Gospel Worthy: The Weblog of Evan Burns (part 1 of an interview)

By Dustin W. Benge

A unique opportunity students have in Ph.D. studies at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is the ability to personally interact and engage with other people. You learn quite a bit about a person after sitting in class with them for eight hours a day as biblical, theological, historical, and cultural ideas are thrown around the room. Evan Burns is one person I have appreciated getting to know during my own studies at Southern. Evan works for Training Leaders International and lives with his family in Southeast Asia where he currently serves on the faculty of Asia Biblical Theological Seminary of Cornerstone University. Evan is currently a Ph.D. candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he is researching the spirituality of Andrew Fuller under the supervision of Dr. Michael Haykin.

Evan’s heart for missions and his love of the theology and spirituality of Andrew Fuller led him to the creation of a blog entitled, Gospel Worthy. Gospel Worthy is dedicated to the spirituality and missiology of Andrew Fuller and his legacy. As he researches, Evan posts his thoughts and musings about Andrew Fuller’s connection between mission and spirituality. I recently asked Evan to answer a few questions that I thought would serve us all in understanding Fuller’s theology of mission:

How and when were you first introduced to Andrew Fuller?


I was first exposed to Fuller in 2004. I had just become an appointed missionary and I was raising support to go overseas. A few individuals in one of my supporting churches found out that I was Reformed and they stridently rebuked me for adhering to the "heresy" of Lordship Salvation. Because they were so ardently certain about their position, I wanted to know more about their perspective so I could better dialogue with them. I discovered that their theological roots could be traced back to Robert Sandeman. Being a student of church history, I did some research and found that an Evangelical Reformed Baptist pastor--Andrew Fuller--had contended against Sandemanianism, and he had also fought against hyper-Calvinism. As an Evangelical Calvinistic missionary with heroes such as William Carey and Adoniram Judson, I detested both Sandemanianism and hyper-Calvinism and their contemporary spin-offs. Consequently, I found a friend in Andrew Fuller.

What do you see as the central theme running through Fuller's missiology?

At this stage of my reading and research, I don’t think I can conclusively say what is the central theme running through Fuller’s missiology. But I think a dominant theme running through his missiology is what he calls, “love to God”, or another way I have described his missiology is, “God-enamored activism.”

Part 2 of this interview will be posted on Thursday. In the meantime you can check out Evan's blog at www.gospelworthy.com.

_____________________________

Dustin Benge serves as the senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Jackson, Kentucky. He is also a PhD candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a junior fellow at The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. Dustin and his wife, Molli, live in Jackson.

Travel to New England with Dr. Haykin (and receive SBTS course credit!)

Southern Seminary is offering a study abroad program to New England this May. This is an incredible opportunity to earn up to 9 hours of on-campus credit and spend invaluable time with professors. The trip will include field lectures at historical sites of American and Church History. In one week you can complete a semester of seminary.

Dr. Gregory Wills, Dr. Michael Haykin, and Dr. Owen Strachan will be leading the expedition May 19-26. One course is included in the cost of the trip. Several of the courses being offered include: 26410 Jonathan Edwards, 25120 Church History II, 25177 Studies in Church History: Puritan and Evangelical Spirituality, and 26100 Baptist History.

More information and registration is available online at http://events.sbts.edu/expeditions_ne/

Two new works on Covenant Theology in its Baptist expression

By Jeff Robinson

One of the theological questions I have been asked most often during my first 24 months as pastor has been some version of this query: Do Baptists believe Covenant Theology or is that just a Presbyterian thing? My answer (which is consistently “Yes, Baptists have historically believed Covenant Theology that obviously differs a bit from our Presbyterian brethren”) has puzzled some and made others curious enough to launch your own study of my conclusion. But my dear friend Mike Gaydosh at Solid Ground Books in Birmingham, Ala., the city where my family lives, has recently published two books that will provide plenty of grist for that mill and will provide substantive historical and biblical answers to the question of Baptists and their relationship to Covenant Theology.

The first work is titled The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology: A Comparison Between Seventeenth-Century Particular Baptist and Paedobaptist Federalism by Pascal Denault. The point of pressure separating the Baptist and non-Baptist version of Covenant Theology is, of course, the subjects (the who?) of baptism. In the concise span of 140 pages, Denault’s work provides a brilliant historical, biblical and theological defense of believer’s baptism and provides an excellent overview of the consistent, biblical Covenant Theology which the Calvinistic (Particular) Baptists of 17^th century England espoused. Denault surveys British Particular Baptists who held to Covenant Theology such as Benjamin Keach and John Gill and also shows biblically how paedobaptists misinterpret the continuity between the promises given to Abraham in the OT and baptism in the NT and arrive at the conclusion that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of membership in the covenant people of God. The author traces the points at which historic Baptists and their fellow Puritans parted ways on issues of the continuity and discontinuity between the old and new testaments and argues forcibly that Baptists more consistently held to a biblical version of Covenant Theology.

Edited by Earl M. Blackburn, the second work, Covenant Theology: A Baptist Distinctive, is a multi-author work and includes chapters from contributors such as Justin Taylor, Fred Malone and Walter Chantry. Like the Denault book, this work is brief in compass (161 pages, including three appendices) and each of the five well-written chapters examines a separate issue related to the covenants of Scripture, ranging from baptism to the question of the existence of a covenant of works. Blackburn opens with an excellent overview of Covenant Theology and Malone follows with a discussion of biblical hermeneutics and Covenant Theology. This work, like Denault’s book, offers a well-done overview of the Baptist version of Covenant Theology and I heartily recommend them both for your spring or summer reading.

To order, see the Solid Ground Christian Books website at http://www.solid-ground-books.com/index.asp. Phone: (205) 443-0311.

___________________________

Jeff Robinson (Ph.D., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Senior Pastor of Philadelphia Baptist Church. Jeff is the author of the forthcoming book, The Great Commission Vision of John Calvin. Jeff is also a fellow of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies.

Overlooking Scottish Christianity

By Michael A.G. Haykin

Today I picked up a copy of T.M. Devine’s Scotland’s Empire: The Origins of the Global Diaspora (Penguin, 2004): it is an excellent work. Noticed an interesting oversight near the beginning of the book, though. Devine is noting the way that Scottish emigration and “engagement with empire [the British Empire] impacted “almost every nook and cranny of Scottish life.” And then gives his reader a list of these nooks and crannies: “industrialization, intellectual activity, politics, identity, education, popular culture, consumerism, labour markets, demographic trends, Highland social development and much else” (p.xxvii).

Now what is missing from that list? Any Scot living in the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century world that Devine is interested in would see it right away: why it is the lack of the word “religion.” Now why do contemporary historians assume that their subjects of study are as secular as themselves? Of course, Devine knows about the presence of religious groups in the period he is writing about: for example, he mentions Presbyterians and Baptists (though his use of the term “Baptistry” to describe the set of Baptist beliefs, on  a parallel with Presbyterianism or Congregationalism reveals a certain lack of familiarity with church history—see p.157). But this list from the beginning of the book may well be a give-away: religion is not important for us, ipso facto, it has never been important. But nothing could be further from the case.

Devine’s main thesis, of course, stands: the British Empire was built by expatriate Scots and were “at the very cutting edge of British global expansion” (p.360). Anyone familiar, for example, with Ontario Baptist life in the nineteenth century will know that nearly all of the key figures in the nineteenth century were Scots or of Scottish descent. Now, there is a thesis or book!

_______________

Michael A.G. Haykin is the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. He also serves as Professor of Church History and Biblical Spirituality at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dr. Haykin and his wife Alison have two grown children, Victoria and Nigel.

The day of Keith Goad's PhD defence

From a few years ago, Keith with his thesis committee: Stephen Wellum, Keith Goad, Michael Haykin, and Greg Allison

Ellen Charry and Implications for Historiography

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

Ellen Charry’s work, By The Renewing of Your Minds: The Pastoral Function of Christian Doctrine (1997), is among those rare gems that challenge you to consider a serious paradigm shift in the way you do theology. Even more, I think her arguments have implications for historiography.

Charry contends for the restoration of theology that is sapiential (which she understands as knowledge that emotionally engages the knower to the known), aretegenic, and salutary. She attempts to show that the best Patristic, Medieval, and Reformation theologians thought, wrote, and spoke about God in this way. Theologians such as Basil of Caesarea, Anselm of Canterbury, and John Calvin insisted on correct doctrine—on knowing God accurately—because it was conducive to moral transformation and flourishing in the Christian life. Knowing and loving God rightly enables authentic imitation of him, and this is the key to human virtue, excellence, and happiness. Thus, pastoral concern drove their theological reflection and engagement in doctrinal controversy.

The modernism of Locke, Hume, and Kant severed faith and sapience from reason, eliminating both from the category of knowledge. Charry suggests that these epistemic shifts facilitated the waning of sapience from theology. Modern academic theology, preoccupied with pursuing knowledge of God on the terms of this modern epistemology, reduced theological reflection to factual knowledge, scientias. However, for classical theologians like Augustine, the goal of scientias was to move the knower to sapientia, wisdom.Knowing factual things about God must be paired with knowing God in wisdom and love. The verity of a doctrine rests largely in its result. For example, Basil of Caesarea argued that the Holy Spirit must be God on the basis that he makes us more like God and unites us to him—only God can do that. Basil contended for this doctrine because he believed that if his congregants denied it they would not grow in godliness. These classical theologians did not separate scientias and sapientia in the way that the modern Academy often does. For them, theology and pastoral theology were synonymous. Their doctrinal battles and treatises functioned primarily to protect and promote their congregants’ holiness.

Charry’s thesis applies to church historians as well. Treatments in historical theology that are limited to broad sweeps of ideologies could fall into the modern trap of severing scientias from sapientia. Historians must avoid imposing this modernist separation on past theological thought. Church historians are responsible for uncovering the pastoral concerns that lie behind the subject’s theological reflection. As Robert Darnton says, the point is “to show not merely what people thought but how they thought—how they construed the world, invested it with meaning, and infused it with emotion” (Darnton, 1985, 3). The historian must investigate the relationship between a theologian’s ideas and his behavior, shepherding, and spirituality. This kind of historiography will assist theologians and pastors in understanding why historic Christian doctrines mattered and still matter to the lives of believers.

__________________

Ryan Patrick Hoselton is pursuing a ThM at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He lives in Louisville, KY with his wife Jaclyn, and they are expecting their first child in August.

A Family History of Sabbatarianism

By Dustin Bruce

Hearing bits of anecdotal family history is one of the most interesting parts of holiday gatherings. When aspects of family history intersect with theological concepts, I find them even more fascinating. Recently I enjoyed learning of the Sabbatarian practices my grandparents experienced as children in the early twentieth-century rural south.

Growing up in a devout Baptist family, my grandfather was not allowed to work or attend any worldly amusements on the Lord’s Day. Slight exceptions were made to allow for some cooking and feeding of animals. Work was not allowed, but the Sabbath was not to be spent frivolously. Fishing and hunting, common pastimes in rural Alabama, were simply out of the question. 

It is interesting to note how quickly the practice of keeping the Lord’s Day has faded from the church culture. Area churches that would have encouraged Sabbath keeping just 70 years ago likely have no current members who give the concept much thought. The shift away from Sabbatarianism has been so swift and decisive that my grandfather’s childhood experience in this area more closely resembles that of Andrew Fuller’s than my own.

In an 1805 letter to a friend, Fuller defends the practice of keeping the Lord’s Day. Responding to doubts as to its observance, Fuller asks, “If the keeping of a Sabbath to God were not in all ages binding, why is it introduced in the moral law, and founded upon God’s resting from his works. If it were merely a Jewish ceremonial, why do we read of time being divided by weeks before the law?”^[1]Fuller possessed a theological conviction that compelled him to set apart the Sabbath as a holy day to the Lord. He instructs, “The first day then ought to be kept as the Lord’s own day, and we ought not to think our own thoughts, converse on our own affairs, nor follow our own business on it.^”

One wonders if Fuller first learned this Sabbatarian practice as a child growing up in the home of Particular Baptist parents. Like my grandfather’s mother, Fuller’s mother may have prevented him from hunting or fishing or attending to other worldly amusements, setting an early example of keeping the Lord’s Day.

Anecdotal family history is interesting, but should also be instructive. Like other types of history, learning of the religious beliefs and practices of those who form my family tree should cause me to reflect on whether I am being more or less faithful in my Christian walk. Feel free to share any interesting examples of your family’s religious history in the comments below.

---

^[1] Andrew Gunton Fuller, The Complete Works of Andrew Fuller, Volume 3: Expositions—Miscellaneous, ed. Joseph Belcher (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1988), 828.

_____________________________

Dustin Bruce lives in Louisville, KY where he is pursuing a ThM in Church History at Southern Seminary. He is a graduate of Auburn University and Southwestern Seminary. Dustin and his wife, Whitney, originally hail from Alabama.

I'm a Historian, Not a Prophet

 By Nathan A. Finn

Historians are often asked to be prophets. In my classes at Southeastern Seminary, hardly a week goes by that one or more students don’t ask me to speculate about how the past might influence the future. This phenomenon is even more pronounced when I teach on church history in local churches. It is most common, both in class and in the church, when I teach on Baptist history. Many folks suppose that being relatively learned in Baptist history means that one is able to discern what will happen in the future. That might be true of Michael Haykin or Lloyd Harsch or Jason Duesing or Jim Patterson, but not this historian.

Recently, I was reading George Nash’s fine book Reappraising the Right: The Past and Future of American Conservatism (ISI Books, 2009). Nash has spent his career studying the conservative intellectual movement in modern America (see his landmark monograph on this topic). Apparently, historians of conservative intellectual history are similar to historians of Christian thought when it comes to requests for one don the prophetic mantle. I like what Nash writes in the introduction to Reappraising the Right.

“Historians are not necessarily good prognosticators, but by deliberately taking a longer view we can try to liberate our readers from the provincialism of the present” (p. xviii).

Now we’re talking. I have no idea if the Cooperative Program will go the way of the buffalo, if the SBC will divide on account of soteriological debates, if the Convention will become less southern and southwestern in its cultural ethos over the next generation, or who will be the next president of such-and-such theological seminary or mission board or other denominational agency (to mention but a few of the questions about which I’m regularly asked to prophesy). I’m a historian, not a prophet.

However, I do know that history reminds us to take the long view on each of these issues. The Cooperative Program has only been around for about half of Southern Baptist history and took a generation to catch on after its inception. Though critically important and worthy of our generous support, the CP is not intrinsic to our identity. The relative center of Southern Baptist soteriology has shifted over time because of a variety of factors, some of them non-theological in nature. Besides, its rather difficult to tell to what degree grassroots Southern Baptists have been in step with the relatively small handful of SBC leaders writing on soteriology at any given point in SBC history. The contemporary SBC is far less southern and southwestern (and Caucasian) than it was two generations ago, even if this isn’t entirely clear at the SBC Annual Meeting. But then the Convention is also more age diverse than is evident at the SBC Annual Meeting. As for denominational ministry presidents and other leaders, you simply never know when someone might retire (or not) and who will arise as a good candidate in such kairos moments. Nobody would have guessed in 1975 that Paige Patterson would become the president of not one but two SBC seminaries, to give but one example.

Historians aren’t prophets, and they shouldn’t pretend to be. But historians have something to offer our students and ministry colleagues as we ponder the great questions of our day. That something isn’t some infallible or even possible future, but rather historical perspective. And maybe, just maybe, if we inject a bit more historical perspective into our discussions of said great questions, such conversations might prove to be more profitable (though not prophet-able) than they so often are.

_______________________________

Nathan A. Finn is associate professor of historical theology and Baptist Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also an elder at First Baptist Church of Durham, NC and a senior fellow of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies.

Smallpox and Scurvy: Medicine in the 18th Century

By Dustin W. Benge

According to historian, David McCullough, in order to properly understand history one must be immersed in the time and setting of their subject(s). This blog primarily focuses on the life, times, surroundings, influences, and friends of Andrew Fuller. Therefore, before we can “walk in their shoes,” it is necessary to know what is going on in the historical context of which they are apart.

One such topic that greatly affected daily life in 18th and 19th century England was the practice and advance of medicine. The 18th century brought great advances in the knowledge of the human body. Until 1745 craftsmen called “barber-surgeons” performed operations. However, that year brought a separation of the two professions and barbers continued to cut hair while surgeons began to be university educated. John Hunter (1728–1793), sometimes called the “Father of Modern Surgery,” invented new procedure such as tracheotomy. Other advances included the discovery of fresh fruit or lemon juice as a preventative to scurvy. A major scourge of the 18th century was the dreaded smallpox. Even if it did not succeed in killing you, your body would be scarred with pox marks. In 1721, Lady Mary Wortley Montague introduced an inoculation whereby you cut the patient and then placed matter from a smallpox pustule into the wound. The patient would (hopefully!) develop a mild case of the disease and be immune in the future.

Andrew Fuller was personally affected by medical problems within himself and his family. In his biographical account of Fuller, John Ryland, Jr. writes, “Though Mr. Fuller appeared to be of a remarkably strong and athletic make, yet he had been, from his youth, liable to severe bilious attacks, and his lungs were, at different times, severely affected by clods. It was, therefore, a more remarkable favour, that he was spared to us so long. It was not till some time after his removal to Kettering, that he had the smallpox, for which he was, at last, inoculated. But, some time before he underwent that operation, he took a journey to London, where he seemed to have been much in danger of infection from that disorder...”

_____________________________

Dustin Benge serves as the senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Jackson, Kentucky. He is also a PhD candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a junior fellow at The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. Dustin and his wife, Molli, live in Jackson.

New Michael A.G. Haykin Conference Audio

By Steve Weaver

Earlier this week, Dr. Haykin spoke at Mount Vernon Baptist Church in Atlanta, GA. Dr. Haykin spoke in the morning worship service at the church on Sunday and twice at a special one-day conference on Monday. On Sunday, Dr. Haykin preached on "The Treasure of Moses" (MP3) from Hebrews 11:23-26. On Monday, Dr. Haykin spoke on "The Piety of the Preacher" (MP3) and "Friendship and the Preacher" (MP3). Please feel free to download these free audio resources provided courtesy of the Mount Vernon Baptist Church pastored by Dr. Aaron Menikoff. Audio of the entire "Feed My Sheep" conference is available here.

__________________

Steve Weaver serves as a research assistant to the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies and a junior fellow of the Center. He also serves as senior pastor of Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY. Steve and his wife Gretta have six children between the ages of 2 and 13.

Revivalism and Higher Criticism

By Ian Hugh Clary

Andrew Holmes, Lecturer in Modern Irish History at Queen’s University Belfast, wrote an article on the causes and consequences of the Ulster Revival of 1859.[1] Near the end of the piece he draws an illuminating link between the role of religious experience and the acceptance of higher criticism within evangelicalism. He says that when “pietistic spirituality”—that emphasizes personal conversion, holiness, and experience—is placed at the centre of theological enquiry, the bible can be characterized as a “record of the developing spiritual experience” rather than a manual of doctrine. This opens the doors for critical views of Scripture to enter in. Theological liberals separated the text and its historicity from spiritual experience and value. For evangelicals who were caught up in the ecstatic experience of revival (especially in Ulster’s case), a pietistic spirituality could be maintained while aberrant views of the bible were shuffled in. Holmes says, “It is significant that those figures most closely associated with modern biblical criticism within the Irish Presbyterian Church were also supporters of modern revivalism.”[2]

Holmes goes on to say that theologians who espoused higher criticism in Scotland were happy to draw the link with revivalism—especially the visits of D. L. Moody—and sought further revivals and religious experience. For instance, J. E. Davey, an evangelical who embraced higher criticism, used revivalism and religious experience in his defence during his trial for heresy in 1926-1927.

This is helpful for historians as we consider the benefits and pitfalls of revival, especially in its more recent forms. It should also temper us as Christians in our labours for revival—we need to make sure that the methods we espouse do not lead us to elevate religious experience to the role of doctrinal credibility. Rather, we need to maintain fidelity to the truths of the gospel handed down to us from our forebears, including those who experienced revival yet remained faithful.

---

[1] Andrew R. Holmes, “The Ulster Revival of 1859: Causes, Controversies and Consequences” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 63.3 (July 2012): 488-515.

[2] Holmes, “Ulster Revival,” 514.

___________________________

Ian Hugh Clary is finishing doctoral studies under Adriaan Neele at Universiteit van die Vrystaat (Blomfontein), where he is writing a dissertation on the evangelical historiography of Arnold Dallimore. He has co-authored two local church histories with Michael Haykin and contributed articles to numerous scholarly journals. Ian serves as a pastor of BridgeWay Covenant Church in Toronto where he lives with his wife and two children.

The Pope: Antichrist or Friend?

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

About four years ago, I traveled with my former pastor to a conference where he was one of the speakers. During a break, one of the other speakers was asking me about my church’s confession (a classic “ice-breaker” at Reformed Baptist conferences). I told him that we hold to the London Baptist Confession of 1689 but with one exception. He responded, “Oh, the article about the Pope being the antichrist?” Perplexed, I said, “No, I was referring to the one about Sabbatarianism.”

My church really did not think that the Pope was the antichrist, I just did not know that the LBC of 1689 mentioned it. Chapter 26.4, says this:

The Pope of Rome cannot in any sense be the head of the Church, but he is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, who exalts himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God, who the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

The Philadelphia Confession of Faith of 1742 reiterates this statement. However, most of the popular Baptist confessions of the past few centuries, such as the New Hampshire Baptist Confession, 1833, and the Baptist Faith and Message, 1925, 1963, and 2000, drop any mention of the Pope. I’m sure that multiple variables factor into this shift, but charting them is not the purpose of this post. My concern is that modern Baptists do not have a consensus about how we should view the election of a new Pope last Wednesday.

I do not agree with the seventeenth century Baptists that the Pope was the antichrist. But I think that Baptists must still affirm that the “Pope of Rome cannot in any sense be the head of the Church.” It may not be wise to restore a mention of the Papacy in our confessions, but believers should be aware of the important differences. Baptists through the centuries have maintained that the classic doctrines and practices of Catholicism are harmful to the world because it offers a misleading gospel and leadership. The election of an Argentine, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, as Pope obviously indicates the strength Catholicism has gained in the Global South. Thus, Baptists today (and evangelicals generally) must not dismiss the countries saturated by Catholicism as sufficiently “Christianized.” Mission agencies need to continue extending gospel work in catholicized areas, obeying the Great Commission issued by the first, truly non-European head of the Church—an Israelite. And no, it wasn’t Peter.

________________________

Ryan Patrick Hoselton is pursuing a ThM at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He lives in Louisville, KY with his wife Jaclyn, and they are expecting their first child in August.

Fuller’s Three Classes of Religious Dissenters

By Dustin Bruce

Often when considering the English Reformation, we distinguish only between those who remained within the newly formed Church of England and those who dissented from it. In “A Brief Statement of the Principles of Dissent,” Andrew Fuller reminds us that “as all dissent is expressive rather of what is disapproved than of what is embraced, it is natural to suppose that the objects of disapprobation will be different in different persons.”^[1]

Fuller goes on to distinguish three classes of dissenters:

1. Those who disagree with the theology of the Church of England.
2. Those who approve of the theology, but desire further Reformation within the English Church.
3. Those who approve of the theology, but reject the establishment of a nation church in principle.

Concerning the first class of dissenters, Fuller speaks of those who abandoned the Church of England due to some unorthodox beliefs or practice. For Fuller, disagreement with the doctrine of these dissenters provides no justification for persecuting them. None who hold respect for private judgment and the authority of Christ “can forbear to regret that the Reformation should at so early a period have been stained with blood.”

The majority of Puritans and Nonconformists form the second class of dissenters. These men did not take issue with the establishment of a national church, but desired a national church with a Presbyterian form of government, which they found “more agreeable with the Scriptures.”

For the third class of dissenters, the primary objection to the Church of England was not one of theology, but of the very existence of a national church. Fuller states,

“The temporal power of bishops, the imposition of ministers, to the exclusion of the free election of the people, the mixture of godly and manifestly ungodly characters at the Lord’s table, the corruption of worship, the total want of discipline, and all other deviations from primitive Christianity, appeared to them to be no more than might be expected, if circumstances admitted it, to grow out of a national establishment. They, therefore, peaceably withdrew from its communion, with the view of forming churches on the plan of the New Testament.^”

To this third class of dissenters belongs the Independents and the Baptists. Both holding to a form of congregational church government, the Baptists further dissented from the Independents by rejecting the practice of infant baptism.

Interestingly, Fuller makes two points of application for the third class of dissenters.

1. “If the government should even offer to make theirs the established religion, however they might be obliged to them for their kindness, they could not accept it without relinquishing their first principles relative to church government.^”
2. “Neither can they, without relinquishing the first principles of the system by which they are distinguished from other Christians, persecute any man for his religion, whatever that religion be. They may think and speak of men according to their true character; they may refuse all religious connexion with them; they may expose their principles to just abhorrence; but their hand must not be upon them.^”

---

^[1] Andrew Gunton Fuller, The Complete Works of Andrew Fuller, Volume 3: Expositions—Miscellaneous, ed. Joseph Belcher (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1988), 459.

___________________________

Dustin Bruce lives in Louisville, KY where he is pursuing a ThM in Church History at Southern Seminary. He is a graduate of Auburn University and Southwestern Seminary. Dustin and his wife, Whitney, originally hail from Alabama.

New Book: Power of Faith: 450 Years of the Heidelberg Catechism

By Steve Weaver

This year marks the 450th anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism. This Protestant document was written in Heidelberg in 1563 on behalf of Frederick III, Elector Palatine and spread over the world when it was approved by the Synod of Dort in 1619. A new volume has recently been released to commemorate this important event in church history—Power of Faith: 450 Years of the Heidelberg Catechism, edited by Karla Apperloo-Boersma and Herman J. Selderhuis. See flyer from the German academic publisher, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, here.

In this 454 page hardcover book, respected specialists in their fields present how the Heidelberg Catechism spread and influenced culture, education and ecclesiastical life. In addition to the text, over 700 pictures illustrate the contributions making an attractive volume for display. This work includes the following contribution from AFCBS Director Michael A. G. Haykin and AFCBS Junior Fellow Steve Weaver: "To 'concenter with the most orthodox divines': Hercules Collins and his An Orthodox Catechism—a slice of the reception history of the Heidelberg Catechism."

Power of Faith is slated to be released in Dutch, English and German editions. You can order the English edition from Amazon.com (German edition) now.

__________________

Steve Weaver serves as a research assistant to the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies and a junior fellow of the Center. He also serves as senior pastor of Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY. Steve and his wife Gretta have six children between the ages of 2 and 13.

On Puritan Preaching

By Nathan Finn

In his wonderful book A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life (Crossway, 1990), J.I. Packer includes a chapter titled “Puritan Preaching.” It’s a gem of a chapter in a book that is filled with many jewels. Packer argues that Puritan preaching was characterized by eight priorities:

1. It was expository in its method. This in contrast to the topical pabulum that is served up too regularly in modern pulpits.
2. It was doctrinal in is content. This in contrast to the overly pragmatic, self-help homilies that confuse law and gospel and, in turn, confuse God’s people.
3. It was orderly in its arrangement. This in contrast to the meandering musings of many modern preachers. (Since I’m writing about preaching, I thought I’d include some free alliteration.)
4. Though profound, it was popular in its style. This in contrast to the two extremes of shallow erudition or esoteric theological treatises, both of which are quite common in evangelical pulpits.
5. It was Christ-centered in its orientation. This in contrast to moralistic preaching, especially of the Old Testament, and the tendency among many preachers to concentrate upon word studies and background information more than they do the life, death, resurrection, ascension, session, and return of the Lord Jesus Christ.
6. It was experimental in its interest. This in contrast to preaching that is divorced from vital spirituality and has little concern for redirecting affections God-ward.
7. It was piercing in its applications. This in contrast to preaching that artificially severs thinking rightly about God from living rightly before God.
8. It was powerful in its manner. This in contrast to weak preaching that seeks to “inspire” or “educate” rather than transform as the Spirit works through the Word.

I appreciate what modern pastors can learn from the Puritans about the art of preaching. This is not to say that modern pastors should preach ninety-minute sermons or divide their sermons in exactly the same manner as the Puritans did. We don’t need to slavishly copy the Puritans (or anyone else). Nevertheless, as we seek out historical role models for faithful preaching, we could hardly do better than the Puritans. If you want to read a Puritan textbook on biblical preaching, see William Perkins’s The Art of Prophesying, which has been reprinted by Banner of Truth.

_______________________________

Nathan A. Finn is associate professor of historical theology and Baptist Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also an elder at First Baptist Church of Durham, NC and a senior fellow of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies.

Interview with Dr. Haykin on the Wisdom of Church History

By Steve Weaver

Dr. Michael Haykin was recently interviewed by Daryl Dash on his blog. Daryl asked Dr. Haykin some great questions. Dr. Haykin's responses reveal his understanding that wisdom can be gained through a study of church history. Dash's questions to Dr. Haykin are listed below.

• Sadly, most evangelicals don't seem to have a good grasp of church history. Why do you think this is so?
• What are some of the results of this lack of knowledge in the church
• What can pastors do to promote an awareness of church history?
• Is there a particular era of church history that especially needs to be rediscovered in today's church?
• I've really appreciated your books. Are you working on one right now?

You can find Dr. Haykin's answers to these pertinent questions at DashHouse.com.

Remember that you can submit your questions to Dr. Haykin at "Ask Me A Question" on this website (see link in left sidebar).

____________________

Steve Weaver serves as a research assistant to the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies and a junior fellow of the Center. He also serves as senior pastor of Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY. Steve and his wife Gretta have six children between the ages of 2 and 13.

On the Pall Mall

By Ian Hugh Clary

In 1959 Arnold Dallimore, a pastor from the small Canadian hamlet of Cottam, Ontario, flew to England to meet with his potential publishers at the Banner of Truth Trust. Dallimore, of course, would go on to publish a monumental two-volume biography of the evangelist George Whitefield. But by the late fifties he had only managed a draft or two that were, in his mind, woefully inadequate. A part of his slew of meetings in the UK involved Martyn Lloyd-Jones. The Banner’s Iain Murray was responsible for helping Dallimore make his way around London and first introduced the Canadian pastor to the Doctor after a service at Westminster Chapel. After discussing their shared interest in Whitefield, Lloyd-Jones invited Dallimore to the Carlton Club, the famous gentlemen’s club near the Pall Mall in London. Its membership included many leading Conservative politicians and Lloyd-Jones would likely have kept his membership from his days at St. Bart’s.

I have given this meeting much thought over the past year or so—what would it have been like to eavesdrop on these two men? Both of them would go on to have a massive influence on evangelicalism, and to hear them talk about a range of subjects, from Whitefield, revival, and even the Canadian fundamentalist T. T. Shields, would have been thrilling. At this meeting Lloyd-Jones gave Dallimore advice on how to proceed with an updated draft, where to go in Wales to find information on Howell Harris, and other such things that have made the biography great. He was also a major supporter of the work, even defending Dallimore’s interpretations against his own publishers. The first volume would not come out for over ten years after this meeting, and the second volume another ten after that—altogether Dallimore spent over thirty years of his life labouring over what must be one of the most important books of twentieth-century evangelicalism. We can all be thankful that parts of the telling of Whitefield’s life were hashed out in a posh club near the Pall Mall, London.

________________________________

Ian Hugh Clary is finishing doctoral studies under Adriaan Neele at Universiteit van die Vrystaat (Blomfontein), where he is writing a dissertation on the evangelical historiography of Arnold Dallimore. He has co-authored two local church histories with Michael Haykin and contributed articles to numerous scholarly journals. Ian serves as a pastor of BridgeWay Covenant Church in Toronto where he lives with his wife and two children.

Free Mini-Conference on March 13th on Living in a Spiritual World

By Steve Weaver

(Click image to enlarge.)

On Wednesday, March 13th, the Andrew Fuller Center will host a mini-conference with Byron Wheaton on living in a spiritual world (details here). The conference, which will meet from 9 am - 12 noon in Heritage Hall on the campus of The Southern Baptist Seminary, will feature three lectures by visiting scholar Byron Wheaton on the conference theme.

Wheaton serves on staff at Bay Park Baptist Church in Kingston ON where he serves as Pastor of Discipleship. Prior to going to Bay Park, he taught Old Testament and Biblical Studies for fifteen years at various institutions in the US, Canada and South East Asia including (Bethel) Seminary of the East (Philadelphia/New York), Singapore Bible College (Singapore), Heritage Seminary (Cambridge) Emmanuel Bible College (Kitchener), Tyndale Seminary and Toronto Baptist Seminary (Toronto). For the past six months, Byron has been on a six month study leave as a visiting scholar at Southern Seminary.

The conference is free. Refreshments will be provided. The first 25 in attendance will receive a free copy of John Piper's biographical booklet Andrew Fuller: I Will Go Down, If You Will Hold the Rope!

__________________

Steve Weaver serves as a research assistant to the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies and a junior fellow of the Center. He also serves as senior pastor of Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY. Steve and his wife Gretta have six children between the ages of 2 and 13.

“Heart-Piercing Conviction” in Logan County, Kentucky

By Dustin W. Benge

James M’Gready (1763–1817) was born in Pennsylvania and later settled in North Carolina with his father. After theological training for ministry, he became a Presbyterian pastor and leader during the Second Great Awakening. In 1796, M’Gready left his North Carolina home for southern Kentucky. He was called to serve the congregations of Gaspar River, Red River, and Muddy River in Logan County, Kentucky. In the summer of 1798, he reported “some movement” among the congregations in Logan County. He describes the event as “a very general awakening.” The spirit of prayer deepened and twelve months later it was apparent that a powerful work of conversion was in progress. During a communion service at Red River at the end of July 1799, “many of the most bold and daring sinners of the country were brought to cover their faces and weep bitterly.” A month later the same “heart-piercing conviction” was also evident during services at Gasper River. Some individuals were reported to have been so overcome with emotion that they fell to the floor. Much more was to follow.

M’Gready writes, “The year 1800 exceeds all that our eyes ever beheld on earth. All the blessed displays of Almighty power and grace, all the sweet gales of the divine Spirit, and soul-reviving showers of the blessings of Heaven which we enjoyed before, and which we considered wonderful beyond conception, were but like a few scattering drops before a mighty rain, when compared with the overflowing floods of salvation, which the eternal, gracious Jehovah has poured out like a mighty river, upon this our guilty, unworthy country. The Lord has indeed shewed [sic] himself a prayer-hearing God: he has given his people a praying spirit and a lively faith, and then he has answered their prayers far beyond their highest expectations.”

For more information on James M’Gready and his ministry, please visit here.

________________________________

Dustin Benge serves as the senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Jackson, Kentucky. He is also a PhD candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a junior fellow at The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. Dustin and his wife, Molli, live in Jackson.

The Intellectual Origins of the 1644 London Baptist Confession

By Dustin Bruce

During a recent reading of David Bebbington’s Baptists Through the Centuries, his mention of a scholarly dispute regarding the intellectual origins of the 1644 London Baptist Confession peaked my interest.[1]

The difficulty in view focuses on Article XL (on baptism), which states:

The way and manner of the (Mat. 3:16; John 3:23; Acts 8:38) dispensing of this ordinance the Scripture holds out to be dipping or plunging the whole body under water: it being a sign, must answer the thing signified, which are these: first, the (Rev. 1:5; 7:14; Heb. 10:22) washing the whole soul in the blood of Christ; secondly, that interest the saints have in (Rom. 6:3-5) death, burial, and resurrection (of Christ); thirdly, together with a (1 Cor. 15:28, 29) confirmation of out faith, that as certainly as the body is buried under water, and rises again, so certainly shall the bodies of the saints by raised by the power of Christ, in the day of the resurrection, to reign with Christ.[2]

According to Glen Stassen, the Particular Baptist framers of the 1644 Confession are indebted to Anabaptist theologian Menno Simons, especially his Foundation of Christian Doctrine, for the motif of “death, burial, and resurrection” in relation to baptism.[3] Stassen’s claim is significant. If the authors of the early Baptist Confession were drawing heavily from Simons’s work, then an intellectual kinship could be established between the Mennonite Anabaptists and the fountainhead of the Particular Baptist stream. Stanley Nelson, however, counters Stassen’s assertion by proposing a different influence, that of William Ames.[4] Ames’s The Marrow of Theology was a popular work during the first half of the seventeenth-century and the Particular Baptist framers of the Confession were almost assuredly familiar with it.

Upon examining the sources, it is quite evident that Simons uses the motif of “death, burial, and resurrection” in his section on baptism. In his section entitled “Concerning Baptism,” Simons writes:

Behold, this is the word and will of the Lord, that all who hear and believe the word of God, shall be baptized (as above stated), thereby to profess their faith, and declare that they will henceforth not live according to their own will, but according to the will of God. That for the testimony of Jesus they are prepared to forsake their homes, chattels, lands and lives, and to suffer hunger, affliction, oppression, persecution, the cross and death; yea, they desire to bury the flesh with its lusts, and arise with Christ to newness of life, even as Paul says, "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life;" Col. 2:11, 12; Rom. 6:3, 4.[5]

However, it is also apparent that such a motif was available in Ames’s Marrow of Theology as well. In his section on “Baptism and the Lord’s Supper,” Ames writes:

Although it seals the whole covenant of grace to all believers, when it is specially made our own, it represents and confirms our very ingrafting into Christ. Rom. 6:3, 5, We have been baptized into Jesus Christ…being planted together with him; 1 Cor. 12:13, We have been baptized into one body.[6]

While Simons clearly makes use of the “death, burial, and resurrection” motif in his section on baptism, this of itself does not suggest an intellectual influence upon the Particular Baptist framers of the 1644 document. The connection between Romans 6:3-5 and baptism was clearly made by Ames in his The Marrow of Theology, which even Stassen recognizes as influential upon the 1644 Confession.

Upon examination of the texts, there is no reason to conclude the authors of the 1644 London Baptist Confession were necessarily drawing from the Anabaptist Simons. The association of the “death, burial, and resurrection” of Christ with baptism was available in Ames’s work. Then again, it could be that the originators of the first Particular Baptist confession were not relying on either work, but thoughtfully reading their Greek New Testament.

---

[1] David W. Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries: A History of a Global People, Waco: Baylor University Press, 2010, pp. 30-31.

[2] The First London Confession of Faith, 1644 Edition, available at http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1st-london-1644-ed.pdf.

[3] Glen H. Stassen, “Anabaptist Influence in the Origin of Particular Baptists,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 36 (1962): 322-48.

[4] Stanley A. Nelson, “Reflecting on Baptist Origins: The London Confession of Faith of 1644,” Baptist History and Heritage 29 (1994): 34-35.

[5] Menno Simons, A Foundation Plain Instruction of the Saving Doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ, 1554, available at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/simon/works1.iv.vii.html.

[6] William Ames, A Marrow of Theology, trans. John Dykstra Esuden,Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997, p. 210.

___________________________

Dustin Bruce lives in Louisville, KY where he is pursuing a ThM in Church History at Southern Seminary. He is a graduate of Auburn University and Southwestern Seminary. Dustin and his wife, Whitney, originally hail from Alabama.