My Redeemer Lives Ministries

My final farewell to the Grace to You blog. They are closing up shop.

2012-01-27T12:40:00.000-08:00

I have felt very privileged to be a part of this great ministry, even if it was from the outside looking in. When I first started posting here, Gabriel Powell assured me that John MacArthur welcomed women as contributors. It was very good news for many Christian women, who love the Lord and love to discuss His Word.

The levels of professionalism from the administrators of this blog, like Tommy Clayton, Fred Butler, Gabriel Powell, and Travis Allen, have been absolutely stellar. Their writing has been inspirational, and the level of teaching, par excellence. They have, after all, learned from a master shepherd, John MacArthur, whose love for the truth is boundless and knows no end.

We were all brought here together because of our love for one book and one Lord; but not just any book, but a book that has eternal significance: the Bible. Words have meaning and consequences, and no other book written throughout our history teaches that with such clarity and force. There have been eloquent men and women who wrote poetry, prose, and great literature, over the centuries, who felt their works of art, was their way of touching eternity. Chaucer was one such man; at the end of Troilus and Criseyde, he wrote, “Go, litel book!” Hoping that his words would take flight, like the seeds of a dandelion on the tail of a wind, and disseminate for all future generations to tarry over and adore. But who remembers Troilus and Criseyde? Who could even spell it? And how “litel” a book it must have been. But alas, we know that all is pure vanity. Only one book has conquered all others, and continues to vanquish its enemies.

God reminds us here: “Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher; all is vanity. Besides being wise, the Preacher also taught the people knowledge, weighing and studying and arranging many proverbs with great care. The Preacher sought to find words of delight, and uprightly he wrote words of truth. The words of the wise are like goads, and like nails firmly fixed are the collected sayings; they are given by one Shepherd. My son, beware of anything beyond these. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh. The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man (Ecc 12:8-13).”

Lastly, this was Carol Burnett’s theme song (I took the liberties of rearranging it a bit). I'm so glad we had this time together, just to have a prayer, or share a Bible verse or two. Seems we just get started and before you know it comes the time we have to say, "So long."

Waiting for the return of our precious Lord, Jesus Christ!

They Poured Out Innocent Blood

2012-01-23T18:47:00.001-08:00

Who Knows What Evil Lurks in the Hearts of Men?

2012-01-18T17:17:00.000-08:00

Written by Mary Elizabeth Palshan (Tyler)
January 18, 2012

We’ve all read the reports of the Marines who were involved in the scandal of urinating on the dead corpses of the Afghan soldiers. It is the current fodder from a war-torn part of our world that is under the iron grip of a false religion and a false god. The attempt by the Taliban is to cut a swath (make a pretentious display of) and put not only our men in uniform, but also our nation as a whole in a bad light. Not to say that it didn’t happen, or that it is befitting behavior coming from our soldiers. We, as Americans, do hold to a moral code of conduct, and we should do everything possible to uphold these standards.

However, war is ugly, brutal, and subject to unpredictability’s. Holding to a standard of ethics is difficult when you see your comrades bodies treated like cadavers made ready for the slaughterhouse. The beheadings of American soldiers and journalists by this evil group of godless men, causes us to rally around our boys, who love our flag and maintain our freedoms with their young, precious lives. We come to their aid and defense, in spite of their alleged crimes. It is, after all, a thing called patriotism. But then war itself has its many incalculable, fundamental, and inherent problems; how do we in fact justify killing anyone, or urinating on dead men, or stomach and forgive those men who beheaded our own people? It is far too mind-boggling for even the most ardent theologians, philosophers, and politicians to wrap their minds around. When war takes a turn from a clean kill, to one of brutal butchery from an evil heart that enjoys killing for the sick thrill of it, we know we are in for the long haul of trying to explain evil and all its manifestations and aberrations.

If we intend to keep things simple, in an age of notable complexities, the old adage is worth repeating here, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” This can provide some moorings to which one can be directed by. But platitudes quickly get lost in the blood, sweat, guts and gun smoke of real flesh-to-flesh battle; and young men can, and do, loose their compass. So to blame our Marines for their offense is a hard sell we Americans are not willing to buy. Sadly, though, there are simply no quaint or enchanting war stories of complete innocence on either side of the fence to be passed around the picnic tables. Or discussed at fire-side-chats at camp Grenada, where frivolities and mirth keep us giddy, dazed and safe from harm. War does not make for pleasant conversation anywhere. So our men of war, regrettably, brood all alone, like the few lost and lingering souls who survived the horrors of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. The average non-military person cannot understand and comprehend the extreme depths of evil that lurks in the hearts of men? Even eye witnesses loath to give it description.

The American idiom, “Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows," was coined by Walter B. Gibson for the famed radio program known as the Shadow. At the close of each episode, the Shadow would remind its listeners, “"The weed of crime bears bitter fruit. Crime does not pay.... The Shadow knows!" As prophetic and full of wisdom as these two phrases may well be, and as perceptive as the Shadow was, we know that the author took his cues directly from a panoramic view of our corrupt world. Not that I pay homage to the author of the Shadow; but the Shadow was a predictable “light,” ironically. Casting not a shadow, but a light, into the dark recesses of all mankinds disturbed misdeeds. But the Shadow pales in comparison to a greater light that is capable of a much deeper penetration, into the long and winding caverns of our wicked hearts. We all know that the human heart (but for the grace of God) is capable of much evil. There but for the grace of God go all of us.

That illumination and light is the Word of God. “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Heb 4:12).” God knows what lies in the shadows and secret chambers of our hearts. “They (we) have all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one (Psa 14:3).”

Hard truths are often hard to swallow. No one wants to admit we could be far worse than what we are, or as bad as God describes in such pointed detail. Our very minds bristle at such a thought; we love our autonomy and our (lite) form of sin. God is referring not just to the evil butchers in this world, here, but also to all men who have fallen since Adam. “All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way (Isa 53:6).” We have all trampled the holiness and purity of God underfoot. And unless we repent of our sins and turn to Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, we will pay the hefty price for our rebellion against a Holy and just God, who desires that all men come to the knowledge of His Son to be saved.

We are only who we are because of God’s grace. If God so chooses, He can make an evil tax collector into an honest citizen; a murderer like the Apostle Paul, into one who weeps sincerely over the fate of the lost sheep of Israel; a coward like Abraham, into a saint, whose progeny God promised to multiply like the glittering stars of the heavens, and a Christ denier like Peter, who denied the Lord three times, into a faithful servant.

The converse to this is God’s ability to raise up evil men like Pharoah, so that by comparison, He can put His glory on display for the entire world to witness. Evil has its purpose in this dark, sin-infested world. To make God’s holiness shine in all its resplendent glory. The evil deeds of men will condemn those who choose to brandish their form of wickedness and butchery over and above God’s righteousness. But be not deceived, God is not mocked, what we sow, we will also reap. “..For it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord (Rom 12:19).”

If God lifted His powerful hand and decided not to restrain most all evil, this world would spiral out of control, and debauchery and malfeasance of every manifestation and stripe would consume all of us. We owe every breath and blessing to our Creator, whether we acknowledge Him as such, or not.

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? That should be a no brainer! God knows. He says this is His Word: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings (Jer 17:9-10).”

But the GOOD NEWS IS: “The LORD is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works. The LORD is **NIGH** unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth. He will fulfill the desire of them that FEAR him: he also will hear their cry, and will save them. The LORD preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will He destroy. My mouth shall speak the praise of the LORD: and let all flesh bless his Holy name for ever and ever (Psa 145:17-21).”

One day soon, the beatific vision will appear before us, and we “Shall see Him as He is (I John 3:2).” “So that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Phl 2:10-11).”

A New Year's resolution Dr. Barnhouse style!

2011-12-31T08:28:00.000-08:00

I found this New Year's resolution while reading an article by Ray Stedman "Ishmael Must Go." May we ALL benefit from the widom of it.

"I recall reading an article about Dr. Barnhouse and was struck by evidences of this very choice in his experience. He said, "Early in my ministry, I had the idea that I must strike out against all error wherever I saw it. I hit Christian Science, Unitarianism, Romanism, and if error was in some fundamental leader with whom I was in 95% agreement, I swung hard at the 5%." This made Dr. Barnhouse a highly controversial figure, often unmercifully sharp and dogmatic. This zeal for truth within him became an Ishmael in his life. Then he tells how there came a time when the Spirit of God taught him to love and he faced the choice -- Ishmael had to go. He had to learn to be more understanding and more tolerant of some of the variant views of others. He wrote, "Some time ago, I published a New Year's resolution expressing regret that I had had differences with men who are truly born again. The results of that resolution were astounding. In the years which followed its publication, my ministry has been transformed. I need to know all who have been redeemed by Christ, for I will never know my Lord fully until I see him in every individual whom he has redeemed and saved by the outpouring of his life for us all upon the cross. This," he says, "is true fellowship." It was wonderful to see in the life of Dr. Barnhouse the removal of an Ishmael. The closing years of his life show much of his mellowing and of the sweetness of the fruit of the Spirit in one who before had been so harsh, critical, and demanding."

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!

The Lamb of God

2011-12-23T06:37:00.000-08:00

"Mary Did You Know"

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy would one day walk on water?

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy would save our sons and daughters?

Did you know that your Baby Boy has come to make you new?

This Child that you delivered will soon deliver you.

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy will give sight to a blind man?

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy will calm the storm with His hand?

Did you know
that your Baby Boy has walked where angels trod?
When you kiss your little Baby you kissed the face of God?

Mary did you know.. Ooo Ooo Ooo
The blind will see.
The deaf will hear.
The dead will live again.
The lame will leap.
The dumb will speak
The praises of The Lamb.

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy is Lord of all creation?

Mary, did you know
that your Baby Boy would one day rule the nations?

Did you know
that your Baby Boy is heaven's perfect Lamb?
The sleeping Child you're holding is the Great, I Am.

A Letter to a Hurting Friend at Christmas

2011-12-21T19:36:00.000-08:00

Dear Pam,

I have found the only way to deal with the pain of loneliness (when it crops up unexpectedly), is to embrace someone who is hurting. It works, too! I think all of us have at one time or another been left for dead, by a dear loved one in our lives. People will disappear from our lives for various reasons; some will die, some will get mad, hurt, and offended, and not have the capacity to forgive and forget and move on. While other loved ones will become so estranged from us, that we wouldn’t even recognize them if they walked right past us on the street.

The sad fact is, when things like this happen, as they so often do, is that WE become the dead among the living. We become the walking dead, BUT, only if we choose to die. Life should be all about renewal. I learned about death and renewal by growing tulips. I so wanted to prune and cut off the brown, lifeless, stems and leaves, when the last red petals of spring gave up their life among the flowerbeds. I saw how lifeless, ugly, and withered the green had become, and hated to see it shrivel and die, but then I realized that the old, decaying matter; did matter. It mattered more then I knew. For without this dead and decaying fertilizer, the bulbs far below the ground would not be nourished and come to fruition in the spring.

When someone dies, we say farewell my beloved, we say I loved you more than life itself, but NOT to the point of my death. I must live to tell someone about the tulips, to tell them that spring is just around the corner for them, that life will once again bloom and be green, red, yellow, and pink. I need to find someone new to hug, someone new who is hurting, so that once again I can feel useful and alive, and most importantly of all; to pay it forward, Your words, Pam, PAY IT FORWARD!!!!!

I feel your pain, Pam. I’ve been there, too. My love and thoughts are with you in this time of sadness and grief. I love your dear heart!

Love,

Mary

"What happens to those who have never heard about Jesus?"

2011-11-21T21:39:00.000-08:00

What do you think about this statement ?... Agree? Disagree?

If we assume that those who never hear the gospel are granted mercy from God, we will run into a terrible problem. If people who never hear the gospel are saved, it is logical that we should make sure no one ever hears the gospel. The worst thing we could do would be to share the gospel with a person and have him or her reject it. If that were to happen, he or she would be condemned. People who do not hear the gospel must be condemned, or else there is no motivation for evangelism. Why run the risk of people possibly rejecting the gospel and condemning themselves when they were previously saved because they had never heard the gospel?

All people are accountable to God whether or not they have “heard about Him.” The Bible tells us that God has clearly revealed Himself in nature (Romans 1:20) and in the hearts of people (Ecclesiastes 3:11). The problem is that the human race is sinful; we all reject this knowledge of God and rebel against Him (Romans 1:21-23). If it were not for God's grace, we would be given over to the sinful desires of our hearts, allowing us to discover how useless and miserable life is apart from Him. He does this for those who continually reject Him (Romans 1:24-32).

In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about God. Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature. Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.” This verse teaches an important principle—everyone who truly seeks after God will find Him. If a person truly desires to know God, God will make Himself known.

The problem is “there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God” (Romans 3:11). People reject the knowledge of God that is present in nature and in their own hearts, and instead decide to worship a “god” of their own creation. It is foolish to debate the fairness of God sending someone to hell who never had the opportunity to hear the gospel of Christ. People are responsible to God for what God has already revealed to them. The Bible says that people reject this knowledge, and therefore God is just in condemning them to hell.

Instead of debating the fate of those who have never heard, we, as Christians, should be doing our best to make sure they do hear. We are called to spread the gospel throughout the nations (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8). We know people reject the knowledge of God revealed in nature, and that must motivate us to proclaim the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ. Only by accepting God’s grace through the Lord Jesus Christ can people be saved from their sins and rescued from an eternity apart from God.

(Shared from Got Questions. org)

The Value of Discernment Ministries

2011-11-14T07:26:00.000-08:00

I just saw a picture of the Tsunami flotsam from Japan that is floating toward Hawaii, and is estimated to reach our soil in about three years. And we know for a fact that much of this debris is contaminated with radioactive waste.

Things like boats, fragments of houses, refrigerators, cars and all sorts of broken and busted up treasures and dreams, are in a soup swirling about the ocean, just waiting to settle in some unsuspecting, pristine cove, or on one of our beautiful, sun-kissed beaches.

We’re alarmed, and we should be! Who, in their right way of thinking, wants this trash to contaminate, infiltrate, and permeate what we believe are our almost sacred, unsullied shores? This, is a newly defined Tsunami. One that is not like anything we have ever witnessed before. It is a mass of shards, junk and twisted debris, and it is coming our way soon.

Well, we have many choices to make. We can sound the alarm of impending doom, and look for solutions to our problems. We can bury our heads in the sand and pretend that all is well with the world. Or we can wait out the impending doom, and stand watch with the bucket brigade to do a very costly clean up.

I believe good, solid discernment ministries, work out the first scenario in the best way possible. They are pro-active, anticipatory, and always forward thinking. Their antenna are up; their senses are heightened; they're looking for the worst possible scenario, for the best reasons possible; so that the Tsunami will not totally deconstruct our way of life and worship, and pollute the sterling, spotless, and pure Word of God. What is the old adage? “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

There is nothing wrong with being a first-rate Chicken Little. The sky IS falling. There ARE wolves in sheep’s clothing. The trash and off scouring of life are looking to rob, steal and pollute. So, what’s new? What IS new, is if you are not made aware of, alerted to the dangers, and acutely discerning when it comes to false teachers, you may become the twisted, sordid, grossly convoluted debris (news flash!), or be broad-sided by someone’s front porch that has been floating around in the cesspool of the latest storm.

Ministries like Pyromaniacs, Sola Sisters and Apprising Ministries; just to name a paltry few, do a pretty fair job in sorting out the trash. So hopefully we can all sit back, hang up our rakes, shovels and buckets and enjoy their fruit. But, let’s not rest in their laurels too eagerly, and be watchmen ourselves, studying the Scriptures to discern the precarious times we live in. And be able to cry foul for ourselves, if perchance Chicken Little is busy with yet another impending Tsunami.

Lately, we can all attest to the fact that there has been a deluge of this false teacher and that false teacher. It is *absolutely* overwhelming. There is ONE Tsunami after ANOTHER in Christendom; they are increasing like birth pains. But let’s not be lax or wore down by attrition because the minions from the pit are on the march and increase, this is all the MORE reason to sound the alarm with greater diligence.

We live on the very BRINK of eternity, and LOVING someone means never to having say you’re sorry. Tell someone you love, about Jesus, and warn them of this new radioactive flotsam coming their way. It may just make their day, not to mention their eternity.

The Total Sovereignty of God by RC Sproul

2011-11-08T22:49:00.000-08:00

Problematic Analogies and Prayerful Adoration by Carl Trueman

2011-11-08T22:24:00.000-08:00

Ask any children’s Sunday school teacher what the most difficult thing to teach is and he will almost certainly tell you: “The doctrine of the Trinity, that God is one but exists in three persons.” Ask them how they do it and you will probably find them outlining an analogy: “God is like water, ice, and steam” is one of the more popular.

The problem with such an analogy — indeed, with any analogy — for the Trinity is that it is actually more misleading than helpful. What it describes is not really something akin to the biblical Trinity but rather to the ancient heresy of modalism. The detailed problems of this heresy, which sees God as one and as turning from Father into Son and then into Holy Spirit, need not delay us here. My point is that analogies for the Trinity are unhelpful because the Trinity is absolutely unique. There is no analogy to the created world that is more helpful than it is misleading.

Another area where Christians are wont to use analogies is that of the incarnation. Here the analogies often flow the other way: the created realm is not used to explain the incarnation so much as the incarnation is used to explain some aspect of the creation. Thus, some have argued for an incarnational analogy as a means of understanding how the divine and the human relate to each other in the doctrine of Scripture, given that the Bible has both human and divine authors. There is no monopoly by one party in the church. Liberals have used this notion; but so did the orthodox Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck. Others have used the analogy to explain the relationship of Christ to culture. Still others have used it as a means of explaining how the eternal God works in the flux of history through providence.

There are theological arguments pro and con for these various uses of the incarnational analogy, and I will not rehearse them here. I want rather to make a simple point relating to these analogies from the perspective of the church’s praise: the Trinity and the incarnation are unique, and that is why the church had to develop particular and precise means of articulating them. We should also remember the dynamic that drove the debates that led to these formulations: Christian worship. The early church needed to know what she meant when she declared: “Jesus is Lord.” and why she baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If analogies therefore serve to reduce the uniqueness of God and the incarnation, they will eventually shape the church culture in ways that impact our worship. Whatever the problems with popular uses of theological analogies, the key practical issue is the way such watering down of uniqueness will also water down the church’s praise.
Vital to worship is the acknowledgment of the vast difference that exists between God and His human creatures. Part of that difference is the fact that He is the Creator and Sustainer of all that is, while we are creatures and sustained in our being by God. Part of it is moral: He is holy, but we are sinful. Part of it has to do with salvation: He is the gracious Savior, and we are vessels of grace. In all three categories, mystery and incomprehensibility provide the backdrop to His action in history.

The doctrines of the Trinity and the incarnation guard that mystery because they state biblical truth in a way that is not reducible to the categories of our finite minds. The result of that for the Christian is surely not to be confusion but adoration. The failure of our intellects to penetrate these mysteries is vital to our Christian lives because that very failure is what drives us to our knees in gasps of adoration, praise, and wonder.

My conviction is that analogies blunt this. By reducing the distance between creation and God, they somehow make Him more manageable, more amenable to our ways of thinking, and thus take some of the urgent spiritual hunger away from our praise and adoration. This is not to argue for fideism, to say that the more mystical our faith, the greater our praise. But it is to say that there is an appropriate place for mystery and uniqueness that must be maintained if our worship is to be truly Christian. The task of the teacher is not to explain the Trinity or incarnation, or reduce them to creaturely categories; it is rather to point to the splendor of the same as a means of provoking awe and wonder in the congregation.

When we talk of God, we should remember we walk on holy ground. We can go only so far before we have to stop and fall on our faces in adoration. As Gregory Nazianzus, an early church father, said of God as Trinity: “Every time I think of the One, my mind is drawn to the Three; yet every time I think of the Three, my mind is drawn to the One.” He could not explain the Trinity; he could simply worship and adore the Three in One and the One in Three. The mystery, the boundary of incomprehensibility, was to him a reminder that he was not God. The maintenance of such a boundary is crucial. Let us not allow any attempt to communicate the faith to become by accident a means for domesticating the faith.

Run your mouse over these little guys and they will follow!

2011-10-24T13:19:00.001-07:00

End of the World

2011-10-21T20:49:00.000-07:00

Question: "What does the Bible say about the end of the world?"

Answer: The event usually referred to by the phrase “end of the world” is described in 2 Peter 3:10: “The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.” This is the culmination of the events referred to in the beginning of that verse as “the day of the Lord,” the time when God will intervene in human history for the purpose of judgment. At that time, all that God has created, “the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), He will destroy.

The timing of this event, according to most Bible scholars, is at the end of the 1000-year period called the millennium. During these thousand years, Christ will reign on earth as King in Jerusalem, sitting on the throne of David (Luke 1:32-33) and ruling in peace but with a “rod of iron” (Revelation 19:15). At the end of the 1000 years, Satan will be released, defeated again, and then cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:7-10). At this point, the end of the world described in 2 Peter 3:10 occurs. The Bible tells us several things about this event.

First, it will be cataclysmic in scope. The “heavens” refers to the physical universe – the stars, planets, and galaxies—which will be consumed by some kind of tremendous explosion, possibly a nuclear or atomic reaction that will consume and obliterate all matter as we know it. All the elements that make up the universe will be melted in the “fervent heat” (2 Peter 3:12). This will also be a noisy event, described in different Bible versions as a “roar” (NIV), a “great noise” (KJV), a “loud noise” (CEV), and a “thunderous crash” (AMP). There will be no doubt as to what is happening. Everyone will see and hear it because we are also told that “the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.”

Then God will create a “new heaven and a new earth” (Revelation 21:1), which will include the “New Jerusalem” (v. 2), the capital city of heaven, a place of perfect holiness, which will come down from heaven and descend to the new earth. This is the city where the saints—those whose names were written in the “Lamb’s book of life” (Revelation 13:8)—will live forever. Peter refers to it as “the home of righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13).

Perhaps the most important part of Peter’s description of that day is his question in verses 11-12: “Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.” For Christians, this means we should live our lives in such a way that we reflect our understanding of what is going to happen. This life is passing away quickly, and our focus should be on the new heavens and earth to come. Our “holy and godly” lives should be a testimony to those who do not know the Savior, and we should be telling others about Him so they can escape the terrible fate that awaits those who reject Him. We wait in eager anticipation for God’s “Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come” (1 Thessalonians 1:10).

Got Question Ministries

False Prophets

2011-10-03T18:04:00.000-07:00

Anyone coming here from Justin Taylor's blog, here is my final comment that did not make it in before he closed the thread down.

The false teachers who have an extra WORD of knowledge (who do not speak for God), are surreptitiously drawing people slowly away from God’s revealed Word. It is more attractive, ear tickling, and flattering for us to hear something personally spoken about US, directly to US, that has been breathed-out by the very mouth of some self-appointed prophet. It gives these false prophets that Midas touch persona, that everything they say or do has that special je ne sais quoi, that intangible quality that makes something distinctive or attractive to others. And it holds the very words of God in complete contempt. Making their words on an even par with God’s Word.

Oh, dear friends, I warn of the susceptibility of the artifices of satan, who would lead you here or there, and tell you that this and that false Christ speaks new revelations. That their words are matched in purity, matched in unassailability, matched in worthiness, matched in solemnity, matched in holiness, and above all matched infallibly. After all, these descriptive words are the very words used to express the only words that have any real value to our souls, and they belong to the Triune, holy God, who is incapable of a lie.

Ask yourselves, do you believe the words spoken in vain by unfit diviners are A MORE SURE WORD, fitly spoken directly into the very real circumstances and bogs of your every day lives, and will they sanctify you, will they cleanse you from all unrighteousness, and inspire you to holy living? if not, if they do not stand the test of purity, throw the secondhand, artificially-spoken-jargon, to the dogs.

YOU MUST WATCH THIS VIDEO by Ray Comfort

2011-09-26T11:23:00.001-07:00

Jazz for Cows

2011-09-17T11:04:00.001-07:00

In My Seat--A story about 9/11

2011-09-07T23:12:00.000-07:00

Recovering Biblical Womanhood Paul Washer

2011-09-05T08:53:00.000-07:00

Happy Fourth of July!!!!

2011-07-03T09:46:00.000-07:00

Horse Sense

2011-07-02T06:02:00.001-07:00

Four year old painter

2011-07-02T05:56:00.001-07:00

A little something for a rainy day!

2011-06-23T10:05:00.000-07:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

A fitting end to the four gospels after 43 years of faithful exposition!!!!

2011-06-16T06:11:00.000-07:00

The Isaac Factor by John Piper

2011-06-11T19:42:00.000-07:00

April 02, 2000
by John Piper
Topic: Risk

The Isaac Factor

Genesis 18:10-15

He said, "I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son." And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing. 12 Sarah laughed to herself, saying, "After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?" 13 And the LORD said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, 'Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?' 14 Is anything too difficult for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son." 15 Sarah denied it however, saying, "I did not laugh"; for she was afraid. And He said, "No, but you did laugh."

God Requires the Impossible - the Gideon Venture

You recall from last week that God's purpose was to give the Midianites into the hand of Gideon. Gideon had an army of 10,000 men. Arrayed against him were Midianites and Amalekites as numerous as the sands on the seashore. So God did something very typical for God and very atypical for man. "The LORD said to Gideon, 'The people who are with you are too many for Me to give Midian into their hands, for Israel would become boastful, saying, "My own power has delivered me"'" (Judges 7:2).

It already looked impossible for Israel to defeat the Midianites with only 10,000 men against so many. But God said, "Ten thousand is too many." Why? Because my purpose is to display my glory, and help you see how utterly dependent you are on sovereign grace.

This is the purpose of God in all that he does in creation and redemption. God's purpose in all that he does is:

To magnify his sovereign grace And keep us in our humble place.

And one of the central beliefs that we have as God's people is that this is good news, not bad news. It is good news because God himself, known to us in Jesus Christ, is more valuable and more satisfying than anything we could ever be or do in our own power. The most loving thing that God can do for us is to make himself indispensable to us. The most loving thing God can do for us is not to make much of us, but to work by his sovereign grace so that we can enjoy making much of him forever. So, if he would love us, he must exalt his sovereign grace and keep us in our humble, happy place.

That's the point of the Gideon Venture. That is why God over and over and over again in the Bible does things in a way that makes us utterly dependent on God for what is humanly impossible - to magnify his sovereign grace and keep us in our humble place.

God Does the Impossible - the Isaac Factor

This morning's message is simply to point to another Bible story and how it illustrates this truth. It's the story of the birth of Isaac, the son of Abraham and Sarah, the child of promise. Let's get some of the details of the story in front of us.

According to Genesis 11:30, Abram's wife was barren even before they came to the Promised Land. "Sarai was barren; she had no child." This was not merely coincidental. It was planned by God. We know this because in Genesis 16:2 Sarah said, "The LORD has prevented me from bearing children." So God is putting in place circumstances that will make the fulfillment of his promise humanly impossible.
What promise? The promise that Abraham would have many offspring and become a great nation. Genesis 12:2, "I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and so you shall be a blessing." That promise came after the knowledge that Sarah was barren. Indeed, God had closed her womb, and then made the promise. So now, if Abraham believes the promise, it will be a believing not just in the ability of God to predict the future, but in the power of God to create a future that is humanly impossible.

This is what I call "The Isaac Factor": God's purpose to do what is humanly impossible, so that we have to trust his power and grace, and he gets the glory. But we do not naturally trust God so easily. It goes against our fallen nature. Here's what usually happens: When we meet a situation like this, we try to think of ways that we can actually make it happen by ordinary human means.

Let's watch this in Abraham's life. The first natural thought he has is that God may fulfill his promise to make him a great nation (Genesis 12:2) by raising up heirs to him through his slave, Eliezer. God has to set Abraham straight here and make sure he sees how impossible he really means the promise to be. Look at Genesis 15:2-4.

Abram said, "O Lord GOD, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?" And Abram said, "Since You have given no offspring to me, one born in my house is my heir." Then behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, "This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir."

So God cuts off Abraham's escape. No, Abraham, my promise will not be fulfilled in the humanly possible way of using your slave as your legal heir. My way will be humanly impossible: You will become a great nation through your own physical seed - your own biological son.

God's Requirement for Us - Faith

What does God require from Abraham? He requires that Abraham believe him, trust him. So God takes Abraham outside and says to him in verse 5, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." Then verse 6 says that "Abraham believed in the LORD; and [God] reckoned it to him as righteousness." That's the faith that corresponds to "The Isaac Factor".

But there is one more escape hatch from God's sovereign grace and the humanly impossible promise. God has only said that the son of promise would come from Abraham's body (Genesis 15:4), not from Sarah's body. So what about using a concubine to get the promise to come true?

Let's watch what happens when Abraham and Sarah try this. Genesis 16:1-2: "Now Sarai, Abram's wife had borne him no children, and she had an Egyptian maid whose name was Hagar. So Sarai said to Abram, 'Now behold, the LORD has prevented me from bearing children. Please go in to my maid; perhaps I will obtain children through her.' And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai.'" Verse 15: "So Hagar bore Abram a son; and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to him."

This was not God's plan for how his promise would be fulfilled. God's promise was going to depend on sovereign grace, not on human ingenuity. Ishmael was not the son of promise, precisely because he was humanly possible.

Look at Genesis 17:15-16 to see what God says about this. The time is about thirteen years later. God comes to Abraham and says, "As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. I will bless her, and indeed I will give you a son by her." This was a great setback to Abraham. He thought he had a human way figured out to have heirs from his own body just as God said he would.

Now God says, No, I will do it the impossible way, Abraham. So Abraham's faith wavered for a moment and Genesis 17:17 says, "[He] fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, 'Will a child be born to a man one hundred years old? And will Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?'" And he pleaded with God to fulfill his promise in a less spectacular way. Verse 18: "Abraham said to God, 'Oh that Ishmael might live before You!' But God said, 'No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.'"

Why Won't He Settle for the Humanly Possible?

Why? Why won't God opt for anything less than the path of impossibility? I think he tells us in the next chapter (Genesis 18:10-14). God comes to Abraham and makes the promise again:

"I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son." And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing [not only barren all her life, but now passed childbearing years]. Sarah laughed to herself, saying, "After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?" And the LORD said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, 'Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?' Is anything too difficult for the LORD?"

There it is. That's the reason God will not settle for anything less than the path of impossibility: He aims to show that nothing is too difficult for the Lord. His purpose in all he does is

To magnify his sovereign grace And keep us in our humble place.

This is "The Isaac Factor" - and it is exactly what God did. Genesis 21:1-3: "Then the LORD took note of Sarah as He had said, and the LORD did for Sarah as He had promised. So Sarah conceived and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the appointed time of which God had spoken to him. Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore to him, Isaac."

God planned and worked in a way that made the promise to Abraham humanly impossible. 1) He saw to it that Sarah was barren from the beginning. 2) He refused the human solution of a legal heir named Eliezer. 3) He rejected the human solution of having sex with Hagar to beget Ishmael. 4) He waited till Abraham and Sarah were old and she was beyond childbearing years before the child of promise was born. 5) And he predicted the very time of the child's birth.
Implications for Us

In all these ways God acted to make clear that sovereign grace, not human initiative, brings about children of promise. Now let me apply this to us in two ways.

1. The first is that each of us who is a child of God - a member of his saved covenant people, an heir of God's promise - became what we are by sovereign grace, not human initiative.

You can see this application in Romans 9:6-9. Paul is wrestling with the heartache that many of his fellow Jews are not believing in Jesus Christ, the Messiah, and are therefore perishing (Romans 9:3). Does this mean that God's promise to his Jewish people has failed? He answers in verse 6, "It is not as though the word of God has failed." How does he explain this? He says in verse 6b, "For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; (7a) nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants." In other words, to be an heir of the promises made to Abraham you can't just be the product of ordinary human reproduction.

Then he goes right to our story of Isaac and the way Isaac came into being to show what he means. He says in verse 7b, "But: 'THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.'" In other words, "Not Ishmael, the fruit of your human self-reliance, but through Isaac the child whom I brought into being when it was humanly impossible." Then Paul states the general principle that he is drawing out of the story. Verse 8: "That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants."

What is the difference between a "child of the flesh" and the "children of promise"? The difference is that ordinary human resources bring children of the flesh into being, but the sovereign power of God's promise brings the children of promise into being. You see this in verse 9: "For this is the word of promise: 'AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON.'" In other words, Abraham tried to make an heir for God's promise by the human initiative, that is, out of flesh (Ishmael), but God said, "No, heirs of promise come into being through supernatural, divine intervention. That is what it means to be a Christian - an heir of God's covenant promises. That is how you became a Christian.

Know this. Cherish this. Be thankful for this with all your heart. Be humbled by this. This is "The Isaac Factor."

God magnifies his sovereign grace And keeps us in our humble place.

2. Finally, the second application is to the funding of Education for Exultation. Is it possible that we could enter a $9 million educational and multi-purpose building in two years, debt-free? The answer we offer is simply the word of God to Abraham in Genesis 18:14, "Is anything too difficult for the LORD?"

Our hope and prayer is that God, in his great mercy, would look upon our plan not as presumption but as one more expression of the great Isaac Factor that runs through the whole Bible: God often does things in a way that makes us depend on him for the humanly impossible. Why?

To magnify his sovereign grace

And keep us in our humble place.

© Desiring God

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be approved by Desiring God.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"What is the proper way to pray?"

2011-06-10T13:17:00.000-07:00

"Is it best to pray standing up, sitting down, kneeling, or bowing down? Should our hands be open, closed, or lifted up to God? Do our eyes need to be closed when we pray? Is it better to pray in a church building or out in nature? Should we pray in the morning when we get up or at night before we go to bed? Are there certain words we need to say in our prayers? How do we begin our prayers? What is the proper way to close a prayer? These questions, and others, are common questions asked about prayer. What is the proper way to pray? Do any of the above things even matter?

Far too often, prayer is viewed as a “magic formula.” Some believe that if we do not say exactly the right things, or pray in the right position, God will not hear and answer our prayer. This is completely unbiblical. God does not answer our prayers based on when we pray, where we are, what position our body is in, or in what order we word our prayers. We are told in 1 John 5:14-15 to have confidence when we come to God in prayer, knowing He hears us and will grant whatever we ask as long as it is in His will. Similarly, John 14:13-14 declares, “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.” According to these and many other Scriptures, God answers prayer requests based on whether they are asked according to His will and in the name of Jesus (to bring glory to Jesus).

So, what is the proper way to pray? Philippians 4:6-7 tells us to pray without being anxious, to pray about everything, and to pray with thankful hearts. God will answer all such prayers with the gift of His peace in our hearts. The proper way to pray is to pour out our hearts to God, being honest and open with God, as He already knows us better than we know ourselves. We are to present our requests to God, keeping in mind that God knows what is best and will not grant a request that is not His will for us. We are to express our love, gratitude, and worship to God in prayer without worrying about having just the right words to say. God is more interested in the content of our hearts than the eloquence of our words.

The closest the Bible comes to giving a “pattern” for prayer is the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:9-13. Please understand that the Lord’s Prayer is not a prayer we are to memorize and recite to God. It is an example of the things that should go into a prayer—worship, trust in God, requests, confession, and submission. We are to pray for the things the Lord’s Prayer talks about, using our own words and “customizing” it to our own journey with God. The proper way to pray is to express our hearts to God. Sitting, standing, or kneeling; hands open or closed; eyes opened or closed; in a church, at home, or outside; in the morning or at night—these are all side issues, subject to personal preference, conviction, and appropriateness. God’s desire is for prayer to be a real and personal connection between Himself and us."

Written by gotquestions.org

This is so deep!!!

2011-06-04T05:28:00.001-07:00

"Why did God choose Israel to be His chosen people?"

2011-05-27T17:27:00.000-07:00

"Why did God choose Israel to be His chosen people?"

Speaking of the nation of Israel, Deuteronomy 7:7-9 tells us, “The LORD did not set His affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the LORD loved you and kept the oath He swore to your forefathers that He brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt. Know therefore that the LORD your God is God; He is the faithful God, keeping His covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love Him and keep His commands.”

God chose the nation of Israel to be the people through whom Jesus Christ would be born—the Savior from sin and death (John 3:16). God first promised the Messiah after Adam and Eve’s fall into sin (Genesis chapter 3). God later confirmed that the Messiah would come from the line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Genesis 12:1-3). Jesus Christ is the ultimate reason why God chose Israel to be His special people. God did not need to have a chosen people, but He decided to do it that way. Jesus had to come from some nation of people, and God chose Israel.

However, God’s reason for choosing the nation of Israel was not solely for the purpose of producing the Messiah. God’s desire for Israel was that they would go and teach others about Him. Israel was to be a nation of priests, prophets, and missionaries to the world. God’s intent was for Israel to be a distinct people, a nation who pointed others towards God and His promised provision of a Redeemer, Messiah, and Savior. For the most part, Israel failed in this task. However, God’s ultimate purpose for Israel—that of bringing the Messiah into the world—was fulfilled perfectly in the Person of Jesus Christ.

Written by GotQuestions.org

How To Recognize False Teachers

2011-05-21T19:50:00.000-07:00

Question: "How can I recognize a false teacher / false prophet?" (Like Harold Camping)

Answer: Jesus warned us that “false Christs and false prophets” will come and will attempt to deceive even God’s elect (Matthew 24:23-27; see also 2 Peter 3:3 and Jude 17-18). The best way to guard yourself against falsehood and false teachers is to know the truth. To spot a counterfeit, study the real thing. Any believer who “correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15) and who makes a careful study of the Bible can identify false doctrine. For example, a believer who has read the activities of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in Matthew 3:16-17 will immediately question any doctrine that denies the Trinity. Therefore, step one is to study the Bible and judge all teaching by what the Scripture says.

Jesus said “a tree is recognized by its fruit” (Matthew 12:33). When looking for “fruit,” here are three specific tests to apply to any teacher to determine the accuracy of his or her teaching:

1) What does this teacher say about Jesus? In Matthew 16:15-16, Jesus asks, “Who do you say I am?” Peter answers, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” and for this answer Peter is called “blessed.” In 2 John 9, we read, “Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.” In other words, Jesus Christ and His work of redemption is of utmost importance; beware of anyone who denies that Jesus is equal with God, who downplays Jesus’ sacrificial death, or who rejects Jesus’ humanity. First John 2:22 says, “Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.”

2) Does this teacher preach the gospel? The gospel is defined as the good news concerning Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). As nice as they sound, the statements “God loves you,” “God wants us to feed the hungry,” and “God wants you to be wealthy” are not the complete message of the gospel. As Paul warns in Galatians 1:7, “Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.” No one, not even a great preacher, has the right to change the message that God gave us. “If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” (Galatians 1:9).

3) Does this teacher exhibit character qualities that glorify the Lord? Speaking of false teachers, Jude 11 says, “They have taken the way of Cain; they have rushed for profit into Balaam’s error; they have been destroyed in Korah’s rebellion.” In other words, a false teacher can be known by his pride (Cain’s rejection of God’s plan), greed (Balaam’s prophesying for money), and rebellion (Korah’s promotion of himself over Moses). Jesus said to beware of such people and that we would know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-20).

For further study, review those books of the Bible that were written specifically to combat false teaching within the church: Galatians, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, and Jude. It is often difficult to spot a false teacher/false prophet. Satan masquerades as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14), and his ministers masquerade as servants of righteousness (2 Corinthians 11:15). Only by being thoroughly familiar with the truth will we be able to recognize a counterfeit.

Article written by GotQuestions.org

Happy Pastors Make Healty People

2011-05-21T17:37:00.001-07:00

God's Purpose in Our Pain

2011-05-18T07:35:00.001-07:00

The Righteous Shall Live By His Faith

2011-02-19T21:23:00.000-08:00

Habakkuk 2:4, "Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith."

The Lord is emphasizing that there are two kinds of people. The proud ("puffed up"), who are wicked and unjust ("not upright"), in contrast to the humble who are faithful and just (righteous"), before God. Pride looks to self while true faith looks outside of self unto God. The proud are not justified before the Lord and thus perish while the faithful and humble are justified thus are gifted salvation.

These Words of the Lord gave Habukkuk comfort while struggling with the Lord's use of the Babylonians to punish His people. That God had not abandoned them but rather was teaching His people the only way they could live an obedient righteous life and not perish like the prideful, selfish, and wicked do, was by focusing on things in heaven above and keeping a steadfast faith and love unto God their Creator, Savior and Lord.

Habukkuk 2:4 is such an important message from God that it is reemphasized in similar ways three times in the New Testament (Romans 1:17;Hebrews 10:38;Galatians 3:7).

God's Freedom to Choose

2011-02-19T21:02:00.000-08:00

I wrote this piece for a blog that I post at, and thought maybe I should post it here, since I haven't posted anything in quite a while.

It helps explain why God has mercy on whom He has mercy, and that He does NOT look down the corridor of time to see who will believe in order to make their so-called free will choice.

God is the only one who has perfect free will. Which means there is no outside force, or other sovereign, who constrains God to act one way or another. If there were, that force or entity would be sovereign and God would not be God. God acts most freely in all that He does because there is no other sovereign to impede, hinder, obstruct, change, influence or thwart His choices/purposes.

On the other hand, man does have constraints, limitations and restrictions on him: his will is not free but captive, captive to the FLESH, the WORLD, and the DEVIL. Free will is a myth. Man does not have it because of these overpowering constraints, and is only free to act according to the easy sinful nature that he was born with. The flesh, the world, and the devil cause man’s will to be in TOTAL BONDAGE to all that is evil, and leaves the will captive, bound, and totally incapable of choosing the good that would set it free. These forces are so powerful and strong, causing man to be at enmity with God, and can only be overcome by God’s powerful intervention, not the weak and sinful will of man. Can a Leopard change his own spots?

So, to my main point: when God elects a person, He acts most freely according to the good pleasure of His will, and His choices are not based on anything good or bad in the individual person, or any foreseen faith the person may display in the future. God’s electing grace is solely based on His good pleasure, His love, His freedom to choose, and ultimately for the glory of His name. (There are of course other factors, as well).

If God based His choices on the actions of men, whether their actions were good, bad or the fact that He saw future faith in them, then God’s choices would not be free. His choices would be conditioned on something outside of Himself, something found in man. This destroys God’s freedom to act as He so pleases. God does not condition His free will choices on anything external to Himself. There are no constraints put on God to choose one way or another. THIS IS FREEDOM--- and only God can possess true freedom.

“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth (Rom 9:11).”

The Seeker Sensitive Movement Al and RC

2011-01-29T08:35:00.001-08:00

♥♥ Happiest Penguin Ever ♥♥

2011-01-04T06:55:00.000-08:00

Can't you just hear this little guy saying, "Come on you stuffed suits, shake a leg."

"No More Night" by David Phelps

2010-12-25T19:42:00.000-08:00

"Oh Holy Night" by David Phelps

2010-12-25T19:19:00.001-08:00

Insignificant Is Beautiful by Mark Galli

2010-12-21T12:45:00.000-08:00

Generation Y is into social justice — so say generation gurus. This is often said in contrast to other generations, like baby boomers, who are supposedly into success. But of course, the boomers made their mark on the world with social justice. Our generation ended the Vietnam War and prodded the country toward civil rights. We even broached the idea of environmental care, which is now catching on. This legacy will be pretty tough to top, but Generation Y is probably up to it.

That Generation Y cares about social justice is linked to another aspiration: the yearning for significance. This generation wants to make a difference in the world, to work on things that matter, engage activities that change the world. Again, this is hype, since people in every era want this. But it is nonetheless something to celebrate whenever we find it.

But before we break out the champagne, we are wise to consider the seamier sides of this aspiration.

First, the yearning for significance can be nothing more than ego masked as altruism. As one young writer put it in Relevant magazine, "Based on my work among college students and young professionals, I will venture to say that the drive for significance in many young women today is rooted in the desperation to feel known and to know that our lives count. We're not just significance addicts, after all. We're hoping that if we can keep up with the big boys, then we will be truly worthwhile and interesting."

This is not exactly a Christian virtue but, as the writer, Shirin Taber, suggests, just another form of narcissism.

Second, the search for significance, especially if it requires changing the world, can blind us to the everyday tasks, the mundane duties, and the dirty work that is part and parcel of the life of discipleship.

I have a good friend who has been caring for his elderly mother. She sits in a wheel chair, complains a lot, and requires constant attention — to the point of cleaning her up after regular bouts of diarrhea. What my friend and his wife are doing is heroic, virtue with a capital V. But it is hard to see how it is "world changing" as we normally think about such things. Such an act doesn't even change the mother's life, only makes it less miserable. It's not even "significant," by our usual calculation, but "merely" an act of love.

When we think of making a difference, we think about making the world a better place for the next generation, not taking care of people who have no future. This is one reason we are quick to push the incontinent into "managed care" staffed with "skilled nurses." No question that this is indeed a necessary move for many families—I had to do it with my own father, sad to say. But let's face it. A fair amount of our motive is mixed. How much skill does it take to clean up excrement from an elderly body? Mostly it takes forbearance—and a willingness to give oneself night and day to something that, according to our usual reckoning, is not all that significant.

Or take the case of dissident Gao Zhisheng. He is a self-taught lawyer who has been described by The New York Times as "one of China's most high-profile human rights lawyers." He has been disbarred, detained, and tortured by the Chinese secret police a number of times after taking on human rights cases.

Those cases include defending fellow and religious minorities like Falun Gong and Chinese underground Christians. After one term in jail, authorities warned him not to mention the electric shocks and cigarette burns he had received. But within days of his release, Gao wrote an open letter on the Internet about his treatment. Many believe his disappearance on February 4, 2009, was due to that open letter. When he resurfaced in March 2010, he said he would no longer criticize the government, but apparently this wasn't good enough for the authorities. He disappeared once again on April 21, 2010.

Let's assume he is still alive (one can hope), subject to solitary confinement while the authorities try to figure out what to do with him. It is hard to imagine that alone in a bare cell—isolated from loved ones, unsure of his fate, for all intents and purposes lost to the world—he comforts himself with his life of significance or the way he has changed the world.

Naturally, we are tempted to wax eloquent about his stand for justice, affirming that his life will not be wasted. But let's be honest: Tens of thousands of dissidents have been murdered by governments brutal and authoritarian—from the former Soviet Russia to present North Korea—whose names are lost to history, whose courageous stands have gone unnoticed. It's hard to believe that many of us today—no matter our generation—would be willing to endure this level of suffering for the sake of making a difference. We want to be noticed, and regularly praised, for making a difference — not forgotten or forsaken. Besides, our idea of a life of significance must allow time to Tweet and chat on Facebook, or, in my case, play the occasional round of golf. A life of significance, yes, but with plenty of time for the insignificant, please.

We should honor any generation that strives for significance, especially if it is a longing to make a difference in the world. Better this than striving to make money and live a comfortable life! But the human heart is desperately wicked and the human soul subject to self-deception, and this colors even our highest aspirations. Even the best of intentions mask the mysterious darkness within, which is why we need to be healed also of our best intentions.

As usual, Jesus turns this whole conversation on its head. Economist E. F. Shumacher wrote a classic during the boomers' salad days (1973) in which he argued for using small, appropriate technology. The book was titled Small Is Beautiful. If Jesus were to have written a book on ethics, he might have titled it Insignificant Is Beautiful. His is an ethic that glorifies giving a mere cup of water to a thirsty soul (Matt. 10:42), praises the relatively worthless donation of an indigent widow (Mark 12:41-44), visits those who have disappeared from history, and honors the one who changes the diapers of the incontinent.

Mark Galli is senior managing editor of Christianity Today. He is author of Jesus Mean and Wild: The Unexpected Love of an Untamable God (Baker), and the forthcoming Chaos and Grace: The Liberating Work of the Holy Spirit (Baker).

"This article first appeared in (10-28-2010) issue of Christianity Today. Used by permission of Christianity Today International, Carol Stream, IL 60188."

This is just awesome!

2010-11-24T20:22:00.000-08:00

Awesome God!

2010-11-11T20:49:00.001-08:00

My Trip to Boston

2010-10-19T16:49:00.000-07:00

On my visit to Boston many years ago, actually, I believe it was 1982; I visited many of the old churches in the downtown area. I was totally fascinated by the pews of some of these beautiful old, stately churches. At the ends of each pew (which these pews were very, very long), were small gates, so when anyone entered into the pews they were locked into place. Then, on the corresponding walls, hung very long, wooden poles, much like pool sticks only much longer, but this was no pool game.

Some hand-picked parishioner, usually a churlish-faced, Amish-type person, who looked more warden-like than an angelic being sitting on a cloud, would summarily jab the offending person(s), with the poles, if they nodded off or if they were found daydreaming during the sermons. And sometimes these sermons lasted for hours upon hours. Imagine sitting there, on hard pews, with no air conditioning, suffocating under layers of cumbersome clothing, locked into place like a crash test dummy, listening to a sermon much like the sermon given by Jonathan Edwards, “Sinners in The Hands of An Angry God.”

Which brings me to wonder, do we have a shallow repentance because we have shallow sermons? Do we need the shock value of sermons like this, and hard wooden pews that force a posture of attentiveness to create in us a deep well of repentance? Are our sermons lackluster, causing us to cozy up to sin too much, do we need the hard-edged-truth more often to keep us vigilant and acutely aware of the God dishonoring sin in our lives? Maybe more often than not we need to be pricked in our hearts, convicted in our souls, admonished by our brothers and sisters, and summarily jabbed with a pole, straight to the head, because life is not a game of pool. It is serious business, and our repentance should be one of deep, Godly sorrow, and never taken lightly.

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places (Eph 6:12).

IS IT RIGHT: To Judge, To Expose Error, & To Call Names?

2010-10-05T11:41:00.000-07:00

Many today believe that it is wrong to expose error and to name names. Liberals have always seemed to believe this, but in recent times it has been widely espoused by evangelicals and charismatics. Now we are seeing the same fatal error being declared by those who profess to be Bible believing fundamentalists. Those who are faithful in exposing error according to the Bible are now being widely denounced, and are accused of being unloving and unkind. In this tract we intend to present the teaching of the Bible on this vital subject.
I. It Is Right To Practice Biblical Judgment

One of the most misused verses in the Bible is, "Judge not, that ye be not judged" (Matt. 7: 1). Every Scripture verse should be read in its context, if we are to properly understand the true meaning. In vs. 2-5 of this same chapter it is evident that v. 1 is referring to hypocritical judgment. A brother who has a beam in his own eye should not be judging the brother who may have a mote in his eye. The lesson is plain, you cannot judge another for his sin if you are guilty of the same sin.

Those who cling to "Judge not, that ye be not judged, " to condemn those who expose error should read the entire chapter. Jesus said, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing... " (v. 15). How can we know false prophets unless we judge them by the Word of God? If we know the false prophets, how can we fail to exam the sheep of these "ravening wolves?" All through the Bible we find proof that they should be identified and exposed.

"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit" (vs. 16,17).

Did the Lord mean that we could not judge the tree (person), by the fruit of their life and doctrine? Certainly not, for you cannot know without judging. All judgment should be on the basis of Bible teaching, not according to whims or prejudices.

"Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment " (John 7:24).

Here our Lord commands that we are to "judge righteous judgment, " which is judgment based upon the Word of God. If judgment is made upon any other basis, other than the Word of God, it is a violation of Matt. 7: 1. Webster's Dictionary says that a judge is "one who declares the law. " The faithful Christian must discern or judge on the basis of God's inspired law, the Bible.

A fornicator is described in I Cor. 5:1-13. Paul "judged" (v.3) the man even though he was absent, and he told the Church at Corinth that they were to "judge" (v. 12) those that were within. The Greek word for "judge" is the same here as in Matt. 7: 1. Paul did not violate "judge not, that ye be not judged, " in judging the man, nor in instructing the Church to judge also. All of this judgment was according to the Word of God.

A person who is able to discern between good and evil, has at least one of the major marks of spiritual maturity.

"But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil" (Heb. 5:14).

W.E. Vine says of the meaning of discern, "a distinguishing, a clear discrimination, discerning, judging; is translated 'discerning' in I Cor. 12: 10 of discerning spirits, judging by evidence whether they are evil or of God. " Strong also agrees that it means to judge.

Those who are unwilling or incapable of discerning or judging between good and evil are in this manner revealing either their disobedience or their immaturity.

II. It Is Right To Expose False Teachers

False teachers are free to spread their poisonous doctrines today because there is a conspiracy of silence among many Bible believers. Wolves in sheep's clothing are thus enabled to ravage the flock, thereby destroying many.

John the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees (the religious leaders of his day) "a generation of Vipers" (snakes) (Matt. 3:7). Today, he would be accused of being unloving, unkind, and unchristian.
Jesus said to the religious Pharisees, "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt. 12:34). To many evangelicals and some fundamentalists, this would be unacceptable language today, but it is biblical language and it came from the mouth of the Son of God.
Standing face to face with these false teachers, Jesus Christ the Son of God, called them "hypocrites", "blind guides, " "blind, " "whited sepulchres, " "serpents, " and "ye generation of vipers" (Matt. 23:23-34). Yet, we are told today that we are to fellowship with men whose doctrines are just as unscriptural as those of the Pharisees. Some who say they are Bible believing Christians insist on working with Roman Catholics and other assorted heretics. Yet, according to many, we are not supposed to rebuke them for their compromise.
Near the beginning of His ministry, "Jesus went up to Jerusalem, And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence, make not my Father's house an house of merchandise" (John 2:13-16). Our Savior is presented today as one who was meek, lowly, kind, and loving, even to false teachers, but this is entirely false. When dealing with false teachers and prophets, His words were sharp and His actions plain.

Near the end of His public ministry, Christ found it necessary to cleanse the temple once again. The exposure of false doctrines and practices is a never ending job. At that time He said, "Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves" (Mark I 1: 17). Is it any different today? The thieves come into the house of God, and rob God's people of the Bible and peddle their perverted Bibles instead. At the same time this den of thieves rob the people off the doctrine of separation and the doctrine of sanctification. Then you can hardly tell God's people from the people of the world. In all honesty, should not these thieves (false teachers) be exposed?

In our day these false teachers have come into the churches with their books, music, literature, movies, psychology, and seminars, and have turned the Father's house into a den of thieves. It is time that men of God stand up and expose their errors for all to see.

The Bible Admonishes Us To Expose Error

We are to TRY them. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they be of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (I John 4: 1). All doctrine and teachers are to be tried according to the Word of God. "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isa. 8:20). Every message, messenger, and method is to be judged according to the Word of God. The church at Ephesus was commended because they had "tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars " (Rev. 2:2[). The church at Pergamos was rebuked because they tolerated those that held "the doctrine of Balaam, " and "the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate" (Rev. 2:14,15). It is never right to tolerate false teachers, but they are to be tried by the Word of God, and exposed. Of course those who want to disobey the Word of God will seek by every means to avoid this teaching.
We are to MARK them and AVOID them. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them " (Rom. 16:17). Those whose conduct and teaching contradicts the Word of God are to be marked and to be avoided. This requires discernment and judgment in the light of the Bible. The ecumenicalists, new evangelicals, and compromising fundamentalists will resist any effort to obey this Scripture. They cannot be marked and avoided, unless they are judged according to the Word of God.

We are to REBUKE them. "Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith " (Titus 1: 13). This was written to Titus, because there Were those going from house to house and subverting whole houses with false doctrine (v. 10-16). Oral Roberts, Robert Schuller, Jimmy Swaggart, Pat Robertson, and others are subverting whole houses with their false doctrine today. Are we to sit silently by, while they do this, without rebuking and admonishing people to avoid their teaching? No, the faithful servant of the Lord is to be "Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers " (Titus 1:9).

We are to have NO FELLOWSHIP with them. "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them " (Eph. 5:11). Reprove means to censure, condemn, find fault, rebuke, and to refute. How can we obey this Scripture unless we try them by the Word of God?

We are to WITHDRAW from them. "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which ye received of us " (II Thess. 3:6). We are to withdraw from those whose doctrine and conduct does not conform to the Word of God. The context clearly shows that obedience to sound doctrine is what Paul has in mind, for he says, "if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet, count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thess. 3:14-15). Paul admonished Timothy to "withdraw thyself " from those who "consent not to wholesome words ... and to the doctrine which is according to godliness " (I Tim. 6:3-5).

We are to TURN AWAY from them. Concerning the last days, he says that some will have "a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. from such turn away" for such people are "never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (11 Tim. 3:5,7). How can we turn away from them if we do not identify them, and this requires that their message be compared to the Word of God. It is the business of the true preacher to: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine " (II Tim. 4:2). This is usually an unpopular and thankless task but it is the duty of the God-called man.

We are NOT to RECEIVE them into our house. "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds " (11 John 10, I 1). There is no doubt about who John is speaking about, it is " Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ... " (v.9). By radio, TV, music and literature, false prophets are brought into the homes of many Christians today. Brethren, this ought not to be!

We are to REJECT HERETICS. "A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject " (Titus 3: 10). We should reject those who deny redemption by the blood of Christ. There are many who deny this or some other doctrine of the Word of God.If they will not respond to being admonished, then they are to be rejected.

We are to look out for those who preach another gospel. Paul warned about those who preached "another Jesus ... another spirit ... or another gospel" (2 Cor. 11:4). How can we know them unless we judge their Jesus, their spirit, and their gospel by the Word of God? Paul called such preachers "false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ" (2 Cor. II:13). He explains in v. 14-15 that these preachers are the ministers of Satan. The God-called man must be just as faithful today in exposing the ministers of Satan.

Paul warned the Galatians about those who "pervert the gospel of Christ." He also said, "If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (See Gal. 1:6-9). Multitudes today are preaching a perverted gospel. Those who teach salvation by baptism, or by works, are teaching a perverted gospel. Those who preach a salvation that you can lose, are preaching a perverted gospel. The charismatics, Catholics, many evangelicals, and many fundamentalists (?) are preaching a perverted gospel. Yet, we are supposed to cooperate with them in evangelism and Christian work, according to many today. If we fail to expose these false prophets, then we have betrayed Christ and His gospel.

We are to SEPARATE from them."Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch no the unclean thing; and I will receive you " (2 Cor. 6:17). This makes it plain. God's people are to come out of apostasy and religious error. How can any Bible believer remain in the National Council or World Council of Churches? How can they remain among compromising evangelicals and wishy-washy fundamentalists?

III. It Is Right To Name Names

Many mistakenly believe that it is wrong to expose error and to name the guilty teachers; but they are wrong according to the Bible.

Paul named Peter publicly. Peter was guilty of unscriptural practice. "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed ... But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" (Gal. 2:11-14). The whole issue revolved around salvation by the law or by grace. When the integrity and purity of the gospel is at stake, then we have no choice when it comes to the matter of exposing error and naming names.

Paul named Demas for loving the world. "For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world" (II Tim. 4:10). Those who forsake the cause of Christ for worldly living and pleasures should be named and exposed.

Paul named Hymenaeus and Alexander. Paul told Timothy to "war a good warfare; Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some have put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme " (I Tim. 1: 18-20). God's true servants should war a good warfare, and name those who have departed from the faith that was once delivered to the saints. Paul is not here discussing the faith of salvation but the faith as a system of doctrine. These men had made shipwreck of it and Paul exposed them and called their names.

Paul named Hymenaeus and Philetus. He told Timothy to "study" that he might be able to "rightly" divide "the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth as canker. of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some " (11 Tim. 2:15-18). False doctrine overthrows the faith of some, so those who are proclaiming it must be exposed.

Paul named Alexander the coppersmith. "Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil. the Lord reward him "cording to his works: Of whom be thou ware also, for he hath greatly withstood our words " (II Tim. 4:14-15). It is clear that this is not a personality problem, but a doctrinal problem. Alexander had withstood the words and doctrine of Paul. He was an enemy to the truth. Godly pastors face the same problem every day. They stand and proclaim the truth, then their members go home and hear this truth disputed by radio and TV preachers. Often times these false prophets are sending their publications into the homes of members of true churches. Then the man of God is suppose to keep his mouth shut, according to many. Only a coward will be silent when the truth of the Bible is under attack.
John named Diotrephes. "I wrote unto the church; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not" (3 John 9). He related how this man had prated against him "with malicious words " (v. 10). He further said, "Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God, but he that doeth evil hath not seen God " (v. I 1). It is not wrong to name those whose doctrine and practice is contrary to the Word of God.
In fact, the whole Bible abounds in examples of false prophets being named and exposed. All this modem day talk about love, used as an excuse for not exposing error, is not really biblical love but is really sloppy agape.
Moses called the name of Balaam. (See Num. 22-25). Peter exposed "the way of Balaam ... who loved the wages of unrighteousness " (II Pet. 2:15). Balaam was a prophet that was in the work for money, just like some of the TV false prophets today. They beg for money and live like kings, while multitudes of innocent people send them their hard earned money. They are always building colleges, hospitals, TV network satellites, and amusement parks that have a water slide for Jesus. And then we are suppose to keep our mouth shut about these religious charlatans. How can we be silent and be true to God?

Jude exposed "the error of Balaam " (Jude I 1). John exposed "the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication " (Rev. 2:14). This gets right to the heart of the matter, concerning the doctrine of separation. Balaam never did curse Israel even though he wanted the wages that he was offered to do so. The men of Israel committed "whoredom with the daughters of Moab ... and bowed down to their gods " (Num. 25:1,2). Why did they do this? Because Balaam taught Balac how to break down the barrier of separation between the Moabites and the Israelites. We know this to be so because it is plainly stated in Rev. 2:14 and Num. 31:16. This sin resulted in 24,000 men of Israel dying under the judgment of God.
False teachers are breaking down the barrier of separation between God's people and false religion. There is too little preaching and teaching on the doctrine of separation. Balaam breached the doctrine of personal separation by causing the men of Israel to commit fornication with the Moabite women. He breached the doctrine of ecclesiastical separation by causing the men of Israel to bow down to Baal. This brought a curse upon Israel. Until we get back to teaching the truth about personal and ecclesiastical separation, we can expect the continued widespread havoc that we have today.

It seems to be believed by many that some people are too high and mighty to be named or exposed. Men in high places, pastors of large churches, and those with great radio or TV audiences, are supposedly above criticism. Whatever they may do or say, no matter how contrary to the Bible it may be, is supposedly all right. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Nathan identified the man. There was a man in a very high place who was a secret adulterer. Surely this man who held the highest office in the land could not be rebuked by a lowly unpopular prophet. Nathan went right into the presence of David, revealed the sin in a parable form, and then told the enraged David, "Thou art the man " (II Sam. 12:7).

Hanani named king Jehoshaphat. In many ways Jehoshaphat was a good king, but he mistakenly forgot to practice religious separation. He caused his son to marry wicked king Ahab's daughter. (See II Chron. 18: 1; 21:1-6). He made an alliance with Ahab and went to the battle of Ramoth-gilead with him (II Chron. 18). Hanani "said to King Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? " (II Chron. 19:2). We have a question for those, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?"

Yes, it is right to expose error and to name those who are in error. It is right to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). It was once delivered and it has never been recalled for revision. We had better beware of "false teachers ... who privily shall bring in damnable heresies " (II Pet. 2: 1). Faithful messengers will warn the sheep of these heretics, and identify them by name. It is not enough to broadly hint of their identity, for the young lambs will not understand and will be destroyed by the wolves.

US Capital Tour with David Barton

2010-09-07T22:29:00.000-07:00

Present Your Bodies as a Living Sacrafice to God

2010-09-05T03:44:00.000-07:00

Another "WOW" sermon from Piper

2010-08-23T12:30:00.001-07:00

A Luther-like Moment

2010-08-23T08:16:00.000-07:00

I am reminded of Martin Luther's many attempts to eradicate the horrible stain of sin from his life. We were all born under the same death sentence of sins bondage, and subsequently find much joy in contributing to this folly, whole heartily our entire lives, unless and until we are quickened by God's Spirit. Luther thought it was extremely hard to follow after God and His impeccable standards of righteousness. How true this is for all unconverted souls. It is hard to follow after God without the Holy Spirit first causing us to be born again.

Luther was hounded by the fruitless attempts and endless endeavors to obliterate sin from his bountiful life, lived in flagrant disobedience to God's Word. He did penance, self-flagellation, and spent numerous hours in the confessional, to the point where many of his roommates, in the monastery, thought him a bit unhinged. He was obsessed with the onerous task of scrupulously living up to standards of righteousness that no man could possibly live up to. He beat his body into submission along with torturing his mind endlessly to work out his ill-fated, ill-informed heart‘s desire to be good enough for God to accept him. All his attempts to eradicate sin from his life, of his own doing, by good works and self-flagellation, proved to be the insanity of Luther’s well-deserved, early-on reputation. Until that one bright and shining moment, when he lit upon the doctrine of justified by faith alone. It was a turning point for Luther in every respect.

He realized that “all men have fallen short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23),” and that, "there is none righteous, no, not one (Rom 3:10).” And only by resting in the perfect sacrifice of Christ on the cross is any man justified and declared righteous before God. He knew God had very high, unattainable standards, and felt it was impossible to live up to such extreme standards of sinless perfection. All this time salvation was available to him, but God in His infinite wisdom needed to demonstrate to Luther why he could do NOTHING to accomplish his own salvation, nothing to obtain or merit the free gift of redemption. Luther had to stop white washing the outside and allow the Holy Spirit to cleanse and renew the inward man and allow Christ to pay his sin debt in full, so he could rest peacefully in Christ’s finished work, knowing that it was finished, and he needed to do nothing but believe in the ONE who justifies.

And this is how it is for all of us, thus the reference to the bitter sweet state of affairs of the life of the ever-mercurial Luther. It IS hard to follow after God without the Holy Spirit to guide and help us, God’s perfect standards seem insurmountable, like a mountain too high for the saintliest of saints to traverse, but with Christ all things are possible (Matt 19:26).” This is why we need to be reminded that: “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an ADVOCATE with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (1 John 2:3).” We do not rely on our own efforts, but we rest in Christ alone for the remittance of sins.

God's yoke is easy, if we rest totally in Jesus' work alone, on the cross. This was the full, demonstrable testimony of Luther’s whole life experience for all of Christendom to stand up and take note of. We are justified by faith alone.

Luther's experience is a common one among all true Christian's, we find our stain of sin unbearable, and find no relief from our own ill-fated attempts to procure a remedy. We all have a Luther-like moment. Even the publican experienced a moment such as this, when he deemed himself unworthy to even come to the temple. "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner (Luke 8:13)."

And some people find Luther unimportant.

Start your Christmas list early!

2010-08-20T18:16:00.001-07:00

Share the Good News of Christmas from Crossway on Vimeo.

Mark Gaither on lust, sin, divorce...

2010-07-15T10:40:00.000-07:00

Dear Jordan:

Mark is a theologian who used to post over at Shepherd's Fellowship, he also wrote the book Redemptive Divorce. He DOES (sorry, I said earlier he didn't) speak about the verse you referred to over at teampyro; I hope this helps explain it some for you. Mark is also the son-in-law of the well known preacher, Chuck Swindoll.

The Sin of Lust

Earlier in His ministry, Jesus commented on the teaching of the rabbis concerning the Law and then offered His clarification as the divine Author. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill” (Matt. 5:17). He then took the opportunity to breathe new life into some Old Testament laws in order to correct the teaching of the Pharisees. Note how He presented His lessons:

* “You have heard . . .” (v. 21), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 22), followed by teaching on murder and resentment.

* “You have heard . . .” (v. 27), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 28), followed by teaching on adultery and lust.

* “It was said . . .” (v. 31), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 32), followed by teaching on divorce and fidelity.

* “You have heard . . .” (v. 33), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 34), followed by teaching on vows and integrity.

* “You have heard . . .” (v. 38), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 39), followed by teaching on justice and kindness.

* “You have heard . . .” (v. 43), “But I say to you . . .” (v. 44), followed by teaching on fair play and grace.

In each case, Jesus extended the application of the Law given through Moses to include what the rabbis had omitted. Furthermore, He amplified the divine revelation in the Old Testament to reveal the full measure of God’s standards. Not only must we refrain from murder, but we must also avoid hatred. Not only is adultery an abomination, so is lust.

While the laws of the Old Testament reflect God’s righteous character, they were primarily intended to regulate the public affairs of a nation, much like the laws of our own government. But we generally understand that a person must be more than merely law-abiding to be considered moral. Obedience to the law is a minimum standard. The rabbis in Jesus’ day not only reduced righteousness to mere obedience to the Law, but they also played clever word games with Scripture to lower the standard even further! They lowered the standard of righteousness in order to call themselves righteous.

When Jesus equated lust with adultery, He was not suggesting the men apply the Law accordingly. It was to point out their hypocrisy. It was to confront the wayward rabbis for lowering the standard of righteousness. It was to convict the self-righteous of their sin.

Correlating the Teaching of Christ on Lust and Divorce

As we examine the teaching of Christ on the Law, we must apply it in the New Covenant sense rather than under the Old Covenant. If we are to apply the Old Covenant strictly (Lust = Adultery = Grounds for Divorce), we must do so consistently: Lust = Adultery = Grounds for STONING!)

When Jesus confronted the rabbis, His purpose was to show that no one can be called righteous, even those who are not guilty of murder or adultery. Our hearts are thoroughly polluted with sin; even our thoughts make us guilty. Therefore, ALL are guilty before God and ALL need His grace.

If we apply the teaching of Matthew 5:27–28 in the same spirit Jesus gave it, then equating lust with adultery is the kind of confrontation needed by men viewing pornography. They want to rationalize their sin by stating it doesn’t involve actual contact with another. We must help them raise the standard of righteousness, not lower it if they expect God to bless their marriages and hear their prayers (1 Peter 3:7)

Mark's blog is http://www.redemptiveheart.com/. I forgot to mention this earlier.

The Immeasurable Greatness of His Power Toward Us

2010-07-11T22:29:00.000-07:00

Pride

2010-07-08T18:35:00.001-07:00

Paul Washer - Faith Alone

2010-07-02T07:27:00.001-07:00

Picture of the week-Say cheese with an arm attached!

2010-06-25T08:59:00.000-07:00

The Crust and The Core by Kevin DeYoung

2010-06-13T17:22:00.000-07:00

If we are to be fruitful and godly Christians we need to have a theological core without being theologically crusty.

In desiring a theological core I don’t mean that all Christians must be bookish and given to intellectual contemplation. I mean that every Christian must be shaped from the inside out by a set of convictions about who God is and what he has accomplished in Jesus Christ. As Christians we should be animated (given life) and motivated (compelled to action) by a core of doctrinal truths–truths like God is loving, sovereign, and holy; God created the world and created it good; as a result of Adam’s sin humans are bent toward evil; Jesus Christ was God’s Son, begotten not created; Jesus suffered and died on the cross for sins and rose again on the third day; the Holy Spirit is God and fills us with power, enables us to believe, equips us with gifts, and bears fruit in our lives; the Bible is God’s word; Jesus is coming again to judge the living and the dead, and justification is by faith alone.

These truths need to be more than a set of beliefs we assume. They should be the lens through which we look at ourselves and the world. There are many Christians and churches that don’t deny any cardinal doctrine of Christian faith, but they still don’t have a theological core. They have, instead, a musty statement of faith they barely understand and hardly believe and wouldn’t dare preach. They are animated and motivated by politics, church growth, relational concerns and the like, but the gospel is merely assumed. “Yes, yes–of course we believe in the Virgin Birth, and the atonement, and the resurrection, and heaven and hell,” they say. But its all periphery, not core. It’s all assumed, not all-consuming. Theologically hollow congregations and pastors may like to think they will bequeath a gospel legacy to the next generation, but the truth is we only pass on what is our passion. New converts and new kids won’t think and live and love like mature Christians, let alone be able to articulate the Christian story, if our beliefs rest in a pamphlet and not in our hearts.

I make no apologies for having a theological church. The church ought to be about the business of the gospel, and the gospel is a message of historical fact plus God-given interpretation. That’s theology. I hope we never feel like we have the “theology thing” down at URC just because we have solid book studies and long, meaty sermons. The “theology thing” is a lifelong project of being transformed by the renewing of our minds. We want to be thinking Christians who know what we believe, why we believe it, and live and die in the comfort of these beliefs.

Having a theological core means, among other things, that our unity is theological. Of course we want to be united in love and purpose too. But whatever actions and affections we share in unison ought to radiate from a theological core. There is so much talk around the broader church about being missional Christians that it’s easy to think the church should be missional-centric. And in one sense, mission is certainly at the center of what we do. But mission itself is not what ties us together or fires us up. It’s only when the mission is defined and it’s genesis is proclaimed that we can rally around mission.

What I mean is that we should be, first of all, Christocentric; that is, centered on the cross of Christ. Christ is our identity, our passion, and our hope. And because of this identity, passion, and hope we pray, and evangelize, and do missions. But missions is not the center. Christ is–which shapes, defines, and launches us into missions. It’s like John Piper’s famous line: “Mission is not the ultimate goal of the church. Worship is.” Being missional is not a sufficient basis for unity. One, because I’m never quite sure what missional means. Two, because the blazing hot center of Christian identity, passion, and hope is not that we are all doing things in Jesus' name. Of course, we should be doing things in Jesus’ name. But the blazing hot center is what God has already done for us in Christ. This must always be explained and rejoiced in, not merely assumed.

Which brings me back to the main point. We desperately need Christians and pastors and missionaries and churches and denominations and movements and institutions which are theological to the core, where doctrines are not simply items to be checked off the dogmatic grocery list or statements to be dusted off out of the ecclesiastical attic. We must all be theological because being a Christian means we embrace a message about who Jesus is and the victory he won for us. And that’s theology.
So, core, yes. Crust? No.
Please, don’t skip the last part of this post, especially if you really liked the first part. Because you may just be a crusty Christian if you’re not careful.

What makes a Christian crusty? A number of things. For starters, it’s an attitude. It’s a demeanor where being Calvinist or paedobaptist or inerrantist (three things I am gladly) are put on like armor or wielded like weapons, when they are meant to be the warm glow of a Christian whose core radiates with love for Christ and the gospel. I believe in theological distinctives–I believe in them and I believe it is good to have them–but if the distinctives are not manifestly the flower of gospel root, the buds aren’t worth the blooming.

A second mark of crusty Christians is approachability, as in, not having any. There is a sizing up-ness that makes some theological types unnecessarily prickly. They are bright and opinionated and quickly analytical. As a result, knowingly or unknowingly, they emit a vibe which communicates something between “You Max Lucado reading moron!” and “I wish R.C. Sproul were here to teach you a thing or two!” Crusty Christians are hard to be around. They are intimidating instead of engaging and growling instead of gracious. They are too willing to share their opinions on everything and unable to put any doctrine in any category not marked “absolutely essential.”

When theology is more crust than core, it’s not so much that we care about good theology too much, we just don’t care about some other hugely important things in the same proportion. So we end up largely skeptical of a prayerful, fruitful, warm-hearted, godly, Arminian leaning pastor. Now, I might think such a pastor is prayerful, fruitful, warm-hearted and godly despite too much emphasis on libertarian free will, but I sure hope to be mighty thankful for all his prayerfulness, fruitfulness, and warm-hearted godliness. Some Christians allow evangelism to trump all other considerations, others size up fellow Christians by their attention to social justice concerns, but a lot of us do our judging with theology. If the theology fits, the lack of mission, prayer, and compassion doesn’t matter much. But if a few theological pieces are misplaced in the puzzle, see you later and don’t let Hymenaeus and Philetus door hit you on the way out.

Striking the balance is not easy. But let’s try hard to be discerning and grounded without always looking for the next theological misstep in our friends, our family, or the songs we sing. And let’s be able to tell the difference between wandering sheep and false teachers. We must delineate between a slightly ill-informed wording of a phrase and a purposeful rejection of truth. We must pursue a passion for fidelity to Scripture and a winsomeness that sweetens the already honey-like drippings of the word of God. Let us be more like a chocolate covered raisin, likeable on the outside and surprisingly good for you on the inside, and less like a tootsie roll pop with its brittle, crunchy exterior that must be broken through before anyone can get to the good stuff. Our theological heart, if it is worth anything, will pulse throughout our spiritual bodies, making us into someone more prayerful, more godly, and more passionate about the Bible, the lost, and the world around us. We will be theologically solid to the core, without the unnecessary crust.

6 Questions for the Potentially Crusty

Yesterday I wrote about the necessity of having a theological core and the danger of being spiritually crusty. I certainly don’t get it all right myself, but here are a few questions that can help prevent crustiness as we unapologetically exult in the precious truths of Scripture.

1. Do we actually care about evangelism? The plight of the lost should break our hearts and the opportunity to share the gospel should be a delight.

2. Do we wear smallness as a badge of honor? “Successful” ministries are not always sell-outs and small churches are sometimes just not very healthy.

3. Are our passions in the right proportion? It’s fine to be passionate about our view on baptism, as long as this passion does not outshine our passion for the cross, the Trinity, and the glory of Christ.

4. Do we (or our pastors) preach with personal, passionate, pleading? The truths we believe are not for dissecting as much as for heralding with joy and humble intercession.

5. Do we know ourselves? We need to understand our gifts, our personalities, our strengths and weaknesses. We need to be ok with who we are and not try to be Driscoll, Piper, Keller, or anyone else. A sense of humor also helps. The Lord probably laughs at us on occasion so we should be able to laugh at ourselves.

6. Are we fighting the battles that matter most in our context? Don’t spend gobs of time preaching on the emergent church if no one in your church has heard of it. Don’t waste a lot of time defending the Pauline authorship of Ephesians if no one around you has ever thought anything different. Understand the issues of worldliness and disobedience that most affect your friends, church, and family.

6 More Questions for the Potentially Crusty

I’ve been writing about the need for core theological convictions without a crusty, crotchety shell. Christians should be a kind of inverse tootsie roll pop–a soft, sweet exterior surrounding a strong, solid interior. Yesterday I suggested six questions to help prevent crustiness in the theologically devout. Today, six more questions.

7. Are we bringing everything up all the way to the glory of God? This is is one of the things I appreciate most about John Piper. Instead of just arguing for justification by faith alone or God’s all-controlling sovereignty, he shows how these precious truths bring glory to God. If we don’t bring everything up to the level of God, our churches will have factions of book people, youth people, social justice people, evangelism people, etc. We need to see how our unique interests and callings relate to God.

8. Are we experts in Scripture first? It’s quite possible to be well-versed in Van Til’s apologetics, Calvin’s third use of the law, and David Well’s critiques of evangelicalism without knowing well the verses of the Bible. We need to know the Bible better than any other book, memorize it, pray it, and teach it (not just a catechism) to our children.

9. Are we theological snobs? If many of my readers are Calvinists, then many of my readers have gone through a crusty Calvinist stage. Some, sadly, never leave it. Certainly, we need to be discerning and help our people grow in their understanding of truth and appetite for meat. But beware the “I’m hipper than thou” attitude that looks down on everyone interested in Left Behind or Facing the Giants are benighted fools. The truly wise learn to benefit from those who don’t get everything right.

10. Can we accept that there are Romans 14 issues? The tricky question (the trickiest question in my opinion) is which issues are Romans 14 issues. But for starters, we should at least affirm in principle that sometimes we will agree to disagree. We will say at times, “Let each person be convinced in his own mind.” This doesn’t mean the issue is pointless or unimportant. It means we recognize that the Scripture is not abundantly clear on every issues and we must allow for differences.

11. Are we resounding gongs and clanging cymbals? If we have convictions and disagree with others, some people will call us loveless. But, that doesn’t mean we have to live up to the charges. We need to love our friends, love the church, and love our enemies. We should not be scared to love and talk about love just because liberals have hijacked the word.

12. Do we possess deep and pervasive piety? I know that pietism is a bad word in some circles. It conjures up notionas of anti-intellectual sentimentality. But we got pietism because Protestant scholasticism had gotten dry (or at least many of the churches of the time had). If we want to be more than intellectual people who happen to be into theology, we need to cultivate deep affections and deeper sanctification. As Reformed Christians (assuming many of you are), let’s lead the way, not only in theolgocial integrity, but also in meditation, Scripture memory, intercession, and earnest worship. What our families, friends, and churches need most from us is our own personal holiness.

The History of Justified by Faith Alone

2010-06-04T17:41:00.000-07:00

The History of Justification by Faith Alone up to the Reformation
by
Thomas R. Thompson

The history of the doctrine justification by faith alone is difficult to trace before the Reformation in the 1500's. A clear line of development of this doctrine from the Apostles to Martin Luther simply does not exit. This does not mean however that this doctrine is a modern invention. The doctrine of justification by faith alone has its foundation in the purpose of God entering the human race in the person of Jesus. The doctrine of justification by faith alone may have received notable attention as stated by Martin Luther, but his statement concerning this doctrine is simply an answer to one of the oldest questions that face mankind. That question being, by what means can a person's sins be forgiven? Whereas the doctrine of justification by faith alone was essentially not a concern of the church before the Reformation, the church was concerned about the means by which one is forgiven of his sins.

The history of justification by faith alone is really the history of the church attempting to find the answer to this question, how can a man be forgiven of sins, and by what means is it accomplished? The early church viewed baptism as a means by which sins were forgiven. This made perfect sense to them for Peter himself said to repent, and be baptized for the remission of sins. This immature thinking that some human work was effectual for the remission of sins, would lead to further errors. For example, if baptism was indeed effectual for the remission of sins, how are sins to be remitted after baptism? The early church should have considered this problem, and concluded that baptism was not effectual for the remission of sin. They should have determined that no human work could accomplish this, and looked more deeply into what Christ accomplished on the cross.

However, they did not do that, and instead started the foundation of a system whereby man can atone for his own sins. This foundation would be built upon for 1500 years. Each successive generation after the Apostles would add new works for man to do to atone for his sins. Each successive generation would corrupt God's plan for the remission of sins more than the previous generation. Towards the end of this corrupting process, a system would be in place that relegated the atonement of Christ to something symbolic, and irrelevant. Instead of the atonement viewed as the only sufficient means for the remission of sins, a complete system is erected whereby sinful man atones for his own sins. This system would become a stench in the nostrils of Martin Luther, and to expose its corruption was something he was willing to lay down his life to do.

Therefore, to trace the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the development of the system whereby man atones for his own sins must be considered first. Then it will be seen how the doctrine of justification by faith alone would rise in response to such a corrupt system. This corrupt system starts growing while the Apostles are still alive. Consider Paul's response to the initial corruption of the atoning work of Christ.

Paul defends the basis for the forgiveness of sin (c. 55)

Paul started a church in Galatia, where the teaching of justification by faith alone was clearly proclaimed and accepted. He taught one's only basis for the forgiveness of sins is faith in the merits of Christ's sacrificial death. After a time Paul received word this church had departed from its initial foundation. He was amazed at the early believers departure from the truth, and sent them a letter in an attempt to guide them back to the truth they initially received. This Paul states in the opening of his letter to the Galatians.

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel... (Gal 1:6)

This young church was being agitated by Judizers. These Judizers were actively trying to bring the Gentile Christians back under the law and into the fold of Judaism, and it appears they were successful. The Judizers were teaching that faith in Christ was needed for the forgiveness of sins, but it was not enough. They were teaching that circumcision was also needed. Paul proves the error of this false doctrine by showing God has never changed His method for forgiving sins. He uses the example of Abraham, whose faith was credited to him as righteousness. Paul references Genesis 15:6 when he writes the following.

Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. (Gal 3:6)

Paul was emphasizing that a person's only basis for salvation is in the merits of Christ. If one wants to add circumcision, almsgiving, baptism or anything else, Paul says Christ will then be of no profit to that person, and "he is a debtor to do the whole law," (Gal 5:3)

One may consider this a minor error to add things concerning righteousness to the gospel, but history shows this not to be the case. The problem is, once something is added room for something else can always be found. Paul knew of this danger and warns the Galatians by saying, "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." (Gal 5:9) That is, accepting doctrinal error concerning how one is justified will cause one's whole doctrinal system to collapse. The doctrine of justification by faith alone gets so corrupted in the next few hundred years, it is essentially unrecognizable by 250 A.D. The shift started after the apostles. While some of the Apostolic Fathers give evidence they understood the doctrine of justification by faith alone, they certainly did not understand the need to fight for its purity.

Christ plus a moral life (c. 95)

Clement was a teacher of the scriptures who immediately followed the Apostles. It his writings, one finds clear evidences of his understanding that the only basis for sins being forgiving is the atonement of Christ. Consider this statement from a letter Clement sent to the church at Corinth.

So all of them received honor and greatness, not through themselves or their own deeds or the right things they did, but through his will. And we, therefore, who by his will have been called in Jesus Christ, are not justified of ourselves or by our wisdom or insight of religious devotion or the holy deeds we have done from the heart, but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning. To him be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Clement, Clement's First Letter, 32.3-4)

In some respects, Clement's statement on how one is justified is clearer than the Apostle Paul's. Not only does Clement affirm Christians are justified by faith in the work of Christ alone, but he also affirms that unless God calls a person he will never be awakened to place his faith in Christ. However, when confronting the morality problem in the Church at Corinth, Clement did not see this as a valuable weapon. Rather than providing an exhortation from the scriptures, emphasizing that Christians are dead to sin, and those living in immorality are not part of the body of Christ, Clement appeals to the social aspect of the gospel. This is a subtle shift. Clement leaves room in his teaching to suggest that a person becomes justified before God by living a righteous life. Whereas, the emphasis should have been that those who are justified by faith live righteous lives. Consider the below example of Clement's association of salvation with a moral life. Some in Corinth had removed church leaders from their offices, of which Clement is now rebuking.

Your contention and rivalry, brothers, thus touches matters that bear on our salvation. You have studied the Holy Scriptures, which contains the truth and is inspired by the Holy Spirit... You will not find that upright people have ever been disowned by holy men. The righteous, to be sure, have been persecuted, but by wicked men. They have been imprisoned, but by the godless. (Clement, Clement's First Letter, 45.1-3)

Clement here links the grounds of one's salvation to performing good deeds. This is a link that must never be made. The grounds of being forgiven are the merits of Christ alone, not the fallible works an individual produces. Clement should have exhorted the Corinthians to examine if they were truly in the faith, rather then trying to adjust their moral behavior. The Corinthians were producing evil fruit that was not consistent with a branch grafted into Christ. Rather than call attention to the tree they were grafted into, he was calling attention to the fruit that was being produced.

Clement did not intentionally desire to lead his listeners away from Christ as the only means of being justified, but if the teaching is not clear, it can point one in the direction of heresy. This is what happened during the period of the Apostolic Fathers. Their warning against heresies were not clear and sharp, and many were overtaken by false doctrines. Clement understood the Apostles teachings on this subject, he just did not understand the crucial nature of the doctrine, and how sinful men by nature desire to pervert it. Nor could Clement foresee into the future how far this doctrine would drift from the original Apostolic formulation of it.

In general though, the tone of Clement's letter is a mixture of forgiveness based on the merits of Christ, and the merits of man. This is an unholy mixture one must be diligent to avoid. The relationship between these was not clearly understood in the church at this time, and perhaps not by Clement either. The work of Christ as the only grounds for being forgiven of sins is being leavened with works based forgiveness by the teachers succeeding the Apostles. Rather than this error being recognized and cut out, it would leaven the whole doctrine in time. Then nothing could be done except start over. After this subtle leavening of forgiveness based on the works of Christ with the merits of man, more leaven would be added to it in the form of baptism.

Christ plus baptism (c. 100)

Among the writings of the early church leaders, many occurrences to the teaching of forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ plus baptism can be found. It was accepted without analysis and handed down in succession to each following generation. An example of this teaching can be found in "The Shepherd of Hermas." In this writing, Hermas describes a vision he had of a great stone tower being built upon water. He is told by the shepherd the tower is the church, and Hermas then asks why the tower is built on water. The shepherd answers.

Hear then why the tower is built on water: because your life has been and will be saved through water. (Hermas, The Shepherd of Hermas, 11.5)

The symbolism of the church being built on water baptism emphasizes the weight the early church placed on baptism. This to the modern evangelical is so far from Biblical teachings, one can easily find verses to refute it. But most in the early church did not have easy access to the scriptures. It would not be until 387 A.D. that the first list is produced that corresponds exactly with today's New Testament canon. Further, the Shepherd of Hermas was considered a canonical book by some churches. It was read during early worship services along with the canonical books.

This water baptism doctrine for the forgiveness of sins is not some spurious doctrine drifting among a few of the early churches, but rather is the dominate understanding of how sins are forgiven. By the year 250 A.D. it is being taught with fervor.

Although there can be no other than the one baptism, they [heretics] fancy they baptize. Forsaking the fountain of life, they promise the grace of living and saving water. Men are not washed there, they are dirtied; their sins are piled up, not purged. (Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church, 11)

Those holding this "Christ plus baptism" view recognized the deficiencies of this teachings. But rather than correct a bad teaching, more bad teachings are added in an attempt to cover the problems with the initial bad teaching. The initial recognized deficiency being, what is the state of those professing faith in Christ, but never baptized. Are their sins not forgiven until they are dipped in water? Cyprian, the water baptism champion "addresses" this question. He contends there exists two ways a person can still attain forgiveness, even though the person was not water baptized.

1. If one is martyred. Cyprian says, "they are baptized with the most glorious and most precious baptism of blood, of which the Lord himself said, I have another baptism to be baptized with." (Cyprian, Letter 69, The Baptismal Controversy, 22)

2. If the church neglected its duty to baptize. Cyprian says, "the Lord in his mercy is able to grant them indulgence and not separate from the privileges of his Church.." (Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church, 23)

The early church is now far from the Apostles teachings that man is saved on the grounds of Christ's merits through faith, and moving further away with each new generation. At this point in time, a few generations have passed since the Apostles, and the Apostles original teachings on forgiveness bases on the works of Christ are all but lost. But before this doctrine surfaces again, it would be buried even deeper in works based salvational systems.

The early church after having shored up, or so it thought, the problems with its baptism doctrine, a new problems arises. Up to now the majority belief was that one is justified by God through baptism, but the early church was soon forced to consider how to deal with sins committed after baptism.

Christ plus the faith of a confessor (c. 250)

Cyprian's solution at removing the weaknesses with the "baptism forgives sin" doctrine, was really no solution at all. He did handle a few additional problems with his enhancements, but the issue of what to do with sins committed after baptism is still not resolved. This becomes a significant problem for the early church.

The early church was persecuted by wicked and ruthless emperors. One emperor even passed a law making it illegal to be a Christian. If a person was suspected of being a Christian, he could be taken to court. If he at the court proceeding denied being a Christian, he would be released without any further actions. But, if he confessed to being a Christian, he would be tortured and most of the time it was unto death. Many Christians under such persecution were able to make noble confessions and admit they were Christians, even after being beaten without mercy for hours, and sometimes days. Yet some under the pressure lapsed, and denied being a Christian to spare their life. Those that were able to pass through the persecution were honored, and given special privileges within the church.

After the time of persecution was over, some of these lapsed Christians wanted to be forgiven and reinstated into the church. Those who were persecuted and did not lapse were taking it upon themselves because of their extra merits they were believed to have, to restore those who had lapsed. This Cyprian says is not valid. By divine law he says, only the bishops have such authority. Cyprian does propose a solutions to the problem.

Finally, it is possible for the lapsed, by undergoing martyrdom afterwards, to receive the promises of the kingdom. (Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church, 19)

To suggest the only way for a lapsed Christian to be restored is with his own blood, is to say Christ's atonement was not sufficient for certain sins. This same error was made by those who passed through persecution, and granted forgiveness to others based on their heroic faith. Rather than correct a bad baptismal doctrine, many more bad teachings in addition to the ones illustrated above will be created to prop it up. At this point it should have been observed that fixing their baptism doctrine one problem at a time was not working. They should have considered the bigger question, by what means are sins forgiven, rather then trying to determine how individual sins would be forgiven. The sadness in all this is that people are looking away from the merits of Christ in the atonement, and replacing His merits with their own. This trend will continue until the Reformation.

Christ plus Apostolic Succession (c. 251)

Just when one might think the church is at a low and ready to rise out of the false theories of forgiveness it has been teaching, another false doctrine is introduced. Cyprian introduces a forgiveness of sins by church membership. With this false doctrine men are the gate keepers determining who is forgiven and who is not. He says, there is no salvation (forgiveness) outside the church. Cyprian's motives were pure. He was simply trying to protect the church from heretics, but in doing so damaged the church by the errors he introduced.

Cyprian was correct in his stating that there is no salvation outside the church, but he had the wrong definition of the church and this gave birth to even more errors. If he simply viewed the church as all those professing faith in Christ making up the spiritual body of Christ, he would have avoided much error. But instead, he viewed the church as the physical body of people whose local Bishop can be traced back to an Apostle, and whose doctrinal beliefs are the same as the Bishop of Rome.

This error should have been rejected when it first appeared, but instead it was nurtured and grew into a huge monster. If a believer in Christ does not accept this principle of apostolic succession tracing back to the catholic church at Rome, he was by reason of this doctrine considered outside of Christ and thus a pagan. Salvation was impossible for such a person.

He who does not keep this unity does not keep the law of God, nor the faith of the Father and the Son- nor life and salvation. (Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church, 6)

The true doctrine of forgiveness based on the merits of Christ alone is now nowhere to be found, and would not be found until the church drifts still further away.

Augustine- Christ plus baptism and the Lord's Supper (c. 400)

Augustine was not immune from the works based salvation teachings of his day. He was infected by them as well. Augustine may have placed more emphasis on one's sins being forgiven based solely on the merits of Christ, but he still does not look to that event alone as the basis for one's justification. Consider the following which he wrote during his conflicts with Pelagius, which occurred near the end of his life, and thus his most mature thoughts.

To the man who believes in Him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed for righteousness. (Augustine, On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants, Book 1, Ch. 18)

One could point to this statement and conclude that Augustine believed the only basis for one's sins being forgiven is faith in the atoning work of Christ. However, when Augustine's statement is taken in its proper context, one finds something quite different. While Augustine does place a major emphasis on the atonement of Christ, faith in that work alone says Augustine is not sufficient to save. To the atoning work of Christ, the works of baptism and partaking of the Lord's Supper must be added. This Augustine states just a few chapters after this grand statement on justification by faith.

The Christians of Carthage have an excellent name for the sacraments, when they say that baptism is nothing else than "salvation," and the sacrament of the body of Christ nothing else than "life..." For wherein does their opinion, who designate baptism by the term salvation, differ from what is written: "He saved us by the washing of regeneration?" or from Peter's statement: "The like figure where-unto even baptism doth also now save us?"... If, therefore, as so many and such divine witnesses agree, neither salvation nor eternal life can be hoped for by any man without baptism and the Lord's body and blood... (Augustine, On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants, Book 1, Ch. 34)

Still further in this writing one finds Augustine's teachings on sins after baptism, the same as those who preceded him. That is, the merits of man are necessary to atone for sins committed after baptism. Consider the following quote from a chapter later in this same book with the heading "Works of Mercy- Means of Wiping Out Sins".

The Lord, ... was pleased to provide and endow with efficacious virtue certain healthful remedies against the guilt and bonds even of sins committed after baptism, for instance, the works of mercy, as when he says: "Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven; give, and it shall be given unto you." (Augustine, On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants, Book 2, Ch. 3)

What Augustine has done with his teachings is make baptism and other works of man ingredients into being forgiven of sins, instead of faith in the atoning work of Christ. This teaching would be formally accepted at a church council in 529 A.D. It teaches that the justification of man is based on a work of man, namely baptism. This makes baptism part of the justification process. Consider what was concluded by the council concerning this teaching.

Canon 13. Concerning the restoration of free will. The freedom of will that was destroyed in the first man can be restored only by the grace of baptism, for what is lost can be returned only by the one who was able to give it. Hence the Truth itself declares: "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36). (Council of Orange, [529 A.D.])

Although Augustine was mired in the works based salvation system of his day still, he stood against the majority view that man with his free will is able to desire the things of God. Augustine said that man's free will is capable of many things, but it was ruined by sin and now incapable of leading to man's justification unless it is first liberated by grace. That is, man's mind is not only incapable to leading him to justification, it will not even desire justification unless God changes it. This thought would be a key element of Martin Luther's thinking on the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Thus Augustine does not turn the theological thinking of his peers to the merits of the atonement of Christ, but rather supports the continual drift towards salvation based on the merits of man. The drift continues, and with the next generation it will include assent to creeds for one's justification.

Christ plus Propositions (c. 500)

The works based salvational system so clearly presented by Cyprian is still having a major influence hundreds of years later. This can be illustrated by an early church writing called the Athanasian Creed (not believed to be written by Athanasius). It states in clear terms that some believed correct doctrine resulted in one's salvation. From the council of Nicea (325 A.D.), to the council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.), orthodox statements concerning the Trinity had been established. Heretics were still challenging these statements, and as a result, some came up with a new document stating that those who did not affirm the decisions of these early councils were not considered true Christians. The church is trying to protect what it considers precious, but deals with the issue wrongly. These innocent intentions keep leading the church further and further away from the truth. Consider this short portion of the Athanasian Creed.

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance... Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

It took the church about 400 years to define its doctrine of the Trinity. Within that 400 years, the church really only placed boundaries around this Biblical doctrine. It did not explain the mystery of the Trinity, it only placed bounds around what was considered orthodox. Therefore, the church wrestled with this doctrine for over 400 years, yet in near the year 500 A.D. the church now teaches one must affirm it to be save. The goal of protecting the faith from heretics was noble, but their approach has no scriptural support. This continues the slide further into doctrinal error.

The church for the most part was stagnate for the next 500 years, a period of time known as the middle ages. No major theological contributions would arise during this time. At the end of this period however, an important contribution to the justification by faith alone doctrine would be made. Anselm shows that salvation based on any merits of man is a contradiction.

Man cannot pay the debt owed for his sins (c. 1050)

Until Anselm of Canterbury it was rare for anyone to speak as if he understood that man has nothing to offer God in exchange for the forgiveness of sins. The dominant thought was being baptized, or performing some act of charity was sufficient to cancel sins committed. Anselm is his writing "Why God became Man," explains why this is not possible. Anselm shows man has no capability to make satisfaction to God for even the smallest of his sins.

Anselm starts by explaining what it means to sin, and how to make satisfaction for it. He notes all the thoughts and labors of a man ought to be subject to the will of God. This is the debt that all men owe to God, and it is sin to not give Him that. No one who pays this debt sins, and anyone who does not pay it sins. Should one sin against God, it is not enough to simply return what was taken. To make satisfaction one must return more than was taken. It is not enough for someone who has injured another to restore his original condition without giving some compensation for the pain and injury suffered. (Anselm, Why God became Man, Book 1, Ch. XI)

When man sinned in the garden, and surrendered his will to the devil, he took from God whatever God planned for humanity. Therefore, according to strict justice in order to make satisfaction with God, man would need to conquer the devil to regain what was lost. Since man was conquered by the devil and stole what belonged to God, and God lost it, so by the fact of man conquering the devil, the devil loses and God regains it. In addition, man would also need to justify as many men as God had planned for the Heavenly City that was lost due to the fall. However, sinful man is incapable of this, because a sinner cannot justify another sinner. Therefore man has no capacity to merit any justice from God for the things he does. Anything man may consider offering to God is only giving to God what is already owed. (Anselm, Why God became Man, Book 1, Ch. XXIII)

It would not be until 500 years later and Martin Luther, that many would understand the full weight of Anselm arguments. In the light of such convincing arguments, it makes previous church council matters on reinstating lapsed Christians and the like seem rather petty. Man has no ability to do penance for any of his sins, so it seems rather foolish to construct systems whereby satisfaction is made to God based on man's so-called merits. If the church considered this bigger problem initially, they may not have invented so many things for one to do to obtain forgiveness of sins. They did not before Anselm, nor after him. As a result the church continues to develop its merits based salvational system, until the weight of this system brings about its own collapse.

Man's merit based salvational system spins out of control (c. 1200 - 1500)

When the early bishops of the church first linked baptism and salvation together, it was a rather innocent mistake. The church was in the midst of a transition from the old covenant to the new covenant. Many were being killed, scattered, and persecuted. The scriptures were not easily accessible by the common people, and the New Testament canon was in the process of being established. This period can better be described as one of survival, rather than theological reflection. It is therefore understandable that they did not develop a solid understanding of the relationship between baptism and salvation. However, this innocent error became the fountainhead of many more errors. By the 13th century, these previous errors were gaining a structure, and would soon be firmly in place. For example, during this period a church council declared that sins committed after baptism would now need to be confessed to a priest. The priest would give the prescribed actions for the confessing sinner to carry out so his sins could be atoned for. It was mandated that this be observed at least once a year.

All the faithful of either sex, after they have reached the age of discernment, should individually confess all their sins in a faithful manner to their own priest at least once a year, and let them take care to do what they can to perform the penance imposed on them. [Fourth Lateran Council, Canon 21, [1215])

This foolish practice would give birth to more errors yet. With the structure in place of the priest prescribing atoning acts for one's personal sins, the confessing sinner became easy to manipulate. The church used this process for financial gain, and various other forms of persuasion. This grew into a system known as indulgences. Through the indulgence system, services could be performed on behalf of the church, or money given to support a church project, in exchange for laxer forms of penance to be performed. For example, when the church was involved with a crusade to gain back control of the holy land, the following degree was given.

It is our ardent desire to liberate the holy Land from infidel hands. We therefore declare, with the approval of this sacred council and on the advice of prudent men who are fully aware of the circumstances of time and place, that crusaders are to make themselves ready... We therefore, trusting in the mercy of almighty God and in the authority of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, do grant, by the power of binding and loosing that God has conferred upon us, albeit unworthy, unto all those who undertake this work in person and at their own expense, full pardon for their sins about which they are heartily contrite and have spoken in confession, and we promise them an increase of eternal life at the recompensing of the just; also to those who do not go there in person but send suitable men at their own expense, according to their means and status, and likewise to those who go in person but at others' expense, we grant full pardon for their sins. [Fourth Lateran Council, Canon 71, [1215])

By the 1500's, the system of indulgences became a means of raising money for church projects. Pope Leo X in 1516 granted indulgences to those who contributed to the building of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. Commissioners, more commonly know as an indulgence preachers were appointed to collect money for this project.

Martin Luther came into contact with one such indulgence preacher that moved him to action. The thought of one buying satisfaction from God, in connection with his studying of the scriptures, caused Martin Luther much anguish. Luther concluded as Anselm did hundreds of years earlier. Man is unable to perform meritorious works for sins to be forgiven. In opposition to the popular Indulgence teachings of his time, in 1517 he wrote a list of 95 theses against indulgences, and nailed them to the door of the church in Wittenberg, and the Reformation was born.

A new beginning for justification by faith alone (1517)

The church journeyed for 1500 years trying to find the answer to that most important question, by what means can sins be forgiven. The church initially did not think the atonement of Christ alone of sufficient for the cancelling of sin. Then after struggling for years and years in 1517 the answer was clearly articulated. Not only was the atonement of Christ sufficient for the cancelling of sins, but no human works could be added to it to cancel sins. All that left of man was to accept by faith that a full payment was made for all sins past, present, and future.

When Martin Luther said "the just shall live by faith", he was really saying the old system of performing works in an attempt to satisfy God was all wrong. Our only hope of satisfying God is by having the merits of Christ imputed to us through faith. Man cannot contribute towards his own salvation. This is completely different than being forgiven of sin in baptism and atoning for personal sins after that on a regular basis. As James Buchanan correctly notes, the one is founded on the finished work of Christ, while the other depends on the imperfect works of sinful men. Man has no resources whereby to atone for any sins. All that he might do in an attempt to atone for sin would only be his duty.

To add any of man's merits, of which he has none, to the atonement of Christ to be forgiven of sins, is to confess to God that the atonement of Christ was incomplete. It is to say that man in some way deserves to be praised, and receive honor from God for completing the saving of his soul. For without such help, God alone could not bring such a one to heaven. Man can thank Christ for his contribution to his salvation, but he cannot thank Christ for it unconditionally, for Christ did not secure the forgiveness for past, present,and future sins according to this false system. Such are the logical consequences of man attempting to add to the atoning work of Christ.

God used Martin Luther to expose the corruptions during his day, and as a result a new movement was started. This movement is known as the Protestant Reformation. The name Protestant is a good one, because it was a collection of people protesting to the unscriptural practices that were being done in the name of Christ. As Luther protested to the practices during his day, the need for protest still exists, since those practices Luther listed as unscriptural are still occurring today. The system of man atoning for his sins, and gaining indulgences are still being taught. While the abuses are not as great, the basic system is still in place. Consider the following proclamation by one of the leaders of this system.

With regard to the required conditions, the faithful can gain the Jubilee indulgence:

1) In Rome, if they make a pious pilgrimage to one of the Patriarchal Basilicas, namely, the Basilica of Saint Peter in the Vatican, ... or some pious exercise (e.g., the Stations of the Cross, the Rosary, the recitation of the Akathistos Hymn in honour of the Mother of God)...

The plenary indulgence of the Jubilee can also be gained through actions which express in a practical and generous way the penitential spirit which is, as it were, the heart of the Jubilee. This would include abstaining for at least one whole day from unnecessary consumption (e.g., from smoking or alcohol, or fasting or practising abstinence according to the general rules of the Church and the norms laid down by the Bishops' Conferences) and donating a proportionate sum of money to the poor; supporting by a significant contribution works of a religious or social nature (especially for the benefit of abandoned children, young people in trouble, the elderly in need, foreigners in various countries seeking better living conditions). (Incarnationis Mysterium, Bull of Indiction of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, [November 29, 1998])

In conclusion then, the history of justification by faith alone is the development of two ways for one to be forgiven of sin. One way says the merits of man's works plus Christ are need for forgiveness. The other way says the merits of Christ alone received through faith are all that is needed. It is the opinion of this writer that the first way seriously degrades the work of Christ, for it implies the sinner is worthy of some praise for his salvation, but the scriptures teach that Christ is worthy of this praise.

Jesus Christ is Not Politically Correct by John MacArthur

2010-05-26T18:05:00.000-07:00

This article was posted, by The Washington Post, in the "On Faith" section of their website on Aug 14, 2009

Let's be brutally honest: most of Jesus' teaching is completely out of sync with the mores that dominate our culture.

I'm talking, of course, about the Jesus we encounter in Scripture, not the always-gentle, never-stern, super-lenient coloring-book character who exists only in the popular imagination. The real Jesus was no domesticated clergyman with a starched collar and genteel manners; he was a bold, uncompromising Prophet who regularly challenged the canons of political correctness.

Consider the account of Jesus' public ministry given in the New Testament. The first word of his first sermon was "Repent!"--a theme that was no more welcome and no less strident-sounding than it is today. The first act of his public ministry touched off a small riot. He made a whip of cords and chased money-changers and animal merchants off the Temple grounds. That initiated a three-year-long conflict with society's most distinguished religious leaders. They ultimately handed him over to Roman authorities for crucifixion while crowds of lay people cheered them on.
Jesus was pointedly, deliberately, and dogmatically counter-cultural in almost every way. No wonder the religious and academic aristocracy of his generation were so hostile to him.

Would Jesus receive a warmer welcome from world religious leaders, the media elite, or the political gentry today? Anyone who has seriously considered the New Testament knows very well that he would not. Our culture is devoted to pluralism and tolerance; contemptuous of all absolute or exclusive truth-claims; convinced that self-love is the greatest love of all; satisfied that most people are fundamentally good; and desperately wanting to believe that each of us is endowed with a spark of divinity.

Against such a culture Jesus' message strikes every discordant note.

Check the biblical record. Jesus' words were full of hard demands and stern warnings. He said, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and is himself destroyed or lost?" (Luke 9:23-25). "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:26).

At one point an unthinkable Roman atrocity took the lives of many Galilean pilgrims who had come to worship in Jerusalem. Pilate, the Roman governor, ordered his men to murder some worshipers and then mingled their blood with the sacrifices they were offering. While the city was still reeling from that awful disaster, a tower fell in the nearby district of Siloam and instantly snuffed out eighteen more lives.

Asked about these back-to-back tragedies, Jesus said, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:2-5).

Ignoring the normal rules of taste, tact, and diplomacy, Jesus in effect declared that all his listeners were sinners in need of redemption. Then, as now, that message was virtually guaranteed to offend many--perhaps most--of Jesus' audience.

Those with no sense of personal guilt--including the vast majority of religious leaders--were of course immediately offended. They were convinced they were good enough to merit God's favor. Who was this man to summon them to repentance? They turned away in angry unbelief.

The only ones not offended were those who already sensed their guilt and were crushed under the weight of its burden. Unhindered by indignation or self-righteousness, they could hear the hope implicit in Jesus' words. For them, the repeated phrase "unless you repent" pointed the way to redemption.

Elsewhere, Jesus made the promise of life and forgiveness explicit: "He who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life" (John 5:24). "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand" (John 10:27-28).

That, of course, is the glorious message of the gospel, just as potent and just as relevant today as it was then. But the promise is for those who are weary of sin; those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matthew 5:6); those who come to Christ with repentant hearts--not those who are convinced they are fundamentally good.

Proud people, including lots of religious people who call themselves Christians, don't really believe Christ's message at all. He said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance" (Mark 2:17).

So what would Jesus say to a pluralistic, tolerant, self-indulgent society like ours? I'm convinced his approach today would be the very same strategy we see in the New Testament. To smug, self-satisfied, arrogant sinners (including multitudes on church rolls) his words would sound harsh, shocking, provocative. But to "the poor in spirit" (Matthew 5:3)--those who are exhausted and spent by the ravages of sin; desperate for forgiveness and without any hope of atoning for their own sin--Jesus' call to repentant faith remains the very gateway to eternal life.

This is a particularly hard message in cultures like ours that elevate self-love, self-esteem, or self-righteousness, but Jesus was absolutely clear, and these words do still speak to us: "Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18:14).

Dr. John MacArthur, pastor of 7,000-member Grace Community Church in Southern California, is a best-selling author of more than 200 books and study guides. His new book is "The Jesus You Can't Ignore: What You Must Learn from the Bold Confrontations of Christ."

Did Jesus Preach Paul's Gospel.....POWERFUL SERMON!

2010-05-24T15:54:00.000-07:00

T4G 2010 -- Session 6 -- John Piper from Together for the Gospel (T4G) on Vimeo.

For Pete's sake save Pete the Moose

2010-05-21T11:13:00.000-07:00

Help Save Pete the Moose!

Help Us to Save Pete the Moose!
Welcome to the Official Site of Pete the Moose in Vermont's Northeast Kingdom! The story of Pete and his human friend, David, is a unique tale. Pete was attacked by dogs and mauled when he was about 5 days old. Vermont Fish and Wildlife told the people who found Pete to let him die. They couldn't bear to just leave him there. So, they took him to a kind man named David Lawrence, and he nursed Pete back to health.
In saving his life & caring for him over 14 months, Pete & David forged a special friendship. But as a result of this same closeness, Pete LOVES people, and so he does not have the normal fear of Man that he should. It would have been VERY dangerous for him to be released back into the wild. So David found an enclosed, 600-acre ranch in the area that is fenced in. The Game Reserve is owned by another nice man named Doug, and he generously provided Pete a place where he (ironically)could live a wild life safe from hunters. Pete lives there along with about 120 other deer and moose that have also gotten thru the "State Designed and Approved" fence.

Enter the Bureaucrats... Now the Vermont Department of Fish & Wildlife wants to destroy Pete & the other animals there. Part of Pete's diet comes from from animal feed. Because of this, Vermont State Officials claim animals there could contract something called "Chronic Wasting Disease", a brain ailment that affects deer-like animals, and which can be spread animal-to-animal or via feed. And so the Dept of F&W would like to "remove" the deer and moose that now inhabit this property. And by "remove", they mean "kill". They have known about us all along, but they didn't care to try and help out a long time ago. Instead, they sat back and did nothing until now...

WE NEED YOUR HELP TO SAVE PETE! We DO NOT want Pete destroyed! We DO NOT want Pete in a zoo! And we want the Governor to put whatever promises he makes about what will happen to Pete to be put in writing! Read on below to learn the ways that YOU can help us to Save Pete the Moose!

Please go to savepetethemoose.org to sign the ePetition!

Head Coverings for Women by George Mattern

2010-05-17T06:52:00.000-07:00

Head Coverings are not required for all Christian women

It is evident that the question of head coverings is, indeed, a cultural issue confined to the Corinthian church--and not a requirement for all Christian women of all ages--for the following reasons:

If head coverings for women were a universal requirement, why are they mentioned only in the epistle to the Corinthians? Remember that the Christians of the first century did not have complete Bibles like we do today. Different epistles to different churches dealt with various issues that needed to be addressed and clarified for those specific churches. Universal principles are restated and reaffirmed by different epistles in a variety of contexts and applications. So, why does Paul not mention the requirement of women wearing head coverings when he writes to Timothy about church authority and function? Rread 1 Tim. 2:9-15, in which Paul specifically delineates the principles of female conduct in the church--you will find NO MENTION of a head covering requirement, although the universal principle of female submission is asserted clearly. Paul even talks about how women are to dress (vs. 9)--and he mentions hair in that verse--but he says nothing about a head covering. Would that not be the obvious place to find such a requirement, if it were intended to be universal...?

The UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE of women in submission to their husbands was and is the real issue. That's why Paul writes, "Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ" (1 Cor. 11:3). He then goes on to explain that the wearing of head coverings "while praying" was a particular way that the Christian women in Corinth could demonstrate that principle in a manner that would be readily recognizable to the people in the surrounding culture.

The wearing of head coverings, then, is the concession made by Corinthian women to the accepted norms of their society, the violation of which would imply that women in the church were NOT in submission to their husbands. Unbelievers not being familiar with their attitudes and practices, the only effective way for Christians to exemplify their fidelity to this genuine principle of God's economy would be to cooperate with the cultural practices that signify such accord.

Here's another example (among many) of how believers made concessions on behalf of those around them. Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 7:19--"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God." He insisted to the Judaizers in the church who wanted to impose circumcision as a condition of salvation: "If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you" (Gal. 5:2). But, in Acts 16:3, Luke reports that Paul took Timothy "and circumcised him"--Why would he do that? Luke continues--"because of the Jews who were in those parts, for they all knew that his father was a Greek." Paul knew that circumcision and head coverings mean nothing in themselves--but he commanded both IN THE SPECIFIC SITUATIONS AND SETTINGS where those actions were the only way to externally demonstrate the much more important internal principle of SUBMISSION TO GOD. The Jews believed circumcision was still the physical proof that a man was in obedience to God, and without such evidence a Jewish Christian would have no opportunity to even begin to witness to his people about what constitutes true obedience to God. And how could the Corinthian church call its contemporaries to obedience of God's commands if, in their eyes, the church woman were in flagrant disobedience of Him...?

Practical Considerations
The practice of men removing their hats when praying (or entering a building, for that matter) is also a cultural concession by which we “respect what is right in the sight of all men” (Rom. 12:17). It is considered disrespectful to have a hat on at the dinner table (at least the way my dad taught me), or in various other situations, including public prayer.

As for prayer, it is likely that the conventions of modern society in this regard were heavily influenced by the Scriptures, particularly 1 Cor. 11. But, if Paul was giving a universal, inviolable moral principle when insisting that, “Every man who has something on his head while praying...disgraces his head” (1 Cor. 11:4), does that mean that a firefighter entering a burning building with his bunker gear--including a protective helmet “on his head”--should refrain from praying? I don’t know about you, but I’d rather “disgrace” my head than “lose” it...

Also, I have witnessed first hand how certain religious groups have taken the requirement for women to wear head coverings and pressed it to such a legalistic extreme that it would be laughable, if not for the pain and anguish such foolishness causes. As usual with human traditions, the fastidious Pharisees end up “straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel” because it is so easy to focus on things like wearing head coverings and tithing garden seeds while “neglecting the weightier provisions of the Law, like justice and mercy and faithfulness” (Mat. 23:23-24). Mennonite women are required to wear a head covering all the time—bud didn’t Paul specify that the covering was to be worn “while praying”? (1 Cor. 11:5). “Well,” retorts the fastidious Pharisee, searching desperately for a Biblical justification of his tradition—“Doesn’t the Scripture say, ‘Pray without ceasing’?” (1 Thes. 5:17). And so, armed with that doctrinal bludgeon, the leaders of such groups mercilessly beat upon the heads of women who do not conform to that tradition. And sadly, as Mark explained in his gospel, “there are many other things which they have received in order to observe” (Mk. 7:4).

And so, let any sincere Christians take heed to himself or herself--“beware and be on your guard against every form of greed” (Lk. 12:15)—in this case, “greed” for the personal merit, recognition, and approval arising from conformity to an outward tradition. In this and every other case, “greed...amounts to idolatry” (Col. 3:5), and self-idolatry is the most insidious and dangerous form of all. Many who would never think of bowing and worshipping before a golden image are all too eager to do just that in front of a mirror...

A Further Question
If head coverings are to be normative for all Christian woman on the basis of Paul's appeal to the purpose of God in creation (according to one interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:8-9), this inspires a crucial question:
Immediately after the Fall and God's pronouncement of the Curse, Genesis 3:21 says, "The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them." Since this was the beginning of humans wearing clothing, why did God not make a head covering for Eve, and command her and all of her daughters to wear such a covering as the universal "symbol of authority" (1 Cor. 11:10)...?

The answer to this question--and the reason why no woman was ever commanded to wear a "symbol of authority" on her head until the writing of 1 Corinthians--must be that such an accoutrement was specific to the culture and society of the city of Corinth. In appealing to the order and purposes of God in creation, Paul was validating the UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE of wives being in submission to their husbands--the demonstration of which was the wearing of a head covering by women IN CORINTH in that particular historical and cultural context.

To take this practice out of that historical context and make it a normative requirement for all Christian women is tantamount to manufacturing an unnecessary external ritualistic observance--which is another way to say that it is rendered meaningless because external ritualism has a tendency to obscure or marginalize the internal realities that the outward act is supposedly designed to signify.

This is certainly true of the multiplied man-made rituals that have defaced the pure skin of genuine religion with the ugly tattoo of human invention--but, it can also be an adverse effect associated with the gneuine ordinances givne to the Church by God. A prime example of this is baptism, which was originally intended to signify the positional "immersion" of a new believer into the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 6:3-7). But, when man tampers with God's valid "ordinance" and turns it into a "sacrament", it is divorced from its original intent and perverted into being a religious ritual performed by a person in order to gain merit or approval from God. This is the fertile seed-bed of the heresy of "Baptismal Regeneration" and many other abominations in the realm of human religious presumptuousness.

Another example of taking a physical act out of its historical context and improperly imposing it upon the entire church is foot washing. The washing of feet was a common necessity in ancient times, and a courtesy extended to visitors when they entered a home. In this age of modern footwear, however, it is unnecessary, but some have turned it into yet another religious ritual on the basis of Jesus' exhortation that "You also ought to wash one another's feet" (Jn. 13:14). It is painfully obvious that the Lord was not instituting a ritual for the whole church to observe, but rather using His act of washing the Disciple's feet as an EXAMPLE--in that historical context--of the UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE of selfless service rendered to others! To turn it into a relitious ritual, as usual, misses the whole point!!!

George Mattern 1/21/2010 1:24:06 AM

Male Authority

2010-05-15T11:03:00.000-07:00

Going back to Genesis to look for answers concerning male authority over women is critically important, because here is where the order of authority is established and given directly by God to Adam and Eve, which we all must abide by, which, btw, He does not change all throughout the entire Bible. God does not establish male rule and authority over women initially, then come to the church age and establish yet a new world order. The order of hierarchy is commensurate with the church age as that which was established from the very beginning. God is consistent. Men take responsibility over women from the clear passages of Genesis, and it is equally true and clearly spelled out in the rest of Scripture, that that domain and exercise of power is to be IN the home as well as IN the body of the church.

It is very apparent that God calls those in authority, in this case man, to be wise and loving to those whom he has rule over. In fact, men are supposed to love their wives as themselves. “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself (Eph 5:28).” Men are also told to love their wives as Christ loves the church. “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it (Eph 5:25).”

If we take into account what it means to have genuine agape love for someone, anyone, be they our brothers and sisters in Christ, our neighbors or our husbands and wives, it means that we esteem them as greater than ourselves. The Bible tells us that, “…love does not seek its own (1Cr 13:5).” So, to truly be a leader and loving simultaneously it is imperative to have wisdom. Wisdom to know that it is impossible to Lord anything over anyone, because “Love does not brag and is not arrogant (1 Cor 13:4).”

More later...

How may we know whether we love God?

2010-05-10T08:53:00.000-07:00

How May We Know Whether We Love God?
by Dr. Thomas Watson

He who loves God desires his presence. Lovers cannot be long apart; they soon have their fainting fits, for want of a sight of the object of their love. A soul deeply in love with God desires the enjoyment of Him in His ordinances, in word, prayer, and sacraments. David was ready to faint away and die when he had not a sight of God. "My soul fainteth for God" (Psalm 84:2). Such as care not for ordinances, but say, "When will the Sabbath be over?" plainly reveal their lack of love to God.

He who loves God does not love sin. "Ye that love the Lord, hate evil" (Psalm 97:10). The love of God, and the love of sin, can no more mix together than iron and clay. Every sin loved, strikes at the being of God; but he who loves God, has a hatred of sin. He who would part two lovers is a hateful person. God and the believing soul are two lovers; sin parts between them, therefore the soul is implacably set against it. By this try your love to God. How could Delilah say she loved Samson, when she entertained correspondence with the Philistines, who were his mortal enemy?

He who loves God is not much in love with anything else. His love is very cool to worldly things. His love to God moves swiftly, as the sun in the firmament; to the world it moves slowly, as the sun on the dial. The love of the world eats out the heart of religion; it chokes good affections, as earth puts out fire. The world was a dead thing to Paul. "I am crucified to the world, and the world is crucified to me" (Gal. 6:14). In Paul we may see both the picture and pattern of a mortified man. He that loves God, uses the world but chooses God. The world engages him, but God delights and satisfies him. He says as David, "God my exceeding joy," the gladness or cream of my joy (Psalm 43:4).

He who loves God cannot live without him. Things we love we cannot be without. A man can do without music or flowers, but not food; so a soul deeply in love with God looks upon himself as undone without Him. "Hide not thy face from me, lest I be like them that go down into the pit" (Psalm 143:7). He says to Job, "I went mourning without the sun" (Job 30:28). I have starlight, I want the Sun of Righteousness; I enjoy the sweet presence of my God. Is God our chief good, and we cannot live without Him? Alas! how do they show they have no love to God who can do well enough without Him! Let them have corn and oil, and you shall never hear them complain of the lack of God.

He who loves God will be at any pains to get him. What pains the merchant takes, what hazards he runs, to have a rich return from the Indies! Jacob loved Rachel, and he could endure the heat by day, and the frost by night, that he might enjoy her. A soul that loves God will take any pains for the fruition of Him. "My soul follows hard after God" (Psalm 63:8). Love is pondus animae (Augustine). It is the weight which sets the clock going. It is much in prayer, weeping, fasting; it strives as in agony that he may obtain Him whom his soul loves. Plutarch reports of the Gauls, an ancient people of France, that after they had tasted the sweet wine of Italy, they never rested till they had arrived at that country.

He who is in love with God, never rests till he has a part in Him. "I sought him whom my soul loveth" (Song of Sol. 3:2). How can they say they love God, who are not industrious in the use of means to obtain Him? "A slothful man hides his hand in his bosom" (Pro. 19:24). He is not in agony, but lethargy. If Christ and salvation would drop as a ripe fig into his mouth, he would be content to have them; but he is loath to put himself to too much trouble. Does he love his friend, who will not undertake a journey to see him?

He who loves God prefers him before estate and life. (1) Before estate—"For whom I have suffered the loss of all things" (Phil. 3:8). Who that loves a rich jewel would not part with a flower for it? Galeacius, marcus of Vico, parted with a fair estate to enjoy God in His pure ordinances. When a Jesuit persuaded him to return to his popish religion in Italy, promising him a large sum of money, he said: "Let their money perish with them who esteem all the gold in the world worth one day's communion with Jesus Christ and his Holy Spirit." (2) Before life—"They loved not their lives to the death" (Rev. 12:11). Love to God carries the soul above the love of life and the fear of death.

He who loves God loves his favourites, the saints (I John 5:1). To love a man for his grace and the more we see of God in him, the more we love him, that is an infallible sign of love to God. The wicked pretend to love God, but hate and persecute His image. Does he love his prince who abuses his statue, or tears his picture? They seem indeed to show great reverence to saints departed; they have great reverence for Saint Paul, and Saint Stephen, and Saint Luke; they canonize dead saints, but persecute living saints; and do they love God? Can it be imagined that he loves God who hates His children because they are like God? If Christ were alive again, He would not escape a second persecution.

If we love God we cannot but be fearful of dishonoring him, as the more a child loves his father the more he is afraid to displease him, and we weep and mourn when we have offended him. "Peter went out and wept bitterly" (Matt. 26:75). Peter might well think that Christ dearly loved him when He took him up to the mount where He was transfigured, and showed him the glory of heaven in a vision. That Peter should deny Christ after he had received such signal tokens of His love, this broke his heart with grief. "He wept bitterly." Are our eyes dropping tears of grief for sin against God? It is a blessed evidence of our love to God; and such shall find mercy. "He shows mercy to thousands of them that love Him."

Use. Let us be lovers of God. We love our food and shall we not love Him that gives it? All the joy we hope for in heaven is in God; and shall not He who shall be our joy then, be our love now? It is a saying of Augustine, Annon pana satis magna est non amare te? Is it not punishment enough Lord, not to love thee? And again, Animam meam in odia haberem. I would hate my own soul if I did not find it loving God.

This was first published in his classic work A Body of Divinity in 1692.

God's Sovereignty and the Human Will by A.W. Pink

2010-05-10T07:48:00.000-07:00

“It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” Php 2:13.

Concerning the nature and the power of fallen man’s will, the greatest confusion prevails today, and the most erroneous views are held, even by many of God’s children. The popular idea now prevailing, and which is taught from the great majority of pulpits, is that man has a “free will”, and that salvation comes to the sinner through his will cooperating with the Holy Spirit. To deny the “free will” of man, i.e. his power to choose that which is good, his native ability to accept Christ, is to bring one into disfavour at once, even before most of those who profess to be orthodox. And yet Scripture emphatically says, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy” Rom. 9:16. Which shall we believe: God, or the preachers?

But some one may reply, Did not Joshua say to Israel, “Choose you this day whom ye will serve”? Yes, he did; but why not complete his sentence? — “whether the gods that your fathers served which were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell” Joshua 24:15! But why attempt to pit scripture against scripture? The Word of God never contradicts itself, and the Word expressly declares, “There is none that seeketh after God” Rom. 3:11. Did not Christ say to the men of his day, “Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life” John 5:40? Yes, but some did come to him, some did receive him. True and who were they? John 1:12,13 tells us: “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God”!

But does not Scripture say, “Whosoever will may come”? It does, but does this signify that everybody has the will to come? What of those who will not come? “Whosoever will may come” no more implies that fallen man has the power (in himself) to come, than “Stretch forth thine hand” implied that the man with the withered arm had ability (in himself) to comply. In and of himself the natural man has power to reject Christ; but in and of himself he has not the power to receive Christ. And why? Because he has a mind that is “enmity against him” Rom. 8:7; because he has a heart that hates him John 15:18. Man chooses that which is according to his nature, and therefore before he will ever choose or prefer that which is divine and spiritual, a new nature must be imparted to him; in other words, he must be born again.

Should it be asked, But does not the Holy Spirit overcome a man’s enmity and hatred when he convicts the sinner of his sins and his need of Christ; and does not the Spirit of God produce such conviction in many that perish? Such language betrays confusion of thought: were such a man’s enmity really “overcome”, then he would readily turn to Christ; that he does not come to the Saviour, demonstrates that his enmity is not overcome. But that many are, through the preaching of the Word, convicted by the Holy Spirit, who nevertheless die in unbelief, is solemnly true. Yet, it is a fact which must not be lost sight of that, the Holy Spirit does something more in each of God’s elect than he does in the non-elect: he works in them “both to will and to do of God’s good pleasure” Php 2:13.

In reply to what we have said above, Arminians would answer, No; the Spirit’s work of conviction is the same both in the converted and in the unconverted, that which distinguishes the one class from the other is that the former yielded to his strivings, whereas the latter resist them. But if this were the case, then the Christian would make himself to “differ”, whereas the Scripture attributes the “differing” to God’s discriminating grace 1 Cor. 4:7. Again; if such were the case, then the Christian would have ground for boasting and self-glorying over his cooperation with the Spirit; but this would flatly contradict Eph 2:8, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God”.

Let us appeal to the actual experience of the Christian reader. Was there not a time (may the remembrance of it bow each of us into the dust) when you were unwilling to come to Christ? There was. Since then you have come to him. Are you now prepared to give him all the glory for that Psa. 115:1? Do you not acknowledge you came to Christ because the Holy Spirit brought you from unwillingness to willingness? You do. Then is it not also a patent fact that the Holy Spirit has not done in many others what he has in you! Granting that many others have heard the Gospel, been shown their need of Christ, yet, they are still unwilling to come to him. Thus he has wrought more in you, than in them. Do you answer, “Yet I remember well the time when the Great Issue was presented to me, and my consciousness testifies that my will acted and that I yielded to the claims of Christ upon me”. Quite true. But before you “yielded”, the Holy Spirit overcame the native enmity of your mind against God, and this “enmity” he does not overcome in all. Should it be said, “That is because they are unwilling for their enmity to be overcome”. Ah, none are thus “willing” till he has put forth his all mighty power and wrought a miracle of grace in the heart.

But let us now inquire, What is the human will? Is it a self-determining agent, or is it, in turn, determined by something else? Is it sovereign or servant? Is the will superior to every other faculty of our being so that it governs them, or is it med by their impulses and subject to their pleasure? Does the will rule the mind, or does the mind control the will? Is the will free to do as it pleases, or is it under the necessity of rendering obedience to something outside of itself? “Does the will stand apart from the other great faculties or powers of the soul, a man within a man, who can reverse the man and fly against the man and split him into segments, as a glass snake breaks in pieces? Or, is the will connected with the other faculties, as the tail of the serpent is with his body, and that again with his head, so that where the head goes, the whole creature goes, and, as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he? First thought, then heart (desire or aversion), and then act. Is it this way, the dog wags the tail? Or, is it the will, the tail, wags the dog? Is the will the first and chief thing in the man, or is it the last thing — to be kept subordinate, and in its place beneath the other faculties? and, is the true philosophy of moral action and its process that of Gen. 3:6: ‘And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food’ (sense perception, intelligence), ‘and a tree to be desired’ (affections), ‘she took and ate thereof’ (the will).” (G.S. Bishop). These are questions of more than academical interest. They are of practical importance. We believe that we do not go too far when we affirm that the answer returned to these questions is a fundamental test of doctrinal soundness.1

1. The Nature Of The Human Will.

What is the Will? We answer, the will is the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action. Choice necessarily implies the refusal of one thing and the acceptance, of another. The positive and the negative must both be present to the mind before there can be any choice. In every, act of the will there is a preference — the desiring of one thing rather than another. Where there is no preference, but complete indifference, there is no volition. To will is to choose, and to choose is to decide between two or more alternatives. But there is something which influences the choice; something which determines the decision. Hence he will cannot be sovereign because it is the servant of that something. The will cannot be both sovereign and servant. It cannot be both cause and effect. The will is not causative, because, as we have said, something causes it to choose, therefore that something must be the causative agent. Choice itself is affected by certain considerations, is determined by various influences brought to bear upon the individual himself, hence, volition is the effect of these considerations and influences, and if the effect, it must be their servant; and if the will is their servant then it is not sovereign, and if the will is not sovereign, we certainly cannot predicate absolute “freedom” of it. Acts of the will cannot come to pass of themselves — to say they can, is to postulate an uncaused effect. “Ex nihilo nihil fit” — nothing cannot produce something.

In all ages, however, there have been those who contended for the absolute freedom or sovereignty of the human will. Men will argue that the will possesses a self-determining power. They say, for example, I can turn my eyes up or down, the mind is quite indifferent which I do, the will must decide. But this is a contradiction in terms. This case supposes that I choose one thing in preference to another, while I am in a state of complete indifference. Manifestly, both cannot be true. But it may be replied, the mind was quite indifferent until it came to have a preference. Exactly; and at that time the will was quiescent, too! But the moment indifference vanished, choice was made, and the fact that indifference gave place to preference, overthrows the argument that the will is capable of choosing between two equal things. As we have said, choice implies the acceptance of one alternative and the rejection of the other or others.

That which determines the will is that which causes it to choose. If the will is determined, then there must be a determiner. What is it that determines the will? We reply, The strongest motive power which is brought to bear upon it. What this motive power is, varies in different cases. With one it may be the logic of reason, with another the ice of conscience, with another the impulse of the emotions, with another the whisper of the tempter, with another the power of the Holy Spirit; whichever of these presents the strongest motive power and exerts the greatest influence upon the individual himself, is that which impels the will to act. In other words, the action of the will is determined by that condition of mind (which in turn is influenced by the world, the flesh, and the Devil, as well as by God), which has the greatest degree of tendency to excite volition. To illustrate what we have just said let us analyze a simple example —

On a certain Lord’s day afternoon a friend of ours was suffering from a severe headache. He was anxious to visit the sick, but feared that if he did so his own condition would grow worse, and as the consequence, be unable to attend the preaching of the Gospel that evening. Two alternatives confronted him: to visit the sick that afternoon and risk being sick himself, or, to take a rest that afternoon (and visit the sick the next day), and probably arise refreshed and fit for the evening service. Now what was it that decided our friend in choosing between these two alternatives? The will? Not at all. True, that in the end, the will made a choice, but the will itself was moved to make the choice. In the above case certain considerations presented strong motives for selecting either alternative; these motives were balanced the one against the other by the individual himself, i.e., his heart and mind, and the one alternative being supported by stronger motives than the other, decision was formed accordingly, and then the will acted. On the one side, our friend felt impelled by a sense of duty to visit the sick; he was med with compassion to do so, and thus a strong motive was presented to his mind. On the other hand, his judgment reminded him that he was feeling far from well himself, that he badly needed a rest, that if he visited the sick his own condition would probably be made worse, and in such case he would be prevented from attending the preaching of the Gospel that night; furthermore, he knew that on the morrow, the Lord willing, he could visit the sick, and this being so, he concluded he ought to rest that afternoon. Here then were two sets of alternatives presented to our Christian brother: on the one side was a sense of duty plus his own sympathy, on the other side was a sense of his own need plus a real concern for God’s glory, for he felt that he ought to attend the preaching of the Gospel that night. The latter prevailed. Spiritual considerations outweighed his sense of duty. Having formed his decision the will acted accordingly, and he retired to rest. An analysis of the above case shows that the mind or reasoning faculty was directed by spiritual considerations, and the mind regulated and controlled the will. Hence we say that, if the will is controlled, it is neither sovereign nor free, but is the servant of the mind.

It is only as we see the real nature of freedom and mark that the will is subject to the motives brought to bear upon it, that we are able to discern there is no conflict between two statements of Holy Writ which concern our blessed Lord. In Matt. 4:1 we read, “Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the Devil”; but in Mark 1:12,13 we are told, “And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness. And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan”. It is utterly impossible to harmonize these two statements by the Arminian conception of the will. But really there is no difficulty. That Christ was “driven”, implies it was by a forcible motive or powerful impulse, such as was not to be resisted or refused; that he was “led” denotes his freedom in going. Putting the two together we learn, that he was driven, with a voluntary condescension thereto. So, there is the liberty of man’s will and the victorious efficacy of God’s grace united together: a sinner may be “drawn” and yet “come” to Christ — the “drawing” presenting to him the irresistible motive, the “coming” signifying the response of his will — as Christ was “driven” and “led” by the Spirit into the wilderness.

Human philosophy insists that it is the will which governs the man, but the Word of God teaches that it is the heart which is the dominating centre of our being. Many scriptures might be quoted in substantiation of this. “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life” Prov. 4:23. “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders”, etc. Mark 7:21. Here our Lord traces these sinful acts back to their source, and declares that their fountain is the “heart”, and not the will! Again; “This people draweth nigh unto me with their lips, but their heart is far from me” Matt. 15:8. If further proof were required we might call attention to the fact that the word “heart” is found in the Bible more than three times oftener than is the word “will”, even though nearly half of the references to the latter refer to God’s will!

When we affirm that it is the heart and not the will which governs the man, we are not merely striving about words, but insisting on a distinction that is of vital importance. Here is an individual before whom two alternatives are placed; which will he choose? We answer, the one which is most agreeable to himself, i.e., his “heart” — the innermost core of his being. Before the sinner is set a life of virtue and piety, and a life of sinful indulgence; which will he follow? The latter. Why? Because this is his choice. But does that prove the will is sovereign? Not at all. Go back from effect to cause. Why does the sinner choose a life of sinful indulgence? Because he prefers it — and he does prefer it, all arguments to the contrary not withstanding, though of course he does not enjoy the effects of such a course. And why does he prefer it? Because his heart is sinful. The same alternatives, in like manner, confront the Christian, and he chooses and strives after a life of piety and virtue. Why? Because God has given him a new heart or nature. Hence we say it is not the will which makes the sinner impervious to all appeals to “forsake his way”, but his corrupt and evil heart. He will not come to Christ, because he does not want to, and he does not want to because his heart hates him and loves sin: see Jer 17:9!

In defining the will we have said above, that “the will is the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action.” We say the immediate cause, for the will is not the primary cause of any action, any more than the hand is. Just as the hand is controlled by the muscles and nerves of the arm, and the arm by the brain; so the will is the servant of the mind, and the mind, in turn, is affected by various influences and motives which are brought to bear upon it. But, it may be asked, Does not Scripture make its appeal to man’s will? Is it not written, “And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely” Rev. 22:17? And did not our Lord say, “ye will not come to me that ye might have life” John 5:40? We answer; the appeal of Scripture is not always made to man’s “will”; other of his faculties are also addressed. For example: “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” “Hear and your soul shall live.” “Look unto me and be ye saved.” “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved.” “Come now and let us reason together”, “with the heart man believeth unto righteousness”, etc., etc.

2. The Bondage Of The Human Will.

In any treatise that proposes to deal with the human will, its nature and functions, respect should be had to the will in three different men, namely, unfallen Adam, the sinner, and the Lord Jesus Christ. In unfallen Adam the will was free, free in both directions, free toward good and free toward evil. Adam was created in a state of innocency, but not in a state of holiness, as is so often assumed and asserted. Adam’s will was therefore in a condition of moral equipoise: that is to say, in Adam there was no constraining bias in him toward either good or evil, and as such, Adam differed radically from all his descendants, as well as from “the Man Christ Jesus.” But with the sinner it is far otherwise. The sinner is born with a will that is not in a condition of moral equipoise, because in him there is a heart that is “deceitful above all things and desperately wicked”, and this gives him a bias toward evil. So, too, with the Lord Jesus it was far otherwise: He also differed radically from unfallen Adam. The Lord Jesus Christ could not sin because he was “the Holy One of God.” Before he was born into this world it was said to Mary, “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” Luke 1:35. Speaking reverently then, we say, that the will of the Son of Man was not in a condition of moral equipoise, that is, capable of turning toward either good or evil. The will of the Lord Jesus was biased toward that which is good because, side by side with his sinless, holy, perfect humanity, was his eternal Deity. Now in contradistinction from the will of the Lord Jesus which was biased toward good, and Adam’s will which, before his fall, was in a condition of moral equipoise — capable of turning toward either good or evil — the sinner’s will is biased toward evil, and therefore is free in one direction only, namely, in the direction of evil. The sinner’s will is enslaved because it is in bondage to and is the servant of a depraved heart.

In what does the sinner’s freedom consist? This question is naturally suggested by what we have just said above. The sinner is “free” in the sense of being unforced from without. God never forces the sinner to sin. But the sinner is not “free” to do either good or evil, because an evil heart within is ever inclining him toward sin. Let us illustrate what we have in mind. I hold in my hand a book. I release it; what happens? It falls. In which direction? Downwards; always downwards. Why? Because, answering the law of gravity, its own weight sinks it. Suppose I desire that book to occupy a position three feet higher; then what? I must lift it; a power outside of that book must raise it. Such is the relationship which fallen man sustains toward God. While divine power upholds him, he is preserved from plunging still deeper into sin; let that power be withdrawn, and he falls — his own weight (of sin) drags him down. God does not push him down, any more than I did that book. Let all divine restraint be removed, and every man is capable of becoming, would become, a Cain, a Pharaoh, a Judas. How then is the sinner to me heavenwards? By an act of his own will? Not so. A power outside of himself must grasp hold of him and lift him every inch of the way. The sinner is free, but free in one direction only — free to fall, free to sin. As the Word expresses it: “For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness” Rom. 6:20. The sinner is free to do as he pleases, always as he pleases (except as he is restrained by God), but his pleasure is to sin.

In the opening paragraph of this chapter we insisted that a proper conception of the nature and function of the will is of practical importance, nay, that it constitutes a fundamental test of theological orthodoxy or doctrinal soundness. We wish to amplify this statement and attempt to demonstrate its accuracy. The freedom or bondage of the will was the dividing line between Augustinianism and Pelagianism, and in more recent times between Calvinism and Arminianism. Reduced to simple terms, this means, that the difference involved was the affirmation or denial of the total depravity of man. In taking the affirmative we shall now consider,

3. The Impotency Of The Human Will.

Does it lie within the prince of man’s will to accept or reject the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour? Granted that the Gospel is preached to the sinner, that the Holy Spirit convicts him of his lost condition, does it, in the final analysis, lie within the power of his own will to resist or to yield himself up to God? The answer to this question defines our conception of human depravity. That man is a fallen creature all professing Christians will allow, but what many of them mean by “fallen” is often difficult to determine. The general impression seems to be that man is now mortal, that he is no longer in the condition in which he left the hands of his Creator, that he is liable to disease, that he inherits evil tendencies; but, that if he employs his powers to the best of his ability, somehow he will be happy at last. O, how far short of the sad truth! Infirmities, sickness, even corporeal death, are but trifles in comparison with the moral and spiritual effects of the Fall! It is only by consulting the Holy Scriptures that we are able to obtain some conception of the extent of that terrible calamity.

When we say that man is totally depraved, we mean that the entrance of sin into the human constitution has affected every part and faculty of man’s being. Total depravity means that man is, in spirit and soul and body, the slave of sin and the captive of the Devil — walking “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” Eph 2:2. This statement ought not to need arguing: it is a common fact of human experience. Man is unable to realize his own aspirations and materialize his own ideals. He cannot do the things that he would. There is a moral inability which paralyses him. This is proof positive that he is no free man, but instead, the slave of sin and Satan. “Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lusts (desires) of your father ye will do” John 8:44. Sin is more than an act or a series of acts; it is a state or condition: it is that which lies behind and produces the acts. Sin has penetrated and permeated the whole of man’s make up. It has blinded the understanding, corrupted the heart, and alienated the mind from God. And the will has not escaped. The will is under the dominion of sin and Satan. Therefore, the will is not free. In short, the affections love as they do and the will chooses as it does because of the state of the heart, and because the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked “There is none that seeketh after God” Rom. 3:11.

We repeat our question; Does it lie within the power of the sinner’s will to yield himself up to God? Let us attempt an answer by asking several others: Can water (of itself) rise above its own level? Can a clean thing come out of an unclean? Can the will reverse the whole tendency and strain of human nature? Can that which is under the dominion of sin originate that which is pure and holy? Manifestly not. If ever the will of a fallen and depraved creature is to me God-wards, a Divine power must be brought to bear upon it which will overcome the influences of sin that pull in a counter direction. This is only another way of saying, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him” John 6:44. In other words, God’s people must be made willing in the day of his power Psa. 110:3. As said Mr. Darby, “If Christ came to save that which is lost, free will has no place. Not that God prevents men from receiving Christ — far from it. But even when God uses all possible inducements, all that is capable of exerting influence in the heart of man, it only serves to show that man will have none of it, that so corrupt is his heart, and so decided his will not to submit to God (however much it may be the devil who encourages him to sin) that nothing can induce him to receive the Lord, and to give up sin. If by the words, ‘freedom of man’, they mean that no one forces him to reject the Lord, this liberty fully exists. But if it is said that, on account of the dominion of sin, of which he is the slave, and that voluntarily, he cannot escape from his condition, and make choice of the good — even while acknowledging it to be good, and approving of it — then he has no liberty whatever (italics ours). He is not subject to the law, neither indeed can be; hence, they that are in the flesh cannot please God.”

The will is not sovereign; it is a servant, because influenced and controlled by the other faculties of man’s being. The sinner is not a free agent because he is a slave of sin — this was clearly implied in our Lord’s words, “If the Son shall therefore make you free, ye shall be free indeed” John 8:36. Man is a rational being and as such responsible and accountable to God, but to affirm that he is a free moral agent is to deny that he is totally depraved — i.e., depraved in will as in everything else. Because man’s will is governed by his mind and heart, and because these have been vitiated and corrupted by sin, then it follows that if ever man is to turn or me in a God-ward direction, God himself must work in him “both to will and to do of his good pleasure” Php 2:13. Man’s boasted freedom is in truth the “bondage of corruption”; he “serves divers lusts and pleasures.” Said a deeply taught servant of God, “Man is impotent as to his will. He has no will favourable to God. I believe in free will; but then it is a will only free to act according to nature (italics ours). A dove has no will to eat carrion; a raven no will to eat the clean food of the dove. Put the nature of the dove into the raven and it will eat the food of the dove. Satan could have no will for holiness. We speak it with reverence, God could have no will for evil. The sinner in his sinful nature could never have a will according to God. For this he must be born again” (J. Denham Smith). This is just what we have contended for throughout this chapter — the will is regulated by the nature.

Among the “decrees” of the Council of Trent (1563), which is the awed standard of Popery, we find the following: —

If any one shall affirm, that man’s free will, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases; but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed!

If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s free will is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed!

Thus, those who today insist on the free will of the natural man believe precisely what Rome teaches on the subject! That Roman Catholics and Arminians walk hand in hand may be seen from others of the decrees issued by the Council of Trent: — “If any one shall affirm that a regenerate and justified man is bound to believe that he is certainly in the number of the elect (which, 1 Thess. 1:4-5 plainly teaches. A.W.P.) let such an one be accursed”! “If any one shall affirm with positive and absolute certainty, that he shall surely have the gift of perseverance to the end (which John 10:28-30 assuredly guarantees, A.W.P.); let him be accursed”! In order for any sinner to be saved three things were indispensable: God the Father had to purpose his salvation, God the Son had to purchase it, God the Spirit has to apply it. God does more than “propose” to us: were he only to “invite”, every last one of us would be lost. This is strikingly illustrated in the Old Testament. In Ezra 1:1-3 we read, “Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? His God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel.” Here was an “offer” made, made to a people in captivity, affording them opportunity to leave and return to Jerusalem — God’s dwelling place. Did all Israel eagerly respond to this offer? No indeed. The vast majority were content to remain in the enemy’s land. Only an insignificant “remnant” availed themselves of this overture of mercy! And why did they? Hear the answer of Scripture: “Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all whose spirit God had stirred up, to go up to build the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem” Ezra 1:5! In like manner, God “stirs up” the spirits of his elect when the effectual call comes to them, and not till then do they have any willingness to respond to the Divine proclamation.

The superficial work of many of the professional evangelists of the last fifty years is largely responsible for the erroneous views now current upon the bondage of the natural man, encouraged by the laziness of those in the pew in their failure to “prove all things” 1 Thess. 5:21. The average evangelical pulpit conveys the impression that it lies wholly in the power of the sinner whether or not he shall be saved. It is said that “God has done his part, now man must do his.” Alas, what can a lifeless man do, and man by nature is “dead in trespasses and sins” Eph 2:1! If this were really believed, there would be more dependence upon the Holy Spirit to come in with his miracle working power, and less confidence in our attempts to “win men for Christ.”

When addressing the unsaved, preachers often draw an analogy between God’s sending of the Gospel to the sinner, and a sick man in bed, with some healing medicine on a table by his side: all he needs to do is reach forth his hand and take it. But in order for this illustration to be in any wise true to the picture which Scripture gives us of the fallen and depraved sinner, the sick man in bed must be described as one who is blind Eph 4:18 so that he cannot see the medicine, his hand paralysed Rom. 5:6 so that he is unable to reach forth for it, and his heart not only devoid of all confidence in the medicine but filled with hatred against the physician himself John 15:18. O what superficial views of man’s desperate plight are now entertained! Christ came here not to help those who were willing to help themselves, but to do for his people what they were incapable of doing for themselves: “To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house” Isa. 42:7.

Now in conclusion let us anticipate and dispose of the usual and inevitable objection — Why preach the Gospel if man is powerless to respond? Why bid the sinner come to Christ if sin has so enslaved him that he has no power in himself to come? Reply: — We do not preach the Gospel because we believe that men are free moral agents, and therefore capable of receiving Christ, but we preach it because we are commanded to do so Mark 16:15; and though to them that perish it is foolishness, yet, “unto us which are saved it is the power of God” 1 Cor. 1:18. “The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men” 1 Cor. 1:25. The sinner is dead in trespasses and sins Eph 2:1, and a dead man is utterly incapable of willing anything, hence it is that “they that are in the flesh (the unregenerate) cannot please God” Rom. 8:8.

To fleshly wisdom it appears the height of folly to preach the Gospel to those that are dead, and therefore beyond the reach of doing anything themselves. Yes, but God’s ways are different from ours. It pleases God “by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” 1 Cor. 1:21. Man may deem it folly to prophesy to “dead bones” and to say unto them, “O, ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord” Ezek. 37:4. Ah! but then it is the word of the Lord, and the words he speaks “they are spirit, and they are life” John 6:63. Wise men standing by the grave of Lazarus night pronounce it an evidence of insanity when the Lord addressed a dead man with the words, “Lazarus, Come forth.” Ah! but he who thus spake was and is himself the Resurrection and the Life, and at his word even the dead live! We go forth to preach the Gospel, then, not because we believe that sinners have within themselves the power to receive the Saviour it proclaims, but because the Gospel itself is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, and because we know that “as many as were ordained to eternal life” Acts 13:48, shall believe John 6:37 10:16 — note the shall’s!) in God’s appointed time, for it is written, “Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power” Psa. 110:3!

What we have set forth in this chapter is not a product of “modern thought”; no indeed it is at direct variance with it. It is those of the past few generations who have departed so far from the teachings of their scripturally instructed fathers. In the thirty nine Articles of the Church of England we read, “The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith, and calling upon God: Wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us (being beforehand with us), that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will” (Article 10). In the Westminster Catechism of Faith (adopted by the Presbyterians) we read, “The sinfulness of that state whereinto man fell, consisteth in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the wont of that righteousness wherein he was created, and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite unto all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to all evil, and that continually” (Answer to question 25). So in the Baptists’ Philadelphian Confession of Faith, 1742, we read, “Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto” (Chapter 9).

THE CONTEMPLATION OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T12:11:00.000-07:00

THE CONTEMPLATION OF GOD

In the previous studies we have had in review some of the wondrous and lovely perfections of the divine character. From this most feeble and faulty contemplation of His attributes, it should be evident to us all that God is--First, an incomprehensible Being, and, lost in wonder at His infinite greatness, we are constrained to adopt the words of Zophar, "Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea" (Job 11:7-9). When we turn our thoughts to God's eternity, His immateriality, His omnipresence, His almightiness, our minds are overwhelmed.

But the incomprehensibility of the divine nature is not a reason why we should desist from reverent inquiry and prayerful strivings to apprehend what He has so graciously revealed of Himself in His Word. Because we are unable to acquire perfect knowledge, it would be folly to say we will therefore make no efforts to attain to any degree of it. It has been well said:

"Nothing will so enlarge the intellect, nothing so magnify the whole soul of man, as a devout, earnest, continued, investigation of the great subject of the Deity. The most excellent study for expanding the soul is the science of Christ and Him crucified and the knowledge of the Godhead in the glorious Trinity" (C. H. Spurgeon).

Let us quote a little further from this prince of preachers:

"The proper study of the Christian is the Godhead. The highest science, the loftiest speculation, the mightiest philosophy, which can engage the attention of a child of God is the name, the nature, the person, the doings, and the existence of the great God which he calls his Father. There is something exceedingly improving to the mind in a contemplation of the Divinity. It is a subject so vast, that all our thoughts are lost in its immensity; so deep, that our pride is drowned in its infinity. Other subjects we can comprehend and grapple with; in them we feel a kind of self-contentment, and go on our way with the thought, 'Behold I am wise.' But when we come to this master science, finding that our plumbline cannot sound its depth, and that our eagle eye cannot see its height, we turn away with the thought, 'I am but of yesterday and know nothing'" (Sermon on Mal 3:6).

Yes, the incomprehensibility of the divine nature should teach us humility, caution, and reverence. After all our searchings and meditations we have to say with Job, "Lo, these are parts of His ways: but how little a portion is heard of Him?" (26:14). When Moses besought Jehovah for a sight of His glory, He answered him, "I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee" (Exo 33:19), and, as another has said: "The name is the collection of His attributes." Rightly did the Puritan John Howe declare:

"The notion therefore we can hence form of His glory, is only such as we may have of a large volume by a brief synopsis, or of a spacious country by a little landscape. He hath here given us a true report of Himself, but not a full; such as will secure our apprehensions--being guided thereby from error, but not from ignorance. We can apply our minds to contemplate the several perfections whereby the blessed God discovers to us His being, and can in our thoughts attribute them all to Him, though we have still but low and defective conceptions of each one. Yet so far as our apprehensions can correspond to the discovery that He affords us of His several excellencies, we have a present view of His glory."

As the difference is indeed great between the knowledge of God which His saints have in this life and that which they shall have in Heaven, yet, as the former should not be undervalued because it is imperfect, so the latter is not to be magnified above its reality. True, the Scripture declare that we shall see "face to face" and "know" even as we are known (1 Cor 13:12). But to infer from this that we shall then know God as fully as He knows us is to be misled by the mere sound of words, and to disregard the restriction of that knowledge that our finiteness necessarily requires. There is a vast difference between the saints being glorified and their being made divine. In their glorified state, Christians will still be finite creatures, and therefore, never able to fully comprehend the infinite God.

"The saints in heaven will see God with the eye of the mind, for He will be always invisible to the bodily eye. They will see Him more clearly than they could see Him by reason and faith, and more extensively than all His works and dispensations had hitherto revealed Him. But their minds will not be so enlarged as to be capable of contemplating at once, or in detail, the whole excellence of His nature. To comprehend infinite perfection, they must become infinite themselves. Even in Heaven, their knowledge will be partial, but at the same time their happiness will be complete, because their knowledge will be perfect in this sense, that it will be adequate to the capacity of the subject, although it will not exhaust the fulness of the object. We believe that it will be progressive, and that as their views expand, their blessedness will increase. But it will never reach a limit beyond which there is nothing to be discovered, and when ages after ages have passed away, He will still be the incomprehensible God." (John Dick, 1840).

Secondly, from a review of the perfections of God, it appears that He is an all-sufficient Being. He is all-sufficient in Himself and to Himself. As the First of beings, He could receive nothing from another, nor be limited by the power of another. Being infinite, He is possessed of all possible perfection. When the Triune God existed all alone, He was all to Himself. His understanding, His love, His energies, found an adequate object in Himself. Had He stood in need of anything external He would not have been independent, and therefore He would not have been God. He created all things, and that for Himself (Col 1:16), yet it was not in order to supply a lack, but that He might communicate life and happiness to angels and men, and admit them to the vision of His glory. True, He demands the allegiance and services of His intelligent creatures, yet He derives no benefit from their offices; all the advantage redounds to themselves (Job 22:2-3). He makes use of means and instruments to accomplish His ends, yet not from a deficiency of power, but oftentimes to more strikingly display His power through the feebleness of the instruments.

The all-sufficiency of God makes Him to be the Supreme Object which is ever to be sought unto. True happiness consists only in the enjoyment of God. His favour is life, and His lovingkindness is better than life. "The LORD is my portion, saith my soul; therefore will I hope in Him (Lam 3:24). His love, His grace, and His glory are the chief objects of the saints' desire and the springs of their highest satisfaction.

"There be many that say, Who will show us any good? Lord, lift Thou up the light of Thy countenance upon us. Thou hast put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased." (Psa 4:6,7).

Yea, the Christian, when in his right mind, is able to say:

"Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will joy in the God of my salvation." (Hab 3:17,18).

Thirdly, from a review of the perfections of God, it appears that He is the Supreme Sovereign of the universe. It has been rightly said:

"No dominion is so absolute as that which is founded on creation. He who might not have made any thing, had a right to make all things according to His own pleasure. In the exercise of His uncontrolled power, He has made some parts of the creation mere inanimate matter, of grosser or more refined texture, and distinguished by different qualities, but all inert and unconscious. He has given organization to other parts, and made them susceptible of growth and expansion, but still without life in the proper sense of the term. To others He has given not only organization, but conscious existence, organs of sense and self-motive power. To these He has added in man the gift of reason, and an immortal spirit, by which he is allied to a higher order of beings who are placed in the superior regions. Over the world which He has created, He sways the scepter of omnipotence. 'I praised and honoured Him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom is from generation to generation: and all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou?'-- Daniel 4:34-35" (John Dick).

A creature, considered as such, has no rights. He can demand nothing from his Maker; and in whatever manner he may be treated, has no title to complain. Yet, when thinking of the absolute dominion of God over all, we ought never to lose sight of His moral perfections. God is just and good, and ever does that which is right. Nevertheless, He exercises His sovereignty according to His own imperial and righteous pleasure. He assigns each creature his place as seemeth good in His own sight. He orders the varied circumstances of each according to His own counsels. He molds each vessel according to His own uninfluenced determination. He has mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardens. Wherever we are, His eye is upon us. Whoever we are, our life and everything is held at His disposal. To the Christian, He is a tender Father; to the rebellious sinner He will yet be a consuming fire. "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen" (1 Tim 1:17).

THE WRATH OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T12:04:00.000-07:00

THE WRATH OF GOD

It is sad indeed to find so many professing Christians who appear to regard the wrath of God as something for which they need to make an apology, or who at least wish there were no such thing. While some who would not go so far as to openly admit that they consider it a blemish on the divine character, yet they are far from regarding it with delight; they like not to think about it, and they rarely hear it mentioned without a secret resentment rising up in their hearts against it. Even with those who are more sober in their judgment, not a few seem to imagine that there is a severity about the divine wrath that makes it too terrifying to form a theme for profitable contemplation. Others harbor the delusion that God's wrath is not consistent with His goodness, and so seek to banish it from their thoughts.

Yes, many there are who turn away from a vision of God's wrath as though they were called to look upon some blotch in the divine character or some blot upon the divine government. But what saith the Scriptures? As we turn to them we find that God has made no attempt to conceal the facts concerning His wrath. He is not ashamed to make it known that vengeance and fury belong unto Him. His own challenge is:

"See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal; neither is there any that can deliver out of My hand. For I lift up My hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. If I whet My glittering sword, and Mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to Mine enemies, and will reward them that hate Me" (Deut 32:39-41).

A study of the concordance will show that there are more references in Scripture to the anger, fury, and wrath of God, than there are to His love and tenderness. Because God is holy, He hates all sin; and because He hates all sin, His anger burns against the sinner (Psa 7:11).

Now the wrath of God is as much a divine perfection as is His faithfulness, power, or mercy. It must be so, for there is no blemish whatever, not the slightest defect in the character of God; yet there would be if "wrath" were absent from Him! Indifference to sin is a moral blemish, and he who hates it not is a moral leper. How could He who is the Sum of all excellency look with equal satisfaction upon virtue and vice, wisdom and folly? How could He who is infinitely holy disregard sin and refuse to manifest His "severity" (Rom 11:22) toward it? How could He, who delights only in that which is pure and lovely, not loathe and hate that which is impure and vile? The very nature of God makes Hell as real a necessity, as imperatively and eternally requisite, as Heaven is. Not only is there no imperfection in God, but there is no perfection in Him that is less perfect than another.

The wrath of God is His eternal detestation of all unrighteousness. It is the displeasure and indignation of divine equity against evil. It is the holiness of God stirred into activity against sin. It is the moving cause of that just sentence which He passes upon evildoers. God is angry against sin because it is a rebelling against His authority, a wrong done to His inviolable sovereignty. Insurrectionists against God's government shall be made to know that God is the Lord. They shall be made to feel how great that Majesty is which they despise, and how dreadful is that threatened wrath which they so little regarded. Not that God's anger is a malignant and malicious retaliation, inflicting injury for the sake of it, or in return for injury received. No, though God will vindicate His dominion as the Governor of the universe, He will not be vindictive.

That divine wrath is one of the perfections of God is not only evident from the considerations presented above, but is also clearly established by the express declarations of His own Word. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven" (Rom l:18). Robert Haldane comments on this verse as follows:

"It was revealed when the sentence of death was first pronounced, the earth cursed, and man driven out of the earthly paradise, and afterwards by such examples of punishment as those of the Deluge, and the destruction of the Cities of the Plain by fire from heaven, but especially by the reign of death throughout the world. It was proclaimed in the curse of the law on every transgression, and was intimated in the institution of sacrifice, and in all the services of the Mosaic dispensation. In the eighth chapter of this epistle, the Apostle calls the attention of believers to the fact that the whole creation has become subject to vanity, and groaneth and travaileth together in pain. The same creation which declares that there is a God, and publishes His glory, also proves that He is the Enemy of sin and the Avenger of the crimes of men...But above all, the wrath of God was revealed from heaven when the Son of God came down to manifest the divine character, and when that wrath was displayed in His sufferings and death, in a manner more awful than by all the tokens God had before given of His displeasure against sin. Besides this, the future and eternal punishment of the wicked is now declared in terms more solemn and explicit than formerly. Under the new dispensation, there are two revelations given from heaven, one of wrath, the other of grace."

Again, that the wrath of God is a divine perfection is plainly demonstrated by what we read in Psalm 95:11: "Unto whom I sware in My wrath." There are two occasions of God's "swearing": in making promises (Gen 22:16), and in pronouncing judgments (Deut 1:34ff). In the former, He swears in mercy to His children; in the latter, He swears to deprive a wicked generation of its inheritance because of murmuring and unbelief. An oath is for solemn confirmation (Heb 6:16). In Genesis 22:16 God says, "By Myself have I sworn." In Psalm 89:35 He declares, "Once have I sworn by My holiness." While in Psalm 95:11 He affirms, "I swear in My wrath." Thus the great Jehovah Himself appeals to His "wrath" as a perfection equal to His "holiness": He swears by the one as much as by the other! Again, as in Christ "dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col 2:9), and as all the divine perfections are illustriously displayed by Him (John 1:18), therefore do we read of "the wrath of the Lamb" (Rev 6:16).

The wrath of God is a perfection of the divine character upon which we need to frequently meditate. First, that our hearts may be duly impressed by God's detestation of sin. We are ever prone to regard sin lightly, to gloss over its hideousness, to make excuses for it. But the more we study and ponder God's abhorrence of sin and His frightful vengeance upon it, the likely are we to realize its heinousness. Secondly, to beget a true fear in our souls for God: "Let us have grace whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: for our God is a consuming fire" (Heb 12:28-29). We cannot serve him "acceptably" unless there is due "reverence" for His awful Majesty and "godly fear" of His righteous anger; and these are best promoted by frequently calling to mind that "our God is a consuming fire." Thirdly, to draw out our souls in fervent praise for our having been delivered from "the wrath to come" (1 Thess 1:10).

Our readiness or our reluctancy to meditate upon the wrath of God becomes a sure test of our hearts' true attitude toward Him. If we do not truly rejoice in God, for what He is in Himself, and that because of all the perfections which are eternally resident in Him, then how dwelleth the love of God in us? Each of us needs to be most prayerfully on his guard against devising an image of God in our thoughts which is patterned after our own evil inclinations. Of old the Lord complained, "Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself" (Psa 50:21). If we rejoice not "at the remembrance of His holiness" (Psa 97:12), if we rejoice not to know that in a soon-coming Day, God will make a most glorious display of His wrath by taking vengeance upon all who now oppose Him, it is proof positive that our hearts are not in subjection to Him, that we are yet in our sins, and that we are on the way to the everlasting burnings.

"Reioice, 0 ye nations [Gentiles] with His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and will render vengeance to His adversaries" (Deut 32:43). And again we read--

"I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God: For true and righteous are His judgments. for He hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of His servants at her hand. And again they said, Alleluia" (Rev 19:1-3).

Great will be the rejoicing of the saints in that day when the Lord shall vindicate His majesty, exercise His awful dominion, magnify His justice, and overthrow the proud rebels who have dared to defy Him.

"If Thou, LORD, shouldest mark [impute] iniquities, 0 Lord, who shall stand?" (Psa 1303). Well may each of us ask this question, for it is written, "the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment" (Psa 1:5). How sorely was Christ's soul exercised with thoughts of God's marking the iniquities of His people when they were upon Him! He was amazed and very heavy (Mark 14:33). His awful agony, His bloody sweat, His strong cries and supplications (Heb 5:7), His reiterated prayers ("If it be possible, let this cup pass from Me"), His last dreadful cry ("My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?") all manifest what fearful apprehensions He had of what it was for God to "mark iniquities." Well may poor sinners cry out, "Lord, who shall stand," when the Son of God Himself so trembled beneath the weight of His wrath. If thou, my reader, hast not "fled for refuge" to Christ, the only Saviour, "how wilt thou do in the swelling of the Jordan?" (Jer 12:5).

"When I consider how the goodness of God is abused by the greatest part of mankind, I cannot but be of his mind that said, The greatest miracle in the world is God's patience and bounty to an ungrateful world. If a prince hath an enemy got into one of his towns, he doth not send them in provision, but lays close siege to the place, and doth what he can to starve them. But the great God, that could wink all His enemies into destruction, bears with them, and is at daily cost to maintain them. Well may He command us to bless them that curse us, who Himself does good to the evil and unthankful. But think not, sinners, that you shall escape thus; God's mill goes slow, but grinds small, the more admirable His patience and bounty now is, the more dreadful and unsupportable will that fury be which ariseth out of His abused goodness. Nothing smoother than the sea, yet when stirred into a tempest, nothing rageth more. Nothing so sweet as the patience and goodness of God, and nothing so terrible as His wrath when it takes fire" (William Gurnall, 1660).

Then "flee," my reader, flee to Christ; "flee from the wrath to come" (Matt 3:7) ere it be too late. Do not, we earnestly beseech you, suppose that this message is intended for somebody else. It is to you! Do not be contented by thinking you have already fled to Christ. Make certain! Beg the Lord to search your heart and show you yourself.

A Word to Preachers--Brethren, do we in our oral ministry, preach on this solemn subject as much as we ought? The Old Testament prophets frequently told their hearers that their wicked lives provoked the Holy One of Israel, and that they were treasuring up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath. And conditions in the world are no better now than they were then! Nothing is so calculated to arouse the careless and cause carnal professors to search their hearts, as to enlarge upon the fact that "God is angry with the wicked every day" (Psa 7:11). The forerunner of Christ warned his hearers to "flee from the wrath to come" (Matt 3:7). The Saviour bade His auditors, "Fear Him, which after He hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him" (Luke 12:5). The Apostle Paul said, "Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men" (2 Cor 5:11). Faithfulness demands that we speak as plainly about hell as about heaven.

THE LOVE OF GOD TO US by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T12:00:00.000-07:00

THE LOVE OF GOD TO US

By "us" we mean His people. Although we read of the love which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom 8:39), Holy Writ knows nothing of a love of God outside of Christ. "The LORD is good to all: and His tender mercies are over all His works" (Psa 145:9), so that He provides the ravens with food. "He is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil" (Luke 6:35), and His providence ministers unto the just and the unjust (Matt 5:45). But His love is reserved for His elect. That is unequivocally established by its characteristics, for the attributes of His love are identical with Himself. Necessarily so, for "God is love." In making that postulate it is but another way to say God's love is like Himself, from everlasting to everlasting--immutable. Nothing is more absurd than to imagine that anyone beloved of God can eternally perish or shall ever experience His everlasting vengeance. Since the love of God is "in Christ Jesus," it was attracted by nothing in its objects, nor can it be repelled by anything in, of, or by them. "Having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end" (John 13:1). The "world" in John 3:16 is a general term used in contrast with the Jews, and the verse must be interpreted so as not to contradict Psalms 5:5; 6:7; John 3:36; Romans 9:13.

The chief design of God is to commend the love of God in Christ, for He is the sole channel through which it flows. The Son has not induced the Father to love His people, but rather was it His love for them which moved Him to give His Son for them. Ralph Erskine said:

"God hath taken a marvellous way to manifest His love. When He would show His power, He makes a world. When He would display His wisdom, He puts it in a frame and form that discovers its vastness. When He would manifest the grandeur and glory of His name, He makes a heaven, and puts angels and archangels, principalities and powers therein. And when He would manifest His love, what will He not do? God hath taken a great and marvellous way of manifesting it in Christ: His person, His blood, His death, His righteousness."

"All the promises of God in Him [Christ] are yea, and in Him Amen, unto the glory of God" (2 Cor 1:20). As we were chosen in Christ (Eph 1:4), as we were accepted in Him (Eph 1:6), as our life is hid in Him (Col 3:3), so are we beloved in Him--"the love of God which is in Christ Jesus": in Him as our Head and Husband, which is why nothing can separate us therefrom, for that union is indissoluble.

Nothing so warms the heart of the saint as a spiritual contemplation of God's love. As he is occupied with it, he is lifted outside of and above his wretched self. A believing apprehension fills the renewed soul with holy satisfaction, and makes him as happy as it is possible for one to be this side of heaven. To know and believe the love which God has toward me is both an earnest and a foretaste of heaven itself. Since God loves His people in Christ, it is not for any amiableness in or attraction about them: "Jacob have I loved." Yes, the naturally unattractive, yes, despicable, Jacob--thou worm Jacob." Since God loves His people in Christ, it is not regulated by their fruitfulness, but is the same at all times. Because He loves them in Christ, the Father loves them as Christ. The time will come when His prayer will be answered, "that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me" (John 17:23). Only faith can grasp those marvellous things, for neither reasoning nor feelings can do so. God loves us in Christ. What infinite delight the Father has as He beholds His people in His dear Son! All our blessings flow from that precious fountain.

God's love to His people is not of yesterday. It did not begin with their love to Him. No, "we love Him, because He first loved us" (1 John 4:19). We do not first give to Him, that He may return to us again. Our regeneration is not the motive of His love, rather His love is the reason why He renews us after His image. This is often made to appear in the first manifestation of it, when so far from its objects being engaged in seeking Him, they are at their worst.

"Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread My skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the LORD GOD, and thou becamest [manifestatively] Mine" (Eze 16:8).

Not only are its objects often at their worst when God's love is first revealed to them, but actually doing their worst, as in the case of Saul of Tarsus. Not only is God's love antecedent to ours, but also it was borne in His heart toward us long before we were delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of His dear Son. It began not in time, but bears the date of eternity. "I have loved thee with an everlasting love" (Jer 31:3).

"Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins' (1 John 4:10). It is clear from those words that God loved His people while they were in a state of nature, destitute of all grace, without a particle of love towards Him or faith in Him; yes, while they were His enemies (Rom 5:8,10). Clearly that lays me under a thousand times greater obligation to love, serve, and glorify Him than had He loved me for the first time when my heart was won. All the acts of God to His people in time are the expressions of the love He bore them from eternity. It is because God loves us in Christ, and has done so from everlasting, that the gifts of His love are irrevocable. They are the bestowal of "the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." The love of God indeed makes a change in us when it is "shed abroad in our hearts," but it makes none in Him. He sometimes varies the dispensations of His providence toward us, but that is not because His affection has altered. Even when He chastens us, it is in love (Heb 12:6), since He has our good in view.

Let us look more closely at some of the operations of God's love. First, in election. "We are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit [His quickening] and belief of the truth" (2 Thess 2:13).

There is an infallible connection between God's love and His selection of those who were to be saved. That election is the consequence of His love is clear again from Deuteronomy: "The LORD did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people" (7:7). So again: "In love, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph l:4,5).

Second, in redeeming. As we have seen from 1 John 4:10, out of His sovereign love God made provision for Christ to render satisfaction for their sins, though prior to their conversion He was angry with them in respect to His violated Law. And "how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?" (Rom 8:32)--another clear proof that His Son was not "delivered up" to the cross for all mankind. For He gives them neither the Holy Spirit, a new nature, nor repentance and faith.

Third, effectual calling. From the enthroned Saviour the Father sends forth the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33). Having loved His elect with an everlasting love, with lovingkindness He draws them (Jer 31:3), quickens into newness of life, calls them out of darkness into His marvellous light, makes them His children. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God" (1 John 3:1). If filiation does not issue from God's love as a sure effect, to what purpose are those words?

Fourth, healing of backslidings: "I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely" (Hosea 14:4), without reluctance or hesitation. "Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it" (Song 8:7). Such is God's love to His people--invincible, unquenchable. Not only is there no possibility of its expiring, but also the black waters of backsliding cannot extinguish it, nor the floods of unbelief put it out.

Nothing is more irresistible than death in the natural world, nothing so invincible as the love of God in the realm of grace. Goodwin remarked:

"What difficulties does the love of God overcome! For God to overcome His own heart! Do you think it was nothing for Him to put His Son to death? ... When He came to call us, had He no difficulties which love overcame? We were dead in trespasses and sins, yet from the great love wherewith He loved us, He quickened us in the grave of our corruption: 'lo, he stinketh'-- even then did God come and conquer us. After our calling, how sadly do we provoke God! Such temptations that if it were possible the elect should be deceived. It is so with all Christians. No righteous man but he is scarcely saved (1 Peter 4:18), and yet saved he is, because the love of God is invincible--it overcomes all difficulties."

An application is hardly necessary for such a theme. Let God's love daily engage your mind by devout meditations on it so that the affections of your heart may be drawn out to Him. When cast down in spirit, or in sore straits, plead His love in prayer, assured that it cannot deny anything good for you. Make God's wondrous love to you the incentive of your obedience to Him--gratitude requires nothing less.

THE LOVE OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:56:00.000-07:00

THE LOVE OF GOD

There are three things told us in Scripture concerning the nature of God. First, "God is spirit" (John 4:24). In the Greek there is no indefinite article, and to say "God is a spirit" is most objectionable, for it places Him in a class with others. God is "spirit" in the highest sense. Because He is "spirit" He is incorporeal, having no visible substance. Had God a tangible body, He would not be omni-present, He would be limited to one place; because He is "spirit" He fills heaven and earth. Secondly, "God is light" (1 John 1:5), which is the opposite of darkness. In Scripture "darkness" stands for sin, evil, death, and "light" for holiness, goodness, life. "God is light" means that He is the sum of all excellency. Thirdly, "God is love" (1 John 4:8). It is not simply that God "loves," but that He is Love itself. Love is not merely one of His attributes, but His very nature.

There are many today who talk about the love of God, who are total strangers to the God of love. The divine love is commonly regarded as a species of amiable weakness, a sort of good-natured indulgence; it is reduced to a mere sickly sentiment, patterned after human emotion. Now the truth is that on this, as on everything else, our thoughts need to be formed and regulated by what is revealed thereon in Holy Scripture. That there is urgent need for this is apparent not only from the ignorance which so generally prevails, but also the low state of spirituality which is now so sadly evident everywhere among professing Christians. How little real love there is for God. One chief reason for this is because our hearts are so little occupied with His wondrous love for His people. The better we are acquainted with His love--its character, fulness, blessedness the more will our hearts be drawn out in love to Him.

1. The love of God is uninfluenced. By this we mean, there was nothing whatever in the objects of His love to call it into exercise, nothing in the creature to attract or prompt it. The love which one creature has for another is because of something in the object, but the love of God is free, spontaneous, uncaused. The only reason why God loves any is found in His own sovereign will: "The LORD did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: but because the LORD loved you" (Deut 7:7-8). God has loved His people from everlasting, and therefore nothing about the creature can be the cause of what is found in God from eternity. He loves from Himself "according to His own purpose" (2 Tim 1:9).

"We love Him, because He first loved us" (1 John 4:19). God did not love us because we loved Him, but He loved us before we had a particle of love for Him. Had God loved us in return for ours, then it would not be spontaneous on His part; but because He loved us when we were loveless, it is clear that His love was uninfluenced. It is highly important, if God is to be honoured and the heart of His child established, that we should be quite clear upon this precious truth. God's love for me and for each of "His own" was entirely unmoved by anything in us. What was there in me to attract the heart of God? Absolutely nothing. But, to the contrary, there was everything to repel Him, everything calculated to make Him loathe me--sinful, depraved, a mass of corruption, with "no good thing" in me.

"What was there in me that could merit esteem,
Or give the Creator delight?
'Twas even so, Father, I ever must sing,
Because it seemed good in Thy sight."

2. It is eternal. This is of necessity. God Himself is eternal, and God is love; therefore, as God Himself had no beginning, His love had none. Granted that such a concept far transcends the grasp of our feeble minds, nevertheless, where we cannot comprehend we can bow in adoring worship. How clear is the testimony of Jeremiah 31:3, "I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee." How blessed to know that the great and holy God loved His people before heaven and earth were called into existence, that He had set His heart upon them from all eternity. Clear proof is this that His love is spontaneous, for He loved them endless ages before they had any being.

The same precious truth is set forth in Ephesians 1:4-5: "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him. In love having predestinated us." What praise should this evoke from each of His children! How tranquilizing for the heart: since God's love toward me had no beginning, it can have no ending! Since it is true that "from everlasting to everlasting" He is God, and since God is "love," then it is equally true that "from everlasting to everlasting" He loves His people.
3. It is sovereign. This also is self-evident. God Himself is sovereign, under obligations to none, a law unto Himself, acting always according to His own imperial pleasure. Since God is sovereign, and since He is love, it necessarily follows that His love is sovereign. Because God is God, He does as He pleases; because God is love, He loves whom He pleases. Such is His own express affirmation: "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" (Rom 9:13). There was no more reason in Jacob why he should be the object of divine love than there was in Esau. They both had the same parents, and were born at the same time, being twins; yet God loved the one and hated the other! Why? Because it pleased Him to do so.
The sovereignty of God's love necessarily follows from the fact that it is uninfluenced by anything in the creature. Thus, to affirm that the cause of His love lies in God Himself is only another way of saying, He loves whom He pleases. For a moment, assume the opposite. Suppose God's love were regulated by anything else than His will: in such a case He would love by rule, and loving by rule He would be under a law of love, and then so far from being free, God would Himself be ruled by Law. "In love having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to"--what? Some excellency which He foresaw in them? No! What then? "According to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph 1:4-5).

4. It is infinite. Everything about God is infinite. His essence fills heaven and earth. His wisdom is illimitable, for He knows everything of the past, present, and future. His power is unbounded, for there is nothing too hard for Him. So His love is without limit. There is a depth to it which none can fathom; there is a height to it which none can scale; there is a length and breadth to it which defies measurement, by any creature standard. Beautifully is this intimated in Ephesians 2:4: "But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us": the word "great" there is parallel with the word "so" in John 3:16--"God so loved." It tells us that the love of God is so transcendent it cannot be estimated.
"No tongue can fully express the infinitude of God's love, or any mind comprehend it: it 'passeth knowledge' (Eph 3:19). The most extensive ideas that a finite mind can frame about divine love, are infinitely below its true nature. The heaven is not so far above the earth as the goodness of God is beyond the most raised conceptions which we are able to form of it. It is an ocean which swells higher than all the mountains of opposition in such as are the objects of it. It is a fountain from which flows all necessary good to all those who are interested in it" (John Brine, 1743).

5. It is immutable. As with God Himself there is "no variableness, neither shadow of turning" (James 1:17), so His love knows neither change nor diminution. The worm Jacob supplies a forceful example of this: "Jacob have I loved," declared Jehovah, and despite all his unbelief and waywardness, He never ceased to love him--John 13:1 furnishes another beautiful illustration. That very night one of the apostles would say, "Show us the Father"; another would deny Him with cursings; all of them would be scandalized by, and forsake Him. Nevertheless, "having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end." The divine love is subject to no vicissitudes. Divine love is "strong as death." "Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it" (Song 8:6-7). Nothing can separate from it (Rom 8:35-39).
"His love no end nor measure knows,
No change can turn its course,
Eternally the same it flows
From one eternal source."

6. It is holy. God's love is not regulated by caprice, passion, or sentiment, but by principle. Just as His grace reigns not at the expense of it, but "through righteousness" (Rom 5:21), so His love never conflicts with His holiness. "God is light" (1 John 1:5) is mentioned before "God is love" (1 John 4:8). God's love is no mere amiable weakness or effeminate softness. Scripture declares that "whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth" (Heb 12:6). God will not wink at sin, even in His own people. His love is pure, unmixed with any maudlin sentimentality.

7. It is gracious. The love and favour of God are inseparable. This is clearly brought out in Romans 8:32-39. What that love is, from which there can be no "separation," is easily perceived from the design and scope of the immediate context: it is that goodwill and grace of God which determined Him to give His Son for sinners. That love was the impulsive power of Christ's incarnation: "God so loved the world that He gave Hs only begotten Son" (John 3:16). Christ died not in order to make God love us, but because He did love His people. Calvary is the supreme demonstration of divine love. Whenever you are tempted to doubt the love of God, Christian reader, go back to Calvary.

Here then is abundant cause for trust and patience under divine affliction. Christ was beloved of the Father, yet He was not exempted from poverty, disgrace, and persecution. He hungered and thirsted. Thus, it was not incompatible with God's love for Christ when He permitted men to spit upon and smite Him. Then let no Christian call into question God's love when he is brought under painful afflictions and trials. God did not enrich Christ on earth with temporal prosperity, for He had not where to lay His head. But He did give Him the Spirit without measure (John 3:34). Learn then that spiritual blessings are the principal gifts of divine love. How blessed to know that when the world hates us, God loves us!

THE LOVINGKINDNESS OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:51:00.000-07:00

THE LOVINGKINDNESS OF GOD

We propose to engage the reader with another of His excellencies--of which every Christian receives innumerable proofs. We turn to a consideration of God's lovingkindness because our aim is to maintain a due proportion in treating of the divine perfections, for all of us are apt to entertain one-sided views of them. A balance must be preserved here (as everywhere), as it appears in those two statements of the divine attributes, "God is light" (1 John 1:5), "God is love" (1 John 4:8). The sterner, more awe- inspiring aspects of the divine character are offset by the gentler, more winsome ones. It is to our irreparable loss if we dwell exclusively on God's sovereignty and majesty, or His holiness and justice; we need to meditate frequently, though not exclusively, on His goodness and mercy. Nothing short of a full-orbed view of the divine perfection revealed in Holy Writ--should satisfy us.

Scripture speaks of "the multitude of His lovingkindnesses," and who is capable of numbering them? (Isa 63:7). Said the Psalmist, "How excellent is Thy lovingkindness, 0 God!" (36:7). No pen of man, no tongue of angel, can adequately express it. Familiar as this blessed attribute of God's may be to people, it is something entirely peculiar to divine revelation. None of the ancients ever dreamed of investing his "gods" with such endearing perfection as this. None of the objects worshipped by present-day heathen possess gentleness and tenderness; very much the reverse is true, as the hideous features of their idols exhibit. Philosophers regard it as a serious reflection upon the honour of the Absolute to ascribe such qualities to it. But the Scriptures have much to say about God's lovingkindness, or His paternal favour to His people, His tender affection toward them.

The first time this divine perfection is mentioned in the Word is in that wondrous manifestation of Deity to Moses, when Jehovah proclaimed His "Name," i.e., Himself as made known. "The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth" (Exo 34:6), though much more frequently the Hebrew word, chesed, is rendered "kindness" and "lovingkindness." In our English Bibles the initial reference, as connected with God, is Psalm 17:7, where David prayed, "Shew Thy marvellous lovingkindness, 0 Thou that savest by Thy right hand them which put their trust in Thee." Marvellous it is that One so infinitely above us, so inconceivably glorious, so ineffably holy, should not only notice such worms of the earth, but also set His heart upon them, give His Son for them, send His Spirit to indwell them, and so bear with all their imperfections and waywardness as never to remove His lovingkindness from them.

Consider some of the evidences and exercises of this divine attribute unto the saints, "In love having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself" (Eph 1:4,5). As the previous verse shows, that love was engaged in their behalf before this world came into existence. "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him" (1 John 4:9), which was His amazing provision for us fallen creatures. "I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee" (Jer 31:3), by the quickening operations of My Spirit, by the invincible power of My grace, by creating in you a deep sense of need, by attracting you by My winsomeness. "I will betroth thee unto Me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto Me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and in mercies" (Hosea 2:19). Having made us willing in the day of His power to give ourselves to Him, the Lord enters into an everlasting marriage contract with us.

This lovingkindness of the Lord is never removed from His children. To our reason it may appear to be so, yet it never is. Since the believer be in Christ, nothing can separate him from the love of God (Rom 8:39). God has solemnly engaged HImself by covenant, and our sins cannot make it void. God has sworn that if His children keep not His commandments He will "visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes." Yet He adds, "Nevertheless My lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break" (Psa 89:31-34). Observe the change of number from "their" and "them" to "Him." The lovingkindness of God toward His people is centered in Christ. Because His exercise of lovingkindness is a covenant engagement it is repeatedly linked to His "truth" (Psa 40:11; 138:2), showing that it proceeds to us by promise. Therefore we should never despair.

"For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but My kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of My peace be removed, saith the LORD that hath mercy on thee" (Isa 54:10). No, that covenant has been ratified by the blood of its Mediator, by which blood the enmity (occasioned by sin) has been removed and perfect reconciliation effected. God knows the thoughts which He entertains for those embraced in His covenant and who have been reconciled to Him; namely, "thoughts of peace, and not of evil" (Jer 29:11). Therefore we are assured, "The LORD will command His lovingkindriess in the daytime, and in the night His song shall be with me" (Psa 42:8). What a word that is! Not merely that the Lord will give or bestow, but command His lovingkindness. It is given by decree, bestowed by royal engagement, as He also commands "deliverances ... the blessing, even life for evermore" (Psa 44:4; 133:3), which announces that nothing can possibly hinder these bestowments.

What ought our response to be? First, "Be ye therefore followers [imitators] of God as dear children; and walk in love" (Eph 5:1,2). "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness" (Col 3:12). Thus it was with David: "Thy lovingkindness is before mine eyes: and I have walked in Thy truth" (Psa 26:3). He delighted to ponder it. It refreshed his soul to do so, and it molded his conduct. The more we are occupied with God's goodness, the more careful we will be about our obedience. The constraints of God's love and grace are more powerful to the regenerate than the terrors of His Law. "How excellent is Thy lovingkindness, 0 God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Thy wings" (Psa 36:7). Second, a sense of this divine perfection strengthens our faith, and promotes confidence in God.

Third, it should stimulate the spirit of worship. "Because Thy lovingkindness is better than life, my lips shall praise Thee (Psa 63:3; cf 138:2). Fourth, it should be our cordial when depressed. "Let ... Thy merciful kindness [same Hebrew word] be for my comfort" (Psa 119:76). It was so with Christ in His anguish (Psa 69:17). Fifth, it should be our plea in prayer, "Quicken me, 0 LORD, according to Thy lovingkindness" (Psa 119:159). David applied to that divine attribute for new strength and increased vigor. Sixth, we should appeal to it when we have fallen by the wayside. "Have mercy upon me, 0 God, according to Thy lovingkindness" (Psa 51:1). Deal with rm according to the gentlest of "Thy attributes, make my case an exemplification of Thy tenderness. Seventh, it should be a petition in our evening devotions. "Cause me to hear Thy lovingkindness in the morning" (Psa 143:8). Arouse me with my soul in tune therewith, let my waking thoughts be of Thy goodness.

THE MERCY OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:47:00.000-07:00

THE MERCY OF GOD

"O give thanks unto the Lord: for He is good: for His mercy endureth for ever" (Psa 136:1). For this perfection of the divine character God is greatly to be praised. Three times over in as many verses does the Psalmist here call upon the saints to give thanks unto the Lord for this adorable attribute. And surely this is the least that can be asked for from those who have been recipients of such bounty. When we contemplate the characteristics of this divine excellency, we cannot do otherwise than bless God for it. His mercy is "great" (1 Kings 3:6), "plenteous" (Psa 86:5), "tender" (Luke 1:78), "abundant" (1 Peter 1:3); it is "from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him" (Psa 103:17). Well may we say with the Psalmist, "I will sing aloud of Thy mercy" (59:16).

"I will make all My goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy" (Exo 33:19). Wherein differs the "mercy" of God from His "grace"? The mercy of God has its spring in the divine goodness. The first issue of God's goodness is His benignity or bounty, by which He gives liberally to His creatures as creatures; thus has He given being and life to all things. The second issue of God's goodness is His mercy, which denotes the ready inclination of God to relieve the misery of fallen creatures. Thus, mercy presupposes sin.

Though it may not be easy at the first consideration to perceive a real difference between the grace and the mercy of God, it helps us thereto if we carefully ponder His dealings with the unfallen angels. He has never exercised mercy toward them, for they have never stood in any need thereof, not having sinned or come beneath the effects of the curse. Yet, they certainly are the objects of God's free and sovereign grace. First, because of His election of them from out of the whole angelic race (1 Tim 5:21). Secondly, and in consequence of their election, because of His preservation of them from apostasy, when Satan rebelled and dragged down with him one-third of the celestial hosts (Rev 12:4). Thirdly, in making Christ their Head (Col 2:10; 1 Peter 3:22), whereby they are eternally secured in the holy condition in which they were created. Fourthly, because of the exalted position which has been assigned them: to live in God's immediate presence (Dan 7:10), to serve Him constantly in His heavenly temple, to receive honourable commissions from Him (Heb 1:14). This is abundant grace toward them; but "mercy" it is not.

In endeavoring to study the mercy of God as it is set forth in Scripture, a threefold distinction needs to be made, if the Word of Truth is to be "rightly divided" thereon. First, there is a general mercy of God, which is extended not only to all men, believers and unbelievers alike, but also to the entire creation: "His tender mercies are over all His works" (Psa 145:9); "He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things" (Acts 17:25). God has pity upon the brute creation in their need, and supplies them with suitable provision. Secondly, there is a special mercy of God, which is exercised toward the children of men, helping and succoring them, notwithstanding their sins. To them also He communicates all the necessities of life: "for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust" (Matt 5.45). Thirdly, there is a sovereign mercy which is reserved for the heirs of salvation, which is communicated to them in a covenant way, through the Mediator.

Following out a little further the difference between the second and third distinctions pointed out above, it is important to note that the mercies which God bestows on the wicked are solely of a temporal nature; that is to say, they are confined strictly to this present life. There will be no mercy extended to them beyond the grave: "It is a people of no understanding: therefore He that made them will not have mercy on them, and He that formed them will show them no favour" (Isa 27.11). But at this point a difficulty may suggest itself to some of our readers, namely, Does not Scripture affirm that "His mercy endureth for ever" (Psa 136:1)? Two things need to be pointed out in that connection. God can never cease to be merciful, for this is a quality of the divine essence (Psa 116:5); but the exercise of His mercy is regulated by His sovereign will. This must be so, for there is nothing outside Himself which obliges Him to act; if there were, that "something" would be supreme, and God would cease to be God.

It is pure sovereign grace which alone determines the exercise of divine mercy. God expressly affirms this fact in Romans 9:15, "For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." It is not the wretchedness of the creature which causes Him to show mercy, for God is not influenced by things outside of Himself as we are. If God were influenced by the abject misery of leprous sinners, He would cleanse and save all of them. But He does not. Why? Simply because it is not His pleasure and purpose so to do. Still less is it the merits of the creatures which causes Him to bestow mercies upon them, for it is a contradiction in terms to speak of meriting "mercy." "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us" (Titus 3:5)--The one standing in direct antithesis to the other. Nor is it the merit of Christ which moves God to bestow mercies on His elect: that would be substituting the effect for the cause. It is "through" or because of the tender mercy of our God that Christ was sent here to His people (Luke 1:78). The merits of Christ make it possible for God to righteously bestow spiritual mercies on His elect, justice having been fully satisfied by the Surety! No, mercy arises solely from God's imperial pleasure.

Again, though it be true, blessedly and gloriously true, that God's mercy "endureth for ever," yet we must observe carefully the objects to whom His "mercy" is shown. Even the casting of the reprobate into the Lake of Fire is an act of mercy. The punishment of the wicked is to be contemplated from a threefold viewpoint. From God's side, it is an act of justice, vindicating His honour. The mercy of God is never shown to the prejudice of His holiness and righteousness. From their side, it is an act of equity, when they are made to suffer the due reward of their iniquities. But from the standpoint of the redeemed, the punishment of the wicked is an act of unspeakable mercy. How dreadful would it be if the present order of things, when the children of God are obliged to live in the midst of the children of the Devil, should continue for ever! Heaven would at once cease to be heaven if the ears of the saints still heard the blasphemous and filthy language of the reprobate. What a mercy that in the New Jerusalem "there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination" (Rev 21:27)!

Lest the reader might think in the last paragraph we have been drawing upon our imagination, let us appeal to Holy Scripture in support of what has been said. In Psalm 143:12 we find David praying, "And of Thy mercy cut off mine enemies, and destroy all them that afflict my soul: for I am Thy servant." Again, in Psalm 136:15 we read that God "overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea: for His mercy endureth for ever." It was an act of vengeance upon Pharaoh and his host, but it was an act of mercy unto the Israelites. Again, in Revelation 19:1-3 we read:

"I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God: for true and righteous are His judgments: for He hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of His servants at her hand. And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever."

From what has just been before us, let us note how vain is the presumptuous hope of the wicked, who, notwithstanding their continued defiance of God, nevertheless count upon His being merciful to them. How many there are who say, I do not believe that God will ever cast me into Hell; He is too merciful. Such a hope is a viper, which if cherished in their bosoms will sting them to death. God is a God of justice as well as mercy, and He has expressly declared that He will "by no means clear the guilty" (Exo 34:7). Yea, He has said, "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God" (Psa 9:17). As well might men reason thus: I do not believe that if filth be allowed to accumulate and sewage become stagnant and people deprive themselves of fresh air, that a merciful God will let them fall a prey to a deadly fever. The fact is that those who neglect the laws of health are carried away by disease, notwithstanding God's mercy. Equally true is it that those who neglect the laws of spiritual health shall forever suffer the second death.

Unspeakably solemn is it to see so many abusing this divine perfection. They continue to despise God's authority, trample upon His laws, continue in sin, and yet presume upon His mercy. But God will not be unjust to Himself. God shows mercy to the truly penitent, but not to the impenitent (Luke 13:3). To continue in sin and yet reckon upon divine mercy remitting punishment is diabolical. It is saying, "Let us do evil that good may come," and of all such it is written that their "damnation is just" (Rom 3:8). Presumption shall most certainly be disappointed; read carefully Deuteronomy 29:18-20. Christ is the spiritual Mercy seat, and all who despise and reject His Lordship shall "perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little" (Psa 2:12).

But let our final thought be of God's spiritual mercies unto His own people. "Thy mercy is great unto the heavens" (Psa 57:10). The riches thereof transcend our loftiest thought. "For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward them that fear Him" (Psa 103:11). None can measure it. The elect are designated "vessels of mercy" (Rom 9:23). It is mercy that quickened them when they were dead in sins (Eph 2:4,5). It is mercy that saves them (Titus 3:5). It is His abundant mercy which begat them unto an eternal inheritance (1 Peter 1:3). Time would fail us to tell of His preserving, sustaining, pardoning, supplying mercy. Unto His own, God is "the Father of mercies" (2 Cor 1:3).

"When all Thy mercies, 0 my God,
My rising soul surveys,
Transported with the view I'm lost,
In wonder, love, and praise."

THE GRACE OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:43:00.000-07:00

THE GRACE OF GOD

Grace is a perfection of the divine character which is exercised only toward the elect. Neither in the Old Testiment nor in the New is the grace of God ever mentioned in connection with mankind generally, still less with the lower orders of His creatures. In this it is distinguished from "mercy," for the mercy of God is "over all His works" (Psa 145:9). Grace is the sole source from which flows the goodwill, love, and salvation of God unto His chosen people. This attribute of the divine character was defined by Abraham Booth in his helpful book "The Reign of Grace" thus:

"It is the eternal and absolute free favour of God, manifested in the vouchsafement of spiritual and eternal blessings to the guilty and the unworthy."

Divine grace is the sovereign and saving favour of God exercised in the bestowment of blessings upon those who have no merit in them and for which no compensation is demanded from them. Nay, more; it is the favour of God shown to those who not only have no positive deserts of their own, but who are thoroughly ill-deserving and hell-deserving. It is completely unmerited and unsought, and is altogether unattracted by anything in or from or by the objects upon which it is bestowed. Grace can neither be bought, earned, nor won by the creature. If it could be, it would cease to be grace. When a thing is said to be of "grace," we mean that the recipient has no claim upon it, that it was in nowise due him. It comes to him as pure charity, and, at first, unasked and undesired.
The fullest exposition of the amazing grace of God is to be found in the Epistles of the Apostle Paul. In his writings "grace" stands in direct opposition to works and worthiness, all works and worthiness, of whatever kind or degree. This is abundantly clear from Romans 11:6, "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace, otherwise work is no more work." Grace and works will no more unite than an acid and an alkali. "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph 2:8,9). The absolute favour of God can no more consist with human merit than oil and water will fuse into one (see also Rom 4:4,5).

There are three principal characteristics of divine grace. First, it is eternal. Grace was planned before it was exercised, purposed before it was imparted: "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" (2 Tim 1:9). Secondly, it is free, for none did ever purchase it: "Being justified freely by His grace" (Rom 3:24). Thirdly, it is sovereign, because God exercises it toward and bestows it upon whom He pleases: "Even so might grace reign" (Rom 5:21). If grace "reigns" then it is on the throne, and the occupant of the throne is sovereign. Hence "the throne of grace" (Heb 4:16).

Just because grace is unmerited favour, it must be exercised in a sovereign manner. Therefore does the Lord declare, "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious" (Exo 33:19). Were God to show grace to all of Adam's descendants, men would at once conclude that He was righteously compelled to take them to heaven as a meet compensation for allowing the human race to fall into sin. But the great God is under no obligation to any of His creatures, least of all to those who are rebels against Him.

Eternal life is a gift, therefore it can neither be earned by good works, nor claimed as a right. Seeing that salvation is a "gift," who has any right to tell God on whom He ought to bestow it? It is not that the Giver ever refuses this gift to any who seek it wholeheartedly, and according to the rules which He has prescribed. No! He refuses none who come to Him empty-handed, and in the way of His appointing. But if out of a world of impenitent and unbelieving rebels, God is determined to exercise His sovereign right by choosing a limited number to be saved, who is wronged? Is God obliged to force His gift on those who value it not? Is God compelled to save those who are determined to go their own way?

But nothing more riles the natural man and brings to the surface his innate and inveterate enmity against God than to press upon him the eternality, the freeness, and the absolute sovereignty of divine grace. That God should have formed His purpose from everlasting, without in anywise consulting the creature, is too abasing for the unbroken heart. That grace cannot be earned or won by any efforts of man is too self-emptying for self- righteousness. And that grace singles out whom it pleases to be its favoured object arouses hot protests from haughty rebels. The clay rises up against the Potter and asks, "Why hast Thou made me thus?" A lawless insurrectionist dares to call into question the justice of divine sovereignty.

The distinguishing grace of God is seen in saving those people whom He has sovereignly singled out to be His high favorites. By "distinguishing" we mean that grace discriminates, makes differences, chooses some and passes by others. It was distinguishing grace which selected Abraham from the midst of his idolatrous neighbors and made him "the friend of God." It was distinguishing grace which saved "publicans and sinners," but said of the religious Pharisees, "Let them alone" (Matt 15:14). Nowhere does the glory of God's free and sovereign grace shine more conspicuously than in the unworthiness and unlikeliness of its objects. Beaufifully was this illustrated by James Hervey, (1751):

"Where sin has abounded, says the proclamation from the court of heaven, grace doth much more abound. Manasseh was a monster of barbarity, for he caused his own children to pass through the fire, and filled Jerusalem with innocent blood. Manasseh was an adept in iniquity, for he not only multiplied, and to an extravagant degree, his own sacrilegious impieties, but he poisoned the principles and perverted the manners of his subjects, making them do worse than the most detestable of the heathen idolators (see 2 Chron 33). Yet, through this superabundant grace he is humbled, he is reformed, and becomes a child of forgiving love, an heir of immortal glory."

Behold that bitter and bloody persecutor, Saul, when, breathing out threatenings and bent upon slaughter, he worried the lambs and put to death the disciples of Jesus. The havoc he had committed, the inoffensive families he had already ruined, were not sufficient to assuage his vengeful spirit. They were only a taste, which, instead of glutting the bloodhound, made him more closely pursue the track, and more eagerly pant for destruction. He is still athirst for violence and murder. So eager and insatiable is his thirst, that he even breathes out threatening and slaughter (Acts 9:1). His words are spears and arrows, and his tongue a sharp sword. 'Tis as natural for him to menace the Christians as to breathe the air. Nay, they bled every hour in the purposes of his rancorous heart. It is only owing to want of power that every syllable he utters, every breath he draws, does not deal out deaths, and cause some of the innocent disciples to fall. Who, upon the principles of human judgment, would not have pronounced him a vessel of wrath, destined to unavoidable damnation? Nay, who would not have been ready to conclude that, if there were heavier chains and a deeper dungeon in the world of woe, they must surely be reserved for such an implacable enemy of true godliness? Yet, admire and adore the inexhaustible treasures of grace-- this Saul is admitted into the goodly fellowship of the prophets, is numbered with the noble army of martyrs and makes a distinguished figure among the glorious company of the apostles.

The Corinthians were flagitious even to a proverb. Some of them wallowed in such abominable vices, and habituated themselves to such outrageous acts of injustice, as were a reproach to human nature. Yet even these sons of violence and slaves of sensuality were washed, sanctified, justified (1 Cor 6:9-11). "Washed," in the precious blood of a dying Redeemer; "sanctified," by the powerful operations of the blessed Spirit, "justified,," through the infinitely tender mercies of a gracious God. Those who were once the burden of the earth are now the joy of heaven, the delight of angels.

Now the grace of God is manifested in and by and through the Lord Jesus Christ. "The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17). This does not mean that God never exercised grace toward any before His Son became incarnate--Genesis 6:8, Exodus 33:19, etc., dearly show otherwise. But grace and truth were fully revealed and perfectly exemplified when the Redeemer came to this earth, and died for His people upon the cross. It is through Christ the Mediator alone that the grace of God flows to His elect "Much more the grace of God, and the gift of grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ ... much more they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ ... so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom 5:15,17,21).

The grace of God is proclaimed in the Gospel (Acts 20:24), which is to the self-righteous Jew a "stumbling block," and to the conceited and philosophizing Greek "foolishness." And why so? Because there is nothing whatever in it that is adapted to the gratifying of the pride of man. It announces that unless we are saved by grace, we cannot be saved at all. It declares that apart from Christ, the unspeakable Gift of God's grace, the state of every man is desperate, irremediable, hopeless. The Gospel addresses men as guilty, condemned, perishing criminals. It declares that the chastest moralist is in the same terrible plight as is the most voluptuous profligate; and the zealous professor, with all his religious performances, is no better off than the most profane infidel.

The Gospel contemplates every descendant of Adam as a fallen, polluted, hell-deserving and helpless sinner. The grace which the Gospel publishes is his only hope. All stand before God convicted as transgressors of His holy law, as guilty and condemned criminals, who are not merely awaiting sentence, but the execution of the sentence already passed upon them (John 3:18; Rom 3:19). To complain against the partiality of grace is suicidal. If the sinner insists upon bare justice, then the Lake of Fire must be his eternal portion. His only hope lies in bowing to the sentence which divine justice has passed upon him, owning the absolute righteousness of it, casting himself on the mercy of God, and stretching forth empty hands to avail himself of the grace of God now made known to him in the Gospel.

The third Person in the Godhead is the Communicator of grace, therefore is He denominated "the Spirit of grace" (Zech 12:10). God the Father is the Fountain of all grace, for He purposed in Himself the everlasting covenant of redemption. God the Son is the only Channel of grace. The Gospel is the Publisher of grace. The Spirit is the Bestower. He is the One who applies the Gospel in saving power to the soul: quickening the elect while spiritually dead, conquering their rebellious wills, melting their hard hearts, opening their blind eyes, cleansing them from the leprosy of sin. Thus we may say with the late G. S. Bishop:

"Grace is a provision for men who are so fallen that they cannot lift the axe of justice, so corrupt that they cannot change their own natures, so averse to God that they cannot turn to Him, so blind that they cannot see Him, so deaf that they cannot hear Him, and so dead that He Himself must open their graves and lift them into resurrection."

THE PATIENCE OF GOD by A. W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:38:00.000-07:00

THE PATIENCE OF GOD

Far less has been written upon this than the other excellencies of the divine character. Not a few of those who have expatiated at length upon the divine attributes have passed over the patience of God without any comment. It is not easy to suggest a reason for this, for surely the longsuffering of God is as much one of the divine perfections as is His wisdom, power, or holiness, and as much to be admired and revered by us. True, the actual term will not be found in a concordance as frequently as the others, but the glory of this grace itself shines forth on almost every page of Scripture. Certain it is that we lose much if we do not frequently meditate upon the patience of God and earnestly pray that our hearts and ways may be more completely conformed thereto.

Most probably the principal reason why so many writers have failed to give us anything, separately, upon the patience of God was because of the difficulty of distinguishing this attribute from the divine goodness and mercy, particularly the latter. God's longsuffering is mentioned in conjunction with His grace and mercy again and again, as may be seen by consulting Exodus 34:6, Numbers 14:18, Psalm 86:15, etc. That the patience of God is really a display of His mercy, that it is indeed one way in which it is frequently manifested, cannot be denied. But that patience and mercy are one and the same excellency, and are not to be separated, we cannot concede. It may not be easy to discriminate between them, nevertheless, Scripture fully warrants us in affiirming some things about the one which we cannot about the other.

Stephen Charnock, the Puritan, defines God's patience, in part, thus:

"It is part of the divine goodness and mercy, yet differs from both. God being the greatest goodness, hath the greatest mildness; mildness is always the companion of true goodness, and the greater the goodness, the greater the mildness. Who so holy as Christ, and who so meek? God's slowness to anger is a branch ... from his mercy: 'The Lord is full of compassion, slow to anger' (Psa 145:8). It differs from mercy in the formal consideration of the object--mercy respects the creature as miserable, patience respects the creature as criminal; mercy pities him in his misery, and patience bears with the sin which engendered the misery, and is giving birth to more."

Personally, we would define the divine patience as that power of control which God exercises over Himself, causing Him to bear with the wicked and forbear so long in punishing them. In Nahum 1:3 we read, "The Lord is slow to anger and great in power," upon which Mr. Charnock said:

"Men that are great in the world are quick in passion, and are not so ready to forgive an injury, or bear with an offender, as one of a meaner rank. It is a want of power over that man's self that makes him do unbecoming things upon a provocation. A prince that can bridle his passions is a king over himself as well as over his subjects. God is slow to anger because great in power. He has no less power over Himself than over His creatures."

It is at the above point, we think, that God's patience is most clearly distinguished from His mercy. Though the creature is benefitted thereby, the patience of God chiefly respects Himself, a restraint placed upon His acts by His will; whereas His mercy terminates wholly upon the creature. The patience of God is that excellency which causes Him to sustain great injuries without immediately avenging Himself. He has a power of patience as well as a power of justice. Thus the Hebrew word for the divine longsuffering is rendered "slow to anger" in Nehemiah 9:17, Psalm 103:8, etc. Not that there are any passions in the divine nature, but that God's wisdom and will is pleased to act with that stateliness and sobriety which is becoming to His exalted majesty.

In support of our definition above let us point out that it was to this excellency in the divine character that Moses appealed, when Israel sinned so grievously at Kadesh-Barnea, and there provoked Jehovah so sorely. Unto His servant the Lord said, "I will smite them with the pestilence and disinherit them." Then it was that the mediator Moses, as a type of the Christ to come, pleaded, "I beseech Thee, let the power of my Lord be great, according as Thou hast spoken saying the LORD is longsuffering" (Num 14:17). Thus, His "longsuffering" is His "power' of self-restraint.

Again, in Romans 9:22 we read, "What if God, willing to shew His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction." Were God to immediately break these reprobate vessels into pieces, His power of self-control would not so eminently appear; by bearing with their wickedness and forbearing punishment so Iong, the power of His patience is gloriously demonstrated. True, the wicked interpret His longsuffering quite differently because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil" (Eccl 8:11)--but the anointed eye adores what they abuse.

"The God of patience" (Rom 15:5) is one of the divine titles. Deity is thus denominated, first, because God is both the Author and Object of the grace of patience in the saint. Secondly, because this is what He is in Himself: patience is one of His perfections. Thirdly, as a pattern for us: "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering" (Col 3:12). And again, 'Be ye therefore followers [emulators] of God, as dear children" (Eph 5:1). When tempted to be disgusted at the dullness of another, or to be revenged on one who has wronged you, call to remembrance God's infinite patience and longsuffering with yourself.

The patience of God is manifested in His dealings with sinners. How strikingly was it displayed toward the antediluvians. When mankind was universally degenerate, and all flesh had corrupted its way, God did not destroy them till He had forewarned them. He "waited" (1 Peter 3:20), probably no less than 120 years (Gen 6:3), during which time Noah was a "preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5). So, later, when the Gentiles not only worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, but also committed the vilest abominations contrary even to the dictates of nature (Rom 1:19-26) and thereby filled up the measure of their iniquity, yet, instead of drawing His sword for the extermination of such rebels, God "suffered all nations to walk in their own ways," and gave them "rain from heaven and fruitful seasons" (Acts 14:16,17).

Marvellously was God's patience exercised and manifested toward Israel. First, He "suffered their manners" for forty years in the wilderness (Acts 13:18). Later, when they had entered Canaan, but followed the evil customs of the nations around them, and turned to idolatry, though God chastened them sorely, He did not utterly destroy them, but in their distress, raised up deliverers for them. When their iniquity was raised to such a height that none but a God of infinite patience could have borne them, He spared them many years before He allowed them to be carried down into Babylon. Finally, when their rebellion against Him reached its climax by crucifying His Son, He waited forty years ere He sent the Romans against them, and that, only after they had judged themselves "unworthy of everlasting life" (Acts 13:46).

How wondrous is God's patience with the world today. On every side people are sinning with a high hand. The divine law is trampled under foot and God Himself openly despised. It is truly amazing that He does not instantly strike dead those who so brazenly defy Him. Why does He not suddenly cut off the haughty infidel and blatant blasphemer, as He did Ananias and Sapphira? Why does He not cause the earth to open its mouth and devour the persecutors of His people, so that, like Dathan and Abiram, they shall go down alive into the Pit? And what of apostate Christendom, where every possible form of sin is now tolerated and practiced under cover of the holy name of Christ? Why does not the righteous wrath of Heaven make an end of such abominations? Only one answer is possible: because God bears with "much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction."

And what of the writer and the reader? Let us review our own lives. It is not long since we followed a multitude to do evil, had no concern for God's glory, and lived only to gratify self. How patiently He bore with our vile conduct! And now that grace has snatched us as brands from the burning, giving us a place in God's family, and has begotten us unto an eternal inheritance in glory, how miserably we requite Him. How shallow our gratitude, how tardy our obedience, how frequent our backslidings! One reason why God suffers the flesh to remain in the believer is that He may exhibit His "Iongsuffering to us-ward" (2 Peter 3:9). Since this divine attribute is manifested only in this world, God takes advantage to display it toward "His own."

May our meditation upon this divine excellency soften our hearts, make our consciences tender, and may we learn in the school of holy experience the "patience of saints," namely, submission to the divine will and continuance in well doing. Let us earnestly seek grace to emulate this divine excellency. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt 5:48). In the immediate context of this verse Christ exhorts us to love our enimies, bless them that curse us, do good to them that hate us. God bears long with the wicked notwithstanding the multitude of their sins, and shall we desire to be revenged because of a single injury?

THE GOODNESS OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T11:32:00.000-07:00

THE GOODNESS OF GOD

"The Goodness of God endureth continually" (Psa 52:1). The goodness of God refers to the perfection of His nature: "God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all" (1 John 1:5). There is such an absolute perfection in God's nature and being that nothing is wanting to it or defective in it, and nothing can be added to it to make it better.

"He is originally good, good of Himself, which nothing else is; for all creatures are good only by participation and communication from God. He is essentially good; not only good, but goodness itself: the creature's good is a superadded quality, in God it is His essence. He is infinitely good; the creature's good is but a drop, but in God there in an infinite ocean or gathering together of good. He is eternally and immutably good, for He cannot be less good than He is; as there can be no addition made to Him, so no subtraction from Him" (Thomas Manton).

God is summum bonum, the highest good.

The original Saxon meaning of our English word God is "The Good." God is not only the greatest of all beings, but the best. All the goodness there is in any creature has been imparted from the Creator, but God's goodness is underived, for it is the essence of His eternal nature. As God is infinite in power from all eternity, before there was any display thereof, or any act of omnipotency put forth, so He was eternally good before there was any communication of His bounty, or any creature to whom it might be imparted. Thus, the first manifestation of this divine perfection was in giving being to all things. "Thou art good, and doest good" (Psa 119:68). God has in Himself an infinite and inexhaustible treasure of all blessedness, enough to fill all things.
All that emanates from God--His decrees, His creation, His laws, His providences--cannot be otherwise than good: as it is written, "And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good" (Gen 1:31). Thus, the goodness of God is seen, first, in creation. The more closely the creature is studied, the more the beneficence of its Creator becomes apparent. Take the highest of God's earthly creatures--man. Abundant reason has he to say with the Psalmist, "I will praise Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are Thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well" (139:14). Everything about the structure of our bodies attest to the goodness of their Maker. How suited the hands to perform their allotted work! How good of the Lord to appoint sleep to refresh the wearied body! How benevolent His provision to give to the eyes lids and brows for their protection! And so we might continue indefinitely.

Nor is the goodness of the Creator confined to man; it is exercised toward all His creatures. "The eyes of all wait upon Thee; and Thou givest them their meat in due season. Thou openest Thine hand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing" (Psa 145:15,16). Whole volumes might be written, yea have been, to amplify this fact. Whether it be the birds of the air, the beasts of the forest, or the fish in the sea, abundant provision has been made to supply their every need. God "giveth food to all flesh, for His mercy endureth for ever" (Psa 136:25). Truly, "The earth is full of the goodness of the LORD" (Psa 33:5).

The goodness of God is seen in the variety of natural pleasures which He has provided for His creatures. God might have been pleased to satisfy our hunger without the food being pleasing to our palates--how His benevolence appears in the varied flavors which He has given to meats, vegetables, and fruits! God has not only given us senses, but also that which gratifies them; and this too reveals His goodness. The earth might have been as fertile as it is without its surface being so delightfully variegated. Our physical lives could have been sustained without beautiful flowers to regale our eyes with their colors, and our nostrils with their sweet perfumes. We might have walked the fields without our ears being saluted by the music the birds. Whence, then, this loveliness, this charm, so freely diffused over the face of nature? Verily, the tender mercies of the Lord "are over all His works" (Psa 145:9).

The goodness of God is seen in that when man transgressed the law of His Creator a dispensation of unmixed wrath did not at once commence. Well might God have deprived His fallen creatures of every blessing, every comfort, every pleasure. Instead, He ushered in a regime of a unmixed nature, of mercy and judgment. This is very wonderful if it be duly considered, and the more thoroughly that regime be expanded the more will it appear that "mercy rejoiceth against judgment" (James 2:13). Notwithstanding all the evils which attend our fallen state, the balance of good greatly preponderates. With comparatively rare exceptions, men and women experience a far greater number of days of health than they do of sickness and pain. There is much more creature-happiness than creature-misery in the world. Even our sorrows admit of considerable alleviation, and God has given to the human mind a pliability which adapts itself to circumstances and makes the most of them.
Nor can the benevolence of God be justly called into question because there is suffering and sorrow in the world. If man sins against the goodness of God, if he despises "the riches of His goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, and after the hardness and impenitency of his heart treasurest up unto himself wrath against the day of wrath" (Rom 2:4,5), who is to blame but himself? Would God be "good" if He punished not those who ill-use His blessings, abuse His benevolence, and trample His mercies beneath their feet? It will be no reflection upon God's goodness, but rather the brightest exemplification of it, when He shall rid the earth of those who have broken His laws, defied His authority, mocked His messengers, scorned His Son, and persecuted those for whom He died.
The goodness of God appeared most illustriously when He sent forth His Son "made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Gal 4:4,5). Then it was that a multitude of the heavenly host praised their Maker and said, "Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace, good will toward men" (Luke 2:14). Yes, in the Gospel the "grace [which word in Greek conveys the idea if benevolence or goodness] of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men" (Titus 2:11). Nor can God's benignity be called into question because He has not made every sinful creature to be a subject of His redemptive grace. He did not bestow it upon the fallen angels. Had God left all to perish it would have been no reflection on His goodness. To any who would challenge this statement we will remind him of our Lord's sovereign prerogative: "Is it not lawful for Me to do what I will with Mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" (Matt 20,15).

"Oh that men would praise the LORD for His goodness, and for His wonderful works to the children of men!" (Psa 107:8). Gratitude is the return justly required from the objects of His beneficence, yet is it often withheld from our great Benefactor simply because His goodness is so constant and so abundant. It is lightly esteemed because it is exercised toward us in the common course of events. It is not felt because we daily experience it. "Despisest thou the riches of His goodness?" (Rom 2:4). His goodness is "despised" when it is not improved as a means to lead men to repentance, but, on the contrary, serves to harden them from the supposition that God entirely overlooks their sin.

The goodness of God is the life of the believer's trust. It is this excellency in God which most appeals to our hearts. Because His goodness endureth for ever, we ought never to be discouraged: "The LORD is good, a strong hold in the day of trouble, and He knoweth them that trust in Him" (Nahum 1:7).

"When others behave badly to us, it should only stir us up the more heartily to give thanks unto the Lord, because He is good; and when we ourselves are conscious that we are far from being good, we should only the more reverently bless Him that He is good. We must never tolerate an instant's unbelief as to the goodness of the Lord; whatever else may be questioned, this is absolutely certain, that Jehovah is good; His dispensations may vary, but His nature is always the same" (C. H. Spurgeon).

THE FAITHFULNESS OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T10:46:00.000-07:00

THE FAITHFULNESS OF GOD

Unfaithfulness is one of the most outstanding sins of these evil days. In the business world, a man's word is, with exceedingly rare exceptions, no longer his bond. In the social world, marital infidelity abounds on every hand, the sacred bonds of wedlock being broken with as little regard as the discarding of an old garment. In the ecclesiastical realm thousands who have solemnly covenanted to preach the truth make no scruple to attack and deny it. Nor can reader or writer claim complete immunity from this fearful sin. In how many ways have we been unfaithful to Christ, and to the light and privileges which God has entrusted to us! How refreshing, then, how unspeakably blessed, to lift our eyes above this scene of ruin, and behold One who is faithful--faithful in all things, faithful at all times.

"Know therefore that the LORD Thy God, He is God, the faithful God" (Deut 7:9). This quality is essential to His being; without it He would not be God. For God to be unfaithful would be to act contrary to His nature, which is impossible: "If we believe not, yet He abideth faithful; He cannot deny Himself" (2 Tim 2:13). Faithfulness is one of the glorious perfections of His being. He is as it were clothed with it: "O LORD God of hosts, who is a strong LORD like unto Thee? or to Thy faithfulness round about Thee?" (Psa 89:8). So too when God became incarnate it was said, "Righteousness shall be the girdle of His loins, and faithfulness the girdle of His reins" (Isa 11:5).
What a word is that in Psalm 36:5, "Thy mercy, 0 LORD, is in the heavens; and Thy faithfulness reacheth unto the clouds." Far above all finite comprehension is the unchanging faithfulness of God. Everything about God is great, vast, incomparable. He never forgets, never fails, never falters, never forfeits His word. To every declaration of promise or prophecy the Lord has exactly adhered, every engagement of covenant or threatening He will make good, for "God is not a man, that He should lie; neither the son of man, that He should repent: hath He said, and shall He not do it? or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good?" (Num 23:19). Therefore does the believer exclaim, "His compassions fail not, they are new every morning: great is Thy faithfulness" (Lam 3:22,23).

Scripture abounds in illustrations of God's faithfulness. More than four thousand years ago He said, "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease" (Gen 8:22). Every year that comes furnishes a fresh witness to God's fulfillment of this promise. In Genesis 15 we find that Jehovah declared unto Abraham, "Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them ... But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again" (vv.13-16). Centuries ran their weary course. Abraham's descendants groaned amid the brick-kilns of Egypt. Had God forgotten His promise? No, indeed. Read Exodus 12:41, "And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt." Through Isaiah the Lord declared, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel" (7:14). Again centuries passed, but "When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman" (Gal 4:4).

God is true. His Word of promise is sure. In all His relations with His people God is faithful. He may be safely relied upon. No one ever yet really trusted Him in vain. We find this precious truth expressed almost everywhere in the Scriptures, for His people need to know that faithfulness is an essential part of the divine character. This is the basis of our confidence in Him. But it is one thing to accept the faithfulness of God as a divine truth, it is quite another to act upon it. God has given us many "exceeding great and precious promises," but are we really counting on His fulfillment of them? Are we actually expecting Him to do for us all that He has said? Are we resting with implicit assurance on these words, "He is faithful that promised" (Heb 10:23)?

There are seasons in the lives of all when it is not easy, no not even for Christians, to believe that God is faithful. Our faith is sorely tried, our eyes bedimmed with tears, and we can no longer trace the outworkings of His love. Our ears are distracted with the noises of the world, harassed by the atheistic whisperings of Satan, and we can no longer hear the sweet accents of His still small voice. Cherished plans have been thwarted, friends on whom we relied have failed us, a professed brother or sister in Christ has betrayed us. We are staggered. We sought to be faithful to God, and now a dark cloud hides Him from us. We find it difficult, yea, impossible, for carnal reason to harmonize His frowning providence with His gracious promises. Ah, faltering soul, severely tried fellow pilgrim, seek grace to heed Isaiah 50:10, "Who is among you that feareth the LORD, that obeyeth the voice of His servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? let him trust in the name of the LORD, and stay upon his God."

When you are tempted to doubt the faithfulness of God, cry out, "Get thee hence, Satan." Though you cannot now harmonize God's mysterious dealings with the avowals of His love, wait on Him for more light. In His own good time He will make it plain to you. "What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter" (John 13:7). The sequel will yet demonstrate that God has neither forsaken nor deceived His child. "And therefore will the LORD wait, that He may be gracious unto you, and therefore will He be exalted, that He may have mercy upon you: for the LORD is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for Him" (Isa 30:18).

"Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust Him for His grace,
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.

Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take,
The clouds ye so much dread,
Are rich with mercy, and shall break
In blessing o'er your head."

"My testimonies which Thou hast commanded are righteous and very faithful" (Psa 119:138). God has not only told us the best, but He has not withheld the worst. He has faithfully described the ruin which the Fall has effected. He has faithfully diagnosed the terrible state which sin has produced. He has faithfully made known his inveterate hatred of evil, and that He must punish the same. He has faithfully warned us that He is "a consuming fire" (Heb 12:29). Not only does His Word abound in illustrations of His fidelity in fulfilling His promises, but it also records numerous examples of His faithfulness in making good His threatenings. Every stage of Israel's history exemplifies that solemn fact. So it was with individuals: Pharaoh, Korah, Achan and a host of others are so many proofs. And thus it will be with you, my reader: unless you have fled or do flee to Christ for refuge, the everlasting burning of the Lake of Fire will be your sure and certain portion. God is faithful.

God is faithful in preserving His people. "God is faithful, by Whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son" (1 Cor 1:9). In the previous verse promise was made that God would confirm unto the end His own people. The Apostle's confidence in the absolute security of believers was founded not on the strength of their resolutions or ability to persevere, but on the veracity of Him that cannot lie. Since God has promised to His Son a certain people for His inheritance, to deliver them from sin and condemnation, and to make them participants of eternal life in glory, it is certain that He will not allow any of them to perish.

God is faithful in disciplining His people. He is faithful in what He withholds, no less than in what He gives. He is faithful in sending sorrow as well as in giving joy. The faithfulness of God is a truth to be confessed by us not only when we are at ease, but also when we are smarting under the sharpest rebuke. Nor must this confession be merely of our mouths, but of our hearts, too. When God smites us with the rod of chastisement, it is faithfulness which wields it. To acknowledge this means that we humble ourselves before Him, own that we fully deserve His correction, and instead of murmuring, thank Him for it. God never afflicts without a reason. "For this cause many are weak and sickly among you" (1 Cor 11:30), says Paul, illustrating this principle. When His rod falls upon us let us say with Daniel, "O LORD, righteousness belongeth unto Thee, but unto us confusion of faces" (9:7).

"I know, 0 LORD, that Thy judgments are right, and that Thou in faithfulness hast afflicted me" (Psa 119:75). Trouble and affliction are not only consistent with God's love pledged in the everlasting covenant, but they are parts of the administration of the same. God is not only faithful notwithstanding afflictions, but faithful in sending them. "then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless My lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer My faithfulness to fail" (Psa 89:32,33). Chastening is not only reconcilable with God's lovingkindness, but it is the effect and expression of it. It would much quiet the minds of God's people if they would remember that His covenant love binds Him to lay on them seasonable correction. Afflictions are necessary for us: "In their affliction they will seek Me early" (Hosea 5:15).
God is faithful in glorifying His people. "Faithful is He that calleth you, Who also will do it" (1 Thess 5:24). The immediate reference here is to the saints being "preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." God deals with us not on the ground of our merits (for we have none), but for His own great name's sake. God is constant to Himself and to His own purpose of grace: "whom He called ... them He also glorified" (Rom 8:30). God gives a full demonstration of the constancy of His everlasting goodness toward His elect by effectually calling them out of darkness into His marvellous light, and this should fully assure them of the certain continuance of it. "The foundation of God standeth sure' (2 Tim 2:19). Paul was resting on the faithfulness of God when he said, "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day" (2 Tim 1:12).

The apprehension of this blessed truth will preserve us from worry. To be full of care, to view our situation with dark forebodings, to anticipate the morrow with sad anxiety, is to reflect poorly upon the faithfulness of God. He who has cared for His child through all the years will not forsake him in old age. He who has heard your prayers in the past will not refuse to supply your need in the present emergency. Rest on Job 5:19, "He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee."

The apprehension of this blessed truth will check our murmurings. The Lord knows what is best for each one of us, and one effect of resting on this truth will be the silencing of our petulant complainings. God is greatly honoured when, under trial and chastening, we have good thoughts of Him, vindicate His wisdom and justice, and recognize His love in His very rebukes.

The apprehension of this blessed truth will beget increasing confidence in God. "Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to Him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator" (1 Peter 4:19). When we trustfully resign ourselves, and all our affairs into God's hands, fully persuaded of His love and faithfulness, the sooner shall we be satisfied with His providences and realize that "He doeth all things well."

THE POWER OF GOD by A.W. Pink

2010-05-05T10:40:00.000-07:00

THE POWER OF GOD

We cannot have a right conception of God unless we think of Him as all-powerful, as well as all-wise. He who cannot do what he will and perform all his pleasure cannot be God. As God hath a will to resolve what He deems good, so has He power to execute His will.

"The power of God is that ability and strength whereby He can bring to pass whatsoever He pleases, whatsoever His infinite wisdom may direct, and whatsoever the infinite purity of His will may resolve ... As holiness is the beauty of all God's attributes, so power is that which gives life and action to all the perfections of the divine nature. How vain would be the eternal counsels, if power did not step in to execute them. Without power His mercy would be but feeble pity, His promises an empty sound, His threatenings a mere scarecrow. God's power is like Himself.--infinite, eternal, incomprehensible; it can neither be checked, restrained, nor frustrated by the creature" (Stephen Charnock).

"God hath spoken once; twice have I heard this, that power belongeth unto God" (Psa 62:11). "God hath spoken once": nothing more is necessary! Heaven and earth shall pass away, but His word abideth forever." "God hath spoken once": how befitting His divine majesty! We poor mortals may speak often and yet fail to be heard. He speaks but once and the thunder of His power is heard on a thousand hills.

The LORD also thundered in the heavens, and the Highest gave His voice, hail stones and coals of fire. Yea, He sent out His arrows, and scattered them; He shot out lightnings, and discomfited them. Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at Thy rebuke, 0 LORD, at the blast of the breath of Thy nostrils (Psa 18:13-15).

"God hath spoken once": behold His unchanging authority. "For who in the heaven can be compared unto the LORD? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the LORD?" (Psa 89:6). "And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing. and He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou?" (Dan 4:35). This was openly displayed when God became incarnate and tabernacled among men. To the leper He said, "I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed' (Matt 8:3). To one who had lain in the grave four days He cried, "Lazarus, come forth," and the dead came forth. The stormy wind and the angry waves were hushed at a single word from Him. A legion of demons could not resist His authoritative command.

"Power belongeth unto God," and to Him alone. Not a creature in the entire universe has an atom of power save what God delegates. But God's power is not acquired, nor does it depend upon any recognition by any other authority. It belongs to Him inherently.

"God's power is like Himself, self-existent, self-sustained. The mightiest of men cannot add so much as a shadow of increased power to the Omnipotent One. He sits on no buttressed throne and leans on no assisting arm. His court is not maintained by His courtiers, not does it borrow its splendor from His creatures. He is Himself the great central source and Originator of all power" (C.H. Spurgeon).

Not only does all creation bear witness to the great power of God, but also to His entire independency of all created things. Listen to His own challenge: "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof." (Job 38:4-6). How completely is the pride of man laid in the dust!

"Power is also used as a name of God, 'the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power' (Mark 14:62), that is, at the right hand of God. God and power are so inseparable that they are reciprocated. As His essence is immense, not to be confined in place; as it is eternal, not to be measured in time; so it is almighty, not to be limited in regard of action" (S. Charnock).

"Lo, these are parts of His ways: but how little a portion is heard of Him? but the thunder of His power who can understand?" (Job 26:14). Who is able to count all the monuments of His power? Even that which is displayed of His might in the visible creation is utterly beyond our powers of comprehension, still less are we able to conceive of omnipotence itself. There is infinitely more power lodged in the nature of God than is expressed in all His works.

"Parts of His ways" we behold in creation, providence, redemption, but only a "little part" of His might is seen in them. Remarkably is this brought out--"And there was the hiding of His power" (Hab 3:4). It is scarcely possible to imagine anything more grandiloquent than the imagery of this whole chapter, yet nothing in it surpasses the nobility of this statement. The prophet (in vision) beheld the mighty God scattering the hills and overturning the mountains, which one would think afforded an amazing demonstration of His power. Nay, says our verse, that is rather the "hiding" than the displaying of His power. What is meant? This: so inconceivable, so immense, so uncontrollable is the power of Deity, that the fearful convulsions which He works in nature conceal more than they reveal of His infinite might!
It is very beautiful to link together the following passages: He "treadeth upon the waves of the sea" (Job 9:8), which expresses God's uncontrollable power. "He walketh in the circuit of Heaven" (Job 22:14), which tells of the immensity of His presence. He "walketh upon the wings of the wind' (Psa 104:3), which signifies the amazing swiftness of His operations. This last expression is very remarkable. It is not that He "flieth," or "runneth," but that He "walketh" and that, on the very "wings of the wind"--on the most impetuous of the elements, tossed into utmost rage, and sweeping along with almost inconceivable rapidity, yet they are under His feet, beneath His perfect control!

Let us now consider God's power in creation. "The heavens are Thine, the earth also is Thine, as for the world and the fulness thereof, Thou hast founded them. The north and the south Thou hast created them" (Psa 89:11, 12). Before man can work he must have both tools and materials, but God began with nothing, and by His word alone out of nothing made all things. The intellect cannot grasp it. "God spake, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast" (Psa 33.9). Primevil matter heard His voice. "God said, Let there be ... and it was so" (Gen 1). Well may we exclaim, "Thou hast a mighty arm: strong is Thy hand, and high is Thy right hand" (Psa 89:13).

"Who, that looks upward to the midnight sky; and, with an eye of reason, beholds its rolling wonders; who can forbear enquiring, Of what were their mighty orbs formed? Amazing to relate, they were produced without materials. They sprung from emptiness itself. The stately fabric of universal nature emerged out of nothing. What instruments were used by the Supreme Architect to fashion the parts with such exquisite niceness, and give so beautiful a polish to the whole? How was it all connected into one finely-proportioned and nobly finished structure? A bare fiat accomplished all. Let them be, said God. He added no more; and at once the marvellous edifice arose, adorned with every beauty, displaying innumerable perfections, and declaring amidst enraptured seraphs its great Creator's praise. 'By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth' (Psa 33:6)" James Hervey, 1789).

Consider God's power in preservation. No creature has power to preserve itself. "Can the rush grow up without mire? can the flag grow without water?" (Job 8:11). Both man and beast would perish if there were not herbs for food; herbs would wither and die if the earth were not refreshed with fruitful showers. Therefore is God called the Preserver of "man and beast" (Psa 36:6), "It upholding all things by the word of His power" (Heb 1:3). What a marvel of divine power is the prenatal life of every human being! That an infant can live at all, and for so many months, in such cramped and filthy quarters, and that without breathing, is unaccountable without the power of God. Truly He "holdeth our soul in life" (Psa 66:9).

The preservation of the earth from the violence of the sea is another plain instance of God's might. How is that raging element kept pent within those limits wherein He first lodged it, continuing its channel, without overflowing the earth and dashing in pieces the lower part of the creation? The natural situation of the water is to be above the earth, because it is lighter, and immediately under the air, because it is heavier. Who restrains the natural quality of it? Certainly man does not, and cannot. It is the fiat of its Creator which alone bridles it: "Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed" (Job 38:11). What a standing monument to the power of God is the preservation of the world!

Consider God's power in government. Take His restraining of the malice of Satan. "The devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Peter 5:8). He is filled with hatred against God, and with fiendish enmity against men, particularly the saints. He that envied Adam inparadise envies us the pleasure of enjoying any of God's blessings. Could he have his will, he would treat all the same way he treated Job: he would send fire from heaven on the fruits of the earth, destroy the cattle, cause a wind to overthrow our houses, and cover our bodies with boils. But, little as men may realize it, God bridles him to a large extent, prevents him from carrying out his evil designs, and confines him within His ordinations.

So too God restrains the natural corruption of men. He suffers sufficient outbreakings of sin to show what fearful havoc has been wrought by man's apostasy from his Maker, but who can conceive the frightful lengths to which men would go were God to remove His curbing hand? "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness, their feet are swift to shed blood" (Rom 3:14,15). This is the nature of every descendant of Adam. Then what unbridled licentiousness and headstrong folly would triumph in the world, if the power of God did not interpose to lock down the floodgates of it! See Psalm 93:3, 4.

Consider God's power in judgment. When He smites, none can resist Him: see Ezekiel 22:14. How terribly this was exemplified at the Flood! God opened the windows of heaven and broke up the great fountains of the deep, and (excepting those in the ark) the entire human race, helpless before the storm of His wrath, was swept away. A shower of fire and brimstone from heaven, and the cities of the plain were exterminated. Pharaoh and all his hosts were impotent when God blew upon them at the Red Sea. What a terrific word is that in Romans 9:22: "What if God, willing to shew His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction." God is going to display His mighty power upon the reprobate not merely by incarcerating them in Gehenna, but by supernaturally preserving their bodies as well as souls amid the eternal burnings of the Lake of Fire. Well may all tremble before such a God! To treat with impudence One who can crush us more easily than we can a moth, is a suicidal policy. To openly defy Him who is clothed with omnipotence, who can rend us in pieces or cast us into Hell any moment He pleases, is the very height of insanity. To put it on its lowest ground, it is but the part of wisdom to heed His command, "Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little" (Psa 2:12).

Well may the enlightened soul adore such a God! The wondrous and infinite perfections of such a Being call for fervent worship. If men of might and renown claim the admiration of the world, how much more should the power of the Almighty fill us with wonderment and homage. "Who is like unto Thee, 0 LORD, among the gods? who is like Thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?" (Exo 15:11).

Well may the saint trust such a God! He is worthy of implicit confidence. Nothing is too hard for Him. If God were stinted in might and had a limit to His strength we might well despair. But seeing that He is clothed with omnipotence, no prayer is too hard for Him to answer, no need too great for Him to supply, no passion too strong for Him to subdue; no temptation too powerful for Him to deliver from, no misery too deep for Him to relieve. "The LORD is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" (Psa 27:1).

"Now unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen" (Eph 3:20,21).