Offer Good While Supplies Last: First 300 Episodes of Christ the Center

The Reformed Forum has been a tremendous blessing to me and I'm certain to a vast number of other people who have desired and continue to desire the cultivation of the historic, Reformed faith.

I have found it a privilege to be able to actually converse with some of the program's pillars, like Jared Oliphint, Jeffrey Waddington and Jim Cassidy online, asking them questions now and again (Camden Bucey is somewhat harder to accost. LOL).

Now the guys have decided to offer the first 300 episodes of the famed Christ the Center program for free as a single download. For directions, go here.

The Decalogue of Covenantal Apologetics

1. The faith that we are defending must begin with, and necessarily include, the triune God— Father, Son, and Holy Spirit— who, as God, condescends to create and to redeem.

2. God's covenantal revelation is authoritative by virtue of what it is, and any covenantal, Christian apologetic will necessarily stand on and utilize that authority in order to defend Christianity.

3. It is the truth of God's revelation, together with the work of the Holy Spirit, that brings about a covenantal change from one who is in Adam to one who is in Christ.

4. Man (male and female) as image of God is in covenant with the triune God for eternity.

5. All people know the true God, and that knowledge entails covenantal obligations.

6. Those who are and remain in Adam suppress the truth that they know. Those who are in Christ see that truth for what it is.

7. There is an absolute, covenantal antithesis between Christian theism and any other, opposing position. Thus, Christianity is true and anything opposing it is false.

8. Suppression of the truth, like the depravity of sin, is total but not absolute. Thus, every unbelieving position will necessarily have within it ideas, concepts, notions, and the like that it has taken and wrenched from their true, Christian context.

9. The true, covenantal knowledge of God in man, together with God's universal mercy, allows for persuasion in apologetics.

10. Every fact and experience is what it is by virtue of the covenantal, all-controlling plan and purpose of God.

(K. Scott Oliphint, Covenantal Apologetics: Principles and Practice in Defense of Our Faith [Illinois: Crossway, 2013])




You can find Dr. Oliphint discussing covenantal apologetics at Reformed Forum here.

More apologetics posts:

Machen on the Perichoresis Between Evangelism and Apologetics

John Calvin's Influence on Reformed Apologetics

Van Til and the Perichoresis of Apologetics and Evangelism

Rev. Allen Vander Pol on the Doctrine of Scripture at PCovRC

Dr. K. Scott Oliphint, in this wonderful ReformedForum broadcast entitled, Nature and Scripture, remarked that the Reformation's chief contribution, arguably, is the regrounding of epistemology on Scripture.

In line with this, Rev. Allen Vander Pol of Miami International Theological Seminary will be conducting a seminar at Pasig Covenant Reformed Church on the doctine of Scripture entitled, "That Word Above All Earthly Powers."

This is a FREE seminar on a very important topic, so you wouldn't want to miss it!

Trueman on Bavinck as Model

I am blessed to own Herman Bavinck's 4-volume "Reformed Dogmatics" and the John Bolt-edited, "The Last Things." And though Cornelius Van Til chides Bavinck for instances of excursions into autonomous reasoning, still the latter's influence on the former is undeniable.

In this short article, Dr. Carl Trueman extols the virtues of Bavinckism.

Orthodox Prosperity Preachers?

Dr. Carl Trueman makes the case that one can vehemently trumpet confessionalism and still be a cultic, money-hungry, devourer of the sheep.

He writes:

So just because somebody preaches the gospel, uses the name of Jesus every other sentence and cries when they talk about the lost does not guarantee that they are not a cult leader or simply in it for what they can get out of it.

The key is the culture. One must ask cultural questions of such men, not simply doctrinal ones. Is the culture of their church or organisation transparent? Are there clear lines of accountability which flow both ways, from the leadership to the grassroots and from the grassroots to the leadership? Is opposition to leadership decisions addressed in an open fashion or via thuggish backroom manoeuvres and public derision and isolation of critics? And one interesting question which I remember a pastor once asking in a pulpit when I was college student: how far above the average economic level of the congregation or funding constituency does the leadership live? That little old lady putting her ten dollars in the plate each Sunday or sending in her pledge -- is she funding a lifestyle for functionally unaccountable leaders which is lavish beyond words and built on gospel rhetoric, on not-for-profit tax breaks and on an overwheening sense of entitlement? That can be quite an interesting gauge of whether the church or ministry takes seriously its role as steward of the money it receives. It is, after all, easy to prostitute yourself to the prosperity gospel when your own prophecies of material wealth are effectively underwritten by the desperate dreams of the poor and destitute which you yourself have helped to create and upon which you prey with a depraved and insatiable hunger.

Cultists and con-men are identifiable only by their culture, not by their confessions.

This is another reason for the desperate need for more confessionally Reformed churches. Why so? Because the best thing to do if you find yourself in the clutches of such a pastor is to leave.

Come Share In Our Joy

Pasig Covenant Reformed Church's 4th Anniversary pictures.

See last year's anniversary greetings from Dr. R. Scott Clark and Dr. Michael Horton.

A Reformation Day Review: The Quest for Comfort (The Story of the Heidelberg Catehchism)

First and foremost, I would like to offer my sincerest thanks to the author, William Boekestein, for being generous enough to send his little book to a virtual stranger like myself, pro bono. We've only known each other through the Internet for a short while, and I am both humbled and honored by his good gesture.

The thing about the book that hit me like a freight train was the new information that I received from it. I have indeed gone through the Heidelberg Catechism, and have been unanimously edified by the Gospel truths contained in it. However, I was not very well acquainted with its three authors, and this little biographical book has shown me that, once again (!), God has proved Himself to favor the Underdogs when it comes to the carrying out of the work of the Gospel! The Heidleberg Catechism was forged by Underdogs Caspar Olevianus, Zacharias Ursinus, and Frederick III.

Van Til on Driscoll

Mark Driscoll's rejection of the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son of God (declared in ecumenical creeds and Reformed confessions) is discussed here (Part 1), here (Part 2), here (Part 3), and here (Part 4).

It appears Cornelius Van Til was on the mark once again when he said:

It is sometimes contended that ministers need not be trained in systematic theology if only they know their Bibles. But "Bible-trained" instead of systematically trained preachers frequently preach error. They may mean ever so well and be ever so true to the gospel on certain points; nevertheless, they often preach error. There are many "orthodox" preachers today whose study of Scripture has been so limited to what it says about soteriology that they could not protect the fold of God against heresies on the person of Christ. Oftentimes they themselves even entertain definitely heretical notions on the person of Christ, though perfectly unaware of the fact. (An Introduction to Systematic Theology [New Jersey: P & R, 2007], ed. William Edgar, 22)

Westminster Wednesday: Is History Important? True, Man!

Dr. Carl Trueman makes the case here.

I haven't finished going through the whole piece, but what I've read thus far has convinced me of its blog-worthiness.

Michael Horton on PCovRC's 3rd Anniversary

In celebration of Pasig Covenant Reformed Church's 3rd Anniversary, Dr. Michael Horton, in typical gracious fashion, offered up the following words of edification:

We are cordially inviting everyone to come and share this day with us. See details here.

Westminster Wednesday: Trueman on a Much-Abused Phrase

Anti-confessionalists almost always have this phrase, "semper reformanda," ready on their lips. As a justifying smokescreen for almost every innovation in the area of church polity, worship, preaching, evangelism, etc., it really is anemic.

The thing that strikes me as funny is that so much of this has been going on for quite a while now that the impetus behind the movement has all but been negated. Wanting to shed the outmoded garb of "traditionalism," these trendy churches are now the norm, and people are finding out that it really does not deliver. Being different is now the "tradition," and like the man who built his house on sand, the inevitability of collapse is undeniable.

Carl Trueman reminds us that the church is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord" (Eph. 2:20, 21), thereby historic, catholic, and Reformed (ad fontes!).

My Credo, by Cornelius Van Til

If you want to know what Cornelius Van Til was all about and where he was coming from, as narrated by the man himself, and be thoroughly refreshed and inspired in the process, then read on.


How can I express my appreciation adequately for the honor you have conferred on me by your contributions to this Festschrift? I shall try to do so first by setting forth in this, my "Credo," a general statement of my main beliefs as I hold them today. Then I shall deal separately with the problems and objections some of you have raised in respect to my views in separate response to the essays themselves. I hope that by doing this we may be of help to one another as together we present the name of Jesus as the only name given under heaven by which men must be saved.

The Coolest of the Reformed Cats

Notice the prominent foreheads? A chief requirement of Reformed coolness.

Turretin was probably wearing a wig or decided on the "heavy metal" look—still within the bounds of cool. LOL.

Triperspectivalism and the Heretical Fringe

I decided to inform myself about John Frame's triperspectivalism using his own primer found here.

The impression that I got is that his method seeks to find a Trinitarian imprint to everything in reality. I would certainly agree with the premise that all of creation is indelibly marked with Trinitarianism in that the One-and-the-Many, evidenced in the universal-particulars relationship found in every created object, is a creaturely analogization of the mystery of God as being One and Three Persons. However, the aspect of Frame's take on this that rubs me wrong is that (based on my understanding of his proposition) if the complete picture view of truth (exhaustive) is only available to God, then the ectypal truth available to the creature (man) must consist in "perspectives" that cannot claim to be the single body of ectypal truth delivered to man, but that the various perspectives contribute to the apprehension of this true ectypal corpus.

In other words, my particular take on truth is always incomplete and necessitates that I engage the truth perspectives of others in order to progressively arrive at complete ectypal veracity. The implications on the Reformed creeds and confessions cannot be missed. Frame states,

"So I think that perspectivalism is an encouragement to the unity of the church. Sometimes our divisions of theology and practice are differences of perspective, of balance, rather than differences over the essentials of faith. So perspectivalism will help us better to appreciate one another, and to appreciate the diversity of God's work among us."

What I hear him saying is that the Reformed consensus is just a perspective among others, and that we would do well perhaps to hearken to the likes of Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Rob Bell, etc. in order to progressively arrive at unified Christian truth. But then how would error be spotted? The determination of heterodoxy must necessarily be predicated on a perspective as being the only perspective. If he claims this as "the essentials," then by what overarching perspectival standard did he arrive at this delimiting conclusion?

His threefold division of normative (God's revelation), situational (objects, the created order), and existential (man in interaction with the former two) is well and good, in my opinion, but then the permutation of this triperspectivalism, as applied by him, into multiperspectives that are each given credence does give rise to a pluralism that is dangerous and precisely what the Reformed creeds and confessions were meant to curb.

My "Testimony"

I'm sure we've all witnessed this peculiar aspect of broad evangelicalism wherein people go up the stage in order to narrate their own personal "testimonies." Usually, this would consist in the person having received some blessing, either positively or negatively (the former taking the form of additional assets, the latter rescue from loss).

While proclaiming the goodness of the Lord in our lives to others is warranted, it should always be remembered that our lives are not the Gospel, and that we should not fall into the seeker-sensitive mistake of assuming that our "attractive" lives are enough to snatch others from the flames apart from the doctrinal preaching of the person and work of Christ.

With that said, allow me to direct you to my own personal "testimony"—my journey from error into the historic, catholic, and confessionally Reformed faith:


Truly Reformed

The Joy of Being Confessionally Reformed

Hidden Treasure

Proud to Be a Member of Pasig Covenant Reformed Church

Who Did John Calvin Consider as His Father in the Faith?

Martin Bucer.

A Primer on Francis Turretin

Francis Turretin is arguably the greatest Protestant Scholastic of the 17th century.

What is scholasticism?

"A discourse is 'scholastic' only when it follows scholastic method–specifically, only when it concentrates on (1) identifying the order and pattern of argument suitable to technical academic discourse, (2) presenting an issue in the form of a thesis or question, (3) ordering the thesis or question suitably for discussion or debate, often identifying the 'state of the question,' (4) noting a series of objections to the assumed correct answer, and then (5) offering a formulation of an answer or an elaboration of the thesis with due respect to all known sources of information and to the rules of rational discourse, followed by a full response to all objections. When that form or its outlines are not observed in a work, that work is not scholastic. By way of example, Thomas Aquinas's Summa theologiae is certainly a scholastic work–but his commentary on the Gospel of John is not, even though its content stands in strong and clear relation to the content of the Summa. Another example, taken from a place somewhat closer to home: Ursinus's Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism is, arguably, scholastic. The catechism itself is clearly not–even though the theological content of the catechism closely reflects that of the commentary written on it" (Richard Muller, After Calvin, 26 [found at Richard Muller on 'What Makes Something Scholastic?'])

Who was Francis Turretin?

Irrationalism, QIRE, and Challies

In this recent blog post, mega-blogger Tim Challies reports of another reason for why he left a confessionally Reformed church in favor of an Anabaptist one, this time the rationale being that the former did not have a strong "evangelistic" suit, born, he claims, out of a seemingly deeply-ingrained distaste for the unregenerate.

While his criticism may indeed be valid, his reaction of going from the context of strong, historical, and Reformed confessionalism to the converse does not share the same quality. In fact, I would say that it is irrational. If irrationalism is the claim that all that is true are the particulars around us, and that there are no universals that dictate upon how particulars operate, then Challies' subsequent embracing of more "feely," experience-driven Anabaptism fits the bill of irrationalism very nicely.

While it is possible for him to assert that the confessionally Reformed faith lacks the quality of "universal" (archetypal), based on biblical theological grounds, it is more likely that the reason he "jumped ship" is that, experientially, he was not being satisfied. This reminds me of Dr. R. Scott Clark's QIRE (Quest for Illegitimate Religious Experience):

"QIRE is then the practical dimension of QIRC. It denies that God mediates His interaction with man through the means of grace, namely, the preaching of the gospel and the sacraments. It posits that man is able to connect with God apart from the institutions that God has ordained in Scripture, thereby blurring the Creator-creature distinction. It is easy to spot more glaring instances of this error in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, but subtle variations also occur in the spiritual disciplines advocacies of many notable figures that are common in supposedly Reformed circles." (Underdog Theology, BOOK REVIEW: Recovering the Reformed Confession (Our Theology, Piety, and Practice) by R. Scott Clark—Chapter I, 'Whatever Became of Reformed Theology, Piety, and Practice?' PART 1)

While Challies' regression from Reformed confessionalism to Anabaptism is lamentable, the blessing that his wisdom has afforded many, through his blog and books, is definitely laudable.

Westminster Wednesday: A Couple of Baptism Debates

"Is infant baptism Protestant? In short, yes. All the Protestant Reformers including Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli and John Calvin held to infant baptism. Though these three great Protestants disagreed on many things, they all agreed on the Protestant doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. They also agreed that infant baptism is a biblical practice and the best expression of the Protestant gospel. In fact, infant baptism has been the practice of the historic Christian church since the Apostolic period. Of course the historic practice of the church does not settle the question. Historic practice, however, suggests a certain presumption in favor of infant baptism. Nevertheless, tradition alone is not sufficient reason for any practice in the church. Therefore Reformed Christians practice covenant baptism because we are commanded to do so in both the Old and New Covenant Scriptures.

We believe that the Bible alone is the Spirit inspired, infallible, Word of God written. God's Word alone is the source of our faith. Comparing our ideas with God's clear revelation in the Bible is the only way to safety and certainty." (Dr. R. Scott Clark, A Contemporary Reformed Defense of Infant Baptism)

The links to the Robert Strimple vs. Fred Malone debate here (Part 1), here (Part 2), and here (Part 3), and the link to the David VanDrunen vs. Thomas Schreiner debate here.

The Muller-Meister Asks, "Was Calvin a Calvinist?"

"Abstract: Answering the perennial question, 'Was Calvin a Calvinist?,' is a rather complicated matter, given that the question itself is grounded in a series of modern misconceptions concerning the relationship of the Reformation to post-Reformation orthodoxy. The lecture examines issues lurking behind the question and works through some ways of understanding the continuities, discontinuities, and developments that took place in Reformed thought on such topics as the divine decrees, predestination, and so-called limited atonement, with specific attention to the place of Calvin in the Reformed tradition of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries" (Richard A. Muller).

Also available here