Is Grandpa Turning in His Grave? Exhortations for Free Will Baptists from Our Own Heritage
by Derek Cominskie
Over the last several weeks, the HSF’s articles have focused on major moments or times of impact in Free Will Baptist history. In this article, I’d like to look to the future and contemplate what might lie ahead. In fact, someone suggested that I write on this topic; because, in his words, I have “seen the denomination from a couple different angles,” having transferred from Gateway Christian College to Welch College, and I also have a brother who attends Southeastern Free Will Baptist College. Another person’s opinion is not my only reason for writing on this topic though.
Scripture itself gives warrant for such an endeavor. Matthew 16 describes Jesus encouraging His disciples to look to the future and contemplate the ramifications of following after Him. I recognize that I myself have neither the experience nor the knowledge required to address the specific circumstance of each individual or church in our denomination. Neither do I have the divine gift to foretell the future. This being the case, I will limit the scope of this article to three general principles that I believe those in our own heritage would have for us all to think over and unite around: love for the brethren, commitment to Scripture, and sound doctrine.
Love for the Brethren
Describing those who will inherit God’s Kingdom, Jesus stated, “For I was hungry, and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger, and you took Me in; I was naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me” (Mt. 25:35-36). He went on to explain, “inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me” (Mt. 25:40). John also records Christ clearly saying that the evidence of our friendship with Him is obedience to His commands, specifically in loving one another (Jn. 13:15). I wonder, in our attempts to maintain friendships with those brothers with whom we have more in common, whether we have neglected to love those with whom we differ, and thus failed to demonstrate our friendship with Christ by not loving His entire Body?
Roughly 1600 years after John wrote his Gospel, Thomas Helwys wrote this concerning certain Calvinists: “They are our natural countrymen and diverse of them are our loving kindred in the flesh, and some of our most worthy and dear friends to whom we owe the best fruits of our lives and the entire affections of our hearts.”[1] If our General Baptist forefather could use such language to describe those with whom he had so much dissimilarity, then shouldn’t we consider our own disposition toward those with whom we have so much in common? Where we have differences, we should learn to communicate lovingly and politely with the goal of unity.[2]
Both Peter and Paul reached points in their ministries where they realized they were mistaken on particular things: Peter over his treatment of Gentile believers and Paul over John Mark. Do we consider ourselves to be more established than they? I hope not. If, in our conversations over differences, we come to an agreement, praise the Lord. If not, praise Him all the more that we can walk away from our encounters benefited by the sharpening of our own convictions through Scriptural exhortation and the expression of our love for one another as believers. Let’s work not to demonize people because we disagree with them, but instead to approach every disagreement with the humility and love exemplified by the apostles.
Commitment to Scripture
A second principle for us to consider, and around which we can unite, is a common commitment to Scripture. Having bought into the lie that we can only believe that which we can see or test (Empiricism), Western culture rejected answers from above and sought to figure out what was true on its own, predominantly through allegedly scientific means (Modernism). When this failed to rid the world of evil, and humanity of unanswered questions, people began to reject the existence of absolute truth at all (Postmodernism).[3] Postmodernists see all previous truth structures as inadequate because they were all replaced in popular culture.
What we must remember though is that Modernism did not prove Scripture false; it simply set it aside through restricted epistemology (limiting what is knowable simply to that which can be seen/tested).[4] As Modernism set aside Scripture, F. Leroy Forlines points out, it set aside its own philosophical foundation of an orderly world.[5] Thus, Modernism’s rejection of Scripture and subsequent fall is not an indictment on both systems, but rather a portrayal of all human endeavors when divorced from the Revelation of God. What a postmodern culture needs more than anything then is to experience Christians who truly believe what the Scriptures say, and in order to do this we must know what the Scriptures say.
In a moment we will discuss the need to be unified around doctrine, but we cannot claim to agree on Scripture’s teachings if we are not ourselves studying it. Helwys accordingly stated, “If you believe anything because it is the judgment or exposition of Mr. Calvin, Mr. Beza, Mr. Perkins, or any other never so highly respected among you either dead or living, you hold the glorious gospel of Christ in respect of persons.”[6]
I wonder if the same could be said of us today; have we been convinced simply by theologians’ writings; or, as Helwys put it, do “we believe it because we know it to be the truth of God . . . [by] our own knowledge from the Word of God by the testimony of the Spirit of God?”[7] Have we simply memorized our answers to basic worldview questions and other theological views from our teachers and/or pastors, without actually backing our beliefs in Scripture through the study of the Word ourselves?[8] Let this not be the case. We cannot live on the food our grandparents have eaten; we must feed on the Word ourselves.
Sound Doctrine
Finally, when we commit ourselves to Scripture, we will naturally be inclined to consider our attitude toward doctrine, or Scripture’s teachings. For some readers, the term doctrine awakens an excitement for mining the recesses of Scripture for truth—indeed a natural response of a Christian toward teaching about God. For some however, the term ushers in feelings of severe boredom and even dread. Often, this is the result of a frustration with certain novices who talk incessantly about trivialities. Regardless of the initial response one has to the term doctrine itself, it is helpful to see how Paul described it to Timothy.
In 1 Timothy 4, he stated that sound doctrine would “ensure salvation both for (himself) and for those who hear (him).” These are not words to be taken lightly. In contrast to Postmodernism’s rejection of absolute Truth, and its acceptance of contradicting truth claims, we must seek to understand and defend God’s entire counsel as a unified whole.[9] We must realize that not all of society has bought into Postmodernism, and those who have will find it wanting. If we do not provide refugees of Postmodernism with a cohesive alternative, we will be found wanting as well. We must gird ourselves with Truth, ready to share it with a truth-deprived world.
Having discussed the necessity of sound doctrine for the sake of the lost, we must also consider its need for those in Christ. Paul tells Timothy that these things will keep him from falling away from the faith and nourish him in his walk with Christ (1 Tim. 4). He also told him that if he would “instruct the brethren in these things (he would) be a good minister of Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 4:6). God intends for believers to share doctrine among themselves collectively.[10]
General-Free Will Baptists have understood this from their very inception. This can be seen in Helwys’ Declaration of Faith of English People Remaining at Amsterdam in Holland[11] (1611), the Standard Confession of 1660[12], Thomas Grantham’s Christianismus Primitivus (1678)[13], and even the Treatise of the Faith and Practices of the National Association of Free Will Baptists[14] (2013). We do not commune together as Free Will Baptists because we like each other, or because we like the same kinds of music or coffee. We commune together as Free Will Baptist because we share a common faith.[15] Scripture calls us to unite and commune around this faith and to share it with a lost world. As Christians, this has been our call for 2,000 years; and as Baptists, for 400.
Conclusion
This month we have taken a look at some key moments in our denomination’s history. As we all realize, we are where we are today because of moments that took place in the past. Furthermore, we will get to where we will be tomorrow because of the moments we create today. The hope of this article is simply this—that the general principles discussed here will help to produce specific moments of positive impact in the near future. I have heard some remark that the conflicts that have plagued our denomination will not be resolved until a few gray hairs have been buried. Call me a prodigal son if you will, but I’d like to see the inheritance of a unified denomination a little sooner than that. May we heed the wisdom of those in our heritage, and collectively seek to see these things exemplified in our lives today.
____________________
About the Author: Derek J. Cominskie and his wife Shelby are natives of Virginia Beach, Virginia, where they attended Gateway Christian College until its close in 2013. The two then transferred to Welch College where Derek just recently graduated with a B.S. in General Christian Ministry. The couple still reside in Nashville, Tennessee as Shelby concludes her Bachelors in Elementary Education. Derek is starting his second year serving as the Student Pastor at Sylvan Park Free Will Baptist Church, while also now working as a clinic concierge at Sarah Cannon Research Institute. In May the couple plan to move to Clayton, North Carolina, where Derek will pursue graduate studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.
____________________
[1] The Life and Writings of Thomas Helwys, ed. Joe Early, Jr (Macon: Mercer University Press, 2009), 67.
[2] By unity, I do not mean full-fledged agreement on every minutia, but rather an understanding of one another and a desire to see the kingdom built through one another. This will only be the case if we cultivate a willingness to dialogue about our differences in an appropriate manner.
[3] F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest for Truth: Answering Life’s Inescapable Questions (Nashville: Randall House Publications, 2001), 14.
[4] See Phillip Morgan’s recent piece, “Fighting on the Wrong Ground: Epistemological Missteps,” for more on this.
[5] Forlines, 16
[6] Early, 67
[7] Ibid.
[8] This is not to insinuate that the teaching of our scholars and our tradition should not speak into our lives and aid us in interpretation, but rather that these should not become a substitute for the study of Scripture on the individual level.
[9] This ties into our discussion of Scripture above; we must ensure that our beliefs are based on the entirety of Scripture and not a few selected verses piecemealed together.
[10] The term for this communal affirmation of doctrine is referred to as Confessionalism. For more on this topic see Jesse Owens post “Confessions: What They Are and Why We Need Them.”
[11] Early, 64.
[12] http://www.reformedreader.org/ccc/tsc.htm
[13] Thomas Grantham, Christianismus Primitivus, Or, The Ancient Christian Religion (London: Printed for Francis Smith, 1678)
[14] http://nafwb.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/13Treatise.pdf
Revised 1948, 1956, 1958, 1969, 1973, 1974, 1977, 1979, 1981, 1992, 1996, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2011, and 2013.
[15] Summary of a lecture by Dr. Pinson in Free Will Baptist History 4/8/15.
Recent Comments