The Baptist Puritan

2011-02-03T10:31:00.000-08:00

Luther's Fight for Recovering the Gospel

At the heart of everything Martin Luther (1483-1546) did as a reformer, it was fighting for the recovery of the Gospel. For Luther, this is what the Protestant Reformation was all about. Despite all the abuses and corruption which the Catholic Church was riddled with during the 16th century, Luther's ultimate battle with Rome was theological. Roman Catholicism had sabotaged the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Luther therefore made it his lifelong mission to recover the Gospel which Catholicism had buried underneath her man-made traditions and her system of a works-righteousness salvation.

This recovery effort was brought forth in several ways: first and foremost, it was by Luther's translation of the Bible in the German language. The New Testament was completed in 1522 and the Old Testament was brought forth ten years later in 1532. This one acheivement sealed the Reformation for Germany by placing God's Word in the hands of the common people to read in their own language. And of course by giving the people a vernacular Bible, no one in Germany would be barred from reading the Gospel for themselves.

Secondly, Luther's fight to recover the Gospel took shape in his influence as a Bible professor, pastor, and mentor for the next generation. This can be seen in the production of Luther's Small Catechism (1529) which would explain the theology of the Bible and Gospel for children. And also there was the enormous affect Luther had on his university students by what would be called his "Table Talk." These were informal discussions and exhortations Luther would give his students and other guests who would gather around the dinner table in Luther's home. Through these "talks" Luther took great advantage to unpack the Gospel and shepherd the impressionable and hungry hearts who sat at his table.

Thirdly, Luther's fight to recover the Gospel certainly took its greatest shape in the form of preaching. The act of preaching was central to the Reformation since the Reformation gave centrality to the sermon. As Roland Bainton said of Luther: "The pulpit was higher than the altar, for Luther held that salvation is through the Word and without the Word the elements are devoid of sacramental quality, but the Word is sterile unless it is spoken." And for Luther, he took this conviction to heart. From the years 1522 to his death in 1546, Luther preached some 6,000 sermons. He believed firmly that "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" (Rom.10:17).

Finally, next to preaching the Gospel, Luther also gave his labors to writing and publishing books that would work to spread the Gospel as well. And without question, this is where Luther's Gospel recovery efforts would have their longest lasting effects. For once Luther's physical voice was silenced in 1546, his written voice would keep fighting to reestablish the Gospel for future generations. But of everything Luther penned for this purpose, there would be no book more prized and revered for recovering the Gospel, than Luther's forceful, theological reply to Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536) in 1525.

Originally titled in Latin as De Servo Arbitrio (which translated means "On the Enslaved Will") - we have come to know this book by its more popular title, The Bondage of the Will. Luther himself regarded this book as the only book of two that he wished to be preserved. The other book for preservation was The Small Catechism. But outside of these two books, Luther said you could burn everything else he wrote.

So by the mere fact that Luther would esteem The Bondage of the Will as holding that much importance in comparison to the rest of his writings (which fill 55 volumes in the English edition and 127 in German) - it would serve us well to know what this book was about and why it was written. Because in truth, The Bondage of the Will actually crystallizes Luther's fight for recovering the Gospel in written form with greater clarity than anything he ever wrote. Regarding its place of importance among all the books written by the Protestant Reformers, B.B. Warfield (1851-1921) called The Bondage of the Will "the manifesto of the Reformation." He then went on to say:

"It is the embodiment of Luther's reformation conceptions, the nearest to a systematic statement of them he ever made. It is the first exposition of the fundamental ideas of the Reformation in comprehensive form."

Now as already mentioned, The Bondage of the Will was a personal reply that Luther had made to the famed Dutch humanist, Desiderius Erasmus. At that time in European history, there was no one who could rival Erasmus in reading and writing the classical tongues. His greatest gift to that age (and even to the church) was his reproduction of the Greek New Testament. Luther himself felt great indebtedness to Erasmus for this publication. And in addition to this work as a scholar, Erasmus also sought to reform the Catholic church. He was repulsed at the abuses and corruption he witnessed in every part of Medieval Catholicism.

But the vision of reform for Erasmus was poles apart from Luther. Erasmus was not a theologian. In fact, he detested theology. For him, a reformation in the Catholic church was a Christianity without Christ. It was nothing more than "a bald moralism", which said: "Be good and all will be well with you." Erasmus therefore saw nothing wrong with the doctrine of Catholicism. He applauded its high and impossible system of works-righteousness salvation.

Luther however, standing firmly against Rome's doctrine of salvation, was also at odds with Erasmus. But these two men had not drawn swords over this issue until 1524. After must pressure from popes and princes, Erasmus reluctantly wrote his first and only attack against Luther. It was a small book he simply entitled, A Discussion Concerning Free-Will. Surprisingly, despite all the subjects he could have chosen to rebut Luther on, Erasmus took the heart of Luther's doctrine as the battle-ground.

For Luther though, he could not have been more pleased. In his reply to Erasmus (which came a year later), he actually thanked him for "attacking the real thing...the essential issue." And that "essential issue" was the nature of salvation as it related to human freedom. There was no subject more important for Luther than this. As far as he was concerned this matter was the centerpiece of the Reformation because it struck at the heart of the Gospel. Luther's reply therefore to Erasmus would be nothing less than a strong, thorough, dogmatic exposition regarding the biblical doctrine of salvation. What Luther would labor to do with all zeal, was to defend "the absolute exclusion of works from salvation, and the casting of the soul wholly upon the grace of God."

You see, for Erasmus, his idea of salvation was nothing more than a regurgitation of both Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian doctrine. While Erasmus strongly maintained that he believed salvation was by God's grace yet he would not concede it was by grace alone. Man must play some part and make some contribution to salvation, however small it may be. And for Erasmus, man's contribution was in his freedom to make the final decision as to whether God would save him or not. In other words, though man was a sinner yet his sinfulness did not impair his ability to apply himself to those things which would lead to salvation. In short, God may provide salvation but it was man's "free will" that makes it happen.

Luther was neither impressed nor convinced by the eloquence of Erasmus' words. In fact, Luther compared Erasmus' book to that of using gold and silver plates to carry feces! Luther's point was that the Erasmian gospel of Free Will was worthless and abominating, since it called no man to see his total helplessness as a sinner to merit salvation; and in turn, would not point men to the sole efficiency of God's grace to save. For Luther, nothing could be worse for sinners to hear than a message like this.

Moreover, Luther called Erasmus' "free will" nothing but a "pure fiction." The only thing man is free to do is "build houses, milk cows" and sin. But left to himself, Luther contended, no sinner would ever strive after God since they are completely ignorant of Him, paying Him no regard whatsoever, bound up in a corrupt sinful nature. Furthermore, in our sinfulness, Luther maintained we would not even know we're sinners unless the Spirit of God convicted us of our sin. So rather than celebrating human freedom like Erasmus, Luther declared that man's freedom as a sinner only reveals his desperation and need to be saved. Therefore, since man in his sin has no power in himself to do any good that would merit salvation, then he must be exclusively dependent on God's grace alone in Christ alone if he would be truly saved.

Articulating this truth to Erasmus (which is the Gospel in a nutshell), Luther essentially gave his greatest fight for recovering the Gospel. For this was not some academic debate between two scholars. This was a battle for preserving and propagating the only message that will redeem sinful man. In fact, even throughout Luther's reply to Erasmus, he made personal evangelistic appeals to the humanist scholar. Luther wasn't trying to win an argument he was seeking to unpack with the greatest clarity the only way sinners can be saved - and Erasmus unwittingly gave Luther the platform upon which to do so. Some years after Luther wrote The Bondage of the Will, he recalled in one of his many "Table Talks" what was at the core of the controversy, which he declared would always be the stand he would take:

"Free will brought us sin and death...Every part of us suffers corruption. So my position is this. Anyone who thinks that by free will he can do anything says 'no' to Christ. I have always taken this position in my writings, especially against Erasmus, one of the world's most learned scholars. I stand resolutely by my thesis because I know it is true. I will stand by it even if all the world opposes it. Divine truth stands."

2011-01-11T12:18:00.000-08:00

Always Be at it!
Do you mortify? Do you make it your daily work? Do not take a day off from this work; always be killing sin or it will be killing you. We must strike it as an enemy until it ceases living. Sin is laboring to bring forth the deeds of the flesh. When sin lets us alone, we may let sin alone. Sin is active when it seems to be the most quiet, and its waters are often deep when they are calm. Sin is always acting, conceiving, seducing and tempting. There is not a day but sin foils or is foiled. There is no safety but in a constant warfare from sin's perplexing rebellion.

Sin will not only be striving, acting, rebelling, troubling, and disquieting if not continually mortified, it will also bring forth great, cursed, scandalous, and soul-destroying sins (Gal.5:19-20). When sin rises to tempt, it always seeks to express itself in the extreme. Every unclean thought would be adultery if it could; every covetous desire would be oppression; and every thought of unbelief would be atheism.

It is like the grave that is never satisfied. Sin's advance blinds the soul from seeing its drift from God. The soul becomes indifferent to sin as it continues to grow. The growth of sin has no boundaries but the utter denial of God and opposition to him. Sin proceeds higher by degrees; it hardens the heart as it advances.

Mortification withers the root and strikes at the head of sin every hour. The best saints in the world are in danger of a fall if found negligent in this important duty. Negligence of this duty decays the inner man instead of renewing him. It is our duty to be "bringing holiness to completion in the fear of God" (2 Cor. 7:1), and every day to be growing in grace (I Pet. 2:2), and seeking to be renewed in the inner nature day by day (2 Cor. 4:16).

(From The Works of John Owen: volume six; published by Banner of Truth Trust: pages 9-14)

2011-01-06T05:05:00.000-08:00

A Puritan Prayer for True Christianity
Lord of Heaven,
Thy goodness is inexpressible and inconceivable.
In the works of creation thou art almighty,
In the dispensations of providence all-wise,
In the gospel of grace all love,
And in thy Son thou hast provided for
our deliverance from the effects of sin,
the justification of our persons,
the sanctification of our natures,
the perseverance of our souls in the path of life.
Though exposed to the terrors of thy law,
we have a refuge, from the storm;
Though compelled to cry, "Unclean,"
we have a fountain for sin;
Though creature-cells of emptiness
we have a fullness accessible to all,
and incapable of reduction.
Grant us always to know that to walk with Jesus
makes other interests a shadow and a dream.
Keep us from intermittent attention to eternal things;
Save us from the delusion of those
who fail to go far in religion,
who are concerned but not converted,
who have another heart but not a new one,
who have light, zeal, confidence, but not Christ.
Let us judge our Christianity, not only by our dependence upon Jesus,
but by our love to him,
our conformity to him,
our knowledge to him.
Give us a religion that is both real and progressive,
that holds on its way and grows stronger,
that lives and works in the Spirit,
that profits by every correction,
and is injured by no carnal indulgence.

(from "The Valley of Vision"; published by Banner of Truth Trust: page 215)

2011-01-05T05:23:00.000-08:00

Living Under Grace

One of the most significant biblical concepts that revolutionized my thinking as a Christian was understanding the difference between the indicatives and imperatives of the Gospel. The "indicatives" of the Gospel are those statements which tell us what God has done for us in Christ, and what has happened to us as the result. For instance, in 2 Corinthians 5:17 & 21, we're told: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come...For our sake he made [Christ] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." In each of these declarations we are given the facts of what God has done to save us in Christ, and the consequence of that saving work in our lives. These are the Gospel indicatives.

The "imperatives" of the Gospel however, are the commands which tell us what to do now that we're saved. Hence, in Colossians 3:12-13, we are commanded to "put on...compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, bearing with one another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive."

Now what is vitally important to understand about the indicatives and imperatives of the Gospel, is the order in which they are placed in Scripture. The indicatives always come before the imperatives. This is why, for example, we see in Paul's letter to the Ephesians, that he devotes the first three chapters to what God has done to save them (indicatives); and then the last three chapters to how they are to live since they are saved (imperatives). One crucial point of keeping indicatives before imperatives helps us to see how it is even possible that we're able to live in the manner God has set forth. It is only due to the fact that God has redeemed us by Christ, giving us a new nature, and has sent the Holy Spirit to indwell us that we can live holy lives which glorify God.

In Romans 6:14, we have a Gospel indicative which is meant to encourage us in our fight against sin and service to God (cf. Rom.6:12-13). In my last two posts I have sought to unpack this indicative by showing how it expresses two principle truths in relation to our Christian life: first, Romans 6:14 establishes our assurance for persevering in sanctification. This assurance is stated by proclaiming that "sin will have no dominion over you." Here is a glorious Gospel fact! The rule and reign of sin has been forever broken over the believer in Christ. This one truth promises a Christian that he will persevere to the very end.

The second principle truth of the Christian life in Romans 6:14, is where we're continuing to camp out even in this present post: it is our permanent position for the perseverance. "...since you are not under law but under grace." As we live the Christian life from day to day with the massive fact of sin's dominion having ceased to enslave us; we do so, with the understanding that our position is no longer under law but under grace. By not being under law (as we saw in the previous post), we are not under the law's curse and condemnation. When we were slaves to sin, all the law could do was to confirm that bondage and judge us accordingly. While the law shows us what God requires for a righteous life, it cannot give us the power to live it nor save us from our sin which keeps us from such a life.

But thanks to be God that we're no longer under law in this way. Rather, by God's redeeming power in Christ, the permanent position of all His people is under grace. What does this mean? The answer to this question is actually a summation of everything the apostle Paul had written from Romans 3 to the first half of Romans 6. First of all, to be under grace is to be in a position before God where He has justified us on account of what Christ has done to save us and bring us to God (3:21-5:1). We're also now in God's favor, at peace with God, and reconciled to Him (5:2-11). Furthermore, to be under grace, is to be in a position where we are no longer in Adam but we're now in Christ - thus, we're no longer classified as sinners but are now classified as saints (5:12-19). Moreover, since we are under grace, we have died to our old life in Adam, having been enslaved to the power of sin (6:1-7). Under grace has further placed us all in spiritual union with Christ (6:3-5, 8-11). So, we have a new life then to live under grace which opposes sin and serves God (6:12-13). All these Gospel facts confirm us as under grace.

2011-01-04T05:31:00.000-08:00

Not Under Law

Musing on the great truth that "sin will have no dominion over you" - John Murray (1898-1975) observed:

"Sin does not rule in the believer. To think so is to deny the lordship which belongs to Christ by reason of his death and resurrection. And just as the deliverance from the power of sin is decisive, so it is inclusive. If the believer were under the dominion of any sin, then the truth of the proposition 'sin shall have no dominion over you' would be abrogated. The deliverance in view must therefore apply to all sin, and the inescapable inference is that the sin he commits does not have the dominion over him. Sin as indwelling and committed is a reality; it does not lose its character as sin. It is the contradiction of God and of that which a believer most characteristically is. It creates the gravest liabilities. But by the grace of God there is this radical change that it does not exercise the dominion."

Every Christian should take in deeply those last quoted words of Murray: "But by the grace of God there is this radical change that [sin] does not exercise the dominion." This is what believers in Christ must hold on to when facing the remaining force of indwelling sin (cf. Rom.7:17-18). Sin's rule, reign, and power has been forever borken. It has been eternally breached. United to Christ, our position is entirely different in relation to sin. We are no longer its slaves. "For sin will have no dominion over you."

Now in my last post I described this truth of Romans 6:14 as our assurance for persevering in sanctification. This assurance comes to us as an encouragement to carry out the imperatives of Romans 6:12-13 - where we're commanded to oppose sin and serve God. With such a high and holy mandate, every believer needs some kind of guarantee that they will not ultimately forsake God and return to their former bondage under sin's reign. Hence, the opening words of Romans 6:14 come to us as a mighty promise of God that we will persevere in sanctification. "For sin will have no dominion over you."

But in addition to this indicative regarding our relationship to sin, Romans 6:14 goes on to express another important reality which aids us as we oppose sin and serve God. It is our permanent position for the perseverance. In the latter half of Romans 6:14, we're told: "...since you are not under law but under grace." The reason sin will not have dominion over us, is because we are not under law but under grace. What does this mean? These words are expressing a definite and permanent position that is true of every Christian. A Christian is not under law but under grace.

But what are the implications of this position? To begin with, let's consider for the remainder of this post, the truth that we are not under law. At the outset of this statement we must clear away a popular misconception. There are many Christians who take this indicative to mean that we have nothing to do with God's law any more. How do we answer this? First of all, the Bible nowhere teaches that a Christian is finished altogether with God's law now that he is saved. While it is true that we are no longer under the curse and condemnation of the law (Gal.3:13); yet, we have not been liberated from the moral mandates of the law - namely - to love God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength; and to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matt.22:37-38). These two commands sum up the whole of God's moral law (Exod.20:1-17), and thus the righteous requirement of the law; which by the regenerating work of the Spirit, we now have the desire, power, and responsibility to fulfill (see Rom.7:22; 8:3-4; 13:8-10; cf. Jer.31:31-34; Heb. 8:8-13). The Christian life therefore is not a life of lawlessness! Salvation by grace has not canceled obedience to God's law. Rather, it has enabled us with the freedom to obey God in response to His law (see I Jn.2:3-6).

So then, what does it mean to be not under law? It means to be not under the curse and condemnation of the law - since all the law can do by itself is to confirm us in our sinful bondage and judge us for this bondage. The law demands perfect obedience to God which it has no power to give but can only declare and approve. A person under law therefore is someone who is enslaved to the power of sin; because they have no power either in themselves to be free from sin nor in the law to aquire that freedom. Yet, for the believer, the law no longer stands over him pronouncing judgment but approval on account of Jesus Christ.

2011-01-03T05:04:00.000-08:00

Free From Sin's Dominion

When it comes to living the Christian life, there is perhaps no passage in God's Word more foundational to our understanding than Romans 6. One reason for this is due to the fact that this chapter addresses head on the danger of antinomianism. This is the teaching which says, "Since I am 'under grace' and no longer 'under law', then it doesn't matter how I live. Under grace I can sin all I want to." Many people in the visible church have bought into this lie. But in Romans 6 the self-deception of the antinomian is exposed, as we are told that a Christian can no longer live in sin since he has "died to sin" (6:1-2, 15-18).

Another reason however for the importance of Romans 6 is the certainty it brings to every Christian regarding the assurance of final salvation. Romans 6 sends a message to every believer in Christ that their salvation will be preserved and thus they will persevere to the very end. No true child of God will be finally and fatally lost. This means that despite how difficult and trying our sanctification may be, God will keep us to the end. And one of the great statements in Romans 6 which speaks directly to this issue is in verse 14: "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace."

This declaration falls on the immediate heels of two great imperatives communicated in verses 12-13. First, we are called to oppose sin. Second, we are called to serve God. But what guarantee do we have that our opposition to sin and service to God will last? How can we be sure that we will not ultimately defect from God and re-enter our former bondage to sin? The answer to these troubling questions are summed up in Romans 6:14, where at the closing of God's command to fight sin and serve Him, we are given a sweet assuring promise regarding the stability and steadfastness of our sanctification. And in this promise there are two important indicatives concerning our relationship to both sin and God.

First, there is our assurance for persevering in sanctification. The opening words of Romans 6:14 declare: "For sin will have no dominion over you..." Right from the start we must understand two things about this statement. First of all, it is not an imperative. This is not a command where we're being told to do something. Second of all, this is not a promise of future reward pending our obedience to what we are commanded to do in verses 12-13. In other words, we must not take these words in verse 14 as either an exhortation or a consequence of what happens if we oppose sin and serve God. Rather, when we read, "For sin will have no dominion over you", this must be understood as a statement of assured fact for the believer in Christ. An assurance that he can and will effectively oppose sin and serve God since sin will have no dominion over [him]. Moreover, this is God's Word of assurance for His people that they will persevere in sanctification because they will never again be under the dominion of sin.

But affirming this truth raises a question: what does it mean to be under the dominion of sin? One reason for this question is due to the reality that sin still remains in our mortal bodies as Christians, and we still commit sin (6:12; cf. 7:14-24). So how then must we understand that sin will have no dominion over you? Again, what does it mean to be under the dominion of sin? The answer to this question takes us to Romans 3:9-18, where we're told that "both Jews and Greeks, are under sin." To be "under sin" is to be under sin's power, rule, and thus its dominion. But the kind of people described as under sin's dominion are not believers but unbelievers. They are in rebellion to God's law, blind to the things of God, with no inclination to seek God in a saving way, and full of corruption on a path of sinful misconduct (3:10-12). This is a person under the dominion of sin. But this is not a Christian!

A Christian has died to his old way of life under the enslaving power of sin (6:2). He no longer lives under sin's tyranny nor in sin's territory. Furthermore, what he was in Adam as a lost condemned sinner has died also. The "old self" is dead (6:6) and a new creation has been joined in spiritual union with Christ (6:3-5; cf. II Cor,5:17). Based on these gospel facts, is it any wonder that we are given such strong assurance - "for sin will have no dominion over you?" Be encouraged, Christian! Sin has lost its rule over you. It may fight to regain power but it will not prevail. United to Christ under the reign of His redeeming grace - this is where you live.

2010-08-02T09:51:00.000-07:00

Why Government Can't Save You

Ten years ago John MacArthur wrote a book entitled Why Government Can't Save You. The subtitle to the book was "An Alternative to Political Activism." As important and timely as this book was when it was originally published, MacArthur has lamented that of all the books he has written, this one book has sold the least copies. Of course, he wasn't surprised at how unpopular the book was, since (as he expressed it), so many American Evangelicals have replaced the Great Commission with political crusades.

But depsite the lack of readership for the book, its biblical message rings just as loud and clear for the church today, as it did ten years ago. In fact, in the last chapter of the book, MacArthur sets forth a clarion call that we all need to take heed to, as we consider our own personal response to government and the American culture at large:

"With society sliding headlong into greater and greater evil, debauchery, violence, and corruption, and seemingly populated outside the church by no one but "modern barbarians," the temptation is strong for believers to jump into the cultural fray as self-righteous social/political reformers and condescending moralizers. All the while those self-styled Christian activists forget or ignore their true mission in the world...As noble as the desire to reform society may be, and as stirring as the emotions sometimes are when we're involved in a political cause we really believe is right, those activities are not to be the Christian's chief priorities...God does not call the church to influence the culture by promoting legislation and court rulings that advance a scriptural point of view. Nor does He condone any type of radical activism that would avoid tax obligations, disobey or seek removal of government officials we don't agree with, or spend an inordinate amount of time campaigning for a so-called Christian slate of candidates.

The church will really change society for the better only when individual believers make their chief concern their own spiritual maturity, which means living in a way that honors God's commands and glorifies His name. Such a concern inherently includes a firm grasp on Scripture and an understanding that its primary mandate to us is to know Christ and proclaim His gospel. A godly attitude coupled with godly living makes the saving message of the gospel credible to the unsaved. If we claim to be saved but still convey proud, unloving attitudes toward the lost, our preaching and teaching - no matter how doctrinally orthodox or politically savvy and persuasive - will be ignored or rejected."

To sum up what MacArthur is basically pleading for here, is that we as the church of Jesus Christ must keep the main thing the main thing. Our "main thing" is "to know Christ and proclaim His gospel." This must always be what everyone in our communities and the nation as a whole recognize about us. We are CHRISTIANS before we're Americans! We are self-denying, cross-bearing followers of Jesus Christ before we're political conservative crusaders seeking to reclaim America as "our country." Thus, when it comes to how we perceive and respond to our government, we need to always be sure that our actions toward the government are in obedience to God's Word rather than merely pontificating our personal political agendas.

2010-07-29T12:50:00.000-07:00

Gospel Freedom and a Godly Example

Of all the many conflicts that plagued the Corinthian church, one of their greatest causes of contention centered around the issue of Christian liberty. In fact, the apostle Paul devoted three chapters to this matter in his first letter to the Corinthian church. In chapters eight, nine, and ten of First Corinthians, Paul confronted a division between fellow believers who were fussing over whether a Christian should eat food which had been offered to an idol. This division however was really over what a Christian was free to do.

For some believers in Corinth, they could not bring themselves to eating food offered to an idol, because in their conscience, they believed it would draw them into the participation of pagan worship. But for other believers, they saw no problem eating such food, since for them, food was food. Thus, at the heart of the division between these believers, was the whole question of Christian liberty. And the exercise of that liberty was determined by what one's conscience would allow.

Now for the apostle Paul, he had no problem eating food which had been offered to idols, because he knew that an idol was nothing and food was just food (8:4-8). He therefore agreed with those fellow Christians who felt the liberty to eat food of any kind no matter where it came from. However, what mattered most to Paul was not the mere exercise of his freedom as a Christian; but rather how his freedom would affect others. And even more than that, Paul was concerned at how his freedom would affect the way in which others received the gospel he was preaching.

So under this consideration, Paul set forth a biblical principle that he lived by in relation to his freedom as a Christian. A principle that he desired the Corinthian church, and all believers for that matter, to live by when it came to the issue of Christian liberty. In I Corinthians 9:19,22 Paul declared:

For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them...I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.

The great point Paul was making by this principle, was that while he would never compromise nor set aside any truth of the gospel; yet, he would gladly deny himself any personal liberty he has in the gospel - if by such a denial, he could win others to the truth. In other words, when it came to matters of personal preference that Paul was free to exercise as a Christian, he would forgo those liberties if they in any way hindered others from receiving the gospel or growing in the gospel.

Thus, Paul said, "to the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews", and "to those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law", and "to the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak" (9:20-22). In each of these examples, Paul was simply demonstrating that he was willing to identify with others at that point where a door for the gospel would be open. And this was not just his practice with unbelievers, but even with fellow Christians (like those offended by eating food offered to idols). Paul would not permit himself to do anything which would hamper their maturity in the faith. A worthy example to follow indeed.

2010-07-28T07:01:00.000-07:00

The Right and Wrong Way to Judge

There is perhaps no passage in all the Bible more misapplied and misunderstood in our day than Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, that you be not judged." Douglas Wilson once remarked that this is the only verse of Scripture that every pagan in America knows by heart. And the reason why is because for most people in our modern culture, Matthew 7:1 has been erroneously employed to mean that no one should ever evaluate or criticize anyone for anything. The moment you declare something to be wrong or in error about someone's belief or behavior, you are immediately charged with "judging." "Don't you judge me!" is the favorite and typical reaction from those people who insist that we must be tolerant and all-inclusive of whatever anyone believes or how they live. And again, their basis for this conviction is Matthew 7:1.

But when Jesus spoke these words in Matthew 7:1 about judging others, was He really meaning that we must never pass an unfavorable judgment on the conduct and opinions of others? Is this what Jesus meant? Are we to take these words - "judge not" - to mean that sin is never to be rebuked or that false doctrine is never to be corrected? Well, if we compare Scripture with Scripture, it can be easily and quickly deduced that Matthew 7:1 is not forbidding the exercise of any judgment whatsoever. In fact, right here in Matthew 7, there is the call by Christ Himself that we must judge those who claim to speak for God (7:15). We must be discerning and perceptive in what they teach and how they live, making every effort to judge between truth and falsehood, between what is really from God and what is nothing but a sham.

Moreover, in the immediate context of Matthew 7:1, Jesus tells us that there is a right way to judge others (7:5). But the right kind of judging must be preceded by our own confession of sin and repentance, so that we may "see clearly to take the speck out of [our] brother's eye." In other words, the only way to rightly correct the sin or false doctrine in others, is to be certain that we ourselves are not guilty of the same thing. This means that we must thoroughly examine ourselves, carefully considering our own ways, and thus critically measuring ourselves by the infallible standard of God's Word. Once we have done this, then Jesus says we will "see clearly" to exercise the right kind of judging toward others.

So then, Matthew 7:1 is not condemning altogether the practice of judging others. However, it is condemning a certain type of judging. And sadly, it is a type of judging that is all too common, not only in the world, but even in the church. When Jesus said, "Judge not, that you be not judged" - our Lord was forbidding what is called "a censorious, fault-finding, hyper-critical" spirit. J.C. Ryle (1806-1900) desribed this as a "readiness to blame others for trifling offences or matters of indifference, a habit of passing rash and hasty judgments, a disposition to magnify the errors and infirmities of our neighbors, and make the worst of them."

But what is so wicked about this judgmental attitude, is that it is carried out by our own personal standard as the measuring rod of what is right or wrong. We don't judge people by God's perfect standard but by our own prejudicial standard that is shot through with sin. And in addition to this, a judgmental person also plays God, since they claim that they can perfectly read the motives and intentions in another person's heart. They act as if they are omniscient, and thus know everything about everything at all times. What arrogance! But this is the kind of judging which our Lord Jesus Christ condemns. John MacArthur summed it up this way: "Whenever we assign people to condemnation without mercy because they do not do something the way we think it ought to be done or because we believe their motives are wrong, we pass judgment that only God is qualified to make."

2010-07-27T13:21:00.000-07:00

Loving Jesus More than Family

One of the hardest statements that came from the lips of our Lord Jesus Christ, is recorded in Matthew 10:34-37,

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person's enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."

The historic context of these words fall within a larger discourse Jesus was giving His disciples, as He was commissioning them to take the gospel to Israel. From verses 24-42, Jesus set forth the kind of characteristics that will embody His true followers as they carry the gospel into the world. And among the marks of an authentic disciple of Christ, is the willingness to forsake everything, including one's own family if necessary, for Christ's sake.

Our Lord unpacks this kind of sacrifice by first telling us that the coming of His Gospel will render division and estrangement between the nearest relations. While the Gospel certainly proclaims the way of peace between the sinner and God (Rom.5:1-2), yet its presence and preaching create a clear division between those who receive it and those who reject it. Hence, Christ is preparing all His followers for what is the inevitable separation between those who believe in Him and those who don't. In fact, to follow Christ, will bring...a sword that will cut ties in a family with such severity, that "a person's enemies will be those of his own household."

But how could this be? How could sons and fathers, mothers and daughters be set...against each other because of Christ? The answer is really quite simple, but hard to swallow. Our relation to others by blood does not translate into the same relation as the family of God. Unless one is born again with a new nature, they will not love, trust, savor, obey, and follow Christ as their Lord and Redeemer (Jn.1:12-13; 3:1-8). Indeed, as long as they remain unbelievers, they will live in a state of spiritual death, enslaved to sin and Satan (Eph.2:1-3) - despite the fact that we may call them "Mom", "Dad", "brother" or "sister." If we follow Christ and the rest of our family doesn't, then we must not be surprised when we find ourselves set against the rest of our family.

Observing the reality of this kind of division, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) once said: "The coming of Christ into a house is often the cause of variance between the converted and the unconverted. The more loving the Christian is, the more he may be opposed: love creates a tender zeal for the salvation of friends, and that very zeal frequently calls forth resentment. We are to expect this, and not to be put off by it when it occurs. Animosities on account of [Christ] often excite the fiercest of enmities, and nearness of kin inflames rather than quenches the hostility."

But while we can expect this division between believers and unbelievers who live under the same roof - yet for the believer, Christ must always be first! First in our hearts, minds, affections, and actions. He must be first therefore even over the natural love we have for our family. "Whoever loves father or mother...son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." Here is the acid test of our claim as Christians: is our commitment and love to Christ so profound and far-reaching, that any relationship that endangers that relationship will be sacrificed? If our parents or siblings are standing in the way of our faithfulness to Christ, will we cut ties with them to serve Christ with greater liberty? What relationship matters more to us?

To quote again from Spurgeon: "We must earnestly beware of making idols of our dearest ones, by loving them more than Jesus. We must never set them near the throne of our King...Father and mother, son and daugther - we would do anything to please them; but, as opposed to Jesus, they stand nowhere, and cannot for an instant be allowed to come in the way of our supreme loyalty to our Lord."

So, what marks does Christ expect to embody His true followers? According to Matthew 10:34-37, we are to be a people whose passion, love, and devotion to Christ surpasses and supersedes every right affection we have for our family. Even if following Christ brings upon us the scorn and disapproval of our family; yet, by God's grace, we will not shrink back from obeying Jesus fully.

2010-05-05T10:26:00.000-07:00

Ashamed of the Gospel

Today I received in the mail John MacArthur's third edition of his 1993 book, Ashamed of the Gospel. Next to his 1988 publication, "The Gospel According to Jesus", Ashamed of the Gospel has been considered by many as perhaps the best book MacArthur has ever penned. The subtitle to the book is "when the church becomes like the world" - and with the straight-forward, plain spoken language which MacArthur is known for, Ashamed of the Gospel is a critical analysis of the seeker-sensitive movement; and a clarion call for the church to return to a firm and humble reliance on the power and sovereignty of God for salvation. In the preface to the original edition, MacArthur raises an important question which all seeker-sensitive churches need to weigh in with grave seriousness: "What's wrong with pragmatism?" MacArthur's answer is both discerning and convicting for any church or pastor either using pragmatism or tempted to be pragmatic as the basis of their ministry. In addition to answering this question, MacArthur also gives helpful examples of what a church does when it is driven by pragmatism rather than God's Word:

"What's wrong with pragmatism? After all, common sense involves a measure of legitimate pragmatism, doesn't it? If a dripping faucet works fine after you replace the washers, it is reasonable to assume that bad washers were the problem...But when pragmatism is used to make judgments about right and wrong, or when it becomes a guiding philosophy of life, theology, or ministry, it inevitably clashes with Scripture. Spiritual and biblical truth is not determined by testing what 'works' and what doesn't. We know from Scripture, for example, that the gospel often does not produce a positive response (I Cor.1:22-23; 2:14). On the other hand, Satanic lies and deception can be quite effective (Matt.24:23-24; 2 Cor.4:3-4). Majority reaction is no test of validity (cf. Matt.7:13-14), and prosperity is no measure of truthfulness (cf. Job 12:6). Pragmatism as a guiding philosophy of ministry is inherently flawed. Pragmatism as a test of truth is nothing short of satanic.

Nevertheless, an overpowering surge of ardent pragmatism is sweeping through evangelicalism. Traditional methodology - most notably preaching - is being discarded or downplayed in favor of newer means, such as drama, music, dance, comedy, variety, side-show histrionics, pop psychology, and other entertainment forms. The new methods supposedly are more 'effective' - that is, they draw a bigger crowd. And since the chief criterion for guaging the success of a church has become attendance figures, whatever pulls in the most people is accepted without further analysis as good. That is pragmatism.

Perhaps the most visible signs of pragmatism are seen in the convulsive changes that have revolutionized the church worship service in the past decade. Some of evangelicalism's largest and most influential churches now boast Sunday services that are deliberately designed to be rollicking rather than reverent.

Even worse, theology now takes a back seat to methodology. One author has written, 'Formerly, a doctrinal statement represented the reason for a denomination's existence. Today, methodology is the glue that holds churches together. A statement of ministry defines them and their denominational existence.' Incredibly, many believe this is a positive trend, a major advance for the contemporary church...We're actually told we can get better results by first amusing people, giving them pop psychology or impressing them with a high-tech, special-effects smoke-and-light show - thus wooing them into the fold. Once they know we are cool and feel they are comfortable, they'll be ready to receive biblical truth in small, diluted doses.

Pastors have drawn their ministry philosophies from books on marketing methods. Many young ministers devour such resources in search of new techniques to help their churches grow. Major seminaries have shifted their pastoral training emphasis from Bible curriculum and theology to counseling technique and church-growth theory. All these trends reflect the church's growing commitment to pragmatism" [pages 27-28].

2010-05-05T09:52:00.000-07:00

Patience in Pastoring

One of my heroes of the faith whom I have gleaned much wisdom from in the work of pastoring is John Newton (1725-1807). Recently I ran across a biographical sketch of Newton by Iain Murray in his book, Heroes. On pages 102-103, Murray unveils some insightful characteristics of Newton's pastoring when it came to the progress of spiritual growth among his congregation. As I read how patient Newton was with God's flock, I was rightly and sorely convicted of how impatient I tend to be with those God has granted me to shepherd. This was a needed word of challenge and wisdom that I must hear as a pastor. Moreover, I was especially taken by Newton's handling of believers who have not yet come to see "the doctrines of grace." May these words be a great encouragement and challenge as well to other fellow-pastors:

"For Newton, God's great patience in his people's slow progress in grace and truth was a lesson that ministers must ever remember. Preachers are to teach, but they do not control the pace at which grace develops in their hearers. They cannot give the experience that prepares a Christian for fuller light. He concluded that it is a dangerous thing to hurry young believers into an acceptance of teaching they are not ready to receive. Our Lord himself taught the people 'as they were able to hear it' (Mark 4:33). Newton regarded this as very relevant to 'the doctrines which are now stigmatized by the name of Calvinism.' On the presentation of those doctrines he writes:

I am an avowed Calvinist: the points that are usually comprised in that term, seem to me so consonant with Scripture, reason (when enlightened), and experience, that I have not the shadow of a doubt about them. But I cannot dispute, I dare not speculate...but...I think these doctrines will do no one any good till he is taught them of God. I believe a too hasty assent to Calvinistic principles, before a person is duly acquainted with the plague of his own heart, is one principle cause of that lightness of profession which so lamentably abounds in this day, a chief reason why many professors are rash, heady, high-minded, contentious about words...I believe that most persons who are truly alive to God, sooner or later meet with some pinches in their experience which constrain them to flee to these doctrines for relief, which perhaps they had formerly dreaded...In this way I was made a Calvinist myself; and I am content to let the Lord take his own way, and his own time, with others."

2010-04-12T12:13:00.000-07:00

Pursuing Peace

In the face of the world, the church of Jesus Christ should not be seen as relishing discord but pursuing peace with all people. This is in fact the imperative set forth in Romans 12:18 - "If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all." The context of this command falls within the framework of a larger series of precepts directed at how the church is to relate to the unbelieving world (cf. Rom.12:14-21). And among these divine requirements is the call to be peaceable rather than pugnacious. In other words, when the world observes the character and conduct of a Christian, they should see someone who is all for peaceful relations rather than just one who loves a fight.

But what does this look like practically? Romans 12:18 gives us a snapshot. "If possible, as much as it depends on you, live peaceably with all." The most important thing we need to notice about this verse is that it is qualified by two conditions. Condition number one says: "If possible...live peaceably with all." Those opening words toward peaceful relations imply something which every Christian must recognize: it may not be possible to be at peace with everyone.

Let's face it: there are people in this world (and sadly, even in the church) who make peace impossible because of either what they believe or how they behave. This means that to be at peace with such people would involve sacrificing both the truth and purity. Thus, having peace on their terms would compromise the gospel and our walk with Christ. Therefore no matter how much we may desire to be at peace with everyone, this is simply unobtainable if we're going to remain faithful to Christ and His Word.

In fact, this is where we've got to use discernment in our pursuit of peace. God has not called us to be Casper Milquetoast. We are not to be a people who are flabby and flimsy, cowards with no conviction. As we pursue peace with all people we do so governed by truth and holiness. This means that peace must never be put first in our relationships with others. We must not live by the unbiblical standard of "peace at any price." We must never go into a relationship with someone by saying, "Well, I'm just here to keep the peace."

If this is the position you take, ask yourself: "What will I have to give up in order to keep the peace?" You see, the moment we put peace as the first priority in how we relate to others, then we will ultimately sacrifice the truth of the gospel and our commitment to Christ. How is this? If peace is all you're wanting to keep in that relationship, then the terms of that relationship will be determined by whatever the other person is wanting - even if that means forfeiting truth and holiness (e.g., Gal.2:11-14). But this is not true peace. Rather it is nothing more than a cold civility that is tolerated as long as we don't say or do anything which would break the selfish terms of the other party. The spirit of authentic Christianity cannot abide under such terms (see Heb.12:14). Therefore, as a faithful servant and follower of Jesus Christ, we must accept this: it is impossible to be at peace with everyone.

But there is another condition to pursuing peace which also surfaces in Romans 12:18 - "...so far as it depends on you...live peaceably with all." The first condition focused on people and circumstances out of our control. The second condition however aims completely at what we will do. And the great point of these words is simply this: don't be the cause for discord! To say this positively - we must exhaust every avenue to live peaceably with all.

But how is this done? First, we ourselves must be at peace with God (Rom.5:1-2). True peace comes from God alone which can only be experienced through faith in Jesus Christ. Second, we must lead others to have peace with God (II Cor.5:20). Since we are at peace with God through Christ, we have the joy of being His instruments to bring others to that same peace. Third, we must help others to be at peace with one another. Where there has been division there needs to be reconciliation (Matt.5:23,24). But to seek this will require rebuking and repenting, since reconciliation implies a division made due to sin. However, if the sin is not confessed and forsaken, then there will be no peace; and hence, no reconciliation. Finally, we must prove ourselves in all things to be lovers of peace. We must contend for the truth without being contentious; disagree without being disagreeable; and confront sin without being abusive.

2010-04-03T16:41:00.000-07:00

The Taproot of Theological Liberalism

Whether one realizes it or not, thelogical liberalism is alive and well in many churches. In fact, it lives and breathes in many so-called conservative churches. I have seen this first hand in my own pastoral experience. But when we talk about liberalism in the church, what do we mean by this? Dr. J.I. Packer has written much on this subject, and gives a fitly spoken expose on what is "the taproot" of theological liberalism:

"For the best part of two centuries, forms of the intellectual chameleon called liberalism, or modernity, have dominated the mainline churches of the West. The taproot of modernist liberalism is the idea, issuing from the so-called Enlightenment, that the world has the wisdom, so that the Christian way must always be to absorb and adjust to what the world happens to be saying at the moment about human life. Deism, which banishes God entirely from the world of human affairs, and the view nowadays called "panentheism" or "monism", which imprisons him pervasively but impotently within it, have been the two poles between which liberal thinking about God has swung. But neither of these God-concepts is, or can be, trinitarian; neither has room for any belief in the incarnation, or in an objective atonement, or in an empty tomb, or in the sovereign cosmic Lordship of the living Christ today; and neither squares with the affirmation that biblical teaching is divinely revealed truth. It is no wonder, then, that liberalism typically produces, not martyrs, nor challengers of the secular status quo, but trimmers, people who are always finding reasons for going along with the cultural concensus of the moment, whether on abortion, sexual permissiveness, the basic identity of all religions, the impropriety of evangelism and missionary work, or anything else...In the last century, when ideas of progress were in the air and it was possible to believe that every day in every way the world was getting better and better, liberalism, which presented itself as progressive Christianity, could be made to appear right-minded...[But] the only sort of Christianity that can reasonably claim attention for the future is the Bible-based Christianity that defines God in scriptural terms and offers, not affirmation, but transformation of our disordered lives" [from the book, A Passion for Faithfulness: Crossway publishers; 1995: pgs. 43-44].

2010-03-31T10:49:00.000-07:00

A New Kind of Pastor?

Critiquing again the market-driven churches, Dr. David Wells describes the type of pastors who emerge out of these churches. If one compares Dr. Wells' description of these pastors with passages like I Timothy 3:1-8, II Timothy 3:15-4:2, and Titus 1:6-9 - it should be very clear that the market-driven pastor is not modeled after what God sets forth to be the kind of man He calls to shepherd His sheep:

"Across much of evangelicalism, especially in the market-driven churches, one...sees a new kind of leadership among pastors now. Gone is the older model of the scholar-saint, one who was as comfortable with books and learning as with the aches of the soul. This was the shepherd who knew the flock, knew how to tend it, and Sunday by Sunday took that flock into the treasures of God's Word. This has changed. In its place is the new 'celebrity' style. What we typically see now...is the leader who works by manipulating the feelings of the audience, enhancing his own image with personal anecdotes, modeling himself after the CEO, and adopting a domineering management style. He (usually) is completely results-oriented, pragmatic, happy to employ any technique from the secular world that will produce the desired results. And this leader has to be magnetic, entertaining, and light on the screen up front" [from The Courage to be Protestant: published by Eerdmans; 2008: pg. 40].

2010-03-31T05:29:00.000-07:00

Catering to the Customer

What is the driving force behind the market-driven churches? Dr. David Wells offers keen insight in answer to this question from his excellent book, The Courage to be Protestant. Dr. Wells' observations clearly imply the fact that market-driven, seeker-sensitive church models are sadly motivated by what attracts the flesh, rather than exalting Christ and spreading His fame:

"If we are going to market the church and its gospel, where are we going to start? We start, of course, with our customer. What does the customer want? The conventional wisdom is that seriousness is the death knell of successful churches. In an age of entertainment, such as our age is in the West, we have to be funny, engaging, likable, and light to succeed. So, seriousness must be banished. Preserve the taste but the cut the calories.

That is the recipe seeker-sensitive strategists and pastors are following. It is their response to their perception of this changing public, and it matches the change Miller Brewing Company made from regular beer to Miller Lite when Americans became more weight conscious. If Miller can follow the changing habits of American consumers, so can our leading evangelical pastors!

Regular Christianity, many now think, does not go down easy and smooth; Christianity Lite does. A church that is serious, that is still regular...well, what can one say? It will stand out like an organ stop, if that still makes sense now that organs are becoming as rare as dodo birds. And how better to signal the change than by replacing the old-fashioned sermon with a personal chat from a barstool, or by replacing the serious discourse from the pastor with a drama whose very format carries with it a sense of entertainment?

There really is no end to the innovations that are possible as churches think of different ways to attract and accommodate consumers. Some churches, for example, allow those who attend to express themselves on walls devoted to sacred graffiti. Those who come can draw, paint, and sloganize their feelings into life. And how about a table laden with Play-Doh from which to build shapes that express how they are feeling that day? These are the tricks of marketing du jour. This is probably not what Jesus had in mind when he said his Father had hidden truth from the "wise" and revealed it to "little children" (Matt. 11:25)!

One of the ways of making the experience of going to church more pleasant is to offer choice. Consumers want to be able to choose the style of music they hear, the kind of worship they participate in, and to have a say in what they hear from the barstool up front. (The barstool, by the way, is what replaced the Plexiglas stand in many avant-garde churches, which, in turn, had replaced the pulpit.) Having a wide array of choices, after all, is the way the world is going" [pgs. 28-29].

2010-03-30T06:31:00.000-07:00

Taking Time To Dig Deep

Writing in light of Matthew 7:24-27 concerning the wise and foolish builder, John MacArthur observed:

"You can't dig deep if you're in a hurry. You just barely have time for a quickie conversion or lightweight confession. Some people say they are saved before they have any sense that they're even lost. Those who claim Christ legitimately as their own are willing to take time to dig deep. They've thought it through, they've counted the cost. Their profession of faith will not be rejected at the final judgment...Those who come rushing in, but who want out again as soon as you start to lay down the standard for following Christ, are not fit for the kingdom.

Those who dig deep show a desire to give a maximum effort. The easy path always tempts us. Sometimes we make the gospel so easy that it's no gospel at all. We Christians stew about how hard it is to follow up with new converts. One large church in America reported it had 28,000 conversions in a year, baptized 9,600 people, and had 123 join the church. The fact is that 28,000 people weren't saved if only 123 joined the church. The problem is not the difficulty of follow-up; the problem is the difficulty of conversion. We're trying to follow up with people who never were redeemed.

Another characteristic of the man who digs deep is that he's teachable. The Pharisees weren't teachable; you couldn't tell them anything. So many people are like that; they profess Christ but don't want to hear all that true Christianity demands. The call to self-denial, they reject. They hold high their own ideas, goals, and designs. They want to go their way, and when you try to teach the right way instead, they don't want to hear it. It's not because they're unteachable Christians; it's because they're sham Christians.

The one who digs deep empties himself of self-righteousness and self-sufficiency, casts aside his own visions and experiences, and builds on the Word of God for God's glory and not his own" [from Hard to Believe : Thomas Nelson publishers; 2003: pgs. 114-116].

2010-03-23T12:51:00.000-07:00

How do we mortify sin? part four

One of the first great lessons that every Christian should learn about their new life in Christ is that while they are now redeemed they are not yet without sin. In other words, the grace of God has not eradicated every remnant of sin's corruption and effects in their life. With Paul the apostle, we all can say:

"So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members" (Rom.7:21-23).

Here is the Christian life in daily experience. Our reach exceeds our grasp. We strive to follow the desires of our new nature (which is consistent faithfulness to Christ) but we find a roadblock in our way each time. And that roadblock is "the law of sin" housed in our members which works like a gravitational pull on our affections, thoughts, words, and deeds.

So, what are we to do? Are we helpless victims to the downdrag of indwelling sin? Thankfully we're not. For our face off with remaining sin is in God's strength through means of grace He has provided, whereby we can deal sin a mortal blow. This exercise is called "mortification." And for my past three posts I have been unpacking from Scripture the "how to" of mortifying or putting sin to death.

In this present study, we will look at the final means of grace for mortifying sin: it is by fixing our hearts on Jesus Christ. In Hebrews 12:1-2, the writer of Hebrews calls on his fellow Christians to "run with endurance the race that is set before us" - which is the race of Christian perseverance. Or as A.W. Pink (1886-1952) describes it: "...it is a call to constancy in the Christian profession; it is an exhortation unto steadfastness in the Christian life; it is a pressing appeal for making personal holiness our supreme business and quest." And in this strong call to "run with endurance the race that is set before us," the writer of Hebrews urges us to do two things: first, we are "to lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely" (12:1). This is a call to mortify sin. But the word-imagery used here is powerful. It is that of a runner who would remove anything that would hinder him from winning the race - whether it would be clothing or extra physical weight. Thus, in the Christian race there is nothing that hinders us most than "sin which clings so closely" to us. Hence, we are called to "lay aside" that sin!

But how do we do this? The answer to this question is the second call issued from Hebrews 12:1-2. We "lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely" by "looking to Jesus...the founder and perfecter of our faith." This is another way God gives us to kill sin. We fix our gaze on Christ, who is the pioneer and perfecter of our faith.

When Hebrews 12:2 says, "looking to Jesus", the verb translated "looking" means "to look away from one thing and to concentrate on another." So, rather than gazing and concentrating on sin and all its allurements - we fix our hearts and minds on Christ, treasuring Him, not only above sin - but above life itself (Phil.3:7-14). He is the goal, the aim, the sustainer, and the keeper of all that we are as His people (Rom.8:29).

In his classic book on the subject of mortification, John Owen (1616-1683) explained the practical outworking and effect of fixing our eyes on Christ as a means for putting sin to death. He noted four applications: First, by faith fill your heart with a right consideration of the provision that God has made in the work of Christ for the mortification of sins. Second, raise up your heart in faith with an expectation of relief from Christ. Third, place your faith particularly upon the death, blood, and cross of Christ; that is, on Christ crucified and slain. Finally, when you meditate upon the death of Christ, keep in mind the power available to us, and your desire to be conformed to Christ.

How often do we really think hard about all that Jesus did by His suffering and dying to save us from our sins? Whenever we are tempted to sin, do we fight to fix our gaze on Christ and remember what He did to kill this sin for us? Do we also remember that by His death we are forever set free from sin's enslaving power, therefore, through Him we have the grace to "lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely to us?" To kill sin is to "look to Jesus." It is to be satisfied in all that He is for us and cast ourselves on all that He has done to liberate us from sin's power.

2010-03-09T08:02:00.000-08:00

How do we mortify sin? part three

When it comes to living the Christian life, God has not left us to figure it out on our own or attempt to make it work by our mere strength. Instead, the Lord has amply supplied His saints with the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, a new nature, and means of grace (like prayer, the Word of God, Christian fellowship, etc.) to sufficiently enable them to live for His glory in all things. And thankfully, such rich supplies for Christian living include what every believer needs to fight, subdue, weaken, and kill the "works of the flesh" (Gal.5:19-21; cf. Rom.7:14-24). In my last two posts we have been considering what "means of grace" God has specifically given us to effectively put sin to death, or "mortify sin" as the old divines would call it. We have observed three specific things: first, we mortify sin by remembering the truth of our death to sin's dominion and our new life in Christ (see Rom.6:1-11; Gal.2:20). Second, we mortify sin by abstaining from fleshly lusts (I Pet.2:11). And third, we mortify sin by making no provision for the flesh (Rom.13:14).

But in addition to these provisions God has made for us to carry out a proficient warfare on sin, we also mortify sin in this way: by saturating our hearts and minds in the Word of God. This can never be said enough: if we are going to kill sin, then we must employ with faithfulness and constancy the Word of God. But what this means practically, is that we must be diligent in the reading, study, meditation, and application of God's Word. We must be what Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) exhorted his own congregation to be: "Walking Bibles!" This means that God's Word must be what governs and rules and shapes our thinking, feeling, conservation, and conduct. Thus when it comes to sin - God's Word must be the final authority to determine for every Christian what sin is and how to deal with it.

So then, we need to be like the psalmist, in Psalm 119:11, "I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you." The verb translated "stored up" literally means to "hoard" or "to reserve." The idea in this context of Psalm 119:11, is that we read the Word of God so that we remember and keep close at hand all that it says regarding sin and holiness. We read the Scriptures to remember the Scriptures. Therefore, if we are reading the Bible every once in a while, then it will not be a safeguard against sin. If we read the Scriptures casually, like some cheap novel, then we are setting ourselves up for sin's invasion. To store the Word of God in our hearts, we must be in the Word daily - and we must commit to memory what God's Word says regarding the nature and danger of sin.

But in addition to memorization, there also needs to be meditation on the Word. Again, consider the godly example of the psalmist. In Psalm 1:1-2, we read: "Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night." What keeps the godly man from "the counsel of the wicked", "the way of sinners", and "the seat of scoffers"? It is his meditation on "the law of the Lord." He meditates "day and night" on God's Word.

What does it mean to "meditate?" Its basic meaning is to "murmur", "mutter", or "muse" and hence, to speak to one's self. It was used to describe the low growling of a lion after he had trapped his prey (Isa.31:4) or even the cow chewing the cud. Both images capture something that takes a slow and methodical concentration. In the context of the believer meditating on the Bible, he is literally taking selected passages of Scripture, and mulling over them in his mind, vocally repeating them to himself. Moreover, he is asking those passages specific questions.

Of course, to be at the discipline of memorizing and meditating on the Bible takes time, planning, prayer, and strategy in our war on sin. We have to be deliberate and intentional to employ God's Word in the killing of sin. Thus we have to make the time to be in the Word. We also must pray as we come to the Word. We need the Holy Spirit to illuminate our understanding so that we see clearly what the Bible says about sin and how to conquer it. The end result will be developing a firm and godly conviction regarding any particular sin we're fighting. A conviction that goes beyond merely admitting sin is wrong, but actually controlling how we think and feel about the sin in accordance with God's Word.

2010-02-03T11:23:00.000-08:00

How do we mortify sin?: part two

John MacArthur once said: "Mortification involves the cultivation of new habits of godliness, combined with the elimination of old sinful habits from our behavior." This statement sums up the practical outworking of what Romans 8:13 describes as mortifying or "putting to death" the sinful deeds of our body. This spiritual discipline is not for only a few elite Christians to practice, but it is for all believers in Christ. Moreover, it should be our daily practice - since the presence of indwelling sin is always there to ensnare us at every turn in all our thoughts, words, and deeds (see Rom.7:14-24).

In my last post I began to unpack the ways in which we carry out this discipline. So far, we have only covered two means of grace that should be exercised for the purpose of mortification. First, we mortify sin by remembering the truth of our death to sin's dominion and our new life in Jesus Christ (see Rom.6:1-11; Gal.2:20). Knowing who we are in Christ and the glory of what God has done for us in Christ is vital to healthy Christian living. And in the arena of killing sin, it is especially important that we understand that sin no longer has power over us to enslave us since we are now united to Christ in spiritual union. Secondly, we mortify sin by abstaining from fleshly lusts (I Pet.2:11). Having been set free from sin's former dominion, we have the power in Christ to say "NO!" to sin. We are not victims to the temptations of the flesh - but in Christ we can "abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against [our] soul" (I Pet.2:11). Thus, to kill sin is to refuse to sin by God's grace.

Another means though of mortifying sin is by making no provision for the flesh. In Romans 13:14, we are commanded "to make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires." Now the question must be raised: what is the difference between "make no provision for the flesh" and the previous point from I Peter 2:11, "abstain from the passions of the flesh?" The difference between these two imperatives is that to "abstain" means just to stop sinning, whereas "to make no provision" carries the idea of not making plans to sin. The word translated "provision" in Romans 13:14 comes from a Greek term that carries the idea of "forethought" or "planning in advance." Hence, when we're commanded to "make no provision for the flesh", then we're being called to refuse accommodating the flesh in any way that will inevitably set us up for a fall.

Let's face it: this is why most Christians fall into sin - they foolishly set themselves up to gratify the desires of the flesh. And what's worse, it is our own wicked pride that leads us into that pit of sin. We say to ourselves, "I can handle this. I'm strong. I can beat this." So we watch television programs and movies that only stir up the lusts of the flesh; we listen to gossip that only excites our taste buds for more of those little trifles; we look at magazines or read books or view websites that fill our minds with ungodly, immoral images; or we keep company with people who have no passion or love for Christ whatsoever, allowing their godless worldview to slowly erode our thinking away from the Bible. And all the while, we're saying to ourselves in the stupidity of our pride: "I can handle this." No, you can't handle it - you're falling!

Consider again the counsel of Romans 13:14, "...make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires." If you don't want to fall, then don't walk where it's slippery. To mortify sin we have to become strategists. We have to be aware of what is going to tempt us and seduce us and drag us into sin; and make strategic plans to stay away from whatever that is. For instance, if we struggle with the sin of gluttony, then we should plan to stay away from those foods and restaurants where the temptation to indulge ourselves is strongest. If we struggle with gossip, then we need to plan out how we are going to converse with others on subjects that will neither draw us into that sin nor the person we are talking with. To mortify sin we must become strategists.

But in addition to this, there must be a wholehearted commitment to give up whatever is necessary, even the most cherished things we possess, if doing that will help protect us from falling into sin. This is what Jesus meant by gouging out the "right eye" and cutting off the "right hand" (Matt.5:29-30). If we are going to mortify sin, then we must make no provision for the flesh - no matter what that self-denial will cost us. Anything that would ensnare us to sin must be eliminated immediately.

2010-01-06T11:35:00.000-08:00

How do we mortify sin?: part one

Having underscored in my past three posts what mortification is and what it is not, I now want to turn our attention to a much more practical question: how do we mortify sin? Since mortification is the lifelong process and work of every Christian, by the divine power of the Holy Spirit, to crush, sap, root out, weaken, and subdue all known manifestations of indwelling sin - what then are the means of grace God has supplied for us to kill sin? Based on how we have defined mortification from Romans 8:13, we know that this is chiefly a work accomplished only through the power of the Holy Spirit. But understanding the importance and absolute necessity of the Spirit's role in our mortifying sin, we are still left wondering, "What do I do?" Answering this question will take up my next few posts.

In the first place, we mortify sin by remembering the truth of our death to sin's dominion and our new life in Jesus Christ. This is what we are commanded to do in Romans 6:11, "So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus." This divine imperative falls on the heels of Paul's incredible exposition concerning the death of every Christian to their former slavery to sin, as a consequence to their spiritual union with Christ (see 6:1-10).

Paul declares that because we have "died to sin" and have been united with Christ - we have received a new life whereby our life in sin is dead and gone (6:3-6). Hence, because we are no longer under sin's dominion, then we must count this as a fact everyday. This is the command of Romans 6:11. No matter how harassed we may be by the temptations of remaining sin (Rom.6:12-13; 7:14-25), it will never change the fact of who we are in Jesus Christ as His people who have been set free from sin's enslaving power.

This must be the first mortal blow we give to indwelling sin. As each new day begins, we need to remind ourselves: "I am dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Sin has no authority over me. Sin has no right to bully me. I belong to God. I live in union with Jesus Christ who is now my life." This is the truth of what God's grace has done for all His people, despite how they may feel. And this is how we start each day to put sin to death.

In the second place, we mortify sin by abstaining from fleshly lusts. In First Peter 2:11, we are commanded: "Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul." Probably the most simple and straightforward response to the ongoing attacks of indwelling sin, is to abstain from it. This verb translated "abstain" in First Peter 2:11, comes from a Greek term that means "to hold one's self away from." Used in the present middle construction, Peter is calling on all believers in Christ to be actively, unceasingly staying away from those things that pertain to the flesh. This means that whatever thoughts, words, images, sounds, feelings, and actions which are sinful in nature - must be at all costs, put away from ourselves. No sin of any kind should be entertained.

This is what Paul meant when he wrote to the Ephesian church, in Ephesians 4:31, "Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice." And again in Ephesians 5:3-4, "But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which is out of place..." The simple point of these prohibitions is this: "Stay away from it! Don't do it! Abstain from these things."

Martyn Lloyd Jones (1899-1981) once nailed down the directness of such a command when he said: "...stop doing it, stop it at once, never do it again! You have to be a total abstainer from these sins, these 'fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.' You have no right to say, 'I am weak, I cannot, and temptation is powerful.' The answer of the New Testament is, 'Stop doing it.' "

So, how do we mortify sin? Here is some of the most practical counsel of God's Word: just stop it! Abstain from sin. Understand this: we have no excuse here. We have been set free from sin's enslaving power, we have a new nature, a new life in Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit indwells us (Rom.6:1-8:17; I Cor.6:19-20; Gal.2:20; Eph.1:3-14; Col.3:1-5) - henceforth, there is no justifiable excuse whenever we give in to the temptation of indwelling sin. God has supplied us with all we need to put sin to death, and thus to abstain from its subtle and deceitful desires.

2009-12-30T12:24:00.000-08:00

Defining Mortification: part two

One of the most helpful and graphic pictures that expresses how God wants us to treat any residual sin in our life, is the account in First Samuel 15 regarding God's command for king Saul to lead Israel in the extermination of the Amalekites. Through God's prophet Samuel, king Saul was ordered by the Lord to carry out a total destruction of the Amalekites, leaving no survivors - not even infants or animals. This people and all that belonged to them was to be wiped off the face of the earth (this was in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 25:17-19).

But king Saul did not obey God fully on this matter. Although by God's design and power, Saul and the army of Israel delivered a crushing blow against the Amalekites (I Sam.15:8); yet, Saul fell short of full obedience. In First Samuel 15:9, we are told that Saul spared the king of the Amalekites, Agag, and "the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good." Saul was not willing to destroy these enemies of God with utter destruction. Instead, motivated by his own greed, pride, and the fear of man, king Saul chose not to follow through in his obedience to the Lord.

As a result of his rebellion, the prophet Samuel declared God's judgment upon Saul and all his descendents: they were to be permanently removed from Israel's throne (I Sam.15:23). But in addition to this judgment, Samuel finished what Saul had merely started. He took a sword and literally hacked king Agag to pieces (I Sam.15:33). Samuel did what Saul was unwilling to do: to carry out God's command to the full.

Now when it comes to the Christian's responsibility to mortify sin (see Rom.8:13), this image of Samuel severing the life of king Agag, serves as a vivid and striking illustration. Rather than being like Saul and letting sin live, we must be like Samuel and hack sin to pieces! In short, there must be no mercy shown to the "Agags" in our life.

But what does it mean to "hack" sin to death? When we read in Romans 8:13 that we are to "mortify sin", what is the substance of this work? In my last post I began answering this question by pointing out that there are five ways to define biblical mortification, based on Romans 8:13. So far, we have considered the first three: (1) to mortify sin is chiefly a work of the Holy Spirit; (2) to mortify sin is a lifetime process for every Christian; and (3) to mortify sin is not to eradicate sin but to subdue it, to deprive it of its power, to break the habit pattern we have developed of continually giving in to the temptation of any particular sin.

Now here are the final two ways that true mortification of sin can be defined: to mortify sin is to mortify all known sin. In Romans 8:13, it reads that we are to "put to death the deeds of the body." The term deeds is obviously in the plural. It refers to all known sinful acts which are the manifestation of indwelling sin that remains in our bodily members (cf. Rom.6:12-13; 7:23). It is not therefore one sin we must concentrate on to kill, but all known sin present in our lives.

Finally, to mortify sin is the responsibility of every Christian in the process of daily sanctification. What I appreciate so much about Romans 8:13, is that it expresses with great clarity the responsibility of the believer in the work of sanctification. We're told: "by the Spirit [you] put to death the deeds of the body." Mortifying sin is never done apart from the Holy Spirit, but it is also not the sole work of the Spirit leaving the Christian with nothing to do in this process. The truth is, based on Romans 8:13, mortification is not what the Holy Spirit does but rather it is what He empowers the Christian to do. It is the believer who puts to death the deeds of the body, as the Spirit of God gives him the strength and wisdom to carry out that work.

So, in putting sin to death, we must not buy in to this false idea that says, "Just let go and let God." God does not treat us as sticks and stones or as an empty glove that only needs a hand to fill it. Rather, we are personally involved in this lifelong work as the Holy Spirit empowers us to kill sin and live in pursuit of holiness (Col.3:5; Heb.12:14).

What then is the biblical meaning of mortification? Tying together the five different ways mortification has been defined from Romans 8:13, this is what we can conclude: mortification is the lifelong process and work of every Christian, by the divine power of the Holy Spirit, to crush, sap, root out, weaken, and subdue all known manifestations of indwelling sin.

2009-12-14T08:36:00.000-08:00

Defining Mortification: part one

The greatest struggle, the most intense battle that every Christian faces everyday of their lives in this fallen world, is a war with "indwelling sin" (cf. Rom.7:14-24). This means that my spouse, my kids, my neighbor, my work, the economy, the government, or terroists will never qualify as my ultimate problem. In fact, not even the devil himself can take this position in my life. No, the supreme battle for a believer in Christ comes from the remaining power and influence of sin in his members.

But the most pressing question for a Christian facing this unpleasant reality is: how do deal with remaining sin? Or to be more practical: how do we effectively battle our pride, envy, jealously, bitterness, anger, and lust? In my last post I began answering these questions by bringing to our attention a principle work in our daily sanctification called "mortification." This term is taken from Romans 8:13, where Christians are exhorted: "...but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." In this verse, the phrase, "you put to death" is where the concept of mortification is derived. Thus, when it comes to battling with our personal sin, we are to mortify sin - and hence, to put it to death.

But it is not enough to simply tell a Christian, "You must mortify sin!" We need direction and guidance as to how. Therefore I began in my previous post to unpack this from the standpoint of considering what mortification is not. It is not therefore covering sin up, internalizing sin, exchanging one sin for another, by-passing the cleansing of our conscience, or merely repressing sin. If any of these examples describe how we have attempted to deal with sin, then we must realize that true mortification has not taken place.

So, what is true mortification? If we go to Romans 8:13, there are five ways to define biblical mortification: first, to mortify sin is chiefly a work of the Holy Spirit. In Romans 8:13, we're told, it is "by the Spirit" that we put sin to death. This is not a work therefore that Christians can ever do in their own strength. The Puritan, John Owen (1616-1683), said in this regard:

"All other ways of mortification are in vain. Men may attempt this work based upon other principles, but they will come short. It is a work of the Spirit, and it is by Him alone that we are to experience victory. Mortification from self-strength, carried on by ways of self-invention, to the end of a self-righteousness, is the soul and substance of all false religion."

Secondly, to mortify sin is a lifetime process for every Christian. The verb tense used for the term, "you put to death", is a present tense. This means that our war on the presence and influence of indwelling sin will never let up until we are taken to heavenly glory. There are no vacations, no weekend getaways, no breaks whatsoever from this work in the life of the believer. We will always have to be mortifying sin somewhere in our lives. Again, consider the wise counsel of John Owen:

"When sin lets us alone, we may let sin alone; but sin is always active when it seems to be the most quiet, and its waters are often deep when they are calm. We should therefore fight against it and be vigorous at all times and in all conditions, even when there is the least suspicion...Sin is always acting, always conceiving, and always seducing and tempting. Who can say that he has ever had anything to do with God or for God which indwelling sin has not tried to corrupt? This battle willl last more or less all our days. If sin is always acting, we are in trouble if we are not always mortifying. He that stands still and allows his enemies to exert double blows upon him without resistance will undoubtedly be conquered in the end."

Third, to mortify sin is not to eradicate sin but to subdue it, to deprive it of its power, to break the habit pattern we have developed of continually giving in to the temptation of any particular sin. We cannot eliminate indwelling sin in this life. It will be with us until we die (see Rom.7:14-25). However, in the work of mortification, we can sap sin of its strength, rooting it out, and depriving it of its influence. And this is really at the heart of what it means to mortify sin. It is a lifelong process of draining sin's power and influence which has been wielded over us. We are literally seeking day by day through the Spirit to take away everything that gives sin its strength and power in our lives.

In my next post, we will consider the last two ways that Romans 8:13 defines mortification.

2009-12-07T12:51:00.000-08:00

Mortification: The Christian Response to Personal Sin

One of the great acid tests of proving whether or not someone is a Christian, is to ask the question: how do you deal with your own personal sin? For instance, do you repent of it or do you molly coddle it and make excuses for it? Also, is your heart broken over personal sin because it is an offense against God or because it just makes you feel bad? Further, when you do sin, do you keep short accounts with God - confessing it immediately to Him for what it is as "sin?" All of these questions are vital for our own self-examination as professing Christians.

Think about it: there are a lot of people in the visible church who cry down the sins they see in others, but do not ever consider the vileness, guilt, and pollution of their own sin. They are the proverbial "hypocrite" whom Jesus warns us about in Matthew 7:1-5. They are quick to point out the "speck" of sin in their brother's eye, while never seeing the "log jam" of sin in their own. It is a tragically comedic picture of the fool who is always condemning others for the tiny particle of dust in their eye, while not seeing the massive tree trunk gaping out of his own eye. In short, such a person never deals with his own personal sin. But what's worse, by never giving admission to his sin but instead denying it - he is actually proving that he is a total stranger to saving grace (see I Jn.1:8,10).

So, again, how do you deal with your own personal sin? If you are a true believer in Jesus Christ, what do you do about the sin that remains in you (cf. Rom.7:14-25)? The biblical answer to these questions takes us to a passage of Scripture that I intend to camp out in for my next several posts. The passage is Romans 8:13, which says: "...but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." In the language of exhortation, this verse describes what is true of every Christian, in relation to the remaining influence and corruption of sin that dwells in our bodies: by the power of the Holy Spirit, a Christian seeks to kill sin wherever he finds sin in his flesh.

This is how a Christian deals with his own personal sin. In fact, this is a Christian's only course of action he takes by virtue of his life in the Spirit - he puts sin to death! This means that even if a Christian may fall in a state of going back to certain sins, it is only for a season; because his new nature and the indwelling presence of the Spirit will renew him to repentance and declare a revived war on personal sin. In other words, a true Christian does not and cannot live in sin (see Rom.6:1-14; I Jn.3:9), though they commit sin - but instead, the Christian life is a life of war on all known sin that remains in our mortal bodies.

Now the theological term for this warfare is what's called "mortification." This word is derived from a Greek verb Paul uses in Romans 8:13, translated in the words: "you put to death." The King James Version of the Bible actually translates these same terms as "mortify." So then, when it comes to dealing with personal sin in our lives as Christians, we are called by God to "mortify sin."

But what does this mean practically? How do we mortify or put sin to death? My first approach to these questions must be to underscore what mortification does not mean. First, to mortify sin does not mean covering sin up. You can obscure sin from the sight of others, but that is not mortification. Until we confess and forsake our sin we have not begun the work of mortification (Prov.28:13). Second, to mortify sin does not mean to only internalize sin. If you forsake the outward practice of some evil yet continue to ruminate on the memory of that sin's pleasure - beware. Although you may have moved that sin into the privacy of your imagination, where it is known only to you and God, yet it has not been truly mortified. Third, to mortify sin does not mean to exchange one sin for another. What good is it to trade stealing for lying or to trade gossip for gluttony? Neither sin has been mortified. Fourth, to mortify sin does not mean to by-pass the cleansing of our conscience. Having a good conscience is to work through the issue of our guilt. We should be ashamed of our sins, and let that sorrow do its full work in our hearts to produce a deep, honest repentance (II Cor.7:10). Finally, to mortify sin does not mean to merely repress sin. To push sin back rather than to deal with it forthrightly in the light of God's Word, will not bring about true mortification. Instead, it will only create more problems as it remains brushed under the proverbial rug, and allowed to fester and gain more influence. This therefore is not mortification.

2009-11-11T13:04:00.000-08:00

Some Sage Wisdom for Fellow Pastors

For the past 20 years I have served in the ministry, I have gleaned most (second to the Bible!) from the writings of Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) as a wise counselor, exhorter, and friend to fellow pastors. One of my favorite books by Spurgeon is An All-Round Ministry (published by Banner of Truth Trust). This book is compiled of Spurgeon's Presidential Addresses at the Annual Conference of the Pastor's College that Spurgeon had founded in 1855. These lectures by Spurgeon are convicting, comforting and quite humorous in certain places. So to any fellow pastors who read this blog, I hope you enjoy the following excerpts from An All-Round Ministry:

When to leave a church?

"I am afraid that there are some ministers who get into a pulpit, intending to stick there. There is no moving them, and they never move the people. It is sometimes remarked to me, 'Some of your men move about a good deal.' 'Yes,' I reply, 'many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.' I like the self-sacrifice of a man who feels that he can move, and will move when he can do more good elsewhere. Never move or stay for selfish reasons, but hold yourself at your great Captain's beck and call.

An old Scotch minister, as he was riding along, saw, according to his own description, something coming which greatly alarmed him. It was a gispy riding aloft upon an ass which he had loaded high with faggots. The beast, which the minister was riding, was alarmed as well as its rider, set its feet down very firmly, and put its ears back, after the manner of amiable horses! 'And,' said the minister in describing it, 'I prepared myself for a fall, so that I fell somewhat more easily.' 'But,' said a friend, 'I should have got off.' That idea had never crossed the worthy man's mind.

So it is with some ministers, they prepare themselves to be dismissed by their people, but never propose to remove of their own will. It is within my knowledge that a brother, not of our Conference, said to his people, when they were in a most earnest manner endeavoring to get rid of him, 'It was the Spirit of God that brought me here, and I shall never go till the Spirit of God leads me to go away, and that will be a very long while.' The last sentence cast suspicion on all that preceded it, for, surely, he could not foretell what the mind of the Spirit might be. Stay or move, brethren; go to Africa, or America, or Australia...only do accomplish your mission, and glorify God. Be holy, be gracious, be prayerful, be disinterested, be like the Lord Jesus; thus only will your lives be consistent with the gospel you are called to preach."

Be simple and clear in your gospel preaching

"Sometimes, young men are fascinated by some famous preacher whose style is grandiose, sublime, or involved. They see the thing done very splendidly, and as they look on, they marvel, and by degrees they think they will try that style, too; and so they put on the seven-league boots, large enough for them to live in, and the result is ridiculous, nay, worse than that, it is spiritually useless. When a man tries to do the magnificent, with elaborate sentences and pompous diction, and grandeur of manner, it must and will come to nought...Speak from your heart, and never mind about eloquence. Do not speak after the manner of the orator; speak as a lover of souls, and then you will have real eloquence...What you have to do is to be the means of saving souls, and look you well to that."

Be always found faithful despite the size of your ministry

"Remember, dear brother, if you give your whole soul to the charge committed to you, it does not matter much about its appearing to be a somewhat small and insignificant affair, for as much skill may be displayed in the manufacture of a very tiny watch as in the construction of the town clock; in fact, a minute article may become the object of greater wonder than another of larger dimensions. Quality is a far more precious thing than quantity...We must never think, because the particular work we have in hand seems to be insignificant, that therefore we cannot do it, or should not do it, thoroughly well. We need Divine help to preach aright to a congregation of one. If a thing is worth doing at all, it is worth doing well...Many a minister has acheived fame, and, what is far better, has brought glory to God, in a congregation which could be counted by units, while another has presided over a large church, and though at first there was a great blast of trumpets, it has ended in the silence and sadness of utter failure. Know your work, and bend over it, throwing your heart and soul into it; for, be it great or small, you will have to praise God to all eternity if you are found faithful in it."

Be masters of the Bible

"Our main business is to study the Scriptures. The smith's main business is to shoe horses; let him see that he knows how to do it, for should he be able to belt an angel with a girdle of gold, he will fail as a smith if he cannot make and fix a horseshoe. It is a small matter that you should be able to write the most brilliant poetry, - as possibly you could, - unless you can preach a good and telling sermon, which will have the effect of comforting saints and convincing sinners. Study the Bible, dear brethren, through and through, with all helps that you can possibly obtain.

Be well instructed in theology, and do not regard the sneers of those who rail at it because they are ignorant of it. Many preachers are not theologians, and hence the mistakes which they make. It cannot do any hurt to the most lively evangelist to be also a sound theologian, and it may often be the means of saving him from gross blunders. Nowadays, we hear men tear a single sentence of Scripture from its connection, and cry, 'Eureka! Eureka!' as if they had found a new truth; and yet they have not discovered a diamond, but only a piece of broken glass. Had they been able to compare spiritual things with spiritual, had they understood the analogy of the faith, and had they been aquainted with the holy learning of the great Bible students of past ages, they would not have been quite so fast in vaunting their marvellous knowledge. Let us be thoroughly well acquainted with the great docrines of the Word of God, and let us be mighty in expounding the Scriptures. I am sure that no preaching will last so long, or build up a church so well, as the expository...I cannot too earnestly assure you that, if your ministries are to be lastingly useful, you must be expositors. For this purpose, you must understand the Word yourselves, and be able so to comment upon it that the people may be built up by the Word. Be masters of your Bibles, brethren; whatever other works you have not searched, be at home with the writings of the prophets and apostles. 'Let the Word of God dwell in you richly.' "

2009-11-04T10:21:00.000-08:00

Led By the Spirit: The Normal Christian Life

One great reality of the Christian life is that of being "led by the Spirit of God" (see Rom.8:14; Gal.5:18). To say this another way: if you are a Christian, then you are someone whose life experience is led by the Spirit of God. This of course implies that if there is no such leading of the Holy Spirit in your life, then you cannot be a Christian.

Now making such a bold proposition like this obviously raises questions of practical concern. And there are two questions that I want to consider in particular: first, what does it mean to be led by the Spirit of God? To begin with, we must understand what it does not mean. It does not mean anything that has to do with fanaticism, auto-suggestion, or hearing fictitous imaginary inward voices. Furthermore, it does not refer to anything which contradicts the clear testimony of God's written Word. No one can claim to be led by the Spirit whose words or actions are in direct opposition to the teaching, the commands, and the history recorded in God's Word. In fact, if any of our words or actions are not in conformity and obedience to the Word of God, then we cannot claim under any circumstances to be led by the Holy Spirit.

So what does it mean then to be led by the Spirit of God? To be led by the Spirit of God is to be guided, directed, and governed by His divine power, persuasion, and providence. This means of course that there is a general and particular leading which the Holy Spirit is always exercising in the life of a Christian. First of all, the Spirit's leading is "general" in the sense that we are always under the Spirit's sovereign control in sustaining and governing the affairs of our life. So, for instance, the only reason we can be promised in Romans 8:28 that "all things" are working together for our good is because the Holy Spirit as God (in relation to the Father and the Son who are each equally God), is bringing all events and circumstances to fulfill His divine purpose for our lives (see also Eph.1:11).

Second of all, the Spirit's leading is also "particular" - whereby He empowers, illuminates, and persuades us in the life-long process called "sanctification" (I Thess.5:23). In this respect, the Holy Spirit's leading can be grieved (Eph.4:30) and quenched (I Thess.5:19) by Christians who fall into sin and disobedience. Thus when we read in Romans 8:14 that all Christians are "led by the Spirit of God", we must understand that this is not a forced, mechanical kind of leading which never takes into account the personal responsibility of the Christian to trust and obey. As John Owen (1616-1683) once wrote concerning the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer:

"[The Holy Spirit] does not so work in us that it is not still an act of our obedience. The Holy Spirit so works in us and upon us, as we are able to be wrought in and upon, and yet He preserves our own liberty and free obedience. He works upon our understandings, wills, consciences, and affections, agreeably to their own natures. He works in us and with us, not against us or without us, so that His assistance is an encouragement as to the accomplishing of the work."

So then, as we are led by the Spirit of God, it is not without our own responsibility to be obedient to what God has called us to do. However, on the flip-side of this truth we must remember: it is only by the Spirit and under His divine influence and power that our obedience to God is effectively carried out (Rom.8:13; Gal.5:16; Eph.5:18). We cannot trust and obey God without the Holy Spirit's leading in our life!

But with this humble admission we must now face our second, and more practical question: how do we know when we are being led by the Spirit of God? Let me offer six ways that we can discern biblically if and when we can honestly say, "I am being led by the Spirit of God." First, we are being led by the Spirit when we are in pursuit of holiness and not in pursuit of sin. Lest we forget, the Spirit of God is most commonly referred to as the Holy Spirit - which tells us much about His charecter. Moreover, as God Himself (co-equal with the Father and the Son), the Holy Spirit cannot sin and is thus completely without sin. He is opposed to sin (Gal.5:17). So the only direction the Holy Spirit will lead us is away from sin and to be at war with sin (Rom.8:13; Gal.5:16) - but never will the Spirit lead a Christian into sin. Indeed, let none of us dare excuse any of our sinful actions as being what the Holy Spirit "led me" to do! When we sin as Christians we have grieved the Spirit not followed Him.

Secondly, to be led by the Spirit is to be led into the truth of God's Word with understanding and delight. The Holy Spirit is also called "the Spirit of truth" (Jn.16:13) whom Jesus promises, "will guide you into all truth." Not only that, but the Holy Spirit in that guidance, will also bring to the believer "illumination" (Eph.1:18), so that he can understand the Word of God (I Jn.2:20,21). Therefore, if we are being led by the Spirit of God then the Word of God will not be a closed book but an opened book; whereby we will have an understanding, hunger and thirst which will saturate our hearts and minds in the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, this dynamic of the Spirit's leading will create a growing desire to obey God's Word. We will say with the psalmist, "Make me walk in the path of your commandments, for I delight in it" (Psa.119:35).

Thirdly, to be led by the Spirit is to be fueled with passion and power to exalt Jesus Christ as His witnesses. Here is a sure test to know if you are being led by the Spirit of God: does your life, by word and deed, make much of Jesus Christ? When we are under the leading of the Holy Spirit, we will be a people who spread the truth and glory of Jesus Christ to others with joy and eagerness (Acts 1:8; cf. Jn.16:14). Furthermore, by the Spirit's leading we will be jealous to guard and defend the truthfulness of who Christ is as God incarnate (I Jn.4:1-6). Fourthly, to be led by the Spirit is to be led into a great love for the Church. To say this another way: to be led by the Spirit is to have a great love and desire to be in the fellowship of God's people. This is a hugely important point regarding how the Holy Spirit leads every believer in Christ. Since He places us into the body of Christ at the moment of conversion (see I Cor.12:12,13), then there is nothing more "normal" and expected for a Christian than to congregate with other Christians in both worship and service to Christ.

Look at Acts 2:42, for instance. One of the clearest and initial signs of the Spirit's work in the early church was that these new believers "devoted themselves to...fellowship." This does not mean they had frequent "potluck" dinners. Rather, it means they took great interest and love in one another for each other's spiritual welfare (e.g., Heb.3:12-14; 10:24-25). But to demonstrate such a loving interest in fellow believers meant that they made the time to be together. They did not forsake their gathered assemblies. In fact, those who choose to have no part of any church and yet claim to be led by the Spirit - are deceiving themselves! Worse yet, they are also calling into question their own claim to be a Christian (see I Jn.3:14).

Fifthly, to be led by the Spirit is to have an increasing awareness of sin within. Since the Holy Spirit leads us to be at war with indwelling sin (Rom.8:13); then He is going to likewise lead us to be more aware of all sin that remains in our members (Rom.7:14-25). Those people however who claim to be Spirit-led but never give admission to the guilt of their own sin nor have godly sorrow over their sin as being against God - these people are neither led by the Spirit nor are they even saved (see I Jn.1:8,10)! A true Christian is someone who agonizes over indwelling sin, makes every effort to kill its remaining influence, and seeks to live in such a way that the holiness of God is faithfully represented in their thoughts, words, and deeds. This is the only path which the Holy Spirit will lead God's people in relation to sin. The presence of sin will be mourned over, confessed and mortified in our lives if we are under the leading of the Spirit of God.

Finally, to be led by the Spirit is to have a greater manifestation of the Spirit's fruit in one's personal life. Galatians 5:16-23 sets forth this great proof of a Spirit-led life: when we are walking by the Spirit (v.16) we will increase in the fruit which the Holy Spirit produces - namely - the fruit of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. In other words, by the Spirit's leading in the lives of God's people, there will be an increase in the character and conduct of godliness and righteousness. In short, a Spirit-led life is a life growing to be more like Jesus. And this above all, is the normal Christian life!

2009-10-26T12:27:00.000-07:00

God's Decree and Man's Freedom

When Governor Pilate looked at Jesus, he did not have the eyes to see the truth of who was standing before him. What's more, he did not have the eyes to see neither the limit nor the true origin of his own power as governor. This was especially demonstrated when Jesus refused to answer one of Pilate's questions - to which Pilate responded in great arrogance: "You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have the authority to crucify you" (Jn.19:10)? At this incredibly brazen statement, Jesus broke His silence and put Pilate in his place: "You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above" (Jn.19:11, italics mine).

These words of Christ were a sobering revelation to this pagan Roman ruler. For they revealed the truth that no matter what Pilate chose to do, his actions were only carrying out a greater purpose and power that he could not see. Pilate's every decision and the fulfillment thereof was "to do whatever [God's] hand and...plan had predestined to take place" (see Acts 4:27-28). In short, Pilate's choices were simply but profoundly (even mysteriously!) establishing God's decree.

Now it might be asked in the light of this truth: "Well, if Pilate was fulfilling God's decree, then does that make him nothing but a mere puppet with no free will?" This is a typical response raised as a matter of objecting to the truth that God has decreed everything that comes to pass (including the choices of a man who would order the crucifixion of the Son of God). But what must be recognized, is that God's sovereign decree does not violate the will of man, but actually sustains and provides his freedom to choose; while at the same time, God fulfills His sovereign plan by the means of those choices. Consider how God's Word states this truth in the Book of Proverbs:

"The plans of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord." (16:1)

"The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps." (16:9)

"Many are the plans in the mind of man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand." (19:21)

"The king's heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will." (21:1)

"No wisdom, no understanding, no counsel can avail against the Lord." (21:30)

"The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but the victory belongs to the Lord." (21:31)

In each of these passages it should be clear that man makes real choices. He plans and devises to do many things. But none of his choices work against God's decretive will nor do they overturn God's decretive will - but instead, they establish what God has already planned to happen in time.

In the 1689 Baptist Confession, consider the careful and insightful words written to declare this relationship between God's decretive will and man's freedom of choice: "Neither, by reason of [God's] decree, is the will of any creature whom He has made violated; nor is the free working of second causes put aside; rather is it established." We are not puppets with no volition, freedom, or power. Man has genuine freedom which can be defined as "the absence of external coercion." Or, as Sam Waldron put it: "If a man is not forced by any power outside himself to do that which is contrary to 'what he wants to do', then we may properly say that he is 'free'." Bringing greater clarity to this truth, with an important qualification, G.I. Williamson observed:

"The wonder of God's predestination is that God does leave men free in this sense, even though he predestines everything that every man will ever do. Some people use the word "freedom" in another sense, however, which is false in the extreme. They mean, by the 'freedom' of man, that man is able to do good or evil at any moment of time. To say that man is able to do good or evil, is very different from saying that a man is at liberty to do what he desires. We believe that man has liberty but not ability to do what is right. For the truth is that man, while free from coercion from the 'outside' is not free from the control of his own nature. He who is evil by nature must of necessity do evil. Just as we may say that God is good and therefore cannot do evil, so we may say that man (by nature) is evil and cannot (of himself) do good."

So when we talk about man's freedom of choice, we need to be clear about what this means biblically. Man is free to do what he wants but this does not mean that he is able to do whatever he wants. He is free to follow the desires of his nature; and God does not violate that freedom. Thus the Scripture says: "The heart of man plans his way..." (Prov.16:9). Man's "heart" (or nature) is free to choose. There is no coercion here on the part of God, or anyone else for that matter. However, what man chooses to do is not independent of God's sovereign decree. Man's freedom exists under the sovereign rule and reign of God, ordering and establishing the steps of man to fulfill God's eternal purpose. Man therefore is only as free to follow the desires of his heart as God has permitted in His sovereign will.

A good example of this is in Genesis 20, when king Abimelech took Abraham's wife, Sarah, to be his wife (under the false idea that Sarah was Abraham's sister). But before Abimelech could consummate the marriage, the Scripture says that, "God came to Abimelech in a dream by night" (20:3) - in this dream, God declared that this pagan king was a "dead man" for taking another man's wife. In response to this charge, Abimelech protested to God that he was completely innocent in this affair because both Abraham and Sarah told the king that they were siblings. Moreover, at this point, Abimelech had not yet had sexual relations with Sarah.

Now in view of the king's innocence in this matter, God said to him: "Yes, I know that you have done this in the integrity of your heart..." (20:6a). In this statement, God is not only acknowledging Abimelech's innocence, but even the freedom of what he desired to do by taking Sarah to be his wife. However, the only reason why Abimelech had not yet consummated the marriage, was because God did not permit him. God said to this king: "...it was I who kept you from sinning against me. Therefore I did not let you touch her." Abimelech followed the desires of his heart to take Sarah to be his wife; but his freedom to do this was entirely under God's sovereign will - thus he was not able to consummate the marriage because God did not let him. "The heart of a man plans his way, BUT the Lord establishes his steps" (Prov.16:9). Man therefore is only as free to follow the desires of his heart as God has permitted in His sovereign will.

Thus, Pilate was free and responsible for the choices he made against Christ (God did not force Pilate to hand Jesus over to be crucified). Yet, all of Pilate's free choices were only the "second causes" for Jesus going to the cross. The "first cause" for Christ to be crucified was God's eternal decree (Isa.53:10; Acts 2:23; 4:27-28). God therefore preordained both the ends and the means that put His Son on the cross.

So then, when we affirm the biblical truth that God has ordained everything that comes to pass - we are not denying that man makes real, responsible choices that have real consequences which he will be held accountable to answer. However, what we do affirm, is that nothing man chooses to do can override or thwart God's sovereign decree. For if in some sense God does not ordain everything that comes to pass, then He is not really sovereign; and if He is not sovereign, then He is not God. Perish the thought!

2009-10-14T08:01:00.000-07:00

Is God the Author of Sin?

There is probably very few of us who are comfortable with unanswered questions. If we inquire about something, we simply expect an answer. In most circumstances this would not be an unfair or even arrogant assumption. However, when it comes to the nature and works of God, it is not only unreasonable but insolent to demand an answer for everything that concerns who God is and what He does (e.g., Rom.9:19-21).

First of all, it is unreasonable to demand that God explain everything about Himself for the simple fact that we are finite and He is infinite (Job 11:7). Our understanding is so limited by our creatureliness and marred by our sinfulness, that it is impossible to fully understand God. Even with being divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit to write God's Word, Paul the apostle had to confess: "Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways" (Rom.11:33)!

But worse than unreasonable, it is insolent for any of us to put "God in the dock", as it were, and demand answers of His nature and works. One reason for such bold impudence is due to our sinful pride, that expresses itself in the postured attitude that it is "my right" to know all that God is doing (e.g., Job 30:16-31:40). Another reason for such arrogance toward God, is because we think (though foolishly and unintentionally, if we are true believers) that God is just like us (cf. Psa.50:21a), and treat Him as if what He does must be given our approval if it can be signed off as a good thing. And by this kind of arrogance, many people in the visible church react in hostile anger toward those parts of God's revealed Word which they cannot understand and seem to them as either unfair or unreasonable. "My God," they retort, as if they own the Almighty, "would never do a thing like that!"

But the truth of the matter is - God can and does whatever He pleases (Psa.115:3); and He owes no one an explanation for what He chooses to do (Deut.29:29; Rom.9:20,21). Moreover, whatever God does is always right, holy, and just (Gen.18:25; Ex.15:11; Num.23:19), no matter how unthinkable and beyond our understanding it may be (see Hab.1-3).

Now with this said, I want to consider another crucial aspect of God's decretive will, which (with humble admission) we cannot wrap our minds completely around: God's decree does not make God either the author of sin nor responsible for it. Though God has "from all eternity...decreed all that should happen in time" (ref. 1689 Baptist Confession: chapter three, paragraph one) - yet, He has not brought to pass everything in exactly the same way. So then, the sinful actions of men are all according to the counsel of God's will (Eph.1:11); however, God neither tempts anyone to sin nor can He be tempted Himself (see Jam.1:13). What does this mean? It means that God decrees the sinful actions of men in such a way that preserves to the full their freedom of choice, and thus does not at all destroy their responsibility; while at the same time, their wicked deeds serve God's sovereign purpose without making God the author of their sin.

Two of the greatest examples to this truth in Scripture are seen in the suffering of Joseph and the crucifixion of Christ. With Joseph, remember what he told his brothers in Genesis 50:20 - "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it [the evil] for good." The term translated "meant" is a Hebrew word that carries the idea of planning, devising, and inventing. Joseph's brothers planned and devised evil against him; but God was behind their evil plan to overrule it for good. Commenting on this amazing revelation from Genesis 50:20, consider R.C. Sproul's observation and application:

"[God] used the brothers' treacherous activity in order to save lives, sanctify Joseph, and bring his plan to pass. One of the most comforting passages in the New Testament is Paul's statement that 'all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose' (Rom.8:28). We must be careful here. Paul does not say that everything that happens, considered in and of itself is good. Nor is our theme song Que Sera, Sera, 'whatever will be, will be.' We do have the astounding promise, however, that everything will work together for good for those who love God and are called according to his purpose. This means that even from the bad things happening to us, God is bringing about good. This glorious concept means that we should trust God - even in the midst of tragedy, pain, disease, and suffering of all kinds. God assures us that he is working all things together for our good."

Now it should be very plain to us that Joseph understood what Paul would write centuries later to the church at Rome. The principle truth that would be later expressed by Romans 8:28 was no mere theory to Joseph, it was a living reality. God gave him the eyes to see that what his brothers did to him was God's plan all along, which was fulfilling a redeeming purpose in the end. Think about this and take it in: God ordained the evil carried out by Joseph's brothers. But Joseph's brothers were still accountable and responsible for their sin. God did not force them to do harm to Joseph, but He gave them freedom to do harm by their own will - yet, their actions all along were bringing to pass what God had already decreed. Hence, Joseph could confess that his brothers' evil intentions was the good intention of God.

The other biblical example which proves how God decrees evil and yet is not the author of it, is the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, this example is the greatest of all, since there has never been a greater sin committed by man, yet God ordained this for our redemption. Consider how this truth is expressed in a prayer recorded in Acts 4:27,28 -

"...for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontious Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place."

In this passage we see both the responsibility of man and the sovereignty of God in the same sentence, contradicting neither. First, we see the enemies of Christ mentioned by name and held accountable for their opposition to the Lord. "they gathered against your holy servant Jesus." They "gathered against" Christ of their own free will, uncoerced, not forced, but by the liberty of their own desires. In Acts 2:23, the apostle Peter indicted the Jews for this opposition against Christ, when he said: "...you crucified [Jesus] and killed by the hands of lawless men." "You did this," Peter said. "This is what you are guilty of." So then, man is responsible for his sinful actions.

But in the crucifixion of Christ, the Son of God was not nailed to the cross only because sinful man willed this to happen. There was a far greater and infinitely more powerful will at work which brought Jesus Christ to die on the cross: it was God's will to crucify His Son. Therefore, in Acts 4:28, the early church confessed that what the enemies of Christ "gathered together" to do against Jesus was in fact the fulfillmemt of a greater plan and purpose: it was "to do whatever [God's] hand and [His] plan had predestined to take place." Now think about this. Remind yourself of all the wickedness done against Jesus. He was betrayed, slandered, blasphemed against, beaten within an inch of His earthly life, given over to a kangaroo court and a blood thirsty mob, and finally nailed to a Roman cross to hang there in all His nakedness and humiliation, till He died. Nevertheless, all this wickedness was carried out against Christ by one ultimate cause: "to do whatever [God's] hand and [His] plan had predestined to take place."

No Jew or Gentile living in the first century could lift a finger, utter a word, or make plans against Jesus apart from "whatever [God's] hand and [His] plan had predestined to take place." As John MacArthur rightly affirmed based on the testimony of Acts 4:28 - "It reminds us that God is the supreme historian who wrote all history before it ever began. Having done their worst [i.e., the enemies of Christ], they merely succeeded in fulfilling God's eternal plan (cf. Acts 2:23). As the psalmist expressed it, 'The wrath of man shall praise Thee' (Psa.76:10)."

But the preeminent principle that we are attempting to see from the examples of Joseph's sufferings and Jesus' crucifixion, is that while God ordained both events and the evil in those events; yet, God remained neither the author of that evil nor responsible for it. God was the First Cause of this historical events, as He is the First Cause of all history, but He cannot be accused of being the creator and author of the sin which takes place in history. God willed sin to be here but He is not sin's author. How can this be? No one knows and no one should foolishly attempt to find out, because God has left that in His secret counsels (cf. Deut.29:29a). But what we do know is this: God is holy and there is no sin in God whatsoever. Secondly, God is sovereign and there is nothing in time that takes place apart from His sovereign decree. Thirdly, man is a sinner and responsible for his sin. Fourthly, the free sinful actions of man fulfill and carry out the divine sovereign decree of God. And finally, because man's sin carries out God's purpose, God will overrule man's sin to bring about good. Therefore, even man's sin will ultimately display the glory of God.

2009-10-13T08:19:00.000-07:00

A Baptist Confession and God's Decree

The most well known and widely published Confession of Faith in Baptist history is The Second London Confession of 1689. It was the adopted confession for the very first Baptist Association in America in 1742 (i.e., the Philadelphia Association, est. 1707). The Charleston Association (1767) also adopted it as their confession for Baptists in the South; and in 1839, Jesse Mercer (1769-1841), republished the 1689 Confession to run as a series in The Christian Index (the Baptist state paper for Georgia) - calling it, "our Old Confession." Moreover, the 293 delegates who met in Augusta, Georgia to form The Southern Baptist Convention (May 8, 1845), all came from Baptist churches and associations who held to the 1689 Confession in its adopted form as the Philadelphia/Charleston Confession of Faith.

Now among the 32 chapters which frame this confession, the third chapter, handles with the greatest care and most well chosen words, the biblical truth of God's decree. In the first paragraph of this chapter, the overall truth of this doctrine is affirmed:

"From all eternity, God decreed all that should happen in time, and this He did freely and unalterably, consulting only His own wise and holy will. Yet in so doing He does not become in any sense the author of sin, nor does He share responsibility for sin with sinners. Neither, by reason of His decree, is the free working of second causes put aside; rather is it established. In all these matters the divine wisdom appears, as also does God's power and faithfulness in effecting that which He has purposed."

Now to just begin wrapping one's mind around this mammoth truth of Scripture, it would be helpful to simply paint with a broad brush a few central truths which are expressed in this paragraph. First, God's decree is His eternal sovereign purpose over all things in the universe. This means that we are not speaking here of what has been called "God's revealed will." The revealed will of God is clearly pronounced commands in Scripture (e.g., the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:1-17). God's will, in this respect, can be obeyed or disobeyed by man. However, God's decretive will is not "revealed" in every respect (Deut.29:29) nor is it a moral command God has given us to obey. Rather, God's decree is His eternal sovereign purpose that encompasses everything that happens in the universe. Hence nothing happens in the universe apart from God's decretive will (see Isa.46:10; Dan.4:34,35; Eph.1:11).

Second, God's decree cannot be frustrated or thwarted by man. Proverbs 19:21 says, "Many are the plans in the mind of man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand." In Isaiah 14:24-27, God's decree concerning His judgment on Assyria is couched in terms which bespeak of His sovereign will as irresistible: "The Lord of hosts has sworn: 'As I have planned, so shall it be, and as I have purposed, so shall it stand...For the Lord of hosts has purposed, and who shall annul it? His hand is stretched out, and who will turn it back' (vv.24,27)?

Finally, God's decree is not conditioned by anything outside of Himself. The Confession states that what God decreed, "He did freely and unalterably, consulting only His own wise and holy will." God does not wait for man to act and then decide what He should do. Never! When God decreed all things to come to pass, He did so as an act of sheer sovereign will. The universe and all its events, great and small, bow the knee to the decretive will of a holy, all-wise God who says: "it will be done."

2009-10-09T11:39:00.000-07:00

Deism: The Denial of God's Decree

If I were to ask the typical pew-sitter in any given evangelical church in America, "Are you a deist?", I'm certain that the answer I would receive would be - "no" - and then in the same breath they would inquire, "What is a deist?" My purpose behind raising such a question is due to the fact that most Americans, combined with many professing Christians are fundamentally deistic in their thinking. I would not say they are consciously of this conviction, but it is by and large the native air many people breath in when talking about God.

Historically, deism was a movement of rationalistic thought from the mid-17th century to the mid-18th century. It basically taught that though God was the Creator of the universe, yet His purpose was to create it to run on its own. Thus, God had no personal intervention at all in the universe He made. Like a great clockmaker, deism taught that God built the clock, wound it up, and then left it to run by itself. Hence, the universe is nothing more than a great big machine run by natural laws which work independently of their Creator. Moreover, man is completely autonomous in the deistic world: he creates, determines, and fulfills his own destiny while God sits by as merely a distant spectator of man's self-determination.

Now if I raise the question again, "Are you a deist?", what would your answer be? When hurricane Katrina basically wiped out New Orleans - was God involved? When the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 were struck by blood-thirsty Muslim terroists - did God have a hand in that tragedy? What about wars, famine, disease, and death - do these things all come to pass by a sovereign God who has decreed for His own holy purposes such events? I am quite certain that questions like these posed to most professing Christians would receive a swift deistic confession. "No!," they would cry. "It is never God's will for any of these things to take place. He has nothing to do with such things." I actually heard a local preacher make such a confession by saying: "God's will is never done on earth, but He has given the earth over to the power of men." This preacher was unwittingly but foolishly teaching his congregation the ideas of deism.

The real problem with deism is that it is on a collision course with biblical Christianity. For it outright denies the plain truth of Holy Scripture that God has not only created the universe, but He also sustains it, governs it, and is in fact working all things in the universe according to the counsel of His own will (Job 12:13-25; Psa.33:8-11; Acts 17:24-28; Rom.11:36; Eph.1:11; Col.1:16,17; Rev.4:11). God is not therefore a mere spectator of events. His sovereignty means more than His knowledge of what is going to happen, but He has actually ordained what is happening.

Thus wars (Hab.1:5-11), famine (Psa.105:16), disease (Lev.14:34), weather of every kind (Job 37:1-13), food (Acts 14:17), habitations (Acts 17:26), seasons (Dan.2:21), existing authorities (Rom.13:1), physical handicaps (Ex.4:11), calamities (Isa.45:7), national sufferings (Lam.3:37,38), death (Heb.9:27), and even the little sparrow that falls from its nest (Matt.10:29) - all of these things, with the rest of what we see in the world, come to pass by God's holy decree (Isa.46:10). And though God does not bring these things to pass in exactly the same way, yet nothing happens in this world apart from His sovereign eternal will. The "god" of deism then is simply a false god. The true and living God is always ruling, reigning, sustaining, and governing His universe. Moreover, if God were otherwise, He would not even be God.

2009-10-01T05:11:00.000-07:00

God's Decree and a Flight of Stairs

There is a story often told by many preachers, of a man who after falling down a staircase, shakes his head in relief, saying, "I'm sure glad that's over." The point of this story is to make a mockery of Christians who believe that God has preordained everything that comes to pass - including a tumble down a flight of stairs. It paints a picture of such Christians as being both foolish and fatalists. In other words, this fictional story is aimed at denying (unwittingly) the biblical doctrine of God's eternal decree as worked out in God's providence. Thus the preacher who tells the story typically says in a snide way: "God may be sovereign but He's not the cause of or in control of everything in the universe." And many Christians who hear this usually affirm it with a hearty, "Amen!"

But, I wonder if we should be so quick to agree that such a confession like this is true? I grant that the story of the man's staircase fall presents some problems if left without a biblical context. However, if we place this story in the light of Scripture, some things begin to emerge about God and man which the story alone does not tell. In the first place, the man's relief that the fall was over should be fanned out to say much more - if biblical. On the one hand, there is nothing wrong in his initial satisfaction that the tumble has ceased. For he recognizes that this fall was no mere accident of purely human carelessness; but rather, it was ordered by the sovereign purpose of God. What would inform him of this? Psalm 139:16 which affirms that in God's "book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me." Then there is Proverbs 20:24, "A man's steps are from the Lord; how then can man understand his way?" These two verses (along with a host of others) simply teach us that nothing happens to us by chance or even blind fate - but our "steps" and "days" have been determined by God's sovereign will.

On the other hand, this man's confession must say more: not only is he glad the fall is over, but what is God teaching him by the fall? This is the difference between God's providence and blind fatalism. Fatalism says everything is determined with no rhyme or reason, it's just impersonal force making things happen. God's providence however is God Himself ordering and governing all things with a holy purpose. Thus the man thanks God for the fall and asks God to teach him what he is to learn from the fall.

We see this in Joseph when he says to his wicked brothers: "As for you, you meant evil against me (i.e., selling him as a slave to Egypt), but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today" (Gen.50:20). Joseph did not deny his brothers' evil actions, but he understood that God was working even this together for the good of Joseph and others (cf. Rom.8:28). In other words, the evil actions of Joseph's brothers were not the only cause for his going to Egypt. They simply established the first cause which was God's sovereign will and purpose (see Eph.1:11). This doesn't mean that God was the author of the brothers' sin nor that they were not culpable before God for what they did. But rather, God ordained through their real free choices that He would bring Joseph to Egypt for the outworking of His great and glorious plan.

So then, the man who has fallen down the steps should not only see his fall as physical clumsiness - but a loving, sovereign, wise, and holy God who ordained even this for His people's good and the display of His own glory.

2009-09-23T11:38:00.000-07:00

Assurance in Suffering: part three
The Knowledge of God's Design for our Sufferings

Looking again at Romans 5:3 along with verse 4: "More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings...knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope." Why should we rejoice in our sufferings as Christians? Our joy, our boasting in pain has to have a foundational, legitimate reason - what is it? According to Romans 5:3-4, it is a "knowledge" God has revealed to us concerning His providential design for the tribulations, trials, and hardships we are going to face. The basis therefore of our rejoicing when we suffer, is knowing what this suffering is actually working out for us by God's sovereign plan. Moreover, based on the larger context of Romans 5, this knowledge of God's design for our sufferings works to bring about a greater assurance of our salvation - and thus, a greater cause for rejoicing.

So, what then should we "know" about our sufferings which God has purposed as the basis for joy and a reason for salvation-assurance? There are three things that are plainly stated here in Romans 5:3-4.

Suffering produces endurance. We rejoice in our suffering because we know that our suffering is producing endurance. But what does this mean? What is endurance? The Greek word used in this text is upomone - which means "patient endurance" or "perseverance." Taken in the present context of suffering, it means to live under difficult circumstances without trying to wiggle our way out from under them. It therefore carries the idea of "constancy." It is the ability to go on in our suffering - patiently, steadfastly enduring.

But of course, the question for us is how does suffering produce endurance? All our sufferings, under God's providence, work to make our faith in Christ stronger because they drive us more to Christ where we realize (again and again) that He is our life, our sufficiency, our all. And the outworking of this is endurance. We therefore do not become bitter, resentful, and complaining when we suffer but rather we increase in strength, steadfastness, and perseverance.

In other words, our hardships are God's means of grace to grow our faith in Him, to remain more patient and enduring as we are suffering. And by this fruit, we are assured that we are saved, that God is keeping us - because we are not denying Him but running to Him for the grace to remain faithful and carry on. Hence, knowing this we can rejoice in our sufferings...[because] suffering produces endurance.

Endurance produces character. The word translated character comes from a Greek term that simply means "proof." This word was used originally to describe the testing of metals such as silver and gold to demonstrate their purity. The idea is that when you put metal through a fiery testing and it comes out on the other side persevering and enduring, what you call that metal is "proven" or "authentic" or "genuine." And this is the sense of what we're being told here in Romans 5:4, "endurance produces character."

How can we be sure we're saved? Here is one test: do our sufferings make our faith in Christ stronger? Do they produce endurance? Perseverance? Steadfastness? If the outworking of our hardships is greater faith, love, and obedience to Christ - then we're only proving the greater truth that we are genuine believers in Jesus Christ. Endurance produces character for the authentic Christian.

Our patient perseverance under trial is only working to prove what we are claiming to be as Christians. And because this is God's design for our pain, then we can rejoice in our pain - since this is giving us greater assurance that we are really saved. Commenting once on this matter, Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) said:

"Tribulations also work in this way, that they not only bring out God's love to me, but at the same time test my love to God, and prove it. If I only love God when everything is going well. I am not truly Christian. It is the man who can say with Job, 'Even though he slay me, yet I will trust him', who is truly Christian."

Are we truly Christian? When our world is falling apart all around us is our faith, love, and obedience to Christ proving true or is it all just a sham? This is where we need to really pause and think about our character in the face of suffering. I have known many people who have once professed loudly their faith in Christ, only now to deny it all because of some experience of suffering and pain. Their adversities only proved what they really were all along: they were not Christians but hypocrites.

Where are we going to be when we face tribulation? Or, when we finally come through on the other side of a great trial - will our professed faith and love to Christ stand under the pressure of that fiery test? Listen again to our text: "suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character." For the Christian who knows this, he can rejoice, because this is God's way of sealing to His child's heart that he really belongs to the Lord. But there is one final product in God's design for our suffering which Romans 5:4 rounds off at the end:

Character produces hope. Now this should be no surprise to us. If all our suffering makes our faith, love, and obedience to Christ only greater, which in turn, brings greater proof to the authenticity of our Christian testimony - then the end result will be hope. Hope in what? Go to Romans 5:2: "we rejoice in hope of the glory of God." What is this? Our "hope in the glory of God" is our certain and sure confidence that we will reach our final destination as believers in Jesus Christ. And that destination is being perfected in the image of Christ (see Rom.8:29-30). So then, we can rejoice in our sufferings because we know what God has designed them ultimately to bring in our lives: it is the hope that we really do belong to God and His promise to us of final glorification, on account of Christ, will indeed come to pass.

Therefore all our sufferings as Christians only work to assure us that we really belong to God through Jesus Christ. God's grace for us in Christ is real because it is actually working to establish us in greater faith, love, and obedience to Christ - and the fruit of that work is seen in how we go through tribulation, hardships, and trials. Rather than hatred, bitterness, or anger, there is a genuine rejoicing in our sufferings. We do not deny Christ but we love Him even more. Why? It is due to this: "[our] sufferings produce endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope." And this is one of God's ways in giving His people the sweetness of salvation-assurance. So, in light of this, I leave you with one great searching question: what are your sufferings producing in your life - are they proving you to be a Christian or are they proving you to be an unbeliever?

2009-09-18T09:08:00.000-07:00

Assurance in Suffering: part two
God's Design in Suffering

Why do we suffer as Christians? Why is pain, hardship, and adversity so woven into the fabric of the Christian life, that it would be abnormal not to suffer? In short, what is God's design in our suffering?

Among the answers that God's Word gives in response to such questions (an answer that is one of the clearest and most comforting), is found in Romans 5:3-4. The general context behind this chapter as a whole is concerning the certainty and security of final salvation. In other words, Romans 5 is establishing the truth that if God has saved us, He will keep us saved. And one of the saving realities which is mentioned as a means of God's grace to this glorious end is - our "sufferings". Think about this: our sufferings as justified believers in Jesus Christ (cf. Rom.5:1-2) is one of the great reasons we can be sure that God will keep us saved!

This means that anything which makes life harder and threatens our faith in the goodness and power and wisdom of God - God has sovereignly designed to work in our lives as a means of assuring us that we are saved. This is the teaching of Romans 5:3-4.

But how can Christians really appreciate and savor this design of God in their sufferings without caving in to the carnal anger and bitterness of remaining sin which seeks advantage of God's people during times of trouble? Romans 5:3-4 answers this question by affirming on the one hand, the attitude that glorifies God most when we suffer; and on the other hand, the knowledge we need of God's design for our sufferings, which fosters the aforementioned godly attitude.

The Attitude that Glorifies God most when we Suffer

In the opening words of Romans 5:3, it says: "More that that, we rejoice in our sufferings..." This is one of the most amazing statements in all the Bible. Consider this: we're being told that, as Christians, we rejoice in our sufferings. We do not complain, murmur, or become bitter - but we rejoice in our sufferings. Our sufferings then are an occasion for joy. More literally though, the verb translated rejoice means "to boast" or "to glory in." Thus, it carries the idea of having a "triumphant confidence" in our sufferings.

In addition to this, we must understand that it is in our sufferings that we have this sense of jubilation. In other words, it is not in spite of our sufferings that we rejoice or even in the midst of our sufferings - but in...our sufferings that we rejoice. We therefore rejoice because of or on account of our sufferings. Hence, the God-glorifying approach to suffering is to rejoice because we are in fact suffering.

And this same attitude of joy in our sufferings is seen elsewhere in God's Word. For example, in Matthew 5:10-12 and Luke 6:22-23, Christ commands us to "rejoice and be glad" and "leap for joy" on those occasions when we are hated, reviled, excluded, and slandered for the sake of Christ. In James 1:2, we are commanded again to "count it all joy...when you meet trials of various kinds." When we are facing trials of any kind, the response that glorifies God most, according to James 1:2, is to look on this matter as an incident for joy! So then, in concert with the affirmation of Romans 5:3, God's Word teaches in other places (see also I Pet. 4:12-13) that when we suffer as believers our attitude is expected to be one of rejoicing.

But as we contemplate this attitude of joy that the Word of God calls for in every Christian when they suffer - what is it about this attitude that is so remarkable? Or what is it about this imperative in Romans 5:3 that makes it one of the most amazing statements in all the Bible? One of the fundamental answers to this question is, that to rejoice in our sufferings flies in the face of the most common non-Christian approaches to human suffering. That is to say, a Christian rejoicing when he suffers stands apart from how a non-Christian reacts to their trials. In fact, for a non-Christian, their most typical response to human suffering can be described from one of two ancient philosophical perspectives - either Epicureanism or Stocism.

Epicureanism approaches suffering by teaching that since there are some bad experiences, which cannot be avoided, the way to handle them is by loading life with more pleasure than pain so that the bottom line is always positive. I've seen this played out in people who, for instance, have lost their job, and in response to this painful experience they take a vacation. Now understand this: they don't have the money to go on vacation, but in spite of this "harsh" reality, they go anyway. They want to avoid the pain of having lost a job and having no money - so they go take a trip they can't afford! That is a small but real example of epicureanism. "Let's fill our life with as much pleasure as we can so we can avoid the pain." There are many people in the world who approach human suffering from that perspective.

But certainly the most popular non-Christian approach to suffering is Stocism. This is the attitude we have heard in such expressions like, "keeping a stiff upper lip," or "just grin and bear it." It is nothing more than a mere resignation to unavoidable pain. And for many people in the world, they greatly admire the Stoic, who simply puts up with pain and gets through it no matter the cost. Some people call this "having courage" - but however you describe it, stocism is not the Christian approach to suffering.

Instead, the Christian "rejoices" in his sufferings. He does not avoid the pain nor does he merely grin through gritted teeth and bear it - but he "counts it all joy when he meets trials of various kinds." This is the attitude that glorifies God most when we suffer. And this is the plain meaning of Romans 5:3, "More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings..."

But at this point, an important question must be raised: why should we rejoice in our sufferings as Christians? It is one thing for us to affirm the imperative of Romans 5:3, but what is behind this command that would give us the motive for joy when we suffer? Answering these questions will draw us into the heart of Romans 5:3-4, as we look at the knowledge of God's design for our sufferings. I will take up this exposition in my next post.

2009-09-16T07:03:00.000-07:00

Assurance in Suffering: part one
Suffering: A Basic Reality

God's Word communicates a basic reality in the Christian life called suffering. In fact, the Word of God actually teaches us that suffering is a divine calling for all Christians. This means that God has purposed for His people to experience hardships, tribulations, and trials as a vital distinguishing characteristic of their lives in this world. For example, our Lord Jesus Christ spoke of suffering as an inevitable part of the Christian life, and even pronounced judgment upon us if there was no such suffering - particularly in the form of persecution. Consider Matthew 5:10-12 and Luke 6:26 in this regard:

"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...[But] woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets."

On another occasion Jesus promised suffering (again) in the form of persecution when He first commissioned His original disciples to be sent out into the world. In Matthew 10:16-25, Christ gave these solemn words about impending suffering:

"Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles...A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and a servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household."

On the night before Jesus was to be crucified, as He shared His last supper with His disciples, He gave them many instructions to prepare them for their life following His resurrection and ascension. He was priming them for their ultimate mission in the world as His witnesses. Among these instructions, Christ reminded His disciples of what will be the ear-mark of their lives as His followers in the world: it would be suffering. In John 15:18-20, Jesus said:

"If the world hates you, know that it hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you."

Finally, on this same occasion, Jesus gave His disciples a solemn promise (John 16:33) which is meant for all believers in every age: "In the world you will have tribulation...but take heart; I have overcome the world."

So then, according to the words of our Lord, we can expect tribulation, persecution, being hated by the world, and slandered for the sake of Christ - all of which is a part of the most basic reality in the Christian life. No promises here then for health and wealth, but rather suffering for Christ's sake by the very design of God.

Now as we read further in the New Testament, this promise for tribulation, trial, suffering, and hardship continue by both example and teaching. For instance, in Acts 3-5, we see the early church suffering at the hands of the Jewish leaders for the sake of Christ. In Acts 6-7, we see Stephen being persecuted and then killed for his faithful witness to the glory of Christ. In Acts 9:16, Jesus speaks of His calling Paul to serve Him as an apostle; and as a part of that calling, Christ says: "For I will show him [Paul] how much he must suffer for the sake of my name."

And we might ask the question: how much did Paul suffer for the name of Christ? In II Corinthians 11:24-28, Paul himself gives a catalog of his sufferings for the sake of Christ, an index that simply leaves one speechless:

"Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from the Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night; in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my care for all the churches."

Needless to say, both Paul and the rest of the early church experienced great suffering in various forms by God's purpose to glorify Christ. But not only do we see New Testament examples of this kind of suffering, but there is also teaching on how we must suffer as Christians. In Acts 14:22, we're told that "through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God." In II Timothy 3:12, we're promised: "Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life will be persecuted." In James 1:2, we're exhorted to "count it all joy...when you meet trials of various kinds." In I Peter 2:20-21, we read: "But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is precious in the sight of God. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps." And again in I Peter - this time in 4:12-19, we're encouraged:

"Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed...Therefore, let those who suffer according to God's will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good."

Now the great overarching point of all these passages is that the Christian life is a life of suffering. Suffering "according to God's will" (I Pet.4:19) "for the name of Christ" (I Pet.4:14). Moreover, it is suffering (as already mentioned) which comes to us in different forms. In fact, Paul gives a digest of Christian suffering in II Corinthians 12:10, out of his own personal experience - which every Christian will be afflicted with to a greater or lesser degree. Paul refers to "weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities." Such terms describe what can be rightly called "the normal Christian life."

2009-09-08T05:21:00.000-07:00

The Kind of People God Uses

Recently I have been reading for a second time Walter Chantry's wonderful book, entitled, Signs of the Apostles. This morning I read a section that was both comforting and convicting. It is a much needed word of rebuke to all of us as Christians (especially preachers) who think that God can only use those people who are exceptionally gifted or talented for the purpose of advancing His kingdom. Muse carefully on these timely words:

"In our biblical desire for revival, we must refuse to seek any experience which proposes to eliminate our natural weakness. God did not spread the gospel of Christ through the world by means of extrovert personalities. Christ did not choose the apostles for their native strength of character. The church was not begun by twelve emperors but by twelve political slaves of Rome. Our Lord had no special use for scholars. Most of the apostles were far from learned. His choice of evangelists included no warriors, nor 'Madison Avenue' publicity men. As a group, the apostles had no outstanding personal strength which can explain their impact on the world.

In various ways Christians reveal their suspicion that only extraordinary men can be used for great works of God. Some place a great emphasis on academic skills. They think, 'If we send men with respected academic honors through the world, the nations will recognize genius and come to Christ.' Others advertise football players, theatre stars, and politicians, expecting that the world will run to their meetings. Unfortunately, though the crowds come they are not changed. Why should they not remain worldly after this appeal to human greatness?

At times we may say too much of Whitefield's eloquence and Edwards' scholarship. We sometimes romanticize the lives of leaders in revivals. John Knox, so remarkably used in the Reformation of the 16th century, declared before his death, 'In youth, mid-age, and now after many battles, I find nothing in me but vanity and corruption.' Such was Whitefield's sense of personal unfitness that he said he could not enter a pulpit but for the imputed righteousness of Christ. The last words of that burning light, William Grimshaw of Yorkshire, were, 'Here goes an unprofitable servant.' It was grace which made these Christians what they were, and had it not been for the Spirit of God attending their ministries they would have remained as obscure as many another who was equal to them in natural ability.

Some of the most profound acts of witnessing and successful evangelism have been performed by the most unlikely, and unprepossessing individuals. Great numbers believed on Christ through the immoral Samaritan woman on the day she first met the Savior. God did not wait until she had established a super-holy reputation among them. The blind man of John 9 was called upon to witness before the greatest Bible scholars in the world during the week of his conversion. God did not need someone who had mastered sound doctrine. The young believer bore a fine testimony.

God does not need your talents, wisdom, holiness, and strength. But rather you, in weakness, desperately need the power of his Spirit in your labors. You need not be wonderfully transformed by a second work of grace to be a suitable instrument of God's Spirit. The Lord delights in exalting his gracious power by using weak instruments."

2009-09-02T13:15:00.000-07:00

A Biblical Alternative to the Unbiblical Altar-Call

What I have sought to establish in these past three posts is a very careful and critical evaluation of the altar-call. It has been my intention to hold up this "sacred cow" of modern evangelism, in the light of both Scripture and church history, to prove that it is purely a practice of man's invention driven initially by pragmatic motives without the warrant of God's Word. Moreover, its theological construct actually robs God of His glory in redemption, by positioning man's will as the determinate factor for why anyone is saved. Hence, the altar-call does not "call" sinners to look only to Christ for their salvation; but rather, their focus is fixed on what they must do (e.g, walk an aisle, pray a prayer, sign a card) in order to secure themselves in God's favor. The fruit however of such misguidance are largely false conversions instead of sinners truly casting themselves solely upon Christ and His saving work. Suffice it to say, the altar-call should be abandoned as an unbiblical method which undermines both the gospel and the redeeming work of Christ.

Now with such a strong condemnation for the altar-call, what kind of evangelism should then be practiced? If we take the altar-call away, what are we left with? In the first place, to remove the altar-call we will reestablish the sufficiency of the gospel. This means that the gospel will again be seen as "the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes" (Rom.1:16), and thus what God has ordained for bringing sinners unto a saving faith in Jesus Christ (Rom.10:14-17). Furthermore, the gospel-commands to "believe" and "repent" will take their rightful place as the only biblical responses necessary to salvation (Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21); as opposed to the unbiblical commands to "raise a hand", "repeat the sinner's prayer", "walk an aisle", or "sign a card." In short, the gospel has its own built-in invitation to all sinners that is sufficient for their salvation, without the confusion and benighted notion of "coming to the altar to be saved."

In the second place, to remove the altar-call we will reestablish the necessity of the Spirit's work of regeneration. To call sinners to an altar for salvation takes away from the fundamental urgency to be "born again" (Jn.3:3-8). If a mere decision and a "coming forward" is all we need to be saved, then why must there be a new birth? But the truth is, we have "stoney hearts" which God in His sovereign mercy must replace with "new hearts", so that we will be savingly converted to Christ (Ezk.36:26; Tit.3:5,6). With no altar-call the doctrine of the new birth can be proclaimed without obstruction, and the sinner will be impressed with the fact that a "change of heart" is the very core and essence of his salvation. As Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) once declared: "I speak advisedly when I say that the doctrine of 'believe and live' would be a very dangerous one if it were not accompanied by the doctrine of regeneration." Remember what Christ said to Nicodemus: "You must be born again" (Jn.3:7, emphasis mine). Without regeneration there is no faith or repentance (Jn.1:12-13).

In the third and final place, to remove the altar-call we will reestablish a context of integrity for both conversions and church membership. This is probably the greatest need of the hour for the local church. The altar-call has bloated so many churches with members who have no fruit to prove the credibility of their conversion. But if the altar-call is taken away, then greater time, patience, and care can be given to sinners who "seem" to be under conviction for their sin and are asking questions about Christ. This means that conversions will not be rushed or forced for the sake of "numbers" or "results" - but instead, the gospel is faithfully preached, sinners are called to believe and repent, and God is trusted for the work which He alone can do, namely, save sinners! In time, we must be assured that if God has brought salvation, then the fruit of that conversion will eventually manifest itself (Matt.13:18-23); and the result will be a church membership with integrity. This, above all, must be recovered in our day.

2009-08-26T12:22:00.000-07:00

The Theology Behind the Altar-Call

There is a definite theology which drives the practice of the altar-call. Though many may argue today that theology and methodology are separate issues; yet, the truth is, we only practice what it is we believe. Thus how we "do ministry" is determined by our doctrinal convictions. And the method of altar-call evangelism is no different in this respect.

So, for the early Methodists and the evangelist Charles G. Finney, it was essentially their theology of salvation which inspired them to use this novel method of calling people to come forward and be saved. For Finney, it was the heresy of Pelagianism (circa 412 A.D.) which moved him to comfortably embrace the altar-call. For the Methodists, it was their affirmation of the aberrant teaching of Arminianism (circa 1618). However, what is peculiar in both cases, is that it was their belief in man's will being the determining factor in salvation which really formed the core doctrine behind the altar-call.

Thus, whether you're considering Arminianism or Pelagianism, what both of these doctrines share in common is that man's will is sovereign in salvation. Albeit, Pelagianism denies the necessity for God's grace in Christ to save (hence, it is heretical teaching), while Arminianism contends that without God's grace man will not be saved - yet in the end, both the Pelagian and the Arminian reward the will of man with the credit for why he is saved; rather than the sovereign grace of God.

This is the fundamental reason why so many people have attributed their salvation to "walking an aisle", "praying a prayer", or "making a decision for Christ." The sole object and reason for their salvation is centered in the exercise of their will to choose. And should we be surprised that this would be where they give the credit for being saved? If you've grown up all your life in church hearing that, "If you take the first step God will do the rest" - then it is only inevitable that under this teaching you will believe that it was your decision which initiated salvation. In other words, God has provided salvation and made the offer, but without man making his move to saved, God is left helplessly wondering if anyone is going to be accept what He has done. Why? Because the theology behind the altar-call is a man-centered view of salvation. God's will is impotent while man's will is omnipotent. Is this biblical?

No, the truth of Scripture is that man by nature is sinful to the core (Psa.51:5; Jer.17:9; Rom.3:9-18). He cannot save himself nor does he want to be saved (Mk.10:27; Jn.5:40; Rom.3:11; Eph.2:1-3). Left to his own decisions, bound up in his sinful nature, man will run at breakneck speed and bust hell wide open. For there is no natural affection for Christ iin the lost sinner (Jn.3:19-20; Rom.8:5-8). Moreover, when he hears the gospel, his natural understanding reasons that it is foolish and stupid (I Cor.1:18a; 2:14). In this condition, we cannot look to the sinner to "take the first step" for salvation - for no such "step" will ever come!

How then is man to be saved? It can only be by the sovereign mercy and grace of God (Rom.8:30; 9:15-18; Eph.2:8-10). God must take the first step! God must work in the sinner a new life, recreating a new heart, a new nature (Ezk.36:26; Jn.3:3-8; Eph.2:5) which brings about new desires that cry out, "Lord, save me and make me right with you!" God must give the faith to believe on Christ and the repentance to flee from sin (Eph.2:8; II Tim.2:25). In short, salvation, from first to last, is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9; Eph.1:3-14; II Thess.2:13). This is the theology of the Bible: God ALONE saves sinners by His grace and for His glory!

2009-08-19T13:50:00.000-07:00

The History behind the Altar-Call

How and why did the altar-call ever become a part of mainstream evangelism? The actual history behind the altar-call began in the late 1700s with the first generation of American Methodists in America. Being concerned not to admit anyone prematurely into church membership, the Methodists began to "count" the number of their converts. The system they came up with for securing this knowledge of true conversions was what they called "the invitation to the altar." The Methodists referred to the "altar" as the end of the building in front of the communion table, which was derived from their roots in the Church of England. Their intial practice of this method was simply bringing individuals to identify themselves publicly to be prayed for and given instruction as new converts to Christ. No one, at first, claimed the altar-call as a means of salvation. However, very soon, and inevitably, "coming to the altar" came to be confused with actual conversion to Christ. Methodist preachers would be heard calling people to "come to the altar and be saved."

It wasn't until the 1820s though, that this innovative practice of American Methodism would become the mainstream of American Evangelicalism. And the introduction of the altar-call to the rest of Protestant America would not come from a Methodist - but a lawyer from New England who was ordained in the Presbyterian church. His name was Charles G. Finney (1792-1875). Finney has been hailed as "America's Greatest Revivalist" and "the premier evangelist of the nineteenth-century." It is beyond dispute that his methods and theology changed the whole course for how evangelicals in America would approach the meaning of revival and the techniques of large-scale evangelism. But what should be in dispute is if following the methods and theology of Charles Finney is conforming to the wisdom and truth of Scripture concerning conversion and evangelism.

You see, for Finney, hijacking the altar-call from the Methodists needed no adjustments for his doctrinal position. Calling people to come forward and giving them immediate assurance of salvation for their public response, was a logical fit for what Finney believed to be a true conversion to Christ. In his theology, all that a sinner needed to be saved was a decision of the will, rather than a regeneration of his nature. In other words, Finney did not believe in the necessity of the new birth (Jn.1:13; 3:1-8) because he did not believe in the reality of the sinner's depraved nature (Jer.17:9; Eph.2:1-3).

Charles Finney was in fact a Pelagian at heart. His entire theology of salvation embodied the fifth-century heresy known as Pelagianism (412 A.D.). Therefore Finney denied the biblical doctrines of original sin, salvation by grace alone, justification by faith alone, and even, the penal substitution of Christ's death. Needless to say, Finney was a bona fide heretic - who dazzled his generation with persuasive arguments that pitted reason over revelation, emotional tactics to manipulate the crowds, and quick conversions - which were documented over a period of several years and proven false by the apostasy of most people who "came to the altar" in his meetings.

Sadly though, "Finneyism" is still alive and well in many churches today. Conversions to Christ are still counted as people answering the altar-call, rather than seeing the evidence of genuine spiritual fruit (Gal.5:22-23). And the determining factor for salvation is still attributed to man's will rather than God's sovereign grace (cf. Rom.8:30). Finney would be proud. But what should matter most for us is this: is God glorified by a method not sanctioned by His Word in which man is given the credit for salvation? We know the answer...but will we obey?

2009-08-12T10:10:00.000-07:00

Altar-Call Evangelism: Is it biblical?

"What mean these dispatches from the battle-field? 'Last night, fourteen souls were under conviction, fifteen were justified, and eight received full sanctification.' I am weary of this public bragging, this counting of unhatched chickens, this exhibition of doubtful spoils. Lay aside such numberings of the people, such idle pretense of certifying in half a minute that which will need the testing of a lifetime." This lamentation combined with sage counsel was given over a hundred years ago by Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892). It was communicated in a public lecture to his ministerial students and then published in his classic book, The Soul Winner. Spurgeon's grief was over a style of evangelism that was all the rage in his day because of how quickly so-called results could be counted, secured and then reported publicly as a mighty "gospel" success. We know this kind of evangelism today as "altar-call" evangelism. During Spurgeon's generation this type of evangelism was very novel, but in our day (a hundred plus years later) - its the norm.

But not only is it an accepted practice for churches in the 21st century, it is revered as the only sure and sacred means of aquiring conversions to Christ. Or, as one church-goer put it to me several years ago: "Without the altar-call no one will be saved." In fact, along this same line of thinking, there is even a local pastor I know, who recently said: "Without the altar-call no church will grow in the South Georgia." For me personally, over the past fourteen years, I have greatly questioned the legitimacy and even integrity of altar-call evangelism. Though for many years as an itinerant evangelist I too had faithfully practiced this manner of "getting people saved." However, in 1995, by a series of illuminating discoveries, I gradually abandoned altar-call evangelism for good.

The first great challenge to me over this practice was simply a question of its biblical warrant. Did Christ or the Apostles or the early church as a whole employ this method of calling people to come forward at the end of a worship service, make a decision for Christ by repeating a prayer, and then be given immediate assurance of their salvation? The answer is an emphatic - NO! Nowhere in Scripture is there either a model or sanction for the altar-call. Rather, what we see is an aggressive, clear, faithful proclamation of the gospel with God blessing His Word with conversions (e.g., Acts 2:14-47; 3:11-26; 17:16-34). To say it another way, biblical evangelism believes in the sufficiency of the gospel (Rom.1:16; I Cor.1:18-2:5). This means the gospel is enough for sinners to hear in order to be saved. Furthermore, it is the gospel alone which God has ordained as the means He uses to bring sinners to Himself (Rom.10:14-17; I Cor.3:5-7). Thus the mandate of the Great Commission is to go into all the world and preach the gospel to all people (Mark 16:15; Lk.24:47; cf. Matt.28:19). Nothing more, nothing less. The altar-call however imposes the church to do something more than what God Himself has ordained. In fact, it implies by its very method that the preaching of the gospel falls short as a means of bringing sinners to Christ. In short, the altar-call is nothing more than a man-made addition to the gospel and therefore a denial of its sufficiency.

But what if someone argues that Christ called people to publicly come to Him and believe in Him - would this imply that altar-call evangelism is simply following Christ's example? There are two important points we need to remember in answer to this assumption: first, believing on Christ is the result of being born again with a new nature that hungers and thirsts for Christ unto salvation (see Jn.3:1-8; 6:35; Eph.2:5; Tit.3:5), not with a physical act of going forward and publicly praying a prayer. When Jesus called people to come to Him in the context of salvation, it was not with the idea that they would physical come toward Him. It meant to believe on Him (e.g., Jn.6:35-37) Second, no one can come to Christ (thereby savingly believe on Him) unless they are "drawn" or "granted" this grace by the Father (Jn.6:44,65). Henceforth, true conversions to Christ are the result of God's sovereign power and good pleasure alone, not the methods induced by men (see Acts 2:47; 5:14; II Thess.2:13,14).

But there is a further reason why the altar-call is an unbiblical practice: it creates a false assurance of salvation. This is the most disturbing and dangerous aspect of the altar-call. Tens of thousands of people who have "walked the aisle" and "prayed the prayer" are given immediate assurance that they are saved. And the only evidence proffered for such assurance is the physcial act of walking to the front of a church building and repeating a prayer. What's worse, is that a local church will seal this false assurance through baptism and church membership - and the so-called new convert will be told "never to doubt your salvation again."

Now the problems with this are too numerous to disseminate for what my aim is in this article. Rather, I will offer three major propositions that should be considered carefully as a warning against this practice of giving immediate assurance, and employing the altar-call in general: First, nowhere in Scripture is the assurance of salvation attributed to a physical act. An atheist can "walk an aisle" and "pray the prayer" and still remain an atheist. The power of salvation and the assurance that would accompany it, is not in the sinner coming to the front of a church building and praying a prayer but God alone who saves.

Secondly, the assurance of salvation in Scripture is related to both an objective and subjective spiritual reality. The objective spiritual reality of assurance is Christ and His saving work (see Rom.3:21-4:5). Saving faith is not in what we have done but in Christ alone and what He accomplished to save us. The subjective spiritual reality of assurance is in the fruit of a holy life (see Gal.5:22-23; Heb.12:14). In fact, the entire book of First John is devoted to this biblical aspect of assurance. If you're saved your life will bear out that transformation in desires and conduct that are both righteous and holy. The altar-call produces no such fruit of this kind - only antinominians and legalists.

Finally, the assurance of salvation is given by the Holy Spirit's witness not a preacher who leads you in a prayer. Romans 8:14-16 affirms this truth. Therefore, it is sheer arrogance (though unintentional, I'm sure) for a preacher to confer salvation-assurance on a sinner because they have repeated a prayer. This is nothing more than the Protestant version of Roman Catholic sacramentalism. Only the Holy Spirit can give us the assurance of salvation as He gives us a new heart, reveals to us the truth of Christ in the gospel, and empowers us to live a holy life. The altar-call cannot grant this kind of assurance.

But sadly and tragically, many sinners are led into thinking they are saved because of their response to the altar-call, rather than being truly regenerated by the Holy Spirit and thus drawn to Christ (Jn.3:5; 6:44; Tit.3:5). Is it any wonder then that the greatest problem facing the local evangelical church in America is unregenerate church membership? The altar-call can increase a church-roll but it will never produce a new creation in Jesus Christ (II Cor.5:17-18a).

2009-08-09T12:49:00.000-07:00

What are the benefits of Calvinism?

For the past nine posts I have written, my aim has been to answer the most common questions raised about the theology of Calvinism. I trust that the answers given have been helpful. I at least hope that whatever misconceptions may have been lingering in one's mind over Calvinism, have been taken away by these previous articles. Even if I have not convinced you of the truth of Calvinism, maybe when you think about it, there will not be the typical strawman version which is so common in our day. To say this another way, if you're going to disagree with Calvinism, at least disagree with what it really teaches and not a false idea you have about it.

Now for my closing post in this series, I simply want to give a list of eleven reasons that historic evangelical Calvinism is beneficial to the health and progress of Christians, both as individuals and collectively as the church. I will give no commentary to each of the points, but simply let them stand as sufficent statements to declare why every Christian who wears the label of a Calvinist has no shame in this badge of biblical theology.

1. Calvinism promotes the glory of God above all things and humbles the sinner.

2. Calvinism promotes the sovereignty of God over all things and humbles the sinner.

3. Calvinism upholds the authority, sufficiency, inerrancy, and infallibility of God's Word as what alone should be preached and determine all that we believe about God, man, salvation, the world, sin, etc.

4. Calvinism engenders a passion for personal holiness and godliness.

5. Calvinism spreads a passion for God-centered worship.

6. Calvinism spreads a passion for Christ-exalting evangelism.

7. Calvinism motivates a Christian's life to self-denial, cross-bearing, and Christ-following.

8. Calvinism enlarges the heart to trust and depend on God for all things at all times.

9. Calvinism gives a God-centered view of the world as under His control and all events being worked out according to His sovereign plan.

10. Calvinism creates a greater hunger and thirst to know God and love Him for who He is.

11. Calvinism glories in the grace of God through the work of Christ by the power of the Spirit as the only true reason any sinner is saved.

2009-08-05T07:02:00.000-07:00

Calvinism's Most Controversial Doctrine: Part Three

It might be very hard for many Christians to believe that a doctrine like reprobation would have any application at all to them. But we must remember what we are told in II Timothy 3:16 about the Word of God as a whole: "All Scripture...is profitable." So with that affirmation we have to ask ourselves: how does the doctrine of reprobation serve me as a Christian? Why would it be useful for me to know this doctrine? I will answer these questions in three different ways:

1. Reprobation teaches us that we too would have suffered eternal punishment had not God stepped in to save us. May we understand this once and for all: left to ourselves, we are no better than any other sinner. What we all deserve is the hardening of God that I covered in my last post from Romans 9:17-18. And this should be the first great truth that grips us about this doctrine. God could have and He should have passed over me. And due to this fact, every Christian should say with George Whitefield (1714-1770) whenever we see or consider the lost state of many men and women in this world: "There but for the grace of God go I." The doctrine of reprobation therefore, if understood properly, should drive us to such thankfulness to God and utter humility before all people everywhere. Had God not stepped in and saved us, we would all face what we actually deserve - eternal punishment for our sins.

2. Reprobation keeps before us the all-important truth that salvation is entirely of grace and that no works of man contribute to it. First of all, the doctrine of reprobation gives us a graphic and terrible picture of what man will do if left to his own will bound up in his sinful nature. He will not seek God (Rom.3:11). He will not have any saving affection for Jesus Christ.

In fact, what we need to understand very clearly - is that there is no such thing as someone who is knocking on the door of heaven trying to get in, but God is turning them away because He has not chosen to save them. We need to get that picture completely out of our minds. Why? Because there is no such person who exists! Those whom God has chosen not to save He leaves to their own will which is always heading for sin and hell. And what we need to remember is that this is true of everyone in the world - therefore if anyone is saved, it will not be determined by anything man chooses or what man does (Rom.9:16; cf. Jn.15:16; Eph.2:8-9). Salvation is entirely of God's sovereign will and grace! And the doctrine of reprobation keeps this before us, because it reminds us that God chooses to save us based on His mercy and not on our merits. "So, it (that is, God's purpose of election: cf. Rom.9:11) does not depend on human will or exertion but on God, who shows mercy" (Rom.9:16).

3. Reprobation helps us to see the glory of God in His justice. In the same way that the doctrine of election glorifies God in His mercy - reprobation glorifies God in His justice. By this doctrine, we are given a greater and more clearer picture of who God is. He is more than loving, kind, good, and gracious. But God is holy, righteous, and just. Therefore, when He chooses to harden sinners, and thus leave them in their sin to receive the condemnation they deserve for their sin - by this action, God is magnifying the glory of His justice. In fact, it is for this great purpose (magnifying God's justice) that the reprobate will serve for all eternity. The reprobate in hell will show forth the glory and rightness of God's justice against sin.

So, the doctrine of reprobation is very useful and profitable for every Christian. It reminds us of God's sovereign and free grace in saving us. It also reminds us of God's holiness and justice against sin. And it truly humbles us and keeps us from looking down our noses at other sinners. We are no better than anyone else. "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Rom.3:23). It is only God's grace in Jesus Christ that has made any of us to differ. But when we think about reprobation, I believe our ultimate application comes from the wise words of Dr. J.I. Packer, when he wrote:

"The reprobates are faceless so far as Christians are concerned, and it is not for us to try to identify them. Rather, we should live in the light of the certainty that anyone may be saved if he or she will but repent and put faith in Christ. We should view all persons that we meet as possibly being numbered among the elect." Amen.

2009-07-31T11:11:00.000-07:00

Calvinism's Most Controversial Doctrine: Part Two

In my last post I simply defined and made clarifications as to the doctrine of reprobation. But in this present article, I want to actually show this truth as it is expounded from God's Word. Specifically, the classic biblical text is in Romans 9:17-18, which says: "For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.' So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills."

As we begin considering these two verses, the first thing we must see is that they are an exact parallel to what Paul has written in verses 15-16 of this same chapter. In those verses, Paul illustrates the sovereignty of God's mercy from Moses, and then draws his conclusion that God's purpose of election does not depend on man's choices or efforts but on God's will to show mercy. But now, here in verses 17-18, Paul is illustrating the negative side to God's sovereign action over sinners - namely - His right NOT to save. And his illustration is in the case of Pharaoh.

What Paul is seeking to prove by the historical example of Pharaoh, is God's sovereign determination to pass over sinners He leaves to perish in their sins for the manifestation of His divine justice. Pharaoh is the great historical representation of all reprobates who will eventually face the full expression of God's wrath for their sin.

Now the particular passage Paul cites to establish this is Exodus 9:16. In the original context of this verse, God is sending Moses back to Pharaoh following the first six plagues which God has already sent upon Egypt. The message Moses is giving to Pharaoh in this passage, is to put this powerful Egyptian monarch on notice - that although God could have destroyed him with all of Egypt from the start; yet, God has spared him for one purpose. Pharaoh's life is preserved by God to show forth God's power in judgment on sinners, and thus glorify the name of the Lord.

To fully appreciate what Moses said to Pharaoh on this occasion, let me quote from verses 15-16 together in Exodus 9:

"For by now I could have struck you and your people with pestilence, and you would have been cut off from the earth. But for this purpose I have raised you up, to show you my power, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth."

The most important term in this whole passage are the words, "I have raised you up..." What did God mean by that? These words quoted in Romans 9:17 come from a Greek verb that carries the idea of "bringing forward" or "lifting up", and was used of the rise of historical figures to positions of prominence. In this context therefore, God is making it known to Pharaoh that he has been brought upon the scene of history to display the power of God's judgment on sinners.

Now in the light of this, how does Paul explain what happened to Pharaoh - and for that matter, how does Paul explain what happens to all sinners whom God chooses not to save? The answer to this question takes us directly to verse 18: "So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills." This verse is obviously a conclusion. It is a conclusion to what Paul has stated in verse 17 - but it is also a conclusion to Paul's entire answer to the objection set forth back in verse 14. And we could go one step further: verse 18 even sums up what Paul was explaining back in verses 7-13.

You see, what Romans 9:18 is stating with one broad stroke of the brush, as it were, is how God deals with all people in every generation of history. In every generation of history there are those on whom God has mercy and then there are those He hardens. Or to say it another way: God chooses to save some while He passes over others. And Paul has been giving us historical examples of each. There is Isaac, Jacob, and Moses who represent those on whom God shows mercy (see 9:7-15). But then, there is Ishmael, Esau, and Pharaoh who represent those whom God hardens (9:7-13,17). These are the reprobate, the non-elect.

Now seeing verse 18 from this broad context, let's come in a little closer and go back to our leading question: how does Paul explain what happened to Pharaoh and all sinners God chooses not to save? In other words, what is God's action toward the reprobate? Romans 9:18 says that God hardens them. What does this mean? The word translated hardens is the Greek verb skleruno which means literally to "make hard", and metaphorically "to render stubborn and obstinate."

In the account of Pharaoh in the book of Exodus, we are told ten times that God hardened Pharaoh's heart (Ex.4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10; 14:4,8). And in a few places we are also told that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Ex.7:13; 8:32; 9:34). But the predominant testimony of Scripture is God hardening the heart of Pharaoh. What are we to make of this? How are we to explain this? To begin with, we must remember that Pharaoh was already a sinner with an evil disposition bent on rebelling against God. This was Pharaoh's natural inclination (see Jer.17:9). God therefore did not make Pharaoh sin nor did He create in Pharaoh a heart of unbelief. Pharaoh was a natural born unbelieving sinner - which is why he could harden his own heart.

For God therefore to harden Pharaoh's heart was simply to aggravate the unbelief that was already there. How did God do this? He pulled away the restraints of His common grace which were holding Pharaoh back from further evil and wickedness. To put this in the terms of Romans 1:24,26,28 - God gave Pharaoh up to his own sin. In other words, God made the decision to remove His restraining influences; while the wicked part of this process was carried out by Pharaoh himself. Understand this: God did no violence to Pharaoh's will. He just simply gave Pharaoh up to the sinful desires of his own will. This is how God hardens sinners! Listen to how R.C. Sproul explained this:

All that God has to do to harden people's hearts is to remove the restraints. He gives them a longer leash. Rather than restricting their human freedom, he increases it. He lets them have their own way. In a sense he gives them enough rope to hang themselves. It is not that God puts his hand on them to create fresh evil in their hearts; he merely removes his holy hand of restraint from them and lets them do their own will.

So what God did with Pharaoh and what He did with Esau and Ishmael (cf. 9:7-13) - and what He has purposed to do with all those He has chosen not to save, is to give them their heart's desire: that is, to resist and rebel against God all their days. This is how God hardens the non-elect. This is what God does in the act of reprobation. He leaves sinners to their own sinful desires which will eventually drive them to self-destruction and condemnation under the holy wrath and judgment of God.

But of course, the greatest point in all of this from Romans 9:17-18 is that God has every right to treat sinners in this way. God is fully justified to have mercy on whomever he wills, and to harden whomever he wills. You cannot say in either case that God is being unfair. On those He shows mercy He is giving them what they don't deserve; and on those He hardens He is giving them exactly what they do deserve. Neither sinner is being treated unfairly or unjustly. God is therefore free to save whoever He chooses to save and He is under no obligation to save anyone - because all have sinned and have come short of His glory (see Rom.3:9-18; cf. v.23). So then, whoever God chooses to pass over in judgment cannot charge God with injustice. In my next and final post on reprobation, I will answer the question: why would it be useful for me to know this doctrine?

2009-07-28T11:43:00.000-07:00

Calvinism's Most Controversial Doctrine: Part One

There is no doubt that the most controversial and hotly debated doctrine of Calvinism is the doctrine of reprobation. I will also add that this doctrine is the most slandered of any teaching within Reformed theology. Sadly, for many Christians, they will not even entertain a discussion about it. The moment they hear that God has not chosen to save everyone, they immediately cry out: "Unfair! Unjust!" They cannot stomach the idea that God's election to salvation is not determined for all people without exception.

But what's most important for us as Christians, is not what we think but what does the Bible actually teach about these things. Remember: the very term "Calvinism" is simply an historic nickname for biblical Christianity. So, when we talk about this doctrine called "reprobation", we are talking about a teaching of God's Word as opposed to a teaching of John Calvin. Calvin believed in the doctrine of reprobation only because he saw it in the pages of God's Word. Therefore, what is mandantory for our discussion of this doctrine should always be: does the Bible teach it?

Now to begin with, I believe it is important that we start with a definition of reprobation. What is the teaching of this doctrine? Reprobation is the name given to God's eternal decision regarding those sinners whom He has not chosen to save. The essence of His decision is NOT to change them but to leave them in their sin (which is the desire of their sinful hearts), and to finally judge them as they deserve for what they have done in their sin. This is the truth of reprobation. It is God's sovereign eternal decree to pass over sinners by not choosing to save them and thus leaving them to receive the condemnation they deserve for their sins.

What must be clarified about this doctrine is that it differs in a very important way from the truth of election. And that difference can be best understood by exposing a common misunderstanding about reprobation. There is a false view of reprobation which goes by the name of "equal ultimacy". The best and simplest explanation of this view I have ever read comes from R.C. Sproul, in his book Chosen by God. Sproul wrote:

"Equal ultimacy is based on a concept of symmetry. It seeks a complete balance between election and reprobation. The key idea is this: just as God intervenes in the lives of the elect to create faith in their hearts, so God equally intervenes in the lives of the reprobate to create or work unbelief in their hearts."

In other words, the basic idea behind "equal ultimacy" is that God determines the destinies of the elect and non-elect in exactly the same way. In the same way God creates faith in the elect to believe on Christ, He also creates unbelief in the non-elect to reject Christ. So when it comes to those whom God chooses not to save, according to equal ultimacy, God has consigned them to hell apart from anything they have done and thus apart from anything they deserve. Instead, it is God who has created in them the sin that will drive them to hell.

Needless to say, this is a very scary doctrine! It is a doctrine which paints a view of God to be some cruel, cold ogre who arbitrarily chooses to send people to hell. It is also a doctrine which makes God the author of sin. Suffice to say, the equal ultimacy view of reprobation is a patently false heretical doctrine! The truth about reprobation is this: when it comes to those whom God chooses not to save, God leaves them to themselves. He passes over them. He does not create unbelief in their hearts. That unbelief is already there. Nor does God coerce them to sin. They sin by their own choices. What God does is to pull back His restraints on the non-elect whereby they continue down a path of sin; which is already the path their own hearts have chosen.

Now understanding this, what makes the difference between election and reprobation? In the act of election, God actively intervenes in the hearts of those sinners He has chosen to save. He does not leave them to the judgment of their own sinful choices. Rather, God creates faith and repentance in the hearts of all His elect so that they will come to Christ and lay hold of Him as their Savior and follow Him as their Lord.

But for those whom God has not chosen to save - He simply does nothing with them but leaves them in their sin. He withholds His special grace that would bring them to salvation by giving them over to the full intentions of their sinful nature which is always to rebel against God. So then, with the elect they receive what they don't deserve (salvation) and with the non-elect they receive what they do deserve (judgment for their sin). And this is the ultimate difference between election and reprobation.

As a footnote to all of this, let me make an important clarification. Those who hold to the aforementioned "equal ultimacy" view of reprobation are historically called "Hyper-Calvinists". The reason I make this clarification is because those Christians who are Evangelical Calvinists ususally get accused for holding to the Hyper-Calvinist view of reprobation. But let me be as plain as I can on this matter: those who are true Calvinists and are thus Evangelical Calvinists have never held to the view of equal ultimacy! Evangelical Calvinists believe in the doctrine of reprobation - but only as it is taught in the Bible as God's righteous judgment of sinners He chooses not to save. In my next post, I will look at the doctrine of reprobation as expounded from the Bible itself.

2009-07-24T07:53:00.000-07:00

Does Calvinism kill missions and evangelism?

In nearly every discussion or debate that I have engaged in over Calvinism, it never fails that this question will surface as either a sincere inquiry or an objection to dispute the truth of Calvinism. But this question is raised due to a misunderstanding on two different fronts: First, there is an historic perversion of Calvinism called Hyper-Calvinism, which goes beyond the bounds of Scripture concerning God's sovereignty and man's depravity. It reasons that since God has already chosen who will be saved and since men do not have the ability to believe the gospel and repent, there is therefore no point in promoting evangelism and missions. This view is solely based on fallen human reasoning rather than the divine revelation of God's Word. The "Hyper-Calvinist" grasps the truth of man's depravity and the truth that God will save only His elect, but he wrongly deduces that there is no necessity therefore to preach the gospel to all sinners and to engage in efforts to reach the lost. His "logic" in going beyond the Scriptures brings him into an unbiblical position where he ceases to see the necessity and divine command of using God-ordained "means" to produce the God-ordained goals. What is so sad about the Hyper-Calvinist is that he loses all zeal and compassion for reaching the lost, and even justifies himself for his anti-evangelistic attitude. But combined with this sad commentary, is that when most people in the church today (especially Baptist churches) hear about Calvinism, they rarely think of evangelical Calvinism but only of hyper-Calvinism.

The second contributor to believing the error that Calvinism kills evangelism, is that for many Christians in our day, they cannot accept the doctrine of God's sovereign election being a means of motivation for reaching the lost. Most Christians seem to reason like the Hyper-Calvinist when it comes to election and predestination: if God has already chosen who will be saved then why evangelize? For such people, their reasoning causes them to reject God's election of sinners for salvation in favor of a man-centered view of salvation and missions. In other words, they take the biblical truth of man's responsibility to believe and repent, along with the church's mission to reach the lost, but go beyond the bounds of Scripture denying God's sovereignty and thus turning salvation into an act determined totally by man's will. Hence, they end up being driven by a carnal dependence on methods to save sinners rather than looking to God's grace and power as man's only hope. This way of thinking is of course the classic position of Arminianism.

But the position of historic evangelical Calvinism embraces without reservation the biblical teaching, that God has chosen to save a people for Himself out of every nation of Adam's fallen race (see Jn.6:37; 10:15,16,26; Acts 13:48; 15:14; Rom.9:14-24; Rev.5:9; 7:9); and God has also chosen the work of evangelism and missions to call His elect to their appointed salvation (see Rom.10:13-17; I Thess.1:4,5; cf. Acts 13:48). Taking therefore these two truths together, the Calvinist reasons biblically: since the preaching of the gospel is God's chosen instrument to bring His elect home, then every Christian should be enflamed with a zeal and compassion to evangelize all men, because the church is assured by God that their labors will never be in vain (see I Cor.1:18-24; 3:5-7; 15:58).

So then, election and predestination do not kill evangelism but gurarantee its success. "All the Father gives me, " Jesus declared, "will come to me" (Jn.6:37). None of the elect will be lost. All whom the Father has given to His Son to save will be saved. It's certain. It's sure. It's guaranteed. Thus, when we obey Christ's command to go and preach the gospel to all people everywhere - we are not pursuing a mission that will fail. The success rate in evangelism is always 100% because all of God's elect will come to faith in Christ. And this is how historic evangelical Calvinism has always reasoned from the Scriptures. Missions and evangelism is not rejected because of God's election but embraced because of God's election. Thus, true Calvinism (not Hyper-Calvinism) will never kill evangelism and missions, but in fact will be its greatest defender and mobilizer.

And the history of the church bears out this testimony. For the greatest and most sacrificial evangelists and missionaries were all staunch, evangelical Calvinists. Just to name a few: there was Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) the famed preacher and pastor of New England during the 18th century revival in Colonial America; also David Brainerd (1718-1747) who was a missionary to the unreached native American Indians in southern New England; and of course, George Whitefield (1714-1770) who has been hailed as "the greatest evangelist since the Apostle Paul"; then there was William Carey (1761-1834), English Baptist minister and "the Father of Modern Missions", who labored for forty years in India; also Andrew Fuller (1754-1815), who worked hard in the support of foreign missions, and gave special assistance to William Carey; Henry Martyn (1781-1812) was a missionary to India who translated the New Testament in Persian; Adoniram Judson (1788-1850) was the first Baptist foreign missionary from America, who went to Burma, India; Luther Rice (1783-1836) was a pioneer in organizing the Triennal Convention, which was the first official mission agency and board for all Baptists in America; Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) pastored in London, England for thirty-seven years and was a diligent evangelist who saw under God's blessing a church grow to over 5,000 members, with 82% being brought in by conversion to Christ; John G. Paton (1824-1905) labored many years as a missionary to the New Hebrides in the South Pacific; and finally, there was Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) who faithfully pastored Westminster Chapel in London, England for thirty-years, holding every Sunday evening "evangelistic services", where he preached the gospel and saw many conversions over those long years. But the most important truth and fact about all these men, is that none of them ever lacked for passion and labor in preaching the gospel to the lost, yet they were all convinced that God had elected to save a people for Himself, and only the elect will be saved.

2009-07-21T12:04:00.000-07:00

What does Calvinism teach about "free will" ?

Calvinism has never denied that man has the freedom to choose, but it has been very careful to clarify the precise limits of that freedom. And what Calvinism has stressed most of all about man's freedom of choice, is that our ability to choose cannot go beyond our nature. Therefore, since man is born with a sinful nature (cf. Psa.51:5; 58:3; Jer.17:9; Rom.5:12) his natural choices will never be in favor of God but in rejection of God (Psa.10:3-4). So then, when a sinner hears the gospel he cannot understand it but thinks it to be foolish (see I Cor.1:18; 2:14); furthermore, because his heart is corrupted by sin, his desires are as well - which is why Jesus taught that sinners "hate the light" and will not come to the light because they "love the darkness" (Jn.3:19-20). And out of that love for the darkness comes a rebellion and resistance against God and His way of salvation in Christ.

Thus, if a sinner is left to himself to make the choice to follow Christ, he will renounce Christ everytime. It is not in man as a sinner to want Christ to save him. His desires and ability are both enslaved to his sinful nature, and are therefore bound to oppose God as a way of life. This is why the Bible declares as a matter of fact concerning all sinners apart from God's grace in Christ: "...there is none who seeks for God" (Rom.3:11). This one statement in the context of Romans 3:9-18, is stating that man in his sinfulness has not one single inclination to seek God as his God and Savior. In fact, based upon the meaning of the verb "seeks" (Greek: ekzeteo), Romans 3:11 is saying that in the nature of every sinner there does not exist a searching, longing, inquiring, craving, and seeking drive to want God in a saving way. This does not mean that man has no freedom to choose, but again, his free choices are totally limited by the natural bent of his nature. And if his nature is sinful (which it is!) then he cannot and will not choose to come to Christ for salvation, left to himself.

This is why Jesus made it so plain in John 6:44, that "no one can (Greek: dunamis - "power or ability") come to me, unless the Father draws (Greek: elkuo - "take possession of") him." Think carefully about what this verse is saying: no sinner has the ability to come to Christ unless God takes supernatural possession of him and brings him savingly to Christ. But this possession is not coercion. God is not forcing the sinner to come against his will. Rather, by giving the sinner a new nature through the new birth (Ezk.36:26; Jn.3:1-8; II Cor.5:17), he comes to Christ willingly and freely as he is enabled by the Holy Spirit (cf.Jn.6:63). This truth is expressed in the most comprehensive way in Chapter Ten of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith:

"At a time appointed by and acceptable to God, those whom God has predestinated to life are effectually called by His Word and Spirit out of the state of death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ. Their minds are given spiritual enlightenment and, as those who are being saved, they begin to understand the things of God. God takes away their heart of stone and gives them a heart of flesh. He renews their will, and by His almighty power He sets them to seek and follow that which is good, at the same time effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ. And to all these changes they come most freely, for they are made willing by divine grace."

This therefore is Calvinism's position on the idea of "free will": man has the natural ability and desire to choose many things, but because he is by nature a sinner, he cannot make the righteous and spiritual choice to trust Christ to save him. He is morally and spiritually unable and unwilling to excercise his will towards Christ. The great gospel evangelist and Calvinist, George Whitefield (1714-1770), summed up the Calvinist doctrine on free will best when he said: "Man has a free will to go to hell but none to go to heaven, till God works in him to will and do for His good pleasure."

2009-07-20T09:17:00.000-07:00

What is the biblical support for the Five Points of Calvinism?

The most critical question regarding the five points of Calvinism is if these so-called "points" are biblical. I will say from the outset that they in fact are biblical - and it is because they are biblical that in every discussion or debate that I have engaged in over these doctrines, all I have ever needed for support is the Bible. I don't need to turn to John Calvin or the Synod of Dort nor even to my favorite Calvinists like Owen, Spurgeon, Edwards, Whitefield, and Lloyd-Jones. If someone asks me to show why I believe the five points of Calvinism, I simply open up God's Word and begin.

So in this post it is my aim to show the biblical support for the five points of Calvinism (or what I prefer to call them, "the doctrines of grace"). I will not be exhaustive here, just concise enough to prove that these doctrines are not the concoctions of man's ideas. If you would like to read a more comprehensive treatment though, of how the doctrines of grace are simply the straight teaching of Scripture - I would suggest two wonderful books: The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented, by David Steele, Curtis Thomas, and Lance Quinn; published by P&R; and The Foundations of Grace, by Steven J. Lawson; published by Reformation Trust. Both of these books are extremely helpful and illuminating for the Christian who sincerely is seeking to know if the Bible does in fact teach these things. I personally count them as the very best in their field.

But for now, let me at least point out some pertitent passages of God's Word which show clearly that the five points of Calvinism are first and foremost the doctrines of the Bible. For total depravity, there is Jeremiah 17:9 which declares that "the heart of man is desperately wicked, and deceitful above all things." There is also Mark 7:20-23, where Jesus teaches that everything that is evil and thus "defiles a person" comes from within his own heart. In John 3:19-20, we are told that a sinner "does not come to the light [Christ]" because they "hate the light" and "love the darkness." And finally, in Romans 3:9-18 and Ephesians 2:1-3, the world as a whole is denounced as being "under sin" which is expounded as being unrighteous, having no spiritual understanding, never seeking after God in a saving way, worthless, unable to do anything good by God's standard, dead to God, in bondage to sin, worldly, devilish, fleshly, and seated under the wrath of God by nature.

For unconditional election, there is John 6:37, where Jesus tells us that "all the Father gives me will come to me." In Matthew 11:27, Christ declared that "no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." There is also Ephesians 1:4 and II Thessalonians 2:13 which plainly say that God "chose us" for salvation "before the foundation of the world." And in Romans 9:11-16 we are told that the basis upon which God did chose to save us did not depend upon "human will or exertion" but it was solely grounded in God's sovereign mercy alone. Moreover, God's choosing to save us is the only reason that we ever came to believe on Christ, according to Acts 13:48 and Romans 8:30.

For limited atonement or particular redemption, Matthew 1:21 pronounces that Jesus shall "save his people from their sins." And in John 10:15, Jesus claims that He lays down His life only for His "sheep." Moreover, in Acts 20:28 and Ephesians 5:25, it is clearly stated that Christ gave His life for "the church." Also, there is Hebrews 2:9-17, where we're told that Jesus tasted "death for everyone", and then the "everyone" is qualified as "the many sons" God is bringing to glory (v.10); those who are being "sanctified" (v.11); those who are called Christ's "brothers" (vv.11-12) and "the children God has given [to Christ] (v.13)"; they are also identified as "the offspring of Abraham" and "the people" for whom Jesus has made propitiation for their sins (vv.16-17). The point is, the "everyone" of Hebrews 2:9 cannot be isolated from its context which identifies who the everyone are - they are not everyone without exception, but a particular people whom God is bringing to glory, sanctifying, described as Christ's brothers and His children, the seed of Abraham, and a people who have had the wrath of God removed from them through the death of Christ. Such a people can only be Christians. Jesus did not die for anyone who would be lost in hell.

For irresistible grace or effectual calling, John 3:3-8 teaches that unless one is "born of the Spirit" he cannot see nor enter the kingdom of God. In John 6:44,65, Jesus makes it quite plain that no one can come to Him unless God the Father has "drawn" them and "granted" them the grace to come. And finally, in Ephesians 2:8-9 and II Timothy 2:25 we are taught that "faith" and "repentance" are both gifts which God grants to the sinner whom He chooses to save.

Lastly, for the perseverance of the saints, in John 6:39 Jesus promises that all those His Father has given Him, He shall lose none but raise them up on the last day. In John 10:27-29, Jesus reassures His sheep that none will perish nor be plucked out of His hand; in Romans 8:28-39, all of God's elect shall never be separated from God's love for them in Christ, but all things shall work together for their good and thus they can be certain that they will be glorified in the end.

As I said, these examples or proofs for the biblical support of the five points of Calvinism would not be exhaustive - but I hope that it is enough to at least provoke a careful study and consideration of these doctrines. As a Calvinist, all I need is the Bible to show why I believe what I believe regarding the sovereign grace of God in salvation. I do not claim this with arrogance but simply with a confidence in what God says in His word concerning why anyone is saved. Thus, for any fellow believer who has sincere and honest questions about the doctrines of grace, let me challenge you as I was challenged 20 years ago: go to the Scriptures and see what God Himself has said. The Bible is our final authority for everything we believe and practice as Christians. If the five points of Calvinism are not biblical then I don't want anything to do with them (and neither should you!). But to prove that, we must explain what the Bible means about the myriad of passages which clearly point to the fact that we are saved by the sovereign grace of God alone.

2009-07-14T11:57:00.000-07:00

What are the "Five Points of Calvinism" ?

The so-called "five points of Calvinism" were the historical response of the Dutch Reformed Church to a movement within their ranks which was seeking to change their confessions on the doctrine of salvation. This movement called themselves Arminians after the Dutch theologian named, Jacob Arminius (1560-1609); who had been reared in Calvinism but came to reject it in favor of the humanist teachings of the 16th century philospher, Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536). What Arminius believed and taught was that man has a "free will" to choose Christ, and on that basis God would save him. In other words, it was man's will that determined his salvation rather than God's will. God simply responded to whatever man's will chose to do. So then, for Arminius, man's will was sovereign in salvation and thus divided the credit between himself and God for reaching heaven.

But the essence of Arminius' teaching was simply a regurgitation of an old heresy from the fifth century called "Semi-Pelagianism." The basic principles behind this belief, that would be strongly followed by Arminius' followers, is explained well Dr. J.I. Packer:

"The theology which it contained stemmed from two philosophical principles: first, that divine sovereignty is not compatible with human freedom, nor therefore with human responsibility; second, that ability limits obligation. (The charge of semi-Pelagianism was thus fully justified.) From these principles, the Arminians drew two deductions: first, that since the Bible regards faith as a free and responsible human act, it cannot be caused by God, but it is exercised independently of Him; second, that since the Bible regards faith as obligatory on the part of all who hear the gospel, ability to believe must be universal."

So then, based on their Semi-Pelagian principles, the Arminians argued that the doctrine of salvation must be interpreted by the following positions which they formulated into five points. The five points of Arminianism are as follows:

1. Free will or human ability. Although human nature was seriously affected by the Fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and and believe, but He does so in such a manner as not to interfere with man's freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it.

2. Conditional election. God's choice of certain individuals for salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. Election therefore was determined by, or conditioned upon, what man would do. The faith which God foresaw, and upon which He based His choice, was not given to the sinner by God (it was not created by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit), but resulted solely from man's will. It was left entirely up to man to determine who would be elected for salvation. God chose those whom He knew would, of their own free will, choose Christ. Thus, the sinner's choice of Christ, not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.

3. Universal redemption or General atonement. Christ's redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved, but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe in Him are saved. His death enabled God to pardon sinners in the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone's sins. Christ's redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.

4. The Holy Spirit can be effectually resisted. The Spirit calls inwardly all those who are called outwardly by the gospel invitation; He does all that He can to bring every sinner to salvation. But inasmuch as man is free, he can successfully resist the Spirit's call. The Spirit cannot regenerate the sinner until he believes; faith (which is man's contribution) precedes and makes possible the new birth. Thus, man's free will limits the Spirit in the application of Christ's saving work. The Holy Spirit can only draw to Christ those who allow Him to have His way with them. Until the sinner responds, the Spirit cannot give life. God's grace, therefore, is not invincible; it can be, and often is, resisted and thwarted by man.

5. Falling from grace. Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith, etc. All Arminians have not been agreed on this point; some have held that believers are eternally secure in Christ - that once a sinner is regenerated, he can never be lost (The citations of the "five points of Arminianism" is cited from Steele, Thomas, and Quinn's book, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented; pgs. 5-8).

So, to summarize these five positions taken by the Arminians, we can say this: "According to Arminianism, salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man (who must respond) - man's response being the determining factor. God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, choose to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man's will plays a decisive role; thus, man, not God, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation" (lbid., p.8).

Now once the Arminians had written their "five points", they called on the Dutch Reformed Church to embrace them in place of their confessional Calvinism. So in 1618, a National Synod of the church was convened in the city of Dort to examine the Arminian doctrines in light of God's Word. After 154 earnest sessions, which lasted seven months, the Five Points of Arminianism were found to contradict the Scriptures and declared heretical. The reason they were denounced as heresy is because at the core of Arminianism is the belief (as already mentioned) that man's salvation depends ultimately on man. Salvation then is no longer the sole work of God's mercy and grace, but a work of man getting himself saved.

In response therefore to the Arminians, the Dutch Reformed Church reaffirmed the position held by the Protestant Reformers as consistent with God's Word. They formulated what would be known as The Five Points of Calvinism. And over the years the studied reply of the Synod of Dort to the errors of Arminianism has been set forth in the form of an acrostic spelling out the word TULIP. Thus the Five Points of Calvinism are as follows:

1. T - total depravity: Because of the Fall, man is unable of himself to savinlgy believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free; it is in bondage to his evil nature. Therefore, he will not - indeed, he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ. It takes regeneration, by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation, but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation. It is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner's gift to God.

2. U - unconditional election: God's choice of certain individuals for salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen responses or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause, of God's choice. Election, therefore, was not determined by, or conditioned upon, any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus, God's choice of the sinner, not the sinner's choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.

3. L - limited atonement (or particular redemption): Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was a substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ's redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith, which unites them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, thereby guaranteeing their salvation.

4. I - irresistible grace (or the efficacious call of the Spirit): In addition to the outward general call to salvation, which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call (which is made to all without distinction) can be, and often is, rejected. However, the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By means of this special call, the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man's will, nor is He dependent upon man's cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God's grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those whom it is extended.

5. P - perseverance of the saints: All who are chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit, are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of almighty God, and thus persevere to the end (Ibid., pgs. 5-8).

Now the one great point that each of these "five points" are teaching is the biblical truth which declares: God ALONE saves sinners (Jon.2:9). From first to last it is the Triune God - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - who are saving sinners. Hence, the Five Points of Calvinism have been better called, "the doctrines of grace". For it is only by God's grace that any sinner is saved, excluding all efforts and boasting on the sinner's part to take credit for being redeemed.

Observing therefore the key differences between the Five Points of Arminianism and the Five Points of Calvinism, consider as a final musing what Dr. J.I. Packer wrote:

"Here are two coherent interpretations of the biblical gospel, which stand in evident opposition to each other. The difference between them is not primarily one of emphasis, but of content. One proclaims a God who saves (Calvinism); the other speaks of a God Who enables man to save himself (Arminianism). One view presents the three great acts of the Holy Trinity for the recovering of lost mankind - election by the Father, redemption by the Son, calling by the Spirit - as directed towards the same persons, and as securing their salvation infallibly. The other view gives each act a different reference (the objects of redemption being all mankind, of calling those who hear the gospel, and of election, those hearers who respond), and denies that any man's salvation is secured by any of them. The two theologies thus conceive the plan of salvation in quite different terms.

One makes salvation depend on the work of God, the other on a work of man; one regards faith as part of God's gift of salvation, the other as man's own contribution to salvation; one gives all the glory of saving believers to God, the other divides the praise between God, Who, so to speak, built the machinery of salvation, and man, who by believing operated it. Plainly, these differences are important, and the permanent value of the 'five points', as a summary of Calvinism, is that they make clear the points at which, and the extent to which, these two conceptions are at variance."

2009-07-07T12:43:00.000-07:00

Why is Calvinism called "Calvinism" ?

The term "Calvinism" is historically derived from the name of John Calvin (1509-1564) who was one of the pillar influences of the Protestant Reformation during the 16th century. Calvin was a pastor, theologian, writer, and religious reformer who had formulated many biblical doctrines into a clear and concise system of understanding. This systematization was published in Calvin's classic work called The Institutes of the Christian Religion, which became his magnum opus of Reformation Christianity. Through this book and many other publications, along with his massive correspondence, he gained a wide adherence from his ministry base in Geneva, Switzerland.

Calvin's teachings however were not new. His expositions on God's sovereignty, human depravity, and the necessity of effectual grace had actually come to clear expression in the work of Augustine of Hippo (354-530 AD). Furthermore, his teachings on justification by faith alone and the bondage of the human will to sin, were already well explained in the works of Martin Luther (1483-1546). What therefore made the significant difference in Calvin's influence, was that he was the first Christian theologian to bring together biblical doctrines recovered during the Reformation into a helpful system of thought. In other words, John Calvin helped the Church to "connect the dots" of biblical truth in one coherent order. Thus, the biblical teachings of the Protestant Reformation have been given the nickname, "Calvinism."

Therefore, those Christians who call themselves "Calvinists" are not strictly and solely following the teachings of John Calvin. I myself am a Calvinist, but I do not agree with Calvin's position on baptism nor even do I agree completely with his church polity. Nevertheless, I am a Calvinist. And the reason I am a Calvinist is because I embrace those doctrines of God's Word which Luther, Calvin, and the rest of the Protestant Reformers so ably expounded. Calvinism then goes far beyond the man, John Calvin. Instead, it is nothing short of biblical Christianity, with the accent falling heavily on the truth of God's sovereignty.

Commenting on the name Calvinism, Baptist preacher and staunch Calvinist, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) once observed:

We only use the term "Calvinism" for shortness. That doctrine which is called "Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them of the Holy Spirit, from Jesus Christ the great founder of the Christian dispensation. We use the term then, not because we impute extraordinary importance to Calvin's having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with fact.

2009-07-06T08:22:00.000-07:00

What is Calvinism?

Despite the growing resurgence of Calvinism in many sectors of American Evangelicalism, there is still a wide breadth of ignorance as to what Calvinism really is and what it is about. I saw this demonstrated two weeks ago at the Southern Baptist Convention, when CEO and president of the Executive Committee, Dr. Morris Chapman, sought to maintain that the rise of Calvinism in the SBC is the rise of a denial in man's personal responsibility in the matter of salvation. Now thankfully, many people have come out publicly to denounce Dr. Chapman's "strawman" version of Calvinism - but nevertheless, it proves my initial point, that there really is an ignorance (whether willful or not) as to the truth about Calvinism.

With this said, I am going to devote my next several posts to answering the most commonly asked questions about Calvinism. Whether I convince the reader or not to become a Calvinist is not my primary goal in this endeavor. But rather, what I at least want to accomplish, is to bring greater light to the truth about Calvinism; so that hopefully there can be a little less ignorance.

The first and most important inquiry we need to raise is simply - what is Calvinism? Historically and theologically, Calvinism is the relentless, uncompromising expression of God (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) as the Creator of the universe and hence, the Sovereign and Sustainer of all things (Rom.11:36). Calvinism affirms then the biblical testimony that God is working all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph.1:11) and nothing can frustrate His plans nor undermine His purpose (Ps.33:10,11; Isa.46:10). Calvinism, in short, is God-centered. It therefore has, as its beginning and end, the glory of God as its highest concern and aim (I Cor.10:31). Thus the doctrine of God is the root principle of Calvinism. For this reason, J.I. Packer once described Calvinism as "a theocentric way of thinking about all life under the direction and control of God's own Word...[it] is the theology of the Bible viewed from the perspective of the Bible - the God-centered outlook which sees the Creator as the source, and means, and end, of everything that is, both in nature and in grace."

Now the outworking of Calvinism's root principle (the doctrine of God) has been seen most in church history by what is called, "the doctrines of grace." In fact, Calvinism has been called "the theology of grace". It has always expressed by confession and proclamation the biblical revelation that God alone saves sinners (Jon.2:9). That is, the Triune-God - the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - working together in sovereign power, wisdom, love and mercy to accomplish the salvation of countless sinners; whom have been chosen for eternal glory to the praise of God's grace and according to His good pleasure (Matt.11:27; Jn.6:37,44,65; Rom.8:28-30; 9:6-24; Eph.1:3-14). This understanding does not detract nor deny man's responsibility to believe and repent when hearing the gospel, but it explains why he ever would - it is only by God's grace alone!

2009-07-02T06:04:00.000-07:00

The Hardest Thing to See

In twenty years of ministry I have become convinced that the hardest thing for people to see is their own sinful depravity. They can talk about the sins of other people all day long, but when it comes to looking at themselves as sinners - well, they're not really all that bad. But this is really the problem, isn't it? Our sinfulness has a built-in blindness where we cannot see the true nature of our corruption and rebellion as sinners against God. The Bible puts this problem in the plainest of terms: "The heart of man is desperately wicked, and deceitful above all things..." (Jer.17:9). There is nothing in the world more "deceitful" than our own natural sinful disposition. And this comes to light with particular force whenever people are confronted with the reality of their sin.

We make excuses. We try to justify ourselves. Or better, we shift the blame. This is the easiest thing to do. We blame our parents. We blame our spouses. We blame our children. We blame our environment. We point the finger at everyone else for our sin (even at God) only so we can escape personal responsibility and not be made to "look bad". But the truth is, we are bad. We are born in sin (Psa.51:5), with a nature that is bent on rebellion against God and a self-serving spirit that is always vying to be in first place.

The Bible again makes this plain and clear: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one" (Rom.3:10-12). This is a grim and alarming picture of humanity, but it is the truth. We are not good but bad at the very core of our being. Our lives do not conform in any measure to that which is perfectly righteous. We have no natural understanding to embrace the things of God nor do we have any inclination to seek God in a saving way. In fact, by nature, we have turned aside from God and His way of salvation, and continue to do so if left to ourselves. Moreover, our natural disposition is as a rotten as sour milk, and thus there is nothing we are able to do in our own strength which measures up to the only true standard of goodness - which is God's standard. This is why the world we live in is so troubled and corrupt. This is why there is murder, hatred, envy, pride, gossip, lying, adultery, and cheating. It's not the environment that causes these things, it is the state of our own hearts (Mk.7:20-23)!

But to explain this truth of our sinfulness to people at large, is like trying to penetrate a Sherman tank with a pea shooter. Their hearts are naturally hardened to hear the truth of what they really are. They don't want to hear it. They want to hear how good and wonderful they are. They want to hear that if they just believe in themselves and follow their hearts, then everything will be just fine. And in the context of religion, they want to hear that as long as they go to church, read their Bible, pay their tithes, and have been baptized or have walked the church aisle - then they are "o.k." with God. The bottom-line is this: in our sinfulness we do not want to believe that we are hopeless and helpless to save ourselves, and deserving of hell before a holy God. Instead, what our sinful hearts crave is to be told that we can be good enough for God.

This is why the gospel of Jesus Christ makes no sense to a sinner lost in their sins. "The natural person [the person who is lost in their sins] does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned" (I Cor.2:14). Man in his sin cannot see his own sinfulness and thus he cannot see his desperate need to be saved by God's grace in Christ. He is blind to his true need and his plight as a sinner. But it is only as we see ourselves as sinners - guilty before God and hopeless to save ourselves - that we will see the joy and glory of what God has done for us in Jesus Christ. However, such a redeeming vision will not come to any of us unless God grants this by His sovereign grace.

As Jesus said: "Unless is one born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (Jn.3:3). We "cannot see" God's rule, His glory, His redemption for us in Christ unless something happens to us. We must be born again. We must be given by God a new heart that sees our own sinful depravity for what it is, and out of that new heart comes forth a cry of faith in Jesus Christ as our only hope, confidence, security, and assurance for being right with God. We no longer look at ourselves as being good enough for God but we look only to Christ as our sole righteousness whom God accepts (II Cor.5:21; cf. Rom.3:21-28). Hence, we cling to nothing we have or can do to be right with God - since we have come to see that all our righteousness is stinking putrid rags in God's sight (Isa.64:6). Our only acceptable righteousness before God is Jesus Christ and what He has accomplished by His life and death in perfect obedience to God's law in our place. Therefore, we cling to Christ and Christ alone for salvation with the confidence that God has accepted everything Jesus has done to save us (Rom.8:1). This is our only hope. This is our only surety to be cleansed of our sinfulness and given a new heart, whereby we will escape God's wrath and embrace His everlasting mercy. But left to ourselves apart from God's grace, we will not see our own sinful depravity and thus our need for Christ alone to save. This therefore is why our own sinfulness is the hardest thing to see.

2009-07-01T13:29:00.000-07:00

What is a Healthy Church Member?

While on vacation this week, among the many books I'm feverishly reading, is Thabiti M. Anyabwile's "What is a healthy church member?" Though I am not finished with the book yet, I have already decided that this is going to be a church-wide study for our congregation at Sovereign Grace. In fact, I would highly recommend this book for all pastors to consider as something either for your church-family to read together, or as a book for new members to be required to read. In this little work (it is only 127 pages), Thabiti gives ten marks that identify the biblical characteristics of a healthy church member. One of these marks (which I was reading about today) is that a healthy church member is a committed church member. The key to this aspect of healthy church membership is what Thabiti calls "committed love." Basing this on John 13:34-35, where Christ plainly says that all men will know that we are His disciples if we "have love for one another" - Thabiti says rightly that this love for one another shows up best in the local church. He writes: "The local church is the place where love is most visibly and compellingly displayed among God's people."

Now following this as the "essence" of church membership, Thabiti goes on to raise an all-important question: What does a committed church member look like? In other words, where do we see the essence of church membership (love for one another) show up? Thabiti answers this question in eight different ways.

First, a committed church member attends regularly. They are not only known to the church because their name is on a roll book. They show up to all the stated meetings of the church. And they do this because they "love the brethren" (I Jn.3:14). Moreover, they attend regularly to stir up fellow believers to love and good works (Heb.10:24,25). Second, a committed church member seeks peace. This is not "peace at any price", but he seeks to be a source of keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph.4:3); rather than being a source of division. Third, a committed church member edifies others. He seeks to build others up in their walk with Christ (Eph.4:11-16) rather than being self-serving and expecting everyone to exist only to meet his needs (Phil.2:3,4). Fourth, a committed church member warns and admonishes others. Concerning this point, Thabiti observes:

"A committed member is committed to speaking the truth in love to his brothers and sisters, to helping them avoid pitfalls, and to encouraging them in holiness and Christian joy. A committed member will not be wrongly intrusive in the lives of others - a busybody - but he also will not be 'hands off' when it comes to caring for and counseling others."

Fifth, a committed church member pursues reconciliation. He does not let things fester between fellow believers. If there has been a breach in his fellowship with a brother or sister in Christ, he will seek forgiveness and reconciliation (Matt.5:23,24; Col.3:13). Sixth, a committed church member bears with others. He shows patience, kindness, meekness, and compassion toward fellow Christians. He strives to esteem them as better than himself, and thus not to think more highly of himself than he should (Phil.2:3; Rom.12:3-8). Seventh, a committed church member prepares for the ordinances. That is, he prepares himself spiritually whenever the church observes either baptism or the Lord's Supper. He does not treat these precious means of grace for the church as something that is merely ritual or "the thing we do". He rejoices when a believer is baptized and looks with anticipation to meeting with his brethren at the Lord's Table to remember why and for what purpose Christ died for His people (I Cor.11:27). Finally, a committed church member supports the work of the ministry. Thabiti explains this point very well:

"A committed member gives resources, time, and talent to the furtherance of the gospel in the local church. He lives out the Bible's call to the body of Christ (see I Cor.12:6-8)...A healthy, committed church member receives and applies the grace of God by working to support the ministry of the local church and excels in giving what he has already received from God to gospel work. He should follow the example of the Macedonians, who committed to a financial giving strategy that was sacrificial, generous, increasing over time, and fueled by faith in God despite present circumstances (II Cor.8-9).

In light of these characteristics which bespeak of what it means biblically to be a "committed" church member, how do we measure up? Where do we need to be more sanctified as those who have committed to one another as the body of Christ in a gathered local assembly? There is certainly no such thing as a "perfect" church member. But neither can we say that our commitment as church members is at a place where we need no more growth. So, let us examine ourselves carefully here, and pray that God will give us grace to increase in the measure of our love for one another as believers in Christ - committed to each other as His people for His glory.

2009-06-26T18:07:00.000-07:00

Personal Musings on the 2009 Southern Baptist Convention

This week my family and I attended the annual Southern Baptist Convention in Louisville, Kentucky. Having missed the past two Conventions, it was a joy to be able to go this year - especially since it was in Louisville, which is home to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. I have a personal love for this school and everything it is about under the wise leadership of Dr. Al Mohler. But most of all, I am thankful that Southern Seminary has reclaimed its original confessional heritage (i.e., The Abstract of Principles) and operates faithfully by that doctrinal standard.

As far as highlights go, the Convention had many for me. First and foremost, there was the Tuesday morning Founders' Fellowship Breakfast. The special speaker for this event was Dr. Danny Aiken (president of Southeastern Seminary). Dr. Aiken gave a wonderful exposition of the book of Third John. And at the end of his teaching, he gave ten reasons why he appreciates Founders' Ministries and seven words of caution to all of us who are a part of the Founders' movement. His words of caution were especially helpful, edifying, and convicting. But what ministered the most to me, was Dr. Aiken's irenic, winsome spirit by which he delivered his entire message. I thought to myself: "Dr. Aiken is a man whose example would be worthy to follow in this respect." For though this dear brother would not claim himself to be completely in agreement with everything we Calvinists hold to - yet, he has proven himself to be a bridge builder with us, whose kindness and friendship emulates a robust Christian maturity that every believer would do well to take on for themselves.

In addition to Dr. Aiken's message, I was thrilled to reunite with some old friends. It was wonderful to see Phil Newton and catch up with him. This brother has been a great encourager to me and a wise counselor in the work of the ministry. I especially appreciate his insightfulness about church planting. Another dear friend I was glad to see was Jeff Robinson. Jeff and I are like "two peas in a pod." I sometimes think that maybe we were separated at birth. We share so much in common it is uncanny. I was thankful God provided for me some great time of fellowship with Jeff, which with our busy schedules is a very hard thing to come by.

Moreover, along with seeing these brothers, it was an honor to have some personal time with Dr. Tom Nettles. I say this was an "honor" because Dr. Nettles is one of my heroes of the faith; and he is my favorite church historian (next to Iain Murray). But what I value the most about Dr. Nettles is not his brilliant mind as much as his gracious, humble, and kind spirit. This man is a true Christian gentleman. And I find in him much that is worthy to emulate as a faithful follower of Christ, and teacher of His Word and providence in history. Needless to say, the Founders' Fellowship Breakfast was worth the trip!

Among other highlights, there was the acceptance of the Great Commission Resurgence (GCR) document, along with forming a task force to study how the Southern Baptist Convention can more effectively be a Gospel-centered denomination. With over 8700 messengers, 95% voted in favor of this adoption. This was huge. Especially since such well-known leaders, like Morris Chapman, had openly opposed the GCR. But I believe that a new day has begun to dawn in the SBC. A day in which we are going to be about the Gospel and not about the Southern Baptist Convention. A day in which Southern Baptists are going to be more known for their passion for Christ, rather than their passion for Southern Baptist funded programs. The vote for the GCR on Tuesday evening sent this message loud and clear to those who cannot see that the Kingdom of God is bigger than the SBC.

Furthermore, the massive turnout of Southern Baptists under the age of forty proved that a new day is indeed dawning. This younger generation of Southern Baptists appear to be fed up with business as usual and earnestly desire the Convention to move back to the Gospel. Their voice was heard powerfully on Tuesday evening when the GCR vote was passed. But I grant, that even with the vote passed, it is still going to take a long while before the substance of the GCR makes the impact needed on the Convention. More than anything, for the Convention to be Gospel-centered it must start with the pastors and the local church. This is where the GCR must take its deepest root, because this is where it is going to matter the most.

On Wednesday, my family and I took a trip to Southern Seminary to visit the school and help honor the celebration of Southern's 150th anniversary. There was a huge luncheon held at the school that day (and my buddy Jeff Robinson was kind enough to secure tickets for my entire family to attend!). But before and after the luncheon we took our time to take in the sights of this historic school and its beautiful campus. In the Archives Room we got to see the Bible used by Charles Spurgeon (that was a thrill!), along with original books that had been used by Boyce, Broadus, and Manly that bore their own handwriting in the margins. Now I know that to many of you that might seem boring, but to me as a lover of church history (and especially Baptist history) I was a kid in a candy shop (though I couldn't take the candy home).

Also during our time at Southern, we went to the Lifeway Bookstore (how could I dare pass this up). But, believe it or not, I didn't buy a single book. However, under God's surprising providence, I ended up helping a dear gentleman purchase some books on the subject of Calvinism. He actually came to the store on a mission to find a couple of books that would explain in the plainest of terms Reformed theology. His son is a student at Southern, and he had encouraged his dad to read up on Calvinism. So, there he was, in the theology section of the store with one of the Lifeway clerks trying to find an appropiate book to meet his need. I just happen to be walking by and overheard their conversation. I couldn't help myself. I jumped into the dialogue and spent at least thirty minutes or more conversing with this dear brother over what he was looking for. By the time it was over, he had purchased a copy of R.C. Sproul's book, What is Reformed Theology? and Steele, Thomas, and Quinn's Five Points of Calvinism. He was a happy man and I made a new friend.

After the luncheon at Southern, there was one more thing I wanted to accomplish while we were there at the Seminary: I wanted to find the graves of James P. Boyce, John. A Broadus, and Basil Manly, Jr. These Baptist worthies formed the very first teaching faculty at Southern (1859), and James P. Boyce was the principle founder of the school and its first president. Again, it is the love in me for church history (and Baptist history in particular) that drove me to seek out where the remains of these godly men were buried. And I am happy to report that we found them (though we needed a map to do so!). They are buried in Cave Hill Cemetery, a mile down the road from Southern. What I really appreciated about this journey was my precious family being so patient with me looking for the graves of these men. They couldn't understand my pursuit but they went on the trip with no complaints. How I love them so!

Finally, on a very personal note, the Lord provided some special moments of expressed appreciation from pastors and denominational leaders who receive our church newsletter. These words of thanks were very unexpected but deeply touched me and humbled me. Our church newsletter goes out every month to 260 people across Georgia and beyond (and that list continues to grow). Many of the receipents I know personally while others I have never met. But when these brethren make a point to say "thank you", and that they look forward to reading the newsletter every month - you just can't help to be humbled at how it pleases God to use your feeble efforts to edify His church. All in all, it really was a joy and special time under God's grace to attend this year's Southern Baptist Convention.

2009-06-25T17:28:00.000-07:00

The "Mean Streak" in Self-Control

To quote again from Ed Welch's book, "Addictions", on the matter of self-control - Dr. Welch observed a characteristic of biblical self-control that many Christians seem to be unaware of:

"...there is a mean streak to authentic self-control...Self-control is not for the timid. When we want to grow in it, not only do we nurture an exuberance for Jesus Christ, we also demand of ourselves a hatred for sin...The only possible attitude toward out-of-control desire is a declaration of all-out war...There is something about war that sharpens the senses...You hear a twig snap or the rustling of leaves and you are in attack mode. Someone coughs and you are ready to pull the trigger. Even after days of little or no sleep, war keeps us vigilant."

We should apply these words from Dr. Welch carefully and thoughtfully. How many of us, as Christians, are honestly "vigilant" about remaining sin (Rom.7:17-23)? Are we on the constant watch for this enemy within our members? Think of it this way: if I knew that as I went to bed there was a rattlesnake lurking somewhere under the covers, would I rest easy? Of course not! I would find that nasty snake and kill it. Well, there is something worse than a snake that we must be ready to kill - it is what the apostle Paul described as "sin that dwells in me" (Rom.7:17). It is that residual propensity toward evil, which though dethroned in the Christian, yet remains as a subtle deceiving enemy of our souls. And what's worse, this enemy knows nothing of sleep or vacations. Sin is always at work to tempt us and draw us away through our thoughts, affections, and desires. Thus, we must develop by God's grace a genuine "mean streak" against sin in every and all forms.

This means affirming that the Christian life is war. It is a war not against other people, but an all-out combat against every sinful impulse I find in myself. Moreover, my hatred for sin will only grow as I keep before me what God says about sin in His Word. I need to see sin as God sees it! I need to see that it is a transgression of God's law (I Jn.3:4). It is therefore always in rebellion against God's revealed will, and hence, it defies His sovereign authority. Furthermore, sin kills. It kills man's soul. It kills human relationships. There is nothing in sin as sin that serves to redeem humanity. No matter how much sin may fill us with pleasure - it is a fleeting pleasure that is deceiving and destructive. Armed then with these biblical principles about sin, a violent streak will grow in our hearts by God's grace which will serve to strengthen the self-control that we have been given by the Holy Spirit (Gal.5:23). So wage war, Christian! Fight by the Spirit and the Word and may we give sin no quarter but only what it deserves - death for the glory of God (Rom.8:13).

2009-06-18T12:59:00.000-07:00

A Greater Need for Self-Control

For the past several weeks I have become more personally convicted for greater growth in the grace of "self-control" (see Gal.5:23). In helping me toward this growth, I have been encouraged and challenged by a book entitled, "Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave". This book is written by Edward T. Welch who is a well-known Christian counselor, and has served since 1981 as professor of practical theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. Welch's basic thesis in the book is that "addictions" are in truth a "worship disorder." In other words, this is really an issue of the heart and therefore a question of who or what we will worship. Will we worship ourselves and our own desires, or will we worship the true God?

Out of the twelve chapters that make up this book, there are two which are devoted to the issue of self-control. In the first of these two chapters, Dr. Welch seeks a proper biblical definition of self-control, which he rightly calls "a gift of the Spirit." As he unpacked this definition, I found his explanation extremely helpful, and I hope it will serve to edify you as well. In his definition, he states four important propositions:

1. Self-control means living within boundaries. Getting very practical about this, Dr. Welch says: "It means eating in public if we struggle with food. It means having passwords for internet accounts that must be opened by someone else; throwing out old reminders of the past idolatrous relationship; and never walking to a bar alone."

2. Self-control means thinking before acting. This is a really insightful principle. None of us ever think biblically before we sin. Sin works against us to crowd out any wise biblical instruction that would prevent us from giving in to irrational wicked cravings. Thus, to walk in self-control, is to think before we act. It is "considering the conquences of our actions in contrast to giving 'no thought to the way of life' (Prov.5:6). It is remembering what the Lord hates and choosing to hate those things too (Prov.6:16-19; 8:13). It is learning from the lessons of the past. It is meditating on the good instruction we have received (Prov.16:20) and being suspicious of our abilities to justify our own plans and desires."

3. Self-control is not emotional flatness or indifference. Rather than being a cold stoicism, self-control works with strong and powerful passions and cravings. But those passions are Godward and Christ-centered not sinful. Self-control, as a fruit of the Spirit, guards us and helps us fight against sinful passions while strongly encouraging godly passions.

4. Self-control is not self-dependence. This is hugely important to understand. "Self-control is...not the same as self-dependence, in which we rely on personal will power to control ourselves. Instead, self-control is a gift of the Holy Spirit, given through faith in Jesus Christ. It is a side effect of the fear of the Lord." In short, "self-control is a strategic countermeasure to the insatiable cravings of sin." A countermeasure that looks to Christ, trusts in His saving work, and depends on the indwelling presence of the Spirit as the source of power to resist the sin that remains in our members (see Rom.7:23; cf. 8:13). But it is a godly virtue that must also be cultivated by our acting upon the wise instruction of God's Word (Prov.1-9). Thus, it is "the skill of living a thoughtful, careful life in which we do what is right despite our desires. It is tested when we are alone or we feel unsatisfied. What do we do when no one is looking? Who or what will rule you then? Your desires or your God? Self-control is the skill of saying 'no' to sinful desires, even when it hurts."

2009-06-15T11:48:00.000-07:00

Stop Comparing and Follow Jesus!

Recently, I have been reminded of those sweet, convicting, blunt words of Christ to Simon Peter: "If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me" (Jn.21:22). The occasion for these words were in response to Peter's question concerning how Jesus would call John to suffer and die for God's glory (Jn.21:20-21). Since Peter had just been told how he would die for the glory of God (Jn.21:18-19), he wanted to know in what manner his friend and fellow-brother in Christ would also lay down his life for this same purpose. Jesus however did not treat Peter's question as an innocent inquiry. He brushed it off with a firm rebuke that said in effect: "Peter, it's none of your business how I choose for John to die for My glory. Your only business is to FOLLOW ME!"

Like Peter, I too need this same blunt reproof. In fact, I would even go so far to say that we all need these hard words from our Savior. Why? Because we are all wired to compare our callings, gifts, abilities, possessions, and varied trials with each other. And at the root of such comparing is an ugly craving to know how we stack up in relation to others. Are we more spiritual? More gifted? More popular? More knowledgeable? More admired by others? And if we find something we have more than our fellow-Christians, there is a subtle, sinister feeling of superiority that wells up in our hearts. Yuck!! How disgusting and deplorable to find something so unloving in us all. Yet, it is there. It was in Peter when he looked at John and wondered how will he glorify God in death. And it is in each of us when we look at our fellow-Christians and start comparing ourselves to them under the providence of God. But like Jesus said to Peter, He says to us as well: "What is it to you how I call and gift and prosper your brother and sister? You follow Me!"

I need these words of rebuke often. Sadly, in the world of church ministry, it is laden with the depressing bondage of fatal comparing. You can't read Christian magazines, hear Christian radio, or go to Christian conferences without receiving the insinuated message: "You're not making it. You're not really successful. If you just preached in this way, enhanced your worship style like this, and employed this evangelistic method - then you would have a church of thousands and be recognized." How discouraging! And if I buy in to this kind of message then I will quickly become a slave to the fear of man and the folly of fads - all in the name of "doing ministry". O how refreshing are those hard words of Christ to Peter: "What is that to you? You follow Me."

So rather than compare ourselves, as either individuals or churches, to the rest of the body of Christ; may we all resolve by grace to simply be faithful followers of Christ. This means rejoicing in whatever calling or giftedness Jesus has blessed others with different than our own. It also means being content with whatever we have received from God to use for His glory (Phil.4:11; Heb.13:5). It further means that the true standard of so-called success in God's kingdom is simply being a faithful steward of whatever God has called us to do (I Cor.4:2). Finally, we must trust in the wisdom and love of God's providence which governs and directs our lives in the very pathway where He knows we will glorify Him most (Prov.16:1,9; Jer.10:23; Rom.8:28; 11:36). Thank you, Lord Jesus, for Your much needed tough words to free us all from the foolishness and ugliness of comparing. Amen.

2009-06-10T13:34:00.000-07:00

The Danger and Delusion of Desiring Man's Universal Approval

In Luke 6:26, Jesus gave a strong warning and searching condemnation to His disciples, "Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets." I have thought often about this passage and what it says about the danger of popularity and having the universal approval of men. There is, of course, nothing wrong with having a "good name" and being "well thought of by outsiders" (see Prov.22:1; I Tim.3:7). But this is not what Jesus is cursing. Rather, the condemnation of Luke 6:26 is both loving and attaining the global praise of men.

Now it must be admitted that there is in all of us a lust for man's approval. We want people to like us. We want people to think we're wonderful. And it is an added plus if "all people" think we're great! But such a desire is not good nor commendable but sinful and dishonoring to the name of Christ. The reason for this is because at the root of this lust is what the Bible calls "the fear of man" (Prov.29:25a).

The fear of man shows up in many different forms. But one of the most common manifestations is the self-centered longing to please others for their praise. This means that we will do whatever it takes to have the approval of others - even if that means compromising the gospel and fudging on our obedience to Christ!

There are numerous examples of this. There is, for instance, the young Christian man who will never take a stand for Christ with his unbelieving parents for fear of offending them and suffering their scorn. There is also the Christian woman who prays for her employers' salvation, but for fear of losing her job, she refuses to take the opportunity to actually speak to him about his need for Christ. Then finally there is the pastor who is unwilling to run the risk of losing his ministry if he would preach the whole counsel of God's Word. For this man, he tickles the ears of his congregation with what they want to hear, rather than proclaiming the Truth they need to hear. And his motivation in this is to be liked by all - thus gaining universal approval. Such a motive reeks of cowardice and selfish ambition!

But what is most shameful, is that in each of these examples, the lust for man's praise always compromises and undercuts one's devotion to Christ and a bold witness for the gospel. Moreover, if we do win the popularity contest then we have immediately positioned ourselves with "the false prophets". This was the chilling reminder Jesus gave to His disciples - that when "all people speak well of you", remember..."for so their fathers did to the false prophets." The false prophets claimed to speak for God, but it was all a lie (Jer.5:31; 6:14; cf. II Peter.2). They only told the people those things which would never offend nor disturb their consciences. They would not preach on holiness, sin, repenatnce or judgment. And why? Because what they valued and loved above everything was the applause and approval of men. This was their idol. This was their god. To have "all people speak well" of them was the passion and pursuit of their life.

Is this what drives us in our relationships with others? Is this the mark of our ministry? Are we ensnared by the fear of man that seeks the praise of man? If so, we need to repent. For we cannot have the universal praise of men while honoring Christ at the same time. Hence, we must forsake this carnal lust for man's praise. And such a forsaking will manifest itself by a daily renewal of our love for Christ, our willingness to suffer for Christ's name no matter the cost and treasuring His glory above that of any other (see Lk.6:22-23; 9:23; 14:26; I Cor.10:31; Phil.1:21; 3:4-14; Col.3:17).

2009-06-08T15:58:00.000-07:00

Self-Denial and Sacred Delight

The principle issue behind the Sabbath command is love for the Lord. In fact, it is the principle issue behind the entire moral law of God (see Matt.22:37,38). But the application of our love to God by keeping the Sabbath focuses on loving God with our "time". This is why God says:

"Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day (or the first day now under the New Covenant) is a Sabbath to the Lord your God" (Ex.20:9,10).

How gracious and generous God is to us. He grants us six full days to pursue all our legitimate interests of work and recreation; while requiring only one day to be devoted entirely to His worship and service. This doesn't mean of course that we do not worship God the other six days, but our worship of the Lord in those six days are fraught with much distraction! But on the Sabbath, on this one day, we have the privilege to show unfettered love to our Lord by self-denial and sacred delight.

Consider how Isaiah 58:13,14 unfolds this two-fold dynamic of what we deny and what we enjoy on the Lord's day:

"If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of the Lord honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly; then you shall take delight in the Lord, and I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, for the mouth of the Lord has spoken."

In the first place, our love to the Lord on the Sabbath is shown by self-denial. We do not profane this holy day by treading upon it with our selfish ambitions and pursuits: "If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath..." The outworking of such desecration would be to do those things which only please us rather than God. Again, it is all about the use of our time on this day. How do we spend the day in our thoughts, conversation, and activity? Are we doing those things that bring us into closer communion with God - like reading Scripture, praying, witnessing to others, ministering to the sick, gathering in public worship? If the time we spend on the Lord's day is anything less than what will bring us directly into fellowship with Christ, then we are profaning His holy day! So turn off the T.V., refuse to do business with the world, and leave your household chores alone. The Sabbath is God's day not family day, not sports day, not work day. We must therefore deny ourselves on this holy day.

But on the other side of self-denial, our love to the Lord on the Sabbath is shown by sacred delight. There is no day in all the week that encourages greater joy in the heart of the Christian than the Sabbath. "Call the Sabbath a delight," God says through Isaiah. A delight! Why? Because we have the justified opportunity and advantage to devote all of our time in one day to the worship of our God. Moreover, when we honor the Lord on His day, He in turn blesses us with the joy of Himself: "I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father." In figurative language, God promises to bless us with Himself. Can anything be greater to the Christian heart than to enjoy more of God? This is our heritage as God's people and it is the heavenly reward of calling the Sabbath a delight.

2009-06-07T06:04:00.000-07:00

The Necessity to Remember the Sabbath

When God gave His moral law in the ten commandments (Ex.20:1-17), it is very peculiar and significant that only the Sabbath command is mandated by the call to "remember". "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy..." (20:8a). The obvious question is, why does this command begin with "remember"? There are two primary reasons: in the first place, God is saying, "Don't forget it or neglect it." The Old Testament writers often use this word "remember" in this way. For instance, in Exodus 13:3 Moses reminds the people not to forget the historical act of their redemption and liberation by God: "Remember this day in which you went out from Egypt, from the house of slavery, for by a powerful hand the Lord brought you out."

In the New Testament, Jesus uses a similiar term when instituting the Lord's Supper: "Do this in remembrance of Me" (Lk.22:19). The point is, we are not to forget nor neglect what God has called us to observe. And certainly the implication behind the call to "remember" in these examples, is that we are fully capable as God's people to by-pass such commands either by omission or commission. Think about it: we have enough residual sin despite our redeemed natures to overlook, ignore, or rebel against what God has commanded us to do (e.g., Rom.7:14-23). Hence, when God says we are to "remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy", we should beware of our own hearts' potential to disregard the Lord's holy day.

The second reason we are commanded to "remember" the Sabbath, is because God is calling us to both observe it and celebrate it. In other words, we are to remember this day above all others by virtue of the fact that God has commanded us to observe it in a special way. The outworking of this observance is to keep this one day set apart (holy) from the other six days by resting from our usual routine of activity, and engaging ourselves in both the private and public worship of the Lord (Ex.20:8-11; Isa.58:13,14; Eph.5:18-19; Heb.10:24-25). Commenting on the blessing of Sabbath celebration and observance, Matthew Henry observed:

"God did design it to be an advantage to us, and so we must make and improve it...He had much more regard for our souls. The sabbath was made a day of rest, only in order to its being a day of holy work, a day of communion with God, a day of praise and thanksgiving; and the rest from worldly business is therefore necessary, that we may closely apply ourselves to this work, and spend the whole time in it, in public and private."

Therefore, it is deeply necessary that when it comes to the observance and celebration of the Lord's day, we must be commanded to "remember" this day! There are far too many traps and distractions propagated by the world, the flesh, and the devil to work hard at our disowning of this day God has set apart for His worship. So Christian, remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy!

2009-06-03T14:46:00.000-07:00

The Sabbath Command Still Exists

As hard as it is to believe in our lawless age, God's command to keep the Sabbath is still a viable and binding moral requirement for every Christian. Let me give at least three biblical reasons which prove that the Sabbath command still exists for today. First, the perpetuity of the "moral law" as a whole proves the continued existence of the Sabbath command. Nowhere in the Bible is God's command to keep the Sabbath isolated from the binding nature of God's moral law as the rule and standard for how we are to live. For instance, in God's promise for the New Covenant, He declared through Jeremiah: "I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts..." (Jer.31:33). He does not say, "I will put My law, except for the Sabbath command, in their minds, etc..." It is the whole of the moral law that God promises to inscripturate on the new hearts and minds of His people in the New Covenant (see Heb.8:8-13). And this includes the Sabbath command which is "the fourth commandment" in God's moral law (see Ex.20:8-11).

There is also the teaching of Jesus Christ Himself regarding the moral law, where our Lord maintained that He came to fulfill it and not to destroy it; and whoever teaches men to break one of the least of the law's commands would be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matt.5:17-19). The Sabbath command was no exception to this standard Christ laid down. Moreover, there are the descriptions of the moral law as being "holy, just, and good", along with "spiritual" (Rom.7:12,14). Again, the Sabbath command is not excluded from these descriptions. Henceforth, by the perpetuity of the moral law as a whole, establishes clearly the perpetuity of the Sabbath command for today.

Second, the extensive teaching of Christ Himself regarding the Sabbath establishes its continuation for today (see Matt.12:1-14; Mk.2:23-3:6; Lk.6:1-11; 13:10-17; 14:1-6; Jn.5:1-18; 7:20-24). In all four Gospels , no less than eight times, Jesus is recorded as giving a thorough teaching and clarification on the Sabbath command. Nowhere does Christ undermine or abolish the Sabbath. Rather He clears the confusion which the Jewish leaders in His day were propagating about it. Concerning this fact, J.C. Ryle elaborated:

"The plain truth is that our Lord did not abolish the law of the weekly Sabbath: He only freed it from incorrect interpretations, and purified it from man-made additions. He did not tear out of [the Ten Commandments] the fourth commandment: He only stripped off the miserable traditions with which the Pharisees had encrusted the day, and by which they had made it, not a blessing, but a burden. He left the fourth commandment where he found it, - a part of the eternal law of God, of which no jot or tittle was ever to pass away. May we never forget this!"

Now one of the most prominent errors of the Jewish leaders regarding the Sabbath was that a "day of rest" meant a day of total inactivity and non-exertion. But human dormancy in which one becomes completely passive has never been the point of keeping the Sabbath. In response then to such gross misinterpretation, Jesus advocated three types of activity that were lawful for the Sabbath. First, there are to be works of piety. This is the most obvious reason for God ordaining a day of rest from our normal employments: it is to redirect our energies and efforts toward the work of worshipping and serving the Lord with unhindered devotion (cf., Isa.58:13-14; e.g., Matt.12::5; Jn.5:17).

Second, there are to be works of necessity (see Matt.12:1-6). This would include such things as food, sleep, and cleanliness which all meet basic human needs and are in full accord with keeping the Sabbath. The third and final type of work Jesus advocated for Sabbath-keeping was works of mercy (see Matt.12:7-13). Above all other conflicts Jesus had with the Pharisees over the Sabbath, it was at this point that the greatest contention ensued. The Pharisees were infuriated with Christ for healing people and feeding His disciples on the Sabbath (Mk.2:23-3:6). But Jesus reproved their Sabbath errors and lack of love for God and others by both example and teaching. He fed hungry disciples and healed the sick. And in this way, Jesus teaches us what is lawful and right and honoring to God in keeping the Sabbath.

Making a pointed application by Christ's example concerning these "works" which should be carried out on the Sabbath, Walter Chantry noted:

"When you confront specific questions regarding behavior on the Sabbath, you will find some issues of application to be obvious, while others are less clear. If you think of the issue of necessity, all will at once recognize that it is proper on the Sabbath for armed forces and police to defend society. It is appropriate for ambulance drivers, nurses and firefighters to work on God's holy day. None will question in these cases. On the other side of the continuum it is altogether clear that the work of athletes, clowns and trinket salesman is unnecessary on the Sabbath. Some cases are black and white."

The final reason for the continuation of the Sabbath, is that the New Testament clearly teaches a continued Sabbath-keeping for the Church; having only changed the day of worship from the seventh to the first, as the result of Christ's resurrection which accomplished the redemption the Old Covenant looked forward to which the New Covenant now fulfills. The essential and greatest proof of this continued Sabbath-keeping in the New Covenant is seen in the historical narratives immediately following Christ's resurrection. In all four Gospel accounts of the resurrection, at the head of each narrative, we see the words: "Now on the first day of the week..." (Matt.28:1; Mk.16:1; Lk.24:1; Jn.20:1). And what follows this revelation of time, is the several appearances that Christ makes on this "first day of the week" to all His disciples. The whole of the day from "morning" (see Matt.28:1-10) till "evening" (see Lk.24:13-32; Jn.20:19-23) becomes a "holy day" of worship to the risen Lord. Hence, by the events of this first day of the week, the Lord Jesus Christ was setting a new pattern: the seventh-day Sabbath of the Old Covenant was changed by Christ Himself to the "Lord's day" as the Christian Sabbath for all New Covenant believers. This means therefore that the substance of the Sabbath commandment (Ex.20:9-11) remains unchanged except for the day itself that is now to be observed on Sunday (see Acts 20:6-7; I Cor.16:1-4; cf. Heb.4:9-11). The famed church historian, Philip Schaff, summed up the continuation of the Sabbath on Sunday in this way:

"This is the beginning of the history of the Lord's Day, which to this day has never suffered a single interruption in Christian lands...Sunday is here pointed out by our Lord Himself and honored by His special presence as the day of religion, and public worship, and so it will remain to the end of time. God's word and God's day are inseparable companions and the pillars of God's church."

2009-06-01T12:03:00.000-07:00

Too Much Like The World

In Romans 12:2 there is a divine imperative given for all Christians in every age: "Do not be conformed to the world..." In other words, do not let the world shape you into its mold. This means that we are not to allow the way we think or feel or conduct our lives to be "conformed" into the thoughts, affections, and actions of the world outside of Christ. A Christian therefore is to be separate in how he lives before the world. Another term for this way of life is "holiness." Christians are to live holy (see II Cor.6:14-7:1; Heb.12:14; I Pet.1:15,16). And the supreme way in which every believer in Christ lives holy is by living in obedience to God's Word, which calls for an evident non-conformity to how the rest of the world lives.

Thus, for the Christian, he is to talk in a manner that obeys God's Word. This would exemplify gracious words that build others up, rather than engaging in words which are coarse, gossiping, slanderous, and deceitful (Eph.4:25,29; 5:4). A Christian is also to think in obedience to God's Word. What we think about God, about Jesus Christ, about man, about sin, salvation, heaven, hell, marriage, family, government, and everything else in life - must all come under the divine authority of God's Word (II Tim.3:16-17). And from thinking in obedience to what God's Word teaches will also spill over into the very manner and conduct that we carry into the world everyday. The world that is outside of Christ should therefore see a difference in how Christians live! A difference that openly follows Jesus Christ in a spirit of love and devotion that seeks to make much of Him and His glory no matter what that may cost them in the eyes of the world (Matt.10:16,34-39; Lk.9:23; 14:26).

And one of the greatest opportunities Christians have every week to show such selfless and sacrificial devotion to Christ, is on the first day of the week - which is called "the Lord's day" or "the Christian Sabbath" (see Acts 20:7; I Cor.16:2; Rev.1:10; cf. Ex,20:8-11; Isa.58:13-14). But the sad truth is, the vast majority of professing Christians in our day fail greatly to express their love for Christ in this way. For many Christians, to speak in terms of "keeping the Sabbath" or "observing the Lord's day", is a language and activity which is foreign at best and scolded at worst for being "too rigid" and "legalistic". To say this another way: despite God's command to set apart one day out of seven for His worship alone, most Christians find such a command a taxing burden on their time rather than an expression of love to the Lord.

Therefore, it seems to be at this point more than any other, where Christians are too much like the world rather than being different from the world. In other words, how often is Sunday - the Christian Sabbath - treated by many Christians as just another ordinary day? How many Christians are there who buy, sell and work on this "holy day"? Or how many Christians celebrate things other than the worship of God on this day, or in addition to the worship of God on this day? The point is, when God commanded in His Word, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Ex.20:8), much of the Church in these modern times have turned a deaf ear and have followed after the passions and pursuits of the world. To say it again, we are too much like the world when it comes to how we treat the Lord's holy day.

2009-05-28T12:56:00.000-07:00

Restoring Regenerate Church Membership

By and large, in our day, church membership has really lost much of its biblical meaning. Centrally, the loss has been seen in compromising the principle of regenerate church membership. For example, it has been said that the typical Southern Baptist church has 233 members, but only 70 are present at the regular Sunday service of worship. The obvious question is, where are the other 163 members? Could it be they are at home sick, in a nursing home, on vacation, or in the military? Some may fit these categories, but not all 163. The painful truth is, the majority of the church membership are members in name only but not in fact. In other words, their names may be listed in the church records as "members", but there is no physical nor spiritual evidence that they are indeed faithful disciples of Christ.

In the rural South, where I pastor, this problem is pandemic. Church membership is more of a form of "fire insurance" (i.e., to keep the sinner out of hell) or a sentimental family tradition ("Mom, Dad, and my Grandparents were members, so I guess I'll join too"). What makes this situation even worse, is that many pastors who are obsessed exclusively with "numerical" church growth, will compromise the gospel commands to savingly believe on Christ alone and repent, for shallow decisions which results in bloated membership rolls of unconverted sinners. Recently commenting on this problem in Southern Baptist life, Dr. David Dockery (president of Union University) observed:

"It seems to me that we are doing harm to the person and to the church by allowing them to stay on the roll. One thing worse than people being lost in their sins is lost people who think they are saved because their names are on a church roll."

The obvious challenge confronting churches with unregenerate church membership is recovering and maintaining the biblical ideal of a church membership that is genuinely saved. But how can this be done? Where can such a recovery begin? The restoration of regenerate church membership must start by reinstating three Scriptural practices that were once common in evangelical churches (especially Baptist churches): first, there must be great care given in the receiving of new members. Many churches are hasty, careless, and irresponsible in how they receive prospective church members. Rather than looking for spiritual fruit that points to a true conversion, they look only for someone's base desire to join - as if they are joining a community club or the local gym. The Bible however teaches us that we are not to lay our hands on anyone hastily lest we share in their sins (I Tim.5:22). The context of this mandate is affirming and receiving men into public ministry. Yet, there is a principle that can be applied here to church membership: prospective church members should only be affirmed by the church if their testimony, character, and understanding of the gospel is biblical. Questions like, how is a sinner made right with God? who is Jesus Christ? what is sin? what confidence do you have that God accepts you? why do you believe you're a Christian, and what is the gospel? - should be asked of any who wish to join a church. Endorsing strongly this careful approach to receiving new members, Mark Dever once said:

"Guard carefully the front door and open the back door. In other words, make it more difficult to join...and make it easier to be excluded...the path to life is narrow, not broad. Doing this will help churches recover their divinely intended distinction from the world."

Second, there must be the faithful practice of formative and corrective church discipline. Many churches fail in one or both of these types of biblical discipline. And the result has been a membership of gross spiritual immaturity, the spread of false doctrine, divisive relationships, and all-out unrestrained sin. Together however, both formative and corrective church discipline maintain a level of spiritual healthiness that separates the church from the world by upholding a Christ-exalting purity of doctrine and life (see Matt.18:15-17; Rom.16:17-18; Gal.6:1-2; Eph.4:11-16). In short, they provide a boundary for all members which makes a clear distinction between the sheep and the goats.

Finally, there must be a formal commitment to maintain God-honoring relationships. This means having a written church covenant that spells out the church's mutual obligations to fulfill all of Scripture's "one another" passages (e.g., Jn.13:34,35; Rom.12:10; Heb.10:24,25). Keeping such a covenant clarifies the spiritual & relational commitments that church membership biblically signifies.

2009-05-24T11:51:00.000-07:00

The Myth of the Non-Resident Church Member

There is no such thing as a "non-resident church member." Despite the fact that this is an actual category recognized among churches (most notably Southern Baptist churches), the very concept is in direct contradiction to what the Word of God identifies as a legitmate member of Christ's church.

When one is described as a "non-resident church member" they are typically classed as someone who has made a public profession of faith in Christ, received baptism, and has joined a local church - yet, for whatever reason, they are completely absent from the fellowship and service of the church they have joined. However, in spite of their disappearance, they are still considered as members in "good standing" of that local church. In fact, their credibility as church members is especially seen when they just happen to reappear to vote the latest pastor out of the church (I know of this experience first hand)!

But when we turn to God's Word, the characteristics and conduct of a genuine member of Christ's church is anything but the non-residential type. First of all, there is nothing superficial about the salvation they have received. They were chosen from eternity by God for salvation (Eph.1:4; II Thess.2:13), given to Christ for redemption (Jn.6:37; Eph.1:7; Tit.3:14), and regenerated by the Holy Spirit unto a new life (Jn.3:3-8; Tit.3:5). They have also been taken out of Adam and placed into Christ (Rom.5:15-19), being forever liberated from the power of sin (Rom.6:1-14). And they have become a part of Christ's living body, the church, and thus joined eternally to all of God's redeemed people (I Cor.12:12-13; Rev.7:9).

Second of all, there is an evident change in who and what they are. They are called a "new creation" (II Cor.5:17), a "new self" (Eph.4:24), and "light in the Lord" (Eph.5:8). The fruit of this transformation is seen in the growth, process, and progress called "sanctification" (Rom.6:19,22). The manifestation of this inner divine work is a manner of life that is being conformed to the image of Christ (II Cor.3:18). Hence, there there will be humility, love, patience, gentleness, kindness, faithfulness, joy, forgiveness, and self-control - which are all Godward virtues exercised for the sole purpose of glorifying God (Gal.5:22,23; Eph.4:17-5:8; Col.3:12-17; cf. I Cor.10:31). Moreover, there is seen in them a growing hatred for sin that is carried out in the daily work of killing sin by the Spirit (Rom.7:14-25; 8:13). And finally, this transformation is also evidenced by an intentional witness to bear to others the glory of Christ in the saving message of His gospel (Acts 5:42; Rom.10:15).

Lastly, they desire the fellowship of other believers and seek that fellowship in the gathered community of a local church (see Acts 2:41-47). This means that they place themselves under the teaching of the Scriptures (Acts 2:42a) and thus under the discipleship of a faithful pastoral ministry (Eph.4:12-13). They also strive to build up other believers by bearing their burdens, exhorting them to holiness, praying for them, worshiping with them, and stirring them up to love and good works (Eph.4:16; Gal.6:1-2; Heb.3:12-14; Eph.6:18; Col.3:16; Heb.10:24-25).

Are there really non-resident church members then, in the light of what Scripture says? No. The truth is, if someone claims to be a "Christian" yet refuses to be committed in covenant with a local church - their entire claim is false and hypocritical (see I Jn.2:19; 3:14). So what should we look for in someone who joins a church? More than a decision but a life transformed by grace.

2009-05-22T13:09:00.000-07:00

A Cardinal Baptist Doctrine

One of the most important foundational and historic principles in Baptist church life is what's called, "regenerate church membership." This principle simply states that the church can only be made up of people who have been "born again" (Jn.3:3-8). The church therefore cannot be composed of any other person but those who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit with credible proof of that inward work by a life of saving faith in Christ and repentance of their sins. Or to state this principle in the words of the 1689 Baptist Confession:

"All persons throughout the world who profess to believe the gospel and to render gospel obedience unto God by Christ are, and may be called, visible saints, provided that they do not render void their profession of belief by holding fundamental errors or by living unholy lives; and of such persons all local churches should be composed "(Chap. 26, para. 2; italics mine).

Writing once on the practice of this principle in Baptist churches during the 18th & 19th centuries, Greg Wills observed:

"Baptists believed that Christ designed his churches for the redeemed. They held that the churches should admit the regenerate only. They therefore required persons seeking admission to the church to give evidence of their conversion. Members knew they could not peer directly into another's soul - they could not know certainly whether a person was truly born again. But they were convinced that Christ required them to judge the evidence. They admitted persons who 'in the judgment of charity' gave satisfactory evidence of conversion."

Needless to say, regenerate church membership is mandantory to the health of a local church. For one thing, it separates the church from the world. This principle maintains the truth and integrity of biblical teaching which draws a clear distinction between believer and unbeliever (see Eph.4:17-5:14; I Jn.3:4-10). A regenerate church membership says that Christians cannot be under the same "yoke" with a non-Christian - "for what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols" (II Cor.6:14-18)? The church may be in the world but the church is not of the world (Jn.17:16).

In addition to this, the principle of regenerate church membership treats conversion to Christ as a supernatural work of God. One of the great implications of this principle is that to be a true member of the church results from one thing only: the sovereign, omnipotent grace of God in Christ bringing salvation to a lost sinner (Eph.2:1-10). Church membership therefore is the consequence of what God has done to bring the sinner to Himself. Thus conversion to Christ is not a decision made, a prayer prayed, or an aisle walked - but the work of God in the sinner delivering him from the tyranny of sin and uniting him to Christ, whereby he is supernaturally baptized into the body of Christ, which is the church (see Rom.6:1-11; I Cor.12:12-13; Eph.1:22,23). And the visible proof this divine work is a life in love with Christ, trusting Christ, and obeying Christ above all things. Such a person bears the marks of a genuine member of Christ's church.

Finally, regenerate church membership keeps the door to the church narrow & exclusive. There is no "open door" policy under this principle. It is not "come one, come all" - no matter what you believe. The door to church membership allows only those who trust in Christ alone for their salvation and bear the fruit of that trust in a life of faithful obedience to Him.

2009-05-20T11:59:00.000-07:00

Why did Christ die?

Under the "big tent" of Evangelicalism there are two opposing views concerning the intention and purpose for why Christ died. One view says that Jesus died to make salvation possible. This is actually the most common and popular understanding among Christians today. The idea goes something like this: "Jesus came into the world to provide salvation by His death and make it possible for anyone who would choose to be saved." The vast majority of preachers on any given Sunday will proclaim this concept as gospel truth.

The second and opposing view regarding the intention of Christ's death declares that Jesus died to secure salvation for all those He came to save. In other words, Jesus did not make salvation a mere possibility, but actually accomplished salvation by His death on the cross. His death purchased a real salvation for a particular people in whose place He died as their substitute.

Now concerning these two very different views of the purpose and intention of Christ's death, we have to ask: which is biblical? The first view is certainly attractive, and that for two reasons: on the one hand, it seems "fair" because it maintains that Jesus died for everyone without exception; while on the other hand, it leaves man as the decision maker for his own salvation. Thus Jesus is held up as a "potential" Savior for someone who might choose to accept what He did on the cross as a worthy provision for salvation.

But is this the way the Bible portrays Jesus Christ? Are we to believe that God would have His Son pay for the salvation of everyone if He knew that Christ would not be able to obtain what He paid for? Was the death of Christ just a gamble God took in the hope that someone somewhere in time would accept what Jesus did and be saved? Or are we to assume that Jesus is sitting in heaven wringing His hands with worry over whether or not His death will bring salvation to some poor sinner? Of course the answer to these questions is a resounding "no"! Let me also add "never". Quite frankly, despite how popular the first view may be it slanders God and makes a mockery of what Christ came to do. Hence it is not biblical.

The second view, though not as widely accepted, treats the purpose and intention of Christ's death with honesty and seriousness. In other words, it holds up the biblical view. The reason why Jesus was sent into the world was to save all those His Father gave Him to save (see Jn.6:37,39; 10:27,28; 17:2,6,9,12). His death therefore was an actual price for an actual people He intended to redeem.

For this reason when the Bible describes what Christ did on the cross, it speaks of what His death accomplished. For instance, His death accomplished "propitiation" (Rom.3:25), "redemption" (Eph.1:7), "justification" (Rom.5:9), and "reconciliation" (Rom.5:10). Each of these terms describe the death of Christ as a curse-bearing, wrath-removing, ransom-paying sacrifice which Jesus procured and effected only for those His Father gave Him to save.

And who exactly are these people the Father gave to His Son to redeem? The Bible is very explicit: they are "His people" (Matt.1:21), "His sheep" (Jn.10:11-13), "the children of God" (Jn.11:51-52), "believers" (Jn.3:16), "the church" (Eph.5:25), "His seed" (Isa.53:10) and "the elect" (Rom.8:32,33). Therefore Jesus did not die to make salvation possible for everyone. But rather, His death guaranteed salvation only for His people. Henceforth, when we proclaim the gospel, we do not proclaim a "potential" Savior but a Savior who really saves. "And you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins" (Matt.1:21).

2009-05-19T07:07:00.000-07:00

The Pillar and Buttress of Truth
There is a description of the church in God's Word, which I believe is a rare characteristic to be found in most local churches today. In fact, it is an attribute of the church which has been laid aside (unintentionally or not) because it may be viewed as irrelevant to so-called "church growth". In I Timothy 3:15, we are told that "the church of the living God" is a "pillar and buttress of truth." Now of all things that could have been said to capture an essential distinctive and quality about the church as it is seen in the world, God breathes in his biblical writer these words: "a pillar and buttress of truth."
This means that wherever the gathered church of Christ is visibly found in the world, it is to be a living, vibrant, and immovable testimony to God's truth. As a pillar...of truth, the church is to be the support of the truth; however, as the buttress of truth, the church is actually being pictured as a foundation to the superstructure of the truth. Thus, the church should never be seen as upholding anything that is false and opposed to the truth of God's written revelation. In fact, any so-called church which openly denies God's Word in any part, or treats it as anything less than being God's infallible Word - cannot be identified with integrity as a true church.
The reason I say this is because without the Word of God, the church has no authority nor legitimate basis for even being the church. For the church is not man's idea but the very creation of God (see I Cor.12:12-27; Eph.1:3-14; 2:11-22). Furthermore, the message and mission of the church in the world does not originate with the cleverness or imagination of man, but is given to the church by God as a stewardship (see Matt.28:18-20; I Cor.4:1-2). Yet the framework and knowledge of all these things come from God's Word. Henceforth, it is only by the truth of God's Word that a local church can be identified as the body of Jesus Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, entrusted with the gospel of salvation; and is able to believe and teach with certainty and assurance the true character of God, the creation and fall of man, justification by grace alone, holiness of life, heaven & hell, and many other great doctrines which distinguish the church from the world. So then, if a church is going to be true and faithful to God's calling on who and what they are in Christ - they must therefore be a visible body of people who are a pillar and buttress of truth. Moreover, the church and the truth have a symbiotic relationship, in which each is always affecting the other. Messing with any part of one will always have adverse effects on the other (see Tit.2:5b, 10b).
In the most practical terms then, as the pillar and buttress of truth the church must, first of all, be digesting the truth. When the world sees the church, they should see a people who are memorizing, meditating, and studying the Word of God (Psa.1:1-2; 119:11; Rev.10:9). If pricked by anyone, the church should bleed bibline! Second of all, to be the pillar and buttress of truth, the church should be defending it. God's Word is always under attack, we must then be ready and willing to lay down our lives (whatever that may cost) to preserve and proclaim it in the face of any opposition (Phil.1:16; II Tim.4:1-4). Finally, as the pillar and buttress of truth, the church must be disseminating the truth & demonstrating its power in holy living. From the pulpit to the pew, from the homeplace to the workplace - the church should always be expounding God's Word without shame or apology to the glory of God, in word and in deed (see Matt.28:18-20; Acts 20:20-27; Eph.4:11-5:21; Col.3:12-17).

2009-05-12T06:29:00.000-07:00

Lessons from Luther on the Authority of God's Word

April 18, 1521 would seem like an ordinary day for probably most people living in medieval Europe. However, for a German monk named Martin Luther (1483-1546), this one spring day was deeply significant beyond anything even he could have imagined. For on this day, Luther would face the most powerful political and religious forces in all of Europe. The reason for this encounter was that Luther had "rocked the boat". Of course, he did more than merely rock the boat - he overturned it and was calling for its destruction.

The "boat" was a thousand years of tradition in the Romans Catholic Church which had literally buried the gospel and gave only lip service to the authority of God's Word. Luther was calling the Catholic church to repent of this apostasy and return to the Bible as the final authority for everything they must believe and practice. The Catholic church however was not listening to Luther's appeal. Instead, they condemned him and his writings and demanded that he recant of his so-called "heresies".

Thus on April 18, 1521 in Worms, Germany, Martin Luther stood before the annual congress of the German nation (called a "Diet"), and was ordered to repudiate all his writings. He had already spent twenty-four hours thinking over this demand, at his own request. But now the moment of truth had arrived. Luther was ready to answer. His response would mark the greatest turning point in the Protestant Reformation up to that time. The heart of his answer was this:

"For I do not trust either in the pope or in the councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradict themselves, I am bound to the Scriptures...and my conscience is captive to the Word of God...I cannot do otherwise, here I stand. May God help me, Amen."

When I ponder these words of Luther at the Diet of Worms, I cannot help but to see in them some timely and needed lessons for us today as the Church of Jesus Christ.

First, we must treasure the truth of God's Word over the traditions of men. No matter how sacred or sentimental our traditions may be - what matters above all, is that everything we believe and practice as the church comes under the authority of God's Word. Our doctrine, worship, preaching, evangelism and missions, and all our methodology for ministry must conform to Scripture if we are going to be faithful in glorifying God (Colossians 2:9; II Timothy 3:16,17; cf. I Corinthians 10:31).

Secondly, we must be a bibliocentric people rather than an impressionistic people. This means that we are not led by our impressions or feelings to determine God's will - but we are led by God's Word alone in the assurance of what His will is for us as individuals and the church as a whole. In short, God's Word is sufficient to teach us all that is necessary for faith and practice (see Psalm 1:1-2; 119:105; II Timothy 3:16). Thus, we are "bound to the Scriptures", as Luther said, to guide, direct, and determine the very course of our lives.

Finally, it is only God's Word which has the authority to bind our conscience. Whose standard has the right to judge our character, conduct, and creed? There is only one standard that can excercise that right in truth with no contradictions: it is God's Word alone (see I Corinthians 4:6). Man, no matter his position in life, does not have the authority in himself to impose his personal judgments on our conscience. But by the authority of God's Word, judgments can be made in truth and thus be conscience-binding. Hence, Martin Luther found his place to stand with a clear conscience: it was on the Bible alone. But what about us? Is this where we stand - on the Bible alone?