Skip to main content

An Update on My Relationship with BiblicalTrinitarian

Given my past recommendations of Biblical Trinitarian, I would like to give you all a personal update on my relationship with the site. When Mike Burgos and I met over a decade ago, there was much that we held in common. Mike has been a consistent friend and encouragement – in matters theological, academic, ministerial, and personal – and I cannot thank him enough for that.

Mike exemplified Christian brotherhood, but as time passed and our understanding of certain aspects of systematic and practical theology changed with our study and experience, I felt morally obliged to part ways with him. I just didn’t feel I could partner with him in good conscience given some of the positions to which he holds, which I will only briefly mention below.

Firstly, however, let me be clear: Mike Burgos is a brother in Christ. He is not a heretic and enemy of the faith. Moreover, if you are interested in hearing good debates defending the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity, I recommend heading over to Biblical Trinitarian and checking out his work. He has produced many good defenses of those doctrines, some of which I have even partnered with him on.

So why have we parted ways?

1. Difference of Opinion Over the London Baptist Confession – Whereas I am a strict 1689 confessionalist, Mike is somewhat looser in his acceptance of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith. For instance, regarding the matter of the gifts of the Spirit Mike is not a cessationist. The confession, which I think gets this right, however, is cessationist.

2. Disagreement over the Doctrine of the Eternal Functional Subordination of the Son – To put the matter simply: Mike heartily affirms EFS; I heartily reject it. If you’re not familiar with the doctrine, Mike Riccardi has a great article going over it in some detail. You can check out the article here.

3. Difference of Opinion Regarding the Orthodoxy of some Prominent LeadersIf you have followed my writing for some time now, you are probably aware of my opposition to the Federal Vision Movement and its proponents. Among the unrepentant propagators of the Federal Vision heresy, we find Doug Wilson. Over the years, sadly, Wilson has managed to rebrand himself as one does not hold to the heretical views of the Federal Vision camp. This has led many, including Mike, to embrace him as a brother in Christ.

Similarly, John Piper, who, like Wilson, preaches and teaches a false gospel has managed to present himself as orthodox. This has led many to accept him as a brother as well. Mike and I do not agree on how we are to understand Piper’s doctrine of “final salvation by works.”

Lastly, Mike is a supporter of Albert Mohler and does not think he, Mohler is enabling the propagation of Critical Race Theory in Southern Baptist churches and schools. I entirely disagree on this point, and I cannot in good conscience recommend Al Mohler’s works to anyone.

4. Disagreement as to the Salvation of Romanists

According to Scripture, salvation is obtained by the means of faith in the truth. Given that this is the case, anyone failing to believe the truth respecting the work of Christ in the Gospel is not saved. As this applies to all sincere Romanists, it follows necessarily that there are no saved Romanists. It is not merely the teachers of false gospels who are anathema, it is anyone who teaches another gospel – including the laity of any professedly Christian body of worshipers. Mike is much more lenient in this matter, and I cannot bend on this issue as it is of first importance.

Concluding Remarks

Since there are many of you who have benefited from the writing that Mike and I have done over at Biblical Trinitarian, I wanted to update you on why I haven’t been posting there for some time now. While Mike and I have some disagreements, I encourage you to learn from his published writings on various apologetic and theological issues, excluding, of course, those I’ve mentioned above.

Until next time…

– Soli Deo Gloria