Bible, Theology & Philosophy

It was a remarkable conference. They had no business. They passed no resolutions. They delivered no institutional reports, made no sales pitch, and received no offering. They simply preached and taught the Bible and enjoyed one another’s company. Oh, and they gave away books.

The meeting was the annual Conference on the Church for God’s Glory at First Baptist Church of Rockford, Illinois. First Baptist has hosted this conference every May for several years. The gathering has grown every year and is now attended by nearly two hundred registrants (plus church members and some others). While a few more could squeeze in, the crowd pretty well fills the church’s auditorium.

No wonder. This conference provides an infusion of fresh air into the ecclesiastical atmosphere of Illinois. It is not about issues so much as it is simply about biblical ministry. The preaching is almost exclusively expository and the preachers are almost all pastors (as opposed to institutional executives). They bring the perplexities of their recent experiences with them, and they challenge one another with biblical answers. They do not set out to provide scintillating displays of pulpit pyrotechnics. Instead, they set out just to preach the Scriptures.

Many of the attendees are old friends, but there is not a whiff of clannishness about the meeting. Both hosts and attendees are genuinely excited and appreciative of everyone who comes. In fact, the church makes a practice of praying for registrants by name during the weeks leading up to the conference.

Every version of parachurch politics is left outside. This conference is hosted by a single church, and it is not a large church. Consequently, it is not likely that attending the Conference on the Church for God’s Glory will be a major career boost. The movers and shakers do not attend, and consequently the meeting is not one where a person goes to be seen.

Republished with permission from Dr. Reluctant. In this series, Dr. Henebury responds to a collection of criticisms of dispensationalism entitled “95 Theses against Dispensationalism” written by a group called “The Nicene Council.” Read the series so far.

Thesis 57

Despite the dispensationalists’ claim that Christ could return at any minute because “there is no teaching of any intervening event” (John Walvoord), many of their leading spokesmen hold that the seven churches in Rev 2-3 “outline the present age in reference to the program in the church,” including “the Reformation” and our own age (J. D. Pentecost).

Response: It is true that some dispensationalists have regarded the seven churches as a kind of prophetic outline of church history. But not all have, and it is a mistake to think it is necessary to the dispensational system. Robert Thomas has a lengthy excursus on this teaching in the first volume of his Commentary on Revelation in which he rejects it. This view reflects an unhealthy admixture of speculative historicism to the futurism implicit in dispensational premillennialism.

Still, those who advocate the historical-prophetic view of Revelation 2-3 are careful to say that the churches are types of the visible church in every age, with one type predominating at one particular time. Thus, the prophetic portion is more in the way of application than strict hermeneutics.

As one who holds that it is often precarious to teach doctrine from types I would be glad to see this approach abandoned.

It has become a bit routine:

• Email arrives from someone assuming I am (or everybody at SharperIron is) a Calvinist.
• Email poses question believed to be incriminating of Calvinists or unanswerable by them.
• Response from me offers biblical answer that is not especially calvinistic.
• Questioner ignores most of the particulars, broadly condemns “Calvinism.”
• Discussion becomes repetitive, overly heated or both, ends.

A recent example appears below, with details removed to avoid identifying the sender. I’m including the exchange because, this time around, a reality hit home to me that hadn’t before: apparently, many fundamentalists think that anti-Calvinism is a complete doctrine of salvation.

But anti-Calvinism is, at best, a thoughtful rejection of one particular doctrine of salvation. More commonly, it’s nothing more than a feeling of hostility toward doctrines only partially understood. As a result, many anti-Calvinists have no coherent doctrine of salvation at all. They have rejected lasagna from the menu but have walked away without ordering any alternative.

Also in this series: Part 1, Part 2.

Pick up a book or a magazine article on the subject of church government and most likely you will read a discussion beginning with pastors, elders, ordination, or authority. Others go directly to instances of church order in the New Testament. Since graduating from seminary, my view on where to begin the subject has changed, step by step. Why is it that when we really want to understand the nature of something in Christ’s church we do not first look at Christ Himself and His church? If “a picture is worth a thousand words,” then why can’t we look at pictures of Christ and His church in the New Testament and begin to get our answers? And why can’t we first ask what Jesus said?¹ As we read the New Testament and begin to reflect, we will understand that we have a few volumes’ worth of ideas to tell us how the church should govern itself, including the one small element I have chosen to write about: early Christian decision-making. I will focus on two of those ideas.

1. Authority and equality

Christians are followers of Jesus the Messiah. From the very first days of the Jesus movement until today, Jesus is known as the head (kephale) of the church (Eph. 4:15, 5:23, Col. 1:18) and the Lord (kyrios) of His followers (Matt. 8:23; Luke 11:1; Acts 1:21, 5:14, 15:11; Rom. 1:3; 1 Cor. 1:2; etc.). The authority of Jesus in the church is regal, absolute, and unquestioned. And to a certain extent, His authority limits creativity in church government.

Read Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.

The Glorification of Dead Christians

The most detailed description of the rapture of the church is found in Paul’s first letter to the persecuted Christians whom he left in Thessalonica. He wrote this letter from Corinth, where he confronted much confusion about the personal destiny of believers. Some Christians in Thessalonica had already died (perhaps by martyrdom), and the saints there were concerned that their dead loved ones would miss out on the second coming of Christ.

But dead Christians will not be forgotten by God at the second coming. In fact, they will be the first humans to experience glorification since the Lord Jesus. Yes, Christ was “the firstfruits.” He is the first and only human ever to have been glorified. But “afterward”—nearly 2,000 years already—members of His body and bride, namely, “those who are Christ’s,” will share His glory “at His coming” (NKJV, 1 Cor. 15:23).

Now Paul was emphatic in his letter to the believers in Thessalonica on this one point: Dead Christians will be glorified even before living Christians!