M’Cheyne Bible Reading Plan: March 15

Exodus 26 (NASB, ESV, KJV, HCSB)

John 5 (NASB, ESV, KJV, HCSB)

Proverbs 2 (NASB, ESV, KJV, HCSB)

Galatians 1 (NASB, ESV, KJV, HCSB)

Sliding into Complementarianism

I was raised as an egalitarian without realizing it. That may sound funny to you, but I never thought of the way that I was being trained as “anti-Biblical” or even liberal. It was what I had seen all of my life…women who choose whether or not to get married, to have kids, to stay at home, etc. I mean, everyone has choices to make, right? Isn’t everyone entitled to make the choice that works best for them?

 

Well, my first informal introduction of complementarianism came from a visit to my husband’s (then boyfriend/beau) church. I was immediately impressed at how loving, warm, and hospitality everyone was. When I inquired further, I realized that all of the women were at raising children. Some did assist their husbands with their businesses, but the majority was at home. What amazed me the most was that this was normal to them. For a woman to have her own career or do whatever she wanted in life as a married woman was completely far-fetched, and they were the type of women to gently coach you back to the Scriptures and home again.

Now, my first formal introduction to complementarianism came during my husband and my courtship through the book (mind you, that was enthusiastically suggested to me by the same women from his church) Created to be His Helpmeet by Debi Pearl. I will tell you this now; I never made it past the first chapter.

I started so eagerly, wanting to learn what these women had learned to have such beautiful marriages and loving homes, and I couldn’t even finish the first chapter without calling up my fiancé crying my eyes out. After trying to decipher the source of the problem for several minutes while making sure he wasn’t the cause of it, he finally asked me to tell him what I read. So I started to read that first chapter to him, and he fell out laughing. I told him that it wasn’t funny because I honestly could not be the wife he was looking for, especially if he thought that the women at his church were perfect. And I most especially did not want his happiness and joy to be dependent on whether or not I smiled all the time. It was all incredibly overwhelming for my poor egalitarian soul, and that first chapter scarred me for life. Over a year later, I still couldn’t pick it up and read it without shuddering with flashbacks, and eventually it was donated once we moved.

Since then, I have come to a much better understanding of complementarianism, and I have even come to understand my own native egalitarianism better as well. Attending a women’s college, I also learned about the influence and effect of feminism on a lot of things, but especially how we look at the roles of husbands and wives in marriage. So in these next few blogs, I would like to explore the actual definitions of egalitarianism and complementarianism, talk about the extremes of these two camps, the lessons that I have brought with me as my husband and I have grown together in the covenant of marriage (lessons that may be beneficial for others), and my concerns for the future. I hope you feel comfortable to join in the discussion in the comment section, and if you would like for me to bring up a certain aspect or expand on something further, just let me know.

CCF Episode Thirty: Chapters 1-3 of Brave New World

CredoCovPodcastMaster

In this episode, JD and Billy sit down with Pastor Jason Delgado to discuss Chapters 1-3 of Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Featuring music by Pink Floyd, Charles Gounod, and Beautiful Eulogy.

MP3 Download | stream:

Subscribe to future podcasts and leave us a review on iTunes: RSS | iTunes  

The book we’re currently reading…brvnwwrld

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

We’d love your participation. Contact us with your comments and questions about the books contents:

CCF Episode Twenty-Three: Christian Liberty According to the 1689 (Part One)

CredoCovPodcastMaster

In this episode, Billy and JD sit down to discuss Christian liberty as it is laid out in The Baptist Confession. Featuring music from Josh White and Stephen the Levite.

MP3 Download | stream:

“Modern Christians seem to marginalize the doctrine of Christian liberty. The subject is rarely discussed in any systematic theologies. Even practical books on Christian living often gloss over the topic. For some, the doctrine of Christian liberty is just not that important in relationship to other doctrines of the faith. For others, the doctrine of Christian liberty is too controversial. Consequently, many modern Christians fail to give this doctrine the attention it deserves.” – from Dr. Bob Gonzalez over at It Is Written, read more…

“Many of today’s young evangelicals have happily thrown off the legalistic fundamentalism of their childhood. They’ve come to a greater understanding of God’s abundant grace, and the gospel has liberated them from slavery to guilt and fear. That’s a very good thing. But I submit that recovering the gospel alone isn’t enough to keep legalism at bay. We need a renewed emphasis on the law of God or else legalism will inevitably reemerge. Specifically, we need a clear emphasis on (1) the law as a covenant, and (2) the law as a standard or rule.” – from Tom Hicks over at The Blog (Founders), read more…

Subscribe to future podcasts and leave us a review on iTunes: RSS | iTunes  

The book we mentioned:

BaptistConfessionLeather1689

 

The Baptist Confession & The Baptist Catechism
edited by James Renihan

We’d love your participation. Contact us with your comments and questions about the confession’s contents:

Christianity and the Arts [Complete]

Many books have been written on the subject of Christianity and the arts. In recent years, there seems to have been a surge of young artists calling themselves Christians in film, music, and other arenas. How ought Christians to think about this issue?

umhb_baugh_visual_arts

Well, we are no experts on the subject, but in Part One and Part Two of our series on “Christianity and the Arts,” JD and I discuss how we have approached the issue, how we were influenced by our upbringings, and how our approach to the subject is informed by the Bible.

The Truth About the Texas GOP Platform on “Reparative Therapy”

The media’s pro-LGBT bias is raising its ugly head once again. The mainstream media and pro-homosexual activists have been up in arms over the platform language passed this weekend at the Texas GOP Convention. With headlines like “Texas Republicans vote to adopt gay conversion policy” and “Texas Republican Party Adopts Discredited ‘Reparative Therapy’ for Gays” one is left to think Republicans in Texas are supporting mandatory, forced therapy to force gays to become straight.

The stories you have read are false.

The Texas GOP simply adopted a straight forward plank that protects freedom and parental rights by allowing Texans to seek the counseling they desire, free from government interference.

The actual language of the platform reads:

“We recognize the legitimacy and efficacy of counseling, which offers reparative therapy and treatment for those patients seeking healing and wholeness from their homosexual lifestyle.  No laws or executive orders shall be imposed to limit or restrict access to this type of therapy.”

– See more at: http://txvalues.org/2014/06/10/supporting-freedom-the-truth-about-reparative-therapy-in-the-rpt-platform/#sthash.xAy1nz4W.dpuf

Positive Confession in the Word of Faith Movement

This paper was initially submitted in April of 2012 to Justin Peters in partial fulfillment of the requirements for his Winter 2012 course on The Theology of the Word of Faith Movement, which he taught at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, TX.

From the beginning, the essence of false religion has been false worship. When Satan tempted Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, he did so by enticing them to give into the temptation to worship themselves. He told them, “You will be like God” (Genesis 3:5b; NASB).[1] Likewise, when Jesus told the rich, young ruler to sell all he had, give it to the poor, and follow Christ, “he was saddened, and he went away grieving, for he was one who owned much property” (Mark 10:22). This young man had fashioned the idol of riches in his heart and made it the object of his worship. Thus, it was “impossible” (vs. 27) for him to turn from his sin and follow Christ. The enemy has not changed from the beginning. Even today, there is a movement that teaches men to worship self, wealth, and even health. The Word of Faith movement teaches that Christians can have whatever they desire if they employ a method called positive confession. This doctrine is nothing more than a doctored version of Satan’s first lie. The church must employ a working knowledge of both the Word of Faith movement and the Scriptures in demonstrating to Word / Faith adherents the error of their doctrine of positive confession.

What is Positive Confession?

One observation that ought to be made in the analysis of the doctrine of positive confession is that it does not find its origins in the Word of Faith Movement itself. Positive confession actually finds its roots in the writings of Essek W. Kenyon (1867-1948).[2]  Notably, many of the 21st century proponents of the Word of Faith Movement develop their theologies largely off of Kenyon’s writings.[3] Kenyon, influenced by the New Thought writings of Phineas P. Quimby and Mary Baker Eddy’s Christian Science, laid the foundation for much of what would become Word of Faith theology. Though not as extreme as his predecessors, his approach to theology paved the way for the direction Word / Faith pillars such as Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, and Jesse Duplantis would go.

So, what is positive confession? Well, the phrase itself can be a bit misleading. Positive confession is the belief that, whether positive or negative, your words (or confession) determine your destiny. If you speak words of faith, God’s promises will be granted to you but, if you speak words of doubt or fear, you bring upon yourself hardship and suffering. Word of Faith teachers exhort their followers, “Speak life into your life, not death.”[4] They teach that this method of getting what one wants is effective because the words of men have power. Not only do men’s words have power, but men themselves have the power to influence and direct the supernatural by their very wills. Kenneth Copeland once wrote, “The key to this is your will. Your will has everything to do with it. What you will to happen is going to happen.”[5]

Often, much of this thinking gets passively overlooked, because these types of sentences are neatly tucked away in volumes that do not major on this type of thought. However, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough” (Gal. 5:9). Christians ought to have nothing to do with any teachers that espouse such heresy, no matter how marginally. In this family known as the church, Christians owe a debt of love to one another, which includes the recognition that one’s own ability to overlook such doctrines in such writings might give way to a weaker brother’s plunge into full acceptance of it. Such blind indulgence by those who know these teachings to be error is nothing short of irresponsible and unloving.

Proof Texting Positive Confession

Positive confession as a Word / Faith doctrine does not exist in a vacuum. As in biblical Christianity, the doctrines of the Word of Faith movement all touch and influence one another. It is important that Christians understand this concept before they jump headlong into a theological debate with a proponent of Word / Faith theology. One should not simply study positive confession and assume that one can then dismantle the entire erroneous paradigm of the Word / Faith worldview. There are other doctrines that more foundationally anchor Word / Faith proponents in their adherence to positive confession.

The first of these foundational doctrines is the Word / Faith doctrine of faith as a substance. They cite Hebrews 11:3 in support of this view: “By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.” Word / Faith adherents argue that this passage teaches that God used words of faith to create the world and, apart from faith, the creation of all things would not have been possible.[6] This faith is a force, a substance of which every believer has been apportioned a certain measure (Rom. 12:3).[7] According to Word / Faith theology, faith is not merely the desire and ability given by God to the elect whereby they know, believe, and trust in Him.

In the hands of the Word of Faith movement, faith becomes a substance that eternally existed apart from God enabling Him to act and accomplish His will. Furthermore, man having been created in the God’s image is entitled a measure of this same faith. God’s will in this whole matter is nowhere taken into consideration. Rather, if you use your measure of faith to accomplish good, you are doing God’s will. If you use it to bring about calamity, you have somehow subverted His will. Passages like Isaiah 46:10 cause great difficulty for such a theology:

“Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure.’”

The question arises naturally, “If both God and man use words of faith to accomplish their individual wills, whose will is accomplished if they are in disagreement?” This question is answered by the Word / Faith teachers. If a man desires to do that which is against God’s will, he desires to do evil. However, in every instance that his desire, though evil, goes against the desire of God, the man’s will is the one that prevails. Such a view undermines the sovereignty and authority of God.

Another foundational though perhaps lesser known doctrine used to support the doctrine of positive confession is the “little gods” doctrine. Word / Faith teachers do not merely teach that Christians have the power to effect their present state because they are made in the image of God and have access to the same “faith” He used to create the world. They further teach that Christians have authority to do the works of God on earth because they themselves are gods.[8]

As men who have been created as “little gods” living in a world created by a God utilizing the same faith “substance” that man has at his disposal, this type of positive confession is simply to be expected. If a man is a god, like God, he should be able to call things into existence with his words, like God. If faith is the substance by which all things come into existence, it only makes sense that such creative power would be summoned up by the power of such a substance. So it is that other doctrines within the Word of Faith movement help to support the doctrine of positive confession in the minds of its adherents.

Therefore, in order for Christians to properly respond to the doctrine of positive confession, they need to know more about the Word of Faith movement than just what is taught in the positive confession doctrine. Christians must understand that the doctrine of positive confession is intrinsically intertwined with the other doctrines of the movement. Thus, there are multiple doctrinal knots constructed of multiple theological ropes that must be unraveled in order to undo the damage done by this heretical movement. The Christian must have more than a surface level understanding of the theology of the Word of Faith movement.

Answering Positive Confession

Surely, many Christians engaging Word of Faith adherence will be better served to have a more comprehensive knowledge of the movement. However, a comprehensive answer to the theology of the Word of Faith movement is not possible in the space allotted in the present article. Thus, this article will seek to answer only the one doctrine of positive confession with some reference to the peripheral doctrines where necessary.

There are many elements of the doctrine of positive confession that must be addressed in order to properly correct the error that it teaches. First, positive confession assumes that the goal of the Christian life is for the Christian to have what the Christian wants. Second, positive confession teaches that the Christian can always expect what he wants as long as he has enough faith and uses the proper words. Third, positive confession teaches that God is always in agreement with the Christian when the Christian channels his faith in order to receive what he desires. Each one of these assertions is fundamentally flawed and straightly denied within the pages of Scripture.

First, the goal of the Christian life is not for the Christian to have what the Christian wants. Though the Christian has been redeemed out of the world, and though the Christian has been set free from sin, the Christian will still struggle with idolatrous desires that go against his new nature (Rom. 7:14-25).[9] He will still want things that are ungodly for him to want. These desires by no means justify the Christian when he goes against the will of God. The will of God must always be primary in all of a Christian’s motives and actions. The questions must be asked, “What if God wants me sick? What if God wants me to be content with a small bank account? What if God doesn’t want me to move to such and such a city for a year and work for such and such employer and build my life savings? What if God has other plans?”

The Word of Faith movement teaches that these questions ought to be suppressed, because they get in the way of one’s faith. The moment you start to ask such questions, you have started doubting God’s will for your life. After all, God always wants you to be healthy. God always wants you to be wealthy. God always wants you to exercise your faith, as He exercised His, to call into being the situations you desire for yourself.

The second issue, then, is crucial: that a Christian can obtain whatever he desires if he simply has enough faith. The Word of Faith movement essentially teaches that Christians can use the same substance that God used to create the world (faith) to call into existence whatever he desires, and God will be on board. The Christian simply needs to have faith in faith and use the proper words.

The problem is that the Bible always points to God, not faith, as the object of faith (Rom. 11:36). The Christian does not simply need to wrangle up enough of some ethereal substance called faith in order to accomplish supernatural occurrences in his life. The Christian is called to call upon his Father in heaven and trust that He will not only do His own good pleasure, but that He will work all things out for the good of those who love Him (Rom. 8:28). If this means that the Christian will suffer trials and hardships, such circumstances are what is best for the believer at that time, and God will give His children everything they need in order to come through on the other side the better for it (1Cor. 10:13).

The third issue, at this junction, ought to be anticipated. The Word / Faith adherent will interject that God always wants him to have what he wants. James, the brother of our Lord, strongly disagrees when he writes:

“Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. You are just a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes away. Instead, you out to say, ‘If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.’ But as it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil” (Jas. 4:14-16).

Such notions that the Christian ought to expect whatever he speaks with faith, in the words of James, is “arrogant” and “evil.” Such notions flatly deny the teachings of Scripture. Such notions presume upon the will of God and bring the judgment of Deuteronomy 18 upon those who teach them: “But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die” (vs. 20).

In short, the person who lays claim to any such doctrine and roots it in the teachings of the Word of Faith movement must have the full weight of the Scripture brought to bear upon them. The church has the testimony of Scripture on her side. She ought to employ the Scriptures wherever they can in their evangelistic encounters and especially with those who would use the Word in an incorrect and ungodly fashion to justify their erroneous doctrines. “The Protestant apologist cannot be concerned to prove the existence of any other God than the one who has spoken to man authoritatively and finally through Scripture.”[10]

Conclusion

The church must be prepared to answer Word / Faith proponents in their error. They will not have the ability to answer them if they do not at least have some prior knowledge of the teachings of the Word of Faith movement. They must also know how to properly handle the Word of God with precision. Employing these two skills, Christians will be well equipped to demonstrate the error of the Word of Faith movement’s teachings. They will be able to demonstrate the idolatry that underlies such doctrines as positive confession and call Word / Faith adherents to repent and place true faith in the God and Savior who can redeem them from such idolatry.

 

 


[1]All citations from the Bible taken from the New American Standard Bible (NASB), except where otherwise noted.

[2]Geir Lie, “The Theology of E.W. Kenyon: Plain Heresy or within the Boundaries of Pentecostal-Charismatic “Orthodoxy”?,” Pneuma 22, no. 1 (2000): 20-21.

[3]Charles Farah, “A Critical Analysis: The “Roots and Fruits” of Faith-Formula Theology,” Pneuma 3, no. 1 (1981): 4.

[4]Joyce Meyer, Me and My Big Mouth: Your Answer Is Right under Your Nose (Tulsa, OK.: Harrison House, 1997), 59.

[5]Kenneth Copeland, Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous (Fort Worth: KCP, 1979), 80.

[6]Kenneth E. Hagin, Exceedingly Growing Faith, 2nd ed. (Tulsa, OK.: K. Hagin Ministries, 1983), 96-97.

[7]Ibid., 97.

[8]Hank Hanegraaff, “Little Gods: Are We Little Gods?” available from http://www.equip.org/perspectives/little-gods (accessed April 15 2012). Internet

[9]William Hendriksen, Romans, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981).

[10]Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, 4th ed. (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 2008).

LBCF of 1677/1689 – Chapter One, Of the Holy Scriptures

1. The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience. Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1-3; Hebrews 1:1; Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19,20 )

2. Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these:

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, I Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings, II Kings, I Chronicles, II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomen, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations,Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The Acts of the Apostles, Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, II Thessalonians, I Timothy, II Timothy, To Titus, To Philemon, The Epistle to the Hebrews, Epistle of James, The first and second Epistles of Peter, The first, second, and third Epistles of John, The Epistle of Jude, The Revelation

All of which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.
( 2 Timothy 3:16)

3. The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.
( Luke 24:27, 44; Romans 3:2 )

4.  The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.
( 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 John 5:9 )

5. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, and many other incomparable excellencies, and entire perfections thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God; yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.
( John 16:13,14; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12; 1 John 2:20, 27)

6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word, and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Galatians 1:8,9; John 6:45; 1 Corinthians 2:9-12; 1 Corinthians 11:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 14:26,40)

7. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.
( 2 Peter 3:16; Psalms 19:7; Psalms 119:130)

8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.
( Romans 3:2; Isaiah 8:20; Acts 15:15; John 5:39; 1 Corinthians 14:6, 9, 11, 12, 24, 28; Colossians 3:16 )

9. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly.
( 2 Peter 1:20, 21; Acts 15:15, 16)

10. The 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.
( Matthew 22:29, 31, 32; Ephesians 2:20; Acts 28:23)

Pragmatic Churches and Pastoral Ministry Students, Pragmatism in the Life of the Church

For context, be sure and read the first four articles listed here.

With such conditions arising in the culture at large, one ought not to be surprised to discover some of the core tenants of pragmatism taking root in the life of the church. James and Dewey were not explicitly anti-religion. They desired to influence religion through their new philosophy, and in many ways they accomplished their task. Pragmatism as a theological system begins by stripping the theologian of any certainty. He can believe the whole of Christian theology and teaching, but he can never be certain of it. According one Pragmatic theologian, “truth exhibits a tentative, fragmentary, and provisional quality.”[1] Thus, a Christian may have clear instructions from the Bible on matters like parenting and church government, but if experience offers newer, better solutions for such issues, the Bible’s mandates must be seen as “tentative, fragmentary, and provisional.”

Back to the Bible. Such a system certainly does not allow for any inquiry into the implicit nature of the Bible. If a Christian claims the Bible teaches something like church membership, but cannot automatically point to an explicit mandate from a proof text in Scripture, that Christian runs the risk of being labeled a pragmatist. Ironically, the one assuming the Bible does not speak to the matter, having not conducted a full investigation of his own, is the one who is ultimately being pragmatic in his approach. There is no situation with which man is confronted about which he cannot find some guiding principles in the Bible, even if he may not be able to find a proof text speaking directly to it. As the Second London Baptist Confession reads:

“Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word, and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.”[2]

As such, rather than searching the Scriptures to see if such things are so, Christians have by-and-large deferred everything to the experts. Thus, if one desires to have a healthy view of church government, one need do no more work than to read IX Marks of a Healthy Church by Mark Dever and implement his ideas. If one wants to develop an easy acrostic for one’s soteriology, one needs look no further than R.C. Sproul’s Chosen by God. However, these godly men would be, and often are, appalled to find that their books often become the system propagated by many in the evangelical church rather than spurring the church on to search the Scriptures to see if these things are so. The church has come to believe that truth comes by experience, and these experts have much more experience than other men in these matters. Therefore, no biblical inquiry is necessary in order to determine that the things they write are true. After all, they have apparently done all the necessary biblical study, right?

The disappearance of the Christian mind. In the early 1960s, Harry Blamires observed and lamented this attitude in the church. In his book The Christian Mind, he decried, “There is no longer a Christian Mind.”[3] Though he does not mention the term, pragmatism in the church had progressed into an anti-thinking, expert-reliant mentality. The western church had lost its mind. Men and women in the church no longer considered matters that did not in some way yield some personal, devotional value.[4] In order for an issue to be deemed worthy of inquiry, it had to “prove to have value for concrete life.”[5] If a line of inquiry was not first proven to have devotional or evangelistic or missiological value it was a moot point, even before the matter was considered.

The default posture of many Western Christians today, and certainly since Blamires’ time, is that of pragmatism. Many Christians argue that in-depth inquiry into the Bible is unnecessary for the making of many decisions. Where ignorance exists, there is liberty. This is not a biblical posture, though. Solomon argued, “It is a trap for a man to say rashly, ‘It is holy!’ and after the vows to make inquiry” (Prov. 20:25). Yet, many today seek to discourage biblical inquiry when discussing issues that have already been decided by evangelicalism’s apparently infallible experts.

The contemporary situation. Oh, there are matters that modern evangelicals find important, even important enough to take to the streets. However, even these matters are often dictated to them by the experts. Evangelicals have learned to devote so much effort to specific issues of the day that they have systematically abandoned any notion that Christian thinking is a prerequisite before acting in any other areas of life. Mark Noll explains:

“To put it most simply, the evangelical ethos is activistic, populist, pragmatic, and utilitarian. It allows little space for broader or deeper intellectual effort because it is dominated by the urgencies of the moment.”[6]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me reiterate: the evangelical church in the West has lost its mind. Such is particularly the case in regard to the issue of the relationship between local churches and those whom they raise up and send out to lead in the work of the ministry. Evangelicals in the West have completely disengaged their brains in regard to just how the local church ought to relate to pastoral ministry students. In any case, there are seminaries and professors for that, right? Wrong. Seminaries and professors play an important role in the life of the pastoral ministry student, but they cannot and should not attempt to do the job of the local church. Certainly, this is an issue regarding which western evangelicals ought to renew their minds and stop thinking so pragmatically.


[1]Victor Anderson, Pragmatic Theology (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1998), 33.

[2]Nehemiah Coxe and William Collins, The Baptist Confession & the Baptist Catechism (Birmingham: Solid Ground Christian Books, 2010), 1.6.

[3]Harry Blamires, The Christian Mind (Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2005), 3.

[4]Ibid., 37-38.

[5]James, Pragmatism, 36.

[6]Mark A. Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1994).