Independent Congregationalism?

I know “Independent” is largely how our English forefathers were known, but I’m more of a New England Congregationalist. I’ll appeal to one of our early documents, the Cambridge Platform, “the definitive statement of church order and discipline produced by the Congregationalists of colonial New England” (Historic Documents of Congregationalism 83). “The term independent, we approve not” (2.5). “One point the authors of the Cambridge Platform (1649) were concerned to make was that though they were Congregational, they did not support an extreme independency” (HDC 83-84). Checkout what the Cambridge had to say on Synods, the main point of difference between us and Presbyterians: “The Synod’s directions and determinations, so far as consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement therewith, (which is the principal ground thereof, and without which they bind not at all), but also, secondarily, for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word” (16.5). As long as the final authority in the local Congregation is Christ mediated through the local elders, we are far from independent. “Indeed many of the statements in the deleted Westminster Chapter 30 are affirmed in the Saybrook Heads of Agreement (1708) and certainly by actual practice in early American colonies. . . . The Key issue for the Congregationalists was the freedom of the local church, as opposed to the synod as a collected body, to set its own ‘rules and directions’” (HDC 7). In the Heads of Agreement 4.1, drawn up in 1691 and accepted in Saybrook in 1708, we read “We agree, that particular churches ought not to walk so distinct and separate from each other, as not to have care and tenderness towards one another. But their pastors ought to have frequent meetings together, that by mutual advice, support, encouragement, and brotherly intercourse, they may strengthen the hearts and hands of each other in the ways of the Lord.” I’m sticking with the authors of the Cambridge Platform in not approving the term “independent.”

Idolatry vs True Religion

In idolatry we love something other than God with the love only He deserves, but it is rarely the idol that we love, it is ourselves. We only serve these man-made gods as we perceive it to benefit us. When we love God we will praise Him though He slay us for He is worthy of all praise and honor. We serve idols for what we get out of it, not because we think they deserve it, not because we find in them the greatest good and beauty. We find our greatest good not in the idol but in ourselves, in our own comfort and pleasure. We either worship God or ourselves.

"I believe that the only form of authentic Christian preaching is expository preaching." -- Al Mohler

I have a bunch of quotes here about preaching that I need to have in one place and I don't want to lose them. Here goes:

“No better portrait of expository preaching could be found than in Nehemiah 8:8. After the people gather at the Water Gate and demand that 'the book' be brought forward, the text says of Ezra and his fellow scribes that 'they read from the book, from the law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.' 'Giving the sense' is not merely the act of translating from one language to another. It has to do with explaining a text, breaking it down, and making its meaning clear to the congregation. Essentially, this is what it means to preach. The heart and soul of expository preaching--of any true Christian preaching--is reading the Word of God and then explaining it to the people so that they understand it.”–Al Mohler, He Is Not Silent

“First there will be careful exposition of God's truth, so that hearers clearly understand what God says, and then there will be an appeal to men and women's wills to respond with reasonable obedience. . . . If we are to expound the whole will of God, we must know His will in detail, and that can be achieved only by a grasp of the whole of Scripture. Admittedly, it is a lifetime assignment, but that provides no excuse for laziness. We should beware of preaching only from passages of Scripture with which we are already familiar. It is easy to neglect the Old Testament, since we tend to be more familiar with the New. But we need the instruction, encouragement, and comfort of all the Scriptures, and if shepherds and teachers do not lead God's people into the pastures of the Old as well as the New, the sheep are unlikely to lead themselves into them. To bring our people into fresh pastures we must continually break new ground.”–Derek Prime, On Being a Pastor

“So what we find in groups where Greek and Hebrew are not cherished and pursued and promoted is that expository preaching--which devotes a good bit of the sermon to explaining the meaning of the text--is not much esteemed by the preachers or taught in the seminaries.”–John Piper, Brothers, We Are Not Professionals

“Expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept, derived from and transmitted through a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its context, which the Holy Spirit first applies to the personality and experience of the preacher, then through the preacher, applies to the hearers.”
“Expository preaching at its core is more a philosophy than a method. Whether or not we can be called expositors starts with our purpose and with our honest answer to the question: ‘Do you, as a preacher, endeavor to bend your thought to the Scriptures, or do you use the Scriptures to support your thought?’ This is not the same question as, ‘Is what you are preaching orthodox or evangelical?’ Nor is it the same as, ‘Do you hold a high view of the Bible or believe it to be the infallible Word of God?’ As important as these questions may appear in other circumstances, a passing grade in systematic theology does not qualify a person as an expositor of the Bible.”–Haddon Robinson, Biblical Preaching

“On the Sunday after his return Calvin mounted the pulpit in St. Peter's and began with the very chapter and verse of the Bible where he had left off preaching three years earlier . . . ‘Nothing could have been less dramatic or more effective. . . . In this way Calvin signaled that he intended his life and his theology to be, not a device of his own making, but a responsible witness to the Word of God” (George quoted by Lindberg in The European Reformations).

Somethings Edwards Taught Me About Heaven

First we must start with some basic presuppositions. We don’t have the space here to defend these so much, but they are things you will no doubt readily agree with. Heaven was created to be a place of eternal happiness, joy, and blessedness (all of which is basically the same). It is a place for the worship of God and the magnifying of His glory. He is our greatest treasure and in Him do we find our greatest joy and satisfaction, and He is most glorified in our enjoyment and treasuring of Him. So in His presence, in heaven are joys and pleasures forevermore, and He wipes away every tear signifying that there is no unhappiness or grief.

One other point that may require a little explanation is that we can expect to recognize each other at the judgement and in the eternal state. Some evidence to consider in this regard would be Paul’s consolation to the saints in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 4:13-18). Paul’s consolation to these Christians that lost friends is that they will meet again. For this to be a comfort it seems they must be able to recognize one another. Jesus’ teaching concerning the rich man and Lazarus would also seem to indicate that individuals will recognize one another after death and that they will be aware of each other’s state, whether of blessedness or corruption.

With this in mind Edwards concludes that the condemnation, judgement, and wrath that fall upon the reprobate will not be a sorrow to believers, but will actually increase their joy. In this world we sorrow over the lost, those we know and love and even those we don’t know. This is appropriate, because or mission here is evangelism, and while men yet live there is the hope that they would turn to Christ. Yet in the world to come that chance is gone. The reprobate no longer will enjoy the patience and mercy of God, but they will experience His full wrath and nothing but. Such is the demand of the righteous justice of a holy God. In heaven we will only love what God loves and we will hate what God hates.

I’d love to keep going and develop this further but you’re running out of time.

Edwards warns the lost saying, “Perhaps there are now some godly people, to whom you are near and dear, who are tenderly concerned for you, are ready to pity you under all calamities, and willing to help you; and particularly concerned for your poor soul, and have put up many fervent prayers for you. How will you bear to hear these singing for joy of heart, while you are crying for sorrow of heart, and howling for vexation of spirit, and even singing the more joyful for the glorious justice of God which they behold in your eternal condemnation? “You that have godly parents, who in this world have tenderly loved you, who were wont to look upon your welfare as their own, and were wont to be grieved for you when any thing calamitous befell you in this world, and especially were greatly concerned for the good of your souls, industriously sought, and earnestly prayed for their salvation; how will you bear to see them in the kingdom of God, crowned with glory? Or how will you bear to see them receiving the blessed sentence, and going up with shouts and songs, to enter with Christ into the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, while you are amongst a company of devils, and are turned away with the most bitter cries, to enter into everlasting burnings, prepared for the devil and his angels? . . . How will you bear to see and hear them praising the Judge, for His justice exercised in pronouncing this sentence, and hearing it with holy joy in their countenances, and shouting forth the praises and hallelujahs of God and Christ on that account?”

Edwards writes in another place, “All natural affections, so far as found in animal nature or the infirmity of the present state, will cease in another world; and with respect to any affection that the godly have had to the finally reprobate, the love of God will wholly swallow it up, and cause it wholly to cease.”

So here is a mystery to our finite minds, that we could be so blessed in God’s presence that not only will we not grieve over the lost, even our loved ones, even if they be our own children, but that we would in fact rejoice it there condemnation, praise God for it, and be more happy for it. I confess that this is a mystery to man’s mind, how this could be so. Edwards explains that it is so because God’s infinite love swallows it up, but even still how this could be so, I don’t think we can understand, but we can understand that it is so. And if this is so, then how glorious heaven must be! It truly is beyond any imagining or conception of men. This is an amazing doctrine, a man humbling, and God honoring and glorifying doctrine. God is far beyond our comprehension. He is wonderful and terrible, and worthy of all our affection and praise. And apart from seeing Him this way, can we really say we honor Him aright? Do we know Him as He is? We never fully will, but as we grow in this grace these are the wonderful and terrifying things we will discover and relish.