Why are you a Christian?
There are a few different ways you might answer that question. Depending on how you look at it, you might say that it’s because you accepted Christ or placed your faith in Him at some point. Or you might say that it’s because your parents nurtured you in the faith, so there’s never been a time that you did not believe in God and trust in Christ as your Savior. If you look at it from God’s perspective, you might say that it’s because He elected you to salvation before the foundation of the world and that you came to faith because of His sovereign work in your life.
But what if we ask the question differently: Why are you a Christian and not a Jew?
If you are like most Christians, you are a gentile, that is, not of Jewish descent or a convert from Judaism. Under the old covenant, gentiles had to become like Jews by marking themselves off from the surrounding nations—literally, in the case of circumcision, and figuratively, by abstaining from common pagan practices and worshiping the God of Israel alone.
In the Old Testament, it was expected that the nations would hear of the God of Israel and would come to worship Him. Israel was meant to be a blessing to the nations, who would then come to worship their God (Gen. 12:1–3). There are clear examples of gentiles converting or otherwise petitioning the God of Israel in Joshua 2, the book of Ruth, and 2 Kings 5; some other possible examples of gentile faith are found in Jonah 3 and Daniel 4 and 6.
The center of the old covenant religion was first the tabernacle and then the temple. At the dedication of the temple in 1 Kings 8, Solomon assumes that gentiles will come to worship the Lord there, and he asks that their prayers would be heard (vv. 41–43). Isaiah speaks of the nations’ coming to worship alongside Israel (Isa. 55), and the sons of Korah speak of the conversion of Israel’s enemies and their coming to the temple mount (Ps. 87). In the restoration after the Babylonian exile, the rebuilding of the temple meant that once again gentiles could come and entreat the God of heaven and earth (Hag. 2:7; Zech. 8:20–23).
In the early church, the relationship between the gentiles and the Jews was a bit of an open question. During His earthly ministry, Jesus spent most of His time among Jews, but He also interacted with gentiles and Samaritans (see Matt. 8:5–13; 15:21–28; John 4). There were many gentiles present in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), but the early church wasn’t sure what to make of gentiles at first. It seems to have been a pleasant surprise in Acts 10–11 that gentiles were granted repentance unto life alongside Jews (11:18). At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, the leaders of the church had to decide what was required of gentiles who placed their faith in Christ, concluding that they were not required to be circumcised. By not requiring of gentiles the entrance rite into Judaism, the church leaders were affirming that it is not necessary to become a Jew into order to be a Christian.
So, what is a Christian? A Christian is something else. He is not a Jew or a gentile. Paul addresses this new reality in Ephesians 2:11–22. In this letter, he is addressing a group of gentile Christians (v. 11), and he explains their relationship to God, to Christ, and to the Jews by using two metaphors. The first is spatial, and the second is architectural.

One danger of reducing “the system of doctrine” down to a generic “Calvinistic system” – such as we see argued for by Charles Hodge – is that such a move was not the original intention of either our American Presbyterian forefathers or the Westminster Divines. What is fundamental to our doctrinal standards? Is it Calvinism? I would hope so. During Hodge’s day there were considerable battles over soteriology, so we should not be surprised to see him reduce the system of doctrine down to Reformed soteriology.[10]

“The words ‘system of doctrine,’ have a definite meaning, and serve to define and limit the extent to which the confession is adopted.” ~ Charles Hodge [1]
The Westminster Confession and Catechisms are a treasure. When people ask for a good one-volume systematic theology, I usually recommend the Confession and Catechisms. When I first became Presbyterian, I was under the assumption that we viewed the Westminster Standards as the system of Presbyterian doctrine because it is biblical.[2] I do not mean that I viewed them on equal ground with Holy Scripture. I viewed them the way Thornwell did, “it certainly is a convenience to have the teachings of the Bible reduced to a short compass, and announced in propositions which are at once accepted without any further trouble of comparing texts.”[3]
I came into the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) after the passing of Good Faith Subscription (GFS). I have always heard that passing it was a hopeful attempt at resolving arguments in the PCA regarding subscription to our doctrinal Standards. If that was the original intent, it is worth asking ourselves the question “is it working?”
It was over 20 years ago that we decided on GFS, and yet at 2021’s General Assembly there was still a need to have a discussion – which was very well attended – between two prominent Teaching Elders on confessional subscription and unity in the PCA.[4] I think part of our continued confusion has to do with how we understand the phrase “system of doctrine” in our BCO, “While our Constitution does not require the candidate’s affirmation of every statement and/or proposition of doctrine in our Confession of Faith and Catechisms, it is the right and responsibility of the Presbytery to determine if the candidate is out of accord with any of the fundamentals of these doctrinal standards and, as a consequence, may not be able in good faith sincerely to receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of this Church as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures.” (BCO 21-4.e, emphasis mine).
I wonder if many who hold a stricter view of subscription have the same view as Morton Smith, who argued that “full subscription does not require the adoption of every word of the Confession and Catechisms, but positively believes that we are adopting every doctrine or teaching of the Confession and Catechisms.”[5] I believe one could hold Smith’s view and still agree with BCO 21-4.e as it currently stands. The question is not over every proposition, but over every doctrine. Part of the confusion regarding how to interpret “the system of doctrine” and with subscription in general may be traced back to the published views of Charles Hodge.
Charles Hodge is rightly a giant in American Presbyterianism. However, he did contradict himself over the course of his writing on this topic of confessional subscription. Hodge at one place argued that “by system of doctrine, according to the lowest standard of interpretation, has been understood the Calvinistic system as distinguished from all others.”[6] Hodge argued that the theology in question which is contained in the Confession is basic Calvinism. He wrote in his book on church polity, “It is one thing to adopt the system of doctrine contained in the Westminster Confession, and quite another thing to adopt every proposition contained in that confession.[7]  John Murray takes issue with Hodge’s statement here, “It needs to be pointed out that Dr. Hodge is not accurate…It is not simply the system of doctrine contained in The Confession that is adopted; the Confession is adopted as containing the system of doctrine taught in Scripture.[8] John Murray gives an excellent short history of various General Assembly actions and statements on “the system of doctrine.”
Read More
Related Posts:

Founded in 2008 as South Bay Church, Echo now has four campuses and draws about 3,000 people to weekly services. Like Saddleback, Echo has ties to the Southern Baptist Convention, though neither church uses the word Baptist in its name. A graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Andy Wood has also worked with church planters through the SBC’s North American Mission Board.

After more than four decades, the pastor of one of the nation’s largest and most influential churches is ready to step down.
And he has named a young couple to take his place.
“This afternoon, at our all-staff meeting held at the Lake Forest campus, I was finally able to publicly announce that we have found God’s couple to lead our congregation, and that they have agreed to come!” Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren told his Orange County, California, congregation in an email on Thursday (June 2).
The email included a link to a video featuring Warren and his wife, Kay, along with Andy and Stacie Wood of Echo Church in San Jose, California. Andy Wood, 40, is currently Echo’s lead pastor, while Stacie Wood is a teaching pastor. They will have the same roles at Saddleback.
Founded in 2008 as South Bay Church, Echo now has four campuses and draws about 3,000 people to weekly services. Like Saddleback, Echo has ties to the Southern Baptist Convention, though neither church uses the word Baptist in its name. A graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Andy Wood has also worked with church planters through the SBC’s North American Mission Board.
“Kay and I believe so much in this couple,” Warren said in a statement announcing the transition. “We love them so much, and we are confident that God has prepared and chosen them to take up the baton and run the next leg of the Saddleback marathon.”
The search for a new pastor began last summer, in part because of ongoing health problems for Warren. He told the church last year that he has spinal myoclonus, which causes tremors and blurred vision, and that it has worsened in recent years.
Saddleback leaders spoke with about 100 potential candidates before settling on Wood, who preached at the church earlier this year.
Wood plans to step down as pastor of Echo Church at the end of June and will move to Orange County to begin the transition. The first step will be a conversation between the Warrens and the Woods during services over Father’s Day weekend. In August, the couple will begin attending Saddleback.
The church will celebrate Warren’s ministry during the first few weekends in September. Wood’s first official day as pastor will be Sept. 12.
“For decades, we have admired and respected Pastor Rick and Kay Warren and their work through the Purpose Driven Church model has been critical,” Wood said in a statement. ”We’ve been so blessed by their friendship, and after months of prayer and seeking counsel from others, we believe that God has called us together to step into serving at Saddleback Church.”
In the email to the Saddleback congregation, Warren said he and Kay were filled with love and gratitude for the church and quoted a New Testament verse about fighting the good fight and finishing the race.
“Now it is time for us to pass the torch on to a new generation who will love, lead, and pastor our church family in the decades ahead,” he wrote.
In May 2021, Saddleback made headlines after ordaining three female staffers as pastors—a controversial step for Southern Baptists. The SBC’s statement of faith limits the office of pastor “to men as qualified by Scripture.” But Southern Baptists disagree over whether that applies only to the church’s senior pastor or whether it bars any women from having the title of pastor. They also disagree over whether women can preach in a Sunday service.
At the SBC’s annual meeting, Saddleback was reported to the Credentials Committee, which is charged with deciding whether or not a church is in “friendly cooperation” with the denomination. Though some churches have left the SBC after naming women as pastor, the denomination has never officially removed any church for having a woman pastor.
Filling Warren’s shoes will be a challenging task, as the current Saddleback pastor has long been one of the most influential Christian leaders in the country, shaping everything from how pastors dress to how they organize and start new churches.
Scott Thumma, director of the Hartford Institute for Religion Research at Hartford International University, said megachurch transitions are often a challenge. The higher a megachurch pastor’s profile, the more difficult it is to replace that person.
Read More
Related Posts: