I believe in being fully transparent with my readers and listeners with my own theological biases and starting presuppositions. While I don’t think we need to hold all of the same theological positions for us to learn from each other, I do think it is important that you know where I’m coming from. Therefore, in the interest of being forthright, you’ll find a list of my distinctive personal theological beliefs below.

Please note that none of the content provided here is meant to be used to subvert the rightful authority of local church elders in the shepherding of your soul. All content published here is for educational purposes and should be consumed with the knowledge that I am not your pastor and that Scripture commands you to honour and submit to those who are (Hebrews 13:17).



I am a Reformed Baptist. I believe that the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith is a biblically faithful, historic, Reformed experession of core doctrines the Christian faith. You can read the full text of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession HERE.

I believe in the 5 Solas of the Reformation: Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Solus Christus and Soli Deo Gloria. These are at the heart of a truly Protestant, Reformed faith.

I believe in a Calvinistic understanding of salvation, often summarized in what is commonly referred to as the “5 Points of Calvinism (TULIP)”. According to Scripture, God is the author of salvation and sovereign over the hearts of men. You can find an article series that explains my postition from the Bible HERE.


I believe that it is important for Christians to “contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3) This faith has been faithfully preserved in Holy Scripture and the core essentials of the faith have been summarized in many historic creeds and confessions. Too many Christians today live in a historical bubble and have not been discipled in the historic faith.

I believe that the following Historic Creeds are good summaries of the historic faith that hold to “the pattern of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13) set down in Scripture.

The Apostles Creed (120–250 AD)

I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth;

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy *catholic* Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

*(The word “catholic” means “universal” – it does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church.)

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381 AD)

We believe in one God the Father, the Almighty, creator of heaven and earth, and of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.


We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son). With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The Chalcedonian Creed (451 AD)

We then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures; inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us; and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.


 I believe that the Bible is God’s Word comprised of the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. I reject the Apocrypha, Deutrocanonical books, Gnostic Gospels, Pseudopigraphal works, and latter additions as part of the inspired canon of Scripture. You can read my article series HERE on the Biblical canon for more info.

I believe that God’s Word as contained in the Bible is the inspired “God-breathed” Word of the LORD and has been faithfullly preserved for us today through copious amounts of manuscripts. God has providentially protected His Word from corruption and destruction. Although many of the manuscripts may contain copying errors, we have such a blessing of so many of them that we can reliably attain the original text of Scripture through careful textual study. I believe that our modern translations (such as the ESV, LSB, NASB, CSB, etc) are faithful in communicating the core message of the original text. There are, however, some unfaithful translations (such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation and the Passion Translation). Thus, it is advantageous for us to also study the Scriptures in their original languages and going back to their original sources.

I believe that all of what is said explicitly in Scripture or implied through reasonable and logical deduction is binding upon the conscience of men and is to be received and obeyed joyfully in faith as coming from our Loving Heavenly Father. We may not tamper with the message, distort the context or original intent, nor dismiss out of hand any part of Scripture today. Instead, we must declare “the full counsel of God” (Acts 20:27).

The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy is a good expression of this position.


I believe that we should be “presuppositional” in our apologetic methodology (technique of defending the faith) so that we do not give up the ground that we stand on, which is the Word of God.

The Christian must start with the truth of God’s Word and reason from that position. It is both inconsistent and unfaithful to give up and deny our Christian worldview in order to reason with unbelievers because it is only in Christ that are found all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3). There is no neutral ground, and everyone has to start with certain presuppositions which must be assumed a priori before we can even begin to reason. Therefore, Christian apologetics should be done from a Christian metaphysical and philosophical starting point.

This differs from Classical and Evidential approaches to apologetics which posit meeting unbelievers on some supposedly “neutral” ground.

Some proponents of the Presuppositional view of Apologetics that have influenced my thought are Dr. Greg Bahnsen, Dr. Cornelius VanTil, Dr. K. Scott Oliphint, Dr. John M. Frame, etc.


I believe that the revelatory gifts of the Spirit given to the apostles and disciples in the First Century have ceased today. Also, the office of Apostle has ceased with the death of the last original Apostle, John. Likewise, the office of Prophet has ceased and although God may give supernatural unction and “words of knowledge” or use a preacher in extraordinary ways through the proclamation of His Word, the gift of prophecy as it was practiced in Biblical times has since ceased. Since the close of the canon of Scripture, God has given to us His complete revelation in the Bible which is sufficient to equip us for every good work and is lacking nothing (2 Tim. 3:16–17).

The Gift of Tongues was the miraculous ability to speak in intelligible, foreign, human languages by the unction of the Holy Spirit. The normative practice of this gift has ceased today in the church. What is now called “tongues” in the modern charismatic movement is not the Biblical gift since it does not carry the distinctive marks of the true gift—mainly that it is the miraculous ability to speak a foreign language not previously learnt. However, God could in special circumstances choose to grant this gift to a person according to His divine wisdom in an extraordinary situation. But this is no longer the normative operation of the gift. This is clearly proven both theologically and historically.

I believe that the modern Charismatic Movement has distorted the Biblical gifts and fallen into error on these points—although there are many genuine, godly Christians within the movement.


I believe that we should worship God in the Sunday gathered worship service only as He has prescribed to us in His Word. The Bible should regulate our worship of God.

This is in contrast to the Normative Principle of Worship which believes that anything that is not explicitly forbidden by God in the Bible is permissible. However, this view leads to all sorts of disorder, novelties and inventions in church services and presumes to know better than God’s Word on how we should honour and worship the LORD. Thus, things not prescribed in the Bible for the corporate gathering of God’s people should not be a part of the Sunday worship gathering such as dramas, skits, light shows, entertainments, and extra ‘ministries’ not explicitly commanded in Scripture. We must not be presumptious like Nadab and Abihu (see. Lev. 10) and offer “strange fire” to the LORD.

I believe that the modern church must reform its worship according to God’s Word, for judgment must begin in the household of God (1 Pet. 4:17).

You can find a good article on the Regulative Principle of Worship HERE.


I am a Partial Preterist Postmillennialist and believe that the Gospel will continue to advance in history and that Christ’s Church will be victorious through His empowerment as more and more of the world is won to Jesus. I believe that Jesus’s promise that “the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church” (Matt. 16:18) will stand true as the Church advances against the enemies of Christ, and that all nations and rulers will eventually “kiss the Son” (Psa. 2:12). I believe that the Millennial reign of Christ was inaugurated at his Ascension to the Right Hand of the Father and continues until “all His enemies have been made a footstool” (1 Cor. 15:24–26), culminating in the abolition of death by Christ himself at the end of history. I believe that Christ will return, bodily, in victory to a Christianized earth and that the number of the elect will be far greater than that of the damned. You can read more about my thoughts on Eschatology HERE.

I am a Partial Preterist and see passages such as Matthew 24 as being in reference to Jesus’s Coming in judgment against unbelieving Jews in Jerusalem in the events leading up to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. This is well attested in history and is a necessary deduction from the text of Scripture. You can read an article series about my exegesis and interpretation of Matthew 24 HERE.

I reject Full Preterism and affirm that the Second Coming of Christ to consumate history is still in our future.


I am a Theonomist who believes that God’s Law is still applicable for today. (Theos = God, Nomos = Law)

While the Law of God cannot save us, it does tell us God’s perfect moral requirements. As such, God’s Law should be the guiding principle and objective standard of morality for all of life, including the civil and public sphere. This does not mean imposing theocratic Israel’s civil governance on modern society’s in a rigid one-to-one way. Instead, nations should base their political and legal systems upon the principles found in God’s Law and the general equity from them which is applicable for today. I reject Thomistic conceptions of Civil Government (such as certain forms of Christian Nationalism) that rely solely on supposed “Natural Law”.

I also believe in Sphere Sovereignty—that God has ordained separate, distinct, and sometimes overlapping spheres of authority such as the Church, the Family, the Civil Government, Businesses, etc. Each of these spheres has legitimate jurisdiction and authority in its own God-given sphere as well as tools to carry out its duty. The “sword” is given to the State to enforce public justice according to God’s standards. The “rod” is given to parents to enforce discipline in the home. The “keys” are given to Church Elders to carry out Church Discipline according to God’s Word. These spheres must remain distinct and should not encroach on each others’ jurisdictions and duties, but may influence each other in their spheres through dialogue and advice. No one sphere should become all-encompassing of the others in a totalitarian fashion.

This position is well articulated in terms of its practical application today in the Niagara Declaration and the Frankfurt Declaration.

You can also read my exegesis and interpretation of Romans 13 as it pertains to Civil Government HERE.


Biblical Patriarchy has also been called Consistent Complementarity or Hard Complementarianism. I don’t care to quibble about the terminology, since it is what is meant that is important. I believe that Soft (or Narrow) Complementarianism has compromised on its views of Biblical gender roles and tends towards becoming indistinguishable from Soft Egalitarianism. The influence of Feminism and Secular Gender Ideology in the Church has led to the softening and obscuring of the Biblical and historic understanding of God’s design for men and women.

I believe that God has created humanity in only two sexes—male and female—each with equal dignity, worth, and value but with distinct designs for different but complementary duties. I do not believe that the roles assigned to each sex/gender were given arbitrarily by God only to be expressed in the domain of the Church and Home. Instead, I believe that God has designed the sexes to equip them for the duties He has given to them.

Thus, they are creational (ontological) realities and because we take our “maleness” and “femaleness” with us wherever we go, the gender distinctions, roles and duties go with us wherever we are—in the home, church, and society. What is explicitly prescribed and prohibited in Scripture with regards to the duties and obligations of the genders in the home and Church are indicative of God’s design for them in all of life and should be reflected as such.

The books Masculine Christianity by Zachary Garris and It’s Good to be a Man by Michael Foster lay out this position very clearly.


I believe that Scripture compells parents to give their children a distinctly Christian education. We are not at liberty to give our kids to secular public schools for indoctrination into a godless worldview. Instead, children must be trained in the fear and admonition of the LORD and this responsibility is primarily given to their father by God. He may deligate this task to capable Christian teachers or schools, but the responsibility to ensure that his children have a Christian education falls on him and God will hold him accountable for it.

I believe that there is liberty in how this may be accomplished, whether through homeschooling, Christian private schools, or Christian Classical Academies.

You can read more about my Biblical reasoning for this position HERE.


I believe that the Biblical model for the gathered assembly of the LORD’s people for worship is to have families worshipping together. I don’t believe that the modern practice of age-segregated (or age-specific) worship is Biblical since it has no Scriptural warrant and goes against the pattern of worship including children in the gathering in both the Old and New Testaments. Everywhere in Scripture where the LORD’s people gather to worship Him, even for solemn assemblies and days of repentance, they gather with their little ones present also.

The practice of modern day kids ministry that takes children out of the gathered worship service is novel and has poor support both historically and biblically. However, that being said, I don’t think that this should be a primary issue of contention or division in a local church. There are many wonderful and faithful ministries which do not hold this position today. But I would encourage churches and believers to look into these things themselves as good Bereans.

I have written an article laying out my Biblical case HERE for consideration.

Also, the Church and Family Life Ministries “Declaration of the Complementary Roles of Church and Family” is a great summary of this position.

I encourage every Christian to be a good Berean and examine the Scripture for themselves to see if these things are so (Acts 17:11).

Share This