Yearly Archives: 2011

Lord, Pour out Your Spirit

Posted on by
Reply

“Pray daily for a great outpouring of the Spirit on the Church and on the world. This is the grand need of the day – it is the thing that we need far more than money, machinery, and men. The “company of preachers” in Christendom is far greater than it was in the days of Paul; but the actual spiritual work done in the earth, in proportion to the means used, is undoubtedly far less. We need more of the presence of the Holy Spirit, more in the pulpit, and more in the congregation, more in the pastoral visit, and more in the school. Where He is, there will be life, health, growth, and fruitfulness. Where He is not, all will be dead, tame, formal, sleepy, and cold. Then let everyone who desires to see an increase of pure and undefiled religion, pray daily for more of the presence of the Holy Spirit in every branch of the visible Church of Christ.” – J.C. Ryle

“The question of gifts is entirely within the sovereignty of the Spirit and that because of that we should always be open, in mind and in heart, to anything that the Spirit of God may choose to do in His sovereignty.” – Martin Lloyd Jones

“When the Holy Spirit is poured out in a day of power the result is bound to affect whole communities and even nations. Conviction of sin, an anxiety to possess the Word of God, and dependence upon those truths which glorify God in man’s salvation, are inevitable consequences.” – Ian Murray

Theology is for Everyone

Posted on by
Reply

“No Christian can avoid theology. Every Christian has a theology. The issue, then, is not, do we want to have a theology? That’s a given. The real issue is, do we have a sound theology? Do we embrace true or false doctrine?” – Dr. R. C. Sproul

Here is Dr. J. I. Packer speaking on the importance of Theology in a talk given at St. Peter’s Anglican Church (Tallahassee, Florida) on February 1, 2010, entitled “Theology Is for Everyone”:

Does it Make God a Moral Monster if He Ordains All that Comes to Pass?

Posted on by
Reply

I am proud to call John Hendryx my friend. He is the founder and overseer of monergism.com, the most comprehensive theological website on the internet, as well as its blog site of reformationtheology.com (where I serve as one of the writing contributers).

In the following short article John Hendryx responds to Roger Olson. He writes:

One of the major premises of Roger Olson’s new book “Against Calvinism” is his declaration that classic Reformed doctrine of meticulous providence makes God into a moral monster, or worse, indistinguishable from the devil. He asserts that the Calvinist cannot consistently affirm that God ordains all that comes to pass, including the wicked acts of men, without also making God the author of sin.

Does it follow? Not in the least. The charge that it makes God a moral monster if the God of Scripture ordains all things, even the wicked acts of men, rests ultimately on the assumption that unless we can explain his actions then we may sit in judgment upon Him. In other words, the charge rests purely upon rationalism and extra-biblical logic. We acknowledge that we cannot explain all of God’s secret acts since God has chosen not to reveal many things about Himself. But one very prominent feature of the Bible is that it frequently declares that God meticulously ordains all that comes to pass (Eph 1:11) AND that men are responsible for their actions. One major example sticks out: the greatest sin ever committed by men in history — the crucifixion of Jesus —when the Apostle Peter, preaching at Pentecost declares:

“…this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.” (Acts 2:23)

and two chapters later in Acts it again says:

“…both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.” (Acts 4:27-28)

The Bible itself testifies, in plain language, that God ordained evil men to crucify Jesus. Yet “lawless men” are 100% responsible for carrying it out. So those who embrace the Bible as authoritative need to be able to develop a theology which fits that into their view. While you may not understand it, you must yield to what the Scripture teaches regarding God’s meticulous hand of providence in all things, and His blamelessness in doing them.

The fatal flaw in Olson’s argument flows mostly from his insistence that Calvinists must somehow explain this philosophically or else we are being inconsistent, or worse, make God into a monster. But I would argue to the contrary: since the Bible holds forth our highest presuppositions, the most consistent position possible is to yield to the Bible’s teaching that both are true. God does not tell us much about HOW he can ordain evil acts while not being guilty of evil, only shows many examples where He does so. It may be a mystery for human beings to understand, yet crystal clear as regards to its established truth.

Likewise, nowhere in the Bible did God call us to work out the details of this doctrine by philosophical means, or pry into the secret things of God. Rather He calls us to be faithful to the Text that says God ordains all things, even evil, and that, at the same time, God is blameless in doing so. That He ordains sin sinlessly. I do not have to hold these truths together rationally (according to human knowledge) or philosophically but because they are axiomatic in the Bible. My understanding the intricacies of how this comes about is secondary. God is God. DO our finite minds have to understand HOW He does this in order for it to be true?

It appears that, ultimately, Olson’s objections to this are moral and philosophical rather than exegetical. He is, therefore, basing his considerations and thus his theological foundations on sand. The conclusions we reach, I would contend, must be based on what the Scripture says. For the alternative is to draw our highest presuppositions from something other than an authoritative source, such as unaided human reason. It is of utmost importance that he come up with exegetical grounds for his position, rather than base his theology on an emotional reaction.

I honestly cringe for Olson when he says that if God ordains evil events then God is indistinguishable from the devil, because the Bible declares that God does ordain them, and also declares that he does so blamelessly, i.e. without sin. And if our theology is biblical, (and I believe it is) then Dr. Olson ends up calling God a monster or worse, the devil. YIKES!!! I would not want to be him.

Note: It should be a given for Christians, that due to the fall, all human beings are not safe from temporal and eternal punishment. Why should it, therefore, so surprise Olson that God justly exercises this authority during our lives? Judgement has already begun east of Eden and we all are subject to death. So nothing (no suffering) should surprise us here except for the great mercy He has shown us in Jesus Christ. Regarding the Tower of Siloam (Luke 13:4), Jesus declared that it did not fall on people for their particular sin(s) because they were somehow worse that others, but as a sign in this fallen world that we are all ill-deserving sinners, under a curse who need to repent and receive the mercy of Jesus Christ. Don’t be surprised that the tower fell on those people – let it be a sober reminder that you deserve the same.

Similar Online Resources
Seven things the Bible says about Evil by Johnathon Bowers
Letter from Visitor on Calvinism, Evil and God’s Holiness by John Hendryx
Testing Roger Olson’s Depth of Exegesis: 1 Timothy 2:4 by James White

Now available at Monergism Books “For Calvinism” by Michael Horton and “Against Calvinism” by Roger Olson.

Eavesdropping on a Holy Conversation

Posted on by
Reply

Below is a transcript from a C. H. Spurgeon sermon where he describes the covenant of redemption and then wonders what it would have been like to be to hear this covenant being made.

“Now, in this covenant of grace, we must first of all observe the high contracting parties between whom it was made. The covenant of grace was made before the foundation of the world between God the Father, and God the Son; or to put it in a yet more scriptural light, it was made mutually between the three divine Persons of the adorable Trinity.”

“I cannot tell you it in the glorious celestial tongue in which it was written: I am fain to bring it down to the speech which suiteth to the ear of flesh, and to the heart of the mortal. Thus, I say, run the covenant, in ones like these:

“I, the Most High Jehovah, do hereby give unto My only begotten and well-beloved Son, a people, countless beyond the number of stars, who shall be by Him washed from sin, by Him preserved, and kept, and led, and by Him, at last, presented before My throne, without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. I covenant by oath, and swear by Myself, because I can swear by no greater, that these whom I now give to Christ shall be for ever the objects of My eternal love. Them I will forgive through the merit of the blood. To these will I give a perfect righteousness; these will I adopt and make My sons and daughters, and these shall reign with Me through Christ eternally.”

Thus run that glorious side of the covenant. The Holy Spirit also, as one of the high contracting parties on this side of the covenant, gave His declaration, “I hereby covenant,” saith He, “that all whom the Father giveth to the Son, I will in due time quicken. I will show them their need of redemption; I will cut off from them all groundless hope, and destroy their refuges of lies. I will bring them to the blood of sprinkling; I will give them faith whereby this blood shall be applied to them, I will work in them every grace; I will keep their faith alive; I will cleanse them and drive out all depravity from them, and they shall be presented at last spotless and faultless.”

This was the one side of the covenant, which is at this very day being fulfilled and scrupulously kept. As for the other side of the covenant this was the part of it, engaged and covenanted by Christ. He thus declared, and covenanted with his Father:

“My Father, on my part I covenant that in the fullness of time I will become man. I will take upon myself the form and nature of the fallen race. I will live in their wretched world, and for My people I will keep the law perfectly. I will work out a spotless righteousness, which shall be acceptable to the demands of Thy just and holy law. In due time I will bear the sins of all My people. Thou shalt exact their debts on Me; the chastisement of their peace I will endure, and by My stripes they shall be healed. My Father, I covenant and promise that I will be obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. I will magnify Thy law, and make it honourable. I will suffer all they ought to have suffered. I will endure the curse of Thy law, and all the vials of Thy wrath shall be emptied and spent upon My head. I will then rise again; I will ascend into heaven; I will intercede for them at Thy right hand; and I will make Myself responsible for every one of them, that not one of those whom thou hast given me shall ever be lost, but I will bring all my sheep of whom, by My blood, thou hast constituted Me the Shepherd — I will bring every one safe to Thee at last.”

Understanding Matthew 23:37

Posted on by
Reply

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!” – Matthew 23:37

“Traditions, everyone has them and those most blinded to them are those who do not believe they have any.” – Dr. James White

In this audio recording, made available through you tube video (which lasts approximately 27 minutes) taken from a Sunday School class, Dr. White (of Alpha and Omega Ministries) exposes the traditions normally associated with the Scripture text of Matthew 23:37.

Many site this text in an effort to refute the biblical doctrine of election. Yet so often the text is misquoted. Key information in the text is left out, obscuring the meaning. Even reformed scholars have been known to misquote the verse. Such is the power of tradition. I recommend this audio teaching highly.

God is Sovereign

Posted on by
1

God Is Sovereign Over . . .

Seemingly random things:

The lot is cast into the lap, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”—yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. . . . Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.”
(James 4:13-15)

Salvation:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
(Romans 9:15-16)

As many as were appointed to eternal life believed.
(Acts 13:48)

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.
(Romans 8:29-30)

Life and death:

See now that I, even I, am he,
and there is no god beside me;
I kill and I make alive;
I wound and I heal;
and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.
(Deuteronomy 32:39)

The LORD kills and brings to life;
he brings down to Sheol and raises up.
(1 Samuel 12:6)

Disabilities:

Then the LORD said to [Moses], “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the LORD?”
(Exodus 4:11)

The death of God’s Son:

Jesus, [who was] delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.
(Acts 2:23)

For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
(Acts 4:27-28)

Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him;
he has put him to grief. . . .
(Isaiah 53:10)

Evil things:

Is a trumpet blown in a city,
and the people are not afraid?
Does disaster come to a city,
unless the LORD has done it?
(Amos 3:6)

I form light and create darkness,
I make well-being and create calamity,
I am the LORD, who does all these things.
(Isaiah 45:7)

“The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.” In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong. . . . “Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.
(Job 1:21-22; 2:10)

[God] sent a man ahead of them, Joseph, who was sold as a slave. . . . As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.
(Psalm 105:17; Genesis 50:21)

All things:

[God] works all things according to the counsel of his will.
(Ephesians 1:11)

Our God is in the heavens;
he does all that he pleases.
(Psalm 115:3)

I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
(Job 42:2)

All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
and he does according to his will among the host of heaven
and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand
or say to him, “What have you done?”
(Daniel 4:35)

Why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I”?

Posted on by
Reply

Sam Shamoun is a Christian with a well established ministry to the Muslim world. He is often seen on various televison outreach programs, in his many youtube videos, as well as in formal debates as an informed Christian apologist (one who makes a defense of the faith). Please pray for our brother Sam that God will continue to use and protect him.

Christians believe that Jesus is God. Yet Jesus said, “The Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). Was Jesus denying his divinity? Or did he mean something else? Sam explains in this video below:

Well Done Phil!

Posted on by
3

“It seems odd, Commenting and Commentaries (London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1876), 1.

“Tradition is the fruit of the Spirit’s teaching activity from the ages as God’s people have sought understanding of Scripture. It is not infallible, but neither is it negligible, and we impoverish ourselves if we disregard it.” – J.I. Packer, “Upholding the Unity of Scripture Today,” JETS 25 (1982): 414

“Although tradition does not rule our interpretation, it does guide it. If upon reading a particular passage you have come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notice of every other Christian for two-thousand years, or has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you had better abandon your interpretation.” – R. C. Sproul

“The best way to guard a true interpretation of Scripture, the Reformers insisted, was neither to naively embrace the infallibility of tradition, or the infallibility of the individual, but to recognize the communal interpretation of Scripture. The best way to ensure faithfulness to the text is to read it together, not only with the churches of our own time and place, but with the wider ‘communion of saints’ down through the age.” – Michael Horton, “What Still Keeps Us Apart?”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

“Sola Scriptura” is not the same as “Solo Scriptura”. A proper understanding of “Sola Scriptura” will not lead to an individualistic, “me and my Bible in the woods” approach to Bible interpretation. Because of Christ’s gifts to the Church through the centuries, we have the privilege of standing on the shoulders of giants.

On this theme, I loved reading Phil Johnson’s response (some time back) to a questioner at his Pyromaniacs blog site who asked:

Your identity as a “Baptist”; your endless quotations from Charles Spurgeon; your faithful devotion to John MacArthur; and especially your willingness to call yourself a “Calvinist” are all huge red flags that tell me something is seriously wrong with your theology. Why do you teach a system of doctrine that is named after a mere man? Why are you following human teachers instead of going to the Bible alone? After all, 1 John 2:27 says, “The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you.” We ought to go to Scripture alone to establish our doctrine! The truth is in God’s Holy word, not in any theological system or theology textbook developed by mere men. Isn’t that principle what the Reformation was originally about? Sola Scriptura? Didn’t even Calvin himself go to Scripture for the truth instead of reading other men? I believe that if Calvin himself wrote for this blog, he would point people to the truth in God’s Holy word, not to a theology developed by some other man.

Phil’s reply: You have seriously misunderstood Sola Scriptura if you really imagine that it rules out human teachers or eliminates systematic theology. The Reformers (including Calvin) often cited the works of Augustine, Tertullian, Jerome, Cyprian, Ambrose, and others-ranging from the early church fathers through Aquinas. They didn’t follow any of them slavishly, of course, but they certainly took them seriously. Not one of the major Reformers would have tolerated the claim that because the Church Fathers were mere men they were therefore irrelevant or incapable of shedding any helpful light on tough theological questions. Continue reading →

Romans 9 (Transcript)

Posted on by
Reply

Transcript from an audio teaching by Dr. James White – Part 1

….let’s look at Romans chapter 9 and let’s start off with the context…. again chapter and verse divisions were not a part of the original text of Scripture.

And so what have we just had? We’ve had the Golden Chain of Redemption, Romans chapter 8. In fact, it might be well to go back and to remind ourselves of what has come before.

“We know that God causes all things to work together for good for those who love God, for those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren.” (Romans 8:28-29)

I just stop long enough to challenge in the minds of anyone who thinks that this term foreknew as a verb is the same thing as the noun to simply have foreknowledge, that you are wrong. And that you need to look at the text of Scripture and realize that this is an active verb. This is something God is doing and every time God is the subject and this is the verb in the New Testament, the object is personal it is never actions. To simply say God knew who was going to believe, there is no example of that statement in the New Testament. It is not there. It is not an untrue statement but it doesn’t answer anything and it doesn’t tell us what it means for God to foreknow someone.

It says God foreknew Christ, does that just mean God had knowledge of what Christ would do? No. This is an active verb. It is something that God does. So, “For those whom He foreknew, he also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren. And these whom He predestined He also called. And these whom He called He also justified. And these whom He justified He also glorified.” Here is the Golden Chain. God is the one doing every single verb. Foreknew – predestined – called -justified – glorified. God does each one. It is the exact same audience in each one. Those whom He foreknew he does all the other things that result in their glorification. It is a certainty. It is all to God’s glory.

Now, we know for example that one of those things is justification. And we know that the bible says we’re justified by grace, we’re justified by the blood of Christ, and we’re justified by faith. So obviously, the means by which these things then come into play, they come into our experience are included in God’s sovereign capacity and power to do these things. And so having said this, then verse 31 “What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us who is against us?”

Notice those terms that are used there. Us. Follow the pronouns. “He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?”

If the ‘us’ here is all humanity, you are going to be forced into the position of absolute universalism here. You will not be able to affirm the existence of those who are saved and those who will be lost.

Who is the us in Romans chapter 8 verse 33? “Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? ” God’s elect. God is the one who justifies. Justifies who? Justifies the elect. Who is it that is justified in the Golden Chain? Foreknown, predestined, called, justified, glorified. “Who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised to the right hand of God.” Who also does what? “intercedes for us.”

The work of atonement and intercession are both the singular work of the High Priest. Those for whom Christ dies, He also intercedes for them. Continue reading →