Sir: The article Remembering Hampton Court (No. 55) though excellent in its appraisal of the Authorised version, suffers from amnesia concerning the so-called Conference which was rather an informal, summing-up chat in the King’s quarters after substantial reforms had been made in Convocation. Far from only one puritan being present, most of the clergy and politicians who took part were strong on the doctrines of grace. Who would reject Chaderton’s, Knewstub’s, Spark’s, Reynold’s and Field’s credentials? Whitgift and Bancroft were men of the Lambeth Articles. However, Reynolds and Spark, thought wrongly nowadays to have represented the ultra-puritan side, were certainly weak in displaying… Full Article
Letters
The adverse criticism levelled at Affirmation 2010 in a good number of Christian magazines and digital publications has moved The Bible League Trust to over-react with an eight point, five-paged rebuttal claiming that all such criticisms are unfounded, ill-conceived, fallacious, confused and indicate a departure from sound teaching. In their condemnation of honest criticism, they sarcastically denigrate the intelligence, integrity and orthodoxy of their critics. Besides choosing to exonerate themselves by ridiculing those who question their policies, they play down this opposition, claiming that they have only found ‘one or two critiques’. This must be the understatement of the year as their ‘critical responses’… Full Article
Sir. Why is the EC promoting the para-church creed, Affirmation 2010, which seeks to ‘win the widest possible agreement’ in ‘various church bodies and constituencies’? This aim is doomed from the start as the twenty-four subscribers to date obviously represent different theologies and denominations and are dodging and dumbing down doctrinal issues. Their views of the Trinity, redemption, atonement, the gospel, law, justification, sanctification and the Church alone can be ranked from sub to anti Reformed and several subscribers’ views of the Scriptures are Barthian and Liberal. They have found unity in signing the same document, but there the unity ends. Indeed, the separate publications of the subscribers show what… Full Article
Reply to Tony Bickley
Dec 31
Sir: Tony Bickley accuses me of being controversial over a point entirely foreign to me, leaving me puzzled at his logic and reasoning. He concludes from my repeated claim that Christ in His human nature was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin, that I teach that the Sinless One was a sinner. Furthermore, he concludes from my belief that Christ became sin on our behalf that I teach that this sin was Christ’s own and not Brother Bickley’s sin and mine. Moreover, he asks me to tell him how Christ rid himself of the sin imputed to Him. This question is best answered by the NT, especially Romans 8:16, “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” I would link… Full Article
Letter to the Evangelical Times claiming that later Puritans and Dissenters were sounder than our Reformers in their understanding of Scripture – The letter was not published. Sir: Towards the end of the nineteen fifties, several Christian magazines served their readership well by re-introducing the teachings of the long-neglected Puritans. Subsequently, the Puritans have become the staple reading of Reformed men. Sadly, however, this has led to a great neglect of our first generation Reformers whose works were used as a basis for Puritan teaching. Reformers such as Jewel, Lever, Latimer, Coverdale, Cox, Grindal, Bullinger, Bucer and Peter Martyr, pillars of the Church of England, were most strong on doctrine,… Full Article
Sir: Strictures against those who disagree with the Reformation Day Declaration outlined in Issue 7650 lose their force because the doctrine of forensic, declarative justification outlined therein is not that of our Reformers. It reflects the Humanism taught by Philip Melanchthon, often called Germany’s Erasmus. Unlike the bulk of Reformers including Bucer, Bullinger, Calvin and the English compilers of the 39 Articles and Homilies, the Melanchthon school taught a mere passive, non-causative, forensic justification turned into actual justification through obedience to natural law and the gospel. Because it was humanistic, it was man-centred. Sadly, the corrupt view of Reformation doctrine promoted in the declaration has… Full Article
Letter on Atonement
Dec 28
A letter to the English Churchman defending the term ‘atonement’ as being descriptive of Christ’s full work on the cross. Sir, The News & Comment article on the atonement (No. 7686) needs etymological and theological correction. The assertions that ‘at-one-ment’ is a breaking up of ‘atonement’; is only ‘a result of atonement’ (not atonement itself); and this is merely a ‘marvellous coincidence’; are false. The word ‘atonement’ was intentionally coined from the three particles ‘at’, ‘one’ and ‘ment’. Thus the term ‘atonement’ is meaningless if made to stand outside of its individual parts and semantic content. The word was a Reformation neologism, used to translate the Hebrew and… Full Article
John Overall not an Arminian
Dec 27
Sir: I am always thrilled to read Jason Loh’s letters-cum-articles and consider him one of the best informed churchmen of this age. However, there was a slight slip of the pen in his letter of 12th /26th March referring to John Overall’s influence under Charles I. As Overall (1559-1618) was long dead by 1625, the year of Charles I’s accession, and as Mr Loh returns to James I in the same paragraph, the reference must be to Overall during the earlier reign of James. Overall deserves to be remembered for his part in the Hampton Court Conference, whose 40oth anniversary we are remembering this year, and for his part in the production of the King James’ Bible. Overall is often made to wear the dunce’s cap in… Full Article
Sir: It is understandable that one who identified himself so closely with the English Reformers, Whitfield and the Marrow Men should be criticised by Arminians. For Huntington, Arminians were Antinomians who rejected the condemning and convicting use of the law in evangelism, inviting sinners to approach God “as if they had never apostatized”. They believed that man was not totally fallen but was naturally able to make saving decisions. Huntington preached a full gospel whereas his Fullerite and Wesleyan critics taught respectively that the doctrines of grace were for believers only or to be rejected as ‘the religion of the Turks’. Contrary to adverse criticism that Huntington stood alone, he was supported by a… Full Article
Robert Williams on Wycliffe
Dec 19
Letter to the Evangelical Times on reading articles critical of John Wycliffe in the Christian Newspaper Sir: Robert Williams (41:11) believes that Wycliffe was not in tune with later mainstream Reformers. He cannot mean the 16th century Reformers as they obviously built on Wycliffe. So he is probably thinking of the many evangelical scholars of today who have sadly little in common with either Wycliffe or the Reformation. Williams appears to have taken over the Lechler/Green, late nineteenth century, critical interpretation of Wycliffe which was excellent in reviving Wycliffe studies but extremely weak in understanding Wycliffe’s doctrines. Like modern Reformed systematic theological appreciation, it was too… Full Article
