John Frame is a spectacular author. Last week I completed his book, Evangelical Reunion. Since then I have had the opportunity to share several thoughts from that book with several people. And it struck a cord with them. Thankfully you do not have to buy this book as Frame puts a number of articles, and several of his books online for universal consumption.

I believe this book matured my thoughts on denominations and the church, particularly the reformed wing of the body of Christ.

Here is the link (scroll down to Evangelical Reunion)

Frame on the Importance of Doctrine

We cannot brush doctrine aside as a mere impediment to unity, as many users of that slogan (Doctrine divides, Experience unites) would like to do. A doctrinally indifferent church is a church that does not care about the gospel message for the gospel is precisely a doctrine, a teaching, a narrative of what God has done for our salvation. Certainly any church worthy of the name must be doctrinally united, in the sense of being fully committed to one message, the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is doctrine that unites us in our love for Christ and it is our foolish trust in our own experience that leads us to compromise that message. Doctrine unites, experience divides! (pg. 84)

Frame on the difference of church and denominations

The difference between the church and the denominations is indicated by this fact: that the birth of a denomination is always attended by sin, but the birth of the church was attended by rejoicing among the angels of heaven. (Evangelical Reunion, pg. 38)

Frame on Unity

Frame comments on Christ's high priestly prayer, "that they may be one, as Christ and the Father are one."

Some exegetes understand Christ here to be referring to spiritual unity rather than organizational unity. Certainly organizational matters are not the emphasis of this prayer. The emphasis is on the vital union of the believers with Christ in the Spirit. However, that union is not wholly invisible; it is visible in the conduct of Christians in their relationships to one another as well as to God himself. Therefore the spiritual and the organizational cannot in fact be sharply separated. Our lack of organizational unity is caused by, and in turn causes, the lack of fellowship, harmony, and cooperation that are certainly aspects of, or manifestations of, spiritual unity. (Evangelical Reunion, pg. 28-29)

Triperspectivalism and it’s application to Epistemology

This summer I was introduced to the idea of Triperspectivalism, a theory popularized by John Frame, but originated by Cornelius Van Til. Triperspectivalism is not a final conclusion by any definition; on the contrary it is a means, a way of thinking. It stresses the idea that different perspectives are essential in finding the truth, indifference and relativism are not options for us as we learn, think and know. This framework emphasizes absolutes. From these perspectives comes the fullest understanding that we can have as finite beings.

Frame writes: Often, however, God's revelation to us of his own perspective is itself multiperspectival in structure. He has, for example, given us four gospels, rather than one. It is important for us to hear the story of Jesus from four different perspectives. God's perspective, in this case, embraces those of the four gospel writers. His infinite perspective validates those four human perspectives and commends them to all of us. Similarly, God has given us both Kings and Chronicles, though these books overlap in many ways. He has also given us both a prose account (Ex. 12-14) and a poetic account (Ex. 15:1-18) of his deliverance of Israel from Egypt. Many of the Psalms, too, give us poetic accounts of what other Scriptures present in prose narrative. There are two givings of the law (Ex. 20:1-17, Deut. 5:1-21). Paul often repeats his ideas (as Rom. 12 and 1 Cor. 12), adding and subtracting matters of interest, varying their contexts.

We can see such perspectives teaching the fullness of truth in: The three offices of Christ. If one does not know Christ as King or Prophet, will one really know Him as Priest? It is the same with Divine Lordship, the Ten Commandments, salvation and finally human knowledge.

At the middle of this paradigm is human knowledge. We know things by experiencing them, which we can only do through our senses, and in order to remember, God gave us reason to discern such moments. In any epistemology, when you separate any of these you come with a theory of knowing that is lacking. Once understood in this way, by God's common grace, it is realized that Descartes was right, in part, when he said, "I think, therefore I am." And Rousseau when he stated, "I feel, therefore I am."

Others have used such a paradigm and applied it to church offices, ministry and church growth. I have not thought about it applying to such areas yet, but I think it is a useful idea, especially when one remembers that it is a means, not an end. (Frame's Primer is found here.)