Recognizing the Phenomena of Evangelical Commonality and Embracing It

A Reformed Christian hears a particular sermon by a Dispensatonal Preacher, and finds him or her self in substantial agreement with that sermon. A Dispensational Christian hears a particular sermon by a Reformed Preacher and finds him or her self in substantial agreement with that sermon. A Baptist happens to visit a Lutheran Church and hears a particular sermon, and says to himself that sounds pretty "Evangelical".

What's going on in each of these incidents?

The Dispensational Preacher is still a Dispensaionalist. The Reformed Preacher is still Reformed. The Lutheran Pastor is still Lutheran. What is happening in each of the above cases is the hearer is recognizing a certain degree of theological commonality with the Preacher.

This kind of reaction and response that can be observed among the differing Evangelical denominations, church groups, and Evangelical theological camps is what I have chosen to call the phenomena of "Evangelical Commonality". This commonality comes out of the fact that amidst the differences that define the various theological camps of the Evangelical world, there is to varying degrees a common shared theological consensus that gives common meeting ground between those various camps.

Case in point: Many Dispensationalists are very Calvinistic. More then a few might tell you they are a 4 point, or 4 1/2 point, or even a full blown 5 point Calvinist. That means that on the issue of soteriology, from 80 to 100% of what they say is in sync with what the Reformed Pastor down the street is saying about that subject. But when you get into issues of eschatology and the relation of the Old Testament to the New Testament, the issues that define each groups difference from one another are clear.

For the most part, much of the Evangelical world intuitively understands this phenomena of Evangelical commonality and embraces it, taking it for granted. They hear a radio preacher like Chuck Swindol or John MacArthur, or Allister Begg, and appreciate these men for upholding fundamental foundational evangelical truth. It is not a matter of these men being Baptist, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, or Calvinist, or any other name you want to use to describe your Church or theology. It is a recognition instead of shared beliefs that cut across the lines of those denominational and theological camps.

In a previous post I took our Reformed Baptist friends to task for a persistent nagging tendency on the part of of some of them to want to claim this preacher or that preacher for their "Reformed Baptist" camp. This is a failure to embrace the concept of Evangelical commonality. Part of the reason for this failure is the prevalent tendency in recent Reformed Baptist history (the past 30 some years) to define the RB movement by those things that distinguish RB's from the rest of the Evangelical world. This tendency, (which I personally observed over many years), feeds an "us verses them" mentality that focuses on separateness from the rest of the Evangelical world, instead of recognizing the Evangelical commonality the Reformed Baptist movement shares with the rest of the Evangelical world.

I am not asking RB's or anyone else to give up their distinctives. But I am asking RB's as well as all other Evangelical groups and theological camps to hold those distictives in balance with that Evangelical commonality that to some degree or another, we all share with one another.

To put it in other words, I am asking the Reformed Baptist movement to acknowledge and embrace that Evangelical commonality. Why? Because until they do, they will continue to remain on the outskirts of the Evangelical world in spite of the clear basic Evangelical character of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.

If you choose to remain on the outskirts, that is your choice, and it is an unfortunate choice. It is also unfortunate that you will have to live with the consequence of that choice. Based on the history of other groups and movements who made that same choice, those consequences are not very pretty.

"So and so" may not be a Reformed Baptist, but they are an Evangelical brother. Can you in Christian love accept and embrace that without giving them your particular label? May God Almighty help you to do so...

Shalom,

~ The Billy Goat ~

The Preaching of the Gospel
The First London Baptist Confesson of Faith 1646 , Chapter XXV.

"The preaching of the gospel to the conversion of sinners, is absolutely free; no way requiring as absolutely necessary, any qualifications, preparations, or terrors of the law, or preceding ministry of the law, but only and alone the naked soul, a sinner and ungodly, to receive Christ crucified, dead and buried, and risen again; who is made a prince and a Savior for such sinners as through the gospel shall be brought to believe on Him.

John 3:14,15, 1:12; Isa. 55:1; John 7:37; 1 Tim. 1:15; Rom. 4:5, 5:8; Acts 5:30,31, 2:36, 1 Cor. 1:22,24."

The True Christian Sabbath

The "sabbatismos" that remains for the people of God has nothing to do with a day of the week. The Hebrews 4:9-10 passage has to be grossly wrenched out of its wider context to say that. Yes, we are obligated to keep the Sabbath, but that Sabbath we are to keep has nothing to do with a day of the week, but on the contrary has everything to do with resting and remaining in Christ alone by grace alone through faith alone.

It is my observation that churches that maintain a Puritan view of the Christian Sabbath as the observation of a specific day of the week, inevitably without exception end up being legalistic in other areas as well.

~ The Billy Goat ~

Where is the author's respect for Scripture?
A Review of Martha Peace's "The Excellent Wife: A Biblical Perspective"
(Focus Publishing,1999)


A number of years ago my wife was reading this book and came to me in frustration. My wife's frustration had its roots in Peace's very loose and inadequate exegesis of Scriptures. In my own examination there were more then a few cases where applications were made of parts of Scripture that had nothing to do with the intent and purpose of the passage cited.

Anyone reading any of Peace's books need to do so with an open Bible and a critically exegetical eye. The author's miss-exegesis did not indicate an understanding of what respect for God's Word demands in terms of careful and respectful handling. I told my wife I did not want her to read this book. She gladly "submitted" to my wishes.

As a Christian man, I take exception to the lop-sided emphasis on the wife "submitting" without taking the husbands to task about loving their wife as Christ loves the church. In Ephesians, Paul devoted more time and words to the husband than he did to the wife. And that for a VERY good reason. Could it just be that if husbands were held accountable for loving their wife, the wife just might find it a joy to properly submit? The lop-sided berating of wives found in some parts of the Christian church does not fit the Biblical balance.

I find the sub-title "A Biblical Perspective" frankly miss-leading. Don't waste your money on it. My wife and I found a better and much more helpful alternative in Dr. Larry Crabb's The Marriage Builder.

~ The Billy Goat ~

Some Christmas Themes in the Old Testament

Introduction:

The essence of Christmas is not found in all our traditions and decorations as such. For the Christian believer the essence of Christmas is found in the words of Matthew 1:18-25

1. Jesus: “…for He will save His people from their sins.”
   
   
2. Immanuel: “…which means, God with us.”
   

God has come into human history by taking on the form of humanity. His purpose in doing so was to bring redemption to a fallen world. This did not happen all of a sudden, just out of the blue. It was anticipated early in the Story of the history of redemption.

• 1. The seed
  
  
  
  • Genesis 3: 15 – The retribution of the woman’s seed…
    
    
  • Genesis 5:29 - The naming of Noah “Rest”- bringing comfort from the curse…
  
  
  
• Genesis 22:18 – The promise: Abraham’s seed to be a blessing to all humanity.
  
  
• 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 – The promise to David
  

2. Messiah as Immanuel

• Isaiah 7:11. The name of the virgin’s child, Immanuel – God with us.
  
  
• Isaiah 9:4-7
  
  
  
  • Humanity: A child is born
    
    
  • Deity:
    
    
    1. Wonderful Counselor
       
    2. Mighty God
       
    3. Everlasting Father (Picture of the King as being a father to his people.)
       
    4. Prince of Peace
    
    
    
  • Verse 7 - This child is the one who will fulfill the promise made to David.

God has been and is working in time and space; (history). We have not been left to ourselves. The God/Man whose name is Immanuel is indeed with His people; all who have trusted and placed their faith in Him. The Christmas story is a critical chapter in that larger Story whose final chapter is yet to be realized.

{These notes are from a recent Adult Sunday School class I taught.
~ The Billy Goat ~}

Of This and That...

In this first article Collin Hansen of Christianity Today looks at trends in the Fundantalist camp.

The Crisis of Modern Fundamentalism Collin Hansen, 10/26/2007, Christianity Today

Fundamentalism is still with us, though you won't hear many evangelicals talk about it. Not so with the fundamentalists, who worry about a growing number within their ranks who have wandered toward evangelicalism. A 2005 survey released on the popular fundamentalist blog SharperIron "revealed that many in the newest generation of fundamentalist leadership were still committed to fundamentalist theology but uncomfortable with some of the more extreme positions on secondary separation, association, worship music, extra-biblical standards, and other issues."

---

In this next article from Touchstone Magazine, six Evangelical leaders give an assesment of the Evangelical movement. Evangelicalism Today - A Symposium: Six Evangelicals Assess Their Movement.

---

Back in February, 2006, A.B. Caneday published on his BIBLIA THEOLOGICA blog an article titled, Twenty-One Theses on Paul & the Law. Recently Dr. Caneday in his own words "...did some clean-up work on the theses, revised some statements, clarified a number of things, and expanded the number to 22 theses by splitting one." So now there are Twenty-Two Theses on Paul & the Law." .

My Cousin Mary

My cousin Mary is about 4 or so years older then me. Her mother, Aunt Florence, was my father's sister. This week I found out Mary's health is not very good. Here is a quote from her CaringBridge site:

"In November of 2004 Mary was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease, but after a rapid decline she was rediagnosed in May of 2006 with Lewy Body Dementia. This is a degenerative brain disorder that shares characteristics of both Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. Its cause is unknown, and there is no cure. Symptoms include depression, tremors, shuffling, anxiety and memory loss."

And here is a further quote from her CaringBridge jpurnel dated Oct. 1, 2007:

"At the present time Mary is at about a two year old level. She is seldom able to speak so that we can understand her. That is often frustrating to her because she knows what she wants but is unable to communicate it to us. Things Mary enjoys include golf car rides around the neighborhood visiting friends, going out to eat, and her favorite is going to church on Sundays and going to choir practice. She is unable to sing but still enjoys being around the music and friends. One of my saddest memories was one Sunday as we were leaving church, I noticed she had tears running down her cheeks. I asked what was wrong and she replied," I can't sing anymore". That was hard on me as well as her. The most valuable lesson that I have learned through this is how good people really are. Our family, our friends, and even people we do not know have gone above and beyond the call of duty. Our church family has been incredible. Mary is proof of the concept, "what goes around comes around" She has helped a lot of people through the years and now it is being returned. Thanks to all of you."

What is hard about this is that I remember Mary as being healthy and energetic. I remember how we use to go to their home when they lived out in the country, and some of the games we played, and stories we acted out. I remember when we went to Mary and Bob's wedding so many years ago. I look at the photo's on the CaringBridge site and am shocked at the change in her appearance. The other thing is, in the face of the Mary I see in those photo's, I see a great resemblence to my Aunt Florence, who though gone for a number of years, I still miss...

Time is marching on. We get to a point in life where we eventually have to come face to face with our mortality, and the fact our years are rapidly growing shorter... I personally thank God for the hope we have in our Lord Jesuis Christ...

Come quickly Lord Jesus.....

Will the “Real” Jesus Please Stand Up


A little over a hundred years ago, the old liberal theologians were faced with a question. Since they did not believe in the intervention of the supernatural into the natural world, they had essentially discounted those parts of the Gospel records that narrated such supernatural intervention. If the Jesus who was portrayed in the Gospels was not a Jesus limited to the time and space boundaries of the presuppositions of secular history, then how do you account for a Jesus who, in the theological liberal mind, was the “real” Jesus, the “historical Jesus”?

“In this idiom, the “historical Jesus” is a technical phrase, designating a hypothetical Jesus who could be interpreted exclusively in human, ordinary historical categories. The Gospel portrait of Jesus is that of a divine man; the “historical Jesus” could not be divine, for history has no room for the category of deity. The “historical Jesus” is a hypotheses reconstructed from the Gospels by the use of the historical-critical method on the basis of naturalistic presuppositions. Such a Jesus must by definition be altogether and only human—a Jesus without transcendence.” (George E. Ladd,A Theology of the New Testament, (1974), p. 178)

Ladd goes on to document the failure of the “historical Jesus” movement. The ethical prophet, the apocalyptic Jesus, the existential Jesus, all were insufficient.

“An “historical Jesus” has not been found who stands the test of scholarship... ” (Ibid, p.178)

In other words an “historical Jesus” who could account for the rise of the Christian faith and the Gospel accounts was not to be found. An “historical Jesus” who in Ladd’s words “was big enough to account for the rise of the Christian faith and the Gospel portrait” could not be found. It is at this point Ladd quotes Kähler:

“Whoever tries to account for the beginnings of Christianity by some purely historical, nontranscendental event, runs up against the difficulty that there seems to be no such event of sufficient magnitude or of a kind such as to fulfill the need.” (Ibid, p.179)

Some thirty plus years after Ladd’s observations on the issue, his observations and conclusions are still relevant. One of the trends I’ve noticed lately on the internet is atheistic denials that Jesus was even an historical person at all. They like to cite the lack of any secular historical evidence contemporary with the Gospel account as proof. It’s at this point Christians need to be careful how they respond. There are legitimate questions about what Josephus actually said about Jesus. That textual issue needs to be studied and carefully analyzed before it is waved in the atheist’s face.

But, let’s say, just for the sake of argument, there are no secular historical references that are contemporary with the Gospel account. Our atheist friend still faces the burden of giving an adequate and sufficient rational for the rise of Christianity and the existence of the Gospel accounts. All attempts to find an” historical Jesus”; all the different enumerations of a secular “form criticism” of the Gospels; all are inadequate.

“The Jesus who lived in history is the geschichtlich, biblical Christ who is portrayed in the Gospels. Kähler believed in the principle of causality; he insisted that only the Christ pictured in the Gospels, in whom dwelt the supernatural (ùbergeschtlich) is big enough to account for the rise of the Christian faith.” (Ibid)

The Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 15:1-28 clearly ties the veracity of the Christian faith to the historical redemptive events of the death, burial, and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. These are events the Apostle affirms as having taken place in time and space, and as events involving supernatural intervention into the natural order of time and space.

What we may tend to over look is that, in this passage, Paul is affirming the veracity of the Gospel accounts of Jesus life, and also affirming the Gospel accounts sufficiency as a portrait of the life of Jesus. All we need to know about Jesus’ life and ministry is there. Yes, it is helpful to understand the historical setting and culture of the New Testament times, but that is a far different thing then to say we need some other glasses to see the “real” or “historical Jesus” other then the glasses the Gospels themselves provide. All other glasses, rabbinic, secular, or whatever will always be insufficient. Kähler’s conclusions still stand. Only that Jesus Christ presented in the Gospels can account for the rise of Christianity, and for the Gospels themselves.

Solo Deo Gloria!

~ The Billy Goat ~

Eleanor Marie Welling

September 19, 1915 - August 9, 2007

"Eleanor M. Welling, age 91, formerly of Waldron, Michigan passed away, Thursday, August 9, 2007, at Vista Grande Villa in Jackson, Michigan. She was born September 19, 1915, in Bridgeville, Pennsylvania to Paul and Alberta (Roach) Kline. She married Arlow Welling on December 22, 1940, in Bridgeville, PA and he preceded her in death on January 26, 1994.

Eleanor taught school in Frontier, Waldron and Morenci Schools and graduated from South Fayette High School in Bridgeville, PA and from Hillsdale College in 1936. She was a member of Waldron Church of Christ, Waldron Literary Club, life member of Order of Eastern Stars and spent many hours with her hobby in genealogy.

Surviving Eleanor is one step-daughter, Joan (Wendell) Mason of Traverse, City, Michigan; three step-grandchildren, Pamela (James) Wood of Randolph, New Jersey, Thomas (Georgia) Mason of Lexington, South Carolina and James (Pamela) Mason of Dewitt, Michigan; eight step-great grandchildren and five step-great great grandchildren. She was preceded in death by her parents and husband.

Funeral services for Eleanor Welling will be Sunday, August 12, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. at the Waldron Church of Christ with Rev. John Ater officiating. Visitation will be Saturday from 5 p.m. until 7 p.m. at the Eagle Funeral Home in Hudson.

Those planning an expression of sympathy may make memorial contributions to the Waldron Church of Christ or Waldron Public Library." (Eagle Funeral Home)

I was in 10th grade at Waldron HS, and we were in Biology class. The regular teacher was out for the day, and Mrs. Welling was the substitute. Then the news came over the school PA system. President John Kennedy had been shot while riding in a motorcade through Dallas, TX... Then the news came that he was dead..... Mrs. Welling had tears in her eyes.... She knew better then any of us young whippersnappers the meaning and impact of that historical event....

RIP

The Church between Modernity and Post-modernity.
I was recently asked what I saw as the challenges to the Evangelical church in the Post-modern age. As I contemplated that question, I came across an article by Dr. Russell Moore at the Carl F. Henry Institute ( http://www.henryinstitute.org/ ) where he picks up on and expands on a discussion from his book “The Kingdom of Christ” in regard to the challenges to the emerging Evangelical consensus regarding the "already" and the "not yet" aspects of the Kingdom of God. Moore identifies those challenges as the issue of open theism, and Emergent church emphasis on community defining kingdom.

This article, "The Neo-Fundamentalism of the Evangelical Left: Post-Conservative Evangelical Proposals as Reversal of Evangelical Doctrinal Development" expands on those concerns, and in reading through and meditating on the things Dr. Moore is concerned with, it struck me that these two issues come from two world perspectives. My thesis is that the open theism view comes from a modern rationalistic world view, and community defining Kingdom comes from a Post-modern world view. In these two issues the Evangelical church is besieged from both sides.

Open theism comes as a rationalistic attempt to deal with the tension and mystery of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. In this rationalistic attempt, open theism has denied the real sovereignty of God. The tension is gone. The mystery dissipated. What I object to in this kind of rationalistic resolution of tension and mystery is that I can not hold this view without doing exegetical gymnastics that keep me from fully embracing the full meaning of those Scripture passages that clearly assert God’s sovereignty in all things. It is the tension and mystery between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility that allows me to let Scripture passages on sovereignty and responsibility to mean what they fully mean without engaging in exegetical gymnastics that defrocks either of those passages of their full intended meaning. This kind of attempt to rationalize tension and mystery has been the Achilles heel of Evangelical theological constructions coming from unrecognized modernistic rationalistic epistemological presumptions.

The issue of community defining Kingdom is much foggier and difficult to get a hold of precisely because it comes out of a Post-modern mind set where definition is, by Post-modern definition, “foggy”.

It is at this point the emergent church use of the word “community” becomes suspect. “Community” to be meaningful as a word, demands an objective content set in an objective context. At this point I am relying on Dr. Moore’s assessment of how the word has been, and is being used in the emergent church context. The community concept is indeed part of what the Kingdom is, and it is an aspect of the Kingdom that was not well understood or developed in the Evangelical world at large during the modern era. However, contrary to some emergent thought, community is not all that the Kingdom is. It is the Kingdom that defines the content and context of the community, not some concept of “community” that defines the Kingdom.

My point is that in a post-modern world, meaning and definition is meaningless and undefined. Yes, that is a contradiction, but it is basic post-modern existential epistemology and we are going to see that vagueness of meaning and definitions enter Evangelical theology and discussion.

On the one hand we have to resist the modern mindset that wants to rationalize everything and in so doing, erase the tension and mystery we find in Biblical theology. We resist that view of reason that says all questions can be answered. We also assert that rational apprehension of God’s truth is not enough to save, but there has to be with that apprehension the experiential (existential) encounter and communion with the God which that rational apprehension points us to.

On the other hand we resist that post-modern epistemology that makes meaning meaningless and definition undefined. Words have some objective meaning and definition. If that were not so, we could not communicate at all with one another and God communicating to man through His revelation of event and Word would be just as impossible. We resist the Neo-Orthodox view that the only “truth” is our existential encounter with a “God Word”. In reading the Bible we are not listening for the Word of God, we are listening to the Word of God; an objective Word given by God in time and space.

So what is a Post-modern Evangelical? Simply, it is one who is living in a post-modern age. Biblical Christian Evangelical epistemology calls me to embrace both objective (rational) reality outside of myself, and the existential experience of being able through that objective reality to know and commune with the Sovereign God of all creation as my Lord and Savior.

~ The Billy Goat ~