Nought Matters but Thee Alone

Reading Newton's Mail: When Humility Is Pride

2011-02-04T10:54:00.000-08:00

By Tony Reinke

Rev. Joshua Symonds (1739–1788) was the pastor of a church in Bedford, England who suffered from frequent afflictions, temptations, and what we might call depression—“family cares and severe bodily affliction sometimes cast a gloom over his spirit and led him to take desponding views of himself” [1]. Symonds’s despondency and sense of personal worthlessness engrossed his life, which is made clear in the letters he exchanged with his friend John Newton.

Symonds was aware of his own depravity and spiritual barrenness. But the bigger problem in Symonds’s life was not in thinking too lowly of himself, but in thinking too lowly of the Savior. He was sliding into legalism. He was aware of his own sinfulness, but unable to appreciate the all-sufficiency of the Savior.

Writes Newton,

You say, you find it hard to believe it compatible with the divine purity to embrace or employ such a monster as yourself. You express not only a low opinion of yourself, which is right, but too low an opinion of the person, work, and promises of the Redeemer; which is certainly wrong.

And therein is the danger of understanding total depravity without understanding the sufficiency of the Savior.

Satan’s School of Humility

So what went wrong in his friend’s thinking?

According to Newton, Symonds had been duped in Satan’s “school of humility,” where humility is twisted and distorted into prideful self-loathing that pushes the Savior away.

Satan transforms himself into an angel of light. He sometimes offers to teach us humility; but though I wish to be humble, I desire not to learn in this school. His premises perhaps are true, that we are vile, wretched creatures—but he then draws abominable conclusions from them; and would teach us, that, therefore, we ought to question either the power, or the willingness, or the faithfulness of Christ.

Indeed, though our complaints are good, so far as they spring from a dislike of sin; yet, when we come to examine them closely, there is often so much self-will, self-righteousness, unbelief, pride, and impatience mingled with them, that they are little better than the worst evils we can complain of.

Tim Keller quotes and explains the significance of Newton's words in his forthcoming book King's Cross: The Story of the World in the Life of Jesus. Keller writes,
There are two ways to fail to let Jesus be your Savior. One is by being too proud, having a superiority complex—not to accept his challenge. But the other is through an inferiority complex—being so self-absorbed that you say, “I’m just so awful that God can’t love me.” That is, not to accept his offer.

And that is how Satan turns humility into false humility, false humility into despondency, and despondency into an inferiority complex that pushes away the gospel.

Looking Directly to Jesus

Newton was keenly aware that at the root of Symonds’s problems were his small thoughts about the Savior. Symonds was tempted to see himself as unworthy of the gospel, the very gospel that invites the most unworthy sinners.

Newton writes,

You have not, you cannot have, anything in the sight of God, but what you derive from the righteousness and atonement of Jesus. If you could keep him more constantly in view, you would be more comfortable. He would be more honored.…Let us pray that we may be enabled to follow the apostle’s, or rather the Lord’s command by him, Rejoice in the Lord always, and again I say, Rejoice [Philippians 4:4]. We have little to rejoice in ourselves, but we have right and reason to rejoice in him.
And in a later letter Newton writes,

The best evidence of faith is shutting our eyes equally upon our defects and our graces, and looking directly to Jesus as clothed with authority and power to save to the uttermost....Plead the Apostle’s argument (Romans 8:31–39) before the Lord and against Satan. [2]

We find no eternal hope within ourselves. Revisiting personal depravity is not the solution. Revisiting past periods of spiritual strength is not the solution. Prolonged introspection is not the solution. The solution is to look outside of ourselves, and to gaze again and again at the all-sufficient Savior who welcomes sinners, forgives sinners, and saves sinners to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25).
In other words, Christ is powerful to save, he is faithful to save, and he is willing to save even the most “monstrous” of sinners.

Conclusion

Rev. Joshua Symonds died at the age of 49. His life was difficult, but in his last days he wrote that the Savior “filled him with a steady, constant peace, and sometimes with unutterable joy and transport” [3].

There can be little doubt that his joy-filled confidence in the Savior at the end of his life was deeply shaped by the caring wisdom that he read in the letters penned by his friend John Newton.

Tony Reinke serves as the editorial and research assistant to C.J. Mahaney. Reading Newton’s Mail is a series of blog posts reflecting on various published letters written by John Newton (1725–1807), the onetime captain of a slave trading ship—a self-described apostate, blasphemer, and infidel, who was eventually converted by grace. Newton is most famous for authoring the hymn “Amazing Grace,” or maybe for helping William Wilberforce put an end to the African slave trade in Britain. Less legendarily, Newton faithfully pastored two churches for 43 years, a fruitful period of his life when a majority of his letters were written. Reading Newton’s Mail is published on Fridays here on the Cheap Seats blog.

What Not to Say to Those Who are Suffering

2011-01-31T11:24:00.000-08:00

Reposted from CCEF.org

by Ed Welch

“It could be worse. Imagine if you broke both legs.”

We have some odd ways of cheering each other up.

Most of our bone-headed comments to suffering people are offered with passable intentions, and most of those comments are judged by their recipients as misguided rather than malicious, but it sure would be nice to improve our record of encouragement in the midst of pain.

We could all generate a Top Ten List of words we spoke or received that make us shudder when we think about them. Here is one that, I suspect, makes a lot of lists.

“What is God teaching you through this?”

Hmmm. This is orthodox. God does teach us in our suffering, and he is working all things together for good. We agree with C.S.Lewis when he writes that pain is God’s megaphone to arouse a deaf world. But the story of Jezebel and her entrails being food for the dogs is orthodox too. We are after orthodoxy that is relevant, pastoral and edifying.

Consider a few of the possible problems with this question.

It tends to be condescending. If you heard this question from someone, you probably didn’t hear compassion.
It suggests that suffering is a solvable riddle. God has something specific in mind and we have to guess what it is. Welcome to a cosmic game of Twenty-Questions, and we better get the right answer soon; otherwise, the suffering will continue.
It suggests that we have done something that has unleashed the suffering.
It undercuts God’s call to all suffering people, “Trust me.”

To briefly respond to these four problems,

Suffering compels us to modesty. Scripture gives us a number of insights into human suffering, but no insight is exhaustive. The mystery in suffering reminds us that we are still like children who don’t understand how good parents can impose difficulties in our lives. In light of the mystery, humility is natural and necessary. For those who speak to suffering people, humility before the Lord is expressed in humility before the suffering person.
We over-interpret suffering. I am speaking with a person now who has gone through horrible suffering in her life, and “What is God trying to tell you?” has been the question everyone asks. She has wondered for years why she doesn’t have an answer yet. All she can figure is that she is too sinful to get it or God is not giving out the answer key – so she is alternately guilty and frustrated. Job in the Old Testament and the man born blind in the New Testament (John 9) should keep us from endless speculation about God’s precise intent. Neither one was supposed to get what God was teaching them.
Focus on a sin-suffering nexus to your peril. Granted, the question might not assume that the suffering person is in sin. The question might have been intended more positively, as in “How are you learning about the Lord in this?” But unless there is an absolutely clear connection between a person’s sin and suffering, and it is obvious to every believer on the planet, then we shouldn’t make the connection and do everything we can to keep the suffering person from making the connection. Most of us see more of our sin during our suffering – I know I do – but that doesn’t mean our sin was the cause of the suffering.
Insight can work against faith. By that I don’t mean that we should be mindless stoics in our suffering. But when our primary goal is to discover a personal message about a specific deficiency in our lives, then we are resting in our human understanding rather than the plainly revealed character of God. Faith is our calling in suffering – faith in Jesus Christ. This is not a mindless leap into the unknown. It is a turn of heart, away from us and to Jesus. In our suffering we want to remember that God is, indeed, good and compassionate. Jesus’ incarnation and his voluntary suffering culminating with the cross are the undeniable evidence. Then we trust him.

Some have heard the question, “What is God teaching you?” and, though not especially edifying, the question wasn’t discouraging. If so, expect that this question was not the first one asked, and it was asked in the context of a secure relationship.

When in doubt, skip the question all together.

Replace it with something like this.

“How can I pray for you?”

Here is a hard working question. With it we are coming beside those who suffer, we are reminding them that God hears, we are asking them to consider the promises of God to them, and we are saying that they are going to be on our heart. If we get an answer such as “pray that God would leave me alone” or a roll of the eyes – something that suggests either anger or spiritual indifference – then we can propose something that is a promise of God, such as comfort or the knowledge of God’s love and presence.

Even better than “How can I pray for you?” we could pray for the person on the spot. “How could I pray for you now?” And after that comes the most important part – we follow up. When we pray for someone we keep praying and we pray until we have witnessed God on the move.

And I didn’t personally say the one about the legs. I am guilty for many other unedifying comments, but I didn’t say the one about the legs. A “friend” said it. Really.

Supernatural Conondrums and the Necessity of Faith

2010-07-07T12:20:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking much lately on the topic of the supernatural. My faith rests on the belief in the supernatural: that God breaks through the ordinary laws of the universe and accomplishes something beyond what science or humans can achieve. I believe that Jesus Christ was miraculously conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit - and that three days after His last breath, He breathed again. I also believe that the Bible is a special book unlike any other - that every word inside its pages have their ultimate source in the Holy Spirit of God.

I've been reflecting on how for well over a century, liberals and conservatives have been divided over this very issue. Conservatives hold to a supernaturalist worldview - so they hold to the divinity of Christ, His miracles, His resurrection, and the special way that the Bible has come to us - through supernatural inspiration.

Since liberals don't believe in the supernatural, they must, by necessity, reject all that I just listed.

I've been reflecting on this supernatural-natural grid for some time. I am an evangelical cessationist, which, in simple terms, means that I hold to a supernaturalist worldview - I believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, and all of the events and truths that Scripture teaches - but I do not believe that the Holy Spirit gifts believers to perform supernatural acts (healing, speaking in tongues) today. I believe that God can step in at any time He likes in order to perform these miracles through believers, but I do not believe that His giving these supernatural gifts is His m.o. during this time in history.

This presents a special problem. I believe in the supernatural but for all practical purposes, my life is void of it. Furthermore, I have been fed up with pithy answers like, "The biggest miracle is a new day," or "The most supernatural thing that happens is love." We're cheating with answers like that.

That got me thinking on whether or not the supernatural really does exist. If I say I believe in all these things, why isn't my life a reflection of that? Why do I so easily dismiss reports of the supernatural as hoaxes or schemes to make money?

I had to resolve this crisis. It happened and it was resolved in the span of about 5 minutes. Here's how it resolved in my mind.

Come back with me to the time of Christ. Atheists and naturalists say that if they saw the miraculous happen with their own eyes, they would be convinced. The life of Christ disproves their theory. Take, for example, the many occasions when Jesus healed people. Let's take the episode of Lazarus as a case study. Scripture says that Jesus purposefully put off coming to see him when he heard that he was sick so that His disciples might believe (Jn. 11:15). I.e., Jesus didn't go to heal Lazarus because raising Him from the dead would make a greater impact on the disciples' faith.

So He stays, waits for Lazarus to die, then goes to His tomb and raises him from the dead.

This event would surely be enough to change the hearts of even the most stubborn, right?

Wrong.

Upon hearing this, Jesus' arch-enemies, the Pharisees, did not doubt the authenticity of His miracles, but instead worried that He would continue doing them and so (in non-sequitur thinking) the Romans would come and take away everything else they had. So they decide it would be best to kill the miracle-maker and his newly raised friend (Jn. 12:10). What I'm getting at here is that supernatural events, even if they are witnessed (e.g. Lk. 14:1-6) do not guarantee belief or faith. They are an aid to faith, but they do not ensure it.

Jesus asserts this Himself when He acquiesces to Thomas' request to examine His crucifixion wounds post-resurrection, responding to Thomas' new faith with the declaration of a beatitude: “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (Jn. 20:29) We who believe without seeing are blessed because belief is the goal of the miraculous. If we, who have not seen Jesus alive, still believe in Him, we have within ourselves the goal of all of Jesus' miracles: faith in Him.

I think this is what Peter was on to when he wrote to second-generation Christians: "Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls." (1 Pet. 1:8-9)

I have a theory I have been nursing for some time now that I have sought to apply to the supernatural. For thousands of years, God revealed Himself in miraculous ways to people - on Sinai in awesome majesty - over the Red Sea with a mighty east wind - and to the death and resurrection of His Son - and then through the faith and testimony of His people, the church. I think the flow of history follows a decrescendo. God seems to move from the loud to the whisper. We are living in the whisper. Does the supernatural change people's hearts? It wasn't enough for Israel, who witnessed miracle after miracle and still stubbornly refused to trust God - and it wasn't enough for Jesus' opponents, who sought to undue everything the Messiah was doing - and in the final equation, their last effort resulted in salvation available for all - God's biggest moment of irony and triumph.

And here's the theory: God has, like a tired parent, chosen to work in a different way with His children. In effect, He has said: "Ok, you won't believe the supernatural? I can put an end to that, then." Why not? I'm merely extrapolating what Jesus and the apostles did on a small scale to a larger scale (Matt. 11:20-21; Matt. 13:58; Matt. 10:14). You won't have faith because or miracles? No miracles for you.

So here we are, living in the whisper of History, with God's (at times, very pathetic) people, the church, and no loud voice from heaven, no lightning, no splitting seas.

I think it only makes sense that, especially in a naturalist society like America, that God would not normally do miracles. What effect would that have on a society that doesn't believe in miracles? This is why I think that God still chooses to work miracles in other societies - especially the Third World, where the supernatural is still believed - and that's why you hear so many miracle-stories from missionaries - because God is using them in a miracle-believing place.

But if we have faith, we have what God has been aiming for all along.

Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.

Our Naked Souls

2010-05-05T07:48:00.000-07:00

"“They look and stare upon me.” Unholy eyes gazed insultingly upon the Saviours’s nakedness, and shocked the sacred delicacy of his holy soul. The sight of the agonizing body ought to have ensured sympathy from the throng, but it only increased their savage mirth, as they gloated their cruel eyes upon his miseries. Let us blush for human nature, and mourn in sympathy with our Redeemer’s shame. The first Adam made us all naked, and therefore the second Adam became naked that he might clothe our naked souls."

C. H. Spurgeon on Psalm 22:17

It Would Drain the Ocean Dry

2010-03-03T13:06:00.000-08:00

Could we with ink the ocean fill
And were the skies of parchment made
Were every stalk on earth a quill
And every man a scribe by trade
To write the love of God above
Would drain the ocean dry;
Nor could the scroll contain the whole
Tho stretched from sky to sky.

Oh love of God, how rich and pure!
How measureless and strong
It shall evermore endure-
The saints' and angels' song.

F. Lehman

Paul and James

2010-02-23T14:48:00.000-08:00

Doug Moo summarizes their unique contributions:

"When faced with legalism, with the attempt to base salvation on human works, Paul needs to be heard - as he was so powerfully at the time of the Reformation. But when faced with quietism, with the attitude that dismisses works as unnecessary for Christians, James needs to be heard - as he was equally powerfully in the time of the Wesleys." (INT, 633)

Potent Quotables

2010-02-06T10:59:00.000-08:00

From Charles Simeon:

"Take the Word as little children without enquiring what human system it appears to favor."

From F.B. Meyer:

"It is urgently needful that the Christian people of our charge should come to understand that they are not a company of invalids, to be wheeled about, or fed by hand, cosseted, nursed, and comforted, the minister being head-physician and nurse - but a garrison in an enemy's country, every soul of which should have some post of duty, at which he should be prepared to make any sacrifice rather than quit it."

If Jack Bauer was Your Pastor

2010-02-05T13:22:00.000-08:00

Here's another gem from Stephen Altrogge:

The other day I was thinking, what if Jack Bauer became a Christian, and then suddenly felt a call to ministry?

What would his church be like? His counseling sessions? Here’s what I think it would be like…

Counseling sessions would be fast. Really fast. Because he only has two minutes, and you better tell him what’s going on or he’s going to mash your knee with his oversized Bible.

He would scream the word “now” a lot. As in, “Tell me why you were impatient with your wife. NOW!”

Every counseling session would end with a confession, because Pastor Jack can pull a confession out of anybody. Even if you didn’t do it.

In every elders meeting Jack would inform the elders that “he did what he had to”.

He would answer every theological question the same way: “It’s complicated…”

He would probably fake his death several times as sermon illustrations.

Scripture references in sermons would be called “backup”.

The church would meet in an abandoned warehouse. The ushers would also be snipers and would establish a perimeter around the building.

At least three times a week Jack would be misunderstood by his congregation and have to go “dark” until he could clear his name.

What else would Jack Bauer do if he were a pastor?

iPad: A Shaq-Sized iPod

2010-02-05T13:18:00.000-08:00

This is from Stephen Altrogge over at Sovereign Grace Ministries. I find his anti-bandwagon humor genius:

Here’s why I’m not so impressed with the iPad…

Zero capacity for time travel. After reading all the hype I was under the impression that I was going to be able to transport myself directly back to 1992 and watch brand new episodes of “Home Improvements”. Apparently Steve Jobs hasn’t heard of a flux capacitor (see Back to the Future).

No ability to be my personal bond-servant. I was envisioning something along the lines of “Hal” from 2001: A Space Odyssey, except that the iPad wouldn’t attempt to kill me or take over my life. It would just make my bed and be a true friend.

No shoulder support. It would appear that the iPad is really just an enormous, Shaq-sized iPod. With an iPod this large, I want to wear jam pants and carry it on my shoulder through the mall, pumping out the tunes, like an old boom box. But there’s no shoulder support. Come on Apple, looks aren’t everything.

No bulletproof anything. Okay can we be honest for a second? For what it does, the iPad is enormous. Almost like a police riot shield. If I’m going to carry it around, shouldn’t I at least be able to block a bullet with it as well? But I didn’t see one mention of bullet proof casing on the specs.

No built in celebrity voices. You can read books on the iPad. Not impressive. I can read books on paper too. I want something that is going to read books to me, preferably in pre-recorded celebrity voices. I want to have Sean Connery reading the book Desiring God to me.

Okay, I’m done wigging out about the iPad.

Preparing for a Beating: My View on the Miraculous Gifts

2010-02-04T17:02:00.000-08:00

I am stepping out on a limb here. I wanted to post a paper that I had to write for my class on the Holy Spirit. In this paper, we had to give our view on the sign gifts (healing, miracles, and especially tongues).

I believe Christians on both sides have been harsh and at times slanderous towards each other (and to the Holy Spirit...which is a very dangerous thing to do considering Matthew 12:22-32) over this issue. Many bridges have been burned that should have been left up, and the body has become more fragmented as a result. I think that we all should examine the Scriptural data honestly and with integrity, and decide what conclusions we can and can't make from the text.

Call me a fence rider, but don't call me a heretic. I give my view as honestly as I can. I would appreciate your honest and charitable feedback, but I'll delete any slanderous or unedifying comments. (One more rant: the comment section in many evangelical blogs is a shameful display of how quarrelsome we can be).

So here it is:

Are the Sign Gifts for Today?

In order to establish the relevance of the sign gifts to the church today, we must define several terms. First, we must define what sign gifts are. Spiritual gifts are special manifestations of the Holy Spirit’s power given to believers in order to win souls to the Christ and edify the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:7). Sign gifts, as the name “sign” indicates, were given by the Spirit in order to testify to the genuineness of the gospel’s proclamation (Heb. 2:3-4). 1 Corinthians 12 lists several, including gifts of healing (12:9), working miracles (12:10), and speaking in foreign languages (12:10). The gifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith, prophecy, discerning between spirits (12:8-10) are not included as sign gifts, because they form the content of the proclamation, rather than testifying to its validity.

We can look to the book of Acts for demonstrations of the sign gifts. Speaking in foreign languages was the first sign gift to make an appearance there, in chapter 2. The believers were gathered in the Upper Room, awaiting the promised Holy Spirit. When He came upon them, they were able to speak in foreign languages that scattered Jews gathered in Jerusalem were able to understand (2:5-13). The tongues were a way of capturing the attention of the Jews and were part of a one-two punch; first the tongues were given and then Peter was able to preach the gospel to a captive audience (2:14ff). This suggests that the tongues were given as a means to an end, the end being the gospel proclamation.

Healing was the next sign gift, showing up in chapter 3. The format is very similar to chapter 2. First, a sign gift is practiced, as Peter heals a crippled man sitting by the temple (3:1-10), and then he proclaims the message (3:11ff). This emulates Jesus’ own ministry while He ministered on earth.

The working of miracles is the next gift presented in Acts. Miracles should not just be considered wonderful, but can often be used to provoke awe and fear in the audience. Chapter 5 contains the notorious account of Anninias and Sapphira, who lied concerning their donation to the apostle’s ministry. Peter perceived this, probably through direct revelation of the Spirit. Right after he confronted each of them, they fell to the ground, dead. Luke’s narrative comments form an inclusio around the encounter, and illustrate the purpose behind this event. "And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus" (4:33, ESV), and “. . .many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles" (5:12, ESV). The apostles were performing miracles through the power of the Holy Spirit for the purpose of testifying to the Lord’s resurrection.

The nature of healing and miracles was relatively simple to discern: A crippled man could walk, and those that lied to God were killed on the spot. The nature of tongues is another matter. It is clear from Acts 2 that the languages spoken there were known languages, as each foreign Jew could hear God’s wonders being declared in their own language (Acts 2:7-13). The most thorough discussion of tongues happens in 1 Corinthians 14. Paul is addressing the abuse of spiritual gifts, describing how they are supposed to work in a body to build the church up, not as spiritual badges that can be used to one-up each other (chapter 12). He wants them to practice love above all (chapter 13) and to practice the spiritual gifts in love. He is also concerned that they be practiced in an orderly manner (14:26-33).

Having established the context, let us look at the main text. The lengthiest explanation of tongues occurs in 14:1-25. The gift of tongues is compared with the gift of prophecy. This is where the first interpretive problem occurs. Paul is clearly affirming the superiority of prophecy to tongues (14:1, 39). Paul esteems prophecy more important than tongues, because without an interpreter, tongues are unintelligible (14:5, 12). This is where the practice of tongues is different from its appearance in Acts 2. In Acts 2, unbelieving Jews heard tongues and recognized them as an intelligible language. The purpose in Acts 2 was to get the attention of the foreign Jews, since they could instantly recognize a dialect spoken in Jerusalem that would probably not have otherwise been spoken. No interpreter would have been needed.

The situation was different in Corinth. Paul did not say, “Stop practicing the gift of tongues because you don’t have any foreigners in your midst.” He said if tongues are practiced, an interpretation must be given. It is safe to imply from this that the purpose of tongues on Corinth was not for foreign unbelievers. Why would an interpreter be needed if the tongue were intelligible to the unbeliever? No interpreters were needed in Acts 2, but by the time of 1 Corinthians, interpreters were needed. In Corinth, if tongues were practiced in the presence of an unbeliever without an interpreter and without a word of prophecy, “will [the unbeliever] not say that [the believers] are out of [their] minds?" (1 Cor 14:23, ESV)

There are two interpretive options: (1) The nature of tongues had changed, at least in Corinth, into a special form of prophecy, in an Ecstatic Unintelligable Speech (EUS), a language which no one but the interpreter could understand or (2) The nature of tongues had stayed the same, and an interpreter was needed because the foreign language was one that neither the speaker or an unbeliever knew.

I believe that we do not have enough data to make a confident decision concerning the nature of tongues in 1 Cor. 14. It is impossible to tell whether an interpreter was needed in Corinth because there weren’t any foreign unbelievers to understand the tongue or whether tongues had changed into an EUS.

From what I know of the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement, they believe that tongues are EUS, and are still given both for public and private edification. Some of the cessationist groups, believing that tongues were only known languages, immediately reject the Pentecostal/Charismatic’s view on tongues because they disagree on the exact nature of the language. Based on my interpretation of 1 Corinthians, I cannot make an authoritative decision regarding speaking in tongues today. I know that tongues, whether genuine or fake, are often practiced today in a manner that violates the apostolic teaching. Some would say that this proves that the tongues are therefore not real. This logic does not hold up. To put it another way, just because some abuse the preaching and teaching of God’s Word does not mean that teaching and preaching should not be done or that it is null. It just proves that people abuse it.

In regards to healing and miracles, I believe that God can still heal people and that miracles do still happen, but I deny that they are a spiritual gift given to the church today. I cannot find a text that supports my conclusion. Some say that the gifts of healing and miracles only existed during the time of the apostles. It is true that the miraculous gifts existed during their time, but nothing in Scripture indicates that the gifts were exclusive to the apostolic period. That they existed during the apostolic period could be incidental; it does not sufficiently demonstrate that the sign gifts were exclusive to the apostolic time.

I must admit that my experience has been the arbiter of my decision regarding the sign gifts. Here I find the insights of Sawyer insightful. He uses Deere when commenting on the role of experience in theologizing, worth quoting at length:

There is one reason why Bible-believing Christians do not believe in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit today. It is simply this: they have not seen them. Their tradition, of course, supports their lack of belief, but their tradition would have no chance of success if it were not coupled with their lack of experience of the miraculous. Let me repeat: Christians do not disbelieve in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit because the Scriptures teach these gifts have passed away. Rather they disbelieve in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit because they have not experienced them. No cessationist writer that I am aware of tries to make his case on Scripture alone. All of these writers appeal to both Scripture and to either present or past history to support their case. It often goes unnoticed that this appeal to history either past or present is actually an argument from experience, or better, an argument from the lack of experience (italics his).[1]

I have not experienced or witnessed sign gifts, so naturally I do not believe that they are relevant for today. My neighbors are believers who claim to speak in tongues and claim to have witnessed miracles and signs. Is it my job to convince them that they are in error? In good conscience, I cannot. Furthermore, I would be burning bridges with other believers in the body of Christ. Our witness to others in our apartment complex would be hindered were I to make the practice of miraculous gifts the test of fellowship. In their affirming the miraculous gifts, they do not seriously compromise any major doctrine of Scripture, including the Trinity, the deity and humanity of Christ, salvation by faith alone, the bodily resurrection of the dead, and several others. Calling them heretics is uncalled for and inappropriate. I would go so far as to say that it would be slander, which is not the way a godly Christian is supposed to speak (Eph. 4:29, 31).

If one day I experience or witness one of the miraculous gifts, I would reevaluate my current view. As it stands, I am a soft cessationist. I believe that the gifts of teacher, leader, administrator, pastor, and the like are relevant for the church today, for the building up of the body.

[1] M. James Sawyer, The Survivor's Guide to Theology (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2006), 123.

Because Quoting Jonathan Edwards is the Cool Thing To Do

2010-02-04T00:25:00.000-08:00

Here you go. From "Advice to Recent Converts." (But this would be good advice for any seasoned believer): [P.S. - I wish I had read #10 when I was just beginning to walk with the Lord...]

3. When you hear a sermon, hear for yourself. Though what is spoken may be more especially directed to the unconverted, or to those that, in other respects, are in different circumstances from yourself; yet, let the chief intent of your mind be to consider, ‘In what respect is this applicable to me? and what improvement ought I to make of this, for my own soul’s good?’

5. Remember, that you have more cause, on some accounts, a thousand times, to lament and humble yourself for sins that have been committed since conversion, than before, because of the infinitely greater obligations that are upon you to live to God, and to look upon the faithfulness of Christ, in unchangeably continuing his loving-kindness, notwithstanding all your great unworthiness since your conversion.

6. Be always greatly abased for your remaining sin, and never think that you lie low enough for it; but yet be not discouraged or disheartened by it; for, though we are exceeding sinful, yet we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; the preciousness of whose blood, the merit of whose righteousness, and the greatness of whose love and faithfulness, infinitely overtop the highest mountains of our sins.

8. Remember, that pride is the worst viper that is in the heart, the greatest disturber of the soul’s peace, and of sweet communion with Christ: it was the first sin committed, and lies lowest in the foundation of Satan’s whole building, and is with the greatest difficulty rooted out, and is the most hidden, secret, and deceitful of all lusts, and often creeps insensibly into the midst of religion, even, sometimes, under the disguise of humility itself.

10. If at any time you fall into doubts about the state of your soul, in dark and dull frames of mind, it is proper to review your past experience; but do not consume too much time and strength in this way: rather apply yourself, with all your might, to an earnest pursuit after renewed experience, new light, and new lively acts of faith and love. One new discovery of the glory of Christ’s face, will do more toward scattering clouds of darkness in one minute, than examining old experience, by the best marks that can be given, through a whole year.

11. When the exercise of grace is low, and corruption prevails, and by that means fear prevails; do not desire to have fear cast out any other way, than by the reviving and prevailing of love in the heart: by this, fear will be effectually expelled, as darkness in a room vanishes away, when the pleasant beams of the sun are let into it.

12. When you counsel and warn others, do it earnestly, and affectionately, and thoroughly; and when you are speaking to your equals, let your warnings be intermixed with expressions of your sense of your own unworthiness, and of the sovereign grace that makes you differ.

A Warning from Warfield

2010-02-02T12:58:00.001-08:00

"We are frequently told, indeed, that the great danger of the theological student lies precisely in his constant contact with divine things. They may come to seem common to him, because they are customary. As the average man breathes the air and basks in the sunshine without ever a thought that it is God in his goodness who makes his sun to rise on him, though he is evil, and sends rain to him, though he is unjust; so you may come to handle even the furniture of the sanctuary with never a thought above the gross early materials of which it is made. The words which tell you of God's terrible majesty or of his glorious goodness may come to be mere words to you— Hebrew and Greek words, with etymologies, and inflections, and connections in sentences. The reasonings which establish to you the mysteries of his saving activities may come to be to you mere logical paradigms, with premises and conclusions, fitly framed, no doubt, and triumphantly cogent, but with no further significance to you than their formal logical conclusiveness. God's stately stepping in his redemptive processes may become to you a mere series of facts of history, curiously interplaying to the production of social and religious conditions, and pointing mayhap to an issue which we may shrewdly conjecture: but much like other facts occurring in time and space, which may come to your notice. It is your great danger."

B.B. Warfield

Exegesis and the Doctor's Office

2010-02-01T13:39:00.000-08:00

I was in the doctor's office the other day. I'm glad I don't have to be in there much, but I try to go when something's wrong just to make sure everything's ok. [Don't worry, it was nothing...everything's ok!]

I spoke with the doctor about what was going on. He was able to explain what was going on in terms I could understand. If he explained what was going on using doctorish language, I would not be able to follow him. I imagined that in his mind he had medical terms whizzing though, but had to translate those into something I could understand.

I think preaching is something like this. The pastor, from his own exegesis of a text, has important observations, but to just tell those to a congregation would be very confusing. It starts with exegesis, but it shouldn't end there.

Exegesis is the work of finding out the original intent of the writer of a Biblical text. The exegete examines a Scripture's original language, historical setting, etc, in order to arrive at the meaning of the text.

What the exegete has once he or she completes exegesis often looks like a complicated mess of grammatical and historical observations. I've seen preachers merely transfer the results of the exegesis 1-for-1 into a sermon. This is bad preaching, as the information communicated is often difficult for the congregation to evaluate the importance of. They wonder, "What was the point of all that?"

I would submit that exegesis is mainly for the pastor's sake. Giving the congregation all of the historical-grammatical details will not build them up [in fact, it will probably puff them up]. The job of the pastor is to do thorough exegesis of the text, consider what is worth mentioning and what is not, and then process the original meaning of the text so that it yields an accurate application.

* * *

Edit: Check this out for a satirical spin on what I'm talking about.

What William Tyndale Asked for Before He Died

2010-01-30T11:44:00.000-08:00

"A warmer cap, a candle, a piece of cloth to patch my leggings. . . . But above all, I beseech and entreat your clemency to . . . permit me to have my Hebrew Bible, Hebrew grammar and Hebrew Dictionary, that I may spend time . . . in study."

A Shira La-Adonai [I Will Sing to the LORD]

2010-01-29T13:21:00.001-08:00

I will sing to the LORD, for He has triumphed gloriously;
the horse and his rider He has thrown into the sea.

Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods?
Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?

You have led in your steadfast love the people whom you have redeemed;
you have guided them by your strength to your holy abode.

Why Do We Feel More Sinful After Getting Saved?

2010-01-27T15:45:00.001-08:00

I've often wondered this. Before I was saved, I was completely unaware of how sinful I was in God's eyes. After I got saved, I slowly became increasingly aware of how I still don't measure up. Sounds familiar in your own life?

Not only that, but you start to notice a conflict inside, a civil war, between the flesh and the Spirit. One would think that getting saved means living in internal peace now that God has forgiven your sins.

I think it has something to do with what the Holy Spirit does in us as we are saved and grow in grace, as well as the fight with the flesh. Ferguson is helpful here:

"[The Holy Spirit's] presence as 'life giving Spirit' in the body of death heightens rather than diminishes the Christian's awareness of the tensions implied in life in the Spirit. Any assumption that the fullness of the Spirit relieves the conflicts of this life misshapes the New Testament teaching. In fact, the presence of the Spirit tends to maximize rather than minimize the sense of contrast between the present [we are saved, but we still are prone to sin] and the future [we will one day be completely free from sin!]."

In other words, before we were saved, there was no conflict, because only the flesh was around. After we get saved, the flesh and the Spirit begin a war, and we must constantly make the choice to submit to the realm of the Holy Spirit, and not to the old realm of the flesh.

Why Are We So Offended All the Time?

2010-01-27T13:05:00.000-08:00

This is a reprint of an article that Kevin DeYoung wrote. Worth reading. (BTW, "Love is not easily angered [or offended]..." 1 Cor. 13.5 )

Let me start with the caveats. Many people suffer at the hands of others. The world can be unfair, at times mercilessly so. Millions of people in the world are genuine victims, right now. All of us will be at some point, whether it's for small matters or large, for a long duration or short.

But we aren't all victims, not all the time anyway, not for everything.

Offendedness is just about the last shared moral currency in our country. And, I'm sorry, but it's really annoying. We don't discuss ideas or debate arguments, we try to figure out who is most offended. Buddhists are offended by Brit Hume. Christians are offended that critics disparage Brit Hume. Republicans are offended by Harry Reid's comments about President Obama. If the shoe were on the other partisan foot, you can bet Democrats would be offended for President Obama (who can legitimately be offended by Reid's remarks). Whenever someone makes a public gaffe, whether real or perceived, critics storm the microphones to let the world know how offended they are. Why is everyone in such a hurry to be hurt?

For starters, being hurt is easier than being right. To prove you're offended you just have to rustle up moral indignation and tell the world about it. To prove you're right you actually have to make arguments and use logic and marshal evidence. Why debate theology or politics or economics if you can win your audience by making the other guys look like meanies?

There's nothing like being offended to nail your opponent. No one wants to look like a jerk (ok, maybe Donald Trump does). No one wants to come off as a free-wheeling dealer of pain. As a result, we end up held hostage by the possible taking of offense. It's rarely asked whether such offense is warranted or whether it even matters. No, if there is offense, there must be an offender. And offenders are always wrong.

So we demand apologies. Sometimes, no doubt, because a genuine sin has been committed. But often we demand apologies just because we can. It's a way to shame those with whom we disagree. It forces them to admit failure or keep looking like a weasel. The weakest offense-taker can now bully multitudes of intelligent men and women through the emotional manipulation that goes with chronic offendedness.

We live in an emotionally fragile culture. We are in touch with every hurt past, present, and perceived. We are the walking wounded and we want everyone to know. Which is too bad, because when people are genuine victims-profoundly, egregiously wronged-they deserve not to be lumped in the same category with those who got picked last for kickball or turned down for their church's "special music."

As Christians, we worship a victimized Lord. We should expect to suffer and should have particular compassion on those who hurt emotionally and physically. But we do not resemble the Suffering Servant when we take pains to show off our suffering. I'm not thinking of the Brit Hume ordeal now. I'm just thinking in general how we are tempted to gain the culture's approval by playing the culture's offense-taking game. If a law is broken or a legitimate right taken away, let us protest with passion. But if we are misunderstood or even reviled let's not go after short-lived and half-hearted affirmation by announcing our offendedness for the world to hear. Every time we try to make hay out of misplaced calumnies, we hasten the demise of Christianity in the public square. As offendedness becomes the barometer of acceptable discourse, we can expect further marginalization of Christian beliefs.

So buck up brothers and sisters. Most often in this country, we are not victims because of our faith. There are just as many people, it seems to me, standing to Brit Hume's defense as they are pillorying him. Let every Tom, Dick, and Harry in the world be crushed to (phony) emotional pieces when their ideas are scrutinized. We can chart a different course and trust that our beliefs can handle Keith Olberman's disapproval. We have no reason to be anxious, every reason to be joyful, and fewer reasons than we think to be offended.

HT: Christianity.com

How Should we Interpret Acts?

2010-01-26T16:12:00.000-08:00

Because there are so many shifts taking place in the theology of the church (ecclesiology), the book of Acts is heavily scrutinized. Many come to it to find out the "master plan" for running the church, and therefore one takes church practices there (sharing everything, breaking bread together, selling all possessions) as what should be normal for the church (normative).

But if we do that with some parts of Acts, why not all parts of Acts? Do we:

Worship God in a Jewish Temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1)?

Face instant death when we lie (Acts 5:-11)?

See Jesus Christ when we are converted (9:1-19)?

(From Gromacki)

Furthermore, look at how the Holy Spirit comes upon believers in Acts:

"In Acts 2, there is no laying on of hands, but there is in Acts 8. In Acts 10, the Spirit is received immediately at the point of salvation before water baptism and without either prayer or the laying on of hands. In Acts 8, there is a delay between salvation and speaking in tongues." (Pettegrew, 110)

What are we to do with Acts? My modest hermeneutical proposal: Get your doctrine and practice from the teaching sections of Scripture (extended sections in the NT narratives and epistles). Look to the narrative for an illustration of the doctrine or practice.

You Don't Remember What You Ate

2010-01-26T07:41:00.000-08:00

Occasionally when talking with other youth ministry leaders, I'll hear something like this: "Your youth won't remember most of what you teach them. They'll remember the relationship they had with you." I agree and disagree.

I agree in that we as youth leaders can hype up our teaching and put so much into it that we forget to spend time with students, listening to them and showing them love. People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care (Thanks Dad for that chiastic piece of wisdom!)

It's true that no one will be able to repeat, word-for-word, the teaching that you give to them. I can't do that for either my former pastor or my youth pastor. But that does not mean that we simply don't teach, and just "hang out" with students.

Think about this analogy, which I may be taking a few liberties with. God's Word is often compared with food (Deut. 8:3, Matt. 4:4). Think about food in real life. You can probably remember what you ate last night, or even last weekend. Can you tell me what you ate two weeks ago? A month ago? Yet the food's nutritional value was still imparted and your body was sustained.

In the same way, God's Word provides spiritual nutrients and sustenance, which is imparted through teaching and individual meditation on the Word. True, you might not be able to recount all the things you've learned in your own devotional time or what your pastor has taught you, but the Word was no less valuable and no less sustaining.

We as youth leaders must not give up teaching the Word just to form relationships. Both are needed to reinforce each other.

The Sacrament of Matrimony

2010-01-22T14:29:00.000-08:00

"For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband." 1 Cor 7:14

The Corinthians believers had a lot of issues. In his first (well, probably second or even third) letter to them, he wastes no time on expositing great theological truths (like he does in Romans, Colossians, and Ephesians), and jumps right into instructing the Corinthians on all of the issues in their church.

The Corinthians thought that what they did with their bodies didn't matter. They thought it was evil. They thought that the only thing that mattered was what happened with their spiritual selves. Some of them believed that the resurrection couldn't happen because they couldn't imagine what kind of body people would get after they were raised (1 Cor. 15:35). Paul shows them the logical conclusion of this belief, showing that the Christian faith is pointless if there is no resurrection, because if there is none, then not even Christ has been raised, and if Christ hasn't been raised, their faith is nothing more than wishful thinking.

Some of them thought that because their body was evil and pointless, they could do whatever they want with it, including sleeping around with temple prostitutes (1 Cor. 6:15), and even practicing a brand of sexual immorality that would make unbelievers blush (1 Cor. 5:1).

Others thought that when they became Christians, it meant that their earthly relationships didn't matter anymore, even to the point they could leave their husbands and wives. Paul also blows the whistle on this (1 Cor. 7:5).

The question came up about what to do if a spouse leaves you. My point today is not to talk about whether believers can get divorced. Paul explains that it is good for believers to remain with their unbelieving spouse because, "...the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband." (1 Cor 7:14) This doesn't mean that an unbelieving spouse is automatically saved because they are married to a believer, but that it is more likely that the unbelieving spouse would be influenced by the believing spouse to believe. He uses an interesting phrase, that the unbelieving spouse is "made holy" by the believing spouse. Believing spouses are a holy influence!

My wife and I are both believers, so this verse isn't directly applicable to us. But then I got to thinking about my wife and what a holy influence she is on me, because even though I am a believer, I am far from holy. She moves me toward purity. She spurs me on toward love and good deeds. She is so attentive to the needs of others, when their needs aren't even on my radar. Sometimes we will do things together, and it will be entirely her idea to do it, and about half way through it, my heart finally comes along and gets into it. I'll think to myself, "Isn't this cheating? Aren't I the one that needs to come up with all these ideas?" And then I thought about this verse. If believing spouses can exert a holy influence on unbelievers, why can't believing spouses exert an equally holy influence on a believing spouse?

The answer, is, of course they can! Marriage can be a wonderful place to grow more like Christ. We are confronted with our own selfish attitudes, and we can see blind spots in ourselves that we wouldn't otherwise see on our own.

A book I would recommend on this subject is Gary Thomas' Sacred Marriage. The basic idea of the book is that marriage can be an arena for holiness, and when you view difficulties and victories in that light, your heart will change.

God truly uses all things to conform us to the image of His Son!

Two Mistakes in Thinking about the Redeemed Life

2010-01-21T10:01:00.003-08:00

Two Mistakes in Thinking about the Redeemed Life

Posted using ShareThis

Comprehended in Christ

2010-01-19T14:12:00.000-08:00

"We see that the whole sum of our salvation, and every single part of it, are comprehended in Christ, we must beware of deriving even the least portion of it from any other quarter. If we seek salvation, we are taught by the very name of Jesus that he possesses it; if we seek any other gifts of the Spirit, we shall find them in his anointing; strength in his dominion; purity in his conception; gentleness in his nativity, in which he was made like us in all respects, in order that he might learn to sympathise with us: if we seek redemption, we shall find it in his passion; acquittal in his condemnation; remission of the curse in his cross; satisfaction in his sacrifice; purification in his blood;... mortification of the flesh in his tomb; newness of life in his resurrection; immortality also in his resurrection; the inheritance of a celestial kingdom in his entrance into heaven; protection, security, and the abundant supply of all blessings... In short, since in him all kinds of blessings are treasured up, let us draw a full supply from him, and none from any other quarter."

Calvin, Institutes, 2.16.19

Robertson's Inhumanity to Man

2010-01-14T16:00:00.000-08:00

Pat Robertson’s Remarks

(From Justin Taylor's blog):

From John Mark Reynolds on Pat Robertson’s statement that Haiti is under a curse for making a pact with the devil. Besides being historically inaccurate (it seems), Reynolds makes a larger point about what is “fitting” (my word not his) to say at certain times. An excerpt:

Robertson has been inhuman in two ways.

First, even if he were right, he has picked a horrid time to pontificate. When my friends is suffering from cancer, even if it is his fault, it is the wrong time to remind him that I told him he should have stopped smoking. It is ugly and useless.

Heal the sick, bury the dead, feed the hungry and then deal with root spiritual causes. Safe to say every nation, and Haiti is surely one, has made philosophical and practical decisions that help cause tragedy. We can talk about that when the people of Haiti have been helped by the Church.

Second, even if his theology were sound, he has stated it in such a way and at such a time that it will be misunderstood and will be mocked. He has pronounced a “truth” that (he must concede) would be hard for our culture to hear in a way and at a time that brings that “truth” into derision.

If Robertson were right in his theology and philosophy, his timing has fed his pearls to swine on a silver platter.

Recently Robertson faced major health problems and rightly asked for our prayers. It would have been wrong to be facile and associate his problems with sin. Robertson should grant the people of Haiti the same treatment that he demanded in the case of his illness.

Compassion, prayer, help, and charity.
HT: Justin Taylor

Potent Quotables

2010-01-08T12:13:00.000-08:00

From http://firstimportance.org:

“Only by seeing our sin do we come to see the need for and wonder of grace. But exposing sin is not the same thing as unveiling and applying grace. We must be familiar with and exponents of its multifaceted power, and know how to apply it to a variety of spiritual conditions. Truth to tell, exposing sin is easier than applying grace; for, alas, we are more intimate with the former than we sometimes are with the latter. Therein lies our weakness.” (Sinclair Ferguson)

“When someone sets his affections upon the cross and the love of Christ, he crucifies the world as a dead and undesirable thing. The baits of sin lose their attraction and disappear. Fill your affections with the cross of Christ and you will find no room for sin.” (John Owen)

Applying Scripture: 2 Pitfalls

2009-11-24T10:05:00.000-08:00

I wrestle with applying Scripture. In my classes at seminary, I am always trying to ask, "So what?" to the things I'm learning. It's very easy in seminary to become calloused to this step, and simply store truths about God in one's head, only to be recalled in a cold, rigid manner when refuting someone who disagrees. Asking, "What would God have me do in response to this?" is an essential step to not having a seminary education turn into cold academia.

I've often spoken to my professors about "The Curse of Hermeneutics." Hermeneutics is the study of the study of Scripture. Hermeneutics is figuring out how to properly interpret Scripture. The curse of hermeneutics is that once you take the course, you can never read a Christian book or hear a sermon without asking, "Are they using Scripture properly? Did they read this verse out of context? Did they misuse a Greek word?" This is essential to do, because we want to keep out error from our teaching and preaching, and analyzing how one uses Scripture must be done. On the other hand, it can drive you crazy.

Hermeneutics is asking, "What did the writer of this Scripture mean when he wrote it?" Application is asking, "What is the significance of what they wrote for my life?" Proper interpretation precedes proper application. For example, a classic misinterpreted text is Matthew 18:20. It reads, "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them." The classic interpretation is: it doesn't take a large crowd for the Lord to bless what's going on there, or something like that. A typical application would be: "Well, we only have 5 people that came to the prayer meeting last week, but Jesus says that where two or three are gathered in His name, He's there. So we should not be discouraged."

The problem with this application is that it is grounded upon poor interpretation. The interpretation breaks the first rule of hermeneutics: look at the context. In this case, Jesus is speaking about church discipline. He is giving instructions on how to do it, making sure that a charge against a brother is not without witnesses (Matt. 18:16). If a member of the church is living in unrepentant sin, and he is confronted by several witnesses, the Lord has given them authority to do so. So when this happens in a church (though church discipline seldom happens, to our shame) the ones confronting a wayward believer should not be bashful or ashamed or timid to do so. If there are witnesses, the confrontation can proceed with the authority of the Lord.

This is an example of proper application that results from proper interpretation.

I have run into two pitfalls in trying to apply Scripture properly.

Pitfall #1: Only Negative
The first is that I only say what the Scripture is not about. For example, the Old Testament stories are not all moral nuggets, so that if you examine each story, you can find some guideline for living a godly life. I'm teaching through the Old Testament right now, and I'm trying to be careful not to do this, and instructing those I teach not to do it as well. But once I say what the Scripture is not about, then what? People are not built up by a series of negations.

Let's take David, for example. His legendary confrontation with Goliath has been subject to many interpretations and applications. A "moral nugget" and allegorical interpretation would be something like this: "When God is with you, you can destroy the giants in your life." Contemporary hermeneutics professors would look at that interpretation and cringe. Ok, so the story is not about how to overcome obstacles. So what is it about?

Pitfall #2: Vagueness
Which leads us to our next pitfall: vagueness and generalization. I think a fitting interpretation of the David/Goliath episode would be: "God can use even insignificant people to accomplish His great purposes." ... That sounds good, but how does it work out in real life? It's accurate, but it's vague.

Our people certainly need to know how to properly analyze interpretations of Scripture. But we don't want to train a group of people who can only discern the errors of interpretation. We want to train people to wrestle with the text of Scripture, obtaining an accurate interpretation, and then following through with a detailed application.

Thoughts on how we can do this?

An Open Letter to President Obama

2009-09-04T11:36:00.000-07:00

(In this letter, I make reference to a PDF document on the US Department of Education's website. You can find the document here.

Dear Mr. President,

I am a 7-12 social studies education graduate. One of the benefits I found of studying social studies was that I was able to get a sweeping panorama of history. I have found, as I'm sure that you have in your own study of history, that oppression and tyranny have had long reigns in the history of mankind. That our government would be bold and courageous enough to break these bonds of oppression is what makes our country so wonderful. I am a freedom-loving person, which is why I am thankful to be a United States citizen. I can voice my opinions, practice my beliefs without government hindrance, and live with no fear of retribution for speaking out when I believe my government has made mistakes.

One such mistake I see is with the curriculum provided by the US Department of Education that accompanies your speech to the public school students. On the Department's front web page (http://www.ed.gov/index.jhtml), there are two PDF files with "Activities" for grades Pre-K-12. While I understand that these are suggested activities, I cannot help but think that many teachers and school districts will follow much of what is suggested in it.

While I was looking at the Pre-K-6 document, something struck me as being a major "shift of priorities" that runs against the American spirit. In the document, questions such as "What is the president trying to tell me? What is the president asking me to do? What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else?" But what I found most disagreeable were the questions, "Why is it important that we listen to the president and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?"

I believe it is important that we respect our government officials, understand what a difficult job they have, and to pray that God would give them the wisdom and strength to do what is right. I have prayed many times for you, Mr. President, and I hope that the load on your shoulders would feel a little lighter knowing that there are people praying for you.

But, in our system of government, we do not listen and do what the government tells us to do. We, the people, are the government - and we tell our elected officials what to do.

I know that you are not going to tell the children to start hating Jews, or anything extreme like that. But I am strongly opposed to sending the message to our children that they are there to do what the government tells them to do. The road to tyranny, oppression, and manipulation starts with subtle shifts like this, as history has taught us.

One suggestion I have for the curriculum is suggested ways the students can get involved in their government - how they can write, call, e-mail, and vote for the people they believe will do the best job in preserving and protecting our precious freedoms.

Thank for you taking the time to read this, Mr. President.

Sincerely,
Andrew D. Brown

(I did actually send this to the President. I encourage you to write him as well here.

Meditation on Romans 1:16-17

2009-09-02T09:21:00.000-07:00

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” (Romans 1:16-17, ESV)

For I am not ashamed of the gospel
(This gospel that I have believed in, this gospel that I have preached and plan to continue preaching - it will not fail to deliver what is promised in it, namely, everyone who believes, whether Jew [though salvation came to them first] or non-Jew, is rescued from the sin through faith and is credited with God's righteousness.)

for it is the power of God
We are not rescued from our sins by our own strength, intelligence, wits, righteousness, works, denomination, income, political affiliation, or anything else. God's power alone rescues us from sin.

to everyone who believes
Everyone. Jew. Non-Jew. Black. White. Asian. Boy. Girl. Poor. Rich. Tall. Short. Skinny. Fat. Healthy. Sick. Young. Old. Everyone.

For in it
That is, the gospel.

the righteousness of God is revealed
What righteousness is this?
(a)Is this the righteousness FROM God? (genitive of source)
(b)Is this God's declaring sinners righteous? (subjective genitive)
(c) Is this God's righteous character? (possesive genitive)
It is most likely God's righteousness credited to us because of Christ (option a). Philippians 3:9 supports this: "and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith"

The Paradox of Church-Haters

2009-09-01T17:33:00.000-07:00

Kevin DeYoung, in Why We Love the Church (pp. 87-88, From Justin Taylor's Blog):

But then again, consistency is not a postmodern virtue. And nowhere is this more aptly displayed than in the barrage of criticisms leveled against the church.

The church-is-lame crowd hates Constantine and notions of Christendom, but they want the church to be a patron of the arts, and run after-school programs, and bring the world together in peace and love.

They bemoan the over-programmed church, but then think of a hundred complex, resource-hungry things the church should be doing.

They don’t like the church because it is too hierarchical, but then hate it when it has poor leadership.

They wish the church could be more diverse, but then leave to meet in a coffee shop with other well-educated thirtysomethings who are into film festivals, NPR, and carbon offsets.

They want more of a family spirit, but too much family and they’ll complain that the church is ‘inbred.’

They want the church to know that its reputation with outsiders is terrible, but then are critical when the church is too concerned with appearances.

They chide the church for not doing more to address social problems, but then complain when the church gets too political.

They want church unity and decry all our denominations, but fail to see the irony in the fact that they have left to do their own thing because they can’t find a single church that can satisfy them.

They are critical of the lack of community in the church, but then want services that allow for individualized worship experiences.

They want leaders with vision, but don’t want anyone to tell them what to do or how to think.

They want a church where the people really know each other and care for each other, but then they complain the church today is an isolated country club, only interested in catering to its own members.

They want to be connected to history, but are sick of the same prayers and same style every week.

They call for not judging "the spiritual path of other believers who are dedicated to pleasing God and blessing people," and then they blast the traditional church in the harshest, most unflattering terms.

Minor Prophet Highlight Reel

2009-08-31T11:59:00.000-07:00

I've just finished reading through the Minor Prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi). I think these are some of the most neglected texts in all of Scripture. Reading them has been an immense joy!

I wanted to share some of the verses from them that intrigued and challenged me. I hope that the LORD will also show you the wondrous things in His Word (Ps. 119:18)

And I will have mercy on No Mercy,
and I will say to Not My People, ‘You are my people’;
and he shall say, ‘You are my God.’” (Hos. 2:23)

(Hos. 3:4) For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods. 5 Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the LORD and to his goodness in the latter days.

Hos. 6:1 “Come, let us return to the LORD;
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will raise us up,
that we may live before him.
3 Let us know; let us press on to know the LORD;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth.”

Hos. 6:4 What shall I do with you, O Ephraim?
What shall I do with you, O Judah?
Your love is like a morning cloud,
like the dew that goes early away.
5 Therefore I have hewn them by the prophets;
I have slain them by the words of my mouth,
and my judgment goes forth as the light.
6 For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice,
the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.

Hos. 10:12 Sow for yourselves righteousness;
reap steadfast love;
break up your fallow ground,
for it is the time to seek the LORD,
that he may come and rain righteousness upon you.

Hos. 10:13 You have plowed iniquity;
you have reaped injustice;
you have eaten the fruit of lies.
Because you have trusted in your own way
and in the multitude of your warriors,

Hos. 13:4 But I am the LORD your God
from the land of Egypt;
you know no God but me,
and besides me there is no savior.
5 It was I who knew you in the wilderness,
in the land of drought;
6 but when they had grazed, they became full,
they were filled, and their heart was lifted up;
therefore they forgot me.

Hos. 14:3 Assyria shall not save us;
we will not ride on horses;
and we will say no more, ‘Our God,’
to the work of our hands.
In you the orphan finds mercy.”

Amos 8:11 “Behold, the days are coming,” declares the Lord GOD,
“when I will send a famine on the land—
not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water,
but of hearing the words of the LORD.
12 They shall wander from sea to sea,
and from north to east;
they shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the LORD,
but they shall not find it.
Amos 8:13 “In that day the lovely virgins and the young men
shall faint for thirst.

Mic. 7:18 Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity
and passing over transgression
for the remnant of his inheritance?
He does not retain his anger forever,
because he delights in steadfast love.
19 He will again have compassion on us;
he will tread our iniquities underfoot.
You will cast all our sins
into the depths of the sea.

Hab. 2:14 For the earth will be filled
with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD
as the waters cover the sea.

Zeph. 2:11 The LORD will be awesome against them;
for he will famish all the gods of the earth,
and to him shall bow down,
each in its place,
all the lands of the nations.

Hag. 1:7 “Thus says the LORD of hosts: Consider your ways. 8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may be glorified, says the LORD.

Zech. 7:9 “Thus says the LORD of hosts, Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy to one another, 10 do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the sojourner, or the poor, and let none of you devise evil against another in your heart.”

Zech. 7:12 They made their hearts diamond-hard lest they should hear the law and the words that the LORD of hosts had sent by his Spirit through the former prophets. Therefore great anger came from the LORD of hosts.

Mal. 1:10 Oh that there were one among you who would shut the doors, that you might not kindle fire on my altar in vain! I have no pleasure in you, says the LORD of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. 11 For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.

Mal. 1:14 Cursed be the cheat who has a male in his flock, and vows it, and yet sacrifices to the Lord what is blemished. For I am a great King, says the LORD of hosts, and my name will be feared among the nations.

Mal. 2:5 My covenant with him was one of life and peace, and I gave them to him. It was a covenant of fear, and he feared me. He stood in awe of my name.

Mal. 2:7 For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and people should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Mal. 3:6 “For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed. 7 From the days of your fathers you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the LORD of hosts.

Prophecies Fulfilled by Christ

2009-08-30T08:23:00.003-07:00

Here's a handy list, from the Expositor's Bible Commentary. If you go to the New Testament text below, the Old Testament prophecy references is found in the footnotes.

Christ’s divine sonship — Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5

The Incarnation — Heb 10:5-9

Christ’s Davidic descent — Matt 22:43, 44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42, 43, John 7:42

Christ’s virginal conception — Matt 1:21-23

Christ’s birth in Bethlehem — Matt 2:6; John 7:42

The flight to Egypt — Matt 2:15

The massacre of the innocents — Matt 2:17, 18

The return to Nazareth — Matt 2:23

John the Baptist’s ministry in the wilderness — Matt 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4-6; John 1:23

John the Baptist as forerunner — Mark 1:2; Luke 1:76; 7:27

John the Baptist, the new Elijah — Matt 11:14; 17.12; Mark 9:12, 13; Luke 1:17

The cleansing of the temple — John 2:17

Christ’s ministry in Capernaum — Matt 4:15, 16

Christ’s prophetic ministry — Acts 3:22, 23; 7:37

Christ’s ministry of compassion — Luke 4:18-21; Matt 12:17-21

Christ’s ministry of healing — Matt 8:17

Christ’s eternal priesthood — Heb 5:6; 7:17, 20

Christ’s use of parables — Matt 13:35

The hardening of many who heard Christ — Matt 13:14, 15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:37-41

Christ’s triumphal entry on a young donkey — Matt 21:5; John 12:14, 15

Christ’s rejection by the Jews — Matt 21:42; Mark 12:10, 11; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1 Peter 2:7, 8

The hatred of the Jews — John 15:25

Christ’s suffering — Matt 26:24; Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:32; 24:26, 46.

The cowardice of the disciples — Matt 26:31; Mark 14:27

The betrayal by Judas — John 13:18; 17:12

The end of Judas — Matt 27:9, 10

Christ’s arrest — Matt 26:54, 56; Mark 14:49

Christ accounted a transgressor — Luke 22:37

Christ’s trial before Gentiles — Luke 18:32

The conspiracy against Christ — Acts 4:25-27

The casting of lots over Christ’s clothes — John 19:24

Christ’s thirst on the cross — John 19:28

Christ’s pierced side — John 19:36

Christ’s death — Luke 18:32; Acts 8:32-35; 1 Cor 15:3; Gal 3:13

Christ’s resurrection — Luke 18:33; 24:46; John 2:22; Acts 2:25, 28, 31; 1 Cor 15:4

Christ’s ascension — Acts 2:34, 35; 13:33-35; Eph 4:8

Christ’s exaltation — Matt 22:43, 44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42, 43; Acts 2:34, 35; Heb 1:13; Rev 2:27

The replacement of Judas — Acts 1:20

The Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit — Acts 2:17-21

The universal expansion of the gospel — Luke 24:47; Acts 13:47; 15:14-18; Rom 9:25, 26; 15:9-12; Gal 3:8; 4:27

The hardening of the Jews against the gospel — Acts 28:26, 27; Rom 9:27, 33; 11:8-10

The persecution of Christians — Rom 8:36

The blessings of the new covenant — 2 Cor 6:16-18; Heb 8:8-12; 10:16, 17

Christ’s viewing believers as his brothers — Heb 2:12, 13

Life in the Jjimjilbang: The Seminary and the Church

2009-08-28T09:56:00.004-07:00

An experience that I'll not soon forget was my time in Korean spas. Over there, they're called "Jjimjilbangs." I'm not sure how much they have in common with our spas in the United States, because I've never even been to a spa in the United States. Anyway...

The cost to get into a jjimjilbang is about $6, so they're very economical. You go into the men's side, take off all your clothes, and take a shower. After the shower, you go into a sauna. You sweat it out until it becomes unbearable. Once your sweat has reached the boiling-lava-hot temperature, you get out of the sauna and jump into freezing cold water. You repeat this as many times as you wish, take another shower, and then end with some time in a lukewarm pool. It's actually quite invigorating.

The entire process is supposed to purify your body of toxins and contaminants. The extreme heat and extreme cold acts to squeeze and shock those harmful pollutants out of your body.

The tension between being a seminary student and a ministry leader at a church could be compared to the jjimjilbang. The rigorous academics of seminary life act as one extreme, supplying doctrinal clarity and a mind that tests all things. Serving in a leadership role at a church provides another extreme, supplying real life questions, practical experience, and a realistic outlook for ministry life. One is no more important than the other - just like both wings of an airplane are essential for flying. Each side informs the other, refines the other, and purifies misconceptions, ignorance, and false expectations.

If you're caught in the middle of these two extremes - be thankful. What sometimes feels like tossing and turning between these two worlds is actually equipping you even more for service in His Name.

Thy Never-Failing Providence

2007-02-08T08:15:00.000-08:00

In my distress let me not forget this.
All-wise God,
Thy never failing providence orders every event,
sweetens every fear.
reveals evil's presence lurking in seeming good,
brings real good out of seeming evil,
makes unsatisfactory what I set my heart upon,
to show me what a short-sighted creature I am,
and to teach me to live by faith upon Thy blessed Self.

Nought Matters but Thee Alone

2007-02-07T19:13:00.000-08:00

Hmmm...a new blog?

Yeah. Xanga has done a good job of chronicling my college years, but those are soon over. I thought that I would begin a new journal as I prepare to begin a different kind of life.

I've not yet graduated, but that's not far away. All of the anxieties of the future are coming, too. In the midst of them, I've found peace in trusting Him.

I'm not concerned with:

...where I'll end up...
...where I'll work...
..how much I'll make...
...whether I'll be a failure or a success.

The words of an old Puritan prayer are comforting, and that is why I've decided to name this blog after them. As of late, I've been caring less and less about my agenda, plans, and ambitions, and more and more about following Him, knowing Him, listening to Him, and finding my satisfaction in Him alone. "Then, whether I succeed or fail, nought matters but Thee alone."

"A Minister's Evils"

Blessed Spirit of God,
Four evils attend my ministry -

The devil treads me down by discouragement and shame
...arising from coldness in private mediation.

Carelessness possesses me
...from natural dullness and dimness of spirit;
...because in the past I have met with success
...and have been highly regarded,
...so that it does not matter if I have now failed

Infirmities and weakness are mine from want of spiritual light,
......life and power,
...so that souls have not been helped,
and I have not felt thee to be near.
Lack of success has followed even when I have done my best.

But thou hast shown me that the glory of everything
...that is sanctified to do good
...is not seen in itself,
...but in the source of its sanctification.

Thus my end in preaching is to know Christ,
...and impart his truth;
...my principle in preaching is Christ himself, whom I trust,
...for in him is fullness of spirit and strength;
...my comfort in preaching is to do all for him.

Help me in my work to grow more humble,
...to pick something out of all providences to that end,
...to joy in thee and loath myself,
...to keep my life, being, soul, and body only for thee,
...to carry my heart to thee in love and delight,
...to see all my grace in thee, coming from thee,
...to walk with thee in endearment.

Then, whether I succeed or fail, nought matters but Thee alone.