When discussing baptism and examining the Scriptural evidence for believers baptism and that for infant baptism, one foundational question which always surfaces is, which side has the burden of proof? Does the practice of infant baptism rest on already established commands of Scripture, given prior to the New Testament era, and therefore there need not be any explicit New Testament teaching in support of infant baptism in order for it to be the practice of the church? Or is baptism, being a New Testament ordinance, new, and therefore it is something which requires explicit teaching regarding who is to receive it? Paedobaptists, those who believe that the children of believers are to be baptized, regardless of their personal faith, look at the household baptisms in Acts and say, “Where does it say that all those who were baptized are believers?” Credobaptists, those who believe that only professing believers are to be baptized, look at the record of Acts and say, “Where does it say that unbelieving infants are being baptized?” Our prior commitments cause us to find support for our own view in the same passages which lead others to the opposite conclusion. This show the difficulty of the task at hand.
In a real sense, each side has the burden of proving from Scripture with clear, reasoned arguments why they hold to a particular view of baptism. Neither side can say, I just assume a particular view and will hold to it unless convinced otherwise. Our doctrine ought not be formed from tradition or the convictions of others, but from God's Word alone.
Thankfully, there are many areas of argreement between credobaptists like myself who hold to covenant theology, and paedobaptists. Although there were temporal aspects to the covenant made with Abraham, we see that the covenant God made with Abraham is not forgotten or erased by the coming of the new covenant. The old covenant types are fulfilled in the coming of the new, and God's promise to bless the nations through Abraham's seed is fulfilled in the coming of Christ. The coming of the Messiah and the beginning of the New Testament era do not give us liberty to dismiss previously given commands without Biblical warrant, as if nothing written in Scripture prior to Matthew chapter one matters for us today. This is no new idea: There are theologians who have held to covenant theology while also embracing credobaptism, such as John Bunyan, Charles Spurgeon, and John Gill.
Paedobaptists have challenged credobaptists to show where there has been a repeal of the command to give the sign of the covenant to infants. When this challenge is given, it is useful to remind ourselves what the actual sign of the covenant in the Old Testament, was: That sign was circumcision. It is true that the sign of the old administration cannot be done away with without explicit teaching. Yet there is explicit teaching in this direction. When we look at the diversity between the old and new covenants, we do see that circumcision has been abrogated as a command for God's people (Galatians 6:15). Circumcision was the sign of the old covenant, and it is called a sign and seal of the righteousness of God to Abraham in Romans 4. All that is needed to show that there has been a change in the administration of the old testament sign and seal is to read what the New Testament says about circumcision.
Sometimes when reading the arguments for paedobaptism, it sounds as if its proponents think that it is paedobaptism and not circumcision which was the sign of the old administration, as if infant baptism was an Old Testament practice. Bryan Chapell writes in The Case For Infant Baptism, “...opponents of infant baptism face the absence of a specific command to deny children the covenant sign and seal...It seems highly probable that if the apostles had changed that practice, that change would have been recorded in the New Testament...”. Since the covenant sign in the Old Testament was circumcision, the change in practice is specifically taught when Paul writes that circumcision is nothing (1 Corinthians 7:19). This could not have been said under the Old Testament economy. If the argument was whether or not circumcision is still commanded to be performed on eight day old male infants, then the burden of proof is certainly on the one arguing there has been a change, and the proof is ample. In the same way, if infant baptism was the Old Testament sign and seal instituted by God, then the burden of proof would rest on those claiming it is no longer commanded. But no one is claiming either of these positions in the debate on baptism. Paedobaptists do believe that the Bible teaches there has been a change with regards to the Old Testament sign. They believe, however, that it is not enough for God to say that circumcision has been done away with, but all the specifics of how that sign was to be administered must also be explicitly mentioned as abgrogated, or we will apply the “how” from the old covenant sign to a different “what.”
We are not allowed to switch from noticing similarities to extrapolating commands. One can see similarity between circumcision and baptism without saying, as James Bannerman does, “...that whatever you can say about circumcision you can say about baptism, because their meaning is identical.” This would lead us to conclude that only males are to be recipients of baptism, as only males received the sign of circumcision in the Old Testament. But we see that is not the case from Lydia's baptism in Acts 16. There are similarities between the priestly office in the Old Testament and the New Testament office of elder. But we are not free to draw lines where the Bible hasn't, and say that the priestly garments under Moses are commanded for an elder of a New Testament church. And the silence of the New Testament on the subject of priestly clothing is not support for such a view. Just because we see similarities in the significance of two symbols doesn't mean we can borrow the explicit commands regarding one and attach them to the other.
It is generally agreed by both paedobaptists and credobaptists that John the Baptist did not baptize infants. He, in fact, when approached by the multitudes to be baptized, though they were descendants of Abraham, refused them, saying, “...bear fruits worthy of repentance...” (Luke 3:7-9). Whether or not one considers the baptism of John to be Christian baptism, this passage shows that despite Israel's long history of infants receiving the sign of the covenant, John the baptist did not believe that one can deduce from that a command to include the children of Abraham in this new ordinance. Nor does he direct us to observe whether or not those in the multitude are the children of believers, though that's what we would expect if the history of children being born into the old covenant teaches who are the proper recipients of a new ordinance. That communion is generally not administered to infants in paedobaptist churches shows that the long history of children being included in the old covenant regardless of their personal faith does not automatically determine the New Testament church practice.
Having examined the issue of the burden of proof, the proper subject of baptism is not determined by this. The New Testament teaching regarding baptism and new covenant membership must still be considered and evaluated. We see that we cannot conclude that “...the silence of the New Testament regarding the baptism of infants militates in favor of rather than against this practice,” as Charles Marcel writes. Hebrews 8 and 10 tell us what is new about the new covenant, and that is a good place to direct our attention. Godly men and women have come down on both sides of this debate. And many have reminded us not to ignore the continuity between the covenants. But also let us not form a view of baptism that minimizes the diversity of the covenants.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Children and Corporate Worship
A woman recently visited my church and noticed all the children running around the building before the service started. I know these kids well, and sometimes eight of them can sound like 20 when they are fully in character, my three doing more than their share of the play and noise. After church, this woman asked my pastor if we had an upstairs or another room where all the children went during service. She hadn't heard kid noises during the service, so she assumed the children weren't in the room with her. She was surprised to find out that all the children were there through the whole service.
Having children in the church service with the adults has come to be called family integrated worship. And having our children sitting by us during church seems so normal to me. But I know that to some, is it is something they have never seen and can't picture. I hear people ask questions like, will it make the child hate church when he is older? Are they able to get anything out of the sermon? Wouldn't a room for kids of the same age and one adult to facilitate be more fun for the children? Isn't it disruptive to the congregation to have children in the service?
These questions are worthy of an answer. But these questions are the wrong place to start. When deciding what church should look like for our children, we ought to start with:
What are the qualifications for an elder?
What are the necessary marks of a church?
Christians are commanded to sit under the preached Word by a pastor who meets the Biblical qualifications (1 Timothy 3:1-7). If you agree with this, then you will agree that believers, who happen to be children, ought to participate in corporate worship, not only in a Sunday school class with a teacher who does not meet the Biblical requirements of an elder. Learning in a Sunday school class can be a good addition to the gathering of the saints, but Sunday school is not a replacement for church.
Christians are commanded to partake communion as a corporate body. Believing children who are kept out the main church service often are kept from ever seeing another take communion, and they are not given the opportunity to take communion themselves. Unbelieving children and those who are so young that it is next to impossible to discern a credible profession of faith in the gospel can witness the church body partaking of communion, and like the children present at the first passover celebrations, ask, why do you do this?
Children are addressed in Ephesians (6:1) and Colossians (3:20), which are letters written to churches in the apostolic era. These letters were read in the churches. It seems to be assumed that the children would be present with their parents to hear these words. At my church, there are many children who are so young that it is next to impossible to discern a credible profession of faith. But they are there hearing the gospel every week. And just as John the Baptist leapt for joy in the womb at the greeting of Mary (Luke 1:41-45), so can those little ones sitting in church be regenerated by the preached Word and the Spirit, no matter how impossible our experience declares that to be.
Some have said that having age-segregated churches enables everyone to learn at their own maturity level. But a ten year old who has been taught theology and has been a Christian for 5 years can be more mature in the faith than a 40 year old who is a new convert. And somehow, 40 year olds who are new converts and 40 year olds who have been in the faith 20 years can all learn from the same sermon.
I know there are people who grew up in church with their parents and hated it. But there are people who grew up in Sunday school and hated it. Some people grew up having the Bible read to them as children and hated it. That doesn't seem to be a good reason to say, I won't read the Bible to my children. It doesn't seem that we as Christians should want to say to our children (by our words or our actions), don't come hear God's Word preached because I know you wouldn't like it. His Word is efficacious, so why would we tell our little ones it isn't for them when it's preached?
Last month, five children were baptized at my church. They were baptized on the basis on their profession of faith in the gospel and in obedience to God's command. It was a reminder to me of the benefits of family worship, since we were able to rejoice with our church family together and be reminded of some important truths together. We were reminded in those baptisms that entrance into the kingdom of God is not on the basis of age (one was as young as six), race, or the profession of faith given by one's parents. My sons watching these baptisms leaned over and told me that they remember their own baptisms. My three year old asked questions quietly as she watched. I am glad she is right there in the service with us on Sundays, hearing God's Word from a pastor who meets the Biblical requirements of an elder, and not excluded from corporate worship.
Having children in the church service with the adults has come to be called family integrated worship. And having our children sitting by us during church seems so normal to me. But I know that to some, is it is something they have never seen and can't picture. I hear people ask questions like, will it make the child hate church when he is older? Are they able to get anything out of the sermon? Wouldn't a room for kids of the same age and one adult to facilitate be more fun for the children? Isn't it disruptive to the congregation to have children in the service?
These questions are worthy of an answer. But these questions are the wrong place to start. When deciding what church should look like for our children, we ought to start with:
What are the qualifications for an elder?
What are the necessary marks of a church?
Christians are commanded to sit under the preached Word by a pastor who meets the Biblical qualifications (1 Timothy 3:1-7). If you agree with this, then you will agree that believers, who happen to be children, ought to participate in corporate worship, not only in a Sunday school class with a teacher who does not meet the Biblical requirements of an elder. Learning in a Sunday school class can be a good addition to the gathering of the saints, but Sunday school is not a replacement for church.
Christians are commanded to partake communion as a corporate body. Believing children who are kept out the main church service often are kept from ever seeing another take communion, and they are not given the opportunity to take communion themselves. Unbelieving children and those who are so young that it is next to impossible to discern a credible profession of faith in the gospel can witness the church body partaking of communion, and like the children present at the first passover celebrations, ask, why do you do this?
Children are addressed in Ephesians (6:1) and Colossians (3:20), which are letters written to churches in the apostolic era. These letters were read in the churches. It seems to be assumed that the children would be present with their parents to hear these words. At my church, there are many children who are so young that it is next to impossible to discern a credible profession of faith. But they are there hearing the gospel every week. And just as John the Baptist leapt for joy in the womb at the greeting of Mary (Luke 1:41-45), so can those little ones sitting in church be regenerated by the preached Word and the Spirit, no matter how impossible our experience declares that to be.
Some have said that having age-segregated churches enables everyone to learn at their own maturity level. But a ten year old who has been taught theology and has been a Christian for 5 years can be more mature in the faith than a 40 year old who is a new convert. And somehow, 40 year olds who are new converts and 40 year olds who have been in the faith 20 years can all learn from the same sermon.
I know there are people who grew up in church with their parents and hated it. But there are people who grew up in Sunday school and hated it. Some people grew up having the Bible read to them as children and hated it. That doesn't seem to be a good reason to say, I won't read the Bible to my children. It doesn't seem that we as Christians should want to say to our children (by our words or our actions), don't come hear God's Word preached because I know you wouldn't like it. His Word is efficacious, so why would we tell our little ones it isn't for them when it's preached?
Last month, five children were baptized at my church. They were baptized on the basis on their profession of faith in the gospel and in obedience to God's command. It was a reminder to me of the benefits of family worship, since we were able to rejoice with our church family together and be reminded of some important truths together. We were reminded in those baptisms that entrance into the kingdom of God is not on the basis of age (one was as young as six), race, or the profession of faith given by one's parents. My sons watching these baptisms leaned over and told me that they remember their own baptisms. My three year old asked questions quietly as she watched. I am glad she is right there in the service with us on Sundays, hearing God's Word from a pastor who meets the Biblical requirements of an elder, and not excluded from corporate worship.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Children Turning Into Teenagers
Instead of dreading the day when my children turn into teenagers, I think often about what I hope my children are like at that age. All the warnings I've received from parents with older children which essentially say, “just wait until your children are older,” haven't discouraged me yet. I look forward to that time. I want to raise my children to be likeable, even at the age we are supposed to not like them, the age we are suppose to call adolescence.
A good economist thinks two or three steps beyond the immediate effects of a given policy, even if that policy claims to be for the people, for the children, for education, for the environment, or for the poor. And parents need to be good economists. We need to know what the long term goal is. It's not enough to determine if a given behavior in our children bothers us now. We should ask, what will this behavior look like coming from an older person? Even though my children are small, this gives me much to think about.
I hope my children as teenagers interact politely with each other and with us, their parents. I want them to know that there is wisdom to be gained from the adults in their sphere of life, and to accept the word "no" with humility. This means I have to teach them now that things which are unpleasant can be beneficial, and I believe that through hard work (weeding, shoveling manure, laundry, cleaning, memorizing) they are learning this. I hope that they are people with self control, gained from years of practice reigning in their will. When I think about it, I guess what I want for my children as teenagers isn't much different from what I expect to see at their ages now.
It is not essential to me that my children as teenagers are college bound. This doesn't mean I see no value in the college experience, and I had a rather good one. But I know that college degrees don't guarantee reasoning ability or wisdom, and it is equally clear to me that intellectual goals can be achieved apart from a four year institution. I do hope that they value knowledge, can dissect different ideas, and are enthusiastic learners. I want them to value logically consistency, and I hope they are able to recognize inconsistency in their own arguments. I was so proud when my nine year old recognized the logical fallacy of asserting the consequent (though not by name) while watching a documentary on the planets. I also hope that their attitude in disagreement is humble and not disdainful or dismissive of others. I guess what I hope for my children as teenagers is not much different from what I want for myself.
I hope my children as teenagers know the Scriptures well enough to teach and to refute false ideas. I hope that their participation in our local church is more than the habit of sitting still, but I hope that they seek to be a blessing to those around them. I hope that they don't see their time as their own possession to be spent only for their own benefit, using all their time for their own education and pleasure. This means that starting now, we can't use our time only for our own pleasure and education. So when I think about it, I guess my goals for them as teenagers aren't much different than what I hope for them as adults.
These goals will keep me very busy. Because I don't believe that the character of our teenagers is randomly determined or completely a product of hormones. In the qualifications for elders listed in 1 Timothy 3, we read that if a man's children are unruly, then his household in not being ruled well. This is a sobering warning. This is a serious task. And I know that I need to start now.
A good economist thinks two or three steps beyond the immediate effects of a given policy, even if that policy claims to be for the people, for the children, for education, for the environment, or for the poor. And parents need to be good economists. We need to know what the long term goal is. It's not enough to determine if a given behavior in our children bothers us now. We should ask, what will this behavior look like coming from an older person? Even though my children are small, this gives me much to think about.
I hope my children as teenagers interact politely with each other and with us, their parents. I want them to know that there is wisdom to be gained from the adults in their sphere of life, and to accept the word "no" with humility. This means I have to teach them now that things which are unpleasant can be beneficial, and I believe that through hard work (weeding, shoveling manure, laundry, cleaning, memorizing) they are learning this. I hope that they are people with self control, gained from years of practice reigning in their will. When I think about it, I guess what I want for my children as teenagers isn't much different from what I expect to see at their ages now.
It is not essential to me that my children as teenagers are college bound. This doesn't mean I see no value in the college experience, and I had a rather good one. But I know that college degrees don't guarantee reasoning ability or wisdom, and it is equally clear to me that intellectual goals can be achieved apart from a four year institution. I do hope that they value knowledge, can dissect different ideas, and are enthusiastic learners. I want them to value logically consistency, and I hope they are able to recognize inconsistency in their own arguments. I was so proud when my nine year old recognized the logical fallacy of asserting the consequent (though not by name) while watching a documentary on the planets. I also hope that their attitude in disagreement is humble and not disdainful or dismissive of others. I guess what I hope for my children as teenagers is not much different from what I want for myself.
I hope my children as teenagers know the Scriptures well enough to teach and to refute false ideas. I hope that their participation in our local church is more than the habit of sitting still, but I hope that they seek to be a blessing to those around them. I hope that they don't see their time as their own possession to be spent only for their own benefit, using all their time for their own education and pleasure. This means that starting now, we can't use our time only for our own pleasure and education. So when I think about it, I guess my goals for them as teenagers aren't much different than what I hope for them as adults.
These goals will keep me very busy. Because I don't believe that the character of our teenagers is randomly determined or completely a product of hormones. In the qualifications for elders listed in 1 Timothy 3, we read that if a man's children are unruly, then his household in not being ruled well. This is a sobering warning. This is a serious task. And I know that I need to start now.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Content and Motives
Vincent Donovan lived in Tanzania before and after it achieved its independence from Britain. He was there as the British national anthem was sung for the last time, the British Union Jack being lowered, and the new flag of Tanganyika flew for the first time. He was a Catholic missionary living in Tanzania (then Tanganyika) in the late1950s through the 1970s. He spent his time there with very little of the comforts which we enjoy, living among the Masai and later the Sonjo people. He watched his hometown disappear out of the back of a train, he learned Swahili and the Masai language, and he lived in tent without access to running water. He writes to his family and friends to kiss the faucets and taps at home for him. In one of his letters home, he says, “...it is not easy work. It is hard. It is discouraging. It is thankless. It is lonely. But I wouldn't willingly change it for any other work in the world.”
Donovan taught the Beatitudes to a people for whom mercy was a vice and not a virtue. “They told me that a man who was wronged by another man was not a man unless he worked out his own revenge...,” he writes. “This revenge is not an empty word... I have seen it worked out in the most horrible forms. I have reached the point of not being able to be shocked or startled at anything anymore. But I couldn't help thinking how unfit I have become for chatting with the Sodality women of St. Bridget's in Connecticut about their difficulties in arranging a cake sale.”
He endured these difficulties in order to bring his religion and his gospel to the people of Tanzania. His letters home to his family and friends make evident his compassion for the people he lived among. But what was his message? What is the content of the religion he traveled so far to spread? The content of his gospel which he taught is written in The Missionary Letters of Vincent Donovan:
“Once there was a young maiden, a virgin, who was very beautiful and very good. She was so beautiful and so good and so holy... that God wanted her for Himself. ... And so that girl, who was called Mary, agreed, and she became the espoused one of God Himself. ... And so after some time, God, by His invisible power, without even appearing on earth, placed a child in Mary's womb... He was the greatest warrior and chief who had lived up until now. ... Every brave man can join the tribe of Christ. ... Christ is our head and he needs brave, good warriors for his tribe and his chiefdom.”
All those years of preparation and travel and hardship to bring them a message of works, a message which says God will accept your goodness, if you have enough goodness. No mention is made of the reason man needs a savior (sin), and no mention of Christ's death and the purpose of Christ's death (atonement). Donovan left out all discussion of sin consciously. To teach the doctrine of original sin, he said, was to engender hopelessness. “The Sonjo and the Masai consider their ancestors beautiful...it is no part of the Christian message to tell them that they are not...that their ancestors and their peers were and are steeped in sin...” So in an effort to not bring them any bad news, he ended up with no gospel at all.
Sometimes it is tempting to think that we ought to be approving of all things done from a caring motive. We are told by the world that it is unloving to disagree with people. It is even called hateful to say that another person's beliefs are wrong. Like a child who dislikes discipline, we are told that to love someone means to approve of them and all of their choices. But just as a wise parent knows that love sometimes requires hard truths, being loving sometimes means telling someone that they are wrong. Christians are accused of violating society's law of non-judgment. The god of tolerance loves everyone- almost. There are a handful of ideas one can be disdainful of, like the truth claims of Christianity, and one will still consider themselves open minded and tolerant.
The command to love one's neighbor is meaningless without further explanation. What does it mean to love someone? Whose notion of love are we to emulate? Some people come up with their own notion of what love looks like; they invent their own ethical code, and they expect others to live by it. And those codes can be as detailed as any organized religion. But Christians are to define love according to the Scriptures. It is God who is the law giver.
Paul writes in Philippians 1:17 that it is the message, not the motive, that is central. “Some indeed preach Christ from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice.” Paul is obviously not saying that it is good to preach from selfish ambition. But the gospel can change hearts apart from the motives of the one bringing the message.
So when we pray for missionaries, we ought to pray that their message would be undiluted. We need to pray that God will make His people able to faithfully communicate His truth. It is in this way that the church is “the golden casket,” as described in O Word of God Incarnate, “where gems of truth are stored.”
Donovan taught the Beatitudes to a people for whom mercy was a vice and not a virtue. “They told me that a man who was wronged by another man was not a man unless he worked out his own revenge...,” he writes. “This revenge is not an empty word... I have seen it worked out in the most horrible forms. I have reached the point of not being able to be shocked or startled at anything anymore. But I couldn't help thinking how unfit I have become for chatting with the Sodality women of St. Bridget's in Connecticut about their difficulties in arranging a cake sale.”
He endured these difficulties in order to bring his religion and his gospel to the people of Tanzania. His letters home to his family and friends make evident his compassion for the people he lived among. But what was his message? What is the content of the religion he traveled so far to spread? The content of his gospel which he taught is written in The Missionary Letters of Vincent Donovan:
“Once there was a young maiden, a virgin, who was very beautiful and very good. She was so beautiful and so good and so holy... that God wanted her for Himself. ... And so that girl, who was called Mary, agreed, and she became the espoused one of God Himself. ... And so after some time, God, by His invisible power, without even appearing on earth, placed a child in Mary's womb... He was the greatest warrior and chief who had lived up until now. ... Every brave man can join the tribe of Christ. ... Christ is our head and he needs brave, good warriors for his tribe and his chiefdom.”
All those years of preparation and travel and hardship to bring them a message of works, a message which says God will accept your goodness, if you have enough goodness. No mention is made of the reason man needs a savior (sin), and no mention of Christ's death and the purpose of Christ's death (atonement). Donovan left out all discussion of sin consciously. To teach the doctrine of original sin, he said, was to engender hopelessness. “The Sonjo and the Masai consider their ancestors beautiful...it is no part of the Christian message to tell them that they are not...that their ancestors and their peers were and are steeped in sin...” So in an effort to not bring them any bad news, he ended up with no gospel at all.
Sometimes it is tempting to think that we ought to be approving of all things done from a caring motive. We are told by the world that it is unloving to disagree with people. It is even called hateful to say that another person's beliefs are wrong. Like a child who dislikes discipline, we are told that to love someone means to approve of them and all of their choices. But just as a wise parent knows that love sometimes requires hard truths, being loving sometimes means telling someone that they are wrong. Christians are accused of violating society's law of non-judgment. The god of tolerance loves everyone- almost. There are a handful of ideas one can be disdainful of, like the truth claims of Christianity, and one will still consider themselves open minded and tolerant.
The command to love one's neighbor is meaningless without further explanation. What does it mean to love someone? Whose notion of love are we to emulate? Some people come up with their own notion of what love looks like; they invent their own ethical code, and they expect others to live by it. And those codes can be as detailed as any organized religion. But Christians are to define love according to the Scriptures. It is God who is the law giver.
Paul writes in Philippians 1:17 that it is the message, not the motive, that is central. “Some indeed preach Christ from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice.” Paul is obviously not saying that it is good to preach from selfish ambition. But the gospel can change hearts apart from the motives of the one bringing the message.
So when we pray for missionaries, we ought to pray that their message would be undiluted. We need to pray that God will make His people able to faithfully communicate His truth. It is in this way that the church is “the golden casket,” as described in O Word of God Incarnate, “where gems of truth are stored.”
Thursday, June 30, 2011
I Love Hymns
In C. S. Lewis' story The Last Battle, many of the talking beasts in Narnia were deceived by a donkey wearing a lion's skin, who was giving orders and claiming to be the lion Aslan. When orders were given which seemed out of character for the real Aslan, doubts arose, but one line was repeated which kept the animals from entertaining serious doubts against the imposter: “He's not a tame lion, you know.” One line of truth used to conceal other truths, like Satan quoting Scripture to Jesus in His wilderness temptation. Feist is almost right when she says, the truth lies.
God help the church to not be so easily deceived when the world echos the serpents words, “Did God really say...”. It is one of my goals as a parent to have my children know the truth so well, even at their young ages, that they would be able to recognize a false gospel and other doctrinal errors. That is one of the reasons I love my children learning hymns. So many important doctrines are communicated in the hymns I love. And when I hear my little ones singing, “God and sinners reconciled...” from Hark! The Herald Angels Sing, I hope that their minds are being fortified against error through the truths they are enmeshed in.
Even if not everyone loves the tunes which the great hymns are set to, no one should miss the doctrine contain in them. We learn about God's sovereignty in Praise to the Lord, the Almighty: “Praise to the Lord, who o'er all things so wonderously reigneth.” We see our own frailty in Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing: “Let thy goodness, like a fetter, bind my wandering heart to thee. Prone to wander, Lord I feel it, prone to leave the God I love.” We see the power of the gospel in O For A Thousand Tongues: “He breaks the power of canceled sin...His blood can make the foulest clean, His blood availed for me.” We learn about Christ's three-fold office in Praise Him! Praise Him!: “Prophet and priest and king!” The trinity is articulated in Holy God We Praise Thy Name, which says, “Though in essence only one, undivided God...”. God's immutability is seen in Great is Thy Faithfulness: “Thou changest not, thy compassions they fail not...”. We admit our likeness to Adam, and Christ's role as the second Adam in Hark! The Herald Angels Sing: “Adam's likeness now efface, Stamp Thine image in its place: Second Adam from above, reinstate us in Thy love.” God's Word is called, “..the golden casket where gems of truth are stored...the chart and compass...[which] guides, O Christ, to Thee.” in O Word of God Incarnate. We see what our affections ought to be in Spirit of God, Descend Upon My Heart: “...make me love thee as I ought to love...I see the cross, there teach my soul to cling...teach me the patience of unanswered prayer...”. We are reminded of God's purpose for trials in How Firm a Foundation: “When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie...The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design Thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine.”
I know I will wince tomorrow about the hymns I forgot to include which deserve to be mentioned. I'm sure I've mentioned enough to get my point across. But I have to include this funny depiction of the difference between chorus and hymns:
A Funny Little Story About Hymns and Praise Songs
By Author Unknown
An old farmer went to the city one weekend and attended the big city church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was.
“Well,” said the farmer. “It was good. They did something different, however. They sang praise choruses instead of hymns.”
“Praise choruses?” asked the wife. “What are those?”
“Oh, they’re okay. They’re sort of like hymns, only different,” said the farmer.
“Well, what’s the difference?” asked the wife.
The farmer said, “Well it’s like this … If I were to say to you, ‘Martha, the cows are in the corn,’ well that would be a hymn. If, on the other hand, I were to say to you, ‘Martha, Martha, Martha, Oh, Martha, MARTHA, MARTHA, the cows, the big cows, the brown cows, the black cows, the white cows, the black and white cows, the COWS, COWS, COWS are in the corn, are in the corn, are in the corn, in the CORN, CORN, CORN, COOOOORRRRRNNNNN,’ then, if I were to repeat the whole thing two or three times, well that would be a praise chorus.”
As luck would have it, the exact same Sunday a young, new Christian from the city church attended the small town church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was.
“Well,” said the young man, “It was good. They did something different, however. They sang hymns instead of regular songs.”
“Hymns?” asked the wife. “What are those?”
“They’re okay. They’re sort of like regular songs, only different,” said the young man.
“Well, what’s the difference?” asked the wife.
The young man said, “Well it’s like this … If I were to say to you, ‘Martha, the cows are in the corn,’ well that would be a regular song. If on the other hand, I were to say to you,
Oh Martha, dear Martha, hear thou my cry
Inclinest thine ear to the words of my mouth.
Turn thou thy whole wondrous ear by and by
To the righteous, glorious truth.
For the way of the animals who can explain
There in their heads is no shadow of sense,
Hearkenest they in God’s sun or his rain
Unless from the mild, tempting corn they are fenced.
Yea those cows in glad bovine, rebellious delight,
Have broke free their shackles, their warm pens eschewed.
Then goaded by minions of darkness and night
They all my mild Chilliwack sweet corn chewed.
So look to that bright shining day by and by,
Where all foul corruptions of earth are reborn
Where no vicious animal makes my soul cry
And I no longer see those foul cows in the corn,
then, if I were to do only verses one, three and four, and change keys on the last verse, well that would be a hymn.”
God help the church to not be so easily deceived when the world echos the serpents words, “Did God really say...”. It is one of my goals as a parent to have my children know the truth so well, even at their young ages, that they would be able to recognize a false gospel and other doctrinal errors. That is one of the reasons I love my children learning hymns. So many important doctrines are communicated in the hymns I love. And when I hear my little ones singing, “God and sinners reconciled...” from Hark! The Herald Angels Sing, I hope that their minds are being fortified against error through the truths they are enmeshed in.
Even if not everyone loves the tunes which the great hymns are set to, no one should miss the doctrine contain in them. We learn about God's sovereignty in Praise to the Lord, the Almighty: “Praise to the Lord, who o'er all things so wonderously reigneth.” We see our own frailty in Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing: “Let thy goodness, like a fetter, bind my wandering heart to thee. Prone to wander, Lord I feel it, prone to leave the God I love.” We see the power of the gospel in O For A Thousand Tongues: “He breaks the power of canceled sin...His blood can make the foulest clean, His blood availed for me.” We learn about Christ's three-fold office in Praise Him! Praise Him!: “Prophet and priest and king!” The trinity is articulated in Holy God We Praise Thy Name, which says, “Though in essence only one, undivided God...”. God's immutability is seen in Great is Thy Faithfulness: “Thou changest not, thy compassions they fail not...”. We admit our likeness to Adam, and Christ's role as the second Adam in Hark! The Herald Angels Sing: “Adam's likeness now efface, Stamp Thine image in its place: Second Adam from above, reinstate us in Thy love.” God's Word is called, “..the golden casket where gems of truth are stored...the chart and compass...[which] guides, O Christ, to Thee.” in O Word of God Incarnate. We see what our affections ought to be in Spirit of God, Descend Upon My Heart: “...make me love thee as I ought to love...I see the cross, there teach my soul to cling...teach me the patience of unanswered prayer...”. We are reminded of God's purpose for trials in How Firm a Foundation: “When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie...The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design Thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine.”
I know I will wince tomorrow about the hymns I forgot to include which deserve to be mentioned. I'm sure I've mentioned enough to get my point across. But I have to include this funny depiction of the difference between chorus and hymns:
A Funny Little Story About Hymns and Praise Songs
By Author Unknown
An old farmer went to the city one weekend and attended the big city church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was.
“Well,” said the farmer. “It was good. They did something different, however. They sang praise choruses instead of hymns.”
“Praise choruses?” asked the wife. “What are those?”
“Oh, they’re okay. They’re sort of like hymns, only different,” said the farmer.
“Well, what’s the difference?” asked the wife.
The farmer said, “Well it’s like this … If I were to say to you, ‘Martha, the cows are in the corn,’ well that would be a hymn. If, on the other hand, I were to say to you, ‘Martha, Martha, Martha, Oh, Martha, MARTHA, MARTHA, the cows, the big cows, the brown cows, the black cows, the white cows, the black and white cows, the COWS, COWS, COWS are in the corn, are in the corn, are in the corn, in the CORN, CORN, CORN, COOOOORRRRRNNNNN,’ then, if I were to repeat the whole thing two or three times, well that would be a praise chorus.”
As luck would have it, the exact same Sunday a young, new Christian from the city church attended the small town church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was.
“Well,” said the young man, “It was good. They did something different, however. They sang hymns instead of regular songs.”
“Hymns?” asked the wife. “What are those?”
“They’re okay. They’re sort of like regular songs, only different,” said the young man.
“Well, what’s the difference?” asked the wife.
The young man said, “Well it’s like this … If I were to say to you, ‘Martha, the cows are in the corn,’ well that would be a regular song. If on the other hand, I were to say to you,
Oh Martha, dear Martha, hear thou my cry
Inclinest thine ear to the words of my mouth.
Turn thou thy whole wondrous ear by and by
To the righteous, glorious truth.
For the way of the animals who can explain
There in their heads is no shadow of sense,
Hearkenest they in God’s sun or his rain
Unless from the mild, tempting corn they are fenced.
Yea those cows in glad bovine, rebellious delight,
Have broke free their shackles, their warm pens eschewed.
Then goaded by minions of darkness and night
They all my mild Chilliwack sweet corn chewed.
So look to that bright shining day by and by,
Where all foul corruptions of earth are reborn
Where no vicious animal makes my soul cry
And I no longer see those foul cows in the corn,
then, if I were to do only verses one, three and four, and change keys on the last verse, well that would be a hymn.”
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
History and Sovereignty
Even children know a good history book when they read it. My favorite history books are those which show connections between influential people, people who had formerly existed in separate spheres in my mind, or make connections between the mundane events in history and the pivotal ones, showing that history is not just a series of unrelated names and dates.
While recently studying Michelangelo, my boys and I learned that he was raised in the home of the famous Medici family. One of the children he was raised with later became Pope Leo X, the same pope who used the sale of indulgences to help pay for the building of St. Peter's Basilica. Michelangelo worked as an architect on St. Peter's. The sale of these indulgences is what led Martin Luther to write his 95 Theses, which is considered by many historians as the start of the Protestant Reformation. Luther was later excommunicated by this same Pope Leo X of the Medici family.
While studying the history of England, I read about King Charles II of England's attempt to ban the newly introduced coffee and coffeehouses, issuing A Proclamation for the Suppression of Coffeehouses. In coffeehouses, he reasoned, defamation against his government was spread, so coffeehouses should be banned. When it looked as if people would revolt and overthrow the monarchy (as they had during his father's reign, King Charles I, who was eventually beheaded), he withdrew the ban. This King Charles II is the same one who kept John Bunyan imprisoned for preaching without a license. Prior to this, as a youth, John Bunyan was stuck in a moat and was helped out by a stranger, who later he found out to be Oliver Cromwell. This is the same Cromwell who was in charge of the army which overthrew the monarchy of King Charles I. It's amazing how intertwined events and people are.
In our own small sphere, we don't always see the lives which are affected by our words and our actions. But that doesn't make it any less real. The one who plants and the one who waters isn't necessarily there to see the growth of the fruit (I Corinthians 3:6-7). But that doesn't make the fruit any less real. 1 Peter 3:16 explains that a watching world will be put to shame by the good conduct of believers, and as my pastor has reminded us often while preaching through I Peter, our conduct matters. Yet though we know that our conduct matters, we also know that God is sovereignly orchestrating all of history for His glory.
Philippians 1:29 tells us that God has granted that His people should suffer, and He has granted us faith. We should acknowledge His sovereign control over all our suffering. We should acknowledge Him as the giver of faith. That God has ultimate and immediate control of the best that can happen and the worst that happens speaks to everything in between. God is in control of all of history. That's why Proverbs 21:1 says, “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wishes.”
In Chosen By God, R.C. Sproul makes the point that when the soveriegnty of God is taught, people sometimes consider that the same as teaching Calvinism. But in actuality, teaching that God is sovereign is simply to teach theism. A god who is not in control is not God.
We don't always like to think that the events which cause our pains and our joys are under the control of a sovereign God. We would rather, at times, have the outcome be determined by our feeble power and foresight, because we think that we really do know what is best. But praise God that those things which He has purposed in Himself are accomplished, and that our obtaining His inheritance does not depend on our work, but on His.
While recently studying Michelangelo, my boys and I learned that he was raised in the home of the famous Medici family. One of the children he was raised with later became Pope Leo X, the same pope who used the sale of indulgences to help pay for the building of St. Peter's Basilica. Michelangelo worked as an architect on St. Peter's. The sale of these indulgences is what led Martin Luther to write his 95 Theses, which is considered by many historians as the start of the Protestant Reformation. Luther was later excommunicated by this same Pope Leo X of the Medici family.
While studying the history of England, I read about King Charles II of England's attempt to ban the newly introduced coffee and coffeehouses, issuing A Proclamation for the Suppression of Coffeehouses. In coffeehouses, he reasoned, defamation against his government was spread, so coffeehouses should be banned. When it looked as if people would revolt and overthrow the monarchy (as they had during his father's reign, King Charles I, who was eventually beheaded), he withdrew the ban. This King Charles II is the same one who kept John Bunyan imprisoned for preaching without a license. Prior to this, as a youth, John Bunyan was stuck in a moat and was helped out by a stranger, who later he found out to be Oliver Cromwell. This is the same Cromwell who was in charge of the army which overthrew the monarchy of King Charles I. It's amazing how intertwined events and people are.
In our own small sphere, we don't always see the lives which are affected by our words and our actions. But that doesn't make it any less real. The one who plants and the one who waters isn't necessarily there to see the growth of the fruit (I Corinthians 3:6-7). But that doesn't make the fruit any less real. 1 Peter 3:16 explains that a watching world will be put to shame by the good conduct of believers, and as my pastor has reminded us often while preaching through I Peter, our conduct matters. Yet though we know that our conduct matters, we also know that God is sovereignly orchestrating all of history for His glory.
Philippians 1:29 tells us that God has granted that His people should suffer, and He has granted us faith. We should acknowledge His sovereign control over all our suffering. We should acknowledge Him as the giver of faith. That God has ultimate and immediate control of the best that can happen and the worst that happens speaks to everything in between. God is in control of all of history. That's why Proverbs 21:1 says, “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wishes.”
In Chosen By God, R.C. Sproul makes the point that when the soveriegnty of God is taught, people sometimes consider that the same as teaching Calvinism. But in actuality, teaching that God is sovereign is simply to teach theism. A god who is not in control is not God.
We don't always like to think that the events which cause our pains and our joys are under the control of a sovereign God. We would rather, at times, have the outcome be determined by our feeble power and foresight, because we think that we really do know what is best. But praise God that those things which He has purposed in Himself are accomplished, and that our obtaining His inheritance does not depend on our work, but on His.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Law and Gospel
To understand the difference between the law and the gospel in Scripture, it is necessary for us to distinguish between commands and promises, between indicatives and imperatives. Regarding this distinction Martin Luther said, “This difference between the Law and the Gospel is the height of knowledge in Christendom. Every person and all persons who assume or glory in the name of Christian should know and be able to state this difference. ” There are some who teach that there is never any antithesis between law and gospel in the Bible. And while it is true that the law and the gospel do not oppose each other in God's purposes, the two have different uses. Paul shows that they are in conflict when one uses the law to do what only the gospel can do, seeking to be justified by the law. But the Scriptures speak of a righteousness apart from law keeping (Romans 3:21).
Recognizing the difference between law and gospel is important for several reasons. In order for the law to be a school master to bring us to Christ, it has to be understood in its full severity. Reading commands as if they are only advice keeps us from seeing our need for the One perfect law keeper, Jesus Christ. 1 Timothy 1:8 says that the law is good when it is used lawfully. When the law is taught as law, souls are convicted and made new.
On the other hand, to read gospel passages as if they're obligations for us to fulfill is to turn good news into bad news. To read the indicatives of Scripture, such as “...the just shall live by faith...,” as if they are instead imperatives, (let us live faithfully), is to mishandle the Word of God. Sometimes the gospel is presented as a set of new laws, laws which are easier to keep that the Old Testament regulations. But a softer set of rules cannot provide relief from our sin nature inherited from Adam.
I am privileged to sit under preaching where this distinction is carefully observed. The sweetness of the gospel is set before me often, and the imperatives of Scripture are proclaimed, yet the two are not blurred. Preaching should not just be a 45 minute list of “oughts.” God's Word is to be handled with respect to its original purpose. Theodore Beza has rightly said, “Ignorance of this distinction between Law and Gospel is one of the principal sources of the abuses which corrupted and still corrupt Christianity.”
A hymn by Isaac Watts
The law commands, and makes us know
What duties to our God we owe;
But 'tis the gospel must reveal
Where lies our strength to do his will.
The law discovers guilt and sin,
And shews how vile our hearts have been;
Only the gospel can express
Forgiving love and cleansing grace.
What curses doth the law denounce
Against the man that fails but once!
But in the gospel Christ appears
Pardoning the guilt of numerous years.
My soul, no more attempt to draw
Thy life and comfort from the law,
Fly to the hope the gospel gives;
The man that trusts the promise lives.
Recognizing the difference between law and gospel is important for several reasons. In order for the law to be a school master to bring us to Christ, it has to be understood in its full severity. Reading commands as if they are only advice keeps us from seeing our need for the One perfect law keeper, Jesus Christ. 1 Timothy 1:8 says that the law is good when it is used lawfully. When the law is taught as law, souls are convicted and made new.
On the other hand, to read gospel passages as if they're obligations for us to fulfill is to turn good news into bad news. To read the indicatives of Scripture, such as “...the just shall live by faith...,” as if they are instead imperatives, (let us live faithfully), is to mishandle the Word of God. Sometimes the gospel is presented as a set of new laws, laws which are easier to keep that the Old Testament regulations. But a softer set of rules cannot provide relief from our sin nature inherited from Adam.
I am privileged to sit under preaching where this distinction is carefully observed. The sweetness of the gospel is set before me often, and the imperatives of Scripture are proclaimed, yet the two are not blurred. Preaching should not just be a 45 minute list of “oughts.” God's Word is to be handled with respect to its original purpose. Theodore Beza has rightly said, “Ignorance of this distinction between Law and Gospel is one of the principal sources of the abuses which corrupted and still corrupt Christianity.”
A hymn by Isaac Watts
The law commands, and makes us know
What duties to our God we owe;
But 'tis the gospel must reveal
Where lies our strength to do his will.
The law discovers guilt and sin,
And shews how vile our hearts have been;
Only the gospel can express
Forgiving love and cleansing grace.
What curses doth the law denounce
Against the man that fails but once!
But in the gospel Christ appears
Pardoning the guilt of numerous years.
My soul, no more attempt to draw
Thy life and comfort from the law,
Fly to the hope the gospel gives;
The man that trusts the promise lives.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Giving Up Things
In the last days, some will depart from the faith to follow false teaching. Paul tells us it is so in I Timothy 4. And what will be the content of the deception intended to lead people astray? What are those teachings which he calls the doctrine of devils? They will speak lies. They will forbid marriage. And they will command people to abstain from certain foods. Not what immediately comes to mind when we think of the doctrine of devils, right?
The Christian religion is not one of asceticism. Sometimes we confuse difficult with God-honoring. But pleasure is not a bad thing in the Scriptures. This seems an important concept to remember during this season when many are participating in lent. In Rome, penitent Catholics are still climbing on their knees up the stairs called Scala Santa, especially popular during lent. In our country, chocolate and coffee are popularly given up for lent, and not because it's thought to be sin, but because to some, we just have to give up something...
If we seek to please God by our denial of personal pleasure, we misunderstand what it is that God is pleased with. Paul prays that the Christians in Colosse would be fully pleasing to the Lord, which he describes as being fruitful in good works and increasing in knowledge of God. If anyone thinks the Bible is against pleasure, consider how the goodness of wine is described in Psalm 104:15, that it makes the heart glad. Food is given to be received with thanksgiving (I Timothy 4:4). And then there's Song of Solomon.
Self-denial for the needs of others is a good thing (Philippians 2:3). But self-denial for it's own sake has no value against the indulgence of the flesh (Colossians 2:23). Colossians 2:20-23 calls the regulations to not touch, taste, and handle the commandments of men. These teachings are self-imposed; it is false humility.
There is a time for mourning. There is a purpose to fasting. And so we all know we should be thoughtful about the things we indulge in. But let us also be careful about the things we forbid.
The Christian religion is not one of asceticism. Sometimes we confuse difficult with God-honoring. But pleasure is not a bad thing in the Scriptures. This seems an important concept to remember during this season when many are participating in lent. In Rome, penitent Catholics are still climbing on their knees up the stairs called Scala Santa, especially popular during lent. In our country, chocolate and coffee are popularly given up for lent, and not because it's thought to be sin, but because to some, we just have to give up something...
If we seek to please God by our denial of personal pleasure, we misunderstand what it is that God is pleased with. Paul prays that the Christians in Colosse would be fully pleasing to the Lord, which he describes as being fruitful in good works and increasing in knowledge of God. If anyone thinks the Bible is against pleasure, consider how the goodness of wine is described in Psalm 104:15, that it makes the heart glad. Food is given to be received with thanksgiving (I Timothy 4:4). And then there's Song of Solomon.
Self-denial for the needs of others is a good thing (Philippians 2:3). But self-denial for it's own sake has no value against the indulgence of the flesh (Colossians 2:23). Colossians 2:20-23 calls the regulations to not touch, taste, and handle the commandments of men. These teachings are self-imposed; it is false humility.
There is a time for mourning. There is a purpose to fasting. And so we all know we should be thoughtful about the things we indulge in. But let us also be careful about the things we forbid.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Defining The Word "Mystery"
“This Is a Great Mystery...” Ephesians 5:32
What comes to mind when the word “mystery” is used? We might think of that which is unknowable, something that is beyond us, that which we do not have the ability to comprehend, or even that which is contradictory. We see this explanation in the writings of some theologians. But when we look at the Bible's use of the word “mystery,” we see something different: The word “mystery” in the Bible means a truth that is or was a secret, later to be revealed.
John Murray explains the Biblical usage of this word in Redemption Accomplished and Applied. He writes, “We are liable to use the word [mystery] to designate something that is completely unintelligible and of which we cannot have any understanding. That is not the sense of Scripture.” Murray goes on to say that a mystery is something which was hidden in the mind of God, but that it did not continue to be hidden: God has made it known.
This is how the word mystery is used in Colossians 1:26. The mystery of the Gentiles is said to have been hidden, but now has been revealed. Romans 16:25 speaks of a mystery which was hidden in times past, but has now been revealed. Mystery is not opposed to comprehension, it stands in contrast to that which is made known. God has disclosed Himself in words, and man is to receive them.
There is difference between saying that a given truth is not known, and saying that it cannot be known. There is a temptation to think, if I don't understand a concept, then it is not understandable. But that is an unwarranted leap. To some, it may may seem that it is a display of humility or piety to declare that the truth of God is unknowable. That God reveals to man knowledge about Himself that is comprehensible is rejected by Herman Bavinck. He expresses this opinion when he says, “...the idea that the believer would be able to understand and comprehend intellectually the revealed mysteries is...unscriptural. On the contrary, the truth which God has revealed concerning himself in nature and in Scripture far surpasses human conception and comprehension.”
Yet Jesus tells His disciples, to them it has been given, to know mysteries (Luke 8:10).
And what good news that is, that God's Word is given that we can comprehend it. We should hold on to those truths which God has made known. Because knowing Him is eternal life.
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” John 17:3
What comes to mind when the word “mystery” is used? We might think of that which is unknowable, something that is beyond us, that which we do not have the ability to comprehend, or even that which is contradictory. We see this explanation in the writings of some theologians. But when we look at the Bible's use of the word “mystery,” we see something different: The word “mystery” in the Bible means a truth that is or was a secret, later to be revealed.
John Murray explains the Biblical usage of this word in Redemption Accomplished and Applied. He writes, “We are liable to use the word [mystery] to designate something that is completely unintelligible and of which we cannot have any understanding. That is not the sense of Scripture.” Murray goes on to say that a mystery is something which was hidden in the mind of God, but that it did not continue to be hidden: God has made it known.
This is how the word mystery is used in Colossians 1:26. The mystery of the Gentiles is said to have been hidden, but now has been revealed. Romans 16:25 speaks of a mystery which was hidden in times past, but has now been revealed. Mystery is not opposed to comprehension, it stands in contrast to that which is made known. God has disclosed Himself in words, and man is to receive them.
There is difference between saying that a given truth is not known, and saying that it cannot be known. There is a temptation to think, if I don't understand a concept, then it is not understandable. But that is an unwarranted leap. To some, it may may seem that it is a display of humility or piety to declare that the truth of God is unknowable. That God reveals to man knowledge about Himself that is comprehensible is rejected by Herman Bavinck. He expresses this opinion when he says, “...the idea that the believer would be able to understand and comprehend intellectually the revealed mysteries is...unscriptural. On the contrary, the truth which God has revealed concerning himself in nature and in Scripture far surpasses human conception and comprehension.”
Yet Jesus tells His disciples, to them it has been given, to know mysteries (Luke 8:10).
And what good news that is, that God's Word is given that we can comprehend it. We should hold on to those truths which God has made known. Because knowing Him is eternal life.
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” John 17:3
Friday, February 18, 2011
Preparing Children for Worship
With forethought and anticipation, we can prepare ourselves for corporate worship Sunday morning. And as parents, we can help prepare our children for the worship of God. This is a great privilege.
Having conversations with our children on the way to church which anticipate which hymns we'll sing and what we might learn does much to turn our mindset from our distractions.
I am thankful to attend a church that not only allows children to join in the corporate Sunday morning worship, but welcomes them. There are churches which actually stop people at the door who want to bring a young child in to that corporate gathering which Scripture commands us to not neglect (Hebrews 10:25).
More Than Just Sitting Quietly
Having our children in the service with the adults, we have had to teach them to sit quietly. But sitting quietly is not the end goal. We want them to be able to participate, and to know that what we do as a corporate body is not just for them when they are older, it is for them fully now, especially if they believe the same Word of truth.
Knowing the songs we sing and and the creed we recite helps them be a participant in the corporate worship. I just started teaching my two and a half year old the Nicene Creed, which our church recites together as a body every Sunday. I didn't choose to teach her the Nicene Creed because it is the single most valuable thing she can have memorized at her age, but because I think enabling her to participate Sunday morning is important.
Besides participation with the corporate body, one added benefit of teaching hymns and creeds at home to your children is, the truths they are learning leads to discussions such as, What is meant by the phrase His Word can't be broken, in Glorious Things of Thee Are Spoken? Or what does it mean to say that Christ is the second Adam from above, in Hark the Herald Angels Sing? Elect from every nation, we learn in The Church's One Foundation.
Even little ones can be engaged during the sermon by keeping track of words and concepts they recognize. When my older children were three and four years old, we used a peg board with words written on it. They move the peg around and place it next to the familiar word they have heard.
Later we moved to tally marks.
At five and six years old, they started drawing a visual narration from the sermon.
After church, I would have them tell me what the sermon was about, and I would write their narration down.
All of these things could be a distraction for some children instead of a help. The important thing is that our children know that we come to church to worship Him. And children are included.
Having conversations with our children on the way to church which anticipate which hymns we'll sing and what we might learn does much to turn our mindset from our distractions.
I am thankful to attend a church that not only allows children to join in the corporate Sunday morning worship, but welcomes them. There are churches which actually stop people at the door who want to bring a young child in to that corporate gathering which Scripture commands us to not neglect (Hebrews 10:25).
More Than Just Sitting Quietly
Having our children in the service with the adults, we have had to teach them to sit quietly. But sitting quietly is not the end goal. We want them to be able to participate, and to know that what we do as a corporate body is not just for them when they are older, it is for them fully now, especially if they believe the same Word of truth.
Knowing the songs we sing and and the creed we recite helps them be a participant in the corporate worship. I just started teaching my two and a half year old the Nicene Creed, which our church recites together as a body every Sunday. I didn't choose to teach her the Nicene Creed because it is the single most valuable thing she can have memorized at her age, but because I think enabling her to participate Sunday morning is important.
Besides participation with the corporate body, one added benefit of teaching hymns and creeds at home to your children is, the truths they are learning leads to discussions such as, What is meant by the phrase His Word can't be broken, in Glorious Things of Thee Are Spoken? Or what does it mean to say that Christ is the second Adam from above, in Hark the Herald Angels Sing? Elect from every nation, we learn in The Church's One Foundation.
Even little ones can be engaged during the sermon by keeping track of words and concepts they recognize. When my older children were three and four years old, we used a peg board with words written on it. They move the peg around and place it next to the familiar word they have heard.
Later we moved to tally marks.
At five and six years old, they started drawing a visual narration from the sermon.
After church, I would have them tell me what the sermon was about, and I would write their narration down.
All of these things could be a distraction for some children instead of a help. The important thing is that our children know that we come to church to worship Him. And children are included.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Tortured For Christ
Read Tortured For Christ, and you will know how you can help the underground church, the church which believes the same gospel you do, but lives in countries where it is against the law to talk of such things. I know, it's overwhelming, because there are so many needs and so many people. Go here to see which countries have laws against believing Christianity to be true or teaching Christianity to others:
http://www.persecution.com/public/restrictednations.aspx?clickfrom=bWFpbl9tZW51
"The underground church is like a surgeon who travels by train. The train collided with another train, and hundreds of people lay on the ground, mangled, injured, dying. The surgeon walked among the dying, crying out: 'If only I had my tools! If only I had my tools!' With these surgical instruments he could have saved many lives. He had the willingness, but he did not have the tools. This is where the underground church stands. It is so willing to give all. It is so willing to give its martyrs! It is so willing to risk years in prisons! But all of its willingness is of no value if it does not have the tools with which to work. The plea of the faithful, courageous, underground church to you who are free is: 'Give us the tools- the Gospels, the Bibles, the literature, the help- and we will do the rest.'"
Richard Wurmbrand, Tortured For Christ
When Richard Wurmbrand received Bibles in Romania from American and British Christians, he met two men who had walked from a nearby village to shovel snow all winter to buy a Bible. Wurmbrand gave them a Bible and refused their money, and they took it back to their village and dividing the Bible into thirty sections. Those thirty people received their piece of the Bible with joy!
Voice of the Martyrs send Bibles into restricted nations through the donations of people who love Christians they have never met. Voice of the Martyrs also financially supports the families left behind when a Christian is arrested or killed. Oftentimes, it is made a crime to help the family of a Christian martyr. When Wurmbrand and his wife were arrested, a woman risked her life by taking their son into her house. She was sentenced to eight years in prison. All of her teeth were kicked out. Her bones were broken. She was crippled for life, never able to work again.
"The underground church works under very difficult conditions. Atheism is the state religion in all the Communist countries. They give relative freedom for the elderly to believe, but children and youth must not believe. Everything in these countries and other kinds of captive nations- radio, television, cinema, theater, press, and publishing houses- has the aim of stamping out belief in Jesus Christ. The underground church has very little means of opposing the huge forces of the totalitarian state. The underground ministers in Russia had no theological training. There are Chinese pastors today who have never read the entire Bible."
Tortured For Christ was written in 1967. Today, it is estimated that 171,000 Christians are martyrs every year. The examples of what Christians have been willing to suffer for their faith, then and now, is so far beyond what what most of us will ever experience. Yet our prosperity can be meaningful in so many ways if we so choose. Our prosperity can travel throughout the world for His sake.
http://www.persecution.com/public/restrictednations.aspx?clickfrom=bWFpbl9tZW51
"The underground church is like a surgeon who travels by train. The train collided with another train, and hundreds of people lay on the ground, mangled, injured, dying. The surgeon walked among the dying, crying out: 'If only I had my tools! If only I had my tools!' With these surgical instruments he could have saved many lives. He had the willingness, but he did not have the tools. This is where the underground church stands. It is so willing to give all. It is so willing to give its martyrs! It is so willing to risk years in prisons! But all of its willingness is of no value if it does not have the tools with which to work. The plea of the faithful, courageous, underground church to you who are free is: 'Give us the tools- the Gospels, the Bibles, the literature, the help- and we will do the rest.'"
Richard Wurmbrand, Tortured For Christ
When Richard Wurmbrand received Bibles in Romania from American and British Christians, he met two men who had walked from a nearby village to shovel snow all winter to buy a Bible. Wurmbrand gave them a Bible and refused their money, and they took it back to their village and dividing the Bible into thirty sections. Those thirty people received their piece of the Bible with joy!
Voice of the Martyrs send Bibles into restricted nations through the donations of people who love Christians they have never met. Voice of the Martyrs also financially supports the families left behind when a Christian is arrested or killed. Oftentimes, it is made a crime to help the family of a Christian martyr. When Wurmbrand and his wife were arrested, a woman risked her life by taking their son into her house. She was sentenced to eight years in prison. All of her teeth were kicked out. Her bones were broken. She was crippled for life, never able to work again.
"The underground church works under very difficult conditions. Atheism is the state religion in all the Communist countries. They give relative freedom for the elderly to believe, but children and youth must not believe. Everything in these countries and other kinds of captive nations- radio, television, cinema, theater, press, and publishing houses- has the aim of stamping out belief in Jesus Christ. The underground church has very little means of opposing the huge forces of the totalitarian state. The underground ministers in Russia had no theological training. There are Chinese pastors today who have never read the entire Bible."
Tortured For Christ was written in 1967. Today, it is estimated that 171,000 Christians are martyrs every year. The examples of what Christians have been willing to suffer for their faith, then and now, is so far beyond what what most of us will ever experience. Yet our prosperity can be meaningful in so many ways if we so choose. Our prosperity can travel throughout the world for His sake.
Friday, February 4, 2011
The Threefold Division of Faith
We know that we are justified through faith alone. Or do we? If we don't know what the word faith means, do we know what it means to be justified by it? We ought to want to know the Scriptures more, because it is the mind of God revealed. We ought to want to know the Scriptures more, just because we want to know Him more. But oftentimes, we do need a push from the practical, a concrete reason for why I should learn this. This is a question some might have when reading about the threefold division of faith. I will conveniently save the reason for the end.
The historic formulation of faith includes three components: Knowledge, assent, and trust. Knowledge is defined as the apprehension of a doctrine. Assent is believing the doctrine to be true. Trust, according to John Murray in Redemption Accomplished and Applied, is commitment to Christ and reliance upon Him. Although this threefold division of faith is taught by the reformers such as Martin Luther, Melanchthon, John Calvin, and by more modern theologians such as John Murray and James Boice, holding to sola scriptura means it is necessary to ask, what do the Scriptures say? Is faith defined in the Bible as being knowledge, assent and trust? It may seem presumptuous to depart from such a commonly held position. It goes without saying that we owe these men a debt of gratitude for the recovery of the gospel in the case of the reformers, and that the church has gained much wisdom from the teaching of these men. But to believe a doctrine simply because it is the commonly held view among theologians would be a form of personality worship.
It is common to hear Christians say, as John Calvin did, that we are not saved by mere assent. Something more is needed, and that something more is trust.
Certainly, the Bible does teach that God's people do trust Him and ought to trust Him. To agree to this is not the same thing as agreeing to the threefold view of faith. There are many things that God's people do and ought to do. The people of God love another (I John 2:10). Yet brotherly love is not a part of the definition of the word faith. We must still ask, how does the Bible define the word faith?
The Greek word in the New Testament which is translated as believe in English, when it appears in the noun form, is translated as faith or belief. What is the verb form of the word faith? It is believe. Faith and belief are synonymous terms in Scripture.
We all believe propositions, so we all have faith. Today, the word faith is sometimes used to mean believing something irrational, sometimes even believing something because it is irrational. This is not the Biblical use of the word faith. This is not a Christian idea. To have faith is to believe something to be true. So saving faith is believing that the message of the gospel is true. Atheists have faith too, they just assent to different doctrines.
What does the threefold division of faith say about salvation? It has lead some to say that belief in the gospel is not enough. The conclusion of this distinction is that is it possible to comprehend the gospel, and to believe all the propositions of the gospel, and yet to not be saved; it teaches that one can fall short of redemption due to a lack of trust. This is what Tedd Tripp, author of Shepherding a Child's Heart, says in a recent issue of Tabletalk magazine (October, 2010). He writes, “...mere knowledge and even assent to the truth, while essential, are not sufficient for our children to have saving faith...According to the Reformers, these two are not enough.”
This undercuts the the teaching of Scripture regarding belief. John 3:16 assures us that all who believe have everlasting life. I Timothy 1:16 says that we believe unto eternal life. Galatians 3:22 tells us that Christ's promise is for all those who believe. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says that God chose us for salvation, and that salvation is through belief. Romans 3:22 teaches that the righteousness of God is to all who believe. The Bible teaches again and again, that all those who believe the gospel are numbered among the redeemed (this does not mean that all those who say they believe the gospel actually do). In light of this, are we really willing to say that a person can believe the gospel and not be saved?
Still, there are some who say, just believing it not enough. It is to easy.
It should be emphasized, as Murray does, that it is not our faith that saves, but it is God who saves through faith. It is the object of our faith that matters.
Hearing this, one may then wonder, how is our believing different from the demons, seeing that James tells us the demons believe, and tremble (James 2:19)? It is the content of their belief which is different. The demons believe there is one God. God's people believe in substitutionary atonement, and many other things.
So why does it matter how many components there are to faith? In light of the importance the Scriptures place on faith, that it is the sole instrument of our justification, few things are more important than clearly defining what faith is, in our own mind, and to others. And who knows, we may be asked by a friend or a neighbor, or even our own children, What must I do to be saved? Our answer needs to be clear: Simply believe on Him who is able to save.
The historic formulation of faith includes three components: Knowledge, assent, and trust. Knowledge is defined as the apprehension of a doctrine. Assent is believing the doctrine to be true. Trust, according to John Murray in Redemption Accomplished and Applied, is commitment to Christ and reliance upon Him. Although this threefold division of faith is taught by the reformers such as Martin Luther, Melanchthon, John Calvin, and by more modern theologians such as John Murray and James Boice, holding to sola scriptura means it is necessary to ask, what do the Scriptures say? Is faith defined in the Bible as being knowledge, assent and trust? It may seem presumptuous to depart from such a commonly held position. It goes without saying that we owe these men a debt of gratitude for the recovery of the gospel in the case of the reformers, and that the church has gained much wisdom from the teaching of these men. But to believe a doctrine simply because it is the commonly held view among theologians would be a form of personality worship.
It is common to hear Christians say, as John Calvin did, that we are not saved by mere assent. Something more is needed, and that something more is trust.
Certainly, the Bible does teach that God's people do trust Him and ought to trust Him. To agree to this is not the same thing as agreeing to the threefold view of faith. There are many things that God's people do and ought to do. The people of God love another (I John 2:10). Yet brotherly love is not a part of the definition of the word faith. We must still ask, how does the Bible define the word faith?
The Greek word in the New Testament which is translated as believe in English, when it appears in the noun form, is translated as faith or belief. What is the verb form of the word faith? It is believe. Faith and belief are synonymous terms in Scripture.
We all believe propositions, so we all have faith. Today, the word faith is sometimes used to mean believing something irrational, sometimes even believing something because it is irrational. This is not the Biblical use of the word faith. This is not a Christian idea. To have faith is to believe something to be true. So saving faith is believing that the message of the gospel is true. Atheists have faith too, they just assent to different doctrines.
What does the threefold division of faith say about salvation? It has lead some to say that belief in the gospel is not enough. The conclusion of this distinction is that is it possible to comprehend the gospel, and to believe all the propositions of the gospel, and yet to not be saved; it teaches that one can fall short of redemption due to a lack of trust. This is what Tedd Tripp, author of Shepherding a Child's Heart, says in a recent issue of Tabletalk magazine (October, 2010). He writes, “...mere knowledge and even assent to the truth, while essential, are not sufficient for our children to have saving faith...According to the Reformers, these two are not enough.”
This undercuts the the teaching of Scripture regarding belief. John 3:16 assures us that all who believe have everlasting life. I Timothy 1:16 says that we believe unto eternal life. Galatians 3:22 tells us that Christ's promise is for all those who believe. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says that God chose us for salvation, and that salvation is through belief. Romans 3:22 teaches that the righteousness of God is to all who believe. The Bible teaches again and again, that all those who believe the gospel are numbered among the redeemed (this does not mean that all those who say they believe the gospel actually do). In light of this, are we really willing to say that a person can believe the gospel and not be saved?
Still, there are some who say, just believing it not enough. It is to easy.
It should be emphasized, as Murray does, that it is not our faith that saves, but it is God who saves through faith. It is the object of our faith that matters.
Hearing this, one may then wonder, how is our believing different from the demons, seeing that James tells us the demons believe, and tremble (James 2:19)? It is the content of their belief which is different. The demons believe there is one God. God's people believe in substitutionary atonement, and many other things.
So why does it matter how many components there are to faith? In light of the importance the Scriptures place on faith, that it is the sole instrument of our justification, few things are more important than clearly defining what faith is, in our own mind, and to others. And who knows, we may be asked by a friend or a neighbor, or even our own children, What must I do to be saved? Our answer needs to be clear: Simply believe on Him who is able to save.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Languages and the Bible
God has spoken to us through His Word, and His Word is perspicuous. The Westminster Confession describes perspicuity in this way: “...those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.” Perspicuity doesn't mean that we will understand every verse in the Scriptures. But the Bible is revelation: It is God is making His truth known. So clarity is good. We of all people should seek to be clear. God uses words to communicate with us. And Christ is called the Word in John 1:1. How then should we think of language, and of languages?
Confusion is Bad
At the tower of Babel, God confused the people's language. Their inability to communicate equaled an inability to accomplish what they had purposed in their heart to do. To our modern ears, the word diversity is only positive. But the creation of the diversity of languages was God's judgment on those building the city who said, “Let us make a name for ourselves.” Anyone who has tried to get out of a French airport without a working knowledge of the French language knows how sweet the ability to communicate really is.
In I Corinthians 14, Paul also tells us that the purpose of language is to communicate truth, and language without meaning is not serving its purpose. There is much dispute over what the Biblical gift of tongues looked like in the New Testament church. But Paul's conclusion in v. 15 to his argument throughout I Corinthians 14 is clear: Pray with the Spirit, and also pray with the understanding. If one speaks, and if their words are not able to be understood, Paul says they are like an instrument that doesn't make a distinction in sound (v. 7-9). If one speaks, and the hearer doesn't know the language, they are foreigners to each other (and the implication is clearly, that is bad). If one speaks in a foreign tongue without an interpretation, the understanding is unfruitful. It shouldn't surprise us then that the God who has spoken through prophets, the God who uses verbal revelation, the God who gifts pastors and teachers also tells us that we ought to use our words to edify the understanding. Our God is not the author of confusion (v.33).
In what way are tongues a sign to unbelievers, as it says in I Corinthians 14:22? God used foreign tongues as a sign of judgment on His people. God pronounced this judgment in Isaiah 28 to those “...who would not hear...,” saying that “...with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to His people (v. 11).” And this was done “That they might go and fall backward, and be broken and snared and caught.” This is a reference to foreign captivity to come, under which Judah was judged for forsaking the Lord (Isaiah 1:4), and was immersed in a foreign tongue. We should not desire to have words without significance spoken, or tongues spoken without interpretation. Because understanding is good.
It is in this way that the gift of tongues given at Pentecost is an undoing of a curse. Jews, Arabs, those from Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Libya, all heard the works of God spoken of in their own language and were amazed. God is removing confusion and ignorance.
Bible Translation
This undergirds the value and the need for Bible translation. Those of us who support Bible translators from our comfortable homes have the easy part. Barbara Thomas, the author of Through the Outhouse Floor, together with her husband, spent five years studying French and linguistics in Brussels in preparation for Bible translation in Zaire (now D. R. Congo). Her book greatly conveys the clash of cultures and the dangers faced by missionaries involved in Bible translation, and what many are willing to endure in order to put the truth of God into the hands of people they didn't even know.
Once in Zaire, her family lived with the Komo people, a people who were without any written language. She writes that a four year old child in the U.S. has had more exposure to written words than a 40 to 50 year old Komo woman. The nine year old girls in their literacy class had never before held a pencil. The Komo people had Bibles in Swahili, but the Swahili they knew was different from the high Swahili in their Bibles. Thomas writes, “...instead of using the more incomprehensible Bible, people corrected or encouraged us by using their hymnals. Yet even then, they could only guess at the meaning of some of the words.”
Richard Wurmbrand, the founder of Voice the Martyrs, was imprisoned and tortured for fourteen years in Romania for his work preaching to the Russian and Romanian people and distributing Bibles and Christian literature. After his release, he was overjoyed to receive Bibles and Christian materials from American and British Christians who risked their lives to give him and others the Word of God. Wurmbrand writes, “The value of the Bibles smuggled in by these means cannot be understood by an American or an English Christian who 'swims' in Bibles.”
"It is the chart and compass..." O Word of God Incarnate
We can take part in this mission. There are missionaries in need of prayer, financial support, and resources. Learning a foreign language might be one way in which God will use us for His purposes. Teaching our children a foreign language might open up opportunities for them to spread the gospel. Voice of the Martyrs still sends Bibles into countries where people are requesting Bibles, yet obtaining a Bible is dangerous or against the law. When a speaker from Voice of the Martyrs recently spoke at my church, he showed a video clip of a room of people waiting where Bibles were being delivered. When the boxes were opened, they jumped around and cried with happiness. And there are more people waiting. There is much work to be done. And much to pray for.
Confusion is Bad
At the tower of Babel, God confused the people's language. Their inability to communicate equaled an inability to accomplish what they had purposed in their heart to do. To our modern ears, the word diversity is only positive. But the creation of the diversity of languages was God's judgment on those building the city who said, “Let us make a name for ourselves.” Anyone who has tried to get out of a French airport without a working knowledge of the French language knows how sweet the ability to communicate really is.
In I Corinthians 14, Paul also tells us that the purpose of language is to communicate truth, and language without meaning is not serving its purpose. There is much dispute over what the Biblical gift of tongues looked like in the New Testament church. But Paul's conclusion in v. 15 to his argument throughout I Corinthians 14 is clear: Pray with the Spirit, and also pray with the understanding. If one speaks, and if their words are not able to be understood, Paul says they are like an instrument that doesn't make a distinction in sound (v. 7-9). If one speaks, and the hearer doesn't know the language, they are foreigners to each other (and the implication is clearly, that is bad). If one speaks in a foreign tongue without an interpretation, the understanding is unfruitful. It shouldn't surprise us then that the God who has spoken through prophets, the God who uses verbal revelation, the God who gifts pastors and teachers also tells us that we ought to use our words to edify the understanding. Our God is not the author of confusion (v.33).
In what way are tongues a sign to unbelievers, as it says in I Corinthians 14:22? God used foreign tongues as a sign of judgment on His people. God pronounced this judgment in Isaiah 28 to those “...who would not hear...,” saying that “...with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to His people (v. 11).” And this was done “That they might go and fall backward, and be broken and snared and caught.” This is a reference to foreign captivity to come, under which Judah was judged for forsaking the Lord (Isaiah 1:4), and was immersed in a foreign tongue. We should not desire to have words without significance spoken, or tongues spoken without interpretation. Because understanding is good.
It is in this way that the gift of tongues given at Pentecost is an undoing of a curse. Jews, Arabs, those from Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Libya, all heard the works of God spoken of in their own language and were amazed. God is removing confusion and ignorance.
Bible Translation
This undergirds the value and the need for Bible translation. Those of us who support Bible translators from our comfortable homes have the easy part. Barbara Thomas, the author of Through the Outhouse Floor, together with her husband, spent five years studying French and linguistics in Brussels in preparation for Bible translation in Zaire (now D. R. Congo). Her book greatly conveys the clash of cultures and the dangers faced by missionaries involved in Bible translation, and what many are willing to endure in order to put the truth of God into the hands of people they didn't even know.
Once in Zaire, her family lived with the Komo people, a people who were without any written language. She writes that a four year old child in the U.S. has had more exposure to written words than a 40 to 50 year old Komo woman. The nine year old girls in their literacy class had never before held a pencil. The Komo people had Bibles in Swahili, but the Swahili they knew was different from the high Swahili in their Bibles. Thomas writes, “...instead of using the more incomprehensible Bible, people corrected or encouraged us by using their hymnals. Yet even then, they could only guess at the meaning of some of the words.”
Richard Wurmbrand, the founder of Voice the Martyrs, was imprisoned and tortured for fourteen years in Romania for his work preaching to the Russian and Romanian people and distributing Bibles and Christian literature. After his release, he was overjoyed to receive Bibles and Christian materials from American and British Christians who risked their lives to give him and others the Word of God. Wurmbrand writes, “The value of the Bibles smuggled in by these means cannot be understood by an American or an English Christian who 'swims' in Bibles.”
"It is the chart and compass..." O Word of God Incarnate
We can take part in this mission. There are missionaries in need of prayer, financial support, and resources. Learning a foreign language might be one way in which God will use us for His purposes. Teaching our children a foreign language might open up opportunities for them to spread the gospel. Voice of the Martyrs still sends Bibles into countries where people are requesting Bibles, yet obtaining a Bible is dangerous or against the law. When a speaker from Voice of the Martyrs recently spoke at my church, he showed a video clip of a room of people waiting where Bibles were being delivered. When the boxes were opened, they jumped around and cried with happiness. And there are more people waiting. There is much work to be done. And much to pray for.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
teaching our children the gospel
Those of us who know Christ, are we teaching our children to know Him? Those of us who have had our sins laid to Christ's account and His life of obedience has been credited to us in return, do our children understand that great exchange? Unfortunately, it is all too possible to go to church on Sundays, open the Bible to read favorite passages, and to still not be clear on what the gospel announcement is. And it is equally possible for our children to hear the Bible read, go to the same church building we do, without being clearly taught, what must I do to be saved?
It is true that no parent can make a child believe the propositions of saving faith. But it would be easy for us to let that become an excuse for our lack of effort at times to teach those propositions. While we can't make our children believers, we can make sure that our children comprehend the message of the gospel. We can make sure they comprehend these truths at a young age. No one can assent to ideas which they don't understand. We pray, we hope, we fret, but how often do we neglect the one thing which God promises will not return void, His Word (Isaiah 55:11)? Souls are made new by the Word and the Spirit. Our children will not know Christ if they don't hear from the Scriptures, and specifically about imputation.
One Problem: Our Lack of Clarity
Ask Christians what one must do to be saved, and some will say, “Ask Jesus into your heart.” Yet when Jesus explained to Nicodemus in John 3 what one must do to enter the kingdom of God, He spoke differently: He said that we must be born again. And He went on to explain what that means. The problem with telling a child that they must invite Jesus into their heart, is that without addition explanation, it has about as much meaning as saying, “You must put God on your head.” It is metaphorical language, and it requires a non-metaphorical explanation. Does inviting Jesus into your heart mean to ask for God's guidance? Does it mean to have a warm feeling towards the person of Christ? Does it mean to desire to live like He did? Or does it mean to believe that He lived a perfect life in your place and died to pay the penalty you deserved? Simply telling a child to invite Jesus into their heart, without explanation, leaves out the reality of sin, its penalty, and the true way out.
“...all things that pertain to life and godliness [are given] through the knowledge of Him...”
This is what 2 Peter 1:3 tells us. So the question is, what must a young person know and believe in order to receive eternal life? The answer is the same as what an adult must believe.
Because of our sin, we are enemies of God. And it's not just adults who are sinners. All those who have Adam as their representative are like Adam. Small children sin too. Even the cutest ones.
Sin deserves punishment. Personally, I was raised knowing that I sinned and that everyone sinned. But I was also taught that my sins were no big deal, they weren't as bad as those people over there, that I really didn't have anything to worry about. Ask your child, what will become of whose who die without Christ as their representative? And teach them the Biblical answer.
Salvation does not come through our adherence to God's law. And we are so prone to think that it does. It is enlightening to ask your little ones, will someone go to heaven because they go to church every Sunday? Do people go to heaven because they read their Bible every day? Ask them if someone who lies can go to heaven. What about someone who killed Christians, like the apostle Paul? How they answer shows whether or not they understand imputation. It obviously isn't needed that they know the word imputation. But like us, our children can be confused about the relationship of works to the gospel.
So what is the gospel? What does Paul mean by the message of the cross, which is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18)? The Sunday school answer is, “Jesus died on the cross for my sins.” But even in this expression, there is room for misunderstanding. Many who can recite that Jesus died on the cross have missed the significance of why. Death on the cross is not the same thing as the atonement. Two other people were crucified at Calvary with Christ. But only one provided atonement. Jesus died in the place of others. His death actually paid the punishment earned by sinners. Jesus' death on the cross was not just as a display of love to a watching world. He was paying a debt for His people, a debt that must be paid for redemption to be accomplished. His people are legally declared not guilty on this basis.
He was a substitute. There is a reason why God's people in the old testament were repeatedly given the picture of a substitute in the sacrificial system, an innocent slain for the guilty. Teaching our children about those old testament types helps make the language of a substitute make sense. Ask your child, why did Christ need to die?
Some people think that these kinds of questions are too difficult for a preschooler to understand. And most likely, a young child will not grasp all of this the first time it is presented. But I personally have known very young children who do comprehend these concepts. Some children answer consistently with the answer, no, someone who lies cannot go to heaven. Some young children consistently say, yes, if you go to church every Sunday you will go to heaven. And some little ones have consistently said, in Christ alone I stand.
I love using a catechism to teach my little ones. Question 37 in the Children's Prove It catechism asks, How does Christ redeem His people? The answer given is, “He kept the whole law for His people and suffered the punishment their sins deserved.” The simplified version I'm teaching my two and a half year old is, “He obeyed the law and died on the cross.” I will add more information when she has that down. At this point, she just says, “obeyed,” (pause) “law.” Memorizing our catechism answers does not cause belief, but it does give us a common language, and in that way, it paves the way for more explanation and discussion. There are so many opportunities to teach, as we sit in our house, as we walk by the way, when we lie down, and when we rise up (Deuteronomy 6:7). The outcome is determined by the Lord. And yet He has also determined the means. And God graciously at times allows us to be those means.
It is true that no parent can make a child believe the propositions of saving faith. But it would be easy for us to let that become an excuse for our lack of effort at times to teach those propositions. While we can't make our children believers, we can make sure that our children comprehend the message of the gospel. We can make sure they comprehend these truths at a young age. No one can assent to ideas which they don't understand. We pray, we hope, we fret, but how often do we neglect the one thing which God promises will not return void, His Word (Isaiah 55:11)? Souls are made new by the Word and the Spirit. Our children will not know Christ if they don't hear from the Scriptures, and specifically about imputation.
One Problem: Our Lack of Clarity
Ask Christians what one must do to be saved, and some will say, “Ask Jesus into your heart.” Yet when Jesus explained to Nicodemus in John 3 what one must do to enter the kingdom of God, He spoke differently: He said that we must be born again. And He went on to explain what that means. The problem with telling a child that they must invite Jesus into their heart, is that without addition explanation, it has about as much meaning as saying, “You must put God on your head.” It is metaphorical language, and it requires a non-metaphorical explanation. Does inviting Jesus into your heart mean to ask for God's guidance? Does it mean to have a warm feeling towards the person of Christ? Does it mean to desire to live like He did? Or does it mean to believe that He lived a perfect life in your place and died to pay the penalty you deserved? Simply telling a child to invite Jesus into their heart, without explanation, leaves out the reality of sin, its penalty, and the true way out.
“...all things that pertain to life and godliness [are given] through the knowledge of Him...”
This is what 2 Peter 1:3 tells us. So the question is, what must a young person know and believe in order to receive eternal life? The answer is the same as what an adult must believe.
Because of our sin, we are enemies of God. And it's not just adults who are sinners. All those who have Adam as their representative are like Adam. Small children sin too. Even the cutest ones.
Sin deserves punishment. Personally, I was raised knowing that I sinned and that everyone sinned. But I was also taught that my sins were no big deal, they weren't as bad as those people over there, that I really didn't have anything to worry about. Ask your child, what will become of whose who die without Christ as their representative? And teach them the Biblical answer.
Salvation does not come through our adherence to God's law. And we are so prone to think that it does. It is enlightening to ask your little ones, will someone go to heaven because they go to church every Sunday? Do people go to heaven because they read their Bible every day? Ask them if someone who lies can go to heaven. What about someone who killed Christians, like the apostle Paul? How they answer shows whether or not they understand imputation. It obviously isn't needed that they know the word imputation. But like us, our children can be confused about the relationship of works to the gospel.
So what is the gospel? What does Paul mean by the message of the cross, which is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18)? The Sunday school answer is, “Jesus died on the cross for my sins.” But even in this expression, there is room for misunderstanding. Many who can recite that Jesus died on the cross have missed the significance of why. Death on the cross is not the same thing as the atonement. Two other people were crucified at Calvary with Christ. But only one provided atonement. Jesus died in the place of others. His death actually paid the punishment earned by sinners. Jesus' death on the cross was not just as a display of love to a watching world. He was paying a debt for His people, a debt that must be paid for redemption to be accomplished. His people are legally declared not guilty on this basis.
He was a substitute. There is a reason why God's people in the old testament were repeatedly given the picture of a substitute in the sacrificial system, an innocent slain for the guilty. Teaching our children about those old testament types helps make the language of a substitute make sense. Ask your child, why did Christ need to die?
Some people think that these kinds of questions are too difficult for a preschooler to understand. And most likely, a young child will not grasp all of this the first time it is presented. But I personally have known very young children who do comprehend these concepts. Some children answer consistently with the answer, no, someone who lies cannot go to heaven. Some young children consistently say, yes, if you go to church every Sunday you will go to heaven. And some little ones have consistently said, in Christ alone I stand.
I love using a catechism to teach my little ones. Question 37 in the Children's Prove It catechism asks, How does Christ redeem His people? The answer given is, “He kept the whole law for His people and suffered the punishment their sins deserved.” The simplified version I'm teaching my two and a half year old is, “He obeyed the law and died on the cross.” I will add more information when she has that down. At this point, she just says, “obeyed,” (pause) “law.” Memorizing our catechism answers does not cause belief, but it does give us a common language, and in that way, it paves the way for more explanation and discussion. There are so many opportunities to teach, as we sit in our house, as we walk by the way, when we lie down, and when we rise up (Deuteronomy 6:7). The outcome is determined by the Lord. And yet He has also determined the means. And God graciously at times allows us to be those means.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
of like faith
I was pretty sure that ten years from now, I would be looking back on the fact that I didn't start a single blog (I did try to start a blog in French once, but no one looked at it, so it doesn't count). I know there are so many creative and edifying blogs out there, and they all have the ability to keep us from the things we woke up vowing to get done.
I can't seem to find the time to check any of the interesting blogs I discover, no matter how much I like the blog. But here I am starting a blog. So here's why:
I love to talk theology. At my church, it is normal for many of us to hang out for an hour or more after the Sunday service or Wednesday night Bible study has ended, and talk. We get into great conversations. Sometimes there are different theological conversations in different clusters of people. But frequently, the guys are huddled in a theological discussion, and I'm having fun with the ladies in more general conversations (lately involving learning French and Russian). As enjoyable and encouraging as that is, I think us ladies sometimes miss out on that theological sharpening. So I decided that a blog would be an avenue to great dialogue among friends. “...To those who have obtained like precious faith...,” Peter writes in 2 Peter 1:1. I am thankful to know so many ladies at this time in my life with that like precious faith. Ladies who like to talk theology too. So I hope this is fun.
I can't seem to find the time to check any of the interesting blogs I discover, no matter how much I like the blog. But here I am starting a blog. So here's why:
I love to talk theology. At my church, it is normal for many of us to hang out for an hour or more after the Sunday service or Wednesday night Bible study has ended, and talk. We get into great conversations. Sometimes there are different theological conversations in different clusters of people. But frequently, the guys are huddled in a theological discussion, and I'm having fun with the ladies in more general conversations (lately involving learning French and Russian). As enjoyable and encouraging as that is, I think us ladies sometimes miss out on that theological sharpening. So I decided that a blog would be an avenue to great dialogue among friends. “...To those who have obtained like precious faith...,” Peter writes in 2 Peter 1:1. I am thankful to know so many ladies at this time in my life with that like precious faith. Ladies who like to talk theology too. So I hope this is fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)