God the Son: An Eternally Distinct Divine Person

"And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed." (John 17:5 ESV) 

Jesus existed as a distinct divine person in the presence of God the Father prior to creation. His prayer defeats unitarian heresies.

The Active Righteousness of Christ

"I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do." (John 17:4 ESV)

In John 17:3, Jesus looks back at his active righteousness, as He lived "under the law" (Gal 4:4), perfectly keeping God's will.

Proper Administrators of the Ordinances

Should a believer who has not yet been baptized partake of the Lord's Supper? Should a church accept 
unbaptized believers into membership? Should a candidate for baptism be baptized by a friend or family member, rather than a church officer? When thinking through baptism, the Lord's Supper, and church membership, these and a myriad of other practical questions come to the minds of church leaders and church members. At a recent "9 Marks at 9" event in Orlando, FL (at 9PM on June 8, 2026), Jonathan Leeman, Greg Gilbert, Aaron Menikoff, and Ben Lacey presented "12 Propositions: Getting the Ordinances and Membership Right." Overall, these were helpful, well-thought-out, and to-the-point statements. For the most part, I believe that every part of each proposition is demonstrably biblical. However, I would like to slightly amend Proposition 11. This proposition states: "Baptism and the Supper should ordinarily be administered by an elder, not a parent or best friend." My suggestion is that the phrase "an elder" should be replaced by "a church officer." This phrasing would allow the ordinary administration of the ordinances to be led by both elders and deacons. Deacons (as well as elders) should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances for at least three reasons: administration of the ordinances by deacons is biblical, administration of the ordinances by deacons is principial, and administration of the ordinances by deacons is practical.

The first reason that deacons as well as elders should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances is that administration of the ordinances by deacons is biblical. Acts 8:26-40 records the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch by Philip. From Acts 6:1-6, we see that Philip is not an elder; rather, he is one of the seven original deacons. If the Holy Spirit could lead Philip to baptize the Ethiopian eunuch, and if the Holy Spirit saw fit to record this baptism by a deacon in Scripture, then it seems likely that deacons as well as elders should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances.

The second reason that deacons as well as elders should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances is that administration of the ordinances by deacons is principial. This is to say that the administration of the ordinances by deacons follows the principles about the ordinances that can be discerned from the New Testament. In explaining Proposition 11, the presenters from "9 Marks at 9" highlighted the fact that the ordinances are given to the church as a body, and not just to individual Christians. Greg Gilbert noted:

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are not personal acts... They are church acts. They are the primary means by which the church formally identifies itself and its members... [The person administering an ordinance ] is acting as a representative of the whole church. That’s why elders are usually the appropriate administrators.

These corporate principles are equally upheld if deacons as well as elders are understood as proper administrators of the ordinances.

The third reason that deacons as well as elders should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances is that administration of the ordinances by deacons is practical. Few churches have enough elders to handle all the steps involved in preparing and distributing the Lord's Supper. Deacons should feel appropriately empowered to step up and help with this ordinance. As preparing and distributing the Lord's Supper are practical matters, it may be even more fitting that deacons take charge of administering this ordinance rather than elders. There may likewise be instances (especially in small congregations) where elders are involved in leading worship and in preaching in such a way that would prevent them from being in the baptismal pool, and it may be practical for deacons to administer baptism in such situations as well.

Some may object to the idea that deacons as well as elders should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances. A possible point of objection may spring from the observation that elders are responsible for the teaching ministry of the congregation, and the ordinances are a form of teaching. This objection may lead to the conclusion that elders should regularly have close oversight regarding the administration of the ordinances. However, this objection does not negate the points made above, and under normal elder oversight, deacons may still be seen as proper administrators of the ordinances.

Deacons (as well as elders) should be understood as proper administrators of the ordinances because administration of the ordinances by deacons is biblical, administration of the ordinances by deacons is principial, and administration of the ordinances by deacons is practical. This matters to the smooth, orderly worship and practice of the church, under the lordship of Christ.

Eternal Life = Knowing God and Jesus Christ

"And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." (John 17:3 ESV)

"Know," though indicating mental apprehension of reality outside of oneself, indicates more than understanding facts; "know" indicates right relationship with the Creator.

"Or Tattoo Yourselves..."

 "I want to get a tattoo of..." 

Even if these words have not come out of your own mouth, you have likely heard them from a child, a spouse, a friend, or someone else close to you. At various times in my life, I myself have considered getting a tattoo. But how should Christians think about getting a tattoo? All Bible-believing Christians agree that there are specific decisions about what we do with our own bodies that are clearly contrary to Scripture (decisions such as engaging in drunkenness, or committing suicide) and specific decisions about what we do with our own bodies that are a matter of mere personal preference (decisions such as wearing a specific color or style of clothing, or eating specific cuisine). However, Bible-believing Christians differ as to whether getting a tattoo should normally be seen as entirely in the 'mere personal preference' category, or if there are reasons Christians should normally refrain from getting tattoos. Christians should refrain from getting tattoos for at least three reasons: to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance, to honor God as the definer of our individuality, and to honor God as the giver of our health.

The first reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance. Before birth, God fashioned each child's physical body in the womb (Psa 139:13; Job 10:8; 31:15; Isa 49:1). David confesses, "I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well" (Psa 139:14). As a graffiti artist spray-painting pictures or words on the Venus de Milo or Michaelangelo's David would be an affront to the sculptors of those works, so the tattoo artist placing permanent pictures or words into our flesh does not enhance but detracts from the work of our creator. 

The second reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the definer of our individuality. If confronted with the question, "Who has the right to define who you are as a person?" many people in American or European nations today would answer: "I do." As part of its worldview, Western civilization has increasingly embraced the concept of "expressive individualism," which Carl Trueman defines as:

the belief that each person must act based on expressing his or her core feelings and intuition, and in so doing they become “authentic,” or, to put it another way, they become really themselves.

The expression of feelings and intuitions, permanently etched into the skin, is one way that people strive for authentic self-identification, signaling personal values to whoever sees the tattoos. However, Christians should recognize that our individuality should not be a matter of self-chosen images or slogans tattooed on the body, but a matter living out our Christian calling in light of the specific spiritual gifts God has given us (Rom 12:3-8; 1 Cor 12:4-30) and the specific circumstances in which God has providentially placed us. A myriad of New Testament verses speak of Christian identity, telling us (to give just a few examples) how we are a "new creation" (2 Cor 5:17), "God's handiwork" (Eph 1:7), and "temples of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor 6:19-20). We do not have to create an identity for ourselves. And when Jesus teaches about how we are to express our identity to others, He does not say, "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you get a tattoo," but, "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (John 13:35). God is the definer of our individuality, and His Word gives us principles on how to best express our individuality.

The third reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the giver of our health. There are health risks associated with getting tattoos. The Mayo Clinic warns that tattoos may cause allergic reactions, reactions to MRIs, diseases spread through the blood, skin infections, and other skin problems. An article published by the National Institutes of Health indicates that "tattoo ink induces inflammation in the draining lymph node and alters the immune response to vaccination." There is some research indicating that tattoos may be linked to cancer. In light of the health risks associated with tattoos, both proven risks and potential risks, wisdom would indicate that we should not get a tattoo, thus unnecessarily risking detriment to the health that God has given us.

Some people believe that tattoos are just a matter of taste, and no more of a moral issue than eating different flavors of ice cream. However, there are no Bible verses that prohibit eating certain ice cream flavors, whereas Leviticus 19:28 says, "You shall not make any cuts on your body for the dead or tattoo yourselves: I am the LORD." Though this Old Testament verse is not legally binding on Christians, it is still Scripture, and as "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim 3:16-17), Leviticus 19:28 should inform Christian sensibilities. Though tattoos today are not associated with a specific pagan religion, as they were during Old Testament times, they are associated with an expressive individualism that may be similar to pagan religions in terms of reorienting identity and allegiance around contra-biblical values. At the very least, the fact that the only reference to tattoos in Scripture is a negative statement should give Christians pause when considering whether to get a tattoo.

There are Christians who argue that they are getting a tattoo not just as an expression of self-chosen identity, but for the glory of God. They may plan to get a tattoo of a Bible verse or phrase from a hymn, etc. However, God does not only tell us to glorify Him to others; He also tells us how to go about glorifying Him to others. In 1 Timothy 2:9-10, Paul writes:

likewise [I teach] also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

1 Peter 3:3-4 says,

Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.

The way to glorify God is not through external adornments: through elaborate clothing, hairstyle, jewelry, nor (by application of the principle here) through tattoos. Rather, we should glorify God through the way He has instructed us: inner beauty expressed outwardly in good works, which benefit others.

Neither of these arguments–that tattoos are just a matter of taste or that tattoos can be used with the motive of glorifying God–are sufficient to prove that Christians should get tattoos, given the biblical prohibition against tattoos and the biblical instructions on how glorifying God is not a matter of external appearance.

Christians should refrain from getting tattoos to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance, to honor God as the definer of our individuality, and to honor God as the giver of our health. This matters to the church as we "consider how to stir up one another to love and good works" (Heb 10:24) and as we encourage one another to keep ourselves "unstained from the world" (Jas 1:27).

Authority Given by the Father to the Son?

"since you have given him authority over all flesh to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. (John 17:2 ESV) 

According to divine nature, Father and Son are equal in authority.

According to redemptive plan, the Father has given the Son authority.

The Hours of Prayer Before the Hour of Suffering

When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven and said,

“Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, (John 17:1 ESV) 

Jesus taught us to pray, "Our Father in Heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven." (Matt 6:9b-10 NIV 1984)

Jesus exemplifies this teaching through His own prayer. "The hour" is the time of His passion.

 

Two ideas I want to keep in mind all this year to help drive my Christian life and evangelism:

- Jesus is a living person (not just an idea), and I should daily grow in my relationship with Him.

- Hell is real. 

A Lament for the Greatest Rock Band

Watching Peter Jackson's documentary The Beatles: Get Back (released in November 2021) was an  amazing experience for a Beatles fan. Getting to be a fly-on-the-wall as these great artists create, rehearse, and record an album of songs was a dream come true. The documentary revealed the ongoing and growing tensions between band members, how they were drifting apart due to differing interests, and how the breakup of the Beatles was likely inevitable (and not really Yoko Ono's fault).

By the time the videos and audio that became Get Back were recorded, the Beatles had been playing their instruments and performing together for so long that they were masters at playing and songwriting. Watching Get Back, it is incredible to listen as songs quickly go from fuzzy ideas to the fully-formed hits that fans still enjoy today.

Get Back also highlights how John and Paul's rebellious, counter-cultural, and iconoclastic tendencies made it virtually impossible for them to write songs that could communicate political or spiritual commitments (or, seemingly, to stay focused on those commitments for long). This limitation is especially apparent as Paul composes "Get Back" and as John works at "Child of Nature."

The refrain from "Get Back" ("get back to where you once belonged") is indicative of Paul's original idea for the song: to be a satirical take, protesting the anti-immigrant rhetoric of some British politicians at the time. The most complete original verse is the following:

Meanwhile back at home too many Pakistanis 

Living in a council flat 

Candidate Macmillan, tell us what your plan is 

Won’t you tell us where you’re at

By the time the final song was written, the political aspect was entirely dropped, and Paul seems to have chosen lyrics almost entirely on the basis of rhythm and rhyme.

A version of "Child of Nature" was recorded when the Beatles were working on the White Album, but it did not appear on that record. As seen in Get Back, John was still working on the song when the Beatles were recording Let It Be. Eventually, John used the music from "Child of Nature" for the song "Jealous Guy," which he released on his solo album, Imagine. Though "Jealous Guy" is more emotionally complex than "A Hard Day's Night" or some other Beatles songs, it does still center around romantic love, losing the nature-centered spiritual theme of the original lyrics.

Beatles' lyrics (Lennon/McCartney lyrics in particular) are cool and catchy, and they certainly speak to Beatles fans on some level. Beatles' lyrics range from nonsensical (as with the final version of "Get Back" or John's "Dig a Pony," which is also on Let It Be) to romantic (as with "In My Life") to pensive (as with "Norwegian Wood"). Beatles' lyrics rarely attempt any hint of political or spiritual themes. What if this amazingly skilled, spectacularly popular band had connected listeners to broader societal issues? What if Lennon and McCartney had made it their goal to not only make hearers feel cool, but to lead them to think deeply? As it is, Beatles' lyrics at their best are known for highlighting introspection and intense feelings. As such, they are part of the fabric of societal dissolution in the postmodern age. 

Charles Spurgeon on the Gospel: Substitutionary Atonement

Charles Spurgeon wrote in his Autobiography: 

I have always considered, with Luther and Calvin, that the sum and substance of the gospel lies in that word Substitution–Christ standing in the stead of man. If I understand the gospel, it is this: I deserve to be lost forever; the only reason I should not be damned is this, that Christ was punished in my stead, and there is no need to execute a sentence twice for sin.