Join Camden Bucey and Jim Cassidy in this special live-streamed episode of Christ the Center. From discussing the “first annual” Reformed Forum Christmas Extravaganza to regional meetups and exciting book releases, this episode highlights several ways we are seeking to connect with our community. As Jim and Camden take questions from listeners in the live chat, the conversation also explores theological questions, including Karl Barth’s doctrines, the nature of ministerial church membership, and practical advice for theological students. Don’t miss this rich blend of theological discussion, community updates, and some unnecessary sports talk.

Watch on YouTube and Vimeo.

Chapters

• 00:00:07 Introduction
• 00:01:26 News, Updates, and Events
• 00:04:19 New Book: Order in the Offices (2nd ed.)
• 00:18:07 Which Denomination Is the “Best”?
• 00:29:56 Karl Barth’s Christology
• 00:35:25 Should I Study Karl Barth?
• 00:41:09 Advice for Research Students
• 00:52:33 Ministers as Members of Presbyteries vs. Local Churches
• 01:04:19 Three Favorite Systematic Theologies
• 01:05:45 Is Gordon Clark Worth Reading?
• 01:09:28 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jim Cassidy

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We begin a discussion of chapter XXV, “The Word of God and the Sacraments in General.” In this episode, we start to talk about the means of grace.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

In Church Membership, Jonathan Landry Cruse emphasizes the biblical and theological necessity of formal church membership. Cruse argues that church membership is not merely a social or optional commitment but a vital and commanded aspect of Christian discipleship. The book contends that being a member of a local church is essential for spiritual growth, accountability, and fulfilling God’s design for communal worship and service.

Jonathan Landry Cruse is pastor of Community Presbyterian Church (Orthodox Presbyterian Church) in Kalamazoo, Michigan. In his writing, Cruse aims to make complex theological concepts accessible to a broader audience. His works often address foundational elements of church life, including worship, preaching, and the sacraments, underscoring the importance of church membership and community.

Chapters

• 00:00:07 Introduction
• 00:07:13 Thinking about Church Membership
• 00:17:38 The Visible and Invisible Church and the Covenant
• 00:30:26 The Duty to Join the Church
• 00:37:09 Biblical Church Metaphors
• 00:42:59 The Benefits of Church Membership
• 00:57:08 Moving toward Others
• 01:01:07 Church Discipline
• 01:07:45 Final Remarks
• 01:10:29 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Carlton Wynne, Jonathan Landry Cruse

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We continue our discussion of chapter XXIV, “The Government and Power of the Church.” In this episode, we talk about church power. What kind of church power or authority does the church of Jesus Christ have?

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We continue our discussion of chapter XXIV, “The Government and Power of the Church.” In this episode, we talk about denominations, church as an organization and its structure, and plenty of other odds and ends related to the church.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We continue our discussion of chapter XXIV, “The Government and Power of the Church.” In this episode, we begin a discussion of church government of Christ’s church beginning with Christ as head of the church and the church officers.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We continue our discussion of chapter XXIII, “The Doctrine of the Church and the Means of Grace.” In this episode, we get into various aspects of the church: the visible and invisible distinction, church discipline, and others.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

This week on Theology Simply Profound, Rob and Bob discuss Louis Berkhof’s little book, Summary of Christian Doctrine. We begin a discussion of chapter XXIII, “The Doctrine of the Church and the Means of Grace.” We’ll spend a few episodes discussing this chapter to dig a little deeper into the nature of the church.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

We welcome John Muether and Danny Olinger to discuss the seventh and final chapter of Machen’s classic book, Christianity and Liberalism. The chapter highlights the importance of the church as the most important social institution in Christianity. Machen argues that the church is not only concerned with saving individual souls but also with education and the maintenance of social life in this world. He critiques the liberal view of the church as a mere human institution and emphasizes the importance of the church as the body of Christ.

The chapter concludes by emphasizing the need for Christians to be united in the Church and the incompatibility of liberalism and Christianity on this question. Overall, the chapter provides a detailed and insightful analysis of the theological and biblical foundations of the church.

Chapters

• 00:00:07 Introduction
• 00:02:24 Upcoming Projects on Meredith G. Kline
• 00:06:36 Christianity and Liberalism: The Church
• 00:12:46 Ecclesiology and Unbelief in the Church
• 00:16:52 Is Machen Representative of Other Presbyterians?
• 00:23:20 The PCUSA Losing Its Presbyterian Identity
• 00:29:10 The Source of the “Nones”
• 00:40:08 The True Presbyterian Church of the World
• 00:47:57 Hymns in the Back of the Hymnal
• 01:07:04 Rest from Strife
• 01:09:37 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Danny Olinger, John Muether

In this episode, we sit down with Dr. A. Craig Troxel, Robert G. den Dulk Professor of Practical Theology at Westminster Seminary California. Dr. Troxel delves into his thought-provoking chapter on the communion of the saints from Theology for Ministry, a festschrift for Dr. Sinclair Ferguson.

What does it mean to build a spiritual community within the church? How can pastors cultivate a culture of love, service, and mutual respect, reflecting the Spirit-endowed riches of Christ’s gifts and graces? Dr. Troxel explores these profound questions, emphasizing the “one another” commands, the forms of mutual service, and the essential role of love in the life of the church.

Dr. Troxel also sheds light on the transformative power of worship and the vital role of the Spirit of God in animating the hearts of God’s people. He concludes with a compelling vision of the communion of the saints as more than just a gathering of individuals—it’s a sacred communion of those set apart for divine privileges and consecrated purposes.

Whether you’re a pastor, theologian, or simply someone seeking to deepen your understanding of community within the Christian faith, this episode offers rich insights and practical wisdom. Join us for a conversation that touches the very heart of what it means to be part of the body of Christ.

Dr. Troxel is the author of With All Your Heart: Orienting Your Mind, Desires, and Will Toward Christ (Crossway). His research interests include pastoral theology, Reformed spirituality, the doctrine of the church, and biblical teaching on the heart.

Chapters

• 0:07 Introduction
• 4:53 Preaching Courses at Westminster Seminary California
• 8:57 A Festschrift for Sinclair Ferguson
• 13:06 Studying the Doctrine of the Church
• 16:42 Building Community
• 25:41 Communion of the Saints
• 30:05 The Health of Our Ecclesiology
• 34:02 WCF Chapter 26 Of the Communion of the Saints
• 37:40 The Uniqueness of the Church
• 53:45 Encouraging Spiritual Vitality in the Church
• 57:34 Suggested Reading
• 1:06:03 Final Remarks
• 1:08:48 Conclusion

Participants: A. Craig Troxel, Camden Bucey

Jim Cassidy and Camden Bucey discuss ecclesiology (the doctrine of the church) and the significant ways it informs our daily lives. Dr. Cassidy is studying R. B. Kuiper’s The Glorious Body of Christ with his congregation, and we take the opportunity to speak about the nature and limits of church authority, the distinction between the church as organism and the church as organization, and the church’s relation to the government and culture.

Chapters

• 00:00 Introduction
• 05:21 R. B. Kuiper and the Doctrine of the Church
• 10:09 Ecclesiology and Other Disciplines
• 17:38 The Spirituality of the Church
• 33:33 The Exercise of Church Authority
• 39:20 Church Authority and the Regulative Principle of Worship
• 47:53 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jim Cassidy

Benjamin Gladd, associate professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi joins us to speak about his book, From Adam and Israel to the Church: A Biblical Theology of the People of God, which is in the Essential Studies in Biblical Theology series from IVP Academic. Dr. Gladd is also the editor of the series. In this particular book, Dr. Gladd examines the nature of the people of God from Genesis to Revelation through the lens of being in God’s “image.”

Gladd addresses biblical-theological themes such as Eden as a mountain-temple, Israel as a corporate image of God, Christ as the perfect image of God and firstborn over all creation, and the Church as the renewed image of God oriented toward the new heavens and new earth.

Participants: Benjamin Gladd, Camden Bucey, Jeremy Boothby

C. N. Willborn speaks about the spirituality of the church, the doctrine which affirms that the Church is a spiritual institution with spiritual aims. It is not administered according to the kingdom of this world. This has a direct bearing upon the work of the church, which is explicitly described and defined by Christ himself in the Great Commission of Matthew 28.

Rev. Dr. Willborn is pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee and adjunct professor of Historical Theology at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. He is the author of many works on history and theology, including the focus of this conversation, “The Soul of the Church: The Church’s Spiritual Mission” in The Confessional Presbyterian, volume 16 (2020): 201–209.

Links

• The Confessional Presbyterian Journal
• Christ the Center, episode 538: “The Spirituality of the Church in the Ecclesiology of Charles Hodge” with Alan Strange.

Further Reading

• Cunningham, William. Discussions on Church Principles. Reprint, Edmonton, AB Canada: Still Waters Revival Books, 1991: 196–210.
• Farmer, James O. Jr. The Metaphysical Confederacy: James Henley Thornwell and the Synthesis of Southern Values. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1986.
• Graham, Preston A. Jr. A Kingdom Not of this World. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2002.
• Peck, Thomas. Notes on Ecclesiology. Reprint, Taylors, SC: Presbyterian Press, 2005.
• Robinson, Stuart. The Church of God. Reprint, Willow Volume 16 (2020) Grove, PA: The Committee on Christian Education of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, 2009.
• Strange, Alan D. The Doctrine of the Spirituality of the Church in the Ecclesiology of Charles Hodge Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2017.
• Thornwell, James H. The Collected Writings of James H. Thornwell, 4 vols. Reprint, Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1974. See especially volume 4.
• Webb, Robert A. “The Modern Mind and Christian Service,” in Elements of Truth, vol. 2. Jackson, MS: Tucker Printing House, 1915. “The Modern Mind” was a series of addresses delivered at Belhaven College for the Synod’s [Mississippi] Training School between June 22–July 2, 1915 and published by the Committee of Synod.
• Willborn, C. N. “The Gospel Work of the Diaconate: ‘A Ministry Proportioned in Number,’” in The Confessional Presbyterian, vol. 11 (2014): 13–23.

Participants: C. N. Willborn, Camden Bucey

Jesus Christ is our eternal king who governs us by his Word and Spirit (Heidelberg Catechism LD 12). In the Reformation, this twofold formula guarded against, on the one hand, the objectivism of Roman Catholic sacramentalism and, on the other hand, the subjectivism of Anabaptist mysticism. With this in mind, I was struck afresh when re-reading The Pilgrim’s Progress by the biblical imagery Bunyan uses for these two things—the Candle and the Comforter.

When Christian comes to the Interpreter’s House, which in many ways symbolizes the church, the Interpreter “commands his man to light the candle” before showing him seven rooms that contain many “excellent things” (Ps. 119:18). In proving Spurgeon’s quip about Bunyan, if we prick him at this point in the story, his “Bibline” blood begins to flow. The psalmist, for one, exclaims, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (119:105). And Peter exhorts us to pay attention to the guiding words of the prophets that have been confirmed by the apostles as to “a lamp shining in a dark place” (2 Pet. 1:19). The candle signifies that the “excellent things” Christian is about to see are things revealed in God’s Word. The path leading to the City is illumined by the light of the Word, the candle of Christ.

As Christian prepares to leave the Interpreter’s House to continue on his journey, the Interpreter speaks to him of the Comforter: “The Comforter be always with thee, good Christian, to guide thee in the way that leads to the City.” Again, Bunyan’s “Bibline” blood flows, for Jesus said, “The Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (Jn. 14:26; see 14:16; 15:26; 16:7, 13). The Comforter has an essential role in the teaching of Christ’s people, illuminating their minds and hearts to the truth of God’s revelation.

As our eternal king, Christ governs us by his Word and Spirit, by his Candle and Comforter.

In this special quarantine episode, we discuss the theological issues and lessons learned from the initial weeks of staying at home during the global COVID-19 health crisis. Though many Christians are prevented from gathering physically to worship on the Lord’s Day, the Lord has promised that his church shall never perish. While our worship practices may be irregular for a time, God has provided means by which he cares for his people.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Glen Clary, Jim Cassidy

Reformed Forum exists to present every person mature in Christ (Col. 1:28). We do that specifically by supporting the Church in her God-ordained task of accomplishing the Great Commission. In this episode, we discuss our mission and vision and share exciting news about the future of our ministry including Camden Bucey’s transition to become our full-time Executive Director.

Reformed Forum is an organization committed to providing Reformed Christian theological resources to pastors, scholars, and anyone who desires to grow in their understanding of Scripture and the theology that faithfully summarizes its teachings. We are committed to the principles of the Reformation and a redemptive-historical approach to Scripture. We believe these faithfully represent the teachings of the Bible, which is our only standard for faith and practice.

During the Modernist-Fundamentalist Controversy of the early twentieth century, E. J. Young wrote to J. Gresham Machen, the founder of Westminster Theological Seminary and key figure in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, which had yet to be formed:

Within the church there should be an organization, entirely independent of the formal church, which would act as leaven. This organization should be composed of ministers, elders and laymen of the new church alone, who not only believe the Westminster Confession but who are on fire with it. The purpose of this organization should be to propagate and to defend the Reformed faith, to point out the errors of modernism, sacerdotalism, premillennialism, Arminianism, Trichotomy, and so much of the anti-Scriptural evangelism of today. Furthermore, this group would seek to propagate Reformed literature, such as your book, Christianity and Liberalism, Boettner’s book and works of that type. It would seek to propagate this literature not only among the clergy but also among the laity. In other words, it would be a missionary agency whose primary field is the church. Further, it would eventually seek to promote truly Reformed Bible Conferences and Evangelistic Campaigns, would seek to start Reformed Bible classes and prayer meetings and would seek to encourage Reformed radio broadcasts, etc.

E. J. Young, letter to J. Gresham Machen, October 2, 1935.

Seventy-three years passed before Reformed Forum was founded and much has changed regarding technology, but providentially we have become such an organization. There is a need today just as there was then, because the theological challenges persist. We are committed to be faithful to Scripture to the end that Christ would be glorified in the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy, Mark Van Drunen

Alan Strange speaks about the doctrine of the spirituality of the church in the ecclesiology of Charles Hodge and how it was formed in the years leading up to and during the American Civil War. Dr. Strange’s dissertation on the topic has been published in P&R Publishing’s Reformed Academic Dissertations series as The Doctrine of the Spirituality of the Church in the Ecclesiology of Charles Hodge. Dr. Strange previously addressed the topic in episode 443 of Christ the Center, but in this episode, we focus more on the Presbyterian General Assemblies and how they wrestled with the theological and political issues surrounding the war.

Participants: Alan Strange, Camden Bucey

Jeff Stivason joins us to speak about his article, “Benjamin B. Warfield and True Church Unity,” published in the Westminster Theological Journal 79 (2017): 327–43. He argues that Warfield developed a theology that requires the existence of denominations. Jeff is pastor of Grace Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA) in Gibsonia, Pennsylvania and has joined us previously to speak about Warfield on the mode of inspiration.

Abstract

This article examines Benjamin B. Warfield’s view of church unity. Though the research explores the entire corpus of Warfield’s body of work, the primary exploration encompasses the exegesis of two articles that are almost identical and yet separated by fourteen years, “True Church Unity: What It Is,” and “Christian Unity and Church Union; Some Primary Principles.” The teaching of these writings substantiate the following claim: the progressive and constructive nature of Warfield’s understanding of theology requires the existence of denominations. The article proceeds in the following manner. First, the research focuses on Warfield’s understanding of what church unity was not according to the apostolic church. Second, having understood the unity in the negative, the article moves on to observe the ground and nature of ecclesiastical unity in the apostolic church as understood by Warfield. The third point explores the progressive and constructive nature of systematic theology and how it applies to Warfield’s understanding of ecclesiastical unity. In this point, the idea of unity and the legitimacy of denominational separation is explored and substantiated from Warfield’s perspective. The fourth and final point gives attention to the minimalism that has the power to eclipse the church’s visible unity. In particular, the failure to engage in theological inquiry grounded upon the Scriptures will hinder and even destroy the unity of the church.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Stivason, Jeff Waddington

On Theology Simply Profound today, Rob and Bob discuss many and varied issues arising out of the dispute between Paul and Barnabas, which led to their separation, regarding bringing John Mark along on their journey to strengthen the churches of Asia Minor.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

Rob and Bob discuss Acts 15 and the many implications the Jerusalem Council has upon the church’s consideration of church government. Does the Bible teach any particular form of organization? Or, are we up to our own devices?

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

In this episode, Rob and Bob discuss the commission of Barnabas to Antioch, the spread of the gospel, the addition of Saul to work in Antioch, and the relief sent to the congregations of Jerusalem for their aid in a time of need. All of this leads us to a discussion of what the Bible says about church government by elders.

Participants: Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

Paul gave Timothy specific instructions to ordain elders and deacons as the leaders of the churches that they were planting. The Deacons who we were first introduced in Acts 6 were to be dignified, honest, and faithful, not addicted to much wine, convinced of their faith and doctrine, mature in life and faith. They are to be the husband of one wife managing their household well. All that just so they can sweep the floor after a Sunday lunch. What are all of the responsibilities of deacons? Are they to be listened to or just the guys that take the offering every Sunday? Are they to be respected in the office or is it just a stepping stone to eldership?

Participants: Melodie McKenzie, Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

The relationship between the kingdom of God and the church, in the words of Geerhardus Vos, is a “delicate and eminently practical question.”[i] In fact, different ecclesiologies have even arisen because of the various ways the church has construed this relationship.[ii] It has implications for the church’s identity and mission (to say the least), which makes it a question well worth wrestling with. Two prominent theologians who have done just this are Herman Ridderbos (1909-2007) and Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949). Ridderbos and Vos wrote in a theological climate in which liberalism and exclusive (or over-realized) eschatology looked to reduce on opposite ends of the spectrum the wholesome picture the Scriptures provide regarding the relationship between the kingdom and the church in their present and future dimensions.[iii] Vos writes in his article, “The Kingdom of God,”

“Did [Jesus] mean by the kingdom a new state of things suddenly to be realized in external forms … or did He mean by it … a spiritual creation gradually realizing itself in invisible ways? For convenience sake these two conceptions may be distinguished as the eschatological and the spiritual-organic conception. … In modern writings both have in turn been pushed to an extreme in which they become exclusive of the other. The tendency at present … is to make [Jesus’] conception of the kingdom largely eschatological. On the other hand … the opposite tendency appears, viz., to eliminate as much as possible the eschatological elements and ascribe to Him the idea of a kingdom entirely spiritual and internal” (Shorter Writings, 307).

Likewise, Ridderbos observes,

“The liberal theology asserted that, as a visible gathering of believers with a certain amount of organization, the church lay entirely outside the field of Jesus’ vision. Jesus was only supposed to be the prophet of the “inner” religion. … According to [the eschatological] interpretation, it is quite out of the question that Jesus took account of an earthly development in which there would be room for the life of a church and for its organization” (The Coming of the Kingdom, 335-36).

While liberalism sought to remove all future aspects to form an exclusively internal heart religion making the organized church unnecessary, exclusive eschatology sought to relegate the kingdom only to the future without any present intrusion of it so that the church and kingdom are unrelated. In either case, the church lost its identity and mission. In liberalism, the church simply became a sociological phenomenon. In the exclusive eschatology camp, the church became the consequence of the failure of the kingdom to come.[iv] Jesus preached the kingdom, but what came instead was the church.[v] Ridderbos and Vos sought to set forth mediating positions that properly took into account the present and future dimensions of the kingdom and church by setting them within an already-not yet paradigm. In a previous article we considered Ridderbos’ formulation, so now we turn to the slightly different approach of Vos, primarily found in his excellent book The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church.

The Kingdom and the Church Defined

Vos writes, “The church is a form which the kingdom assumes in result of the new stage upon which the messiahship of Jesus enters with his death and resurrection.” Also, he states, “The church is that new congregation taking the place of the old congregation of Israel, which is formed by Jesus as the Messiah and stands under his Messianic rule.”[vi] This congregation could not begin until Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection were accomplished and he was subsequently exalted to the Father’s right hand as the Messiah (cf. Acts 2:36). Vos, unlike Ridderbos, does not see the element of community as foreign to the definition of the kingdom. He writes, “The kingdom is indeed a community in which men are knit together by the closest of bonds, and especially in connection with our Lord’s teaching on the church this is brought out.”[vii] He clarifies though that the kingdom is not limited to this; in fact, he recognizes that this aspect of the kingdom receives little emphasis in Jesus’ teaching (cf. Matt. 13:24-30, 47-50). He goes as far to say that this aspect “is not ultimate because not the union of men as such, but that in God which produces and underlies it, is the true kingdom-forming principle.”[viii] The kingdom exists not merely where “God is supreme, for that is true at all times and under all circumstances, but where God supernaturally carries through his supremacy against all opposing powers and brings man to the willing recognition of the same. It is a state of things in which everything converges and tends towards God as the highest good.” Within this sphere of the kingdom is divine power, divine righteousness, and divinely bestowed blessedness. The kingdom reveals itself as power “in the acts by which [it] is established,” as righteousness “in the moral order under which it exists,” and as blessedness “in the spiritual blessings, privileges and delights that are enjoyed in it.”[ix]

The Church and the Keys of the Kingdom in Matthew 16:18-19 and 18:17

Matthew 16:18, according to Vos, deals with the church “for the express purpose of introducing it as something new, of describing its character and defining its relation to the kingdom.” The occasion for this new revelation was Peter’s confession of Jesus being the Christ, which stood in stark contrast to the multitude who abandoned him. “It is this rock-character … that is praised by Jesus, that, when others wavered, he had remained true to his conviction.”[x] The giving of the keys of the kingdom to Peter, “as the foundation of the church, and therefore to the church,” does not mean that he (or the church) “had been given the power in some way or other to open and shut the gates of the heavenly kingdom.” This interpretation would make the church the gatekeeper of the kingdom. “The binding and loosing do not refer to heaven itself, as if heaven were shut or opened, but refer to certain things lying within the sphere of heaven, and not of heaven alone but of earth likewise.” Vos argues that the keys are not to the outer door, but to the entire house. The church is not here referred to as a gatekeeper, but “the house-steward, and therefore symbolize the administration of the affairs of the house in general.”[xi] From this relationship, Vos sees the kingdom of heaven “existing, in part at least, on earth.” The keys are of the kingdom of heaven, but they bind and loose on earth. So what Peter “does in the administration of the kingdom here below will be recognized in heaven.”[xii] Vos sees the two statements of Jesus (“You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church” [Matt. 16:18] and “I will give you [Peter] the keys of the kingdom of heaven” [Matt. 16:19]) as having the same referent or figure, namely, that of the house. He writes,

First the house is represented as in process of building, Peter as the foundation, then the same house appears completed and Peter as invested with the keys for administering its affairs. It is plainly excluded that the house should mean one thing in the first statement and another in the second. It must be possible, this much we may confidently affirm, to call the church the kingdom.[xiii]

This provides the exegetical ground from which he formulates the relationship between the kingdom and the church as being identical.

The Kingdom and the Church are Identical

Vos argues that Jesus’ view of the kingdom as an organism of men, a church, is found subtly in his earlier teaching. He maintains that “sayings like Matt. 20:25; Mark 9:35; Luke 20:25, at least suggest the idea of the kingdom as a society.” Jesus’ gathering of the disciples, according to Vos, is what the kingdom of God was always intended to be, namely, an aggregate of men. This is supported by the parables of the wheat and the chaff (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43) and the fishnet (Matt. 13:47-50). “This ‘kingdom of the Son of man’ agrees with the ‘church of Jesus,’ in that both phrases make the kingdom a body of men placed under the Messiah as their ruler.” If such was always the intention of the kingdom, then the church, being external and visible, is clearly an advancement of it since it only previously had been internal and invisible. For this reason, Vos argues that the advance “must be sought in something else than the mere fact of its being a body of disciples.” He puts forth two points concerning this. First, the Old Testament church that rejected the Messiah must be replaced and “therefore receive some form of external organization.”[xiv] Vos continues,

This [viz., external organization] the kingdom had not hitherto possessed. It had been internal and invisible not merely in its essence, but to this essence there had been lacking the outward embodiment. Jesus now in speaking of the house and the keys of the house, of binding and loosing on earth, and of church discipline, makes provision for this.[xv]

Second, Vos contends, “Our Lord gives to understand that the new stage upon which his Messiahship is now about to enter, will bring to the kingdom a new influx of supernatural power and this makes out of it, not only externally but also internally, that new thing which he calls his church.” Vos looks for support of this claim in Jesus’ words regarding the gates of Hades. He posits that the phrase should be translated: “the gates of Hades shall not surpass it.” He understands the gates of Hades as “a figure for the highest conceivable strength, because no one can break through them.”[xvi] So Jesus is saying that the church’s power will excel even that of the highest conceivable strength. For Vos the church’s strength is owing to its being built upon a rock. This new influx of power is also spoken of the kingdom (cf. Matt. 16:28; 26:64; Mark 9:1; 14:62; Luke 9:27; 22:69), hence the church and kingdom are identical.

The Son of Man Coming in His Kingdom (Matt. 16:27-28)

In fact, Jesus’ words to his disciples are emphatic about this: “The Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom” (Matt. 16:27-28). The imagery of angels and the glory of the Father denotes power. But in what sense will the kingdom be seen by Jesus’ disciples prior to their death? Vos believes “we can interpret these sayings of the coming of the kingdom in the church.” Jesus’ statement is so emphatic because the power of the Holy Spirit that was at work in the early church anticipates “in some respects the phenomena that will be observed at the end of the world. … The church actually has within herself the powers of the world to come. She is more than the immanent kingdom as it existed before Jesus’ exaltation. She forms an intermediate link between the present life and the life of eternity.”[xvii]

Conclusion

The above analysis leads to this conclusion: “The church is a form which the kingdom assumes in result of the new stage upon which the Messiahship of Jesus enters with his death and resurrection.” Vos takes it further saying, “Jesus plainly leads us to identify the invisible church and the kingdom.” He appeals to John 3:3-5, which explicitly teaches that to be born again is a requirement for anyone who would see or enter into the kingdom. “The kingdom, therefore, as truly as the invisible church is constituted by the regenerate; the regenerate alone experience in themselves its power, cultivate its righteousness, enjoy its blessings.”[xviii] If the invisible church is equated with the kingdom, then what is the relationship between the visible church and the kingdom? Vos answers, “Our Lord looked upon the visible church as a veritable embodiment of his kingdom. Precisely because the invisible church realizes the kingship of God, the visible church must likewise partake of this character.” The keys of the kingdom bring some sort of visible manifestation to the kingdom. And Jesus by conferring this power acts in the capacity of King over the visible church. Vos further draws the identity of the visible church and the kingdom when he says, “In Matt. 13:41 the kingdom of the Son of Man … is nothing else but the visible church. The visible church is constituted by the enthronement of Christ as the King of glory.” The invisible forces of the kingdom that exist in the invisible sphere “find expression in the kingdom-organism of the visible church.”[xix] In the end, Vos identifies the kingdom with church since for him the church is the externally organized kingdom.

[i] Vos, Geerhardus, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom and the Church. PTR 2:335-336. [ii] Cf. Morgan, Christopher W., and Robert A. Peterson, The Kingdom of God (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2012), 179. [iii] For a brief discussion of these two positions Vos and Ridderbos are responding to see Millard Erickson, A Basic Guide to Eschatology, pp. 21-22. [iv] Ridderbos adds, “The church is then supposed to owe its origin to the fact that those who had been waiting for the coming of the kingdom in vain had no other alternative in the continuation of history than, as Jesus’ disciples, to form an organization” (Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 337). [v] The implications of these two systems of thought are massive since the church in both cases becomes a mere human invention and severed from its relationship to the kingdom. [vi] Vos, Geerhardus, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church, 79, 85-86. [vii] The full quote: “We must reject as inadequate the favorite modern explanation that in the figure of the kingdom the point of comparison lies primarily in the mutual association of men so as to form a moral or religious organism. The kingdom is indeed a community in which men are knit together by the closest of bonds, and especially in connection with our Lord’s teaching on the church this is brought out. Taking, however, the kingdom-teaching as a whole this point is but little emphasized, Matt. 13:24-30, 47-50. Besides, this conception is not nearly wide enough to cover all the things predicated of the kingdom in the Gospel, according to which it appears to consist as much in gifts and powers from above as in inter-human relations and activities. Its resemblance to a community offers at least only a partial explanation of its kingdom-character, and so far as this explanation is correct it is not ultimate because not the union of men as such, but that in God which produces and underlies it, is the true kingdom-forming principle” (Vos, The Teaching of Jesus, 49). However, Vos defines the kingdom differently with respect to this community aspect in his review of Das Reich Gottes nach den synoptischen as “a gift of God (not a task, a goal, an ideal or a community); the attitude of man with reference to it is purely receptive, not productive; the kingdom is wrought by God; human activity comes into consideration only in so far as it conditions the reception or loss of the kingdom … the world receives the kingdom in so far as the latter steps forward out of its hidden state and by drawing the world into its sphere becomes manifest; God brings the kingdom, though in Christ, and Christ through the power of God, these two being synonymous” (Vos, Geerhardus, and James T. Dennison, The Letters of Geerhardus Vos, 54). It should be noted that this definition was written in 1900, while the Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom and the Church was published in 1903. [viii] Vos, The Teaching of Jesus, 49 [ix] Ibid., 50, 52 [x] Ibid., 78 [xi] Ibid., 80-81 [xii] Ibid., 81 [xiii] Ibid. [xiv] Ibid., 82-83 [xv] Ibid., 83 [xvi] Ibid. [xvii] Ibid., 84 [xviii] Ibid., 85-86 [xix] Ibid., 87. Vos is sure to clarify the above conclusion noting that the church is not the only expression of the invisible kingdom. He writes, “Undoubtedly the kingship of God… is intended to pervade and control the whole of human life in all its forms of existence.” The kingdom, then, manifests itself in the various spheres of life (e.g., science; art; family; state; commerce; industry; etc.) when it comes under “the controlling influence of the principle of the divine supremacy and glory.” Jesus looked upon every province of human life as being intended to “form part of God’s kingdom,” though he did not see subjection to the visible church as the way it would be accomplished. For the kingdom to penetrate any sphere of life and manifest itself there, including in the church, the principle of regeneration must be there from which it supernaturally empowers it. “While it is proper to separate between the visible church and such things as the Christian state, Christian art, Christian science, etc., these things, if they truly belong to the kingdom of God, grow up out of the regenerated life of the invisible church” (Vos, The Teaching of Jesus, 87-89).

The complexity revolving around the question of the relationship between the kingdom and the church is largely due to varying definitions. So before setting forth Herman Ridderbos’ formulation in his magisterial work on the gospels, The Coming of the Kingdom, we’ll first consider his definition of the church and the kingdom.

The Church Defined

Ridderbos succinctly defines the church (Gk. ekklesia) as “the name of those who have been united into one community by the preaching of the gospel.”[i] In other words, the church is the people of God who have been called out to a single assembly by means of the Word and Spirit. Although Jesus does not use the term “church” often (cf. Matt. 16:18; 18:17), the idea of the church, according to Ridderbos, is “a very essential element in the scope of Jesus’ preaching and self-revelation.”[ii] This raises the question: where did this idea of the church in Jesus’ teaching originate from? Scholars have appealed to the Son of Man’s symbolic representation of “the people of the saints of the Most High” in Daniel 7[iii] and “the remnant” of the people of Israel (cf. Isa. 10:22ff). But Ridderbos (though not necessarily rejecting these connections) sees them as superfluous starting points for the origination of the idea in Jesus’ teaching.[iv] Instead, he argues, “The idea of God’s people has a much more general foundation in Jesus’ messianic preaching of the basileia [kingdom]. … [It] occupies a much more central place in it than can be made plausible on the ground of such special connections.”[v] He goes on to provide three grounds that he finds more suitable on which to build the idea of the church. First, there is “the a priori messianic viewpoint.” The Messiah must have a people, “a kingdom-of-God-community.” He must act for, answer to and be united with a people—a people whom he will confess before his Father (Matt 10:32-33), whom he calls his brothers (12:50; 25:40) and who are children of the messianic bridegroom (9:15). It is for this reason Jesus says, “my church” (Matt. 16:18)—“it is the ‘my’ of the Messiah speaking of the people to whom he has given his grace and whom he rules.”[vi] The fact that the kingdom has come, means that this people is not a purely eschatological entity, but a present reality that is being gathered even today (cf. Matt. 10:34-38; 12:30; Mark 9:40; Luke 9:50; 11:23; 12:51-53). Second, Israel’s rejection of the Messiah warrants “the concomitant new formation of God’s people”—something that “has already begun to be realized with the coming of Jesus.” The rejection of Israel as the people of God is seen in the parable of the wicked tenants (Matt. 21:33-44; cf. Isa. 5:2). Israel’s own rejection of Jesus as the Messiah catalyzes the ripping of the kingdom from their possession and the giving of the kingdom to “a people producing its fruits” (Matt. 25:43). “By this ‘people’ is… [meant] the new people of God to whom, in passing over the old Israel, he will give the salvation of the kingdom.” Ridderbos recognizes that here the two concepts—the kingdom of God and the gathering of a new people of God by the Messiah—are apparent. “The revelation of the kingdom is directed to the formation of a people that will replace Israel in the history of salvation.”[vii] This finds further support in the fact that Jesus gathers twelve disciples to form the nucleus or foundation of the new Israel, the new people of God. The point Ridderbos seeks to make here is that Jesus’ messianic mission was, in fact, directed and determined by this idea of forming the new people of God, his church. Third, the idea of the church arises from “the basic motif of the covenant and of the people of God.” This is found in the definition of ekklesia as “the gathering together of the people of the divine covenant.”[viii] These people who belong to the Covenant Lord are the people of the Messiah and vice-versa. These three observations lead Ridderbos to define the church as

the community of those who, as the true people of God, receive the gifts of the kingdom of heaven provisionally now already since the Messiah has come, and one day in the state of perfection at the parousia of the Son of Man.” In other words, “the ekklesia is the people elected and called by God and sharing in the bliss of the basileia.[ix]

The Kingdom Defined

The kingdom is defined by Ridderbos as “the revelation of God’s glory (Matt. 16:27; 24:30; Mark 8:38; 13:26, etc.).” Ridderbos notes that basileia can be translated as “kingdom,” “kingship,” and “kingly dominion.” The spatial interpretation is to be seen as secondary to the kingly dominion sense. From here Ridderbos argues that the kingdom of God has a “personal connotation” for it is “the coming of God himself as king.” He appeals to the parables of the kingdom for support since a personal character always stands at the center of them, not some static, impersonal force (cf. Matt. 13:24ff; 18:23ff; 20:1ff; 21:33ff; 22:1ff; 25:14ff). This is consistent with the Old Testament conception of the coming of the kingdom as a coming of a person, generally conceived of as the Messiah.[x] Nevertheless, dominion must create or maintain a territory where it can operate, which makes “kingdom” a legitimate translation of basileia. Therefore, the coming of the kingdom has both a spatial (a territory) and an ethical (a power of dominion) connotation. In Jesus’ coming, the kingdom is revealed as (1) a power seen in Jesus’ miracles and ruination of Satan’s reign that brings judgment, salvation, and restoration to the created order, (2) a message of salvation that is preached to the poor in spirit, and (3) a gift that the people of God, the church, may delight in. In summary, “the basileia is the great divine work of salvation in its fulfillment and consummation in Christ.”[xi] The question that now presents itself to us is: How does the church, the people elected and called by God, relate to the kingdom, the great divine work of salvation?

The Kingdom and the Church are Complementary

Ridderbos strongly stresses that the kingdom is not to be identified with the church. He writes, “The concept basileia nowhere occurs in the sense of this idea of the ekklesia … [nor is it] used in the sense that the kingdom of God in its provisional manifestation on earth would be embodied in the form and organization of the church.”[xii] However, the kingdom parables (e.g., Matt. 13), which keep the gospel central, seem to suggest the coming of the church. Calvin even tried to apply some of them to the church (e.g., the wheat and tares and the fishing net). The issue that is often at hand when these parables are taken up is the “mingling of the wicked and the good in the church.” This application is still widely popular in contemporary interpretation of the parables. However, Ridderbos rejects such un-nuanced application since “the field in which the wicked and good are growing up in together is the world,” not the church. The parables are much more broad, encompassing “the universal work of the divine salvation.” To limit them to the church is to unduly narrow them. This does not necessarily have to exclude the church, for, as Ridderbos comments, “this progress includes the salvation of all those who will inherit the kingdom.”[xiii] For Ridderbos, then, the relationship between the kingdom and the church is clear with regard to their connections and differences:

The basileia is the great divine work of salvation in its fulfillment and consummation in Christ; the ekklesia is the people elected and called by God and sharing in the bliss of the basileia. Logically, the basileia ranks first, and not the ekklesia. The former, therefore, has a much more comprehensive content. It [the kingdom] represents the all-embracing perspective, it denotes the consummation of all history, brings both grace and judgment, has cosmic dimensions, fills time and eternity. The ekklesia in all this is the people who in this great drama have been placed on the side of God in Christ by virtue of the divine election and covenant. They have been given the divine promise, have been brought to manifestation and gathered together by the preaching of the gospel, and will inherit the redemption of the kingdom now and in the great future.[xiv]

In Jesus’ coming, the kingdom is revealed as a power, message, and gift. The church, then, reveals the kingdom “in its redeeming and saving significance, in all the gifts and treasures promised and granted now already in and through Christ.” The church is “as far as humanity is concerned… the soteriological goal” of the kingdom. The salvation that the kingdom is bringing is universal and cosmic, restoring all of creation as far as curse is found, “in which the church is herself included.”[xv] That is to say, the church does not reveal the kingdom comprehensively, only in part—the kingdom is far more encompassing than the church. The church and the kingdom do not oppose one another, as if only one can exist, but neither are they to be construed as identical. The salvation that the kingdom brings “bears both a messianic and a historical character.” The Messiah must have a people and since the kingdom is already being realized in history, the church takes on a present, historical nature. “The ekklesia is the fruit of the revelation of the basileia; and conversely, the basileia is inconceivable without the ekklesia. The one is inseparable from the other without, however, the one merging into the other.”[xvi] The kingdom has a universal scope in which the church shares but which she never encompasses. The church is the fruit of the kingdom, not the kingdom itself. Raymond Zorn, in his helpful book, Christ Triumphant: Biblical Perspectives on his Church and Kingdom, writes in agreement with Ridderbos, “The church is to be found within the kingdom but is not co-extensive with it.”[xvii]

Conclusion

Ridderbos’ formulation of the church from the viewpoint of the kingdom leads to three conclusions. First, the church is the community that awaits the full salvation of the kingdom. Second, it is the place where “the gifts and powers of the [kingdom] are granted and received.” Third, it is the instrument of the kingdom as she professes Jesus as the Christ, obeys his commandments, and fulfills the Great Commission by preaching the gospel to the ends of the earth. “In every respect,” then, “the church is surrounded and impelled by the revelation, the progress, the future of the kingdom of God without, however, itself being the basileia, and without ever being identified with it.”[xviii]

[i] Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 343. [ii] Ibid., 347. [iii] G.K. Beale argues that “the Son of Man is both an individual and also a representative for a community” (A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2011], 394ff). Also, in the book of Revelation the saints of the Most High, i.e., the church, shares the authority and dominion of the Lamb (1:6, 9; 2:26-27; 3:21; 5:9-10), which seems to be consistent with Daniel 7. [iv] cf. Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 347-348. [v] Ibid. 348 [vi] Ibid. [vii] Ibid., 351-53 [viii] Ibid., 354 [ix] Ibid. [x] Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 24-27. [xi] Ibid., 354 [xii] Ibid., 343 [xiii] Ibid., 344-47 [xiv] Ibid., 354-55 [xv] Ibid., 355 [xvi] Ibid. [xvii] Raymond O. Zorn, Christ Triumphant: Biblical Perspectives on His Church and Kingdom, 71 [xviii] Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 356

Dispensationalism is a system of doctrine that views human history as divided into distinct eras (or dispensations). In each of these dispensations, God provides a unique test to humanity. Repeatedly, they fail these tests and receive the judgment requisite to each dispensation. We welcome Rob McKenzie and Bob Tarullo from Westminster OPC in Indian Head Park, Illinois. Rev. Tarullo serves as pastor of Westminster OPC and Mr. McKenzie serves as an elder. Together, they have produced an extended audio series on dispensationalism for their Theology Simply Profound podcast. Listen as we introduce the history and salient features of this system of doctrine. Be sure to keep listening immediately after our recording ends for a bonus episode of Theology Simply Profound on the Dispensation of Promise.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Rob McKenzie, Robert Tarullo

Dr. Alan Strange is professor of church history and apologetics at Mid-America Reformed Seminary and associate pastor of New Covenant Community Church in Joliet, Illinois. Dr. Strange sits with us to speak about the great American Presbyterian, Charles Hodge, and his contribution to the Doctrine of the Church. Hodge was a proponent of the doctrine known as the Spirituality of the Church. While many Reformed theologians are familiar with the name of the doctrine, its permutations are many. Dr. Strange details the history of the doctrine through several controversies of which Charles Hodge was involved. By understanding this history, we learn many important practical lessons for the Church today.

Participants: Alan Strange, Camden Bucey

Jonathan Brack explains a Reformed ecclesiology which spans Old and New Testaments. He touches upon covenant theology, polity, and other foundational issues as he speaks about important books on ecclesiology.

• George Gillespie, Aaron’s Rod Blossoming, or the Divine Ordinance of Church Government Vindicated
• Stuart Robinson, The Church of God as an Essential Element of the Gospel
• Douglas Bannerman, The Scripture Doctrine of the Church
• James Bannerman, The Church of Christ

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jared Oliphint, Jonathan Brack, Mark A. Winder

Several contributors are on location in Green Lake, Wisconsin as we discuss the practice of ecclesiology. Although ecclesiology is one of the traditional loci of systematic theology, it is often under-studied and even under-appreciated. Even if we do study the subject thoroughly, we can fail to put biblical ecclesiology into practice as we ought. In this episode we discuss the practical importance of ecclesiology.

Links

• OPC Presbytery of the Midwest
• Green Lake Conference Center in Green Lake, WI
• Grace OPC in Hanover Park, IL
• Apple Valley Presbyterian Church in Neenah, WI
• Westminster OPC in Indian Head Park, IL
• Hope OPC in Grayslake, IL

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Matt Cotta, Robert Tarullo, Steve Schmidt

Mark Bube and Kurt Vetterli speak today about ecumenism and inter-church relations. Mark Bube, general secretary of foreign missions in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, plays an important part in the OPC’s ecumenism because the OPC collaborates with other NAPARC denominations in foreign missions, supporting the missionaries of other denominations and receiving support for their own missionaries. Kurt Vetterli is a pastor in Basel, Switzerland, in a reformed church connected to the OPC. Links:

• NAPARC
• International Council of Reformed Churches
• OPC Foreign Missions
• Evangelisch-reformierte Kirche Westminster Bekenntnisses (Evangelical-Reformed Church, Westminster Confession)

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Kurt Vetterli, Mark Bube

In light of the recent discussion on “The Future of Protestantism,” I thought I would post Machen’s take on church unity as he deals with this topic in his classic work, Christianity and Liberalism:

We are not dealing here with delicate personal questions; we are not presuming to say whether such and such an individual man is a Christian or not. God only can decide such questions; no man can say with assurance whether the attitude of certain individual “liberals” toward Christ is saving faith or not. But one thing is perfectly plain—whether or not liberals are Christians, it is at any rate perfectly clear that liberalism is not Christianity. And that being the case, it is highly undesirable that liberalism and Christianity should continue to be propagated within the bounds of the same organization. A separation between the two parties in the Church is the crying need of the hour. Many indeed are seeking to avoid the separation. Why, they say, may not brethren dwell together in unity? The Church, we are told, has room both for liberals and for conservatives. The conservatives may be allowed to remain if they will keep trifling matters in the background and attend chiefly to “the weightier matters of the law.” And among the things thus designated as “trifling” is found the Cross of Christ, as a really vicarious atonement for sin. Such obscuration of the issue attests a really astonishing narrowness on the part of the liberal preacher. Narrowness does not consist in definite devotion to certain convictions or in definite rejection of others. But the narrow man is the man who rejects the other man’s convictions without first endeavoring to understand them, the man who makes no effort to look at things from the other man’s point of view. For example, it is not narrow to reject the Roman Catholic doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church. It is not narrow to try to convince Roman Catholics that that doctrine is wrong. But it would be very narrow to say to a Roman Catholic: “You may go on holding your doctrine about the Church and I shall hold mine, but let us unite in our Christian work, since despite such trifling differences we are agreed about the matters that concern the welfare of the soul.” For of course such an utterance would simply beg the question; the Roman Catholic could not possibly both hold his doctrine of the Church and at the same time reject it, as would be required by the program of Church unity just suggested. A Protestant who would speak in that way would be narrow, because quite independent of the question whether he or the Roman Catholic is right about the Church he would show plainly that he had not made the slightest effort to understand the Roman Catholic point of view. The case is similar with the liberal program for unity in the Church. It could never be advocated by anyone who had made the slightest effort to understand the point of view of his opponent in the controversy. The liberal preacher says to the conservative party in the Church: “Let us unite in the same congregation, since of course doctrinal differences are trifles.” But it is the very essence of “conservatism” in the Church to regard doctrinal differences as no trifles but as the matters of supreme moment. A man cannot possibly be an “evangelical” or a “conservative” (or, as he himself would say, simply a Christian) and regard the Cross of Christ as a trifle. To suppose that he can is the extreme of narrowness. It is not necessarily “narrow” to reject the vicarious sacrifice of our Lord as the sole means of salvation. It may be very wrong (and we believe that it is), but it is not necessarily narrow. But to suppose that a man can hold to the vicarious sacrifice of Christ and at the same time belittle that doctrine, to suppose that a man can believe that the eternal Son of God really bore the guilt of men’s sins on the Cross and at the same time regard that belief as a “trifle” without bearing upon the welfare of men’s souls − that is very narrow and very absurd. We shall really get nowhere in this controversy unless we make a sincere effort to understand the other man’s point of view. J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009), 136–37.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jim Cassidy

In his masterful two-volume work, The Church of Christ, James Bannerman explores the various ways the word “church” is used. For example, “the term Church is used in Scripture to denote the whole body throughout the world of those that outwardly profess the faith of Christ.” One of the ways Bannerman connects ecclesiology to soteriology and the gospel is through (not surprisingly) union with Christ. Bannerman recognizes the reality of the invisible/visible church distinction, which affirms that some people within the visible church on earth are not elect; that apostasy exists. He then uses John 15 as exegetical warrant to apply this invisible/visible distinction within ecclesiology to individual soteriology and the kinds of union with Christ described by Christ himself, recorded by John in chapter 15. For discussions surrounding the relationship between ecclesiology and soteriology, this distinction gets overlooked too often. Bannerman:

[O]ur Lord likens the relation between Himself and His Church to the union subsisting between the vine and the branches. “I am the true vine,” said He, “and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit He taketh away; and every branch that beareth fruit He purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.” “I am the vine, ye are the branches.” “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered.” It is plain that in such language our Lord recognised a twofold union to Himself,—one, a living union, like that of the fruitful branch in the vine; the other, a dead or mere external union, such as the unfruitful branch in the vine, that was cast forth and withered; and such precisely is the two-fold connection with Christ, exemplified in the case respectively of the invisible and the visible Church. Those who are united to the Saviour by a living union,—unseen indeed of men, but known to Him,—constitute that society of believers spoken of in Scripture as the spiritual or invisible Church of Christ. Those, on the other hand, who are united to the Saviour by an external union of outward profession and outward privileges, known and seen of men, numbering among them the true believers in Christ, but not exclusively made up of true believers, constitute the visible Church. “The visible Church,” says the Confession of Faith, “which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion, together with their children, and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.”

James Bannerman, vol. 1, The Church of Christ: A Treatise on the Nature, Powers, Ordinances, Discipline, and Government of the Christian Church (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1868), 10-11. Put as simply as possible, we see three categories:

1. Visible unbelievers (outside the church) and invisible (non-elect) unbelievers (not on the vine)
2. Visible believers (inside the church) yet invisible (non-elect) unbelievers (united on the vine, but dead)
3. Visible believers (inside the church) and invisible (elect) believers (united on the vine, alive)

Say goodbye to the “progressives” and “conservatives” and hello to the “convergent” and “wild goose” Christians. That’s the suggestion of Eric Elnes in an interview with Christian Piatt on Sojourner’s blog God’s Politics. For Elnes, the labels “progressive” and “conservative” have become virtually meaningless in today’s Christian climate. Darryl Hart made a similar point with reference to the word “evangelical” in his excellent Deconstructing Evangelicalism. This erosion of significance has led to an identity crisis of sorts. In a recent post titled, “Mainline Celebrity Blues,” Hart illustrates this struggle in the mainline. Previously, the mainline could turn to celebrities for brand identity and loyalty. But this isn’t the case any longer. As David Heim notes, “mainline Protestants don’t really have celebrities” (HT: Carol Howard Merrit and Hart). Where can they turn? Enter “movements.” For a while it was “progressive.” But that has already worn thin, which brings us back to Elnes’s suggestions. His “convergent” or “wild goose” Christians are coming to terms with the fact that they are finding themselves in agreement with those from the other side of the progressive/conservative divide. Within the post-evangelical and post-liberal movements people are finding they have a lot more in common than their theological forbears. The new terms are a way to signal that these groups are more fluid and merge together at points. This is always the problem when we start to define theological groups in terms of brands rather than by confessional documents. Instead of thinking about these shifts as some sort of theological advance, perhaps we should consider whether both sides simply gave up on the same foundational doctrines years earlier. For instance, when a post-conservative pulls the plug on inerrancy what really holds him or her back from embracing post-liberal distinctives? In practice it seems the distinguishing mark between post-liberals and post-conservatives is primarily where they came from, not what they believe. That’s why confessional documents are more useful in distinguishing groups. Granted, at times we need more specificity than what “Three Forms of Unity” or “Westminster Standards” offer. Still, it seems like a much better place to start. The dangers of identifying with a celebrity are many, but perpetual reinvention through socio-theological branding is a poor alternative. Either way, we may lose sight of what really matters.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy

Jonathan Brack reviews The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology by Pascal Denault and published by Solid Ground Christian Books. This is a helpful treatment of historic Reformed credo-baptist arguments.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jonathan Brack

Links

• Ministerial Training Institute (MTI) of the OPC
• John R. Muether and Danny E. Olinger, eds., Confident of Better Things
• A. Craig Troxel, What is Man?
• Stuart Robinson, The Church of God as an Essential Element of the Gospel
• James Bannerman, The Church of Christ (Volume 1, Volume 2)

Participants: A. Craig Troxel, Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington

Participants: Camden Bucey, Guy Prentiss Waters, Jeff Waddington, Mark A. Winder

Today we welcome Owen Strachan to the program to speak about the new book, The Pastor as Scholar and the Scholar as Pastor: Reflections on Life and Ministry. Dr. Strachan is Assistant Professor of Christian Theology and Church History at Boyce College in Louisville, Kentucky. He has published six books and written with The Atlantic, First Things, Christianity Today, and the Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jared Oliphint, Nick Batzig, Owen Strachan

Jim Cassidy leads a discussion on church planting in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church with Brad Hertzog and Mark Winder. Rev. Hertzog is Pastor of Reformation Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Queens, NY and Rev. Winder is Church Planter of Wolf River Presbyterian Church in Collierville, TN near Memphis. post image by _sig_.

Participants: Brad Hertzog, Jim Cassidy, Mark A. Winder

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jim Cassidy, John Fesko, Nick Batzig

Links

• Guy Waters on N. T. Wright’s Doctrine of Justification, Part 1 and Part 2

Participants: Camden Bucey, Guy Prentiss Waters, Jeff Waddington, Josh Walker, Nick Batzig

Divergent approaches to foreign missions have been employed for centuries. Disagreements over various approaches have been at the heart of many historic events in modern church history. Indeed, one such disagreement was critical to the founding of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Christ the Center was pleased to welcome Mark Bube and Doug Clawson, General Secretary and Associate General Secretary, respectively, of the Committee on Foreign Missions for the OPC. Mark and Doug detail the OPC’s specific views regarding foreign missions. They touch upon the reformed standards, catechesis and, most notably, the importance of church government and special office. Join us for a stimulating discussion that will stimulate you to think critically about the work of the Great Commission regardless of denominational affiliation.

Links

• OPC Committee on Foreign Missions

Bibliography

Piper, John. Let the Nations Be Glad! 2nd Edition. 2nd ed. Baker Academic, 2003.

Young, John. Missions: The Biblical Motive and Aim. Pittsburgh PA: Crown & Covenant Publications, 2007.

Other Formats

• Zotero RDF
• Dublin Core RDF

Participants: Camden Bucey, Doug Clawson, Jeff Waddington, Mark Bube

Derek Thomas joins Josh Walker and Nick Batzig to discuss the regulative principle of worship. Derek Thomas is the John E. Richards Professor of Systematic and Practical Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi. He is also the minister of teaching at First Presbyterian Church in Jackson, Mississippi.
Archive.org

Participants: Derek Thomas, Josh Walker, Nick Batzig

Bibliography

Participants: Jon Payne, Nick Batzig

Panel

• Cornelis Venema
• Lane Keister
• Nick Batzig
• Jim Cassidy
• Jeff Waddington
• Camden Bucey

Bibliography

Participants: Camden Bucey, Cornelis Venema, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy, Lane Keister, Nick Batzig

The Christ the Center panel tackled the importance of an ordinary means of grace ministry and the place of catechism within that overall approach. First, it was determined that God has ordained that the church in this age proclaim the gospel and advance in the faith through his ordained means and not some man-made program such as revivalism (to be clearly distinguished from true revival). The biblical foundations for this were developed in the distinction between the foundation and superstructure of the church and the extraordinary and ordinary ministries in the church. The extraordinary ministry of apostleship and miracles laid the foundation with Christ as the cornerstone (Eph), but in this age of the ordinary ministry of the superstructure of the church, the stress falls on the ordinary means of grace (Acts 2:42): the Word, sacraments, and prayer. It is in this setting that the panel discussed the necessity and benefits of catechism for both children and adults. God has said he would bless these means and the church strays from them to her own peril.

Panel

• Jim Cassidy
• Jeff Waddington
• Camden Bucey

Links

• Derek Thomas on Blogging Through the Institutes
• Ordinary Means podcast
• Feeding on Christ
• Calvary OPC Ringoes, NJ
• Calvary OPC Glenside, PA

Bibliography

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy

• Jim Cassidy
• Jeff Waddington
• Camden Bucey

Bibliography

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy