A recent blog entitled Updating and Refining the 1689 Baptist Confession: Toward a Humble Orthodoxy struck a chord with me, especially in consideration of my blog posted October 2. In the more recent blog the author, Bob Gonzales, a self professed Reformed Baptist, claims that those of his persuasion, "sometimes give the impression that we view ourselves as closer to historical Christian faith and practice than others in every respect." He goes on to state that, "Revising our Confession is a good opportunity to show our evangelical brothers that we don’t believe the illumination of the Holy Spirit ended with our Particular Baptist forefathers in the 17th century." And that, "…borrowing language or insights from their creeds where appropriate demonstrates a teachable and humble spirit on our part."
For my part I suggest that those who claim the Reformed position just admit that they are evangelicals rather than Baptist at all. To remind you of my previous blog, I quoted a missionary:
“… our English Baptist forefathers left their original position of "local church" proclaimed in their declaration of 1644 to embrace the reformation idea of the universal church to be "politically correct" in the second London Confession of 1689. They felt the need to be accepted as orthodox in their doctrine in order to be included in the Act of Toleration of 1689. From that time on we find Baptists struggling with this issue. On one hand we have the clear Bible teaching of the "ekklesia" and on the other hand the insatiable desire to be accepted by the protestant/evangelical community. May God help us to be faithful to Him and not to men.”
The last thing a Baptist needs to be as deemed "orthodox" by the Protestant powers that be. Just as Amos disavowed identification with the prophets of his day, the Baptist identification is one that is separate and distinct from those accepted orthodoxies of any age. We follow the Lord as He is revealed in the Word of God, not the orthodox standards of whichever age a Baptist may find himself. If a Baptist has a reason to exist it is as salt and light against the culture of our world, including those forms of Christianity that have morphed with the world.
Humility yes; but not before Protestant hierarchies. Our doctrine stands or falls in "the eyes of him with whom we have to do."
Marvin McKenzie
In the fields
For my part I suggest that those who claim the Reformed position just admit that they are evangelicals rather than Baptist at all. To remind you of my previous blog, I quoted a missionary:
“… our English Baptist forefathers left their original position of "local church" proclaimed in their declaration of 1644 to embrace the reformation idea of the universal church to be "politically correct" in the second London Confession of 1689. They felt the need to be accepted as orthodox in their doctrine in order to be included in the Act of Toleration of 1689. From that time on we find Baptists struggling with this issue. On one hand we have the clear Bible teaching of the "ekklesia" and on the other hand the insatiable desire to be accepted by the protestant/evangelical community. May God help us to be faithful to Him and not to men.”
The last thing a Baptist needs to be as deemed "orthodox" by the Protestant powers that be. Just as Amos disavowed identification with the prophets of his day, the Baptist identification is one that is separate and distinct from those accepted orthodoxies of any age. We follow the Lord as He is revealed in the Word of God, not the orthodox standards of whichever age a Baptist may find himself. If a Baptist has a reason to exist it is as salt and light against the culture of our world, including those forms of Christianity that have morphed with the world.
Humility yes; but not before Protestant hierarchies. Our doctrine stands or falls in "the eyes of him with whom we have to do."
Marvin McKenzie
In the fields
