A Discussion of Cessationism

Posted on by
Reply

Pastor Joel Ellis discusses the question: Why Do Confessionally Reformed Christians Believe Miraculous Gifts and New Revelation Are No Longer Given to Christians?

4:09 – Distinguishing Acts of God: Miracles and Extraordinary Providence

7:06 – Distinguishing Views: Cessationist, Continuationist, Charismatic

15:29 – Is This a Salvation Issue?

20:57 – What Cessationism Does NOT and DOES Affirm

25:57 – #1: The Purpose of the Gifts (Heb. 2:1-4)

32:43 – #2: The Transmission of the Gifts (Acts 8:14-18; and others)

46:33 – #3: The Cessation of the Gifts (1Cor. 13:8-13)

55:35 – #4: The History of the Gifts 58:30 – Closing Comments

Evangelism and the Calvinist

Posted on by
Reply

An article by Ernest Reisinger entitled “What Should We Think of Evangelism and Calvinism” – original source here: https://founders.org/1995/03/24/what-should-we-think-of-evangelism-and-calvinism/

One of the greatest evangelists ever to set foot on American soil was George Whitefield. Read carefully the following quote and note his pleading with sinners.

I offer you salvation this day; the door of mercy is not yet shut, there does yet remain a sacrifice for sin, for all that will accept of the Lord Jesus Christ. He will embrace you in the arms of his love. O turn to him, turn in a sense of your own unworthiness; tell him how polluted you are, how vile, and be not faithless, but believing. Why fear ye that the Lord Jesus Christ will not accept of you? Your sins will be no hindrance, your unworthiness no hindrance; if your own corrupt hearts do not keep you back nothing will hinder Christ from receiving of you. He loves to see poor sinners coming to him, he is pleased to see them lie at his feet pleading his promises; and if you thus come to Christ, he will not send you away without his Spirit; no, but will receive and bless you. O do not put a slight on infinite love–he only wants you to believe on him, that you might be saved. This, this is all the dear Saviour desires, to make you happy, that you may leave your sins, to sit down eternally with him at the marriage supper of the Lamb. Let me beseech you to come to Jesus Christ; I invite you all to come to him, and receive him as your Lord and Saviour; he is ready to receive you. I invite you to come to him, that you may find rest for your souls. He will rejoice and be glad. He calls you by his ministers; O come unto him–he is labouring to bring you back from sin and from Satan, unto himself: open the door of your hearts, and the King of glory shall enter in. My heart is full, it is quite full, and I must speak, or I shall burst. What, do you think your souls of no value? Do you esteem them as not worth saving? Are your pleasures worth more than your souls? Had you rather regard the diversions of this life, than the salvation of your souls? If so, you will never be partakers with him in glory; but if you come unto him, he will supply you with his grace here, and bring you to glory hereafter; and there you may sing praises and hallelujahs to the Lamb for ever. And may this be the happy end of all who hear me!

George Whitefield was a staunch Calvinist. There is one thing certain–Whitefield’s Calvinism did not in any way dampen his holy zeal for the souls of men.

What is Calvinism?

The great Princeton theologian, Dr. B. B. Warfield, describes Calvinism as follows:

Calvinism is evangelism in its pure and only stable expression, and when we say evangelism we say sin and salvation. It means utter dependence on God for salvation. It implies therefore, need of salvation and a profound sense of this need, along with an equally profound sense of helplessness in the presence of this need, and utter dependence on God for its satisfaction. Its type is found in the publican who smote his breast and cried, “God be merciful to me a sinner!” No question there of saving himself, or helping God to save him, or of opening the way to God to save him. No question of anything but “I am a sinner, and all my hope is in God, my Saviour!” This is Calvinism, not just something like Calvinism, or an approach to Calvinism, but Calvinism in its vital manifestation. Wherever this attitude of heart is found and is given expression in direct and unambiguous terms, there is Calvinism. Where this attitude of mind and heart is fallen away from it however small a measure, there Calvinism has become impossible.

The Calvinist, in a word, is the man who sees God. He has caught sight of the ineffable Vision, and he will not let it fade for a moment from his eyes–God in nature, God in history, God in grace. Everywhere he sees God in His mighty stepping, everywhere he feels the working of His mighty arm, the throbbing of His mighty heart…Calvinism is just Christianity. The super-naturalism for which Calvinism stands is the very breath of the nostrils of Christianity; without it Christianity cannot exist…Calvinism thus emerges to our sight as nothing more or less than the hope of the world.

John A. Broadus, one of the great and respected Southern Baptist fathers, described the Calvinism of his fellow-founder of Southern Seminary, Dr. James P. Boyce, as nothing less than the technical name for “that exalted system of Pauline truth.”

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, that great soul-winner, once said,

We only use the term “Calvinism” for shortness. That doctrine which is called “Calvinism” did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin’s having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact.

Spurgeon went on to say,

The old truths that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, is the truth that I preach today, or else I would be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox’s gospel is my gospel. And that gospel which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.

Diverse Attitudes Toward Calvinism

The subject of this article is one which arouses diverse feelings in the minds of men. History has witnessed no small amount of controversy over “Calvinism.” The subject remains vitally important at the present time. This is particularly true in light of modern deviations from historical and biblical orthodoxy.

Unfortunately many harmful yet fashionable opinions have invaded almost every area of religious life. On nearly every side we hear the voice of inquiry with Pilate’s old question, “What is truth?” There are a thousand different religious opinions regarding the answer to this query. Sometimes this question is asked by the skeptic, who doubts even the existence of an objective answer. Often, however, it is asked by serious, troubled souls desirous of finding their way through the rocky religious shoals of life’s storm-tossed sea of religious confusion. It is the latter I hope will find help in this study.

As diversified as the modern professing religious world may be with regard to its numerous sects and communions, split up as it is with its irreconcilable creeds and contentions, it will nevertheless be found, upon close and critical examination, that among those who can (reasonably) be called Christian, there are basically only two sections or parties. Practices may vary, diverse views on many subjects may be held, different attitudes may be taken up in relationship to many questions, and the outlooks may be fixed at widely differing angles, but the fundamental positions occupied will be found to center on one or the other of two distinct forms of belief. Perhaps it is more correct to say that all such perspectives derive from one of two systems of theology. The root principles of all are to be found embedded either in Calvinism or in Arminianism. Such, at least, are the modern terms used to distinguish and describe these widely differing systems of theological thought and teaching. These terms, however, have a tendency to confuse and mislead.

Christianity should bring us to the feet of the apostles, and, indeed to the feet of our Lord Himself. Any understanding of revealed truth which fails to do so is not worthy of the name “Christian.” The views which are stated and defended in the following pages, when properly embraced, have precisely this effect.

We call it Calvinism. It might with equal justice be called Augustinianism. We might, with the same cogency of reasoning, go even further back into the pages of ecclesiastical history and designate it Paulinism. Whichever name we use, however, it should be regarded only as a mere convenience now rendered necessary because of its general adoption. Personally, we regard the name as an entire mistake seeing that it has been the means of fostering many of the ignorant cavilings which have been heard not only in these days but also in days which are past.

There is a genuine resurgence today of this grand and glorious Pauline system of biblical truth–particularly among Southern Baptists. For those of us who are numbered among this group, it is nothing less than coming home to our doctrinal roots. The founding fathers of the SBC were immersed in that stream of biblical truth where no man can touch bottom, and which caused the great Apostle to cry “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has become His counselor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be repaid to him? For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.”

Do Not Go Further Than The Scriptures

The following warning should guide anyone who embarks on a study of Calvinism:

The importance of the subject discussed should lead us to proceed only with profoundest reverence and caution. While it is true that mysteries are to be handled with care, and while unwarranted and presumptuous speculations concerning divine things are to be avoided, yet if we would declare the Gospel in its purity and fullness we must be careful not to withhold from believers what is declared in the Scriptures concerning the truth of Calvinism. That some of these truths will be perverted and abused by the ungodly is to be expected. No matter how plainly it is taught in Scripture, the unenlightened mind considers it as absurd, for instance, that one God should exist in three persons, or that God should foreknow the entire course of world events, as that his plan should include the destiny of every person. And while we can know only as much about Calvinism as God has seen fit to reveal, it is important that we shall know that much; otherwise, it would not have been revealed. Where Scripture leads we may safely follow (L. Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, pp. 54-55).

There are many misrepresentations by those who do not know what biblical Calvinism really is. Most of this group call real Calvinism “hyper-Calvinism.” Some think that if you believe in the antinomian view of “eternal security” you are a Calvinist and everyone else is either an Arminian or a hyper-Calvinist.

There is no question that many Calvinists are not as evangelistic as they should be, but this is not because of Calvinism but because of a cold and indifferent heart. Many Arminians are not evangelistic but it is not because of their Arminianism. Again, it is because of a cold and indifferent heart.

It is also true that Calvinism will kill some kinds of evangelism but it will never kill real biblical evangelism. Some people do not like rock-and-roll music but that does not mean that they do not like music. So it is with shallow, unbiblical evangelism. It is repulsive to Calvinists, but this does not mean that they do not love and embrace true, God-centered, biblical evangelism.

Calvinism may kill man-centered evangelism, but true, biblical Calvinism gives evangelism its only proper doctrinal foundation. Furthermore, it guarantees evangelism’s success. God saves sinners–that is Calvinism. He does not merely make salvation possible, but actually saves by plan and power.

Doctrine Is Vital to Evangelism and Election

The doctrine of unconditional election is one of the foundational doctrines of Calvinism. Before considering some of the biblical evidence for election, let us distinguish the difference between means and cause.

God elected the means of salvation as well as the recipients of salvation. His Word reveals that He chose to save His own people through preaching and witnessing: “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”

But we must always remember that preaching and prayer are the means and not the cause of anyone’s salvation. The cause is God’s unconditional, electing love. For God so loved the world that the “whosoevers” will believe and will not perish.

Who are the “whosoevers”?

Answer: “All that the Father giveth . . . shall come . . .” (John 6:37).

“My sheep hear My voice and I know them and they follow Me” (John 10:27).

Why is it that some do not believe?

Answer: “But you believe not because you are not My sheep . . .” (John 10:26).

The Father gave His Son some sheep and He has sent us out to preach and witness because that is the means He employs to call them. “As thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as Thou hast given Him” (John 17:2).

They will come because Christ died for them and Christ has prayed for them. “I pray for them; I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given me: for they are thine” (John 17:9). Jesus prayed for the future sheep who would come. “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word” (John 17:20). “Father, I will that they also, Whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am; that they may behold My glory, which Thou hast given Me: for thou lovest Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).

Why is God’s electing love so important to the preacher and missionary? It is the doctrine that assures the success of our missionary efforts. The greatest preacher-evangelists in the history of the church believed in the biblical doctrine of election. It is an important part of the doctrinal foundation of Calvinism .

It would be wise for our present day Southern Baptists to heed the exhortation found in Isaiah 51:1–“Listen to Me, you who follow after righteousness, You who seek the Lord: Look to the rock from which you were hewn, And to the hole of the pit from which you were dug.”

The Israelites were commanded to call to remembrance their past. Remembrance of God’s mercy in the past will be profitable in many ways. A recollection of the past will be sure to excite our thankfulness. God’s people are always happy when they are grateful. But at this particular time in our history it will be profitable to examine our doctrinal foundation, “the rock from whence we were hewn.” An honest looking back will teach us the importance of sound doctrine, especially, as the foundation for gospel preaching. Southern Baptists, (all Baptists for that matter) have always been marked by their zeal for evangelism and missions. That is why we have over 3,000 foreign missionaries in 91 different countries and about 3,200 home missionaries and nearly 40,000 churches with over 15,000,000 members.

Looking back to the great warriors in the work of evangelism and missions we should ask, “What did these men believe about God, man, sin and salvation?” By looking back it is easy to find that they were mostly Calvinists and their evangelistic efforts were grounded in the doctrinal foundation of Calvinism. A biblical, doctrinal foundation is more important than most Baptists believe. Sound doctrine undergirds all true worship and witness, and that is what Christianity is all about. Doctrine not only expresses the true conversion experience but it determines the message and methods of evangelism.

The doctrinal foundation of biblical evangelism is as important to the work of evangelism as the back bone is to the human body. Doctrine gives unity and stability.

It is the doctrinal foundation that produces the spiritual strength that enables evangelism to endure the storms of opposition, hardship and persecution which so often accompany it. Therefore, the church that neglects the true doctrinal foundation of biblical evangelism will soon weaken its efforts.

The lack of a doctrinal foundation will work against unity and will invite error and instability in all evangelistic efforts. It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of a sound biblical foundation for true God-centered evangelism.

Doctrine shapes our destiny, and we are presently reaping the fruits of unbiblical evangelism. The great apostle, instructing a young minister to do the work of an evangelist, tells him that doctrine is the first purpose of Scripture. “All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God and is profitable for DOCTRINE . . . .” (2 Tim. 3:16).

When I speak of doctrine I am not speaking of any doctrine but that which the founders of our first seminary believed and taught. The doctrines that Boyce believed and taught were the foundation of his devotion and the devotion that he inspired in others. Now, many recognize the importance of doctrine and keep using the term. Jehovah’s Witnesses have doctrine, as do Mormons and Christian Scientists. All Baptists have some doctrine. But what doctrine?

What doctrines am I talking about? I mean those doctrines that were defined, defended, expressed and set forth by the Synod of Dort in 1618; the doctrines that were set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Heidelberg Catechism; those doctrines expressed in the Old Baptist Confession of 1689, later adopted by the Philadelphia Association, out of which Southern Baptists came.

These precious doctrines that set forth a God who actually saves, and does not just makes salvation possible for sinners to somehow save themselves by a decision, or by cooperation in their salvation. Rather, these doctrines delcare a God who actually saves by plan, by purpose and by power.

I mean those doctrines that reveal the three great acts of the triune God in recovering poor lost sinners, that is:

  1. The loving election by the Father.
  2. The powerful redemption accomplished by the Son.
  3. The effectual calling by the Spirit.

Each Person of the Trinity works for the salvation of the same people, thus securing the salvation of those people infallibly.

These doctrines make salvation depend on the work of God, not on the ability or will of man. These doctrines give all the glory to God for the saving of sinners–not dividing that glory between God and sinners. These doctrines reveal that history is nothing less than the working out of God’s preordained plan. These doctrines set forth a God who is sovereign in creation and sovereign in redemption; the Trinity working together for the salvation of the sheep. God the Father planned it. God the Son achieved it. God the Spirit communicates and efficaciously applies it. There is no war in the Trinity. They all work together for the same people: “My sheep hear My voice….”

We do not support the erroneous idea that God has done all He can, and is now standing idly by waiting to see what sovereign sinners are going to do with an impotent, pathetic Jesus. No! God saves sinners–salvation is of the Lord. We must not weaken this great truth by disrupting the unity of the Trinity or by dividing the achievement of salvation between God and man.

Calvinists believe and teach that the cross was not a place just to make salvation possible but rather, to actually secure the salvation of His people (Isa. 53:11). These doctrines show the cross as revealing God’s power to save, not His impotence. God was not frustrated at the cross. He was the Master of Ceremonies. As Peter declared, “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:23).

A Calvinist does not believe that God’s decision to save man by a decree leaves man passive or inert. No! No! The very opposite takes place! The covenant of grace does not kill man, it does not regard him as a tin can or a piece of wood or a robot; it takes possession of the man, it lays hold of his whole being with all his faculties, his power of soul and body–for time and eternity.

God’s sovereign grace does not annihilate man’s powers, rather it overcomes his powerlessness. It does not destroy his will but frees it from sin. It does not stifle, or obliterate his conscience but sets it free from darkness. It regenerates and recreates man in his entirety and in renewing him by grace, causes him to love and consecrate himself to God most freely.

I am aware that as I write these words a deep-seated prejudice exists in many parts of the church against the systematic exposition of the doctrines of the Bible. It probably falls within the experience of every pastor to see the gathering frown, the averted shoulder, and the drooping head, as soon as certain doctrines are announced as the theme for discussion. It does not excite or surprise us that the world of the ungodly should manifest this displeasure; for the same “carnal mind” which is enmity against God, is enmity likewise against the truth of God. However, that professing Christians should engage in this unholy crusade against doctrinal religion, and that even ministers of the gospel should sigh over the earnest proclamation of its truths, and accuse the faithful witness of “daubing with untempered mortar,” is certainly a most afflictive and atrocious scandal.

Look Back

I have a long-cherished conviction that, next to the Bible, from which all that relates to God and the soul must be drawn, there are no books I would rather recommend for an experimental and devotional use than those written by our Calvinistic fathers, such as, John Bunyan, Andrew Fuller, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Basil Manly, James P. Boyce and John L. Dagg.

In looking back to the rock from which we are hewn we cannot overlook some of our great Southern Baptist Convention fathers and leaders who were committed, articulate Calvinists:

Basil Manly, Sr.–One historian said Manly played the part of concertmaster in orchestrating the events that resulted in the call for a conservative convention of Baptists. Manly produced a strongly worded six-point resolution which led to the separation of Northern Baptists and Southern Baptists. This resolution was “passed standing and unanimously.” Basil Manly was a Calvinist of the first order.

James P. Boyce–He was the principal founder of our first seminary (Southern Seminary). Long after Boyce’s death, one of his former students, Dr. David Ramsey, gave a Founders Day address on January 11, 1924. His message was entitled, “James Petigru Boyce: God’s Gentleman.” A few quotes from Dr. Ramsey’s address will tell the story that Boyce was a committed Calvinist who loved the souls of men.

Dr. Ramsey said:

My contention is that no other theology than that of an overwhelming and soul consuming love for men will account for James P. Boyce and his career. This passionate love was the motif that directed his thinking in those early conferences and in the preparation of those papers which led to the establishment of the seminary.

This purpose to help his fellowmen ran through all his plans, through his conversation, his writings and his preaching and teaching as the scarlet thread that runs through every foot of cable of the English Navy.

This zeal for souls called out the finest of his being as the morning sun causes the dew laden flowers and plants to bend toward the god of day.”

Dr. Boyce not only loved men, he loved God. Dr. Ramsey said, concerning this point, “Let the thought embrace both the subjective and objective love; man’s love for God and God’s love for man.”

Boyce’s close friend and fellow founder of the seminary, John A. Broadus, expressed his own feelings about the theology of Boyce: “It was a great privilege to be directed and upborne by such a teacher in studying that exalted system of Pauline truth which is technically called Calvinism, which compels an earnest student to profound thinking, and when pursued with a combination of systematic thought and fervent experience, makes him at home among the most inspiring and ennobling views of God and the universe He has made.”

Dr. Boyce’s legacy to us and to our posterity is the biblical theology expressed in the Abstract of Systematic Theology, which is nothing other than his classroom teaching. It is pure Calvinism.

William A. Mueller, author of A History of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said, “As a theologian Dr. Boyce is not afraid to be found `in the old paths’. He is conservative, and eminently Scriptural. He treats with great fairness those whose views upon various points discussed he declines to accept, yet in his own teaching is decidedly Calvinistic, after the model of `the old divines’. Difficulties as connected with such doctrines as the federal headship of Adam, election and the atonement he aims to meet, not so as to silence the controversialist, but so as to help the honest inquirer.”

Rev. E. E. Folk, in the Baptist Reflector commented on Boyce’s abilities and fruits as a teacher of theology: “You had to know your systematic theology, or you could not recite it to Dr. Boyce. And though the young men were generally rank Arminians when they came to the seminary, few went through this course under him without being converted to his strong Calvinistic views.” Boyce was a strong Calvinist.

W. B. Johnson–First President of the SBC was a Calvinist.

R. B. C. Howell–Second President of the SBC was a Calvinist.

Richard Fuller–Third President of the SBC was a Calvinist.

Patrick Hues Mell, who was known as “The Prince of Parliamentarians” was Professor of Greek and Latin at Mercer University, Georgia. One of the outstanding things about P. H. Mell is that he was president of the SBC 17 times–twice as many times as any other man. Mell was a polemic defender of Calvinism. Mrs. D. B. Fitzgerald, a member of the Antioch Church and a resident in Mell’s home for a number of years, recalls Mell’s initial efforts at the church:

“When first called to take charge of the church Dr. Mell found it in a sad state of confusion. He said a number of members were drifting off into Arminianism. He loved the truth too well to blow hot and cold with the same breath. It was a Baptist church and it must have doctrines peculiar to that denomination preached to it. And with that boldness, clearness, and vigor of speech that marked him, he preached to them the doctrines of predestination, election, free-grace, etc. He said it was always his business to preach the truth as he found it in God’s Word, and leave the matter there, feeling that God would take care of the results” (A Southern Baptist Looks at the Doctrine of Predestination, pp. 58,59).

Names of other Southern Baptist leaders who were committed Calvinists and strong on evangelism could be multiplied. One more, however, will have to suffice.

John A. Broadus, a great preacher and one of the founders of our mother seminary said, “The people who sneer at what is called Calvinism, might as well sneer at Mont Blanc. We are not bound in the least to defend all of Calvin’s opinions or actions, but I do not see how any one who really understands the Greek of the Apostle Paul or the Latin of Calvin or Turretin can fail to see that these latter did but interpret and formulate substantially what the former teaches.”

No preacher or evangelist since the day of the Apostle Paul ever laid so much stress on the absolute sovereignty of God as did that great soul-winner, Jonathan Edwards. And it may come as a surprise to the promoters of man-centered evangelism of our day to discover that the preaching of God’s sovereignty was very fruitful. Under the ministry of Edwards, revival swept through his church. He said, “I think that I have found that no discourses have been more remarkably blessed than those in which the doctrines of God’s absolute sovereignty with regard to the salvation of sinners were stressed.”

The man who did more for biblical evangelism internationally than anyone in our generation was the late Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Dr. Lloyd-Jones saw himself primarily as an evangelist. Those who knew him best also saw him in the same way. Mrs. Lloyd-Jones was once present with a group of men who, in her husband’s absence were paying compliments to his abilities. As she listened to them she evidently thought that they were missing the main thing and surprised them by quietly remarking, “No one will ever understand my husband until they realize that he is first of all a man of prayer and then, an evangelist.”

As a convinced Calvinist, Dr. Lloyd-Jones opposed some of the most popular features of modern evangelism. This led those who were uncomfortable under his strictures to allege that he was “a teacher, not an evangelist.” A critic once challenged his commitment to evangelism with the question, “When did you last have a campaign at Westminster Chapel?” The answer he received was not intended to be humorous, “I have one every Sunday.” When Martyn Lloyd-Jones was instructing students for the ministry he said, “I contest very strongly and urge that there should always be one evangelistic service in connection with each church every week.” In his case it was the Sunday night service which had this purpose, and he continued that practice from the beginning of his ministry in 1927 until he concluded his pastoral oversight in 1968.

Where is the hope for the success of evangelism?

Calvinism is the certainty of success in the work of evangelism. It is the foundation and hope of missionary endeavor.

If the hope of preachers and missionaries was in their own power and ability to convert sinners, or, if our hope was in the power or ability of dead sinners to give themselves life, all would despair. But when the worker’s hope for results is in the work of the Holy Spirit, who alone can quicken, we labor with the expectation that God will do what no preacher can do. We can be sure that He will effectually call His sheep by His own will and power through prayer and preaching.

Much of the modern confusion about Calvinism stems from distortions and caricatures of its actual teachings. For this reason it is vital to understand what Calvinism does not teach.

What Calvinism Is Not

Calvinism is not anti-missionary: Rather, it gives the biblical foundation for missions (John 6:37; 17:20,21; 2 Tim. 2:10; Isa. 55:11; 2 Pet. 3:9,15).

Calvinism does not destroy the responsibility of man. Men are responsible for whatever light they have, be it conscience (Rom. 2:15), nature (Rom. 1:19,20), written law (Rom. 2:17-27), or the gospel (Mark 16:15,16). Man’s inability to do righteousness no more frees him from responsibility than does Satan’s inability to do righteousness.

Calvinism does not make God unjust. His blessing of a great number of unworthy sinners with salvation is no injustice to the rest of the unworthy sinners. If a governor pardons one convict, is it injustice to the rest (1 Thess. 5:9)?

Calvinism does not discourage convicted sinners, but welcomes them to Christ. “Let him that is athirst come” (Rev. 17:17). The God who convicts is the God who saves. The God who saves is the God who has elected men unto salvation. He is the same God who invites.

Calvinism does not discourage prayer. To the contrary, it drives us to God, for He it is who alone can save. True prayer is the Spirit’s prompting, and thus will be in harmony with God’s will (Rom. 8:26).

Words Of Caution

  1. It is not wise to make derogatory remarks about what is in the Bible whether you understand it or not.
  2. It is not wise to reject what the Bible teaches on any subject, especially if you have not studied what the Bible has to say about it.
  3. It is not wise to make a hobby out of any one doctrine. Although this doctrine is of vital importance, it must not be separated from all Christian truth.
  4. It is not wise to reject any doctrine because it has been abused, misused and confused. All the key doctrines have been perverted and abused.
  5. It is not wise to try to learn what a Calvinist is from those who are not Calvinists.

A Word Of Warning

Calvin’s warning against undue speculation in respect to the lofty doctrine of Predestination can well be applied to all the doctrines of Calvinism:
“Human curiosity renders the discussion of predestination, already somewhat difficult of itself, very confusing and even dangerous. No restraints can hold it back from wandering in forbidden bypaths and thrusting upward to the heights. If allowed, it will leave no secret to God that it will not search out and unravel. If this thought prevails with us, that the Word of the Lord is the sole way that can lead us in our search for all that it is lawful to hold concerning him, and is the sole light to illumine our vision of all that we should see of him, it will readily keep and restrain us from all rashness. For we shall know that the moment we exceed the bounds of the Word, our course is outside the pathway and in darkness, and that there we must repeatedly wander, slip and stumble. Let this, therefore, first of all be before our eyes; to seek any other knowledge of predestination than what the Word of God discloses is not less insane than if one should purpose to walk in a pathless waste (cf. Job 12:24), or to see in darkness. And let us not be ashamed to be ignorant of something in this matter, wherein there is a certain learned ignorance” (Institutes, III. 21. 1-2).

Conclusion

The harmonious relationship between Calvinism and evangelism has often been expressed in our evangelical hymnody. Two such hymns provide a fitting conclusion to this study.

I sought the Lord, and afterward I knew
He moved my soul to seek him, seeking me;
It was not I that found, O Saviour true,
No, I was found of thee.

Thou didst reach forth thy hand and mine enfold;
I walked and sank not on the storm-vexed sea,
`Twas not so much that I on thee took hold,
As thou, dear Lord on me.

I find, I walk, I love, but, O the whole
Of love is but my answer, Lord to thee;
For thou wert long before-hand with my soul,
Always thou lovedst me.

–Anonymous

`Tis not that I did choose thee, For, Lord that could not be;
This heart would still refuse thee, Hadst thou not chosen me.
Thou from the sin that stained me hast cleansed and set me free;
Of old thou hast ordained me, that I should live to thee.

`Twas sov’reign mercy called me and taught my op’ning mind;
The world had else enthralled me, to heav’nly glories blind.
My heart owns none before thee, for thy rich grace I thirst;
This knowing, if I love thee, Thou must have loved me first.”

–Josiah Conder

Goals and Methods in Mission & Evangelism

Posted on by
Reply

Doctrinal differences between the Reformed and Arminians account for differences in their goals and their methods. Rev. Daniel Kleyn is a missionary of the Protestant Reformed Churches in America, stationed in Manila, Philippines. Here is an excerpt from an article he wrote in the publication “The Standard Bearer”:

The main goal of Arminian missions (and witnessing) is to bring an individual into a personal relationship with Christ. That is basically all. Very little or no thought is given to having that individual join a church and remain an active member in it. The latter is not that important. What matters most (if not exclusively) is that one is brought to exercise his supposed free will and to accept Christ as his Savior.

That this is the case is evident from the following “mission statements” of various Arminian churches: “Helping lost, broken people become passionate, devoted followers of Jesus Christ”; “Rescuing one another to follow Jesus every day”; “To present the gospel of Jesus Christ in such a way that it turns non-Christians into converts, converts into disciples, and disciplines into mature, fruitful leaders, who will in turn go into the world and reach others for Christ.”1

That the goal of Arminianism is conversion is also evident from what traveling evangelists usually do at their crusades. Their desire is to have people come forward to accept Christ and to commit their lives to Him.

Toward the end of their services they issue an altar call. Everything that precedes the altar call is done with a view to that altar call. In fact, if no one comes forward, or too few do, the service often continues until the audience responds. And what usually happens is that if an individual does come forward to “give his life to Christ,” that is the end of it. Little is done with regard to having that person join a church. The new convert is left without a means to be spiritually nourished and to grow in faith. Having “converted” these people, the evangelist and his team consider their work done. They pack up their tent, their stage, bands, choirs, and all their other “tools of trade,” and move on, boasting of how many souls they have saved. Meanwhile, the one who has supposedly been saved is left (for the most part) to fend for himself. And as a result, often these new “converts” end up falling back into an ungodly life.

The goal of Reformed missions, however, is to bring the elect of God, with their families, into covenant fellowship with God and Christ, and with the people of God within an instituted church. That is, the goal of Reformed mission work is not simply the salvation of God’s people, but also their church membership. For the believer needs to be a member of a church institute. All who are saved are “bound to join and unite themselves” to a true church of Christ on this earth (Belgic Confession, Art. 28).

That this is a Reformed goal is seen, for example, from the language used in the Constitutions of some of our denomination’s Evangelism Committees. One such Constitution states the following: “In obedience to the command of Christ to preach the gospel to every creature, the church must bring the whole counsel of God to all men, in order to lead them into fellowship with Christ and His church.”

Church membership is and must be our goal, first of all, because it is in the church where the truth of the gospel is preached that one finds Christ. Christ is there in the preaching. The saved sinner, therefore, needs that preaching. He needs it because He needs Christ. There is no other way of salvation (Acts 4:12). He needs to hear Christ so that he comes to a saving knowledge of God and of his Savior (John 17:3). He needs to hear Christ in order to receive continued assurance of forgiveness and life eternal. He needs to hear the gospel because only then will he be preserved in his faith and grow in his spiritual life (Rom. 1:16; II Pet. 3:18). Without the preaching, one’s faith weakens and one’s spiritual life suffers and declines.

Another reason why church membership needs to be a goal of Reformed missions is that participation in worship is the means by which one enjoys covenant fellowship with Christ and with God. We enjoy this in the church service through God speaking to us and we speaking to Him. At the heart of God’s speech to us is the forgiveness of our sins. Without that forgiveness, fellowship with God would be impossible (Is. 59:2). We need to be forgiven, and to know that we are. And Christ alone can provide that forgiveness. By means of preaching He says to the sinner, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). The rest that He gives (and which is worked in our hearts by the Spirit) is that of knowing we are forgiven, we are at peace with God, and therefore we can enjoy covenant fellowship with Him. For this reason, too, it is crucial that church membership be a goal of mission work.

Another significant reason why Reformed mission work involves bringing new believers into the church is the blessing of the communion of saints. God’s people need each other. They are members together of the body of Christ, and their experience of belonging to that body and to each other does not wait until heaven but is meant to be enjoyed already in the church on earth. Through that fellowship with each other, the members of Christ edify one other. They comfort those who are sorrowing. They lift up those who are weak. They bear one another’s burdens. They encourage each other in life’s difficulties. They restore each other when they fall into sin. They help and encourage each other to walk together on the straight and narrow way that leads to life eternal. The newly converted sinner needs all this too, and thus needs to become a member of a true church.

But there is still more. The covenantal goal of missions has in view that the covenant pervades the life of those who are saved. They are not only brought into the covenant fellowship of God and of His people in the church, but flowing out of that, the covenant life is established within their homes and daily lives. They know God’s friendship. They experience the reality that they are walking through life with their sovereign Friend at their side. He walks with them through the valleys. He is with them at work, in school, and in every area of life. And He establishes His covenant in their homes and families, sovereignly fulfilling His promise to save believers and their seed. There are exceptions, of course, but we know that that is the ordinary way God works. In order to experience and enjoy the covenant in his home life, a new believer needs to become a member of a faithful church that preaches and teaches all these truths concerning the covenant.

All of this means that the goal of missions is to establish churches. This is exactly what the apostles did, as recorded in the book of Acts. Where the preaching resulted in a gathering of believers, churches were established. The apostles understood that the people of God needed to become members in instituted churches so that they could feast spiritually each Lord’s Day. The apostles, therefore, worked diligently to establish congregations that had their own office bearers and that could be called “churches.”

By the grace of God, that has been and continues to be our goal in mission work, too. Prof. D. Engelsma puts it this way: “Evangelism does not end with ‘getting someone saved,’ but continues in their being taught to confess the truth in the true church. …For this reason it is also essential in the work of evangelism that those brought to the saving knowledge of the truth be directed to join a true church, a soundly Reformed church. No Reformed missionary could say to a convert, ‘Now join the church of your choice.’”2

The person who has expressed an interest in and love for the truth of God needs to come to and eventually join the church where the truth is faithfully maintained, for there alone will he hear the voice of Christ. By means of that faithful preaching, Christ works in the hearts of His elect to give them the blessed experience of the riches of His grace and of His covenant.

All of this means that an essential element of Reformed mission work is the establishment of indigenous Reformed churches. This is pointed out by the missiologist, John M. L. Young, in his definition of missions: “Missions is the work of the Triune God, through His Church, of sending Christ’s ambassadors to all nations to proclaim His whole Word for the salvation of lost men, the establishment of indigenous churches, and the coming of God’s kingdom, all for the glory of God.”3

The establishment of such churches must be our goal so that those who are brought to faith in Christ can join themselves to those churches and receive the means of grace there.  

Acts 2:47 confirms what we have been saying. There we read, “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” God’s people were added “to the church.” The reference is to the church as an institute. This passage does not refer to the church as the universal body of Christ, for the elect believers were already members of that church and had been from eternity.

Those who were brought to faith in Christ were added to the church as an institute, there to hear the gospel, to enjoy fellowship with God by means of His Word and Spirit, and to live in fellowship with the people of God. That is the biblical and Reformed goal of missions. We must keep it always in view. And whenever this goal is attained, we thank the Lord for His goodness and for His sovereign hand in establishing new Reformed churches and bringing new believers to be members of such instituted churches on this earth.

1 These mission statements were gathered from the Internet and belong to various Baptist and non-denominational (“community”) churches in the USA.

2 David J. Engelsma, “Evangelism and the Reformed Faith” (South Holland, IL: Evangelism Committee of the Protestant Reformed Church, 1994), 12.

3 John M. L. Young, Missions: The Biblical Motive and Aim (Pittsburgh: Crown and Covenant Publications, 2007), 3.

The End of the World?

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Gary DeMar (source: https://americanvision.org/23071/what-does-the-bible-say-about-the-end-of-the-world/)

When Christians hear the phrase the “end of the world,” most assume it’s a reference to a great end-time prophetic event like Armageddon, the Second Coming of Christ, or the cataclysmic end of heaven and earth as a prelude to a New Heavens and New Earth. Actually, the phrase “end of the world,” as in the end of the physical world, is not found in the Bible. There is Psalm 19:4, but in context “end of the world” is a geographical description: “Their line has gone out through all the earth, and their utterances to the end of the world.” The same is true of its use in the New Testament (Acts 13:47; Rom. 10:18).

The “end of the world” appears several times in the King James translation of the Bible. The Greek word kosmos, the word we would expect to find for the translation of these “end of the world” passages, is not used. Modern translations render the passages as the “end of the age” because the Greek word aiōn not kosmos is used. The New King James translation remedies the translation error of the original KJV by translating aiōn as “age” and not “world” (Matt. 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Aiōn refers to a limited historical period, not the physical world (1 Cor. 10:11). Kosmos (“foundation of the world,” that is, the physical world) and aiōnōn (“consummation of the ages”) are used in Hebrews 9:26, a time when Jesus had been “manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” It seems odd that the translators of the KJV translated two different Greek words in the same verse as “world.” The New King James corrects the error.

Jesus’ appearance on earth as “the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), not just Jews but the nations (4:42), coincides with the consummation of the ages, a first-century reality. In fact, the writer to the Hebrews opens his epistle with the claim that he was living in “these last days” because of the first coming of Christ in the world (Heb. 1:2). The tabernacle had become incarnate (John 1:14) and personalized (2:13–22) in Jesus Christ. Peter uses similar language when he writes, “For [Jesus] was foreknown before the foundation of the world [kosmos] but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you” (1 Peter 1:20). Paul tells his Corinthian audience that “the ends of the ages have come” (1 Cor. 10:11).

Peter writes from the vantage point of his day that “the end of all things is at hand” (1 Peter. 4:7; cf. 1:20). This can hardly be a declaration that the end of the physical universe was about to take place. “At hand” tells us that whatever this end is, it was near for Peter and his first-century audience. Jay E. Adams offers a helpful commentary on the passage, considering its historical and theological context:

[First] Peter was written before A.D. 70 (when the destruction of Jerusalem took place)…. The persecution (and martyrdom) that these (largely) Jewish Christians had been experiencing up until now stemmed principally from unconverted Jews (indeed, his readers had found refuge among Gentiles as resident aliens)…. [H]e refers to the severe trials that came upon Christians who had fled Palestine under attack from their unconverted fellow Jews. The end of all things (that had brought this exile about) was near.

In six or seven years from the time of writing, the overthrow of Jerusalem, with all its tragic stories, as foretold in the Book of Revelation and in the Olivet Discourse upon which that part is based, would take place. Titus and Vespasian would wipe out the old order once and for all. All those forces that led to the persecution and exile of these Christians in Asia Minor—the temple ceremonies (outdated by Christ’s death), Pharisaism (with its distortion of O.T. law into a system of works-righteousness) and the political stance of Palestinian Jewry toward Rome—would be erased. The Roman armies would wipe Jewish opposition from the face of the land. Those who survived the holocaust of A.D. 70 would themselves be dispersed around the Mediterranean world. “So,” says Peter, “hold on; the end is near.” The full end of the O.T. order (already made defunct by the cross and the empty tomb) was about to occur. [1]

Adam Clarke (1762–1832) writes the following in his commentary on 1 Peter 4:7: “Peter says, The end of all things is at hand; and this he spoke when God had determined to destroy the Jewish people and their polity by one of the most signal judgments that ever fell upon any nation or people. In a very few years after St. Peter wrote this epistle, even taking it at the lowest computation, viz., A. D. 60 or 61, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. To this destruction, which was literally then at hand, the apostle alludes when he says, The end of all things is at hand; the end of the temple, the end of the Levitical priesthood, the end of the whole Jewish economy, was then at hand.” [2]

The end of the age was the real end of the world, the world of old covenant Judaism, and the inauguration of a new era where God no longer speaks in types and shadows but “in His Son” (Heb. 1:2). There was such a dramatic transference from one age to the next that Peter described it as “the end of all things.”

The use of this end-time language is “typical Jewish imagery for events within the present order that are felt and perceived as ‘cosmic’ or, as we should say, as ‘earth-shattering’. More particularly, they are regular Jewish imagery for events that bring the story of Israel to its appointed climax. The days of Jerusalem’s destruction would be looked upon as days of cosmic catastrophe. The known world would go into convulsions: power struggles and coups d’état would be the order of the day; the pax Romana, the presupposition of ‘civilized’ life throughout the then Mediterranean world, would collapse into chaos. In the midst of that chaos Jerusalem would fall.” [3]

Jerusalem was the redemptive center of the then known world: “Thus says the Lord GOD, ‘This is Jerusalem; I have set her at the center of the nations, with lands around her’” (Ezek. 5:5). The Jews lived “at the center of the world” (38:12). To be far from Jerusalem was to be at “the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). For a Jew, Jerusalem was the center of life (2:5–11). Medieval maps show Jerusalem to be the geographical center of the world because it was the center of redemptive history. Isaiah predicted that the nations would look “to the house of the God of Jacob” for redemption and instruction:

In the last days, the mountain of the house of the LORD will be established as the chief of the mountains and will be raised above the hills; and all nations will stream to it. And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us concerning His ways, and that we may walk in His paths” (Isa. 2:2–3).

The nations did look to the “house of Jacob” for their redemption. Paul writes that the gospel “has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:26). The “mystery of godliness” had been “proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world” (1 Tim. 3:16).

Christians writing less than 100 years after the destruction of Jerusalem and the dismantling of the temple understood that Isaiah 2 was looking forward to the ministry of the gospel in the world among the nations. Jesus was the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophetic words when He said, “Come to Me” (Matt. 11:28). Consider the brief commentary of Justin the Martyr (c. 100–165):

And when the Spirit of prophecy speaks as predicting things that are to come to pass, He speaks in this way: “For the law will go forth from Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And He will judge between the nations and will render decisions for many peoples; and they will hammer their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never will they learn war” [Isa. 2:3–4]. And that it did so come to pass, we can convince you. For from Jerusalem there went out into the world, men, twelve in number, and these illiterate, of no ability in speaking: but by the power of God they proclaimed to every race of men that they were sent by Christ to teach to all the word of God; and we who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we might not lie or deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ. [4]

Irenaeus (c. 130–200), another second-century Christian writer, taught that Isaiah 2 was fulfilled at the time of “the Lord’s advent,” that is, the first coming of Jesus. You will notice that he believed that the message of “the new covenant” had a worldwide impact before Jerusalem’s fall:

If any one, however, advocating the cause of the Jews, does maintain that this new covenant consisted in the rearing of that temple which was built under Zerubbabel after the emigration to Babylon, and in the departure of the people from thence after the lapse of seventy years, let him know that the temple constructed of stones was indeed then rebuilt (for as yet that law was observed which had been made upon tables of stone), yet no new covenant was given, but they used the Mosaic law until the coming of the Lord; but from the Lord’s advent, the new covenant which brings back peace, and the law which gives life, has gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: “For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and He shall rebuke many people; and they shall break down their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and they shall no longer learn to fight.” [5]

Tertullian (160–225) makes a similar application when he argues that it is “among us, who have been called out of the nations,—‘and they shall join to beat their glaives into ploughs, and their lances into sickles; and nations shall not take up glaive against nation, and they shall no more learn to fight.’ Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices,—the old law being obliterated, the coming of whose abolition the action itself demonstrates?” [6]

With the advent of Jesus and the ministry of the gospel to the nations, earthly Jerusalem would no longer be the geographical center of the world. The world had come into view, so much so that Paul could write that the gospel had been “proclaimed in all creation under heaven” (Col. 1:23; cf. 1:6; Rom. 1:8; 10:18; 1 Tim. 3:16d). The temple and the city of Jerusalem were shadows of better things to come. The tabernacle was a “copy and shadow of heavenly things … according to the pattern which was shown [to Moses] on the mountain” (Heb. 8:5). Jesus is the “true tabernacle” (8:2). The “new covenant . . . made the first [covenant] obsolete” (8:13). The writer to the Hebrews describes it this way: “But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear” (8:13). The word translated as “ready” is actually the Greek word engus, “near.” James C. DeYoung writes:

The total impression gained from the accumulation of evidence from Jesus’ teaching and prophecy concerning the rejection and doom of Jerusalem, as well as from the teaching of Galatians and Hebrews is that the significance of Jerusalem in the history of redemption had come to an end with the death of Jesus. Thus, the antithesis between the earthly and heavenly Jerusalem is based upon the cross of Christ. Jerusalem’s rejection and crucifixion of her Messiah, whether viewed retrospectively by the Apostles, or prospectively by Jesus himself, formed the basis for the pessimistic view of the future of the city. Thus the investigation of the relevant passages from the Gospels has shown that the Christian break with Jerusalem came long before her destruction in A.D. 70. [7]

Jesus is the center of redemptive history. He far surpasses anything the temple of stone and the sacrificial system of bloody animals were thought to be. “We have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh” (10:19–20).

  1. Jay E. Adams, Trust and Obey: A Practical Commentary on First Peter (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1978), 129–130.[↩]
  2. Clarke’s Commentary on The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 vols. (New York: Carlton & Porter, 1810), 2:864.[↩]
  3. N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996),362.[↩]
  4. Justin Martyr, “The First Apology of Justin,” Chapter XXXIX: Direct Predictions by the Spirit, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1:175–176.[↩]
  5. Irenaeus, “Proof Against the Marcionites, that the Prophets Referred in All Their Predictions to Our Christ,” Against Heresies,” Book IV, Chapter 34.[↩]
  6. Tertullian, “Of Circumcision and the Supercession of the Old Law,” An Answer to the Jews, Chapter III.[↩]
  7. James Calvin DeYoung, Jerusalem in the New Testament: The Significance of the City in the History of Redemption and in Eschatology (Kampen, Netherlands: J. H. Kok, 1960), 109–110.[↩]

Improve Your Preaching

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. Steve Lawson – source: https://blog.tms.edu/20-tips-on-improving-your-preaching

How do I become a better preacher? There is more to it than eye contact, hand motions, and freedom from manuscript. There is more to it than staring at yourself in the mirror as you rehearse. The following are the twenty things I would tell the man who wants to improve his preaching:

1. Sit under great preaching

I firmly believe that preaching is more caught than taught. Over the years, I have learned so much about how to preach simply by sitting under great preaching. I often have young men ask me how to become a great preacher. I always encourage them with this: before even going to seminary, find someone who knows how to preach, and sit on the front row and glean as much as you can. You can’t just listen to him on a podcast or watch him on YouTube. You need to be in the building. You need to see it and feel it. Feel the pregnant pauses, the emotion of the congregation, the weight of the worship. We learn how to preach by sitting on the front row under powerful preaching.

2. Take Notes from Great Preaching

I used to listen to preaching on cassette tapes. I would hit the play button, listen to ten seconds, and then stop it. I would then write down everything the preacher just said. Then I would hit the play button for another ten seconds. Stop it. Then I would write that down. This would take hours. But through this tedious process, I began to grasp structure, transitional statements, subpoints, illustrations, applications, conclusions—all simply by transcribing great sermons. I saw what an introduction looked like on paper. I saw how carefully transitions are worded. I saw the precisely crafted draws and demands of application.

As soon as I heard great preaching, I knew what it was that I wanted to do. I just didn’t know how to do it. I needed for great preaching somehow to become practical. By taking notes, I learned what great preaching looked like on paper. I learned the movement, flow, and cadence of a sermon. I knew what great preaching looked and felt like before ever stepping foot in a preaching class, simply by taking notes.

3. Listen to Great Preaching

By this, I do mean just listening to preaching. When you listen to preaching over and over, it gets into your bones. Tune your ear to the sound of great preaching.

4. Read Great Preaching

There is much to be learned even from reading great preaching. Like taking notes, this is another way to see preaching. Read Spurgeon. Soak your mind in him. You can feel his passion. You can see the evangelistic pull and appeal of his words. You can almost hear the tone of his voice. Read Whitefield. Let him set you on fire as he did me.  

5. Learn from Many Great Preachers

My encouragement to you is not to listen to just one preacher. Do not become mesmerized with one personality. It will set a low ceiling over your preaching. You will settle into imbalances and imitation. Have multiple voices coming into your preaching. Everybody has weaknesses, blind spots. Surround yourself with a multitude of voices as you learn to find your own. They will complement and round off your edges.

6. Preach Yourself

You can’t learn to ride a bike in a classroom. You have to go outside and do it. The same is true of preaching. You have to go out and preach. Seek out preaching opportunities, even if it is just to a small group. Learn to preach by preaching.

7. Preach Often

Many men never surpass mediocrity in their preaching for the simple reason that they just don’t preach enough. George Whitefield said, “The more I preach, the better I preach.” Just as the more you play golf, the better you play golf; and the more you play piano, the better you play piano—it’s just a reality: the more you preach, the better you preach. That’s just the way it is. So preach often.

8. Preach in Different Settings

There is a certain predictability about preaching in a certain place. You need to continue to expand your horizons and enlarge your gift. Preach in as many different settings as you can, with different site-lines, podiums, faces, and responses—each one pulling something unique out of you. This doesn’t mean you have to go around the country to preach, just find different venues in your own city. Each one will draw something unique from you.

9. Preach Narrative

Our tendency as preachers is to tunnel deep into the epistles. And they are wonderful. But you must expand to other genres of Scripture. Learn to preach narratives. By preaching narratives, a didactive preacher becomes a dynamic preacher. There is a certain energy in a story—a passion that naturally flows from an inspired plot with rising action and conflict and character development. Learn to handle these portions of Scripture. Let them make you into a more dynamic preacher.  

10. Preach the Psalms

I did not fully develop as a preacher until I preached through the entirety of the psalter. That immersion into the songs of Israel ushered me into a different dimension of preaching. If you preach the psalms, they will change you. Your vocabulary will deepen. You will discover a new passion in your preaching. Metaphors and analogies will begin to pour forth from you. You will discover figures of speech in your arsenal. Your preaching will no longer have the tone of a correspondent, but a poet. You will gain a natural command of the language. You will preach to broken hearts—to people on the mountaintops and in the valleys of life. You will better understand emotions. But most of all, your preaching will be immensely God-centered.

11. Improve Your Vocabulary

Preaching is simply putting words into the air. If you have better words from which to draw, you will automatically have more going for you. In the first day of my doctoral program under Dr. Sproul, he made everyone in the class learn three hundred English vocabulary words. We were quizzed the next day. If you are a preacher, your life work is words. Read books to expand your vocabulary. Do whatever it takes to add more words to your arsenal—buy books, flashcards, and thesauruses. Use them. Never repeat yourself in preaching. Find the best word, the right word. Learn to opt for a carefully selected word over a story. If you are a preacher, words are your trade. Master them.  

12. Improve Your Grammar

When I graduated from seminary, my grammar was awful. English teachers in our church would pull me aside after sermons and correct my grammar. Initially, it bothered me. But I am so thankful those English teachers loved me enough to challenge my grammar. It opened doors. It cleared roadblocks. Those English teachers were God’s way of refining me to gain a hearing with people that I otherwise would not have. Yes, grammar really does matter. We have flies in the ointment when we have bad grammar. Tell your wife, I want you to correct me every time you hear me use incorrect grammar. Stop me. Have her make a list of grammatical mistakes in your preaching. There is no other way to extract bad grammar from you than for someone to love you enough to tell you. Thank her when she corrects you. It is God’s way of refining you.

13. Read Great Literature

If you are going to have a command of the sentence—its cadence, length, lead-in, phraseology, emphasis, word choice—there is no better method than to read great literature. I would urge you to do that. Spend time enjoying how masters of the English language communicate. It will begin to seep into you.

14. Learn to Write and Edit

To learn to preach, you must learn to write a sermon. And to write a sermon, you must learn to write. It may be nothing more than an article in the worship bulletin. Just write. It doesn’t matter who (or if anyone) is reading it. Learn to get your thoughts onto paper. Go through the excruciating practice of editing your own writing. Force yourself to dig into your own sentences, by doing this you will begin to learn to speak. Writing breeds accuracy, and accuracy is the heartbeat of expository preaching.

15. Invite Feedback when Preaching

Every preacher is subject to discouragement when our preaching is criticized by others. But find one or two people who love you and are committed to you, and ask them to give you honest feedback on your preaching. Ask them to show you your blind spots.  

16. Read Books on Preaching

Read Martin Lloyd-Jones’s book Preaching and Preachers. This book is a must read. Read MacArthur’s Preaching: How to Preach Biblically. Read J.W. Alexander’s Thoughts on Preaching. Read R.L. Dabney, Evangelical Eloquence. Read Between Two Worlds by John Stott. Read Spurgeon’s Lectures to my Students.

17. Read Biographies of Great Preachers

I am still trying to recover from reading the two-volume biography of George Whitefield by Arnold Dallimore. This is the only book I have ever read three times. It just makes me want to preach. You need to read books that make you want to preach. Read the autobiography of Charles Spurgeon. That book will do something to your soul. It makes me cry. It makes me want to get up early. It makes me want to study—to pray; to preach; to live a godly life. Read the biography of Martin Lloyd Jones by Iain Murray. This book will be a tipping point in your life. Read books that make you want to do something. Specifically, read books that make you want to preach.

18. Read Church History

Before seminary, I didn’t even know what church history was. I learned of the Reformation and the Great Awakening and the Modern Missions Movement and the Great Victorian Preachers, and these men became etched into me. There was a fellowship that I had with them. I was in their company. I was one of them. Church history taught me that conflict and controversy mark every movement forward. Studying church history forces you to grow up as a man. It matures you.

19. Read of the Martyrs

In one of his resolutions, Jonathan Edwards resolves to remember the martyrs. We must do the same. Read about Tyndale. Read about Cranmer. Read about these men and women being strapped to the stake.

In the front of my Bible, I carry a picture of John Rogers. He was burned at the stake in 1555. He was the first martyr burned by bloody Mary. His crime—helping finish Tyndale’s work of translating the Bible into the English language, repudiating the mass, and preaching the purity of grace. When you read church history, you begin to identify with the martyrs. I’ve never had a bad day, not compared to the martyrs. Any criticism I’ve ever had, any firing I’ve endured, any rejection I’ve suffered—is nothing. When you spend hours considering the lives of the martyrs, it has an effect on you when you step into the pulpit. It is hard to be a goofball in the pulpit when you’ve been drinking from this well.

20. Be More Zealous for God

Don’t let whatever stage of life you are in quench your fire. Let the words of Jesus sink in: “I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first” (Rev. 2:4–5). Remember when you were on fire for God. Remember when you were zealous and passionate. Remember when you were actively witnessing. When you used to cry. When you used to rejoice when you sang. And return to those days. Be more zealous for God. Ask God, by His Spirit, to ignite you—to set you on fire: “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?” (Luke 24:32, italics mine). Ask God to do that in your heart. That is a prayer God will answer.

A Rising Tide

If you were able to incorporate even some of these into your life, the tide would come in, and your preaching would be raised. If you could incorporate a good number of these into your life, your preaching would be lifted even higher. Be on fire for God. And if you are, no one will have to talk to you about gestures, eye contact, or techniques. In some ways, techniques are for men who don’t know how to preach. Get on fire for God, and you will find a way to get it across. I fell in love with my wife, and no one had to teach me about hand motions or eye contact when I told her I loved her. Fall in love with Christ, and you will learn to communicate.

Creeds & Confessions – Ten Things

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Craig Van Dixhoorn (original source: https://www.crossway.org/articles/10-things-you-should-know-about-the-churchs-historic-creeds-and-confessions/)

1. Creeds are honest.

Honesty is the original impulse behind almost every statement of faith. Cults hide what they believe until you’re so far into the riptide that you can’t do anything about it. Honest churches do the opposite: they announce what they do believe and (in the best creeds and confessions) even a few things that they don’t. We want everyone to know the most important facts and ideas revealed in the Bible and denied by the Bible, so we summarize them in our creeds.

2. Creeds promote unity.

The best doctrinal summaries promote church unity. They help us to identify, through a common set of priorities and teachings, what we have in common with other Christians. And that is not all. These summaries also have the potential to create peace in the church, since people coming to the church will readily be able to see what it teaches, and will be able to compare it with the Scriptures, which is the only basis on which Christian teaching should be built. Avoiding doctrinal disguises minimizes unhappy surprises.

3. Creeds are old.

The classic Christian Creeds were written in the early history of the church. Most confessions were written sometime during the Protestant Reformation. This is useful. When it comes to doctrinal statements (and much else besides!) age is more of a benefit than a liability—it is good to study texts which remind us that Christianity was not invented last Tuesday.

4. Creeds and confessions can be long.

Lengthy creeds and confessions are a good thing! Evangelical statements of faith are often too short and not sufficiently theological. As I see it, the church needs to experiment with theological maximalism, in place of its current minimalism, if we are to maintain a faithful witness to Christ in our generation. A dozen doctrinal points on a website is probably inadequate for the church’s thriving, for its mission not only to evangelize but also to teach the nations. Big creeds and confessions hold out a large faith for us to own, offering a welcome view of the triune God and his work and more robust statements of the gospel of Christ.

5. Creeds remind us we are not alone.

Classic creeds remind us that we don’t simply read the Bible by ourselves. We read the Bible as one body and find unity in so doing. Reciting a creed as a church declares that we read the bible in ways similar to other Christians in the depth and in the breadth of the church—over time and around the world.

6. Creeds and confessions expose disagreements.

Creeds also show how we disagree. This, too, is good. Discussing our differences is better than papering over them and pretending they don’t exist. By the time of the Protestant Reformation of the 1500s, so much had been learned—and so many doctrines were disputed between the Reformers and Rome—that the category of creed was supplemented by longer lists of doctrines that Christians confessed. Creeds were still in use, most often in worship, but now confessions were written to expound what Lutheran and Reformed Christians believed. These confessions carefully articulated what doctrines were shared in common with the old faith of Rome, and where the Reformers were forced to disagree with Rome in their recovery of the teachings of the early church, and most basically, of the Bible. They also explain where Reformers disagreed with one another. This is helpful, for knowing where we disagree allows us to talk at the curb. Living with labels, but without understanding, results in verbal grenades being lobbed over walls.

7. Creeds and confessions help us learn.

Creeds and confessions pay careful attention to precise wording. They provide the kind of labeling that allows for Christian learning. These documents function as teaching materials that lead us deeper into the Christian faith. With texts like these, Christians no longer need to be content with speaking of “salvation”, for example, only in general. Once alert to fuller teaching, Christians can then celebrate justification, discover adoption, and bless God for sanctification, perseverance, and glorification.

8. Creeds and confessions help us to avoid error.

Even as creeds and confessions served as bulwarks against doctrinal error in time past, they continue to do so in the present. Errorists and heretics are often uncreative. The basic shape of their faults remain the same over the centuries. Creeds set doctrinal parameters that safeguard the principles of the church against the increasingly common tendency to be inclined toward everything new and fancy. Tip: It’s helpful for pastors to read the relevant section in a creed or confession before preaching a tricky doctrine, or one that is easy to state incorrectly.

9. Creeds and confessions help us worship.

Creeds function not only as a teaching tool but as a worshipping tool as we remember why it is that we gather together: it is because of who God is and because of what he has done. While not usually used in worship, confessions are also useful for worship. Careful distinctions provide richer material for praise than do broad generalizations. Saying more about the character of God and the grace of the gospel encourages more confidence in prayer and praise.

10. Creeds and confessions are biblical.

From the beginning, the word of God has offered, and the people of God have employed, statements of faith. Old Testament readers encounter such a statement in the capstone of the books of Moses: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut. 6:3). It is what New Testament readers see when Paul provides the Corinthians with a summary of his own teaching: “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:3-4). In Paul’s instruction to Timothy, he reminds Timothy to follow the pattern of sound words (2 Tim. 1:13) so that the church would not be tossed about in uncertainty. Biblical summaries are biblical!