There is a Hermeneutic Principle that is very helpful when we are trying to iron our our Eschatology. Easily stated the principle is this: Allow the clear, simple, and explicit to interpret the unclear, complex, and implicit.There are passages in the bible that are more clear than others. We need to understand the complex in light of the simple, not the other way around. If we have to stretch the interpretation of an otherwise clear, straight-forward passage to accommodate our interpretation of a less clear passage, we are mistaken.
I have heard this referred to as theologically analyzing the text. We have all seen places in scripture that seem to contradict another portion of scripture. Well what do we do in that case? We interpret scripture with scripture. Where else is this doctrine taught? Are there four passages that seem to say one thing and only one that seems to teach a different idea? Well in that case we interpret the isolated scripture through the lens of what the rest of scripture teaches.
I agree with this method. Think for a moment about the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25. If we were to read this parable plainly, then Jesus is teaching that salvation comes by our involvement in social justice (feeding the hungry, providing shelter for the homeless etc.) If we were to read that text in isolation, we could make an argument for justification by works. However, we know that scripture teaches justification by grace through faith alone. Despite the imbalance in the specific references, we must also weigh the clarity of the verses. Matthew 25 tells that story in the form of a parable, a story form in which Jesus teaches kingdom principles through narrative. That is a less-clear text about justification than Ephesians 2:8 where Paul is simply in the middle of a theological discourse and says that it is by grace we are saved through faith.
Kik relies on this principle a lot throughout his book.
If you have a moment, read through Matthew 24.
Verse 34 is an interesting verse: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
That seems straight forward enough, but do we really think that everything Jesus said in Matthew 24 prior to verse 34 was fulfilled in the lives of the generation living when Jesus spoke these words?
Kik says: "Many commentators see that the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Jewish economy adequately fulfills the words of Matthew 24:4-28, but the great majority cannot grant it of verses 29-31. These words, they say, can only find fulfillment at the second coming of the Lord and have nothing whatsoever to do with the destruction of the Jewish dispensation and the city of Jerusalem... The honest conclusion then is: Our Lord was mistaken [or] he meant something else by 'generation'"
He goes on to say that some commentators will say that the word generation could also be translated "race" referring to Israel as a nation. The Greek word 'genea' is used 8 other times in the book of Matthew however, and always refers to a specific generation. In fact, in all of scripture this word is never used to mean anything other than a literal generation. Therefore if we must take the word literally, we must take the sentence in which Jesus uses it literally and infer that all he had spoken in Matthew 24 up until that point was fulfilled within the generation living while he spoke the words.
SO what is so hard about Matthew 24:29-31?
29"Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.30Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.31And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."
Oh, right. That. Yeah, that sure sounds like the second coming to me.
Kik disagrees.
"The word immediately binds this verse to the events which are described in verses 4-28. You cannot excise this verse from the events mentioned previously... Of course you could say immediately does not mean immediately, just as generation does not mean generation. That seems like a rather dishonest way to get out of a seemingly difficult passage..."
Kik interprets this passage as referring to the passing away of Judaism. It describes the eclipse of the Old testament dispensation and with it Jewish glories and privileges.
He goes on to reference Isaiah 13:10 (describing God's judgment against Babylon), Isaiah 34:4-5 (God's judgment against Idumea) and Ezekiel 32:7-8 (in a Lament against Egypt) saying that they all use similar language (stars light being withheld, stars falling from heaven and the earth and/or heavens shaking). His argument is that if God would use such strong language in his judgment against these nations, how much more would he use it in describing the downfall of his own chosen nation of Israel?
Lastly, Kik brings up Peter and Pentecost. "Peter states that the events of the day of Pentecost fulfilled the prophecy of Joel 2:28-32, which [Peter] quotes in these words: 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, and I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my hand-maidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: and I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: the sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.'
In Joel two things were prophesied: the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and judgment upon Israel... Quoting both elements of the prophecy, Peter indicates that both elements had now been fulfilled. "
What I find attractive about Kik'sexegy of Matthew 24 is that he interprets the poetic language and metaphors about what things will be like using the clear and straightforward instructions of Jesus.
He takes clearly what seems plain, and applies interpretation to the figurative language which needs to be dug in to.
Where is he going with this? Well at this point in the book Kik is deconstructing the ways pre and amillennials have traditionally applied meaning to passages that reference the second coming of Christ. Because Postmillennialism is off in left field so to speak (in terms of popularity in modern evangelicalism) before he gets in to the meat, he has to loosen the grip these other traditions have on the way we are reading and interpreting scripture.
Initially when I looked in to the differing views of the millennial reign of Christ, my study was limited to Premillennialism and Amillennialism. This is, in part, due to my closest friends in the faith holding one of those two views but also because those two views were what my two favourite (at the time) contemporary Christian authors John Piper and Sam Storms held to.
Though Jonathan Edwards was a postmillennialist, and his views are shared in a book like "The End for which God Created the World", the first book I picked up that explicitly taught a postmillennial position was J. Marcellus Kik's work "An Eschatology of Victory".
For anyone reading this who did not have 2 hours to kill and did not watch John Piper's round table discussion, here is a quick link to a one page summary of the orthodox positions as they refer to the millennium.
Postmillennialism reminds us that there is a difference in language and in teaching between two kingdoms: The Messianic Kingdom and the Consummate Kingdom:
Kik writes: ....Revelation is concerned almost entirely with the Messianic kingdom which begins in time and ends in time. For instance, the "thousand-year" period of Revelation 20 cannot refer to the consummate kingdom because it commences in time with the binding of Satan and ends in time with the short period of the release of Satan. It deals with time before the last judgment. Also the Messianic kingdom, as such, ceases to exist, as is clearly indicated in I Cor. 15:24-28 where it is stated: "Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom of God, even the Father....And when all things shall be subdued unto Him then shall the Son also himself be subdued unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all." The eschatology of the Old Testament is chiefly concerned with the Messianic kingdom, and its types speak of the Messianic kingdom. The predictive didactic elements of the New Testament prophecy deal with the Messianic Kingdom. The consummate kingdom is not the great object of Old Testament prophecy or New Testament prophecy.
I am going to pull out a couple of interesting arguments from Kik's work hoping our readers and my fellow bloggers have some time to add to the discussion. I will post a point, hope and pray discussion follows and then post another:
1. The Crushing of the Head of the Serpent
The curse of Satan in Genesis 3:15 speaks of the crushing of the serpents head and speaks of defeat. The language used about the serpent eating dust in his defeat in the preceding verse is language used throughout scripture (particularly in Psalms and Isaiah) concerning the defeat of enemies.
What is interesting is how Paul describes this event in Romans 16:20: "The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet."
Reading literally, Kik argues that Paul is telling his readers that Satan is defeated, not through a cataclysmic event, but by the feet of Christians. God crushes Satan (alluding to the Gen. 3 "bruising defeat") by means of the feet of Christians on the earth. Rev. 12 also describes the defeat of Satan describing, again, that it is by the means of Christians that God destroys Satan, here it is stated that the tools they use for this task is the "blood of the lamb" (work of the cross) and the "word of their testimony" (the gospel).
Both of these instances seem to indicate it is by means of the church that God intends to crush Satan. In Luke 10 Jesus is rejoicing at the successful ministry done by the seventy two disciples he sent out to preach the gospel. He says that he saw Satan cast down and that they had authority over serpents... a sort of picture of what happens as the gospel is preached successfully.
He also cites Colossians 2:15, 1 Cor. 15, Heb. 2:14 and 1 John 3:8 and says "To say that the defeat of Satan will only come through a cataclysmic act at the second coming of Christ is ridiculous in light of these passages. To think that the church must grow weaker and weaker and the kingdom of Satan stronger and stronger is to deny that Christ came to destroy the works of the devil... and it dishonors the first coming of Christ."
I would be lying if I said this wasn't alluring. The idea that the Great Commission was a literal and achievable command is exciting!
I think it is important to note that Kik is not arguing that we can usher in a return to sinlessness or perfection. My heart has been regenerated, I have received Christ's righteousness and he has nailed my sin to the cross through his substitutionary atonement... but I am not sinless, nor am I perfect.
To say that the gospel can be spread throughout the whole world and the nations can become disciples seems impossible... which gives us a much longer term vision of the world.
The questions that may be swirling around in your head may be: "what does a 'Christian world' look like? 80%, 90%, 100%?" or "is this a militant spreading of the Christian worldview or just peaceful gospel?" or other passages may come to your mind about tribulation and suffering... "how much will Christians be 'sharing in the suffering of Christ' in a Christian world?"
Don't worry. They are swirling around my head to...
When I first became interested in theology, it seemed as though Eschatology was one of my favourite points of interest, as well as one of my favourite discussions to get involved in. Recently I have been guilty of calling this field of study a peripheral issue and taking less interest in it than I once did.
I was recently challenged by a friend and mentor who said that if God's Sovereignty is a central issue because it reminds us who is in control, who is "driving this boat" so to speak, then Eschatology is a central issue because it tells us where he's taking everything... or "where he's driving the boat."
I have considered myself a "soft Amillennialist", though I am fully aware that my favourite dead theologian (Jonathan Edwards) was a post-millennialist and my favourite alive theologian (John Piper) is a historic premillennialist.
Jude and I have often talked about how often our studies in theology come down to which experts we are going to trust because we have less access to historical research and less knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. Certainly to say guys like Piper, Packer and Grudem are more intelligent than me is like saying Jude can defeat me in an arm wrestling match -- the statement is true but fails to communicate how outmatched I am.
While it remains true some issues need me to trust the fallible research of men (for example the complimentarian expert argues that women were educated when the New Testament was written and egalitarian experts argue they were not... both citing historic evidence to prove their statement), I am convinced that I need to open up my bible and prayerful wade through the text as best I can. It is not sufficient for me to call myself a "soft amillennialist" because belief without conviction is prone to apathy.
So... all that to say, I am waist deep in to a book called "An Eschatology of Victory" by J. Marcellus Kik that I have been finding incredibly challenging and refreshing. Over the next few days I am going to post some of my recent thoughts on my journey to find a hard position on one of the three orthodox stances.
The following is a video from Desiring God ministries in which John Piper mediates a discussion between Sam Storms (representing Amillenialism), Jim Hamilton (arguing for premillennialism) and Doug Wilson (who takes a postmillennial stance).
I think that Jim is rather abrasive and continues to push his point of the literal reading of Rev. 20 without responding well to counter-points. I think Storms articulates himself best, but I imagine he's hard to argue with (For example: "Well, to believe that I'd have to abandon my belief in biblical inerrancy", to which Piper responds, "Good grief Sam!"). I find Doug to be the most warm character of the three and I think he argues himself well, but once Piper jumps in to back Jim against Doug he seems to back away.
Video removed due to lag... just google: "An Evening of Eschatology"
I have begun to read a book on suffering by Michael Horton called A Place for Weakness. Interestingly, I received this book free because I joined Tim Challies' Friends of the Blog. It is a great way to support a solid blog and receive a bunch of swag. Anyways, here is a quote from Horton's book that I find very convicting. I have the fickle heart that the author describes in this excerpt. I'm praying God will replace a fickle heart with a resolute one as I continue on my journey.
But precisely because life is both tragedy and comedy, it is more apparent to us than ever that our hearts are fickle. When life goes well, we wonder how it could be better ("Sure, the manna is okay, but can he give us meat?"). When things head south, we challenge God's fatherly care ("Did he bring us into this desert to die?").
We are studying Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in the grade 11 english class I teach. I am thoroughly enjoying reuniting with this 'old friend' that I first encountered in college. One of the many wonderful attributes the author displays in this classic is a keen and penetrating understanding of the visceral reality of guilt, despair, and remorse. Shelley clearly has a grasp, likely through her personal experiences, of these emotions. In the following excerpt, Victor Frankestein laments the death of his younger brother, the guilty verdict and death sentence of a framed friend, all due t the actions of the creature he created and its actions which he was morally resposible for. Enjoy the fine writing and gratefully bask in the truth that there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus.
During this conversation I had retired to a corner of the prison-room, where I could conceal the horrid anguish that possessed me. Despair! Who dared talked of that? The poor victim, who on the morrow was to pass the dreary boundary between life and death, felt not as I did, such deep and bitter agony. I gnashed my teeth, and ground them together, uttering a groan that came from my inmost soul. Justine started. When she saw who it was, she approached me, and said, "Dear Sir, you are very kind to visit me; you, I hope, do not believe that I am guilty."
I could not answer. "No, Justine," said Elizabeth; "he is more convinced of your innocence than I was; for even when he heard that you had confessed, he did not credit it."
"I truly thank him. In these last moments I feel the sincerest gratitude towards those who think of me with kindness. How sweet is the affection of others to such a wretch as I am! It removes more than half my misfortune; and I feel as if I could die in peace, now that my innocence is acknowledged by you, dear lady, and your cousin."
Thus the poor sufferer tried to comfort others and herself. She indeed gained the resignation she desired. But I, the true murderer, felt the never-dying worm alive in my bosom, which allowed of no hope or consolation. Elizabeth also wept, and was unhappy; but her's also was the misery of innocence, which, like a cloud that passes over the fair moon, for a while hides, but cannot tarnish its brightness. Anguish and despair had penetrated into the core of my heart; I bore a hell within me, which nothing could extinguish. We staid several hours with Justine; and it was with great difficulty that Elizabeth could tear herself away. "I wish," cried she, "that I were to die with you; I cannot live in this world of misery."
I have often shared with you posts from The Puritan's Woodshop which is a blog maintained by Brandon Phillips. It is a great blog and is worth checking regularly. I noticed today where Tim Challies mentions Brandon's other blog, The Essential Owen (also shared on this blog), in his daily 'A La Carte' post. That should increase the traffic!
Good for Brandon and good for all those who check out his blog. Links to the blog are below.
The four writers of this blog attend Church In The Oaks in London, Ontario. Today, CITO welcomed our new head pastor, Dr. Garry Milley, for his first service as our pastor. Though the official induction service is not until next week, we enjoyed his first Sunday with us.
The following is a bio of Dr. Milley:
Garry E. Milley was born and raised in Newfoundland. He is the eldest son of the late Pastor E. R. Milley. In his early years in the ministry, Garry served as chaplain to Memorial University, pastored Bethel Pentecostal Church in Grand Bank and then came back to St. John’s as the Program Director for Youth for Christ. In 1981 the Board of Governors of EPBC asked him to come to teach. For the past 25 years he has been a Professor of Church History. He is the author of several books and many articles. He has national and international experience as a Bible conference and camp meeting speaker. His wife Christine is from St. John’s. She is a graduate of Eastern Pentecostal Bible College. She is a gifted children’s teacher and pastoral care worker. They have three adult children, Erika (Mrs. Jonathan Massimi), Andrew and Philip.
Don't try to debate a controversial social issue on Twitter.
That's the take-away message from today's column, which runs the gamut from hockey to same-sex marriage to Donald Trump and the philosopher Voltaire. Who would ever have guessed that these items would appear in the same column?
It all started when the NHL's Sean Avery appeared in a video for the New Yorkers for Marriage Equality campaign, stating, "I'm Sean Avery and I'm a New Yorker for marriage equality. I treat everyone the way I expect to be treated and that applies to marriage."
Suddenly, Avery, who is known more for creating controversy than his actual hockey ability, was being celebrated for bringing positive attention to an issue that hasn't had much exposure in professional sports.
But a Canadian sports agent named Todd Reynolds had a different opinion. Reynolds, whose agency represents about 10 NHL players, posted the following message on Twitter: "Very sad to read Sean Avery's misguided support of same gender 'marriage.' Legal or not, it will always be wrong."
Not surprisingly, criticism and hate-filled comments began to roll in Reynolds' direction. So he tweeted again: "To clarify. This is not hatred or bigotry toward gays. It is not intolerance in any way, shape or form. I believe we are all equal . . . But I believe in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. This is my personal viewpoint. I do not hate anyone."
And that's when Rogers Sportsnet television host Damien Goddard entered the fray, tweeting in support of Reynolds with the comment, "I completely and wholeheartedly support Todd Reynolds and his support for the traditional and TRUE meaning of marriage."
The very next day, Rogers Sportsnet played the Donald Trump card and fired Goddard. Of course, the official, public explanation was that "it had become clear that (Goddard) is not the right fit for our organization." But those words didn't exactly cover the giant same-sex marriage elephant that stood in the locker-room.
So much for Voltaire and his, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" quote that is supposedly a bedrock principle of freedom of expression.
Before the hate mail starts flowing in my direction, let's consider the fact that this issue remains controversial and divisive.
A 2010 Angus Reid Global Monitor poll showed only 36 per cent of American respondents believed that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. In Canada, that same poll showed that 61 per cent support our current laws, which allow same-sex marriage.
That means the comments made by Reynolds and Goddard would have the support of 64 per cent of Americans and 39 per cent of Canadians. Such numbers are by no means insignificant.
Gay marriage even remains controversial in the liberal mecca of California, where a 2008 vote on the issue resulted in a prohibition on the legalization of such unions. Gay marriage is legal in Canada, but it remains illegal in 41 states of the United States. A 1996 U.S. federal law called the Defense of Marriage Act remains in place and it defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.
Most troublesome is the generalized assumption that Reynolds and Goddard are homophobic and Rogers' apparent acceptance of the idiotic notion that no one should ever have to be offended by what they hear. Reynolds, in particular, made it clear that his issue was with the act of marriage and not with individual homosexuals.
Ironically, a Canadian broadcaster would rather toss aside the whole idea of free speech than risk offending anyone.
Purging those who disagree with the current zeitgeist doesn't exactly make Rogers Sportsnet the poster child for tolerance or freedom of speech.
The idea that we can express conflicting ideas is supposedly at the heart of the right to exercise freedom of speech. But that individual right is lost when we shut down ideas we disagree with and society's freedom itself is diminished when the public loses access to all ideas in a public debate.
It's the end of the day, but I'll leave you with a quote anyways:
Had He emptied the full vials of His wrath upon the world, sweeping it before the fury of His anger, and consigning it to woeful and eternal punishment, it would not have presented to the universe so vivid, so impressive, and so awful a demonstration of the nature and glory of His holiness, of His infinite abhorrence of sin, and the necessity why He should punish it, as He has presented in the humiliation, sufferings, and death of His beloved Son. - Octavius Winslow
We have been forewarned that an enemy relentlessly threatens us, an enemy who is the very embodiment of rash boldness, of military prowess, of crafty wiles, of untiring zeal and haste, of every conceivable weapon and of skill in the science of warfare.
We must, then, bend our every effort to this goal: that we should not let ourselves be overwhelmed by carelessness or faintheartedness,
but on the contrary,
with courage rekindled stand our ground in combat.
Since this military service ends only at death, let us urge ourselves to perseverance. Indeed, conscious of our weakness and ignorance, let us especially call upon God's help, relying upon him alone in whatever we attempt, since it is he alone who can supply us with counsel and strength, courage and armor. (Institutes I, xiv, 13, line breaks mine)
O what a miserable, worthless kind of saving faith is this, that cannot fit a believer to practise in a gospel manner on the most pure and powerful principles of grace, but rather leaves him to work on legal principles, which can never bring him to serve God acceptably out of love! - Walter Marshall
A faith that leaves you trying to earn your salvation has left you where you were before you were saved in regards to fitting you to live a godly life. A legalistic approach to gospel-living is doomed to fail. If good works could get it done, we would not need grace. The only hope for godliness in our daily lives is a faith that rests solely on the grace of Christ; this provides the motivation and the means whereby we are sanctified.
I have listened to the messages from several Clarus conferences and they have all been excellent. I have not listened to these, but I'm guessing they will also be great. I found this at Between Two Worlds: Trent Hunter:
Clarus is Latin for clear, bright, or radiant. From April 29-May 1, believers from Albuquerque, NM, and the surrounding Southwest region gathered at Desert Springs Church for Clarus ‘11, a Regional Conference of The Gospel Coalition.
This year’s theme, “Scripture: God Speaks,” focused our attention on the subject of the Bible, God’s Word written. Our speakers, G.K. Beale and Carl Trueman, both professors at Westminster Theological Seminary, approached this theme from a variety of angles: what Scripture says about itself, how Christians have understood the nature of Scripture throughout history, the effects of meditating on Scripture, the need to defend Scripture, how the Scriptures persevere us in suffering, how Jesus fulfilled Scripture, why and how Scripture is meant to be preached, and how Scripture shapes Christian marriage.
In addition to a panel discussion led by Ryan Kelly, both men spoke a total of four times. For those who couldn’t join us, video will be available in the weeks to come, and audio is available now:
With the news of Osama bin Laden's death at the hands of U.S. Navy SEALS this past week a lot of conversation has been sparked as to how Christians should react to such an event. From conversations that I've had personally with friends and family I can say first hand that there are mixed emotions. On the one hand, this is the same man who is responsible for orchestrating the most deadly terrorist attack ever on American soil. On the other, he was a man who had no relationship with Christ and who will now spend an eternity in torment and anguish, separated from God.
So there are clearly two sides to this complex coin from a human perspective, but how does God see it? What does he think about all this?
Ezekiel 18:23–Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord God, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?
Genesis 9:6–Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.
On the surface these verses look to be contradictory, but at the heart of them is the display of God's infinite glory and justice! John Piper has a fantastic article on this tension found here.
A quote from Millard Erickson’s Christian Theology had a significant impact on me the first time I read it several years ago:
. . . In criticism it is not sufficient to find flaws in a given view.
One must always ask,
“What is the alternative?”
and,
“Does the alternative have fewer difficulties?”
John Baillie tells of writing a paper in which he severely criticized a particular view. His professor commented,
“Every theory has its difficulties, but you have not considered whether any other theory has less difficulties than the one you have criticized.” (p. 61)
The following little clip of Phil Donahue interviewing Milton Friedman is a good example of this principle at play.
My point of posting this is not to defend capitalism (though I believe it can be defended from a biblical worldview.) But the main reason for posting it is that is serves as a nice illustration of the fact that criticizing a theory is insufficient if one’s alternate theory is equally weak or worse.
"...we who are believers must learn to glorify Jesus by increasingly apprehending as much graciously revealed truth as we can, forging it into our lives until it both transforms us and prompts spontaneous and enthusiastic praise." (152)
More from Storms in A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ:
The joy that Paul has in mind is a deep, durable, delight in the splendor of God that utterly ruins you for anything else. Its a whole-souled savoring of the spiritual sweetness of Jesus that drives out all competing pleasures and leads the soul to rest content with the knowledge of God and the blessings of intimacy with him. This is the kind of joy that, rather than being dependent on material and physical comfort, actually frees you from bondage to it and liberates you from sinful reliance on worldly conveniences and gadgets and gold." (Storms, C. Samuel. A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ: 100 Daily Meditations on 2 Corinthians. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010. Print. 57)
In his two-volume devotional on Second Corinthians entitled A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ, Sam Storms comments on the idea of the holy Spirit as our 'guarantee' as it appears in 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, "And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee."
Storms writes, "In other words, when you become consciously and experientially aware of the presence within of transcendent deity, of a joy that is inexpressible and full of glory, of a power that triumphs over the allure of fleshly lusts, of a delight that is sweeter than the passing pleasures of sin, of a satisfaction that puts earthly success to shame, you are sensing, if only in small measure, what will be yours in infinite and unending degree in the age to come!"
The Authorized Version was first published 400 years ago, in 1611.
In 1611 William Shakespeare was 46 years old.
In the AV translation of Psalm 46 …
… the 46th word from the top is translated “shake” (v. 3)
… the 46th word from the bottom is translated “spear” (v. 9)
It is highly doubtful this was pulled off by Shakespeare himself. But perhaps this was the work of a sneaky translator or editor? Perhaps this acknowledges Shakespeare’s literary influence on the AV translators? Or perhaps this is just a mere coincidence of great statistical proportion? We will probably never know.
You that are yet in the flower of your days, full of health and strength, and, with all the vigour of your spirits, do pursue some one thing, some another, consider, I pray, what are all your beloveds to this Beloved? What have you gotten by them? Let us see the peace, quietness, assurance of everlasting blessedness that they have given you? Their paths are crooked paths, whoe’er goes in them shall not know peace. Behold here a fit object for your choicest affections,—one in whom you may find rest to your souls,—one in whom there is nothing will grieve and trouble you to eternity. Behold, he stands at the door of your souls, and knocks: reject him not, lest you seek him and find him not! Pray study him a little; you love him not, because you know him not. Why doth one of you spend his time in idleness and folly, and wasting of precious time, —perhaps debauchedly? Why doth another associate and assemble himself with them that scoff at religion and the things of God? Merely because you know not our dear Lord Jesus. Oh, when he shall reveal himself to you, and tell you he is Jesus whom you have slighted and refused, how will it break your hearts, and make you mourn like a dove, that you have neglected him! and if you never come to know him, it had been better you had never been. Whilst it is called To-day, then, harden not your hearts.
- John Owen -
from Of Communion With God, volume 2 of Works, page 53
As the body receives things into itself by the hands and mouth, so the soul receives these things to itself, and lays actual hold on them, by the faculty of the will, making choice of them and embracing them in a way of present enjoyment and possession, as it does by the faculty of the understanding, see and apprehend them.
In The Reformed Pastor, Richard Baxter gives us an insight into godly productivity; a tidbit of wisdom to help us to what we are called to do. In speaking of the work of catechizing his congregation, Baxter confesses,
I was long convinced of it, but my apprehensions of the difficulties were too great, and my apprehensions of the duty too small., and so I was long hindered from the performance of it.
I think we often react to jobs and work in a similar way. One, we exaggerate the difficulties until the chore looks overwhelming. Second, we downplay the importance of the work, downgrading it from essential, to necessary, to optional. Thirdly, we don't do it.
A precious word of wisdom to take heed of from one of the Puritan eras great pastors. Let's evaluate the work with wisdom and honesty, and then get to it in the grace of God.
Christ [is] the very essence of all delights and pleasures, the very soul and substance of them. As all the rivers are gathered into the ocean, which is congregation or meeting-place of all waters in the world: so Christ is that ocean in which all true delights and pleasures meet. . . .
His excellencies are pure and unmixed; he is a sea of sweetness without one drop of gall.
What kind of author, Christian author that is, would write a book that had the words “Greener Grass” in the title and started a chapter with the following: “Had I lived in ancient Israel, I would have been stoned. Not in the “Hey, man, pass me another doobie” way but in the “People are throwing large stones at my head” way.” (59)?
Stephen Altrogge, that's who.
According to the bio at his blog, “Stephen Altrogge works as a pastor at Sovereign Grace Church of Indiana, PA, where his main duties include leading worship, working with college students, and shining his dad’s shoes. He also has written a number of worship songs that have been included on Sovereign Grace Music albums. Stephen is the author of the book Game Day For the Glory of God: A Guide For Athletes, Fans, and Wanabes, which was published by Crossway Books in September 2008, and The Greener Grass Conspiracy: Finding Contentment on Your Side of the Fence, which will be published by Crossway Books in April 2011. When not shining his dad’s shoes, you can find Stephen drinking coffee or playing video games.”
This lighthearted playing with words can be found throughout the book. But don't let that colour your impression of the book. The Greener Grass Conspiracy is a serious book dealing with a serious topic; contentment. Altrogge's use of humor is an appreciated skill when reading a book that concerns itself with selfishness, suffering, and sin.
The Greener Grass Conspiracy is a work that seems to lean on two classics on the same subject: The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment by Jeremiah Burroughs and The Art of Divine Contentment by Thomas Watson. I have read the former but not the latter. Both these Puritan books are considered by many to be 'must-reads' on the topic of contentment and Altrogge's dependence on them is wise and winsome. By drawing from Watson's book and 'The Rare Jewel', and sprinkling in some quotes by Piper, Spurgeon, and Tada, Altrogge has produced a nice little gem.
Altrogge's writing style, simple to silly to sophisticated to serious, makes this subject approachable to many who might find the aforementioned Puritan volumes too difficult or too much work. He discusses many facets of this timeless and troublesome transgression with personal stories that help in the recognition of the problems as well as some of the answers and practical responses in dealing with being discontented.
After opening with the idea of a conspiracy that enmeshes us all and breeds a dangerous and deadening discontentment in us all, Altrogge begins to unfold the dilemma of the discontented. In the first two chapters, the author discusses the reasons for the problem of not being content. First, when it comes to discontentedness, “The problem is me. I am my own worst enemy. The raging, covetous, discontented desires come from within” (17). Secondly, discontentment “happens when I attempt to displace God from his rightful place at the center of the universe ... Discontentment results from a big view of myself and a very little view of God” (24). With this starting point of man's depravity, Altrogge begins his exhorting and explaining of true contentment.
After exposing the underlying roots of the 'Greener Grass Conspiracy', Altrogge lays the groundwork for a life of contentment by giving the reader his definition of contentment: “Contentment is a disposition of the heart that freely and joyfully submits to God's will, whatever that will may be” (28). This Borroughs-inspired definition indicates where the author would like to see his readers focus instead of grass-gazing at others.
After breaking down his definition, Altrogge works through issues related to contentment: idolatry and lies we believe about God's character and ours. This opens his discussion on the gospel. I found the chapter entitled Bloody Contentment to be my favorite. In Altrogge's opinion, to be content we need to have a relationship with God which is only possible due to the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. In similar fashion to other Sovereign Grace Ministries authors, Altrogge keeps the cross at the center of this work. The next chapters move towards practical application of what Altrogge has expounded so far.
We learn that contentment can not be conjured with a magical formula and that a sincere relationship with Jesus is the only “secret” to sustaining a disposition of contentment. We are presented with the dangers of complaining and the benefits of gratefulness. These chapters add some depth to the book and their practical bent will be appreciated by readers.
The final two chapters focus on encouragement. We can find solace in suffering when we consider the fact that God is working all things for our good. And our forward-looking view of heaven will provide motivation for a heart-posture that is submissive to God.
I found this book a great, quick read on a topic that we North Americans need constant reminder about. The Greener Grass Conspiracy stays far away from self-help therapy and cliche-ridden platitudes by focusing on God and the gospel. Altrogge's 80's allusions (Back to the Future for example), sarcasm, and willingness to poke fun at himself make a sometimes difficult discussion considerably easier. Despite the looked-for but noticeably absent bacon jokes (follower Mark on twitter for an idea about his bacon infatuation), this is a book that will work nicely as a compliment to the weightier works by the Burroughs and Watson and it just may be a better choice for a small group study or a less ambitious reader. I definitely recommend it.
One of the issues that I have been working on-thinking about, reading about, talking about, praying about, preaching about hearing about-is how the gospel functions in our life. The gospel is hard-core objective truth; it is news about what has already happened-really happened, in time, eternally true. "How does this foundation work itself out in our daily lives?" is the question I have been grappling with.
Walter Marshall suggests that the gospel truths are necessary precursors to gospel practices. He believes that the comfort from the benefits and the promises that result from the grace of God works as arguments and motivations to stir us up to gospel-living.
Here is the excerpt I found so helpful:
The usual method of gospel doctrine, as it is delivered to us in the Holy Scriptures, is first, to comfort our hearts, and in this way to establish us in every good word and work (2 Thess. 2:17). And it appears how clearly this method is adjusted in several Epistles written by the apostles, in which they first acquaint the churches with the rich grace of God towards them in Christ, and the spiritual blessings which they are made partakers of for their strong consolation, and they exhort them to a holy conversation, answerable to such privileges. And it is not only the method of whole Epistles, but of many particular exhortations to duty, in which the comfortable benefits of the grace of God in Christ are made use of as arguments and motives to stir up the saints to a holy practice; which comfortable benefits must first be believed, and the comfort of them applied to our own souls, or else they will not be forcible to engage us to the practice for which they are intended.
To give you a few instances, out of a multitude that might be alleged, we are exhorted to practice holy duties because we are dead to sin and alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom. 6:11); and because sin shall not have dominion over us, for we are not under the law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14); because we are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, and God will quicken our mortal bodies by His Spirit dwelling in us (Rom. 8:9, 11); because our bodies are the members of Christ and the temples of the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. 6:15, 19); because God has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (2 Cor. 5:21); and has promised that He will dwell in us, and walk in us, and be to us a Father, and we shall be to Him sons and daughters (2 Cor. 6:18; 7:1); because God has forgiven us for Christ's sake, and accounts us His dear children; and Christ has loved us, and given Himself for us; and we, that were sometimes darkness, are now light in the Lord (Eph. 4:32; 5:1, 2, 8); because we are risen with Christ and, when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall we also appear with Him in glory (Col. 3:1, 4); because God has said, 'I will never leave you,. nor forsake you' (Heb. 13:5); because of the many promises made to us (2 Cor. 7:1). Search the Scriptures, and you may with delight see that this is the vein that runs through gospel exhortations, and you may find the like vein of comfort running through the prophetical exhortations in the Old Testament.
Walter Marshall, in The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, on the benefits of sanctification endeavored biblically:
Now, mark well the great advantages you have for the attainment of holiness by seeking it in a right gospel order.
You will have the advantage of the love God manifested towards you,
in forgiving your sins, receiving you into favour, and giving you the spirit of adoption, and the hope of His glory freely through Christ,
to persuade and constrain you by sweet allurements to love God again, who has so dearly loved you,
and to love others for His sake,
and to give up yourselves to the obedience of all His commands out of hearty love to Him.
You will also enjoy the held of the Spirit of God to incline you powerfully to obedience, and to strengthen you for the performance of it against all your corruptions and the temptations of Satan, so that you will have both wind and tide to forward your voyage in the practice of holiness.
On the panel at The Gospel Coalition I was asked how my preaching may have become more Christocentric over the years. Here’s the summary of my answer.
My devotion to the truth that God magnifies himself in all that he does has been increasingly refined in a Christ-centered direction. I have been driven in this direction by a cluster of insights.
1. The apex of God’s display of his own glory is the display of his grace.
“God predestined . . . according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace” (Ephesians 1:5–6). Grace is the endpoint in the revelation of God’s glory.
This is seen in the way wrath serves to make God more glorious for the vessels of mercy. “Desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, God has endured with much patience vessels of wrath . . . in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy” (Romans 9:22–23).
2. God’s glorification of his grace was planned before creation.
“God chose us in him before the foundation of the world . . . to the praise of the glory of his grace” (Ephesians 1:4–6).
3. God’s glorification of his grace was to happen through the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
“He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ . . . to the praise of the glory of his grace” (Ephesians 1:5–6).
“God called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began” (2 Timothy 1:9).
4. From eternity the apex of God’s glorification of his grace was designed to be Christ’s crucifixion for sinners.
Before there was any human sin to die for, God planned that his Son be slain for sinners. We know this because of the name given to the book of life before creation. “Everyone [will worship the beast] whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain” (Revelation 13:8).
5. God’s glorification of his grace in the crucifixion of his Son for sinners was the ultimate purpose for creating the universe.
“All things were created through him and for him” (Colossians 1:16). For all eternity we will sing “the song of the Lamb” (Rev. 15:3). We will say, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain” (Revelation 5:9).
6. Therefore God planned from eternity that the revelation of his glory would be the ultimate reason for creating the universe.
This glory would be supremely displayed in God’s grace. This grace would be supremely glorified in Jesus. And the apex of that glorification in Jesus would be reached when he was slain to save a people who would spend eternity magnifying the greatness of that grace.
In other words the universe was created for the glorification of God’s grace at Calvary, echoing through eternity in the Christ-exalting joys of the redeemed.
Dr. Gary Milley will soon be taking up his position at Church in the Oaks, the church where the bloggers of this blog attend. This is an article I recall reading when Milley was being considered for the position. A recent tweet by @Rich_Cherry reminded me of it. You can read the whole article here, and below you will find an excerpt.
It’s Tough being Pentecostal! By Garry E. Milley
I grew up among the Newfoundland Pentecostals. That tells you a lot about me! I was raised in a pastor’s home and cut my teeth on the back of a pew when it wasn’t popular to be a Pentecostal. Pentecostalism now numbers close to one half a billion world wide—half the size of Roman Catholicism in one tenth of the time! The bulk of the growth is in Asia, Africa and South America. I lived through the transition from persecution to popularity, poverty to prosperity. We are celebrating what the early Pentecostals could only dream about. However, we are our own worst enemies here in North America.
But, preachers who blow people down, promise miracles for money, or who encourage strange behavior as proof of God’s work, embarrass me. I tire of being tyrannized by every religious fad. I am sick of the thin theological gruel dished out by the religious media. I want to be loyal to my roots without being blind to past errors. I oscillate between recovering the original vision and transcending traditionalism. I want the revival to mature as an expression of historic Christianity and not fossilize as a monument to the past.
I want to be positive about what is going on in the broader Christian world without being gullible and I want to offer advice on questionable issues without being merely opinionated. I, too, am a pilgrim in search of a city. I don’t have all the answers. But I’m fearful of remaining silent when something needs to be said. It’s tough being a balanced, sympathetic but self-critical Pentecostal.
I love it when God orchestrates my sanctification through multiple avenues. For some reason, this captures my attention and helps me process and progress the lesson at hand. I am even learning to like it when it comes with a punch to my pride and a sidekick to my selfishness.
Last night I was roasting coffee and reading The Reformed Pastor by Richard Baxter. A lengthy tirade against pride in the clergy caught my attention. It is a long excerpt, but well worth the read.
One of our most heinous and palpable sins is PRIDE. This is a sin that hath too much interest in the best of us, but which is more hateful and inexcusable in us than in other men. Yet is it so prevalent in some of us, that it inditeth our discourses, it chooseth our company, it formeth our countenances, it putteth the accent and emphasis upon our words. It fills some men’s minds with aspiring desires, and designs: it possesseth them with envious and bitter thoughts against those who stand in their light, or who by any means eclipse their glory, or hinder the progress of their reputation. Oh what a constant companion, what a tyrannical commander, what a sly and subtle insinuating enemy, is this sin of pride! It goes with men to the draper, the mercer, the tailor: ‘it chooseth them their cloth, their trimming, and their fashion. Fewer ministers would ruffle it out in the fashion in hair and habit, if it were not for the command of this tyrannous vice. And I would that this were all, or the worst. But, alas! how frequently doth it go with us to our study, and there sit with us and do our work! How oft doth it choose our subject, and, more frequently still, our words and ornaments! God commandeth us to be as plain as we can, that we may inform the ignorant; and as convincing and serious as we are able, that we may melt and change their hardened hearts. But pride stands by and contradicteth all, and produceth its toys and trifles. It polluteth rather than polisheth; and, under pretense of laudable ornaments, dishonoreth our sermons with childish gauds: as if a prince were to be decked in the habit of a stage-player, or a painted fool. It persuadeth us to paint the window, that it may dim the light: and to speak to our people that which they cannot understand; to let them know that we are able to speak unprofitably. If we have a plain and cutting passage, it taketh off the edge, and dulls the life of our preaching, under pretense of filing off’ the roughness, unevenness, and superfluity. When God chargeth us to deal with men as for their lives, and to beseech them with all the earnestness that we are able, this cursed sin controlleth all, and condemneth the most holy commands of God, and saith to us, ‘What! will you make people think you are mad? will you make them say you rage or rave? Cannot you speak soberly and moderately?’ And thus doth pride make many a man’s sermons; and what pride makes, the devil makes; and what sermons the devil will make and to what end, we may easily conjecture. Though the matter be of God, yet if the dress, and manner, and end be from Satan, we have no great reason to expect success.
Pride is an oft-encountered obstacle in my walk with God. Baxter's keen writing caught my attention and caused me to contemplate my corrupted confidence ill-placed on myself.
This morning I read the devotional on 2 Corinthians by Sam Storms entitled a Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ. In the third devotion, Storms considers 2 Corinthians 1:8-11 which reads,
For we do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again. You also must help us by prayer, so that many will give thanks on our behalf for the blessing granted us through the prayers of many.
Of this passage of Scripture Storms suggests that "as overwhelming, excessive, and burdensome as this brush with death was for Paul, he knew that God was in it!" (32). Paul realized that there was a point behind the tribulation, and that the point was to "make us not rely on ourselves." The crystal-clear clarion call was the second step in my recent sanctification.
The process was continued as I read in Jeremiah this morning, chapter 44 to be precise. In chapter 44 Jeremiah prophesies to the remnant of Israel who have traveled to Egypt, contrary to Jeremiah's instructions, for fear of the Chaldeans. Jeremiah urges, repeatedly, the remnant to stop whoring after their idols. However, the people reject his God-backed rebuke and aver that they will continue to worship their gods and goddesses. This passage also spoke loudly to me; let me put it all together.
Baxter reminded me that I am a prideful person prone to promote myself. Storms sought to show me that one area in which my pride surfaces is in self-reliance in struggles. Jeremiah's jolting of the Jews helped me realize that my continual returning to relying on my own means in the midst of difficulties was akin to the vulgar ignorance and conceited indifference that the Israelite remnant displayed when they refused to refrain from worshiping their idols.
God help me to rely on you and refrain from returning to my idol of self-reliance. Use your rod of discipline, particularly in my current difficulties, to cure me of whoring after the glorifying of self. Your love is evident in this as true joy can only be found when I glorify you and recognize your rightful place; first and foremost. Thank you for your teachers, dead and alive, who help to point me in this direction. Thank you most of all for your Word, which contains Your words, and leads into truth.
If we be so tender of ourselves, and so loath to confess, God will be the less tender of us, and he will indite our confession, or his judgements shall proclaim our iniquities to the world.
There are several things from this quote that resonate with me. First, Baxter's disdain with being tender with oneself in the face of sin strikes a chord with me. I want to be honest, and ruthless if needs be, with sin in my own life; I don't want to be a self-coddler. Second, the idea he puts forth that the loathing of confession should pale in comparison to the loathing one should have for displeasing God. That is a powerful contrast if we put our minds on it and consider our lives in light of it. Finally, I want a heart that confesses sin quickly. If fear of exposure helps that, though perhaps not the best motivation available, then I want to keep that in mind and leverage my confession should I be recoiling from it.
In The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, Walter MArshall rails against legalism by refuting our ability to please God through our own efforts of moral performance. In the following excerpt, Marshall exposes that we often think that our sincere endeavours to live a life of dutiful holiness will secure our salvation and foment God's favour. Such is not the case. Sincerity is no more sufficient to save us than is the performance of our duties. Thus he writes,
Our consciences are informed by the common light of natural reason that it is just with God to require us to perform these duties, that we may avoid His wrath and enjoy His favour. And we cannot find any better way than this to obtain happiness, or to stir up ourselves to duty, without divine revelation. Yet, because our own consciences testify that we often fail in the performance of those duties, we are inclined by self-love to persuade ourselves that our sincere endeavours to do the best we can shall be sufficient to procure the favour of God, and pardon for all our failings.
Marshall continues to remind us that sanctification is by faith and not of works, the same as our salvation. And yet, we are called to work out our salvation as we know that it is God who works and causes us to will it.
Jeremiah Burroughs in The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment:
You never learned the mystery of contentment unless it may be said of you that, just as you are the most contented man, so you are also the most unsatisfied man in the world. You will say, 'How is that?' A man who has learned the art of contentment is the most contented with any low condition that he has in the world, and yet he cannot be satisfied with the enjoyment of all the world.
I used to often wonder about the Christian's future life in heaven and about how that life would be played out. One of the things that troubled me was the doubt about our ability to remain, for eternity, in a state of sinlessness. I figured, Adam and Eve lived as sinless beings and walked with God and yet they sinned. What is to insure and assure us against sinning in our afterlife; eternity is a long time.
One of the errors I was making in these thoughts was that I had wrongly assumed that the atoning work of Christ was an attempt to 'get us back to the garden.' I thought our goal in the Christian life was to become, once again, like Adam and Eve. Now, there is some truth to these ideas, but they fall short of the purpose of God's work in Christ on our behalf.
Walter Marshall discusses this in The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, saying:
... Christ aimed at a higher end in His incarnation, death and resurrection, than the restoring the decay and ruins of our natural state. He aimed to advance us to a new state, more excellent than the state of nature ever was, by union and fellowship with Himself, that we might live to God, not by the power of a natural free will, but by the power of His Spirit living and acting in us.
We can rest assured that eternal bliss will not be interrupted by iniquity because we are not being made like Adam. Rather, we are being made like Christ. And our union with Christ by the Holy Spirit seals this eternally. Praise God.
I spent some time this morning praying for and thinking about the various ministries that I am involved in. I am so thankful to God not only for the privilege it is to be in ministry full time, but specifically this morning I was so grateful that God has sustained these ministries over the last two years, despite my own short-comings, busyness and a difficult time of transition for the church at large.
One ministry in particular that I am so encouraged in by the fruit we've been seeing recently is the young adult ministry. It is hard to imagine four years ago Chris (my blogging comrade) and I were leading a group of twenty-somethings by getting them together to drink coffee, talk about all the things that we see wrong in the "church today", assume our generation had better ideas... and, well, occasionally open up our bibles.
This past Monday I sat as we closed in prayer, listening to the prayers pouring forth from these young people. They aren't the same people they were four years ago, or two years ago, or even one year ago. They are growing tremendously, both in their desire to know God and their desire to study and learn more about Him.
How did it happen?
Well I assure you it had little to do with me. In fact, all I really had to learn to do was get out of the way... check my own massive ego at the door and just try pointing to the cross.
We took some time to talk about God's Sovereignty (in history, in current circumstances and in salvation), then we took some time to study the gospel specifically. What is the gospel? What is necessary in the sharing of an "unadjusted gospel"? How do we articulate it and how does it make a practical difference in our day to day, post-conversion life?
This past September we went through a book together called "Living the Cross Centered Life" by CJ Mahaney and finally now we are going through the video worldview study: The Truth Project.
Gospel. Gospel. Gospel.
I go through this because it was a healthy reminder to me this morning that often times we, as church leaders, get inflated with our own "great" ideas. A series we think will penetrate hard hearts, an event we think will draw the masses. A way of teaching that will make more people, more comfortable.
The amazingly satisfying revelation in all this is that I don't save anyone. I can't change a person's life. (And quite honestly, the harder I try, the more I usually mess them up.)
What I can do though, is point people to the cross. And it seems the closer people get to the cross the more God can radically redefine their lives.
This past Monday I sat astounded as doctrines of God's Sovereignty over evil and suffering, doctrines of election, the reality of Christ's lordship and a true desire to have our will fall under the will of God laced the closing prayers.
Thank you Lord that you are Sovereign over people's hearts. And I pray that I would never forget.
This Sunday at Church in the Oaks we continue the series on Living in Community that interim Pastor Owen Black started.
Jude, Rich and I have each had an opportunity to preach in this series, and this coming Sunday I preach again, and the topic given to me is "Authenticity".
This is another broad topic, and I sought help on how to approach the subject through the lens of the cross. Who better to help me with that, then John Piper?
I really enjoyed this quote speaking of Romans 14:
"Verse 9 tells us what that divine purpose is: "For to this end (for this purpose) Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living." God's purpose in sending Christ to die for our sins and rise again was to purchase us out of slavery to the lordship of sin and bring us over as servants under the lordship of Christ (1 Corinthians 6:20; 7:23; 1 Peter 1:18). We are called to be servants of Christ, and there will be no abiding sense of authenticity as long as we strive against this submission and allegiance. We were made to bow before the Son of God and to live for his honor. Until we do, we will feel adrift in the universe and be plagued by a deep sense of inauthenticity."
From Sinclair Ferguson's John Owen on the Christian Life I came across these instructions that that the author, Ferguson, summarized from Owen's writings:
Duty is man’s responsibility to God, and there are 4 reasons Owen thinks it should be so: 1. Duties are consistent with the new nature – we have a disposition towards it 2. Duties cannot be performed without the Spirit’s help 3. Duties are defined in Scripture 4. Duties must be performed by faith
We have a duty to mortify sin, which consists of three things: 1. A cherishing and improving of the principle of grace 2. Frequent exercise in all God-given duties 3. Application of the principle, power and actings of grace in opposition to sin
The first summary, speaking of duties, undermines much of what we associate with duty; duty is not a great self-generated effort to do what is right. Rather, it is the working out of a God-generated disposition with a Spirit-fuelled ability in a faith-filled context.
The second summary is also an eye opener. The mortifying of sin begins with grace as a principle, and continues with the exercise of that grace in duties and in opposition to sin.
I read this book a few years ago and am enjoying re-reading the significant quotes I recorded.
Monday, April 11, 2011
From Your Mind Matters by John Stott:
But the fact that man’s mind is fallen is no excuse for a retreat from thought into emotion, for the emotional side of man’s nature is equally fallen. Indeed, sin has more dangerous effects on our faculty of feeling than on our faculty of thinking, because our opinions are more easily checked and regulated by revealed truth than our experience.
Here is an excerpt-line breaks, bullets, and emphasis mine-from the fourth direction in Walter Marshall's classic work on sanctification entitled The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification:
A hearty affectionate trusting on Christ for all His salvation, as freely promised to us, has naturally enough in it to work in our souls a rational bent and inclination to, and ability for, the practice of holiness; because it comprehends in it a trusting that, through Christ,
we are dead to sin and alive to God;
that our old man is crucified (Rom. 6:2-4);
and that we live by the Spirit (Gal. 5:25);
and that we have forgiveness of sin;
and that God is our God (Ps. 48:14);
and that we have in the Lord righteousness and strength, by which we are able to do all things (Isa. 45:24; Phil. 4:13);
and that we shall be gloriously happy in the enjoyment of Christ to all eternity (Phil. 3:20, 21).
I'd like to note two things, two glorious things, about this passage. First, the inclination and ability to grow and perform godliness is inherent in faith. The trusting and treasuring of Christ, a gift of grace from God, which believes in the gospel and on Christ, comes with the things necessary for growth in Christ-likeness. This is contrary to any type of legalism which suggests we can please God through our self-centered working and striving. It is all by grace.
Secondly, consider-no, rather, feast-on the list of the benefits of faith. If that does not stir you, what will?
Around New years I put a lot of thought in to "how" I wanted to read my bible this year. Two years ago I invited my youth leadership team to read through the bible with me in 2009. Last year I picked a book at a time and read through a few books more slowly and carefully with one of RC Sproul's suggested commentaries.
This year I decided to continue my commentary aided, in-depth study, but planned to accompany that with a reading of a Psalm or Proverb each day.
I am currently working through the Gospel of Luke and spending time in the Psalms because I recently heard John Piper say that we should always have a good dose of the gospels and psalms in our daily in taking of the word... for it is in the gospels we see Christ most clearly, and it is in the psalms we see ourselves most clearly.
Today i was reading Psalm 22,, where there is a healthy dose of both sights. I was reflecting on some words I found of Spurgeon's on this text:
"For plaintive expressions uprising from unutterable depths of woe we may say of this Psalm, there is none like it. It is the photograph of our Lord's saddest hours, the record of his dying words, the lachrymatory of his last tears, the memorial of his expiring joys. David and his afflictions may be here in a very modified sense, but, as the star is concealed by the light of the sun, he who sees Jesus will probably neither see nor care to see David. . . . We should read reverently, putting off our shoes from off our feet, as Moses did at the burning bush, for if there be holy ground anywhere in Scripture, it is in this Psalm" (CHS).
I agree with Spurgeon that this psalm, even though it may speak of David's personal experience, is Messianic, pointing to Christ.
The opening words of the psalm are found on the lips of Jesus as he hung on the cross in Matthew 27:46. The taunt of the scorners, "... those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads", (Matt. 27:39) is from v. 7. They also challenged him in Matthew 27:43)with the very words of verse 8. And Jesus cried out from the cross, "I thirst" (John 19:28), in fulfillment of verse 15. Finally, his garments being split among those who pierced him is seen in verses 186to 18.
There comes a time, when reading certain passages of God's Word, that commentary must yield to contemplation.
For me, the psalms are a portion of scripture I am so used to seeing the depths of my own sin... and in this psalm in particular I see the suffering of my saviour and see myself in the portraits of those surrounding him on the cross.
He died for me, he suffered for me, and I will never be grateful enough for it...
As I continue to work through The Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin, I have reached Calvin's discussion of the trinity. I particularly enjoyed this section and the seriousness and consideration with which the author tackles it. Calvin also approaches the doctrine with humility, stresses on numerous occasions that we cannot know, and should not delve, beyond what Scripture teaches about the trinity.
I section 18 of chapter 13, Calvin writes,
...the Father is attributed the beginning of activity, and the fountain and wellspring of all things; to the Son, wisdom, counsel, and the ordered disposition of all things; but to the Spirit is assigned the power and efficacy of that activity. Indeed, although the eternity of the Father is also the eternity of the Son and the Spirit, since God could never exist apart from his wisdom and power, and we must not seek in eternity a before or an after, nevertheless the observance of an order is not meaningless or superfluous, when the Father is thought of first, then from him the Son, and finally from both the Spirit.
Of course, the trinitarian discourse presented throughout is heady stuff, but it is a discussions that is of great import;
...Satan, in order to tear our faith from its very roots, has always been instigating great battles, partly concerning the distinction of the persons. He has during nearly all ages stirred up ungodly spirits to harry orthodox teachers over this matter and today also is trying to kindle a new fire from the old embers. (1.13.21)
I have continued to read and study about the two natures-or one, depending on how you define 'nature'-and I have come across another interesting piece. Puritan Thomas Boston preached a sermon entitled The Old and the New Man in Believers. It is a quick read and well worth the short time investment. Here is an interesting quote on the old man being crucified:
The old man may live long on the cross before he be destroyed: but then his hands and feet cannot serve him as they did before, there are nails driven through them; he may move them indeed, but then it is with pain and difficulty.
Boston later explains,
The old man in believers is in a state of death, though not dead outright. It is crucified with Christ. It may move and stir in them, and vehement struggles it may make, as a dying man struggling with the mortal disease: but whatever efforts it make, it is on the cross, whence it shall not come down till it breathe out its last.
This side of several months pondering Bavinck's writings on justification, here's my best attempt at a single (run-on) sentence articulating his view--
Justification, the outstanding blessing of salvation, is the Triune God’s counterintuitive gift of forensic acquittal and right status, an end-time decision announced now in the middle of history, consisting of Christ’s own righteous obedience freely imputed to sinners united to Christ through self-divesting and Christ-riveted faith.
The Greener Grass Conspiracy: A Review
From Your Mind Matters by John Stott:
As I continue to work through The Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin, I have reached Calvin's discussion of the trinity. I particularly enjoyed this section and the seriousness and consideration with which the author tackles it. Calvin also approaches the doctrine with humility, stresses on numerous occasions that we cannot know, and should not delve, beyond what Scripture teaches about the trinity.