Today, Facebook reminded me of this exchange with a stranger 7 years ago - A white lion came patronizing a brown calf...
This RB white lion couldn't see the difference between these two statements:
This RB white lion couldn't see the difference between these two statements:
"As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes." ~~ new school RBs.
"The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified." ~~ old school particular baptists.
================
Bill Hyer to Sing
December 31, 2010 at 4:57pm ·
Thanks, my brother in Christ, for accepting my invitation to friendship. As we are brothers in the Lord, I consider friendship on FB a trifle, except as it reflects that perspicuity of character we are to have in the Lord.
Bill Hyer (not the real name)
By the way, if you don't mind my prying and asking, how are you in presuppositional apologetics, and church history? At times, considering what God is using me for lately, these are things I seem to have a need to study more, although church history and the study of the Greek take precedence, currently.
What books would you recommend for church history, to honestly treat of all the issues, including those that are against the so-called free will of the not-totally depraved man?
There are so many, I hope to narrow the field to those most useful.
Thanks for your consideration of these questions and your love in Christ as a brother, Sing.
Sing
I am quite ignorant of presuppositional apologetic as well as church history. You should seek advice from other more learned men. The few books I have are mainly old theological works by the old school particular baptists...
Bill Hyer
Old school particular baptists are reformed baptists, brother. :-)
I am looking into these areas of study, just wanted to know if you were acquainted with them more than I. Thank you and bless you.
Sing
Bill@ "Old school particular baptists are reformed baptists, brother. :-)"
========
If there is one ERRONEOUS statement, that would be one.
If you don't mind, take a peek here...
I was a RB for many years. I am no longer one. Any further questions, feel free to ask.
Bill Hyer
Sing, I had only to read the first few statements to see that is a very unbalanced view of Reformed Baptists - at least, those I know of, of which I am one by belief, of Christ, by the Holy Spirit regenerating my dead in sin spirit unto new life, whereupon I repented and believed, all of and by God.
Have you read or listened to any of the Dividing Line with James White, or listened to Albert Moeler, etc.? They neither preach or believe the way that even the first two statements on that link said of such.
You might find this Statement of Faith from Alpha and Omega ministries helpful - there are so many misrepresentations out there, it is refreshing when one is given in truth:
http://www.aomin.org/articles/statement.html
Sing
Those things stated there are taken verbatim from the RBs here in Malaysia. I do abhor misrepresentation.
I have interacted with many RBs elsewhere... they are quite different from the old school baptists.
I have not heard of a RB agreeing with the old school baptists statement...
"The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
Bill Hyer
Do you agree with the 1689 Baptist confession of faith, Sing?
Do you agree with the 1689 Baptist confession of faith, Sing?
Here is an RB church that does: http://www.prbc.org/Confession.htm
As well as the statement from Alpha and Omega ministries, which I linked to you earlier.
We are given faith when we are renewed, at which time the forensic righteousness of Christ is imputed to us - Salvation includes all the parts as one whole, and is all of God.
Not all churches which state they are RB truly hold to these things, and I suspect you have come across some of these - I looked at the ARBC listing for Arizona, and this particular church was not mentioned, which surprised me - and possibly enlightened me, though I would have to research each one's SoF to see - they all claim to hold to the 1689 SoF.
Sing
Yes, I am quite familiar with it. So many claim to believe the 1689 CoF, but they all differ so VASTLY in their understanding of it.
The modern RBs, that came into being in the 1960's believe quite differently from the old school particular baptists who drawn up the confession.
In fact, it was precisely a careful study of the 1689 CoF that led me to the conviction that they RBs are quite deficient and inconsistent in their understanding of the doctrine of salvation. The 'Pruning' book records part of the journey.
Bill Hyer
If you look at the SoF at those links I sent to you and compare them to the 1689 confession, I think you will be pleasantly surprised - in fact, it is the SOFat that church I linked too.
Sing
I quote: "We believe that God, in His sovereign grace and mercy, regenerates sinful men by the power of the Holy Spirit, not by any action of their own, bringing them to new life. God grants to them the gifts of faith and repentance, which they then exercise by believing in Christ and turning from their sins in love for God. As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes. God's gift of faith, and the continuing work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the elect, results in good works. These good works flow from true, saving faith; they are a necessary result of faith, but are not to be considered necessary to the gaining of justification, which is by God's grace through faith alone, so that no man can boast."
============
New School Reformed Baptists (like the RBs) believe this:
"As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes."
Old School Particular Baptists believe this:
""The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
Do you see a fundamental difference?
I say the 1689 CoF repudiates the lies of the new school fullerites RBs.
The 1689 states plainly what the old school particular baptists stated, "The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
Sing
"As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes."
Consider this obvious contradiction of the above statement.
1. The RBs believe God justifies the believing.
- The simple truth is: God justifies the UNGODLY.
- The simple truth is: believing justifies a man, vindicates him as one already justified by God.
- The simple truth is: believing justifies a man, vindicates him as one already justified by God.
2. The RBs believe that the unjustified are capable of believing in order to be justified. Plain nonsense.
- The simple truth is: those NOT YET justified by God are STILL in their native state of condemnation and death; how could such a person believe? So much for the calvinists' claim of logical supremacy!
- The simple truth is: those NOT YET justified by God are STILL in their native state of condemnation and death; how could such a person believe? So much for the calvinists' claim of logical supremacy!
3. The RBs rightly believe that regeneration precedes faith, and faith (man's act of believing) is the necessary instrument for his justification by God.
- This statement necessarily implies that the Spirit's work of regeneration precedes God's work of justifying the ungodly.
The RBs are confused and willfully ignorant in this very important doctrine. They confused the EXPERIENTIAL justification of believers through faith as the FORENSIC justification of the ungodly by the free grace of God based solely on the righteousness of Jesus Christ.
The 1689 states the DISTINCT and SEPARATE facets of justification. The RBs have lost that completely - explaining their confusion and ignorance in this central doctrine.
Bill Hyer
Did you go to those links?
Sing
One link led me to the 1689 CoF of which I have read endless times and studied through with the church several times in the last 20 years.
Another link led me the SoF of which I read from beginning to end, and from which I quoted a statement that is obviously in error from both the logical and biblical consideration.
Bill Hyer
Sing, in this case, it is a matter of either semantics, or purposed misunderstanding - the SoF I linked you too believes and teaches the exact same things as the 1689 Confession - while saying faith justifies, it in no manner says that the faith is of men, but a gift of God. The logical conclusion is that justification is entirely of God.
In certain cases, I have dialogued with people who purposely misrepresent the truth and what others say - I hope you are not one who argues for the mere sake of the argument.
I do not doubt your intentions, but I would question your interpretation of a SoF so concisely worded as to reiterate that which the Scriptures say, attributing each and every part of the whole and entirety of salvation to God, and to God alone.
Do you enjoy the past sermons and writings of brother Spurgeon, who was before the current phase of Reformed Baptists (some of which, I think, indeed may be of different persuasion, but as I said, I have not checked out all their confessions)?
Have you listened to James White teach?
I do not think you would find much, if anything, that disagrees with either the Scriptures (of first priority) or the 1689 confession.
Sing
Have you heard before that "distinction is the essence of sound theology"?
If you think it is just semantics, then you are wrong.
Those who know better know the vast difference and condemned that which exposes the inconsistency and deficiency of their beliefs.
I don't think you will profit from a further study... EVEN if I can show you the OBVIOUS difference between RBs and old school baptists.
Thank for the conversation.
Let me just conclude by saying this:
The Scriptures speaks of these distinct aspects of justification:
- DECRETAL justification: God purposed justification in eternity. The old baptists speak of this justification in eternity. RBs foolishly slander the old school baptists for believing ETERNAL justification, i,e that a man is personally justified in eternity.
- LEGAL justification: Christ's death on the cross secured the LEGAL justification of all God's elect. Double imputation took place at the death and resurrection of Christ, Christ's righteousness was IMPUTED to all His elect, and the sins of all His elect were imputed to Him. This is what the Scriptures say, justification by the blood of Christ.
- VITAL/PERSONAL justification: God applies the righteousness of Christ to EACH individual elect personally... what was LEGAL is made vital and personal at the effectual calling of an elect out of his state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation. What was IMPUTED LEGALLY is now IMPARTED PERSONALLY, making it VITAL. This is what the Scriptures say justification by the free grace of God. Vital Justification being justification OF LIFE (Rom 5:18) carries with it REGENERATION. Justification/Regeneration makes it possible for a man to believe!
That is why the old baptists declared "The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
I hope you see some light now!
- EXPERIENTIAL/EVIDENTIAL justification: This justification is by the believing acts of God's children (already justified by the free grace of God.) In believing in Jesus Christ, they EXPERIENCE the blessedness of their justified state by the righteousness of Jesus Christ. That's what Gen 15:1-6 is all about. The RBs FOOLISHLY think Abraham WAS NOT a justified man BY GOD in Gen 12-14, i.e he was still a man under the condemnation of death, and believe that he was justified by God ONLY in Gen 15:1-6. They GRIEVOUSLY mistake the experiential justification in Gen 15:1-6 for the VITAL/PERSONAL justification that had ALREADY TAKEN place way back in Ur when God called him.
God justifies the UNGODLY.
Faith justifies the believing children of God.
Faith EVIDENCES the justified state of a man by the free grace of God. Do you understand why the RBs condemned the plain statement of the old school baptists, "The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
If you wish to continue, interact with the points above.
May our Lord grant you to see some light in this matter.
Bill Hyer
I'm sorry, Sing, but you do seem to be poisoned against that which those I know of who are Reformed Baptists hold too, which is the same as those points which you made.
I truly do not understand your hostility in these matters - did you listen to Dr. White doing exegesis of the Scriptures? I find it hard to believe that, from the above points, you would disagree with him - simply quoting the golden chain of redemption proves that all aspects of salvation are settled from eternity (eternity past really makes no sense whatsoever), and the ones I know agree completely with these Scriptural facts. That it is worked out in faith, also ordained by God in counsel with Himself, from eternity (the call is effective because it is all of God, and none of man), does not make faith the vehicle of that eternal justification, no more than working out our own salvation with fear and trembling, because it is God who is at work in us both to will and do of His good pleasure, makes faith the predecessor of sanctification that is eternal, yet shown in progressive manifestation in time/space/history.
We are sanctified, we are being sanctified - these are two sides of a coin that speaks of that which God accomplished in Christ before the world began - that is election in a nutshell, to put it blandly.
If you wish to argue, brother, I do not, for I do not understand your bile - I certainly don't agree with certain of various traditional Reformed doctrines, in certain things, but on those things I have mentioned, I certainly would have no problem saying I hold to the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, as those whom I know would not, either.
Blessings and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ - if you have no further wish to communicate, please feel free to De-friend me at any time.
[sing: the sanctification in the “we are sanctified” and the sanctification in “we are being sanctified” are completely different and distinct sanctification. There is the once-for-all definitive sanctification of being set apart from sin and death to that of righteousness and life by the direct, free, and sovereign activities of God, and there is an ongoing sanctification of being set apart from ignorance and ungodliness unto knowledge and godliness through the gospel ministry. If you don’t understand the distinction, then it is all soundbytes only!]
Sing
Bill, there is NO HOSTILITY... just the plain observation of the obvious distinction between what the RBs believe and what the 1689 does say.
I am surprised you see no difference. I wonder why the RBs who understood me have declared me and others as heretics. Maybe you are not as alert as them, or maybe you are being large-hearted.
Let me give you an example... tell me whether it is semantics or not:
Supposing a man FREELY credited a $1b to your account while you were a condemned and declared bankrupt, AND ALSO settled all your debts too. And he sent someone to bring the good news to you. And you believed the good news of the FREE gracious act, and by faith you went to the bank to draw on the money.
Would it not be SCANDALOUS and TREACHEROUS of you to claim that it was your believing the good news and going to the bank that CAUSED the gift to be freely credited to your account?
Does this illustration help to identify the exact issue at hand?
I am simply pointing out that the RBs come far short of what the old school baptists believed.
The old said this:
"The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."
The new said this:
"As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes."
And Brother Bill insisted that the old and the new are saying the same thing.
Thanks for the exchanges. May our Lord bless you richly.
Bill Hyer
May our Lord bless you richly, as well, brother Sing. That salvation is of God from the very first, before time began, to the very last, when we shall inherit that which the Holy Spirit is spoken of as the secured promise of, I have no doubt - all elements are of, from, and for God, to glorify Himself, which we benefit from.
May our Lord bless you richly, as well, brother Sing. That salvation is of God from the very first, before time began, to the very last, when we shall inherit that which the Holy Spirit is spoken of as the secured promise of, I have no doubt - all elements are of, from, and for God, to glorify Himself, which we benefit from.
There is nothing in man, even after God has regenerated him, to make him worthy of salvation - all elements are of God, and do that which God states clearly in His Scriptures.
Do you think Dr. White would declare you a heretic? I can hardly imagine that.
Keeping growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, my brother.
============
After the exchanges, he defriended me. So much for his pious words stated from the beginning of the exchange.
"Thanks, my brother in Christ, for accepting my invitation to friendship. As we are brothers in the Lord, I consider friendship on FB a trifle, except as it reflects that perspicuity of character we are to have in the Lord."
