February 15, 2020 Standard Bearer preview article

The covenant and Dordt (10)

Total depravity: Children incapable of fulfilling a condition

The Canons’ positive treatment of the Reformed doctrine of total depravity is straightforward and relatively brief. And yet, all nine articles of the Rejection of Errors condemn errors of the Remonstrants connected with total depravity. The reason for this is simple. The Canons set forth the Reformed truth over against the specific teaching of the Remonstrants. However, the Reformed doctrine of total depravity was explicitly set forth in the existing confessions, the Heidelberg Catechism and the Belgic Confession of Faith. The Remonstrants did not write what they really believed about fallen man. If they had, they would obviously contradict the confessions; it would indicate that their theology was not Reformed. Accordingly, their “third point,” on fallen man’s condition, though meandering, is something with which Reformed believers could agree, though most would want to state it clearer.

Afraid of the Gospel (12)

Afraid of the Gospel (11)

“The pedagogical approach.”

The apostle Paul never heard of such a thing!

How could he have heard of it? It is a twentieth century discovery. Indeed the apostle was not ignorant of pedagogy.* How could he be? The Holy Spirit, the all-wise and divine teacher who leads us into all the truth, the Master of all pedagogy, by means of organic inspiration, used the apostle Paul to teach the church the truth. A more able teacher, one whose pedagogical approach is superior to that of the apostle Paul, you will not find in the world today. But “the pedagogical approach”—please note the quotation marks—which requires conditional theology as its principle and method of instruction was not known to the apostle Paul. 

Afraid of the Gospel (10)

Conditional theology is an insult to God!

Thus we wrote in a former article. And we would have you note that we say that conditional theology is an insult to God. We do not say that every use of the conditional form is to be condemned. To use what, in grammar, is called the conditional form does not necessarily mean that you are presenting conditional theology and are making statements that are insults to God.

Afraid of the Gospel (9)

Conditional theology.

Christless preaching.

These, we wrote last time, go hand in hand.

And, then, we do not mean that in sermons which are based on conditional theology the name of Christ is not mentioned. The use of the name of Christ does not save a sermon from being Christless. Even the modernist will mention the name of Christ repeatedly in his “sermons.” And yet the Christ is not in his “sermons” at all! The Christ of the modernist is the imagination of man’s mind, not the atoning Christ of God’s counsel.

Afraid of the Gospel (8)

Conditional theology!

Christless sermons!

These go hand in hand. Hand in hand they must go. For conditional theology wants us to believe that there are works of men that precede the works of God and for which God waits, either before saving us or before he can and will give us the next installment of salvation. We must believe, so the particular phase of conditional theology which was smuggled into the Protestant Reformed churches declares, before the promise of God to save us will go into effect.