The Riddleblog

"The Fruit of This Assurance" -- Article Thirteen, First Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 13: The Fruit of This Assurance

In their awareness and assurance of this election God’s children daily find greater cause to humble themselves before God, to adore the fathomless depth of his mercies, to cleanse themselves, and to give fervent love in return to him who first so greatly loved them. This is far from saying that this teaching concerning election, and reflection upon it, make God’s children lax in observing his commandments or carnally self-assured. By God’s just judgment this does usually happen to those who casually take for granted the grace of election or engage in idle and brazen talk about it but are unwilling to walk in the ways of the chosen.

_________________________________________

Contrary to a theology of fear and guilt taught by so many of our contemporaries, the assurance of our salvation is actually the only proper basis for good works. Critics of Reformed theology often charge that if you tell Christians that they can assuredly know that they will go to heaven when they die, then there is no longer any incentive for doing good works. This has long been the case with the Roman church which speaks of such assurance as a false presumption to be avoided (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Sixth Session on Justification, XII, XIII).

One response to this misguided argument is to ask a simple rhetorical question. “Does a dog bark to become a dog, or does a dog bark because it is a dog?” According to Ephesians 2:10, those who have been given faith in Christ as a gift by God do those good works which God has ordained of his people. Non-Christians cannot perform any good work that is acceptable to God (Hebrews 11:6), because whatever work they perform is completely tainted and stained by the guilt of sin (Romans 3:12).

To read the rest, follow the link below

The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerJune 5, 2023Assurance and ElectionComment

June Musings (6/3/2023)

News and Riddleblog Updates:

I will soon wrap up season two of the Blessed Hope Podcast in which we worked our way though Paul’s two Thessalonian letters. Watch for an announcement about season three and some possible episodes on various topics before the new season three episodes (on Paul’s Corinthian letters) begin.

Recently Read:

For those interested in Victorian history and the background to World War One, you will enjoy this fascinating book from Miranda Carter on three remarkable first cousins and grandchildren of Queen Victoria. George Nicholas and Wilhelm: Three Cousins and the Road to World War I. How did three first cousins (King George, Czar Nicolas, and Kaiser Wilhelm) bring the three great European nations they led from apparent peace and prosperity into the Great War with its unprecedented death and mass destruction. Carter describes the way in which both the unique personalities of each, along with events beyond their control (especially in the Baltic), brought about this horrific cataclysm.

Why did Wilhelm choose to wage war on England and Russia and his royal first cousins who led them. Carter’s narrative asserts that while Victoria was alive, she was able to keep all three vastly different personalities in check (along with a host of other Europeans royals related to her in one way or another). But Victoria could not live forever. Kaiser Wilhelm was the aggressor in the Great War. Carter describes how Wilhelm’s anglophilia gave way over time to an aggressive German nationalism. Wilhelm coveted a navy as powerful Britain’s, he wanted a greater share of the colonial pie, and he came to resent his cousin George. Nicolas was a self-isolated milquetoast of a man, who did little as his nation careened toward a horrible war and a bloody Bolshevik Revolution in which he and his family would perish. King George presided over a colonial empire at the end of an industrial revolution which left England with serious social ills and growing resentment of the crown.

As one reviewer put it, this is “history at its most entertaining, full of scathing and often witty descriptions of the follies and tragedies of royalty, and the way in which the three royal cousins’ lives, despite the deep social divide between the royals and ordinary people, became intertwined with the changes and the dangers confronting the major European powers in the early years of the 20th century. It is a splendid picture, splendidly narrated.” I agree.

To read the rest of June Musings, follow the link below

“Eschatology and the Reformers” -- A Discussion on the Renewalcast

I was a recent guest on the Renewalcast. Here’s the link: Renewalcast -- “Eschatology and the Reformers"

Amillennialism, eschatology, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerJune 1, 2023Eschatology of the ReformersComment

B. B. Warfield on the Value of the Westminster Shorter Catechism

B. B. Warfield knew full well that Christianity isn’t caught, it must be learned. And even though it must be learned, as he puts it, it is “not very easy to learn. And very certainly it will not teach itself.” Since Christianity (Bible knowledge and basic doctrine) is the sort of knowledge people ought to possess, this is why the authors of the Westminster Shorter Catechism “were less careful to make it easy than to make it good.”

Here are a couple of gems from this short essay on the value of the Shorter Catechism.

An anecdote told of Dwight L. Moody will illustrate the value to the religious life of having been taught these forms of truth. He was staying with a Scottish friend in London, but suppose we let the narrator tell the story. “A young man had come to speak to Mr. Moody about religious things. He was in difficulty about a number of points, among the rest about prayer and natural laws. ‘What is prayer?,’ he said, ‘I can’t tell what you mean by it!’ They were in the hall of a large London house. Before Moody could answer, a child’s voice was heard singing on the stairs. It was that of a little girl of nine or ten, the daughter of their host. She came running down the stairs and paused as she saw strangers sitting in the hall. ‘Come here, Jenny,’ her father said, ‘and tell this gentleman “What is prayer.” ‘ Jenny did not know what had been going on, but she quite understood that she was now called upon to say her Catechism. So she drew herself up, and folded her hands in front of her, like a good little girl who was going to ‘say her questions,’ and she said in her clear childish voice: “Prayer is an offering up of our desires unto God for things agreeable to his will, in the name of Christ, with confession of our sins and thankful acknowledgment of his mercies.” ‘Ah! That’s the Catechism!’ Moody said, ‘thank God for that Catechism.’ ”

To read the rest, follow the link below

B. B. WarfieldKim RiddlebargerMay 30, 2023Westminster Shorter CatechismComment

“Safely Through Water” (1 Peter 3:18-22) – Words from Peter to the Pilgrim Church (Part Eight)

The Noisy Conscience

We all have consciences which accuse us because we have all sinned against God and disobeyed his commandments. So, whenever we suffer or are persecuted by those with power over us, there is a little voice within which says to us, “why, of course, you are suffering.” “God is punishing you because you did this, or because you did that.” To those first century Christians of the Diaspora undergoing difficult trials, and no doubt, wondering whether or not God abandoned them because of something they had done to displease him, Peter offers a wonderful word of encouragement–a word which can silence the accusatory voice, but also reminds us of the promise God has made to us. No matter what happens in this life, everything will turn out for our good and unto God’s glory, just as he has promised. God has given to us a suffering Savior, who has died for our sins. And God has given us a tangible promise (the waters of baptism) that he will save his people–his elect exiles–on the day of judgment.

The Context for Peter’s Discussion of Noah and Being “Saved” by Water

Part eight of our series (vv. 18-22 of 1 Peter 3) is the conclusion to the preceding section (vv. 2:11-3:17). The closing verses of chapter 3 are intended to remind those sufferers whom Peter has been addressing of the meaning of Christ’s suffering on behalf of his fellow sufferers. Jesus’ perfect humility and suffering as the God-man took him to the cross. His death saves us from our sins–even those sins we committed when we have responded to those who curse and revile us with curses and reviling of our own. 1 Peter 3:18-22 also speaks a profound word of pardon to all of us who have cursed and reviled our enemies, and who have sought to take vengeance into our own hands, and who have not properly submitted to those authorities mentioned by the apostle. In effect, Peter follows his series of imperatives (commands, i.e., do this”)–with a wonderful indicative declaration (a statement of fact). Jesus’ death covers our sins when we fail to comply with those imperatives which Peter has set forth. And hearing the good news in the indicatives, in turn, creates in us a desire to obey the imperatives.

In the previous section (vv. 8-17), Peter instructs Christians to not curse and revile those who curse and revile us, but rather to respond to them with a word of blessing. Christians are to do this because God hears the prayers of his oppressed people and promises that he will deliver us from those who have wronged his people. Peter understands how difficult responding like this is to do, which is why he offers a word of encouragement from Psalm 34 (when David expresses a change in heart), before reminding us that Jesus’ death removes the guilt of our sin and brings us to God. In part eight of our look at Peter’s epistle we are covering (vv. 18-22), where he lays out the benefits we receive from Jesus’ humility and suffering. Jesus dies for us and in our place so that our sins are forgiven. In imitating the humility of Jesus, Peter reminds us, Christians point their oppressors back to the sinless Savior in whom alone men and women may be saved, and so that Christians may receive better treatment from the hands of their oppressors.

To read the rest, follow the link below

I PeterKim RiddlebargerMay 29, 2023Saved by Water, 1 Peter 3:18-22Comment

More Musings (5/27/2023)

News and Riddleblog Updates:

Now that the WSC spring semester is over, and I have a bit more time, you will notice a number of updates at the Riddleblog. The Biblical and Theological Studies tab has been re-worked to make it easier to find past entries.
Some of you have suggested that I add the Logos extension which allows biblical citations to appear in a pop-up window. Great idea! But the version of Squarespace which I am currently using does not support that extension. Drat!
I will soon be wrapping up season two of the Blessed Hope Podcast, a study of Paul’s two Thessalonian letters. I’ll devote a season two follow-up episode to explain where we will be going after season two concludes.
One of the benefits of retirement is that the missus and I will be able to do some traveling. So, there may be a week here or there when I drop off the map.

Hummel’s New Book on the Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism:

As of this writing, I am far along in Daniel Hummel’s fascinating and important new book, The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism. If you have a dispensational background, or if you are interested in the history of evangelicalism, this is a must read. I’ll have a lot more to say about it down the road (some positives and a few cautions). But here’s a brief summary. "Left Behind"

To read the rest, follow the link below

Paul's "Man of Sin" (Part Two), the Next Installment of the Blessed Hope Podcast Is Ready! Join Us As We Discuss the Antichrist and 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12

Episode Synopsis:

Soon after Paul sent his first letter to the Thessalonian Christians, the apostle received word that someone in the congregation was teaching that the day of the Lord had already come. Composing his second Thessalonian letter to correct this error, Paul makes it abundantly clear that anyone spreading such a rumor is flat-out wrong. Paul declares that two things must occur before the day of the Lord can come. First there will be a great apostasy, and only then comes the revelation of a figure Paul identifies as “the man of sin”– an individual often associated with the Antichrist.

But Paul also tells the Thessalonians that a mysterious “restrainer” is currently preventing the man of sin from being revealed. He informs the Thessalonians that at some point this restrainer (a “who” or a “what”) will cease to restrain the man of sin, who will then appear (in connection with the apostasy) only to be destroyed by Jesus Christ when the day of the Lord does come to pass.

In part two of our study of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, we will discuss this mysterious restrainer in some detail, identify to whom or what Paul is referring, and then wrestle with the question of the timing when all of this will come to pass. Is Paul referring to the events of AD 70 and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple–which are still future to him, but long in the past for us? Or is he predicting an end-times Antichrist, who will appear at the end of the age immediately before Jesus returns?

To see the show notes and listen to the podcast, follow the link below

Blessed Hope PodcastKim RiddlebargerMay 26, 2023The Man of Sin Part Two, 2 ThessaloniansComment

The Basics -- Election

As Americans raised in a democratic republic, we cling tenaciously to the principle “one person, one vote.” It is very easy (and almost natural) to carry over this principle to our understanding of redemption from the guilt of our sin. We mistakenly assume that God should give everyone a chance to go to heaven, and if people refuse God’s gracious offer, then people, in effect, send themselves to hell by refusing God’s gracious gift. This makes perfect sense on democratic presuppositions because in the civil kingdom (the political sphere) each individual is assumed to be entitled and empowered to determine their own course in life. And if this is true in American political life, then it should be true when it comes to the salvation of sinners. Right? Well, no. The Bible does not allow us to understand humanity’s redemption from sin in such rosy terms.

Because of Adam’s sin, we are all sinners by nature and by choice. As his biological children and heirs, we are born guilty for Adam’s act of rebellion in Eden. The Bible speaks of this as being dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1). This simply means that we are unwilling and unable to do anything to save ourselves. Because we are dead in sin, we cannot even take those first steps toward God that some Christians mistakenly think we should be able to make (cf. John 6:44, which tells us that on one can come to Jesus unless drawn by the Father). It is common to hear Christians describe God’s grace in generic, medicinal terms, or as a rescue from peril such as, “grace is like a medicine which, if we are willing to take it, enables us to come to Christ,” or that “grace is a life-ring which we must grab and cling to, or we will drown in our sins.”

To read the rest, follow the link below

The BasicsKim RiddlebargerMay 24, 2023The Doctrine of Election Comments

"The Assurance of Election" -- Article Twelve, The First Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 12: The Assurance of Election

Assurance of this their eternal and unchangeable election to salvation is given to the chosen in due time, though by various stages and in differing measure. Such assurance comes not by inquisitive searching into the hidden and deep things of God, but by noticing within themselves, with spiritual joy and holy delight, the unmistakable fruits of election pointed out in God’s Word—such as a true faith in Christ, a childlike fear of God, a godly sorrow for their sins, a hunger and thirst for righteousness, and so on.

______________________________________

We now come to one of the most troubling aspects of the biblical teaching about election, which is the question, “how do we know that we are numbered among the elect?” Assurance of salvation is one point where the rubber hits the road for many struggling saints. The authors of the Canons are aware of this perennial issue and are therefore careful to point out that “assurance . . . is given to the chosen in due time, though by various stages and in differing measure.” Assurance of salvation is a struggle for some, and not at all an issue for others. Furthermore, not all Christians have the assurance of their salvation at all times. The blessing of such assurance is a difficult struggle for many.

The primary reason for a lack of assurance is human sinfulness. Although we were chosen before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4), and we are called to faith in Jesus Christ at a particular point in time (Ephesians 1:13), are then justified and have the hope of heaven and glorification (Romans 8:28-39), the sinful nature is not eradicated until death (Romans 7:14-25; Galatians 5:17). In fact, the sinful nature (the flesh) puts up a fierce struggle until we take our last breath, and finally enter into the presence of God. When we are disobedient to God’s commands, or when we are indifferent to the things of the Lord, we may indeed feel God’s displeasure with us, and for a time, this may raise the question whether or not we are among the elect.

To read the rest, follow the link below

The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerMay 22, 2023Assurance and electionComment

“I Delight to Do Your Will, O My God” -- An Exposition of Psalm 40

Background

One of the best-known Psalms among our contemporaries is Psalm 40. No doubt, this is because for many years the Irish rock band U2 closed out their concerts with a very moving rendition of it, in which huge audiences sang along with the band. As written, Psalm 40 reflects the author’s (David) thanksgiving for deliverance from urgent danger. In light of this sense of immediate need for deliverance of which David is speaking, John Calvin–who was very reticent to speak about himself–describes his conversion as being pulled from the mire of his addiction to the papacy, a direct reference to verse 2 of this particular Psalm. Calvin goes on to say, “God by a sudden conversion subdued and brought my mind to a teachable frame, which was more hardened in such matters than might have been expected from one at my early period of life.”[1] In light of this Psalm’s historic importance, and current familiarity, an exposition of Psalm 40 would be beneficial.

The Book of Psalms was the hymnal of ancient Israel. The Psalter is also one of the most beloved portions of God’s word, provides Christ’s church with much of its song, and also serves as the foundation for the devotional life of God’s people. The more we know about the Book of Psalms, the greater our desire to read, reflect upon, and sing them as God’s people have done throughout the ages.

The Five Books of the Psalter

The Psalter is composed of 150 songs which reflect the entire range of human emotion, from despair to jubilation. Although the Psalter was written by different authors over the course of much of Israel’s history, most Psalms are closely tied to the life and times of David (Israel’s most prominent king). Many of the Psalms reflect Israel’s worship of YHWH during this turbulent period in the nation’s history. There are a number of different types and genres of Psalms. There are Psalms of praise, Psalms of lament (67 of them), there are imprecatory Psalms (which invoke God’s judgment on his enemies), there are messianic Psalms (which prefigure the coming of Jesus Christ), there are “enthronement” Psalms (which speak of God as king and ruler of all), there are wisdom Psalms (which reveal to us wisdom from God), and there are Psalms of trust, (which express confidence in God’s power, and in God’s faithfulness in keeping his covenant promises).[2] And then, there is the famous “shepherd Psalm,” the twenty-third Psalm.

There are also a number of names attached to the 150 Psalms (i.e., David, Solomon, Moses, Asaph, the Sons of Korah). 73 of the Psalms are ascribed to David (king of Israel). 12 Psalms are ascribed to Asaph (who was one of David’s three temple musicians, along with Heman and Jeduthun). 11 Psalms are ascribed to the Sons of Korah (who were a guild of temple singers), 3 are ascribed to Jeduthun (a Levite), 2 are connected to Solomon, as well as one each to Moses, Heman (a grandson of Samuel), and Ethan (a symbol player in David’s court and thought by some to be another name for Jeduthun). The remainder of the Psalms are unattributed. With the exception Moses, the others to whom various Psalms are ascribed are mentioned throughout the two books of Chronicles, so we know certain details about them and their service of YHWH. Even though not all of the Psalms were written by David, it is reasonable to speak, as many do, of the “Psalms of David” since the vast majority of them are ascribed to David or his known associates.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical Events, Biblical Theology, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerMay 19, 2023Psalm 40Comment

Warfield on 2 Timothy 3:16: Scripture Is Not "Inspired" But "God-Breathed"

In his essay “The Biblical Idea of Revelation” (1915), Warfield addresses the terminology associated with the divine production of Scripture. His comments here are widely known and have been very influential upon recent Bible translations and discussions of inerrancy.

Warfield addresses the common use of “inspired “and “inspiration.” He writes . . .

The Biblical books are called inspired as the Divinely determined products of inspired men; the Biblical writers are called inspired as breathed into by the Holy Spirit, so that the product of their activities transcends human powers and becomes Divinely authoritative. Inspiration is, therefore, usually defined as a supernatural influence exerted on the sacred writers by the Spirit of God, by virtue of which their writings are given Divine trustworthiness. (BBW, The Inspiration and Authority, 1948 ed., 131; new edition 71)

The term has changed meaning over time:

Meanwhile, for English-speaking men, these terms have virtually ceased to be Biblical terms. They naturally passed from the Latin Vulgate into the English versions made from it (most fully into the Rheims-Douay: Job 32:8; Wisd. 15:11; Ecclus. 4:12; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21). But in the development of the English Bible they have found ever-decreasing place. In the English versions of the Apocrypha (both Authorized Version and Revised Version) “inspired” is retained in Wisd. 15:11; but in the canonical books the nominal form alone occurs in the Authorized Version [i.e., the KJV] and that only twice: Job 32:8, “But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding”; and 2 Tim. 3:16, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." The Revised Version removes the former of these instances, substituting “breath” for “inspiration”; and alters the latter so as to read: “Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness,” with a marginal alternative in the form of, “Every scripture is inspired of God and profitable,” etc. The word “inspiration” thus disappears from the English Bible, and the word “inspired” is left in it only once, and then, let it be added, by a distinct and even misleading mistranslation. (BBW, The Inspiration and Authority, 1948 ed., 132; new edition 71)

But “inspiration” is not the proper translation . . .

For the Greek word in this passage—θεόπνευστος, theópneustos—very distinctly does not mean “inspired of God” . . . . The Greek term has, however, nothing to say of inspiring or of inspiration: it speaks only of a “spiring” or “spiration.” What it says of Scripture is, not that it is “breathed into by God” or is the product of the Divine “inbreathing” into its human authors, but that it is breathed out by God, “God-breathed,” the product of the creative breath of God. In a word, what is declared by this fundamental passage is simply that the Scriptures are a Divine product, without any indication of how God has operated in producing them. No term could have been chosen, however, which would have more emphatically asserted the Divine production of Scripture than that which is here employed. (BBW, The Inspiration and Authority, 1948 ed., 132-133; new edition 71-72)

You can find this and other essays here: B. B. Warfield" The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (new edition)

“If You Should Suffer for Righteousness’ Sake” – (1 Peter 3:8-17) – Words from Peter to the Pilgrim Church (Part Seven)

It is foolish to attempt to deny reality. The fact is Christians are going to be misunderstood, mistrusted, and persecuted precisely because we are believers in Jesus Christ. Those unbelievers, secularists, and pagans we encounter do not understand our faith in Christ. They feel no need whatsoever to believe in Jesus, and when they do understand what we believe, they openly reject it–especially Christian teaching about salvation being found only in Jesus (an exclusive truth claim), as well as Christian teaching about sexual ethics. Whenever this conflict between Christians and unbelievers occurs–and it will–how are we to respond?

In chapter 3 of his first epistle, Peter instructs us to seek to bring glory and honor to Jesus Christ in such situations, rather than focusing upon responding to any personal insults directed our way. Christians must learn how to deal with those who have power over us in the civil kingdom without being afraid of our oppressors, who will themselves answer to our Lord. We must learn to respond in such a way that we continually point those who are contentious toward us back to the suffering servant, Jesus. According to Peter, Christians must be prepared for these encounters with both the right answers and the right attitude.

Setting the Context

In our series on 1 Peter, so far, we have made our way into chapter three and we are presently considering Peter’s instructions to Christians of the Diaspora. To set the context, recall that Peter’s epistle is sent to a group of Christian exiles in Asia Minor, who have been displaced from their homes by a decree from Claudius, the previous Roman emperor. Peter begins his letter of encouragement to these struggling sojourners by reminding them that God has caused them to be born again, they have been set apart (sanctified) by God, and therefore sprinkled by the blood of Jesus–ensuring their sins are forgiven. Also, Christians are to live holy lives before the Lord so as to silence those critical of our faith.

Peter reminds his hearers that although they are facing difficult times from their pagan neighbors, in God’s sight, these people are elect exiles, a chosen race, and spiritual house, indwelt by the Spirit of the living God. Although they are citizens of Rome, they simultaneously possess a heavenly citizenship and are heirs to all the things promised them by God. But their heavenly citizenship will inevitably bring them into conflict with the unbelievers around them, and so the apostle seeks to prepare his readers to deal with those who reject Jesus, and who do not understand why Christians believe and do the things they do.

To read the rest follow the link below

Musings (05/13/2023)

News and Updates:

This past week I wrapped up my Spring course (ecclesiology) at Westminster Seminary California. My three year term as visiting professor of systematic theology is up and a new full-time professor will be filling the gap which I had previously covered.

I truly enjoyed my time in the classroom, but am ready to step aside. Thanks to the WSC faculty for giving me the chance to finish up my career as a seminary professor! Thanks to the students who endured too many dad jokes and quips from the beloved Rod Rosenbladt (AKA “the prophet Rod”).

I’ll be plenty busy with the Riddleblog, The Blessed Hope Podcast, several book projects, as well as teaching the weekly adult Sunday school class at Christ Reformed Church.

To read the rest of my “musings,” and peruse the “recommended links” follow the link below

"The Man of Sin" (Part One) -- The Latest Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast Is Up As We Tackle 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 and the Doctrine of the Antichrist!

Episode Synopsis:

There is little doubt that one of the most interesting, controversial, and a constant source of on-going speculation is the doctrine of the Antichrist.

Indeed, there has been so much written about the Antichrist by Christians–both ancient and modern–and so many references made to the Antichrist in film and popular culture, it is vital that we go back to the biblical accounts of this mysterious and evil figure to separate biblical fact from speculative fiction. What does the Bible actually say about the Antichrist?

Paul tackles the subject head on in his second Thessalonian letter. Soon after completion of his first Thessalonian letter, Paul received news that someone in the Thessalonian congregation was teaching that the day of the Lord had already come. If true, this meant that all of Christ’s promises to his people have already been realized. It also reminds us that Bible prophecy pundits and speculators have been around for a long time.

Paul exhorts the Thessalonians not to listen to such wild speculation because the day of the Lord had not yet come. Two things need to happen first. One is a great apostasy, and only then comes the revelation of a figure whom Paul identifies as “the man of sin.” Either the apostasy creates the conditions necessary for the man of sin to be revealed, or the apostasy is closely connected to the man of sin’s appearance. But Paul is clear that the day of the Lord has not come because these two things have not yet occurred when he writes his second letter.

Paul also tells the Thessalonians that something is preventing the appearance of the man of sin, a mysterious “restrainer” who, at some point, will cease to hold back the revelation of the man of sin (the Antichrist), who then will be destroyed by Jesus when the Lord returns.

Join us then, in this, part one of our discussion of the “man of sin,” as we tackle 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12.

To read the show notes and/or listen to the episode, follow the link below

The Basics -- The Fall of Adam

Most Americans operate on the sincere but misguided assumption that deep down inside people are basically good. When we compare ourselves to others, we might be able to measure up pretty well. Sure, there are some who we might begrudgingly admit are better people than we are, but still, we usually do pretty well in most of our self-comparison tests made against others.

The problem with assuming that people are basically good is that it completely ignores the fact that ours is a fallen race, under the just condemnation from God, awaiting the well-deserved sentence of death and eternal punishment. The reality is that on judgment day God is not going to compare me to someone else, who is a fallen sinner like I am. Instead, God will measure me against the standard of his law (specifically, the Ten Commandments), which is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12). And when God measures me using the standard of his law, it will become all too clear that like everyone else descended from Adam, I cannot meet God’s standard of absolute and complete obedience to his commandments. I am a sinner. I am guilty before God. I am under the sentence of death. How did this happen?

For most folks, this dilemma immediately raises the question of fairness. Is it fair for God to judge me against a standard I cannot possibly meet? The answer would be “no,” if we were to look at this question in a vacuum without any biblical context. The Bible teaches that Adam was not only the first human (from whom all humans are biologically descended), but that Adam was created holy, without sin, and with the ability to obey God’s commands. Adam was placed in Eden for a time of probation under the covenant of works with its condition, “do this (not eat from the forbidden tree) and live,” or “eat from the tree and die.” Adam chose the latter, bringing down the covenant curse of death upon the entire human race. Many people agree with Ben Franklin’s famous adage that the only two things in life which are inevitable are death and taxes, both of which I might add, stem from human sin. Yet, the fact remains, death is not natural to the human race. Death is the consequence of the fall of Adam.

To read the rest, follow the link below

"Election Unchangeable" -- Article Eleven, First Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 11: Election Unchangeable

Just as God himself is most wise, unchangeable, all-knowing, and almighty, so the election made by him can neither be suspended nor altered, revoked, or annulled; neither can his chosen ones be cast off, nor their number reduced.

___________________________________

The synod appeals to the fact that God is immutable (unchanging) in both his being and his purpose. Therefore his decree of election is likewise unchanging. We know this to be the case because election is based solely upon God’s good pleasure and purpose, and occurs, as Paul says, “before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). This means the full number of the elect is unchangeable.

This is an important point because it affirms that God does not change his mind or his purpose once his decree is executed as it unfolds in time and space. God does not add to the number of the elect when he sees someone doing something good he did not expect. Nor does God subtract from the number of the elect when one of those whom he has chosen happens to fall into sin. All of God’s elect will come to saving faith in Jesus Christ. This is God’s purpose in Christ (Ephesians 1:3-14; Romans 8:28-30) and it does not (indeed, cannot change).

The knowledge of this fact should give us great comfort because it means that no one who is presently numbered among the elect can fall away and be lost. Jesus clearly affirms this to be the case when he says “all that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (John 6:37). God is not capricious nor does he change his mind. This means that if we are truly in Christ at this moment, we can be assured that we will die in Christ, because he will never leave nor forsake us. We cannot simply slip through his fingers. Nor will he cast us away on a whim or in a moment of anger.

As Paul reminds the Philippians, “and I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:6). Indeed, the Good Shepherd reminds us, “my sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30).

Just think of where we would be if God's decree was not immutable . . .

The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerMay 8, 2023Election UnchangableComment

How Much Evidence Is Required for Christ’s Resurrection?

Here’s a simple and effective argument to use when contending for the truth of Christ’s resurrection.

According to John Warwick Montgomery . . .

The issue here is a miracle: a resurrection. How much evidence is required to establish such a fact? Could evidence ever justify excepting it?
Phenonmenally (and this is all we need worry about for evidential purposes) a resurrection can be regarded as death followed by a life, D. then L. Normally, the sequence is reversed, thus L. then D.
We are well acquainted with the phenomenal meaning of the constituent factors (though we do not understand the “secret” of life or why death must occur), and we have no difficulty in establishing evidential criteria to place a person in one category rather than in the other. Thus the eating of fish (Luke 24:36-43) is sufficient to classify the eater among the living, and a crucifixion among the dead. In Jesus' case the sequential order was reversed, but that has no epistemological bearing on the weight of evidence required to establish death or life. And if Jesus was dead at point A, and alive at point B, then resurrection has occurred.

From John Warwick Montgomery, “A Revelational Solution” in Human Rights and Human Dignity (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1986), 154-155.

ApologeticsKim RiddlebargerMay 4, 2023Christ's resurrectionComment

Richard Muller on the Ministerial (or Instrumental) Use of Reason

There are two common extremes regarding the relationship between faith and reason. The first is rationalism, which attempts to base theological claims on universal principles of reason and absolute knowledge, The second is fideism, which makes theological claims with no attempt at arguing their basis, usually in opposition to reason and knowledge.

However, “faith seeking understanding” is the proper relationship between belief and knowledge. This is consistent across the arts and sciences: in every pursuit of truth a basic interpretation of reality is presupposed.

The Christian faith is not opposed to reason, but to its suppression and perversion in unrighteousness against the truth of God. Therefore, faith must not be opposed to knowledge. Every Christian doctrine transcends reason’s comprehension, but does not contradict reasonable apprehension. A “ministerial” or “instrumental” use of reason in which God’s revelation is apprehended and interpreted is necessary to understand the basic teaching of the Bible. But a “magisterial” use of reason (in which human reason seeks to discover truth apart from divine revelation) is to be rejected. It is this magisterial use of reason against which Martin Luther railed,

“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”

To read the rest, follow the link below

“The Beauty of a Gentle and Quiet Spirit” – (1 Peter 3:1-7) – Words from Peter to the Pilgrim Church (Part Six)

Christians in American do not encounter the same kind of persecution which Christians among Peter’s first century audience were facing. Many of those to whom Peter was writing were forcibly displaced from their homes and land by an edict from a previous Roman emperor, Claudius, because they refused to worship pagan deities, and did not consider the Roman emperor to be a “god.” Peter speaks of these struggling Christians as elect exiles and describes them as a chosen race. The apostle is writing to remind them of their living hope and sanctification in Christ, which will help them cope with the very difficult circumstances which they were then facing. Peter’s original audience experienced open hostility from their government and their pagan neighbors. The opposition we face is a bit more subtle, but no less dangerous. In the thoroughly secularized America in which we live, we are not persecuted so much as we are pressured to conform to non-Christian ways of thinking and doing. Peter’s discussion of the relationship between husbands and wives will expose some of these non-Christian ways, and challenge us how to think of this foundational relationship within human society in the light of God’s word.

In a lengthy section of his first epistle (vv. 2:13-3:7), Peter is addressing specific societal relationships held in common by Christians and non-Christians–elements of the unwritten but widely accepted “household code” which defined many of the social relationships within Greco-Roman society. These relationships include the authority of civil government, the relationship between slaves and masters, and the relationship between husbands and wives. All of these fall under the heading of what we now call natural law. Although Christians and non-Christians both value these social institutions, God has spoken about these same relationships in his word, and so Peter is writing to do two things: 1) To remind his hearers that Christians do indeed regard these relationships as the foundation of society just as do Greco-Roman pagans, and 2). To correct whatever misconceptions his Christians readers/hearers may have regarding these relationships in light of God’s word.

To read the rest, follow the link below

The First Two Volumes of the "Classic B. B. Warfield Collection" Are On Sale!

You can order these from The Westminster Theological Seminary bookstore for 50% off. But hurry, the sale ends soon (May 5)!

The First Two Volumes of the Classic B. B. Warfield Collection

Here’s my endorsement:

“Many of us first encountered B. B. Warfield through the five Warfield volumes published by P&R from 1948 to 1958. My own Warfield volumes are thoroughly highlighted and well worn. I have purchased duplicate volumes over the years to mark up all over again. All but one of the Warfield volumes had fallen out of print, so I was thrilled to learn of the republication of this new and entirely updated version of the five-volume set. I cannot recommend these volumes highly enough or sufficiently thank the folks at P&R for bringing the ‘Warfield set’ back into print. May a new generation of readers discover America’s greatest theologian as I once did.”

Kim Riddlebarger

Visiting Professor of Systematic Theology, Westminster Seminary California; author, The Lion of Princeton: B. B. Warfield as Apologist and Theologian