Authority« Previous Entries Next Entries »
One of the luminaries of the early Particular Baptist leadership was Daniel Dyke, M.A. From an important and well-known family of puritan ministers (at least one of his uncle’s books is still in print today), Dyke became co-pastor of London’s Devonshire Square church with William Kiffin.
The careful reader will notice that 2LCF chapter 25 differs from WCF 24 (remembering that after chapter 20 the numbers differ between the two confessions) in that it does not contain the paragraphs on divorce. The Baptists follow the Savoy Declaration in making this change.
Here is a question I have been asked several times–sometimes with real concern. In 2LCF 22:3, which describes acceptable prayer in a variety of ways, the doctrine concludes with the phrase ‘if vocal, in a known tongue.’ Several times, I have received communications asking if this statement somehow opened the door to a private prayer [...]
Over the years, I have taught Symbolics in many places. Without fail, my students are bright and interested and ask me very useful and thought provoking questions. For the next few days, I want to explore some of those questions here. Let’s begin with Chapter 1.
Recently, I obtained a copy of Crawford Gribben’s new book Writing the Rapture: Prophecy Fiction in Evangelical America (Oxford: OUP, 2009). It is one of the most important books I have read in a while, and is definitely worth buying and digesting carefully.
We live in a day when the distinctions between pastors and people have largely broken down. Loud voices cry out, calling for a mobilization of every member of the church, as if all had the same call and responsibilities from the Lord. While this may be the dominant view today, it is really an historical [...]
Human life is all about communication. God made us to be social creatures, interacting with others over a wide spectrum of occassions. From the womb onward, we express ourselves. Parents nurture their children; friends encourage friends; people reach out to one another. But most importantly, the Lord speaks to us.
B. The Puritan use of the Fathers. This positive exposition still needs some careful qualification. No reformed writer treated any church father as if his writings were on a par with Scripture. But neither did they succumb to a naïve Biblicism, thinking that they alone with their Bibles could arrive at a satisfactory system of [...]
2. Archetypal error: the great heresies. We must consider the other side of this coin. Not only did the Puritans employ the writings of the Fathers as an aid in support of their orthodoxy, so also they viewed the errors of the patristic era as archetypal heresies: i.e. many of their own battles were simply [...]
Let’s consider two key points. The study of the writings of their predecessors were important for two reasons—it established right and wrong doctrine and practice: 1. Archetypal theology and practice. How does one establish orthodoxy and orthopraxy? By building from scratch? No. Rather it is by recognizing the work of the Spirit in the church [...]« Previous Entries Next Entries »