User:Calvinerd/sandbox

Reformed Baptist Definition
The term Reformed Baptist is itself, quite controversial. Some insist that the label "Reformed" may only be properly applied to (add R. Scott Clark's limits here).

Calvinistic Baptists
Calvinistic Baptists are those Baptists who accept Reformed Soteriology but do not necessarily see themselves as attached to other elements of the Reformed tradition. Specifically, Calvinistic Baptists accept some version of TULIP, and acronym sometimes used to summarize Reformed Soteriology. TULIP is usually expanded Total depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints. On issues like sacrementology, eschatology, and Church government, Calvinistic Baptists may draw on sources other than the Reformation to form their views.

Reformed Baptists
Reformed Baptists see themselves as attached to the tradition of the Reformation in ways beyond mere soteriology. Some have said a person is Reformed if his theology comports with the three C's, Calvinistic, Confessional, and Covenantal.

Calvinistic refers to Reformed Soteriology. This may be summarized by the acronym TULIP, though more properly it points back to the Canons of Dort from which TULIP was derived.

Confessional refers to the fact that the Reformed typically subscribe to a particular historical document as their doctrinal standard. These standards address a broad range of issues far beyond soteriology. For non-baptists these confessions might include the Westminister Confession of Faith or the Three Forms of Unity. Baptists might subscribe to the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, The First London Baptist Confession, The New Hampshire Confession or similar documents.

Covenantal refers to belief in a form of Covenant Theology. Covenant Theology is a broad hermeneutical framework that impacts one's overall view of the scriptures. It stands in contrast to Dispensationalism which is a major alternate hermeneutical framework. Baptist covenant theology may take may forms including 1689 Federalism. This point is the one which the strongest controversy resides. This is because the Presbyterian and Reformed derive their pedobaptism from their covenantal views. As such, some contend that covenant theology that leads to believers baptism (the Baptist view) is not properly reformed.

Christianity and Liberalism DRAFT
Christianity and Liberalism was written by J. Gresham Machen in 1923 as a critical contribution to the Fundamentalist–modernist controversy. It entails a defense of Christian Orthodoxy and asserts that Liberal Christianity is not merely a different form of the Christian faith, but is in fact a distinct religion.

Chapters
Introduction

1. Doctrine

2. God and Man

3. The Bible

4. Christ

5. Salvation

6. The Church

Critiquing "Shall the Fundamentalists Win"
The sermon, "Shall the Fundamentalists Win" by Harry Emerson Fosdick was a watershed moment in the Fundamentalist–modernist controversy, inspiring a direct response in Christianity and Liberalism. Specifically, Machen excoriates Fosdick's attack on the substitutionary atonement of Christ. In chapter 6, Machen says,

Upon the Christian doctrine of the Cross, modern liberals are never weary of pouring out the vials of their hatred and their scorn. Even at this point, it is true, the hope of avoiding offence is not always abandoned; the words "vicarious atonement" and the like--of course in a sense totally at variance from their Christian meaning--are still sometimes used. But despite such occasional employment of traditional language the liberal preachers reveal only too clearly what is in their minds. They speak with disgust of those who believe "that the blood of our Lord, shed in a substitutionary death, placates an alienated Deity and makes possible welcome for the returning sinner." Against the doctrine of the Cross they use every weapon of caricature and vilification.

A form of Lewis's Trilemma
It is interesting to note that in the midst of this work Machen presents a form of what has come to be known as Lewis's trilemma. Lewis's Trilemma is an argument for the diety of Jesus famously put forward by C. S. Lewis. The argument is sometimes summarized as saying Jesus was either "lunatic, liar, or Lord." Since Lewis presented his version first in BBC radio broadcasts in August 1941 Machen's formulation actually precedes Lewis's by several years. Machen formulates his version of the trilemma in Chapter 5 of this book as follows:

"The real trouble is that the lofty claim of Jesus, if ... the claim was unjustified, places a moral stain upon Jesus' character. What shall be thought of a human being who lapsed so far from the path of humility and sanity as to believe the eternal destinies of the world were committed into his hands? The truth is that if Jesus be merely an example, he is not a worthy example for he claimed to be far more,"

Since Machen treats liberalism as a religion distinct from Christianity, it is completely consistent with his view to direct this apologetic argument at what others might consider a group within the Christian faith.

Access Christianity and Liberalism
This book is in the public domain and can be found at the Wikimedia Commons here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christianity_and_Liberalism.djvu#globalusage