The Bondage of the Will and the Gospel Call (Part One)

Jesus responded, "I assure you: Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. (John 8:34 HCSB)

By these words, Jesus exposes the true spiritual condition of His Jewish audience as well as the condition of all people after the Fall. Every individual is in slavery to sin,

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23 HCSB).

And this slavery is not one of external compulsion, "but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin;" (James 1:14-15a NIV). This "evil desire," which leads to temptation and sin, making us all slaves to sin, is present within every person, for God has testified that "the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth" (cf. Genesis 8:21). It is the natural intent of our heart- our desires, or, to say it another way, our will- that is the source of our enslavement to sin as well as our natural alienation from God and our hostility toward Him (cf. Colossians 1:21).
->And it is for this reason that we declare so strongly that any system of philosophy that would make the cooperation of our 'free-will' necessary for our release from the bondage of sin is a distortion of the biblical Gospel. As Martin Luther taught:

“Free will, after the fall, exists in name only…”

For anyone to come to faith in Christ for salvation, God alone by His grace alone must transform his or her will so that he or she will no longer hate the Light of the Gospel (cf. John 3:20), but instead he or she will come to the Light "so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God" (John 3:21b NASB). For anyone to come to faith in Christ for salvation, God the Father must do a special work in drawing him or her to Jesus His Son, as Jesus Himself declared, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (John 6:44a HCSB). For you to be saved, God must first "remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh" (Ezekiel 36:26b HCSB)

Therefore, brothers, make every effort to confirm your calling and election, because if you do these things you will never stumble. (II Peter 1:10 HCSB)

Examine your heart in the light of Scripture. Do you "hunger and thirst for righteousness" (cf. Matthew 5:6) or do you "love the world," that is, "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life" (cf. I John 2:15-16 NASB)? If you are in love with the things of this world system, I beg you to call out to Jesus to save you- you will certainly not be disappointed,

"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Romans 10:13 KJV)

And if you have called upon Jesus for salvation, you can be sure that it was God who placed this desire for salvation in your heart,

for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Philippians 2:13 NASB)

To the glory of God alone.

Spurgeon on Christmas

At the beginning of this month, Tom Ascol, the executive director of Founders' Ministries, published a blogpost on Charles Spurgeon's view of Christmas.
The quotes from Spurgeon found in the post linked above are thought-provoking and give a well-balanced view of how Christians should think biblically about the celebration of Christmas. My favorite quote in the post is:

"Religion never was designed to make your pleasures less."

This quote reminds me of the teachings of John Piper, who constantly preaches about pleasure from a biblical perspective.

The Names of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25- Part Three: "Jesus"

Review
In the previous two posts on the names of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25, I have reflected on the name "Christ" and the name "Immanuel". By the name "Christ" we see that God is faithful to keep His promises and that He has provided a king who will deliver His people from our enemies; by the name "Immanuel" we know that God is always with us. Finally, I would like to lead us to briefly reflect on the name "Jesus".

Jesus
"Jesus" means, simply put, "God saves". Matthew 1:21 informs us that the son of Mary would be given this name because "He will save His people from their sins". I would like to briefly call your attention to three points concerning the work of God that are revealed by this statement, "He will save His people from their sins". The points from this verse that I would like to examine are: 1. The specific work of God; 2. The specific people impacted by the work of God; 3. The nature of the work of God.

The Specific Work of God Declared in Matthew 1:21
First of all, Matthew 1:21 informs us of an action that will certainly be accomplished by God through Jesus. "He will save His people from their sins". This is important for us to understand because there are many forms of religion that claim an allegiance to Jesus, but they disregard the very meaning of His name as revealed to us in this verse. This fact is demonstrated in that salvation from sin is declared in Matthew 1:21 to be a work that God Himself will accomplish. False systems try to subtly add human works to this statement, giving the impression that God has made us savable, and that there is some action that individuals must perform to 'seal the deal', so that they will be saved by cooperating with God. These false systems have the effect of belittling the glory of God and exalting sinful people.

The Specific People Impacted by the Work of God in Matthew 1:21
So, the name "Jesus" tells us of a particular action- our salvation- that is actually accomplished by God.
Next, Matthew 1:21 informs us of a particular people who benefit from God's work of salvation.
For this verse declares that God will save His people from their sins.
And it is clear from the teaching of Jesus later in Matthew- and the other Gospel accounts- that there are some people who will not be saved from their sins. Some people will die having never turned away from their sinful lifestyle and having never trusted in Jesus as their Savior. These people will die in their unbelief and they will be judged by God according to their sins- they will suffer His just wrath against sin for all eternity in Hell.
But God has chosen for Himself a people- His people- whom He will save from their sins. And His people are revealed by their faith in Jesus.

The Nature of the Work of God Declared in Matthew 1:21
Finally, Matthew 1:21- this verse that gives an explanation of the name "Jesus"- reveals to us what God will save His people from. God will save His people from their sins. For the people of Israel at the time of Jesus looked for the Messiah- the Christ- who was a king that God had promised to send to deliver His people from their enemies. But the people of Israel expected this king to be a political leader who would set them free from the Romans who held control over the Israeli nation. What the Israelites did not understand- what no one understood- is that their true enemies were not the Romans but their own sinful desires that battled against God, making them His enemies. Jesus came to set His people- people from within national Israel as well as people from all over the world who would believe in Him- free from their sins. This is the nature of the work that God promised He would accomplish through Jesus. And due to the nature of the salvation that God accomplished through Jesus, His people are, in fact, saved from their sins. In the lives of God's people, there will be a change. Our salvation from sin will be manifest in a growing hatred for sin and a growing love for God.

The Question
The question, then, is, are you a member of the particular group mentioned in this verse- are you one of God's people? Has God saved you from your sin? Is God's salvation from sin demonstrated in your life by a growing hatred for sin and a growing love for God? If you can not answer "yes" to these questions, then I beg you to cry out to Jesus to save you. Jesus alone can save you from your sin. It is for this reason that He came into the world:

This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief. (I Timothy 1:15 ESV)

The Names of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25- Part Two: "Immanuel"

The Faithfulness of God in Matthew 1:22-23
In my last post, I focused on the name "Christ" and mentioned that the revelation of Jesus as the Christ demonstrates God's faithfulness to fulfill His promises. In this post, I would like to begin by briefly examining how God's faithfulness to His promises are brought into greater focus as Matthew 1:22-23 gives an example of a specific prophecy that is fulfilled through the birth of Jesus.
Matthew 1:22-23 reads:

Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet:
See, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and they will name Him Immanuel , which is translated "God is with us." (HCSB)

In this passage, it is revealed that the birth of Jesus fulfills the Word of God which was given through the prophet Isaiah over 700 years before His birth.

Immanuel
In addition to the faithfulness of God, these verses tell us that God is actually "with us". God is revealed throughout the Bible as the great king of the universe who is holy and just in all respects. By being born in an impoverished condition through the baby Jesus- who, as the Gospel account of Luke tells us, was laid in a manger because there was no room for Him in the inn- God reveals that He also sympathizes with us in our weaknesses. Jesus was with His people in His earthly ministry- His perfect life, His death for our sins, and His resurrection- and He remains with His people through the Holy Spirit, who is given to everyone who trusts in Christ. So that whatever heartaches that we have, whatever hard times that we face, by faith we must must cling to the promise that, in Jesus, "God is with us".

The Names of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25- Part One: "Christ"

The birth of Jesus Christ came about this way: After His mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. So Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her publicly, decided to divorce her secretly. But after he had considered these things, an angel of the Lord suddenly appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, don't be afraid to take Mary as your wife, because what has been conceived in her is by the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to name Him Jesus, because He will save His people from their sins." Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: See, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and they will name Him Immanuel , which is translated "God is with us." When Joseph woke up from his sleep, he did as the Lord's angel had commanded him. He took his wife home, but he did not know her intimately until she gave birth to a son. And he named Him Jesus.
(Matthew 1:18-25 HCSB)

Introduction
During the Christmas season, as we see the name of "Christ" everywhere- at least as it is attached to the word "Christmas"- and as we even hear the Bible story of Christ's birth recited on network television in "A Charlie Brown Christmas", it is good for us to take some time to seriously reflect on what God's Word has to say about the birth of Jesus Christ. What I would like to do, by God's grace, over the next three posts (including this one), is to lead us to briefly examine the names for Jesus that we find in Matthew 1:18-25. By meditating on the names for Jesus given in this Bible passage, we see how these names reveal some crucial aspects about the person and work of God.

Christ
The first name in Matthew 1:18-25 to which I would like to give attention is the name "Christ". In Matthew 1:18 we read:

The birth of Jesus Christ came about this way: After His mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. (HCSB)

"Christ" here is actually a title given to Jesus meaning "Messiah" or "anointed one". The term "anointed one" refers to a king who is promised by God to deliver His people from their enemies. This term comes from the way that the first kings in ancient Israel were appointed by God. God had His prophet Samuel use oil to anoint Saul and later David as He chose them to be kings. As Samuel poured oil on the heads of these men, this action symbolized God pouring out His Spirit on them so that they would be empowered to rule over His people, as we read in First Samuel chapter 10. In the Old Testament Scripture, God promised an ultimate "anointed one"- that is, the Messiah, or Christ- to rule over His people and deliver them from their enemies for all time. Through Jesus, who is named as Christ, God fulfills these Old Testament promises. By the name "Christ" in this passage, we see that God is revealed as one who is faithful to keep His promises, for He has provided a ruler and deliverer for His people.

Conclusion
Jesus is Christ. He is the ruler and deliverer for His people. The question to you today is whether you have submitted to Jesus as your ruler and have called out to Him as your deliverer from sin.
God is faithful to fulfill His promises, by trusting in Him through Christ you can be delivered from your sin and brought into the kingdom of God.

That John MacArthur is NOT a "Christmas Calvinist"

1. Introduction: This post really has little to do with the Christmas holiday.
It's a bit funny that I'm finally getting time to write this post over my Christmas break from teaching at Loachapoka Jr. High. As you will discover if you continue reading this post, my topic has very little to do with the Christmas holiday other than the humorous name given to a certain belief.

2. Who is John MacArthur?
John MacArthur is the pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church and the speaker on the radio broadcast Grace to You. For more information, you can read MacArthur's "bio" on the Grace to You website.

3. What does the term "Christmas Calvinist" mean?
First of all, there are a few different ways that people have defined the term "Calvinism". In this post, I am using "Calvinism" to indicate the "Doctrines of Grace", which have been traditionally explained using the acronym "TULIP". "TULIP" stands for the following "five points":

(These are taken from Appendix D of Steele and Thomas' ROMANS, An Interpretive Outline. This summary is found as a link on the Monergism.com website.)

Total Depravity
Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature; therefore, he will not--indeed he cannot--choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ--it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation--it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.
Genesis 2:15-17, Romans 5:12, Psalm 51:5, 1 Corinthians 2:14, Romans 3:10-18, Jeremiah 17:9, John 6:44, Ephesians 2:1-10

Unconditional Election
God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause of God's choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God's choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
Romans 9:10-21, Ephesians 1:4-11, Ephesians 2:4-10, Romans 8:29-30, Acts 11:18, Acts 13:48

Limited Atonement
Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was a substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ's redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which united them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, thereby guaranteeing their salvation.
Matthew 1:21, Romans 5:12-21, Romans 3:21-26, Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:5-6, Philippians 1:6, John 10:11-30, John 17:6-12, Romans 8:28-30, John 6:44, Acts 20:28

Irresistible Grace
In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call (which is made to all without distinction) can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected, it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man's will, nor is He dependent upon man's cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God's grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended.
John 3:16, Matthew 22:14, Acts 17:29-31, Matthew 23:37-39, John 6:44, Romans 8:28-30, John 1:12-13, John 3:1-8, Ephesians 2:8-10

Perseverance of the Saints
All who were chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of Almighty God and thus persevere to the end.
John 3:16, John 6:35-40, John 6:44, Philippians 1:6, Philippians 2:12-13, Jude 24-25, Ephesians 1:13-14, Romans 8:28-30, Romans 8:35-39

Now, when someone first learns of these "five points", it often takes some time for that person to carefully study the Scriptures and embrace these doctrines as being truly representive of the teaching of the Word of God. Often, one or two of these doctrines will prove to be particularly challenging to an individual who wishes to determine whether they represent biblical theology or human-invented logic. Specifically, many people have great difficulty in accepting the "L" of the above acronym. "Calvinists"- those that believe "Calvinism", as described above, is biblical- often refer to people who accept the other four points, but do not accept the doctrine of "Limited Atonement", as "Christmas Calvinists". And you can hear the reason why. Those who accept the other points and deny "Limited Atonement" are "no-L" [sounds like "Noel", get it?] "Calvinists". The term "Christmas Calvinist" is used as a kind of joke between friends. A "five-point Calvinist" would usually only refer to someone as a "Christmas Calvinist" if it was known that the person who took exception to "Limited Atonement" nevertheless affirmed the essentials of what the Bible teaches about salvation, such as: each and every person on earth is a slave to their own sin; peoples' sin makes them guilty under the justice of God and deserving of His wrath; Jesus' death on the Cross provided satisfaction for God's just wrath against sin; and that God is entirely sovereign in the matter of which individuals are set free from sin and come in faith to appropriate the salvation from His wrath that was provided by the Cross.

4. The issue raised...
John MacArthur is a Bible teacher who has become well known for his love for the Word of God, which is expressed in his teaching of sound biblical doctrine. Though the word "Calvinism" is rarely, if ever, mentioned from his pulpit, John MacArthur has also become known as a "Calvinist". This reputation primarily is due to his books, such as Hard to Believe, in which he defines "Calvinism" as the belief that "sinners are saved by hearing the gospel while the Holy Spirit awakens them from spiritual deadness" (page 84), and then he spends the entire book expounding upon this theme in different ways.
->From quotes like the one above, it seems that MacArthur would agree with one of his heroes of the Faith, the 19th century English preacher Charles Spurgeon, who wrote:

If anyone should ask me what I mean by a Calvinist, I should reply, "He is one who says, Salvation is of the Lord." I cannot find in Scripture any other doctrine than this. It is the essence of the Bible. "He only is my rock and my salvation." Tell me anything contrary to this truth, and it will be a heresy; tell me a heresy, and I shall find its essence here, that it has departed from this great, this fundamental, this rock-truth, "God is my rock and my salvation." ...
I have my own Private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor.
[This quote is from Spurgeon's "A Defense of Calvinism". The assertion that Spurgeon is highly respected by MacArthur is justified by the fact that MacArthur wrote a book titled Ashamed of the Gospel, which quotes Spurgeon favorably throughout the book, from the Preface to the first Appendix.]

But some people have raised the issue of whether MacArthur is really a "five-point Calvinist". Some people have taken statements from MacArthur such as the following to indicate that he does not, indeed, hold to the doctrine of "Limited Atonement". In this quote MacArthur is speaking about II Peter 2:1:

The analogy simply says unthinkably, unimaginably, having been bought by a master they refuse to submit to his authority. In the spiritual dimension, you would ask the question, "In what sense did Christ buy these false teachers?" Two ways to view it: First of all, you can view it as universal provision for the redemption of sinners- even though they refuse it, and are damned. As First John 2:2 says, "He is not only the propitiation for our sins, but the sins of the whole world." And the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross was a sufficient purchase price to redeem all men. The price has been paid. In that sense, they have been bought. But I think there is a second sense in which we have to understand this, not only the sense of universal atonement- or universal purchase made available [emphasis added]. But there is also the sense that they have made an earthly identification with Christ's redemption, so that they claim Him as the One who bought them and they claim Him as their redeemer, testifying that He indeed has bought them, and their word then is taken at face value. No matter what they say, though the price was paid in full for them [emphasis added], and though they say they are Christ's, they refuse to say yes to His sovereign lordship and thus they are false teachers.
["How You Can Spot a False Teacher: II Peter 2:13", sermon by John MacArthur]

So, is MacArthur a "Christmas Calvinist"?

5. That John MacArthur is not a "Christmas Calvinist."
In order to find the answer to the above question, I contacted Phil Johnson, who is an elder with John MacArthur at Grace Community Church. Johnson is also the executive director of MacArthur's radio ministry, "Grace to You", and he edits most of MacArthur's major books.
->Mr. Johnson was kind enough to send me the following email:

[John MacArthur is] a five-pointer and has been at least since 1995, when he preached through 2 Corinthians 5. His view of the atonement is broader than some Calvinists. It's the same view outlined by R.L. Dabney in his book The Five Points of Calvinism, and by R. B. Kuiper in For Whom Did Christ Die? The view allows for a universal aspect to the atonement, but insists that all the *substitutionary* aspects of the atonement are limited to the elect alone.

The above statements are more fully explained in a seminar that Johnson gave at the 2003 Shepherd's Conference of Grace Community Church. Following are several lengthy quotes from this seminar- I encourage you to take the time to read them, as they are very helpful in understanding the Bible's teaching concerning the extent of the atonement:

Modern Calvinist circles seem to be filled with guys who insist that Christ's death had no benefit whatsoever for anyone other than the elect and God's only desire with regard to the reprobate is to damn them period. Too many Calvinists embrace the doctrine of limited atonement, they finally see the truth of it but then they think, "Oh that's that." Christ died for the elect and in no sense are there any universal benefits in the atonement, so the atonement is limited to the elect in every sense and it has no relevance whatsoever to the non-elect. I think that's an extreme position and it's not supported by many of the classic Calvinist theologians and writers if you read carefully what Calvinists have said throughout history. ...
->If you begin to study this issue in depth you will quickly discover that the classic Calvinist view on the extent of the atonement is a lot less narrow and a lot less cut and dried than the typical seminary student Calvinist on the Internet wants to admit. Historic Calvinism, as a movement has usually acknowledged that there are universal aspects of the atonement. Calvin himself had a view of the extent of the atonement that was far more broad and, and far more extensive than the average Calvinist today would care to recognize. ...
->The real question is for whom did God ordain the atonement? In other words, the real issue in the extent of the atonement debate comes down to the very same issue as election itself. Did God purpose to save specific people or was He trying indiscriminately to save as many people as possible? What was His intent? What was His design? And if you accept the truth of election I can't understand why you would balk at the truth that the atonement had specific people in view. So that's the real question not was Christ's death sufficient to save all but what was the design and the goal of the atonement? What did God intend to do through it? Did He intend to save specific people through Christ's work on the cross? And if you answer that question, yes, you've affirmed the principle behind the Calvinistic position.
->Here's an even more important question. Will all of God's purposes for sending Christ to die ultimately be accomplished? Did God intend something by the atonement that will not come to pass? Is there any purpose in Christ's dying that will ultimately be frustrated? And if you ask those questions it puts the importance of the whole issue in a totally different, clearer light. And I believe that Christ's atoning work on the cross ultimately accomplishes precisely what God designed it to accomplish, no more no less. If you believe God is truly sovereign you must ultimately come to that position. The fruits of the atonement are no less than what God sovereignly intended. God is not going to be frustrated throughout all eternity because He was desperately trying to save some people who just could not be persuaded. If that's your view of God than your God isn't really sovereign. Pharaoh fulfilled exactly the purpose God raised him up to fulfill. God is not wringing His hands in despair over Pharaoh's rebellion and unbelief.
->But on the other hand, Christ's atoning work accomplishes no more than God intended it to accomplish. If benefits accrue to non-believers, reprobate people, because of Christ's death, than it is because God designed it that way. If Christ's dying means that the whole, the judgment of the whole world is postponed, than unregenerate people reap the blessings and the benefits of that delay. They reap the benefits and the blessings of common grace through the atonement. And if that's the case than that is exactly what God designed. It didn't happen by accident. And for that very reason it is my position and the position of most Calvinists throughout history that some benefits of the atonement are universal and some benefits of the atonement are particular and limited to the elect alone.
->Now one of the points I made in my seminar last year was this: You cannot ultimately escape the limited and particular aspects of the atonement if you believe Christ's death on the cross was substitutionary. Let me illustrate. Did Christ suffer for Pharaoh's sins, in Pharaoh's place, and in his stead? Certainly not. Because when Christ died on the cross Pharaoh was already in hell suffering for his own sin. Those who suffer in hell all suffer for their own sin. Christ does not suffer on their behalf and in their stead in the same way He did for people who are ultimately redeemed and escape hell. That's a rather obvious point if you think about it. Substitutionary atonement and the substitutionary aspects of the atonement are ultimately something that belong to the elect alone. There's no escaping it. He bore their punishment so that they will not have to. If He had suffered vicariously for the sins of Judas in the same way He suffered in Peter's place then Judas wouldn't be suffering right now for his own sins. That's the inevitable ramification of vicarious atonement.
->But at the same time, there are universal aspects of the atoning work of Christ and historic Calvinism has always recognized this. There is a legitimate sense in which Christ is set forth as the Savior of the whole world. The Savior of all men, Lord of all. And the only one all men everywhere are commanded to believe in. And there's another sense in which He is especially the Savior of those who believe. That's exactly the meaning of 1st Timothy 4:10, which is the verse that I think, better than any in Scripture, settles this whole question. First Timothy 4:10, "We trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe." I think it was R.B. Kuiper, a classic Five Point Calvinist, who said he preferred to speak of Christ's dying "specially for the elect rather than only for them." And that seems to be a good Biblical perspective. To those who believe Christ is Savior in a special and particular sense. His death had a particular reference to them in the ultimate design of God. And that is what Calvinists mean when they speak of particular redemption.
->Curt Daniel gives a helpful illustration of how this is true in his syllabus. He points to the parable in Matthew 13:44, where a man finds a treasure hid in a field and Jesus says this: "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a treasure hid in a field which, when a man hath found, he hideth, and for the joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath and buyeth that field." He buys the field and therefore he buys the treasure. The treasure was the object and the aim of his purchase. The treasure was the reason for his great joy. The treasure was the reason he made this deal in the first place but he did not only purchase the treasure, he purchased the whole field. That's a good way, I think, to look at the atoning work of Christ. Listen to Romans 14:9, "For to this end Christ both died and rose and revived that He might be Lord both of the dead and living." Now notice what that verse is saying; because of Christ's death and resurrection, because of His atoning work, He is Lord of all men in a special way. And that includes elect and otherwise. Dead and living. His death on the cross purchased the right for Him as perfect man and perfect God, to rule as Lord over all the earth: over both the dead and the living, over the redeemed as well as the reprobate. That's also the same message you read in Philippians 2:8-10. Listen. "Being found and fashioned as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death even the death of the cross. Wherefore, [that is for this reason], because He was obedient unto the death of the cross, [because of His atonement] God has also highly exalted Him and given Him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven of things in earth and things under the earth." There is a very clear statement that there is a universal ramification of the atonement. Christ's death, in some sense, purchased Him an exalted position of Lordship over all. And so there's a true sense in which He purchased the whole world in order to get the treasure, the Church.
->Now meanwhile, there are certain benefits of the atonement that accrue directly to the non-elect, the reprobate. Spurgeon said it well in a sermon entitled "Good Cheer for Many that Fear", Spurgeon said this: "We believe that by His atoning sacrifice, Christ bought some good things for all men and all good things for some men. And that when He died He had a definite purpose in dying and that His purpose will certainly be effected."
->Now what specifically, did Spurgeon have in mind when He said that "Christ bought some good things for all men?" Well clearly, he was speaking of common grace, the goodness of God that is shown to all men. The common blessings of life. This is the grace that keeps the evil in the world from being as bad as it can possibly be. Common grace is the grace that permits all sinners to live and enjoy life under a temporary reprieve from just judgment and justice even though they're worthy of instant damnation. Common grace delays that. Common grace is also the grace that pleads tenderly and earnestly with sinners to repent and to be reconciled to God, even though they're hearts are set against Him. And according to Matthew 5:44-45, these common grace blessings are tokens of God's genuine love. Scripture does not hesitate to apply the expression "love" here. For those of you who may be my Calvinist brethren out there who balk at saying that, "God loves the whole world." Scripture doesn't balk at that. This goodness that He shows even to the reprobate is a sincere compassionate love even though it's not the same eternal redemptive love that God has set on the elect from all eternity. It's love of a different sort but it's true love. It's genuine love. It's heartfelt compassion. It's real goodness. And if you think about it you'll realize that all of the good things God gives us, all the blessings of common grace, all of them are made possible by the atonement. Because if God had no intention to save anyone, ever, He would have instantly damned the whole human race the minute Adam sinned. That's what He did with the angels that fell. They were cast out of heaven at once and no atonement will ever be made for the sins of any angel. They were immediately judged and deposed without any grace period. But by contrast, the human race, fallen though we are, for the most part, lives and enjoys life in a world where even though we are under the curse of sin we're blessed to an amazing degree with a providential good God gives us. We see beauty. We enjoy the taste of our food. John MacArthur always says, "God could've, if He wanted to, made all our food taste like sand." But He was good to us. He gave us things we would enjoy. He gave us all things richly to enjoy. We laugh and experience joy and appreciate love and we relish the good things of life and all of those things are ultimately made possible by the atoning work of Christ. None of them would have been possible, at all, if Christ had not intended to die to save sinners. God would have damned us instead. And even the reprobate, even the non-elect benefit from Christ's death in that way. The crumbs that fall from the table, God spreads for His elect, are a veritable feast for the reprobate who experience all of the blessings of common grace. That is a side benefit of the cross. And it's an expression of God's goodness towards them.

6. Conclusion: So what?
So, why is it important to understand the position on the extent of the atonement held by the elders of Grace Community Church? I believe that this is important because the ministry of Grace Community Church influences so many Christians through Phil Johnson's websites and through John MacArthur's books, his radio ministry, and his Study Bible. With this much influence, it is important for Christians to be well-informed about the doctrine taught by Grace Community Church.
->More importantly, I hope that this post has prompted you to think more deeply about the nature of Christ's work on the Cross and to glorify God for the good and perfect sacrifice of His Son on our behalf.

To the glory of God alone-

Spurgeon on Matthew 16:28

The following teaching by Charles Spurgeon concerning Matthew 16:28 was helpful to me in understanding this verse and I hope that you who are reading this post will be blessed as well with the careful examination of God's Word. The remainder of this post is the first half (roughly) of Spurgeon's sermon #594 preached at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in 1864. The thoughts that I had while reading this sermon will be interspersed in green.

An Awful Premonition

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. –Matthew 16:28

I confess that I have frequently read this verse with only a vague sense of its poignancy and have passed over it rapidly because I have not understood it clearly. Although I am well acquainted with the usual interpretations, none of them has ever really satisfied me. This text seems to arouse the reader’s surprise without suggesting a simple, obvious meaning. Bible commentators have thus invented explanations and offered suggestions that are widely divergent, but all are equally obscure and improbable.

I greatly appreciate Spurgeon's candor here in relating his struggles to understand this text as well as the confession that he gives that he has not, in the past, carefully examined the verse as he ought. This is encouraging in that we see that even a man of God as gifted as Spurgeon did not automatically have an adequate understanding of every passage. Spurgeon's words here are also convicting in that we see that in order to have an adequate knowledge of Scripture, we must apply ourselves to diligent study- In other words, we have to work to understand the Word.

->Lately, however, in reading a volume of sermons by Bishop Horsley, I have met with an altogether new view of this passage, which I firmly believe to be the correct one. Though I do not suppose I will be able to convince all of you of this interpretation, yet I will do my best to elicit from our text the terrible charge that I believe the Savior has left here on record.

At this point I would like to encourage everyone to prayerfully examine Spurgeon's exegesis of this text. Spurgeon's explanation of Matthew 16:28 will most likely be significantly different from any previous material you may have studied on this verse, and we are often prone to favor the position we have become accustomed to rather than to allow our thoughts on a given subject to be challenged by sound reasoning from the Scripture.

->With His own cross in mind, Jesus had just admonished his disciples to steadfastness and appealed to them to take up their crosses and follow him at any sacrifice, which he followed with a portrayal of the inestimable value of the soul and the horror of a soul being lost. (See Matthew 16:24-26.) The full force of that doom was (and is) impossible to comprehend until he “shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels” (Matthew 16:27). Then he stopped, looked on some of the company, and said something like this: “Certain people are standing here who will never taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
->Now, what did he mean by this? Obviously, it was either a marvelous promise to some who were disciples indeed, or else it was a portent of woe to others who would die in their sins. How do the popular interpretations of our learned commentators view this statement of our Lord?

The first of the "popular interpretations" mentioned by Spurgeon below is the one that I have read and had come to accept. You may also currently hold to this interpretation, but please weigh carefully Spurgeon's argument against this understanding of the verse under examination.

->Some say it refers to the Transfiguration. It certainly is remarkable that the account of the Transfiguration immediately follows this verse both in Mark and in Luke, as well as in this record of Matthew. However, can you for a moment convince yourself to believe that Christ was describing his Transfiguration when he spoke of “the Son of man coming in his kingdom”? Can you see any connection between the Transfiguration and the preceding verse that says,

“For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works” (Matthew 16:27)

We grant you that Christ was in his glory upon Mount Tabor, but he did not there “reward every man according to his works,” nor is it fair to call that a “coming” of the Son of Man at all. He did not “come” on Mount Tabor, for he was on the earth already; and it is a misuse of language to construe that into an advent. Besides, where would be the occasion for such a solemn prefix— “Verily I say unto you”? Does it not raise expectation merely to cause disappointment, if he intended no more than this—“There be some standing here who shall see me transfigured”? That scene took place six days afterwards. The next verse tells you so,

And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart. (Matthew 17:1)

Why, the majesty of the prediction which carries our thoughts forward to "the last things" in the world's history, makes us shrink from accepting an immediate fulfillment of it all. I cannot imagine, therefore, that the transfiguration is in the slightest degree referred to here; and I do not think that anyone would have thought of such a thing unless he had been perplexed and utterly nonpiussed for an explanation.
->And again—though it seems almost incredible—Dr. Gill endorses this view, and moreover says, that it also refers to the descent of the Holy Ghost, At this I am staggered. How any man can find an analogy with Pentecost in the connection here I cannot think. Pentecost took place six months after this event, and why Jesus Christ should say, "Verily I say unto you there be some standing here who will live six months," I really cannot comprehend. It seems to me that my Master did not waste people's time by talking such platitudes.
->Who that reads this passage can think it has any reference to the descent of the Holy Ghost—

“For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works” (Matthew 16:27)

Did Christ come at Pentecost in the glory of his Father? Was there then any company of angels? Did he then reward every man according to his works? Scarcely can the descent of the Holy Spirit, or the appearance of cloven tongues, like as of fire (Acts 2:3), be called the coming of the Son of Man in the glory of his Father with his angels, [to give] every man according to his works, without a gross misuse of our mother tongue, or a strange violation of symbolic imagery.
->Both these constructions, however, which I now mention, have now been given up as unsatisfactory by those modern students who have thought most carefully upon the subject. The third still holds its ground, and is currently received, though I believe it to he quite as far from the truth as the others.

The third interpretation that Spurgeon wishes to refute is especially relevant to us today with the current popularity of "partial preterism." Partial preterism is the view that nearly all of the prophesies of the Bible- save for the bodily return of Christ and the final resurrection- have been fulfilled in the past (from our point of view), specifically in the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem and in the reign of the Roman emperor Nero. Though partial preterists have some very compelling arguments, they tend to see all references to the future found in the New Testament as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, even when this interpretation is not supported by the text.

->Will you carefully read the chapter through at your leisure, and see if you can find anything about the siege of Jerusalem in it? Yet this is the interpretation that finds favor at the present time. Some persons were standing there who would be alive when Jerusalem should be destroyed by the Romans!! Nothing surely could be more foreign to the entire scope of our Lord's discourse, or the narrative of the evangelists. There is not the slightest shadow of a reference to the siege of Jerusalem. It is the coming of the Son of Man which is here spoken of, in the glory of his Father with his angels, to reward men according to their works. Whenever Jesus spoke of the siege of Jerusalem and of its coming, he was wont to say,

“Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled;” (Matthew 24:34)

But he never singled out some few persons and said to them, “Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till the city of Jerusalem is besieged and destroyed.”
->If a child were to read this passage I know what he would think it meant: he would suppose Jesus Christ was to come, and there were some standing there who should not taste of death until really and literally he did come. This, I believe, is the plain meaning.
->”Well,” says one, “I am surprised; do you think, then, that this refers to the apostle John?” No; by no means. The fable passed current, you know, that John was to live till Christ came again. But John himself repudiated it. For at the end of his gospel, he says,

Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? (John 21:23, emphasis added)

This, you see, was putting a suppositions case, and in no sense the language of prediction.

Having examined the interpretations that he believes are contrary to the meaning of the text, Spurgeon now moves on to present his positive argument for what he believes the text is intended to indicate.

->Now, dear brethren, if you are so far convinced of the unreasonableness of each of these efforts to solve the difficulty by feigning a sense, I shall hope to have your minds in readiness for that explanation which appears to me to harmonize with every requirement. I believe the “coming” here spoken of, is the coming of the Son of God to judgment at the last great and terrible assize, when he shall judge the righteous, and separate the wicked from among them.
->The next question is—“Of whom were the words spoken?” Are we warranted in supposing that our Lord intended this sentence as a gracious promise, or a kindly expectation that he would kindle in the breast of his disciples? I trow not. To me it appears to have no reference whatever to any man who ever had grace in his soul: such language is far more applicable to the ungodly than the wicked. It may well have been aimed directly at those followers who should apostatize from the faith, grasp at the world, shrink at the cross, endeavor to save their lives, but really lose them, and barter their souls.

Now, carefully weigh Spurgeon's exposition of the use of the phrase "taste of death."

->At the glorious appearing of Christ there are some who will taste death, but will they be the righteous? Surely, my dear friends, when Christ comes, the righteous will not die; they will be caught up with the Lord in the air. His coming will be the signal for the resurrection of all his saints.
->But mark you, at the time of his coming, the men who have been without God, and without Christ, will begin for the first time to “taste of death.” They passed the first stage of dissolution when the soul quitted the body, but they have never known the “taste of death.” Till then, they will not have known its tremendous bitterness and its awful horror. They will never drink of the wormwood and the gall, so as really to “taste of death,” till the Lord shall come. This tasting of death here may he explained, and I believe it is to be explained, by a reference to the second death, which men will not taste of till the Lord comes.
->And what a dreadful sentence that was, when the Savior said—perhaps singling out Judas as he spoke—“Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here, who shall never know what that dreadful word ‘death’ means, till the Lord shall come. You think that if you save your lives, you escape from death. Ah! you do not know what death means. The demise of the body is but a prelude to the perdition of the soul. The grave is but the porch of death; you will never understand the meaning of that terrible word till the Lord comes.”
->This can have no reference to the saints, because in the eighth chapter of John, and the fifty﷓first verse, you find this passage—

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.” (John 8:51-52)

No righteous man, therefore, can ever “taste of death.” He will fall into that deep oblivious sleep in which the body sees corruption; but that is another and a very different thing from the bitter cup referred to as tasting of death. When the Holy Ghost wanted an expression to set forth that which was the equivalent for the divine wrath, what expression was used?—“Christ, by the grace of God, tasted death for every man” (cf. Hebrews 2:9).
->The expression “to taste of death,” means the reception of that true and essential death, which kills both the body and the soul in hell for ever. The Savior said then, as he might say, I fear, if he stood in this pulpit to-night—

“Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” (Matthew 16:28)

If this be the meaning, and I hold that it is in keeping with the context, it explains the verse, sets forth the reason why Christ bespoke breathless attention with the word “verily,” answers both the grammar and the rhetoric, and is not by any argument that I have ever heard of to be moved—if this be so, what thrilling denunciations are contained in my text. O, may the Holy Spirit deeply affect our hearts, and cause our souls to thrill with its solemnity!
->What thoughts it stirs up! Compared with the doom which will be inflicted upon the ungodly at the coming of Christ, the death of nature 'is nothing. We go farther: compared with the doom of the wicked at the coming of Christ, even the torments of souls in a separate state are scarcely anything. The startling question then comes up. Are there any sitting or standing here who will have to taste of death when the Lord comes?

I urge every reader of this post to carefully re-read and prayerfully consider the last question given above.

SDG

The Word of God- Veiled to Sinful Man (Isaiah 53:1)

Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? (NASB)

Introduction
->Sunday after Sunday people all over the world meet in places known as "churches"- places that are, at least, superficially similar to the congregation of Grace Heritage Church, where I am a member- and they hear messages preached concerning the Bible. This book- the Bible- is consistently the single best-selling book in the world every year. And so it is amazing how many people are ignorant of the basic content of this book- both in terms of the details of what events are recorded in the Bible and also of the main idea of the Bible. This general lack of biblical knowledge in our society as been made painfully obvious to me as I am currently employed as a reading teacher at a junior high school. Several of the selections that we read in class- from Beowulf to Shakespeare to Edgar Allen Poe- contain biblical allusions, and I am always a bit surprised at how few of my students have any knowledge of even the most fundamental Bible stories to which our selections refer. And what really bothers me is that it is not only my students whose parents fail to bring them to church meetings who cannot identify common Bible names and events- even students who profess to attend church regularly are often as clueless in this area as the others. The other day, for example, we were reading a short section of the epic poem Beowulf because my students needed to be instructed on identifying the characteristics of epic poetry. As I was giving my class background knowledge on the basic outline of Beowulf, I mentioned that the monster Grendel, who is Beowulf's enemy, is portrayed as being a descendent of Cain. At this point I introduced the Bible story of Cain and Abel into the discussion so that my students would understand why being a descendent of Cain would be considered a bad thing. I had planned to spend only a couple of minutes on this point, but I found, to my dismay, that there were hardly any of my students who were sufficiently familiar with this bit of Bible history. (Its little wonder then, I guess, that my students treat each other so poorly, as I'm not sure how parents teach their children not to kill each other without referring to the story of Cain and Abel.)
->But even more distressing than peoples' lack of knowledge about foundational points of Bible history is the widespread ignorance concerning the central theme of the Bible. It is odd to think that in a society where so many homes have Bibles in them that so few people can, when asked, articulate what the main idea of the great book is. And those of us who proclaim Jesus as Lord must be ready and able to articulate the Truth of the Bible. As the Apostle Paul commands:

Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. (II Tim. 4:2 NKJV)

As we desire to obey this command and speak to others about the Bible- the record of God’s Word- we are hindered by many obstacles. Some of these obstacles are internal- we often lack wisdom in how to present God’s Word and we lack boldness in speaking His Word when we know that we ought to. And so we are instructed to pray for wisdom in the book of James, which says:

If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.

And we are instructed by the example of the Apostle Paul who implored the Ephesian church to pray for him, so that he would proclaim God’s Word boldly (cf. Eph. 6:19-20 NKJV).
->But in addition to these internal obstacles against the proclamation of God’s Word, we must also understand that those to whom we must proclaim the Word also present obstacles to our effective communication of the Truth. The fact that most people willfully reject God’s Word and cling to a form of sinful skepticism is the focus of Isaiah 53:1, and it is this fact- and the remedy to peoples’ rejection of the truth- that I wish to explore in this post.

Exposition
-> To begin with, let’s take a look at the basic structure and content of this verse. Isaiah 53:1 presents two rhetorical questions given by the prophet Isaiah to emphasize the fact that the vast majority of the race of Israel has rejected the Word of God. In Isaiah 53 the prophet is lamenting the manifestation of the prophecy God had given him at his commission, for God had said to him,

"Go, and tell this people: 'Keep on listening, but do not perceive; Keep on looking, but do not understand.' Render the hearts of this people insensitive, Their ears dull, And their eyes dim, Otherwise they might see with their eyes, Hear with their ears, Understand with their hearts, And return and be healed." (Is. 6:9-10)

This command to Isaiah at the beginning of his ministry is a judgment against Israel. So the primary thrust of this text is Isaiah’s lament over the reception of his message (or, rather, the lack of reception that his message receives), but this verse also gives us a brief glimpse of the content of the Prophet’s message. For the phrase, “the arm of the LORD” in the second question is given as a parallel to the term, “our message” in the first question. And this phrase “the arm of the LORD” is used in the Old Testament to speak of the power of God– as clearly demonstrated in verses such as Deuteronomy 26:8,

So the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm, with great terror and with signs and wonders. (NKJV)

So the message of Isaiah was about the “arm”- or “power”- of God. And this is to be our message as well, the power of God– particularly, the power of God living in Christ Jesus. As it is written:

For I am not ashamed of the gospel [that is, the “Good News”] of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. (Rom. 1:16 NKJV, emphasis added)

Our message is a message of faith in Jesus Christ– that He alone has the power to save us from God’s wrath against sin.
For the power of God lives in Christ forever, as the Apostle declares:

For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form. (Col. 2:9 NASB)

And God’s power worked through Jesus during His personal earthly ministry, as demonstrated in His miracles. But even these miracles were not enough to convince the people of Israel to place their faith in Him, as the apostle John records:

But though He had performed so many signs before them, {yet} they were not believing in Him. {This was} to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet which he spoke: "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT? AND TO WHOM HAS THE ARM OF THE LORD BEEN REVEALED?" (John 12:37-38)

In general, the crowds that came to see Jesus rejected Him and eventually called for His crucifixion. The crowds’ rejection of Jesus was due to an active judgment of God, as John goes on to record:

For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again, "HE HAS BLINDED THEIR EYES AND HE HARDENED THEIR HEART, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES AND PERCEIVE WITH THEIR HEART, AND BE CONVERTED AND I HEAL THEM." (John 12:39-40)

These verses clearly tie in the message of the prophet Isaiah to the work of our Lord. The Word of the Lord is the same Word whether it is given through the prophets or through the incarnate Son of God, as the writer of Hebrews declares:

Long ago God spoke to the fathers by the prophets at different times and in different ways. In these last days, He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things and through whom He made the universe. (Heb. 1:1-2 HCSB)

This Word- the Good News of forgiveness of sins through the person and work of Jesus Christ- is regularly rejected. This rejection is both a sin and a result of God’s judgment on sin. The first verse of Isaiah 53 demonstrates this spiritual fact and for this reason Paul refers back to this verse in explaining why the nation of Israel, who had been blessed so long to receive the Word of God, for the most part rejected the Good News of Jesus Christ:

However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?" (Rom. 10:16)

Though the verses quoted above primarily refer to the rejection of God’s Word by the nation of Israel, it is important to note that no one in their natural state will believe the Word of God, as it is written:

There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, there is no one who seeks God. All have turned away, together they have become useless; there is no one who does good, there is not even one. Their throat is an open grave; they deceive with their tongues. Vipers’ venom is under their lips. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and wretchedness are in their paths, and the path of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes. (Rom. 3:10-18, HCSB)

And Jesus declares,

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. (John 3:19 KJV)

This state of loving darkness- or sin- rather than the light, who is Christ (cf. John 1:4) and the subsequent rejection of the Word of God, is seen to be a universal condition.
And this is not a state from which people can free themselves, as Jesus said, “Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin” (John 8:34b HCSB), and, “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him” (John 6:44a HCSB). If you are reading this blog and you have not come to faith in Christ, then you must come to realize that you are a slave to your love for sin and that no one can free you except God alone. If you fail to comprehend this fact, then you will try to invent some way to be made right with God other than trusting Jesus and “there is no other name under heaven given to people by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12b HCSB)

But Some Will Believe
->I would like to give a final word to Christians who have been desperately trying to witness– to tell the Good News of who Jesus is and what He has done– and have been rejected by non-Christians to the point of lamenting with the Prophet,

Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

The following counsel is from pastor John MacArthur’s book Hard to Believe. In a chapter named “But Some Will Believe.” MacArthur writes:

If you looked at the world and judged God’s power by the responses of men, you would give up trying to share the Word of God. I have gone places and poured out my heart, and nothing happened. But that’s all right, because all that the Father has given to Christ are going to come home. That’s what Jesus said: “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me” (John 6:37).
I’m not responsible for who gets saved, and neither are you. I refuse that responsibility. Then who is responsible? “No man comes to Me,” Jesus said, “except the Father draw him.” God has that responsibility, not us. Therefore, I can look over the multitude and say, as Jesus said, “Most of you won’t believe.” But some will believe, brought to faith through reading the Bible, talking with a friend, or hearing a preacher on the street.

It is our duty then to proclaim the Gospel– the message of the power of God– as Isaiah did, regardless how our message is received. Out of loving obedience to our God, we must proclaim His Word at every opportunity. And God will be faithful to use our proclamation of the Word to draw His people to Himself. We know this by faith, even when the results of our proclaiming His Word are not immediately discernable.
Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?- The answer is, 'those whom the Father has given to the Son– those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation (cf. Rev. 5:9).' For this result, we trust in God and not in our own abilities and not in the results we currently see around us.

For His glory alone.

Visit From Friends

This past weekend, my good friend Nathan White and his wife Courtney (pictured on the right) visited Abby and me at our home in Auburn, Alabama.

This was a great time with friends- among other things, we went to see the new Chronicles of Narnia movie (a great review of this movie may be found on the blog of Christian musician Steve Camp), we discussed eschatology quite a bit (this conversation was prompted by comments on a recent blogpost by Tim Brown, who is an elder at a Reformed Baptist church congregation), and we worshipped at Grace Heritage Church, where Abby and I are blessed to be members.

Abby and I are very much thankful to God for the friendship of Nathan and Courtney White. I met Nathan "accidently" (that is, completely by God's providence) one night at Borders Cafe when he was visiting a Bible study group that met there and I was invited into the group by a friend of a friend who recognized me as I was sitting around studying for college. Nathan asked some very difficult questions and was challenging the views of other members of the group that turned out to be more based on tradition than on Scripture. Nathan then invited me to a weekly Bible study at his apartment. I began attending that Bible study and became close friends with both Nathan and Mark Jensen. Eventually, I began attending Grace Bible Church with Nathan and Mark. Mark and I became roommates for a year before I was married and Nathan and Mark were two of my groomsmen at my wedding.

One thing in particular that I enjoy about my friendship with Nathan is that time spent with him and his wife truly seems to be "redeemed". That is, a great deal of the conversation this past weekend was centered around the Person and Work of Jesus Christ or on understanding different sections of His Word to the glory of God. Nathan and Courtney have by their words and example truly challenged Abby and me in our study and application of the Scripture. If anyone reading this blog does not have friends like this, I encourage you to pray for God to send you friendships that can strengthen you in your faith and to seek out quality friendships for the upbuilding of His everlasting kingdom.

As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend. (Proverbs 27:17 NKJV)

Please keep Nathan and Courtney in your prayers as Nathan has the strong desire to preach and to pursue a biblical education at either Southern Baptist Theological Seminary or Master's Seminary.

The "Prevailing Seriousness" of a Soul-Winner

For the next couple of weeks, at least, I plan to follow the tradition established by Phil Johnson, curator of the online Spurgeon Archive, and devote Mondays to posting material from Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-92) "England's best-known preacher for most of the second half of the nineteenth century."

The following is a quote from Spurgeon's great work on evangelism, The Soul Winner, in a chapter called "Qualifications for Soul-Winning- Manward":

->I think also that, if we are to be soul-winners, there must be about us a seriousness of manner. Some brethren are serious by nature. There was a gentleman in a railway carriage, some time ago, who overheard a conversation between two of the passengers. One of them said, "Well, now, I think the Church of Rome has great power, and is likely to succeed with the people, because of the evident holiness of her ministers. There is, for instance, Cardinal ________, he is just like a skeleton; through his long fasting and prayers, he has reduced himself almost to skin and bone. Whenever I hear him speak, I feel at once the force of the holiness of the man. Now, look at Spurgeon, he eats and drinks like an ordinary mortal; I would not give a pin to hear him preach." His friend heard him very patiently, and then said quite quietly, "Did it ever strike you that the Cardinal's appearance was to be accounted for by the fact of his liver being out of order? I do not think it is grace that makes him as lean as he is, I believe it is his liver." So, there are some brethren who are naturally of a melancholy disposition, they are always very serious; but in them it is not a sign of grace, it is only an indication that their livers are out of order. They never laugh, they think it would be wicked to do so; but they go about the world increasing the misery of human kind, which is dreadful enough without the addition of their unnecessary portion. Such people evidently imagine that they were predestinated to pour buckets of cold water upon all human mirth and joy. So, dear brethren, if any of you are very serious, you must not always attribute it to grace, for it may be all owing to the state of your liver.
->The most of us, however, are far more inclined to that laughter which doeth good like medicine, and we shall need all our cheerfulness, if we are to comfort and lift up those who are cast down; but we shall never bring many souls to Christ, if we are full of that levity which characterises some men. People will say, "It is all a joke; just hear how those young fellows jest about religion, it is one thing to listen to them when they are in the pulpit, but it is quite another matter to listen to them when they are sitting round the supper table." I have heard of a man who was dying, and he sent for the minister to come and see him. When the minister came in, the dying man said to him, "Do you remember a young man walking with you one evening, some years ago, when you were going out to preach?" He said, he did not. "I recollect it very well," replied the other. "Do you not remember preaching at such-and-such a village, from such-and-such a text, and after the service a young man walked home with you?" "Oh, yes, I remember that very well!" "Well, I am the young man who walked home with you that night; I remember your sermon, I shall never forget it." "Thank God for that," said the preacher. "No," answered the dying man, "you will not thank God when you have heard all I have to say. I walked with you to the village, but you did not say much to me on the way there, for you were thinking over your sermon; you deeply impressed me while you were preaching, and I was led to think about giving my heart to Christ. I wanted to speak to you about my soul on the way home; but the moment you got out you cracked a joke, and all the way back you made such fun upon serious subjects, that I could not say anything about what I felt, and it thoroughly disgusted me with religion, and all who professed it, and now I am going to be damned, and my blood will lie at your door, as sure as you are alive:" and so he passed out of the world. One would not like anything of that sort to happen to himself; therefore, take heed, brethren, that you give no occasion for it. There must be a prevailing seriousness about our whole lives, otherwise we cannot hope to lead other men to Christ.

This "prevailing seriousness", is something which all too few Christians give much thought to. There are many examples that could be given in which it is obvious that too much "kidding around" tends to obscure matters that are crucial to peoples' eternal salvation. I have personally heard my more doctrinally sound brothers and sisters make biting jokes about "mega-churches" much more often than I have heard them pray for these congregations. Many times I have heard sarcastic nicknames given to particular "seeker-sensitive" congregations and I have thought, "If the theology of these congregations is really a corruption of the Gospel, then we should weep that so many people are being deceived, rather than make jokes that are likely to inflate our own pride." I was therefore very thankful to God when my good friend Nathan White had the opportunity to interact in a serious manner with Johnny Hunt, pastor of the mega-church First Baptist Woodstock, concerning doctrinal issues centered around the Gospel of Grace.

Another example of the danger of unbridled levity that many who frequent the "blogosphere" are aware of resulted in escalating the infamous "Blog War" around this past Thanksgiving. Many nasty comments were made at this time and the use of sarcastic humor only seemed to confuse the real issues at stake as well as the relationship of these issues to the Gospel. For this reason, I was again grateful to God to see Phil Johnson rethink his use of humor on his blog- not wanting to get rid of all reason for laughter, but being more careful to avoid any unnecessary offense. In the post "Six Month Reckoning", Mr. Johnson included the following section:

This is a weblog, not a pulpit or seminary class, so I have deliberately included some personal-journal-style entries, a high percentage of humor (or well-meant attempts at merriment), and occasional lighter-than-usual fare. But I have lately wondered whether so much farce and frivolity is wasted effort, or even counterproductive to what I really hope to accomplish with the blog. For one thing, American humor doesn't always translate well into other cultures. And I think Southern California humor sometimes isn't even funny in other North American climates. I'd have a lot less 'splainin' to do if I just throttled my humor reflex whenever possible. I like the mildly droll graphics. The trademark comic-book covers may have to go, though.

In conclusion, we all need to remember that there is "a time to weep and a time to laugh" (cf. Ecclesiates 3:4) and that our blessed Savior was also known as "a man of sorrows" (cf. Isaiah 53:3). Though we have much to be joyful about as Christians, the glory of God and the eternal destiny of those around us is no laughing matter.

-To the glory of God alone.

Narnia

With the new "Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" movie in theatres across the nation today, I had hoped to post on the theology of the creator of Narnia, C.S Lewis. Due to my exploration of the extent of the atonement on my own blog and my attempts at keeping up with a conversation concerning eschatology on Tim Brown's blog, I have not had the time to prepare material for a post on the rather complex topic of Lewis' theological views. I still hope to be able to post on this subject before Christmas, but until I have the opportunity to do so, I would like to highly recommend the blogpost of Steve Camp titled, The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe... a look at the theology of C.S. Lewis.

SDG

Hebrews 10:14

For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

Introduction
->Hebrews 10:14, beginning with the signal word "for" offers a summary of the passage that has come before it. After Hebrews 10:14, the author of this book gives additional proof for the veracity of the conclusion reached in this verse. Therefore, when viewed in context, Hebrews 10:14 is a key verse in understanding the doctrine proclaimed in this portion of Scripture -that is- the superiority of Christ's work as the ultimate High Priest in contrast to the pre-Christian high priests of national Israel.

The Situation BC
->Until the time of Christ, the priests of Israel offered sacrifices "year by year" to make atonement for sins. The same sacrifices were repeated again and again, and yet people were never cleansed from their sins by 'em, "otherwise, would they have not ceased to be offered?" But- as sound reason should dictate- "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." For what does the death of a bull have to do with a person's standing before God? If we have all broken God's commandments and are guilty before His holiness, as our own consciences and the Scriptures declare, then how can killing goats make us innocent in His sight? Surely these sacrifices that He commanded were meant to point our attention to something else- something much greater- infinitely greater- than animal sacrifices, something that actually accomplishes the purpose of saving people from their sins.

The Ultimate High Priest
->The Good News of the Christian faith is that Jesus is the ultimate High Priest offering the ultimate sacrifice- that of His own body- to bring salvation from sin. Notice how the verse under consideration proclaims this Good News, directly contrasting the work of Jesus with the former, ultimately ineffectual, sacrificial system. The priests used to offer many offerings, but Jesus offered "one offering." The sacrifices that the priests made could never secure a peoples' standing with God, but Jesus "has perfected" His people.

Some False Doctrines Refuted By This Verse
->Many current religious systems are proven to be unbiblical by the clear teaching of Hebrews 10:14. Consider the Roman Catholic idea that in the Mass the body of Christ is broken again and again, being "re-presented" for sacrifice. The teaching that by "one offering [Jesus] has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" annihilates this blasphemy. Or think of the teaching, present in Roman Catholicism and in many religious systems, that those who have been once sanctified can then lose their salvation. The finality of this verse- that, again, Jesus' work on the Cross "has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" utterly destroys this attack on Christian assurance, and gives us confidence in our hope found in Christ alone.

An Additional Consideration
->This verse also speaks to issue of who were the intended beneficiaries of Christ's work. For some people would imagine that when Jesus died on the Cross that He was hoping that every person ever to live would somehow be perfected by His work- that He was providing the potential for everyone to be saved. But this verse declares that there were very specific beneficiaries for whom the death of Jesus actually achieved pefection "for all time." These beneficiaries are named as the sanctified- a term meaning the "set apart ones."

Conclusion
->Jesus provided a particular sacrifice [His body on the Cross] providing a particular benefit [eternal perfection] to a particular people [those who have been set apart]. Any teaching that tries to add to this sacrifice, to take away from this benefit, or to name different beneficiaries is an unbiblical teaching that obscures the Good News of the work of Jesus Christ.

Glory to God alone