The Prostrate Calvinist

Fighting under the Prince of Peace

2011-12-30T14:05:00.001-08:00

The annual cleaning of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the (likely) traditional spot where Jesus was crucified and buried, degenerated into a fight on Wednesday between Greek Orthodox and Armenian priests.

You can watch it unfold:

Read the story from the Israeli paper, Haaretz (HT: BiblePlaces)

When I saw this, it reminded me of my own visit to the Holy Sepulchre. While reflecting on the death of Christ, I found myself quite suddenly inserted in a conflict between a desperate old woman and an angry Armenian priest (see Luke 20:46-47). For a brief moment, I thought I was going to have to tell my wife to run and go for his beard, but fortunately it was diffused before it came to that.

Though this fight is further proof that Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) remains relevant, even at the spot where He died for those who cannot possibly justify themselves. By God's grace, I hope to expound it on the first day of next year.

NB, also coming in 2012 are some significant changes to this blog. So you six readers, stay tuned!

Take the Good: Merry Christmas!

2011-12-25T14:18:00.000-08:00

We have various examples in our recent history on how a Christian may set aside Christmas Day.

John Murray, that stalwart Presbyterian theologian of the previous generation, made the following comment from the library at Westminster Seminary in a letter written to Valerie (who eventually became his wife) on December 24th:

I hope to be here all day tomorrow. I have not even accepted a dinner engagement for what they call ‘Christmas.’ I hate the whole business.

- Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol 3.

Let's just say that Prof. Murray was not hurt if he did not make it on your Christmas card list! Though we can be assured Murray's his time was well-invested in that library and finishing his (still authoritative) Romans.

Then are responses like that of C.H. Spurgeon, The Incarnation and the Birth of Christ:

This is the season of the year when, whether we wish it or not, we are compelled to think of the birth of Christ. I hold it to be one of the greatest absurdities under heaven to think that there is any religion in keeping Christmas-day. There are no probabilities whatever that our Saviour Jesus Christ was born on that day, and the observance of it is purely of Popish origin; doubtless those who are Catholics have a right to hallow it, but I do not see how consistent Protestants can account it in the least sacred.

However, I wish there were ten or a dozen Christmas-days in the year; for there is work enough in the world, and a little more rest would not hurt labouring people. Christmas-day is really a boon to us; particularly as it enables us to assemble round the family hearth and meet our friends once more. Still, although we do not fall exactly in the track of other people, I see no harm in thinking of the incarnation and birth of the Lord Jesus. We do not wish to be classed with those

"Who with more care keep holiday
The wrong, than others the right way.”

The old Puritans made a parade of work on Christmas-day, just to show that they protested against the observance of it. But we believe they entered that protest so completely, that we are willing, as their descendants, to take the good accidentally conferred by the day, and leave its superstitions to the superstitious.

HT: Challies

We are with Spurgeon, leave the superstitions to the superstitious and take the good from God's providence to meet again with friends once more. I hope this Lord's Day, assembled with the saints, was edifying and that time around that family hearth is enjoyable (even if it it is now electric!).

Merry Christmas!

Christian Bookstores are Worse than Amazon

2011-12-20T10:47:00.000-08:00

I agree with Challies:

Speaking personally, I have long since stopped shopping at the nearby Christian bookstore. They almost never have the books I want and even if they did, I would pay quite a bit for them and spend a lot of time driving there and back. And then there’s the fact that so much of what they carry is junk—not just trinkets and toys, but material that is opposed to sound doctrine. The last time I went to a Christian bookstore there was a section for Roman Catholics and a section for people who need their fix of Joyce Meyer and Benny Hinn. And I thought, “This is no more Christian than Amazon.” In fact, I think it is actually worse; under the banner of “Christian” things are being sold that claim to be Christian but are deceptively anti-Christian. That may have been the moment I realized that I felt no obligation to support that business.

Let me be brutally honest: Visiting a local Christian bookstore feels like visiting a has-been business (as is the case with pretty much any other bookstore). The whole publishing industry is changing and the little family-owned Christian bookstore seems to be increasingly obsolete. And at least as it pertains to me, I don’t think I will lose anything when the last local Christian bookstore has closed its doors. I feel guilty saying that and I truly feel for the people who own those stores. But unless they can radically change what they do and how they do it, I don’t see most of them making it in this new world.

Read The Local Christian Bookstore.

Providentially, I came to the exact same conclusion just last week. After finding myself in a local Christian retailer I realized that this place is over-priced, poorly-stocked, heresy-filled, and packed to the gills with nonsense. I'm done.
Challies is right, most of them will not make it. But neither is that a bad thing. We need less (anti)Christian bookstores on the market.

Created to Habituate

2011-12-19T05:00:00.000-08:00

Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being (Gen 2:7).

Can you believe it's almost shutters on 2011? We have come to that time of year when many begin to reassess their life-patterns and even make one or two of those pesky resolutions. I've never been a fan of that particular New Year's ritual, but I like considering how to habituate better activities (in hopes that considering will one day lead to doing).

As Lionel Windsor points out, we are "creatures of habit," because we are, well, creatures:

We all develop habits, because we are creatures. That common expression, ‘creatures of habit’, points to an important truth. Habits are an aspect of the way God has made us, as creatures who live in his good creation. God has created us from the ‘dust of the ground’ (Gen 2:7). He’s placed us in time and in space. He’s given us minds and bodies that are suited to this world; we respond to familiarity, regularity, cycles and seasons. Because of this, we’re all constantly forming habits—often without even realising it. Our habits are a key part of our character, of who we are; and so they are closely bound up with our decisions and our desires. Even our seemingly spontaneous decisions are highly influenced by our character and habits.

Windsor continues by offering 13 tips for developing habits:

Motivate yourself by preaching to yourself the gospel of grace.
The ultimate goal in developing a particular habit is coming to the point where you love to do it.
Realise, though, that the goal I mentioned in the previous point (to love what you’re doing) will probably take a very long time to develop.
Don’t be a hero—you’ll only set yourself up for failure.
The flipside of the previous point is to start small.
Start now. Just do it.
Think creatively about ways to fit your habits into your life circumstances.
Learn from the habits of others, but don’t follow them slavishly.
When it comes to habits, simple regularity is much better than sporadic brilliance [that is gold, my friends].
Make your habit-developing plans simple.
Develop the super-habit of regularly reviewing your habits!
Use the relatively good or easy times in your life to work hard at developing your habits. When the hard times come, and/or when life changes, you’ll have spiritual resources to use.
I said it at the start of the list, and I’ll say it again at the end: keep coming back to God’s grace.

I know this is good counsel from personal (mostly, failed) experience. One more gem from his article:

In war (I’ve been told), very little time is spent waging glorious battles and smiting the enemy. Most of the time, warfare is about training, preparing and honing skills. The effectiveness of a soldier is only as good as his habits: his reflexive reactions developed through constant, repetitive training. The same applies to spiritual warfare. Our main task in spiritual warfare is to get prepared: to put on the “armour” of truth, righteousness, the readiness of the gospel of peace, faith, salvation and the word of God through prayer (Eph 6:10-18). Putting on this armour is, in large part, about developing good habits.

Read all of Creatures of Habit, because the more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in battle.

Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011)

2011-12-16T09:54:00.000-08:00

Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?

For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies, declares the Lord God. Therefore, repent and live (Ezek 18:31-32)

Last night, Christopher Hitchens - the vocal and articulate atheist apologist - succumbed to esophageal cancer and stepped into eternity. Though I oppose everything he advocated, and that with every fiber of my being, I oddly enjoyed his writing. Perhaps it was the honesty with which Hitchens presented what was at stake - more honest than many "evangelicals" with rooms of elephants that I know of.

Justin Taylor, reflects:

He once expressed incredulity at the platitudes of a Unitarian minister who saw the beauty of Jesus’ moral teachings while rejecting his divinity:
I would say that if you don’t believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and Messiah, and that he rose again from the dead and by his sacrifice our sins are forgiven, you’re really not in any meaningful sense a Christian.
He was no admirer of C. S. Lewis, but he did agree with Lewis’s statement about Jesus: “Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse.”

Read Taylor, Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011).

Hitchens' sparing partner in Is Christianity Good for the World? - and the subsequent documentary, Collision - Douglas Wilson made the following insightful comments on his death:

Christopher knew that faithful Christians believe that it is appointed to man once to die, and after that the Judgment. He knew that we believe what Jesus taught about the reality of damnation. He also knew that we believe—for I told him—that in this life, the door of repentance is always open. A wise Puritan once noted what we learn from the last-minute conversion of the thief on the cross—one, that no one might despair, but only one, that no one might presume. We have no indication that Christopher ever called on the Lord before he died, and if he did not, then Scriptures plainly teach that he is lost forever. But we do have every indication that Christ died for sinners, men and women just like Christopher. We know that the Lord has more than once hired workers for his vineyard when the sun was almost down (Matt. 20:6).

... Christopher Hitchens was baptized in his infancy, and his name means "Christ-bearer." This created an enormous burden that he tried to shake off his entire life. No creature can ever succeed in doing this. But sometimes, in the kindness of God, such failures can have a gracious twist at the end. We therefore commend Christopher to the Judge of the whole earth, who will certainly do right. Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949-2011). R.I.P.

Read Wilson, Christopher Hitchens Has Died. The Judge of the earth will do right, taking no pleasure in the wicked one's death, but delighting in the exercise of His own impeccable justice.

If you have not seen Collision, do so - perhaps invite a friend to watch it with you. (You can view it for free here). It is worth discussing the exchange in the final scenes when Hitchens says he would not convince the last Christian on earth, even if he could... even the most virulent atheist can never fully erase the image of God.

Repent and live.

A "Stupid and Graceless Culture"

2011-12-02T09:07:00.000-08:00

Bob Costas nails it:

HT: Challies

Predictably, perhaps, I blame "mindless exhibitionism" on Facebook and Twitter. Of course, it's been around a lot longer than social media.

There have, however, been Christians with the opposite concern of exhibiting their victories:

For if I do wish to boast I will not be foolish, for I will be speaking the truth; but I refrain from this, so that no one will credit me with more than he sees in me or hears from me (2 Cor 12:6).

This is good for Christians to keep in mind. Showboating is stupid and graceless on and off the field. And even more so for children of His grace.

A Brief Rant on "The First Christmas"

2011-11-29T14:47:00.000-08:00

I typically try to keep my posts more substantive and edifying, but I need some outlet for a brief bit of nit-picking.

I am an annoying stickler for language. I understand the annoyance others experience, but remain nonetheless undeterred. Why? Words create perceptions. It's axiomatic. Just ask a drunkard if he'd prefer to be called an "alcoholic," or whether an adulterer would prefer to refer to his "affair," or (as has recently been highlighted) whether Mormons would rather be described as cult-members or "Latter-Day Christians." Words create perceptions, which is why we should choose ours carefully.

With that in mind, I am unnerved by the unrelenting references to "The First Christmas" or "The Story of Christmas" or "The Christmas Narrative" this time of year. You want to tell the story of Christmas? Fine. It goes something like this: Romans had a pagan celebration of the winter solstice surrounding Saturn's fertility cult that involved trees, lights, gifts, and parties - sound familiar? So, when the Roman Empire mandated Christianity to a pagan populace in the mid fourth century, they amalgamated their holidays with Christian themes and picked December 25th for the solstice turned celebration of the birth of Jesus. In contrast to the very early annual celebration of the resurrection (you know it as "Easter," better, Resurrection Sunday), Christians never celebrated the incarnation until this point. Later, around the 11th century, it was dubbed "Christmas," which is from "The Christ Mass." Yep, the Mass.

And that is the "story of Christmas" or "the first Christmas" or "the Christmas narrative." The plain fact is that the "first Christmas" was held hundreds of years after our Lord Jesus had died on the cross and ascended into heaven. Are there Roman Catholic priests or altars in Luke 2? Do any of the Gospels give a recounting of the Mass? Was Jesus born anywhere near the month of December? If the answer to all these (and other) questions is "No," then quit referring to the birth of our Lord as "Christmas"!

Now, before I am hastily labeled a hopeless curmudgeon, I would direct you to explicit proof to the contrary: the 7ft tree in my living room. Truth be told, I love the lights and the trees and my wife's pumpkin pies (with extra homemade whip cream on top!). But what does it have to do with the humiliation of our Lord Jesus, who became poor for our sakes, took the form of a bond-servant, and was born of a virgin in first century Bethlehem? Absolutely nothing.

Tell the story of Christ. Shout it from the mountaintops! And use every cultural opportunity to declare that all people everywhere must repent before Jesus or be judged by Him (Acts 17:30-31). Just please quit referring to His coming as "Christmas." It's confusing. People have no idea what trees and parties and gifts have to do with the Savior of the world, and because we sinners prefer the former to Jesus Himself, the real meaning of His incarnation is quickly lost in a sea of twinkling lights.

It's not the "First Christmas," it's the coming of the Savior. It is not the "Christmas Narrative," it is the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is not the "Story of Christmas," it is the good news of the Son of Man who came to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many.

The last thing you ever want to do is confuse people about Jesus.

Edwards' Manuscripts Online

2011-11-25T05:00:00.000-08:00

Now, this is just plain fun. Digital images of Jonathan Edwards' original manuscripts are now available online.

For those of us who have yet to make a pilgrimage to Beinecke Library, this is a real treat. And it definitely beats standing in-line this morning for a cheaper camera.

Here is the preface to one of my favorites, Edwards' A Farewell Sermon, where he explains why he's no longer the pastor at Northhampton.

Viva La Resolution!

HT: JEC

Singing about Election

2011-11-21T12:47:00.000-08:00

just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world... (Eph 1:4)

After Jonathan Edwards was convinced of the doctrine of election from Scripture, that bare conviction eventually grew into a delightful one:

But I have often, since that first conviction, had quite another kind of sense of God's sovereignty than I had then. I have often since had not only a conviction, but a delightful conviction. The doctrine has very often appeared exceedingly pleasant, bright, and sweet. Absolute sovereignty is what I love to ascribe to God.

- Personal Memoir, Works.

Much more recently, Sinclair Ferguson has likewise observed:

Until we have come to the place where we can sing about election with a full heart we have not grasped the spirit of the New Testament teaching.

- The Christian Life, 125.

I have long abominated the sentiment that God's sovereign grace in electing and predestining unworthy sinners is the Church's "family secret." That is not biblical, nor consistent with the best of Christian tradition, nor edifying for Christians today, who grapple with the teachings of Scripture.

So, how can we sing about election? Well, we can learn from prior eras and traditions of the Church that were not as burdened by such foolish sentiments. For one example, the 19th century hymn by Josiah Condor, 'Tis Not That I Did Choose Thee:

'Tis not that I did choose Thee,
For, Lord, that could not be;
This heart would still refuse Thee,
But Thou hast chosen me;
Thou from the sin that stained me,
Hast cleansed and set me free,
Of old Thou hast ordained me,
That I should live to Thee.
'Twas sov'reign mercy called me,
And taught my op'ning mind;
The world had else enthralled me,
To heav'nly glories blind;
My heart owns none before Thee,
For Thy rich grace I thirst;
This knowing, if I love Thee,
Thou must have loved me first.

Paul the Apostle gave the Ephesians much to sing of in chapter 1, and we are constrained by conscience and the Spirit to offer no less in our congregations today. Until we can sing heartily such hymns, we have not truly grasped the meaning of the New Testament.

"If I love Thee, Thou must have loved me first"... sing it!

Prayerful Ministry of the Word: The Pastor's Measure

2011-11-19T12:29:00.000-08:00

But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word (Acts 6:4)

John Owen gets to the rub of pastoral ministry in The True Nature of a Gospel Church:

The second duty of a pastor towards his flock, is, continual fervent prayer for them. 'Give ourselves unto the word and prayer.' Without this, no man can or doth preach to them as he ought, nor perform any other duty of his pastoral office. From hence may any man take the best measure of the discharge of his duty towards his flock. He that doth constantly, diligently, fervently pray for them, will have a testimony in himself of his own sincerity in the discharge of all other pastoral duties; nor can he voluntarily omit or neglect any of them. And as for those who are negligent herein, be their pains, labour, and travail in other duties never so great, they may be influenced from other reasons, and so give no evidence of sincerity in the discharge of their office. In this constant prayer for the church, which is so incumbent on all pastors, as that whatever is done without it, is of no esteem in the sight of Jesus Christ.

Those who neglect the ministry of word and prayer - regardless of their tenacity in other labors - can have no assurance as to the faithfulness of their ministry. Whatever else you do, whatever else you sacrifice, if it is lacking in prayer, it is "of no esteem in the sight of Jesus Christ" - and, to be clear, His is the only esteem that actually matters.

Owen concludes with the simple challenge of whether we actually believe the Gospel we have been installed to minister:

To preach the word therefore, and not to follow it with constant and fervent prayer for its success, is to disbelieve its use, neglect its end, and to cast away the seed of the gospel at random.

See Owen, Works, vol. 16, p. 78.

I ask myself - and encourage everyone who ministers, in or out of church office - how do we measure the discharge of our duties and faithfulness of our roles? By personal labor or by personal prayer? Not an unimportant question.

HT: 9Marks

Penn St. and Protecting Children Like Jesus

2011-11-10T09:57:00.000-08:00

But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these" (Matt 19:14).

Our Savior's love for children was built into the fabric of His creation. Just consider His sovereign options before the world began. Our Lord could have made every man and woman like our two fore-bearers (see Gen 2:7, 21-22), straight from dust to adult! But He decreed an entirely different process for Adam and Eve's subsequent offspring. God determined that His image-bearers would bring about His global purposes for eternal glory through conception, birth, growth, and natural dependence as children (Gen 1:28; cf. 3:15).

And "her seed," as we tend to emphasize this time of year, was born in Bethlehem to be our Savior. Do not overlook that the radiance of eternal glory - the exact representation of God's nature and the fullness of Deity - was once Himself a child. Jesus was born (Luke 2:7), circumcised (v. 21), developed in strength and wisdom (vv. 40, 51), and even astonished His parents (v. 48) - though He perfectly subjected Himself to them (v. 51)! So, in the earthly ministry of our Incarnate Creator as an adult, He loved and blessed children. Now, one of the more obvious take-aways for His disciples is: I love children and so should you.

It is possible that this take-away is what makes the recent events at Penn State all the more sickening - and latent with critical lessons for Christians and local churches.

From time to time - fortunately, more infrequently than not - I am contacted regarding my advice as to how to handle a suspected or newly-discovered case of child abuse. You see, the tension that many pastors, church officers, and Christians in general tend to feel is how should we who know the transforming power of Christ for the most heinous of sinners (with the violent, murderous life of our beloved Apostle, Paul, being case in point) address heinous sin when it (inevitably) lands across our desk? Should we minister the Gospel according to Scripture or notify the governing authorities? The answer, of course, is yes. In other words, you call the police and then you follow close behind with your Bible.

I was grateful to read the counsel of Al Mohler to churches and Christian organizations in the wake of the tragic Penn State debacle:

Sometimes Christians are reluctant to report suspected sexual abuse because they do not feel that they know enough about the situation. They are afraid of making a false accusation. This is the wrong instinct. We do not have the ability to conduct the kind of investigation that is needed, nor is this assigned to the church. This is the function of government as instituted by God (Romans 13). Waiting for further information allows a predator to continue and puts children at risk. This is itself an immoral act that needs to be seen for what it is.

... After law enforcement authorities have been notified, the church must conduct its own work of pastoral ministry, care, and church discipline. This is the church’s responsibility and charge. But these essential Christian ministries and responsibilities are not substitutes for the proper function of law enforcement authorities and the legal system. As Christians, we respect those authorities because we are commanded to do so.

It is worth reading The Tragic Lessons of Penn State - A Call to Action, in its entirety.

Mohler's counsel is fundamentally sound and should be heeded by every Christian in these situations. Biblically-speaking, by invoking Romans 13:1-4 (or 1 Pet 2:13-14), we are not thereby denying Matthew 18:15 -20, much less 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 or 1 Timothy 1:15-16. We have not set aside our spiritual responsibilities in any situation by appropriately dealing with the legal or criminal ones.

As a pastor and minister of the Word, I am more than ready to take the Gospel of the grace of God to child molesters, abusive parents, and every other manifestation of unrighteousness that scars His world and bars His image-bearers from the Kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-10). I am willing to proclaim to any and every perverted wretch that he or she may be washed, sanctified, and completely "justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God" (v. 11).

And I am ready and willing to extend that Gospel to them behind bars.

Christians must not perceive contacting the proper authorities and addressing spiritual concerns as somehow inconsistent. It is "an immoral act" to leave children at risk while we dance in indecision. God must not be mocked, men must reap what they have sown (Gal 6:7). Self-evident sins must result in judgment (1 Tim 5:24). And it is not unbiblical nor sub-Christian nor un-Gospel-centered to insist upon this. Quite the contrary, in fact.

The Master who rebuked His disciples for hindering children is the same Savior who gave His life as a ransom for even the most vile of sinners (Matt 20:28). Even for child molesters. Christians, you can preach the Gospel and protect our children. Doing both is very much like Jesus.

Idolatry in Pastoral Ministry

2011-11-08T10:56:00.001-08:00

... it is a fine work he desires to do (1 Tim 3:1).

Church-planter, Eric Davis, a friend from my seminary days, has offered a very important post on Church-Planting and Idolatry. I would suggest that the relevance of Eric's thoughts extend beyond church planters to younger pastors, specifically, but even more generally to all the Christians who pray for them, are shepherded by them, and who occasionally form committees to hire them.

A desire for ministry, and especially church-planting, should never be thought of as a sanitized, neutral desire. On the contrary, there are not many more dangerous means of laboring for self-approval than ministry.

... It’s ok if your resume says: “____ has never: spoken at a conference, planted more than one church, written anything, or preached anywhere outside of Ulysses, Kansas. He does 2 services per week with 42 people in a dilapidated modular building.”

Take a deep breath and remember that your well-being is in the finished work of Christ and not filled pews and satellite campuses. Recall that Jeremiah was not invited to a conference, but thrown in a mud pit. This is not to glory in hard ministry or little fruit, but to calibrate our motives. Hunker down and give yourself fully to the word and prayer until your promotion to glory where you will be rewarded by the Chief Shepherd. Neither repudiate, nor be enamored by, apparent success. Praise God that Christ is preached; take heed to your own faithfulness, and thank the Master that you get to shepherd his flock among you.

Much of what is happening in contemporary evangelical church-planting is fleshly. Young men, who, perhaps, mean well, yet are looking to leap over the cross and grab that crown.

Please read Eric's entire post.

I agree - and have previously-posted regarding the same - that the "fleshiness" in many contemporary evangelical circles is distressing and disconcerting. I for one am growing less and less enamored with my own generation, which may be the point (of God's sanctifying work in my own heart).

Interestingly, Paul uses ἐπιθυμέω (epithumeo) in describing the aspirations of the elder / pastor in 1 Timothy 3:1. It is interesting because that word is typically rendered as "lust" in your English Bible. In fact, Paul will use the nominal form in 2 Timothy 2:22 and exhort Timothy to "flee from youthful lusts [= ἐπιθυμίας, epithumias]." Our fight as younger pastors is keep sin, Satan, or the world-system from turning our good desire into one from which we are accountable to flee.

So, if you are not a pastor, this is how you should pray, encourage, and even hire (when that comes up) the younger pastors in your life. And it may be as simple as, "Lord, please make and keep his epithumia the good kind."

The Perfection of Beauty

2011-11-01T10:11:00.000-07:00

The heavens are telling of the glory of God;
And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands (Ps 19:1)

Even though our musical genre preferences are more punk-rock than rap, we cannot help but enjoy and appreciate the Godward efforts of Shai Linne.

shai linne - "The Perfection of Beauty" ft. Blair Linne (Official Trailer) from Lamp Mode Recordings on Vimeo.

Preach it, sister! (Don't get carried away; yes, we still firmly believe in 1 Tim 2:12). By the way, Blair is Shai Linne's wife, who is also an alumnus of TMC.

Our favorite lines:

'Cause dimes get lost day-dreaming in dark gutters,
Unable to hear the call to wake up!

If they truly beheld Your beauty,
You'd make magazines and Mattel go bankrupt.

Shai Linne's new album, The Attributes of God, is being released today and available at Lampmode Records. I believe it even comes with a copy of Pink's book.

Even those of us who like it turned-up to eleven, give thanks for God-centered rap!

Holding onto Tradition: Responsive & Non-Captive

2011-10-25T10:44:00.001-07:00

Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other (1 Cor 4:6).

Good, clear, and helpful thoughts from John Frame:

... I try to encourage Bible interpretation that is responsive to tradition, but not captive to it. The chief rule of Reformation hermeneutics is that Scripture is the best interpreter of Scripture, under the illumination of the Holy Spirit. “Biblical” theology is often defined as a method of Bible interpretation focusing on redemptive history. That’s fine, but it should not be the only method we use. Redemptive history may be the chief content of Scripture, but there are many things in the Bible (Psalms, Proverbs, e.g.) that are most narrowly historical.

... We should certainly learn from people God has appointed to teach the word, both in our generation and in the past. However we should be ready to make a break with the past if Scripture forces us to do that. That itself has an important precedent in tradition: the Protestant Reformation. And when we do make use of tradition in our theology, we should not be narrowly confined to the tradition of our own denomination. Theology today, in my view, partly because of the nature of graduate education, is far too focused on theologians in the past and present and far too little focused on Scripture itself. The best balance is in John Murray’s work.

Read the Credo Magazine's entire interview with John Frame.

There is a lot of wisdom in Frame's answers. Not least of which is his simple principle on the relationship between Scripture and tradition: Responsive, but not captive. It often seems that Christians are either captive or non-responsive to Christian tradition. Either position leaves us impoverished and ill-equipped. With Reformation Day upon us, Frame's encouragement that "we should be ready to make a break with the past if Scripture forces us to do that" is a timely reminder.

In what I read and observe in contemporary theology, I heartily agree with Frame that "graduate education" has set theology too far adrift from its source in the Word of God and made it far too concerned with the personal theology of individual writers / lecturers. I am grateful for Frame's courage to (frequently) call theologians and the Church to account on this matter (see previous post on Schreiner for a similar point).

Also, I second his nod to John Murray, who is truly a great resource for responsive, but not captive theology. After more recently procuring his four-volume, Collected Writings, I have been greatly helped. Murray is moving closer to the top of my "consult-first" list in my library. (Hint: The "Library of Light" in my church has a copy of his biography, Life of John Murray. It is a heartening read and good introduction to this faithful brother in Christ).

Finally, in this category of tolle lege, John Frame's Theology of Lordship series is likewise a real gem, I consult one of those four volumes in my library regularly. Frame writes lucidly and biblically, not afraid to challenge his readers nor his own tradition. Personally, I am ambivalent toward his triadic structure, but that does not diminish the value of his works.

You would be wise to add Frame to your "wishlist" (Tip: start with Doctrine of God or Doctrine of the Word of God).

NB, his Apologetics to the Glory of God is likewise indispensable on that topic... especially if Van Til is a bit much for you.

It Matters What You Wear

2011-10-15T14:07:00.000-07:00

that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless (Eph 5:27).

As you lay out your clothes for corporate worship tomorrow on the Lord's Day, please keep in mind that your attire does matter.

R.C. Sproul Jr.:

The glory of the gospel is that God isn’t looking at my clothes when I come to worship. Whether I am dressed to the nines or dressed in flip-flops, He isn’t looking at my clothes. He is, however, looking at what I am wearing. And praise God what I’m wearing not only covers my body, but covers my heart as well. What I wear to worship is what I wear the rest of the week. I do not come dressed for a formal dance. I do not come dressed for a picnic on the beach. I come instead dressed like royalty. I come dressed like a prince. For I wear the righteousness of the Son of God. I do not come as I am. I come as I AM is.

Read Come As You Aren't.

Join the saints tomorrow in the finest dress in the universe... the spotless garments of the bride of Christ.

Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to the cross I cling;
Naked, come to Thee for dress;
Helpless look to Thee for grace;
Foul, I to the fountain fly;
Wash me, Savior, or I die.

- "Rock of Ages" by Augustus Toplady

When He shall come with trumpet sound,
Oh, may I then in Him be found,
Clothed in His righteousness alone,
Faultless to stand before the throne!
On Christ, the solid Rock, I stand;
All other ground is sinking sand.

- "My Hope is Built," by Edward Mote

Evangelicalism, We Have a Problem

2011-10-14T05:30:00.000-07:00

...I refrain from this, so that no one will credit me with more than he sees in me or hears from me (2 Cor 12:6).

Okay, this is the last post on the whole "celebrity pastor" thing (see 1, 2, & 3). We'll let Carl Trueman, Don't Know Much about Art, but I Know It When I See It, offer the last word:

The issue is that there is a real problem -- in fact, many real problems -- to which some are trying to draw attention. There is a problem with the yob aesthetic, the arrogant stage swagger, the stand-up routines, the obsession with talking about sex in sermons which puts some of these conference headlining pastoral role models about as far from Paul's vision of leadership as possible; there is a problem with pastors who tell their people they will only visit them in hospital once they have been placed in a body bag; there is a problem with pastors who make videos which ape the aesthetics of the mainstream media and focus on the pastor, not the pastor's God; there is a problem with churches of thousands of people, few of whom ever get to meet an elder, let alone the pastor; there is a problem with church planting strategy that is so wedded to the cult of the one man that he has to be skyped in to the community; there is a problem when a man has to phone the librarian at Westminster Seminary with a pastoral issue because nobody at his home church of thousands has the time to speak to an ordinary church member about his crisis of faith.

Read his entire post.

Without exaggeration, there is a problem. There is no hyperbole in that paragraph. And Trueman's last example especially - of a call placed to the seminary librarian - makes me want to weep.

Regardless of what you term it, the behavior of many Christian leaders runs directly counter to Paul's concern that the Corinthians not "credit me with more than he sees in me or hears from me."

D.A. Carson explained Paul's attitude:

...it is the typical attitude displayed by this apostle, who is always concerned to insist that people should focus on the gospel and on the Savior; not the messenger.

- A Model of Christian Maturity, p. 149.

Yet, we often find the messenger himself precisely at the focus. Or, as Trueman puts it, "focus on the pastor, not the pastor's God." It can be subtle, to be sure. Though a careful observer can distinguish when something has been written or said to exalt God or to exalt a man's exaltation of God - and there is a world of difference between those two.

Keep that difference in mind the next time you read a bio, conference introduction, or book blurb. There is a problem when Christians are too eager to be credited with more than is seen in them or heard from them. Or they are least negligent in allowing others to do it for them.

I have a close friend who is fond of saying his goal in life is "to die in obscurity for God's glory." Amen, brother. And I do hope he represents the majority of the next generation of missionaries, teachers, and pastors. We are messengers. And whether many people know us or like us - or even remember us when we die - is utterly unimportant.

May the Spirit of our Savior remind us that irrespective of the venue that is afforded to our teaching or writing, we have been called to be pastors, not personalities.

Related Posts:

It Will Happen to Us

2011-10-12T05:30:00.000-07:00

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever (Heb 13:8)

During a recent visit, Christian journalist, Collin Hansen, was dismayed over the abysmal conditions of a once-faithful and historic church. In fact, this church was once led by none other than Jonathan Edwards himself.

So, Hansen applied this living parable:

Future generations may wonder how Bethlehem Baptist Church of all places could lose its missionary zeal. They may look back on a theological downgrade at Redeemer Presbyterian Church. If the Lord tarries, they might mock a ministry called The Gospel Coalition that lost the gospel. If it happened to Edwards, Luther, and Wesley, it can happen to us.

We should take every precaution to guard our confessions and plead with the Holy Spirit to give our descendants the new birth. Even these efforts, however, guarantee nothing. The history of redemption is littered with the rise and fall of evangelical empires. Only God remains the same, and only God deserves our worship.

Read his entire article, Rise and Fall of an Evangelical Empire.

Respectfully, I would add that Hansen overlooked an important element... the writing is always on the wall. Take Northampton, for example. Let's not forget that in 1750 this congregation actually fired Pastor Edwards. So, how can we feign surprise that the church continued to slide from orthodoxy? Edwards himself warned them at that time in "A Farewell Sermon," from Acts 20. (It is one of our favorite Edwards' sermons).

It is no less true today. Let's just take, for example, The Gospel Coalition. Hansen muses about a future when the TGC might tragically mock its own name by losing the Gospel itself. Again, we would add that the writing is already on the wall. On this immediate point, see these previous posts:

Yet, even with this oversight, Hansen is spot-on. There are no efforts that we can invest to guarantee anything. If one thing is certain, neither you nor I can keep it all together. It happened to Paul (see 2 Tim 4:9-16), Luther, Calvin, Edwards, et al. Be assured, it will happen to The Gospel Coalition and other contemporary "empires." It will happen to us... the writing is always on the wall.

Our glorious God only guarantees the preservation of His name and His glory. So, when we celebrate any movement, give thanks for any institution, or even cherish our own local church, we must end where our Lord Himself taught us to begin:

Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.

"Only God remains the same, and only God deserves our worship." Amen, brother.

N.B., for a helpful analysis and application of Jonathan Edwards' termination, please see Mark Dever, "How Jonathan Edwards Got Fired and Why It's Important for Us Today," which was subsequently published as a chapter in A God-Entranced Vision of All Things.

It's Not a Couple of Hours

2011-10-07T05:30:00.000-07:00

On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together... (Acts 20:7)

I'm convinced. Though I'm more of an American Football man myself, I am convinced that we need more rugby players in our churches. Devout Euan Murray Questions Sunday Matches:

It's basically all or nothing, following Jesus. I don't believe in pick 'n' mix Christianity. I believe the Bible is the word of God, so who am I to ignore something from it?

I might as well tear out that page then keep tearing out pages as and when it suits me. If I started out like that there would soon be nothing left.

I want to live my life believing and doing the things (God) wants and the Sabbath day is a full day.

It's not a case of a couple of hours in church then playing rugby or going down the pub, it's the full day.

Read the entire article, which gives also nod to Eric Liddell.

May Murray's tribe of rugby-theologians increase... even in the US! (I think they would make great ushers).

Enjoy the Lord's Day.

HT: Ref21

Related Posts:

Afraid. The End

2011-10-05T05:30:00.000-07:00

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Ps 111:10a).

In Mark's Amazing Ending, Jesse Johnson identifies the purpose of Mark's actual ending:

The book also ends with a powerful evangelistic thrust. So far, the only person to open his mouth and positively identify Jesus as the Son of God has been a Roman—the same soldier responsible for his arrest, trial, and execution. The apostles haven’t said it, and neither have the women. When the book ends with the phrase “And they said nothing to anyone…” it serves as a rhetorical device: will you open your mouth? Will you join the centurion and even the demons that identify Jesus as God’s son? Will you tell others? Or will you go missing like Peter, or silent like the women?

When the ending of Mark is seen as it was written, it ranks with Judges, Jonah, and Revelation in terms of having a powerful ending that raises a question. Do you do what is right in your own eyes? Do you have compassion on the lost? Do you long for the Lord’s return? And finally, are you amazed at what Jesus has done? You should be, and you should open your mouth about it.

Read Jesse's entire post.

I concur entirely with his observation: "knowing that those final 11 verses of Mark 16 are not Markan should actually bolster one’s confidence in the transmission of Scripture, not lesson it."

I argued the same in A Tradition of Translation Timidity:

Leaving passages like Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 in the same flow of the canonical text - just because the publisher does not want to handle the deluge of angry e-mails that are sure to follow their exclusion - just seems irresponsible.

Furthermore, this practice actually undermines our confidence in the inerrant text and undoes all that was accomplished in the Reformation's call to sola scriptura. For a vigorous application of "ecclesiastical usage" amounts essentially to a Roman Catholic view of binding authoritative tradition.

By not distinguishing these inauthentic passages - something like Wallace's footnote proposal - we are truly doing a great disservice. By offering a more transparent admittance of what we have known (for centuries!), we give greater witness to the text of Scripture and greater credibility to the preaching and teaching within the Church.

Identifying what we know only serves to hinder the Church's confidence in Scripture's transmission. Ignorance can bolster neither confidence nor conviction.

Mark actually ends with "... for they were afraid" (16:8) and that is the best ending (or question) that the Spirit of the Lord could have ever superintended for His Church.

After all, it is the beginning of wisdom.

Exporting our Evangelical Freakshow

2011-10-03T11:37:00.000-07:00

Apart from such external things, there is the daily pressure on me of concern for all the churches (2 Cor 11:28).

Little did I know that when I wrote on Asterisks for Celebrity Pastors, that very world of personalities and media platforms would furnish an ample illustration that very week. If you missed it, James MacDonald, pastor of Harvest Bible Chapel and council member of The Gospel Coalition, invited T.D. Jakes - yes, that T.D. Jakes - to speak at The Elephant Room, for a dialogue-style conference. Perhaps even more implausible than the invitation itself, was MacDonald's defense of his invitation. It is a staggering and almost unbelievable lapse in judgment from such a prominent Christian leader. (I keep waiting for MacDonald to say, "Gotcha! Just kidding!").

Thoughtful and biblical responses have been offered by Tim Challies, Phil Johnson, Nathan Busenitz, and Thabiti Anyabwile, not to mention the glut of resources from Ligonier. Though, as usual, I find the rejoinders of Carl Trueman to be among the most perceptive:

Is Nicene Christianity that Important?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Don't worry, the post is in English)
L'Orthodoxie? C'est Moi! (Ditto)
Quantum Theory
Fixing the Indemnity

Phil Johnson observed the same today in The Evangelical Freakshow. Though Phil notes an important disagreement with Trueman's analysis. Namely, could these sorts of celebrity pastors ever exert influence over Christians in other parts of the world? Of course, the shameful answer is that they already do.

It is precisely the celebrity of American evangelical rock stars that the rest of the world seems so attracted to. And the more outlandish the personality, the more other cultures seem interested. These things spread around the world, not only because American evangelicals are wantonly imperialistic but because morbid curiosity, worldly interests, and carnal lusts are a problem in every culture, and the mortification of those passions fell out of fashion among church people ages ago.

...And Dr. Trueman is right to point out that it is a uniquely American evangelical phenomenon to foster these cults of celebrity and to encourage each wave of superstars to push the limits of sobriety and propriety further than the last superstar did. American evangelicalism has become a large jingoistic freak show.

Read Phil's entire post here. I have personally observed this tragedy on 3 different continents. And every time it was emotionally taxing, as I vacillated from sorrow to rage to near comatose apathy - and usually in the same hour!

It should come as no surprise to us. The world is enamored with our salacious entertainment. They are desperate to catch-up to our styles in food, fun, and fashion. Even our political enemies cannot wait to eat at their own McDonald's or Starbucks! And the very real tragedy is that things are no different in the Church.

Just as quickly as evangelical movements and personalities take hold in the US, they export the same to our brethren around the world. Our brothers and sisters who need our time and our heritage of biblical resources, are instead deluged by our pointless fads.

If for no other reason than this, The Gospel Coalition - whose confessional statement actually begins with "The Tri-une God" - faces a pivotal moment:

Will TGC remain a coalition around the Gospel or will they defer to influential personalities? (Please remember that Arianism did not flourish in the 3rd century because Arius was a boring and unpersuasive communicator).

Is TGC actually a movement to "unite on the nature of truth, how best to read the Bible, on our relationship to culture, on the content of the gospel, and on the nature of gospel–centered ministry" (TGC, Vision Statement) or simply another manufactured platform for celebrity pastors?

What does subscription to TGC's own confessional statement mean for their own council members? Put more simply, what role does TGC believe doctrine should have in their vision for evangelicalism? Or put more pointedly, is TGC just another collection of ecclesiastical pragmatists with theological window-dressing?

This is no molehill. When we talk about doctrines like the Trinity, we are not debating peripheral issues. We are asking, will our generation of Christian leaders remain Christian?

Without any sensationalism intended, I do pray that there is an Ezekiel out there - perhaps a whole coalition of them - that sees "what they are doing" (Ezek 8:6). And that not only for the sake of the Church in America, but for all the churches around the world who are watching us - even now.

Dead Sea Scrolls Online

2011-09-30T05:30:00.000-07:00

The grass withers, the flower fades,
When the breath of the Lord blows upon it;
Surely the people are grass.
The grass withers, the flower fades,
But the word of our God stands forever (Isa 40:7-8).

One of the most enjoyable moments of life thus far has been visiting Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in the late 1940's. The Dead Sea Scrolls, contrary to speculations from 19th century historical critics, confirmed our Masoretic Text (the Hebrew manuscripts from which your English Old Testament was translated) as reliable and therefore God's Word as accurately preserved through the centuries. It was no small find!

The year following our visit to Qumran, we were able to actually view the Dead Sea Scrolls on display in San Diego - ever the romantic, I took my wife to stare for hours at dusty old papyri and to discuss advances in biblical archaeology (she was overcome with excitement, as you can imagine).

Now, the Israel Museum (in Jerusalem) and Google have collaborated to make such an experience much easier - searchable, high-resolution images of the Dead Sea Scrolls online in The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls Project!

Currently including the largest and most-known scrolls, such as the Great Isaiah Scroll (see below) and the Habakkuk pesher (i.e., Commentary on Habakkuk), this project will eventually include all the scrolls.

Even more exciting are some of the features, like searching the Isaiah Scroll which can be searched verse by verse, with an English translation just a mouse-click away! (Even if it's all Hebrew to you, scrolling through Isaiah is just plain fun).

Even though Google is slowly eating-away our brains (see here), the accessibility and usability of this resource is a real gift. And just one more testimony that the "word of our God stands forever (Isa 40:8).

HT: BAS

The New and Cooler Pharisee

2011-09-28T05:30:00.001-07:00

For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:20).

After recently finishing lessons on the Sermon on the Mount, the subtle self-righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees are often on my mind. Hypocritical (6:1), dividing between those they must love and those they may hate (5:41), and seeking the things of this world, under the guise of religious devotion (6:32; cf. 23:6-7).

The term "Pharisee," however has been spun in our modern culture in a very, well, pharisacial way. Jared Wilson explains in The "Religious People Boogeyman":

“Pharisee,” “legalist,” “religious person” is the church version of racist or Nazi. It is the rhetorical nuclear option specifically designed to shut up anyone with questions and paint them among their brothers and sisters as graceless jerks. But I think it actually works the other way around:

Employing the “religious people” boogeyman ironically indulges in what it professes to decry. It is a great way to pray along with the self-justified pharisee, “I thank you God that I’m not like those religious people.”

If you’ve got real legalists in your church—and you do—the only way to intentionally offend them is by preaching the gospel of grace in Jesus Christ. Everything else is just vain posturing and prideful provocation.

Read his entire post. "Pharisees" are still hypocritical, unloving, and fundamentally worldly... they're just not always who you think they are. In fact, the Pharisee in the pew is probably not even the guy in the suit. He may actually be the "coolest" guy in your church.

And Jesus says - in sober warning - the self-righteous, unloving, and the hypocritical, however influential and hip, will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven without repenting.

HT: JT

On Asterisks for Celebrity "Pastors"

2011-09-26T09:28:00.000-07:00

As I had considered this very issue earlier this morning, I was pleased with the providential reading of Ed Stetzer's post, Should 'Broader Interests' Preclude Pastoring? (HT: Challies). I am grateful for Stetzer's three reasons on why Christian speakers and writers must stay close to the local church:

I love the church
I need the church
I'm committed to serve

And he concludes with this perceptive statement:

Reality means accountability to some kind of leadership structure in the church and to body as a whole. Rick Warren alluded to this problem in a tweet that followed the Rob Bell announcement: "Speaking tours feed the ego = All applause & no responsibility. It's an unreal world. A church gives accountability & validity" The last thing anyone needs is more to feed out selfish egos, but that is precisely part of the challenge associated with the speaking circuit (emphasis added).

Read his entire post.

We do not often gel with the views of Rick Warren, but he could not be more right on this one. Pastors and teachers who leave local churches for the speaking and/or writing circuit, have departed reality for a manufactured environment without real accountability. And it is that last aspect which is especially troubling.

It is all the more troubling because their move from accountability is a move into greater influence before the eyes and ears of impressionable Christians. Such influence is guaranteed by retaining the privilege and prerogative of the title, "Pastor."

God intended the local church to be the auspices under which teaching, speaking, and writing was to be conducted. Any author or speaker who is not under accountability, has no credibility. This is to say that even our best-selling authors - irrespective of how crazy their love - simply lack credibility as representatives (much less as leaders!) of Christian faith and life.

Now, here's what I'm thinking and proposing. If we are concerned to inform impressionable young boys to hold their admiration because that athlete was "juiced-up," should we not tell Christians that the water-treading faith of their favorite speaker or author is worth questioning? And why not use the same asterisk?

Maybe Christian publishers could agree on some standardized warning that the asterisk would indicate:

* This author has removed himself from the accountability of the local church, which is the normal community for every Christian and is probably assumed by you. In other words, this author is mostly accountable to the dictates of his personal ambitions, along with those of his agent, who profits monetarily by any increase in popularity. Please read this book with that in mind. Any self-reference as "Pastor" should be read with suspicion.

It may be unrealistic, but I like the idea of asterisks for celebrity "pastors."

The point is that if you find the other-worldly spirituality of such men unbelievable, you are right. It is unbelievable because they are unaccountable. The spirituality of the Christian speaking and writing circuit is not a spiritual reality.

Is everything such writers say unhelpful, unedifying or even unbiblical? Of course not.

But all their books are followed by a *

Reformation Commentary Series

2011-09-22T10:08:00.000-07:00

This is a brief note on what may be a helpful resource for those of us who cherish the insights of the Reformers, but who lack the time to hunt down all their works. Can we read and reflect on commentators of the Reformation other than Calvin?

It looks like it! The forthcoming commentary series, The Reformation Commentary on Scripture, ed. Timothy George., is hot off the press of IVP, this month.

The first volume - Galatians, Ephesians - and the companion introduction by Timothy George, Reading Scripture with the Reformers, is available.

If you sign-up for the service through IVP, you save 80% on Galatians, Ephesians and also receive George's introductory volume for free (I believe that each subsequent volume is 40% off). I joined the service in July and look forward to receiving these volumes (maybe a brief review will show-up on this blog?).

Anyway, now you know, so you may plan accordingly.

Semper reformanda!

HT: JT

Our Holy Husband

2011-09-20T10:02:00.000-07:00

...the Spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the entrance of the north gate of the inner court, where the seat of the idol of jealousy, which provokes to jealousy, was located. And behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there... (Ezek 8:3-4)

John Calvin aptly described the faithful jealousy of our God and how it speaks of His love for His people:

The more holy and chaste a husband is, the more wrathful he becomes if he sees his wife inclining her heart to a rival.

In like manner, the Lord, who has wedded us to himself in truth, manifests the most burning jealousy whenever we, neglecting the purity and his holy marriage, become polluted with wicked lusts.

- Institutes of the Christian Religion, I.VIII.18.

Any husband who met his bride's adultery with indifference would be unloving and rightly described as unfaithful himself! And our Lord is the holiest of husbands. His jealousy is His holiness, faithfulness, and love expressed against the sin of His bride.

It is in glory that He is provoked to jealousy in faithfulness and in love for His bride - redeemed by Him, called by His name, and covenanted to Him in love. We are His Temple, "bought with a price" (1 Cor 6:19-20). We are His Bride, for whom He died in His love "that He might sanctify here... that she would be holy and blameless" (Eph 5:25-27).

So wedded to the Lord by the blood of Jesus His Son and by the bond of the New Covenant, we are instructed to flee immorality. Our husband loves us faithfully. Let us seek His glory in purity until we recline at His side forever at the marriage supper of the Lamb.

The One Thing That Matters

2011-09-07T10:42:00.000-07:00

Ask, and it will be given to you... (Matt 7:7)

That great and assuring promise of Christ, as explained by the Doctor:

Abraham was like the Lord Jesus Christ Himself who, under the shadow of the cross, and knowing that even His most trusted disciples were suddenly going to leave Him and forsake Him in their fear and concern about saving their own lives, nevertheless was able to say this: 'The hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me' (John 16:32).

According to the Bible, that is the one thing that matters. Our Lord does not promise to change life for us; He does not promise to remove difficulties and trials and problems and tribulations; He does not say that He is going to cut out all the thorns and leave the roses with their wonderful perfume. No; He faces life realistically, and tells us that these are things to which the flesh is her, and which are bound to come. But He assures us that we can so know Him that, whatever happens, we need never be frightened, we need never be alarmed. He puts all that in this great and comprehensive promise: 'Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.'

- Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, p. 457

There are many things He does not promise. But, the one thing He does is the only thing that actually matters.

Luther on Multi-Roled Ministry

2011-09-01T12:12:00.001-07:00

...making the most of your time, because the days are evil (Eph 5:16).

The most encouraging thing I have read this week from Martin Luther:

I have need almost continually of two secretaries, for I do scarce any thing else all day long than write letters. I am preacher to the Convent, reader of prayers at table, pastor and parish minister, director of studies, vicar of the priory, (that is to say, prior ten times over,) inspector of the fish ponds of Litzkau, council to the inns of Herzberg at Torgau, lecturer on St. Paul, and commentator on the psalms.

Seldom have I time to say my prayers, or to sing a hymn; not to mention my struggle with flesh and blood, the devil and the world. See what an idle man I am!

HT: What's Best Next

I have no idea how to inspect a fish pond, but my days often feel (and smell) like I imagine it. And two secretaries, indeed, would be a luxury!

Of course, herein is a hint at why there have been no new posts at TPC. Weary in the work, but not of it; continually pressing against "idleness."

Me too, brother Martin, me too!

The Lord's Prayer is Reproof

2011-08-22T05:30:00.000-07:00

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name...

Excepting Psalm 23, no other passage of Scripture is more apart of our common memory than this one. Though it has long been entitled “The Lord’s Prayer,” that title lacks accuracy since it is our Lord's instruction on prayer to His disciples. So, we may prefer “The Disciples’ Prayer" as a heading, though it is doubtful that will ever enter popular recognition.

This misnomer does tell us that we may not have understood the point of the Lord's Prayer. If we only observed its use in catechisms, in lessons for children and in repetition in corporate worship for centuries, we might get the impression that the Lord ascended to His sermon just to impart some new liturgical method or write a new prayer-book for Christians. So it is something of a surprise to reenter the context of the Sermon on the Mount and find that Jesus' purpose in the Lord's Prayer goes far beyond even the topic of prayer itself.

The Lord's Prayer is not the model for prayer - certainly our Lord prayed from the Psalms as well? Nor is it even a mandated protocol or formula of prayer for Christians. In short, the Lord's Prayer is a rebuke. A reproof. A removal of our false sense of righteousness to view the inner corruption of our hearts before the holiness of God Himself. To say the Lord's Prayer is a rebuke really shouldn't surprise us. That is essentially the point of the entire Sermon on the Mount and certainly no less that of Matthew 6:9-13.

The Sermon on the Mount

Our Savior began His sermon by pointing to the character of spiritual blessedness (5:3-12). Including those who are of a poverty of spirit, a personal mourning, a believing humility, and desperately hungering and thirsting for righteousness. What is the reason for their spiritual pangs and pantings? The standard to which they must be held accountable:

For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven (5:20).

That is unsettling for at least two reasons. First, Jesus told His audience they have to be holier than the holiest men they knew to enter the kingdom of heaven. Second, even the holiest men they knew were not entering the kingdom of heaven!

Pharisaic tradition had lowered the bar of righteousness so that sinners might actually feel they were righteous without a twinge inconsistency. They assiduously avoided placing themselves in the category of “sinner,” even incredulously asking Jesus’ disciples, “Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?” (Matt 9:11). Or accusing a once blind man, “You were born entirely in sins!” (John 9:34). Were they really any different? Well, they thought so. Pharisaic tradition instructed people to be those “who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt” (Luke 18:9). So our Lord begins His public ministry by disabusing them of such notions.

The Context of Chapters 5-6

Jesus gave six contrasts in 5:21-47 to illustrate the impeccable righteousness of God as:

Peaceful appreciation of each life, even those with whom you conflict.
Purity in thought and desire, even if your body is not involved.
Fidelity in marriage, even when you complete the protocols and paperwork for divorce.
Honesty in speech and commitments, even if you allowed yourself a loophole.
Sacrifice and suffering in love, even if people persecute or oppress you.
Universality in whom you love, even toward your enemies and those who hate you.

Or, in a word, perfect. “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (v. 48).

And the perfection of God’s standard is still the Savior’s focus into chapter 6. Except, instead of addressing self-righteousness in moral issues, He narrows upon religious ones. Every Pharisee then – and since! – should be sweating at this. Not only are you not as morally blameless as you think you are, but you are not even as religious as you think you are! Actually, your religion is hypocrisy (vv. 2, 5, 16). So, the Lord offers three examples to prove His point - notably, the three main acts of Jewish piety. He taught that true and righteous religion:

Is not giving for gratitude, but giving before God (vv. 2-4)
Is not praying as performance, but praying in private (vv. 5-6)
Is not fasting for fanfare, but fasting before the Father (vv. 15-17)

With each example, our Lord reproves hypocritical practices with the nature of true religion that is rewarded by our Father in heaven. It is no less a rebuke than chapter 5 and may be even more so, since we especially love to deny our depravity in our acts of devotion. And this is the context for the Lord's Prayer.

Our friend and mentor, Robert Murray M’Cheyne is reported to have said, "A man is what he is on his knees before God, and nothing more." That was Jesus’ point.

What and how we pray tells us who we are, in truth. Just ask this Pharisee (Luke 18:11-12). The Lord's Prayer is impossible for sinners. Just as we have no hope of exceeding the righteousness of a scribe or Pharisee (5:20), and even less hope of attaining the perfection of the Father (5:48), we have no hope of ever praying the Lord's Prayer with full integrity. And that is precisely the point. The Lord’s Prayer is a rebuke.

We will try to unpack our Savior's reproof a bit further this week - and unfold the refuge that we must find Him, lest we be forever barred from the Kingdom.

Do Not Lose Sight of Christ!

2011-08-19T06:00:00.000-07:00

For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified (1 Cor 2:2).

Great exhortations to preachers from a wise steward, Sinclair Ferguson, in A Preacher's Decalogue. Particularly, "Don't Lose Sight of Christ."

What do I mean? Perhaps the point can be put sharply, even provocatively, in this way: systematic exposition did not die on the cross for us; nor did biblical theology, nor even systematic theology or hermeneutics or whatever else we deem important as those who handle the exposition of Scripture. I have heard all of these in preaching . . . without a center in the person of the Lord Jesus.

Paradoxically not even the systematic preaching through one of the Gospels guarantees Christ-crucified centered preaching. Too often preaching on the Gospels takes what I whimsically think of as the “Find Waldo Approach.” The underlying question in the sermon is “Where are you to be found in this story?” (are you Martha or Mary, James and John, Peter, the grateful leper . . . ?). The question “Where, who and what is Jesus in this story?” tends to be marginalized.

The truth is it is far easier to preach about Mary, Martha, James, John, or Peter than it is about Christ. It is far easier to preach even about the darkness of sin and the human heart than to preach Christ. Plus my bookshelves are groaning with literature on Mary, Martha . . . the good life, the family life, the Spirit-filled life, the parenting life, the damaged-self life . . . but most of us have only a few inches of shelf-space on the person and work of Christ himself.

Am I absolutely at my best when talking about him or about us?

Great question for Saturday night sermon-review: Is this about Him or about us?

When Doctrine is Unsavory

2011-08-18T06:00:00.000-07:00

... and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus... (Acts 18:25)

When is the doctrine of God's Word unsavory? When it is taught absent personal zeal.

Doctrine without zeal is either like a sword in the hand of a madman, or else it lieth still as cold and without use, or else it serveth for vain and wicked boasting. For we see that some learned men become slothful; other some (which is worse) become ambitious; other some (which is of all the worst) trouble the Church with contention and brawling. Therefore, that doctrine shall be unsavory which is not joined with zeal.

- John Calvin, Commentary on Acts, 2:154.

An armed lunatic. An impotent craftsman. A wicked braggart. A slothful steward. An ambitious cleric. A contentious churchman.

Do not despise the zealous preacher... there are many options that are much worse.

Family Worship = Family Fun?

2011-08-16T15:45:00.001-07:00

Well, why not? In Second Thoughts on Family Worship, Jerry Owen outlines some thoughts on family worship:

Family Worship Isn't Required by the Bible (Owen explains what this means)
Family Worship, If Done, Is Not the Most Important Spiritual Thing You Do (the Church!)
Family Worship Should Be Delightful for Everyone

It is his last point that I found to be most helpful:

My biggest concern for parents [that] are gung-ho on family worship is the tendency for it to be very “serious” and therefore unengaging and often no fun for the kids. This means that the most “spiritual” time the family spends together, supposedly the most important, the time spent talking and learning about God, is in fact the time that is least like experiencing Him

Reread that last line with your Bible open to Psalm 16:11 (okay, just hit the link).

There is a reason kids loved to be around Jesus, and it wasn’t because he was lecturing at length about the Torah or the Five Points of Calvinism. I love the Torah and the Five Points, so I try to make them digestible to my three year old so she can love them too. Good news should feel like it. This might mean singing one verse of a song, or just one song. It means all sorts of things for different situations, for people of different ages, for parents with different abilities. We need to be open to the idea that less is more. Better one verse read, enjoyed and digested, than 30 painful pious lecture minutes.

Read the entire article here. As one who also loves Torah and the doctrines of grace, I am grateful for Owen's liberating counsel. I say it is liberating because my hunch is that many households avoid family worship owing to wrong conceptions of how they assume it must be conducted.

All parents - especially fathers - take encouragement that a time of family sanctity need not be a time of family severity. Family worship should be like the Gospel of Jesus... good news.

No Faith Without Struggle

2011-08-12T09:20:00.000-07:00

... and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor 10:5)

From vol. 1 of Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics:

It remains the duty of every person, therefore, first of all to put aside his or her hostility against the word of God and “to take every thought captive to obey Christ” [2 Cor. 10:5]. Scripture itself everywhere presses this demand. Only the pure of heart will see God. Rebirth will see the kingdom of God. Self-denial is the condition for being a disciple of Jesus. The wisdom of the world is folly to God. Over against all human beings, Scripture occupies a position so high that, instead of subjecting itself to their criticism, it judges them in all their thoughts and desires…

A Christian believes, not because everything in life reveals the love of God, but rather despite everything that raises doubt. All believers know from experience that this is true… There is not a single Christian who has not in his or her own way learned to know the antithesis between the “wisdom of the world” and “the foolishness of God.” It is one and the same battle, an ever-continuing battle, which has to be waged by all Christians, learned or unlearned, to “take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5).

Here on earth no one ever rises above that battle. Throughout the whole domain of faith, there remain “crosses” (cruces) that have to be overcome. There is no faith without struggle. To believe is to struggle, to struggle against the appearance of things.

- RD, 1:440-42. (HT: Kairos)

Good to remember when you're preparing to preach a verse like this. We never rise above the battle here, but it has been victoriously won. And one day, our striving will cease.

Prayer is an Invitation for Realignment

2011-08-04T06:00:00.000-07:00

Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven (Matt 6:9-10).

An excellent clarification of the purpose of prayer from Michael Lawrence in How Prayer Transforms Prep:

We live in a culture and age that values self-expression above all else. When we pray, we're keeping it real with God; we're telling him what's on our mind, what we're concerned about, or what we need. And that's a problem, because in Scripture pouring out our hearts to God is never the essential point of prayer. The point of prayer is realignment, as our hearts assume a posture of dependence and humility before God. Prayer places our needs in the perspective of God's sufficiency, our problems in the perspective of his sovereignty, and our desires in the perspective of his will. Prayer is not a monologue. Rather, prayer invites God to have the last word with us, and for his Word to shape and define us.

Read the entire article here.

What a necessary clarification! Prayer is not "keeping it real with God." Even a cursory reading of the Psalms and other biblical prayers demonstrate that these men were not just pouring-out their hearts. They were - as we are thereby instructed - realigning themselves under God in prayer. It truly is an invitation for Him to shape us.

Prophets Live in a Separate World

2011-08-03T06:00:00.001-07:00

He who hears, let him hear; and he who refuses, let him refuse; for they are a rebellious house (Ezek 3:27).

In his superb commentary on Ezekiel, Daniel Block offers this summation of Ezekiel's initiation into the prophetic office in chs 1-3:

Thus the curtain falls on the final act in the call of Ezekiel. He has been initiated into his office. The roles of the various participants in the ensuing drama have been delineated, and the prophet is left completely isolated from his compatriots. The recorded oracles that follow will confirm this alienation.

Ezekiel is never seen out on the street or in the marketplace. No hint of the daily life of the exiles intrudes the prophecy. The prophet lives in a separate world. Others may drift in and out of that world, but they remain merely shadows, with little direct contact. The only recorded conversation between prophet and audience comes by the command of Yahweh in 24:18-24.

Accordingly the book of Ezekiel is a spiritual diary of a man's encounters with God. His experiences move the reader to weep for him - though he never weeps for himself.

- The Book of Ezekiel, vol. 1, p. 161.

It is sobering. Ezekiel did not weep for himself nor his wife (see 24:18); though there was more than enough for him to shed a tear. We recall not only the loneliness of other prophets - like Micah (see 7:1-2) - but that of our Savior, who would likewise utter these words of warning to a recalcitrant generation, "He who has ears to hear..." (Matt 11:15).

The pathos of Ezekiel's call to prophetic ministry breathes of God's brilliant holiness, humanity's sinful sorrow, and unbelief's utter foolishness. And, for the prophet himself, the basically unenviable position of speaking the truth of God to a world that mocks it and its prophets. Anyone who stands to speak for the Creator will stand "in a separate world" alone.

Ministry - be it pastoral or otherwise - has actually little to do with other people, though people are the obvious arena. Ministry is successive encounters with God Himself. It is a commission to confront the shame of the world, without weeping for yourself.

Ministry is walking coram Deo - and only that - even as it is walking among others.

N.B., Daniel Block is one of the great Christian scholars of our generation, for which we give thanks. If he has written a commentary on a book, it is probably one of the best treatments you will find on the market. Judges / Ruth is excellent (and we eagerly await his forthcoming commentary on Deuteronomy in the NIVAC series).

Yet, Block's work on Ezekiel in NICOT is quite possibly the most satisfying commentary I have read on any book of Scripture. At nearly 2,000 pages of detailed exegesis, it is not only a trove of textual and biblical-theological information, but he has written it in a spiritually-mature and a self-consciously Christian prose. Those qualities are unfortunately rare in commentaries!

I do not often recommend commentaries to folks, but if you are a serious Bible-student and diligent reader, Block's two-volume Ezekiel will not disappoint.

A Tradition of Translation Timidity

2011-08-01T06:00:00.001-07:00

...not the smallest letter or stroke... (Matt 5:17)

When we confess plenary and verbal inspiration of Scripture, we mean to say that we care about the details. So, I have been long supportive of the textual suggestions given by noted text-critic and Greek grammarian, Dan Wallace. He repeated them recently in part 3 of a review of NIV 2011. Wallace offers a helpfully succinct summary of why passages like Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 are still in our English Bibles (when they really shouldn't be):

... along with virtually every other translation on the planet, Mark 16.9-20 and John 7.53–8.11 are found in the text, even though (almost) all the translators considered them to be inauthentic. But the NIV 2011 admirably puts them in a different font and has an in-text note to show that they are rather dubious. The reasons translations keep these verses in the text even when the translators themselves do not consider them authentic is due to a tradition of timidity. But with the publication of Bart Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus (2005), a popular book on the transmission of the New Testament text, the cat is out of the bag. Most biblical scholars—including evangelical scholars—have long recognized that these passages are most likely later additions. We do the living church no service by not fully admitting this fact in our translations. But because these two passages have a long history in printed Bibles and even in the manuscripts, they should not be eliminated altogether. Placing them in the footnotes would seem to be the best policy.

Read his entire article here. Though I am decidedly not changing English translations to NIV 2011, I am encouraged to hear of the progress being made in how these passages are treated.

In an earlier article, Wallace addressed this further in respect to Ehrman's "revelations" (i.e., his attempts to make money and gain prominence by sensationalizing what has been widely-known and public for centuries):

As I noted in my review in JETS [see The Gospel According to Bart], keeping these two pericopae in our Bibles rather than relegating them to the footnotes seems to have been a bomb just waiting to explode. All Ehrman did was to light the fuse. One lesson we must learn from Misquoting Jesus is that those in ministry need to close the gap between the church and the academy. We have to educate believers. Instead of trying to isolate laypeople from critical scholarship, we need to insulate them. They need to be ready for the barrage, because it is coming. The intentional dumbing down of the church for the sake of filling more pews will ultimately lead to defection from Christ.

Read Wallace, "My Favorite Passage That's Not in the Bible."

I have long been persuaded that Wallace's approach is discerning and pastorally necessary. Isolation is always the wrong approach; we must equip, educate and "insulate" the Church from the attacks of the evil one. You know, something like "destroying speculations" or preventing Christians from being taken "captive through philosophy and empty deception." Radical concepts, but maybe they're worth trying?

To be sure, every translation committee must consider "ecclesiastical usage." That is, how the Church has read the Bible. This is why, for example, ἐκκλησία (ekklesia) is consistently translated "church," rather than "assembly" or "congregation." Even though our word "church" is properly derived from κυριακός [kuriakos], "of the Lord" or "the Lord's" in 1 Cor 11:20; Rev 1:10 (the Scots are closest with "kirk"). William Tyndale had ἐκκλησία right the first time with "congregation."

Nor is ecclesiastical usage always improper. I, for one, am not eager to see ἱλαστήριον, hilastarion rendered by anything other than "propitiation" (e.g., Rom 3:25).

So though ecclesiastical usage has its place in Bible translation, it must not drive textual or translation decisions. Leaving passages like Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 in the same flow of the canonical text - just because the publisher does not want to handle the deluge of angry e-mails that are sure to follow their exclusion - just seems irresponsible.

Furthermore, this practice actually undermines our confidence in the inerrant text and undoes all that was accomplished in the Reformation's call to sola scriptura. For a vigorous application of "ecclesiastical usage" amounts essentially to a Roman Catholic view of binding authoritative tradition.

By not distinguishing these inauthentic passages - something like Wallace's footnote proposal - we are truly doing a great disservice. By offering a more transparent admittance of what we have known (for centuries!), we give greater witness to the text of Scripture and greater credibility to the preaching and teaching within the Church.

(NB, MacArthur's recent sermon, "The Fitting End to Mark’s Gospel").

Bowling with Calvin!

2011-07-30T13:38:00.000-07:00

... God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy (1 Tim 6:17)

We are prayerfully preparing for the rest and remembrance of the Lord with the church tomorrow, on the Lord's Day. In our congregation, we will also be ending our evening prayer meeting with... ice cream and games?

Of course. Just ask Calvin:

There is an old story, which may be apocryphal, that when John Knox came to Geneva to visit John Calvin at his home on the Sabbath, he was shocked to find Calvin engaged in lawn bowling. If the story is true, it may indicate that the theologian most devoted to Sabbath-keeping in history, Calvin, did not see recreation as a violation of the Lord’s Day, but as a part of the rest-taking or recreation that is to be part of this day. Recreation would never have been acceptable to Calvin if it had interrupted or supplanted the time devoted to worship on the Sabbath.

- R.C. Sproul, Defining the Debate, Tabletalk (June 2011)

It's good to remember that we are not Stoics or Ascetics. Our God has given us all good (and tasty!) things to enjoy, with thanks to Him.

And it's good to enjoy those things together.

Related Posts:

John Stott (1921-2011)

2011-07-28T06:00:00.001-07:00

John Stott passed into the presence of the Savior yesterday morning.

Certainly much more will be said regarding the impact of this great preacher of the Gospel in our generation, but we are indeed grateful for the life and ministry of John Stott. Now brother John enjoys the fruits of God's eternal grace, while we enjoy the fruits of God's grace in his life and ministry.

His last published words from a rare and accomplished ministry of writing:

As I lay down my pen for the last time (literally, since I confess I am not computerized) at the age of eighty-eight, I venture to send this valedictory message to my readers. I am grateful for your encouragement, for many of you have written to me. Looking ahead, none of us of course knows what the future of printing and publishing may be. But I myself am confident that the future of books is assured and that, though they will be complemented, they will never be altogether replaced. For there is something unique about books. Our favorite books become very precious to us and we even develop with them an almost living and affectionate relationship. Is it an altogether fanciful fact that we handle, stroke and even smell them as tokens of our esteem and affection? I am not referring only to an author’s feeling for what he has written, but to all readers and their library. I have made it a rule not to quote from any book unless I have first handled it. So let me urge you to keep reading, and encourage your relatives and friends to do the same. For this is a much neglected means of grace. . . . Once again, farewell! (The Radical Disciplepp. 136-137)

(HT: JT)

Though he is dead, he still speaks... may that continue for generations!

For more information:

Carson on M'Cheyne: Pastor-Theologian

2011-07-27T06:00:00.000-07:00

Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching... (1 Tim 4:16)

Why does D.A. Carson recommend Robert M'Cheyne? (See previous post).

First, he typifies a host of ministers who were scholar-practitioners, pastor-theologians, serious students yet fervent evangelists. The bifurcation between scholar and pastor that cripples so much of ministry today was not for him.

Second, he brought piety and serious study together in unashamed union. So much of the Western tradition of study magnifies dispassionate distance from the subject. Certainly we need the careful listening to the text that avoids mere subjectivism. But our aim should not be to become masters of the text but to be mastered by the text.

Third, M’Cheyne was passionately committed to reforming the church by the Word of God, and did all he could to promote a broad, deep, and reverent grasp of Scripture. By his standards, so much ecclesiastical ministry today seems misfocused or even frivolous.

So I recommend M’Cheyne—and not just M’Cheyne, but a host of pastor-theologians who manifest similar values. They will inform our minds, warm our hearts, and steel our wills.

Read Carson's entire recommendation of M'Cheyne in "Overlooked Shapers of Evangelicalism," pp. 77-79.

It may be that so many Christian minds are left ill-informed, so many Christian hearts are cold, and so many Christian wills are un-steeled, because our pastors are no longer theologians.

May God confound that satanic division of scholar and pastor and equip a generation of churchmen to reject frivolity for "a broad, deep, and reverent grasp of Scripture." Christians, these are the pastors for which we must be praying!

Carson on M'Cheyne: Study and Piety

2011-07-26T06:00:00.000-07:00

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart(Deut 6:5-6)

When D.A. Carson was asked, "Whom would you name as someone whose contributions have been overlooked?" His answer? Robert Murray M'Cheyne! (See this post and that one, from last week).

Carson explains further:

Where M’Cheyne excelled was in his mix of serious study and eminent piety. While still a theological student in Edinburgh, he met regularly with Andrew Bonar, Horatius Bonar, and a handful of other earnest ministers-in-training. The purpose of these informal meetings was to pray, to study, and to work through Greek and Hebrew exercises—disciplines M’Cheyne preserved throughout his short life. This group of students took the Bible so seriously in their living and preaching that when the eminent Thomas Chalmers, then Professor of Divinity, heard of the way they approached the Bible, he said, “I like these literalities.”

- In "Overlooked Shapers of Evangelicalism," Southern Seminary Journal (Spring 1999): 78.

I have found M'Cheyne's Memoirs so invigorating and challenging for the same reason - "serious study and eminent piety." What God has joined together let no man separate.

May the tribe of "literalities" increase!

Sproul on Difficult Passages and Doctrines

2011-07-25T06:00:00.001-07:00

In a post last week, On Apologizing for God, we affirmed DeYoung's wise correction on whether Christians may dislike Scriptural doctrine; specifically, the doctrine of Hell.

The answer, of course, is no! And that is a good answer, as far as it goes. But, what exactly are we to do when we confront scriptural a passage or doctrine that initially does not sit well with us?

Though it is not rocket-science, outlining a proven-method can be quite helpful. And we find one from R.C. Sproul in chapter 3 of The Soul's Quest for God.

Here are three excerpts (pp. 61-62) introduced by my questions:

How should we respond to passages and/or doctrines that we initially dislike?

A word of advice I often give my seminary students is this: As you study the Bible, take special care to mark the passages you find difficult to accept. That is, mark the passages you don't like. Then give special attention to them. Closer scrutiny may reveal that you simply failed to understand the meaning of the text.

But what if we find that our understanding is, in fact, correct?

If you don't like what the Bible says, there is either something wrong with the Word of God or something wrong with your thinking. By isolating these texts you have a quick and easy way of discovering where your thinking is out of sync with the mind of Christ. You know exactly where you need to repent.

How have you practiced this in your own life and ministry, R.C.?

While in seminary I had a card on my desk that read: You are required to believe, to teach, and to preach what the Bible says, not what you want it to say.

I consulted the card frequently, especially when I struggled with the doctrine of predestination. Over the years, a pattern developed. First I would be convinced of the truth of the biblical teaching I didn't like. Then I would see the sweetness of those truths so that I delighted in them rather than despised them.

Classic Sproul, fun, simple, and helpful. Fun, because it is hard to imagine an R.C. Sproul who "struggled with the doctrine of predestination" - oh, how I would love to go back and talk with that student!

But it is even more helpful because treating our difficulties with Scripture is quite simple:

Study
Repent
Delight

If you regularly bristle at any particular passage or doctrine, then there is certainly a breakdown in #'s 1, 2, or 3 - or all of the above.

Admittedly, the journey from #1 to #3 is often times long and arduous - and we will probably spend our entire lives on that journey with more than one passage - but it is nonetheless a journey worth taking. Why? At the end is the joy of knowing and loving our triune God as He really is in Himself.

NB, The Soul's Quest for God is a lesser-known work of R.C. Sproul. However, during this recent Q&A, Sproul remarked that he particularly labored-over this book and "poured his soul" into it. Thus far we have not been disappointed, especially with the frequent application of one Jonathan Edwards!

There are great deals to be had ($2!) at the Amazon Marketplace.

Where Would Jesus Be on Sunday?

2011-07-22T06:00:00.000-07:00

Summer Sundays always tempt Christians with other distractions and activities. And they encourage us to underestimate the significance of regular corporate worship. We may therefore be helped here by simply asking, "Where would Jesus be on Sunday?"

And, thankfully, B.B. Warfield has given us a good answer:

If ever there was one who might justly plead that the common worship of the community had nothing to offer him it was the Lord Jesus Christ. But every Sabbath found him seated in his place among the worshipping people, and there was no act of stated worship which he felt himself entitled to discard.

Even in his most exalted moods, and after his most elevating experiences, he quietly took his place with the rest of God’s people, sharing with them in the common worship of the community. Returning from that great baptismal scene, when the heavens themselves were rent to bear him witness that he was well pleasing to God; from the searching trials of the wilderness, and from that first great tour in Galilee, prosecuted, as we are expressly told, “in the power of the Spirit”; he came back, as the record tells, “to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and” — so proceeds the amazing narrative — “he entered, as his custom was, into the synagogue, on the Sabbath day.”

“As his custom was!”

Jesus Christ made it his habitual practice to be found in his place on the Sabbath day at the stated place of worship to which he belonged. “It is a reminder,” as Sir William Robertson Nicoll well insists, “of the truth which, in our fancied spirituality, we are apt to forget — that the holiest personal life can scarcely afford to dispense with stated forms of devotion, and that the regular public worship of the church, for all its local imperfections and dullness, is a divine provision for sustaining the individual soul.”

“We cannot afford to be wiser than our Lord in this matter. If any one could have pled that his spiritual experience was so lofty that it did no require public worship, if any one might have felt that the consecration and communion of is personal life exempted him from what ordinary mortals needed, it was Jesus. But he made no such plea. Sabbath after Sabbath even he was found in the place of worship, side by side with God’s people, not for the mere sake of setting a good example, but for deeper reasons. Is it reasonable, then, that any of us should think we can safely afford to dispense with the pious custom of regular participation with the common worship of our locality?”

Is it necessary for me to exhort those who would fain be like Christ, to see to it that they are imitators of him in this?

- B.B. Warfield, Selected Shorter Writings (P&R, 1970), 1:421–422

(HT: TR) As we prepare for this Lord's Day, we are well-advised to remember that "stated forms of devotion" do not undermine "the holiest personal life." In fact, they serve it!

Even our Lord Jesus - God Incarnate - attended to and participated in the common worship of His locality. Jesus would be with His local church.

Dilbert onTwitter (and Facebook)

2011-07-21T10:11:00.000-07:00

And now for something completely different...

(HT: Challies)

Like all great comic-strips, this one gets to the center of pressing existential questions in contemporary society. Here, that peculiar validation and assurance people seem to receive from their "followers" or "friends" (neither label, by the way, is an accurate description).

As for us, we remain quite content to live as if we don't exist.

If You Die Wrong...

2011-07-20T06:00:00.000-07:00

Behold, now is “the acceptable time,” behold, now is “the day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2).

Continuing from yesterday's post, here's more from M'Cheyne's letter to "one awakened":

I was in a very wicked family to-day, where a child had died. I opened my Bible, and explained this verse to them over the coffin of their little one: “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment,” Heb. ix.27. Solemn words! we have only once to die, and the day is fixed.

If you die wrong the first time, you cannot come back to die better a second time. If you die without Christ, you cannot come back to be converted and die a believer,—you have but once to die. Oh! pray that you may find Christ before death finds you. “After this the judgment.” Not, after this purgatory. No further opportunity to be saved: “after this the judgment.” As death leaves you, so judgment finds you. If you die unsaved, you will be so in the judgment. May I never see you at the left hand! If I do, you will remember how I warned you, and prayed for you, and besought you to come to the Lord Jesus.

Come to Jesus,—He will in nowise cast you out.

- Bonar, Memoir and Remains of the Rev. Robert Murray McCheyne, pp. 277-78.

M'Cheyne's phrase is hauntingly true and helpfully simple - "If you die wrong the first time, you cannot come back to die better a second time." One error that cannot be undone is the error of "dying wrong."

I further find M'Cheyne's words pastorally sharpening - warn sinners not to die wrong. Now, there's a simple mission statement that'll get you out of bed in the morning!

Do not die wrong, come to Jesus!

What Has the World Done for You?

2011-07-19T06:00:00.002-07:00

The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever (1 John 2:17).

What we may most appreciate of Robert Murray M'Cheyne is how his own communion with God translated into such faithful evangelism. The following is from a letter he wrote in September of 1842, to "one awakened":

Surely you have lived long enough without Christ. You have despised Jesus long enough. What has the world done for you, that you love it so much? Did the world die for you? Will the world blot out your sins or change your heart? Will the world carry you to heaven? No, no! You may go back to the world if you please, but it can only destroy your poor soul. “She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.”—1 Tim. v.6. Read these words in your Bible, and mark them; and if you go back, that mark will be a witness against you before the great white throne, when the books are opened.

Have you not lived long enough in pleasure? Come and try the pleasures of Christ,—forgiveness and a new heart. I have not been at a dance or any worldly amusement for many years, and yet I believe I have had more pleasure in a single day than you have had all your life. In what? you will say. In feeling that God loves me,—that Christ has washed me,—and in feeling that I shall be in heaven when the wicked are cast into hell. “A day in thy courts is better than a thousand.”—Ps. lxxxiv.10.

- Andrew Bonar, Memoir and Remains of the Rev. Robert Murray McCheyne (1894), p. 277.

Read his whole letter.

M'Cheyne boldly identified sin and unbelief - "You have despised Jesus long enough" - while tenderly describing the comforts of Jesus - "Come and try the pleasures of Christ." Such is a model of faithful evangelism that is consistent with the Savior and His apostles. As we grow in our own enjoyment of Christ, our evangelistic witness will inevitably become less of a programmatic function than the overflow of our pleasure in Him. And, with that, be delivered in the aroma of authenticity.

For Related Posts:

Piper on Robert M'Cheyne

Remembering Robert Murray M'Cheyne

Tough Guys and Fluff Guys

2011-07-18T06:00:00.000-07:00

Therefore, I was not vacillating when I intended to do this, was I? (2 Cor 1:17a)

As we have mentioned on more than one occasion, we have not ceased to appreciate Carl Trueman's wit and wisdom. And "There's Tough and Then There's Fluff" was no exception.

Thinking over this story taught me an important lesson: there are tough guys and there are fluff guys. The fluff guys, rather like eunuchs, are often quite brilliant. They also (like eunuchs) know what should be done, how it should be done and who should be doing it but are sadly not actually capable of doing it themselves. The tough guys may not be perfect and may never achieve all that they hope to achieve. Calvin managed what? Maybe 70% of what he really wanted in Geneva? But they do actually do some reformation, they have the backbone to sit in meetings, say unpopular things to the face of those who oppose them, and take the consequent hits; they take personal risks with their careers for the sake of making a difference; they do not simply talk about reformation from the safe distance provided by the internet. Talk is fun; the internet is a hobby; only action makes a difference.

Read Trueman's entire post.

This reminded me of the divisive criticism of pastors and leaders, which can so easily take hold in our hearts and - if left unchecked - through an entire congregation. How easy it is for us to ask "Why hasn't he done more about ________?" Or, "Doesn't he care about Scripture, why doesn't he address ___________ ?" And yet we launch such assaults on character from a "safe distance" to the trenches of real reformation work. Such terms as "Monday morning quarterback" come to mind.

So, this is a reminder that before we criticize or confront our leaders - either in our church or in a wider sphere of influence - we need to keep several matters in mind. First, we may not know what our subject actually wants to achieve. We also may be overlooking the ferocity of the opposition which he may face. Thirdly, we may underestimate how much courage it actually takes to say unpopular things, especially with the knowledge that "hits" will come. And, in the end, we may best serve the cause of Christ simply by praying that the Lord will strengthen our leaders to remain faithful and persistent amid the heat of real action.

NB, for more from Carl Trueman:

See his blogs and articles at Ref21.
Minority Report & Wages of Spin; collections of Trueman's essays
Reformation: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow; a great application of the Reformation for the modern evangelical church.
Look-out for a forthcoming book on the use of confessions in the church!

Prayer Groups are Pure Hedonism

2011-07-15T06:00:00.001-07:00

And when they had prayed, the place where they had gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak the word of God with boldness (Acts 4:31)

John Piper on corporate prayer groups:

God's hand is not shortened by the size of the prayer meeting.

There are hundreds of you who don't regularly pray with other believers... you have just considered it to be unimportant... I just want to plead with you that you are cutting yourself off from extraordinary blessing. And I would like you to have it... It's pure Christian hedonism.

Many of us who are indeed "chicken by nature" gather here each Lord's Day at 5pm - including this week! - to pray for boldness and for the world. Come and receive.

On Apologizing for God

2011-07-14T06:00:00.001-07:00

The judgments of the LORD are true; they are righteous altogether [יַחְדָּֽו; lit., "at the same time"] (Ps 19:9).

Related to the inerrancy of God, there is wise correction from pastor Kevin DeYoung in "Is it Okay for Christians to Believe in the Doctrine of Hell But Not Like It?" DeYoung narrows on the recurring issue of whether Christians may dislike what they believe the Bible teaches - especially in relation to hell.

To admit that God says hard things is admirable honesty. But to profess our dislike for what he does or wish that he were a different kind of God who did things in a different way–even if we come around to accept these ways in the end–is not the right kind of humility. It’s one thing to say to unbelievers and skeptics, “I struggled with the same questions you’re asking.” It’s another to throw God under the bus, admitting “I don’t like hell anymore than you do. I’d take it out of the Bible if I could. But it’s in there, so I can’t deny it.”

God is good and his ways are always right. It is a measure of our maturity that we not only affirm the truth of God’s word but rest in the goodness and rightness of it. Christians should have anguish in heart at the thought of eternal suffering, but we should also see the glory of God in the Bible’s teaching on eternal punishment.

Read DeYoung's entire post here.

Unfortunately, on more than one occasion I have heard an otherwise faithful pastor say just what DeYoung hypothesized, "I'd take _______ out of the Bible if I could." I'm sure they do not understand the blasphemy of such a statement - implying they are wiser than the Author of the Bible.

A refresher from Theology 101 - neither you nor I are wiser than God. Admit challenges in understanding. Struggle with difficulties. Pray for spiritual illumination. Seek help from pastors and teachers. But never, ever, ever apologize or wish away any portion of Scripture. All of His Word is completely righteous... every jot and tittle.

Resisting the Inerrancy of God

2011-07-13T06:00:00.000-07:00

All Scripture is inspired by God [θεόπνευστος; lit., "God-breathed" or "breathed-out by God"] and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16).

The more we hear from Sinclair Ferguson, the more we appreciate his incisive pastoral and theological wisdom. Neither did he disappoint in the recent Q&A with RC Sproul & Ligonier Teaching Fellows. At the end of the session, as they discussed why people resist the doctrine of Scriptural inerrancy, Ferguson made this biblically-informed observation:

It's amazing, isn't it, how many people will despise the inerrancy of Scripture who don't actually read the Scripture? And if you challenge them just on that simple point, then what lies behind their resistance to the inerrancy of Scripture is their resistance to the inerrancy of God at the end of the day.

That is not only insightful, it is helpful. People (even professing Christians) resist inerrancy because they know exactly what it implies - the clear authority of God over their lives. In other words, when you hold to "errancy," you get what every sinner ultimately desires - vague religious sentiments that allow you to fashion a deity who affirms your own (sinful) desires.

This should be in the back of our minds as we contend for inerrancy; it is ultimately about God Himself, and therefore, the Gospel. People resist an inerrant Bible, because they reject the authority of the God who has breathed-out the Bible in truth. Fortunately, we know a Savior who has come and risen to reconcile them to the inerrant God they resist.

Watch the whole Q&A:

The Lord's Day is a Demand to Repent

2011-07-09T15:59:00.000-07:00

“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Exod 20:8).

Great point to reflect upon from John Piper as we approach the Lord's Day. On the issue of why so many seem to regard the priority of the Lord's Day and the sabbath command as a burden, Piper responds:

The reason that so many people feel it as a burden is partly that we have so much leisure, we don't feel the need for the sabbath rest; but more important, I think, is the fact that not many people really enjoy what God intended us to enjoy on the sabbath, namely, himself. Many professing Christians enjoy sports and television and secular books and magazines and recreation and hobbies and games far more than they enjoy direct interaction with God in his Word or in worship or in reading Christian books or in meditative strolls.

Therefore, inevitably people whose hearts are set more on the pleasures of the world than on the enjoyment of God will feel the sabbath command as a burden not a blessing. This is what John says in 1 John 5:3, "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome." The measure of your love for God is the measure of the joy you get in focusing on him on the day of rest. For most people the sabbath command is really a demand to repent. It invites us to enjoy what we don't enjoy and therefore shows us the evil of hearts, and our need to repent and be changed.

- "Remember the Sabbath Day to Keep It Holy"

In a climate of leisure and recreation - and that being in the Church, as much as outside it - the command for direct communion with God is indeed "a demand to repent." Given my own propensity to enjoy the world before the Savior, I am grateful for the weekly call to trust that what He offers is more than any other.

Related Posts:

We Are Not the First Readers

2011-06-27T15:05:00.000-07:00

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers (Eph 4:10).

Presuming objectivity appears to be a leading occupational hazard for biblical scholars. For example, consider this recent reflection from a well-known NT commentator and scholar:

As a professional biblical scholar, I always try hard to resist falling into such 'ruts,' though I am much aware of my fallibility in this respect. My goal, at least, is always to let scriptural exegesis more than presuppositions, 'functional nonnegotiables,' or theological traditions determine my conclusions.

I actually laughed out-loud when I read that line, "As a professional biblical scholar..."! There's even a little " :)" in the margin of the book to mark the moment of hilarity.

What tickled my funny-bone is that the guild of "professional biblical scholar" is wedded to more presuppositions and "nonnegotiables" than any other demographic of Bible-readers. Do not misunderstand, holding tenaciously to presuppositions is essential to the scholar's job security, advancement, and plain ol' r-e-s-p-e-c-t from their peers. Just because their presuppositions do not appear in any creed or confessional statement does not mean they are objective (as they strangely often assume).

So, for this reason, I was so refreshed to read the following in the introduction of Thomas Schreiner, Galatians (my copy arrived on Saturday to great fanfare!):

Amazingly, Gordon Fee writes from quite a different perspective, saying that his goal is to help people read Galatians 'as if the Reformation had never happened' [citing Fee, Galatians [2007), p. 1). On the one hand, Fee's goal is laudable. He wants to read the text on its own terms. On the other hand, it is remarkably naive and ahistorical, for he pretends that he can read Galatians as a neutral observer of the text apart from the history of the church. I am not suggesting that we must read Galatians in defense of the Reformation, nor am I denying that the Reformation may be askew in some of its emphases. But it must be acknowledged that none of us can read Galatians as if the Reformation never occurred. Such a reading is five hundred years too late. Nor can we read Galatians as if the twentieth century never happened or apart from the works of Ignatius, Irenaeus, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, and the like. We can consider whether Reformation emphases were wrong (I will argue that they were not), but what we cannot do is read Galatians as if we were the first readers (p. 21).

Preach it, brother! It takes courage for a "professional biblical scholar" like Schreiner to write that paragraph. Courage he likewise showed in the preface, when he wrote:

I know it is out of fashion in some circles, but it seems to me that Martin Luther and John Calvin were substantially right in their interpretation of the letter and that their pastoral application of the letter still stands today (p. 13).

I can already tell, this commentary is going to be worth every penny.

But more to the point, not only can we never read Galatians as if we were the first readers, but we should not even lament this fact! We are privileged to stand on the shoulders of two millennia of faithful Christian teachers who yet lead and equip us by their writings.

They are gifts to the Church, and gifts not to be implicitly despised under the guise of presumed objectivity.

Israel: Careful Divine Crafting

2011-06-24T06:00:00.000-07:00

He has brought us to this place and has given us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey (Deut 26:9).

Once again from Beitzel's Moody Atlas (see preceding posts: 1, 2, & 3):

God prepared the Promised Land for His chosen people to the same degree that He prepared His chosen people for the Promised Land. Although various biblical accounts and theological statements rightly describe how God set about preparing the Israelites to become the special benefactors of His grace by reason of inheriting the land, the following discussion will underscore that it was a certain kind of land that was selected and prepared by God, positioned at a particular spot, and designed to elicit a specific and appropriate response. In fact, God's craftsmanship has been vividly manifested both in the character of His chosen people and in the characteristics of His chosen land. He has been at work in both history and geography. A most helpful insight is lost for one who fails to realize that the Promised Land itself has been the object of careful divine crafting (p. 27).

Even though it goes without saying, it is often helpful just to say it: our God leaves nothing to chance. The Land of Promise is at the very center of the world (here) and devoid of nearly all natural resource and defense (here) in order to fulfill His design. Specifically, that the people of promise might come to trust the God who had promised.

I was struck by that point again while reading Deuteronomy 26 - 29 this week. In this lengthy enumeration of the blessings and curses of the Mosaic covenant, Israel was reminded that their flourishing in that Land would never be owed to their own "military prowess nor environmental ingenuity," but their faith in their Covenant Lord.

If God's people trusted their God who redeemed and delivered them,

The LORD will establish you as a holy people to Himself, as He swore to you, if you keep the commandments of the LORD your God and walk in His ways. So all the peoples of the earth will see that you are called by the name of the LORD , and they will be afraid of you (28:9-10)

However, if they trusted in their own ability or ingenuity,

The LORD will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down, a nation whose language you shall not understand... It shall besiege you in all your towns until your high and fortified walls in which you trusted come down throughout your land, and it shall besiege you in all your towns throughout your land which the LORD your God has given you (vv. 49, 52; emphasis added).

Many, many instructions are given to us about the Lord's providential ordering of our lives today. Maybe some further thoughts on them later.

Israel: The Land that Fosters Faith

2011-06-23T09:17:00.000-07:00

We continue our thoughts from yesterday's post on God's sovereign strategy in the Promised Land. Specifically, what was the salvific intention behind Israel's geography?

Again, Beitzel's observations are helpful:

Unquestionably during the biblical period, the destiny of this tiny but strategic land was largely one determined by outsiders... [survey of ANE Empires].

Consequently, someone living in this land unavoidably was faced with a combination of geographic and military hostility. Possessing meager physical and economic resources and being inescapably caught in a maelstrom of political upheaval, one residing in these surroundings, even under ideal circumstances, might have been able to eke out the barest of existence. Life in this land would have been simple, mystifying and precarious. In the final analysis, survival in such terrain depended upon neither military prowess nor environmental ingenuity... In a word, this was a land that fostered faith.

- Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, pp. 26-27.

Israel: The "Land Bridge" at the Center

2011-06-22T06:00:00.000-07:00

Now the LORD said to Abram, 'Go forth from your country... to the land which I will show you' (Gen 12:1).

"From Dan to Beersheba" (e.g., Judges 20:1; 1 Sam 3:20) is a land of admittedly small significance in terms of its size, natural resources, and even its inhabitants from ancient times up to the present-day. A very unlikely place for the Holy Land. Yet, as we posted yesterday, Scripture testifies that it lies at the very center of humanity and the world.

Barry Beitzel, in his superb Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, comments on the counter-intuitive prominence of the Promised Land:

At first blush, therefore, this stretch of geography would seem to be an unlikely candidate to become the center stage for a divine drama that would eventually affect all of humanity.

Upon closer examination, however, one discovers that this land mass is poised in an amazingly strategic position. Actually the Promised Land represents the only intercontinental land bridge that connects Africa with Asia and Europe, and that links the Indian Ocean, via the Red Sea, with the Atlantic Ocean, through the corridor of the Mediterranean. Since high antiquity, mighty powers with international political and economic aspirations have been positioned at either end of the bridge. What happened in Palestine was almost always a reflection of what was occurring or had just occurred in one of Israel's neighboring countries. It was on this land bridge that east met west (pp. 25-26).

Why did our God select this land as the stage for His redeeming purposes? It is at the intersection of humanity; a land bridge connecting society to society and - by His sovereign design - reconnecting men to their God.

NB: You cannot do much better than Beitzel's Atlas. We have found it a trustworthy companion in study, as well as travel to Israel itself.

And, even better, Beitzel gave it a full revision and update two years ago as The New Moody Atlas of Bible Lands. You can read reviews of this new edition by Todd Bolen (biblical geography scholar) and Kevin DeYoung (pastor).

Jerusalem on the Big Screen

2011-06-21T09:48:00.000-07:00

Jerusalem is a new IMAX film, slated to release in 2013. You can view the short trailer online or below. It takes some sweeping vistas from Caesarea, to the Dead Sea and Masada, down the Jordan to Galilee, with the Capernaum synagogue on its northeastern shore, and over the Mount of Olives to Jerusalem itself. Some great shots - and memories, from our own visit in 2007.

And, despite the implicit comment at the introduction to the above-trailer, Jerusalem still is the center of the world.

Jerusalem | Filmed in Imax 3D from JerusalemGiantScreen on Vimeo.

Note: If you are able, save and plan to visit Israel. It is indispensable to seeing much of the biblical narrative in "full color." Or, as Todd Bolen has remarked, "Go on a Study Tour of Israel. I wouldn’t say that one cannot teach the Bible without such a study, but neither would I say that a one-legged man cannot snow ski."

Schedule It on Saturday

2011-06-17T06:00:00.000-07:00

I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day... (Rev 1:10)

Since we brought up the topic of Father's Day yesterday, would you kindly consider joining a new movement? Right now, it's just me and the family I shepherd, so there is plenty of room for grassroots activists! For the time-being, we're calling this movement "Schedule it on Saturday."

Specifically targeting Christians, this is largely a movement of awareness; that the smorgasbord of American celebrations (i.e., Father's Day, Mother's Day, etc.) may be observed on Saturday. Practically, it does not really involve much additional planning, you just... schedule it on Saturday.

Just move it up one day. Even if you risk disappointing "Dad" on Father's Day (and, equally, "Mom" in May). In fact, that simple disappointment might actually preach the Gospel (a la Matt 10:37-39; Luke 14:26-27).

As you can see, our platform at "Schedule it for Saturday" is simple: the first day of the week has been named by God's Word as the Lord's Day. And what a testimony to the Gospel of Christ to prohibit other recreations or celebrations from crowding-out all that we give to and receive from our Father (Mal 2:10) on His day.

We have yet to secure a lobbyist yet, but I know a few, so we'll see where this goes.

Fathers are Shepherds

2011-06-16T08:52:00.000-07:00

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph 6:4).

By God's providence and grace, I am a pastor (or, a shepherd). Equally by God's providence and grace, I am a father... soon to be two times over, DV. Are these two related? Inextricably.

That point is the excellent observation made in this week's Kairos Journal, Fathers are Shepherds. Particularly, how the context of Paul's exhortations to families shapes their very function:

Paul did not separate private family life from public church life. Theologically, the health and unity of the Church is directly related to the health of the marriages and families within the Church. After all, local churches are simply congregations of everyday people: husbands and wives (5:22-33); children and parents (6:1-4); and, in the early church, slaves and masters (6:5-9). If these relationships are dour or unruly, the Church will suffer. Thus it makes sense in a letter where Paul is so concerned about Church unity that he would speak so directly to fathers.

... Furthermore, as every Christian father guides his own family, he will be helping his own church understand what it means to be in Christ. Indeed, every Christian father is a shepherd.

Exactly. Every dad is a pastor. And how every father pastors his home is not insignificant to how he contributes to the growth of the Gospel in the church of which he is a member. So this Father's Day, we Christian fathers are exhorted to take seriously our pastoral ministry among our family. Dads, shepherd your family for His Church.

Adam was a Real Man

2011-06-15T11:49:00.000-07:00

Just ask Seth, Enosh, and Kenan.

Kevin DeYoung debunks the recently popular notion that Adam (and therefore, Eve) was not a literal person, by insight-fully stating the obvious: he's the first person in a genealogy of real people (see, for example, 1 Chron 1).

Are we really to think that any Jew reading 1 Chronicles (or any Christian up until very recently for that matter) would have read the genealogies as anything other than true historical truth? The Chronicler’s whole aim is to recount history. And everything in the Israelite worldview underlines the importance of God’s dealing in real time and space. Nothing suggests that 1 Chronicles is mixing in some fantastic über-man with blood and guts real men.

That kind of genealogy wouldn’t begin to make sense, not to the Jews and not to us. It’d be like starting your family tree with the Jolly Green Giant and Paul Bunyan. It’d be like writing a biography that begins with Anakin Skywalker and his son Luke and then goes on to his son Hugh Hodge and his son Charles and his son Archibald Alexander. Not very convincing.

And not very encouraging for a bunch of exiles trying to figure out who they really are.

Read DeYoung's entire post here.

Along with a helpfully provocative line - "It'd be like starting your family tree with the Jolly Green Giant and Paul Bunyan" - DeYoung has exposed the underbelly of this issue. When you start to pull on the "minor" threads of Scripture, many not-so-minor things begin to unravel.

So, the next time someone mentions their disbelief in a literal Adam, I'm going to turn to Luke 3:23-38 and ask, "If the last man in this genealogy is figurative, what are we to say about the first?"

(NB, for more on this issue, see Coppenger, Epicycles and Phlogiston: Fanciful Flights from the Historical Adam and Jesus)

Reflections on Preaching the Entire NT

2011-06-14T11:42:00.001-07:00

Continuing the theme of our previous post, here are some other reflections on John MacArthur completing the exposition of the entire New Testament.

Fred Butler, 1969-2011:

This past Sunday, June 5th, 2011, John MacArthur accomplished something that is extremely rare in Christendom. He finished preaching through the entire New Testament, verse by verse.

To our knowledge here at Grace, this hasn't been done in over a hundred years or more. The one person that comes immediately to my mind is John Gill, who preached through both the OT and NT, but that was in the 1700s.

It was an emotional moment. John's last sermon was on the longer ending of Mark, chapter 16:9-20. It was a encouraging message that explained the confidence we can have in the integrity of the Scriptures.

The message can be downloaded here: A Fitting End To Mark's Gospel.

The Sunday evening before that, John did a Q&A with the audience. He opened by sharing a bit about his thoughts and feeling with finishing the NT. A number of the questions asked had to do with his ministry. It, too, is worth the download to listen. Q&A Part 58

John is on sabbatical until August, but I have heard him mention on a few occasion that he may return to preaching through the Gospel of John, because he felt he didn't cover it as thoroughly as he liked the first time around. I believe it was the first major book he preached through. Others have mentioned they said he may do some character sketches of lesser known folks in the Bible. What ever the case, I am excited to see where he goes next.

And Cripplegate, If I were John MacArthur...

If I were John MacArthur, I’d keep doing the only thing I know how: dream big and preach the word. And I would start in the Old Testament. I’m not kidding. I don’t mean I’d ask God for 130 more years of life to go wormy again. I’d go bird’s-eye-view, chapter by chapter til the Rapture. And that’s what Iain Murray would call the 2nd volume of my biography (assuming he too inherited genes from Methuselah).

On the other hand, if I were John MacArthur I wouldn’t be typing this post, I’d be preparing for my next mission, perhaps brushing up on my Hebrew. What would be the expositor’s equivalent of colonizing Mars? We’ll see soon enough. His scheduled six week vacation time has dawned, and his return is already being awaited with Thessalonian anticipation.

And a simple reminder from JT, Preaching the Entire New Testament:

You can listen to all 42 years worth of his expositional preaching online for free. This is a gift to the Church, both in its original delivery and its modern availability.

Praise be to God.

Oh, and I providentially received my copy of this book yesterday and accordingly stayed up too late reading it. Good stuff. Maybe some excerpts and extracts will follow...

All the Words of the Book

2011-06-13T13:02:00.001-07:00

At the risk of contradicting our immediately preceding post, we would be terribly amiss note to observe the significant moment last week. John MacArthur, after forty years of faithful exposition, completed the entire New Testament by concluding the Gospel of Mark, "The Fitting End to Mark's Gospel."

Our friend, Travis Allen, recaps that moment:

When John MacArthur said “Amen” at the end of his prayer last Sunday night, he had just finished his exposition of Mark’s Gospel. The evening was the final punctuation on a monumental body of work—the verse-by-verse exposition of the entire New Testament. After praying, John looked up at his congregation, and with a meek grin said, “There we are.” The church erupted in applause and a standing ovation, which he quieted in short order so he could thank everyone for allowing him to minister to them for more than four decades.

We gain a better perspective on this achievement in the most recent edition of The Master's Seminary Journal, Spring 2011 (22/1). Presented as a festschrift for Pastor John with articles from a variety of contributors, from Steve Lawson to Al Mohler, one of the most interesting tidbits was offered by Dr. Mayhue's introductory editorial. He outlines a short list of men who have actually preached through the entire New Testament and put their preaching into print:

16th - John Calvin
17th - Matthew Henry
18th - John Gill
19th - Alexander MacLaren, Joseph Parker, B.H. Carroll
20th-21st - J. Vernon McGee, Warren Wiersbe

After two millennia of Christian history, when you are among a list of no more than ten other preachers, that is significant. Especially when that list includes expositors like Calvin and Henry. In other words, this is no mean feat.

In his post, Travis also marked the release of John MacArthur: Servant of the Word and Flock by Iain Murray,

In the book, Murray accurately portrays John MacArthur’s passion for theology, and his courage in proclaiming it publicly. Armed with an insatiable curiosity and a zeal for the glory of Christ, John has read extensively and deeply. What he’s learned has enabled him to lead the charge in some of the most important theological battles of our time. Murray pulls back the curtain on his thinking about doctrinal controversy and personal confrontation, and actually chronicles some of the better-known episodes.

If Murray's work is anything like the sketch he provided in the introduction to Truth Endures, this newest biography should prove to be an exceedingly helpful work. We eye the mailbox daily in anticipation of our copy.

In view of this grace-empowered achievement, we hasten to add that Pastor John is far from done. Lord willing, with many more years of preaching ahead, with the continued spreading of his influence globally through alumni of The Master's Seminary (a band of brothers over 1,000 strong!), and with more writing - the completion of MacArthur New Testament Commentary is slated for 2014 and a systematic theology (Christian Doctrine: The Persons, Purposes, and Plans of God) is scheduled for 2013 - there is much yet for him to do.

So, in prayerful anticipation of all that the Lord may yet plan for Pastor John, we give thanks that like the days of Josaiah, "he read in their hearing all the words of the book of the covenant which was found in the house of the Lord" (2 Kgs 23:2).

Not Really a Big Deal

2011-06-10T05:30:00.000-07:00

We live in an era where almost every event and individual is over-sold and over-hyped. Most events - and most people, for that matter - are really not that important. Including you and me. (My sneaking suspicion is that Facebook has had something to do with this, but I have to consider it further). Perspective on ourselves and our age is available by the bucketful in church history.

Carl Trueman in The Price of Everything, does not disappoint in reflecting on our age and its need of perspective:

We live in a Warhol world where everybody wants their fifteen minutes of fame, preferably while still here to enjoy it. You can see this even in writing style. Too many theologians think that the first person singular pronoun is like a main verb: no English sentence is properly complete without one. It derives from overestimating the importance of the here and now; or, to put it more pointedly, the importance of ourselves and our contributions.

Church audiences are apparently the same: we want our man or our woman of the here and now to be the next Luther.

Too true. So what are we to do, Carl?

And that is why church historians play such an important role and our cynicism is such a boon. Church history keeps things in perspective. Through reading the texts and studying the actions and events of the past we can truly say that we have seen it all before. Thus, whatever it is that the latest guru is suggesting, it definitely will not work as well as expected, probably will not work at all, and anyway it will be a hundred years or more before we can say whether it made a real difference or not.

Read the rest of his article here.

And read Church History! Maybe wade-in with the archives of Christian History & Biography? It's not just good for the sake of intellectual growth, it's good for your humility and your perspective before the providence of God.

Holiday or Holy Day?

2011-06-09T11:01:00.000-07:00

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who 1stays with you. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy (Exod 20:8-11).

Observe the sabbath day to keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work,but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant or your ox or your donkey or any of your cattle or your sojourner who 1stays with you, so that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to observe the sabbath day (Deut 5:12-15)

Great reflections in this week's Kairos Journal, Holiday or Holy Day?:

Do people work that they might play or play that they might work? Do they toil to accumulate the wherewithal for vacation, or do they vacation to recharge their batteries for the work set before them? Which is the priority? A cursory look at the Fourth Commandment suggests that work is central; one labors for six days and rests on the seventh. This is not a grim description of the human condition but a biblical norm, an ideal if you will.

In his classic work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Max Weber argued that Calvinists, Lutherans, and the cultures they shaped were keen on living consecrated lives, lives exhibiting the marks of regeneration. These Protestants had little use for the sacred/secular distinction—even shop men and homemakers had holy vocations. They understood the principle of deferred pleasure, so savings and the accumulation of capital were normal. They believed that shirking their work was an affront to the Lord who gave them these tasks. They might even pass up some of their vacation days. (Of course, many Americans work themselves to death for materialistic reasons, and their vacations are increasingly hedonistic.)

...for the God-called servant, there is nothing particularly merry in excessive rest. After all, there is God-given work to do.

We are increasingly persuaded that much spiritual strength is sapped from the Church, not only because devotion to work often rises to the idolatrous, but because the type of rest she often pursues is simply carnal.

Calvinist Crossing

2011-06-04T10:40:00.000-07:00

We have been less than diligent with our blogging as of late, but hope to remedy it in the near future. Until then, if the two of you still read this, check-out these articles that we have found stimulating and helpful as of late:

A Case Against the Repatriation of Archaeological Artifacts - A good opinion piece from the folks at BAR on an issue that is not irrelevant to future biblical studies and that is unfortunately increasingly clouded by sentimentality than practicality. Hallote identifies what has seemed painfully-obvious to many of us for quite some time:

Many nations of origin for artifacts quite simply no longer exist
Many nations presently requesting repatriation are quite simply too unstable to be entrusted with artifacts (case-in-point, "Arab Spring").

God's Been Hunting Me Down - Sobering testimony and sound counsel by Prof. David Murray. Namely, 7 S's:

Sleep more,
Slow down,
Stay at home,
Serve the local church,
Socialize more,
Switch off, and
Seek the Lord.

Read Murray's story, pray for him, and learn from his experience. These exhortations would be well-heeded even for us who did not stare eternity in the face last month.

Arousing Ourselves to Death - Excellent piece by Russell Moore on the grievously pervasive influence of pornography among us. I too resonate with his experience in counseling and was exhorted to be more proactive on this issue in my shepherding.

The Pleasures of Reading in an Age of Distraction - New work by Jacobs, that is now in my "wanted" file. For related practical advice, see Starke's Advice for Slow Readers (which is good advice for every reader).

A Pastoral Case for the Filioque Clause - Having recently reviewed this theological point for teaching on God's Triunity, I appreciated Starke's article and his concluding point:

The filioque clause is not so heavenly minded that it is no earthly good. It is useful for Christians who must preach, sing, and think hard about God who is Three-in-One and has saved us and is keeping us until the Son of God, Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, comes again.

Purpose-Driven Christian Hedonism?

2011-05-31T10:08:00.000-07:00

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth (2 Tim 2:15).

With John Piper's recent affirmations of the ministry and teaching of Rick Warren, many have begun to reconsider previous critiques "Purpose-Driven" industrial-complex. Mind you, it is an industry. Is a reassessment warranted? Is Rick Warren actually closer to Christian orthodoxy and orthopraxy than many of us have thought? Tim Challies, for one, says "No." And I am grateful for his courage to say so, because I whole-heartedly agree with him.

Challies has done a great service in his recent post, Thinking about Rick Warren & John Piper. It is a wise articulation of my exact concerns regarding this entire relationship.

For example, what are we to make of Piper's apparent endorsements of Warren?

I do not think he has given us an accurate understanding of Rick Warren or his ministry. It has given us a very partial understanding, one based on a very limited scope of conversation. I do not think there is any malice here or any intent to deceive. It’s just reality as I understand it.

What are we to make of Warren's apparently correct assertions to John Piper?

One of the most common critiques of Rick Warren and one of the most important is that he is something of a chameleon. There is a kind of pragmatism to him where he will be A and Not A depending on the context. I have little confidence that in a different context Warren would have answered the questions the same way. I am not saying that he outright lied to Piper, but simply that his track record shows that he adapts to fit the context.

Warren has been lauded in the secular media for speaking for a long time to a large group of Jewish leaders without ever using the name of Jesus. He is now being lauded by Calvinists for affirming the doctrines of grace. He has received praise from Roman Catholics.

...There is still a pronounced gap between what Warren says in this interview and what he says elsewhere. And there is just as large a gap between what Warren says here and what his ministry bears out. Saying all that he said and affirming all that he affirmed is not enough; he also needs to show it. But he has not done that. The reason everyone was so surprised that Warren is Reformed is that he has never given us any reason to imagine such a thing.

What are we to make of Rick Warren as a Bible-teacher?

Throughout The Purpose Driven Life he consistently and unapologetically tears verses from their context and applies them haphazardly, relying on a long list of translations and paraphrases to do so. Examples abound and would probably number in the hundreds; these are very well documented and very widely known.

...We do not want men to learn from Warren how to preach, how to use Scripture! He does not treat the Word of God as the very words of God. He can speak of his indebtedness to Edwards and Spurgeon and others, but his preaching shows very little of their influence.

I likewise hasten to affirm Challie's statement regarding John Piper, "I love and admire John Piper. And yet I find that I disagree with his conclusion." Read the entire article here.

I firmly believe that future Christian reflection will vindicate the continued and necessary criticism of Rick Warren's teaching as unbiblical and dangerous to the Church. Likewise, notwithstanding my deepest gratitude for John Piper's contribution to the Church in our age, I firmly believe that history will deem his recent affirmation of Warren to be a major lapse of judgment in an otherwise Christ-centered and Bible-saturated ministry.

In view of Warren's representations to John Piper, I was reminded of the simple reminder given by Al Mohler in his address at this year's Shepherd's Conference, "You do not remain orthodox just by declaring yourself to be so."

So, in sum, we must be grateful for that reminder. By His grace, we reapply ourselves to the labor of ministering the Word rightly for His glory in the Church and the world. Our God expects of us to actually be orthodox and show it. In sincere Christian love, we do hope that Rick Warren will one day actually do that.

Productivity in the Church

2011-05-26T10:15:00.000-07:00

...so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen (1 Pet 4:11).

One of my favorite blogs is What's Best Next by Matt Perman, a director at DesiringGod (you would be well-served to save it for your reader). Today, in a guest post, Loren Pinilis gets to the heart of ministry in the local church... and in a really convicting way.

In Church Productivity: Organizational Effectiveness and Not Personal Effectiveness, I believe Pinilis identifies the center of the New Testament teaching on "gifts," contrary to what may be wide-spread misunderstanding as to their purpose and function.

“Having a heart” for a particular area of ministry is a signpost pointing you to an area where you may be the most productive. Passions are often God’s way of showing you how you can contribute to the greatest organizational effectiveness of the church.

But the performance of the body is the final measure of success — not our fulfillment. Not our individual accomplishments.

If the pursuit of our lives is to bring God glory, let’s make sure we’re doing it in a way that honors him and his body. Let’s do what will help the church the most — asking first “what needs to be done,” rather than simply “what would I like to do.”

Read the rest of this post here.

By asking what God has graciously enabled ("gifted") me to address in my local church - more often than what would I prefer to do for personal fulfillment - we get much closer to a biblically "productive" church and, even more, to Him being glorified in all things through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Truth Matters Conference: Sept 1-4, 2011

2011-03-29T11:35:00.000-07:00

Another announcement and update for those who may be interested...

Grace Community Church and Grace to You are collaborating on a new conference on September 1st - 4th: Truth Matters Bible Conference.

Ever desired a Shepherd's Conference for the rest of us? Well, this appears to be such an opportunity! It will feature sessions with John MacArthur, as well as Phil Johnson and Don Green.

Personal Note: Phil and Don were the Elders of the fellowship group, GraceLife, in which I was a member and served as a Bible study leader. They are both skilled workmen, who have made lasting imprints on my own life and ministry. Assuredly, if it were not for the long shadow of John MacArthur, they would be more widely-known and appreciated. So, I am grateful to see their participation in this conference. (Resources from their weekly ministry are available at The Gr aceLife Pulpit).

More details regarding cost, schedule, and registration for Truth Matters are here. It would not be wise to invest in every conference opportunity available, but it seems it may be equally unwise to not at least consider this one!

Reformation Heritage Book Sale

2011-03-24T09:50:00.000-07:00

Speaking of good deals on good books, Reformation Heritage is having a $5 Book Sale, with some real gems that include:

Jeremiah Burroughs, The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment. If you have ever complained, you may want to read this.

John Owen, The Mortification of Sin. If you have ever sinned, you may want to read this.

Joel Beeke, The Soul of Life: The Piety of John Calvin. If you have ever thought John Calvin (and, hence "Calvinism") was cold, detached, and unloving, you may want to read this.

William Still, The Work of the Pastor. If you have ever wondered what a pastor or elder is actually supposed to do, you may want to read this.

Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Faith on Trial. If you have ever wondered why Christians suffer, you may want to read this.

Anyway, you get the idea. More titles for just $5 to peruse here.

Christian Focus Book Giveaway

2011-03-23T10:50:00.000-07:00

Go check-out the Free Book Giveaway by our friends at Christian Focus.

It includes volume 1 of Kelly's Systematic Theology...

And the recent reprint of Owen's The Priesthood of Christ!

Who knows, the next winner could be you.

You Must Belong to Proclaim

2011-03-22T10:00:00.000-07:00

Having touched on these very matters in a recent sermon, Purifying the Holy Church, I greatly appreciated James White's wise counsel for apologists and evangelists (White is a skilled apologist with Alpha & Omega Ministries).

Bottom-line? If you do not belong within the church, you have zero credibility "out there" and, even more, you are sinning and putting yourself in grave spiritual danger. I agree with White that this is the missing component and weakness to numerous American apologetic and evangelistic groups, which greatly undermines their effectiveness.

(FYI, I tried to get the video to fit this blog, but it wouldn't work. Watch it full screen at YouTube here).

This Just In... Bell "Unbiblical" and "Unreliable"

2011-03-16T13:46:00.000-07:00

I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears (Acts 20:30-31).

Paul know the wolves would come, but I doubt he would have expected them to be unmasked and "owned" on MSNBC. Breaking news... Rob Bell is unbiblical and historically unreliable! Yes, from MSNBC!

I wanted to stand and applaud for journalist Martin Bashir. What we have here is modern media shedding its usual bias and actually unmasking one of Satan's servants trying to disguise himself as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14). Here is how Bashir winds-down the interview:

You’ve just indicated though one of the problems with this book, which is, in a sense you are creating a Christian message that’s warm, kind, and popular for contemporary culture, but it’s frankly – according to this critic – unbiblical and historically unreliable. That’s true isn’t it? What you’ve done is you’re amending the Gospel – the Christian message – so that it is palatable to contemporary people who find, for example, the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach. So here comes Rob Bell, he’s made a Christian gospel for you! And it’s perfectly palatable and much easier to swallow. That’s what you’ve done isn’t it?

That, my friends, is what theologians call "getting schooled." Mr. Bashir, you get the TPC Award for Best Journalism from a Cable Network.

Watch the whole interview - best thing you'll see on cable tv all day. Read the transcript here.

For other round-ups of the Bell debacle, please see:

Al Mohler, We Have Seen This Before: Rob Bell and the (Re)Emergence of Liberal Theology

Ligon Duncan, Speaking Seriously and Sensitively about Hell

Kevin DeYoung, God is Still Holy and What You Learned in Sunday School Is Still True

Fight the Despising of the Lord's Day

2011-03-02T09:18:00.000-08:00

If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot
From doing your own pleasure on My holy day,
And call the sabbath a delight,
The holy day of the LORD honorable,
And honor it, desisting from your own ways,
From seeking your own pleasure
And speaking your own word,
Then you will take delight in the LORD,
And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth;
And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father,
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken (Isa 58:13-14).

I find it universal amongst Christians - and to be clear, that includes myself - to struggle with honoring the Lord's Day. We often excuse it with seemingly reasonable explanations, such as "I've had a busy week" or "Corporate worship is early" or "The kids are slow in the morning," etc. This can create a tension within us, namely, why would the Lord give us something that seems so difficult?

For that reason, I found Al Martin's obvious explanation of the root of our excuses in "The Lord's Day Sabbath" so convicting and helpful:

When I get up on the Lord’s Day morning, I not only get up as a new creature in Christ, with a new heart, indwelt by the Spirit, the law of God written internally, so that I have an internal motivation to obey the Law in its external revelation. That Law that says “Remember the Sabbath" [Exod 20:8]. And there’s a part of me that says, "I delight in the law of God in my inward part" [Rom 7:22].

But, I have this other principle in me and I begin to have a mind that goes off in the directions of worldly concerns and feels an irritation as to why I have got to be present at Sunday School and Sunday morning and then to… what is that? It is the actings of your remaining sin that would lead you in the direction of ignoring in some degree, despising, disregarding, or even profaning, and carelessly observing the Sabbath.

And you need to recognize that indisposition and deal with it the same way you would if you woke up next Lord’s Day morning, saw your neighbor’s wife and a horrible though of lusting after her flashed across your mind. What would you do with it?! Would you entertain it? I hope not! You would cry-out, “Lord Jesus! Scour my heart of that horrible adulterous thought toward my neighbor’s wife!”

Or, if you suddenly felt an impulse to hop in your car and go to a shopping mall and engage in an half hour of shoplifting and violate the command, “You shall not steal” [Exod 20:15]. What would you do with those thoughts that rise up out of that horrible muck of your remaining sin? I hope you would resist it with all your power.

So, when you get up next Lord’s Day, and you feel an indisposition to honor the Lord on His day, recognize where it comes from and deal with it accordingly in the strength and in the power of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We struggle with the rest and worship given to us on the Lord's Day, not because it is a hard thing, but because we are hard people. Our excuses amount to manifestations of "the actings of your remaining sin."

It is our sin that would have us believe there are better gifts in the world than in obeying and honoring the Lord on His Day and with His people. It is rooted in the same lie that led Adam and Eve to obey the serpent, and their desires, believing that was better than obeying the Lord. They were wrong and so are we.

And I believe that is a clarification that is so helpful, because we have a great Savior who saves His people from their sin. We have the resources in the Lord to rebuke and fight by faith the lies of sin with the truth of God's Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.

In commanding a day of rest and worship the Lord is placing upon us an onerous burden, but offering a gift to us as His people. Or as the Puritans described it, "the market day of the soul"!

Related Posts:

Holding the Line for the Gospel

2011-03-01T09:30:00.000-08:00

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6).

Providentially, related to our recent series (and one that should continue shortly) is the current firestorm over the yet-to-be-released book by hipster and so-called "pastor," Rob Bell, Love Wins. I was surprised over the controversy because it is not as if Bell's universalism has been well-hidden. I was present when Bell "preached" in Los Angeles a couple years ago and I would attest to any and all opponents that Rob Bell is a false teacher and a heretic.

If those titles still hold any meaning at all, Bell must be unequivocally anathematized by the entire Church. It seems that Paul's warnings of the "dogs" and "evil workers" (Phil 3:2) are aptly applied to Rob Bell personally, unless he repents.

In any case, this controversy was kicked-off by Justin Taylor, "Rob Bell: Universalist?" and was furthered by Kevin Deyoung, "To Hell with Hell" and "Two Thoughts on the Rob Bell Brouhaha." Both of these men have faced the ire of the Gospel-less segments of "evangelicalism" (note the oxymoron !). For that reason, I appreciated the call for intercession on their behalf by Prof. David Murray, "Pray for Justin and Kevin", specifically petitioning the Lord:

1. Have peace and assurance in the heat of the battle
2. Enjoy restful nightly sleep
3. Communicate wisdom and grace in all their responses
4. Avoid losing their tempers in public (and private)
5. Receive understanding and support in their congregations and workplaces
6. Be protected from overt and covert assaults on their ministries and characters
7. Experience the daily relief of happy relationships with their wives and children
8. Win souls to Christ as they have opportunity to speak the truth in love
9. Hold the line.

This seems most appropriate given Taylor's admitting in an interview with CNN (!), "To be honest, it was a pretty rough weekend.”

Praise God for Taylor's integrity, clarity, and courage in the "public arena." He continued in the same interview:

We’re talking about the big things here, things that have been historically defined as orthodox... I have a high degree of confidence in what God is saying and what we can understand.

...This isn’t a peripheral academic debate. What Rob Bell is talking about gets to the heart of Christianity.

... It is not preaching the gospel as found in the New Testament... The New Testament is pretty clear if someone preaches a false gospel… that we are to reject that and have nothing to do with them.

Again, praise the Lord and His Spirit's enabling Justin to speak with clarity and simplicity in a CNN interview. May his tribe increase!

Please pray for more strength to be given to leaders like Justin Taylor and Kevin DeYoung - not to mention all the other shepherds contending earnestly for the faith once for all given to the Church (Jude 3). May the true Gospel and the orthodox Church prevail against all opposing philosophies and experience the victory her Head has promised (Matt 16:18)! Let's continue to "hold the line."

NB - 30 years ago today, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, "The Doctor," went to be with His Savior and Master. (For more on MLJ's life and work, plus a rare video-interview, see Taylor's post "Martyn Lloyd-Jones"). It is with thanks to God that we recognize today Lloyd-Jones mantle of fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus Christ has not perished from the Church. Our Lord is a faithful Shepherd.

The Lord Is in the Room: An Evangelism Encouragement

2011-02-28T06:00:00.000-08:00

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Rom 1:20).

...they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them (Rom 2:15).

We interrupt our current series with a brief, but related, encouragement for personal evangelism. At the most recent Men's Theology Breakfast at our church (which concurrently meets here, here, and here every other Friday at 6am, according to this schedule) we discussed "The Necessity of Scripture," which included an encouraging and edifying discussion related to personal evangelism. Especially in relation to "general revelation":

The knowledge of God's existence and character also provides a basis of information that enables the gospel to make sense to a non-Christian's heart and mind: unbelievers know that God exists and that they have broken his standards, so the news that Christ died to pay for their sins should truly come as good news to them.

- Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 123

I have found no other truth more energizing for personal evangelism than this: Every one on the planet knows there is a holy God before whom they are guilty. All religions and philosophies are at their root, vain attempts to assuage the unrelenting guilty conscience of sinful men and women.

This is really liberating news for those of us burdened to share the good news of the only Savior! We do not have to start from scratch. Nor do we have to move conversations to an awkward starting-point to initiate the launch sequence for our stock evangelism method. We can also skip the logical hoop-jumping and philosophical gymnastics that come with assuming the unbeliever's mindset is actually rational. We just have to speak to our hearers as if they know there is a holy God before whom they are guilty and as if He too is in the room (both of which happen to be true!). How much easier and less daunting (and more biblical!) to begin with the universal knowledge of God and sin that is expressed by every individual?

For example, I recently received a haircut from "Chatty Cathy." Cathy expressed her frustration with "kids these days" and especially their perverse behavior on various social media (being a non-Facebooker, I was unable to personally relate). Yet, I do believe in the existence of human perversity and, thanks to my copy of the Bible, I know why it is so. So, rather than proceed with a discussion about kids, social media or any other less-controversial issue - hoping that the "sin" word may fortuitously pop-up - I began to discuss what I know the Lord, who was also there at the barbershop, thought about it and what Cathy intuitively knew as well.

So, here's how the conversation progressed:

born

Needless to say, I was grateful for a rather fruitful "haircut." I left praying for the Gospel to penetrate Cathy's heart, as well as for an opportunity to follow-up as my hair will inevitably grow back.

Yet, to our immediate point, our conversation was neither awkward nor artificial; in fact, we began with a topic that she brought-up. Also, I did not capitulate to the world's sinful perspective nor avoid confrontation by wrongly assuming that we can understand anything apart from its relationship to our holy Creator. I only had to ask, since the Lord is in the room, what does He think about what Cathy just said?

I would not consider myself a gifted evangelist (I'm barely competent with interpersonal communication at all, to be quite honest), but I have found help in the reality of "general revelation." Just ask yourself, what does the Lord think about that? If someone complains about anything, that is an opportunity to talk about sin or justice. If someone expresses joy or gratitude for anything, that can be an opportunity to discuss His patience and undeserved kindness. We could go on and on...

To be clear, I do not believe in watering-down the offensive exclusivity of Christ (see immediately previous posts) nor in avoiding Christ's lordship and His command to repent and believe (e.g., Acts 17:30-31). However, I also believe that we do not have to make personal evangelism more difficult than it already is. As well intended as many evangelical "methods" are, they can also come across as manipulative, contrived, "gimmicky," abstract, and even artificial to the point of downplaying the relevance of the Gospel and turning conversations into minor speeches that are given indifferent to the actual person with whom you are speaking (that's true even of those methods that claim to be The Way).

I just prefer to proclaim the Person of Christ to real people, than to try and trap my hearers into a pre-fabricated "sales pitch." Not only does it seem more faithful to the Gospel and to Christian love... it's also, well, easier.

For more on this perspective on personal evangelism, see the "What do you say when... ?" series by those helpful folks at The Briefing. Or, just remember to ask yourself: "Since God is in the room, what does He think about that?" And pray for the courage to say it.

A Definite Death, 1: Three Reasons for Particular Redemption

2011-02-24T10:37:00.000-08:00

... the church of God which He purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28).

Previous posts in this series:

We have been discussing the exclusivity of Christ for salvation and eternal life in His Father. Namely, He is the Savior and the only Savior of the world. But how does His saving work, Jesus' death and resurrection, relate to the entire world? Unfortunately, that is not a question that has received a uniform answer.

Two main responses have been given on the extent or intent of Jesus' death: (1) that He died to provide salvation for all men, its effect being contingent on their faith, or (2) that He died to effectually secure the salvation of all who will truly be saved. The former being "hypothetical universalism" - that is, He hypothetically died for the whole world, though only those of faith grasp this universal "gift" - and the latter being "particular redemption" (or "definite atonement") - that is, He died with the intention of saving all whom the Father had chosen before the foundation of the world.

To be clear, this is not a debate over the value of Jesus' death, that is a non-issue. It is infinitely glorious and immeasurably valuable to save whomever the Lord would have predestined to be saved in Him! Rather, we are asking what was the Father's purpose in sending His Son? What was the Son's intention in voluntarily laying-down His life? And what have been the effects of His death and resurrection?

Personally, I used to think this was more of a secondary issue and not one to make too much fuss over. I am increasingly persuaded, however, that this doctrine is at the very heart of the Gospel, is the doctrinal guardian of the atoning work of Christ, and is the very basis for personal assurance and confident evangelism in the Christian life. So, I guess you could say I no longer think it is secondary!

I would offer six reasons why I believe that particular (or definite) redemption is the true and necessary teaching of God's Word. (How 'bout 3 today and 3 more tomorrow, to keep this in the "blogging" range?) However, please do not confuse what follows with the best exposition of this doctrine. I would suggest the following resources to go deeper:

John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ All subsequent writings have really been footnotes to Owen's work. It is not for the faint of heart, but it will reprove the faintness of every reader's heart! An attendant classic is J.I. Packer's "Introduction" (ca. 1958) to Owen's work, which is definitely worth reading - plus its shorter and in "normal" English!

R.B. Kuiper, For Whom Did Christ Die? R.B. Kuiper was a professor at Westminster Seminary (1933-52) who had a way with articulating great truths in an accessible fashion. His Glorious Body of Christ is a classic and so is this work, which many point to as the deciding-point after reading.

Roger Nicole Professor Nicole, who recently went to be with His Savior (who definitely redeemed him) has been a modern stalwart on the biblical teaching of the atonement. See links to several of his articles here, as well as an excellent three-part series on the atonement at the 1989 Bethlehem Pastor's Conference here (his accent makes it really fun!). A compilation of Nicole's writings is available in Standing Forth

Justin Taylor has posted a helpful outline in Primer on Limited (or Definite) Atonement.

John MacArthur has recently treated this doctrine in an accessible and biblical (!) fashion. See his "The Atonement: Real or Potential?" and "The Complexity of Divine Love."

So, that's at least a few things to read this weekend. And for now, here's three reasons why I am convinced Jesus' atonement was particular and definite:

1. Jesus’ commission from His Father had a particular or definite purpose. Why did the Father send His Son? To "gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad" (John 11:52). And "to purify for Himself a people for His own possession" (Titus 2:14).

If we take seriously the relationship of the Father and the Son - the very unity of God Himself ! - then we must not remove the purpose of Jesus' death from His Father's commission, which He stated Himself as "not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (John 6:38). So any conception of Jesus' death that is at odds with the Father's sovereign electing will must be rejected as introducing a grievous (and foreign) divide within our Triune God.

Or, put another way, how could Jesus die for those whom the Father never gave Him (and whom the Spirit would not call nor regenerate)? If Jesus is His Father's Perfect Son (and the second co-equal and co-eternal Person of the Godhead) then His death must be consistent with the Father's election. "Hypothetical Universalism," however unintended, introduces a grievous conflict within God's unity.

2. Jesus' mission had a particular or definite point of relationship. Jesus is said in Scripture to have explicitly given His life for "His people" (Matt 1:21), "for many" (Matt 20:28), "for the sheep" (John 10:11), "for his friends" (John 15:13), "the church of God" (Acts 20:28), "the body... the church" (Eph 5:23-26), and as Paul assuredly declares "for me" (Gal 2:20). Did Jesus die to make all men "savable" or did He die for "His people"? We cannot over look the impact of these and many other like statements in Scripture. Jesus gave Himself explicitly for His people. These texts cast much aspersion on the idea that Jesus died for a general potential, rather than a particular people. If Jesus did not explicitly die for particular individuals, how could Paul ever say He "gave Himself up for me" (Gal 2:20)?

3. Jesus’ death and resurrection was a definite substitution. Closely related to #2 above, how often do we read in the New Testament that Jesus died "for us" or "on our behalf"? This is a precious truth of the Gospel, that Jesus is our substitutionary atonement, our vicarious Savior, and His death was a penal substitution. He is the One who "knew no sin" and yet became "sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor 5:21).

How can Jesus be the substitute for a potential or hypothetical mass of people? Even more, for those who will never be saved? Was Jesus the substitute for those who become forever lost? If that is the case, then He is no one's substitute! This is why I say that "definite atonement" stands sentry at the very heart of the Gospel. Without it, the whole basis of our salvation - the assurance that Jesus has suffered God's wrath on our behalf - is undone and must be revised.

In fact, I would suggest that the rejection of this doctrine is a proximate cause to evangelicalism's continued loss of penal substitution and slide toward universalism. Reject "particular redemption" or "definite atonement" and, eventually, you will lose the Gospel entirely.

That's enough for now, I'm sure. Three more definite reasons for definite atonement tomorrow.

Universal Exclusivity, 2: From Every Nation

2011-02-23T06:00:00.000-08:00

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6).

Previous posts in this series:

There is another reason that we must confess Jesus to be the only Savior of the world. And that is the observed effect of His death in the worship of heaven. We encounter it in the transcendent vision of heaven's praise given to John the Apostle, particularly the song of the 24 elders and four living creatures before the Lamb:

Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth (Rev 5:9-10).

Note the language of international achievement in their singing! Jesus did not purchase in His death the nations of the West who presuppose something of a Judeo-Christian heritage. Nor was He slain for Israel alone. Jesus voluntarily poured out His blood for men "from every tribe and tongue and people and nation" to make them a new kingdom unto God.

Jesus is the "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29) and will deservedly receive the praise from all the nations of the earth eternally. His work was for men and women from every nation.

The exclusivity of Jesus' work and the Gospel is the very thing that establishes its universality. If He is the only Savior of the world, then He is the only way to be saved from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. The Lord God excludes no one from the reach of His grace because of their ethnicity, culture, nation of origin or language.

It is with grief, therefore, that we must acknowledge the Church is not always faithful to the "universal religion" with which she has been entrusted:

Christians should breathe the spirit of a universal religion. A religion which regards all men as brethren; which looks on God, not as the God of this nation, or of that church, but as the God and father of all which proposes to all the same conditions of acceptance, and which opens equally to all the same boundless and unsearchable blessings...

It must be very offensive to God, who looks on all men with equal favor (except as moral conduct makes a difference), to observe how one class of mortals looks down upon another, on account of some merely adventitious difference of rank, color, external circumstances, or social or ecclesiastical connection.

- Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans [1880], p. 351

When we are encumbered with ethnic, racial, or national overtones, we betray the Gospel. Somewhat counter-intuitively, it is the "hard edge" of the Gospel's exclusivity that supports the Church's mandate to universal love for men. We serve the Savior and Lord of the world, who died for those under death from Adam and those separated into varying languages, tribes, nations, and peoples.

This, of course, raises a question that is often poorly answered - at least in many American evangelical circles. Did Jesus die for every individual in the entire world - without distinction - or was His death more particular and more definite? Far from being a tertiary point of theological trivia, it is a fount of faith, assurance, worship, and stands as a sentry at the very center of Gospel truth. But, we'll try to deal with that tomorrow.

Universal Exclusivity, 1: For Adam's Race

2011-02-22T06:00:00.000-08:00

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6).

Previous posts in this series:

Christianity's Glorious Hard Edges

Can people be saved any other way than through the work of Christ on the cross? Are there other provisions or means by which people may be brought into relationship and eternal life with God the Father? These questions are asked of the Church in every generation and require definitive answers.

Scripture teaches that Christ's atonement on the cross is the universally exclusive means of salvation and receiving the promise of eternal life in God Himself - He is the only Savior for the entire world.

The scope or reference for Christ's death and resurrection is the human or Adamic race, mired in sin and condemned to death. Or as Wesley put it in "And Can it Be?":

He left His Father’s throne above
So free, so infinite His grace—
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race.

Two - out of many - passages that establish the universal reference and necessity of Jesus' death and resurrection are Romans 5:17-19 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-23.

First, in Romans 5:17-19, we observe that Jesus' saving work corresponds to the universality of Adam's "work." That is, just as Adam's sin led to death for everyone united to him (i.e., "through the one"), so Jesus' death leads to life for all united to Him (i.e., "through the One"). , but in v. 18 Paul intentionally and provocatively parallels "condemnation to all men" and "justification of life to all men" to establish Jesus' saving work as the means of redemption not merely for Jews, or any other segment of humanity, but for the entire race of Adam - all of humanity.

Note: this text does not teach "universalism," that all men will be saved by virtue of Jesus' death, whether they believe in Him or not. That would make for a rash reading. The "all" is specifically defined in v. 17 as “those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness…”, which implies that some will receive and some will not. Not to mention that Paul has already established the reality of God's just wrath (e.g., 2:5-8), as well as faith as the means of justification (e.g., 3:28; 5:1).

Secondly, in 1 Corinthians 15:20-23, we comparably observe that just as death came by Adam, resurrection-life comes by Jesus Christ (v. 21). As in Romans 5, Adam's progeny is specifically marked by death ("in Adam all die"), whereas Christ's progeny is specifically marked by life ("in Christ all will be made alive"). Again, we must note some similar cautions against a superficial reading, that life is given to those who are "in Christ" and implied exclusion in the phrase "those who are Christ's" (v. 22).

Again, Jesus' saving death and resurrection is universally exclusive - the only means of salvation for the entire race of sinners descended from Adam. Positively stated, Jesus Christ is God's answer - His only answer - for the human need of redemption. Because He "bled for Adam's helpless race," none are excluded by their ethnicity, nation or culture. That is one of the hard, but glorious edges of the Gospel.

Christianity's Glorious Hard Edges

2011-02-21T06:00:00.000-08:00

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6).

Over the past two weeks, I have had the opportunity to be encouraged by and to encourage in the fundamentals of biblical Christianity, that is, the exclusivity of salvation and truth in Christ. In his new (and well-done) The Christian Faith, Michael Horton describes the stripes of philosophical opposition many have posed to the Gospel truths:

Ours is not the first age to have found the doctrine of everlasting punishment difficult to accept. In recent decades, contemporary views have been classified as (1) pluralist (all religions are paths to God), (2) inclusivist (salvation comes by Christ alone but not exclusively through explicit faith in Christ), and (3) particularist (also identified, usually by critics, as exclusivism or restrictivism, holding that salvation comes only through faith in Christ).

In "Catechesis, Preaching, and Vocation" (in Here We Stand!), Gene Veith remarks on how evangelicals have in recent years stumbled over the severity of Christ's exclusivity

Classical Protestantism has always taught that Jesus Christ died to save sinners, but many contemporary evangelicals are downplaying sin, salvation, and the atonement. The new gospel replaces salvation with therapy. Sin gives way to self-esteem; the doctrine of justification by faith is replaced with the doctrine of positive thinking. This new version of Christianity recasts the Bible from the Word of salvation into a step-by-step manual for happy living. The hard edges of historic Christianity - the Bible's stern moral demands, unpleasant doctrines such as hell, Christ as the one way to salvation- are minimized in an effort to reduce Christianity to a feel-good religion. The focus of the new theology is not God, but the self. Objective doctrines are replaced by subjective experiences; worshiping a holy God gives way to entertaining the congregation. Such notions may promote church growth [i.e., numerically], but they are not historic Christianity.

Over the next few days, I'd like to do a brief review of the "hard edges" of the Gospel. For it is in these severe and sobering truths that the foundation of our mission, our perseverance in faith, our endurance of suffering, and - most significantly - our joy in His glories are found. May we see Him restore those hard edges to the flabby church of our age!

Ask R.C. Sproul Live Tonight

2011-02-17T09:14:00.001-08:00

Tonight at 5pm (PST), Ligonier Ministries will be hosting "Ask R.C. Sproul Live."

Questions may be submitted via Twitter or Facebook... too bad we do not use either here at TPC, I wonder if he'd take a collect call?

Happy 300th Anniversary to A Method for Prayer!

2011-02-14T11:02:00.000-08:00

There are books that are worth reading and then there are those that are nearly indispensable. Even after 300 years, A Method for Prayer (1710) by Matthew Henry is firmly in the latter category. To be quite personally-direct, you really need to own this book, especially in the new, thoroughly-revised edition, A Way to Pray.

Though Henry is most known for his Commentary on the Whole Bible, I would suggest his magnum opus is actually the lesser known Method for Prayer. It is to complete this work that Henry left his Commentary unfinished upon his death (friends and fellow-pastors completed Romans - Revelation by utilizing Henry's drafted notes).

Ligon Duncan observes about Henry's Method:

Along with Isaac Watts’s Guide to Prayer (1715) it stands as the classic treatise in the Protestant English-speaking world for the promotion of the practice of biblical prayer, that is, praying Scripture, or praying with the intelligent use of the language of Scripture.

- The Dev oted Life: An Invitation to the Puritan Classics.

Matthew Henry was a devoted pastor of the latter Puritan era, known to rise each day at 4am to spend eight hours in prayer and study (!) before undertaking his numerous ministerial labors. In his Method, Henry draws from his study of Scripture and his own personal experience in prayer to outline biblical prayer according to the themes noted in the Westminster Directory for Public Worship (another overlooked gem, edited and introduced by Ferguson and Dever).

Using a six-part model, Henry organizes an unbelievable amount of Scripture in the forms of adoration, confession, petition, thanksgiving, intercession, and conclusion. This is easily convertible to our more familiar (and simpler) ACTS model (adoration, confession, thanksgiving, and supplication = petition and intercession). His motivation was simply to deepen his readers' praying in accord with God's Word.

In 1994, Ligon Duncan edited and introduced a reprint of Henry's work - and one that is still valuable, not only for Duncan's original contributions, but the addition of 3 sermons by Henry on prayer and worship - A Method for Prayer. This edition also became the basis for matthewhenry.org, which affords several ways to utilize and search this material (including daily e-mails).

Given the benefit I have received from this work, I initially hesitated to hear of Banner's plan for a thorough revision for its 300th Anniversary of this work. If it ain't broke, why fix it, right? Well, it was never broke, but they have indeed fixed it!

A Way to Pray is a complete revising and updating of Henry's Method by O. Palmer Robertson. It is, again, simply indispensable. (Robertson, interestingly enough, was the seminary professor who originally introduced Ligon Duncan to this work when Duncan was yet a lowly ordinand). By simplifying Henry's overall organization, correcting some questionable applications of certain passages, and updating the language to modern English, A Way to Pray is, in my estimation, the single greatest aid to prayer, whether private, public, or corporate, that currently exists in the English language. And, no, that is not an overstatement.

Robertson gave his motivation for such labor in his "Introduction":

For the past fifty years this book has been my constant companion. My copy was passed down to me by my mother. It had been in use in the family for several previous generations. Almost daily I have been blessed by its use in my times of personally seeking the face of God. Next to the Bible it has been the most and the most influential book in my life. For many years I have wanted to update the language of the book so it could be accessible to future generations of believers in Christ. I wanted to pass it on to my own children and grandchildren. By now the pages of my old copy have begun to disintegrate. Every time I open it, a few pieces of page flake off. So I am grateful to God that I finally have had the opportunity to offer this revised, edited and updated version of the book. Considering the state of my personal copy, this edition comes 'just in the nick of time'.

- A Way to Pray, xiii - xiv.

And from "How to Read this Book":

The best way to read this book is while you are on your knees, not while sitting in an easy chair. Then you may proceed to read in the following way: Read a brief section of the work - a phrase, a sentence, a paragraph. Then close your eyes or life them to heaven. Rephrase what you read in your own words. If you can't remember what you read, look at the section again. Make the words applicable to your own situation.

...make this book your constant life-companion. By continuing to shape your prayers in conformity with God's own words, you will find few disappointments in your fellowship with your heavenly Father. For he is more ready to give than you are to ask, if only your heart continues to conform to his.

- A Way to Pray, xx - xxi.

This is the "prayer book" you have been looking for. I have been using this book - as Robertson suggests - for just a couple weeks now and have never had a single greater motivator to private and public prayer outside of God's Word itself.

So, seriously, buy this book (WTS | Amazon | CBD | Banner).

Peet's for the People

2011-02-10T15:01:00.000-08:00

From the sublime to the mundane... but not entirely without merit. Why not love someone else for the glory of God in Jesus by getting 'em a cup of Peets? Until February 20th, it is free!

Calvinist Crossing

2011-02-07T13:42:00.001-08:00

More M'Cheyne to come, DV. We have been regrettably delayed by illness and those pesky demands of real life and ministry which continually interrupts our time on the internet!

Until we return with more M'Cheyne, here's some interesting links on life in the church for your consideration...

A La Carte. Appreciated Challies' brief introduction to today's A La Carte:

Super Bowl this, Super Bowl that. It’s tough to get too excited about the Super Bowl when your church has an evening service that overlaps kickoff. And when you don’t have cable. And when you don’t have a favorite team. And I’m okay with this (especially after catching some video of that unspeakably awful half-time performance).

Ditto, Tim, I am okay with this too. Actually, I pray for the day when God's church in our age is so revived that Christians look to the Lord's Day with a holy greediness of its blessings(see next link) and say at the end of the day, "Oh, there was a game today?"

A Phrase to Retire. Great reminders from Kevin DeYoung that the Church - and her means of grace - are God's gifts and not just arenas of our giving to God.

Amen to evangelism. Amen to services that recognize the presence of non-Christians. Amen to poking long-time believers to serve in ways besides the reading of books. But boo-hoo to chiding church members for wanting a church that loves them, teaches them, and watches over their souls. The phrase sounds prophetic and I understand the good intentions, but there is simply no biblical warrant for saying to God’s people “church is not for you.” Better to say ala the Apostle Peter: “Church is for you, and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God calls to himself.”

Mom Always Shovels the Drive. Part biopic and part exhortation from Tim Challies. If you are fathering a son, read this! Reminded me of an exhortation I recently heard from an older professor to single men: "Serve the single mothers in your church! Put down the video games and take her kids to the park, so she can have a break and you can invest some time in another's faith." Great stuff.

Evangelize by Loving Christians. Terrific synopsis of Stiles' work, Marks of the Messenger, by Andy Naselli. Turns out that John 13:34-35 is not only true... but it just might work!

Why Facebook (and Your Church) Might Be Making You Sad. Insightful and helpful article by Russell Moore. Grateful that we sang, "The Lord is Angry," during corporate worship yesterday.

By not speaking, where the Bible speaks, to the full range of human emotion—including loneliness, guilt, desolation, anger, fear, desperation—we only leave our people there, wondering why they just can’t be “Christian” enough to smile through it all.

Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone? Another one from Russell Moore, but a recent article in WSJ, with poignant indictments and encouragements. Reminded me of the constant need for fidelity and sobriety in the church, without defaulting into dead traditionalism.

But there are some signs of a growing church-focused evangelicalism. Many young evangelicals may be poised to reconsider denominational doctrine, if for no other reason than they are showing signs of fatigue with typical evangelical consumerism.

John Piper on Rober Murray M'Cheyne

2011-02-02T09:57:00.000-08:00

"Fruitfulness in this life is not quantifiable in years." That gem, with which John Piper summarized the life of Robert Murray M'Cheyne, is worth an hour of meditation and is the motivation for praying for increasing fidelity and discipline with the time we have been given.

Piper strove for the bottom of M'Chenye's life and ministry with "Living and Dying in the Morning of Life: Robert Murray M'Cheyne." (You can read, listen, and eventually watch the session at that link).

He identified the center of M'Cheyne's power and impact as an acute awareness of the preciousness of Christ and the painful shortness of life and even how that was conveyed in his own personal preparation and discipline:

You need not have less fruitfulness if you take the time to get that training, and like McCheyne, you may have more. Fruitfulness in this life is not quantifiable in years. He only had seven years left when he was done with school. But with everything he had learned form Chalmers and with immersion in the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Old Testament and with a radical commitment to holiness and evangelism, and with a band of friends, those seven years were worth seven decades.

Piper did an excellent job explaining M'Cheyne's passion for personal holiness and proclaiming Christ, highlighting many of my favorite excerpts from M'Cheyne's writings along the way (they go by quickly in audio / video, so it is worth reading Piper's manuscript).

Of course, how much can you say in an hour? So much was left untouched. We'll try to point-out a couple lessons and passions of M'Cheyne that didn't make it into Piper's talk yesterday.

NB, see the previous post for suggested biographies and free resources on M'Cheyne.

Remembering Robert Murray M'Cheyne

2011-01-31T05:30:00.000-08:00

Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith (Heb 13:7).

We believe in Christian heroes, not to idolize men, but because God has exemplified His faithfulness to His promises through men of faith (cf. Heb 6:12). We look to men (and women!) so as to behold their God and rejoice that the same Lord reigns still over His Church (the point of vv. 7-8, in Heb 13).

And how much do we still need to consider Christians of past eras, in a day when "DIY" applies not just to home-improvement, but to pastoral ministry as well (see this previous post)? I for one love to look to heroes, especially ones like Robert Murray M'Cheyne.

M'Cheyne was a Scottish pastor in the 19th century - a compatriot of other Scottish luminaries like Horatius and Andrew Bonar, John Milne, amongst others - and a leader in the great Scottish revivals of that era. A prolific writer, poet, preacher, and evangelist, M'Cheyne died at the young age of 29. Though I have already outlived him by more than 3 years, I believe it would be presumptuous to expect to see more accomplished through my life and ministry than his.

On the occasion of my recent ordination to Gospel ministry, my brother and sister-in-law gifted me a copy of Memoir and Remains of Robert Murray M'Cheyne.

As I have read his Memoirs (a collection of biography, diary, letters, sermons, poems, and tracts), I have been simultaneously encouraged, admonished, rebuked, and burdened to know the Lord and minister His Word as did our dear brother who has gone ahead of us. At times, I have even needed to set down his Memoirs, just for the sake of relieving the conviction!

So, you can imagine my anticipation when I first heard that John Piper will be doing a biographical message on M'Cheyne at this week's Desiring God Pastors Conference! Tomorrow at about 12 noon (PST), Piper will deliver his message, and since they are typically live-streamed it could make for a great lunch break. (Update: Live-stream for main sessions will be available here).

If God's work through Robert Murray M'Cheyne is unknown to you, my friend, that needs to be rectified! Maybe Piper's message will be just the introduction you need.

Please note the many resources currently available to us:

Website on M'Cheyne maintained by David Haslam. (I have briefly corresponded with Mr. Haslam and he seems to be a fine chap. I am grateful for his work on this site).

M'Cheyne's Memoirs can be read and downloaded for free at GoogleBooks, Project Gutenberg, or Internet Archive. Logos Bible Software has also graciously made M'Cheyne's Memoirs available for free download for a limited time!

The classic biography is written by Andrew Bonar (the first portion of the entire Memoirs) and is available at DG for $8. Two other new biographies include Constrained by His Love by Van Valen and Awakening by Robertson.

To see how John Piper develops his biographical sketches, watch this brief video:

For the rest of the week, we will be posting some favorite excerpts of M'Cheyne thus far in our reading of his Memoirs.

Why We Are Told to Wait

2011-01-27T05:30:00.000-08:00

But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the LORD;
I will wait for the God of my salvation.
My God will hear me (Micah 7:7)

In a message on Micah 7, "Patient like a Prophet," I applied Micah's patient endurance by waiting upon the Lord to our continual need to cultivate the discipline of waiting upon the Lord. This means, in part, rejecting frenetic anxiety and beholding the impending fulfillment of the Lord's promises in time and personal experience.

If I would have had more time to develop the point, I hope I would have said something as half as helpful as Paul Tripp's recent article at DesiringGod, Spiritual Muscle Development.

Tripp helpfully develops the point that waiting on the Lord is not just a matter of waiting, but a process of becoming. Specifically, that the process of waiting is one of God's primary tools to shaping us into the image of His beloved Son. And in this sanctifying process, there are some bad habits that may develop if we are not careful:

Giving way to doubt.

Giving way to anger.

Giving way to discouragement.

Giving way to envy.

Giving way to inactivity.

Again, please read how Tripp diagnoses and unmasks these bad habits for what they really are, unbelief. Tripp's response to this unbelief is remembering:

He is wise and loving. His timing is always right, and his focus isn’t so much on what you will experience and enjoy, but on what you will become. He is committed to using every tool at his disposal to rescue you from yourself and to shape you into the likeness of his Son. The fact is that waiting is one of his primary shaping tools.

So, what does this mean for this morning?

Here are the things that he has designed for you to build the muscles of your heart and strengthen your resolve: the regular study of his Word; consistent godly fellowship; looking for God’s glory in creation every day; putting yourself under excellent preaching and teaching of Scripture; investing your quiet mental time in meditating on the goodness of God (e.g., as you are going off to sleep); reading excellent Christian books; and spending ample time in prayer.

Waiting on the Lord is a discipline and an intentional process to mortify our sin, vivify our devotion, and deepen our joy in Him. In other words, waiting is integral to becoming increasingly holy. That is why we wait. So, how are you waiting?

Good Counsel for Young Pastors (and Many Others)

2011-01-26T05:30:00.000-08:00

The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also (2 Tim 2:2).

For those who are unaware, a minor bruh haha has erupted online over John MacArthur's comments regarding Darrin Patrick in a recent interview.

If you are unaware, be encouraged! Most of it owes to our now widespread failure to cease Tweeting, "friending," and even blogging (!), in order to actually read real things like books, actually do real things, like pray, and actually spend time with real things, like people. But that's another post... Some better remarks on this controversy were made by Travis Allen, a friend and former ministry leader at GCC, who is the director of GTY's internet-presence: Culturally Contextualized or Historically Connected?

In any case, MacArthur clarified the passing comment in the interview in another post at GTY, "Radical Individualism: A Good Trait for Young Pastors?". It is worth a read, but most pertinent and helpful are his concluding exhortations:

The issue is rather the danger of developing a unique theology and a radically individualistic philosophy of church leadership. When one’s “own theological beliefs” are self-styled and unique, those beliefs need to be questioned. Protecting the soundness of our theological convictions is a commitment that we all must make. It is increasingly clear that the vanguard of evangelical Christianity is intent upon actively promoting change at every level within the church, and young men in particular should not be encouraged to think radical individualism is a positive mindset for church leadership and ministry style.

Amen and amen! Men in ministry who emphasize the subjective aspiring to the pastoral office (1 Tim 3:1) above the objective affirmation of the character and gifting for the pastoral office by the local church (cf. 1 Tim 3:2-7; Titus 1:5-9) are flat-out dangerous. They inevitably form communities around personalities and preferences rather than the Gospel (see previous post). Ideally, the pastoral charge is an unbroken chain of Gospel doctrines and duties passed-on from the Apostles themselves.

Yes, I Am a Calvinist

2011-01-25T05:30:00.000-08:00

There are admitted risks to using theological "short-hand" in discussions. That is to apply certain nomenclature to yourself or others without an exhaustive definition of what exactly you intend by a specific term. Or, put another way, what happens when you and a friend (or a whole group) are saying the same word but using different dictionaries?

John Piper recently answered this question with the oft-repeated refrain to forget labels and to use biblical explanations or, as he put it - "Saying What You Believe Is Clearer than Saying 'Calvinist'":

We are Christians. Radical, full-blooded, Bible-saturated, Christ-exalting, God-centered, mission-advancing, soul-winning, church-loving, holiness-pursing, sovereignty-savoring, grace-besotted, broken-hearted, happy followers of the omnipotent, crucified Christ. At least that’s our imperfect commitment.

In other words, we are Calvinists. But that label is not nearly as useful as telling people what you actually believe! So forget the label, if it helps, and tell them clearly, without evasion or ambiguity, what you believe about salvation.

In short, Piper advocates saying the following (abbreviated here; see Piper's statements with attendant Scripture-proofs here):

I believe I am so spiritually corrupt that I would never have come to faith without God’s sovereign victory over my rebellion.

I believe that God chose me to be his child before the foundation of the world.

I believe Christ died as a substitute for sinners and that he had an invincible design in his death to obtain the assembly of all believers.

When I was dead in my trespasses, God made me alive, and united me to Jesus.

I am eternally secure not mainly because of anything I did in the past, but because God is faithful to complete the work he began.

At one point, I too advocated this "no labels but the Bible" position. But, I have since given that up as impractical, postmodern (or modern!), and even a bit dangerous.

It is impractical because you cannot stop with these bullet points, you have to keep defining and articulating their interrelationships You have to define "corrupt" and "substitute" and "obtain" and "dead" and "alive" and "secure" and et cetera. Classic Arminians, for example, might use the very same bullets and still mean vastly different things. The point of labels is to make conversations efficient when lunch is getting cold.

Secondly, it can tend to cater to the spirit of the age that considers labels and terms as open-license for whatever you want to make of them (i.e., write your own dictionary). I don't think that is true, helpful, and quite frankly I just don't want to be a part of it. Label me naive, but I'm holding my ground here... "Calvinist" has a classic, historic, and objective definition. And that is exactly what I mean when I use it. The "no label but the Bible" position can tend toward the unintended consequence of making labels themselves futile. If that is true, then let's just throw-out "Christian," "Reformed," and "evangelical" while we're at it, because those terms suffer horrendous misuse as well.

Finally, it may even be a bit dangerous because it can subtly communicate the failure to separate what God has spoken and what you believe God has spoken. (And, let me assure you, if you do not know the difference between those two propositions, you are in for a lot of trouble and difficulty getting along with practically everybody).

So, here's my general approach with all its admitted pitfalls and problems:

"Yes, I am a Calvinist" (note the puzzled, frustrated, bemused or some other facial expression on the evidently non-Calvinist).

Let's get together, have a cup of coffee, and discuss what God has spoken, comparing what you believe God has spoken and what I believe God has spoken; and hopefully you'll discover you're a Calvinist too or become one along the way.

So, that's where I am. I suppose it's not too far from Piper, but I just do not like the advocacy of ditching labels. In the end, it seems to defeat the recognized need throughout millennia of human discourse to having, well, labels! Yes, I am a Calvinist.

Hurray for Free History!

2011-01-24T05:30:00.000-08:00

An often overlooked, but excellent resource for studying the history of the Church is the previously defunct magazine, Christian History & Biography.

It ended with issue #99 a couple years ago, to the dismay of many, including yours truly, but in honor of the 400th year of the KJV, it is making a comeback! Even better... for free. You can sign-up for a free copy of issue #100, on the making and spread of the King James version here.

CH&B has been established as an accurate and accessible primer on major people and movements in the growth of Christianity. You can search their on-line archives (be sure not to pass-by issue #77, Edwards!)

Christianity did not begin when we came to the Savior, so let's not act like it by overlooking the doctrines, traditions, people, movements, and, yes, the errors, that have preceded us. CH&B is an interesting way to do that. With pictures and brief summaries, its really a great tool.

(HT: JEC)

Calvinist Crossing

2011-01-21T05:30:00.000-08:00

Four helpful posts I recently encountered involving Christian roles and relationships. Enjoy.

Whose Wife are You? Challies rightly identifies the missing-link in much of the complementarian debates - distinguishing role from function:
...I wonder if we spend far too little time talking about how this husband and this wife complement one another. When we move beyond the generalities of gender roles, we find that the specifics may look very, very different from one couple to another.

Is Small Talk Worthless? Still chewing on this one from Powlison (via Mahaney). Powlison contends the futility or fruitfulness of chatter is embedded in its intent:
...when you climb into anything a person ever says you find profound things revealed about what they are about: what they are after, what their intentions are, what their worldview is. Even in small talk there is a revelation of the heart that God is searching out, and he weighs the intentionality of small talk.

...Small talk is going to be judged by God for the kind of deep intentionality it is. In other words, small talk is counsel.
Admittedly, still on the fence with this. I doubt that encouraging "small talk" is really the needed emphasis in our "social network" age. It brought to mind 2 of the points from the Scots' Confession of the Sins of the Ministry (ca. 17th century):
FRUITLESS conversing ordinarily with others for the worse rather than for the better.

Foolish jesting away time with impertinent and useless discourse, very unseeming the Ministers of the Gospel.
Leading from Your Strengths will Look Unusual. Citing an example from business, Matt Perman offers some needed counsel:
You will be more effective being who you are than who you are not. In fact, it’s often the most unconventional minds that make a difference because what seems unconventional is often simply counterintuitive wisdom.
I almost avoided pastoral ministry because I was repeatedly given bad counsel along the lines of "If you're going to be a pastor, you'd better learn to be __________ (gregarious, life of the party, fond of small talk [see above], etc.)." I was preserved from such horrendously bad advice by learning the simple truth,"be who you are" - by His providence and in His grace.

God Didn't Create a Mistake. (HT: Challies). I've always enjoyed Tony Evans' pulpit style (and many moon ago, edited his radio program for a short time) and this clip does not disappoint (I wish I could pull-off that blue suit!):

“There may be illegitimate relationships, but every child that comes out of ‘em becomes legitimate." Well-said and well-remembered.

Happy Heidel-Birthday!

2011-01-20T05:30:00.000-08:00

Thanks to JT, we were reminded that yesterday was the 446th birthday of the Heidelberg Catechism.

Originally published on January 19, 1563, it is one of the "three forms of unity" in the Calvinist or Reformed heritage (alongside the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dordt). It has been rightly loved and studied for over four centuries because of its deeply personal and devotional character.

For example, while the Westminister Shorter Catechism begins with the doctrinal and abstract, "What is the chief end of man?" (though, admittedly an excellent and necessary question). The Heidelberg Catechism begins with the more pastorally-driven, "What is your only comfort in life and death?" Now, that's really where the rubber meets the road, is it not? The answer:

That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with His precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by His Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto Him.

Now, if you believe that by His grace, you will be sustained through much sorrow on the way to the Kingdom. (For more on question 1, see Riddlebarger, What is Your Only Comfort? from Tabletalk [April, 2008]; to understand Question 1 as a protest against Roman Catholicism, see Trueman, Terrible Beauty, Beauty, and the Plain Terrible; for an applied-overview of the whole, see Kevin DeYoung's The Good News We Almost Forgot).

Theology professor at Talbot Seminary, Fred Sanders, has served us in Today is the Heidelberg Catechism's 446th Birthday by offering several reasons for studying this Catechism:

It’s Personal.
It’s Devotional.
It’s Biblical.
It’s Ecumenical (read what he means by the "e-word" before freaking-out)
It’s Irenic.
It’s Pastoral.
It’s Didactic.
It’s Confident.
It’s Dense.
It’s Free.

In short:

It is designed not simply to instruct you or exhort you, but to set you before the face of God, confessing to him who you are, what you need, who he is, and what he has promised.

If reading, memorizing, and meditating upon a catechism is not already part of your private worship repertoire, might I suggest you add it? This is especially helpful for those of us shepherding the young hearts in our homes, not to mention for regularly meeting with another to "breathe life" to them (see yesterday's post).

Since we're on the topic, another great catechism - and probably more easily adapted for us "free-churchy" folks - is Spurgeon's Catechism (adapted from the London Baptist Confession of 1689). For a more recent adaptation, see John Piper's revision of the same in A Baptist Catechism.

Breathe Life into Others

2011-01-19T05:30:00.000-08:00

New Testament Greek scholar, author, and pastor, Bill Mounce, recently gave some very helpful reflections in "The Cycle of Life - Personal Reflection". In this brief personal account, Mounce reminds us of all the opportunities which constantly surround us to make an impact in another life for their good - even eternally.

For those of you reading this, may I encourage you to breathe life into those around you so that when you run into them in the years ahead, you can feel this sense of gratitude and affection that you should, and that your son or daughter will take great delight in meeting the person who so influenced their mom or dad.

I really liked his word-picture for discipleship, "breathe life," and may commandeer it for personal use. As disciples of Christ, we must not too often measure our "impact" in the world beyond individuals. This is a lesson, even in pastoral ministry, that I continually grow in learning - as well as one at which I have admittedly failed far too often in the past. Let's seize each encounter and relationship to seek the love of Christ for the good of another.

NB, for more from Bill Mounce see his blog. Note that "Mondays with Mounce" at Koinonia are always helpful as well. For the interested, I have found his commentary on the Pastoral Epistles to be the "go-to" reference on my shelf for that portion of Scripture.

What Do We Celebrate?

2011-01-18T05:30:00.000-08:00

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3)

Good diagnostic questions from Trevin Wax, "What You Celebrate as a Church Is Just as Important as What You Believe":

Pastors and church leaders, it’s important that we believe the gospel; it’s also important that we celebrate this gospel in a way that makes clear it is “of first importance.”

What do we celebrate as a church?

Do we ever lift up our church’s expression as “what church should be” in a way that unites our congregation around a style rather than the gospel?

Do our discipleship efforts lead to missional living or look-alike converts who will have a difficult time serving in another context in the future?

I do pray that Christ and His Gospel is the increasingly dominant flavor of the church's culture.

The Irrelevant Theology of Martin Luther King, Jr.

2011-01-17T09:54:00.000-08:00

So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, 'If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free... So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed' (John 8:31-32, 36).

It is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. It is a conflicting day. While we can be sincerely grateful for the socio-political achievements of the Civil Rights Movement, it cannot be overlooked that its methods and essential vision leaves a deadly-wake.

It is especially concerning when professing Christians do jumping-jacks over the vision of Martin Luther King, Jr. like this. Why? I am convinced that his message misplaces the source of true hope and is, therefore, irrelevant.

First, what I do not mean... I do not mean to say that the injustice and racism that civil rights leaders osought to address was not what it was (and is). Segregation, Jim Crow laws, and the like, are wicked manifestations of an evil and depraved society. It was and is right to condemn them and seek their rectification. To the extent that professing Christians opposed this protest of America's legal and cultural infrastructure, they are rightly condemned for their ignorance of God's Word and shameful refusal to act publicly in accord with it. (For more on this point, see Russell Moore, "Racial Justice and the Godness of God").

So, why is the vision of Martin Luther King, Jr. largely irrelevant? It equates the hope of God in the Kingdom of His Son with the hope of better things in this life. And in a cursed world of fallen men, that is trading the glories of God's promises to the Redeemed for an uncertain wish that is certain to disappoint.

Take, for example, "I've Been to the Mountaintop," delivered on April 3, 1968, the eve before Dr. King brutally fell victim to the hatred he had so long opposed.

We need all of you. And you know what's beautiful to me, is to see all of these ministers of the Gospel. It's a marvelous picture. Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher? Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and say, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Somehow, the preacher must say with Jesus, "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to deal with the problems of the poor."

And I want to commend the preachers... I want to thank them all. And I want you to thank them, because so often, preachers aren't concerned about anything but themselves. And I'm always happy to see a relevant ministry.

It's all right to talk about "long white robes over yonder," in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here. It's all right to talk about "streets flowing with milk and honey," but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can't eat three square meals a day. It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preachers must talk about the New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do.

Many people find depths of hope in these words... I am concerned it is hope woefully misplaced. Note the subtle exchanges made by Dr. King:

From minister of the Gospel to messenger of the populace. "Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher?" What happens when preachers of the Gospel find their role in speaking on behalf of the people and their message in the desires of men? Jesus' Gospel is silenced and the real freedom of the Son is unheard.

From the real to the symbolic. "It's all right to talk about 'long white robes over yonder,' in all of its symbolism." A reference to "symbolism" is a nod to denying the tangibility of God's promises of the future Kingdom of His Son. What happens when the promises of God's Word are exchanged for malleable symbols? God's Word loses all meaning and its visions of victory to make Christians courageous are erased.

From the eternal to the temporal. "It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preachers must talk about the New York, the new Atlanta..." What happens when certain hope in the unsurpassed and unfading glory of Christ is exchanged for the wish that things might get better in our cities? Hope dies. Period.

Despite Dr. King's insistence that these exchanges make for "a relevant ministry," I am constrained to respectfully disagree. A vision of men creating a virtuous society is not Gospel, it is the hope of an atheist. And in God's world atheistic hopes are always a bad bet.

And the tragic irony is that hope in the future grace and glory of Jesus is the only real basis for hard labors of love in a world of hatred. By removing the future hope of God in bringing sinners to Himself in Jesus, Dr. King essentially removed the foundation for the work to which he called people.

Let's remember and celebrate the accomplishments of Dr. King and God's gracious kindness to our nation. But I especially plead with Christians and churches to not confuse MLK Day with the real hope and relevant ministry still greatly needed in our nation. We must still pray for freedom to come to every "race" of American, that men and women of every skin-color might know the hope of the only true freedom in the glory of their Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ. In cities inhabited by hopeless men it is the only relevant ministry to pursue. What greater sorrow can befall anyone than to be shut-away from Christ Himself? He alone is relevant.

Persecution and Praying for the Government

2011-01-12T06:00:00.000-08:00

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men,for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity (1 Tim 2:1-2).

From the inception of His earthly ministry, our Lord Jesus guaranteed persecution to His disciples (e.g., Matt 10:16-39). And this promise continues for the Church(e.g., 2 Tim 3:10-12). So, why are we to pray for "a tranquil and quiet life" through our governing authorities? Are we told to ask for something that God has promised we will not obtain in this life? As is so often typical in Scripture, the answer is in the following verses (1 Tim 2:3-4):

This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

We pray for tranquility and freedom under our governing authorities, so that the mission of God to save men through the message of the Church may be fulfilled. Praying for the government is akin to praying for the spread of the Gospel. Pastor Piper explains it as follows:

God aims to save people from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. But one of the great obstacles to victory is when people are swept up into social, political, and militaristic conflicts that draw away their attention, time, energy, and creativity from the real battle of the universe.

- Let the Nations Be Glad!, p. 70.

As we pray for our government leaders - as our church does by name each Lord's Day - we are not thereby presuming our hope lies in the level of prosperity and protection that can be afforded by our government. Rather, we are asking God to fulfill His promises by preventing our government from hindering the "godliness and dignity" of His saints and the Church's mission to proclaim the Gospel of Christ until He returns. This, of course, is most directly accomplished through the salvation of our leaders!

So, I am grateful for the recent popular attention being given to Christian persecution. See, for example, Brinkley's article in SF Chronicle, "A Wave of Christianophobia" (HT: Duran Central). Yesterday, OneNewsNow reported that the U.S. State Department is purportedly "deeply concerned" about Christian persecution, especially in Africa and the Middle East (I would be indebted to anyone who can verify this with the original report from the State Department).

We continue to pray that the United States government would include the persecution of Christians - both at home and abroad - at the top of their policy concerns. Yet, we pray this in concert with the petitions that His Church may remember we are but slaves, who are not above the treatment endured by our Master(Matt 10:24), and that she may speak His Word with confidence to those who threaten (Acts 4:29). May the Kingdom and will of God's Son be accomplished.

Bizzare Passions or Godly Passions?

2011-01-10T11:37:00.000-08:00

... Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. And when I saw it, I fell on my face... (Ezek 1:28).

Phil Johnson's post today at Pyromaniacs is a real gem: "Bizarre Passions of Worldly Culture, and Why They are Incompatible with a True Passion for God's Glory." (I miss hearing Phil in-person at GraceLife each Lord's Day... though this is not to say I regret where the Lord has since placed me!).

I mainly liked his post for two reasons. First, it has a really long title and - maybe I'm reading too much in the 16th and 17th centuries - but, I do confess to harboring an odd affection for long titles. Second, it nails why so many today, even in the Church, feel simultaneously over-extended and under-satisfied. An answer is extraordinarily simple - we are engrossed in passion for the wrong things. Or as Mr. Johnson has helpfully articulated:

There's plenty of passion in the world today. Unfortunately, a lot of it is evil passion—lust, anger, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, self-love, and so on. Even whatever good feelings there are in this world are misspent—squandered on trivial things: sports, entertainment, recreation, and the pursuit of personal happiness. We're expected to be deliriously excited about things like that; and we're generally discouraged from taking serious things seriously.

That last sentence is worth the price of admission... we too often buy the assumption that serious matters are not to be taken seriously! And this cultural pressure accounts for why many pastors and leaders in wider evangelicalism act like clowns and why you leave the "services" of their "churches" thinking, "Wow.... I may actually be dumber and less spiritual now than I was an hour ago." (Unfortunately, I have had that exact thought more than once). It is especially grievous when we who profess Christ squander our passion:

It is clear from the Old Testament alone that passion for the glory of God is one of the key evidences of authentic faith. In fact, a yearning to see and perceive God's glory is perhaps the truest expression of saving faith and genuine love for God.

Even more, God's glory is the very reason why we were given passions in the first place!

In other words, not only is God's glory inherently worthy of all our affections, it's the very thing our affections were created for in the first place—and it's also the only thing that can ultimately satisfy our most basic urges and longings.

A lot of this life's sins and frustrations would be eliminated if we could just bear that in mind.

As I begin to stare-down 2011, I honestly would prefer a little less sin and frustration than I dealt with in 2010. So, if I were to venture one resolution for this year - though I do not really believe in them, well except for these - it would be to take some of my bizarre passions out back and beat 'em senseless. Then, come back to the living room and light a fire under the godly passion for His glory that His Spirit has graciously birthed in me. Christ created us and died on our behalf that we might rejoice in His glory. Let's not trade His gift for the bizarre delirium of the world.

Seeking Love in a World of Lust

2010-12-20T10:42:00.001-08:00

Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God (Matt 5:8).

A poem, submitted to blogger Tim Challies, by the wife of a man consumed with pornography broke my heart. You can read it here (Caution, a couple verses are understandably PG-13, so please read with discretion).

I am astonished and grieved at the Satanic inroads made by internet pornography into the lives of men - even in the Church! It may be - as once noted by theologian Carl Trueman - the greatest issue facing the Church today. When the men of Christ, who are called to lead the flock, are mesmerized by idols of lust, how can the Church be anything but weak and defiled? It is not a small nor insignificant issue.

Fortunately, there are many helpful resources in fighting this sin, such as those listed here, not to mention the sufficiency of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Pet 1:3), the sufficiency of Christ's Holy Word (John 17:17), and the all-sufficient work of Christ's Spirit in His people (Gal 5:16).

If lust and pornography go unchecked, your sight for our glorious Lord - as well as for those whom you love most - will be blinded and at that your only hope in this life will slowly dissipate, "to see His righteousness" (Micah 7:9).

PLEASE NOTE: If you are a man struggling with lust and pornography, especially a member of my church - there is a standing-offer for you to meet with me, confess your sin, and seek the forgiveness and cleansing found in Christ alone. By His grace, you will be greeted with the love of a pastor and a partner in killing this deceitful wickedness. Do not wait for the shame and reproof of having your sin discovered (cf. 1 Tim 5:24-25)... nothing can be hidden forever.

Raking the Leaves

2010-12-10T06:00:00.000-08:00

Okay, so this is amounts to little more than a shameless picture of my favorite little heathen and I raking the leaves... he is daddy's boy, after all.

On the other hand, at the time the photograph was taken, I was listening to Sinclair Ferguson give the 2010 den Dulk Lectures on Pastoral Ministry at Westminister Seminary (which are superb and available for download here).

And, I am trying to apply this wise pastoral counsel: What is the One Regret All Pastors Should Want to Avoid?

Thus, this picture qualifies for the theme of this blog after all!

Preaching with Profound Simplicity

2010-11-30T10:02:00.001-08:00

Great counsel from Prof. David Murray in "A Plea for Profound Simplicity", wherein he criticizes those of us who preach with a little "too much"...

Too much material
Too many words
Too many long words
Too many long sentences
Too long arguments
Simply too long
Too many headings
Too much logic, not enough like Jesus
Too many quotations
Too much clutter
Too much reading
Too much doctrine

Ouch! I recognize myself in several of Murray's criticism, so I am grateful for his Gospel-centered remedy:

The spiritual solution is a love for souls. That old-fashioned phrase must become a modern day reality in our pulpits. If we love our hearers and want to see them live better here, and also prepare for life hereafter, we will do everything to simplify our sermons for their benefit. If we keep the spiritual welfare and eternal destiny of our hearers in front of us at all times, making ourselves understood will become a life-or-death matter.

It’s wonderful that God is calling preachers with huge brains into the ministry of the Word. But huge brains need huge hearts if they are to lovingly and sympathetically serve God’s less gifted (but maybe more-graced?) children.

Now, back to seeking the love of souls through Micah 5.

Calvinism is Purely Supernatural Salvation

2010-11-29T06:00:00.000-08:00

But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved) (Eph 2:4-5).

What is the most fundamental principle or center of the doctrines of grace, known as "Calvinism," by friends and foes alike? B.B. Warfield answered this question in his article, "Calvinism" (see Works, vol. V, pp. 353-69; online here), and his answer may surprise some.

It is not, as commonly supposed, the beloved (and berated!) doctrine of predestination, but the monergism of salvation. Or, the "I" in the familiar acrostic "TULIP." Warfield explains:

Thus it comes about that the doctrine of monergistic regeneration - or as it was phrased by the older theologians, of 'irresistible grace' or 'effectual calling' - is the hinge of the Calvinistic soteriology [doctrine of salvation], and lies much more deeply embedded in the system than the doctrine of predestination itself which is popularly looked upon as its hall-mark.

Indeed, the soteriological significance of predestination to the Calvinist consists in the safeguard it affords to monergistic regeneration - to purely supernatural salvation.

What lies at the heart of his soteriology is the absolute exclusion of the creaturely element in the initiation of the saving process, that so the pure grace of God may be magnified. Only so could he express his sense of man's complete dependence as sinner on the free mercy of a saving God; or extrude the evil leaven of Synergism (q.v.) by which, as he clearly sees, God is robbed of His glory and man is encouraged to think that he owes to some power, some act of choice, some initiative of his own, his participation in that salvation which is in reality all of grace. There is accordingly nothing against which Calvinism sets its face with more firmness than every form and degree of autosoterism (pp. 359-60).

Warfield concludes and summarizes this point in this clear and heart-warming sentence:

He who knows that it is God who has chosen him and not he who has chosen God, and that he owes his entire salvation in all its processes and in every one of its stages to this choice of God, would be an ingrate indeed if he gave not the glory of his salvation solely to the inexplicable elective love of God (p. 360).

Firmly set against "autosoterism," the Calvinist rejoices, "... by grace you have been saved!"

NB, for a practical expansion on this point into Christian life and worship, please see Ian Hamilton, "Heart-warming Calvinism." For one of the best recent treatments of regeneration, see John Piper, Finally Alive!

Gospel Light on "Black Friday"

2010-11-26T06:00:00.001-08:00

We agree with Prof. Thomas, that "Black Friday" is incomprehensible to us and our usual commentary would sound something like Ephesians 5:5.

Yet, while we hesitate to encourage the voracious consumerism (= idolatry) today, there are a number of exceedingly helpful Christian works presently on-sale and we would be remiss not to point them out.

Several on-line Christian booksellers are having special deals this weekend, including:

Reformation Heritage has several excellent works on sale, starting at $10. (Note, especially - Jonathan Edwards' sermons in To the Rising Generation; John Owen's The Priesthood of Christ and The Glory of Christ; Matthew Henry's Family Religion and A Method for Prayer by Matthew Henry; A Godly Home by Richard Baxter).

Grace Books International is having a "CyberMonday Sale" (Note, especially - A Portrait of Paul; biography of William Carey).

Ligonier Ministries is expanding their usual $5 Friday Sale with good books and DVD's. (Note, especially - Beeke's edited collection on Calvinism in Living for God's Glory; Edwards' sermons in A Just and Righteous God; classic Sproul in The Holiness of God).

Tolle lege!