any, except I have some particular good call
for it. Dec. 19, 1722.

37. Resolved, to inquire every night, as I am going to bed, wherein I have been negligent,- what sin I have committed,-and wherein I have denied myself;-also at the end of every week, month and year. Dec. 22 and 26, 1722.

38. Resolved, never to speak anything that is ridiculous, sportive, or matter of laughter on the Lord' s day. Sabbath evening, Dec. 23, 1722.

39. Resolved, never to do any thing of which I so much question the lawfulness of, as that I intend, at the same time, to consider and examine afterwards, whether it be lawful or not; unless I as much question the lawfulness of the omission.

40. Resolved, to inquire every night, before I go to bed, whether I have acted in the best way I possibly could, with respect to eating and drinking. Jan. 7, 1723.

41. Resolved, to ask myself, at the end of every day, week, month and year, wherein I could possibly, in any respect, have done better. Jan. 11, 1723.

42. Resolved, frequently to renew the dedication of myself to God, which was made at my baptism; which I solemnly renewed, when I was received into the communion of the church; and which I have solemnly re-made this twelfth day of January, 1722-23.

43. Resolved, never, henceforward, till I die, to act as if I were any way my own, but entirely and altogether God's; agreeable to what is to be found in Saturday, January 12, 1723.

44. Resolved, that no other end but religion, shall have any influence at all on any of my actions; and that no action shall be, in the least circumstance, any otherwise than the religious end will carry it. January 12, 1723.

45. Resolved, never to allow any pleasure or grief, joy or sorrow, nor any affection at all, nor any degree of affection, nor any circumstance relating to it, but what helps religion. Jan. 12 and 13, 1723.

46. Resolved, never to allow the least measure of any fretting uneasiness at my father or mother. Resolved to suffer no effects of it, so much as in the least alteration of speech, or motion of my eye: and to be especially careful of it with respect to any of our family.

47. Resolved, to endeavor, to my utmost, to deny whatever is not most agreeable to a good, and universally sweet and benevolent, quiet, peaceable, contented and easy, compassionate and generous, humble and meek, submissive and obliging, diligent and industrious, charitable and even, patient, moderate, forgiving and sincere temper; and to do at all times, what such a temper would lead me to; and to examine strictly, at the end of every week, whether I have done so. Sabbath morning. May 5, 1723.

48. Resolved, constantly, with the utmost niceness and diligence, and the strictest scrutiny, to be looking into the state of my soul, that I may know whether I have truly an interest in Christ or not; that when I come to die, I may not have any negligence respecting this to repent of. May 26, 1723.

49. Resolved, that this never shall be, if I can help it.

50. Resolved, I will act so as I think I shall judge would have been best, and most prudent, when I come into the future world. July 5, 1723.

51. Resolved, that I will act so, in every respect, as I think I shall wish I had done, if I should at last be damned. July 8, 1723.

52. I frequently hear persons in old age, say how they would live, if they were to live their lives over again: Resolved, that I will live just so as I can think I shall wish I had done, supposing I live to old age. July 8, 1723.

53. Resolved, to improve every opportunity, when I am in the best and happiest frame of mind, to cast and venture my soul on the Lord Jesus Christ, to trust and confide in him, and consecrate myself wholly to him; that from this I may have assurance of my safety, knowing that I confide in my Redeemer. July 8, 1723.

54. Whenever I hear anything spoken in conversation of any person, if I think it would be praiseworthy in me, Resolved to endeavor to imitate it. July 8, 1723.

55. Resolved, to endeavor to my utmost to act as I can think I should do, if, I had already seen the happiness of heaven, and hell torments. July 8, 1723.

56. Resolved, never to give over, nor in the least to slacken, my fight with my corruptions, however unsuccessful I may be.

57. Resolved, when I fear misfortunes and adversities, to examine whether I have done my duty, and resolve to do it, and let the event be just as providence orders it. I will as far as I can, be concerned about nothing but my duty, and my sin. June 9, and July 13 1723.

58. Resolved, not only to refrain from an air of dislike, fretfulness, and anger in conversation, but to exhibit an air of love, cheerfulness and benignity. May 27, and July 13, 1723.

59. Resolved, when I am most conscious of provocations to ill nature and anger, that
I will strive most to feel and act good-naturedly; yea, at such times, to manifest good nature, though I think that in other respects it would be disadvantageous, and so as would be imprudent at other times. May 12, July 11, and July 13.

60. Resolved, whenever my feelings begin to appear in the least out of order, when I am conscious of the least uneasiness within, or the least irregularity without, I will then subject myself to the strictest examination. July 4, and 13, 1723.

61. Resolved, that I will not give way to that listlessness which I find unbends and relaxes my mind from being fully and fixedly set on religion, whatever excuse I may have for it-that what my listlessness inclines me to do, is best to be done, etc. May 21, and July 13, 1723.

62. Resolved, never to do anything but duty, and then according to Ephesians 6:6-8, to do it willingly and cheerfully as unto the Lord, and not to man: "knowing that whatever good thing any man doth, the same shall he receive of the Lord." June 25 and July 13, 1723.

63. On the supposition, that there never was to be but one individual in the world, at any one time, who was properly a complete Christian, in all respects of a right stamp, having Christianity always shining in its true luster, and appearing excellent and lovely, from whatever part and under whatever character viewed: Resolved, to act just as I would do, if I strove with all my might to be that one, who should live in my time. January 14 and July 13, 1723.

64. Resolved, when I find those "groanings which cannot be uttered" (Romans 8:26), of which the Apostle speaks, and those "breakings of soul for the longing it hath," of which the Psalmist speaks, Psalm 119:20, that I will promote them to the utmost of my power, and that I will not be weary of earnestly endeavoring to vent my desires, nor of the repetitions of such earnestness. July 23, and August 10, 1723.

65. Resolved, very much to exercise myself in this, all my life long, viz. with the greatest openness, of which I am capable of, to declare my ways to God, and lay open my soul to him: all my sins, temptations, difficulties, sorrows, fears, hopes, desires, and every thing, and every circumstance; according to Dr. Manton' s 27th Sermon on Psalm 119. July 26, and Aug.10 1723.

66. Resolved, that I will endeavor always to keep a benign aspect, and air of acting and speaking in all places, and in all companies, except it should so happen that duty requires otherwise.

67. Resolved, after afflictions, to inquire, what I am the better for them, what am I the better for them, and what I might have got by them.

68. Resolved, to confess frankly to myself all that which I find in myself, either infirmity or sin; and, if it be what concerns religion, also to confess the whole case to God, and implore needed help. July 23, and August 10, 1723.

69. Resolved, always to do that, which I shall wish I had done when I see others do it. August 11, 1723.

70. Let there be something of benevolence, in all that I speak. August 17, 1723.

P.S. If you should like a copy of these Resolutions for e-Sword, you may download it on the PastorThroop.com website's Downloads page under the category "e-Sword - Miscellaneous." Keith

What is Christmas about?

This is the song "It's About the Cross" by the band Go Fish, which is set to images from The Passion, the Jesus Film, The Gospel of John, The Nativity Story, It's a Wonderful Life, and other films. I thought it captured pretty well the important Scriptural teaching that Jesus was born in order to die so that He could save His people from their sins:

NKJ Matthew 1:18-21 18 "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. 19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. 20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, 'Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.'"

Monthly "What is a Reformed Baptist?" Poll Update

It is the fifth month running this poll, and there continues to be well over half of those responding (60%) who do not think strict adherence to the Baptist Confession of 1689 is necessary to being a Reformed Baptist. Here is the breakdown thus far (found at the bottom of the page):

20% thought that one only had to be a Baptist who held to Calvinistic soteriology.

33% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to Calvinism and Covenant Theology.

40% thought that one must be a Baptist who holds to the 1689 Confession.

6% thought that one must hold to the 1689 Confession for the most part, but thought that this should not have to include adherence to the Sabbath requirement.

The sample from which this is taken is still pretty small at this point - with only 95 responses - but I remain hopeful that I may be able to get several hundred responses to the poll over the course of the poll's one year lifespan. There are 215 days left, so if you haven't responded yet, scroll down to the bottom of the page and weigh in.

A Timely Warning From the Didache

I have been teaching through the book of Ephesians lately, and while studying about the apostles and prophets in 4:11, my research led me to some interesting comments in The Didache. Although there are some strange things to be found in this document, it does give us an intriguing glimpse as to the practices of many Christians in the late first to early second centuries. Hear what this ancient document has to say about apostles and prophets (11.3-6, 12):

(3) Now concerning the apostles and prophets, deal with them as follows in accordance with the rule of the gospel. (4) Let every apostle who comes to you be welcomed as if he were the Lord. (5) But he is not to stay for more than one day, unless there is need, in which case he may stay another. But if he stays three days, he is a false prophet. (6) And when the apostle leaves, he is to take nothing except bread until he finds his next night's lodging. But if he asks for money, he is a false prophet.

(12) But if anyone should say in the spirit, "Give me money," or anything else, do not listen to him. But if he tells you to give on behalf of others who are in need, let no one judge him.

We don't have to wonder what these ancient followers of Christ would have to say about so many of today's televangelists, who constantly ask for money while trying to make it sound like the godly thing to do!

Response to the House-Church Movement: Part Five

What is the meaning of Ekklēsía?

In a previous post (Part Four of this series) I indicated that one possible reason for the de-emphasis on elder leadership and authority among some House-Church Movement (HCM) advocates is a misunderstanding of the Greek word ekklēsía, which is commonly translated as church in the New Testament. Now I would like to address that issue more fully by examining one line of argument made by Steve Atkerson regarding church government, in which we will see that he places a fair amount of weight on his understanding of this important term. In fact, Atkerson begins his treatment of Consensus Governing with a discussion of the meaning of ekklēsía. Here are the relevant portions of the article:

Why do you suppose that Jesus choose the word church to describe His followers? “Church” is the English translation of the original Greek term ekklesia. Outside the context of the New Testament, ekklesia was a secular word that carried strong political connotations. There were other Greek words Jesus could have used to describe His followers and their gatherings, words that carried religious and nonpolitical connotations. As we will see, one of the reasons He chose the word ekklesia to describe His followers is because He wanted them to make corporate decisions that affected all of them as a group. How did Jesus intend for the church to be governed? Let’s begin by looking more closely at how the true meaning of the modern word church has been all but lost....

During the time of Jesus, the word ekklesia was used almost without exception to refer to a political assembly that was regularly convened for the purpose of making decisions. According to Thayer’s lexicon it was “an assembly of the people convened at the public place of council for the purpose of deliberation.” Bauer’s lexicon defines ekklesia as an “assembly of a regularly summoned political body.” In Colin Brown’s New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ekklesia is said to have been “clearly characterized as a political phenomenon, repeated according to certain rules and within a certain framework. It was the assembly of full citizens, functionally rooted in the constitution of the democracy, an assembly in which fundamental political and judicial decisions were taken . . . the word ekklesia, throughout the Greek and Hellenistic areas, always retained its reference to the assembly of the polis.” In the secular ekklesia, every male citizen had “the right to speak and to propose matters for discussion” (women were not allowed to speak at all in the secular Greek ekklesia).

This secular usage can be illustrated from within the Bible as well, in Acts 19:23-41. These Acts 19 occurrences of ekklesia (translated “assembly,” “legal assembly,” and “assembly” in 19:32, 39, 41) referred to a meeting of craftsmen who had been called together by Demetrius into the town theater to decide what to do about Paul, though there was so much confusion the majority did not know why they had been summoned. This is an example of ekklesia used to refer to a regularly summoned political body (in this case, silver craftsmen and those in related trades). They convened (as a sort of trade union) to decide what to do about a damaged reputation and lost business. (Bold emphasis mine.)

Even though I will essentially agree with his position about the importance of consensus in governing the local church, I strongly object to Atkerson's argument based upon the supposed meaning of ekklēsía in this respect. The problem that I have with this argument is that Atkerson restricts his understanding of the word to the secular use it had in the first century, while ignoring the Septuagint (LXX) background of the word, which is clearly the proper place to look for an understanding of Jesus' and the Apostles' use of the term. In fact, Atkerson asserts no less than four times that ekklēsía was a secular word and argues that this secular meaning was intended by Jesus when applied to the Church. He cites this meaning from two lexical works and one theological dictionary, and then he lists a single New Testament passage where this meaning is certain. But, just as he has done in his discussion of the meaning of dialégomai when arguing for interactive meanings (recall my response to his treatment of that term in a previous article), so here Atkerson has once again been selective and misleading in his use of lexical evidence. He operates under the faulty assumption that the word had no significant religious connotations in the first century and that, if Jesus wanted to use a word that carried religious rather than secular or political connotations, He would have chosen another word. But Atkerson couldn't be more wrong here, as even a casual reading of the very lexical sources that he cites will show.

To be sure, the word ekklēsía did have a secular and political meaning in the first century, but all of the the primary lexical sources available also acknowledge a religious usage of the word and see this as the proper background of its usage in the New Testament. I will demonstrate the validity of this assertion by first examining the sources cited by Atkerson himself and then by citing several other recognized lexical authorities. I will quote in each case a significant portion of the cited works so that the proper context will be apparent. The reader will quickly see that Atkerson has simply avoided anything in these sources that happens to disagree with the meaning he wants ekklēsía to have in order to suit his argument.

First, I take Atkerson's mention of “Thayer's lexicon” as a reference to Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by Joseph Thayer. Here is what that lexicon actually says:

1. among the Greeks from Thucydides (cf. Herodotus 3, 142) down, an assembly of the people convened at the public place of council for the purpose of deliberating: Acts 19:39. 2. in the Septuagint often equivalent to [qāhāl], the assembly of the Israelites, Judg. 21:8, 1 Chr. 29:1, etc., especially when gathered for sacred purposes, Deut. 31:30 (Deut. 32:1); Josh. 8:35 (Josh. 9:8), etc.; in the N. T. thus in Acts 7:38; Heb 2:12. 3. any gathering or throng of men assembled by chance or tumultuously: Acts 19:32, 41. 4. in the Christian sense, a. an assembly of Christians gathered for worship... b. a company of Christians, or of those who, hoping for eternal Salvation through Jesus Christ, observe their own religious rites, hold their own religious meetings, and manage their own affairs according to regulations prescribed for the body for order's sake.... [Note: Both Matt. 16:18 and 18:17 are listed under this last heading.](BibleWorks #1664).

Notice that, although it doesn't make explicit the commonly assumed LXX background for ekklēsía, the Thayer lexicon does list the LXX usage (#2) as distinct from the secular usage (#1) and then goes on to list the word as having a Christian sense (#4) that is also distinguished from that of the common secular usage. And the primary meaning given there is not “an assembly of the people convened at the public place of council for the purpose of deliberation,” as Atkerson suggests, but rather “an assembly of Christians gathered for worship” (#4.a). It then goes on to give an additional meaning as “those who, hoping for eternal Salvation through Jesus Christ, observe their own religious rites, hold their own religious meetings, and manage their own affairs according to regulations prescribed for the body for order's sake” (#4.b) And, as I have indicated above, both uses by Jesus are included under this last heading and not as belonging to the secular meaning. How could Atkerson have missed this when he argued based on Thayer's work that Jesus intended the secular meaning?

Now, I suppose that Atkerson may want to see connotations of the secular meaning in Thayer's mention of the ekklēsía's management of its affairs, but given that this meaning is listed as distinct from the secular meaning, it would make sense to look somewhere other than the secular background to determine the nature of such management. So, instead of trying to read the secular connotations into the word in order to help support a preconceived idea, one should just read the New Testament texts that address the matter of church government in order to assess its meaning, allowing Jesus and the Apostles to shape the meaning as they intended. At any rate, if the Thayer lexicon agreed with Atkerson, wouldn't it have addressed the meaning of the word under its secular usage (#1) as, perhaps, a subcategory? I conclude that it doesn't agree with Atkerson, and that he should have known this given even a cursory reading of the lexical definition.

Second, I take Atkerson's mention of “Bauer's lexicon” as a reference to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Third Edition, by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker (BAGD3). Here is what this lexicon actually says:

... 1. a regularly summoned legislative body, assembly, as gener. understood in the Gr-Rom. World... 2. a casual gathering of people, an assemblage, gathering... 3. people with shared belief, community, congregation... in our lit. of common interest in the God of Israel... a. of OT Israelites assembly, congregation [Dt 31:30; Judg 20:2; 1SA.17:47; 1KI.8:14]; e.g. to hear the law (Dt 4:10; 9:10; 18:16) Ac 7:38... b. of Christians in a specific place or area (the term ev. apparently became popular among Christians in Greek-speaking areas for chiefly two reasons: to affirm continuity with Israel through use of a term found in Gk. translations of the Hebrew Scriptures, and to allay any suspicion, esp. in political circles, that Christians were a disorderly group). (BibleWorks #2369)

Notice that the first meaning, cited by Atkerson, is only one meaning that the word may have, but that it lists as a separate meaning the LXX usage of the word – a religious usage – with reference to the assembly of the people of Israel. And it lists the New Testament under the same category as that of the LXX, not as belonging with the secular usage. But you wouldn't know this if all you read was Atkerson's article. And you wouldn't know that the lexicon gives a reason for not seeing ekklēsía as being properly understood in accordance with the secular meaning. The entry plainly states that the term “apparently became popular among Christians in Greek-speaking areas for chiefly two reasons: to affirm continuity with Israel through use of a term found in Gk. translations of the Hebrew Scriptures [the LXX], and to allay any suspicion, esp[ecially] in political circles, that Christians were a disorderly group.” So, there is no doubt that the religious usage of the LXX is seen as the primary background for the meaning of the term, while at the same time it is acknowledged that it would have indicated an orderly assembly to those more familiar with its secular meaning. However, that the term had this added advantage doesn't entail that secular ideas predominated in the usage by the Church. The lexicon clearly dispels that notion. So, I assert once again that Atkerson is wrong about the meaning of ekklēsía as indicated in this lexicon and that he should have known this given even a cursory reading of the definition it gives. Atkerson just continues his practice of being selective and misleading in his use of such sources.

Third, although Colin Brown's New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT) does discuss the secular meaning as Atkerson indicates, it also has this to say:

Where ekklesia is used in the LXX for qahal, it indicates the assembly of the people or a judicial assembly (e.g. Deut. 9:10; 23:3 ff. ; Jdg. 21:5, 8 ; Mic. 2:5 ), the political body (e.g., the returned exiles Ezr. 10:8 , 12 ; Neh. 8:2, 17 ). It also indicates, especially in the Chronicler, the assembly of the people for worship (e.g. 2 Chr. 6:3 at the consecration of the temple; 30:2, 4, 13, 17 at Hezekiah’s Passover; cf. also Joel 2:16 and several times in the Pss. , e.g. 21:22 (22:22); 88:6 (89:6). Nevertheless, even in these instances (even though, unlike Deut. 23:2 , 3, 4, 9, Mic. 2:5, and Jdg. 20:2, the gen. kyriou, of the Lord, or tou theou, of God, is not added) ekklesia is only used where it is a question of the people as God’s assembly, characterized by having answered Yahweh’s call. Admittedly the word is used especially where the historic greatness of Israel is implied, and avoided where it could perhaps suggest to the Gk. reader merely a political claim on the part of the contemporary Jewish community (in the sense of the Gk. ekklesia, see above, CL). Perhaps that is why, in the legal passages regulating the life of the community, qahal is translated by synagoge (cf. L. Rost, op. cit., 127 ff.). (p.295-296)

Now, this passage does indicate that ekklēsía could sometimes be used to translate the Hebrew qāhāl in instances where it refers to a judicial or political assembly, but such an assembly among the ancient Jews would have been quite different from that of first century Greeks! Why, then, does Atkerson look to the first century Greek secular usage to support his view? The answer appears to be that this is really the only usage that could support his view. Such a usage just happens to differ with the very source he cites.

In addition, the dictionary also goes on to stress the fact that the term ekklēsía was used in the LXX in such away as to avoid the kind of political (i.e. secular) meaning that the Greek reader might mistakenly attribute to the assembly of God's people. Thus, according to NIDNTT, the LXX translators tried to reserve the term for a more religious use and chose to use sunagōgē for more overtly political passages. Clearly, then, the LXX usage was intended not to highlight the very secular notions that Atkerson believes to be necessarily associated with ekklēsía. He has committed the very mistake that the LXX translators tried to avoid people making. But there is more:

It seems indisputable that, if ekklesia here [in Matt. 16:18] represents an idea of late Judaism, it has taken over the content of qahal, and is probably to be understood as the eschatological assembly of the true people of God. On the analogy of the claim of remnant groups representing the whole (cf. OT, 4) the word then stood for an eschatologically determined special synagogue, in which the true Israel was present. The statement that “the powers of death (Gk.: the gates of Hades) shall not prevail against it” has its foundation in the fact that this community is linked to the risen Christ as victor over death. This again indicates the period of the primitive church. (p.302-303)

Notice that NIDNTT believes that, if Jesus' usage of ekklēsía is congruent with the Jewish usage at the time (which the dictionary appears to grant), then it is indisputable that it is to be understood in light of its LXX usage as a translation for the Hebrew qāhāl (referring to the congregation/assembly of Israel). But this means that it sees the proper background of the term as being found in the religious usage of the LXX and not in the secular usage of first century Greek culture. This is opposed to Atkerson's view. But, again, you wouldn't know any of this if you only read what he has to say about the matter.

So, after examining the three lexical sources cited by Atkerson in defense of his contention that Jesus intended ekklēsía to be understood as a secular term, it should be obvious to the impartial reader that even a casual reading of these very lexical sources demonstrates that he is wrong and that, in fact, these sources disagree with him.

Now, in order to show that these works are typical of lexicons and theological dictionaries in differing with Atkerson, here are three more reputable lexical works that define ekklēsía in a way that disagrees with him:

... In general Greek usage it was normally a socio-political entity based upon citizenship in a city-state.... For the NT, however, it is important to understand the meaning of [ekklēsía] as 'an assembly of God's people.' (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, by J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida, BibleWorks #2029)

... 1) in a general sense, as a gathering of citizens assembly, meeting (AC 19.32); (2) as the assembled people of Israel congregation (HE 2.12); (3) as the assembled Christian community church, congregation, meeting (RO 16.5); (4) as the totality of Christians living in one place church (AC 8.1); (5) as the universal body of believers church (EP 1.22). (Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, by Timothy and Barbara Friberg, BibleWorks #8531)

... [ekklēsía] was a common term for a congregation of the ekklētoí (n.f.), the called people, or those called out or assembled in the public affairs of a free state, the body of free citizens called together by a herald (kerux [G2783]) which constituted the ekklēsía. In the NT, the word is applied to the congregation of the people of Israel (Act 7:38). On the other hand, of the two terms used in the OT, sunagōgē (G4864) seems to have been used to designate the people from Israel in distinction from all other nations (Act 13:43 [cf. Mat 4:23; Mat 6:2; Jam 2:2; Rev 2:9; Rev 3:9]). In Heb 1:25, however, when the gathering of Christians is referred to, it is called not sunagōgē, but episunagōgē (G1997), with the prep. epí (G1909), upon, translated "the assembling . . . together." The Christian community was designated for the first time as the ekklēsía to differentiate it from the Jewish community, sunagōgē (Act 2:47 [TR]). The term ekklēsía denotes the NT community of the redeemed in its twofold aspect. First, all who were called by and to Christ in the fellowship of His salvation, the church worldwide of all times, and only secondarily to an individual church.... In the OT, two different words are used to denote gatherings of the chosen people or their representatives: edah (H5712) meaning congregation and qahal (H6951), assembly. In the Sept., sunagōgē (G4864) is the usual translation of edah while qahal is commonly rendered ekklēsía. Both qahal and ekklēsía by their derivation indicate calling or summoning to a place of meeting, but there is no foundation for the widespread notion that ekklēsía means a people or a number of individual men called out of the world or mankind. Qahal or ekklēsía is the more sacred term denoting the people in relation to Jehovah, especially in public worship. Perhaps for this very reason, the less sacred term sunagōgē was more commonly used by the Jews in our Lord's time, and probably influenced the first believers in adopting ekklēsía for Christian use. Sunagōgē, though used in the early church as a syn. for ekklēsía (Jam 2:2), quickly went out of use for a Christian assembly, except in sects which were more Jewish than Christian. Owing to the growing hostility of the Jews, it came to indicate opposition to the church (Rev 2:9; Rev 3:9). Ekklēsía, therefore, at once suggests the new people of God, the new Israel. (The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament by Spiros Zodhiates, e-Sword #G1577)

Note again that in each instance there is a separate listing or discussion of the word as it applies to the Church. None of these lexicons treat the usage of ekklēsía with reference to the Church as rightly belonging to a treatment of its secular meaning. The reason for this can be found especially in BAGD3 and Zodhiates as cited above. It is because the proper background for understanding the usage of ekklēsía as applied to the Church is not to be found in the secular usage of the first century but in the religious usage of the Septuagint (LXX). This Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures had been in common use among the Jews for generations by the first century and was the common Bible for the Apostles and early Christians as well. It provides the proper background for understanding much of the language in the New Testament as the above cited sources consistently – and correctly – assume.

But what does all this mean with respect to Atkerson's argument about the nature and government of the New Testament churches? Well, it certainly means that he cannot use the first century Greek notions of a secular and political entity as the analogy he draws upon for so much of his understanding of the nature of governing in the New Testament churches. Rather it means that, if he wants to understand the correct form of governing in the churches, he should allow the various New Testament passages that actually have some bearing on the subject to speak for themselves, instead of trying to force a secular meaning into the text. This is a major flaw in his presentation and should give anyone pause when reading much else he has to say about the subject.

I find it inconceivable that Atkerson could have written that “during the time of Jesus, the word ekklesia was used almost without exception to refer to a political assembly that was regularly convened for the purpose of making decisions.” That may have been true of pagan Greek culture at the time, but it definitely wasn't true of Jesus and the Apostles when referring to God's people.

I also cannot imagine how Atkerson could say that “there were other Greek words Jesus could have used to describe His followers and their gatherings, words that carried religious and nonpolitical connotations.” Really? Then what are these words? What other words could Jesus have used if He intended to highlight the continuity of His people with that of the Old Testament assembly while at the same time distinguishing them as His own assembly? What other Greek word was there that was so connected in meaning with the Old Testament people of God and with the Hebrew qāhāl? If Atkerson is going to make such a claim, shouldn't he make some attempt to support it?

I will conclude by saying that, as I see it, it is inexcusable that Atkerson simply ignores all of the evidence contrary to his view, even from the very lexical sources that he cites. After all, it is one thing for him to be mistaken on some point due to misunderstanding, or to have a stated disagreement with current lexicographical consensus, but it is another thing altogether for him to cite sources so as to give the impression that they agree with his view of Jesus' usage of ekklēsía when, in fact, these sources all disagree with him. Atkerson has led his readers astray here, and he should have known better.

SBC Increase in Calvinist Pastors

In a November 27 article entitled, Study: Recent grads 3 times more likely to be Calvinists, Baptist Press reported a rise in Calvinist pastors among recent seminary graduates now serving in as pastors in SBC churches. The report asserted:

Nearly 30 percent of recent SBC seminary graduates now serving as church pastors identify themselves as Calvinists, according to data presented during the opening session of a conference on Reformed theology and the Southern Baptist Convention.

By contrast in the SBC at large, the number of pastors who affirm the five points of Calvinism is around 10 percent, Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research, said in reporting various findings by LifeWay Research and the North American Mission Board Center for Missional Research.

Such a rise bodes well for the Southern Baptist Convention, and one can only hope that this increase is also happening in other Baptist groups. And, of course, one hopes that the trend continues within the Evangelical community at large.

The Reformed Renewal Among Baptists

Clint Humfrey is a former professor of New Testament Greek at Toronto Baptist Seminary and currently serves as pastor of Calvary Grace Church in Calgary, Alberta. He has written an interesting November 12 article entitled The Reformed Renewal on his Cowboyology Blog. I thought this blog's readers might find it interesting as well. Here is the article in its entirety:

The Reformed Renewal
Yesterday in Sunday School I offered a brief history of Calvinistic Baptists, including the main North American streams in existence today. I summarized the streams as follows:

1. The Neo-Evangelical Stream
Leading Example: John Piper
Characteristics: Calvinistic convictions arrived at from within the broad mainstream Neo-evangelical ethos.

2. The Dispensational Stream
Leading Example: John Macarthur
Characteristics: Calvinistic conclusions arrived at out of the generally '3-4 point Calvinist' circles of 'Dallas' dispensationalism.

3. The Fundamentalist Stream
Leading Example: Spiritual heirs of TT Shields
Characteristics: Distinguished from other Fundamentalists by Calvinism and at times non- Premillenial eschatology. Yet still Fundamental in ethos and association (cf. Paisley in N. Ireland, Bob Jones University, etc.)

4. The Reformed Baptist Stream
Leading Example: Al Martin, Tom Ascol
Characteristics: Often connected with Presbyterians, possessing the same view of the Law's implication for Christian living, particularly in the form of Sabbatarianism, and 10 commandments as normative for Christians.

5.The New Covenant Reformed Baptist Stream
Leading Example: John Reisinger
Characteristics: Derived from the Reformed Baptist stream, but broke away from those circles over disagreement about Sabbatarianism and the relation of the Law to the Christian. Tended to emphasize a more Christocentric view of the Law (i.e. Law is fulfilled in Christ entirely, therefore the idea of Sunday as equivalent to a Jewish Sabbath is incorrect). Can draw from Progressive Dispensational circles as well as other eschatological perspectives.
There is often overlap between these different streams, and many Calvinistic Baptists would not be associated with any of them in a formal way. However the influence of the various teachers in these streams has had a significant impact within the broader Reformed Renewal of the 20th and early 21st century. To the reader I ask, 'In what stream do you find yourself?'

So, what do you all think? Do you think these are helpful or accurate categories? Do they reflect your own experience of the Reformed Baptist community?

P.S. Thanks to Nathan White on the Reformed Baptist Discussion List for bringing this article to my attention.

Are You Feeling Weighed Down?

This picture reminded me of how we can all sometimes feel. We can all feel as though we are weighed down with a heavy burden, and, try as we might, we just can't seem to get anywhere. I have found at times like these I am generally feeling this way because I have begun to operate in the flesh, depending too much on my own strength rather than upon Christ.

At such times I need to cry out to God in prayer, humbly recognizing that He alone is the source of all my strength and of anything good in me. And I try to remember a few key Scriptures that invariably see me through. I hope some of these scriptures will help to any of you who are feeling burdened and overwhelmed today!

NKJ Matthew 11:28-30 "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

NKJ Philippians 4:13 "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."

NKJ 1 Peter 5:6-7 6 "Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon Him, for He cares for you."

What keeps us from coming to Christ with our burdens, so that we may carry them through His strength? Well, Peter assumes it can be nothing more - and nothing less - than pride. He assumes that truly casting our cares upon Him requires that we humble ourselves under His mighty hand. Could it be that we are more like a mule - although not the poor creature in the picture - than we want to admit sometimes? Too stubborn to really rely on God in everything?

George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation

On October 3, 1789, in his first year in office, George Washington signed the first proclamation of thanksgiving by a U.S. President. If you click on the image at the left, you can read the original text as it was published in the The Massachusetts Centinel on Wednesday, October 14, 1789.

In case this old newspaper abstract is difficult to read, here is the text of that decree:

WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houfes of Congress have, by their joint committee, requefted me "to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to eftablifh a form of government for their safety and happiness:" NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and affign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of thefe States to the fervice of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our fincere and humble thanksfor His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the fignal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpofitions of His providence in the courfe and conclufion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have fince enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to eftablish Conftitutions of government for our fafety and happinefs, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are bleffed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffufing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleafed to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in moft humbly offering our prayers and fupplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and befeech Him to pardon our national and other tranfgreffions;-- to enable us all, whether in publick or private ftations, to perform our feveral and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a bleffing to all the people by conftantly being a Government of wife, juft, and conftitutional laws, difcreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all fovereigns and nations (especially fuch as have shewn kindnefs unto us); and to blefs them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increafe of fcience among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind fuch a degree of temporal profperity as he alone knows to be beft.

GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand feven hundred and eighty-nine.

(signed) G. Washington

PastorThroop.com Back Online With Finalweb

Many of you have wondered where my website went over the past few weeks. Well, I was in the process of transferring to a new host provider and building an entirely new site - which is still in process - but I am happy to announce that the domain transfer finally went through and I am back up and running.

I chose to go with Finalweb as my new provider, and their website building software, well developed church & ministry package, and fabulous support have made the change as pleasant as could be. In fact, I don't think I have found better support anywhere. They even offered free support while I was taking it for a test drive with their free 14 day trial. For example, during the trial time I found that there was a problem with downloading topic notes files for e-Sword that I had uploaded to the server. Their software apparently didn't like the '.top' extension. Well, I called the technical support team and they had the problem fixed before the trial time was even concluded! I think it was just a few days later that I tried it, and it worked.

On that note, for all you e-Sword users that liked to download the many Reformed resources I previously made available on my website, I assure you they will all be back soon. I am in the process of uploading them all (and more) as soon as possible.

Anyway, I cannot recommend Finalweb highly enough. And, for any other Shepherds' Fellowship members, you can receive a significant discount.