← Back to sermon library

So the next question, and I think is excellent, what distinguishes a confessional Reformed Baptist Church, like Free Grace Baptist Church, from Calvinistic Baptist Churches associated with figures like John Piper or John MacArthur? So the question assumes a distinction between Reformed Baptist Church and Calvinistic Baptist Church.

So I agree, we can call Calvinism the reformed faith, but I also agree that we need to nuance. Yeah, we would want to say more, even as we use the word Calvinism. We would want to say more than that, you know, because the canons of Dort are 100 years after Calvin. And that's just the reformed faith dealing with a contemporary issue, right? They didn't formulate the five points of themselves. They were responding to something that was troubling the church. And so the question is, what's the difference between churches like ours and a Calvinist? A confessional reform Baptist church and a Calvinistic Baptist church vis-a-vis John Piper.

Well, it's which I, by the way, I really have grown. I've, you know, been on both sides of John Piper. I appreciate the man, wonderfully gifted man. in so many ways. He's done a lot of good for American evangelicalism in the late 20th century, early 21st century. However, men like him and others, the departures from what we recognize as the reformed faith, and I would even say, now, if you're gonna reduce Calvinism as you did, which again, it has precedent to reduce Calvinism to the five points, but even there, You know, I've often said, now speaking of Piper directly, my background, raised, baptized, catechized, Pentecostal, later charismatic.

There is a distinction there. I've said, look, if you can't subscribe our first chapter, you don't get to claim to be Calvinistic or Reformed because the previous ways of God revealing himself have ceased. That's right. So Piper is out right there. So then the question is, well, is it just cessationism? Well, it is, but it's because it's a part of, Dr. Renahan will talk about when you read our confession, you have to read it horizontally. That's a part of a larger understanding.

And so, Thank God for Baptist churches that are becoming Calvinistic, right? I rejoice in that. It's wonderful because what they're doing is they're seeing it really is all of grace. It's grace, it's grace, it's grace. So how would we distinguish ourselves from them? I mean, you can go through the catalog of theological concerns, whether it's the covenant, The law. Covenant of works. Covenant of works. Because Piper doesn't, as far as I know, hold to it. No, yeah. So, chapter 22. Law of Sabbath.

Regular principle of worship. Regular principle of worship is, you know, and even that issue there, since we're talking more narrowly about a Baptist, the Baptist, I think even the general Baptist, which there's no relationship historically between the two groups. I think even they held to something close to, if not identical, to the regular principle of worship. That is a Baptist distinctive, an instinct, going back to the English Puritans. So if you're not holding to that, by the regular principle of worship, that God regulates our worship by what he's commanded. if that's not a fundamental aspect of your church's worship and identity as a church, you're not reformed.

And that's where, because even as we allow Calvinism to be reduced, but even Calvin, Calvin was so clear that, how do you say, I know it's how impossible it is to convince the world that what they give, if they're just sufficient zeal, God doesn't accept it. That's Calvin. I've often, when I'm instructing my people, say, look, the truth is, if you brought Calvin to the president and he had a conversation, after he gets over being unhappy that there are people calling themselves Calvinists, right, he's going to go, oh, so you agree with me. that we can only worship God as he's commanded us in scripture.

That's at the front end of his thinking. And so even there, I begrudgingly recognize Calvinistic Baptist churches, because it's like, well, you reduce Calvinism, or Calvin himself, in a way that, I mean, we do it, you know, you have to have shorthand. But there is a distinguishable difference between a Calvinistic Baptist narrowly defined in, say, a John Piper. And we're not picking on him. Or John MacArthur, a dispensationalist who held to the five points. Exactly. So a dispensationalist is not going to affirm Chapter 7 Confessions, certainly not Chapter 19.

So basically what I think I'm hearing is that reformed theology or confessional reform theology is Calvinistic. So theologically, we affirm Calvinism, but there's additional things. You know, Sproul says, didn't Sproul say that Calvinism is or reform theology is covenant theology?

Yeah, you know, what did the Reformation historically, what did it produce? Reformed documents, documents reflecting the principles that they were arguing for. And that would be in the great Protestant confessions and catechisms. I think that's, it's better to understand what a Reformed Christian is in terms of their confessional adherence. Is it a test? Yeah. Do they hold to one of the classic documents? And by the way, the issue is not, are those guys saved or... Right. No, it's just an intramural debate in terms of who gets to call themselves reformed.

It seems like it comes down to that at times. When I say reformed, I'm basically making it the same as Protestant confessional. one of the confessions that came out of the Protestant Reformation. And then to drill down even farther, when I say I'm a Reformed Baptist, I'm saying I hold to the Second London Confession as the most mature expression of my understanding of Scripture, which happened to come out at the end of the 17th century, which is the most perfected Protestant doctrine, document.

I'm kind of kidding. And they leaned on predecessors. I think that's helpful. I mean, you see where they tightened up language. They went with Savoy on some issues. They didn't go with Westminster. They leaned on those things in an informed way and took the best route. statement you just made, they leaned on others. But they, by the time 1677 comes around, when our confession was first edited and it became a product, they changed some terms. Now, did they do it willy-nilly? I don't like that term. Let's put it this way.

Or was there historical theological context for subsistences instead of persons and other changes? And the evidence is from the primary documents is that they were calculated changes. They were not willy-nilly. And Dr. Renahan, James, has shown that some of their changes, probably most if not all of them, are historical, theological, contextual, and they got it from pedobaptists because they were right.

And it was a more mature reflection on some issues in light of some heresies and whatever were going on there. And so I think it's a good thing. So when I read somebody that says, well, they changed it here, it's kind of arbitrary or whatever, or it's uniquely Baptist or it's uniquely particular Baptist or something like that, I'm going, no, I don't, I don't, I mean, there might be some stuff like, some changes like that.

I'm sure there are. But there are, most of them aren't that way. They're not like unique to, yeah. And they're borrowing from somebody else's arguments, yeah. I get really upset when outsiders look at our document and say, well, look at this weird change. You guys are strange. And sometimes I know for a fact that they're borrowing from Pedo-Baptist literature. They're borrowing from your guys.

You know, something else, if I can, you know, going back to your original question as I'm listening and I'm thinking. you know, Calvinistic Baptists, right? You know, are there really churches that would just only denominate themselves as Calvinistic Baptists?

No, no, no. But see, that's helpful. And particular Baptist churches are specifically churches. And we don't have, again, we recognize John Piper as a very gifted, faithful brother, on and on and on. But our churches don't We don't have a personality that we're organized around or a movement. Our confession. Yeah. Right. In other words, what's at the front end and then brings up the rear end is our theological commitments that's rooted in something that actually goes back to the creeds and to the apostles. So at your church, and I've been to your church several times, and your church several times. I've been to my church several times.

I hope, and I think this is the case, that our people are not trained to say, Oh, but Pastor David doesn't hold that view. Or I hope, and I think this is the case, our people would say, we don't confess that. Our understanding of Scripture is summarily contained in our confession of faith. And it does not have to do with our boundaries are not Jim Butler, David Charles, and Richard Barcellas. Sorry, like Protestant papalism. Private potpourri. Yeah, private potpourri. Pastor Jim says, Pastor Cam says.

Evangelicals have, they've been rightfully taught to have an allergic reaction to papism, right? And oftentimes when they encounter us, creeds, confessions, catechisms. It sounds like papism. It does. And one of the things that I actually want, when I'm trying to sell And I mean that in the best sense. Even the regular principle of worship. I tell people who are looking at our church or coming to church, I say, listen, those things, the confrees, the confessions, protect the church from me. Yes, that's right. Yeah, exactly. And I say this without a giggle.

Pope is Antichrist, but that spirit is still very much alive and well. We all want a Pope. We want a Pope. Is there a Lutheran? No, Hodge says every man has a Pope in his own bosom, a desire to lord it over others. And you know, as a pastor, it's like, Yeah, I could lord it over my people. It feeds pride and it subjects people to the wrong authority. The authority is not your pastor.

And I like the way you said that. I tell my people this all the time. You shouldn't be driving to church going, I wonder what he's going to say this week. Are we going to get tongues? Yeah, you should know what your pastor is over against. You don't know the text.

You don't know the particular words, but you know he's going to expound a text and he's going to relate it to Jesus and to me and to unbelievers. He's going to relate it to our Lord. He's going to relate it to believers. He's going to relate it to unbelievers. Somehow, someway, he's going to do that.

And that should be an anchor for your soul instead of driving to church going, what's going to happen this week, you should already know. Within the safeguards of a confession that has stood the test of time. That heads you in, right? That heads you in. You're not going to get a woman preacher this Sunday. You're not going to get— Or next Sunday. Any Sunday. Any Sunday.

You know, it's a protective thing. And churches that don't have them, yeah, the pastor becomes the pope, whether outspokenly or not. He's the guy that runs the show. I have a friend that used to be at a large church and I think he said it was either an unspoken or maybe even a spoken and written rule that in the Bible studies that might be held by, you know, the church, in the various Bible studies, you can't contradict. The pastor.

Yeah. Wow. Well, you know, again, I'm just reflecting over how people responded to these things and they're like, well, isn't that restrictive? And I'm like, well, It's like the rails for a train is restrictive, right? Not all restriction is bad. Exactly. And I ask them, what happens if the train's not on the rail? What do we call that? They go, a train wreck. That's right. Or a derail. They don't see the ecclesiastical equivalent to that. I love fishing on a river bank. I'm not getting near a swamp because I don't know what I'm going to step in, where I'm going to step. And so boundaries are good. And especially the boundaries that God has given us in his word as rightfully and now been interpreted for 2000.

What kind of arrogance? I know that we can do it better. Oh, my goodness. Or we don't need the gifts that Christ gave to his church over the years. Right. Ephesians 4 legitimizes and expects I'd argue creedalism and confessionalism. If Jesus gives gifts to the church in an Athanasius or an Augustine or a Calvin or a Luther, who are we to say, nah, we don't need those gifts. We can do it. We can do it. I just don't think so. I think we need the insights of the gifts that Christ has given to His church. We're not called to reinvent the wheel. Yeah. Amen.