Should I ‘Let Go and Let God’?

In this brief clip from an Ask R.C. event in 2014, R.C. Sproul debunks the idea that Christians are sanctified by ‘letting go and letting God.’

Transcript

Question: Dr. Sproul, could you please comment on the significance of ordinary means in our lives, particularly in light of the view that some people espouse that we just need to sit back and wait upon the Lord to do everything for us?

R.C. Sproul: Okay, thank you for that question. There is a heresy that developed in the seventeenth century associated with a French movement called quietism, and it had a kind of mystical foundation to it. The phrase ‘let go and let God’—you’ve probably heard that. And the idea in terms of our sanctification is that we should quit striving for sanctification or for holiness because this is something that only God can bring to pass in our lives. So we need to just be quiet and let go and let God and wait on God to do it for us. Now the opposite heresy at that time was called activism, which was the idea that the only way I’m going to be sanctified is by applying myself vigorously and strenuously every day without any dependence on God the Holy Spirit. Just by my pulling myself up from my spiritual bootstraps, I’m able to accomplish growth in sanctification to the point of holiness. Actually, the church had to say no to both of those distortions.

I know that when I joined a church as a young person, one of the vows that we had to take in joining the church was to make diligent use of the means of grace. Now that came out of the teaching of the Apostle in Philippians when he says “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12)—that’s not casually, in a cavalier manner, laid back. When you’re doing work in fear and trembling, you have your nose to the grindstone and you are sweating bullets to make sure that you’re accomplishing the task that is set before you. So there is the admonition and exhortation apostolically for us to be strenuously involved in pursuing our sanctification. But then in the next breath he says, “for God is at work within you both to will and to do” (Phil. 2:13). So that, on the one hand, we’re to be actively engaged, not quietly waiting for God to do it for us, but at the same time not depending on our own powers and our own resources but realizing that this is a synergistic operation—a cooperative enterprise. I’m working. God is working. And He works through means. Those means of grace that He has given to us to help us in our sanctification: prayer, Bible study, worship, fellowship, witnessing, and service. Those are the ordinary means of grace. You know, we’re lazy, and we want sanctification in three easy steps. But, no. The whole process of sanctification is a lifelong enterprise of diligence and of commitment, making use of those means that the Lord has given to us. So, it’s the lazy man’s Christianity who says I’m going to sit back and let God do it for me.

Exposing the Deception of the Word of Faith

★SHOW 1: Justin Peters interviews Costi Hinn (who is Benny Hinn’s Nephew) about his testimony on how he LEFT the: Word of Faith Prosperity Gospel– AND they talk about the “Sovereign Grace of God” in his life of how the Lord mercifully opened Costi Hinn’s eyes (and his wife’s eyes) to the True Gospel of Repentance & Faith in Jesus Christ.

Charismatic Movement: Defining Key Terms | Justin Peters & Costi Hinn – SO4J-TV | Show 2

★SHOW 3: Justin Peters & Costi Hinn (Benny Hinn’s Nephew who LEFT the Prosperity Gospel) examine the New Testament “Gift of Healing”, and expose the false “Healings” happening in the church today that claim to be a work of the Spirit. They discuss some of the misconceptions of Cessationism, especially as it relates to the miraculous “Gift of Healing”. Justin then explains the purpose of the gifts and the true work of the Spirit in regenerating us and conforming us into the Image of Christ.

★SHOW 4: Justin Peters & Costi Hinn (Benny Hinn’s Nephew who LEFT the Prosperity Gospel) speak on: How can God be both GOOD & SOVEREIGN with so much SUFFERING in the world? This is one of the-age-old-questions but one of which followers of Christ need not be afraid. In this installment of their series, Costi Hinn and Justin Peters discuss how we are to understand God’s Goodness and His Sovereignty (Rom 8:28) in light of: Suffering, Persecution, and Sickness (2 Cor 11:23-30, 2 Cor 6:4-10). Trials are not meant to be enjoyed, but we as Believers may count them as Joy as they serve to conform us into the Image of Christ. (James 1:2-4, 1 Peter 4:12-14, Romans 8:29)

★SHOW 5: Justin Peters & Costi Hinn (Benny Hinn’s Nephew who LEFT the Prosperity Gospel) on: Are the Word-Faith/New Apostolic Reformation movements in error on secondary issues or do they actually qualify as heretical? In this program Costi Hinn and Justin Peters demonstrate that these movements actually teach a very different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible. Christology is not a secondary issue. A different Jesus constitutes a different gospel. This program will show why you should be very concerned if you have a friend or family member in this movement. Souls are truly at stake.”

★SHOW 6: Justin Peters & Costi Hinn (Benny Hinn’s Nephew who LEFT the Prosperity Gospel) on: Problem Bible Verses— Scriptures that are often Twisted, Misinterpreted, and taken out of its proper Context. It is not that False Teachers never refer to the Bible– they do! The problem is that they Twist Scripture & take Bible Verses out of their proper Context and thereby distort their meaning. In this program Costi Hinn and Justin Peters discuss Bible Verses that are commonly misused by: Word of Faith / NAR [New Apostolic Reformation] preachers such as ISAIAH 53:4-5, “By His stripes we are healed,” and JOHN 14:11-12, “Greater works than these,” etc. that would SEEM to support that it is ALWAYS God’s Will to be healed AND that we as believers should regularly be performing incredible Miracles. Costi and Justin will show, HOWEVER, that these verses have been TWISTED to mean something they simply do NOT mean, and then they will discuss the TRUE meaning of these verses. When we know God’s Word rightly, we will know HIM rightly.

★SHOW 7: Justin Peters & Costi Hinn (Benny Hinn’s Nephew who LEFT the Prosperity Gospel) answer: What Tactics do Faith Healers use to manipulate people at Healing Crusades? How do Faith Healers use Music to manipulate people? Is anyone actually miraculously healed at a Benny Hinn crusade or is it Fake? Justin Peters & Costi Hinn discuss these Issues– as well as Costi Hinn also ANSWERS some of the CRITICISMS he has received since he LEFT the Prosperity Gospel and his Uncle Benny Hinn’s ministry.
★Justin and Costi also share that they BOTH wish they did NOT have to WARN about FALSE TEACHERS and would rather just talk about the GOSPEL, but as the Book of Jude rightly talks about in Jude 1:3-4 it is unfortunately “necessary to do so”. This last show in this series ends with the true Gospel of Jesus Christ as shared from Costi Hinn.

What Is the Regulative Principle?

Article: What Is the Regulative Principle? by Dr. Derek Thomas (original source here)

Put simply, the regulative principle of worship states that the corporate worship of God is to be founded upon specific directions of Scripture. On the surface, it is difficult to see why anyone who values the authority of Scripture would find such a principle objectionable. Is not the whole of life itself to be lived according to the rule of Scripture? This is a principle dear to the hearts of all who call themselves biblical Christians. To suggest otherwise is to open the door to antinomianism and license.

But things are rarely so simple. After all, the Bible does not tell me whether I may or may not listen with profit to a Mahler symphony, find stamp-collecting rewarding, or enjoy ferretbreeding as a useful occupation even though there are well-meaning but misguided Bible-believing Christians who assert with dogmatic confidence that any or all of these violate God’s will. Knowing God’s will in any circumstance is an important function of every Christian’s life, and fundamental to knowing it is a willingness to submit to Scripture as God’s authoritative Word for all ages and circumstances. But what exactly does biblical authority mean in such circumstances?

Well, Scripture lays down certain specific requirements: for example, we are to worship with God’s people on the Lord’s Day, and we should engage in useful work and earn our daily bread. In addition, covering every possible circumstance, Scripture lays down a general principle: “present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:1–2). Clearly, all of life is to be regulated by Scripture, whether by express commandment or prohibition or by general principle. There is therefore, in one sense, a regulative principle for all of life. In everything we do, and in some form or another, we are to be obedient to Scripture.

However, the Reformers (John Calvin especially) and the Westminster Divines (as representative of seventeenth-century puritanism) viewed the matter of corporate worship differently. In this instance, a general principle of obedience to Scripture is insufficient; there must be (and is) a specific prescription governing how God is to be worshiped corporately. In the public worship of God, specific requirements are made, and we are not free either to ignore them or to add to them. Typical by way of formulation are the words of Calvin: “God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by his Word” (“The Necessity of Reforming the Church”); and the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689: “The acceptable way of worshiping the true God, is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures” (22.1).

Where does the Bible teach this? In more places than is commonly imagined, including the constant stipulation of the book of Exodus with respect to the building of the tabernacle that everything be done “after the pattern … shown you” (Ex. 25:40); the judgment pronounced upon Cain’s offering, suggestive as it is that his offering (or his heart) was deficient according to God’s requirement (Gen. 4:3–8); the first and second commandments showing God’s particular care with regard to worship (Ex. 20:2–6); the incident of the golden calf, teaching as it does that worship cannot be offered merely in accord with our own values and tastes; the story of Nadab and Abihu and the offering of “strange fire” (Lev. 10); God’s rejection of Saul’s non-prescribed worship — God said, “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22); and Jesus’ rejection of Pharisaical worship according to the “tradition of the elders” (Matt. 15:1–14). All of these indicate a rejection of worship offered according to values and directions other than those specified in Scripture.

Of particular significance are Paul’s responses to errant public worship at Colossae and Corinth. At one point, Paul characterizes the public worship in Colossae as ethelothreskia (Col. 2:23), variously translated as “will worship” (KJV) or “self-made religion” (ESV). The Colossians had introduced elements that were clearly unacceptable (even if they were claiming an angelic source for their actions — one possible interpretation of Col. 2:18, the “worship of angels”). Perhaps it is in the Corinthian use (abuse) of tongues and prophecy that we find the clearest indication of the apostle’s willingness to “regulate” corporate worship. He regulates both the number and order of the use of spiritual gifts in a way that does not apply to “all of life”: no tongue is to be employed without an interpreter (1 Cor. 14:27–28) and only two or three prophets may speak, in turn (vv. 29–32). At the very least, Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians underlines that corporate worship is to be regulated and in a manner that applies differently from that which is to be true for all of life.

The result? Particular elements of worship are highlighted: reading the Bible (1 Tim. 4:13); preaching the Bible (2 Tim. 4:2); singing the Bible (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16) — the Psalms as well as Scripture songs that reflect the development of redemptive history in the birth-life-death-resurrection- ascension of Jesus; praying the Bible — the Father’s house is “a house of prayer” (Matt. 21:13); and seeing the Bible in the two sacraments of the church, baptism and the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:23–26; Col. 2:11–12). In addition, occasional elements such as oaths, vows, solemn fasts and thanksgivings have also been recognized and highlighted (see Westminster Confession of Faith 21:5).

It is important to realize that the regulative principle as applied to public worship frees the church from acts of impropriety and idiocy — we are not free, for example, to advertise that performing clowns will mime the Bible lesson at next week’s Sunday service. Yet it does not commit the church to a “cookie-cutter,” liturgical sameness. Within an adherence to the principle there is enormous room for variation—in matters that Scripture has not specifically addressed (adiaphora). Thus, the regulative principle as such may not be invoked to determine whether contemporary or traditional songs are employed, whether three verses or three chapters of Scripture are read, whether one long prayer or several short prayers are made, or whether a single cup or individual cups with real wine or grape juice are utilized at the Lord’s Supper. To all of these issues, the principle “all things should be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40) must be applied. However, if someone suggests dancing or drama is a valid aspect of public worship, the question must be asked — where is the biblical justification for it? (To suggest that a preacher moving about in the pulpit or employing “dramatic” voices is “drama” in the sense above is to trivialize the debate.) The fact that both may be (to employ the colloquialism) “neat” is debatable and beside the point; there’s no shred of biblical evidence, let alone mandate, for either. So it is superfluous to argue from the poetry of the Psalms or the example of David dancing before the ark (naked, to be sure) unless we are willing to abandon all the received rules of biblical interpretation. It is a salutary fact that no office of “choreographer” or “producer/director” existed in the temple. The fact that both dance and drama are valid Christian pursuits is also beside the point.

What is sometimes forgotten in these discussions is the important role of conscience. Without the regulative principle, we are at the mercy of “worship leaders” and bullying pastors who charge noncompliant worshipers with displeasing God unless they participate according to a certain pattern and manner. To the victims of such bullies, the sweetest sentences ever penned by men are, “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in anything, contrary to His Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience: and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also” (WCF 20:2). To obey when it is a matter of God’s express prescription is true liberty; anything else is bondage and legalism.