Showing posts with label OPC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OPC. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

An Outline of Christianity and Liberalism, Part 1: Introduction


In preparation for a men's fellowship talk I'll be giving in March at Grace Presbyterian Church in Springfield, IL (click here for directions), I'll be posting some notes from Machen's Christianity and Liberalism over the next few days. I'll be compiling and distilling these notes into a presentation.

One thing I have been struck by while reading this book is how relevant it still is today. If you're unfamiliar with it, it was first published in 1923. If you've never read it, I highly encourage you to do so.


Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism: An Outline

  1. Introduction
    1. Thesis: There exists a religion which calls itself Christianity and uses Christian terminology, but which, in fact, is not Christian. Machen names it “Liberalism.”
      1. “In the sphere of religion, in particular, the present time is a time of conflict: the great redemptive religion which has always been known as Christianity is battling against a totally diverse type of religious belief, which is only the more destructive of the Christian faith because it makes use of traditional Christian terminology. This modern non-redemptive religion is called ‘modernism’ or ‘liberalism.’” (2)
      2. “Despite the liberal use of traditional phraseology modern liberalism not only is a different religion from Christianity but belongs in a totally different class of religions.” (7)
    2. Background: Changes in life in past 100 years (1820s-1920s): Industrial age, rise of “science”, naturalism.
      1. “But manifold as are the forms in which the movement appears, the root of the movement is one; the many varieties of modern liberal religion are rooted in naturalism--that is, in the denial of any entrance of the creative power of God (as distinguished from the ordinary course of nature) in connection with the origin of Christianity.” (2)
    3. Modernism: The view that all the past is suspect. The modern age is the best age in every respect.
      1. “It is no wonder that that appeal is being criticized today; for the writers of the books in question [the Bible] were no doubt men of their own age, whose outlook upon the material world, judged by modern standards, must have been of the crudest and most elementary kind. Inevitably the question arises whether the opinions of such men can ever be normative for men of the present day; in other words, whether first-century religion can ever stand in company with twentieth-century science.” (4)
    4. Proposed solution
      1. Separation of religion from science
        1. “Religion, it is said, is so entirely separate from science, that the two, rightly defined, cannot possibly come into conflict.” (4-5)
        2. PROBLEM: The truth claims of Christianity are based in real, historical acts.
          1. “For, rightly or wrongly, religion during the centuries has as a matter of fact connected itself with a host of convictions, especially in the sphere of history, which may form the subject of scientific investigation; just as scientific investigators, on the other hand, have sometimes attached themselves, again rightly or wrongly, to conclusions which impinge upon the innermost domain of philosophy and of religion.” (5)
      2. Liberalism’s answer: Rescue the core religious principles of Christianity.
        1. The liberal theologian seeks to rescue certain of the general principles of religion, of which these particularities [the person of Christ, redemption through His death and resurrection] are thought to be mere temporary symbols, and these general principles he regards as constituting ‘the essence of Christianity.’” (6)
        2. PROBLEM: Modernism will not stop if we abandon the “non-essentials.”
          1. “Modern materialism, especially in the realm of psychology, is not content with occupying the lower quarters of the Christian city, but pushes its way into all the higher reaches of life; it is just as much opposed to the philosophical idealism of the liberal preacher as to the Biblical doctrines that the liberal preacher has abandoned in the interests of peace. Mere concessiveness, therefore, will  never succeed in avoiding the intellectual conflict. In the intellectual battle of the present day there can be no ‘peace without victory’; one side or the other must win.” (6)
        3. PROBLEM: What is left when “non-essentials” are stripped away is not christianity at all.
          1. “What the liberal theologian has retained after abandoning to the enemy one Christian doctrine after another is not Christianity at all, but a religion which is so entirely different from Christianity as to belong in a distinct category.” (6-7)
    5. Liberalism is un-Christian
      1. “In trying to remove from Christianity everything that could possibly be objected to in the name of science, in trying to bribe off the enemy by those concessions which the enemy most desires, the apologist has really abandoned what he started out to defend.” (7-8)
    6. Modernism’s Problems
      1. Decline of the spiritual state of man
        1. “The improvement appears in the physical conditions of life, but in the spiritual realm there is a corresponding loss. The loss is clearest, perhaps, in the realm of art.” (10)
        2. “Material betterment has gone hand in hand with spiritual decline.” (15)
      2. Decline of individual freedoms
        1. “In the interests of physical well-being the great principles of liberty are being thrown ruthlessly to the winds.” (11)
    7. Machen’s Solution
      1. Christianity/Reformation
        1. “But the Christian religion which is meant is certainly not the religion of the modern liberal Church, but a message of divine grace, almost forgotten now, as it was in the middle ages, but destined to burst forth once more in God’s good time, in a new Reformation, and bring to light and freedom mankind.” (15-16)

Monday, January 30, 2012

The Original Westminster Confession of Faith on the Antichrist

Yesterday, during the Sunday School class at Communion Presbyterian, we discussed Chapter 25 of the Westminster Confession, having to do with "The Church". Now, there's lots of great biblical truth in that chapter, but, the American revisions to the Confession deviate from the original text on a pretty major point in Section 6. The original text of the Confession reads:

There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.13 Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.14
13. COL 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. EPH 1:22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church.
14. MAT 23:8-10 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 2TH 2:3-4, 8-9 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. REV 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
The American revisions (such as the PCA, OPC, etc--with the exception of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church) read:

There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof.

And, lastly, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church edition of the Confession reads:

There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can mere man in any sense be the head thereof.
Since one of the things I've tried to do in my Sunday School class is point out the differences between the ARP Confession and other versions of the Confession, I read the text of the original version to my class. I could tell that some folks in the class had no idea that the Reformers considered the Pope to be the Antichrist, the man of sin, etc. So, I told my class I would post some of the reasoning behind that conclusion. Below are the reasons and Scripture proofs David Dickson gives in Truth's Victory Over Error (the first commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith ever written). Read through what he has to say and judge for yourselves if the Reformers got it right.

Question IX. ―Is the Pope that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church of God against Christ, and all that is called God?


Though this be denied by the church of Rome, yet the true description of Antichrist agrees to him.

1st, Because he is not one single man, but an order and race of men, succeeding to one another, in that same state and office; which you will see, by comparing 1 John 4:3; 2 Thess. 2:7-8. together.

2nd, His coming in after the manner of Satan, 2 Thess. 2:9.

3rd, As to his name, he calls himself a Christian, but in very truth, an adversary to Christ; and by consequence, one that denies Jesus to be the Christ, Rev. 17:14; Rev. 19:19; 2 Thess. 2:7-8; 1 John 2:23.

4th, He sitteth in the temple of God as God, 2 Thess. 2:4.

5th, He ruleth in the great city, and exercises dominion over the kings of the earth.

6th, He deceiveth them that dwell on the earth, with lying wonders and miracles, 2 Thess. 2:9; Rev. 13:14-15.

7th, He causeth all sorts of persons to receive his mark on their right hand, or on their forehead, Rev. 13:16-17.

8th, To him agrees what Paul says, And now ye know what withholdeth (namely the roman emperor) that he might be revealed in his time, 2 Thess. 3:6-7.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

A Comparison of WCF 23.3 (Of The Civil Magistrate)

Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 23, section 3 is a very interesting section if for no other reason than it has been modified so differently by various American Presbyterian denominations. Below is a link to a PDF I put together with a side-by-side comparison of this section as it appeared in the original Confession, as well as how the ARP, PCA, OPC, RPCNA, EPC, and PCUSA have modified it.

WCF 23.3 Comparison Chart (PDF)

WCF 23.3 Comparison Chart (Word) 

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

News Roundup

I figure it's time for another News Roundup, so here goes:

ARP/Erskine News
If you like numbers and statistics, take a look at this report at ARPTalk from last month. It gives some enrollment numbers for Erskine Theological Seminary over the past few years. Interestingly, the number of United Methodist students has declined significantly (explanation given at ARPTalk), but the number of PCUSA students has increased. I fear that will continue to be the case, until we can remove non-inerrantists from the faculty at Erskine.

In other Erskine news, Dr. David Norman recently delivered his "State of the School" report to the Board of Erskine. You can read about it at The Aquila Report. Continue to pray for Dr. Norman and his family, as he strives to manage the school. When you read the story at The Aquila Report, you will see it is no easy task he has in front of him.

PCA News
Meanwhile, in the PCA, the controversy over the Federal Vision continues. Most recently, the Missouri Presbytery exonerated Teaching Elder Jeff Meyers of teaching FV doctrine. The background for this story is that several concerned elders in the PCA sent a letter to the Missouri Presbytery about TE Meyers' teaching. MO Presbytery responded by alleging that signers of the letter had violated the Ninth Commandment and then cleared Meyers of the allegations. Doug Wilson announced the "good news" on his site. Here are links to a number of articles about this latest debacle:

MO Presbytery exonerates Federal Visionist Jeffrey Meyers of all theological errors
UPDATED: MO Presbytery’s specific exonerations of TE Meyers
Doug Wilson: “Some Heartening FV News”
TE Jeffrey Meyers Cleared by Missouri Presbytery of Allegations Against Him


In other PCA news, the next round of Presbytery meetings is about to begin, and the issue of the amendments to the BCO will be on a lot of agendas. At last count, the voting was 17 Presbyteries in favor of the amendments, 16 against. Two-thirds of all Presbyteries need to approve these amendments in order for them to be ratified, and I just don't think that will happen. Nonetheless, the Administrative Committee of the PCA is doing its best to push them through. byFaith, the denominational magazine of the PCA, published a piece on the issue, framing it as a conservative vs. liberal debate. Not the best article byFaith has ever done, in my opinion.

OPC News
And lastly in the OPC, nothing happened. Just kidding of course, but it does seem like the OPC has been strangely quiet recently. Perhaps God is giving them a bit of (well-deserved) rest. Or perhaps they have better PR people than the ARP and PCA.