Author:

Jared Smith

Jared Smith was born in Wimbledon, London and became a Christian when he was eight years old. He has been the pastor of Bethesda Baptist Church, Kensington Place, since 1999. The church was established in 1866 by baptized believers who subscribed to Restricted Communion and Particular Redemption. These founding doctrines remain core values of the church, as does the Authorised Version and pastoral oversight. Jared seeks to promote these values among churches today.

Website: www.expoundit.com

These are notes of a sermon preached on Sunday 15 October 2017. They have not been proofread. The subject is the precepts of the Gospel Law.

Having looked at the province and principle of the Gospel Law, we now turn to the precepts. A precept is “a general rule intended to regulate behavior or thought”. The Heart Law has two precepts (commandments)—to love God supremely and one’s neighbor as one’s self. The Moral Law (Ten Commandments) is a special application of the Heart Law for the nation of Israel, and it obviously has ten precepts. However, since the regenerate sinner’s rule for life is the Gospel Law, three questions arise—First, are the precepts of the Gospel Law in opposition to the Heart Law? Second, how many precepts are there in the Gospel Law? Third, what are the precepts of the Gospel Law?

Continue reading

These are notes of a sermon preached on Sunday 22 October 2017. They have not been proofread. The subject is the personal precepts of the Gospel Law.

As I mentioned in the previous study, there are several ways the precepts of the Gospel Law could be catalogued. I have chosen to select the threefold category of Gospel precepts given by James in the first chapter of his epistle, the twenty-seventh verse:

James 1:27: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”

This text arranges the Gospel precepts under the following categories:

1. The God-ward Precepts of the Gospel Law—“Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father…”

2. The Relational Precepts of the Gospel Law—“To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction…”

3. The Personal Precepts of the Gospel Law—“To keep himself unspotted from the world.”

Now, rather than beginning with the God-ward precepts or the relational precepts, I feel it is in our best interest to begin with the personal precepts. I say this, because if the believer has no rule over his own soul, then he is like a city that is broken down, and without walls (Prov 25:28). Indeed, if he lacks the personal discipline of keeping his own heart with all diligence (Prov 4:23), then how will he hope to be faithful in those precepts that relate to God and others?

Continue reading

These are notes of a sermon preached on Sunday 22 October 2017. They have not been proofread. The subject is the personal precepts of the Gospel Law.

If the believer is to keep himself unspotted from the world (Js 1:27), then he must learn how to govern his own soul. Otherwise, he will be like a city that is broken down, and without walls (Prov 25:28). If the believer lacks the personal discipline to keep his own heart with all diligence (Prov 4:23), then he will experience spiritual declension and suffer a backslidden condition. It is for this reason we have been looking into the two natures that reside in the believer’s soul. Thus far, we have considered (1) the names given to the two natures; (2) the leading characteristics of the two natures; (3) the dividing lines between the two natures. In this study, I wish to open up (4) the bitter conflict between the two natures and (5) the prescribed treatment of the two natures.

However, before looking at the bitter conflict, allow me to answer a common objection that is brought against this teaching:

OBJECTION: If there are two natures residing in the soul, then doesn’t this mean the believer will suffer from a multiple personality disorder?

No, not at all. First, the scriptures distinguish…

Continue reading

These are notes of a sermon preached on Sunday 29 October 2017. They have not been proofread. The subject is the God-ward precepts of the Gospel Law.

In a single statement, James reduces the precepts of the Gospel Law under three headings:

1. The God-ward Precepts of the Gospel Law—“Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father…”

2. The Relational Precepts of the Gospel Law—“To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction…”

3. The Personal Precepts of the Gospel Law—“To keep himself unspotted from the world.”

Having looked more closely at the personal precepts of the Gospel Law, we now turn our attention to the God-ward precepts.

When the precepts of the Gospel Law were introduced (see the seventh study), I enumerated several God-ward precepts without making further comment. My only purpose in that study was show that the believer is given certain responsibilities towards God. I wish now to expand the list, but as it is only my intention to highlight the precepts, I will not provide a commentary for each text. This I will leave for the believer to explore…

Continue reading

These are notes of a sermon preached on Sunday 29 October 2017. They have not been proofread. The subject is the relational precepts of the Gospel Law. These notes are more than 14,000 words in length (Paul’s Epistle to the church in Rome is just under 10,000 words). The size is attributed to every scripture reference quoted in full. Although my commentary is relatively short, yet I have provided a fairly extensive outline for the various duties of the believer.

As pointed in the introduction to the Gospel precepts (seventh study), James appears to be establishing a baseline from which the believer’s pure and undefiled walk with God may be measured. He is not restricting pure and undefiled religion to visit ONLY the fatherless and widows in their affliction. Rather, he is showing that if the believer is ready to communicate with those in their worst condition, then that is the starting point that ensures he will communicate with others in their best condition. Henceforth, with one statement, James is able to show how the believer is responsible to walk with others on all levels of society. I have arranged the relational precepts within the context of four social circles—(1) The Believer’s Duty towards the World; (2) The Believer’s Duty towards the Government; (3) The Believer’s Duty Towards the Church; (4) The Believer’s Duty towards the Family. The first social circle is the widest, for it encompasses everyone the believer may come into contact with on a global level. The second social circle is the next widest, for it involves the believer’s duty towards those in authority within a specific country or region. The third social circle is more narrow, for it is restricted to those that belong as members to the same church. The fourth circle is the most narrow, for it includes only those belonging to the believer’s family. Let us begin with the widest social circle—the believer’s duty towards the world.

Continue reading

Is the Communion Table open or closed? Since all Christians recognize the Communion Table is restricted to professing believers, at the exclusion of all unbelievers, it is safe to say that there is no such thing as a purely open Table. And, since all discerning Baptists recognize the Communion Table is restricted to professing Christians that have been baptized, it is safe to say that there is no such thing as a purely open Table among Baptist churches. It therefore reeks of hypocrisy when the ‘Open Communionists’ accuse their brethren who subscribe to a restricted Table as being uncharitable, unkind, judgmental and legalistic. Unlike the open Communion Baptists who recognize only two restrictions on the Table (regeneration and baptism), I believe there are four restrictions—(1) An evidential…

Continue reading

First, at no time is a sinner duty-bound under both covenants simultaneously.

Second, so long as the sinner remains unregenerate, he/she is held accountable under the terms and promises of the Covenant of Works (not the Covenant of Grace).

Third, once the sinner has been born again, he/she is delivered/released from the Covenant of Works, being brought experientially under the terms and promises of the Covenant of Grace.

Fourth, the non-elect have absolutely no part in the Covenant of Grace—it is not their duty to believe savingly on Christ, nor is it the duty of the preacher to offer…

Continue reading

Wade Burleson wrote an article entitled, “The Problem of Calling People Hyper-Calvinists”. Having attended the John 3:16 Conference in 2008, he described how Dr. David Allen, Professor of Preaching at Southwestern Theological Seminary, circulated a handout that listed a dozen names identified as “Hyper-Calvinists”. Following Dr. Allen in the pulpit, was Dr. Steve Lempke of New Orleans, who made the observation, “I am not sure that there is such a thing as a living hyper-calvinist. I find that those who call others hyper-calvinists have simply run into people more calvinistic than they are.”

Yet, there is a listing for “Hyper-Calvinism” in the New Dictionary of Theology. The definition is framed by Dr. Curt Daniel, who earned a doctorate studying “hyper” Calvinism…

Continue reading

Here is a classic misrepresentation of High-Calvinism, and the misleading assertion that Fuller was the hero who rescued the Particular Baptists from ‘Hyperism’:

“Fuller’s pastorate at Soham, which lasted until 1782 when he moved to pastor the Baptist church in Kettering, Northamptonshire, was a decisive period for the shaping of his theological outlook. It was during his time there that he decisively rejected High Calvinism (i.e., an emphasis on the sovereignty of God in salvation to an extent which denied the free offer of the gospel and seriously hampered effective evangelism. Fuller said that his predecessor ‘had little or nothing to say to the unconverted.’).”

First, denying the free-offer is not an extreme emphasis on the sovereignty of God in salvation, it is a consistent application of His sovereignty in salvation.

To “offer”, is to “present or proffer (something) for (someone) to accept or reject as so desired”. An offer of the gospel reduces God to an ineffectual, pathetic beggar, desperately…

Continue reading

Having not been able to complete the scheduled Bible study for the mid-week service, I threw together some notes on the ninth chapter of Romans. It is not often I go ‘old school’ by scribbling on the nearest blank piece of paper. After teaching the study, I proceeded to broaden my notes for future reference. As the notes set forth a statement on High-Calvinism, I’ve chosen to include them with the online resources of the AHB. There are two sets of notes—the handwritten scribble is what I used in the pulpit (I haven’t bothered typing them out); the typed notes are what I jotted down after teaching the study.

Continue reading

Copyright © 2011, The Association of Historic Baptists