Norma Normata

Moving...

2010-12-17T20:27:00.001-05:00

that is, my blogging. I'm going to leave this one up for the indefinite future, I may or may not return to it, but I have a desire to be more focused in my blogging efforts and I am going to attempt this here. So long, for now.

Berkhof's Systematic Theology (Part One Chapter Six): The Incommunicable Attributes

2010-12-03T08:48:00.000-05:00

Part One
The Doctrine of God (The Being of God)
VI. The Incommunicable Attributes (God as the Absolute Being)
A. The Self-Existence of God
B. The Immutability of God
C. The Infinity of God
D. The Unity of God

"It has been quite common in theology to speak of God as the absolute Being" (p.57), though the term "absolute" is more common to philosophy than theology. In philosophy, the Absolute is "regarded as that which is free from all conditions (the Unconditioned or Self-Existent)...When the Absolute is defined as the First Cause of all existing things, or as the ultimate ground of all reality, or as the self-existent Being, it can be considered as identical with the God of theology. He is the Infinite One, who does not exist in any necessary relations, because he is self-sufficient, but at the same time can freely enter into various relations with his creation as a whole and with his creatures. While the incommunicable attributes emphasize the absolute Being of God, the communicable attributes stress the fact that he enters into various relations with his creatures" (p.57-58).

A. The Self-Existence of God
"God is self-existent, that is, that he has the ground of his existence in himself...As the self-existent God, he is not only independent in himself, but also causes everything to depend on him" (p.58).

"Additional indications of it are found in the assertion in John 5:26 'For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself'; in the declaration that he is independent of all things and that all things exist only through him, Ps. 94:8 ff.; Isa. 40:18 ff.; Acts 7:25; and in statements implying that he is independent in his thought, Rom. 11:33,34, and in his will, Dan. 4:35; Rom. 9:19; Eph. 1:5; Rev. 4:11, in his power, Ps. 115:3, and in his counsel, Ps. 33:11" (p.58).

B. The Immutability of God
Berkhof defines God's immutability as "that perfection of God by which he is devoid of all change, not only in his Being, but also in his perfections, and in his purposes and promises" (p.58). This divine immutability is clearly taught in Scripture, but the question naturally arises concerning the incarnation and God's apparent changes of mind toward his creation in certain passages of Scripture. To give an answer Berkhof says "The divine immutability should not be understood as implying immobility, as if there were no movement in God" (p.59). He argues that the incarnation brought no change in God's Being, perfections, or purposes and when Scripture speaks of God changing in some way (repenting, relation to creatures, intention) he reminds us "this is only anthropopathic way of speaking. In reality the change is not in God, but in man and in man's relations to God" (p.59).

C. The Infinity of God.
To say that God is infinite is to say that he is free from all limitations. When we ascribe to God infinity we deny that he can be limited, though Berkhof says it should not "be regarded as a merely negative concept" (p.59) though he admits "that we cannot form a positive idea of it" (p.59). "The infinity of God must be conceived as intensive rather than extensive, and should not be confused with boundless extension, as if God were spread out through the entire universe, one part being here and another there, for God has no body and therefore no extension"(59).

1. His Absolute Perfection.
"This is the infinity of the Divine Being considered in itself. It should not be understood in a quantitative, but in a qualitative sense; it qualifies all the communicable attributes of God...In this sense of the word the infinity of God is simply identical with the perfection of his Divine Being"(p.60).

2. His Eternity.
God's infinity in relation to time is called his eternity. The Bible represents God's eternity in a way that is a duration through endless ages. This is the way we often conceive of eternity. "But this is only a popular and symbolic way of representing that which in reality transcends time and differs from it essentially. Eternity in the strict sense of the word is abscribed to that which transcends all temporal limitations...He is the eternal 'I am.' His eternity may be defined as that perfection of God whereby he is elevated above all temporal limits and all succession of moments, and possesses the whole of his existence in one indivisible present"(p.60).

3. His Immensity.
God's immensity is is defined as "that perfection of the Divine Being by which he transcends all spatial limitations, and yet is present in every point of space with his whole Being"(p.60). He adds the last words to avoid the idea that God's being is diffused through space. He says that though sometimes immensity and omnipresence are used synonymously, the two terms should be understood as distinct. Immensity points to God's transcendence while his omnipresence points to his immanence.

D. The Unity of God.
There is a distinction to be made in God's unity quantitatively and qualitatively.

1. The Unitas Singularitatis.
In this we understand that God is single, that there is one God and no other beside him. "This excludes all polytheistic conceptions of God"(p.62). See I Kings 8:60; I Cor. 8:6; I Tim. 2:5; Deut. 6:4.

2. The Unitas Simplicitatis.
This refers to the simplicity of God, meaning that God is free from division into parts. Berkhof says that "in recent works on theology the simplicity of God is seldom mentioned"(p.62). "This implies that among other things that the three Persons in the Godhead are not so many parts of which the Divine essence is composed, that God's essence and perfections are not distinct, and that the attributes are not superadded to his essence...Scripture does not explicitly assert it, but it implies it where it speaks of God as righteousness, truth, wisdom, light, life, love, and so on..."(62).

Fesko on Baptism and Ferguson on Hamilton

2010-11-30T21:09:00.000-05:00

Here are a couple of audio recordings that I have benefited from lately. The first is John Fesko being interviewed about his new book on baptism Word, Water, and Spirit. The second is by Sinclair Ferguson from this past Reformation Day at Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, PA. This year marked the 450th anniversary of the Scottish Reformation and Ferguson discussed the life and impact of Patrick Hamilton and his similarity with the Apostle Paul.

The Principles and Elements of Public Worship

2010-11-27T22:06:00.000-05:00

Chapter 47 of the Book of Church Order, Presbyterian Church in America

The Principles and Elements of Public Worship

47-1. Since the Holy Scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and
practice, the principles of public worship must be derived from the Bible, and
from no other source.

The Scriptures forbid the worshipping of God by images, or in any
other way not appointed in His Word, and requires the receiving, observing,
and keeping pure and entire all such religious worship and ordinances as God
hath appointed in His Word (WSC 51, 50).

47-2. A service of public worship is not merely a gathering of God’s
children with each other, but before all else, a meeting of the triune God with
His chosen people. God is present in public worship not only by virtue of the
Divine omnipresence but, much more intimately, as the faithful covenant
Savior. The Lord Jesus Christ said: “Where two or three are gathered
together in My name there I am in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20).

47-3. The end of public worship is the glory of God. His people should
engage in all its several parts with an eye single to His glory. Public worship
has as its aim the building of Christ’s Church by the perfecting of the saints
and the addition to its membership of such as are being saved -- all to the
glory of God. Through public worship on the Lord’s day Christians should
learn to serve God all the days of the week in their every activity,
remembering, whether they eat or drink, or whatever they do, to do all to the
glory of God (1 Corinthians 10:31).

47-4. Public worship is Christian when the worshippers recognize that
Christ is the Mediator by whom alone they can come unto God, when they
honor Christ as the head of the Church, who rules over public worship, and
when their worship is an expression of their faith in Christ and of their love
for Him.

47-5. Public worship must be performed in spirit and in truth.
Externalism and hypocrisy stand condemned. The forms of public worship
have value only when they serve to express the inner reverence of the
worshipper and his sincere devotion to the true and living God. And only
those whose hearts have been renewed by the Holy Spirit are capable of such
reverence and devotion.

47-6. The Lord Jesus Christ has prescribed no fixed forms for public
worship but, in the interest of life and power in worship, has given His
Church a large measure of liberty in this matter. It may not be forgotten,
however, that there is true liberty only where the rules of God’s Word are
observed and the Spirit of the Lord is, that all things must be done decently
and in order, and that God’s people should serve Him with reverence and in
the beauty of holiness. From its beginning to its end a service of public
worship should be characterized by that simplicity which is an evidence of
sincerity and by that beauty and dignity which are a manifestation of
holiness.

47-7. Public worship differs from private worship in that in public
worship God is served by His saints unitedly as His covenant people, the
Body of Christ. For this reason the covenant children should be present so
far as possible as well as adults. For the same reason no favoritism may be
shown to any who attend. Nor may any member of the church presume to
exalt himself above others as though he were more spiritual, but each shall
esteem others better than himself.

47-8. It behooves God’s people not only to come into His presence with
a deep sense of awe at the thought of His perfect holiness and their own
exceeding sinfulness, but also to enter into His gates with thanksgiving and
into His courts with praise for the great salvation, which He has so graciously
wrought for them through his only begotten Son and applied to them by the
Holy Spirit.

47-9. The Bible teaches that the following are proper elements of worship
service: reading of Holy Scripture, singing of psalms and hymns, the
offering of prayer, the preaching of the Word, the presentation of offerings,
confessing the faith and observing the Sacraments; and on special occasions
taking oaths.

Justified

2010-11-20T07:13:00.000-05:00

A Faith to Confess

2010-11-15T06:28:00.002-05:00

The Origin and Formation of the Westminster Confession of Faith

The Necessity of Scripture

2010-11-10T06:32:00.000-05:00

Belief in God's existence has never been an obstacle for me. Even during the darkest years of my life, when my depravity was on open display I was convinced from the light of nature, providence, and my own conscience that there was a God and he was the maker of heaven and earth. This general revelation testifies to God's existence "for what can be known about God is plain...because God has shown it...his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20). God is revealed in all that he has made as the heavens are declaring the glory of God (Psalm 19:1). There is a sensus divinitatis which is common to all men.

This has never been a problem for me. My push back has always been with what God reveals about himself in Scripture and it is interesting to me that I am now seeing the same thing in my oldest son. He has no problem believing there is a God who is Creator and sustainer of all things. He sees it everywhere. This is not to say that he is without questions concerning general revelation, but he readily accepts this as fact. He also knows that he is a sinner, his own conscience condemns him and although he is only six he understands that there is a harmony between Scripture's testimony of human sin and the testimony of his own conscience. The true questions (as well as doubt or outright unbelief) come when Scripture reveals that which finds no affirmation by our natural conscience or by what may be seen and observed. Case in point: the doctrine of the Trinity. The Scriptures reveal to us that God is one yet in three - the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All three are referred to as God and ascribed that which belongs to God alone. For instance, all are said to have created all that is yet the Scripture does not lead us to believe that there are three gods but rather teaches that there is but one only, the living and true God. We don't gather this knowledge from nature or the moral understanding of our conscience, we know this from Scripture. Here we find the reason why we need the Scriptures. Natural revelation is not enough to lead us to a Trinitarian understanding of God, neither can we be saved through natural revelation. The law we understand for their is a moral order to creation, but the gospel is only given to us through God's special revelation; that which has been revealed in Scripture and by the advent of his Son.

Natural revelation and rational apologetics only go so far. What is revealed in natural revelation gives great testimony to God's existence and to his law, but it can never lead us home. Ultimately, natural revelation leaves us with a guilty knowledge of God, a sense of the condemnation we are under for violating the law of God written on our conscience, and finally without hope as we face death. The Scriptures alone proclaim the only comfort we may find in life and death, for this is where we find that the Father has loved the world so that he sent his Son to obediently live and die in behalf of the unrighteous, to rise again from the dead, ascend to heaven, and send the Holy Spirit to apply his purchased redemption to his own who are scattered across the globe.

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” (Romans 10:13-16 ESV)

Listen to "The Necessity of Scripture" by Jim Wilkerson, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Brunswick, Georgia.

Letter to the Pope

2010-11-09T06:44:00.000-05:00

Martin Downes has posted part of a letter written by Charles Hodge to the pope in 1869.

In 1869 the aged Professor Charles Hodge of Princeton Seminary wrote a letter to Pope Pius IX "explaining why the Presbyterian church was declining an invitation to send a representative to the Vatican Council of 1870" (David Calhoun, Princeton Seminary Vol 2: The Majestic Testimony, p. 32).

You can read the full text of the letter at the Banner of Truth Trust site, the first part of the letter is below:

To Pius the Ninth, Bishop of Rome,

By your encyclical letter dated 1869 you invite Protestants to send delegates to the Council called to meet at Rome during the month of December of the current year. That letter has been brought to the attention of the two General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. Those Assemblies represent about five thousand ministers and a still larger number of Christian congregations.

Believing as we do, that it is the will of Christ that his Church on earth should be united, and recognizing the duty of doing all we consistently can to promote Christian charity and fellowship, we deem it right briefly to present the reasons which forbid our participation in the deliberations of the approaching Council.

It is not because we have renounced any article of the catholic faith. We are not heretics. We cordially receive all the doctrines contained in that Symbol which is known as the Apostles' Creed. We regard all doctrinal decisions of the first six ecumenical councils to be consistent with the Word of God, and because of that consistency, we receive them as expressing our faith. We therefore believe the doctrine of the Trinity and of the person of Christ as those doctrines are expressed in the symbols adopted by the Council of Nicea AD321, that of the Council of Constantinople AD381 and more fully that of the Council of Chalcedon AD451.

We believe that there are three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are the same in substance and equal in power and glory. We believe that the Eternal Son of God became man by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, and so was, and continues to be, both God and man in two distinct natures and one person forever.

We believe that our adorable Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the prophet who should come into the world, whose teachings we are bound to believe and on whose promises we rely. He is the High Priest whose infinitely meritorious satisfaction to divine justice, and whose ever prevalent intercession, is the sole ground of the sinner's justification and acceptance before God.

We acknowledge him to be our Lord not only because we are his creatures but also because we are the purchase of his blood. To his authority we are bound to submit, in his care we confide, and to his service all creatures in heaven and earth should be devoted.

We receive all those doctrines concerning sin, grace and predestination, known as Augustinian, which doctrines received the sanction not only of the Council of Carthage and of other provincial Synods, but of the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus AD431, and of Zosimus, bishop of Rome.

We therefore cannot be pronounced heretics without involving in the same condemnation the whole ancient church.

Neither are we schismatics. We cordially recognize as members of Christ's visible Church on earth, all those who profess the true religion together with their children. We are not only willing but earnest to hold Christian communion with them, provided they do not require, as conditions of such communion, that we profess doctrines which the Word of God condemns, or that we should do what the Word forbids. If in any case any Church prescribes such unscriptural terms of fellowship, the error and the fault is with that church and not with us.

But although we do not decline your invitation because we are either heretics or schismatics, we are nevertheless debarred from accepting it, because we still hold with ever increasing confidence those principles for which our fathers were excommunicated and pronounced accursed by the Council of Trent, which represented, and still represents, the Church over which you preside.

The most important of those principles are: First, that the Word of God, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only infallible rule of faith and practice. The Council of Trent, however, pronounces Anathema on all who do not receive the teachings of tradition pari pietatis affectu (with equal pious affection) as the Scriptures themselves. This we cannot do without incurring the condemnation which our Lord pronounced on the Pharisees, who made void the Word of God by their traditions (Matt. 15:6).

Read the rest here

Joel Beeke on the Heidelberg Catechism

2010-11-05T22:53:00.000-04:00

From the Meet the Puritans site (which is great btw)

Junker Jorg

2010-11-03T06:11:00.000-04:00

Every night at bed time my boys beg me to tell or read them a story. So last night I told them one which I knew would be right up their alley. It involved a fugitive on the run, kidnapping, a fast ride through a forest, and a castle with a knight. In the story, ML was the name of the main character and the face. The heel was simply known as "the organization." The organization was out to get ML and found him guilty of treason. ML was a fugitive on the run and in order to keep him safe, his friends staged his kidnapping and hid him in a castle disguised as a knight. Just the kind of story a young boy would like.

Sound familiar? If it does, it may be because the story is true. ML is Martin Luther, the organization is the Catholic Church. When Luther left the Diet of Worms his friends kidnapped him to keep him safe from those who sought his life. He was taken to the castle in Wartburg where he grew a beard and disguised himself as Junker Jorg (Knight George). It was here that Luther was allowed to work and translated the Scriptures into the German language.

The bearded Luther, Junker Jorg

Behold, I Show You a Mystery

2010-10-29T07:10:00.000-04:00

Last night, we took the boys down to the Jacksonville Zoo for their big "Spooktacular" Halloween event. It was a lot of fun for the kiddos, but most of the attraction had nothing to do with the zoo itself. Staff members handed out candy at stations along the way and the pathway was lighted appropriately for the holiday. We did see a few animals, however. The highlight of the night was watching one of these guys (a black Jaguar) investigate a pumpkin in the pool area of his habitat.

What I noticed from those around me is that this black Jaguar was continually referred to as a black panther, like Bagheera in the Jungle Book. But here's the thing, there is no such thing as a black panther - at least according to the experts. What is known as a black panther is the black Jaguar pictured above. What is called a "panther" is actually a cougar or smaller version of a mountain lion (Florida Panther pictured below).

According to studies, there are fewer than 100 panthers in Florida and most of them are all near the everglades, but I'm pretty sure that I could come up with 100 people in the North Florida area who claim to have seen one in the wild. Perhaps there are more than estimated and they could be more widespread. That can be understood, but what is strange is that out of every sighting that I know of no one has seen the cat in the picture below but the one in the picture above. Here is the explanation given: What people are seeing is actually a black bobcat which they think is a panther. One problem: as evident in the name the bobcat has a very short tail, the panther does not and those I ask are quick to assure me that the cat they saw had a long tail. Claims of black panther sightings are common in North Florida, Middle Georgia, and throughout the Southeast. I remember being with my grandfather in a rural area as a young boy and seeing something dart across the road in front of us. He told me it was a black panther. My parents, my father in law, and my wife all claim to have seen one. In fact, my wife had a rather close encounter with one, the thought of which still gives her chills. So at the zoo watching the black Jaguar I began to ask her if - but before I could finish my question she said, "Yes, that is what I saw."

So what are people seeing? The Florida Panther can sometimes be darker in color, but there is no evidence (that I am aware of) of a black cougar. Are there Jaguars roaming the southeastern United States? Or is the black panther merely a legend with scores of undocumented sightings like the Sasquatch? This mystery has perplexed me for a long time. In the meantime, check out the videos below.

Got Your Hammer?

2010-10-29T06:08:00.000-04:00

In honor of Reformation Day this Sunday, Gene Veith invites you to nail your theses to his blog!

The Heidelberg Rap

2010-10-26T21:57:00.000-04:00

Yeah, that's right. I'm not sure what to think about this but here it is.

Under Care

2010-10-26T07:29:00.000-04:00

October 18-19, 2010.
I traveled with my pastor, one of our ruling elders, and another young man in our church to Augusta, Georgia for the fall meeting of the Savannah River Presbytery. On Monday evening I met with the Candidates and Credentials Committee at Westminster PCA to give them a testimony of my conversion and sense of call to the ministry. They had a few questions for me and another who was being brought under care as well and on Tuesday morning we stood before the presbytery at Lakemont PCA to be received (or denied, but thankfully we were received). This was the first and easiest step in the process of becoming a minister in the PCA. In the Baptist Church (where I was formerly ordained) the process was shorter and less strenuous. As an outsider I always admired the high requirements of the Presbyterians for their ministers, though I never thought I would be going through the process myself. I have been forced to eat my share of humble pie as of late. Going from a place where you are considered someone to be looked up to as a spiritual leader to having no reputation is difficult. The people in my church and the leaders around me are not impressed with me, and this is a good thing. It is as though I am a recent convert learning the faith all over again and in some ways I truly am. In a sense, I have been reduced to the status of a child - literally, I am learning the same catechism as my children! There are issues that I will have to work through; for one, the theological education I received doesn't exactly match up with the uniform curriculum of the PCA. I am just glad for now to have taken a step, though a small one, to what I believe God is calling me to.

The Glory of Christ in Deuteronomy

2010-10-14T05:50:00.000-04:00

A few years ago I was in a discussion with a pastor-friend over his next preaching series. He was expressing to me his ideas of certain topics or books of the Bible that he was considering preaching about or through. I threw out this question "Why don't you preach through Deuteronomy?" He laughed. It was almost unthinkable for him to do that. Matthew, John, a Pauline letter - sure. Deuteronomy - no way. Maybe it was too much material, maybe he didn't know how to tackle that genre of literature, or maybe he didn't think his congregation would receive it well. Whatever the reason may have been, he didn't choose Deuteronomy. He probably went with I Peter or something of the like.

Deuteronomy is not a book that we hear quoted from often (much less preached from), but interestingly enough, Jesus did. When tempted by the devil, Jesus answered the temptations with Scripture from Deuteronomy.

What is this book about? The title (deutero - second, nomos - law) implies the second giving of the law and it would be possible to sum the book's content up in that way, but the book is about more than that; it is about the glory of Christ. We can be sure of this because of the words of Jesus who said that the Old Testament spoke of him, that Moses wrote of him, and in his Emmaus hermeneutics class he took two disciples through the Old Testament declaring from the law and the prophets the things testifying of the Christ who was to come (Luke 24). Why should pastors preach through a book like Deuteronomy? Because it is about Jesus Christ. Consider the following outline.

I. Moses speaks of Israel's history (1-4)

II. Moses speaks of God's law (5-26)

III. Moses speaks of blessing and cursing for covenant obedience/disobedience (27-33)

IV. Moses dies (34)

This book is divided into sections of Moses speaking as God's prophet. In the midst of speaking as God's prophet we are told of a greater prophet who was to come (18:15), fulfilled by the Lord Jesus who comes as our prophet, priest, and king.

I. Moses speaks of Israel's history (1-4). Jesus is the fulfillment of Israel's history. He is the true Israelite, brought up out of Egypt, passing through waters of baptism, and taken in the wilderness to be tested. Only, where Israel failed and wandered for forty years, Jesus withstood the temptations for forty days as a faithful son.

II. Moses speaks of God's law (5-26). Jesus did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it, and he did just that. Like Moses, he speaks as God's prophet the law of God from the mountain (Matt 5-7). He is also the faithful covenant keeper who loved the Lord his God with all of his heart, mind, soul, and strength and who loved his neighbor as himself.

III. Moses speaks of blessing and cursing for covenant obedience/disobedience. Inaugurating the kingdom, Jesus dispenses covenant blessings and curses as the king ("Blessed are" or "Woe to you"). He is the one who deserves to hear the blessings from Mt. Gerazim for his obedience, but was the cursed man hung on the tree receiving the curses from Mt. Ebal in order to bring blessing upon his people.

IV. Moses dies (34). Moses could not bring Israel into their inheritance. According to the author of Hebrews, Joshua could not give them rest either. Yet Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath (rest) comes to bring Israel into the promised land of the new heaven and new earth. Like Moses, Jesus died, but he rose from the dead on the third day assuring his people of what he accomplished.

This book is glorious, for it testifies of the glory of Jesus Christ.

Berkhof’s Systematic Theology (Part One, Chapter Five): The Attributes of God in General

2010-10-12T06:03:00.000-04:00

Part One
The Doctrine of God (The Being of God)
V. The Attributes of God in General
A. Evaluation of the Terms Used.
B. Method of Determining the Attributes of God.
C. Suggested Divisions of the Attributes.

A. Evaluation of the Terms Used.

Berkhof prefers the term “properties” over against “attributes” as pointing to that which is proper to God alone. However, even this term has its own weakness as some of the attributes are communicable and not proper to God alone. Even more so, he likes the terms “perfections” or “virtues” though in using the latter it must be clear that these virtues are not added to the being of God but that his virtues reveal his Being. “They may be defined as the perfections which are predicated of the Diving Being in Scripture, or are visibly exercised by Him in His works of creation, providence, and redemption” (p. 52).

B. Method of Determining the Attributes of God.

The scholastics sought to determine the attributes of God in their understanding of natural theology and did so largely in three ways:

via causalitatis - determining the ultimate cause from the effects we see in the world.
via negationis - removing from God all of the imperfections seen in his creatures to understand him as the perfect Being.
via eminentiae - the relative perfections found in man are ascribed to God in absolute perfection.

Modern theologians seek to understand the attributes of God through experimental theology. In this concept “we may begin with our intuitions of the reality of God, those unreasoned certitudes which are firmly rooted in immediate experience” (p. 53). One way of doing this is to understand man’s needs and see God as the one who meets those needs.

To these methods Berkhof writes that they “take their starting point in human experience rather than in the Word of God. They deliberately ignore the clear self-revelation of God in Scripture and exalt the idea of the human discovery of God…the only proper way to obtain perfectly reliable knowledge of the divine attributes is by the study of God’s self-revelation in Scripture” (p. 53-54).

C. Suggested Divisions of the Attributes.

There have been many suggestions by theologians as to how to divide the attributes of God. “The most common distinction is that between incommunicable and communicable attributes. The former are those to which there is nothing analogous in the creature, as aseity, simplicity, immensity, etc.; the latter those to which the properties of the human spirit bear some analogy, as power, goodness, mercy, righteousness, etc” (p. 55).

Concerning Berkhof

2010-10-07T20:22:00.000-04:00

In posting the outlines and brief summaries of Berkhof's points from his classic theology text, my purpose is to do just that; to give a summary of what he is saying. I'm not seeking to interact with Berkhof so much at this point, but to boil it down to his main ideas. In doing so I hope to use it for a frame of conversation to speak about these topics with my family, to have a short and concise treatment at hand, and to help my own memory as to what I have read by writing these summaries.

If Berkhof's work is a sum of Bavinck's dogmatics, then what I am posting is a sum of that sum ;)

Berkhof’s Systematic Theology (Part One, Chapter Four): The Names of God

2010-10-07T07:29:00.000-04:00

Part One
The Doctrine of God (The Being of God)
IV. The Names of God
A. The Names of God in General.
B. The Old Testament Names and their Meaning.
C. The New Testament Names and their Interpretation.

A. The Names of God in General.
“While the Bible records several names of God, it also speaks of the name of God in the singular…In such cases ‘the name’ stands for the whole manifestation of God in his relation to his people, or simply for the person, so that it becomes synonymous with God” (p. 47).

“In the most general sense of the word, then, the name of God is his self-revelation. It is a designation of him, not as he exists in the depths of his divine Being, but as he reveals himself especially in his relations to man” (p. 47).

B. The Old Testament Names and their Meaning.

1. ’El, ’Elohim, and ’Elyon.
These names speak of God as being first, lord, strong and mighty, the object of fear, or the elevated one. It should be noted that these names are not proper to Jehovah alone, for they are also used of pagan deities and rulers.

2. ’Adonai
“This name is related to the preceding ones…points to God as the almighty Ruler, to whom everything is subject, and to whom man is related as a servant” (p. 48).

3. Shaddai and ‘El-Shaddai.
This name of God reveals God as the one who has condescended to enter into relations with his creatures. This is the God who has all power in heaven and earth. This name “while it stresses the greatness of God, it does not represent him as an object of fear and terror, but as a source of blessing and comfort” (p. 49).

4. Yahweh and Yahweh Tsebhaoth.
“It is especially in the name Yahweh, which gradually supplanted other names, that God reveals himself as the God of grace. It has always been regarded as the most sacred and the most distinctive name of God, the incommunicable name” (p. 49).

This name is often referred to as Jehovah. The original meaning and pronunciation of this name is not known. God reveals himself to Moses in the burning bush with this name and its meaning “I am that I am” (Ex. 3:14). This name is used of no one but Israel’s God, for it is proper to him alone, stressing his covenant faithfulness to his people.

“The name Yahweh is often strengthened by the addition of tsebhaoth [Lord of Hosts]. It is rather hard to determine to what the word tsebhaoth refers. There are especially three opinions:” (p. 49).

a. The armies of Israel.
Berkhof thinks this interpretation is highly doubtful. The prophets, in using this name “Lord of hosts” do not refer to Jehovah as the God of war. The armies of Israel are referred to in the singular but the Lord of hosts in the plural

b. The stars.
Again, Berkhof says that when speaking of the host of heaven Scripture always uses the singular and never the plural. He says “while the stars are called the host of heaven, they are designated the host of God” (p. 50).

c. The angels.
“This interpretation deserves preference” (p. 50) according to Berkhof. This name is often found in connection with angels, those who surround the throne of God. “Jehovah of hosts, then, is God as the King of glory, who is surrounded by angelic hosts, who rules heaven and earth in the interest of his people, and who receives glory from all his creatures” (p. 50).

C. The New Testament Names and their Interpretation.

1. Theos.
According to Berkhof the New Testament has the Greek equivalents of the Old Testament names. Theos, like ‘El, ‘Elohim, or ‘Elyon is the most common name for God and at times is used of heathen gods.

2.Kurios.
The basic meaning of kurios is Lord. It is derived from kuros, which means power. “This name designates God as the Mighty One, the Lord, the Possessor, the Ruler who has legal power and authority. It is used not only of God, but also of Christ” (p. 50).

3. Pater.
Berkhof argues against the notion that the New Testament introduced a new name for God in the use of Pater (Father). Heathen religions applied father to their gods and the Old Testament presents God as the Father of Israel.

The New Testament uses the title to refer to God as the originator and creator of all things, as the relation in which the first Person of the Trinity stands in relation to the second, and as the relation of God “to all believers as his spiritual children” (p. 51

To Laugh or to Cry, That is the Question

2010-09-30T06:07:00.000-04:00

I often meet people who were a part of or grew up in a similar church atmosphere as I did. It is good to speak with those few who are familiar with many things that so many just aren't. The type of church I was reared in was of the fundamentalist brand, the fundamentals not being certain truths revealed in Scripture like the ones J. Gresham Machen stood for in the liberalism controversy of the 1920s and 1930s, but basically certain standards of conduct. I meet people quite often who have been in these circles. However, our brand of fundamentalism was a little different. In fact, most of those I meet are not so familiar with some of those things I grew up around. I grew up a Baptist, but I'm sure we looked Pentecostal to most. It wasn't all that uncommon to see people running the aisles, waving the Christian flag, screaming and shouting at the top of their lungs, or dancing in the church. It was embarrassing to watch confused visitors gather their belongings and leave when it "broke out" in the church or just sit there and endure the awkward moment . These services usually contained no preaching, so folks weren't leaving because of the offense of the cross, they undoubtedly thought we were crazy. A friend of mine, who happens to be a former prison guard, sat on edge through an entire worship service when a lady behind him let out a bloodcurdling scream in "praise" to the Lord.

I do have to say that the video below beats everything I have ever seen. A friend (who has also been a part of this atmosphere) sent this clip to me and at first it brought back many memories. I honestly wondered if I knew some of the people or was familiar with this particular church. But about half way through the video, I asked the same question you will ask. Did he just...? The answer is yes, yes he did. My first reaction was to laugh. I mean, never in the long history of nonsense have I seen such chaos in a place where things are supposed to be done decently and in order. Now that I have had time to reflect, I think tears may be the proper response. Oh, I almost laughed to the point of crying, but tears of sorrow may be more appropriate.

I can't find any relation in the clip above to what we are to understand regarding the nature of worship from the following passage of Scripture.

18 For you have not come to what may be touched, a blazing fire and darkness and gloom and a tempest 19 and the sound of a trumpet and a voice whose words made the hearers beg that no further messages be spoken to them. 20 For they could not endure the order that was given, “If even a beast touches the mountain, it shall be stoned.” 21 Indeed, so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, “I tremble with fear.” 22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, 23 and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

25 See that you do not refuse him who is speaking. For if they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape if we reject him who warns from heaven. 26 At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.” 27 This phrase, “Yet once more,” indicates the removal of things that are shaken—that is, things that have been made—in order that the things that cannot be shaken may remain. 28 Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, 29 for our God is a consuming fire. (Hebrews 12:18-29)

Office Hours

2010-09-22T07:03:00.000-04:00

Scott Clark has recently interviewed two ministers from the Savannah River Presbytery (the presbytery of the PCA that our church is a part of), David Hall and Terry Johnson. The interviews are for Office Hours, the podcast of Westminster Seminary California.

David Hall on Tributes to John Calvin (July 21, 2010)

Terry Johnson on Reformed Worship (September 22, 2010)

Berkhof’s Systematic Theology (Part One, Chapter Three): Relation of the Being and Attributes of God

2010-09-17T06:58:00.000-04:00

Part One
The Doctrine of God (The Being of God)
III. Relation of the Being and Attributes of God
A. The Being of God.
B. The Possibility of Knowing the Being of God.
C. The Being of God Revealed in His Attributes.

Some dogmaticians have separated the being of God and the attributes of God. “Others prefer to consider the Being of God in connection with His attributes in view of the fact that it is in these that He has revealed Himself” (p. 41).

A. The Being of God.
“It is quite evident that the Being of God does not admit of any scientific definition…At most only an analytical-descriptive definition is possible. This merely names the characteristics of a person or thing, but leaves the essential being unexplained” (p. 41).

“The Bible never operates with an abstract concept of God, but always describes Him as the Living God, who enters into various relations with His creatures, relations which are indicative of several different attributes” (p. 41).

To speak of the being of God is to speak of his essence. While our knowledge of his essence is most limited, Berkhof points to two passages in Scripture where his essence is defined: “An indication of the very essence of God has been found in the name Jehovah, as interpreted by God Himself, ‘I am that I am.’ On the basis of this passage the essence of God was found in being itself, abstract being. And this has been interpreted to mean self-existence or self-contained permanence or absolute independence” (p. 42). He also points to the words of Jesus in John 4:24 where Jesus speaks of the spirituality of God. “God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

B. The Possibility of Knowing the Being of God.
“The consensus of opinion in the early Church, during the Middle Ages, and at the time of the Reformation, was that God in His inmost Being is the Incomprehensible One” (p. 43).

Can we truly give answer to the following questions? “What is God? What is the nature of His inner constitution? What makes Him to be what He is?” (p. 43). We as creatures are finite and unable to comprehend the infinite. Berkhof goes on “Apart from the revelation of God in His attributes, we have no knowledge of the Being of God whatsoever. But in so far as God reveals Himself in His attributes, we also have some knowledge of the His Divine Being, though even so our knowledge is subject to human limitation…We know God only in so far as He enters into relations with us” (p. 43). The Reformers held that the Divine essence is incomprehensible.
Calvin’s take on the matter is considered and Berkhof speaks of his understanding when he says “this knowledge cannot be obtained by a priori methods, but only in an a posteriori manner through the attributes, which he regards as a real determination of the nature of God” (p. 44).

“The question, therefore, is not as to the possibility of a knowledge of God in the unfathomableness of His being, but is: Can we know God as He enters into relations with the world and with ourselves? God has entered into relations with us in His relations of Himself, and supremely in Jesus Christ; and we Christians humbly claim that through this Self-revelation we do know God to be the true God, and have real acquaintance with His character and will” (p. 44).

C. The Being of God Revealed in His Attributes.
Some have gone so far as to say that God’s attributes are God himself. While this safeguards “the unity and simplicity of God by maintaining that the whole essence is in each attribute” to do this “is a very dangerous extreme…moving in the direction of Pantheism” (p. 45). This rules out all distinctions in God. “Thomas Aquinas….asserted that the attributes do not reveal what God is in Himself, in the depths of His Being, but only what He is in relation to His creatures” (p. 45).

“Naturally, we should guard against separating the divine essence and the divine attributes or perfections, and also against a false conception of the relation in which they stand to each other” (p. 45). Berkhof quotes Shedd who speaks of the divine attributes as “an analytical and closer description of the essence.” Berkhof will say that “”because of the close relation in which the two stand to each other, it can be said that knowledge of the attributes carries with it knowledge of the Divine Essence…These qualities cannot be altered without altering the essential Being of God. And since they are essential qualities, each on if them reveals to us some aspects of the Being of God” (p. 46).

Those Tricky Presbyterians

2010-09-16T20:31:00.002-04:00

Berkhof's Systematic Theology (Part One, Chapter Two): The Knowability of God

2010-09-15T06:15:00.000-04:00

Part One
The Doctrine of God (The Being of God)
II. The Knowability of God
A. God Incomprehensible but yet Knowable.
B. Denial of the Knowability of God.
C. Self-Revelation the Prerequisite of all Knowledge of God.

A. God Incomprehensible but yet Knowable.
“The Christian Church confesses on the one hand that God is the Incomprehensible One, but also on the other hand, that He can be known and that knowledge of Him is an absolute requisite unto salvation” (p. 29)

“Reformed theology holds that God can be known, but that it is impossible for man to have a knowledge of him that is exhaustive and perfect in every way…it is maintained that man can obtain a knowledge of God that is perfectly adequate for the realization of the divine purpose in the life of man. However, true knowledge of God can be aquired only from the divine self-revelation, and only by the man who accepts this with childlike faith” (p. 30).

B. Denial of the Knowability of God.
Berkhof takes up the arguments of agnoticism and defines it as follows: “The fundamental position is that the human mind is incapable of knowing anything of that which lies beyond and behind natural phenomena, and is therefore necessarily ignorant of supersensible and divine things” (p. 30). Agnosticism allows for the possibility of God’s existence, but not for knowledge of him.

Four of the arguments he takes on are:

(1) Man knows only by analogy.
To this argument Berkhof replies: “while it is true that we learn a great deal by analogy, we also learn by contrast. In many cases the differences are the very things that arrest our attention” (p. 32).

(2) Man really knows only what he can grasp in its entirety.
“This position proceeds on the unwarranted assumption that partial knowledge cannot be real knowledge, an assumption that would really invalidate all our knowledge, since it always falls far short of completeness” (p. 32).

(3) All predicates of God are negative and therefore furnish no real knowledge.
This is false. There are positive ideas of God including “love, spirituality, and holiness” (p. 32). Even in that what we know of God may be in negative form, what we know may also convey something positive.

(4) All our knowledge is relative to the knowing subject.
“It is said that we know the objects of knowledge, not as they are objectively, but only as they are related to our senses and faculties…because we know things only through the mediation of our senses and faculties, we do not know them as they are. But this is not true; in so far as we have any real knowledge of things, that knowledge corresponds to the objective reality” (p. 32-33).

C. Self- Revelation the Prerequisite of all Knowledge of God.

1. God communicates knowledge of himself to man.
“In the study of all other sciences man places himself above the object of his investigation and actively elicits from it his knowledge by whatever method may seem most appropriate, but in theology he does not stand above but rather under the object of his knowledge…Without revelation man would never have been able to acquire any knowledge of God. And even after God has revealed himself objectively, it is not human reason that discovers God, but it is God who discloses himself to the eye of faith” (p. 34-35).

I Corinthians 2:11 tells us that there is an archetypal knowledge of God that no man can know. There is also an ectypal knowledge of him given to man by revelation.

2. Innate and acquired knowledge of God.
Innate knowledge of God (called by some ingrafted or implanted) is that knowledge of God implanted in man be his creation in the image of God. Acquired knowledge is “obtained by the study of God’s revelation” (p. 35).

3. General and special revelation.
Berkhof contrasts what these two distinctions have been called throughout Christian history. He argues that all revelation is supernatural if it comes from God so natural and supernatural may not be the best ways to describe them. General revelation is God’s revelation of himself in creation, providence, and the human conscious (innate knowledge), while special revelation is what is revealed to man in history of God’s redemptive purpose, that which we find in Christ and in Scripture.

He quotes Warfield on the two forms: “The one is addressed generally to all intelligent creatures, and is therefore accessible to all men; the other is addressed to a special class of sinners, to whom God would make known his salvation. The one has in view to meet and supply the natural need of creatures for knowledge of their God; the other to rescue broken and deformed sinners from their sin and its consequences” (p. 37 - quoted from Revelation and Inspiration).

Berkhof's Systematic Theology (Part One, Chapter One): The Existence of God

2010-09-04T12:00:00.001-04:00

Part One

The Doctrine of God

(The Being of God)

I. The Existence of God

   A. Place of the Doctrine of God in Dogmatics
   B. Scriptural Proof for the Existence of God
   C. Denial of the Existence of God in its Various Forms
   D. The So-Called Rational Proofs for the Existence of God

Berkhof''s Systematic Theology has been heralded as the standard textbook for the seven loci of theology. Louis Berkhof (1873-1957) was born in the Netherlands and (like so many others) moved to Grand Rapids, Michingan in 1882. He was a graduate of Calvin and Princeton Seminaries, pastored two Reformed churches, and eventually became president of Calvin Theological Seminary.

A. Place of the Doctrine of God in Dogmatics
According to Berkhof, we begin theological study with two presuppositions, (1) that God exists, and (2) he has revealed himself in his divine Word. Systematic theology is the study of God throughout in all its ramifications, from the beginning to the end. Without these presuppositions the study of theology cannot commence. The study of theology should begin with the doctrine of God and this was the norm until Schleiermacher introduced his new method by beginning with the religious consciousness of man. This reverses the order and leads to a rational search for God instead of God's own self disclosure to man. He writes, "Faith in Scripture as an authoritative revelation of God was discredited, and human insight based on man's own emotional or rational apprehension became the standard of religious thought. Man ceased to recognize the knowledge of God as something that was given in Scripture, and began to pride himself on being a seeker after God." (p.20)

B. Scripture Proof for the Existence of God
Scripture proves the existence of God is this way, namely that it assumes God's existence. "The assumption is not merely that there is something, some idea or ideal, some power or purposeful tendency, to which the name of God may be applied, but that there is a self-existent, self-conscious, personal Being, which is the origin of all things, and which transcends the entire creation, but is at the same time immanent in every part of it." (p. 20-21) The God of Scripture must be received by faith, this is what Scripture sets forth. Surely, there are evidences of God in creation (Rom. 1) but there is no natural proof that leads natural man to embrace God's existence beyond all doubt.

C. Denial of the Existence of God in its Various Forms
The idea of God is practically universal in the human race even in the most uncivilized nations and tribes, yet there are those even in Christianized lands who deny the existence of God as he is revealed in Scripture.

     1. Absolute denial of the existence of God.
There are two types of atheism; theoretical and practical. We are familiar with both. The former deny God based upon some scientific or philosophical reason. The latter deny him in their lives though giving assent to his existence. Theoretical atheists can be distinguished in at least three categories which often overlap, (1) dogmatic, (2) skeptical, and (3) critical. Berkhof notes that agnosticism respecting the existence of God, while allowing the possibility of reality, leaves us without an object of worship and adoration just as much as dogmatic atheism does." (p.23)

   2. Present day false conceptions of God involving a denial of the true God.
There are many false conceptions of God "which involve a denial of the theistic conception of God." (p.24) By "theistic" Berkhof means the Christian conception of God or that which is revealed in holy writ. Theism has always believed in a God who is both transcendent and immanent.

     a. An immanent and impersonal God. While Deism removed God from his creation and denied his immanence and Pantheism failed to recognize God's transcendence, Schleiermacher's focus on man's religious experience ignores God's transcendence and also does away with God's immanence in that man's religious conscience is dependent attributes of God that are merely symbolic with no reality.

     b. A finite and personal God. The concept of finite gods are nothing new. For those who believe in a God who is personal but finite, certain realities make it impossible to believe in an infinite or omnipotent God, namely the miserable condition of the world. "Because of the evil that is in the world, he [God] must be thought of as limited in knowledge or power, or in both. The existence of a larger power which is friendly to man and with which he can commune meets all the practical needs and experiences of religion." (p.25). Berkhof notes the idea of a struggling and growing God, which seems to be the understanding of proponents of today's open theism.

     c. God as the personification of a mere abstract idea. The old statement is given that God created man in his image and man has thus returned the favor ever since. Many who profess faith in God, create a god of their own imaginations. I see how this is possible in both theoretical and practical atheism. God may be seen as a quality, a goal, the spirit of some great desire or hope. God is seen by some to be needful for human evolution but that mankind is approaching a time when God will no longer be necessary. In this view God is a projection of the human mind.

D. The So-Called Rational Proofs for the Existence of God.
Berkhoff gives the five most common rational proofs of God, some of which, he says, were in essence suggested by Plato and Aristotle but added to and developed later by students of philosophy and religion. These so-called "proofs" cannot by themselves prove anything, they may be more accurately labeled "testimonies" rather than arguments, yet he acknowledges that they have some value for believers as testimony to divine revelation and while they do not prove beyond doubt the existence of God "they can be so construed as to establish a strong probability and thereby silence many unbelievers." (p.28)

     1. The Ontological Argument.
Credit for developing this argument is generally given to Anselm. The basic argument is that man can conceive of a perfect being, therefore a perfect being must exist. This is true in that all men have some knowledge of God by virtue of being made in his image, but of course conception cannot prove absolute existence. The argument cannot stand alone.

     2. The Cosmological Argument.
Every effect must have a cause, though some would argue this point given certain supposed discoveries at the quantum level, but nevertheless we understand cause and effect. The universe is an effect of something, there must be a cause and it is reasonable to assume an adequate cause, that being God. Again, this is a true testimony to Scriptures account of creation, but the push back to this argument when standing alone is that we cannot assume that God is eternal and that the universe is not. If everything must have a cause, as Kant pointed out, then God must have a cause which results in an endless regress.

     3. The Teleological Argument.
This argument seems to be the best of the five, that the order we find in the universe proves a grand architect, but again according to Kant this does not lead an orthodox understanding of God.

     4. The Moral Argument.
This is a popular one today, that man's moral standard is derived from a moral being. The law of God is written upon the heart of man and he is therefore accountable to it. This presupposition is necessary. The new atheists seem to have no problem harmonizing their denial of God and their own moral standards. Berkhof writes, "While this argument does point to the existence of a holy and just being, it does not compel belief in a God, a Creator, or a being of infinite perfections." (p. 27).

     5. The Historical or Ethnological Argument.
To every place one may go and find man throughout history, one will find religion. Man is a religious being.

To these arguments, Berkhof says that believers do not need them. Though this may sound harsh, he does not trash them completely (as I previously commented). His point, and I think a right one, is that if believers are willing to stake their faith on rational arguments they refuse to accept the testimony of God's Word. These arguments are not to stand alone and cannot by themselves lead to faith in the God of Scripture, but can be seen as accurate interpretations of general revelation and supplements to special revelation. As Schaeffer rightly said, "all truth is God's truth."

Reformation Worship Conference

2010-09-01T06:40:00.000-04:00

The historic Midway Presbyterian Church in Powder Springs, Georgia is hosting a Reformation Worship Conference October 21-24. Here is the purpose statement from the website:

The schedule includes many workshops and two public worship services on Friday and Saturday nights which will make use of the Genevan liturgy of John Calvin and the Scottish liturgy of John Knox.

Random thoughts on the mind this morning

2010-08-31T06:47:00.000-04:00

Some time ago I decided to change the name and address for the blog. This may not have been the best idea, perhaps I should have given the warning or created a new one altogether with the new address attached to the old site. Consequently, the traffic has come to a screeching halt for the most part (though the number of actual readers is hard to tell with most receiving feeds via email or a tool like Google Reader. I rarely ever visit an actual blog that I read, it all comes to my Google account.). Maybe the traffic will pick up soon, or maybe not. Maybe the traffic loss is the result of inconsistent posting and lack of interesting content. This probably has more to do with it than the address change. I've often wondered why I continue this blog and have decided to delete it on more than one occasion. But, for some reason I keep it around. I enjoy writing and keep thinking that one day I will have more time to write. It's nice to have a place to post one's thoughts whether they are read or not. For now the blog continues under a new bat-name and a new bat-channel, so to speak.

When I began the blog in the spring of 2007 I gave it the fitting title "Crying in the Wilderness" which fit well and the site address contained the words all of grace. I had fully embraced the Calvinistic scheme and these words remind me of such a great time in my Christian life of seeing the glory of God's amazing grace in salvation. All of Grace was also a 30 minute internet radio broadcast for a period of time. That was a lot of fun. I still have the audio for all of the episodes but they will remain hidden away for my children to maybe stumble upon for a good laugh after my death.

Thinking back, All of Grace (which also happens to be the title of a C.H. Spurgeon book) was an excellent description for that period of time for me. Not that I have "moved on" to bigger and better things (I have to daily return to the gospel of grace and weekly have it proclaimed to me among Christ's people), but "Norma Normata" is a good title to sum up where I am presently. For the last few years I have been able to better understand what it means to embrace the Reformed label. It is much more than giving assent to the TULIP, though it is at least that much. We have a confession. Ask any random Christian what they believe and the likely response will be "the Bible." Any sect or cult member could give the same answer. The real question is "What do you believe the Bible to teach?" The phrase Norma Normata means "the rule that is ruled." My rule of faith is the Scripture, but my confession of faith is what I believe the Scripture to teach, which is the Reformed confession of the Christian faith bound up in the Westminster Standards or the Three Forms of Unity (in my case it happens to be the Standards, the confession of my particular denomination). The confession is a rule of faith, but it is a rule that is ruled by a higher rule; the Word of God which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Given the name of the blog, I hope to have more to say in the future regarding confessions and being confessional. For now, there are a two helpful articles on the sidebar by Carl Trueman and R.C. Sproul (anything I say will probably be taken from them anyway).

So again, the blog continues for now. I have a couple ideas to try and beef up the content and make it more interesting. We'll see how that goes. It will probably be much of the same; a few days of posting here, a few weeks of silence there. To the few of you who follow and/or continue to read, thanks alot. I'm going to grab some breakfast.

Locusts and Wild Honey

2010-08-29T06:30:00.000-04:00

Newly Translated Francis Turretin Sermons
The International Center for Reformation Faith and Life have made available two newly translated Francis Turretin sermons into English: The Happiness of the People of God and Jesus' Tears for Jerusalem

Free Audio Book: Tim Keller's Ministries of Mercy
Available for only a couple more days from Christian Audio. Use the coupon AUG2010 and download the book for free. Keller sets out a pretty detailed and practical guide for mercy ministries. His design may not be for every church, but it is helpful in thinking through how to be involved in this area either personally or corporately. His chapter on following up with those we show mercy to is worth the download.

Me Centered Bible Interpretation
Shane Rosenthal of the White Horse Inn on Issues Etc discussing his article "You're Son Vain, You Probably Think this Text is About You."

Horton on Calling
A great article on Vocation

Why We Memorize the Catechism
There seems to be (at least to me) a catechetical resurgence in the modern church. Some churches have always catechized their members and children but many are doing so who haven't before. It is always encouraging when doctrine replaces the dog and pony show ;)

The Words We Need to Hear

2010-08-26T06:52:00.000-04:00

"Truly I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist" (Matthew 11:11)

I have often thought, as many have noted, that it would be nice if John the Baptist actually heard these words. But he didn't; he was in prison about to lose his head and he sent his disciples to ask Jesus "Are you the one who is to come or shall we look for another" (Matthew 11:2). Though there is debate over the reason behind John's question, apparently Jesus didn't quite fit into his understanding of the Messiah. Most Jewish minds expected the Messiah to be the king who would deliver Israel from the heavy hand of Rome and bring them into their long awaited glory. The Messiah, John himself had said, would bring judgment upon the wicked and blessing upon the righteous (3:11). For now however, the kingdom of heaven was suffering violence (11:12) and John was experiencing this first hand being imprisoned by Herod.

To the crowds Jesus presented John as a prophet, even more than a prophet. He was the very one of whom the Scripture said would prepare the way for the coming of the Lord (11:10). He was Elijah who was to come (11:14). But again, John did not hear these words, they were spoken after the disciples of John "went away" (11:7). Why is this? Wouldn't it have been an encouragement to John to hear what Jesus said of him? Wouldn't that have given him strength to endure his imprisonment and face death? It is amazing to me that Jesus spoke these words to the crowd about John but not to John. He did not allow John to hear these words because these were not the words John needed to hear. He didn't need a pep talk from Jesus assuring him of his own greatness. Instead Jesus says to those who came "Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them" (v.4-5). He follows these words up with "And blessed is the one who is not offended by me" (v.6).

Though Jesus affirmed John to the crowds, the words that were directed to John were about Jesus. The hope that John needed in the midst of what he could not understand, and the assurance he needed in the face of death was not found within John. It was found in Christ. Jesus directed John's hope on Christ's words and works. It seems that what is promoted in modern Christianity is the opposite. Today's pastors and authors would remind John of who he was and of his own greatness. A survey of contemporary Christian book titles reveals this because this is what we are being when authors write such things as It's Your Time, Get Out of That Pit, or Reaching Your Full Potential for God.

True hope is not found within us but outside of us in Jesus Christ and all he is for us. The words John needed to hear and the words we need to hear are not those which assure us of our selves, but those which assure us of our God by pointing us to the hope found in Christ.

The Church History ABC's

2010-08-25T05:49:00.000-04:00

While browsing the local mega bookstore a few weeks ago, I came across a nice little book I didn't expect to find there, Stephen Nichols' and Ned Bustard's The Church History ABC's. It's a Church history book for children in which a prominent figure from Church history is featured for every letter of the alphabet. The only criticism I have seen for the book is that there are important figures from Church history who are left out of it. While this is true and the book actually admits this point, it must be remembered that there are only 26 letters in the alphabet. Overall, I think it is a great introduction for children to church history and nicely illustrated, if I might add. We have decided to use it as a regular part in educating our young children. On Fridays, Camdyn and Cayde have a history lesson that ties into the letter they are currently studying. The first week their letter was "I" and on Friday they learned about the Church father Ignatius. Last week the letter was "U" so they were introduced to Ursinus, the primary author of the Heidelberg Catechism and particularly relevant to our Reformed heritage.The book is witty, fun for children, and I would recommend its use for any Christian family.

Packer on the Freedom of God's Grace

2010-08-23T05:25:00.000-04:00

Ancient paganism thought of each god as bound to his worshipers by bonds of self-interest, because he depended on their service and gifts for his welfare. Modern paganism has at the back of its mind a similar feeling that God is somehow obliged to love and help us, little though we deserve it. This was the feeling voice by the French freethinker who died muttering, "God will forgive - that's his job." But this feeling is not well founded. The God of the Bible does not depend on his human creatures for his well being (see Ps 50:8-13; Acts 17:25), nor, now that we have sinned, is he bound to show us favor.

We can only claim from his justice - and justice, for us, means certain condemnation. God does not owe it to anyone to stop justice taking its course. He is not obliged to pity and pardon; if he does so it is an act done, as we say, "of his own free will," and nobody forces his hand. "It does not depend on man's will or effort, but on God's mercy" (Romans 9:16 NEB). Grace is free, in the sense of being self-originated and of proceeding from One who was free not to be gracious. Only when it is seen that what decides each individual's destiny is whether or not God resolves to save him from his sins, and that this is a decision which God need not make in any single case, can one begin to grasp the biblical view of grace.

-Knowing God, p132-133

Camdyn, Trinitarian Thought, and Frogs

2010-08-17T21:37:00.000-04:00

From very early on we could tell that Camdyn would be an analytical thinker. Like every other Christian for the last two thousand years he cannot wrap his mind around the simultaneous oneness and threeness of God. Questions from a five year old will truly force a father to work out his own understanding of the Holy Trinity. Tonight, during our family worship time, this discussion came up again. I mentioned something of how Jesus brings us to God and having an understanding of Christ's deity, Camdyn told me that this made him think there are two gods. I began a brief discourse in orthodox Trinitarianism on how the Father and the Son are indeed one while also being distinct persons. While I was talking Camdyn's eyebrows raised and a look of excitement came over his face. It looked as though he had an "aha" moment. He seemed to be excited, and as his father I was beginning to get excited as well over my young son grasping such profound truth. Then he made me aware of the true source of his excitement. "Dad," he said, "there are three frogs on the window." I love my boys.

Have your cake and eat it too

2010-08-16T07:23:00.000-04:00

From the Desiring God blog.

Groom's Cake for a seminary student. Nice.

Calvin on the Necessity of Prayer

2010-08-16T05:48:00.000-04:00

Book Three, Chapter Twenty, Point Two:
The Necessity of Prayer

It is, therefore, by the benefit of prayer that we reach those riches which are laid up for us with the Heavenly Father. For there is a communion of men with God by which, having entered the heavenly sanctuary, they appeal to him in person concerning his promises in order to experience, where necessity so demands, that what they believed was not vain, although he had promised it in word alone. Therefore we see that to us nothing is promised to be expected from the Lord, which we are not also bidden to ask of him in prayers. So true is that we dig up by prayer the treasures that were pointed out by the Lord's gospel, and which our faith has gazed upon.

Words fail to explain how necessary prayer is, and in how many ways the exercise of prayer is profitable. Surely, with good reason the Heavenly Father affirms that the only stronghold of safety is calling upon his name. By doing so we invoke the presence both of his providence, through which he watches over and guards our affairs, and of his power, through which he sustains us, weak as we are and well-nigh overcome, and of his goodness, through which he receives us, miserably burdened with sins, unto grace; and, in short, it is by prayer that we call him to reveal himself as wholly present to us. Hence comes an extraordinary peace and repose to our consciences. For having disclosed to the Lord the necessity that was pressing upon us, we even rest fully in the thought that none of our ills is hid from him who, we are convinced, has both the will and the power take the best care of us.

Blessed by God (Part 6): The Blessed Life

2010-08-12T07:54:00.000-04:00

    I recently heard a pastor on television preaching to his congregation about these themes of blessing and cursing. He was right to hold out to his people the promise of God’s blessing, but sadly the hope he offered was far removed from the hope given in Scripture. The focus was in the here and now and the blessing he spoke of was that of a fulfilled life which included a long awaited promotion in one‘s employment. Giving consideration to what we saw in the previous chapter, don’t these earthly blessings lose their significance at least in some sense? The gospel is relevant for living but it is primarily for dying. The truth is that the promotion may never come, and for those who are named by the name of Christ true fulfillment will only come in the new heaven and the new earth. Until then we may have seasons of fulfillment or prosperity here but we are by no means guaranteed it. The church is a pilgrim people wandering through a wilderness awaiting the rest that will come in the promised land.

Blessed are…

    I often see decals in the back of car windows that say “Life is good.” I have always wanted to ask the driver to define this for me. We may be asking a similar question now given the biblical criteria of blessing that we have seen. What does the blessed life look like? Our Lord helps us in his Sermon on the Mount.

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
“Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
“Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
“Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
“Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matthew 5:3-12).

    Here we have it, these are the blessed according to Jesus. If we are honest, we must admit that our Lord’s words are against the grain of the way we tend to think . We would like it to read “Blessed are the rich, the confident, the go-getters.” Our default setting is to equate success with God’s blessing, it seems obvious to us. But those Jesus describes as “blessed” don’t fit the description of successful. What is Jesus speaking of here? Who are these blessed people? Jesus is not telling us what we need to do in order to be blessed. The prophets until John the Baptist preached the message of repentance under the administration of the old covenant. We have seen Jesus as the servant of the covenant but he is acting here as the Lord of the covenant. Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God and as king he is comes to dispense covenant blessings and curses (Matthew 11:20-24). The poor in spirit are not necessarily the materially poor, though they may be. Rather they are poor in spirit, in spiritual poverty. They recognize they are bankrupt before God having nothing owed to them but judgment. Those whose eyes are opened to see their spiritual poverty mourn over their condition, lamenting their sin. This leads to a meekness, submitting to the God they are indebted to like a horse who has been bridled. Those are blessed who recognize their need of a righteousness outside of themselves, and hungering and thirsting for it find it provided in Jesus Christ. Some have called the beatitudes synonyms of salvation. Why are they called blessed? For they inherit the kingdom, obtain mercy, are called God’s sons, and will ultimately see him (Revelation 22:4). Mercy is extended to those who are blessed, and they themselves as recipients of mercy are merciful to others. They are called pure in heart, being made pure by the blood of Christ in their standing with God and being progressively purified by the operating of the Holy Spirit within them conforming them to the image of God’s son. They are peacemakers, for their extension of mercy is to bring others into the kingdom and to reconciliation with their Creator.

    Also included in the list Jesus gives are those who are persecuted and suffer for his sake. Have you counted your blessings lately? Did you include persecution and suffering? This is why the prosperity gospel gives people a false hope and ultimately fails; it has an inaccurate theology of suffering. These traits sound entirely antithetical to blessing, but we are helped when we remember the meaning of the word blessed. The Reformation Study Bible says of those who are blessed “This means more than the emotional state represented by the word ‘happy.’ It includes spiritual well-being, having the approval of God, and thus a happier destiny."(1) Being blessed by God means union with Christ and approval by God because of Him. This is a bond so unbreakable that “tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword” (Romans 8:35) cannot separate.

    The blessed life does not mean the absence of suffering or the maximizing of pleasure or possessions in this life (remember that Jesus preached repentance to the rich). It does not mean success in all or any of our endeavors. It is found in the one who has seen his poverty before a holy God and need of a savior, has embraced the savior and his finished work on their behalf by faith, and is being brought forward in righteousness at a continual (though sometimes indiscernible) pace. The blessed life is the one for whom “to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Philippians 1:21). True blessing is primarily spiritual. God blesses his own “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places (Ephesians 1:3). He has chosen us (v.4), predestined us (v.5), redeemed us (v.7), given us an inheritance as sons (v.5, 11), and sealed us (v.13). These are realities for those in Christ possessed now, but not able to be fully grasped yet. By faith the blessed look forward to the realization of those blessings though they may experience poverty or suffering in this life. Here we find the tension between the already and the not yet, what we have already by faith but not yet by sight. The blessing is real but not fully realized. Glory is to come for God’s people, but in this vale of tears they carry the cross. This was the pattern of the Savior, and this is the pattern of those he came to save. Those who are in Christ cannot have their best life now because their richest blessings are in the heavenly realms. This is the day of carrying the cross not of wearing the crown. Jesus said to the dying thief, not to the Church, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). Glory does not belong to us yet. The church needs the theology of the cross not a theology of glory as we pour out our lives for the redemptive good of others and patiently wait for the reward that is to come. We may die every day (I Corinthians 15:31) and still be blessed.

What about the Law?

    We saw earlier that our attempts to keep the law of God are futile though the law itself is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12). Again the problem is not with the command but with our moral inability to keep it. The Westminster Shorter Catechism states that no mere man since the fall is able in this life perfectly to keep the commandments of God, but daily breaks them in thought, word, and deed (A.82). Therefore, the very command that promises life proves to be death (Romans 7:10). Though the Bible is progressive in its revelation, it remains one coherent book of law and gospel from beginning to end. The promises of God are true but equal are the demands of God’s law. Some have taught that Jesus came to give us an easier law to keep, the law of love. Far from it, Jesus presses the law to its extreme, requiring purity in our motives as well as our deeds (Matthew 5:21-30). I remember reading the Sermon on the Mount as a young Christian and being totally overwhelmed. “I’ll never make it” I thought as I hoped that somehow I would be graded on a curve. No curve, this is God’s standard of righteousness: perfect holiness. The law, we are told by the apostle, has a pedagogical purpose. The law is a guardian or schoolmaster as some translations put it (Galatians 3:24). The guardian was a slave-attendant responsible for a child’s education and training, taking the child to and from school, testing the remembrance of what was learned, and teaching the child manners until he reached maturity. Among its manifold purposes this was the primary function of God’s law revealed to Israel, to hold them captive until the fulfillment of all righteousness should come, namely in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is right for us to read the law in the Old Testament and in the New Testament (i.e. the Sermon on the Mount) and to understand our inability to keep it. They say the old portraits of the pedagogical relationship would present the guardian with a rod in hand used for correction. As our schoolmaster the rod of the law drives us to a righteousness that cannot be found within us but outside of us in Jesus Christ who has fulfilled the law on our behalf. Our hope is that Christ has fulfilled the law for us, that by faith his deeds are our deeds. We need not fear missing the mark for Christ has hit the bull’s eye and our hope is in him. But the question that follows is, now that we are in Christ do we cast off the law? Are the ten commandments to be ignored by the Christian? By no means. The commandments are repeated in the New Testament for Christ’s followers. Most certainly, we have a moral obligation to the law of God for it is a revelation of his will for our lives in loving God and loving neighbor. Many Christians want to know what God’s will is for their lives. We would do well to realize where we are in God’s providence and to seek to obey the ten commandments in our callings and responsibilities as an employee, spouse, parent, student, child, etc. God has prepared before hand good works for his people to walk in (Ephesians 2:10). The difference is that we do not have to obey the law as a fearful slave. “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1). We are free to keep the commands of God toward others without the fear of failing and coming under the law’s curse. The Anglican minister and hymn writer John Newton wrote “Christ has hushed the law’s loud thunder, he has quenched Mt. Sinai’s flame.” We are free, not that we may live lawlessly but that we may do good, working out our salvation with fear and trembling (not panic but reverence toward God), knowing that God is at work within us both to will and to work for his good pleasure (Philippians 2:12-13). God is at work in our will and our actions for we are now led not by the letter of the law but by the Spirit who has written the law upon our hearts.

The Importance of God’s Blessing Through His Appointed Means

    Wouldn’t it be great if there were a place on earth where the benefits of Christ’s work could be communicated to us? Yes it would, and the good news is that there is such a place. It is common today for those who profess Christ to take a “me and my Bible” attitude and set off on the rugged trail of individualism as a lone ranger Christian to the neglect of the ordinary means that God has appointed for his people. Christ has established his Church on earth as the pillar and ground of the truth. God is with his people individually because they are indwelt by his Spirit, but he is especially present with them when they come together for worship. The meeting of God’s people for corporate worship is not to be taken lightly or neglected (Hebrews 10:25), it is coming “to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Hebrews 12:22-24). The author of Hebrews follows with “See that you do not refuse him who is speaking” (v.25). God’s people come together to hear him speak his words of law and gospel, of commandment and promise, of curse within ourselves and blessing in Jesus Christ. This is where Christ is communicated to us by his Spirit through his means of grace, the word and the sacraments. God brings his righteousness near, he puts salvation in the midst of his people (Isaiah 46:13). Christ is as near to us as the word preached (Romans 10:8). In the preaching of the gospel he is held out to us to be received by faith and in his sacraments he confirms his promise to us. As the bread and wine of his supper are present to our physical senses that we may see with our eyes, hold in our hands, smell with our nostrils, crunch in our teeth, and taste with our tongue we can be sure that Christ has really and truly given himself for us in a supreme sacrifice on the cross. As sure as water washes away dirt from the body, the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin. The sacraments are a tangible sign and seal of God’s promises to us.

    It seems foolish that the God of heaven would use such simple means; ordinary human words to give his son to his people, ordinary water and ordinary bread and wine to seal these benefits to believers and to commune with them. Indeed these things are ordinary, but they are the means appointed until the end of the age. By these ordinary means the Spirit applies the extraordinary work of redemption. Christ’s people must return to hear this message again and again, for we often lose sight of it and return to the default mode of self sufficiency. It is then that the blessing is given to the people, after they have heard the gospel for it is only in Christ (Eph 1:3) and through that message that they may be blessed. The minister raises his hands as the sons of Aaron would and as Christ did before his ascension to glory to bless the people by pronouncing the benediction. The blessing spoken from Scripture is not from the minister, it is from God. It is here that we can be sure we are blessed, in hearing the blessing of God upon all of those who trust in Christ alone for salvation. Those who trust in Christ are truly blessed, blessed by God in Christ.

1. The Reformation Study Bible. Text note on Matt 5:3. p 1367

They Called Him "Case"

2010-08-12T06:22:00.000-04:00

Cornelius Van Til was born in the Netherlands but known for his work in America as the great Reformed theologian and apologist of the last century. To his nephew, John Van Til, he was known as "Uncle Case." On a recent edition of Office Hours Scott Clark spoke with John Van Til about the personal life of his uncle.

Listen or download

From Scott Clark:

If you want to know more about C. Van Til’s life and work you should begin with this excellent biography by John Muether. Van Til’s most basic book is Defense of the Faith.

Cayde in Concert (Live from the Living Room)!

2010-08-10T21:57:00.000-04:00

Blessed by God (Part 5): The Meeting Place

2010-08-09T21:45:00.001-04:00

The apostle Paul’s epistle to the Galatians is a dynamic letter to say the least. The words seem to come from a fiery preacher, one who is zealous for the truth and jealous for the people he is writing to. The church in this region was in danger of abandoning the message preached to them by the apostle, the gospel of Jesus Christ. False teachers had crept in and persuaded the people to turn away from Christ alone as their hope to keeping the ceremonial laws of the Jewish people - laws commanded by God but laws that were types and shadows of the Christ who was to come and fulfill them. It seems that these “Judaizers” were not denying Jesus as the Messiah but were adding requirements to the churches in Galatia that they may be fully included with the people of God. They had come to God through the door of Jesus Christ, only to find themselves in the vestibule of Judaism.# This is what we typically call legalism, seeking to gain or keep a right standing with God by virtue of our own law keeping. It was good that the Galatians had come to faith in Christ, now they only needed to be pushed farther if they “really” wanted to be joined to God’s covenant people. Usually we think that this view of the law is too high, but the opposite is true. In fact, legalism is actually holding too low a view of God’s law. Why? Because the Judaizers thought it was possible for sinners to actually keep it. Paul’s argument against them was that “all who rely on works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them’” (Galatians 3:10). Here he quotes from Deuteronomy, a passage we viewed previously.

Due for Collision

It seems that we have been speaking of the “curse” theme for quite some time, but do you remember the note we began on? Blessing, the blessing of God defined in Scripture as coming through Abraham. Being blessed by God we saw is justification, a right standing in the sight of our Creator. This is the context that the apostle himself is speaking in. Those included in Abraham’s blessing, his true sons, are those who have received this blessing through faith in the promise of God to bless just as Abraham received it. Abraham did not receive the ten commandments. The Galatians need not follow the logic of the Judaizers in receiving the sign of circumcision and keeping the festivals and holy seasons of the Jews. “So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith….if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise” (Galatians 3:9, 18). It is by faith and not law that one is blessed by God, being freely justified. However, this does not at all solve our dilemma. The law remains written on tablets of stone by God himself, the same God who blessed Abraham without law, and this God curses those who are guilty of transgressing it. The tension could not be greater for “it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for ‘The righteous shall live by faith’” (Galatians 3:11), while at the same time “the law is not of faith, rather ‘The one who does them shall live by them’” (Galatians 3:12). The difference between cursing and blessing can be defined in the distinction between law and gospel. The gospel or promise brings blessing for it comes from God, the fount from which all true blessings flow but the law can only give a curse for every thought, word, and deed of man is tainted with sin.

How can this dilemma ever be solved? How can the blessing of Abraham and the curse of the law ever be reconciled? These two seem to be striving against one another for supremacy in the redemptive story, they are bound for a head on collision and they finally meet in the cross of Jesus Christ. In the cross the blessing of Abraham and the curse of the law finally come together. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us.” How could the Christ be accursed, wouldn’t this finally prove that he was not the long awaited for deliverer after all for “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” (Galatians 3:13)?

The Hero Emerges

    The main character of the redemptive drama is Jesus Christ. Like all stories, the leading role is not always directly in view, but he remains from cover to cover central in the plot line. He comes on the scene as the one long awaited, the one who will make all things new, deliver his people, and destroy the serpent of old. It is clear that a new day has arrived in Jerusalem, a voice cries in the wilderness “Prepare the way of the Lord” (Matthew 3:3) and it is announced that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3:2). Jesus inaugurates the kingdom of God. He comes preaching and teaching and healing, his works authenticating his words. He fulfills prophecy as only the Messiah would, the gospel writers and his apostles interpret the sacred writings in light of him. Jesus emerges as the second Adam, as the true Israel. “Out of Egypt I called my son” (Matthew 2:15) is said to refer to Jesus, who’s parents were forced to flee with him to Egypt from the wrath of a wicked ruler and then returned to Israel. He, like Israel, was baptized in the river (I Corinthians 10:2) and driven into the wilderness to be tested - not for forty years, but for forty days. The deliverance and testing of Israel prefigured the Christ who was to come and prevail over sin and Satan where Israel failed. “To obey is better than sacrifice” (I Samuel 15:22) and finally an obedient Israelite has come, a true law-keeper! There is no fault to be found in him, he has come to fulfill the law (Matthew 5:17). He has come to fulfill the words of Jeremiah:

    “Behold the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will raise up for David a     righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice     and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell     securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The LORD is our     righteousness.’”(Jeremiah 23:5-6).

    Jesus is the hero who emerges onto the scene. He is to be crowned king of Israel and establish the kingdom of God on the earth. But wait; if this is so then why is he crowned with thorns and suspended on a Roman torture stake to die? The Messiah wins, he is to rule forever. He cannot die, especially not in this way for the one hung on a tree is cursed by God. What a dilemma! A cursed Christ? No, this cannot be. The Messiah is to be blessed by God not cursed, and furthermore this Jesus has earned the full blessing of God as an obedient man born under the law. It is no wonder that the apostle Paul called the message of Jesus a stumbling block to the Jew and foolishness to the Greek. Christ’s crucifixion proved that he was accursed by God. The Scripture is clear. How can anyone believe or preach a cursed Messiah? This was truly a scandalous message to the ears of the first century Jew. It was a foolish message to the first century Greek. One of the earliest known pictorial representations of Christianity is a graffito drawing on a wall in Rome of a human figure hanging on a cross with the head of a donkey. Another male figure is also in the picture with one hand raised toward the figure on the cross. The inscription reads Aleximenos worships his god. To the world, the cross is utter folly. Deity would never stoop to the level of humanity to get its hands dirty, much less to hang on a cross. To worship someone who died on a cross, that instrument of death reserved for the dregs of society, was the equivalent of worshiping a jackass. The world cannot comprehend a God who comes in weakness. We can understand to a degree the difficulty of preaching this message for the apostles of Jesus Christ. Who would believe the scandal and folly of such a message? And yet, this message is the power of God to deliver and save (Romans 1:16).

    So which is it, did Jesus merit the promised blessing by fulfilling the righteous standard or was he cursed by God on the cross? The answer is Yes. Both are true. The hanging of Christ on the tree proved that he was indeed cursed by God. The one Israelite to whom was due blessing received the curse. He was the righteous man of the first Psalm. It was all his to claim that it go well with him, that he be overtaken by covenantal blessings, that he be crowned with a diadem, and be raised on the throne of David to reign forever. This is what Israel expected their Messiah to do. The government was to be upon his shoulder, the enemies of God’s people were to be placed under his feet. He was to throw off the oppression of the Roman empire. Instead he ascends a bloody throne with a crown of thorns driven into his skull and nails piercing his hands and feet. Behold the accursed man on the wretched tree! But oh the wisdom, beauty, and power of that tree when we see the design of it all! “The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (I Tim. 1:15). “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13). What causes us to go from confusion to awe and what causes the cross to become beautiful in our eyes is to understand that Christ did not become a curse for his own sake but for ours. We were the accursed underneath the wrath of God. It was in our place that he stood condemned. It was because of us that he became as a detestable thing in the sight of the Father. The curse that we were under, the wrath that we deserved fell upon the Blessed One. When Jesus, the great hero of the redemptive drama finally arrives he should hear the great benediction pronounced upon him, instead he receives the ultimate anathema.

Reversing the Great Benediction

Israel’s great hope was the presence of God with his people. He was to be their God, they were to be his people and Yahweh, the Lord, was to dwell with them. His presence was in the tabernacle and in the temple prefiguring the day when God would tabernacle among them in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14). As R.C. Sproul has so helpfully pointed out in his book The Truth of the Cross, the hope of the Israelite was ultimately to see God. This is reflected in Moses’ request to the Lord “Please, show me your glory” (Exodus 33:18) and in the great Aaronic blessing of Numbers chapter six.

“The LORD bless you and keep you;
the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up his countenance upon you upon you and give you peace” (Numbers 6:24:26).

This is what Jesus deserved to hear, not only because the Father is gracious as he was to pronounce this upon his people, but because Jesus merited this blessing. He was the great law keeper. He upheld the glory of the Father on the earth, loving the Father with all that was within him and loving his neighbor as his own self. He was zealous for the house of God, chasing the money changers out of the temple and overthrowing their tables. He spoke the words of God, himself being the eternal word of God imaging forth the Father to the people. But for Jesus being suspended between heaven and earth on the cross, the opposite of this benediction was true. Instead, as Sproul would say, Jesus heard,

“The LORD curse you and forsake you;
the LORD cause darkness to come upon you and pour his wrath upon you;
the LORD turn his back on you and give you hell.”

On the cross the Blessed Son of the Father was cursed. He who had enjoyed fellowship with the Father for eternity, who was face to face with God (John 1:1) in the beginning, cried “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” His being forsaken was confirmed by silence from Heaven. On the cross Jesus was cursed. He did not hear “God bless you” but rather “God damn you.” No worse words can be uttered or heard than these and on the cross they were directed toward Jesus on our behalf in order that we might be blessed. In his body he absorbed the full fury of God’s wrath toward us because of our sin, bearing our sins in his own body on the tree. Speaking of the coming Christ who would suffer before his reign for sins of his people, the prophet Isaiah said “he was crushed for our iniquities…it was the will of the LORD to crush him” (Isaiah 53:5,10). C.J. Mahaney is right to say that reading John 3:16 with Isaiah 53 in mind causes us to say “For God so loved the world that he crushed his only son.” The cross does not demonstrate our worth, rather it demonstrates our depravity that such a cost was demanded for our reconciliation. It cost the Son of God his life for us to be blessed. Christ became our guilt offering to free us from guilt. He became a curse for us, redeeming us from the curse of the law, “so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.” Here we find how the great dilemma is solved. How could God promise to bless a people who proved to be under his curse? Is it by works, by keeping his holy law? Yes indeed, but not by our own law keeping, it is by Christ’s own law keeping. He fulfilled the law, merited the blessing, and bore the law’s curse in our behalf that the blessing might come upon us! The sinless son of God became sin for the sinful sons of men. There is nothing left for us to do but to cling to Christ in faith for he has accomplished all with his definitive cry “It is finished” (John 19:30). We enter the redemptive drama by faith in Jesus Christ and by faith his righteousness is imputed to us because on the cross our sin was imputed to him. He was not a sinner but was declared to be one on the cross as he suffered the curse. We are by no means righteous but are accounted so in the Father’s sight because of the active and passive obedience of Christ in his life and death. This is the gospel in its simplest form that Jesus Christ died in our place to bring us to the Father. God is now both just and the justifier of the one who trusts in Jesus. He is just in upholding his righteous demand by punishing sin in Jesus Christ and he is the justifier of those who rest in him by faith as he declares them righteous for Jesus’ sake.

I hear the Savior say, ‘Thy strength indeed is small,
child of weakness watch and pray, find in me thine all in all.’

Lord, nothing good have I whereby thy grace to claim,
I’ll wash my garments white in the blood of Calvary’s Lamb.
Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe,
sin had left a crimson stain, he washed it white as snow.

A necessary question arises at this point: how can we be sure what the New Testament says of Christ’s death is true? How do we know he wasn’t a lunatic who got himself crucified and proved to be a blasphemer under God’s curse for his own transgression by being hung on the tree? The answer is found in his empty tomb. Of course, not everyone believed that Jesus had risen from the dead but there was one thing the Jewish and Roman, Christian and non Christian historians agreed on: there was a controversy over an empty tomb and the missing body of Jesus. His resurrection is the vindication of his death. It demonstrates God’s approval of his life and offering of himself on the cross “for you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption” (Psalm 16:10). Christ “was declared to be the Son of God in power…by his resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:4). He goes before his people assuring them of their bodily resurrection by virtue of his own.

Introduction to the Life and Thought of Thomas Aquinas

2010-08-06T06:26:00.000-04:00

From Carl Trueman's post at Ref21. Original Link

Having just agreed to write a short introductory text on the life and thought of Thomas Aquinas for a Protestant audience, I have spent the last few days pulling various primary and secondary texts off my shelves to refresh my memory of the great man. I used to teach an Honours course on his life and thought many years ago at the University of Nottingham, and found him both a fascinating and stimulating thinker.

Returning to him so many years on, I am struck again at what a theological resource he is, and that for a variety of reasons:

1. His development of the topical ordering of theology represents a definite advance on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and, in many ways, set the gold standard for subsequent Western systematic theologies.

2. While his two Summae are strongly theological/philosophical, they are underpinned both by biblical exegesis and by a thorough grounding in the ecumenical creeds. Indeed, I believe Thomas was the first Western theologian of the Middle Ages to make extensive use of the canons of the ecumenical councils; and, as a medieval teacher, he had to exegete, teach, and preach his way through more scripture before he was deemed qualified as a teacher than any Protestant minister of whom I am aware (including myself), despite the fact that we are the ones who are supposedly committed to scripture alone and the Bible's centrality to life and faith.

3. His constructive theological work (particularly Summa Theologiae Part One) lays the groundwork for much of what is later incorporated into Reformed understandings of God. This is also done with a fine pastoral touch (as in his handling of the question, `If God knows the future, why should we pray?')

4. As a theologian operating at a time of significant philosophical upheaval (the arrival in the Latin West of Aristotle's metaphysical treatises) and theological/cultural challenge (the influence of Islamic culture in the south of Spain and Islamic science and philosophy everywhere -- even on Aquinas's own back doorstep in Paris), he is a great example of a great mind wrestling with great issues. Given the philosophical disturbances of our own times, and, indeed, the pressing importance of both cultural and intellectual engagement with Islam, there is surely something to be learned from seeing how Thomas did it all those years ago.

Of course, there are other areas where Protestants will have fundamental disagreements -- authority, sacraments, justification, Mary, ecclesiology -- but this should not blind us to his strengths; nor should we ignore these parts of his work. Reading a great theologian is always productive, and often no more so than at those points of disagreement where our own thinking is made necessarily sharper and clearer.

Blessed by God (Part 4): Do This and Live

2010-08-06T05:56:00.000-04:00

    For some time now I have enjoyed watching ESPN’s College Gameday, a Saturday television broadcast in the fall which analyzes the day’s upcoming college football games. One of the analysts has a well known phrase for contesting points made by his colleagues: “Not so fast, my friend,” Lee Corso says. It is almost as if we hear these words from Scripture when we come to Mount Sinai. Abraham is justified freely by grace alone through faith alone, he and his descendants receive incredible promises from God, but as his children cross the Red Sea and come to Mount Sinai they are told in effect to “Do this and live” as they are given the Decalogue. Which is it, the simple promise that Abraham received or the command? What brings life, law or gospel? In the great plot of the redemptive drama we encounter twists and turns even early on in the story. The fall comes quickly, the earth is destroyed save eight souls and enough animals to replenish the earth, Abraham is told to slaughter his son, Jacob steals the birthright, Levi and Simeon enter Shechem with swords to kill all the males of the city, and finally Joseph and eventually all of Jacob’s family find themselves in Egypt where following generations would become slaves under Pharaoh. But this story is about redemption, and the Lord redeems his people from Egypt, judging the nation and its gods, and ultimately drowning Pharaoh in the water ordeal. Israel was brought out with a mighty hand . “Come and see what God has done: he is awesome in his deeds toward the children of man. He turned the sea into dry land; they passed through the river on foot” (Psalm 66:5-6a). We expect them to march right in to the land promised to them through Abraham but we find them camping at the foot of Sinai to receive the law of God.

    Earlier we saw the Lord enter into a covenant with Abraham as the animal carcasses were severed and the presence of God passed between the halves. Archaeological discoveries have shown us the similarities in ancient eastern treaties and the covenant documents of the Old Testament. God is the great king, the suzerain Lord, and Israel is the vassal, the lesser king. Typically a prologue was given with the greater king’s names and titles as well as his acts toward the lesser people. The stipulations were laid out to the people as well as the consequential blessings or curses for obedience or rebellion to the covenant. We see these elements particularly in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In the preface to the ten commandments God proclaims who he is and what he has done; he is the Lord, the God of Heaven who has redeemed Israel from the land of Egypt. The laws of the covenant are given in Exodus and again in Deuteronomy and then the blessings and curses are proclaimed to the covenant people. If the people are obedient to the laws of the Great King then they will receive blessing, but if they are disobedient they will be cursed. The people heard the word of God through Moses “and all the people answered with one voice and said, ‘All the words that the Lord has spoken we will do’”(Exodus 24:3, 7). Moses then threw the blood of the covenant on the people who had declared their covenant vows. One cannot help but the notice the stark contrast between God’s covenant with Abraham and his covenant with the nation of Israel. In the Abrahamic covenant the Lord of the covenant says “All this I will do” as he passed between the animal pieces, now the roles are reversed as Abraham’s children are delivered from Egypt and the blood is one their hands, so to speak. Yahweh makes promises to them but these promises are conditioned upon the obedience of the people.

The Children of Promise Cursed?

    I have always been fond of the story of Balaam, the pagan prophet hired by the king of Moab to curse Israel in the wilderness. You may remember Balaam as the man who was rebuked by his own donkey (Numbers 22). Balaam’s renown was known to Balak king of Moab who said, “I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed” (Numbers 22:6). As much as Balaam tried he could not curse Israel. Instead, Balaam heard the word of God saying, “You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed” (Number 22:12). The extent of Balaam’s knowledge of the true God is unknown to us and though the Lord used Balaam to confirm his promises to Israel and to speak his word, Balaam stands through time as an example of a false prophet (2 Peter 2:15; Jude 11). Four oracles Balaam spoke from different locations with animal sacrifices either for pagan religious purposes or for the use of divination, but four times he failed in cursing the people. “How can I curse whom God has not cursed?” Balaam asked in his first oracle. He said later “he [God] has blessed, and I cannot revoke it….The Lord their God is with them….How lovely are your tents, O Jacob, your encampments, O Israel!…” (Numbers 23:20-21; 24:5). God’s blessing of this people could be traced back to his promise to Abraham “Blessed are those who bless you, and cursed are those who curse you” (Numbers 24:9). Balaam spoke of Israel as an exalted kingdom (Numbers 24:7) with a mighty king who would rise and “crush the forehead of Moab” (Numbers 24:17), a prophecy fulfilled in David and ultimately in David’s greater son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Israel could not be cursed for if God blesses his people, no curse against them can stand.(1) What is so shocking to read as the Old Testament is unfolded is that Israel does find itself under a curse; not because of a pagan prophet’s incantation, but because the people failed in their covenant obligations to their Great King. When Adam failed to obey God, he and Eve were exiled from the garden. Soon enough Israel would be in exile as well, taken captive by the nations around them. The covenant curses would eventually come upon the holy nation. Obedience for Israel would mean that they would be overtaken by covenant blessings (Deuteronomy 28:2), but failure to obey would bring the opposite. They would be overtaken by the curse.

    Upon entering the promised land of Canaan, Israel’s new leader Joshua was given a command from the Lord through his predecessor Moses regarding the blessings and curses of the covenant (Deuteronomy 27:9-26). When the people crossed the Jordan River, which marked the border, half of the tribes were to stand on Mount Gerizim and half were to stand on Mount Ebal. The book of the covenant was to be read in the hearing of the people, all of the law with the blessings and curses. Those on Mount Gerizim stood to bless the people for their obedience while those on Mount Ebal stood to curse them for their disobedience. As Moses gives instruction to Joshua regarding the curses for specific acts of disobedience, we find that many of these acts are sins committed in secret. A number of these deeds could be acted out away from the public eye, some of which may never have the possibility of appearing before a human court. F.F. Bruce writes, “Therefore no specific penalty is prescribed for each offence mentioned, but Yahweh is called upon in effect to execute his curse on the wrongdoer.”(2) We see this play out as the people enter the land under Joshua when Achan and his family are executed for his secret sin revealed to Joshua by the Lord (Joshua 7). “Be sure,” the Lord says, “your sin will find you out” (Numbers 32:23). Secret sins are brought to the light in God’s presence (Psalm 90:8), and on the last day the secrets of men will be judged (Romans 2:16) for “no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13). The Scriptures have a way of laying us open, of cutting us deep within like a two-edged sword, allowing us to see what lies in our hearts, to see what God sees. King David said of the Lord, “You desire truth in the inward parts” (Psalm 51:6 NKJV). Only those with clean hands and a pure heart may stand before the Lord. When Jesus begins his teaching ministry, he confirms the words of the law to us, not making the commandment lighter I might add, but bringing it into full scope. Man is an adulterer if he has looked upon a woman with lust, he is a murderer if he has hated another. The commandment is meant to be obeyed in full with heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30). Jesus does not give us a lighter version of the law to keep, he drops the full weight of the commandment on our consciences.

    Right about now is the time when we normally rise up against the demands of God. This seems so unfair to the people that they must keep every jot and tittle of the law. We want to be freed from this burden of law, or so we think. The truth is that we are all wired for law keeping. “All the words that the Lord has spoken we will do,” the people said. Typically, we will do one of two things: either we will look to someone we consider greater than ourselves, perhaps God or a successful leader, and make an attempt to keep their law, or we will look within to our own standards and seek to live up to our own moral code, which may or may not be very high at all. Humans (especially Americans who pull themselves up by their own bootstraps) love to hear the words “do this and live” whether it is a command to keep in order to inherit eternal life or seven steps to debt relief, a fulfilled marriage, or just becoming a better person. If you give me a list of to-do’s to check off in order to get what I desperately want or think I need, I will take it every time. We are wired that way, for obedience to some standard - though we may have created our own, and this is because we are made in the image a holy God who gave us the commandment in the beginning to fulfill - a commandment that we failed to obey. Many of us live with a low grade guilt that we have grown accustomed to. It is always there. We know we have failed to live up to God’s standard, we know this partly because we have failed to live up to our own. We sense God’s curse in our consciences, for the law is written there (Romans 2:15) and it says “Cursed by anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them” (Deuteronomy 27:26). The law of God reveals the requirement of God for perfect obedience from those made in his image. The law is an expression of the will of God, the commandment is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and yet it brings a curse. However the problem does not lie with the law itself, the problem is in the human heart which rebels against the holy law of God. The problem is in our inability to keep it. Israel broke the covenant and the land vomited them out as the Lord had said. Prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah came as covenant attorneys prosecuting Yahweh’s case against the people for their unfaithfulness announcing to them imminent exile.

The Great Dilemma

    What irony we find in the redemptive story that Balaam and Israel’s enemies could not curse this “blessed” people but that they come underneath the curse of the very one who had blessed them! Can a blessed people be cursed? Balaam said no. If they are indeed cursed, could they ever be blessed? This is the great dilemma of the Old Testament, and a manifold dilemma it is. How can God bless the people when they are under his curse? How can God curse those whom he has blessed? This all sounds much more complicated than the promise that first came to Abraham. Has God gone back on his promise, did he fail to give to Abraham the fine print of the deal received by the following generations? The whole earth and its inhabitants lie under the curse of God because of man’s fall in the garden (Isaiah 24:5-6), but Israel was supposed to be different. They were those redeemed by the strong hand of the Lord. They have been given incredible promises by the Lord that he would dwell with them, be their God, and that they would be his people. Will they go the way of all mankind?

    Recently, my oldest son (who is still very young) brought to me a metal slinky that had been twisted and turned every way imaginable. Of course, he wanted me to untangle the mess, but to make matters worse a jump rope was intertwined through the metal loops. It is hard to believe all of this could happen at the bottom of a toy box, but few things surprise me with a house full of rowdy boys. The point is that his request of me was nearly impossible, so bad that I told him we would purchase another slinky - one that would not find its way in with all of the other toys. Understanding how God could bless and curse these people in making unconditional promises to them and simultaneously requiring them to keep his commands, seems to be much more complicated than untangling a slinky. What we should remember as the covenants with Noah, Abraham, Israel, and David are unfolded is that the Bible is a progressive revelation. We are made to understand more as the story moves forward. God made his promise to Abraham to bless him and his seed, but the covenant obligations and sanctions given to his children revealed the great cost that would come for this promised blessing.

1. http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/loveofgod/2010/05/14/numbers-23-psalms-64-65-isaiah-13-1-peter-1/
2. Bruce, F.F. New International Greek Testament Commentary on Galatians. Eerdmans. 1982. P 158.

Blessed by God (Part 3): Father Abraham Has Many Sons

2010-08-05T05:53:00.000-04:00

As a child I remember singing a song with the other children in the church that said “Father Abraham had many sons, many sons had Father Abraham, I am one of them, and so are you…” - and then the song got rather silly. Not only do I remember singing the song, I also remember not having a clue who this Father Abraham was. As I grew older and became more acquainted with this man of faith I found that there are many people in the world who trace their ancestry to Abraham. Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike claim that their faiths descended from this patriarch. Why Abraham, what is so special about him? As we open the Scriptures we find that Abraham is the man most identified with God’s blessing. His lineage is traced for us back through Noah to Seth, the one through whom God would send the serpent-crusher. God comes to Abraham in sovereign grace, calling him out from his pagan home to enter a land which will be given to his descendents after him. God’s promise to Abraham is to bless him, to make his name great, to make of him a great nation, and that through him all peoples will be blessed (Genesis 12:1-3). This is a unilateral covenant, God promises to do everything without giving any requirements to Abraham. This covenant will be completely gracious and from this point on in redemptive history being blessed is identified with being in union with Abraham, the man God has promised to bless. It is also through Abraham that we understand what it truly means for one to be blessed by God.

Blessing Defined

    In the beginning I posed the question what does it mean to be blessed? We all have our own understanding even if we cannot quite articulate it. It is possible to be deceived, to think we are blessed and find ourselves to be under the curse of God and not blessed at all. We must discern the difference between receiving blessings and being blessed, because there is a difference. Many receive blessings in life from the hand of a benevolent Creator in his common grace while it cannot be said of them biblically that they are blessed. Even those who will suffer God’s curse receive blessings in their earthly life. God sends his sunshine and rain on all the just and unjust under heaven. We may tend to think that if our needs are met and if we find fulfillment in having these needs met we are indeed blessed. The problem is that we are seeking answers to either what we feel we need or what the world tells us we need without realizing our true need. We are looking for answers but that isn’t the problem; what is wrong is that we often ask the wrong questions. God tells us of our most pressing need; it is to be made right with him. We have marred the image of God that we have been made in. We have set ourselves against the Father of Lights and have joined the kingdom of darkness. Our greatest need has to do with him. We, as enemies, need to be reconciled to our Creator.

    Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk in the medieval Church, struggled desperately with this question. He was tormented day and night with this heavy burden. How could he, a sinner, be just in the sight of God. The Church’s system of merit taught him that what was required was that he did the best he could. Of course, he could not attain to perfect righteousness but God would sort of grade on a curve if he tried hard enough. Luther was not helped by this doctrine of congruent(1) merit. He always questioned whether or not he actually did his best. He attempted to separate himself from the world and to God in solitude but found that he brought his greatest enemy with him, namely himself. He was plagued by the age old question “How then can man be in the right before God?” (Job 25:4). This is what it would mean for man to be truly blessed for this is his greatest need, justification in the sight of God. This is exactly why the apostle Paul considers Abraham to be blessed as he applies Psalm 32 to the father of the faithful: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin” (Romans 4:7-8). Here we find the biblical definition of what it is to be blessed by God. Stated negatively it is to have our sins not be counted to us, to have our lawless deeds forgiven. Stated positively, it is to be as Abraham, counted as righteous (Romans 4:3).

    Why is this man’s greatest need? Is it so that he will escape the wrath to come and live eternally? Of course this is desirable, but the answer is no. Justification does equal blessing, but not because it is the end but the means to the greater and ultimate end. Man was not made to make much of man and enjoy himself forever free from conscious torment, man was made to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. Justification is a means to that end. Man was created with the goal of life upon the condition of his obedience. It is not that the tree of life was the ultimate goal, but it was the goal because life meant life with God forever. God, not a tree, was to be man’s aim and in God’s purpose to redeem man, God again, not escaping punishment, is the goal. When God comes to make his covenant with Abraham he says “I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward” (Genesis 15:1 KJV). In the words of the Puritan Thomas Watson “God is not only the rewarder of his people, he is their reward.” Justification equals blessing because it brings us to the greatest treasure, the high king of heaven himself. “Whom have I in heaven but you? And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you” (Psalm 73:25).

Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing

God is the source and goal of blessing “For from him and through him and to him are all things” (Romans 11:36). We can easily understand that man receives blessing from God alone, what may seem strange to us is that the Scriptures speak of God himself as being blessed. It is appropriate for the Church to sing Praise God from whom all blessings flow because God is the fountainhead of all good. Being self-existent, self-sufficient, and having all perfections in himself, the eternal God had no need to be met by making his creatures. Rather, from all eternity God is situated as the Blessed One and is the spring that overflows into his vast creation looking upon it at the end of his work and calling all very good (Genesis 1:31). Therefore we worship the Blessed who blesses by ascribing to him blessing. “Blessed be God…who has blessed us” (Ephesians 1:3). “The Creator is blessed forever” (Romans 1:25). The redeemed sing in heaven “Blessing and glory and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever. Amen!” (Revelation 7:12). These are all attributes that God possesses and cannot be given to him by his creatures, yet what he is intrinsically is ascribed to him in praise. There are two words in the New Testament used for blessing. One, eulogia (from where we receive our word eulogy), is only used in reference to God himself. It means good or to speak well of, having the idea of praise and thanksgiving. “There is only one who is good” (Matthew 19:17) and therefore there is only one from whom all blessings can flow. God is good, forever blessed and he loves to bestow blessing and good upon his creatures as he governs and cares for his creation. Truly, he is the fountain of living waters (Jeremiah 2:13) where his people may drink and be forever satisfied.

A Smoking Pot and a Flaming Torch

    God’s covenant with Abraham included a strange ceremony in which Abraham is commanded to bring animals, cut them in half, and lay them down beside each other. At evening, when the sun was going down, a deep sleep and a dreadful great darkness fell upon Abraham (at this time called Abram). The Lord spoke his promise to Abraham that his seed would inherit the land God had promised to him but would first be afflicted in a land that was not their own (Egypt). When it was dark a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch representing the presence of God passed between the animal halves. “On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram” (Genesis 15:18).

    Archaeological discoveries have given us insight on strange ceremonies such as these. It was common in the ancient Near East for covenants to be made between greater kings and lesser kings. When a great king would rescue a lesser king and his people, a treaty would be made in which certain promises were given mutually or by the greater king to the lesser king and his people. The great king would promise protection to the lesser and his subjects upon the condition of certain sanctions. This covenant was sealed by the severing of animals and passing between the halves. In some cases the suzerain (greater) king would pass between the pieces arm in arm with the vassal (lesser) king, at other times only the lesser king would pass through as a representative for all of his people. By passing through the halves one was vowing that he would suffer the same fate as the animals at his feet if he and his people were to break this covenant.

    In Abraham’s case, the vassal did not pass between the halves at all. It was the presence of God in the smoking fire pot and the flaming torch that passed through. The upholding of this covenant did not depend upon Abraham. This covenant was a royal grant from the Great King. God would see to it that the promises were upheld. He had promised to bless Abraham and in essence made a vow to also bear the curses of the covenant. Little did Abraham know the cost the Lord of the covenant would pay in order to bless him.

The Eschatological Abraham

It is true that Father Abraham has many sons, but there are many who claim him as father who are not his children. Muslims claim Abraham through Mohammed, a descendant of Abraham’s son Ishmael. The Jewish people trace their lineage to Abraham through the promised son Isaac. In Jesus’ day the boast of the religious leaders was that they were Abraham’s offspring. According to the apostle, both groups are making the same claim to have physically descended from Abraham (Galatians 4:21-25), while the true children of Abraham are not necessarily his physical descendents but those who like Abraham have been counted righteous through believing the promise of God. These are the blessed. Abraham simply believed the promise God made to him “and he counted it to him as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6). Our justification is not based on our performance or any works that we have wrought, for we are not the ones who passed through the halves. We are full of sin and remain unrighteous in ourselves but we are counted as righteous when we believe the gospel just as Abraham who had the gospel preached to him (Galatians 3:8). This really sounds too good to be true. We read of God’s people raising or purchasing animals to bring as a sacrifice to have their throat slit for the forgiveness of sins and all we have to do is hear and embrace the promise of God given to us through a sacrifice that he has provided for us in his Son Jesus Christ? Yes, for it is “those of faith who are the sons of Abraham” (Galatians 3:7).

Abraham is the man blessed by God. We need to be his sons to receive the covenant promise; the promise that was typified in a plot of land in Palestine given to his physical descendents but ultimately fulfilled in justification (Gal. 3:8), the giving of the Holy Spirit (Gal. 3:14), and the New Jerusalem (Gal. 3:26). Those who are Abraham’s seed are blessed. To be blessed by God, one must be in union with Abraham for it is through Abraham and in Abraham that we receive these promises for “the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring” (Galatians 3:16a). These covenant promises find their fulfillment in Abraham’s son; not Ishmael, not Isaac, but Christ (Galatians 3:16b). Therefore our union with Abraham means nothing if it does not mean union with Jesus Christ for it is “in Christ Jesus that the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles” (Galatians 3:14). Christ is the eschatological Abraham in whom we receive true blessing through union with him.

_________________

1. The idea of merit was elaborately developed by the medieval scholastics. Condign merit (meritum de condigno) was described as merit awarded because it was fully deserved. Congruent merit (meritum de congruo) was described as half-merit or merit awarded by divine generosity in view of imperfect human works. Condign merit, Thomas Aquinas taught, can only be awarded in recognition of the work of the Holy Spirit in the individual. Congruent merit is awarded when the individual does what he or she is able to do (facere quod in se est) and God responds with the gift of needed merit. This allowed later scholastic theologians to argue that salvation requires an initial first act on the part of the believer which is then completed by the gift of merit granted through God's grace. In this scheme salvation is awarded in view of an adequate accumulation of merit.
http://demo.lutherproductions.com/historytutor/basic/medieval/genknow/merit.htm

Blessed by God (Part 2): Polarizing Themes in Scripture: from Adam to Abraham

2010-08-04T20:57:00.000-04:00

     Every good story has certain elements, which may include the promise of hope and the threat of evil as well as the protagonist and the antagonist who are striving against one another to ensure their own desired outcome of the story. Typically, stories are told in the order of creation, fall, redemption, and restoration or consummation. The story given to us in Scripture is no different. The old and new testaments of the Bible together tell one story - the greatest story ever told. It is the drama of redemption; complete with battles, romance, and a longed for hero. It is the true pattern of which all other stories follow. This is precisely why man can write excellent novels with such creativity or produce films with amazing plotlines, it is because he was made in the image of God who is the archetypal story writer. William Shakespeare’s famous words are right: “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” This is exactly who we are, players in what John Calvin called God’s “beauteous theatre” as the story of redemption is told. It is God’s story, but we all have a part to play. And in the beginning the stage was set, a beautiful world made for the crown of God’s creation to inhabit. This is where the drama will unfold.

   The God revealed to us in the Scriptures is different than the pagan deities. He is involved in the affairs of his creation, he works and appears to “get his hands dirty” as he makes man from the dust of the ground. Yet there remains a great distance between the Creator and the creature, so God condescends to man to communicate himself in ways that man can understand. We find that this story is structured by a series of covenants in the Scriptures, complete with covenant sanctions promising blessing as the sanctions are fulfilled and curses if they are not. The Westminster Confession of Faith states “The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of him, as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant” (WCF 7.1). And so we see God enter into a covenant with his people; first with Adam, then Noah, Abraham, Moses and the nation of Israel, King David, until these covenants and the overall story find fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. God’s covenant defines his terms. We as creatures cannot approach God in any way we please based on our intuition or presupposed notions, we must come to him on his terms, in what he has revealed covenantally.

   The covenant sanctions in the Bible present to us the polarizing themes of blessing and cursing. If the demands of the covenant are met by God’s covenant people they will receive the reward of blessing but if they are not fulfilled God’s curse is just as sure. The tragic part of the redemptive narrative is that God’s people are always failing to fulfill their end of the covenant relationship like an unfaithful bride who is constantly breaking her marriage vows. Though we find the people to be utter failures and unfaithful in every way, we find the covenant God to be incredibly faithful and relentless in his pursuit of his rebel bride.

One day in Paradise

   “And God blessed them” (Genesis 1:22, 28). In Genesis one we have the first occurrence of God blessing his people. Our first parents, Adam and Eve, being made in the image of God, were blessed in the garden of Eden prepared by God for them. They were blessed to “be fruitful and multiply,” to fill the earth, subdue it, and have dominion over all of creation. Adam was to work in the garden and he was to keep it. Adam was made to be a king of the earth under the rule of the Almighty, having dominion over all of what God had made. However, Adam’s rule was not ultimate. One tree was placed in the midst of the garden, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the only tree forbidden to the Adam. One prohibition was given to the man God had made, and yet the man failed miserably. Later on in the unfolding of the biblical drama, the prophet Hosea compares the nation of Israel with the Adam, “like Adam they transgressed the covenant” (Hosea 6:7). The federal head of the human race failed in what God had given him to do. He was to dress and keep the garden yet he allowed an intruder to come in and then transgressed the command of God by eating the fruit of the forbidden tree. Adam broke the covenant and failed to obtain its hope and receive the blessing of the tree of life for himself, his wife, and all his posterity. Instead, as the head of our race he has plunged all of mankind into a miserable state where we receive the curse of God - alienation from him and the death of our bodies and souls. In Adam all are born in sin and all die. Like our first father, we are covenant breakers who have joined forces with the enemy. We, whose hands should be lifted in praise to the God who breathed into our nostrils the breath of life have instead used them to draw a rebel sword against our great King. We have made ourselves enemies of the righteous Judge and have incurred his curse and so we find this to be true for all men for death has passed upon all men.

   The Scriptures do not only present to us a God who is just but also a God who is gracious. In the midst of pronouncing his curse upon the creation because of man’s sin, good news is given from the mouth of the covenant Lord. Another will come, one who will be born of woman and will succeed where Adam failed. The seed of woman, though his heel will be bruised by the serpent, the same heel will crush the serpent’s head (Genesis 3:15). Thus God enters into another covenant with man, a covenant of a different sort. The first covenant which Adam broke was based upon the man’s obedience; if man will be saved from the curse the covenant must be based upon God’s grace in sending the promised Redeemer to destroy the serpent and win back what man has lost and the life that he failed to attain. What we see from this point forward in the unfolding drama is that though the masses lie under the curse and wrath of God, there is a chosen remnant of humanity who are pursued by God himself that he may bless them, rescue them from his own curse, and use them to point to and ultimately bring the promised Savior into the world. Little boys love the stories of make believe princes who defeat dragons at the point of a sword and undo curses to deliver the lovely damsel while little girls love the thought of the hero who comes to her rescue. Curses aren’t reserved for fairy tails however, and neither are heroes. The biblical narrative presents humanity under the real-life curse of death and a true hero who enters as the denouement(1) of the redemptive drama, appearing in order to bless those he rescues and deliver them from the dreaded curse.

Continuing motifs

   The polarizing themes of blessing and curse are continued throughout the Bible. Man has fallen from his created state therefore all are now conceived in sin and born under the curse of God. Death was sure to come for Adam and tragically the first human death Adam knew was not his own. Adam’s son Cain slew his brother Abel and was banished from his original family. Cain (having a curse placed upon him) and his descendants prove to be the seed of the serpent at enmity with God and his people. But another son was born to Eve, Seth, and it is through this son that we trace God’s redemptive purposes all the way to a greater son, Jesus Christ. The two lines are clearly drawn in the opening pages of Scripture, both are from Adam, both deserve the curse of God, but one is shown grace. It is through this line that we are introduced to Noah.

   Among the multitude of sinful men, “Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord” (Genesis 6:8). Noah and his sons, continuing the line from Seth, were safely brought into the ark and rescued from the great deluge. The men of the earth were drowned under God‘s curse (Genesis 8:21) but “God blessed Noah and his sons” (Genesis 9:1) having entered into covenant with them. Noah’s salvation from the fury of God’s wrath was all of grace. Noah is called righteous but his righteousness is not inherent, he proved to be a sinner soon enough (Genesis 9:20-29), and he died as all sinners do. Noah was in the line of the coming Redeemer and for a time he provided rest for his people, but it did not last “for the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Soon we find mankind again at enmity with God, attempting to make a great name and build a tower to Heaven.

   Tracing Noah’s seed we are introduced to Abraham, a pivotal character in the story and one on whom God bestows his sovereign grace for no apparent reason found outside of God himself. The drama continues and so do the themes of blessing and cursing but now we find that God’s purpose to bless from this point forward finds its focus on Abraham the Hebrew and his offspring. Abraham receives the promise to be blessed by God and to be a channel through which blessing will flow to all peoples. Those who bless Abraham will be blessed and those who curse him will be cursed. God’s promise to bless Abraham will be the consideration of the following chapter.

1. John Piper’s title for his message at the 2009 Desiring God National Conference “Jesus Christ as Denouement in the Theater of God.” http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/ConferenceMessages/ByDate/2009/4232_Jesus_Christ_as_Denouement_in_the_Theater_of_God/

Blessed by God (Part 1)

2010-08-03T06:26:00.000-04:00

Are you blessed?

    Did you answer yes, no, or are you still waiting to see if this is somehow a trick question? If you answered yes, why did you do so? On what basis do you consider yourself to be blessed?

    Cultures from all times and places have had their own ideas of what it means for one to be blessed. The modern American culture is no different. We are familiar with the language of blessing and we speak of being blessed. For all of my life I have lived in the south and I have become accustomed to what may be Bible belt cultural phenomena. I am familiar with the song God Bless America the salesman telling me to have a blessed day as I leave the department store, hearing “bless you” after a sneeze and the beloved Billy Graham benediction “the Lord bless y’all real good.” We are familiar with blessing and we have our own idea of what it is. To be blessed in this culture is to live the American Dream of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

But what if you can’t?

    What if you have a debilitating illness, or your spouse dies? Can you be blessed then or does being blessed require that you have your health, family, friends, and that the bills are paid? We are prone to man centered thoughts so therefore our understanding of what it means to be blessed is often horizontal. Our blessedness is found in what we have (the people or possessions which surround us), or perhaps in something that is within us such as a sense of peace or well being. But what about on the vertical level? How do we relate our blessedness to God? Many will confess that God is the one who has blessed them but when an explanation is given of what it means for one to be blessed, quickly the attention is once again focused on the horizontal level. I am blessed by God because of what I have around me and/or within me.

    Of course, everything we consider to be a blessing is indeed given to us by the good hand of God. The New Testament author James declares that “every good gift and every perfect gift is from above” (James 1:18). God has made every good thing in creation and it is he who bestows good gifts upon his creatures. “The Lord is good to all, and his mercy is over all that he has made” (Psalm 145:9). He is the giver of all good things and if we are blessed then there is no doubt that we have been blessed by our benevolent Creator. But again, does being blessed by God consist in these gifts? Can we only consider ourselves to be blessed because of what we have? In order to determine how blessed we are should we take inventory of all that is good in our lives? Are we like young children (and some adults) peeking under the Christmas Tree looking to see how many gifts have our name on the tags? Does he who has the most toys win? If being blessed consists of what we have then are we to conclude that prosperity and comfort equal God’s blessing while poverty and suffering are equivalent to God’s displeasure or even his curse upon our lives? Am I more blessed than others because I do not have cancer or because my children weren’t born with Down Syndrome? The point I hope to make is that there is a great difference in receiving blessings and being blessed.

    Recently my family moved into a new home. My wife and I were sharing with one another what we particularly liked about the house that we had moved into. This home had many benefits (luxuries to us) that other places we had lived in did not. This was the first time in our seven years of marriage that we would have such things as attic storage space, walk in closets, and a garage with a paved driveway big enough for both of our vehicles. This house was newer, bigger, and nicer than anything we had lived in before. Our yard was big enough for our young boys to enjoy. They were excited that we could bring along their outdoor toys and other things that were previously kept by their kind grandparents due to a combination of theft and lack of storage . Though our home would still be considered small to many (a neighbor told me that he thought it to be a nice lil’ ol’ house in his own south Georgia vernacular), we thought it to be a significant improvement for us. We were so thankful for the way that God had blessed us. Blessed - yes, we were blessed by God to be living in our new home and we thanked God for his blessing on our family, especially when we remember that our living standard would be luxurious to most of the world’s population . We sort of felt like George Jefferson, we had “moved on up.” Our extended relatives affirmed that God had indeed blessed us when they saw the new place, some even told us of how proud they were of us. Though I think this was a way of saying that they were happy for us and I certainly do not think they meant proud in a sinful way, this comment made me wonder if they were proud or happy for us before. Could the same thing be said two years earlier when we left the comfort and security of everything we knew to plant a church? What about when we couldn’t quite get back on our feet after the move and lived with my grandmother for a few months? Could it be said that they were proud of us then?

    As we discussed these things I posed the question to my wife of whether we were more blessed now than we were before. Certainly what we had been given was a blessing but could we remain blessed if those things were stripped from us again? Could we still say that we were blessed by God? What if we did lose our new luxuries, would that be a sign that God had abandoned us and removed his blessing for whatever reason he saw fit? Did we need to take the proper precautions to maintain and retain our newfound blessing? Did we need to make sure and bless others that we might remain in God’s blessing as I heard one woman say? She told me she liked the best in life so she treated others well in order to be blessed. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” she said. Yes, these are the words of Jesus but it is no guarantee that you will receive the good that you give to others. That is not Christianity. That is charma, not grace. Grace pours itself out regardless of what it may gain from others. So were we blessed in our new home? Yes, we were. Were we more blessed than at other times in our lives? We both said no, but why not? We had everything we had before and now we had more, how could we not be more blessed?

    If God chooses to bless someone what will it look like? Is it always tangible, as in our possessions? Will the events of our lives begin to go the way we would like them to or the way we think they should? This is one of the dangers I fear may be an effect of some modern Christian films. Typically, the main character’s life turns around as they convert to or return to Christianity. Marriage, job, and life in general make a turn for the better and everyone lives happily ever after. I don’t believe Christian film makers want to present a false hope of reality for non Christians but when the outcome of these films is combined with the prosperity gospel propagated by numerous televangelists, authors, and mega church pastors (the belief that God’s blessing is equivalent to one’s best life now) it is inevitable. The truth is that God’s covenant people have often been a suffering people. When one realizes the redemption offered in Jesus Christ, one might be found in the wilderness of life as the people of Israel found themselves after their exodus from Egypt. God’s blessing does not always mean a new home, a finer automobile, a promotion at work, or a turbulent free marriage; when one comes to Christ it could result in the departure of a spouse or the loss of a job - which could actually result in the bank repossessing one’s car and/or home. We might also note that many of the most vile and cruel people of human history have also been very wealthy. Did they have the blessing of God? It is possible to have much, to have many “blessings” and yet incur God’s wrath, finding one’s self to be cursed and not blessed at all.

    If possessions are not the measuring stick of being blessed by God then in what way may we know that we are indeed blessed? Does it mean that certain fears are never realized? For instance, we have had many “scares” with our children where something seemed to be seriously wrong. For us, tests have always returned fine. This we call a blessing and rightly so, but are we more blessed than other relatives and friends because our tests came back fine while they were told that cancer was found in them or in their children? Will our being blessed be confirmed to us through one or more spiritual experiences, some sort of burning in the bosom or inherent sense of peace? Should we trust ourselves and what we feel or know to be true within? Do we know we are blessed because we just feel it or know it deep down in the heart? The problem with this subjective test of God’s blessing is the same as seeking to understand it through material possessions; what happens when my inward feelings change? What if the sense of peace I once had is no longer there? If I don’t feel blessed, does it mean that God has forsaken me and removed his hand from my life?

    Assessing one’s blessedness by these means focuses on what is in or around us and very little on God himself, whom we claim has blessed us. The Scriptures present a different paradigm of what it means to be truly blessed by God.

“Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven,
whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man against whom the Lord counts no iniquity,
and in whose spirit there is no deceit” (Psalm 32:1-2).

The Redeemer's Offices

2010-08-01T07:29:00.000-04:00

Q. 23. What offices doth Christ execute as our Redeemer?
A. Christ, as our Redeemer, executeth the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation.
Q. 24. How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?
A. Christ executeth the office of a prophet, in revealing to us, by his Word and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation.
Q. 25. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
A. Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, and reconcile us to God, and in making continual intercession for us.
Q. 26. How doth Christ execute the office of a king?
A. Christ executeth the office of a king, in subduing us to himself, in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies.

-Westminster Shorter Catechism

Is Joel Osteen a Legalist?

2010-07-31T22:04:00.000-04:00

Typically we think of legalists as rigid and strict, not with the easy going nature and southern charm of a Joel Osteen. However, I think those who have labeled his teaching as "law light" are correct. The law says "do this and live." Joel gives you practical steps to fulfillment and success. His message is that of good advice rather than good news. Fulfilling the requirements of "law light" will lead to a better you and your best life now (to make use of his own terms). Human beings are wired for law, just tell us what we need to do and we will perform if we believe it will be the answer for what we deem to be a great need. The problem here is two-fold. First, the gospel is totally different. It says that Christ has accomplished everything and that he did it in my behalf. Second, "law light" gives answers to the wrong questions. Our need is not to have a meaningful and fulfilled life, it is to be reconciled to our Creator.

Watch the video below with this in mind.

I have to admit that what he says about these animals seems to be good reason to stay away, but that is the point. His focus is completely off, he acts as though the dietary laws were merely given for health purposes. In Osteen's theology this is what truly matters, health wealth and prosperity. Legalism rules in religion without a gospel, no matter how "light" it may seem.

The Quest for Relevance

2010-07-30T06:18:00.000-04:00

From contextualization to strategic planning Christian denominations seem to be on a quest for relevance, which usually means becoming more palatable to those outside the church. I've often thought that those fringe religions outside of Christianity don't seem to be concerned with this. I was wrong. Currently, the Latter Day Saints are airing television commercials in nine U.S. media markets to show the public that mormons are "just like everyone else." Jacksonville happens to be one of those markets so I have seen many of these commercials. It just goes to show that everyone desires to be relevant. I wonder if the JWs will follow the trend?

Walking on the moon gives one the right to do this

2010-07-22T05:53:00.000-04:00

7 years ago today...(mushy stuff)

2010-07-20T00:01:00.000-04:00

I married my dream girl.

I couldn't have imagined on that day what would be in store for us.

Seven years later our family has grown with the addition of three little boys.

The Lord continues to be faithful with fresh mercies every morning.

Christen remains the apple of my eye.

I love you my love.

An Excellent Resource for Prayer

2010-07-01T05:07:00.000-04:00

Matthew Henry's Method for Prayer has been made available for free online by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. This is a great resource for learning to pray the Scriptures. One can read the book chronologically or browse the categories of Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, Intercession, The Lord's Prayer, etc. My favorite part of the project is the daily email I receive from the site. Here are a few examples.

Consider your Evil Sins in Light of the Corrections you have Received and the Vows you have Made

8.5
The greater afflictions I have been under for sin, the greater is the sin if I go on in it.

You have struck me down, but I have felt no anguish; I have refused to take correction and have made my face harder than rock, Jeremiah 5:3(ESV) and the rod has not driven the folly out of my heart. Proverbs 22:15(ESV)
You have disciplined me with the rod of men and with the stripes of the sons of men, 2 Samuel 7:14(ESV) yet I have not turned to him who struck me, nor have I inquired of the LORD of hosts. Isaiah 9:13(ESV)
When some have been overthrown as Sodom and Gomorrah were, I have been as a brand plucked out of the burning; yet I have not returned to you, O LORD. Amos 4:11(ESV) And when your hand has been lifted up, I have not seen it. Isaiah 26:11(ESV)

8.6
The more vows and promises I have made of better obedience, the greater has been my sin.

I have not kept the terms of the covenant that I have made before you; Jeremiah 34:18(ESV) but as a traitor, I have betrayed. Isaiah 24:16(ESV)
Did I not say, “I would not transgress, Jeremiah 2:20(KJV) I would not offend anymore?” Job 34:31(ESV) I did, and yet I have returned with the dog to its own vomit; 2 Peter 2:22(ESV) I have returned to folly after God has spoken peace. Psalm 85:8(ESV)

Thank God for the Communion of Saints

2.2.30
For the communion of saints, that spiritual communion which I have in faith and hope and holy love and in prayers and praises with all good Christians.

I bless you that if your people walk in the light, they have fellowship with one another, 1 John 1:7(ESV) even with all those who in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and mine. 1 Corinthians 1:2(ESV)
That your people, who are many, are one bread and one body; 1 Corinthians 10:17(ESV) and that though there are varieties of gifts and service and activities, yet there is the same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God, who empowers them all in everyone. 1 Corinthians 12:4-6(ESV)
I thank you that all the children of God who are scattered abroad, John 11:52(ESV) are united in him who is the head of the body, the church; Colossians 1:18(ESV) so they are all my brothers and partners in the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus. Revelation 1:9(ESV)

Pray for the Ministers of God's Holy Word and Sacraments

12.3.11
For all the ministers of God’s holy word and sacraments, the masters of assemblies.

Teach your ministers how they ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, 1 Timothy 3:15(ESV) that they may not preach themselves but Jesus Christ as Lord, 2 Corinthians 4:5(ESV) and may do their best to present themselves approved to God, workmen who have no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15(ESV)
Make them competent in the Scriptures, Acts 18:24(ESV) that from them they may be equipped for every good work, 2 Timothy 3:17(ESV) in teaching showing integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned. Titus 2:7-8(ESV)
Enable them to give attendance to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching; 1 Timothy 4:13(ESV) to practice these things; 1 Timothy 4:15(ESV) to devote themselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word; Acts 6:4(ESV) to immerse themselves in them and to persist in them, that they may save both themselves and their hearers. 1 Timothy 4:15-16(ESV)
Let words be given to them in opening their mouths boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, that they may speak as they ought to speak, Ephesians 6:19-20(ESV) as competent ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; 2 Corinthians 3:6(ESV) and let them by the Lord’s mercy be trustworthy. 1 Corinthians 7:25(ESV)
Let the arms of their hands be made agile by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob; Genesis 49:24(ESV) and let them be full of power by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts, Micah 3:8(ESV) to show your people their transgressions and the house of Jacob their sins. Isaiah 58:1(ESV)
Make them sound in the faith, Titus 1:13(ESV) and enable them always to teach what accords with sound doctrine, Titus 2:1(ESV) correcting their opponents with gentleness; and let not the Lord’s servants be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach. 2 Timothy 2:24-25(ESV)
Make them good examples to the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, and in purity; 1 Timothy 4:12(ESV) and let them purify themselves who bear the vessels of the Lord, Isaiah 52:11(ESV) and let HOLY TO THE LORD be written upon their foreheads. Exodus 28:36(ESV)
Lord, grant that they may not labor in vain or spend their strength for nothing and vanity, Isaiah 49:4(ESV) but let the hand of the Lord be with them, that many may believe and turn to the Lord. Acts 11:21(ESV)

Due for Collision

2010-06-19T06:28:00.001-04:00

It is by faith and not law that one is blessed by God, being freely justified. However, this does not at all solve our dilemma. The law remains written on tablets of stone by God himself, the same God who blessed Abraham without law, and this God curses those who are guilty of transgressing it. The tension could not be greater for “it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for ‘The righteous shall live by faith’” (Galatians 3:11), while at the same time “the law is not of faith, rather ‘The one who does them shall live by them’ (Galatians 3:12). The difference between cursing and blessing can be defined in the distinction between law and gospel. The gospel or promise brings blessing for it comes from God, the fount from which all true blessings flow but the law can only give a curse for every thought, word, and deed of man is tainted with sin.

How can this dilemma ever be solved? How can the blessing of Abraham and the curse of the law ever be reconciled? These two seem to be striving against one another for supremacy in the redemptive story, they are bound for a head on collision and they finally meet in the cross of Jesus Christ.

How Serious was the Reformation?

2010-06-15T05:53:00.031-04:00

The Church of Rome took it pretty seriously (and they knew exactly what they were refuting):

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.

CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema. .

CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

(Council of Trent, Decree on Justification)

The Major Works of Herman Witsius

2010-06-02T06:39:00.001-04:00

Reformation Heritage Books has recently published The Major Works of Herman Witsius, a five volume set. The books include two volumes containing his magnum opus The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man, two volumes on the Apostles' Creed, and one on the Lord's Prayer. Witsius was a Dutch theologian, pastor, professor of divinity, and obviously an author. Though not as well known as Calvin and Owen, his thought was important to the development of Covenant Theology.

His work on the Apostles' Creed can be read here.
The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man can be read here.

Should Christians be on Facebook?

2010-05-28T06:01:00.000-04:00

Some great questions to ponder from R.C. Sproul Jr.

Boy, Oh Boy, Oh Boy!

2010-05-24T16:55:00.000-04:00

We welcomed our third son into the world this morning at 8:20am. Everything went well with mom and baby Carsyn. Here is a video of when Christen got to see him for the first time.

Mom Sees Carsyn for the First Time from joshua hinson on Vimeo.

Baby Carsyn is coming tomorrow

2010-05-23T21:40:00.000-04:00

He should be here by 8:30 in the morning, Lord willing. Please pray for the baby, the delivery, and the mommy - she is pretty nervous about the scheduled c section.

The Excellency of Christ

2010-05-22T22:09:00.001-04:00

A few years ago I picked up a book on sale containing a collection of Jonathan Edwards' sermons. There are probably a dozen or so of his sermons in the book, including some of my favorites. The way Edwards' mind worked and the way he thought about Scripture is amazing to me. My favorite Jonathan Edwards sermon is The Excellency of Christ where he puts forth the glory of Jesus Christ in what he calls "diverse excellencies". For instance, Edwards points out that Christ is both lion and lamb, God and man, servant and Lord.

Read sermon
Listen to John Piper talk about this sermon

R.C. Sproul & John MacArthur Debate Baptism

2010-05-22T20:03:00.000-04:00

From the Ligonier Blog :

Infant baptism or believer's only baptism? For the past two days on Renewing Your Mind, Drs. R.C. Sproul and John MacArthur have discussed their views on the Biblical meaning and mode of Christian baptism. Dr. MacArthur presents the credo-baptist position and Dr. Sproul presents the historic paedo (infant)-baptist position. Listen in as these two friends discuss a historic doctrinal divide.

In addition to the free streams above, this debate is available on CD for purchase.

Surprised by Grace: God's Relentless Pursuit of Rebels

2010-05-07T23:21:00.001-04:00

Tullian Tchividjian's new book due to release May 31st.

Justin Taylor gives an excerpt:

From Tullian Tchividjian’s Surprised by Grace: God’s Relentless Pursuit of Rebels (p. 16):

I once assumed the gospel was simply what non-Christians must believe in order to be saved, but after they believe it, they advance to deeper theological waters.
Jonah helped me realize that the gospel isn’t the first step in a stairway of truths but more like the hub in a wheel of truth.
As Tim Keller explains it, the gospel isn’t simply the ABCs of Christianity, but the A-through-Z.
The gospel doesn’t just ignite the Christian life; it’s the fuel that keeps Christians going every day.
Once God rescues sinners, his plan isn’t to steer them beyond the gospel but to move them more deeply into it.
After all, the only antidote to sin is the gospel—and since Christians remain sinners even after they’re converted, the gospel must be the medicine a Christian takes every day. Since we never leave off sinning, we can never leave the gospel.

Providential Presumptions

2010-05-07T22:54:00.003-04:00

There is a danger in interpreting the providence of God in our own lives. At times we feel as though we have the inside track on the divine counsel only to find how far off we actually are in our understanding of God's providence. Then what happens? Do we repent and turn back to our God in the mercy offered to us in Christ or do we harden our hearts for the wrong we believe we have received because things did not go or turn out the way we thought they should? Perhaps the greatest danger for the "new calvinists" is that their beliefs may be tested in the fiery trials of everyday life.

J.I. Packer on our providential presumptions:

This comforting pretense becomes part of us: we feel sure that God has enabled us to understand all his ways with us and our circle thus far, and we take it for granted that we shall be able to see at once the reason for anything that may happen to us in the future.

And then something very painful and quite inexplicable comes along, and our cheerful illusion of being in God's secret councils is shattered. Our pride is wounded; we feel that God has slighted us; and unless at this point we repent and humble ourselves very thoroughly for our former presumption, our whole subsequent spiritual life may be blighted.

Among the seven deadly sins of medieval lore was sloth (acedia) - a state of hard-bitten, joyless apathy of spirit. There is a lot of it around today in Christian circles; the symptoms are personal spiritual inertia combined with critical cynicism about the churches and supercilious resentment of other Christians' initiative and enterprise.

Behind this morbid and deadening condition often lies the wounded pride of one who thought he knew all about the ways of God in providence and then was made to learn by bitter and bewildering experience that he didn't.

-J.I. Packer, Knowing God, p.106

History of the Church Lectures...(Early Church)

2010-04-27T22:12:00.000-04:00

...I hope to edit and upload them soon. At the end of 2009 I taught a Sunday School class where we focused on the Early Church. The lectures are simple and to the point, not profound or academic. The focus is on key events, main figures, and the progression of the early church. A link will be posted as soon as they're up.

Clark on Tebow, Evangelicals, and the Sabbath

2010-04-26T18:13:00.000-04:00

Even as a Gators, Tebow, and Broncos fan I can't argue with Scott Clark on this one.

The Schizophrenic Psalmist?

2010-04-26T06:31:00.000-04:00

When one takes to reading the psalms consecutively, it is not long before certain themes are seen developing. In Psalm one we find that there are two types of people, the righteous and the wicked, the blessed and the cursed. Psalm two tells us of God's king, the one who will judge the nations with a rod of iron. It is not long until we see that this righteous king and the righteous people of God suffer at the hands of the wicked and cry out to God "How long, O Lord?" though the righteous one trusts in the Lord while the wicked trusts in himself. The psalmist tells us that the Lord knows the way of the righteous, he loves the righteous, but hates all evildoers. This tension points us forward to a consummation, when the rigtheous will finally be vindicated, finally and fully delivered, and the wicked will be justly condemned.

We can understand these polarizing themes of blessing and cursing, the righteous and the unrighteous, salvation and judgment. What is confusing is the psalmist's own words about himself. David, God's king who writes most (if not all) of these early psalms, is confident of God's favor. He trusts in the Lord. He is bold as a lion in declaring that the Judge of all the earth will do right. He is also confident that he is the Lord's holy one, blameless, and righteous. The words of psalm 18 are almost hard to read:

20 The Lord dealt with me according to my righteousness;
according to the cleanness of my hands he rewarded me.
21 For I have kept the ways of the Lord,
and have not wickedly departed from my God.
22 For all his rules were before me,
and his statutes I did not put away from me.
23 I was blameless before him,
and I kept myself from my guilt.
24 So the Lord has rewarded me according to my righteousness,
according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight.

I say that these words are hard to read because of the man who pens them down. David says all of this but we also find him confessing his own sin to the Lord, being at times in agony over his transgressions. We know from his biography that David is an adulterer and a murderer. Which is it, is he righteous or sinful? Does the psalmist of Israel suffer from schizophrenia? Do the psalms give us insight into the mind of a crazy and confused man? Do his words that come later in Psalm 51 negate everything in the earlier part of the psalter? Doesn't he realize that he is calling down judgment on himself when he calls for God to make the unrighteous bear their own guilt? He declares a universal depravity, that the Lord looks down from Heaven and finds none who are righteous, none who seek after God and yet does David have the gall to believe that the Lord will not destroy him as well?
How is this dilemma solved? We must remember that David could say these things because of the God he hoped in (Psalm 5:7, 11) and we must also see how the apostles interpreted the psalms in the New Testament, that is, in light of Christ. The truth is that David was only a shadow of the true King who was to come. Any righteousness that we see in David is only a shadow of the righteousness brought by the true King. This King would be truly righteous, he would be the true Israel who kept perfectly the law of the Lord and fulfilled all of its demands. This King would earn a righteousness for his people so that they may stand in the Day of Judgment and be bold like David though they are sinners like David. Christ would truly suffer at the hands of wicked men as the servant of God being truly forsaken of the Father while David only felt that God had abandoned him, but he would be raised from the dead as David had said (Psalm 16:10).
Who is this one who may ascend the hill of the Lord and stand in his holy place? It is only he who has clean hands and a pure heart who will receive blessing and righteousness from the Lord. As he ascends the hill of the Lord the gates and doors are commanded to be lifted that this righteous king may come in. Who does David say this king is? It is not himself, it is the King of Glory, the Lord of hosts, strong and mighty (Psalm 24), and he alone leads his people into the presence of God. Remember the Christ of the Psalms.

Grandfather Oak

2010-04-25T21:45:00.000-04:00

The old courthouse of historic downtown Brunswick is surrounded by beautiful palms and enormous oak trees. Some of the limbs of these oaks come near the ground and on any given Sunday children can be found sitting, swinging, climbing, and bouncing on these branches after the worship service across the street. As I watched my own children play along with a dozen others on one particular tree branch, a favorite of the children, this big boisterous oak seemed to me like a jolly old grandfather with all of his young grandchildren on his lap. I hope they remember the pleasure they've had in what God has made for them to enjoy.

Dilemma Wretched

2010-04-23T05:27:00.000-04:00

from the Of First Importance blog:

“Dilemma wretched: how shall holiness
Of brilliant light unshaded, tolerate
Rebellion’s fetid slime, and not abate
In its own glory, compromised at best?
Dilemma wretched: how can truth attest
That God is love, and not be shamed by hate
And wills enslaved and bitter death—the freight
Of curse deserved, the human rebels’ mess?
The Cross! The Cross! The sacred meeting-place
Where, knowing neither compromise nor loss,
God’s love and holiness in shattering grace
The great dilemma slays! The Cross! The Cross!
The holy, loving God whose dear Son dies
By this is just—and one who justifies.”

—D.A. Carson, Holy Sonnets of the Twentieth Century (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 101

Hitting the Nail on the Head

2010-04-22T22:55:00.000-04:00

A great post from Michael Horton on churches, movements, labels, and the like. I thought it was so good that I decided to post the whole thing. Here is the link to the original post.

The Hallway and the Rooms

Movements are funny things. Especially in the Internet Age, they can be like a summer monsoon in the Arizona desert, gathering impressive force with lightening and showers and then dissipating just as quickly. For example, the Tea Party movement in U.S. politics has been grabbing the headlines recently, but time will tell whether it’s a tempest in a teapot.
All the hoopla over John Piper’s invitation to Rick Warren to speak at an upcoming Desiring God conference points up the vitality and challenges of the “young, restless, and Reformed” movement. Almost as soon as TIME Magazine hailed this as the third of the ten trends shaping our world today (March 12, 2009), fissures and fault lines became apparent. Currently on Christianity Today’s liveblog, Collin Hansen (author of Young, Restless, and Reformed) has a good summary of the recent debate over the Warren invite. David Mills over at First Things has just added a thoughtful take on it. Since both of these quote some of my comments from this blog, I thought it might be worthwhile to expand a little bit on some wider concerns.
The Hallway and the Rooms
Evangelicalism is a movement, not a church, and that’s been part of its strength. In the wake of the Evangelical Revival in Britain and various “awakenings” in North America, a grassroots cooperation in missions and mercy ministries was formed between conservative Protestants ranging from Anglican to Anabaptist. Ever since Wesley and Whitefield, the evangelical movement has struggled to keep flying with its Arminian and Calvinist wings. Though dominated ever since the Second Great Awakening by Arminian sympathies, the “New Calvinism” of recent years has been nothing short of phenomenal.
However, evangelicalism—even in its “Calvinist” manifestation—is a movement, not a church. Movements are led by impressive and charismatic figures. Even Ben Franklin wanted to cozy up to George Whitefield, a Calvinistic Anglican leader of the Great Awakening who was the closest thing to a rock star in 18th-century America. Yet the tendency, then as now, has been to downplay the ordinary ministry of the church in favor of the extraordinary movements of the moment.
I’ve argued elsewhere that evangelicalism is like the village green in older parts of the country, especially New England. There may be two or three churches on the grounds, but the green itself is a wide open space where people from those churches can spill out in conversation and cooperation. Evangelicalism is not a church, though it often acts like one. It isn’t the big tent (more appropriate, given the history) that encompasses all of the churches on the green. It’s just…, well, the green. When it tries to adjudicate cases of faith and practice through conferences, press releases, and blogs, evangelicalism (including Calvinistic versions) exhibits its movement mentality.
My analogy echoes C. S. Lewis’s “mere Christianity”: a hallway in a large house where believers mix and mingle, often opening the door as non-Christians knock. But, as Lewis insisted, it’s in the rooms where people actually live as a family—where they sleep, are warmed by the fire, fed and clothed, and grow. We are formed in the family life of Christ’s body by particular churches, with their distinct confessions and practices. You can’t live in the hallway.
I’m not against evangelicalism as a village green or hallway. In fact, I think it’s a wonderful meeting place. However, when it acts like a church, much less replaces the church, I get nervous.
Young, Restless and Reformed?
Like wider evangelicalism, the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is a grassroots trend among people who are, generally speaking, not Reformed. I’m energized by this movement every day, as I interact with people from a variety of churches, backgrounds, and traditions who are drawn to the doctrines of grace. I spend a lot of my time in this hallway and am enriched by it.
Nevertheless, not even a “Reformed” hallway is anything more than a hallway. “Reformed” has a specific meaning. It’s not defined by movements, parachurch ministries, or powerful leaders, but by a confession that is lived out in concrete contexts across a variety of times and places. The Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity (Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, and Canons of Dort) define what it means to be Reformed. Like Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Anabaptism, Reformed Christianity is a particular tradition. It’s not defined by a few fundamentals, but by a whole system of faith and practice. If being Reformed can be reduced to believing in the sovereignty of God and election, then Thomas Aquinas is as Reformed as R. C. Sproul. However, the Reformed confession is a lot more than that. Even the way it talks about these doctrines is framed within a wider context of covenant theology.
It’s intriguing to me that people can call themselves Reformed today when they don’t embrace this covenant theology. This goes to the heart of how we read the Bible, not just a few doctrines here or there. Yet what was once recognized as essential to Reformed faith and practice is now treated merely as a sub-set (and a small one at that) of the broader “Reformed” big tent. Yet now it would appear that the identity of the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is at stake over whether Rick Warren gets an invitation to speak at a national conference.
Nobody thinks a Roman Catholic person is narrow and exclusive for embracing papacy and the sacrifice of the Mass. People don’t call themselves Lutheran just because they believe in justification. Baptists (at least historically) do not even recognize as valid the baptism of non-Baptists. Yet increasingly those who affirm the Reformed confessions are treated with suspicion as narrow and divisive for actually being Reformed.
For centuries, the “Reformed” label has been embraced by people from Anglican, Presbyterian, and Reformed traditions. Only in the last few decades has it included those who do not embrace a covenantal interpretation of Scripture, which encompasses baptism and the Supper, the connectional government of the church, eschatology, and a host of other issues that distinguish Reformed from non-Reformed positions. I often run into Christians who say that they are Reformed—and also dispensational or charismatic, Baptist or Barthian, and a variety of other combinations. Like the term “evangelical,” “Reformed” is whatever you want it to be. It’s hard to challenge pragmatic evangelicalism’s cafeteria-style approach to truth when “Reformed” versions seem to be going down the same path.
In this situation, whatever divides confessionally Reformed and Presbyterian folks from others who affirm the five points of Calvinism has to be treated as secondary. Most obviously, the baptism of covenant children and the nature of the Lord’s Supper are treated merely as relatively unimportant. But the nature of the visible church and its ministry, especially the sacraments, have always been regarded as relatively unimportant in evangelicalism. By the way, when a Baptist brother refuses to acknowledge our baptism as valid, it’s hardly secondary to Baptists. I respect those who hold this view at least for the importance that they give to a crucial biblical doctrine.
Evangelicalism’s conversion-centered paradigm is different from Reformed Christianity’s covenantal paradigm. It’s not just a divergence here and there, but a difference that affects (or should affect) how we understand, experience, and live out our faith in the world. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t hang out in the hallway from time to time; we should just be aware that it’s the hallway.
Regular listeners to White Horse Inn and readers of Modern Reformation are familiar with our regular reminder that we’re not a church, but a conversation. Our organization isn’t Reformed, but a conversation between Calvinistic Baptists, Lutherans, Reformed, and Anglicans, drawing from our common agreement in the truths rediscovered in the Reformation. Sometimes views are expressed that I don’t agree with as a Reformed person, but that’s fine. Even when we defend truths we all agree on in substance, we are coming at it from the depth of our own traditions, which we did not invent. We’re not looking for a lowest-common-denominator, a quasi-confession for a movement, but are hoping to provoke discussions that lead people back to their rooms with more understanding of the other rooms and resources for vital engagement with the issues of our time and place. The old-style evangelicalism, where the movement is defined by parachurch conferences, networks, and personalities, is hopefully on the wane, as younger generations enjoy the conversation in the hallway but take the church more seriously.
Movements can serve an important role in shifting broad currents, but they are shallow. They rise and fall in the court of public opinion, not in the courts of the churches where Christ has installed officers to shepherd his flock. That doesn’t mean that they are wrong: it’s wonderful when thousands of brothers and sisters encounter the God of glorious grace in a deeper way. Yet movements can’t go very deep: when they do, differences are bound to emerge. The usually rise and fall with the personalities who lead them. Nor can movements pass the faith down from generation to generation. Only churches can do that.
If Not “Reformed,” Then What?
So I’ve wondered about a new term that we can use for the “young, restless, and Reformed” movement: “Evangelical Calvinism.” Why not? It’s the sort of term that can encompass J. I. Packer, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, John MacArthur, John Piper, and R. C. Sproul. Reformed Christians should swell with excitement when brothers and sisters embrace the doctrines of grace and “evangelical Calvinism” distinguishes us from evangelical Arminianism.
I’m suggesting this not just out of a concern to protect the distinctives that I believe are essential to Reformed Christianity, but also out of a concern for the ongoing vitality of the movement toward the doctrines of grace. Right now, it seems to me, this movement is being threatened by the movement mentality that characterizes evangelicalism more broadly. The very lack of a doctrine of the church lies at the heart of this. There are “evangelical Calvinists” from other traditions who realize this. For example, my friend Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist Church has a strong Baptist ecclesiology. In comparison with mainstream evangelicalism, it isn’t “weak” in the least, although it’s also not Reformed. He hasn’t settled for a movement-oriented evangelical ecclesiology, but bases his ministry in the local church. In other words, for him, the hallway isn’t a substitute for the Baptist room.
Right now, though, the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is in danger of succumbing to the fate of all movements at their peak: splintering. Our confessions help us major on the majors, leaving secondary matters open. Yet the “New Calvinism” movement is already showing signs of stress over questions like the age of the earth. Churches have ways of dealing with questions of fraternal relations and cooperation, but leader-driven movements can’t handle the stress. Conferences operate as quasi-official church courts, with vigilante benedictions and excommunications determining who’s in or out. It’s like the wild west.
Christ promised to be with his church to the end, expanding his embassy to the ends of the earth. Christ pledged that the gates of hell cannot prevail against his church. The same promise can’t be invoked for a movement. May God swell the hallway with new visitors! And may we all have the charity to come out of our rooms every now and again to bless each other and bear witness together to God’s sovereign grace. But discipleship has to be formed in the rooms—in real churches, where the depth and breadth of God’s Word is explored and lived.
-Michael Horton

Posterized

2010-04-21T06:09:00.000-04:00

From Monday Night

a church growth plan that I am completely on board with....

2010-04-21T05:45:00.000-04:00

Shane Waters, a pastor in Jacksonville, shares how his church is growing.

Twin Lakes Audio

2010-04-21T05:25:00.002-04:00

Here is the audio from the 2010 Twin Lakes Fellowship Conference. The speakers include such men as Ligon Duncan, Martin Downes, and Derek Thomas.

Together for the Gospel Resources

2010-04-21T05:19:00.000-04:00

Here is the audio and video of the Together for the Gospel Conference held last week in Louisville (I think).

Wow!

2010-04-16T06:35:00.000-04:00

Justin Taylor's list of the $400 worth of books given to each attendee of the T4G Conference.

Why Sing the Psalms?

2010-04-15T21:50:00.002-04:00

Ten Reasons from Brian Cochran.

They are inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21).
It is an excellent way of hiding God’s word in your heart and letting the word of God dwell in you richly (Ps. 119:11; Col. 3:16).
The Psalms present the Biblical pattern for properly balancing the objective and the subjective aspects of the Christian life.
The Psalms give us a comprehensive presentation of Christian emotion.
The Psalms give us hope by anticipating the return of Christ and the age to come.
The Psalms are a great way to express our unity with God’s people from thousands of years ago.
The wisdom of church history.
The Psalms will help you understand the New Testament better.
The Psalms are Christ-centered (Luke 24:27, 44).
You will come to know the heart and mind of Christ better (e.g. Matt. 27:46; cf. Ps. 22).

I was thinking about this myself when I came across this post. When we sing the psalms we don't have to wonder if what we are singing to God and to one another is theologically correct. Abraham Kuyper once said that he was in favor of good hymns and quickly followed it up by expressing his hope that one day maybe God would give us one! I think we do have good hymns but they cannot compare to the inspired hymn book that God has given us. The psalms also express the broad spectrum of human emotion. Our hymns almost never say the kind of things the psalms are willing to say. The psalms ask God why, admit our melancholy (many modern hymns give the impression of a false Christian triumphalism), and ask God to break the teeth of his enemies in judgment.

"What Can Miserable Christians Sing?" by Carl Trueman

A Guide for Prayer

2010-04-03T06:54:00.004-04:00

Our church prints a little booklet entitled A Guide for Prayer. In the booklet prayer is divided into four sections. You have heard of the old ACTS formula: Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, Supplication. It is basically the same pattern but I think this expression is better in that it gives reason for each aspect of prayer.

Awed by His Beauty................Praising
Humbled by His Holiness........Confessing
Amazed by His Grace............. Giving Thanks
Desiring His Glory................... Asking

Resurrection Resources

2010-04-03T05:24:00.002-04:00

In light of the celebration of the death and resurrection of our Lord, Monergism has compiled a directory of free resources from Church History on the resurrection.

Good Friday: The King's Bloody Throne (re-post from 4/9/09)

2010-04-02T04:54:00.001-04:00

Mike Brown, pastor of Christ United Reformed Church in Santee, CA, writes:

And so, this king was lifted up. He was not lifted up on a castle balcony to be adored by cheering crowds. He was not lifted up on a throne of gold. Instead, he was lifted up on a bloodstained throne of wood. He was nailed through the wrists and the feet by Roman regulation, so that this method of execution would have its course. Jesus, along with the criminals crucified on either side of him, would die in the way crucified people were meant to die: slowly and painfully in suffocation, dehydration, and blood-loss.

This was NOT what the disciples were expecting. Jesus once said “When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all people to myself,” but at the time they could not imagine this meant a Roman crucifixion. They were familiar with crosses. The Romans used this horrible method throughout their Empire to evoke fear in the hearts of their subjects. They could not imagine their King enthroned on one. Yet, there he was: beaten, naked, and dying, in this terrible place of shame. This was the place that the Law of Moses said was a curse, for “cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.”

Nevertheless, this king was EXACTLY where he was supposed to be. Everything was according to plan. This was no failure. This was victory.

Read the entire post

Christ the Center's Interview with Danny Hyde

2010-04-02T04:44:00.004-04:00

I love these guys. The shows are always great, and I'm sure this episode will be as well.

From the show notes:

Camden and Nick speak with Danny Hyde about his new book Welcome to a Reformed Church: A Guide for Pilgrims. Rev. Hyde is pastor of Oceanside United Reformed Church in Oceanside, CA and has written a helpful resource explaining the characteristics of a Reformed church. In this accessible volume, Hyde helps the reader through the historical roots, key doctrines and practices of Reformed churches.

Christen's Maternity Pictures

2010-03-27T14:09:00.004-04:00

My cousin Julie took some great pics of Christen and baby Carsyn.

Christen's Maternity Album

Ferguson Audio from Westminster Seminary California

2010-03-27T13:43:00.004-04:00

Sinclair Ferguson recently gave the 2010 den Dulk Lectures on Pastoral Ministry at Westminster Seminary California.

“Not ourselves, but Jesus Christ . . . with ourselves: The Heartbeat of Gospel Ministry.”

"The Pastor and His Heart"
"The Pastor and His Type"
"The Pastor and His Preaching"

Categories of Kingdom in Church History

2010-03-27T07:23:00.003-04:00

Carl Trueman gives five categories for understanding the Kingdom of God throughout the history of the Church. He argues that almost any figure from Church History will fit into one of these categories of understanding. The brief explanations are mine, so don't blame Dr. Trueman if they aren't helpful.

Augustinian - Two cities/ Two kingdoms (Augustine, Luther)
Constantinian - Sovereignty and Sword of the kingdom given to earthly magistrate
Separatist - Grab your belongings and get in the bunker (Anabaptists)
Liberationist - The kingdom of God helps the poor, liberating people and society
Evangelical - which he calls a non-answer. Evangelicals aren't known for thinking deeply about the kingdom of God

Of course, these categories can and do overlap at certain points. You can listen to the entire lecture or more by Carl Trueman and other Westminster profs (past and present) on the WTS audio resource page. You must register, but all of the material is free for download.

Did you know that the brother of Christopher Hitchens is a Christian?

2010-03-26T04:12:00.004-04:00

Read story

Peter Hitchens Author Interview--The Rage Against God from Gorilla Poet Productions on Vimeo.

More on Wright

2010-03-25T19:33:00.003-04:00

Scott Clark gives his thoughts (in light of the previous post) on N.T. Wright's upcoming speaking engagement at Redeemer NYC

Carrying Out Love to Our Neighbors - The Doctrine of Vocation (Jim Wilkerson)

2010-03-24T22:32:00.000-04:00

This will certainly raise a few eyebrows

2010-03-24T22:09:00.005-04:00

I don't know all of the details, but this really doesn't seem like a good thing.

From Nick Batzig at Feeding on Christ:

Apparently Redeemer Presbyterian Church’s Center for Faith and Work is hosting N.T. Wright, on April 20th, to speak about his latest release, After You Believe: Why Christian Character Matters. How is this not a tacit approval of Wright?

The School of Athens

2010-03-24T21:32:00.006-04:00

Recently my brother-in-law gave me a poster of Raphael's famous painting of the School of Athens. This was a great gift, now if I can only find a frame for it.....

Please, Show Me Your Glory

2010-03-23T20:07:00.006-04:00

I had the privilege to preach this past Sunday morning for my good friend Shane Waters, pastor of Sovereign Grace Baptist Church in Jacksonville, FL. We considered Moses' request to see the glory of God. Here is a link to the audio.

Welcome to a Reformed Church

2010-03-23T19:52:00.003-04:00

An interview with Daniel Hyde on his newly released book

When Couples Fight on Facebook

2010-03-23T19:29:00.003-04:00

Okay, so I have a Facebook account, or profile, or whatever you call it. I've witnessed arguments and debates but I've never seen this....at least not yet.

For my friend, Garrett

2010-03-23T19:12:00.002-04:00

Christ to Return in May of Next Year

2010-03-23T06:09:00.005-04:00

So Harold Camping is at it again. Jesus is to return on May 21, 2011. Here is how he calculated the date (I have also provided a video demonstration below). As Kim Riddlebarger commented "You thought dispensationalism was complicated." Not as complicated as this. Well, we can all now be sure of a date that Jesus won't return.
You Tube HT: imonk

The method to Camping's madness:

The number 5, Camping concluded, equals "atonement." Ten is "completeness." Seventeen means "heaven." Camping patiently explained how he reached his conclusion for May 21, 2011.

"Christ hung on the cross April 1, 33 A.D.," he began. "Now go to April 1 of 2011 A.D., and that's 1,978 years."

Camping then multiplied 1,978 by 365.2422 days - the number of days in each solar year, not to be confused with a calendar year.

Next, Camping noted that April 1 to May 21 encompasses 51 days. Add 51 to the sum of previous multiplication total, and it equals 722,500.

Camping realized that (5 x 10 x 17) x (5 x 10 x 17) = 722,500.

Or put into words: (Atonement x Completeness x Heaven), squared.

"Five times 10 times 17 is telling you a story," Camping said. "It's the story from the time Christ made payment for your sins until you're completely saved.

"I tell ya, I just about fell off my chair when I realized that," Camping said.

Btw, I've heard that his last prediction was 1994. Word has it that didn't turn out so well.

A Popular Book on the Heidelberg Catechism

2010-02-25T05:25:00.003-05:00

Kevin DeYoung's latest book is due out at the end of March. After the recent success of his other books that have dealt with the Emerging and Institutional Church and decision making and the will of God, the subject of this one was a pleasant surprise to me. This book is on the Heidelberg Catechism, entitled The Good News We Almost Forgot: Rediscovering the Gospel in a 16th Century Catechism. Two things excite me about this publication: first, it is wonderful to see those of a younger generation being interested in historic Christianity (being a part of this generation this gives me great confidence that I will not be a nerd among my Christian peers in 20 years), and second, it is good to see a popular author write about this sort of thing. Many younger Christians are not reading the more academic works of Lyle and Clark on such a topic but this book puts needful material within reach of a popular audience.

What is so special about the Heidelberg Catechism? It is hard for me to say personally that it is better than say the Westminster Shorter Catechism, but it is unique. The Catechism was published in 1563 and is outlined by three main headings: guilt, grace, and gratitude. It begins with the Gospel. The Continental Reformed did not consider prayer to be a means of grace (Westminster does), this title is reserved only for the Word and the Sacraments, and because of this prayer is not under the heading of grace but under the heading of gratitude, being the chief part of our thankfulness.

Read the Heidelberg Cathechism

Here are the opening paragraphs from the upcoming book posted by DeYoung at his blog.

The only thing more difficult than finding the truth is not losing it. What starts out as new and precious becomes plain and old. What begins a thrilling discovery becomes a rote exercise. What provokes one generation to sacrifice and passion becomes in the next generation a cause for rebellion and apathy. Why is it that denominations and church movements almost always drift from their theological moorings? Why is it that people who grow up in the church are often less articulate about their faith than the new Christian who converted at forty-five? Why is it that those who grow up with creeds and confessions are usually the ones who hate them most?

Perhaps it’s because truth is like the tip of your nose—it’s hardest to see when it’s right in front of you.

No doubt, the church in the West has many new things to learn. But for the most part, everything we need to learn is what we’ve already forgotten. The chief theological task now facing the Western church is not to reinvent or to be relevant, but to remember. We must remember the old, old story. We must remember the faith once delivered to the saints. We must remember the truths that spark reformation, revival, and regeneration.

And because we want to remember all this, we must also remember—if we are fortunate enough to have ever heard of them in the first place—our creeds, confessions, and catechisms.

Your reaction to that last sentence probably falls in one of three categories. Some people, especially the young, believe it or not, will think, “Cool. Ancient faith. I’m into creeds and confessions.” Others will think, “Wait a minute, don’t Catholics have catechisms? Why do we need some manmade document to tell us what to think? I have no creed but the Bible, thank you very much. I thought catechisms were for Catholics.” And yet others—the hardest soil of all—want nothing more than to be done with all this catechism business. “Been there, done that. Bor-ing. I’ve seen people who knew their creeds backward and forward and didn’t make them missional, passionate, or even very nice.”

To all three groups I simply say, “Come and see.” Come and see what vintage faith is really all about. Come and see if the cool breeze from centuries gone by can awaken your lumbering faith. Come and see if your church was lame because of its confessions and catechisms or if your lame church made the confessions and catechisms lame all on its own. Whether you’ve grown up with confessions and catechisms or they sound like something from another spiritual planet, I say, “Come and see.”Come and see Christ in the unlikeliest of places—in a manger, in Nazareth, or even in Heidelberg.

Horton on Worship : a Table Spread in the Wilderness

2010-02-22T05:43:00.005-05:00

Churches that follow the apostolic, Reformation faith are charismatic in the fullest sense of that term. That is, they believe that every service of Word and Sacrament is a time of signs and wonders. They eagerly anticipate - or, at least, should eagerly anticipate, the miraculous when they come to church, because God has promised that when we gather to worship and receive God's forgiveness, he will faithfully feed his flock in the wilderness. But we often become like the cynical generation of Israelites in the wilderness who, when God reaffirmed his promise to feed them, cried out, "What! Is the Lord going to spread out a banqueting table for us right here in the middle of the desert?" But that is precisely what God does. He is a wonder-working God who feeds us among the thorns and sand of our spiritual wasteland, when and where we are least expecting.

- Michael Horton

Ryken Leaving Tenth for Wheaton

2010-02-20T14:25:00.003-05:00

HT: Nick Batzig

While it is sad to see such a faithful pastor leave such an influential church, it is very encouraging to see Wheaton College go in a Reformed direction. Pray for Tenth Pres. as they seek to find another pastor. Along with Phillip Graham Ryken, the church has been pastored by such men as Donald Grey Barnhouse and James Montgomery Boice (they will need to find someone whose "full" name sounds nice to continue the streak).

Read the story at Christianity Today (*the comments are even more interesting*)

The Gospel of Korah

2010-02-11T05:36:00.004-05:00

Moses was the man God had chosen. It was Moses whom God spoke to from the burning bush. It was Moses who stood before Pharoah, who carried the rod of God, whose face shone with Yahveh's glory, who spoke with the Lord, and who delivered the law to Israel. Moses was the appointed leader and mediator of God's covenant people, but Korah would not have it so. Korah and his company rebelled (Numbers 16). They would not have this man Moses to reign over them. Korah challenged Moses' authority, and ultimately challenged God's authority.

Of course, God's approval of Moses was shown. Korah is mentioned by Jude in his brief list of examples of those who come under the wrath of God. Jude speaks of fallen angels, the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, of Cain, Balaam, and Korah. Cain's judgment was seen slowly through his lineage. Balaam's judgment was momentary. Sodom and Gomorrah stored up wrath. But Korah's judgment was sudden. The earth opened her mouth and swallowed Korah's company.

Korah's sin should not surprise us, the tenants of the Lord's vineyard were constantly rejecting God's servants (Mark 12:1-11). When the son came they said, "This is the heir, let us kill him." Judgment certainly awaits those who have rejected the Lord's Christ, but what is radically different about the appearance of the true Mediator between God and man is that instead of sudden judgment falling upon the guilty, it fell upon the innocent. The Son of God was swallowed in God's wrath while he cried, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” He was taken to the grave for them. In the case of Korah the ground was opened to demonstrate God's approval of Moses by consuming Korah, with Jesus it was opened as he came forth from the grave being declared as the Son of God though his resurrection and promising the end of death for all he came to save.

Singing for Scripture

2010-02-11T05:22:00.002-05:00

Malawi Christians rejoice over receiving copies of God's Word. HT: DG

Fesko on Justification

2010-02-11T05:04:00.003-05:00

Recently, J.V. Fesko sat down with Scott Clark to discuss his book Justification: Understanding the Classic Reformed Doctrine. The interview is well worth the listen. As you would expect, in the book Fesko sets up the Reformed teaching of a forensic declaration up against Rome's doctrine of justification as well as the New Perspective's. I find it interesting and thoughtful that he added a chapter on the view of the Eastern Orthodox.

Spread His Fame

2010-02-07T07:01:00.002-05:00

Is this a Gregorian chant for the 21st century? I especially like the lines:

Lord of all continents,
Source of all consciousness,
His compliments are the consequence of His accomplishments
Every sphere of life, He’s the Lord of it
And every other power is either fraudulent or subordinate.

Shai Linne with "Spread His Fame." from Grace EV Free on Vimeo.

Dual Citizens by Jason Stellman

2010-02-06T08:46:00.001-05:00

Dual Citizens - by Jason Stellman, Part 1 of 2 from Ligonier Ministries on Vimeo.

Dual Citizens - by Jason Stellman, Part 2 of 2 from Ligonier Ministries on Vimeo.

Suffering well: Faith tested by pastor's cancer

2010-01-31T16:20:00.005-05:00

The Associated Press released an article today on Matt Chandler, a young pastor in Texas who is suffering with brain cancer.

HT: Between Two Worlds

The Lord's Day

2010-01-31T00:00:00.002-05:00

When we think of the Sabbath, our minds often go back to ancient Israel who was given the commandment to honor the Sabbath and to keep it holy. However, this pattern of six and one goes back all the way to creation, where God worked for six days and rested on the seventh.

God could have made man without any need for rest, but he didn’t. Man is a creature who must rest. Every day man needs sleep, and as God’s image bearer man is to reflect the same pattern of work and rest in creation; the pattern of six and one. Six days in a week God has given us to work and to accomplish our tasks, but one day is to be set aside for rest, worship, and focus upon our God. The Hebrew word for Sabbath means to cease or to pause.

Israel worked six days and rested on the seventh, but the resurrection of Christ brought about a monumental change. As the Princeton theologian B.B. Warfield wrote, “Christ took the Sabbath into the grave with him and brought the Lord’s Day out.”

Christians begin the week with rest. Not only is this rest a physical rest but it is a resting in what God has provided in Christ. Christ is our rest, it is he who is our Sabbath, and those who are in him have in a sense already entered their rest though they await the greater rest God will give in the age to come. There remains a rest for the people of God.

Christian, have your rest today. Rest from your sins in the sweet mercies of Jesus Christ. Today, let your mind cease from all you need to accomplish, and find rest in what Christ has accomplished for you.

Hanging in There

2010-01-30T07:28:00.003-05:00

After back to back national titles the Florida Gator men's basketball team has failed to make the big dance for the past two years, being left out of the NCAA tournament. Will they miss the cut three years in a row? Maybe, but as of now they are hanging in there by a thread. At the end of the day wins are matter most and two of those wins have come via a Chandler Parsons buzzer-beater, one from 70 feet.

A Fallen Sparrow

2010-01-29T22:26:00.004-05:00

I guess it just flew right into the side of the house. On the way out to dinner this evening, the boys and I noticed something on the ground, something that was not a part of the landscape. A dead sparrow lay there on the ground and we wondered how it got there. A few minutes later Christen was able to help us put the pieces together when she recalled hearing an unexplained "thump" outside the kitchen early this morning. Camdyn and Cayde were amazed to see wildlife up close and personal even if it was just a dead sparrow. We disposed of the bird and quickly headed out for some barbecue with some close friends, but this occasion provided great conversation for us as a family. My mind quickly ran to the following passage of Scripture:

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.

Not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. Not one. Not even the one that falls two millenia later in Southeast Georgia when flying into someone's home. God is sovereign, absolutely sovereign, and he governs the universe by his providence.1 Even the smallest of details in the smallest of creatures are all governed by the Sovereign Lord. The very hairs of our heads are numbered, Jesus says.

What do we gather from this? Comfort. It is not comforting to know that God is sovereign; it is comforting to know that God is good in his sovereignty. It is comforting to know what Jesus says, that we are not to fear for we are of more value than many sparrows. What freedom we have in this knowledge of God's sovereign goodness! The King who upholds all things cares for us. We know this, not because of a dead bird, but because of a dead Son. There was never a more heinous crime than the murder of the Son of God, yet the Father decreed the slaughter of Jesus and he did so for our sake in order to reconcile us to himself.

1. Q. 11. What are God’s works of providence?
A. God’s works of providence are, his most holy, wise, and powerful preserving and governing all his creatures, and all their actions.