What is Biblicism? Why is it dangerous? | Theocast

Biblicism might sound like a good thing...but it's not. Biblicism is a methodology that tends to introduce confusion and mystery into the Scriptures where there isn't any. It also tends to confuse doctrinal and theological categories such as law/gospel distinction and faith versus works. Jon and Justin consider these things and more in this episode.
Semper Reformanda: The guys discuss how biblicism is related to theonomy and unhelpful views on the nation of Israel. And, as a bonus, we get into a little bit of eschatology.
Resources:
Episode: Is the whole Bible about Jesus? • Is the Whole Bible Rea...
Episode: Is your theological system any good? • Is Your Theological Sy...
Series: Covenant Theology series • Covenant Theology: Int...
Book: "Living in God's Two Kingdoms" by David VanDrunnen amzn.to/2T0r2wC
SUPPORT Theocast: theocast.org/g...
FACEBOOK: Theocast: / theocast.org
TWITTER: Theocast: / theocast_org
INSTAGRAM: Theocast: / theocast_org
#biblicism #reformedtheology #bible

[@litlgrn]

Thanks for the great show. Biblicism is and can be a major problem and or pitfall even for Christians. When I was a zealous new Christian I took so many scriptures out of context. It was a source of major undoing for me. It was only the mercy of God that brought me back. So much damage has been done because of dispensation thinking etc. I was sincere and was still fooled. Went down many wrong roads. I am still learning and growing in grace. Thank you so much for your ministry.

[@tomtemple69]

this podcast is one of the best resources i have ever found, God bless you 2 so much! completely changed my perspective of Christianity vs how i was raised

[@ChericeGraham]

"They who pervert this passage for the purpose of building up justification by works, deserve most fully to be laughed at even by children." - John Calvin (commentary on Romans 2:13)

[@PETERJOHN101]

"We see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only." (James 2:4)

[@ChericeGraham]

@@PETERJOHN101 different kind of justification

[@PETERJOHN101]

@@ChericeGraham No, you have a different kind of Jesus. "He that saith he knows him, but keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (1 John 2:4)

[@first3numbers]

@@PETERJOHN101 kzbin.info/www/bejne/immYYph-ZrdnaLs Exegesis of James 2 because you want to cherry pick passages. No one here is a free gracer who believes that someone simply proclaiming Christ must then be saved. We all agree that he if someone has works THEN he can be considered saved, but those works do not contribute to earning his salvation. The work of Christ alone grants him his salvation.

[@halilalexanderzeverboom6872]

​@@PETERJOHN101 John is speaking against gnosticism in his letter. They professed Christ but loved the world as unbelievers do who don't confess Christ nor faith in Him.

[@deborahgessner]

I've taught my young kids to read the Bible with 5 guideposts in mind: 1. It never contradicts 2. Never use a verse out of context to form a theology 3. Know who the author of book is 4. Understand the style of writing 5. Learn who audience it was originally written for to understand emphasis. Like for instance our pastor is doing a series on Rev and realized he is DEEP into the dispy theology so I have to come home and undo all the false things he said. And explain to them that the author was writing down a dream/vision and this is to be read metaphorically/symbolically.

[@bowinghearts]

Great discussion

[@graftme3168]

It's my understanding that the book of James was originally considered to NOT be inspired by God because of the apparent contradictions and was only added about 100 years later. Anybody have any insight on this?

[@paulfairfield4514]

Seems like an odd discussion to me. James White, a Reformed Baptist, considers himself a Biblicist. Nothing I hear here sounds like James White. It seems that the term has been redefined in the recent past.

[@EricBryant]

This is good. i agree: all scripture should be taught with a Christocentric focus

[@THEOCAST]

Amen!

[@patlangness7942]

A gospel centered focus

[@jamessheffield4173]

The Proper Distinction between Law and Gospel by C.F.W. Walther

[@KeepingWatch95]

Ecclesiastes 12:12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. Ecclesiastes 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

[@rosemarietolentino3218]

Biblicist: is a person who interprets the Bible literally. I don’t care for your definition of it.

[@EarsToHear23]

"With appropriate theological systems in place" 7:34 - This is a loaded statement that should be unpacked. Typically, what is meant by that is this: theology precedes ones hermeneutic. The "Biblicist" would say wait a minute, there is a fundamental principle of understanding the scripture that is violated here. How can one obtain a theological system without employing a particular hermeneutical framework? So, if biblicism is stringing together some verses taken out of context and drawing theological conclusions that ultimately contradict then the true Biblicist would reject that as well. However, I don't think your definition would be described as you put it by those who would describe themselves as Biblicists. There's a hint of burnt straw here. I would define biblicism as those that draw from the Word of God directly, as their authority. As opposed to a doctrinal statement or confession. A bible student ought to be able to go direct to the Word of God to support their view and have that view be consistent. Unfortunately, many well-meaning pastors and learned men spend a disproportionate amount of time interacting with their preferred confession than they do with the Word of God.

[@florida8953]

This is what the IFB/NIFB bros all are, biblicists.

[@patlangness7942]

We only meet God's standards positionally, in Christ's righteousness

[@patlangness7942]

If we see the micah 6:8 as something only Christ can do through us, it can be seen as gospel, but we never. Include "Christ in us" in the gospel.

[@scottgordon1303]

This is a very convoluted discussion. Your definition is very broad and weak. I do not have a problem with the term biblicist or scripturalist. While there are some groups that use the term inappropriately (KJV Only groups, fundamentalists, snake handlers) it is a good label. It does not necessarily equal dispensationalist, no creed but Christ (which tend to be spiritualists in my experience) or charismatics. Even the confessions proof text so this is not biblicism. I am not shocked you guys mock the term as you are Confessionalists but it is sad. Any good theologian should focus primarily on scripture before placing some confession, systematic theology, study Bible notes, or denomination tradition in the mix (Romans 10:17). How many Confessionalists baptize babies. If they would face scripture honestly they would repent of that. I do appreciate you guys work on the distinction of law and Grace though I argue that is an biblicist issue primarily as there may be some confessions that confuse these doctrines.

[@PETERJOHN101]

I find that label addicts like these guys always seem to have an axe to grind. It's a major red flag for me when anyone spends all their time deconstructing everyone else. We should instead be expositing the words of Jesus and his Apostles, restating their doctrines, and not inventing our own.

[@scottgordon1303]

@@PETERJOHN101 I agree! It is hard enough for me to adequately study and understand my Bible, much less spend time on a 17th century theological treatise. I find Matthew 6:24 applies to this. People will either study the confession or the Bible. We should heed Proverbs 10:19 and keep it simple with a statement of faith.

[@PETERJOHN101]

@@scottgordon1303 👍

[@ElijahGreaves-kr6it]

Well you have to understand that you’re not reading your Bible in a vacuum, you have 2000 years of church history to pull from, so brother in Christ I love ya but I would strongly encourage you and tell you that it would be wise of you to study that “17th century theologian who God used to labor for the church’s benefit to rightly understand the scriptures.

[@ElijahGreaves-kr6it]

We all have our systems whether you deny it or not, so I don’t know about you but I’m gonna tap into some good systems that the bulk of the Protestant church from centuries past agree with and that line up with scripture.

[@jgeph2.4]

Love you guys , when you coming over to the dark side of Presbyterianism ?💦👶🏻😅

[@revrobholley]

I’m not sure your definition for ‘biblicist’ isn’t just people who do not use proper hermeneutics and methods of correct Bible interpretation. I think you’re overly broad on your characterization of ‘biblicists’

[@ChericeGraham]

31:00 🔥

[@rosemarietolentino3218]

You must have something in the Bible that you can reference to. To at least show how you come to that conclusion.

[@zacdredge3859]

So it sounds like you have a certain notion of the term but I still don't see why the assumption is that Biblicist means someone who fails to engage with exegesis. Seems like a caricature and there plenty of people who don't consider themselves Biblicists who use eisegesis and people who are Biblicist who don't...

[@tomtemple69]

no, biblicists are those people who think they are the first ones to interpret the Bible properly and ignore everyone else who came before them and rely on their private interpretation

[@EricBryant]

I think the antidote to biblicism is 1 john 2:27 27 As for you, the anointing(A) you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things(B) and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him.(C) The Holy Spirit is the highest authority, not scripture.

[@litlgrn]

Hi Eric. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1 God’s Word is what speaks to us. 😇

[@EricBryant]

@@litlgrn and what is the Word of God? Or rather *Who*? It's Jesus, not a Scripture. Jesus is the Living Word. We are in relationship with a *Person*, not a set of propositions.

[@PETERJOHN101]

@@EricBryant The Rhema and the Logos are in total agreement. His Word is breathed by the Holy Spirit, which is why the guys at Theocast almost never quote it.

[@tomtemple69]

@@EricBryant and where does the Word of God reveal Himself? in the word

[@chrisland4023]

Wow. First time watching this video and you are slandering brothers in Christ. You clearly do not understand Biblicism and made it into a theological boogeyman.

[@Star-dj1kw]

Restart 22:30

[@joshuaseawright221]

Isogesis right, exegesis for life, Tota Scriptura.

[@carldelpopolo9254]

You need nobody to teach you for the Holy Spirit will lead you.into all truth

[@THEOCAST]

Interesting. Not what scripture by the power of the Spirit teaches.

[@carldelpopolo9254]

@@THEOCAST john 16 13 1john

[@corbinbrosneck790]

Okay, so how do we know who the holy spirit is teaching? People disagree on theology. Do only some Christians get taught by the holy spirit?

[@PETERJOHN101]

@@THEOCAST It is what the passage in John's epistle states emphatically, though I am not surprised you would deny it. Are there any doctrines of the Bible you actually believe?