Search

You searched for 'Chapter 1'

I've found 19 results!

Simon Wartanian | 14,377 views | 547 words | 0:02:57 hours | 08 March 2014 16:57

Welcome to The Staunch Calvinist. This is a place where Calvinistic Theology will be displayed. A place where the Doctrines of Grace will be explained and defended. This is a place where the Sovereignty of God is cherished and promoted. We hope you will be ministered to through the material on the website. Our goal is to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ and honor Him. “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” 2 Corinthians 13:14

The following document may help you to understand the Biblical case for ‘Calvinism’: God’s Absolute Sovereignty – A case for Calvinism.

I have two sections dedicated to the Doctrines of Grace: defining the Doctrines of Grace & defending the Doctrines of Grace, which are taken from the document above. In the general section, you will find some book reviews and the resources from which I mainly drew the content of the “God’s Absolute Sovereignty” document.

As a Reformed Baptist, I started the 1689 Confession section wherein I seek to explain the chapters and make a biblical case for what is said on a particular subject. As of 18/09/2016, the commentary is complete:

Of the Holy Scriptures
Of God and the Holy Trinity (the attributes of God and a case for the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity)
Of God’s Decree (I make a case for predestination, election, reprobation and absolute sovereignty even over evil and sin)
Of Creation
Of Divine Providence
Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, And of the Punishment Thereof (Total Depravity)
Of God’s Covenant (1689 Federalism)
Of Christ the Mediator (including a case for the Substitutionary Atonement, Active and Passive Obedience of Christ, Definite Atonement and answers to passages used against the doctrine)
Of Free Will (with the help of Jonathan Edwards, the consistency of moral agency being found in carrying one’s desires, the inconsistencies of libertarian free will, explanation of necessity and inability)
Of Effectual Calling (with a case for infant salvation)
Of Justification (faith is a gift and regeneration precedes faith)
Of Adoption
Of Sanctification
Of Saving Faith
Of Repentance Unto Life and Salvation
Of Good Works
Of The Perseverance Of The Saints (A positive case for the Reformed doctrine and responses to passages such as Hebrews 6 and the like)
Of The Assurance Of Grace And Salvation
Of The Law Of God (Threefold Division of the Law, the Decalogue before Moses, a brief exposition of the Decalogue, ceremonial and civil laws, the abiding moral law under the New Covenant in the OT prophecy and the NT, Threefold Uses of the Law, The Law and the Gospel)
Of The Gospel, And Of The Extent Of The Grace Thereof
Of Christian Liberty And Liberty of Conscience
Of Religious Worship And the Sabbath Day (A case for the Regulative Principle of Worship and the Christian Sabbath)
Of Lawful Oaths And Vows
Of The Civil Magistrate
Of Marriage
Of The Church
Of the Communion of Saints
Of Baptism And The Lord’s Supper
Of Baptism
Of The Lord’s Supper
Of The State Of Man After Death And Of The Resurrection Of The Dead (Intermediate State Hades, Sheol, Heaven; A Case for Amillennial Eschatology; critique of Premillennialism)
Of The Last Judgment (Endless punishment in Hell contra Annihilationism)

...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 28,171 views | 35,236 words | 3:04:25 hours | 04 March 2015 20:52

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 1 Holy Scriptures Bible Canon Inspiration Authority Inerrancy Infallibility Apocrypha Old Testament New Testament Canon Sufficiency Sola Scriptura

...!DOCTYPE html

Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures

What does the Bible itself teach about the Word of God? Which books are contained in the Bible? Are the Apocryphal books God-inspired and authoritative? Who made the Bible authoritative? What is Sola Scriptura? What does it mean that Scripture is inerrant and infallible? Is Scripture sufficient? What does it mean that the Scripture is inspired? Are creeds and confessions above or subordinate to the Scriptures? In this chapter, we will explore the Bible’s view of the Word of God. The paragraphs in which I deal with parts of the Scripture’s doctrine are not necessarily in a logical order, therefore, here are the topics in a somewhat more logical order:

Necessity of Scripture (paragraph 1)
Scripture As Self-Revelation (paragraph 1)
Canon of the Old Testament (paragraph 4)
Canon of the New Testament (paragraph 3)
Inspiration of Scripture (paragraph 2)
Inerrancy and Infallibility of Scripture (paragraph 1)
Authority of Scripture (paragraph 4)
Sufficiency of Scripture (paragraph 6)
Sola Scriptura (paragraph 1, 10)
Authentication of Scripture (paragraph 5)
Perspicuity of Scripture (paragraph 7)
Interpretation of Scripture (paragraph 9)

This chapter is in many ways based upon the truths in 2 Timothy 3:16. All the particular subjects which are treated are part of a unified whole doctrine about God’s Word.

§1 The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule

The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience 1, 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 2; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. 3 Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church 4; 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 5, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased. 6
1. Isa. 8:20; Luke 16:29; Eph. 2:20; 2 Tim. 3:15-17^[1]
2. Ps. 19:1-3; Rom. 1:19-21, 32; 2:12a, 14-15
3. Ps. 19:1-3 with vv. 7-11; Rom. 1:19-21; 2:12a, 14-15 with 1:16-17; and 3:21
4. Heb. 1:1-2a
5. Prov. 22:19-21; Luke 1:1-4; 2 Peter 1:12-15; 3:1; Deut. 17:18ff; 31:9ff, 19ff; 1 Cor. 15:1; 2 Thess. 2:1-2, 15; 3:17; Rom. 1:8-15; Gal. 4:20; 6:11; 1 Tim. 3:14ff; Rev. 1:9, 19; 2:1 etc.; Rom. 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19-21
6. Heb. 1:1-2a; Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7-8; Eph. 2:20

Holy Scripture, which is defined to be the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, is “sufficient, certain, and infallible”. This means that Scripture is enough; true and sure; and cannot err. What is the scope of this sufficiency, certainty, and infallibility? The Confession says that Scripture is the only infallible “rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience”. Holy Scripture is given as a measuring line and a standard. It is a standard of standards. There are other standards and rules besides the Bible, but the Bible alone is the “sufficient, certain, and infallible rule”. The Bible is the norm and rule to test ever...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 2: Of God and of the Holy Trinity - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 23,731 views | 28,880 words | 2:33:55 hours | 04 March 2015 20:55

The Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Chapter 2 God Trinity Attributes Of God Immutability Repentance Of God Love Of God Justice Of God Spirituality Of God Monotheism

...4The Incomprehensibility of God

Webster’s 1913 Dictionary defines “incomprehensible” by “Not capable of being comprehended or understood; beyond the reach of the human intellect; inconceivable.”^[5] Only God can fully understand God. All that we know about Him is revealed by Him. There is no use in people sitting and contemplating about God without standing on the solid and infallible foundation of the Word of God (Chapter 1). As the Confession declares, so the Bible teaches, God is fully comprehended only by Himself. Obviously, we do not mean that He is absolutely incomprehensible, for we know a lot of things about Him even without special revelation. From the natural world, says Paul, we can know “his eternal power and divine nature” (Rom. 1:20), for example. But we cannot fully and exhaustively understand “his eternal power and divine nature” whether from general revelation or even from special revelation. The essence of God is only exhaustively and completely understood by Himself alone.

Job 7:11-12 describes this doctrine: “Can you find out the deep things of God? Can you find out the limit of the Almighty? 8 It is higher than heaven—what can you do? Deeper than Sheol—what can you know?” There are hundreds of mysteries about God which we do not know and do not comprehend. Even things which we know about Him from special revelation, we do not fully comprehend. How is it that a being can exist without a beginning? What is eternity exactly? It is difficult for us to understand because these things fall outside of our experience. Even when thinking about God and when God speaks to us in Scripture, He condescends to speak in a way that we would understand. Thus He speaks of Himself being a father, a husband, a friend, and so on. Using things from the natural world which we know, so that we would comprehend Him a little bit. Paul breaks forth in praise, saying: ‘“For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” 35 “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?” 36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen’ (Rom. 11:34-36). The incomprehensibility of God is implied when Paul speaks about “the depths of God” which the Spirit searches and understands (1 Cor. 2:10). Wayne Grudem writes:

It is not only true that we can never fully understand God; it is also true that we can never fully understand any single thing about God. His greatness (Ps. 145:3), his understanding (Ps. 147:5), his knowledge (Ps. 139:6), his riches, wisdom, judgments, and ways (Rom. 11:33) are all beyond our ability to understand fully.^[6]

Yet obviously, even though we cannot fully understand anything about God, yet we understand several things that God has revealed to us in general and special revelation about Himself. But all the things which we know are the “outskirts of his ways” and a small “whisper do we hear of him” (Job 26:14).

The Immutability of God

Although this heading properly belongs to the Infinity of God, yet since I want to give a longer treatment of this subject, I chose to include it under a separate heading. The immutability of God is the doctrine that God never changes His mind. The word immutable means “not capable or susceptible of change; unchangeable; unalterable.”^[7] This doctrine is closely connected with the absolute sovereignty of God and His perfect knowledge of all things. Since God is perfect and infinite in all His attributes, including His knowled...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 32: Of the Last Judgment - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 15,792 views | 16,377 words | 1:25:50 hours | 06 March 2015 23:30

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 32 Last Judgment Eternal Hell Eternal Suffering Lake Of Fire

...ed will of God in the gospel. Each will be judged according to the measure of knowledge they have of the will of God. This is evident from such passages as Matthew 11:21-24; Luke 12:47-48; 20:47; 2 Corinthians 9:6. Luke 12:47 explicitly speaks about the Master’s will. With the knowledge that we have of God’s will, with that also we will be judged. This does not mean that people who have not heard the gospel will not be judged, that would be contrary to the argument of Romans 1:18-32. But rather, the standard of judgment is the Law of God and the knowledge that we had of His will. This is why the apostle Paul is harsher against Jews in Romans 2 than he was against the Gentiles in Chapter 1. The reason is that the Jews have the oracles of God and they know with certainty what God approves and what He disapproves because God has spoken in Holy Writ. On the other hand, the Gentiles do not have a special revelation of God, but they only have the general revelation of God in the created world. This does not excuse them because the apostle says very clearly that they knew God and that’s why their without an excuse (Rom 1:20). Yet Scripture makes clear that their final condition will be a bit different than those who had a wider knowledge of God’s will. This does not mean that they will not go to Hell, but rather, their torment will be “lighter” than those who receive a “severe beating” (Matt. 11:21-24). A person who has gone to church for a long time, heard the faithful preaching of God’s Word, heard the gospel proclaimed and he denied it, will receive a severe beating, while a man living in the jungles of Africa will likewise be condemned, but his condition will be “lighter” in comparison to that rejector of the gospel. This is no basis to ignore foreign missions or ignore sharing the gospel with people who are un-churched or do not know much about God and the Bible. They will be judged and they will be in torment, it does not matter if their condition will be “lighter” in comparison to others. They still need saving. They need the gospel to escape the righteous judgment of God.

According To Works

The most difficult aspect of the judgment is the fact that we are judged by our works. That this is the case is evident from several biblical passages in both testaments, such as: Job 34:11; Psalm 62:12; Ecclesiastes 12:14; Jeremiah 17:10; 32:19; Matthew 16:27; 25:34-46; John 5:28-29; Romans 2:6; 14:10-12; 1 Corinthians 3:8; 4:3-4; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Galatians 6:7-8; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:25; 2 Timothy 4:14; 1 Peter 1:17; Revelation 2:23; 20:12; 22:12. Does this mean that we are justified by our works? Not at all. Scripture is clear that salvation and justification are by grace through faith (e.g., Eph. 2:8-9, see also here). Not only that, but our works are explicitly excluded from any part in salvation and justification (Rom. 3:28; 4:6; Gal. 2:16).

Therefore, how should we understand these two biblical truths? For those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, the option cannot be that Paul or the other authors of Scripture are contradicting themselves, rather, it is what it is. The Bible teaches that we are justified by faith apart from our works, yet in the future, at the Last Judgment, we will be judged according to our works. Our works done in the body will determine either our eternal rewards or our eternal misery. The Lord Jesus teaches us that we will have to give an account even for our words (Matt. 12:36-37). Thoughts ar...

A Review of Hell Under Fire

Simon Wartanian | 4,966 views | 1,399 words | 0:07:19 hours | 22 January 2017 20:36

Book Review Eschatology Heaven Hell Gehenna Judgment Eternity Annihilationism Universalism Eternal Punishment Hell Under Fire

...ognize--we rightly deserve. We likewise believe that all those without the Gospel of Christ, do not have a hope, are under the wrath of God and will everlastingly be under the wrath of God. It is terrifying to think of that and we cannot, without sympathy, discard the emotional appeal of Universalists and Annihilationists. The Bible is the sole infallible and highest authority for the Christian and if the Bible teaches that historical view of hell, then my emotions do not matter and cannot settle the truth about hell. It is as simple as that.

This book contains 10 chapters dealing, containing among other things,

a historical survey about hell up to our day (Chapter 1, by Albert Mohler Jr.);
the OT and hell (chapter 2, by Daniel I. Block);
the Lord Jesus and Hell (chapter 3, by Robert W. Yarbough);
Paul and Hell (chapter 4, by Douglas J. Moo);
the Apocalypse and Hell (chapter 5, by G. K. Beale);
Biblical and Systematic Theology as it relates to hell (chapters 7-8, by Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson, respectively);
an examination of Universalism and its arguments (chapter 8, by J. I. Packer);
an examination of Annihilationism and its arguments (chapter 9, by Christopher W. Morgan); and finally
Hell and pastoral theology (Chapter 10, by Sinclair Ferguson).

There is a ton to be learned in these chapters by the Bible student. What is to be learned from this book should not only fill our heads with information, but motivate us to share the Gospel with the lost because of the dreadful fate which faces them if they receive not Christ and His righteousness.

The reason we believe in the existence and everlasting nature of hell and of its punishment is simply because we believe that Holy Writ teaches it. If it were not for the words of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, who spoke more often about hell than Heaven, we would not believe in Hell, because it is so repugnant to our fallen natures.

Interaction

This work continually interacts with popular scholarship as it regards the nature of hell and the arguments for and against Annihilationism in Evangelicalism. Authors most cited and interacted with include John Stott, Clark Pinnock, David Powys and Edward W. Fudge. The authors of this work continually argue that Annihilationists do not look at the whole portrayal of hell as presented by Scripture, but rather choose to focus on and emphasize specific portrayals of hell with neglect to the rest. This accusation is also leveled against those who hold to the traditional view of Hell who emphasize the punishment aspect of hell, while neglecting to share the Gospel, or declaring that hell is also a banishment (not merely a separation of God's presence) and destruction.

The Destruction Picture of Hell

An important and helpful study was Douglas J. Moo's on the meaning of destruction. He accuses Annihilationists of reading their preconceived meaning of destruction as cessation of existence or as "annihilation" rather than deriving its meaning from the whole of Scripture. He shows how it is better and more consistent with the total picture of hell in the Bible to understand the usage of words like destruction to mean "ruin" (p. 106) and "they [the two Greek word groups olethros and

...

Review of Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology

Simon Wartanian | 17,132 views | 1,938 words | 0:010:06 hours | 19 July 2015 19:18

Wayne Grudem Systematic Theology Book Review Calvinism Baptist Continuationist Premillennialism

... of God reflects the character and its integrity is based upon the character of God.

The Bible, which is the collection of 39 Old Testament books and 27 New Testament books is the very and certain Word of God.

See my commentary on the first chapter (Of The Holy Scriptures) of the 1689 Baptist London Confession.

Trinity

Dr Grudem excellently shows the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity from the Scripture and not from creeds as is often alleged by unbelievers. I have often gone back to Chapter 14 (God in Three Persons: The Trinity) to get more insight into this great doctrine and the biblical support.

Dr Grudem goes on to prove the doctrine of the Trinity by using three statements that summarize the doctrine:

God is three persons.

Each person is fully God.

There is one God.

From there on he goes into the Scriptures to prove just that!

See my case for the doctrine of the Trinity in my commentary on the 1689 Baptist London Confession.

God’s Providence

This is the first chapter that I read from Grudem. Chapter 16: God’s Providence. And man...I was in for something. It was excellent and it was fully biblical. I loved it.

He defines God’s Providence as follows:

God is continually involved with all created things in such a way that he (1) keeps them existing and maintaining the properties with which he created them; (2) cooperates with created things in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act as they do; and (3) directs them to fulfill his purposes.^[2]

God is absolutely sovereign over His creation. Nothing can happen without His will. Moreover He has ordained whatsoever comes to pass.

Although God is absolutely sovereign, even over chance events (Prov 16:33), man is still held responsible (Isaiah 11, Gen 50:20; Acts 4:27-28).

This is above our understanding, but it is what the Scriptures teach and thus we are to obey it.

This is not fatalism, this is the carrying out of a divine plan of a God who is just, holy, wise and merciful.

We are not “robots,” as many non-Calvinists would accuse Calvinists of making man, we make responsible choices, but these choices are absolutely under the control of God.

See my commentary on chapter 3 (Of God’s Decree) and chapter 5 (Of Divine Providence) on the 1689.

The Person of Christ

The treatment of of the Person of Christ is excellent. His two-fold natures in one Person, His effective and definite atonement, resurrection and ascension. All these he handles in part 4 with great care and persuasive biblical argumentation.

Before reading his treatment on the Person of Christ, I thought that Christ now was only divine and not man. God graciously used Dr. Grudem to persuaded me otherwise.

In the incarnation the Word took on flesh (Jn 1:1, 14). He did not lay aside His divinity, but added humanity to His divine Person (Phil 2:5-11). He was resurrected with a human body and went into heaven with that glorified body, nothing actually convinces us that the Lord Jesus ceased to be human at the moment of His ascension. In fact the Bible tells us that it is the man Christ Jesus who is our Mediator:

1Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

The Application of Redemption

Part 5 is entitled The Doctrine of The Application of Redemption. Therein Dr. Grudem handles among other things:

Common Grace

Election and Reprobation

The G...

Review of Dean Davis' The High King of Heaven on Amillennialism

Simon Wartanian | 12,976 views | 8,095 words | 0:42:03 hours | 13 April 2015 23:31

Review Book Review Dean Davis The High King Of Heaven Amillennialism Eschatology Reformed Eschatology

...ia

Footnotes

^ Visit his blog where he has a lot of good stuff, audio teachings, charts, diagrams on Amillennialism at https://amillennialism.wordpress.com

^ See my commentary on Chapter 1 of the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689. https://www.thecalvinist.net/post/1689-Baptist-Confession-Chapter-1:-Of-The-Holy-Scriptures/1020

^ Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative, pages 451-465.

^ The Bible and the Future, pages 229-238

^ Joseph Henry Thayer's Greek Definitions, G3952

^ Joseph Henry Thayer's Greek Definitions, G602

^ Joseph Henry Thayer's Greek Definitions, G2015

...

2 Peter 3:8-9, not wishing that any should perish

Simon Wartanian | 14,199 views | 2,323 words | 0:12:04 hours | 11 February 2014 13:56

Not Willing Any To Perish 2 Peter 3:9. Calvinism Election Predestination Limited Atonement Mercy Sovereignty

... confused and misled by the false teachers. The repentance in view, for the sake of which God delays judgment, is that of God’s people rather than the world at large. God is not willing that any of His elect should perish (John 6:39).

The HCSB Study Bible explains:  [3]

3:9 The Lord has not yet returned, says Peter, because He is patient with you, not wanting any to perish. "You" is variously interpreted as a reference to the letter's Christian recipients (identified in 1:1) or else more broadly as all people. In Chapter 1 "you" and "your" both refer back to the recipients identified in 1:1 (see 1:2,4,5,8,10,11,12,13,15,16,19,20). Peter's later use of "dear friends," (3:1,8,14,17) seems also to point back to those identified in 1:1.

What Matthew Henry said about 2 Peter 3:9:  [4]

That what men count slackness is truly long-suffering, and that to us-ward; it is giving more time to his own people, whom he has chosen before the foundation of the world, many of whom are not as yet converted; and those who are in a state of grace and favour with God are to advance in knowledge and holiness, and in the exercise of faith and patience, to abound in good works, doing and suffering what they are called to, that they may bring glory to God, and improve in a meetness for heaven; for God is not willing that any of these should perish, but that all of them should come to repentance. Here observe, 1. Repentance is absolutely necessary in order to salvation. Except we repent, we shall perish, Luke 13:3; Luke 13:5. 2. God has no delight in the death of sinners: as the punishment of sinners is a torment to his creatures, a merciful God does not take pleasure in it; and though the principal design of God in his long-suffering is the blessedness of those whom he has chosen to salvation, through sanctification of the spirit, and belief of the truth, yet his goodness and forbearance do in their own nature invite and call to repentance all those to whom they are exercised; and, if men continue impenitent when God gives them space to repent, he will deal more severely with them, though the great reason why he did not hasten his coming was because he had not accomplished the number of his elect. "Abuse not therefore the patience and long-suffering of God, by abandoning yourselves to a course of ungodliness; presume not to go on boldly in the way of sinners, nor to sit down securely in an unconverted impenitent state, as he who said (Matt. xxiv. 48), My Lord delayeth his coming, lest he come and surprise you;"

Here is what John Gill said:  [5]

but is longsuffering to us-ward: not to all the individuals of human nature, for the persons intended by us are manifestly distinguished from "some men" in the text, and from scoffers, mocking at the promise of Christ's coming, in the context, 2Pe 3:3; and are expressly called beloved, 2Pe 3:1; and God's longsuffering towards them is their salvation, 2Pe 3:15, nor is it true of all men, that God is not willing that any of them should perish, and that everyone of them should come to repentance, since many of them do perish in their sins, and do not come to repentance, which would not be the case, if his determining will was otherwise; besides, a society or company of men are designed, to which the apostle himself belonged, and of which he was a part; and who are described, in his epistles, as the elect of God, called out of darkness, into marvellous light, and having obtained like preciou...

The Purpose For Writing The Commentary On The 1689

Simon Wartanian | 5,415 views | 446 words | 0:02:24 hours | 19 September 2016 15:21

1689 Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Study Reformed Baptist

About a year ago or more,^[1] I started diving into the 1689 Baptist Confession of faith to study it. My main purpose was not to study the Confession per sé, but to study the doctrines asserted by the Confession and to see if they were biblical. My main focus was to teach myself to make a biblical case for cardinal doctrines which Reformed folk believe, and I believe that I have been able to make a biblical case for every (or almost all?) doctrine which is espoused by the Confession to my satisfaction. If you want a study which focuses on the words of the Confession^[2], this is not what you’re looking for. If you’re looking for a study which intends to make a case for the doctrines asserted, you may be blessed by this study. Basically, the purpose was to teach myself systematic theology and teach myself to defend Reformed doctrine biblically.

I cannot say that I disagree with any doctrine in the Confession, but there may be some who may question whether I hold to the Confession, especially Chapter 1, because I consider myself a theological continuationist. I stress theological, because I do not practice “prophecy” or “speaking in tongues.” Practically, I’m a cessationist with a very high view of Holy Writ and critical of charismania and those weird things which you see on the Net of charismatics. The study on the gifts is one which I started, but have not finished yet (I have not read all the books which I have purchased from both sides). But I must honestly say that I’m not convinced of cessationism because I don’t believe the Bible teaches it. The statement in 1:1 which says “those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased” may be the only one which I would interpret differently.

I’m not big on names, it doesn’t matter to me if one considers me a Reformed Baptist or not, I will not pride myself in that, either way it is not essential to me what title I have besides Δοῦλος Χριστοῦ.

Footnotes

^ The dates of publication which every post has for the Confession, do not mean that I finished the commentary on that day. At the beginning I commented very briefly (few lines) on the whole Confession, just because I was simply willing to know what it taught. Sometime after, I’m not sure when, maybe a year ago, I started enlarging the chapters and adding more of my thoughts and comments. The first longest chapter was chapter 7 on God’s Covenants, which makes a case for 1689 Federalism.

^ https://1689commentary.org/ is such a study.

<<

<

1

2

>

>>