Backgrounds of the Restoration Movement: Where Do We Go From Here?

passioncartoonThe books on how to teach adult Bible classes all say you need to end with an application: how do we apply these lessons to our lives? It’s good to gain a perspective from history because it helps us separate culture from command and accident from design. That doesn’t tell us what to do with the conclusions.

We’ve seen that the 20th Century Churches of Christ were the very opposite of the movement that Stone and the Campbells worked to establish, with the original teachings misrepresented, suppressed, and ultimately forgotten. For a time, we pretended to have no history at all — as though somehow the church founded by Peter in AD 33 lept across the pages of history to the present with no intervening events at all — other than a series of digressions by “the denominations.”  It’s just not true.

More recently, many have sought to wrap themselves in the cloak of Restorationism, as though being in the Restoration Movement had always been about restoring First Century practices, rather than First Century unity built on faith in Jesus.

It’s easy to become a bit arrogant and look down on our spiritual fathers of the last century as though they accomplished nothing of merit. But here we are in a Church of Christ Bible class — not a Baptist or Methodist Bible class — and we should ask ourselves why we’re here? What did the 20th Century Churches of Christ get right? Continue reading

Posted in Restoration Movement, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 10 Comments

Neo-Calvinism: Abraham Kuyper, Criticisms, Part 3

Common grace

For [Kuyper] common grace is primarily a grace directed to the redemption of the cosmos and culture. By rooting this doctrine in the divine decree of predestination he was able to construct a system whereby God’s plan for His creation is realized along a double track: the elect are brought to salvation by Christ as Mediator of redemption (particular grace) and the cosmos with all its potential for culture is redeemed by Christ as Mediator of creation (common grace). Such a conception had to lead to an essentially optimistic view of culture and the world. Not that Kuyper himself lost sight of sin and its awful consequences for the human race and the cosmos. He deeply believed in the antithesis and thus in the fundamental difference between common and particular grace.

I’m good with optimism. I think anyone who is on God’s side should believe he’s on the winning team — not just that he’ll be saved in the end, but that God will accomplish his entire agenda in time. Continue reading

Posted in Neo-Calvinism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 7 Comments

Empty Nest

empty nestWell, my youngest is now settled into life as a Harding freshman, my oldest (of 4) just finished a week-long visit, and my wife and I are now officially empty nesters. I have one at Harding, one at Auburn, one in the Miami graduate law school for taxation, and one who is actually working for living and entirely on his own. It’s a very strange (and quiet) feeling.

What does it mean for the blog? Well, I doubt that it means more posts per day. I tried that a while back. Not a good idea. In fact, I’m glad GraceConversation is over so I only have to write for one blog. It was fun, but all the fun I could stand.

It could mean that I have less time to post. I mean, you should see my wife’s honey-do list! The kids had kept her pretty distracted, but that’s pretty much over I think. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 12 Comments

Neo-Calvinism: Abraham Kuyper, Criticisms, Part 2

Douma points out that the Hebrew verb abad means simply to cultivate a field. This labour is required of man if he is to eat (Gen.1:29; 2:5; 3:17ff.). What these verses seem to tell us is that there is a connection between working and eating and that sin has made work difficult.

Hmm … The passage under consideration is —

(Gen 2:15)  The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

And there are two commands: to “work” (‘abad) the Garden and to “take care” (shamar) of it. I’ll grant that ‘abad means to work the ground in the sense of tilling the ground — that is, to make it produce food. It’s a utilitarian verb. But shamar shows up in verses such as —

(Gen 3:24)  After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard [shamar] the way to the tree of life.

(Gen 4:9)  Then the LORD said to Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?” “I don’t know,” he replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper [shamar]?”

(Gen 6:19)  You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep [shamar] them alive with you.

(Gen 18:19)  For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep [shamar] the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”

(Gen 28:15)  “I am with you and will watch over [shamar] you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.”

Adam was commanded to care for the Garden in the sense of guarding it, protecting it, or honoring it. This is obviously quite different from a command merely to make it productive. It means to keep safe. Plainly, Kuyper’s critics aren’t being fair with the text. Continue reading

Posted in Neo-Calvinism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 33 Comments

Neo-Calvinism: Abraham Kuyper, Criticisms, Part 1

Pronk notes that there certain problems arose with Kuyper’s theology.

Prior to Kuyper the Reformed, while not denying that the church has a task in society, put the emphasis on the salvation of sinners. Preaching for the Old School Calvinists, therefore dealt with the great Biblical themes of repentance — and then not just daily repentance of believers, but also the initial act of repentance on the part of the unconverted in the church — faith, the new birth, justification, sanctification and so on. But with Kuyper a shift in emphasis took place. Not what the Holy Spirit works in sinners’ hearts through the Word, but what Christians should do to redeem society and culture — that became the important thing.

Now, we considered this problem in the earlier posts on the Third and Fourth Great Awakenings. We Christians have a tendency to emphasize either personal salvation or mission to the world. For some reason, Christians struggle to keep these two in balance.

Therefore, in America, we see churches that all about personal evangelism or all about social justice, but virtually none that manage to do both. Of course, among 19th Century Calvinists, many wouldn’t have seen the urgency of evangelism at all, as some would believe that God elects and God saves and our preaching has nothing to do with it. Continue reading

Posted in Neo-Calvinism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Neo-Calvinism: Abraham Kuyper, Criticisms, Part 1

Neo-Calvinism: Abraham Kuyper, Introduction to His Thought

These posts will be built around a lecture given by Rev. C. Pronk on neo-Calvinism to the Student Society of the Free Reformed Churches of North America.

For Kuyper the domain of Calvinism was much broader than what most people in his time understood by it. His contemporaries in Reformed circles saw Calvinism as basically an ecclesiastical and confessional movement [correct church order and correct doctrine — sound familiar?]. Reformed or Calvinistic for them meant believing in the depravity of man and his absolute dependence on God for salvation. In other words, they stressed the doctrines of grace or the so-called Five Points of Calvinism in opposition to Arminians and Modernists who denied these doctrines.

Kuyper saw it as his mission in life to convince his fellow Reformed believers that Calvinism was much more than that. It was an all-encompassing world-and-life view, he insisted, which enables us to understand and make sense of reality. Our task as Christians, he said, is to bring the principles of Calvinism to bear upon the world so as to influence and change it, redeeming and claiming it for Christ to whom the whole created order belongs.

The key-concept of Calvinism, according to Kuyper, is the sovereignty of God over the whole cosmos in all its spheres. This Divine sovereignty is reflected in a three-fold human sovereignty, namely in the State, in Society and in the Church.

Kuyper was a TULIP Calvinist. And he wrestled with the same problem we see in modern evangelical and fundamentalist churches — the tendency to define our Christianity exclusively in terms of “going to heaven when we die.” Thus, we argue salvation issues endlessly and we focus on evangelism, but we don’t see our Christianity as deeply influencing other areas of life. Continue reading

Posted in Neo-Calvinism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 21 Comments

Backgrounds of the Restoration Movement: Positive Law

In hindsight, it’s easy to see that the doctrine taught by Stone, the Campbells, and Scott differed radically from much that was taught in the years following the Civil War. What changed? Surely they didn’t realize at the time that an entirely different theology was being taught.

I think it boils down to two important doctrinal trends: the abuse of positive law theory and Landmarkism, borrowed from the Baptists.

Positive Law

LardMoses Lard began his editing career in 1864. He insisted that all Christians must agree on every single point —

For if both of these men be true Christians neither more nor less, evidently there cannot exist between them even a nominal, to say nothing of a real difference. … Consequently they are now, be it supposed, Christians strictly according to the Bible; that is, they mentally accept and in heart hold, as the matter of their faith, precisely and only what the Bible certainly teaches; they do and practice what, and only what, it either expressly or by precedent enjoins; in spirit, temper, and disposition, they are exactly what it requires; and as to names, they wear none save those which it imposes. Continue reading

Posted in Restoration Movement, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

How Could a Benevolent God … ?

Posted in Thought Questions | Tagged | 2 Comments

Backgrounds of the Restoration Movement: Landmarkism

passioncartoonMany of the second generation of the Restoration Movement misunderstood the Campbells. In particular, Moses Lard and Benjamin Franklin (great nephew of the Revolutionary War Benjamin Franklin) taught a much narrower doctrine of salvation (soterology), sometimes insisting on near-perfect doctrine as a test of fellowship.

I’ve not come to a fully satisfactory explanation for why this generation so severely departed from the teachings of the first generation. But I think it’s a combination of the difficulty of understanding much of the Campbells’ writings (they liked really long sentences) and the influence of the Landmark movement among the Baptists, centered around Nashville.

Alexander Campbell famously debated the leader of the Landmark movement, James R. Graves, late in his career, with Graves trying to prove that the Restoration churches are all lost due to not bearing the true marks of the church and not being founded at Pentecost.

Consider these quotations taken from the Wikipedia article on Landmarkism – Continue reading

Posted in Restoration Movement, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Backgrounds of the Restoration Movement: Landmarkism

Church Finances and Business: Starting a New Church

I get emails —

Jay, I am involved in a group of individuals that is starting a house church. We want to give the members an opportunity to tithe as well as support other activities. The research that I have done on the IRS website basically leads me to believe that we need no special registration like 501-3.C to allow our members to deduct their contributions. We would only need to track and provide receipts to the individuals that contribute $250 or more in aggregate. Am I correct?

Also what are feelings about incorporation? I know that we only would need to be incorporated if we wanted to purchase real estate or enter into to binding contracts in the name of the church.

I’m a tax lawyer, and even tax lawyers get confused with these questions. But I do quite a lot of work for churches and have had to work through the rules many times. Here are the answers — Continue reading

Posted in Church Finances and Business, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments