The perspective of the articles on this site is "non-confessional" in nature. I.e., the intent (imperfect as it is) will be to be true to the text of Scripture. Certainly there is much here that aligns with the various historical confessions that have developed over the course of Church history. However, there is no attempt to align with any partiular creed or confession, either Reformed or Dispensational or whatever. Consequently, the articles here may be reflective of either or all of these confessions.

The theological positions associated with Dispensational and Reformed thinking are open to various understandings. The intent here is use these terms to indicate a general or overall position. The same may be said for the terms Calvinist and Arminian. Listed below are some points that will provide a basic understanding of my perspective.

• I believe that the unifying purposes of God as found in his decree are primarily ordered around his work for his own glory and then, secondarily, around his work for man's salvation. The chief end of man (and for that matter for all of creation) is to glorify God. Period! That some of mankind (the elect) will enjoy him forever is a secondary, albeit important, issue.
• I believe that man is totally depraved, meaning that he is completely helpless to save himself and apart from God unable to come to salvation. I also believe that the people of God (those who have been or will be saved) are so because they were unconditionally elected by God, this having been done before creation. Furthermore, I believe that everyone who has been elected will come to salvation. And I believe that under no conditions can one who has been saved lose that salvation. Essentially this is all but the "L" of the Calvinist's "TULIP".
• Regarding the "extent of the atonement" (the "L" in TULIP), I believe the death of Christ to be more far-reaching than only for the redemption of the elect. I believe that in God's plan the death of Christ had a multitude of purposes. God used it for his glory to accomplish many things, things that extend beyond the elect to all of creation, the non-elect included. It may be true that in his death Christ accomplished more for the elect than for the non-elect. However, it is also true that the non-elect benefit from certain aspects of Christ's death. For example, this benefit is reflected in what is termed common grace. Therefore, the extent of the death of Christ is both limited and unlimited.
• I believe that there is only one family or people of God, namely, the elect. In that sense all who are saved are the children of God, member's of God's family. However, I further believe that not only does God have the right to divide this one people into groups, but in fact, has done so. I believe that God has chosen, for his own glory, not to treat all members of his family identically. Thus I maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church and reject the views of so-called "replacement" theology.
• I believe that there will be a future, literal reign of Christ on the earth that will endure for at least 1000 years. Before this reign begins, membership of the Church, the bride of Christ, will have been completed. At the time this reign of Christ on earth begins, the nation of Israel will be established as the head of the nations and the promises to Abraham and his seed will find complete fulfillment.

These views are the result of an effort to employ a "literal" hermeneutic applied uniformly to all of Scripture. I find that such an approach provides consistent understanding of the Word of God. So then, I believe that God's program is primarily doxological and secondarily soteriological.

There are, of course, practical differences that follow from this approach. They are not simply academic. These are differences that impact our approach to life now, both individually as God's children (e.g., our relationship to the OT Law) and corporately as members of the body of Christ (e.g., the practice of infant baptism). These differences are reflected in the documents appearing herein.