A River In Abraham's House

The Book "What is Faith?"

2008-04-12T23:35:00.002-05:00

"What is Faith? or what is "biblical faith" juxtaposed with the fanciful "faith" of the unbeliever and misguided believers alike is the issue that J. Gresham Machen discusses in his book "What is Faith?" I loved this book. I would recommend this book as an apology to any Christian or non-Christian alike who is interested in the issues regarding the principles and foundations of saving faith. In this book, Dr. Machen addresses the misunderstandings and erroneous philosophies of modernity, including the anti-intellectualism and make-shift mysticism that pervades modern Christendom. Interestingly, many of the issues that are addressed have progressed into our day and are still entrenched in the spirituality/skepticism that is often termed "faith." Dr. Machen presents himself as a tremendous theologian/philosopher and wields his words as an apologist, anticipating and answering the arguments that arise. In essence, faith must be born out of a tremendous need and must be answered by the specific work of Christ alone, as He is faithfully presented in the Gospel. Therefore, it must have knowledge as its supreme foundation, it must assent to the truth, and it must trust in the revealed truth, as it sees God as only and effectually trustworthy. Machen asserts that faith is well-grounded, rational, real, passive, as well as active. It is founded upon objective facts, not human observations. He addresses fallacious positions on church dogma, including the doctrines of justification, sanctification, and the law of God, bringing light upon the historic reformed positions, as they are so beautifully revealed and made known in the Scriptures.

I would also recommend this book as an excellent manual for evangelism and church pedagogy. Machen has a well-grasped understanding of the fallen mind as well as the fallen opinions of men and answers many of their objections to Christian faith.

Machen is no dry theologian, an old bag of useless or overdone platitudes. He is a man of tremendous faith and love for Christ, His church, and fallen humanity as a whole. I thank the Lord that he has called such tremendous shepherds to correct and encourage his flock, bringing them back to the pastures of purity and truth. It's true: liberty of conscience is found only in the revealed and effectual Word, not in the gross and sordid opinions of men.

I'll close with a choice quote from the last chapter titled "Faith And Hope":

"It is a poor religion that can abandon to science the whole realm of objective truth, in order to reserve for itself merely a realm of ideals. Such a religion, at any rate, whatever estimate may be given of it, is certainly not Christianity: for Christianity is founded squarely, not merely upon ideals, but upon facts. But if Christianity is founded upon facts, then it is not entirely independent of science; for all facts must be brought into some sort of relation. When any new fact enters the human mind it must proceed to make itself at home; it must proceed to introduce itself to the previous denizens of the house. That process of introduction of new facts is called thinking. And, contrary to what seems to be quite generally supposed, thinking cannot be avoided by the Christian man. The Christian religion is not an innocent but useless epiphenomenon, without interrelation with other spheres of knowledge, but must seek to justify its place, despite all the intellectual labour that that costs, in the realm of facts."

I realize that this is a short overview, but hopefully it will encourage you to go and pick up this great book that I believe has and will continue to stand the test of time until our blessed Christ returns. Soli deo Gloria!

The Lesson of the Law

2008-03-26T14:32:00.006-05:00

J. Gresham Machen exhorts the church to have a faith that is born of an inherent and intrinsic need that one is made fully and often painfully aware of by the Spirit of God. As he analyzes and denounces the modern educational programs of moral reform, he explains how the modern view of moral pedigree in the school system is authoritative only insofar as experience is found. Because evil is not clearly presented as objective and contrary to a corporeal law that reaches far beyond American "values," the educators "will only serve, yet further, we fear, to undermine in the hearts of the people a sense of the majesty of the law of God." This ignorance of the law of God is made manifest all over the Gospels as well as in our midst today, not to mention Machen's. This is extremely pervasive in the unbiblical view of idealship, whereas Christ is made the ideal Christian which we are all to follow by example as prime model. Sadly, this is seen in much of BBC's ideology and professorship. Ignoring the claims of Christ that assert his holiness and Messiahship, the claims that are to bring the sinner to his knees in penitence, we look at Him as an ideal and a social worker. He is made a Friend, not a Savior. More than that, this improper view of law has become more than evident in the covenant nomism of the NPP and FV, though in different measure than idealship.

J. Gresham Machen says it well, "No man can call Jesus friend who does not also call Him Lord; and no man can call Him Lord who could not say first: "Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord." At the root of all true companionship with Jesus, therefore, is the consciousness of sin and with it the reliance upon His mercy; to have fellowship with Him it is necessary to learn the terrible lesson of God's law."...."A new and more powerful proclamation of that law is perhaps the most pressing need of he hour; men would have little difficulty with the gospel if they had only learned the lesson of the law. As it is, they are turning aside from the Christian pathway; they are turning to the village of Morality, and to the house of Mr. Legality, who is reported to be very skillful in relieving men of their burdens. Mr. Legality has indeed in our day disguised himself somewhat, but he is the same deceiver as the one of whom Bunyan wrote. "Making Christ Master" in the life, putting into practice "the principles of Christ" by one's own efforts-these are merely new ways of earning salvation by one's own obedience to God's commands. And they are undertaken because of a lax view of what those commands are. So it always is: a low view of law always brings legalism in religion; a high view of law makes a man a seeker after grace. Pray God that the high view may again prevail; that Mount Sinai may again overhang the path and shoot forth flames, in order that then the men of our time may, like Christian in the allegory, meet some true Evangelist, who shall point them out the old, old way, through the little wicketgate, to the place somewhat ascending where they shall really see the Cross and the figure of Him that did hang thereon, that at that sight the burden of the guilt of sin, which no human hand could remove, may fall from their back into a sepulchre beside the way, and that then, with wondrous lightness and freedom and joy, they may walk the Christian path, through the Valley of Humiliation and the Valley of the Shadow of Death, and up over the Delectable Mountains, until at last they pass triumphant across the river into the City of God."

Sola Gratia!

Heidelberg Catechism Q.45

2008-03-23T13:31:00.008-05:00

Q. 45: What doth the resurrection of Christ profit us?

A.: First, by His resurrection He has overcome death, that He might make us partakers of that righteousness which He had purchased for us by His death; secondly, we are also by His power raised up to a new life; and lastly, the resurrection of Christ is a sure pledge of our blessed resurrection.

1 Cor. 15:16
Rom. 6:4; Col. 3:1
1 Cor. 15; Rom. 8:11

Speaking of new life, my brother Josh's wife gave birth to a new child on Good Friday. Her name is Selah Joy Huff. You can read about it and see a bunch of pics of Selah at Josh's blog.

Machen and the Beauty of Condescending Deity

2008-03-21T17:26:00.002-05:00

I realize I haven't blogged in quite some time, and I figured that good Friday would be as proper a day to start as any. Since graduating from school for now, I've had the chance to delve into such rich books that have profoundly fed my mind and spirit. Currently, I'm going through the Princeton theologians of old, men who embodied and defined the Reformational mandates and principles almost as greatly as the Westminster divines. I finished up Hodge's The Way of Life(which I would highly recommend as a profound presuppositional summary of the grounds and substance of the reformed faith) and I'm going through Machen's What is Faith? at this time. Today, as good Friday, I was finishing up his chapter titled "Faith in Christ." In this chapter, he discusses, among other things, the great difference between the historical and biblical "gospel about Jesus" and the modern "gospel of Jesus." Concluding the chapter, he states this:

"Reflections on the nothingness of human life, it must be admitted, are often rather dull; they clothe themselves readily in cant. But if a thing is true, it cannot become false by being hackneyed. And as a matter of fact, it cannot be denied that man is imprisoned on one of the smaller of the planets, that he is enveloped by infinity on all sides, and that he lives but for a day in what seemes to be a pitiless procession. The things in which he is interested, the whole of his world, form but an imperceptible oasis in the desert of immensity. Strange it is that he can be absorbed in things which from the vantage ground of infinity must seem smaller than the smallest playthings.
It cannot be denied: man is a finite creature; he is a denizen of the earth. From one point of view he is very much like the beats that perish; like them he lives in a world of phenomena; he is subject to a succession of experiences, and he does not understand any one of them. Science can observe; it cannot explain: if it tries to explain, it ceases to be science and sometimes become almost laughable. Man is certainly finite.
But that is not the whole truth. Man is not only finite: for he knows that he is finite, and that knowledge brings him into connection with infinity. He lives in a finite world, but he knows, at least, that it is not the totality of things. He lives in a procession of phenomena, but to save his life he cannot help searching for a first cause. In the midst of his trivial life, there rises in his mind one strange and overpowering thought-the thought of God. It may come by reflection, but subtle argument from effect to cause, form the design to the designer. Or it may come by a "sunset touch." Back of the red, mysterious, terrible, silent depths, beyond the silent meeting place of sea and sky, there is an inscrutable power. In the presence of it man is helpless as a stick or stone. He is as helpless, but more unhappy-unappy because of fear. With what assurance can we meet the infinite power? Its works in nature, despite all nature's beauty, are horrible in the infliction of suffering. And what if physical suffering should not be all; what of the sense of guilt; what if the condemnation of sonscience whould be but the foretaste of judgment; what if contact with the infinite should be contact with a dreadful infinity of holiness; what if the inscrutable cause of all things should turn out to be, after all, a righteous God?
The great beyond of mystery-can Jesus help us there? Make Him as great as you will, and still He may seem to be insufficient. Extend the domains of His power far beyond our ken, and still there may seem to be a shelving brink with the infinite beyond. And still we are subject to fear. The mysterious power that explains the world still, we say, will sweep in and overwhelm us and our Saviour alike. We are of all men most miserable; we had trusted in Christ; He carried us a little on our way, and then left us, helpless as before, on the brink of eternity. There is for us no hope; we stand defenseless at length in the presence of unfathomed mystery, unless-a wild- fantastic thought-unless our Saviour, this Jesus in whom we had trusted, were Himself in mysterious union with the eternal God. Then comes the full, rich consolation of God's Word-the mysterious sentence in Philippians: "who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"; the strange cosmology of Colossians: "who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature: for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist"; the majestic prologue of the Fourth Gospel: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"; the mysterious consciousness of Jesus: "All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."
These things have been despised as idle speculation, but in reality they are the very breath of our Christian lives. They are, indeed, the battle ground of theologians; the Church hurled anathemas at those who held that Christ, though great, was less than God. But those anathemas were beneficent and right. That difference of opinion was no trifle; there is no such things as "almost God." The though is blasphemy; the next thing less than the infinite is infinitely less. If Christ be the greatest of finite creatures, then still our hearts are restless, still we are mere seekers after God. But now is Christ, our Saviour, the One who says, "Thy sins are forgiven thee," revealed as very God. And we believe. It is the supreme venture of faith; faith can go no higher. Such a faith is a mystery to us who possess it; it is ridiculed by those who have it not. But if possessed it overcomes the world. In Christ all things are ours. There is now for us no awful Beyond of mystery and fear. We cannot, indeed, explain the world, but we rejoice now, that we cannot explain it. To us it is all unknown, but it contains no mysteries for our Saviour; He is one the throne; He is at the centre; He is ground and explanation of all things; He pervades the remotest bounds; by Him all things consist. The world is full of dread, mysterious powers; they touch us already in a thousand woes. But from all of them we are safe. "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

-J. Gresham Machen What is Faith?

Rev. John Fleetwood and the Contemplations of the Lord's Supper

2007-08-23T23:47:00.000-05:00

This is a very profound excerpt taken from Reverend John Fleetwood's book The Life of Christ, published in the early 1800s. Notice the reverent doxology intertwined with the beautiful theology.

"When we actually join in communion, we should be careful that our affections be properly directed and warmly engaged. To have our hearts fixed upon the vanities, the profits, and the cares of this world, is a direct violation of the ordinance; and therefore we should be extremely careful to maintain a right temper and behavior at that time. We should study to abstract our thoughts as much as possible from every foreign, every terrestrial consideration, and to have our passions fervently employed in the solemn service.

"Retire, O my soul (each of us should say) from this inferior scene of things; from all its pleasures and all its pursuits, and hold communion with the Almighty, and his Son, the immaculate Jesus. Meditate upon that infinite grace of Omnipotence, which formed the amazing plan that displayed pardon, peace, and endless happiness, to so undeserving a creature as thou art. Recollect that surprising condescension and tenderness of thy compassionate Redeemer, which induced him to bring down from heaven salvation to the sons of men. Call to mind the admirable instructions he offered, the charming pattern he exhibited, the hard labors and suffering he endured, in the course of his ministry: especially, call to mind the ignominy, the reproaches, the agonies he endured when he hung upon the cross, and purchased for thee eternal mercy. Think upon these affecting subjects, till thine heart is filled with sorrow for thine iniquities; till thy faith becomes lively, active, and fruitful; till thy gratitude and love are elevated to the highest pitch; till thy obedience is rendered uniform, steady, and complete.

Hast thou, O my God, the parent of universal nature!-hast thou so illustriously manifested thy compassion for sinners, as not to spare thine own Son: hast thou sent the Saviour into the lower world, in order to raise the children of men to immortality, perfection, and glory: and am I now in thy presence on purpose to celebrate this institution, which requireth me to commemorate the death of the great Messiah; to declare my public acceptance of his excellent revelation, and my regard to my Christian brethren?

May then the remembrance of his beneficence dwell upon my mind, and upon my tongue, for ever and ever! May I consider and comply with the intention of his Gospel; and may the sentiments of kindness and charity towards all my fellow mortals, and fellow disciples, reign in my breast, with increasing purity, with increasing zeal."

Let's Hear It For Kim Riddlebarger!!

2007-08-19T01:02:00.000-05:00

Many of you may recall the controversy surrounding John Macarthur's message at his 2007 Shepherd's Conference entitled "Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillenialist." Also, you may remember the many uninformed, extremely controversial, and just plain nonsensical statements he made about amillennarians, all non-dispensationalists, calvinists, and John Calvin particularly.

Praise the Lord for our brother Kim Riddlebarger, who has finished and posted his response to Dr. Macarthur's statements. Dr. Riddlebarger has written extensively on the issue of eschatology, with his books A Case for Amillennialism and The Man of Sin. I also enjoy listening to his insights weekly on the White Horse Inn radio program, a round-table discussion hosted by Michael Horton.

If you are at all interested in the Dispensationalism vs. Reformed Theology debate, then I would recommend this article. He outlines very well the crucial nature of a Gospel-centered hermeneutic. It's very clear, very well-written, and just plain sweet.

Here's the link to Kim Riddlebarger's blog, the Riddleblog. He gives a small part of it right there on his blog. Then you have to click on his link at the bottom to read the whole thing, which I would encourage you to do. It'll melt your face.

Let me know what you guys think of it.

Graham Proclaims Edwards

2007-08-16T00:01:00.000-05:00

A very interesting page that the Jonathan Edwards Center is doing on Billy Graham caught my eye. Countless times in many of my circles, Graham has been pronounced as almost a borderline heretic for being the champion of American Revivalism in the 20th Century, almost being cast as the 20th century Charles Finney. I would disagree with this. Charles Finney's heterodox means and message were no where close to Graham, for Finney's "gospel" was not Christian. Although I do not agree with Graham on many things, Graham was a man who sought to be faithful to presenting the Gospel to the people of His day, and he did not compromise in the areas that Finney did. He presented that all men are inherently sinful and that they needed a Redeemer.
Mark Driscoll states in his book The Radical Reformission...

"Rather than critiquing the methods of men like Dr. Graham, I am simply saying that we should follow their example and be faithful in our own day. Since the gospel must be contextualized in a way that is accessible to the culture and faithful to the Scriptures, God's people must continually review their presentation of the gospel to ensure that the form in which they present it is the most effective one."

For all of the criticism that Graham's gets, I was very encouraged to see that he preached America's most famous sermon during his Los Angeles Canvas Cathedral Crusade in 1949, the sermon "Sinners in the Hands of An Angry God" by Jonathan Edwards. This is a sermon that Finney would never have preached, for it appealed to the original sin of men and their need of a Mediator. It's interesting that Graham felt that the men and women of His day needed a timeless message such as this. Is the message of "Sinners" framed in such a way that it would affect the men and women of our day? I think so.

At the Jonathan Edwards Center At Yale University website, they are providing audio clips of Graham preaching this sermon. Although, I must say, I do not agree how Graham exchanged the notable Edwards phrase "pleasure" of God for "mercy" of God. They explain on the site that Edwards did not emphasize God's mercy in his sermon, but God's arbitrary pleasure. Graham sought to correct this. However, Edwards did not at all believe that the pleasure of God was arbitrary. Edwards was much in tune with the Reformers and Westminster divines who believed that the pleasure of God was providential, well-designed and correlated in such a way that His electing will demanded. I think "pleasure" is much more in tune with Edwards' meaning than "mercy."

Other than that, it's some pretty sweet stuff. Here's the Link. Enjoy....and be encouraged.

July Past, August Present

2007-08-07T13:36:00.000-05:00

Hello again. Sorry again for the blog gap. Twas a busy, yet very fun July month, as well as a lot of blog procrastinations. But I have returned to the blogger, and hopefully this time, will update the blog much more frequently. Oh, just FYI...there are A LOT of pics in this blog.

I returned to Queens in late June with my good friend Isaac Ferrell, a friend from my home church in the Chicago area. We were roommates all the way through the month of July. It was a joy having the consistent company and such great social and theological harmony with someone who is very like-minded. Every morning during VBS, Isaac and I got up at about 7:30 and opened the gates to the church at 8:00. We set out the registration tables and set out everything that was necessary for registering the kids and giving them their name-tags daily. This was our basic morning routine for the 3 weeks of VBS. Thankfully, we had a coffee maker, which we used mostly every morning and thoroughly enjoyed drinking from. VBS officially started at 9:00 and everyone gathered in the sanctuary for the opening, which lasted a half hour. We averaged about 100 kids everyday, our highest day being about 120.

About 95% of the kids were either unchurched or from other churches in the area. It was great to have so many races and creeds gathering together to hear the Gospel. It was a beautiful picture of the expanding kingdom of grace. For many of the openings, Isaac and I would put on a skit that we had just thought up about 20 minutes before, and many times I would lead the singing on the guitar, the favorite song being the infamous "NO ROCK" song from Fox Valley past. For the first couple of weeks, I spent most of my time with the older kids group, ages 10-13. For much of the day, I was kind of their undesignated leader from activity to activity. All of the groups learned about Elijah on the second week, and I got to play Elijah and teach 2 of the 3 age groups about "my" story, which was fun, but a very itchy and hot costume.

During the weeks, I took some of the kids aside and talked to them about the Gospel many times. It was interesting listening to their responses and finding out what they thought Christianity was. One kid named Edgar I took aside a number of times, talking to him about the Gospel. He was a great kid, very well behaved and very well-groomed. However, as much as he stated he believed the truths of the Bible, it was very difficult for him to admit that he was a sinner. It was very interesting and altogether alarming to listen to many kids explain that the way to come to God is by works, by being "good." And as I thought about it, I realize that this isn't all their faults. Not to be offensive, but the material that Regular Baptist Press puts out for their VBS programs are judaistic and awful. Even many of the songs that they give out for us to sing are all about "being good" and "doing what's right," presenting the fulfillment of the law as something that is very attainable for all men to do and the Gospel as something that is very subordinate to Law. Even the material is very frustrating, because they present these Bible stories as very disjointed, having no correlation to a consistent Biblical them, other than that God saves people who have faith.

These pics were taken at The Cathedral of St. John the Divine, a place Isaac and I stumbled across while in upper Manhattan.

The third week of VBS, I was given the opportunity to teach the middle age kids, ages 7-9. I taught on the story of Jesus calming the storm and the story of Jesus talking to the Samaritan women. It was awesome to have the opportunity to speak to kids who were so full of questions and childlike faith. I talked about the biblical theology of the Kingdom, as it related to the women of Samaria and worshipping in spirit and truth. I talked about Jesus being the second member of the Trinity and being completely sovereign over all events, governing all events for His glory. They were very basic biblical doctrines, but doctrines that these kids had never heard before. And to my joy, they really seemed to enjoy it and come out of their boxes of finite godism. They asked very thoughtful and mindful questions, some about God and 9/11, some about Catholicism and Christianity, questions about God and the existence of sin. It was a great opportunity to speak about the sheer beauty and majesty of God and the Gospel and to see these kids eat it up so readily. It was refreshing to not talk about works and the law and just speak about grace, forgiveness, and the glory of God. After the Bible time, four kids stayed behind with more questions. I asked them if they knew the Lord and prayed with them. It was a great day, probably my most exciting one.

On August 28th, we had our annual Block Party. We closed off the block and set up tents, food, tables and chairs, booths and all kinds of stuff for the many people that came along for the free fun and free food. I spent much of the morning setting up the sound and band equipment outside, which took longer than I thought it would. But it all set up very nicely and we actually had a pretty sweet setup. I led the music on guitar with Jason and Joanna(two great people from Long Island) on guitar 2 and keyboard. The music went pretty well and everyone at the Block Party seemed to enjoy themselves. We had a speaker from Jersey come in and he shared the Gospel with the people who took the time to listen.

Meanwhile, I was still doing my normal church functions, preparing and leading the music on Sundays, as well as preaching to the youth group on Friday nights. It was and still is a joy to lead the music on Sundays and sing of the glories of Christ, hopefully in way that He is glorified. I preached twice during the month of July, and Isaac preached the Friday before he left. He did a great job. Jana came and visited me after the 2nd week of VBS, and we had a great time in Manhattan. We took the train in to Columbus Circle and went and bought our lunch at Whole Foods. We took our lunches to Central Park, which was right across the street, and ate. We shared a plate of sushi and wasabi, which was delightful and painful(too much wasabi). We walked through the park, taking pictures on Bow Bridge(bridge from Spiderman 3), and stopped over at the Metropolitan Museum of Art for their new Greek and Roman Gallery. We then took the train downtown to the Brooklyn Bridge. We walked halfway across, then back into Manhattan. We walked down to the South Street Pier and hung out there for a bit, passing Ground Zero on the way there. We then took the train back uptown to Central Park and took a 15 minute handsome cab ride through the south side of the park as the sun was going down. Neither of us had been on a handsome cab ride before, so it was quite an experience...it would've been better if it wasn't a 2$ per minute fee, but that's ok. We then walked down to Times Square, passing Carnegie Hall. After the hour wait for a table, we ate dinner at the Olive Garden, after which we took the train back to Queens. Quite a fun day, a day that just me and Jana could hang out and enjoy one another.

To be honest, probably my favorite part about New York has been attending Redeemer Presbyterian Church on Sunday nights. Currently, they are going through a series on the Ten Commandments and it's such a time of tremendous feeding for my soul, hearing the moral law being preached in such a Christ-exalting way. They understand that the Ten Commandments have a much higher and fuller meaning now that Christ has come and given the keys of understanding the Scriptures, which is a rare thing it seems like. I'm not gonna lie, but it's some of the best preaching I've ever heard. Not only do they give a strong biblical theology for law and grace, but they present it all in a worldview that reaches to New Yorkers. It's something that Isaac and I greatly looked forward to every week.

Well, there is so much more I could say. I did go to Jana's house last weekend and enjoyed spending a few days with her and her family. We went mountain hiking and did all sorts of fun things. This weekend, I'm heading down to a wedding at Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia. I'm looking forward to spending another weekend with Jana and attending Tenth Pres. on Sunday morning. It will be great to hear Dr. Ryken preach again...he is a tremendous shepherd of the sheep.

Anywho, until next blog....sorry, i know it was long.

Back to it...

2007-07-03T22:55:00.000-05:00

Hello, everyone. I regret that I've taken some time off of the blogging, but I'm anxious to get back into it again. The last month was quite eventful, full of traveling and weddings. But I'm back in Queens, continuing the Gospel ministry, but this time with my friend Isaac Ferrell, whose presence is much appreciated.

Early in June, I left Queens and went to my best friend/girlfriend's house in Altoona, PA. I stayed there for the weekend and had a great time with her and her family. On Sunday, June 10th, I drove home to Chicago and spent about 10 days there with my family and friends. It was privilege to spend time there with them and attend my home church on Sunday. One of the main reasons I went home, aside from renewing my driver's license, was to see my best friend Dan at the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago. I went there with my other best friend, Adam, and spent quite a few hours with him in his room. Admittedly, it was quite difficult seeing Dan now as a quadriplegic on a ventilator, knowing him so well as a healthy guy. For those of you who don't know, Dan had an accident on missions trip with Cedarville back in March. He was trying to do a flip, leaving him paralyzed from the neck down and unable to breathe on his own. We ordered Chinese and ate with him and had a great time with him. It was difficult seeing him so helpless as we fed him and helped get him into bed later that evening. Being on a ventilator, he can only talk when he exhales and he was frequently coughing...of course, he can't cough like we can so it looked more like choking to us. Dan actually got to go to his sister's wedding when I was home and we all had a great time at the wedding. The picture below is of Dan, his twin brother Mike, Adam, and me. These are my lifetime friends, guys I've been best friends with since we were very young. It was tough seeing Dan so bound to his wheelchair, but it was great to talk to him and see him out of the hospital.

To be honest, I love my friend a lot, and I'd like nothing better than to see him walk again and breathe freely on his own. But God in His infinite and providential mind is pleased to have other plans. Sometimes it's difficult to give praise to God when my best friend for 15 or so years is so afflicted, but I realize that He is righteous in all His ways and His ways past my sinful understanding. Jesus has taken the sting of suffering away from His people, availing us to all of His abundant covenant graces. I know that Dan will walk again in His resurrection body, dancing and leaping and praising God. I'm reminded of how we are all like Dan, completely paralyzed from Adam in our sin and depravity. It's only because of God's infinite pleasure and the Divine monergism so freely given by Christ that those sealed in the covenant of grace can come to God. Praise the Lord, Praise the Lord, Praise the Lord!

Moving on, Jana flew into Chicago about 10 days into my visit home and she spent the night at my house. The next day, we left for Rochester, Minnesota for Jordan Harris' and Angela Harris'(formerly Clay's) wedding. We arrived a few days early, because I was in the wedding party as best man. It was a great wedding. I've had the privilege of getting to know Jordan and Angela over the last couple years, and I know that Jordan and Angela are perfect for each other on many different levels. I know that they will exhibit a model marriage for others to follow. Doc did a great job as the minister. His words were so saturated with the beauty of the Gospel and the joy of our marriage with Christ that I am seriously considering asking Doc to do my wedding, which will probably happen next summer, Lord-willing....that's right, baby.

Anyways, after the wedding, Rich Rudolph, Seth Hague(both groomsmen), Jana, and I went to the historic center of consumerism called the Mall of America........for about an hour. I didn't really spend much $, although I probably could've if I had stayed longer. All I purchased was a car freshener from Yankee Candle............you can probably tell that it's about 1:30 in the morning as I'm writing this. On Sunday morning, some of us went to the famous Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and were greatly blessed by hearing John Piper preach on marriage and divorce. Prior to this visit, I had never been to the church and I was quite impressed with the pastoral countenance of Pastor Piper and his willingness to stay and talk to the long line of people after the service. Praise the Lord for His servant.

After the service, we drove back to Chicago. Jana spent a few more days with me at my house, and we did a lot of great things together, one of which was to go and see Dan again, this time in the hospital. He had surgery on a back pressure sore that was getting worse and worse. My brother Jeremy left on Tuesday for Uganda, where he will be spending the next five months of his life. Please pray for him as he seeks the Lord and furthers his education. On Wednesday, Jana, Isaac, and myself left to come back out East. We stayed the night at Jana's house, and on Thursday, Isaac and I went back up to Queens after making a brief stop at BBC for my coffeemaker.

Anyways, that was my journey. I applaud those of you who didn't quit halfway through, and for those of you who did, don't expect me to read your blog either........just jokin.

If you'd like to keep up on my brother's experience in Uganda, go to www.jeremyhuff.com. If you'd like to check up on how Dan is doing with his rehab and such, go to checkinondan@blogspot.com.

Until next time, later......

Book Review

2007-06-04T13:20:00.000-05:00

"If the catholicity of the church means anything, it means that the church should cultivate a profound respect for its inheritances in the faith, and look with suspicion upon present-day theological fads."

A recent book put out by Banner of Truth called Getting the Gospel Right by Cornelius Venema has proved to be a very useful book as a constructive overview of the issues surrounding the controversy of the New Perspective on Paul versus the Reformational Perspective on Paul. Dr. Venema has written many other works on the subject and has proved to be quite a scholar on these matters.

He begins the book explaining why this issue is to be taken seriously and puts forth his purpose for the book, to introduce the New Perspective and evaluate it, considering its three most cogent and representative figures who have championed its development.

Venema then examines the Reformational or "Old" Perspective on Paul as he assesses Luther and Calvin's definition of justification as a "judicial declaration of acceptance with God." The five solas are a key testament to the reformational perspective on justification, for the alien righteousness that is made the believer's by grace alone through faith alone as a forensic and judicial declaration, as opposed to a moral process of transformation. The basis for the justification of men is that they are ungodly, not that they are godly or moral people.

After assessing the classic Protestant perspective on justification, Venema than goes into assessing the New Perspective and examining their claims: firstly, that the Refomational view on justification was built on a false picture of second temple Judaism....secondly, that the Reformational perspective misses the mark and erroneously identifies the problem that Paul was addressing when Paul was discussing justification and the 'works of the law' as a kind of legalistic righteousness...thirdly, the language of justification by Paul does not primarily address the issue of men's acceptance with God but of identification as to whom belongs to the covenant community.

Venema puts forth the arguments by E.P. Sanders, James D.G. Dunn, and the most popular figure, N.T. Wright. Sanders is most renown for his work on second temple Judaism, and he argues that the judaism that Paul was addressing was not a legalistic religion at all, but a religion that was built on grace and faith, something Sanders calls "covenantal nomism." Covenantal nomism describes the obedience to the law in Israel's history as a means of maintaining or staying in the covenant. Although God did start the process of electing Israel as his own, that relationship is maintained or sometimes "re-established" by obedience to the law. Sanders asserts that Paul's description of the problem of sin comes from his prior convictions about Christ. Paul's main problem with the Judaizers was that they rejected the reality of God's saving work through Christ....as Sanders puts it, "this is what Paul finds wrong in Judaism: it is not Christianity," not a misunderstanding of the law. Paul develops a doctrine of the law and human sinfulness to correspond to his view that Christ alone saves.

Dunn would agree with Sanders' second temple judaism, but would say that Sanders fails to address the relationship of Paul and second temple Judaism. He creates an opportunity for a new perspective, but does not fill the gap. Dunn would argue that Paul was objecting not to a Christless-Judaism, but Jewish exclusivism. The Judaizers in the book of Galatians were trying to use their 'works of the law' to exclude Gentiles from membership in the covenant community. The 'works of the law' were not referred to as a legalistic means but as boundary markers of identification between Jews and Gentiles. It was this social use, this perverted nationalism that Paul objects to.

Finally, Wright would assert that the doctrine of justification needs to be re-defined. He believes that justification is a subordinate theme in Paul's gospel. The doctrine of justification does not answer the question of reconciliation between God and the guilty sinner, but it addresses the question of Lordship. The Reformational perspective is too individualized and the doctrine of justification suffers as a result. Wright would assert that the primary focus of Paul's teaching is the theme of Christ's lordship, rather than the salvation of individuals. Wright states that the "righteousness of God" refers to God's covenant faithfulness, to his Yahwehness. He believes that the courtroom scene analogy that the phrase "justification" appears to create is a false one, for the judge never grants his own righteousness to the defendant. God declares favor to his people by his covenant faithfulness, not by means of imputed righteousness. Furthermore, Wright would assert that the doctrine of justification is not soteriological but ecclesiological. It addresses the issue of "who" is in the covenant community, not the issue of how do you "get in" to the covenant community. Justification primarily identifies who is in the covenant community, not primarily the issues of salvation. Furthermore, Wright would assert that "faith" is a badge of covenant membership. As the "works of the law" had proved before to be the determiner between Jew and Gentile, now "faith in Christ" is the only badge that is needed. Wright would continue to say that "justification" is eschatological vindication, something that is past, present, and future. In the past event of the cross, God has accomplished what he will do at the end of history, when God will declare in favor of His people, the covenant community promised to Abraham. This past event becomes a reality for us through faith. In the final justification, God's vindication of his people will even include a justification by works. The 'works of the law' spoken of by Paul excluded the Jewish nationalism, but the justification that Paul spoke of includes those works that are produced in us by obedience in faith. Lastly, Wright has little regard for the historic position of the substitutionary atonement of Christ, the God/man who bore the curse of the law for His people. He would state that the passage in Gal.3:10-14 addresses the curse of Israel's exile that they were experiencing under Rome. This curse reached its peak in the cross and was dealt with by Christ, allowing the blessings of covenant renewal to flow out from Him. Christ's death and resurrection are merely representative of Israel's exile and restoration.

Venema then begins a critical assessment of the New Perspective on Paul, beginning with Sanders' Second Temple Judaism. Venema states that Sanders' "covenantal nomism" is semi-Pelagian in form and character. He states that the implications of "covenantal nomism" imply that acceptance with God is either gained or sustained by "grace plus good works." And they have unwittingly entwined their position with that of the Roman Catholic church, a position directly opposed to Scripture.

Venema also criticizes their assertions on the "works of the law" as being those of national exclusivism or failure to include Gentiles in the covenant. Paul clearly states from the texts in Gal.3 and Rom.3 that faith in Jesus is the only way to "become" a child of Abraham. The language regarding the "works of the law" is speaking of something far more broad than that of covenant exclusivism. It did include this argument, but it also addressed the issue that no man, Jew or Gentile, is justified by the works of the law, because no man can fulfill the law. And the reason that no man is justified by the law is not simply because faith is a badge of covenant membership, but that all men are unable as sinners to fulfill the law's requirements. Therefore, Paul does oppose the legalism because he states that no man is justified by the law. And the "boasting" that the Judaizers exhibited was not simply that they were prideful in their identity as Jews and covenant recipients, but that they were somehow able to gain God's favor because of their obedience to the law's requirements as heirs of the law.

The use of the "righteousness of God" addressed by the New Perspective is a far too general and broad to grasp the force and capture the meaning of Paul's writings. The study of Paul's usage of "righteousness" calls forth a judicial declaration in securing acquital or innocency of God's covenant people and bringing judgment and further wrath upon God's enemies, the non-covenant people. Paul's usage of the righteousness of God not only includes the idea of God's Lordship over his creatures, but also God's just retribution. In the salvation of sinners, believers exhibit and reveal the righteousness of God in justly punishing sinners and upholding the law of God. In Romans 10, for example, Paul parallels the "righteousness of God" and the "righteousness based on faith." Furthermore, God, as the Propitiator, has entered into judgment on behalf of the ungodly. God has intervened in His own court room to grant a righteous status to believers on the basis of Christ's work on their behalf.

The new perspective states that "justification" finds its meaning within the context of God establishing a relationship with his covenant people, but this fails to tell us what exactly the word "justification" means. If one examines Paul's argument in Rom.1-5, one discovers that justification answers the problem of human guilt before God. This argument goes against Wright's and Sanders' view that that the Jews in Paul's day were unconcerned regarding their future judgment and the wrath of God for breaking the law. Paul clearly states that "justification" is quite soteriological and theological. The issue goes far deeper than the issue of who are the people of God, but of how can guilty sinners be reconciled to God. Furthermore, the problem that is resolved is not the problem of God's faithfulness to His covenant, but whether God is just in justifying the guilty sinner who is worthy of condemnation. Paul proves that all men are guilty before God because all have broken the law, even the Jews who had the specific law of God. Paul's argument cannot be reduced to covenant membership because the Jews he was addressing had already been circumcised. Paul states that because "no one" can be included in the covenant family based on the law, God has demonstrated his righteousness in providing a Savior whose obedience and propitiatory death form the basis for the believing sinner entering God's favor. Only within the framework of these deeper theological and soteriological issues does the obvious issue of ecclesiology and Gentile inclusion have a place.

The new perspective states that faith in Christ is not a means of receiving imputed righteousness but is merely a badge that distinguishes the covenant family member from everyone else. This position fails to account for Christ's substitutionary nature and the way believers benefit from God's redemption. God has designed that believers benefit from Jesus' life, death, resurrection... events that have occurred for us and in our place. This is the only way to explain the way believers benefit from Christ's work.

Addressing the issue of Wright's "future justification by works," if the believer's present justification could be undone or even completed by a future justification, then the gospel promise of free acceptance is made void. The idea of a concluding chapter in our justification is not what Paul is speaking of. Because all believers are joined to Christ by faith and are being renewed or sanctified by obedience, their acquittal in the final judgment will be a public confirmation of their genuine faith, and their original justification. No one will be saved who does not exhibit the fruit of the Spirit's working in his life.

Although this did seem like quite a lengthy overview from Venema's book, there is still much more to his arguments, so I encourage you to pick up Getting the Gospel Right or one of his lengthier books on the topic called The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ at banneroftruth.org

The City of God According to Keller

2007-05-31T14:42:00.000-05:00

This is a great article by Tim Keller, Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan. Keller has been an enormous asset to the growth of the kingdom in the city of New York and is very highly respected by many of the other city churches in the five burroughs. I thank the Lord for empowering a servant such as him for the ministry.

In this article, he presents four different kinds of city churches, and presents what he believes to be the heart of a very healthy urban church....i hope you enjoy it.

Christ and the City

What does it mean to be an urban Christian? Is the city really the most strategic place for a Christian to live? Or is it something to survive, something to tolerate? Years ago, a theologian named R. Richard Niebuhr wrote a book that many theologians are still talking about today, "Christ and Culture." Harvie Conn, professor of urban ministry at Westminster Seminary, has reworked Niebuhr's models of how the church relates to culture and society in order to highlight the different theological perspectives which control the way urban Christians relate to their city. His ideas are marvelous food for thought for any urban Christian. The first two models are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and are very distinct. The third is in the "mushy middle" between the first two extremes. The final model is the one to which the City Church of Denver will aspire, and which will most likely prove effective in producing cultural transformation in Denver.

Model 1: Christ Against the City

Many Christians blame the city environment itself for the troubles of society. Rural regions and small towns are seen as sacred and humanizing, while cities are secular and dehumanizing per se. This theological perspective expects that ministry in the city can do little to change it, and even expects individual evangelism to be very difficult or impossible. City churches influenced by this model are like "fortresses" which huddle Christians together for warmth in the spiritually cold urban wasteland.

Response: These churches seem to be unaware of what Augustine called "The City of God" - the forces of the Kingdom of God, advancing in every human city. Their pessimism about change ignores not only the Biblical teaching about the presence and spread of the Kingdom of God, but also the historical fact that early Christianity thrived and succeeded largely because it was urban. This kind of "fortress mentality" is fueled, we suspect, by a profound failure to grasp the grace of God. Legalism needs very strong "us vs. them" boundaries and very clear rules and regulations in order to assure our guilty consciences that we are OK.

Model 2: Christ of the City

On the other end of the spectrum is the theological perspective that views all historical movements that work to emancipate the oppressed as the Kingdom of God (whether Christian, non-Christian, or even atheistic.) Here, the church is not seen as a community in which the coming Kingdom begins its fruition in history, but as simply one of many human institutions that must join together and lead humanity toward liberation and freedom. These churches end up simply as "mirrors" of the city, uncritically accepting and reflecting the dominant moral consensus of the city's culture.

Response: While the Christ Against the City model ignores "The City of God" and the depth of his grace, the Christ Of the City model ignores the presence of "The City of Man" - (the world system of idolatrous rebellion against God) - and the depth of our sin. These churches have lost touch with the need for conversion of heart and life. While the first model misses the sovereignty of Christ over all the world, the second model misses the uniqueness of Christ in all the world. The result of this second perspective is a church that is nothing more than a community center, concert hall, or political action group. It has nothing unique or to offer.

Model 3: Christ Above the City

This model sees cities as good, but it neither recognizes nor engages itself very much with the brokenness of the city. Members use the city as an opportunity for self-improvement but give little back to it. These churches do evangelism, and their programs may include "charity" volunteer work - but they do not equip or mobilize members to heal social brokenness through mercy and justice. Neither do they equip their members to transform the culture through their vocations. The result is a very privatized, individualized faith. This model tends to produce a "Christian subculture."

Response: Although the Christ Above the City model regards the city more positively than the Christ/Against model, it is still a failure. While it does recognize the uniqueness of Christ and the reality of sin and the need for conversion, it is still ignorant of the presence and power of the Kingdom of God to change both hearts and social structures. This model also tends to see sin as only personal moral lapses, rather than as a systematic, idolatrous reliance upon wealth, beauty, power, or comfort. Thus members may be behaviorally 'pure' but still very worldly in the way they use their time and resources.

Model 4: Christ Transforming the City

Harvie Conn says that the Transformation Model is the most "hopeful about its holistic mission in the city." Why? The other models tend to think of the redemption purchased by Christ individualistically - as simply for the purpose of forgiveness of sins and attaining a place in heaven.

But the Bible tells us that the ultimate purpose of redemption is a completely restored creation. The book of Revelation shows us the final goal of all of Christ's redemptive work - the City of God (Revelation 21:2) which is the restored Garden of Eden (now in urban form) filled with the Tree of Life, healing the nations (Revelation 22:2). The curse of Eden that brought mental, social, and cultural alienation and brokenness is removed in that new city that God is preparing. This is what Christ's redemption was all about: restoration - not simply individual pardon and forgiveness. Thus the Transformational Church seeks to actively engage the culture in every aspect - spiritually, socially and economically - on both an individual and corporate level.

Harvie Conn writes: "Perhaps the best analogy to describe all this is that of a model home. We are God's demonstration community of the rule of Christ in the city. On a tract of earth's land, purchased with the blood of Christ, Jesus the kingdom developer has begun building new housing. As a sample of what will be, he has erected a model home of what will eventually fill the urban neighborhood. He now invites the urban world into that model home to take a look at what will be. The church is the occupant of that model home, inviting neighbors into its open door to Christ. Evangelism is when the signs are up, saying 'Come in and look around.'

"…As citizens of, not survivalists in, this new city within the old city, we see our ownership as the gift of Jesus the Builder (Luke 17:20-21). As residents, not pilgrims, we await the kingdom coming when the Lord returns from his distant country (Luke 19:12). The land is already his…in this model home we live out our new lifestyle, as citizens of the heavenly city that one day will come. We do not abandon our jobs or desert the city that is…We are to "seek the peace and prosperity of the city" to which God called us in exile (Jeremiah. 29:7). And our agenda of concerns in that seeking becomes as large as the cities where our divine development tracts are found."

Book Review

2007-05-28T18:48:00.000-05:00

Recently, I finished reading the famous book Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture by Graeme Goldsworthy.(Well, it's famous among circles I'm a part of) I must confess that I was quite stunned by the scholarly work and solidly exegetical innovations that Goldsworthy includes in his work. It's one of the best books I've ever read and his relentless Christological reflections have led me many a time to doxology. Prior to reading the book, I had many of the concerns that Goldsworthy expresses in the genesis of his book in regards to propositional preaching today. Goldsworthy does a wonderful job of fashioning a preaching method that is solidly exegetical in manifesting "biblical theology" opposed to "systematic theology." It's an enormously pleasing and profoundly satisfying book.

The book begins by addressing the problem of not preaching the gospel weekly. They made add what Goldsworthy calls the "Jesus bit" now and then to make it a Christian sermon, and what we are left with is pure moralism and testamental separation, without any kind of mindset towards totality.

"My own impression of the modern literature is that it is predominantly weighted towards matters of effective communication and methods of sermon preparation. I find that questions regarding the nature of Scripture, which provide us with the principles of interpretation and application, are not so prominent."

"Biblical theology is nothing more nor less than allowing the Bible to speak as a whole: as the one word of the one God about the one way of salvation."

Goldsworthy expounds on biblical theology very thoroughly in the first half of the book. The second half of the book is on how biblical theology manifests itself in the pulpit. He proceeds through the kingdom epochs and the various literary types and literatures of the Old and New Testaments and describes the theological foundations for solid Christocentric preaching from these various places. He states that biblical theology is "central to our thinking" in that "the Gospel is our means of contact with the truth about God." It is also "central theologically" in that "in both testaments, what the people of God are called upon to do is always based upon what has already been done." The Gospel is the driving force of all of Scripture; every event, every person, every verse derives its fullest meaning in the person and work of Christ. Goldsworthy continues to expound on how Jesus is the mediator between us and God, for He is our divine connection to God. Therefore, He is the speaker, as well as the Word spoken. He has embodied the message and is the "source of all meaning." Goldsworthy discusses how we take the life and teachings of Christ as simple ethics for us today, instead of seeing how every teaching of Christ, every miracle, every act, was a way of Christ stating something about HIMSELF. Christ is also the obedient hearer. For he has come and fulfilled what humanity could not through His untarnished life. "Jesus comes as the one who fulfills all of God's purposes for humanity and, in particular, for Israel[...]He is the true and obedient Adam, and the faithful Israel."

"Jesus is thus the God who speaks the creating word at the beginning. He is the God who speaks now the new-creating word. He is himself the message of that word, and he is the faithful hearer of the word."

This is crucial when it comes to preaching ethics. If preachers come to expound on ethics without any sort of link to the faithful and perfect Man, then they are preaching basic Judaism, messages that many times are fully acceptable in Jewish synagogues. In fact, moralism is the basic truth of every other religion, including atheism. We cloud, distort, and mock the message of God when that message is Jesus-less. It is only through Christ and because of Christ that morality occurs for a believer. And it is only through Christ's finished work of obedience and death that legalism does not overtake the believer. If we preach a message of marital fidelity without including Christ's complete fidelity to God and the church, then the mark is missed completely. We act because God has acted already. The propaganda of pure moralism and legalism brings nothing but a Christless Christianity, joyless, graceless, and full of condemnation. As the perfect Man, Christ must be the foundation of all morality.

"The ethics of the Bible are put out of perspective when they are given exclusive or prior claim over the grace of God. To put it another way, the gift of God is always prior to and the basis of the task we are given, to live godly lives."

Goldsworthy speaks of the unity of the Bible in Christ and how "a continual emphasis on distinction leads to separation." This section was particularly interesting to me because of what I'm continually indoctrinated with at "college." He discusses how the Bible does have a "literary variety", a "historical progression", as well as a "progressive revelation" that all has one beating heart. The "types and antitypes" as well as the "promise-fulfillments" all have one goal of a "salvation history-eschatological goal." Salvation history is a message of God restoring the world to its proper order. It is profoundly eschatological in nature. From the very beginning, God was focusing on his eschatological destinations that were decided in the covenant of redemption. Christ's first coming was the beginning of the "last days" and was the fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah and the Kingdom. Though there were faint and typological kingdom epochs in the Old Testament, the kingdom and the Israel that God desired were eschatological. Though there is still a future consummation, Christ's first advent was when the blessed kingdom began and the divine mandate was fulfilled as creation is being re-created.

Goldsworthy sees the Gospel as the "hermeneutical key" and the "biblical theological center" that unlocks for us the messages of the Scriptures. He sees the Bible as divided into various kingdom epochs that always involve "God's people in God's place under God's rule." This pattern is seen in all of the Scriptures. This pattern is seen in the Garden of Eden, outside the Garden of Eden as humanity is thrown into confusion, in redemptive history as God calls a people to be the means of Him revealing his purposes in redeeming men from every nation, in prophetic eschatology as the promised kingdom and full redemption that failed to establish itself in Israel is promised in the future, in Jesus Christ who comes to fullfill Adam, Israel, and all prophetic prophecy as He establishes the kingdom that was spoken of in the prophets, and in the consummation where the perfection and holiness that Christ possessed is fully established in the world and the church.

In regards to preaching this kind of biblical theology, Goldsworthy places any given text in either three epochs: the first is the kingdom revealed in the history of Israel, the kingdom revealed in prophetic eschatology, and the kingdom revealed and gloriously fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

"Thus in A (the kingdom revealed in Israel's history) we include the whole history of God's activity outside of Eden up to and including David and the first part of Solomon's reign. The key figures are Abraham as recipient of the promises of God, and David as the one to whom a certain measure of the fulfillment of these promises comes. This epoch becomes the first anchorage for the doing of biblical theology. The second epoch, B, takes in the historic decline of Israel, including the exile and beyond, but the major impetus in revelation is the prophetic promise of a future perfect salvation. The third epoch, C, is the fulfillment of the historic promises to Abraham and his descendants, and of the prophetic hope, in Jesus Christ."

These epochs are the foundations for understanding the people and events of the Bible. All things are related to their glorious fulfillment in Christ. Graeme would argue that these teachings are the historical/theological foundations for understanding and preaching any sermon from the Bible.

The Bible is a profound book and is only profound within a Christological context. God reveals Himself only in and through Christ as the means and the message. I would recommend this book to any Christian who seeks to understand the Bible as a whole as a picture of the glory of God, as well as any aspiring proclaimers of the Word. As the Puritan Thomas Watson said(whose quote is at the top of my blog), "From our blessed Rock Christ, we shall behold the beatific sight of God."

By the way, life in New York is good. I'm getting a lot of opportunities to do some things that I've aspired to do for awhile. The Lord is continually showing Himself as a gracious God. He gave me an opportunity to preach the Word in youth group last Friday, discuss and share the Gospel with a few people(pray specifically for Mike, Jehovah's witness and James, spiritualist/humanist/skeptic). I also took a walk across the Brooklyn Bridge last Saturday and took a ton of pics. Here's one.....I'll post more later.

More Ocean Beach Pics...

2007-05-23T16:43:00.000-05:00

Hey, blog people. Here's some more pics from Ocean Beach, NJ. I hope you enjoy them. Click on them if you want to expand them.

If you could pray for me specifically right now as I'm preparing to preach to the youth group on Friday night on the rejection of man to the Gospel and the light of the Gospel compared to the serpent on the pole story in Numbers 21....it's exciting, there are so many redemptive indicatives. Pray that my eyes will be enlightened from the beauty of God's Word and that I would speak clearly, humbly, and affectionately.

Week 1 in NYC

2007-05-21T14:16:00.000-05:00

Hey, everyone. I think I need to keep you more up-to-date with what's going on. Needless to say, the PCRT was awesome, and I'll give out more of the pictures upon request.

For those of you who don't know, I moved to Queens, NY about a week ago. I'm serving at Queens Regular Baptist Church or the summer. I arrived here late on Sunday night, May 13th. It took a lot longer to move out of the dorm than I thought. I ended up leaving about 70% of my stuff under the stairs on the bottom floor of Ketcham, and I still had a full car. Life is very different up here. The city truly is one enormous melting pot, as cultures and colors are so intertwined. The church is extremely diverse culturally, so I'm probably the only white person here(besides the pastor's wife). But I'm really enjoying it, for the church is abundantly full of gracious hearts joyful attitudes, and it constantly reminds me of the beauty of the gospel in that Christ has united Jew and Gentile, people of every tribe, nation, and tongue under the power of His Word. I'm starting to memorize people's names and especially the names of the kids. I figured it would be a good idea, considering I'm gonna be here awhile.

The church is a street corner church, a building that used to be a bar, but was refurbished into being a church. The sanctuary is on the first floor, I'm living on the second floor with my own little kitchen, room, and computer room(which the pastor shares), and Pastor Oliver lives on the 3rd floor with his wife Christa and their daughter Anna. Basically, I'm here to help out Pastor Oliver for the summer. Mainly, I'll be picking and leading the music on Sundays, Wednesday nights, Friday nights, and Saturday nights. There's a couple college kids from Long Island who'll be coming up to help with music and children's church on Sundays, and Pastor Oliver helps on guitar sometimes.

Pastor Oliver is also giving me opportunities to lead preach now and then, which I'm really excited about. He gave me an opportunity last week to give a little presentation on the Geneva Bible to the youth group. That was pretty time-consuming to prepare. He wants me to prepare something again this Friday and share a devotional on Sunday. I just finished Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture by Graeme Goldsworthy, so I'm excited to incorporate the method of preaching biblical theology, a theology that takes the Gospel and the epics of the Kingdom as the foundation for understanding Scripture. I'll write more about this book on my next blog.

Pastor Oliver and I are getting used to each other well, and we're really getting along. We share a lot of commonality in our opinions and approaches to issues of the church. We've prayed together a lot, and have had some great conversations. He is dispensational and he is a baptist, but it's something that does not hinder our communion or togetherness for the mission of the Gospel. It's a great blessing to serve where I can. I constantly have to guard my heart and realize my place as a small vessel, carrying a message infinitely greater than myself. Although the church is very different from the church I would probably attend normally, the church is still a wonderful church that is moving in a great direction under the instruction and administration of the holy Word. The pastor's and my philosophy of church are very different, but it's interesting and stretching to discuss and sometimes incorporate our ideas.

The first week was pretty busy; I actually went to all five burroughs of the city, for various reasons. Last Monday, I went to Ocean Beach, NJ to meet a couple friends of the Oliver's, so that was pretty fun. The Pastor and I drove a couple people to week early in the morning on Tuesday and Wednesday, one in the Bronx and the other here in Queens. I went to Manhattan a couple of times last week and did a ton of walking and took a ton of pictures. Among a bunch of other things I did, I went in and out of about five old old churches, mostly Roman Catholic, in Manhattan. But what beautiful churches they were!, aside from the paganism and idolatry that presided in the atmosphere. That night, I went to a comedy club on 2nd Avenue and 81st street called the Comic Strip Live. It was some pretty funny stuff, although I kinda felt like a loser going to a comedy club by myself. On Saturday, another guy from the church and me went to the Bronx to help out some church builders(literally.) They were converting an abandoned synagogue into a Baptist church. It was some fun stuff, although we were working about 3o feet above the ground, mostly on planks that were about a foot wide....kinda freaky. From that high up, we had a great view, seeing the Empire State Building off in the distance....quite enjoyable, yet scary too....like Gospel Joy, Gospel Fear fused into the heart of a pietistic Christian.

Anywho, I figured I had to write a long blog, considering a took some time off because of the busy week. But I hope you're all doing well and savoring the Lord through good reading, good communion, and good fellowship.

By the way, all of these pictures you can enlarge by clicking on them. Most of them were taken in downtown Manhattan, Central Park(like the bridge picks which was in Spiderman 3), and the Bronx.

PCRT Recap Part 1

2007-05-08T21:53:00.000-05:00

Hey, everyone. Sorry about the extensive time off, but it's been a mad couple weeks. Finals are happening right now, and I just had my senior oral yesterday...so I was pretty busy. The Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology (PCRT) was a joy and something I will never forget. The theme was called "Above All Earthly Powers" and it centered on many aspects of the Word. The speakers were phenomenal and very worthy of praise. There words were affectionate and saturated with Gospel glee, not to mention very scholary.
Here's a short recap on pre-conference:

We left on Friday morning and arrived at Tenth Presbyterian Church a few hours later. There was quite a downpour and many of us were quite soaked as we went in to the pre-conference. Ligon Duncan spoke for the pre-conference and did a wonderful job. He preached "How to Preach a Good Sermon" and said that the Word of God delivered is an Applicatory Declaration. It is the Word of God delivered through the preacher. The preacher mediates a Word-based encounter with the living God and the Spirit reveals Himself in the Truth. He needs to have confidence in the Word of God and ought not to look outside of the Scriptures for something to augment the Word, as if it's fundamentally insufficient.

Later, he spoke a message on "How to Listen to a Bad Sermon." He encouraged us all to be well-read and knowledgable in the subject of our preaching because ignorant teachers do not create people of understanding. As far as the listener goes, he must go into any sermon and listen as if his life depended on it; have a ready attitude. The ultimate message is spoken by God to the listener. He went to Luke 16 with the story of Lazarus and the rich man to illustrate that the voice of Lazarus was not significant but the Divine message was. We can all glorify and enjoy God forever because Christ drank the cup of wrath(the message of Scripture), enabling our enjoyment. He went to Numbers 5:11-35 and stated that as the adulterous women drank the bitter cup of curses, Christ has done the same. In 2 Sam.23:13-24, Ligon discussed that as David violated the covenant love that was established with Uriah in 2 Sam.23, so in Psalm 51 he exclaims that he clings to the covenant love of God.

We are to remember that we don't scale down our sin, but we scale up the grace of God. The problem lies in looking within ourselves for a solution, rather than outward. Christianity is not the starting of a new life, but receiving a new life to start with.(I liked that part.) Therefore, we need to prepare to hear the Word. We need to study and read the Word in private, then you will be able to discern the truth in public.

I took a lot of pictures I keep sharing them with you. We took a really good one with Ligon Duncan with all of our Reformed shirts....it was quite euphoric.
More on the actual conference and more pictures next...

Off to the PCRT....

2007-04-26T22:51:00.000-05:00

In about five and a half hours, I'm leaving for the PCRT (Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology) down in Philadelphia at the famous Tenth Presbyterian Church. I'm going with Doc Harris, Tim Massaro, Seth Hague, Jana Ervine(ya!), and Jake Tipton. It seems like so long ago when I put in all of the orders for the tickets, and it's finally here, baby! I'm gonna miss the guys in B Suite, but I think it's going to be well worth the trip. I've actually never seen any of these theologians preach in person before, other than D.A. Carson, who was at the Bunyan Conference a couple years ago. I've only either heard them on my computer, or read some of their books. I pray that it will be a wondrous time, a time that is enriched with solid biblical truth and higher beauty.

Of course I'll write a better blog about it when I get back, but for now, I gotta catch up on sleep. Tomorrow morning, the pre-conference kicks off with Ligon Duncan, then R.C. Sproul tomorrow night. oooooooooh.....

Natural Affections and True Virtue

2007-04-25T10:46:00.000-05:00

For my Microexegesis of Jonathan Edwards class, we just finished going through Edwards' dissertation on the nature of true virtue. What a stimulating work. I'd recommend it to anyone who is interested in knowing the epistemology of Edwards more fully, as it concerns the essence of God as beauty and the virtues of man as relishing in that essence.

This is my final short essay for the class. It concerns Edwards' arguments for the natural affections and how they relate to the primary operation of virtue.

Concerning the nature of true virtue, there are natural affections that are commonly mistaken to be truly virtuous. Undoubtedly these affections incline to the general nature of virtue in their primary operation, which is love. Natural pity and natural gratitude have the same influence and effect as true benevolence because they are expressed in a love to others, a tendency of true benevolence. Furthermore, even self-love contains something of the nature of true virtue because it is manifested in love to self. However, these natural affections are naturally defective because they are private in nature and only beautiful within their own private spheres, not with respect to being in general. Therefore, because natural affections only resemble virtue in their benevolence, they are not of the nature of true virtue.

Many human affections are mistaken to be truly virtuous because they employ a form of love, which is the primary operation of virtue. True virtue is benevolence to being in general, and in these natural affections there appears the tendency and effect of benevolence. However, the benevolence of these natural affections is displayed to particular objects and beings.

Pity and gratitude are affections that are natural to all men and incorporate love in some degree. Natural pity is demonstrated in desiring the relief of those in distress, which is an effect of truly virtuous benevolence. However, though this pity has a tendency and effect to love, it is not grounded in the nature of love, for a truly virtuous pity would desire the happiness of its object. Evidently, there are many who naturally pity those in distress and yet are indifferent concerning their positive pleasure. They only express concern in the knowledge of the object’s extreme pain, remaining insensible to their lack of happiness.

Natural gratitude is demonstrated in thankfulness to other beings, which is another effect of truly virtuous benevolence. However, gratitude in many instances is not called love because it can be expressed outside of a proper friendship. In many cases, gratitude is expressed between enemies when mercy is displayed, manifesting a similar operation and effect of friendship, yet not friendship itself. In many other instances, natural gratitude is more inclined to be called by the name of love, for it can be mutual between beings. In this kind of natural gratitude, men, with a kind of benevolence, love those who love them. Therefore, gratitude is manifested in a proper friendship between the beings.

Furthermore, self-love contains something of the nature of true virtue. Self-love is expressed as a love and good will to oneself, which is an effect of true virtue. However, though this love incorporates the primary operation of virtue, it is rarely mistaken to be truly virtuous by itself. Though there is no difference between a private sphere consisting of one and a private sphere consisting of many, men bear a greater proportion and weight to the sphere of many. When natural affections are displayed by a being to a considerable number of people, men congratulate him. It is evident to all that the sphere of self-love is so small and private that unless the man is regulated by a more extensive principle, he will become an enemy to society. This occurs when many consider themselves as if they were all of humanity, letting their pride subdue all other affections. However, there are also many who undoubtedly believe that self-love is truly benevolent. They perceive that self-love is essential to the preservation of human life and therefore have high esteem for it. There are others who deceive themselves as with the other natural affections, that self-love resembles virtue in its act of love and believe it to be truly virtuous.

Though these natural affections have something of the nature of true virtue, they are essentially defective. In their exercises of benevolence, they resemble virtue in their primary operation, but they are not virtuous benevolence, for virtuous benevolence is manifested to being in general and is not limited to a private sphere. The benevolence of these natural affections is only beautiful in its own particular sphere and is appreciated by those who confine their attention to that sphere. Therefore, the reason that many consider these natural affections to be beautiful is because of the narrowness of their views. Furthermore, these men are apt to omit the Divine Being from their minds. Though they may believe in God’s existence, they regard the Divine Being as irrelevant to their natural view of things. It is not natural for men to view things that they cannot see with their natural senses. Men deceive themselves in believing that a particular sphere is universal, creating a false beauty.

These natural affections share something of the nature of true virtue but are inherently defective and unbeautiful, for they do not arise from the principle of virtue, which is the union of heart to being in general. The false beauty that is created by these affections has deceived many into thinking that these affections are truly virtuous. In reality, true virtue and beauty is displayed in benevolence to being in general, and the Divine Being is the center of this benevolence. Natural affections only resemble virtue and beauty in their displays of benevolence and are, therefore, not of the nature of true virtue.

The Historical Jesus: The Early Acts Sermons Part 3

2007-04-18T18:08:00.000-05:00

The third sermon in the book of Acts was proclaimed by Stephen in Acts 7. Stephen is addressing Jews, specifically the Jerusalem Council with the High Priest presiding. Stephen begins by identifying himself with his audience, himself being a Jew. In Acts 7:2, he states, “Brothers and fathers, hear me.” He is making it very clear to his audience that he himself is a Jew who is asking his fellow Jews to hear what he has to say. Stephen then proceeds to speak to them from the Scriptures, the Old Testament writings that they all highly respected. He uses his audience’s respected documents to demonstrate their repeated acts of unbelief in the past by rejecting the prophets and their unbelief in the present by rejecting and putting to death the greatest Prophet, Jesus Christ.

Stephen begins with the story of Abraham(7:2-8) and the God of glory appearing to him and telling him to go out to the land that He will show him. God did not give Abraham his promised inheritance, but He promised to give it to his offspring(7:5). Stephen then refers to the Egyptian captivity and the exodus in verse 6, stating the fulfillment of what God told Abraham in Genesis 15:13-14. As Stephen finishes this first section of his sermon, he states the covenant of circumcision given to Abraham, which was passed on to his son Isaac, then Jacob, then the twelve patriarchs. Stephen then continues through the story of Scripture with the story of Joseph and his brothers.(7:9-16) Through the jealousy of his brothers, Joseph is sold into Egyptian slavery. However, Stephen states that God was with Joseph and blessed him. A great famine came upon the land and Jacob’s family found food in Egypt. Jacob then moved to Egypt along with his family where he died.

Stephen then, referring to the promise mentioned in his first section, states, “But as the time of the promise drew near, which God had granted to Abraham, the people increased and multiplied in Egypt.”(7:17) Stephen then spends most of the rest of his sermon expositing the story of Moses, the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai.(7:20-43) He begins with going through Moses’ birth and upbringing as an Egyptian prince. He continues with Moses’ killing of the Egyptian man and his fleeing to Midian, eventually arriving at the story of the burning bush.

In verse 35, Stephen then takes a much more personal route as he draws his audience’s attention to Israel’s original rejection of Moses. He states “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’-this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush. This man led them out, performing wonders and signs in Egypt and at the Red Sea and in the wilderness for forty years. This is the Moses who said to the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers.’”(7:35-37) He is clearly stating that Israel rejected a man “God sent as both ruler and redeemer.”(7:35) Although Moses did great signs and wonders amidst the people of Israel, they still rejected him because of their ignorance. Later Stephen states that they “refused to obey him, but thrust him aside, and in their hearts they turned to Egypt, saying to Aaron, ‘Make for us gods who will go before us.’”(7:39-40) Not only did they reject Moses as God’s servant, but they rejected God Himself by turning aside to idolatry and fleshly desires. This idolatry was visualized in the construction of the golden calf. Stephen then quotes Amos 5:25-27 where the prophet speaks the words of God. Because of Israel’s idolatry and their non-existent sacrifices during their time in the wilderness, God states, “I will send you into exile beyond Babylon.”(7:43) The judgment being spoken of by Stephen was well-known to his audience, for their fathers had experienced much foreign captivity. Stephen then ends his Old Testament exposition by concentrating on the issue of the Lord’s dwelling place.(7:44-48)

Firstly, he states that, in obedience to the words of Moses, they constructed the tent of witness. This tent was fervently carried by Israel as a heavenly tabernacle all the way through the conquering of Joshua up until the time of David. David sought to build a new dwelling place for the Lord, not a weak tent, but a temple. His son Solomon built this beautiful temple. Stephen then begins to head in a new direction by stating in verse 48, “Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?’”(7:48-50) The tents and temples of God were symbols of God’s dwelling amidst His people, giving them blessings and protecting them. In Israel’s sin and rejection, these temples and tents were destroyed. God withdrew His blessings from His people and retracted the typological kingdom. Stephen is stating that in the full reality, God cannot be contained. His glory surpasses all man-made houses and walls. The Jewish council did not understand that these tents and temples were merely shadows of what was to come. As it says in Colossians 2:17, “the substance belongs to Christ.” Moses was the prophet and ruler of Israel who redeemed his people from their bondage. Stephen was stating that Christ is the new Moses, the final Prophet and Ruler who had come to redeem His people from their bondage of sin. Christ is the culmination of redemptive history. The historical redemptive story line was progressively portraying shadow after shadow of what was to come. The Abrahamic Covenant had a partial fulfillment in the story of Joseph, for in it a people were sovereignly placed in bondage, and in their bondage, the people of Israel grew numerous, and God showed Himself as their Redeemer through His servant Moses, a type of Christ. The giving of the law and the sacrificial system showed, among other things, the necessity for a final Sacrifice and One who would fulfill the law. During this time, God dwelt among His people in their tents and eventually their temples. However, when Israel rebelled against the Lord and disobeyed the suzerainty treaty, they would be cursed and God would withdraw His presence from them. All this time, however, there was a final Redeemer and Savior being spoken of by the prophets. Stephen believed that Jesus was the final Moses, the final Temple, the final Ark of the Covenant. Yet Israel would continually rebel and murder these prophets who spoke of the coming of the Messiah. This continuous rebellion and outright ignorance of Israel is what Stephen attacks in his conclusion.

In conclusion to His sermon, Stephen becomes extremely accusative and personal to His audience. In fact, he calls them “stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears,”(7:51) for they were not partakers of the Abrahamic Covenant. His audience had no true understanding of the real purposes of the Old Covenant. The Scriptures point directly to Christ as its fulfillment. The Jews were missing what the Old Covenant was meant to reveal. He states, “which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed and murdered.”(7:52-53) Stephen is accusing the council of being more ignorant and sinful than their fathers. For their fathers killed those who prophesied the Messiah, but the men of the council delivered the actual Messiah, the Righteous One, to death. These men had no understanding in them, for their eyes were blind to the truth. The council’s arrogance is made even further evident when these men of the council murder Stephen after his great sermon.

Both Peter and Stephen preached the historical Christ. In respect to their audiences, they used the Scriptures to point that Jesus Christ is the abiding theme and fulfillment of the Scriptures. The Gospel of repentance and faith in Christ is firmly grounded in Old Testament Christological truths. For these men, Christ is the culmination of all of history. The gospel is the theme of all the Scriptures, so Christ must be preached historically.

The Historical Jesus: The Early Acts Sermons Part 2

2007-04-16T10:45:00.000-05:00

Later in chapter 3 of Acts, Peter is again preaching a sermon to Jews, this time in Solomon’s Portico. Peter had just healed a lame man and the people were filled with wonder and amazement, just as the people in chapter 2. Peter preaches in much a similar approach as he did earlier in chapter 2. He begins by addressing the peoples’ reaction to his miracle by asking why the people are amazed at him, as if the power to heal came from him.

Peter then states through the next few verses that it was through faith in Christ that the lame man was healed. Peter states “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus.” He is drawing a direct parallel between the God of the Jewish forefathers and Jesus. The God that his audience worshipped gave glory to Jesus. He is again drawing a connection between the old and the new; the God of the Old Testament, and the crucified Messiah Jesus. In verse 18, Peter again states that the Gospel message was foretold by the prophets.

He then follows this statement with an exhortation to repent and turn to salvation in Christ as the one “whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.”(3:21) Peter is speaking of the blessings which would come on Israel in accordance with their repentance and belief in Jesus. Christ is the One in whom the belief of Israel would bring blessings, and Christ will not return until the time for the prophetic restoration comes. Peter equates the “times of refreshing” with the statement, “send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus” relating the blessings which would come upon God’s people if they turned and repented. However, Peter also states the curses that will come upon those who do not repent and believe in Jesus Christ. In verses 23, Peter quotes Moses from Deuteronomy 18:19 and states, “It shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.” Those who do not believe the gospel of Jesus will be destroyed from God’s people. He is stating here that God’s true people are the ones who believe the gospel, the ones who will receive the blessings spoken of in verses 20 and 21. Moses is stating that those who do not believe in this new Prophet will be destroyed from the people. Peter further supports these truths in verse 24 by stating “all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed these days.” By “these days,” Peter is referring to the “times of refreshing” and “restoring” spoken of earlier in verses 20 and 21.

Peter concludes his sermon by referring to his audience as the “sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with [their] fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ Peter states his audience’s heritage as being sons of the prophets and the Abrahamic Covenant. They were the people to whom the covenant was addressed and Peter was sent to Israel to bless them by turning them towards repentance in Christ, according to verse 26. In this verse, Peter uses the word “bless” again, having previously quoted it in verse 25. Peter believes that of all the families of the earth to bless, he was sent to Israel firstly to exhort them to become real partakers of the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant stayed alive in Israel throughout the Old Testament through the faithful remnant offspring of Abraham who obeyed and reaped its blessings. For as it was stated in verse 23 that every soul who does not turn to Christ would be destroyed, it also states in Genesis 12:3, “I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” Peter draws a very clear connection between Christ and Abraham. In a very literal sense, Christ is the new Abraham.

The Historical Jesus: The Early Acts Sermons Part 1

2007-04-14T23:39:00.000-05:00

Throughout the book of Acts, Luke records a number a sermons spoken by the apostles. These sermons were spoken as Gospel presentations, many times, especially early in the book, addressed to mainly Jewish audiences. In each Gospel presentation, the apostles are found speaking of the “historical Jesus.”

The historical Jesus is the Jesus of the Old Testament, the one constantly referred to either specifically or typologically. The apostles endeavored to show the Jews that Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets, the One who was promised and typified throughout the Scriptures as the final King and Redeemer. For the apostles, the Gospel was not a new phenomenon; for it was prophesied and typified throughout the Scriptures and the Old Covenant. However, the Gospel message was culminated and made wonderfully clear and lucid in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. According the apostles, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the overarching theme of all Scripture.

The first sermon in the book of Acts was spoken by the apostle Peter. This is the day of Pentecost, and Peter is addressing an extremely large number of Jews who had just witnessed the great acts of the Holy Spirit being displayed through the men who were filled. Peter begins his sermon by explaining the miraculous act of the men speaking in tongues. Firstly, he disregards the notion of the men’s drunkenness, which was a popular explanation of some of the witnesses. Following this, Peter quotes the prophet Joel in Joel 2:28-32. He states that “this is what was uttered though the prophet Joel: ‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams…”(2:16-17) Peter draws a direct connection between the occurrences at Pentecost and the outpouring of the Spirit on all flesh spoken of by Joel. In the same quotation, the prophet also stated many signs and wonders that would occur in the last days such as “wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day.”(2:19-20) Now, regardless of how much of this prophesy was fulfilled at Pentecost(whether partial, gradual, or complete), Peter does draw a line between the old prophesy of Joel and the acts at Pentecost. Clearly, eschatology was a present reality. For the end times had come, and the mustard seed had begun to sprout. From that point onward, the end times were being manifested in the beautiful Gospel of the Kingdom. The coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was done for the purpose of prophetic fulfillment as well as the spread of the gospel, first to the three thousand souls in Jerusalem, and eventually to the world. So, in essence, Joel spoke of the days when the message of salvation would be spread through the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. The Gospel schema, though imperfectly displayed in the Old Covenant was now a perfect reality, growing to its fullest sense in the second advent.

Following this quote, Peter speaks of Christ directly as the One who was “delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God”(2:23) and who was raised from the dead “because it was not possible for him to be held by it.”(2:24) Peter states that the death of Christ was all part of God’s sovereign design and purpose. He also states that it was not possible for death to conquer Him. For the resurrection of Christ was also apart of God’s sovereign plan. To prove this point, Peter quotes another prophet, this time being King David. He quotes Psalm 16:8-11 where David speaks of Christ as the “Holy One” who will not “see corruption.”(2:27) Peter then draws a connection between David’s body and Christ’s body. Peter states that David “died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.”(2:29) Though David died and his body experienced corruption and decay, Christ’s body did not see corruption and decay. For His body was resurrected, an act which was prophesied by David earlier in the passage.

Peter then goes further with the passage by stating the intended meaning of David’s prophesy about the resurrection. He states that David, “knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ.”(2:30-31) Peter draws a direct parallel between the great resurrection event and the crowning of Christ on the Davidic throne. David anticipated the crowning of the Messiah happening when the Holy One did not see corruption but was resurrected. In verse 33, Peter states that Christ had risen to the right hand of God, which according to verse 32, is the Davidic throne. Proving this statement, Peter again quotes David in Psalm 110:1. He states “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”(2:34-35) Peter is telling these Jews that Christ is King and Lord, sitting at the right hand of God in heaven until His enemies are conquered completely. Peter then summarizes these truths in the statement “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”(2:36)

Peter then brings the main exhortation of his sermon and calls all of his listeners to repent and be baptized. He calls his listeners to accept Christ as their Lord and Savior. Peter had purposefully gone to certain Old Testament patriarchs, specifically Joel and David, men whom his audience would know and respect. He proved through the words of these two men that Jesus of Nazareth was the One foretold who would come as Redeemer and King. Peter preached the historical Jesus.

Wessel Gansfort: A Pre-Reformational Reformer?

2007-04-08T11:21:00.001-05:00

Very widely considered a 15th century reformer was the Dutch theologian Wessel Gansfort. Early on in life, he had the priviledge of coming under the sonship of a wealthy widow who became his patroness after hearing of his high intelligence and paid for him to go to school. He grew up in Groningen, Netherlands and was educated at the University of Cologne and eventually lived at the seminary of the Brethren of the Common Life where such acclaimed theologians as Thomas a Kempis resided. Gansfort highly valued the right of questioning. In fact, one of his favorite verses was Matthew 7:7, "Seek and you shall find."

Although Gansfort may have held very strongly to some of the tenets of the early reformers, he was not a reformer. He stood very solidly on Catholic ground, never seeking to separate from it. He denied the infallible teachings of the Roman church and the Pope, many of the formalistic church dogmas, and the complete veneration of the virgin Mary. In fact, in a response to Thomas a Kempis' coaxing to seek Mary for comfort and assistance, he's recorded to have said, "Why do you not lead me to Christ, who kindly invites all who are loaded down to come to him?" Gansfort had a great love for the Scriptures and, as a humanist, was highly dismayed by the pagan practices of the Catholic church. He's recorded to have said to Pope Sixtus IV, whose gross paganism and immorality helped lead to the reformation, "Holy Father,...since you on earth occupy the place of the highest priest and shepherd, I ask...that you fulfill your elevated duty in such a way that when the Great Shepherd of the sheep...comes, he may say to you: 'Well done, good and faithful servant, enter into the joy of your Master.'" Gansfort denied the remission of sins by indulgences, he emphasized the individual and subjective fruits of the Eucharist, he denied the priestly absolution in the Sacrament of Penance, holding that temporal punishments were eradicated with sin remission, and he denied the papal authority to forgive sin. Some of the beliefs/practices of the 15th century church he denied completely, and as far as many others go, he denied their formalistic divine/papal-authoriative natures, but not their practice or belief.

Gansfort had problems with the church and denied many of their practices and suppositions, but Gansfort was nowhere close to being a reformer. He was a humanist who was early on converted to Formalism, not surprisingly as a Roman Catholic. As his thirst for knowledge and questioning continued, he was fascinated by the nominalist vs. realist controversy and became himself a nominalist. Because of the nominalist denials of universals and their concentration on individuality(originated with Aristotle), the drastic theological ramifications are many. The debate between the realists and the nominalists was not merely philosophical but highly theological. Because of the nominalist belief that all things consist as autonomous individuals, sharing nothing but words, the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of natural law are viewed quite antithetically. A nominalist would claim that the Trinity can only be explained as tritheism, three distinct separate gods. Furthermore, there is no natural law, or law of the heart, that governs all people. Right and wrong are only objective when the specific law of God is given.

Despite these claims of Gansfort to be nominalist as well as a humanist, he had further un-reformational convictions as well. Gansfort still held to the freedom of the will in salvation(similar to Erasmus' claims), justification not by faith alone but by faith exercising itself in love, the meritorious nature of good works, the supremacy of Scripture and Tradition(obviously his view of Biblical authority was not sola scriptura), transubstantiation by priestly consecration and the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist, and a modified veneration of Mary. Furthermore, he still believed in Purgatory, just not its condemning nature(it's purpose is simply to purify souls from venial sins), as well as the practice of indulgences, just not the justifying nature of it.

It's clear that Gansfort did not believe in the core doctrines of the early reformers. Theologically, he rejected some Catholic beliefs, but he did not affirm reformational dogma. By the time of Luther, Gansfort was nearly forgotten. However, Luther thought well of Gansfort; in fact, he saw him as an ally. In what way that was manifested is not exactly clear. An author writes, "Luther compares his own age and fate to that of Elijah. Just as the prophet thought that only he had been left to fight God's battles, so Luther felt that he was quite alone in his struggles with the church. But on reading Wessel's works he realized that the Lord had saved a 'remnant in Israel.'" "Luther goes so far as to declare: 'If I had read his works earlier, my enemies might think that Luther had absorbed everything from Wessel, his spirit is so in accord with mine.'" Based on these statements, it's possible that Gansfort did not believe in the theological ramifications of nominalism, but it's not clear. Clearly, he did coincide with Luther in many core areas.

Although Wessel was not a reformer, he condemned many of the practices that led to the reformation. The Lord was pleased to use a man like Gansfort as a pre-cursor or a shadow of things that were to come years later. Many of the ideas that Gansfort declared were very much in harmony with the reformers, but very much incomplete to be reformational. His high view of Scriptural authority and the individuality of the sacraments were ideas that were declared many years before Luther.

Based on these things, I believe that Wessel Gansfort was not a pre-reformational reformer. Although he held some of the affirmations and rejections of the reformers, his theology was not fully reformational.

Gleanings from Queens...

2007-04-02T22:21:00.000-05:00

Last Saturday, Jana and I drove to south Queens, NYC to visit a church for a possible internship this upcoming summer. It's about a 3 hour drive from BBC. To be honest, I had some apprehensions prior to my visit due to fact that it's a regular baptist church and strongly dispensational. My short experience with RBC churches in the past is that they major on the minors and minor on the majors. But this church was not the case. It was a great visit which I gleaned a lot from. Jana and I spent the evening talking to the pastor and his wife about the church, BBC, life and ministry in the big city, and many other things. The pastor's name is Nimit Oliver. It was awesome to share such blessed fellowship with a brother who's working hard in the Gospel ministry.

Jana spent the night in their apartment above the church and I spent the night in one of the Sunday school rooms. The next morning I had the privilege of leading the worship music on the piano. The music was older kinda 80s worship music, not the kind I'm used to playing, but it was still good. The congregation was super gracious and so culturally diverse. In fact, Jana, me, and the pastor's wife were the only white people there. I was stuck by the beauty of the Gospel in the many cultures and races coming together for worship. I was reminded that in Christ, there is no distinction. Such wonder! I felt very comfortable in the environment and could easily see myself working full-time in a similar environment in the future. As I said, the people were so gracious and approachable....in fact, I think everyone approached me with a welcome and a smile. I truly was blessed. I was also amazed at the knowledge of the congregation and the level of biblical education and discussion they were receiving in Sunday School. It's a church that values the knowledge of God and seeks to conform to the Scriptures in their thoughts and practice.

Jana and I had lunch with the pastor and his wife and 3 year old and discussed more of the city ministry, some plans for the summer if I took the position, and some of their expectations of me. Me and the pastor even went outside and walked around the neighborhood a little getting petitions for their upcoming evangelistic block party in July.

This church was a great church and I will seriously consider it as a possible place the Lord many put me to learn and give this summer. I'm excited and very blessed.

If you want to check out the church online, it's www.servenyc.org
It's called Queens Regular Baptist Church.

Covenants, Babies, and Baptisms

2007-03-31T15:06:00.000-05:00

I love Covenant Theology. The beauty of the Gospel and the shapeliness of covenant epochs all finding their foundations in a Christ who is the perfect manifestation of all Old Testament prophecy makes the allurement of covenant theology so forceful.

Recently, I've been looking into the issue of baptism and how it relates to covenant theology. I believe my curiosity first came to rise when I realized that most of theologians whose works(books and/or sermons) I've gleaned the most from are proponents of paedobaptism. For Presbyterians, paedobaptism is grounded in covenant theology, specifically the Abrahamic Covenant. Furthermore, paedobaptism is supported in the reformed confessions, including the Belgic Confession(1561), the Heidelberg Catechism(1563), the Second Helvetic Confession(1566), the Wesminster Confession of Faith(1647), the Westminster Shorter Catechism(1647), and the Westminster Larger Catechism(1648.) All of these confessions explicitly state the covenant sign of baptism being a continuation of the covenant sign of circumcision, a seal of the blessings that come upon you when the conditions of the covenant are met, these conditions being personal faith in the workings of God.

I finished a booklet I picked up on monergism.com that has greatly helped shape my thinking. It's written by a Presbyterian named Bryan Chapell, who is the president of Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis. I would highly recommend this book to any layman who is interested in learning more of the Presbyterian faith, the covenant ramifications of paedobaptism, and the biblical support for the sacrament(which is very strong) It has dispelled many of my misconceptions about it as well as put me in a place of uncertainty regarding my thoughts on the issue. At this point, I think the paedobaptists have a more biblically consistent argument. I still need more books and more time. But in any case, praise the Lord for our Presbyterian brothers.

To be honest with you, I did write a pretty extensive review of the booklet and my demonized computer decided to freeze up and erase it all before I could publish it. I was too frustrated to write it again, so you'll have to buy the book.

"In him [Christ] you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead."(Col.2:11-12)

Tour Update and other musings....

2007-03-23T23:10:00.000-05:00

Hello, everyone. Tour is going very well. We've been greatly blessed to minister at multiple churches and Christian schools in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland. I've had the opportunity to share a personal testimony about the Gospel and Suffering(relating to my friend Dan's situation) in an emphasis on consecration. It's been a huge treat to get to know the other Chambers members better as well as get some good reading done. Also, we've been going through Romans 3:21-26 as a group this week, and Doc has been teaching us and exhorting us in its truths.

We had a very interesting situation this morning. We encountered legalism in a way that most of us had never encountered previously. At a fundamental baptist school in Maryland, our djembe was a source of great offense to some of the teachers and this offense was vocalized during the performance.(Ask me later for details) If we had known of their conservative dogmatisms, we would have never used a djembe, for we desire to be all things to all people for the sake of the Gospel. But being ignorant of that, we were greatly taken back by what happened. As frustrated and discouraged as we all felt during the rest of the performance, we were all struck with the beauty of grace so perfectly and finally revealed in the Gospel of Jesus. The disdain, the gloom of the clouds of Sinai, and the sadness of legalism was made all too apparent and the effulgent joys of grace were made all the more glorious and precious. Doc, although he was extremely discouraged, was very gracious. It is for freedom that Christ has set us free, not for establishing a righteous of our own and judging others or our hearts by that personal standard. We are twice damned, once at our conception and again at our willful rebellion. I praise the Lord for the worship we do at BBC, a worship that is inherently Christ-centered and joyously fearful. We do not focus on method or self-righteous preferences that only create further dissension and disharmony in the body. The only thing to cleave to is the grace of Jesus Christ, not standards that only cheapen grace and form new Galatian heresies. I do believe that these men are our brothers in Christ, yet I strongly disagree with their ungraceful and unloving emphasis on Law.

I pray that the beauty of grace will overflow upon these men so that Christ is made preeminent. I make the same prayer for all of us, for we all struggle with legalistic self-righteousness in one degree or another. Sola Gratia, my brothers! Praise the Lord for the righteousness of Christ, imparted to our filthy cloaks of shame.

Soli Deo Gloria

Rom.3:21-26

Off on Choir Tour....

2007-03-17T03:30:00.000-05:00

Well, I'm off to tour with the Chamber Singers for spring break. Please pray that the various churches will encouraged by the grace of Jesus Christ and that the kingdom will continue to grow and flourish through the preaching of His beautiful Gospel. Pray that God will keep us from sin and that our minds will be riveted by the Scriptures always being diligent and sober-minded in the things of God.

Also, please pray for my best friend Dan Knudsen of whom I have been friends with for about 15 years. He recently had an accident while on a missions trip in Mexico with Cedarville. He was trying to do a backflip and landed on his neck. At this point, he is currently paralyzed from the neck down and the doctors are waiting for the swelling to go down around his upper vertebrae so that he can breathe on his own and hopefully have feeling back in his body. Thankfully, though he was not breathing for quite awhile, he has no brain damage. He is a believer and has a very high countenance so far, praise the Lord. He was flown back home to Northeastern Hospital in Chicago where the doctors are still working on him. Please pray that the swelling will go down, for comfort for the entire Knudsen family whom I love dearly, and that Jesus Christ will be seen as preeminent.

Here's a picture of him.

The Gospel and Suffering

2007-03-09T08:47:00.000-05:00

This past week, we've had a speaker in chapel preach on the sufferings of Job and our response to personal suffering. His ultimate purpose was to look at Job in a moralistic fashion endeavoring to use him and his response to tremendous sufferings as a model for us. In the end, we are to find solace in God by trusting in his Sovereignty and His love. Now I do not question this man's heart or his motives, for I'm sure they are immaculate. Also, his content was sound and biblical. But as a college student, I'm called to think critically. This blog is a response to his sermons, not to his person. This is not a polemical attack.

Growing up in Christian circles, I've heard this sermon of Job numerous times. Over the past year, I've been asking the question: Is Christ relevant to this problem of suffering? It was quite obvious that Jesus Christ was omitted during all three of the sermons, except for a couple random references. Is there something inherently wrong with this kind of exposition?

Why do we look to Job as the tragic sufferer instead of looking to Christ who is the "Sovereign Sufferer?"

Can a sermon that does not preach Christ at all be considered a Christian sermon? Amen, preaching the value and necessity of trusting God amidst suffering is quite virtuous. But, is it something that is uniquely Christian? Is there not a similar message spoken in other religions as well? Is it satisfactory that those same messages could be spoken in any local synagogue and be readily accepted? I would fervently say "No!" A Christian cannot find any hope apart from the explicit person and work of Christ. Any sermon that moves directly from an Old Testament text DIRECTLY to the hearer in a list of simple do's and don'ts preaches legalism and cheapens the biblical theology of Law and Gospel. It cheapens the Law because it frames it in such a way as to show ourselves possibly fulfilling it, when in reality, we cannot. This is why Christ came, to redeem those who were in Adam under the law to make them in Christ under grace. It cheapens the Gospel because it makes Christ's perfect human existence and terrible death irrelevant, assuming the gospel of grace, not making it central. It tells the individual to look to God apart from His most perfect manifestation: our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Because Christ is the center of ALL biblical revelation, we cannot see anything in Scripture apart from the hermeneutical key, the foundation and center of ALL biblical revelation.

"While the temptation in preaching will be strong to proceed directly from, say, the godly Israelite to the contemporary believer, this method will inevitably produce distortions in the way we understand the text. There is no direct application apart from the mediation of Christ[...] The correct approach proceeds through the biblical structures that inevitably lead us to Christ before they lead to the hearer."-Graeme Goldsworthy

Compared to Job, Christ lost much more. Condescending to weak humanity from perfect Triune delight and perfection, Christ suffered separation from God on the cross and bore the sins of many, suffering the wrath of God as our Propitiator. Such suffering!

"To say what we should be or do and not link it with a clear exposition of what God has done about our failure to be or do perfectly as he wills is to reject the grace of God and to lead people to lust after self-help and self-improvement in a way that, to call a spade a spade, is godless."-Graeme Goldsworthy

Is preaching simply a therapeutic device or is it a God-enhancing device? Job could not find hope apart from the revelation of God, nor could the Israelites in Egypt (Ex.10:2) In the kingdom, Christ has revealed himself through the Son. He IS the Way, the Truth, and the Life. A Christian cannot find hope unless it is found directly and ultimately in the person and work of Christ. Preaching only moralism and "model-following" does not emphasize Christ's work but deemphasizes it. It tells us that we can find hope amidst the frowning providences of life through simply modeling someone else. We MUST recognize the place of Historical Prologues as the foundation of everything that we do. This is the foundation of the Gospel Schema. The historical nature of biblical theology is the driving force of our faith. We submit to the Law of God because of what He has done for us. And the greatest thing He has done for us is giving us a Perfect Savior. The hope and refuge we find in God is found ONLY and SPECIFICALLY through looking not on the types of sufferers but on the substance of our faith, the One who is the foundation of ALL morality, fulfiller of the Law and the Prophets, namely Jesus Christ, the Author and Perfecter of our faith.

Preaching simple remedies for suffering without gazing on the beauty of Christ, "the radiance of the glory of God"(Heb.1:3) does not teach the individual to value God. If you do not preach Christ, you do not preach God. What you are left with is a simple therapeutic faith and a Gospel that is robbed of its intrinsic value. Let us look to Christ! in our sufferings, not the models.

The 1599 Geneva Bible

2007-03-06T09:00:00.000-05:00

Finally, the Geneva Bible that I ordered back in January arrived up at school yesterday. Apparently, these things are selling like milk, due to the tremendous hype surrounding its historical release. This is a Bible I would highly recommend to any believer who desires to see and savor the beatific gospel of Christ as the early Reformers did.

The Geneva Bible was the Bible of John Calvin, John Knox, William Shakespeare, John Milton, John Bunyan, the Puritans, and the Pilgrims. This was the first Bible to be read by the common people in English, the first Bible to assign chapter and verse markers, the first English Bible to be fully translated from the original languages, the first Bible translation to be printed in easy-to-read Roman type, rather than the older Gothic text, the first Bible to be deemed a Study Bible(with study notes by the early Reformers), and the first Bible that was conveniently portable as well as very affordable.

"This edition of the Geneva Bible is the first completely new publication since the time of its first issue, and timed for release on the 400th Anniversary of the settlement of Jamestown in what is now Virginia. The Geneva Bible surely was carried aboard their three ships that sailed from England in December of 1606. The New England Pilgrims likewise relied on the Geneva Bible for comfort and strength on their 66-day voyage aboard the Mayflower in 1620, and were even more dependent upon it as they wrote the Mayflower Compact, a document unique in world history and the first constitutional government in the western hemisphere."

Historically, the laypeople never had a Bible in English. The Germans had Luther's German Bible since 1534, but English believers never had personal Bibles to read and study on their own. In fact, the Roman Church deemed it a capital crime to read the Scriptures in the "vulgar tongue"(English), making the Bible only available in Latin to scholars and the clergy. After fleeing for Germany, the English scholar William Tyndale published the New Testament in English in 1526, fulfilling his commitment to translate the Bible into the vulgar tongue..."[God's] version was to be made for all the people, even the humblest: if God spare my life, ere many years pass I will cause the boy that driveth the plow to know more of Scripture than [a theologian] dost." 6,000 first editions of his New Testaments were smuggled to England. However, these testaments were "pulpit Bibles," and to be used by the clergy; the common people could not afford any of these Bibles. In 1536, Tyndale was captured and burned at the stake for his unlawful acts. Following Tyndale's death, Henry VIII took the throne and supported the Protestant reformers. However, this support did not last long.
In 1553, upon the death of the King Henry VIII's son Edward, Mary Tudor took the throne and married the Catholic King of Spain. Quickly, she set out to quell the Reformation at any cost, burning more than 300 reformers, pastors, and Bible translators at the stake, earning her the title "Bloody Mary."

Queen Mary drove more than 800 English scholars out of England to the Continent(the Marian Exile) and some of the finest theologians and Bible scholars assembled in the republic of Geneva, Switzerland under John Calvin's protection. This group of theologians, led by William Whittingham (Calvin's brother-in-law) and assisted by Miles Coverdale, Christopher Goodman, Anthony Gilby, John Knox, and Thomas Sampson, produced a new English Bible which they called The Geneva Bible. They sought not to publish a Bible that was in the Queen Mary-supported Latin language. Due to the fall of Constantinople in 1453, many of the previously unknown Hebrew and Greek Scriptural manuscripts were carried to the West. During the Renaissance, these antiquitous documents were made known to the Genevan Scholars. Therefore, the Geneva Bible translators used the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts for their new translation. The project was overseen by John Knox and John Calvin. The men spent two years on the project.

"For generations after its first printing, the Geneva Bible remained the Bible of personal study in England, Scotland, and then in America. A 1579 Scottish edition of the Geneva version was the first Bible printed in Scotland; it soon became the standard of the Scottish Kirk. The Scottish Parliament required that every householder worth 300 marks, and every yeoman or burgess worth 500 pounds, have a Bible in the "vulgar tongue" in their homes, under penalty of 10 pounds."

Upon reading, one can see all too easily that the marginal notes are tuned with the doctrines of the preeminence of Christ, the five solas, and the doctrines of grace. These teachings infuriated King James I, hence the creation of the King James Version, but these doctrines have prevailed, much like the Old Testament remnant. The eloquent language and beatific beauty of God is bleeding from every verse and marginal note. The epic of Christ as Sovereign Redeemer is a beauty that is lost today through tolerance and ungodly forgeries of men. The 2006 re-publication of the Geneva Bible is greatly needed and will be used in a mighty way to proclaim that though "in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." 1 Cor.15:22

"Whatever resistance we see today offered by almost all the world to the progress of the truth, we must not doubt that our Lord will come at last to break through all the undertakings of men and make a passage for His Word. Let us hope boldly, then, more than we can understand; He will still surpass our opinion and our hope." -John Calvin, exiled in Geneva

The Gospel Schema

2007-03-03T15:24:00.000-05:00

In his book Preaching the Whole Bible As Christian Scripture, Graeme Goldsworthy speaks of the gospel as the hermeneutical key to all biblical revelation. In fact, the message of all Biblical revelation is the story of a God condescending to a lost people for redemptive purposes. A reductionist view could see that all of reality could be broken down to two things: God and the created order. The created order is further dichotomized as the human race is given superiority and kingship over the creation. Furthermore, the pattern that emerges in the Scriptures rests on three focal points: God, His people, and the created environment for the God-people relationship. This God-people-place schema is the exact pattern that composes the kingdom. Sadly, however, sin was the virus that infected this schema.

Redemption was the only remedy for the problem that infected the God-people-place schema. Historically, this problem never came to ultimate solution in Israel nor Mt.Sinai, nor was it meant to. The pattern of the kingdom was set forth in Israel in type form and was, therefore, never fully realized; economically, the law the land and the people(the schema) were doing what they were designed to do as "shadows" and "types," yet they were ultimately imperfect and incongruent to God's ultimate designed Kingdom of Zion, to the One who was the culmination of all eschatology and prophetic revelation...the schema brought to ultimate fulfillment in One.

This perfect pattern took an opaque shape in prophecy, and took a perfect shape in the Gospel.

"The pattern of the Kingdom is perfectly established in Jesus in a representative way. The pattern of the kingdom begins to be formed in the people of God through the gospel. The pattern of the kingdom is consummated at Christ's return."

The process of all restoration is brought to culmination in the Son, for the baseness of man could never bear a kingdom without Divine mediation. The God-people-place relationship has its culmination in Christ, and this kingdom pattern is brought forth, no longer in type form, but in the glorious Anti-type of the Son. Praise the Lord for the Sovereign Grace of God!

"The 'mechanics' of salvation, then consist in this: that what is lost with the fall God foreshadows in the history of redemption in Israel. The solid reality comes, namely, Jesus, who bears in himself the fullness of the kingdom in that he is GOD, MAN AND CREATED ORDER, all existing in perfect relationship."

Back To Blogging....

2007-02-28T22:58:00.000-05:00

I think it's time to start blogging again. I apologize profusely for the extended time-off. Hopefully, I shall have the discipline to blog regularly. For this premier, I think I shall post the lyrics of a song I just finished. I wrote in response to a wonderfully virtuous book I'm currently reading called "God of Promise" by Michael Horton. The divine connections of covenant themes and epochs presented have very much helped shape my perspective at gaining a sound "biblical theology," not to mention a consistent hermeneutic that is concretely orthodox and effectually Christocentric. Admittedly, Doc and I had to change some of the lyrics for it be fitting for a BBC audience. The parachurch institution I'm currently attending grows very defensive and polemical at almost any covenant language that is church-applied, so I had to take most of it out. But, I think the message is still there. It's taken from children of promises passages in Gal.4, and Is.54, drawing parallels back to 1 Cor.12, Is.55, 2 Cor.3, Heb.12, and 1 Jn.2:1.

Gospel Made Mine!

From Sinai my soul doth despair
But in Christ, a herald of grace beckons there
From Calvary, God's people to Zion will cling
Christ the Righteous, His Righteous Mine

Your promises, wrought in Your name
Will ever, forever speak Jesus’ praise
The Law and the Prophets proclaim
Christ the Righteous, Advocate mine.

Let us sing, for we were barren and we could not bear
But behold! Covenant mercies brought nigh!
For our Maker is our Husband
The Lord of hosts is His name
The Holy One of Israel
Christ the Righteous, Gospel Made Mine!

My heritage, my dross is in Thee
My priestly God, my daunting heart is fortressed in Thee.
Glory be! The nations will sing
“Three times holy! Holiness mine!”

So come all who thirst!
All who are hungry
Come, buy & eat
Though you have no money

Melech

2006-09-20T22:31:00.000-05:00

I figured I should start blogging, so I'm puttin this out there for kicks and giggles. I'm taking this from the Hebrews discussion blog regarding the "name" given to Christ in Hebrews 1:4. Christ's Kingship IS His radiance. If we take away from His rule and authority as an effectual King in the present reality, we, ourselves, become no better than the Pharisees, men who would not recognize their King because of their stubborn hearts......as R.C. Sproul says, we live so much of our Christian "journeys"(BBC lingo) as if we're still living in the Old Testament....not recognizing what we can, and MUST own through the purpose of God displayed in Christ, who has set forth the fullness of time.(Eph.1:10)

I believe that Christ, as being the radiance of the glory of God(vs.3)(present reality), is married, specifically in the passage under discussion, to His KINGSHIP. There is a clear parallel between Christ’s “sitting down at the right hand” and “the name.” Not only is Christ “sitting,” but the “angels worship him.”(vs.6) Also, in verse 8, it states that “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of unrightness is the scepter of your kingdom.” There is a clear picture of Christ as the King of Kings, sitting on His throne.

And as I try to interpret Scripture with Scripture, I will go to Peter’s sermon in Acts 2. If I may, I will highlight verses 29 through 35.

“Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, HE FORESAW AND SPOKE ABOUT THE RESURRECTION OF THE CHRIST, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having receieved from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.[reference to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit mentioned earlier in the quotation of Joel 2:28-32] For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, until I make your enemies your footstool.’”

To me, it is clear from this passage that Christ was exalted to his Kingship, specifically on the throne of David, at his resurrection. I’m not quite sure how to escape that truth, considering verse 31 and following….especially because Peter quotes the very same passage in verse 34-35 that the writer of Hebrews quotes in 1:13. Furthermore, apparently from this Acts passage, Christ’s “being exalted to the right hand of God” coincides with His kingship on David’s throne in verses 30-31.
Therefore, taking into consideration that the author of Hebrews uses multiple images of kingship in describing the Christ, and that Peter tantamounts Christ’s kingship on David’s throne to Christ’s sitting at the right hand of the Father, I believe that this passage referring to Christ’s “name” refers to Christ’s glorious Kingship on the throne of David.

Now, before I continue, I do want to make a point of saying that this name could very well mean his High Priestly nature as well. I simply think that the emphasis in this particular passage is on His Kingship….prophet, priest, and King.

I believe that Christ is enjoying His glory as King, even now. He IS exalted. God has set forth His purpose in Christ, “as a plan for the FULLNESS OF TIME, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.” I believe this is one of the so-called “now and not yet realities” of Scripture. It was accomplished legally in Christ as stated in Matt.28:19, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” and in 1 Peter 3:22 when Peter speaks of Christ as one “who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorites, and powers HAVING BEEN SUBJECTED to him”, yet it is also playing itself out even now through the blazing gloriousness of the Gospel message and the seeing and savoring of Him by His people.
Christ is the King of the Church, sitting on the throne formerly occupied by David. Of course in this case, the throne has a much fuller and pregnant meaning; David’s throne was simply over the land, and Christ’s throne is over the entire earth. It is through Christ that all the nations of the earth are blessed, as was promised by God to Abraham and His offspring, who is Christ.(Gal.3:14-18) And likewise, we are children of Abraham because we are of Christ through faith.

Needless to say, on Easter Sunday, I will give my all in the praise of my final and glorious KING DAVID who is Jesus Christ, the the radiance of the glory of God.

For my next blog, I think I'll discuss the annual BBC Ministry Fair......the thing that makes me ponder if the Harlot of Babylon is now the church

Early Watts Poem

2006-05-22T18:20:00.000-05:00

I am a vile polluted lump of earth,
So I've continued ever since my birth,
Although Jehovah grace does daily give me,
As sure this monster Satan will deceive me,
Come therefore, Lord, from Satan's claws relieve me.

Wash me in thy blood, O Christ,
And grace divine impart,
Then search and try the corners of my heart,
That I in all things may be fit to do
Service to thee, and sing thy praises too.
-Isaac Watts Age 7