Welcome

I hold to the 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith (with exception to 24.1) as an accurate summary of what God has revealed in Scripture.

Here is an index list of posts on the site

Specific Passages

Podcast Interviews

1689 Federalism

(for an overview, start here: http://www.1689federalism.com)

General 1689 Federalism

New Covenant

Old Covenant

Typology

Abrahamic Covenant

Covenant of Works

Davidic Covenant

The Sure Mercies of David

Westminster Federalism

Leviticus 18:5

OPC Report on Republication

20th Century Reformed Baptist View

NCT/Progressive Covenantalism

Dispensationalism

Baptism/Ecclessiology

John Owen

Justification

Sanctification

Final Judgment

Calvinism

Reformed Libertarian

Two Kingdoms

(For much more of my writing on this, see my posts at http://www.reformedlibertarian.com)

Politics

(For much more of my writing on this, see my posts at http://www.reformedlibertarian.com)

Economics

(For much more of my writing on this, see my posts at http://www.reformedlibertarian.com)

Science

Health

Film

Books

Uncategorized

69 thoughts on “Welcome”

Pingback: The 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration and Dispensationalism's continued impact on theology and politics | No Peace With Rome
Jose R

Hi Brandon,
I was wondering if there are any plans for transcribing the Reformed Northwest podcasts that you were recently on. They were extremely helpful and I would like to use some of the material discussed for a class.

Blessings in Christ,
Jose R

LikeLike

January 9, 2018 at 1:48 pm Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Jose,
  I’m working on summarizing the podcast into a short, concisely-stated primer/summary. In the meantime, here is the outline I used for the podcast https://www.evernote.com/l/ANB85bGQwH9PBIiRVWUD3D2V51nOSs5UFrk
  
  LikeLike
  
  January 9, 2018 at 2:23 pm Reply
  1. Jose R
    
    Thanks, Brandon. That will be helpful. And thank you for your efforts as we seek to rediscover our Reformed Baptist heritage. Blessings, brother.
    
    LikeLike
    
    February 27, 2018 at 10:45 am Reply
Kevin Lee

Dear Brandon,

I thank God for His sovereign grace that He led me out from your exposure on Witness Lee and the Living Stream Ministries. If you take a look on the comment section, I was engaged in an argument with you. I’m living in the Philippines, but the Reformed Baptists churches are far away from my city.

https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/the-false-gospel-of-witness-lee-and-the-living-stream-ministries/

LikeLike

February 10, 2018 at 3:39 am Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Kevin, Praise God! Thank you so much for letting me know of God’s kindness in your life. I would encourage you to reach out to those Reformed Baptist churches and let them know your situation. They may have some advice. May God continue to guard and bless you.
  
  LikeLike
  
  February 10, 2018 at 9:35 am Reply
  1. kevinporacan1994
    
    Brandon, can you go over to this forum to answer Evangelical what I send link about the The Impact of the Living Stream Ministries Cult on Hank Hanegraaff.
    
    http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=77693&postcount=256
    
    LikeLike
    
    July 12, 2018 at 11:01 pm Reply
Hardy Smith

Hello again, Brandon. I recently heard about Thomas Schreiner’s book “Covenant and God’s Purpose for the World,” which got great reviews on Amazon. He lists 6 covenants, but doesn’t mention the Covenants of Grace, Works, or Redemption, at least according to the reviews. Have you read/reviewed this book? Do you know where Schreiner stands on the Abrahamic Covenant? I think that the view presented by you and Jeff Johnson and Pascal Denault best sums up how God intended to use it, but I haven’t seen a lot of other people discussing your take on it.

LikeLike

February 11, 2018 at 3:30 pm Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Hardy. I have not read Schreiner’s book. Not sure where he stands on the Abrahamic Covenant. 1689 Federalism does not get much attention I suspect because the books are all basically self-published. Scholars like Schreiner therefore don’t give it notice (Schreiner also does not give historical theology much weight, so he would not be interested in works like Denault’s or Renihan’s soon to be published dissertation). Regretfully.
  
  LikeLike
  
  February 11, 2018 at 3:38 pm Reply
2. brandonadams
  
  Schreiner says “I would say my book is really a footnote to Peter Gentry and Steve Wellum’s book, Kingdom Through Covenant.” I would recommend reading Sam Renihan’s review of KTC (on the 1689fed site) if you haven’t.
  
  Here’s what he says about the Abrahamic:
  
  Then we move on to the covenant with Abraham. We have the Tower of Babel before that, showing again that human beings have not fundamentally changed. God makes a covenant with Abraham; and he promises Abraham lands, offspring, and universal blessing. The land is Canaan, the offspring initially is Isaac, and the universal blessing is rather far away. So that promise given to Abraham, (I’m just being brief here) has conditional and unconditional elements. Ultimately, Genesis 15 – we have a covenant ceremony there, ultimately that covenant is unconditional; but no particular individual will experience the blessings of that covenant unless they are obedient and faithful. The story of Abraham and his offspring continues. We come to the book of Exodus; Israel is in Egypt, they are not in the land. The promise of offspring is being fulfilled in significant ways. In fact, that promise is being fulfilled so significantly that Pharaoh tries to wipe out Israel, showing, by the way, that Pharaoh is the offspring of the serpent. And Pharaoh is trying to wipe out the nation; but the Lord fulfills his promise to Abraham. He frees the people from Egypt and then a covenant is made with Israel.
  
  I would argue the covenant made with Israel at Sinai, with Moses, that covenant sets apart Israel from the rest of the nations. That covenant, I would argue, is a conditional covenant. God shows his grace to his people in freeing them from Egypt; but the covenant made with Israel is conditional. However, if Israel obeys, per the Abrahamic covenant, it will be the means by which the promise of the Abrahamic covenant is realized.
  
  http://www.booksataglance.com/author-interviews/interview-thomas-r-schreiner-author-covenant-gods-purpose-world/
  
  LikeLike
  
  February 11, 2018 at 5:09 pm Reply
Dave

Re: a recent Reformed Forum “Vos Group” podcast with Camden Bucey and Lane Tipton in which they continued their discussion of the ceremonial law.

Since the substance of the covenants is one of the principal divergences in theology between PB federalism and traditional Reformed federalism, I would appreciate your thoughts on the “substance” remark that Tipton made near the end of this transcribed excerpt. If I am reading (hearing) it right, I surmise that this view is consistent with the Reformed understanding of the covenants being administrations of the Covenant of Grace.

Here’s Lane’s statement:

“The theocracy functions, and the ceremonial law within it, functions as a redemptive and remedial means to that eschatological end realized in Christ. And so, what you have under the Mosaic law, what you have under the theocracy, what you have in the tabernacle through sacrifices and offerings, is a high priest offering the sacrifices of clean animals to purify a people to dwell in fellowship with God. The tabernacle (mobile form), the temple (stationary form) – [these are] the dwelling of God in the midst of his people, and the sacrifices offered served to consecrate a people in blood to the Lord for the purpose of religious fellowship – covenantal fellowship with God.

And remember: the relative high point of all of this is Moses (Ex. 32-34). When he ascends Mt. Sinai and dwells in the presence of the Lord in friend-to-friend, face-to-face fellowship (Ex. 33:11), where he is supernaturally sustained by God for 40 days without food or drink (Ex. 34:48), it’s there you get a foretaste, a prolepsis of what the consummate form of theocratic fellowship with God looks like. It’s all present in Moses in that heightened typical form.
. . .

This is the fabric of religion that lies at the heart of purification and cleanness and the ceremonial law. It is a redemptive and remedial means to the eschatological climax of what’s coming in Christ, but it’s organically related to that climax. It’s an already-received redemptive fellowship bond with the Lord that the ceremonial law is maintaining through promises, types, and sacrifices. It’s the same in substance – this is key for our listeners to know. What is happening in Moses – in the theocracy, under the ceremonial law – is the same in substance with what comes to the church in Pentecost, in its climactic form, through Spirit-wrought communion with the ascended Christ.

There’s the fabric of religion, that’s it in a nutshell. That’s kind of the protological Adam, the typological Moses, eschatological Christ – that’s kind of the three basic strands of the fabric.”

Can it actually be that the “redemptive fellowship bond with the Lord that the ceremonial law is maintaining through promises, types, and sacrifices” is the same in substance as “what comes to the church in Pentecost, in its climactic form, through Spirit-wrought communion with the ascended Christ?”

Thanks very much, Brandon, for this site and for all your work here.

LikeLike

March 7, 2018 at 4:45 pm Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Dave,
  
  See if this post answers your question: https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2016/09/29/substanceaccidents-substanceshadows/
  
  LikeLike
  
  March 11, 2018 at 3:28 pm Reply
Pingback: Audio resources on 1689 federalism | No Peace with Rome
Hardy Smith

Hey Brandon, have you read “The High King of Heaven” by Dean Davis? It’s endorsed by Sam Storms and others and presents a very compelling case for Amillennialism. But the author keeps referring to a lot of administrations of the Covenant of Grace, and he doesn’t seem to make the distinction between the Old (Mosaic) Covenant and the New Covenant as lined out in Hebrews. I haven’t finished the book yet, and it has a lot going for it, but I am still looking for the same distinction that the Bible makes about the covenants. Any thoughts?

LikeLike

November 6, 2018 at 11:34 am Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Hardy. Sorry, I am not familiar with the book.
  
  LikeLike
  
  November 6, 2018 at 4:14 pm Reply
Hardy Smith

Hi Brandon,
I have noticed that practically all of my correspondence with you is in regard to your take on certain books. I want you to know that I respect your views greatly, and that’s why I ask about them. Your understanding of the covenants, and especially the Abrahamic Covenant and Owen’s rejection of the “one covenant, two administrations” idea has helped my get a grasp on that rather involved theology. You have assisted me incredibly, and I just want to thank you. I hope you are doing well, and continue to serve our Lord and endure to the end. I’ll see you there!

LikeLike

November 13, 2018 at 7:53 am Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Thank you brother for your very kind words. I’m very glad the blog has been helpful! I will see you there as well, if not before!
  
  LikeLike
  
  November 13, 2018 at 9:05 am Reply
Hardy Smith

Hi Brandon, I’ve got a question for you. I’m reading “Interpreting Prophecy” by Philip Hughes, which I think is really good. I need another resource to supplement his teaching in regards to the two-level fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. Which of your articles (or another book) would you recommend to give me a fuller, Reformed Baptist take on it?

LikeLike

April 9, 2019 at 9:53 am Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Hardy, if you want my take, I would recommend my podcast series on the Reformed Northwest podcast (at least the last 4 episodes), as well as:
  
  https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/galatians-316/
  and
  https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2018/12/28/klines-abrahamic-covenant-of-works-1-murray-and-shepherd/ (all 6 parts)
  
  LikeLike
  
  April 9, 2019 at 10:26 am Reply
Amy Knight

Hi Brandon; I am a Sister in Christ. I just read your article on witness lee. I don’t have a problem with any of your conclusions, I was just researching after receiving some books from them and a recovery version Bible to add to my collection. I also received a book by Watchman Nee, and was wondering your opinion on his writings and view. I am careful to stay away from false teachings, and constantly in prayer that the Holy Spirit will guide my way through Jesus Christ. And I was lead to your site; I don’t believe that was random.
Thank you for your time and the thorough research you do. Amy

LikeLiked by 1 person

May 21, 2019 at 3:36 pm Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Hi Amy, I’m sorry but I have not read Watchman Nee, so I cannot comment on his teaching. From what I understand, it is not the same as Lee’s. I’m glad the article was helpful. Continue to seek the Lord in prayer for wisdom.
  
  LikeLike
  
  May 22, 2019 at 8:34 am Reply
Rosten Riggan

Hey Brandon,

Recently listened to your 5 part series with Reformed Northwest podcast and greatly appreciated your walking through the realities of a thoroughly 1689 federalist understanding of the Scriptures. My biggest question right now is how to read the portions of the Pauline epistles dealing with “the law” and how that relates to us as gentiles. I understand the argument that “the law” referring to the old covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, promised temporal life in the land and failure to comply with the law resulted in covenant curses resulting in a removal and ultimately a divorce. No one with a decent understanding of 1689 federalism will argue this point. What I question is passages like Romans 7:10, “The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.” and Romans 8:3-4, “For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” These raise two questions. 1) Yes temporal life in the land was a result of covenant keeping, but the new testament in passages like Romans 7 tie covenant keeping with life, and the context of the life referred to does not refer merely to temporal life in Canaan in the context. How do you reconcile this? 2) When Paul refers to a “righteous requirement being fulfilled in us”… is Paul only speaking to the Jews and Christ keeping the Mosaic covenant for them, or is this more broadly referring to Christ keeping a covenant of works for all of us and connecting us to the benefits by grace through faith? These questions are related because so often Paul is addressing Jews in his letter and dealing with their understanding of the Law. If he is only ever referring to simply the Mosaic covenant and temporal life in the land, how are we to understand the Romans 8 passage just quoted as gentiles? Surely this just doesn’t apply to us…?

Thank you so much for your service to the church in providing all these resources to help us understand our God and His Word! Blessings to you!

LikeLike

December 17, 2019 at 7:48 am Reply
1. brandonadams
  
  Rosten, thanks for the question. See if this post helps https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/pauls-enthymemes-on-the-law/
  
  LikeLike
  
  December 17, 2019 at 5:26 pm Reply

	Federal Vision Pt. I… on Federal Vision Baptists?
	V.K on A Note on Reformed Libert…
	On Social Justice, p… on On Social Justice (3): Justice…
	On Social Justice (2… on On Social Justice (3): Justice…
	On Social Justice (3… on Podcast Discussion of Theonomy…
	On Social Justice (3… on A Note on Reformed Libert…
	On Social Justice (3… on On Social Justice (2): Definin…

Contrast

Welcome

Specific Passages

Podcast Interviews

1689 Federalism

General 1689 Federalism

New Covenant

Old Covenant

Typology

Abrahamic Covenant

Covenant of Works

Davidic Covenant

Westminster Federalism

Leviticus 18:5

OPC Report on Republication

20th Century Reformed Baptist View

NCT/Progressive Covenantalism

Dispensationalism

Baptism/Ecclessiology

John Owen

Justification

Sanctification

Final Judgment

Calvinism

Reformed Libertarian

Two Kingdoms

Politics

Economics

Science

Health

Film

Books

Uncategorized

69 thoughts on “Welcome”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply