Dangerous Assumptions!
When I finally submitted to the Word of God and embraced what we fondly refer to as the “doctrines of grace”, I did not know of any group of Baptist churches that openly adhered to those precious truths. In conjunction with this personal awakening, I also became aware that the evangelical and fundamentalist church traditions with which I was familiar were not sufficiently concerned to worship God in spirit and in truth. Church services had become primarily focused on evangelism and that evangelism was essentially an attempt to decision people (this being one serious consequence of the man-centeredness of the prevailing theology). So, several upheavals were taking place in my thoughts. It was disconcerting to find myself venturing into areas wherein there did not seem to be many clear church models. Of course, I was not alone in all of this. I was aware of other young men and some not so young who were grappling with many of the same concerns. In God’s kindness, those friends were enormous helps and guides to me at that difficult time. We are talking now about the late ’60s and early ’70s.
In the throes of this upheaval, I was made aware of “Reformed Baptist” churches. That was so long ago that I am unclear now if that title was self assumed or imposed by others. At any rate, that is how these churches were known to me. Many things drew out my interest in these congregations (at the time very few in number). The obvious seriousness in the worship of God was refreshing. The preaching was the most impressive feature, being more authentically Bible based than any preaching I had heard (and I was exposed to fairly solid preaching from my youth–preaching which professed to be implicitly biblical). There were numerous differences to the fundamentalism of my youth. However, the one thing that drew me above all others was the determination to be wed to the Bible no matter what! After being trained in an institution which made that claim, it was revolutionary to find serious men who were actually doing that! The willingness to take a fresh look at every subject or practice in light of biblical exegesis was unlike anything I had ever witnessed. It was so clearly right. And, it was so invigorating! I recall learning in those days that this work must be on-going as long as we remain in this world–we must ever be examining the Scripture and reforming our thoughts and practices accordingly. We must not settle upon our accomplishments because we do not receive all the light we need at any one time. There must be a humble and diligent and prayerful study of the Scriptures continually, both to strengthen our correct convictions and to improve in matters where our present understanding may not be completely clear or accurate. That too was so obviously right! Here was a work to give oneself to for life–the fresh study and application of God’s Word.
That was almost 40 years ago for me and it is embarrassing to look back and realize how poorly I have adhered to those original principles! But, I am thankful to God’s grace for a continuing conviction that those principles are right! The Word of God is alone sufficient to guide us in righteousness; yet, we must be ever in the Scriptures expecting to be established in right things and to be stretched by fresh and deepening understanding of things not so accurately known before. It is exciting to anticipate improvement and growth in understanding and in practice. Indeed, there is much to learn and many needs for improvement.
It is in this regard that we must confront some “dangerous assumptions”. There appears to be several assumptions present among Reformed Baptists that are disturbingly similar to the assumptions of the fundamentalists of my past–associations that are not in-keeping with the essential principles identified above. One such assumption appears to be that Reformed Baptist churches attained to a decree of maturity and even perfection in the 1970s. I am referring now especially to the form of our public meetings. But, not exclusively that, also included is the thought that we had figured out how to do evangelism sufficiently well that nothing new or innovative should be introduced. The assumption of an achieved maturity expresses itself by the explicit conviction that any change introduced in the forms or “circumstances’ of our public meetings must necessarily be a decline away from the perfection already achieved. Now, I have not heard any one actually put it in such crass terms as this. Hopefully, every one draws back from the idea that perfection or complete maturity has been achieved. However, is that not the undertone of the immediate suspicion of any change brought into public worship or in the church’s efforts at evangelism–efforts involving bridge building with the unconverted for the sake of the Gospel? Is not it not implicit that Reformed Baptist churches do not change because they do not need to change and they do not need to change because a measure of perfection has been achieved!
Of course, I am writing this from the perspective of an eldership that believes that change has been and continues to be necessary with us. We fully agree that change is unsettling and that no change should be undertaken unless the pressure of the Bible makes it necessary and even then it should take place with instruction and care. No change should be made simply for the sake of change or to bring about greater conformity to the expectations of current thought or culture. On the other hand, we have concluded that in certain areas our practice has not measured up to the actual teaching of Scripture. Not surprisingly, from our perspective, we have discovered that there are elements of Biblical teaching that we had not understood or considered with sufficient care. Thus, after serious study and an effort at the instruction of God’s people, we have endeavored to bring about changes so as to have greater conformity with the actual words of the Bible. We fully expect that such conviction and change will continue to occur. It is not our thought that we are now fully mature. No doubt further alterations will be required as the Word and Spirit of God continue to illuminate our minds.
I have not mentioned the particular changes that we have made, because that is not my concern. There are dear Brethren who will not agree with those changes. That is understandable. I will just say that such has been our conviction, again from actual words of Scripture, that for us not to change would have been a form of rebellion. Nonetheless, the area of concern just now is an attitude which resists all change and would suggest that any and all change is indicative of an erosion of fidelity to the Bible, even a compromise of commitment to Christ. That is a very dangerous attitude and assumption. It is a denial of an accepted principle of Reformed Baptist theology, at least as I have understood it, namely that being reformed means ever reforming in conformity to a maturing understanding of God’s Word. To dismiss that principle as a conscious operating principle is to cease being genuinely reformed!
Another dangerous assumption is that the Holy Spirit has in some sense ceased giving gifts to the church, or that He has ceased giving illumination and wisdom and utterance as in previous periods of the church’s history. Again, no one has actually said this (as far as I know); however, it is clearly implied in a stubborn refusal to accept almost anything coming from Christians that are contemporary with ourselves. The refusal to read anything that is not 100-500 years old or to sing anything that has not been part of accepted church hymnology for 100 years (preferably more) implies that the Holy Spirit is in no sense a part of what has been written in the contemporary church either in terms of theology or exegesis or music for congregational worship. Surely, we would not reject what we believe to be in some respect the fruit of the Holy Spirit’s work in the modern church! Do we not criticize and lament the scorn heaped upon Whitefield and Spurgeon by their contemporaries…how could those people have been so foolish, we ask? Thus, given that stance, it must be assumed that the refusal to read contemporary authors or even to consider singing contemporary hymns reflects the conviction that we are not making the same mistake of Whitefield’s or Spurgeon’s brethren. Our refusals are based upon a deep-seated persuasion that the Spirit of God is not present in these modern works.
1Corinthians 12:3 creates some difficulty in holding anything approximating this perspective:
1 Corinthians 12:3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
Surely that does not mean that no one can verbalize the words “Jesus is Lord” except through the inner work of the Holy Spirit. But, it would seem to indicate that speaking those words with heart conviction is reflective of a work of the Spirit in grace. Therefore, if people are writing true and biblically accurate things about Christ and the Gospel and give every appearance of being genuinely convinced that those things are true, does that not speak of the presence of the Holy Spirit? Granted no one can read everything that is being written in Jesus’ name and not everything written for congregational singing is worthy. That is very true. However, to take the position that if it is contemporary we should not waste our time with it because it is inevitably inferior, would seem very dangerous. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is still active, even powerfully active. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is illuminating the minds and hearts of Godly men with superior insights on important Biblical subjects. Perhaps there are Godly scholars who while deliberately standing on the shoulders of the Reformers and Puritans, are being brought by the Spirit to a more mature understanding of crucial truth (which I believe is happening). If that is at least possible, would it not be dangerous to hold a position that only the old stuff is profitable, that everything new is shoddy and carnal and of little profit? Might that not be an insult to the Holy Spirit? Might that not deprive ourselves and the people of God of insights that are desperately needed?
I am challenged by Paul’s words to the church in Thessalonica. I am unable to limit this counsel to the age of the Apostles:
1 Thessalonians 5:19-21 19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies. 21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.
I take that to mean that we will have things to test until Christ comes and that not all of it will prove to be bad. Some of it will be good, the gift of the Spirit’s present ministry in the church. Every preacher wants that to be true of his own preaching each Lord’s Day, why would we deny that it might be true of books and songs as well?
Unquestionably the most important, the most clearly revealed truths, have been formulated in a way that does not admit of change. We will not discover a nuance of “justification” which will require that we rework our doctrinal statements. Though we may well discover depths of the doctrine that we have not recognized. On matters less substantially defined, we may come to see that some of the views we have adopted from others, more than from our own prayerful study, are not adequate. Recently in an on-going exposition of Colossians trying to understand 3:16 and comparing other New Testament passages speaking to the public meetings of the church, I was convicted that in a zeal to uphold the primacy of worship I had neglected to see the bi-directional emphasis of so many such passages. Worship must be at the fore-front of the gathered church, but not in a way that loses focus on the need for ministry to one another. That is a strong teaching of the New Testament epistles to which I had not given sufficient emphasis in my preaching. That represents a change. This one did not arise from reading anything other than the Scriptures. Another example, in recent years I have become a stronger Baptist than ever before. I now am convinced that we may have conceded too much to the hermeneutical philosophy of our highly esteemed paedo-baptist friends. Other examples could be given. The point has to do with matters that are not at the fore of orthodoxy; but are nonetheless crucial to our faith. Could we possibly need more light? Could we need to change in certain ways of thinking and acting?
The fact is that the Holy Spirit is working in the church, just as He always has since Pentecost. There are sermons, prayers, books, and songs being produced through the grace of the Holy Spirit. It is extremely dangerous to deny that or to attribute to purely naturalistic factors what is in fact a gracious work of God. These works of the Spirit are recognizable by their conformity to the Word of Christ. Everything, both old and new, must be tested by the Scriptures. In the process of such testing much will not pass muster. However, in that same process, we may increase in knowledge and holiness. Sanctification is change. We believe in both personal and corporate sanctification. Some of that sanctification will come about by the fresh insights of Spirit taught men–men contemporary with ourselves, insights which may sound new and strange but upon careful examination will prove to be accurate, Scriptural and needed.
What makes us resistant to the contemporary? Perhaps it is fear. Perhaps it is pride (we might have to admit that we were unwittingly in error in something we have done or said). Perhaps it is an unwillingness to concede or to have our people think that anyone outside of our immediate circle has anything substantial to contribute to our church life. Perhaps it is the reluctance to do the testing necessary. Or, perhaps it really is our conviction that we should (must) never change in any respect because what we have is as close to being completely right as we will ever come.
Let me say again, I have not heard any one say that Reformed Baptists have actually achieved perfection or that the Holy Spirit has been withdrawn. I am confident that no one would actually say either. However, there are attitudes which imply both of these things and do so quite strongly. And, my point is that both of those insinuations reflect very dangerous assumptions. The purpose of this writing is to affirm the established Reformed perspective that being genuinely reformed will inevitably involve continuing reformation, some of which will be open and public.
