Monthly Archives: October 2012

Five Big Myths About Calvinism

Posted on by
Reply

Repost:

I speak for many when I say that I have not always embraced the doctrines of grace or what is commonly called Calvinism. Its actually unfortunate that a man’s name is associated with the doctrines that came out of the Protestant Reformation. Calvin was not the first to articulate these truths, but merely was the chief systematizer of such doctrines. There was actually nothing in Calvin that was not first seen in Luther, and much of Luther was first found in Augustine. Luther was an Augustinian monk, of course. We would also naturally affirm that there was nothing in any of these men that was not first found in Paul and Peter and John in the New Testament.

Even now, I have no desire to be a Calvinist in the Corinthian sense of the word – a follower of John Calvin, per say. Though I believe Calvin was a tremendous expositor of the Scriptures and had many great insights, I am not someone who believes he was in any way infallible. I am with Spurgeon who declared, “There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines of grace than I do, and if any man asks me whether I am ashamed to be called a Calvinist, I answer – I wish to be called nothing but a Christian; but if you ask me, do I hold the doctrinal views which were held by John Calvin, I reply, I do in the main hold them, and rejoice to avow it.” (C. H. Spurgeon, a Defense of Calvinism)

In coming to understand these doctrines that are now so precious to me, I now realize that there were fortresses built in my mind to defend against the idea of God being Sovereign in the matter of salvation. Such was my total depravity! These fortresses were not made of stone and brick but of man made ideas – concepts that I believed Scripture taught with clarity. These fortresses did not come down easily. In fact, I believe it is a work of Divine grace in the heart not only to regenerate His people, but also to open hearts and minds, even of His own people, to the truth of His Sovereignty in election.

There are many false concepts about Calvinism. Here are five that are very common:

1. CALVINISM DESTROYS EVANGELISM

I think some Calvinists do have an aversion for evangelism, and this is something that needs to be addressed whenever this tendency is seen, yet both historically and biblically, nothing could be further from the truth. It is quite easy to prove that the whole missions movement was started by Calvinists who believed Christ had His elect sheep in every tribe, tongue, people and nation. Romans 8 and 9 teaches election clearly, and Romans 10 tells us of the necessity of preaching the Gospel. How shall they (the elect) hear without a preacher? Romans 10 is in no way a contradiction to Romans 8 and 9.

Divine election is the only hope of evangelism. No one we speak to about Christ is beyond hope, for God may well have ordained from all eternity that our conversation or preaching is to be the very means by which He would achieve His ends – the gathering of one of His elect sheep into the fold! What a privilege to be used by God in this way.

Divine election should never undermine evangelism. In fact, the truth about election should cause us to continue to proclaim Christ, even when results may not come immediately. The concept of election should actually fuel our evangelism when mere human emotion wanes. We should remember that God has His elect sheep who will hear His voice and will follow Him when we preach the Gospel of Christ. So then faith comes by hearing and hearing the word of Christ (Rom. 10:17).

Election is not a hindrance to evangelism. It simply explains to us why some believe the Gospel and why some do not. Jesus said to one group hearing Him “you do not believe because you are not My sheep” (John 10:26) and Luke explained the evangelistic results of the early church by declaring, “as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48)

2. CALVINISM APPEALS TO THE PRIDE OF MAN

Sadly, some Calvinists do reek of pride and give off an air of being better than those around them, but such is a total betrayal of biblical Calvinism. If we recognize our total depravity or radical corruption, we understand that there was absolutely nothing in us that caused God to look down upon us to show us such favor. The only thing we can say in response to His electing grace is “Lord, why me?”

Romans 9:11-16 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad- in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call- 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.

“God intentionally designed salvation so that no man can boast of it. He didn’t merely arrange it so that boasting would be discouraged or kept to a minimum – He planned it so that boasting would be absolutely excluded. Election does precisely that.” – Mark Webb Continue reading →

Ephesians 1; Romans 9; John 6

Posted on by
Reply

by James White

Numerous biblical passages can be cited that plainly teach the divine truth that God predestines men unto salvation. John 6:35-45, Romans 9:10-24, and 2 Timothy 1:8-10 all teach this truth. But I shall focus first upon the classicus locus, Ephesians 1:3-11, for my initial exegetical defense of this divine truth. As space permits, I will then briefly address Romans 9 and John 6. I invite the interested reader to follow along. I shall use as my base text the Nestle-Aland 27th edition of the Greek New Testament. English translations are my own.

Ephesians 1

Paul begins this tremendous introduction to his letter1 with a word of blessing addressed to God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1:3). All of salvation comes from the Father, its source, and its end. It is the Father who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ. Immediately we encounter three vital truths: 1) God is the one who has blessed us (we did not bless ourselves); this is seen in recognizing that ho eulogasa refers to the Father specifically; 2) that Paul is not speaking of all mankind here, but specifically of the redeemed, for he uses the personal pronoun hama (us) when speaking of the scope of the blessing of the Father; we will see this is continued throughout the text; and 3) the phrase en Christo (in Christ) or its equivalent in Him, is central to Paul’s thought. All of salvation takes place only “in Christ.”

Verse 4 is central to our subject: “just as He chose us in Him before the creation of the world so that we should be holy and blameless before Him.”2 Again the Father is in view, for He is the one who chose us (hama, accusative, indicating direct object of “to choose”). This choice is exercised only in Christ (there is no salvation outside of the Son). It is vital to recognize the personal aspect of this choice on the part of God the Father. The passage says that we were chosen by God the Father, not that a mere “plan” was chosen, or a “process” put in place. The choice is personal both in its context (in the Son) and in its object (the elect). Next, the time of this choice by the Father is likewise important: before the creation of the world. This is a choice that is timeless. It was made before we were created, and therefore cannot possibly be based upon anything that we ourselves do or “choose.”3 This is sovereignty-free and unlimited.

God does nothing without a purpose. Both the means, and end, are in view. God chooses the elect to the end that they should be “holy and blameless before Him.” God is redeeming for Himself a people, and no power in heaven or earth can stop Him from accomplishing His intention.

Paul continues to expand upon the nature of the Father’s choice: “In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will” (v. 5). This is the first appearance of the word “predestined” in the text. The exact same term (proopizo) is used in verse 11 as well. The meaning of the term is not ambiguous, no matter how hard some might try to avoid its impact. It means “to choose beforehand” or “to predestine.”4 In this context, it is unquestionably personal in its object, for again we find hama as the direct object of the action of predestination. This is truly the key element of this [issue], for grammatically there is no escape from the plain assertion here made: God the Father predestined us. He did not predestine a plan, He did not merely predestine a general conclusion to all things, but He chose us and predestined us. The “us” of Ephesians 1:5 is the “we” of Ephesians 1:11 and the “elect” of Romans 8:33 and those who are “given” by the Father to the Son in John 6:37. Continue reading →

He Loved Us Then: He’ll Love Us Now

Posted on by
Reply

by Dane Ortlund

It is not hard for me to believe God has put away all my old failures that occurred before new birth. What is hard is to believe that God continues to put away all my present failures that occur after new birth.

We tend to view the Father looking down on us with raised eyebrows–‘how are they still such failures after all I have done for them?’ we see him wondering.

A Christian conscience is a re-sensitized conscience. Now that we know God as Father, now that we have become human again, we feel more deeply than ever the ugliness of sin. Failure makes the soul cringe unlike ever before. That’s why Romans 5:1-11 is in the Bible.

Lots to say about 5:1-5 and the present peace believers enjoy because of the past justification that has been secured, but here’s something I’m reflecting on this week from verses 6-11.

No less than three times in these verses Paul says roughly the same thing:

While we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. (5:6)

While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (5:8)

If while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. (5:10)

Three times Paul says that God did something to save us when we were hating him. Weak. Sinners. Enemies. We didn’t have to clean ourselves up first. He didn’t meet us halfway. He pulled us out of the moral mud in which we were drowning. That’s great news. But that’s not Paul’s burden in these verses. He’s after something else.

What’s the ultimate point Paul is driving at in Romans 5:6-11? Not God’s past work, mainly. His point is our present security, given that past work. He raises Christ’s past work to drive home this point: If God did that back then, when you were so screwy and had zero interest in him, then what are you worried about now? The whole point of vv. 6-11 is captured in the “since” of v. 9: “Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him . . .” It is not hard for him to hug you in your mess now that the hard part’s done. This really helps us relax.

He drew near to us when we hated him. Will he remain distant now that we want to please him?

He suffered for us when we were failing, as orphans. Will he cross his arms over our failures now that we are his adopted children?

His heart was “gentle and lowly” toward us when we were lost. Will his heart be anything different toward us now that we are found?

“While we were still.” He loved us in our mess then. He’ll love us in our mess now. Our very agony in sinning is the fruit of our adoption. A cold heart would not be bothered. We are not who we were.

Spurgeon:

Christ loved you before all worlds; long ere the day star flung his ray across the darkness, before the wing of angel had flapped the unnavigated ether, before aught of creation had struggled from the womb of nothingness, God, even our God, had set his heart upon all his children.

Since that time, has he once swerved, has he once turned aside, once changed? No; ye who have tasted of his love and know his grace, will bear me witness, that he has been a certain friend in uncertain circumstances. . . .

You have often left him; has he ever left you? You have had many trials and troubles; has he ever deserted you? Has he ever turned away his heart, and shut up his bowels of compassion? No, children of God, it is your solemn duty to say ‘No,’ and bear witness to his faithfulness.

–Charles Spurgeon, ‘A Faithful Friend,’ in Sermons of C. H. Spurgeon (New York: Sheldon, Blakeman & Co., 1857), 13-14

The ‘Gospel’ According to Rome

Posted on by
Reply

by Paul says of salvation, “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.”

By contrast, Roman Catholicism finds itself in the impossible position of advocating a gospel in which salvation is offered both by grace and also on the basis of works. The Catholic church promotes a synergistic sacramental soteriology in which human good works, along with God’s grace, contribute to the sinner’s justification.

This is in distinct contrast to the evangelical understanding of the gospel, in which salvation is received by grace through faith alone.

Despite the eccumenical efforts of some, the difference between Roman Catholicism and Protestant Evangelicalism is one of substance not merely semantics.

Today’s post is intended as a summary of Roman Catholic teaching with regard to the essence of the gospel (in order to demonstrate how it strays from the biblical message of salvation). Catholic sources are included under each of the following points.

* * *

I. According to Rome, salvation is not by grace through faith alone; it does not come through the sole imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the sinner.

Council of Trent, Canons on Justification, Canon 9: “If anyone says, that by faith alone the impious is justified . . . let him be anathema.”

Council of Trent, Canon 11: “If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, excluding grace and charity which is poured into their hearts by the Holy Spirit and inheres in them, or also that the grace which justifies us is only the favor of God, let him be anathema.”

* * *

II. According to Rome, good works are necessary for salvation. They are not merely the fruits of justification (as evangelicals assert), they are actually the root of it. They are meritorious and will be rewarded with eternal life.

Council of Trent, Canon 24: “If anyone says that the justice [or justification] received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia, in an article entitled Sanctifying Grace, states that the sinner “is formally justified and made holy by his own personal justice and holiness” such that “over and above faith other acts are necessary for justification” including acts of charity, penance with contrition, and almsgiving.

Catholic Answers: ”Even though only God’s grace enables us to love others, these acts of love please him, and he promises to reward them with eternal life (Rom. 2:6–7, Gal. 6:6–10). Thus good works are meritorious. When we first come to God in faith, we have nothing in our hands to offer him. Then he gives us grace to obey his commandments in love, and he rewards us with salvation when we offer these acts of love back to him (Rom. 2:6–11, Gal. 6:6–10, Matt. 25:34–40). . . . We do not ‘earn’ our salvation through good works (Eph. 2:8–9, Rom. 9:16), but our faith in Christ puts us in a special grace-filled relationship with God so that our obedience and love, combined with our faith, will be rewarded with eternal life (Rom. 2:7, Gal. 6:8–9).”

Notice the confusion Catholic theology portrays in trying to maintain a gospel of both grace and works. On the one hand, Catholics assert that believers do not earn their salvation through good works. On the other hand, they contend that God rewards good works with eternal life. Those two concepts are contradictory. Is eternal life a free gift (received by grace) or is it a reward (received on the basis of good works)? Continue reading →

The Meaning in Greek

Posted on by
Reply

“If someone claims that the Greek says something that none of the translations say, dismiss their idea and walk away. Perhaps if they are commentary writers or scholars, their argument might have some validity; but I am always suspect of someone who bases their interpretation on any basis that you are not able to check… Beware of people who claim authoritative knowledge based on something you can’t check. If they can cite a well-known translation or commentary writer, or if they make a sensible contextual argument, that is one thing. But to dismiss interpretations to the contrary that are held by all translations, be suspicious.” – Bill Mounce

The Rich Young Ruler and Me

Posted on by
Reply

Ask R.C. Sproul, Jr: Jesus told the rich young fool that he must sell all that he had, give it to the poor, and follow him. Is this true for all who would follow Jesus?

Yes. This, of course, is not what we typically hear about this text. We are told, for instance, that Jesus was tapping into the first use of the law rather than the third here, that rather than telling the young man what he must do to inherit eternal life He was demonstrating that despite the man’s claims, he had not in fact kept the ten commandments. Jesus here is saying, “Well, let’s look at commandment one. Do you have any gods before me? Money perhaps?” This is all true and good exegesis of the text.

Trouble is that we then go on to comfort ourselves by thinking, “Since I am not like this rich young fool, since I would be willing to sell all that I have and give it to the poor if Jesus asked, I pass this test.” We think that he failed an actual test because he was no good, while we pass a hypothetical test because we are good. It is, however, a very different thing to give up all your actual wealth than to merely hypothetically give it all up.

Now it may be that money is not actually an idol in your life. It may be that were Jesus to give you this command you would get right to work selling off assets. All of us, however, have idols, things we hold back from giving to the Lord. I discovered an idol in my own life several years ago when God in His providence didn’t ask me to give it away, but simply took it from me. I had at that time something of a reputation as a rather bold and prophetic fellow, someone who bravely didn’t much give a thought to his reputation. That reputation quickly morphed into a reputation as a bully and a cheat. And I learned rather quickly that I did indeed give a thought to my reputation, that I craved, longed for a reputation as one who didn’t care about his reputation. My deceitful heart had deceived me again.

When we sign on with Jesus we give up our wealth. We give up our reputations. We give up every gift that He had already given us, and every gift He will give us from that moment forward. When we become a part of the bride of Christ our pre-nuptial agreement reads, “All that I am and all that I have is yours O Lord, from this day forth and evermore.” When, therefore, He asks for anything, whether our wealth, our reputation, even our spouse or our child, we confess, “Yes, Lord.” The rich fool went away from Jesus sad for he had great wealth. We, however, walk toward Jesus, joyful, for we already had nothing. My Denise, and my Shannon, these are the golden crowns that I joyfully cast before His glassy sea. For they were always His, and because I am His always.

Do you have to give up your wealth? Of course. Even if the Master allows you to continue to steward it for Him. Do you have to give up your reputation? Of course, even if He allows you live in peace and quietness with all men. Will you have to give up your loved ones? Of course, even if they are with you until your home going. You have to give up everything, just like He did. And, like Him all you will receive in return, is everything.

Images of Christ

Posted on by
2

Arguments for and against Images of the Incarnate Christ

From lecture outlines that were expanded into The Doctrine of the Christian Life, Dr. John Frame identifies five arguments against picturing Jesus:

1. Since God may not be pictured, and Jesus is God, Jesus may not be pictured either.
2. Iconoclasts in the Eastern Church argued that those who venerated images of Christ were circumscribing Jesus’ divine nature. To worship the picture would involve the assumption that his divine nature is limited, circumscribed by the human nature and is therefore picturable. Or it would imply that the human nature alone is pictured and thus is separable from the divine nature.
3. Some have argued that since we don’t know what Jesus looked like, any picture will be a lie.
4. Some take the second commandment to exclude any representations of deity.
5. The danger of idolatry, at least, is always present when pictures of Jesus are used for any purpose.

Frame’s response to argument 1:

1. As we have seen, Scripture does not teach purely and simply that God cannot be pictured.

2. But even if God in himself were in every sense unpicturable, it is clear that Christ, God incarnate, was picturable. He could be seen, felt, touched, as well as heard. His face could be held in memory (and there is surely no suggestion in Scripture that such mental images were sinful! On the contrary, recall the emphasis upon the eyewitness character of the apostolic testimony.) To deny this is docetism, pure and simple. In this respect, clearly, the Old and New Covenants are sharply different. At the establishment of the Old Covenant, there was emphatically no form (Deuteronomy 4:15). At the establishment of the New, there emphatically was (I John 1:1ff., etc.).

Response to argument 2:

The relation between the two natures of Christ is, of course, a difficult matter at any point in theology. I would argue, however, that Jesus himself is, in both natures, in his person, image of God. In him, deity was in one sense “circumscribed,” for all its fullness dwelt in him; though in another sense, God was active beyond the body of Jesus. To picture Jesus is to picture a divine person, not one “nature” or other. To venerate such a picture, I believe, would be wrong for reasons already adduced. I do not, however, think that an adequate argument has been given against pedagogical use of such pictures.

Response to argument 3:

As we’ve said earlier, a picture does not become a “lie” simply by being non-exhaustive. And, in fact, we do know something about Jesus’ looks: He was male, Semitic, in middle life, was known to wear a robe, etc. . . .

Response to argument 4:

As we have seen, the second commandment doesn’t forbid all images of God, only those intended for use in worship, as we earlier discussed it.

Reply to argument 5:
True.

HT: JT

On the loss of a child…

Posted on by
Reply

I found this to be profoundly moving – by R C Sproul, Jr.

Life is liturgy. Habits are holy, I have noticed already, for the passing of my precious daughter Shannon has left me without my tempo. Because of her frailty four times each day Shannon had to be fed. Four times a day she had to be given her water and her medications. Those times come each day and I not only ache for her absence, but I grow dizzy, not knowing where to turn. Serving her was our rhythm, the ticking of our grandfather clock.

While all liturgies are holy, some are more holy than others. While all move us, only one takes us to our end, our destination. When we come to the Lord’s Table we are not merely stopping to remember and contemplate the suffering of Jesus for us. We are not just looking backward, but we are moving forward. We come to taste eternity, for at the table we draw near to Him; we feast with Him. It is not just a miracle in our midst, but puts us together right in the midst of The Miracle, God in the Flesh.

My Shannon, though her faith was obvious to all who knew her, was never able to verbally profess that faith. Because she could not speak she could not speak of her love and need for Jesus. Because she could not profess her faith she was not allowed to eat the bread and drink the wine. Though our Lord is delighted to work through means, to draw uncommonly near through common bread and common wine, He is not so constrained. He did not look to Shannon from a distance, and wish there was something He could do. He is mighty to overcome.

Which is why I added to The liturgy my Liturgy. Whenever and wherever we celebrated the Table of our Lord I kept Shannon close to me. Though she could not take the bread of life, I spoke to her the words of life. I would every time whisper two precious truths into her ear, “Shannon, Jesus is here sweetheart. And Jesus loves you.”

Four days ago as I write Shannon walked through the vale, and through the veil. Yesterday we laid her body to rest. Today, however, we will meet again. Today the Holy Spirit will lift me and my children up into the heavenly places, to the true and eternal Mount Zion, to the souls of just men, and moms and little girls made perfect. Today the church militant and the church triumphant will be one, and will feast together. Today He will draw us to Himself, and we will be one.

Today, for the first time, I will hear Shannon’s voice. At that table, at that feast, in the midst of that liturgy. I, profoundly disabled though I am, will be there. Jesus will feed me. And Shannon will whisper in my ear, “Jesus is here Daddy, and Jesus loves you.” Because He does. World without end. Amen.

Comfort for Christians by Arthur W. Pink

Posted on by
Reply

GOD’S INHERITANCE

“For the Lord’s portion is His people; Jacob is the lot of His inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 32:9)

This verse brings before us a most blessed and wonderful line of truth, so wonderful that no human mind could possibly have invented it. It speaks of the mighty God having an “inheritance,” and it tells us that this inheritance is in His own people! God refused to take this world for His inheritance—it will yet be burnt up. Nor did heaven, populated with angels, satisfy His heart. In eternity past Jehovah said, by way of anticipation, “My delights were with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:31).

This is by no means the only scripture which teaches that God’s inheritance is in His saints. In Psalm 135:4 we read, “For the Lord has chosen Jacob unto Himself, and Israel for His peculiar treasure.” In Mal. 3:17 the Lord speaks of His people as His “special treasure” (see margin)—so “special” that the highest manifestations of His love are made to them, the richest gifts of His hand are bestowed on them, the mansions on High are prepared and reserved for them!

The same wondrous truth is taught in the New Testament. In Ephesians 1 we behold the apostle Paul praying that God would give unto His people the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him: the eyes of their understanding being enlightened that they might know “the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance” (verse 18). This is a truly amazing expression; not only do the saints obtain an inheritance in God, but He also secures an inheritance in them! How overwhelming the thought that the great God should deem Himself the richer because of our faith, our love and worship! Surely this is one of the most marvelous truths revealed in Holy Writ—that God should pick up poor sinners and make them His “inheritance!” Yet so it is!

But what need has God of us? How can we possibly enrich Him? Does He not have everything-wisdom, power, grace and glory? All true, yet there is something that He needs, yes, needs, namely, vessels. Just as the sun needs the earth to shine upon, so God needs vessels to fill, vessels through which His glory may be reflected, vessels on which the riches of His grace may be lavished.

Mark that God’s people are not only called His “portion,” His “special treasure, but also His “inheritance.” This suggests three things. First, an “inheritance is obtained through death: so God’s inheritance is secured to Him through the death of His beloved Son. Second, an “inheritance” denotes perpetuity—”to a man and his heirs forever” are the terms often used. Third, an “inheritance” is for possession, it is something which is entered into, lived upon, enjoyed. Let us now consider five things about God’s inheritance:

1. God purposed to have such an inheritance. “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom he has chosen for his own inheritance” (Psalm 33:12). The “nation” here is identical with the holy nation,” the “chosen generation, royal priesthood, peculiar people” of 1 Peter 2:9. This favored people was chosen by God to be His inheritance: it was not an afterthought with Him, but decreed by Him in eternity past. Before the foundation of the world God fixed His heart upon having them for Himself.

2. God has purchased His people for an inheritance. In Ephesians 1:14 we are told that the Holy Spirit is the “pledge of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory.” So again in Acts 20:28 we read of “the Church of God which He has purchased with His own blood.” God has not only redeemed His people from bondage and death—but for Himself.

3. God comes and dwells in the midst of His inheritance. “For the Lord will not cast off his people, neither will he forsake his inheritance” (Psalm 94:14) This is a clear proof that these scriptures are not referring to the nation of Israel after the flesh. Just as Jehovah tabernacled in the midst of the redeemed Hebrews, so He now indwells His church, both collectively and individually. “Don’t you know that you (plural) are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” (I Cor. 3:16). “Don’t you know that your body (singular) is the temple of the Holy Spirit?” (I Cor. 6:19).

4. God beautifies His inheritance. Just as a man who has inherited a house or an estate takes possession of it and then makes improvements, so God is now fitting His people for Himself. He who has begun a good work within His own is now performing it until the day of Jesus Christ (Phil. 1:6). He is now conforming us to the image of His Son. Each Christian can say with the Psalmist, “the Lord will perfect that which concerns me” (Psalm 138:8). Nor will God be satisfied until we have been glorified. The Lord Jesus Christ “shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body!” (Phil. 3:21) “When he shall appear—we shall be like Him!” (I John 3:2)

5. And what of the future? God will yet possess, live upon, and enjoy His inheritance. In the unending ages yet to be, God will make known the “riches of his glory” on the vessels of His mercy (Romans 9:23). The glory which God shall ever live upon—as upon an inheritance—shall rise out of His people. What a marvelous statement is that which is found at the close of Ephesians 2, where the saints are likened unto a building “fitly framed together (which) grows unto a holy temple in the Lord,” of whom it is said, “in whom you also are built together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”

Wonderful and glorious is the picture presented before us in Revelation 21:1-4: “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared. And the sea was also gone. And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven like a beautiful bride prepared for her husband. I heard a loud shout from the throne, saying, “Look, the home of God is now among his people! He will live with them, and they will be his people. God himself will be with them. He will remove all of their sorrows, and there will be no more death or sorrow or crying or pain. For the old world and its evils are gone forever.”

What a marvelous statement is that in Zephaniah 3:17: “The Lord your God is with you, He is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, He will quiet you with his love, He will rejoice over you with singing.” The great God will yet say, “I am satisfied: here will I rest. This is My inheritance that I will live upon forever, even the glory which I have bestowed on redeemed sinners.” Surely we have to say with the Psalmist, ” Such knowledge is too wonderful for me—too great for me to know!” (139:6). May Divine grace enable us to walk worthy of our high calling.

I Asked The Lord by John Newton

Posted on by
Reply

I Asked The Lord

I asked the Lord that I might grow
In faith and love and every grace
Might more of His salvation know
And seek more earnestly His face

Twas He who taught me thus to pray
And He I trust has answered prayer
But it has been in such a way
As almost drove me to despair

I hoped that in some favored hour
At once He’d answer my request
And by His love’s constraining power
Subdue my sins and give me rest

Instead of this He made me feel
The hidden evils of my heart
And let the angry powers of Hell
Assault my soul in every part

Yea more with His own hand He seemed
Intent to aggravate my woe
Crossed all the fair designs I schemed, laid me low

Lord why is this, I trembling cried
Wilt Thou pursue thy worm to death?
“Tis in this way” The Lord replied
“I answer prayer for grace and faith”

“These inward trials I employ
From self and pride to set thee free
And break thy schemes of earthly joy
That thou mayest seek thy all in me,
That thou mayest seek thy all in me.”

HT: TC