A Condensation of Romans Chapters 1-3 in Only 3 Verses

 

Stott (The Message of Ephesians)

Sometimes the Scriptures have a way of abbreviating things in one place that are spoken of at greater length elsewhere in its pages. For example, John R.W. Stott describes Ephesians 2:1-3 this way:

“It is a condensation into three verses of the first three chapters of Romans, in which he [Paul] argues his case for the sin and guilt first of pagans, then of Jews, and so of all mankind” (The Message of Ephesians, p.71).

What a great way to put it! So if you want to boil down (or condense) the essential message of Romans chapters 1-3, you could do a lot worse than looking to these three verses in Ephesians:

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. (Ephesians 2:1-3 ESV)

Outside of Jesus Christ we are all dead in sins and trespasses; enslaved to sin, and helplessly under the sway of the world, the flesh, and the devil. Outside of Christ we are all by our very natures the objects of God’s just wrath.  Romans 1-3 goes to great lengths to teach us these things. Ephesians 2:1-3 teaches us the same things, just in far fewer words.

Thankfully Ephesians chapter 2 does not stop there, but goes on to speak of God’s mercy, love, grace, and kindness toward sinners in the gospel of His Son, Jesus Christ. In Ephesians 2:4-10 Paul writes,

But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:4-10 ESV)

You could say that if Ephesians 2:1-3 is a condensation of Romans chapters 1-3, then Ephesians 2:4-10 is similarly a condensation of Romans chapters 4-16 (the rest of the book of Romans), where Paul goes into great detail about the good news of the gospel of Christ and its implications for our lives.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Mighty Adversative

Stott (The Message of Ephesians)

“A mighty adversative” – that is John R.W. Stott’s description of the first two words of Ephesians 2:4: “But God . . . .”

Stott writes,

“Verse 4 begins with a mighty adversative: But God . . . These two monosyllables set against the desperate condition of fallen mankind the gracious initiative and sovereign action of God. We were the objects of his wrath, but God, out of the great love with which he loved us had mercy upon us. We were dead, and dead men do not rise, but God has raised us with Christ. We were slaves, in a situation of dishonour and powerlessness, but God has raised us with Christ and set us at his own right hand, in a position of honour and power. Thus God has taken action to reverse our condition in sin.” (The Message of Ephesians, p.79-80)

No wonder some have said that the words “But God . . .” are the two most important words in Scripture!

Posted in Books & Other Resources, Ephesians, Grace, John Stott, Regeneration | Leave a comment

The “Grotesque Anomaly” of the Un-Churched Christian

Stott (The Living Church)

In the opening chapter of his book, The Living Church, the late John R.W. Stott has some strong words for those who call themselves believers in Christ all the while having nothing to do with the local church (which is the body of Christ). He calls the un-churched Christian a “grotesque anomaly” (p.19).

It is an anomaly; that is, it is abnormal. It is simply not the way that it is supposed to be. He wastes no time informing us as to why such a person is anomalous. He simply states,

The New Testament knows nothing of such a person. (p.19)

That just might be the best one-sentence argument against church-less Christianity that you will ever read. You will look in vain to find anywhere in the Scriptures where a believer in Christ all by his or her lonesome (or even a family), disconnected from a local body of believers, is considered to be the norm, or even that such a thing is acceptable. In fact, everywhere in Scripture the exact opposite is stated, implied, or assumed.

In the book of Hebrews we are told in no uncertain terms that we are intended to meet together for public worship on a regular basis:

Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:23-25 ESV)

You will notice that everything about this passage is first-person plural (i.e. we, not I; us, not me). There is nothing privatized about anything here. We are to hold fast to “the confession of our hope” (v.23) together. We are to “consider how to stir up one another to love and good works” (v.24). And we are not to neglect to “meet together,” but are rather to encourage one another (v.25).

Now just because something is an anomaly (or even a “grotesque” one, to use Stott’s words), does not mean that it is not all-too-common. In fact, the passage cited above clearly tells us that neglecting to meet together is (unfortunately) “the habit of some” (v.25). In our day it actually seems to be the habit of many. To be sure, there are numerous reasons for such a neglect of the public gathering of the church. But, to be blunt, none of those reasons does away with the simple fact that believers in Christ are meant to meet together, worship together, serve together, and grow together.

Much more could certainly be said. Perhaps in future posts on this blog we will take some time to explore some of the various reasons that many give for not belonging to a local church.  But for the time being, if you somehow find yourself falling into the unfortunate and unflattering category of the “grotesque anomaly,” there is no better time than the present to resolve that you (and your family) will finally stop “neglecting to meet together” with the body of Christ.

Look for a local church where the Bible is clearly believed and taught, where the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper are rightly administered, and where the elders of the church will faithfully exercise discipline for your good. And if you need any help finding such a church, get together with some other believers whom you know and ask them for help. You may find yourself in a church that is far from perfect and even quite messy, but that is much better than being grotesque, isn’t it?

Posted in Books & Other Resources, John Stott, The Christian Life, The Church, The Marks of the Church | 4 Comments

Those Blasted Presbyterians: Reflections on Independence Day

Andy Schreiber:

A great read!

Originally posted on The Chief End of Man:

“We are subject to the men who rule over us, but subject only in the Lord. If they command anything against him, let us not pay the least regard to it.” Book Four, Calvin’s Institutes

Presbyterian Revolution

“I fix all the blame of these extraordinary proceedings upon the Presbyterians.”  So one colonist loyal to King George wrote to friends in England.

Around the same time, Horace Walpole spoke from the English House of Commons to report on these “extraordinary proceedings” in the colonies of the new world.  “There is no good crying about the matter,” he said.  “Cousin America has run off with the Presbyterian parson, and that is the end of it.”

The parson of which he spoke, was  John Witherspoon—a Presbyterian minister, as well as a descendant of John Knox.  At the time, Witherspoon was president of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton).  He was also the only clergyman…

View original 868 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Teaching Election Properly (The Canons of Dort)

teacher

It is often said that there is a right way to do things, and a wrong way to do things. And that is true even when it comes to how we are to teach and preach the doctrine of election.

The 1st point of doctrine in the Canons of Dort is “Divine Election and Reprobation.” It then further breaks out the various aspects of this point of doctrine into no less than 18 “articles” (or sub-points).  Article 14 is about the proper way to teach the doctrine of election.  It says,

As the doctrine of divine election by the most wise counsel of God was declared by the prophets, by Christ Himself, and by the Apostles, and is clearly revealed in the Scriptures both of the Old and the New Testament, so it is still to be published in due time and place in the Church of God, for which it was peculiarly designed, provided it be done with reverence, in the spirit of discretion and piety, for the glory of God’s most holy Name, and for the enlivening and comforting His people, without vainly attempting to investigate the secret ways of the Most High.

Notice that the first thing this article establishes is that the doctrine of election is thoroughly biblical, and so because of that it is most certainly to be taught. So the first thing about teaching the doctrine of election properly is, well, to teach it. It is to be taught. If we fail to teach it, we are failing to teach the whole counsel of God. If we fail to teach it we are failing to teach what was “declared by the prophets, by Christ Himself, and by the Apostles.”

The second thing we see in this article is that there is a proper time and place for teaching the doctrine of election.  It is still to be taught in the church of God. It is clearly taught in Scripture, and is clearly taught throughout Scripture, but it is not found in every text. If it is in the text, preach it, and preach it plainly. But don’t look for it under every bush, so to speak.

The third thing that this article tells us about the right way to teach the doctrine of election is that it is to be done “with reverence, in the spirit of discretion and piety.”  Election is an act of the grace and mercy of the most holy God in saving sinners, and so it should be preached in such a way that it reflects that truth properly. It should not be used as a means to show how wise or learned we are (or how foolish or unlearned those who disagree with us on this issue are).

It should also be taught “for the glory of God’s most holy Name.” At times the doctrine of election can be taught in such a way that the glory actually seems to go to us for having believed it properly or for teaching it unashamedly. (There is something highly ironic about someone being proud of a right understanding of God’s sovereign grace, isn’t there?) If we are guilty of that, we are not teaching the doctrine of election properly, not by a long shot. The doctrine of election, whereby God has chosen us in Christ “before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4) is to be taught “to the praise of His glorious grace” (Ephesians 1:6). This doctrine should lead to doxology!

The doctrine of election is also to be taught “for enlivening and comforting” God’s people.  In other words, for believers in Christ election and predestination have to do with comfort and assurance. If we are teaching election in such a way that we are in effect beating people over the head with it, we are doing something wrong. Genuine believers may find the doctrines of God’s sovereign grace confusing at times, but they should never find the manner of our preaching and teaching of it to be deflating or disturbing. It should be clear that we are seeking their growth in holiness and godly comfort in teaching it. If our teaching of election leads to laziness or discouragement, there is  something amiss.

The last thing that article 14 tells us is that we are to teach the doctrine of election, but not in such a way that we go beyond what the Scriptures actually tell us about it. We should not use it as a springboard to vainly attempt “to investigate the secret ways of the Most High.” This is probably most often done with regard to the implications of the doctrine. For example, we might wrongly suppose that if God chooses whom He is going to save, then we do not then need to go and “make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). If our understanding of election leads us to disregard or downplay the clear commands of God to His church, we are doing something wrong.

So while we must certainly be careful that we are understanding and stating the doctrine of election accurately as it is taught in Scripture, we must also be careful to teach it properly, in the correct context, and with the right purposes in mind as well. To simply teach it in the first place is certainly a good start (and is doing more than most), but that is not nearly enough.

Posted in 5 Points of Calvinism, Canons of Dort, Election, Notable Quotes, Predestination, Reformed, Three Forms of Unity | Leave a comment

Calvin on Why We Should not Avoid the Subject of Election

Calvin

What are we to make of the doctrine of election? Despite the fact that it is clearly taught in Scripture (and repeatedly so, I might add!), many sincere, well-meaning, Bible-believing people in the church today seem to be of the opinion that it is a doctrine (oops, that word is also on the ever-expanding list of things to be avoided in the preaching and teaching of the church) better left unsaid.  After all, many people find it to be confusing or even downright offensive.

If it is so sure to confuse some people or offend others, shouldn’t we just avoid the subject altogether? No doubt that is the approach taken by many today.  In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin gives us some helpful advice on the subject:

For Scripture is the school of the Holy Spirit, in which, as nothing is omitted that is both necessary and useful to know, so nothing is taught but what is expedient to know. Therefore we must guard against depriving believers of anything disclosed about predestination in Scripture, lest we seem either wickedly to defraud them of the blessing of their God or to accuse and scoff at the Holy Spirit for having published what it is in any way profitable to suppress. (Vol.2, p.924)

Only a couple pages later, he writes:

Whoever, then, heaps odium upon the doctrine of predestination openly reproaches God, as if he had unadvisedly let slip something hurtful to the church. (Vol.2, p.926)

In other words,to avoid the subject is to cast aspersions upon God Himself for including the subject (and, frankly, for doing it so often!) in His Word. To ignore or downplay the doctrine of election when it is prevalent in the text is to accuse God Himself of either including something in His Word that is unnecessary (as if He intentionally gave us something we do not need), or (worse yet) even downright harmful to His people.

So let us not deprive God’s people of something that He gave us for our good; and (even more importantly), let us not insult our heavenly Father as if He would give His children a stone when they ask for bread (Matthew 7:9).

 

Posted in Books & Other Resources, Election, Ephesians, Grace, John Calvin, Notable Quotes, Predestination, Systematic Theology | Leave a comment

The Glorious Certainty of the Gospel

Machen

What is the relationship between the grace of God in the gospel and assurance? Why is the doctrine of justification by faith alone so important? J. Gresham Machen writes,

Such is the glorious certainty of the gospel. The salvation of the Christian is certain because it depends altogether upon God; if it depended in slightest measure upon us, the certainty of it would be gone. Hence appears the vital importance of the great Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone;  that doctrine is at the very centre of Christianity. It means that acceptance with God is not something that we earn; it is not something that is subject to the wretched uncertainties of human endeavor; but it is a free gift of God. (What Is Faith?, p.200-201)

That is just one more reason why the doctrine of justification by faith alone is so important. It is not just a matter for ivory tower theologians or fodder for theological debate – far from it!  It makes all the difference in the world to each and every believer in Christ. Why? Because it is the only real way to true certainty and assurance in the Christian life.

Justification by faith alone presents us with a choice between the “glorious certainty of the gospel” (i.e. knowing without a shadow of a doubt that you have been fully forgiven and accepted by a holy God) or the wretched uncertainties of human endeavor.”

If our salvation depends upon our works in even the slightest degree, all certainty and assurance are cast aside. But if salvation is a free gift of God (which is ultimately what justification by faith alone entails), then & only then can the believer truly have the peace and assurance that comes with believing the gospel of Christ.

Posted in Assurance of Salvation, Books & Other Resources, Grace, J. Gresham Machen, Justification, Notable Quotes, The Gospel | Leave a comment