TAKING ERROR WITH APOSTOLIC SERIOUSNESS

Martin Downes emphasizes a perennial need in the Church, but perhaps never more important than now simply because the lack of discernment among pastors and laymen alike is pronounced.

Every generation of the church needs to cultivate doctrinal discernment with regard to truth and error. Every generation of church leaders need to practice pastoral vigilance in the nurture and protection of the flock. God’s Word on these matters must be understood and applied.

In this regard there are unchanging positive calls to preach the Word (2 Tim. 4:1-2), to teach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27), to hold fast to the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1-2), to follow the pattern of sound words (2 Tim. 1:13; 1 Tim. 4:6), to guard the good deposit (2 Tim. 1:14; 1 Tim. 6:20), to appoint faithful men able to teach others also (2 Tim. 2:2), and to teach disciples all that Jesus has commanded them to obey (Matt. 28:19-20).

These imperatives set the tone and direction of Christian ministry. They call for a wholehearted commitment to love the Lord our God, to be faithful stewards of the gospel, and to feed his sheep (Jer. 3:15; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; Titus 1:9; 1 Peter 5:2).

Alongside these positive calls are the unrelenting warnings about the presence of false teachers, and clear instructions about how to deal with them (Rom. 16:17-18; Eph. 4:14; 1 Tim. 1:3-4; 2 Tim. 2:16, 22-26; Titus 1:11; 3:9-11; 2 Peter 2:1-3). These warnings are clothed in powerful images. False teachers are wolves, dogs, waterless clouds, fruitless trees, wild waves, wandering stars, and their teaching will eat up like gangrene (Matt. 7:15-20; Acts 20:29; Phil. 3:2; 2 Tim. 2:17; Jude 12-13) .

It is required of church leaders that they keep a watch on themselves, their teaching, and the flock entrusted to their care (Acts 20:28, 31; 1 Tim. 4:16). They must have a solid grasp of sound doctrine, held with a clear conscience, and an ability to mix it with false teachers (1 Tim. 1:5, 19; Titus 1:9). Truth must be taught and those in error must be rebuked and their teaching refuted.

Scripture never soft pedals the true nature and effects of heresy. It regards the most virulent forms of error as soul destroying and insidiously evil (Gal. 1:6-9; 2 Cor. 11:1-4, 12-15; 1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 2:25-26; 1 John 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7). Harold O. J. Brown underlined the seriousness of rejecting the true gospel and embracing a different one:

 

…just as there are doctrines that are true, and that can bring salvation, there are those that are false, so false that they can spell eternal damnation for those who have the misfortune to be entrapped by them.

 

 

Nevertheless, in God’s providence, these errors have been the occasion of producing greater clarity in the articulation of the essential articles of the Christian faith. They have also provoked some of the most substantial responses to be found in the theological literature of the Church. Alfred North Whitehead, of all people, rightly remarked that “wherever there is a creed, there is a heretic round the corner or in his grave.”

Rather more positively, Martin Luther was right to say that “If heresies and offenses come, Christendom will only profit thereby, for they make Christians to read diligently the Holy Writ and ponder the same with industry…Thus through heretics and offenses we are kept alert and stouthearted and amid wrangles and battles understand God’s word better than before

…FROM THE READING ROOM

I just finished reading John Piper’s new book, Finally Alive. In his unrivaled expositional style he examines the new birth inside out, upside down, forward and backward, leaving virtually no question or possible question unanswered. He does not neglect the practical, enumerating several ways in which each of us can spread the Good News, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Encouraging, stimulating, elucidating – a landmark work.

WHAT DOES CORAM DEO MEAN?

February 23, 2009 @ 6:10 AM  |  Posted By: Tim Challies

by R.C. Sproul I remember Mama standing in front of me, her hands poised on her hips, her eyes glaring with hot coals of fire and saying in stentorian tones, “Just what is the big idea, young man?” Instinctively I knew my mother was not asking me an abstract question about theory. Her question was not a question at all–it was a thinly veiled accusation. Her words were easily translated to mean, “Why are you doing what you are doing?” She was challenging me to justify my behavior with a valid idea. I had none. Recently a friend asked me in all earnestness the same question. He asked, “What’s the big idea of the Christian life?” He was interested in the overarching, ultimate goal of the Christian life. To answer his question, I fell back on the theologian’s prerogative and gave him a Latin term. I said, “The big idea of the Christian life is coram Deo. Coram Deo captures the essence of the Christian life.” This phrase literally refers to something that takes place in the presence of, or before the face of, God. To live coram Deo is to live one’s entire life in the presence of God, under the authority of God, to the glory of God. To live in the presence of God is to understand that whatever we are doing and wherever we are doing it, we are acting under the gaze of God. God is omnipresent. There is no place so remote that we can escape His penetrating gaze. To be aware of the presence of God is also to be acutely aware of His sovereignty. The uniform experience of the saints is to recognize that if God is God, then He is indeed sovereign. When Saul was confronted by the refulgent glory of the risen Christ on the road to Damascus, his immediate question was, “Who is it, Lord?” He wasn’t sure who was speaking to him, but he knew that whomever it was, was certainly sovereign over him. Living under divine sovereignty involves more than a reluctant submission to sheer sovereignty that is motivated out of a fear of punishment. It involves recognizing that there is no higher goal than offering honor to God. Our lives are to be living sacrifices, oblations offered in a spirit of adoration and gratitude. To live all of life coram Deo is to live a life of integrity. It is a life of wholeness that finds its unity and coherency in the majesty of God. A fragmented life is a life of disintegration. It is marked by inconsistency, disharmony, confusion, conflict, contradiction, and chaos. The Christian who compartmentalizes his or her life into two sections of the religious and the nonreligious has failed to grasp the big idea. The big idea is that all of life is religious or none of life is religious. To divide life between the religious and the nonreligious is itself a sacrilege. This means that if a person fulfills his or her vocation as a steelmaker, attorney, or homemaker coram Deo, then that person is acting every bit as religiously as a soul-winning evangelist who fulfills his vocation. It means that David was as religious when he obeyed God’s call to be a shepherd as he was when he was anointed with the special grace of kingship. It means that Jesus was every bit as religious when He worked in His father’s carpenter shop as He was in the Garden of Gethsemane. Integrity is found where men and women live their lives in a pattern of consistency. It is a pattern that functions the same basic way in church and out of church. It is a life that is open before God. It is a life in which all that is done is done as to the Lord. It is a life lived by principle, not expediency; by humility before God, not defiance. It is a life lived under the tutelage of conscience that is held captive by the Word of God. Coram Deo . . . before the face of God. That’s the big idea. Next to this idea our other goals and ambitions become mere trifles.

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/2009/02/what-does-coram-deo-mean.html accessed 23 February 2009

IS DOCTRINE IMPORTANT?

Godward Thoughts blog posted this excellent video:

JUDGMENTALISM

from The Sacred Sandwich:

Posted on 16 March 2009

Jan thought about warning the diver that the pool wasn’t filled with water, but she didn’t want to appear too judgmental.

READING PSALMICALLY

Credit goes to Justin Buzzard for this great idea:

I’ve been changing things up.

Weeks ago I began to notice that my conversations with God had a “stuckness” to them. My prayer life had grown stale and stuck–always saying the same old things in the same old way. So, I decided to change my method.

For the past few weeks I’ve been praying through the Psalms.

This is how I do it:

Most mornings I use my Moleskine in praying through a psalm. Right now, the discipline of writing out my prayers is proving deeply helpful. I began with Psalm 1. Today I prayed through Psalm 20. I use black ink to write out the words of the psalm. As I write the words I pray them to God. When a certain stanza, verse, sentence, or word of the psalm especially grips me and triggers further prayer, I take my red pen and use it to write out/pour out further prayer to God in my own language. When I’m done, I move back to the black pen/psalm.

That’s it. That’s what I do.

It’s just a simple change of method in my prayer life, but this simple change of method is slowly changing how I live and relate to God. I’m living more psalmically than before.

 

DOES MAN HAVE FREE WILL?

Visitor Comment: Words need to have meaning or all argument becomes nonsense. Either salvation is open to all or it is not. Either it is predestined who goes to heaven or it’s an individual’s choice to choose salvation through Christ. You can not have it both ways and be thinking logically and rationally. The bottom line, the predestination doctrine eliminates the role of an individual’s free will.

Response: Hi and thanks for your comment. However, the Bible does not teach anywhere that natural man has a free will … but rather that his will is in bondage to sin (2 Timothy 2:26; Rom 6:17, 20; 1 Cor 2:14). and since I agree with you that words do mean something, last time I looked, that which is in bondage is not free. Ask yourself, in light of clear biblical teaching, can a person believe the gospel apart form the work of the Holy Spirit? If not, then you agree that, left to himself, man is morally powerless to come to Christ. (i.e. has no free will.) He can make voluntary choices but he sins by necessity. No one coerces him since he voluntarily chooses to sin and yet he cannot do otheriwise until Christ set him free – so until we are joined to Christ by the Spirit we will ALWAYS reject the gospel. And this is exactly what Jesus teaches when he tells us that no one can believe the gospel unless God grants it (John 6:65).

Secondly, it is important to consider that God demands that you obey the ten commandments perfectly? Have you? No, none of us have. That is why we need a Savior … who Himself was without sin having obeyed all God’s commands. He does for us what we cannot do for ourselves. In the same way the command to believe the gospel cannot be obeyed apart from the Holy Spirit. HIs salvation includes delivering us from the bondage of the will. The Holy Spirit gives us a new heart, opens our blind eyes and unplugs our deaf ears … without which we would never come to saving faith on our own. The scripture says no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ apart form the Holy Spirit. If someone owes a debt they cannot repay (like us) then the inability to repay the debt does not alleviate us of the responsibility to do so. The point is that you appear to have a lot of unbiblical assumptions in your statement. Back up what you say with Scripture, not just your unaided logic and then we have a place to start.

Please consider this question:. If many of us hear the gospel and some people end up believing and others do not, what makes these people to differ? Are some more natually inclined to the gospel? Are some more wise? No, it is Jesus that makes people to differ. Salvation is by the grace of Jesus Christ alone. If we believe the gospel then it is by grace we have believed. Only a new heart can love and trust Jesus. Faith does not come from an unregenerate heart. We did not come up with faith ourselves. Otherwise we could boast and thank ourself for not being like other men who did not make such a good choice. Our choice is real but requires regenerating grace or we would all perish.

Solus Christus
John
(From Reformation Theology)

HT: Allsufficient Grace

HOW TO DO THEOLOGY

from Against Heresies:

Most of us are more comfortable looking at doctrines neatly displayed in glass cases than in those moments when our eyes focus on the letters that read “Emergency Break Glass.” But the real test of how much we truly understand and really believe them (and by doctrine I don’t mean abstract ideas but God’s written truth about himself, his purposes, us, and his world in which we live), is discovered not in a classroom but more likely in a hospital waiting room, or by the side of a grave.

It is when we are under pressures of various kinds, when we are enduring trials, that we are forced to ask ourselves “Do I really believe this? Am I willing to trust, obey, and suffer for the sake of Christ?”

Are you willing to walk by faith and not by sight? Will you believe that he will never leave you and never forsake you? Can you trust that you live by promises and not explanations, that God designs your good although you are grieved by various trials? Will I be ashamed of Jesus and his words when I am under pressure to fit in with the moods, tastes, and acceptable standards of the culture?

Packer wrote the following gem about Luther’s approach to doing theology:

When Martin Luther wrote the Preface to the first collected edition of his many and various writings, he went to town explaining in detail that theology, which should always be based on the Scriptures, should be done according to the pattern modelled in Psalm 119.

There, Luther declared, we see three forms of activity and experience make the theologian.

The first is prayer for light and understanding.

The second is reflective thought (meditatio), meaning sustained study of the substance, thrust, and flow of the biblical text.

The third is standing firm under pressure of various kinds (external opposition, inward conflict, and whatever else Satan can muster: pressures, that is, to abandon, suppress, recant, or otherwise decide not to live by, the truth God has shown from his Word.

Luther expounded this point as one who knew what he was talking about, and his affirmation that sustained prayer, thought, and fidelity to truth whatever the cost, became the path along which theological wisdom is found is surely one of the profoundest utterances that the Christian world has yet heard.

TYPOLOGY VERSUS ALLEGORY

The following is from “Into the Word,” Tabletalk Magazine, March 2009.

“Allegorical interpretation of Scripture is to be rejected because it ultimately strips the text of all meaning. Since allegories can mean something wholly different than what the context allows, there is no way to evaluate different interpretive possibilities. The passage can mean anything, and if it can mean anything, it means nothing and can be misused however one sees fit.

Paul describes his interpretive work in Galatians 4:21-31 with the same Greek word from which we get the English term allegory (v. 24), but he does not embrace fanciful allegories.  Instead, he uses typological interpretation, which, John Calvin writes, is consistent with ‘the true and literal meaning’ of the original text. Typology is based on the fact that God works in recurring patterns throughout history and says that a past event or person can prefigure or serve as a type of a future person or event. In the antitype, a future person or event more fully expresses the truth of what came before. For example, consider the relation of the exodus to the work of Jesus. God’s rescue of his people from Egyptian bondage typifies the greater salvation from slavery to sin and death He accomplished in Christ. The latter work is consistent with the first-in both instances the Almighty Himself rescues a helpless people. But His work also has a fuller meaning, for while people can return to physical slavery, he whom the Son sets free is free indeed, never to be enslaved to evil again (John 8:36).

Typological interpretation can be problematic because too many people call what they are doing typology when they are really employing allegory. Thus, it is generally wise to stick to the typologies explicitly revealed in Scripture.

How do we know that Paul’s reading of the Genesis account is a typology, not an allegory? Remember that Galatians addresses those who attempt to gain the promise of salvation through their own efforts, efforts that enslave people to sin (Galatians 3:10-14). This is precisely what Abraham and the slave-woman Hagar did when they came together to ‘help God along’ and tried to produce the promised heir (Genesis 16:1-6). Paul’s use of Hagar to represent those who try to justify themselves by their deeds is fully harmonious with the Genesis account.”

INTERVIEW WITH WILLIAM YOUNG

Tim Challies tipped us off to this interview:

Interview with William Young
Here is an interview with The Shack author William Young. In it he flatly denies the substitutionary atonement (which was one of the questions many people had as they read the book).