1. I encourage you to read our doctrinal statement. Though put together in 1987, it still gives a basic idea of where we stand on major issues.
2. The Biblical Examiner site is quite old, being up for well over 20 years. When I started the site, I put up everything I could find that I had in an electronic file, so many articles are about 25 years old. Obviously, like every reader of this site, my understanding of Scripture "matured" over time, as has yours. There are far too many articles on this site for me to go back and edit them. Therefore, if you have any questions about anything here, please contact me, and ask for my defense of what I believe. I may have changed in areas enough that I will correct an article.
3. I certainly do not claim inspiration for what I put up. If you will call attention to Scriptural error, let me know. If you can prove from Scripture that I am wrong, I will change the article. I am sure there are errors, but, again, it is impossible at this point of my life to go back and edit everything, especially my earlier writings.
4. I claim the reformation, but soundly reject on Biblical grounds any idea of infant baptism. I took hundred of hours of study to settle that issue in my mind some years ago, and have a lengthy study on that subject. Admittedly, infant baptism appeals to the human understanding. Yet, I have never had anyone show me from Scripture the requirement to baptize infants. In fact, all the honest reformers I have examined, including Calvin, admit there is no such requirement, but they try to justify it anyway. (Defenders today feel they have passed the reformers in find Scripture to justify the practice.) The reformers admitted, Zwingli especially, that the reason infant baptism made it through the Reformation was because their followers would not leave Rome if they did not have something tangible to hang on to.
5. I do, however, hold to the 5 points of the Reformation:
1 Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
2 Sola fide ("by faith alone")
3 Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
4 Solus Christus ("Christ alone")
5 Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")
I certainly do not understand how a Christian who knows his Scripture can reject any of those points, but some do.
6. I identify myself with "Sovereign Grace," in the fact that God sovereignly works in all events of history. Therefore, if anyone is saved, it is because God sovereignly moved in that person's heart to come to Christ. He does as he pleases in the heavens above and in the earth beneath, and no man can say to him, "What doeth thou?"
Rather than go into a theological discussion here, I identify with CH Spurgeon, AW Pink, John Gill, John Trapp, and such men. I know of nothing they have said with which I cannot agree. There are a good number of other men I stand with in the "Sovereign Grace" area, such as Hodge, Fairbairn, Hengstenberg, Rushdoony, Warfield, Dabney, Lightfoot, Parker, Shedd, &c. However, there is no Scriptural support for their doctrine of Infant Baptism.
See Study list
7. Reconstruction. I use the term in many of my studies. What do I mean by the term? To put it very simply, I mean doing ALL THINGS all things for the glory of God. 1 Corinthians 10:31.
Hebrews 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
Until the time of reformation. The word here rendered reformation diorywsiv means, properly, emendation, improvement, reform. It refers to putting a thing in a right condition; making it better; or raising up and restoring that which is fallen down. Passow. Here the reference is undoubtedly to the gospel, as being a better systema putting things where they ought to be. Comp. See Barnes "Ac 3:21". The idea here is, that those ordinances were only temporary in their nature, and were designed to endure till a more perfect system should be introduced. They were of value to introduce that better system; they were not adapted to purify the conscience and remove the stains of guilt from the soul. (Barnes' Notes. Context is "putting things right in the matter of worshiping God.)
Acts 3:21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Reconstruction is putting things right in society according to God's entire word. It is not the church's job. Rather, the responsibility of the church is to train the believers how to take their faith into the community; that is, how to properly put God's law-word into action. (Ephesians 4:11ff.)
Example: The family must be "reconstructed," or constructed, according to God's total word if it expects to claim God's promises.
"The movement, in its modern form, was founded in the United States of America, popularized by Rousas John (R. J.) Rushdoony in his work The Institutes of Biblical Law (published in 1973), though to an extent it had its beginnings in the colonial governments of early New England (especially that of the Massachusetts Bay colony)." (Emp added.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism
The real "Civil War" started in Europe with the French Revolution, and came to the US in the 1860s. It has been a "War" against the Biblical foundation of this nation as founded in the law-word of God. There are still a few Biblical based laws hanging around, but they are on their way out as fast as the wicked can move.
There is an interesting article about Christian Reconstruction at http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/reconstruct2.html
The article is on a web site that raises money by selling "professional horoscopes," which in itself is very unbiblical. The article is very much against reconstruction, so, like so many other "anti" sites, it selectively quotes and puts words in the mouths of those supportive of "Christian Reconstruction," (CR).
1. CR is very much against a church controlled state. Remember, the reformation was against the Roman Church-State. However, CR does hold to training Christians in all areas of faith and practice, and then those Christians (not the church) be involved in every area of life, including politics. The Christian must take his active, Biblical faith with him into whatever area God opens for him.
2. Death to all lawbreakers? Freedom of Religion? We could certainly go into a long dissertation here, but let me refer the reader to the Institutes of Biblical Law, vol. 1. (RJ Rushdoony.) Every pastor should have a copy of this in his library, whether he agrees with all its precepts or not. I see no need to reinvent the wheel, for I basically hold to what is presented by RJR.
3. Some in the reconstruction movement go further than what I can go.
Maybe I an too simple, but I can sum up my "reconstruction" stand in the few words found in 1 Corinthians 10:31,
Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
As a pastor and church, I am responsible to equipt the saints, including myself, to do all things to the glory of God, as defined by God's total word. Then God works through his obedient saints for his praise and glory, to bring about his kingdom on earth. Matthew 6:33ff, 28:19, 20. His kingdom never has nor never will be advanced by the literal sword, but by him working through his faithful people.
By His Sovereign Grace Alone,