Still Considering the Clark-Van Til Controversy

I took a stab at the Controversy a few years ago after reading (or trying to read) Herman Hoeksema’s book.  That post remains quite popular.  I’ve been meaning to read Van Til on the incomprehensibility of God, but more important matters have hindered me from investing the time necessary.

But I finally began John Frame’s The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God.  Early on in the book, he interacts with the Controversy and makes what I think are some helpful comments on it.  I’ve been meaning to blog about this, but have been (yes) busy.  Since today is something of a sick day, I’ve got a bit more time.

“We should be gentle with those who differ from us; they may not be rebellious or sinful in their disagreement, only immature (in other respects they may surpass us).  And, of course, we must always recognize the possibility that we may be wrong, that a brother or sister who disagrees with us may have something to teach us.”

Frame asserts that this controversy was not the highlight of either man’s career, and that they seriously misunderstood one another.  As the first, such controversies tend to bring out the worst in us.  This is why many godly men offered warnings about how to conduct themselves in theological controversy.  It is quite easy for pride to deceive us and distort our thinking, motive and goals.  Part of that deception ties into the misunderstanding of the other person’s actual views that takes place.  As I mentioned in the earlier post, controversy tends to move us to further extremes in the quest to be right (as opposed to understanding truth).

Both, however had valid concerns.  Van Til wished to preserve the Creator-creature distinction in the realm of knowledge, and Clark wished to prevent an skeptical deductions from the doctrine of incomprehensibility, to insist that we really do know God on the basis of revelation.  Van Til, therefore, insisted that even when God and man were thinking of the same thing (a particular rose, for example), their thoughts about it were never identical- God’s were the thoughts of the Creator, man’s of the creature.  Such language made Clark fear skepticism.

Here is how they were talking past each other in some ways (there was a real disagreement, but not as vast as either made it out to be perhaps).  They wanted to protect different ideas in their discussion of the topic.  Different agendas or concerns, which led to different expressions and therefore misunderstanding.

Read Full Post »

Considering Addictions

Been looking at addictions lately.  As Calvin says, the human heart is a factory of idols.  We are a mass of addictions.  Some of our additions seem innocuous, like caffeine.  Others only seem troublesome when they are out of control- like when your shoe collection rivals Imelda Marcos (or you’re always broke because you feed that addiction.

Oddly enough, some addictions are becoming “mainstream”.  I am disheartened to see the popularity of pornography.  Looking at pornography used to be a shameful thing: dark, seedy theaters, brown covered magazines.  It was something you did alone, except for bachelor parties.  After all, no one looks at porn just to look at porn as if it is a work of art.  You look at it to stimulate and facilitate sexual release (either alone or with a partner).

But today porn is viewed differently.  It is apparently for women too.  There are porn parties- with both sexes watching.  I just can’t comprehend that.  Even as a young, sex-crazed heathen I couldn’t conceive of such a thing.  But I was “unliberated”, shackled by the smothering guilt of a Roman Catholic upbringing.  [Actually, I think my conscience was still functioning- barely- to restrain some sin in my life.]

Read Full Post »

Considering Election and Righteousness

I have been a Christian who holds to the theology expressed in the 5-Points of Calvinism (a response to the Arminians) for approximately 20 years.  It was a view that grew out of my reading of Scripture, but the puzzle became clear when I read R.C. Sproul’s Chosen by God.

You can imagine that I’ve heard a few objections, theological and philosophical over the years.  There are also practical objections that are common raised as well.  One of them is that the Reformed doctrine of election undermines personal holiness or righteousness.  It is an important objection, though I think an unfounded objection.  Sure, there are people who are confessionally Calvinists but who are either in great obedience or are counterfeit Christians.  Rightly understood, the biblical texts regarding election point us in a very different direction.

Let’s start in Genesis 18.  God is speaking of Abraham.

¹⁹ For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.” (NIV, 1984)

The Hebrew for chosen here is ‘yada’ which means to know.  It can mean to know intimately.  As such it is often used as a euphemism for sexual intercourse.  It can also mean to discriminate or distinguish.  This is the meaning the majority of modern translators use.  God knew Abraham and chose him.

Here we see one of the purposes tied with the great promises of Genesis 12.  He was to direct his children in the “way of the Lord”, a way that means doing what is righteous and just.  Abraham was not chosen because he was righteous and just, but so that God would make him righteous and just.

In order to be a blessing to the nations, Israel had to be righteous and just.  To be righteous is to live in conformity to the law (which is a reflection of God’s character).  It is about our actions with respect to the law.  To be just is to act toward others with respect to their actions with respect the law.  I give them what they deserve.  Just people protect the oppressed and bring the oppressors to account for how they exploit others.  Our sin and injustice curses others.

Righteous and just communities are formed by families that are righteous and just.  Those families are not accidental, but have parents (particularly fathers) who instruct their children in God’s ways.  This is the point of Deuteronomy 6:6-7.  Godliness usually begins in the home.  Proverbs was written to instruct children in godly living- which starts in that commitment of faith the book calls them to in the early chapters.

Read Full Post »

Considering Antinomianism

The Book at the Center of it All

Here are my notes from the 3rd lecture by Sinclair Ferguson on The Marrow Controversy.

Antinomianism

This controversy enables us to see marks in our hearts and ministry of where we are with relationship to the grace of God.  We must exegete those great passages dealing with law & gospel.  It is one of the hardest notes in all divinity for us to untie.

The Marrow Men were accused of Amyraldianism, Arminianism, antinomianism.  But they held to a particular, not universal, atonement; free grace, not free will; and the law as a rule of life.

The 2^nd part of the Marrow of Modern Divinity is an exposition of the place of the law of God in the life of the believer.  Wherever natural hearts, or gracious hearts bound by a legal spirit, hear of the grace of God they hear “shall we sin that grace may abound?”  We are in danger of legalism in response to this.

Wherever free grace is fully preached, the accusation of antinomianism has ever arisen.  Israel called John the Baptist a legalist and Jesus an antinomian.  The gospel is ever under attack.

Often it is a false conclusion from a true premise.  Grace does abound all the more where sin abounds.  But we do not sin that grace may abound.  We must affirm the true premise that grace is greater than sin.

The Nature(s) of Antinomianism- it wears many faces

The historical use of the term arose in the days of Martin Luther.  He emphasized free grace.  About 1537, one of his friends drove this to unbiblical, but logical, conclusions.  This friend taught we were free from the law as a rule of life.  Luther began to correct his friend.

Antinomianism existed long before the name was given to it.  The WCF teaches that while the law is not a covenant of works to the believer, it remains a rule of life to the believer.  We are bound to the law as a rule of life.  Antinominism denies this in a variety of ways.

We must not dispute about mere words, but instruct with gentleness.  We should not use it as a cuss word, condemning others needlessly.  We often attribute the worst possible theological conclusions to adherents of a particular view point, conclusions they do not hold.  We need the wisdom of Solomon and the meekness of the Son of Man.

It is a pastoral and theological duty for us to distinguish from the forms of antinomianism.

Doctrinal Form- the absolution of the law as a rule of life is the result of a theological premise.  Some Puritans emphasized the free grace of God that any question of law was opposite to the grace of God.  Justification was eternal, and emphasized immediate assurance apart from the Word of God.  Since we are justified, we have no need to know our sin.  It was associated with hyper-Calvinism at times.

They ignore the indicative-imperative pattern of Scripture from beginning to end.  They focus only on the indicative, rending asunder what God had joined.

The Brethren and their concern for the purity of the church, similar to hyper-Calvinism, drew similar concerns.  Darby called the covenant of works as a mischievous fable.  He could see no place for the 10 Commandments in the life of the believer.  In his full-blown dispensationalism, it was confined to the OT.  This has lead many Brethren to fill the void with tradition, looking for decisions instead of obedience as a fruit of grace.  This is like Ryrie’s “unbelieving believer.”  Easy believism rejects the place of the Law in our life as a rule.  When Christianity is more a matter of decision than living, grace becomes an excuse of licentiousness.

Exegetical Form- it is commonplace now for theologians to take a view of the law is like the position adopted by hyper-Calvinists and dispensationalists.  They think Jesus did away with the law.  They think Paul makes no distinction between the end of the ceremonial law and the continuation of the moral law.  This does not mean these men are immoral.  They often affirm all but the Sabbath since they are repeated in Paul.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Recovery of Reformed Worship

Yes, it has been since before my vacation that I’ve read any of Recovering the Reformed Confession. I’ve been quite busy since I’ve been back.  But I’m picking up with Recovering Reformed Worship.

Immediately he is lamenting the changes to worship liturgy in the last 30 years, including the loss of the Psalter.  He quotes D.G. Hart:

“… more congregations in the PCUSA are likely to follow the Genevan order of service than those in the OPC or PCA.”

My initial response is that the Genevan order of service isn’t getting them too far.  I’d rather keep Calvin’s theology than his order of service.

We actually utilize a fairly traditional liturgy or structure to our worship (Call to Worship, Invocation, Confession of Sin, Confession of Faith, Pastoral Prayer, Scripture Reading & Sermon, Benediction).  We want the heritage to inform us, but not enslave us.  Clark is alarmed that Calvin, the Heidelberg Reformers and others would not recognize our worship services.  Neither would the Apostles.  For that matter, they wouldn’t recognize the services of Calvin and the others either.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Marrow Controversy & Legalism

Here are my notes from Sinclair Ferguson’s lecture on Legalism in the Marrow Controversy.  As an interesting aside, I’m currently reading Costly Grace which is a modern application of Bonhoeffer’s The Cost of Discipleship.  Many of the formulations there sound much like the conditional grace which plagued the Pharisees and the Church of Scotland.  That bears more thought.

Legalism

Robert Trail:  men who take a middle way have more kindness toward that extreme toward which they move than that from which they come.

John Simpson has been accused of propogating Arminianism.  He would later teach Arianism.  He was merely warned not to grant too much to natural reason.  The General Assembly had been moving away from free grace and toward legalism.  They were kind to this halfway house to full blown legalism.

Read Full Post »

Considering the History of the Marrow Controversy

This Sunday I’m sort of preaching on the Ten Commandments since it is 10/10/10.  What I’ll be doing is grappling with Law and Gospel.  I want my people to understand the nature of their relationship to the law because of the gospel.

I’ve had a few of those conversations on the internet lately.  It is a difficult issue to grasp and we tend to head toward the extremes of legalism and antinomianism.  They are the 2 ditches on the side of the road.  And both ditches are deadly.  I don’t advise falling into either.

So, I started to listen to Sinclair Ferguson’s Pastoral Lessons from the Marrow Controversy.  Here is a short history of the Marrow Controversy.  I thought my notes might help a few people to understand what was going on, whetting the appetite about this pastorally important theological controversy.

The History of the Marrow Controversy

1717- the Presbytery of Auchterarder examined a candidate for ordination, William Craig was asked a question unique to that Presbytery.

“Do you subscribe to the following: I believe that it is not sound and orthodox to teach that we forsake sin in order to our coming to Christ.”  Craig hesitated and they refused to grant him ordination.  This brought the Auchterarder Creed before the General Assembly.

It was condemned by the Church of Scotland “as unsound and detestable doctrine.”

Thomas Boston was there, and he was quite disturbed by the proceeding.  He saw this as an attack upon the gospel of grace, falsely accusing it of antinomianism.  In 1700 Boston had discovered The Marrow of Modern Divinity which enabled him to grasp the relationship of law and gospel.  He recommended it to James Drummond who gave it to James Hog who ended up reprinting it.

Read Full Post »

Considering The Marrow of Modern Divinity, Part 2

This is really part 3, but the 2nd part was limited to the idea of Gospel Pardon arising from the book.  I’ve now finished the first part of The Marrow of Modern Divinity.  The 2nd part is an exposition of the law.  The first, and original, part covered some significant territory.  In case you didn’t read the other post, I’m reading the new edition with notes by Thomas Boston.

I previously wrote about the difference between the law of works and the law of Christ.  Fisher writes in the form of a dialogue between a legalist, an antinomian, a new convert and a pastor.  The pastor helps to sort out their misunderstandings about our relationship to the law.  I won’t revisit that territory.

The dialogue touches on the free offer of the gospel.  There was a strain of legalism that was hyper-Calvinistic which rejected (and still does) the free offer of the gospel.  They restrict the offer of the gospel to those who show signs of being elect- seeking Christ, and conviction of sin are two.  Some have since accused Fisher of teaching a universal pardon, or his doctrine implying one.  Thomas Boston protects him from such erroneous charges in his notes.

“… yet so long as the Lord has concealed their names, and not set a mark of reprobation upon any man in particular, but offers the pardon generally to all, without having any respect either to election or reprobation, …”  Edward Fisher

The Scriptures often make a general pronouncement of the pardon.  In fact, all men everywhere are commanded to repent.  we are merely calling them to repentance in light of the work of Christ for sinners.  God is the one who sheds his light into their hearts and converts them (2 Corinthians 3-4).  The elect will respond with faith and repentance.  The reprobate will not.  We are not to play God and try to discern whether or not someone is elect prior to offering them the gospel.

“… for all this general pardon, the formal personal pardon remains to be obtained by the sinner, namely, by his accepting of the pardon offered.”  Thomas Boston

Read Full Post »

Considering the Reformed Confession Part 4

As I read the first chapter on how to Recover the Reformed Confession in Scott Clark’s book on the subject, I have a funny feeling.  I get the distinct impression he wants us to be a Reformed ghetto.  You know, the place where we sit around and discuss all our theological distinctives and pretend that we alone are really Christians.

Why do I think this?  Well, he again criticizes John Frame for thinking that we are part of Evangelicalism.  As a broad-based movement, I think we fit under the tent.  We are, after all, evangelical meaning we believe the good news should be made known.  We certainly have a more defined theology than most Evangelicals, but if all we do is push our distinctives we fail to see our connection to the rest of the Body of Christ with whom we disagree on some points.  Or are we all there is?  I’d hate to think we are THAT arrogant.

In discussing the reality that our theology is analogical- we only know God as He has revealed Himself to us- Clark sets his sights on Frame again.  Frame can defend himself, and has, regarding much of what Clark asserts about his theology.  I will agree with Frame that Clark seems to want us to use particular vocabulary that is not itself found in Scripture, nor in our Confessions.  One of his complaints about modern Reformed Theology is that we have redefined our theology rather than speaking it so people will understand it.  Easy to assert, but difficult to prove.  He really doesn’t try.

Read Full Post »

Considering Dual Citizens

No, it isn’t about the immigration issue.  It was Dual Citizens‘ subtitle that interested me: Worship and Life Between the Already and the Not Yet.  I eagerly anticipated the day when I could get a copy and begin reading.  That day come recently and I read much of it on the way back from General Assembly.

Let’s say the anticipation far exceeded the reality.  Jason Stellman is a former missionary who was associated with Calvary Chapel.  He has since discovered Reformed Theology, attended Westminster West and is now a PCA pastor in the Pacific NW.

The forward was written by Michael Horton.  The book reminds me of Horton’s earlier work.  Years ago I used to love Horton’s books.  Not so much anymore.  The problem is not that I have shifted theologically.  I found him to be reactionary and prone to over-correction.  That is how this book reads.

At times you can’t really be sure who he is reacting against.  Evangelicalism is too broad to say “evangelicalism”.  At times I wonder if it is his Calvary Chapel background, but sometimes it is the church growth movement and Rick Warren.  But the end result is a book that was more critical than instructional.  When he is instructive, the book is better.

I was hoping he would develop the reality of the already/not yet regarding worship and life.  He doesn’t really spend much time developing the idea of the already/not yet and how both under & over-realized eschatology plagues the church by distorting our expectations and practices.  That could have been a great book.

Read Full Post »

Considering God’s Pattern for Creation

W. Robert Godfrey’s book God’s Pattern for Creation: A Covenantal Reading of Genesis 1 is a short, fairly easy to understand book that wrestles with some of the issues regarding the interpretation of Genesis 1.  Godfrey, from Westminster West, focuses on the theological and is not trying to integrate the scientific.

Godfrey was a student of Meredith Kline’s, and the book (mostly) teaches the Framework Hypothesis (FH).  He has some mild critiques of the FH, but the vast majority of what he says fits quite well within the FH.

My beloved professor, Roger Nicole, jokingly called his friend Meredith Kline “covenant crazy.”  It is appropriate that Godfrey’s book focuses on a covenantal approach to Genesis 1.  He sees it as a covenant prologue of sorts for the Exodus generation (and all who follow).

“It is a covenant history focusing on what the people of God need to know about their God and themselves.”

Godfrey often frames God’s act of creation as preparing a suitable environment for humanity.  God is also revealing who we are and what we are supposed to do.  God subdues the chaos (tohu) and fills the void (bohu), even as He overcomes the darkness (the 3 problems Godfrey highlights in verse 2).  The creation mandate is to fill the earth & subdue it.  As God’s vice-regents, Adam and Eve were to act like God on God’s behalf.

“Genesis 1 presents creation as the progressive ordering of the earth to be a home for man in fellowship with God and to teach man how he is to bear God’s image.  Genesis 2:4-4:26 begins with the creation of man in fellowship with God and then presents the formation of a place for man to live.”

Godfrey is also highly dependent on Calvin’s method of exegesis (his principle of accommodation- God speaks so we’ll understand).  While Calvin does not do it with his work in Genesis, he often recognized that many historical accounts in the OT were not in chronological order, but in topical arraignment.  He attempts to take Calvin where Calvin did not go.  And this, I think, is the weakness of the book.  He argues that Days 1 & 4 were the same day since sometimes Hebrews were not as concerned about chronology as we are.

Read Full Post »

Considering Idolatry

I’m currently working on a sermon on idolatry.  Since I was addressing the topic in my recent sermon on Jonah 2, I thought that would be an ‘easy’ sermon to put together as I prepare for my trip to Arizona for my examination before Presbytery.

David Powlison has some good material on the subject.  His article Idols of the Heart and “Vanity Fair” seeks to connect counseling with this biblical pre-occupation.  He touches on my sermon text, the seemingly odd 1 John 5:21.  Idols are sinful substitutes for fellowship with the living God, which takes up most of John’s letter.

There is also Tim Keller’s excellent new book, Counterfeit Gods: The Empty Promises of Money, Sex and Power, and the Only Hope that Matters.  He is like a gentle physician seeking to make you well.  He’s kind to you as he tried to cut out your spiritual cancer.

Hidden in my boxes of books (one of my idols at times) I’ve got some good resources.  One is Elyse Fitzpatrick’s Idols of the Heart: Learning to Long for God Alone.  She relies on the Puritans as she navigates the dark places of our hearts, and shed light on them.  It is a discomforting book precisely because our hearts are “factories of idols” (Calvin).

Also locked away is an older book by Dan Allender and Tremper Longman III which has been re-released as Breaking the Idols of Your Heart: How to Navigate the Temptations of Your Heart.  They work their way through Ecclesiastes to show how idols operate in our lives.

At some point I’d like to pick up G.K. Beale’s We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry.  Perhaps a bit more academic, but a thorough treatment of idolatry in Scripture.

Read Full Post »

Considering Church Censures, Synods and Councils

This morning I’m working on some PCA history.  Interesting.  I see some interesting parallels with much of what has gone one with the “Confessing Church” and “New Wine” movements in the PC (USA) over the last decade.  Prior to the formation of the PCA, the “Continuing Church” movement was supported by The Presbyterian Journal, The Presbyterian Evangelistic Fellowship, The Presbyterian Churchmen United and Concerned Presbyterians Inc.  These were both ministerial and lay-led groups that sought to reform the Southern Presbyterian Church.  These groups eventually provided the necessary foundation for the structure of the PCA.  They found that working through the church courts failed, since they were a minority.  They found that severing themselves from a corrupted body was the only option.

With that, we move to church censures & councils.

Chapter XXX: Of Church Censures

245. What is the nature and extent of Church power? The keys of the kingdom include the power to retain and remit sin, to excommunicate the impenitent, admit the repentant thru the ministry of the gospel.

246. What is Church censure (discipline)?  It is formally addressing the sin of another to promote repentance, and utilizing certain consequences to warn the impenitent.

247. Is Church discipline necessary? Why? It is necessary to restore sinners, defend the honor of Christ, and protect the church from unholy influences.  Our propensity to sin makes it necessary.

248. What are the steps of Church discipline? Demonstrate from scripture.   Mt. 18- admonish privately, if not repentant admonish with 2-3 witnesses, if not repentant inform the Session who will take appropriate action (rebuke, suspension or excommunication).

249. Are you personally committed to Church discipline? Yes, though it can be difficult without the support of the Session.

Chapter XXXI: Of Synods and Councils

250. Upon what grounds does the believer in Christ owe obedience to the church courts?  They are duly appointed authorities to which we owe our submission unless to do so is to sin (Heb. 13).

251. May church councils err? Give an example where this has occurred.  Yes, they can.  First they used “like substances” instead of “same substance” to describe the Trinity with respect to the Son.

252. Explain how you understand subscription to the second ordination vow.   I understand it to be subscription to the system of doctrine contained in the Westminster Standards.  Some matters are of greater import than others, “striking to the vitals.”  Exceptions to the vitals of the Westminster Standards should not be permitted.  In lesser matters, exceptions may be permitted according to the wisdom of the court.

Let me say that while technically I argue for “loose” subscriptionism I am personally a strict subscriptionist.  Theological legalism can be as great a danger as theological libertarianism (once again, witness the Marrow Controversy).  My sole exception on the Westminster Confession is regarding recreation on the Sabbath.  I take a Continental Position, argued for by John Calvin.  The current use of loose subscriptionism is not like that of earlier generations which was used to gut the faith of its essentials.  A key difference to keep in mind.

Read Full Post »

Considering Religious Worship, the Sabbath and Vows

As I begin preparation for my examination in theology, Bible, government and sacraments, I thought I would resume the process of putting my study notes on-line.   It’s been awhile since I put some material on the Westminster Confession of Faith up here.  So today I’m covering the chapters on Religious Worship & the Sabbath Day, and Lawful Oaths and Vows.  Some good things to consider (the same caveats apply- I’m not arguing with anyone: if I misrepresented a position let me know).

Chapter XXI: Of Religious Worship and the Sabbath Day

214. Explain the significance of the statement: “… the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will, that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture”.   Scripture provides us with the elements of worship, and also prohibits some other practices.  We are not to imagine that our understanding of acceptable worship is better than God’s.  There is freedom in how we carry out those elements of worship so they are culturally appropriate.

215. Given your understanding of this principle, what would you consider to be prohibited in worship (particularly those elements currently practiced in other churches)?  The use of crucifixes, patriotic music or services, pictures of “Jesus”, worshipping the elements of the Supper as if they were Christ himself, snake handling, women preaching.

216. What are the “elements” of worship?  Call to Worship, Prayer, Creeds (Confession of Faith), Confession of Sin, Songs of Worship, Scripture Reading & Preaching, Giving, Sacraments, Benediction

217. What is the function of preaching in worship? With what attitude should it be received?  It should exalt God, edify Christians and evangelize the lost by making known & applying the Scriptures expositionally with a focus on Christ’s work for us, in us and thru us.  It is to be heard in faith and love to be stored in our hearts and practiced in our lives.

218. Is the fourth commandment a perpetual part of the moral law? How do you sanctify the Lord’s Day?  Yes, in that we should rest & worship one day in seven.  I spend a day resting from my ordinary work, spending time with my family.  On the Lord’s Day we worship Him.

Chapter XXII: Of Lawful Oaths and Vows

219. What is a lawful oath? Why is an oath a part of religious worship? The person calls God as a witness to what he asserts or promises to do.  It is part of religious worship lest we use God’s name loosely or falsely.

220. What is a vow? What are some examples? When is it lawful to vow? A vow is like a promissory oath.  You may vow to give 25% of your income to the church for missions.  It must be made to God and done voluntarily.

221. Are there vows or oaths into which a Christian should not enter, either within or outside the church (for example, those related to secret societies, military service, or civic organizations)?  We are not to take vows which would lead us to sin by either omission or commission.

One of my exceptions is regarding the Lord’s Day/Sabbath.  I take a more Continental view (as opposed to the Puritan view) which was held by John Calvin.  It permits recreation since you are ceasing from your regular work to provide for your family.  In most things I tend to fall in line with Calvin.  I find him most consistent with Scripture.

Read Full Post »

Considering The Transforming Community, Part 1

The topic of church discipline is a touchy one.  People tend to go to extremes.  They either try to discipline people for anything and everything, or they try to avoid ever doing it no matter how severe the sin.

My experience as a pastor has been mixed.  There have been times I’ve believed church discipline was required, but enough of the Session disagreed that we never pursued it.  I’m sure some of those times I may have been over-reacting since the people were attacking me.

I have been wanting to read The Transforming Community: The Practise of the Gospel in Church Discipline by Mark Lauterbach (that’s not a typo, but the British spelling of “practice”, I think) for a few years.  I finally picked it up.  I’m glad I did.  It is a great little book (so far, I’m only 1/2 done).  Mark sees church discipline as a part of how we live out the gospel and how God transforms us.  It is an essential function of church life- part of the church being the church.  Without it the church becomes a social club and lives are not really changed.  This was one of the issues I encountered.  Many in the church wanted it to be more of a chapel (nice service, not much else) rather than a place where the gospel was at work to make people more like Jesus (Romans 8), as Christ is formed in them (Galatians 6).

“… as the saving doctrine of Christ is the soul of the church, so does discipline serve as its sinews, through which the members of the body hold together…  all who desire to remove discipline or hinder its restoration- whether they do this deliberately or out of ignorance- are surely contributing to the ultimate dissolution of the church.”  John Calvin

Lauterbach rightly points to pride as one of the main problems in the church.  We  resist church discipline, thinking it unnecessary because we think more of ourselves than we ought.  We fail to recognize we are the biggest sinners we know (1 Timothy 1:15, as Paul uses the present tense).  If we are unwilling to face our sin, the gospel makes no progress in our lives.

Read Full Post »

Considering Christ-Centered Worship, Part 1

Bryan Chapell’s Christ-Centered Preaching is one of the better books on preaching.  It would be easy to get worn down in the nuts and bolts of that book and miss the big picture that Chapell is trying to convey.

The same could be said for his newest book, Christ-Centered Worship.  It is not a nuts and bolts book (unlike his book on preaching).  It focuses on the big picture of worship, which is becoming quite rare these days.  His goal is not to advocate any particular form of worship- but rather to communicate that the gospel should shape our worship so that it shapes us.  If the gospel is not shaping our worship, then our worship (which really won’t be worship after all) is shaping us into something it should not.

“We consider the history because God does not give all of his wisdom to any one time or people.  Slavish loyalty to traditions will keep us from ministering effectively to our generation, but trashing the past entirely denies God’s purposes for the church on which we must build.”

So, Chapell tries to walk that fine line of being instructed by not enslaved by the past.   Chapell begins by comparing the liturgies of the Western Church to show how alike they tend to be.  He doesn’t want to ignore the differences between them, but focuses on the big picture- that the liturgies themselves are designed to present the gospel each week.  It is because we have forgotten that the gospel is to shape our worship that we have some many problems with worship.

“Because they have not been taught to think of the worship service as having gospel purposes, people instinctively think of its elements only in terms of personal preference: what makes me feel good, comfortable, or respectful.”

The particular liturgies he examines are that of Rome (pre-1570), Luther’s, Calvin’s, the Westminster liturgy and one proposed by Robert Rayburn in the late 20th century.  To most American evangelicals, these will seem quite foreign because we have mostly abandoned liturgies of the past.  We have done this not realizing they were intended to communicate the gospel.  As a result, worship in America is often devoid of the gospel.  It becomes more about styles and preferences.

The pattern they had in common is one of Adoration => Call to Worship=> Confession of Sin => Scripture Reading=> Sermon=> Singing of a Creed, Psalm or Hymn=> Offering=> Communion => Song of Response=> Benediction.

Read Full Post »

Considering Counterfeit Gods

While on vacation I started to read Tim Keller’s most recent book Counterfeit Gods: The Empty Promises of Money, Sex, and Power and the Only Hope that Matters.  Yes, that is a long subtitle.  You’d think a Puritan wrote this book.

Others have tackled these topics, like Richard Foster in Money, Sex and Power.  But Tim Keller, for better or worse, frames it historically in light of the failure of many of these false gods in the economic crisis most of the world is experiencing.

This is an excellent book, though I am not sure it measures up to The Prodigal God.  Few books do.  This is a subject Tim Keller handles very well.

Some have been critical of the new, prevailing notion of idolatry as if it takes the place of sin.   Keller argues that the idea of idolatry makes more sense than the idea of sin (in this world of relativism).  Beyond that he refers to Luther’s point that idolatry is the root of sin rather than just being one of many sins.  So what Keller is doing here is trying to get to the root of our sin, the many false gods that we serve.

Read Full Post »

Considering Finally Alive

Another painful phone call

Back when I worked for Ligonier ministries, I often talked with the “Born Again Guy”.  This was my name for someone who often called to discuss what it meant to be born again.  I did not like talking with him.  He was convinced that his novel ideas were true, and refused to ground those ideas in a sound, reasonable interpretation of Scripture.  I had many a painful, pointless conversation with him.

I wish I had a copy of Finally Alive then, because I could have sent it to him.  Perhaps John Piper would have made more progress with him than I did.  In his recent book , John Piper sets out to explain and apply the doctrine of regeneration.  He has a valid concern that the term “born again” has been removed from its biblical moorings.  There is a great ignorance about the biblical concept, and this misunderstanding has lead to many problems within the church.  It is at the root of much of the church’s problem with sin.  Piper’s desire is for this book to clear the air and restore the glory of God in regeneration.

Don't judge it by the cover!

Piper approaches this subject by exegeting and explaining the key passages that this subject.  The key passage is John 3, and this takes up much of the book.  He also spends significant time in 1 John and 2 Peter as he unpacks the implications of this significant doctrine.

The chapters in the book are short.  This is not a bad thing.  I was able to read a chapter during my 30-minute lunch break each day, slowly working through the book.  So while the material is not easy, John Piper provides enough for people to digest at each sitting.  He does not overwhelm people with lengthy chapters.

There are far too few books that cover this material.  I agree with 98% of what Piper says in this book.  The one thing I disagreed with him on was the meaning of “water and the Spirit”.  He thinks the “water” is a reference to the cleansing we receive (of which baptism is a picture) in regeneration (he argues this point from Ezekiel’s promise of the New Covenant).

I take an approach more akin to Leon Morris’ in that it refers to physical birth.  I think this due to the parallelism I see between verses 5 & 6.

5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.  6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

To be born again, we must be born the first time, in the flesh.  Jesus is speaking of water and birth.  The interpretation that makes most sense to me is water referring to birth, being born of the flesh.  This is insufficient for us to see, or enter, the kingdom of God.  We are powerless, but utterly dependent upon the work of the Spirit to give us life in Christ.

This difference is fine tuning, and has little/no difference in application.  But this text and others are clear to both of us that regeneration precedes faith rather than follows faith.  Piper labors to show the truth and significance of this truth.  Scripture teaches the regeneration is a significant change that produces faith in us, grants us the power to resist temptation and so please God.  It does not just produce a relational change, but also a spiritual, moral change.

Regeneration is mysterious, but that does not mean it is irrational.  Scripture connects it with the ministry of the Word.  As Calvin often noted, Word and Spirit are joined together.  The Spirit grants us new life through the ministry of the Word so that we then believe the Scriptures.  We then begin to obey the Scriptures as well.

Not only that, but we begin to make the Scriptures known that others may be born again.  Scripture is clear that God’s appointed means for faith is hearing the Word, through others.  We are responsible to engage in evangelism.

John Piper’s book is theology at its best.  By that I mean:

• It is Scriptural.  It seeks to understand Scripture in a cohesive way.  He’s not proof-texting, but seeking to examine texts in their context.
• It is gospel-centered.  All sound doctrine is in accordance with the gospel.  This means it is connected, in some way, shape or form, to the gospel.
• It is practical.  He shows the implications and applications of the doctrine.  As John Frame has oft said, we do not truly understand a text until we apply it.  Piper does just that.

Once again John Piper has written a book that many won’t like but need to hear.  It is not just about theological minutia, but reminds me of Charles Simeon’s criteria for a sermon: Does it humble the sinner?  Does it exalt the Savior?  Does it promote holiness?  This book achieves all three of these goals.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Marrow Controversy

The Marrow Controversy is one of those obscure questions that appears on the ARP examinations.  Many a student has little knowledge of this controversy that involved, among others, the Erskine brothers.  As a result of the Erskine brother connection, the ARP holds to the “free offer of the gospel”.  The Marrow Controversy shaped the groups that would one day shape the ARP.

I heard of the Marrow Controversy while in seminary, but it was not discussed or examined in any great detail (I can think of a few guys who were examined in Central Florida Presbytery who wish it had so they could answer R.C. Sproul’s questions about evangelism as Calvinists).

One of my favorite Puritans, Thomas Boston, was central to the Marrow Controversy.  The Controversy involved The Marrow of Modern Divinity by Edward Fisher.  Thomas Boston witnessed its censure by the Church of Scotland and saw this as an attack on the gospel itself.  He and the Erskines were among “the Marrow Men” who believed Fisher’s book defended true Christianity against both anti-nomianism and legalism.

Phil Ryken’s introduction to a recent (and needed) reprinting of this book is helpful to put some of this together.  This new edition includes Thomas Boston’s explanatory notes.  Even more helpful is Sinclair Ferguson’s lectures Pastoral Lessons from the Marrow Controversy.  It has 3 lectures that examine its history, the twin problems of license and legalism, and their resolution in the free grace of God.  In many ways, Tim Keller’s book The Prodigal God is a modern defense of free grace against license and legalism.  It is the Marrow Controversy applied to today.

“Anyone who comes to grips with the issues raised in The Marrow of Modern Divinity will almost certainly grow by leaps and bounds in understanding three things: the grace of God, the Christian life, and the very nature of the gospel itself.”- Sinclair B. Ferguson

Read Full Post »

Considering Sermon Preparation

Tim Keller has begun blogging.  One of his first posts is on the balance between time preparing a sermon and other pastoral tasks.  His point is that in Reformed circles, we can often think that great preaching cures a multitude of ills.  But meaningful ministry is far more than that (not less though).

He brings up the pattern of John Calvin who taught and/or preached almost every day.  But he also spent Thursdays in the consistory counseling with people about their sins, temptations.  He spent the better part of a day each week shepherding the people.

It is then that Keller says something surprising:

I pastor a church with a large staff and so I give 15+ hours a week to preparing the sermon. I would not advise younger ministers to spend so much time, however. When I was a pastor without a staff I put in 6-8 hours on a sermon.

I suppose I would expect Tim Keller to give 15 hours to sermon prep.  He has a lifetime of learning upon which to draw.  I probably spend about 15 hours on sermon preparation.  Much of that is sorting out how to communicate the text: structure, application, illustration.

I try not to spend too much time in commentaries.  They can become redundant and you have a law of diminishing returns (so choose wisely!).  You can also get too many good ideas and feel the burden of trying to say everything.

I wanted to spend more time in shepherding.  But in a small congregation there are only so many problems people can have.  Or is that people who have problems (and actually want to deal with them).

A younger pastor will probably need more time to prepare a sermon since he is still learning how.  He does not have a lifetime of learning upon which to draw.  He needs to put in a bit more time in study.  I’m not sure 6-8 hours are enough time for a young pastor to properly prepare a solid, applicable sermon.

This does not mean a young pastor shouldn’t spend time with people.  When I started, I had lunch most Sunday afternoons with congregants.  I would meet people for lunch, did some counseling etc.  A small church pastor can devote 10-15 hours to sermon preparation and have adequate time to spend shepherding and leading.

So, I agree with Keller that pastors much do more than study and preach or teach.  Shepherding and leadership need to be regular, significant parts of their week (administration as well).  I guess we just have different estimates of who much time a young man needs to adequately prepare a sermon

Read Full Post »