Monthly Archives: February 2018

How to Find the Will of God

Posted on by
Reply

Article by R. C. Sproul: What Is the Will of God for My Life?

This excerpt is taken from the book “Everyone’s a Theologian”.

What does the Bible say about God’s leading? It says that if we acknowledge God in all our ways, He will direct our paths (Prov. 3:5–6). We are encouraged by Scripture to learn the will of God for our lives, and we do so by focusing our attention not on the decretive will of God but on the preceptive will of God. If you want to know God’s will for your life, the Bible tells you: “This is the will of God, your sanctification” (1 Thess. 4:3). So when people wonder whether to take a job in Cleveland or in San Francisco, or whether to marry Jane or Martha, they should study closely the preceptive will of God. They should study the law of God to learn the principles by which they are to live their lives from day to day.

The psalmist writes, “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night” (Ps. 1:1–2). The godly man’s delight is in the preceptive will of God, and one so focused will be like “a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season” (v. 3). The ungodly, however, are not like that but “are like chaff that the wind drives away” (v. 4).

If you want to know which job to take, you have to master the principles. As you do, you will discover that it is God’s will that you make a sober analysis of your gifts and talents. Then you are to consider whether a particular job is in keeping with your gifts; if it is not, you should not accept it. In that case, the will of God is that you look for a different job. The will of God is also that you match your vocation—your calling—with a job opportunity, and that requires a lot more work than using a Ouija board. It means applying the law of God to all the various things in life.

When it comes to deciding whom to marry, you look at everything Scripture says with respect to God’s blessing on marriage. Having done that, you might discover that there are several prospects who meet the biblical requirements. So which one do you marry? The answer to that is easy: whichever one you want to marry. As long as the one you choose falls within the parameters of the preceptive will of God, you have complete liberty to act according to whatever pleases you, and you do not need to lose any sleep wondering whether you are outside the hidden or decretive will of God. First, you cannot be outside the decretive will of God. Second, the only way you are going to know the hidden will of God for you today is to wait until tomorrow, and tomorrow will make it clear to you because you can look back on the past and know that whatever happened in the past is the outworking of the hidden will of God. In other words, we only know God’s hidden will after the fact. We usually want to know the will of God in terms of the future, whereas the emphasis in Scripture is on the will of God for us in the present, and that has to do with His commands.

“The secret things” belong to God, not to us. “The secret things” are not our business because they are not our property; they are His. However, God has taken some of the secret plans of His mind and removed the secrecy, and such things do belong to us. He has taken the veil away. This is what we call revelation. A revelation is a disclosure of that which once was hidden.

The knowledge that is ours through revelation properly belongs to God, but God has given it to us. That is what Moses was saying in Deuteronomy 29:29. The secret things belong to God, but that which He has revealed belongs to us, and not only to us but to our children. God has been pleased to reveal certain things to us, and we have the unspeakable blessing of sharing those things with our children and others. The priority of passing that knowledge on to our children is one of the main emphases in Deuteronomy. God’s revealed will is given in and through His preceptive will, and this revelation is given that we might be obedient.

As I said earlier, many people ask me how they can know the will of God for their lives, but rarely does anyone ask me how he can know the law of God. People do not ask because they know how to understand the law of God—they find it in the Bible. They can study the law of God in order to know it. The more difficult question is how we can do the law of God. Some are concerned about that, but not too many. Most people who inquire about the will of God are seeking knowledge of the future, which is closed. If you want to know the will of God in terms of what God authorizes, what God is pleased with, and what God will bless you for, again, the answer is found in His preceptive will, the law, which is clear.

Abiding in Christ

Posted on by
Reply

Article: What Does it Mean to Abide in Christ? by Dr. Sinclair Ferguson (original source here)

The exhortation to “abide” has been frequently misunderstood, as though it were a special, mystical, and indefinable experience. But Jesus makes clear that it actually involves a number of concrete realities.

First, union with our Lord depends on His grace. Of course we are actively and personally united to Christ by faith (John 14:12). But faith itself is rooted in the activity of God. It is the Father who, as the divine Gardener, has grafted us into Christ. It is Christ, by His Word, who has cleansed us to fit us for union with Himself (15:3). All is sovereign, all is of grace.

Second, union with Christ means being obedient to Him. Abiding involves our response to the teaching of Jesus: “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you …” (John 15:7a). Paul echoes this idea in Colossians 3:16, where he writes, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly,” a statement closely related to his parallel exhortation in Ephesians 5:18: “be filled with the Spirit.”

In a nutshell, abiding in Christ means allowing His Word to fill our minds, direct our wills, and transform our affections. In other words, our relationship to Christ is intimately connected to what we do with our Bibles! Then, of course, as Christ’s Word dwells in us and the Spirit fills us, we will begin to pray in a way consistent with the will of God and discover the truth of our Lord’s often misapplied promise: “You will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you” (John 15:7b).

Third, Christ underlines a further principle, “Abide in My love” (15:9), and states very clearly what this implies: the believer rests his or her life on the love of Christ (the love of the One who lays down His life for His friends, v. 13).

This love has been proved to us in the cross of Christ. We must never allow ourselves to drift from daily contemplation of the cross as the irrefutable demonstration of that love, or from dependence on the Spirit who sheds it abroad in our hearts (Rom. 5:5). Furthermore, remaining in Christ’s love comes to very concrete expression: simple obedience rendered to Him is the fruit and evidence of love for Him (John 15:10–14).

Finally, we are called, as part of the abiding process, to submit to the pruning knife of God in the providences by which He cuts away all disloyalty and sometimes all that is unimportant, in order that we might remain in Christ all the more wholeheartedly.

Charles Spurgeon – The Man

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Michael Reeves: 10 Things You Should Know about Charles Spurgeon (original source here)

1. His ministry began in the year of his conversion as a young man.
Spurgeon was raised in a Christian home, but was converted in 1850 at fifteen years old. Caught in a snowstorm, he took refuge in a small Primitive Methodist chapel in Colchester. After about ten minutes, with only twelve to fifteen people present, the preacher fixed his eyes on Spurgeon and spoke to him directly:

“Young man, you look very miserable.” Then, lifting up his hands, he shouted, “Young man, look to Jesus Christ. Look! Look! Look! You have nothin’ to do but to look and live.” Spurgeon later wrote, ‘Oh! I looked until I could almost have looked my eyes away.’ 1

The ‘Prince of Preachers’ was tricked into preaching his first sermon that same year. An older man had asked Spurgeon to go to the little village of Teversham the next evening, “for a young man was to preach there who was not much used to services, and very likely would be glad of company.” It was only the next day that he realized the ‘young man’ was himself.2

2. He was a man of hard work and huge influence.
He went on to preach in person up to thirteen times per week, gathered the largest church of his day, and could make himself heard in a crowd of twenty-three thousand people (without amplification). In print he published some eighteen million words, selling over fifty-six million copies of his sermons in nearly forty languages in his own lifetime.

3. He was self-consciously a theological and doctrinal preacher.
While Spurgeon is not known as a theologian as such, he was nevertheless a deeply theological thinker and his sermons were rich in doctrine, and dripping with knowledge of historical theology – especially the Puritans.

Some preachers seem to be afraid lest their sermons should be too rich in doctrine, and so injure the spiritual digestions of their hearers. The fear is superfluous. . . . This is not a theological age, and therefore it rails at sound doctrinal teaching, on the principle that ignorance despises wisdom. The glorious giants of the Puritan age fed on something better than the whipped creams and pastries which are now so much in vogue.3

4. He was pre-eminently a theologian and preacher of the cross.
Spurgeon’s was a cross-centered and cross-shaped theology, for the cross was “the hour” of Christ’s glorification (John 12:23–24), the place where Christ was and is exalted, the only message able to overturn the hearts of men and women otherwise enslaved to sin. Along with Isaiah 45:22, one of Spurgeon’s favorite Bible verses was John 12:32: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

He insisted on celebrating the Lord’s Supper every Sunday, and often broke bread during the week as well. He believed his preaching of the crucified Christ was the only reason why such great crowds were drawn to his church for so many years. Continue reading →

Looming Debate Over SSA

Posted on by
Reply

By Rick Phillips (original source here)

These days, it seems that almost every week social media uncovers another eruption along the Presbyterian Church in America’s (PCA) volcanic fault line between social accommodation/compassion and biblical obedience. This week, a conference promoting strategies to address same sex attraction (SSA) has raised heads and provoked comment. This particular event seems to be a laudable attempt to balance the tension: while calling for a compassionate acceptance of SSA Christians it also makes clear statements in support of biblical marriage and takes a position against homosexual behavior that most people in our society would consider fundamentalist. Conservatives should therefore refrain from drawing the worst possible implications from what seems to be a thoughtful and responsible attempt to address this major cultural touchstone.

While avoiding hysterical division, we can at the same time note that a major question mark hangs over the normalization of SSA as a Christian category. It seems that there is a growing consensus in the PCA that we can and must distinguish between one’s sexual orientation and sinful desires. The alternative would seem to be that we tell men and women struggling with homosexuality that what they consider a part of who they are is sinful and (as some would have it) subject them to tortuous rehabilitation techniques that probably include electric shock. The bridge, therefore, between compassion and biblical fidelity is to embrace “gay in Christ” as a normal and wholesome category and then help our LGBTQ brothers and sisters live celibately with these desires.

One problem with this love-motivated strategy is that it collapses under the weight of Scripture. The biblical argument in favor of SSA acceptance goes like this: we always distinguish between desire and temptation. A heterosexual may sinlessly experience an attraction to a member of the opposite sex without giving in to lust. The same must therefore be the case for a homosexual. The orientation is not necessarily sinful, while the desire represents a temptation to be avoided. The key issue is behavior: does the person (heterosexual or homosexual) give in to temptation and commit the sin?

A first criticism of this approach will note that it fails to apply the Bible’s vastly different approach to homosexuality versus heterosexuality, only one of which can ever be sinless. But the major problem is that the Bible does not distinguish between orientation and desire, while instead categorizing desire as temptation. Biblically, temptation is the outward circumstance that prompts desire into sin. But desire for sin itself is an expression of our sinful nature. Bible-believing churches take this approach to virtually every sin other than homosexuality (it is often pointed out that we would never take the pro-SSA approach to racism, for instance). A biblically accurate approach to homosexuality must therefore be congruent with our understanding of sin in general.

One key text is James 1:14-15: “each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.” Notice that James does not equate desire and temptation but distinguishes them. Desire is the inward disposition toward a given sin. As James sees it, the key issue is not temptation but desire: until desire is sanctified by the grace of Christ, temptation is going to produce sinful behavior. Epithumia, the Greek word translated as “desire” identifies an inward impulse and almost always has a sinful connotation (see Rom. 7:7-8, Gal. 5:17, Col. 3:5, and 1 Thess. 4:5). Therefore, to isolate orientation from sinful desire in simply contrary to Scripture. Continue reading →

Catechism Modification

Posted on by
Reply

Q: What is the fourth commandment?
A: The fourth commandment is, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Ex. 20:8)

Q: What does the Sabbath signify?
A: The Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as a remembrance that God gave them rest by bringing them out of slavery in Egypt (Deut. 5:12-15), and as a sign of the Mosaic covenant between God and Israel (Exo. 31:16-17), and as a type and shadow of the rest that has come in salvation through Jesus Christ (Col. 2:16-17) and that will come in the final state (Rev. 21:3-4). Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest, having given us peace with God (Heb. 4:9-11).

(Eric Bryant)

A. W. Pink – The Person

Posted on by
Reply

Article: A. W. Pink: glorifying God by disobeying Him?
by Dan Phillips (original source here)

I realize that A. W. Pink is a hero and beloved saint to many. His books, particularly The Sovereignty of God, have been very helpful for decades.

For my part, I’ve never been a huge fan. I’ve tried reading him, and generally been defeated by his verbosity or his fanciful exegesis. I’ve other books that do a better job of what he tries to do, so they take up my time instead of Pink.

HSAT, I’m reading through a book called Bible Interpreters of the Twentieth Century: A Selection of Evangelical Voices, edited by Elwell and Weaver. The chapter I just finished was devoted to A. W. Pink.

From a whole-Bible, sufficient-Scripture perspective, it’s not a particularly happy story after the opening bits. Pink had been a Theosophist, but was soundly converted whilst in the middle of his activities, and instantly preached Christ in a Theosophical meeting at which he was to be a speaker.

But after that, Pink’s life goes south in a number of ways. He eschews any kind of apprenticeship or training, too devoted to himself and his own endeavors. This will yield mixed fruit: the intensity of his studies will indeed give Pink some good material to give away. However, this isolation is constantly and roundly warned against in Scripture, which commends instead humble exposure to the reproof and counsel of others (e.g. Prov. 10:17; 12:1; 13:18; 15:5, 10, 31-32; 18:1-2; etc.). As anyone who reads and believes the Bible could have predicted, baleful effects followed foolish choices.

Pink attempts to pastor, but ends up careening from location to location to location. Pink prefers talking to people from a great distance (i.e. writing), and ends up devoted to that activity solely, in complete isolation from any personal contact with Christ’s church or the means of grace. Which brings me to set these two passages in contrast.

First:

He labored faithfully for his remaining twelve years of life, writing and producing the periodical while he lived in virtual isolation, not even attending a local church. He justified this behavior by explaining that the admonition not to neglect the assembling of ourselves together does not mean that the sheep of Christ should attend a place where the goats predominate or where their attendance would sanction that which is dishonoring to Christ. On Sundays he spent his time pastoring his flock of faithful readers by writing letters answering their questions concerning the Bible and theology. Would-be visitors who had traveled great distances to Stornoway were discouraged as they were usually turned away, not being allowed to see him. The townspeople knew little about him, except that each day at a certain hour he took a walk through the town.
[Elwell, W. A., & Weaver, J. D. (1999). Bible interpreters of the twentieth century: A selection of evangelical voices (138). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.]

Second:

Pink also believed in, practiced, and preached holiness of life, including sacrificial living for his Lord. He longed to do the will of God, whatever it might be. He searched and searched, prayed and prayed, waited and waited to learn the will of God, and finally surrendered to do what was unmistakably God’s will—the use of his pen. [Ibid., 140.]

These passages in juxtaposition give us an opportunity to consider what I’ve hammered on again and again, just about every place I have a chance.

Consider:

The second passage tells us Pink was holy, and committed to “sacrificial living for his Lord,” doing the will of God heroically, surrendering to “what was unmistakably God’s will—the use of his pen.” But the first passage had told us that Pink had no time for pursuing the second most important thing in the universe according to Jesus: love your neighbor as yourself (Matt. 22:36-40).

Now, like all religious people, Pink worked out what the biographer calls a “justification,” which as always is nothing but a rationalization. And the biographer gives Pink a pass, because he was such a splendid writer. So because of Pink’s (and the biographer’s) writing, Christians are once again urged to the fiction that one can seek and do the “will of God” in direct and continued disobedience to the Word of God.

Get enough ‘notes from God,’ and pretty soon you can’t see what’s right in front of youBecause the second passage is utter nonsense, to a Biblical Christian. Disobeying God’s direct, unambiguous and insistent commands to be personally in community, under the oversight of elders, is not “holiness of life,” and it is not “sacrificial living for the Lord.” It is indulgent and arrogant living for oneself. It is someone who didn’t seem, in any way, to “get” what it means to live and think like a slave.

In fact, mark the first passage. Not only was Pink too good to associate with imperfect saints (where he is not in charge and running things his way); he would not even accept visitors. Pink must have imagined that he had some mystical exemption from Romans 12:13, Hebrews 13:2, and 1 Peter 4:9 as well as the previously-noted commands. And while he wrote very critically and insistently upon evangelism, and how everyone else was doing it wrong, “The townspeople knew little about him, except that each day at a certain hour he took a walk through the town.” So according to this, Pink “practiced holiness” by neither actually obeying the Word of God, nor even through practicing what he literarily preached.

Instead, here once again this ugly specter of a mystical, individual will of God that in fact trumps the written Word of God rears its devastating head. The writer is content that God had a will for Pink that trumped the revealed will He inscripturated for all saints at all times and in all places. God’s inerrant and unchanging and living Word is packed with “one-anothers” to be lived in the fellowship of the local church; but to A. W. Pink, we are given to think that He whispered, “Not you, Arthur. I want you to disobey what I told everyone else to do and stay at home, isolated and distant, practicing none of the graces of the Spirit, lecturing others about their responsibility. You just write; and in your writings, urge others to the obedience and holiness from which I am hereby excusing you.”

So you see, like many who have tried to ply their wares in our metas, Pink imagined he had a “note from God” excusing him for actually obeying those commands God addressed to lesser beings. And the biographer apparently confirms that note.

Goodness, all these ‘notes from God’ are getting hard to keep track of!

You want to say Pink wrote some helpful things? If you say so. You want to tell me he’s a model of Christian holiness and sacrificial living and integrity?

Yeah, I don’t think so. In walking after Christ I constantly struggle (cf. Gal. 5:17ff.), I too frequently fail, I am at unceasing war with my own inconsistencies and inadequacies. The human knack for rationalization is an ever-present risk and fear.

The last thing I need held up for emulation is a man who found a way to avoid that whole struggle by pious-sounding excuses.

How about you?

Nassar victim Rachael Denhollander speaks out – Continued

Posted on by
Reply

The Story Continues: Here’s the link to the Christianity Today interview with Rachael Denhollander (January 31, 2018).

And here’s SGM’s response (at this link).

Finally, Rachael’s response and challenge to SGM on her Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/rachael.denhollander/posts/10155089841635264)

PUBLIC RESPONSE TO SOVEREIGN GRACE CHURCHES
(For those who have asked, this link is now shareable.)

In a recent article with Christianity Today I referenced deep concerns with the intentional failure to report sexual assault perpetrated in multiple churches, by multiple elders, at Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM), now “Sovereign Grace Churches” (SGC). Three days ago, SGC responded to this article and stated I was “mistaken” in my statements and that these concerns “are not true and have never been true”. They further stated that they would not respond to my “false accusations” with evidence as to why they are false, because they would appear “unsympathetic” to victims of abuse. They linked, as proof, to the dismissal of the civil suit against them. The lawsuit was dismissed because the statute of limitations had expired. This is a dismissal on technical grounds only, it had nothing to do with the substantive claims made against SGM. It simply means that the time for which legal proceedings can be initiated has expired and therefore the court no longer has the authority to examine the merits of the plaintiff’s claims. Ultimately, this dismissal means that the evidence against SGM was never examined by the courts. This is not evidence, in any way, shape, or form, that SGM has not done what is alleged.

I am glad to know that SGC is concerned about victims of sexual assault, but I assure them the most unsympathetic thing they can continue to do is refuse to respond to the concerns of sexual assault victims, myself included. I have no need to be protected from any evidence or response they have. On the contrary, I have sought out this evidence and a response, for more than seven years.

I chose to pursue expertise in the area of sexual assault and institutional dynamics years ago, including my own legal training as an attorney. Having reviewed the allegations and evidence against SGM and their own responses to it, my concerns have only solidified and grown. I have summarized these concerns at the end of this post.

I am asking SGC to support their recent claim that I am making “false accusation”, “mischaracterizing” and communicating things that “are not true and have never been true”, and instead show true care for the victims by finally dealing transparently with these concerns, through taking one specific step:

Allowing GRACE, an Christian organization whose expertise is sexual assault and institutional dynamics, to do a thorough independent investigation of the organization’s historical and current handling of abuse complaints, which will be released to the public. GRACE has no affiliation with SGM or any survivors and therefore is in a unique position of approaching such an investigation with objectivity and independence. GRACE is founded and organized by Boz Tchividjian, the grandson of Billy Graham and is comprised of a team of mental health experts, former prosecutors, and pastors who have a combined experience of over 100 years of addressing sexual abuse related issues. Their legal knowledge, investigative abilities and character is of the highest caliber. I will personally spearhead fundraising efforts for such an investigation and donate myself, to ensure that this can be done with no extra burden to SGM, if the organization will pursue transparency and accountability through GRACE. I will also readily accept any conclusions GRACE arrives at, and personally and publicly apologize if I am found to be in error.

As SGM is not facing a civil lawsuit, there is no reason they cannot, at this time, pursue and provide answers to the many concerns, questions, and evidence about their handling of sexual assault allegations. I am confident that the best way to care for past victims, and the best way to prevent assault in the future, is to take these steps. I hope to see them finally do so.

——————SUMMARY OF CONCERNS————————-
During a time when CJ Mahaney was senior pastor of Covenant Life Church and in leadership in the parent organization he founded (SGM),

1. SGM had an internal policy of not reporting sexual assault allegations to law enforcement, and instead handling them internally. This is evidenced by statements made by multiple SGM pastors, including in official police reports, and in internal SGM documents.

2. Elders in SGM churches did, in fact, follow this internal policy and did not report sexual assault allegations, did not warn congregants of known sexual predators, and did not place limitations on known predators to prevent additional access to children. Under-oath testimony and police reports in criminal investigations demonstrate this.

3. Additional statements by numerous members of multiple SGM churches independently allege further conduct that is in-line with known church policy and proven church practices, including failure to report abuse, failure to warn congregants of known predators, and failure to place limitations on known predators in the congregation. These allegations are numerous, arose independent of each other, and are internally and externally consistent, all factors which carry substantial evidentiary weight.

4. Numerous independent victims and victim families allege that SGM pastors discouraged reporting, were uncooperative with investigators, interfered with investigations, or supported the perpetrator. Some of these allegations have documentary evidence, including a letter on church letterhead, in the official court file, in support of early release of a known pedophile. Other allegations should be given consideration because the allegations are numerous, independent, and internally and externally consistent.

5. SGM has never publicly acknowledged or repented of these known failures to report. They have never responded with specificity to any additional allegations that fit the known patterns, outside of blanket statements that there was “no conspiracy” to coverup abuse, and that the civil lawsuit was a threat to their First Amendment freedom.

6. Additionally, three of the elders directly involved in known instances of failure to report were close relatives of CJ Mahaney, two brothers-in-law and a son-in-law. Internal church documents also state that every elder is to be notified of any claims of sexual assault. During many of the known and alleged failures, CJ was an elder in the church in question. Specifically, he was the head elder.

These known failures and additional concerns and allegations merit close attention and an independent, transparent investigation by a trusted organization with expertise, if SGM wishes to show care for victims, or prevent these failures in the future. I hope to finally see them take this step.

3 Reasons Every Christian Needs to Use the Creeds

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Timothy Massaro, staff writer for Core Christianity. He is the Social Media Manager for the White Horse Inn. (original source here)

When we think about the Christian faith, most people today rarely think about creeds, liturgy, or confessions, let alone see them as essential to their relationship with God. Our hesitation concerning creeds is understandable, especially when they are disconnected from our worship and love of God. People often see them as cold, mindless doctrines that have nothing to do with Jesus. But this is not how they were created nor how they should be used.

In the creeds of the early church, we find something of a hidden secret a treasure chest overlooked by many. We find a way to instruct ourselves and our children in the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3). Let’s look at each of these three points to see why every Christian needs to use the creeds in their personal and corporate worship.

1. Creeds are instructive because they are biblical.
When we think of the great Christian creeds (the Apostles Creed or Nicene Creed, for example), we often put them in opposition to the Bible. What we often do not realize is that the Bible itself leads us into making creeds and is filled with creedal statements.

In the Old Testament, we see Israel confessing its faith in God as it worshiped him in what is called the Shema: Hear, O Israel. The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (Deut. 6:4-5). This daily statement of faith is intertwined with the command to love God. Who God is and what he has done to save his people is tied to our response in faith and love. Credo, from which creed is derived, after all simply means, I believe.

The early church inherited this tradition and confessed before the world what it believed. Many of these confessions and creeds found their way into the New Testament writings (cf. 1 Thess. 4:14, 2 Cor. 5:15, Rom. 4:25, Rev. 2:8). These statements were circulated in the early church to confess what they believed. Who God was, who Jesus was as the God-man, and what he came to do were essential to their worship and life as the church.

We rightly say that Scripture is our ultimate authority. When the church becomes aware of what it believes in opposition to false teaching concerning how we come to a saving faith in God, we must clarify our beliefs. We must write them down. The Apostle Paul did this and placed many of these statements into the New Testament (1 Cor. 15:3-5, 11:23-26; 2 Thess. 2:15). Jesus himself tells the church in the Book of Revelation to carry on this biblical tradition and believe what they have received and heard from the apostles the eyewitness testimonies of the risen Lord (Rev. 3:3).

The church looks at Scripture as its ultimate authority and cannot but respond in faith concerning what she believes. She believes, confesses, and declares to the world what God has done for her in Jesus Christ. To neglect this great treasure is to attempt to reinvent the wheel and miss what Christians for millennia have been doing as part of their faithful witness to Jesus. Study the creeds to know they are true.

2. Creeds are summaries of redemption and lead us to worship God.
While the creeds were formed in the heat of controversy, it was often the case that worshipping God in church, what was said, sung, prayed, and spoken, became the fountain from which people recognized truth from error. Worshipping God, and understanding what was necessary for our salvation, drove our church fathers to write down why salvation had to look and be a certain way. Without each person of the Godhead being fully God, the early church knew there could be no salvation. We could not worship God rightly. Without Jesus being fully God and fully man, we have no hope. Worshipping Jesus as Lord drove them to confess their faith against error.

The earliest creeds, therefore, became the very life-blood of Christian worship and the way to praise God for all his wondrous deeds.

He appeared in the flesh,

was vindicated by the Spirit,

was seen by angels,

was preached among the nations,

was believed on in the world,

was taken up in glory (1 Tim. 3:16).

This is still our pattern today. As we come to know more and more about God, our worship and love for him are purified by Gods Word and Spirit. This is specifically what Christ came to do. He brought us to worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). He is the one who forms and shapes us to speak all the words God has given us to say, declaring to the world the works of God (Ps. 71:15, 105:1, 145:6; Heb. 10:5-10). Creeds are meant for worship, to be sung, recited, and memorized so the word of Christ may dwell in us richly. Put them into your worship services to meditate on God.

3. Creeds are guardrails for our faith and doctrine.
When our beliefs are written down and we have them informed by those who have gone before us, we safeguard ourselves from our generations peculiarities and from the tyranny of leaders who would abuse their authority. Like roads on a highway, they keep us from driving onto terrain that will destroy our tires or, as Paul says, to prevent us from shipwrecking our faith (1. Tim. 1:19).

When we fail to write down what we believe and why, we open the door for peoples unspoken traditions to tyrannize us. When traditions are unspoken, they ironically take on supreme authority. Because no one can read them, no one can question them. When they are written down, they compel us to see if they are in fact biblical. When they are known by the smallest child to the oldest saint, they can lead us to worship the triune God as he has revealed himself.

In the creeds, we find a way to worship God with the saints of all ages, hearing the echoes of worship through the centuries. We find a people from all nations, tribes, and tongues worshipping the triune God for the redemption he has purchased in Jesus. We have a foretaste of the new creation he has ushered into this world and will one day bring to completion. In the creeds, we see time-tested paths to tread that keep us looking to Jesus every day as we seek to know him more and more. Use them to guide your love for the triune God.