“Mixed Marriages, `Holy’ Spouses and Children” A New Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast Covering 1 Corinthians 7:12-16

Episode Synopsis:

Paul’s Gentile mission was a huge success. A number of new churches were established throughout the eastern Mediterranean world–including fast growing churches in important cities such as Corinth, Thessalonica, and Ephesus. But with the spread of the gospel into a previously unevangelized world dominated by Greco-Roman culture and religion, came a whole set of pastoral problems–problems which were not specifically addressed in the Old Testament or in the teaching of Jesus.

A number of such questions surface in Corinth–as we have seen. But one pressing matter facing the Corinthians is what should happen when one party to a marriage comes to faith in Jesus Christ, while the other spouse does not, creating a so-called “mixed-marriage.” Should the believer leave or divorce the unbeliever if they refuse to convert to Christianity? And what, exactly, is a Christian spouse’s status if their unbelieving spouse divorces them because of their new-found faith in Jesus Christ? Must they remain single and celibate until the deserting spouse dies?

And an even bigger question arises. What about the children of mixed marriages? What is their standing in the church and what is their status before God? Are they members of the covenant of grace, and therefore eligible for all of the benefits thereof, while assuming all the responsibilities of covenant membership? Are they eligible to receive the sign and seal of that gracious covenant, which is baptism?

Paul answers these questions by appealing to the “holy” status of a partner to a mixed marriage and applying that same status to the children of such a union. How can an unbeliever be said to be “holy.” How can Paul affirm that of children who are born in original sin? To make his case, Paul grounds this “holiness” in the Old Testament’s principle of covenant authority–the believing parent’s authority over those in the household and as seen in the five household baptisms found in the New Testament.

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

Read More
Warfield on The Fact of Christ’s Resurrection

In an age when “spirituality” has replaced being “religious” (see, for example Michael Horton’s outstanding bookShaman and Sage), B. B. Warfield’s remarkable essay tying Christianity necessarily to historical events comes as a breath of fresh air—even if it has the slight sense of coming from more than a century ago.

Warfield’s essay, The Resurrection of Christ: A Historic Fact, begins with something quite obvious, yet too often assumed, overlooked, or rejected. Christianity is absolutely dependent upon what Jesus said and did (especially in his dying and bodily rising again from the dead), and not with any possible response to the message coming from the “spiritual self,” pushing me to find “my truth within” quite apart from the historical facts of the life of Christ. Warfield makes his view crystal clear in this regard.

It is a somewhat difficult matter to distinguish between Christian doctrines and facts. The doctrines of Christianity are doctrines only because they are facts; and the facts of Christianity become its most indispensable doctrines. The Incarnation of the eternal God is necessarily a dogma: no human eye could witness his stooping to man’s estate, no human tongue could bear witness to it as a fact. And yet, if it be not a fact, our faith is vain, we are yet in our sins. On the other hand, the Resurrection of Christ is a fact, an external occurrence within the cognizance of men to be established by their testimony. And yet, it is the cardinal doctrine of our system: on it all other doctrines hang.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
End of Summer Musings (8/26/2024)

Riddleblog and Blessed Hope Podcast Updates:

  • The Blessed Hope Podcast (which is available on most podcasting feeds) has migrated from Google Podcasts to YouTube. If you prefer to get the Blessed Hope Pod through YouTube podcasts, that is now an option. Be sure to like and subscribe as this will get the Blessed Hope deeper into the YouTube algorithm.

  • We have returned to season three of the Blessed Hope podcast, “God is Faithful”, a deep dive into 1 Corinthians. We picked up with chapter 7:1 and we are dealing with sex, marriage and divorce, and celibacy.

Thinking Out Loud:

  • There is something blissfully transformative about being in the mountains—Machen wrote about it

  • The Houston Astros’ Space City uniforms are absolutely ridiculous. Perfect for Altuve though . . .

  • Does anyone else not like the Seinfeld “100th” episodes? Seinfeld is not a “best moments” sort of comedy

  • Political virtue signaling—since I am not voting for either presidential candidate (the lesser of evils is still evil—especially when both candidates are positively terrible and neither should be president), I did not watch a single moment of either party’s conventions. Doesn’t sound like I missed anything, except Hulk Hogan tearing off his shirt and Joe Biden blathering on way past his and my bedtimes

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
New Devotional by Trevin Wax -- Reading Through the Letters of Paul in 30 Days

A new devotional based on the Letters of Paul, and prepared by Trevin Wax, is now available.

If you are a listener to the Blessed Hope Podcast you know that in every episode, I urge listeners to read through the letters of Paul (especially as we go through them), or listen to them read aloud. Trevin Wax has made reading all of Paul’s letters a bit easier to do. Wax has arranged Paul’s letters (along with several devotional elements) in short readings so that you can make your way through all the letters of Paul in but thirty days. I highly recommend this volume to you (albeit with a couple of minor caveats), if you are a listener to the Blessed Hope.

Caveat # 1: In order to make it through the body of Paul’s letters in 30 days, Wax suggests three readings per day (morning, noon, and evening). This is great for a disciplined reader or someone who is retired or works from home. This was done to achieve the goal of reading all of Paul in 30 days—a bit artificial. But I see no reason why you couldn’t set your own pace and do one reading per day and thereby read all of Paul’s letters in 90 days (Wax acknowledges this).

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
The Wisdom in John Calvin’s Exposition of 1 Corinthians 1:1-31

I have been spending a fair amount of time of late working through 1 Corinthians for the Blessed Hope Podcast, (Season Three — “God Is Faithful” A Deep Dive into 1 Corinthians) and for my re-edited exposition of 1 Corinthians in the Lectio Continua Series (Reformation Heritage Books). A couple of things have become very apparent to me.

First, although often overlooked among the Reformed (who seem more at home in Galatians, Romans, and Ephesians—Paul’s doctrinal epistles) I am repeatedly struck by how an occasional letter (like 1 Corinthians) speaks so powerfully to many of the issues the church is facing today—especially since a number of the same issues confronting Christians in a Greco-Roman pagan city such as Corinth have resurfaced before our very eyes. If you haven’t read or studied Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians in awhile I encourage you to do so.

Second, having read much of Calvin’s commentary on 1 Corinthians for these projects, it is apparent that Calvin was very much interested in ecclesiology—a major theme in Paul’s letter. As Tadataka Maruyama points out, at the urging of Farel, Calvin completed this commentary in November of 1545 and saw it published the next year—at a time when Calvin was very much concerned with “the legitimate form of the church,” which, as Calvin argues, was revealed in the two marks of a church, Word and Sacrament. This explains why Calvin’s commentary has such sharp responses to the Anabaptists, Libertines, and Nicodemites of his day—the latter a reference to someone who conceals their true views to avoid persecution or conflict. Antecedents to the teaching of all of these groups can indeed be found in first century Corinth and Calvin made much of this fact in his commentary.[1]

Calvin’s work on 1 Corinthians might just be his best commentary and should not be overlooked. Calvin is feisty in places (as is Paul), at times he manifests a wry sense of humor, and his pastoral heart and wisdom come through in so many instances throughout. We ought to keep in mind that Calvin is doing something quite new when writing this commentary—he is looking to Paul for aid in developing a Reformed (Presbyterian) ecclesiology for the Genevan church while at the same time wrestling with the interconnectedness of like-minded churches in different locales with prominent and independent leaders (Farel, Bucer, Bullinger etc.,). This commentary is a real gem and you can find it here.

To whet your whistle to read and study 1 Corinthians and/or check out Calvin’s commentary here are a number of quotes from Calvin from his commentary[2]. These are but a few brief examples from the first chapter of 1 Corinthians.

____________________________________

Paul on the Nature and Danger of the Issues Facing the Corinthians

During Paul’s absence false apostles had crept in, not, in my opinion, to disturb the Church openly with wicked doctrines, or designedly to undermine sound doctrine; but, priding themselves in the splendour and magnificence of their address, or rather, being puffed up with an empty loftiness of speech, they looked upon Paul’s simplicity, and even the Gospel itself, with contempt (Volume 1, Page 37).

Note: when Calvin speaks of “false apostles,” we may immediately think of the Judaizers in Galatia. But Calvin quickly clarifies who these individuals were—those enamored with Greek wisdom—and what was driving them, ambition.

They afterwards, by their ambition, gave occasion for the Church being split into various parties; and, last of all, reckless as to every thing, provided only they were themselves held in estimation, made it their aim to promote their own honor, rather than Christ’s kingdom and the people’s welfare (Volume 1, Page 37).

To rest the rest of Calvin's comments, follow the link below

Read More
"Sex and Marriage" -- The Blessed Hope Podcast Is Back! What Does Paul Say About These Matters in 1 Corinthians 7:1-11?

Episode Synopsis:

Sex and marriage were pressing issues in Corinth. Gentiles who came to faith in Jesus Christ during Paul’s Gentile mission were learning the biblical sexual ethic for the first time. Grounded in the creation order, the Ten Commandments, and the teaching of Jesus, it did not take long for the Corinthians to understand that sex was not merely a pleasurable bodily function, but biblical sexuality has a strong moral foundation. That meant that much of the common sexual attitudes and practices of the Greco-Roman world were in direct conflict with Paul’s teaching regarding sexual ethics.

As these new Christians learned the teaching of Jesus, it was clear that Jesus limited sexual relations to marriage and taught that divorce was an illustration of fallen human nature. The Corinthians also learned that Christians understand sex as a part of something much larger–the way in which God created things, and that God assigned sexual activity to marriage which was intended to be a lifelong commitment centered around the family. It was difficult for the Corinthians to embrace Christian sexual ethics because they went against the grain of so much Corinthian culture and religion. It is also hard to both unlearn something you’ve embraced all your life (pagan sexuality) and then learn a new way to think about sex and marriage–a view which at first glance seems quite restrictive.

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

Read More
“The Seventieth Week” Daniel 9:24-27 (An Exposition of the Book of Daniel–Part Eighteen)

The Seventieth and Final Week of Daniel’s “Seventy Weeks” Prophecy

As famed philosopher-catcher Yogi Berra once quipped, “when you come to a fork in the road, take it!” When we come to Daniel 9:27 and read of one who makes a strong covenant with the many for one week (the seventieth), we have come to such an interpretive fork in the road. Is Daniel speaking about a future antichrist making a seven-year peace treaty with Israel which marks the beginning of the tribulation? Or is Daniel instead speaking of the coming of the Messiah, who makes a strong covenant on behalf of those whom he is about to redeem at the climax of his messianic mission? The choice is fundamental as to how we understand this prophecy. Christ or the Antichrist?

The Context for Daniel’s Messianic Prophecy

In the previous expositions of Daniel 9, we have been working our way through a passage which includes the famous prophecy of the “seventy weeks” (vv. 24-27). As we noted throughout our time in this chapter, this is one of the most disputed and difficult prophecies in all the Old Testament. But everyone does agree that it is also one of the most important Old Testament prophecies. Although those influenced by dispensationalism see this prophecy as predicting a future seven-year tribulation period and a peace treaty between the Antichrist and Israel, the prophecy makes much better sense when seen as a messianic prophecy, predicting the coming of Jesus (Israel’s Messiah) with great accuracy and specificity–the so-called “messianic interpretation.”

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
“The Error of Teaching That Faith Itself Is Reckoned as Righteousness” — The Rejection of Errors, Second Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort (4)

Having set forth the orthodox teaching, the Synod rejects the errors of those:

IV Who teach that what is involved in the new covenant of grace which God the Father made with men through the intervening of Christ’s death is not that we are justified before God and saved through faith, insofar as it accepts Christ’s merit, but rather that God, having withdrawn his demand for perfect obedience to the law, counts faith itself, and the imperfect obedience of faith, as perfect obedience to the law, and graciously looks upon this as worthy of the reward of eternal life.

For they contradict Scripture: “They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Jesus Christ, whom God presented as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood” (Rom. 3:24–25). And along with the ungodly Socinus, they introduce a new and foreign justification of man before God, against the consensus of the whole church.

_________________________

Because of the use of biblical terminology it is easy to miss the fact that the Arminian view of the justice of God and the nature of the atonement inevitably distorts the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, on account of Christ alone as confessed by the Reformed churches.

The Arminian does so by defining justification in such a way that the biblical ground of our justification (the imputed righteousness of Christ) is transformed into a doctrine of human merit. This can be confusing because Arminians do indeed use the biblical language of forgiveness, imputation, and “faith alone.” But all of these terms are redefined in a manner which does not comport with the biblical usage of these words, nor with the doctrine of the Reformers.

According to the Arminian system, justification should be understood as follows. Due to Adam’s fall all men and women have a universal tendency toward sinfulness. But the death of Christ secures a prevenient grace for all men and women, which enables people to use their free-will to seek after God and righteousness, and then come to Jesus Christ through faith. Since God has arbitrarily decided that he will regard the blood of a sacrificial victim as a sufficient demonstration of his love and justice (thereby allowing him to remit sin), he has also determined that when someone exercises faith in Christ, God will arbitrarily regard the personal exercise of faith as though it were righteousness.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
The Mountains Are Calling . . .

And I must heed the call . . .

The R’s are taking our annual trek to the Eastern Sierras. So, little will happen here until mid-August.

Lord willing, upon my return, we’ll get back to our regular programing, including new episodes of the Blessed Hope Podcast (we will pick up at 1 Corinthians 7:1), new installments in my series on Christ’s Spotless Bride (ecclesiology) and the completion of my exposition of the Book of Daniel.

In the meantime, if you haven’t done so, check out some of the resources on the Riddleblog, including sermons, book reviews, recommended readings, my musings, and lots of content under the Amillennialism, Biblical and Theological Studies tabs at the top of the page.

The missus and I will be posting about our time in the Sierras, so feel free to check out my Instagram.

Read More
“Seventy Weeks” Daniel 9:20-27 (An Exposition of the Book of Daniel–Part Seventeen)

Messianic Prophecy or a Guide to the End times?

Daniel’s prophecy of the seventy weeks is one of the most intriguing passages in all the Bible. It is often described by commentators as among the most difficult passages to interpret in all the Old Testament. Many of our contemporaries understand this passage as a map to the end times. But I think the passage makes much more sense when understood as a messianic prophecy foretelling the coming of Jesus, the Messiah. Yes, the passage does tell us much about the end times (in a big picture kind of way), but it does so through the lens of Jesus’s work in fulfilling the six conditions set forth in the prophecy–finishing transgression, putting an end to sin, atoning for iniquity, ushering in everlasting righteousness, sealing both vision and prophet, and anointing a most holy place. As we will in this and in the essay to follow, these things were, in fact, accomplished by Jesus through the strong covenant which he makes with the many (i.e., the people of God whom the Father chooses to save). If Gabriel’s revelation to Daniel does speak to the end times, it does so in the form of a messianic prophecy, foretelling with an uncanny accuracy the suffering and obedience of the one who fulfills it–the Lord Jesus.

Many of us grew up in churches influenced by dispensationalism. We learned this passage well because it was thought to serve as a guide to the end times. The prophet Daniel supposedly foresees a time (the 70th and final week of the seventy weeks) when Israel is back in the land at or about the time the Gentile church is removed from the earth (the Rapture). The Rapture also marks the dawn of the so-called seven year tribulation period, during which the Antichrist (on this scheme, the one who makes a covenant with Israel) turns upon the Jews in their rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, leading to a final battle (Armageddon) which culminates in the return of Jesus. Although this is the view which dominates much of American evangelicalism, this interpretation is wide of the mark for several reasons we will address in this and the next installment of our exposition of Daniel’s remarkable prophecy.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
Warfield on Prayer

The following is an excerpt from B. B. Warfield’s sermon “Prayer as a Means of Grace” reprinted in a volume of Warfield’s collected sermons, Faith and Life (Banner, 1974).

Prayer as a confession of weakness . . .

In its very nature, prayer is a confession of weakness, a confession of need, of dependence, a cry for help, a reaching out for something stronger, better, more stable and trustworthy than ourselves, oil which to rest and depend and draw. No one can take this attitude once without an effect on his character; no one can take it in a crisis of his life without his whole subsequent life feeling the influence in its sweeter, humbler, more devout and restful course; no one can take it habitually without being made, merely by its natural, reflex influence, a different man, in a very profound sense, from what he otherwise would have been. Prayer, thus, in its very nature, because it is an act of self-abnegation, a throwing of ourselves at the feet of One recognized as higher and greater than we, and as One on whom we depend and in whom we trust, is a most beneficial influence in this hard life of ours. It places the soul in an attitude of less self-assertion and predisposes it to walk simply and humbly in the world.

After discussing the nature of prayer, Warfield speaks of the proper attitude to be taken in prayer . . .

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
“The Error of Denying that Christ’s Merits Secure Our Salvation” — The Rejection of Errors, Second Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort (3)

Having set forth the orthodox teaching, the Synod rejects the errors of those:

III Who teach that Christ, by the satisfaction which he gave, did not certainly merit for anyone salvation itself and the faith by which this satisfaction of Christ is effectively applied to salvation, but only acquired for the Father the authority or plenary will to relate in a new way with men and to impose such new conditions as he chose, and that the satisfying of these conditions depends on the free choice of man; consequently, that it was possible that either all or none would fulfill them.

For they have too low an opinion of the death of Christ, do not at all acknowledge the foremost fruit or benefit which it brings forth, and summon back from hell the Pelagian error.

_________________________________

The third error promulgated by the Dutch Arminians and dealt with by the authors of the Canons is an error which is also tied to the modified governmental theory of the atonement. As devotees of the governmental theory see it, the death of Christ does not merit or accomplish anything in particular. Rather, through the death of Christ, God’s love and moral governorship of the universe is displayed, since the death of Christ supposedly shows us how seriously God regards human sinfulness.

As the Arminian theologian Limborch states, “the death of Christ is called a satisfaction for sin; but sacrifices are not payments of debts, nor are they full satisfactions for sins; but a gratuitous remission is granted when they are offered.” Notice the slippery language used by Limborch, since he speaks of the death of Christ as a "satisfaction," yet when doing so, means something far different than do the biblical writers (and the Reformed confessions) when they use the same term. For Limborch and the Arminians, “the atonement is a satisfaction.” But it is a "satisfaction" only because it demonstrates how seriously God takes sin, since God has arbitrarily determined to accept it as such.

Notice in the Arminian scheme what the atonement is not. The death of Christ is not the payment in full of the debt we owe to satisfy God's holy justice because of our sins. Nor is the atonement a payment for sin which is in any sense directly connected to the retributive justice of God, in which sin must be punished to the exact degree that it is an offense to God's holiness.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
Mid-Summer 2024 Musings

Riddleblog and Blessed Hope Podcast Updates:

  • Look for the return of the Blessed Hope Podcast season three on 1 Corinthians in mid-August. I’ve managed to research and write the script for chapters 7-10 and will start cranking out new episodes upon my return from vacation.

  • The Blessed Hope Podcast has made a successful “migration” from Google podcasts over to YouTube podcasts. If you enjoy the Blessed Hope pod, please consider liking and subscribing.

Thinking Out Loud:

  • What happened in Butler PA, sure gives new meaning to the phrase “dodged a bullet.” I am very thankful Trump’s life was spared. So far in my lifetime JFK was assassinated, so too were RFK and MLK, Gerald Ford survived two bungled assassination attempts, and Reagan was nearly killed. Assassinations create a generational national trauma, and I am so thankful that our nation is not facing such a thing now.

  • Joe, you stubborn old geezer, turn over the car keys already!

  • The stray kitty who moved into my yard a dozen years ago pays no attention to various cats and critters who come into the yard and eat her food. But one cat—a new skinny all black cat—drives her crazy. She goes from full nap to absolute screeching fury whenever it gets near her food bowl. I wonder what that is all about. The mind of a cat . . . unfathomable.

  • A sure sign that ours is a fallen race is that you cannot buy an equal number of hot dogs (usually six) and buns (usually eight).

To read the rest of my “musings,” follow the link below

Read More
Ancient Corinth, Judge Judy, and Litigious Christians

What follows is an excerpt from season three, episode ten of the Blessed Hope Podcast which covers chapter six of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians.

Only Americans could love Judge Judy–the über-mom, as I call her, because of her uncanny ability to make grown men look like disobedient children. Yet I’m sure that if the Corinthians had the technology we have, they too would love Judge Judy. The public airing of personal grievances makes for great theater. This explains Judge Judy’s huge audience in contemporary America. Public quarreling and exposing one’s laundry before an audience was also popular in first century Corinth. To Paul’s chagrin, the Corinthians joined right in.

Roman courts of the first century distinguished between criminal trials and civil disputes. In chapter 6, it is clear that Paul is speaking of civil matters involving litigation (lawsuits or “small claims”),[1] not criminal matters (i.e., murder, assault, theft, etc.). Criminal trials were formal legal procedures and in many cases a jury was present.[2] In Corinth, common legal disputes were usually settled in large public buildings called basilicas which were part of the city’s agoura (marketplace). Whenever the court met to deal with a civil case, the public often gathered to take in the spectacle of well-known townsfolk accusing each other of all kinds of wrongdoing before the court, while a leading citizen appointed by a magistrate served as judge.[3]

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
“To the Lord Our God Belong Mercy and Forgiveness” Daniel 9:1-19 (An Exposition of the Book of Daniel–Part Sixteen)

Setting the Scene for Daniel’s Seventy Weeks

The ninth chapter of the Book of Daniel contains one of the most debated and difficult passages in all the Bible–the famous vision of the seventy weeks is found in verses 24-27. This vision, given to Daniel through the Angel Gabriel, is often taken to be a prophetic revelation focusing exclusively on the end times. While the vision does indeed extend to the time of the end, the focus in the opening verses of the chapter is explaining how is it–if, as Israel’s prophets have foretold, the seventy years of exile in Babylon are about to come to an end–that God will extend this time of exile for seventy more weeks. The news of an extension of Israel’s exile (a form of covenant curse) takes a surprising turn, as Gabriel now reveals to Daniel. As promised, God’s people will return to Jerusalem and rebuild both the city and the temple. How then can the people still be said to be in exile?

The Critical Questions

In Daniel 9, the root cause of this extended time of exile is revealed to be human sinfulness. Because God is holy, human sin must be dealt with once and for all before the time of exile finally and ultimately comes to an end. As Gabriel now reveals to Daniel, this is the work of the coming Messiah, who will truly restore Jerusalem, the temple, and the sacrifices, but will also put an end to sin, atone for wickedness, and bring in an everlasting righteousness. Although many take the prophecy of the seventy weeks to predict specific events at the time of the end, Daniel 9 is better understood as one of the most important messianic prophecies in all the Bible. It foretells of a coming Messiah who will overcome all his enemies and ours, and who will once and for all put an end to the guilt and the power of human sin. It is this covenant-making Messiah–not a future Antichrist–who is the key figure of the seventy weeks.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
Christ's Spotless Bride -- The Attributes of the Church (Part Six)

Having considered the marks of the church, we now move on to consider the attributes of the church.

There are four classical attributes of the church as expressed in the Nicene Creed which are held in common by all major Christian traditions. These are: 1). Unity, 2). Holiness, 3). Catholicity, and 4). Apostolicity. The Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Reformation churches all confess these same attributes, yet understand them in fundamentally different ways. The Lutherans, for example, add “invisibility” to the four marks expressed above as a polemic against Rome’s claim of the visibility of the true church (Rome claims to be the true church because of its visibility).[1]

James Bannerman, a Scottish Presbyterian, who wrote what many consider to be the definitive volume on Presbyterian polity (The Church of Christ) offers a number of reasons why discussing the marks of the church should be done before considering the attributes of the church. He lists the four attributes of “Unity, Sanctity, Catholicity, and Apostolicity.” But then notes that these “belong . . . to the Christian Church, in consequence of the Church holding and professing the true faith of Christ.”[1] Herman Bavinck also considers the marks before addressing the church’s attributes since, as he contends, it is important to distinguish a true church from a false church since this determination defines how we are to understand the attributes of the church.[2]

To read the rest, follow the link, below

Read More
John Calvin on Prayer -- What God Offers Us in Christ

These are familiar words to many, but are always worth reading . . .

We clearly see how destitute and devoid of all good things man is, and how he lacks all aids to salvation. Therefore, if he seeks resources to succor him in his need, he must go outside himself and get them elsewhere. It was afterward explained to us that the Lord willingly and freely reveals himself in his Christ. For in Christ he offers all happiness in place of our misery, all wealth in place of our neediness; in him he opens to us the heavenly treasures that our whole faith may contemplate his beloved Son, our whole expectation depend upon him, and our whole hope cleave to and rest in him. This, indeed, is that secret and hidden philosophy which cannot be wrested from syllogisms. But they whose eyes God has opened surely learn it by heart, that in his light they may see light [Ps. 36:9].

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
Kim Riddlebarger
“The Error of Rejecting the Establishment of the New Covenant” — The Rejection of Errors, Second Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort (2)

Having set forth the orthodox teaching, the Synod rejects the errors of those:

II Who teach that the purpose of Christ’s death was not to establish in actual fact a new covenant of grace by his blood, but only to acquire for the Father the mere right to enter once more into a covenant with men, whether of grace or of works.

For this conflicts with Scripture, which teaches that Christ “has become the guarantee and mediator” of a better—that is, “a new”—“covenant” (Heb. 7:22 9:15), and that “a will is in force only when someone has died” (Heb. 9:17).

_______________________________

In the “refutation of errors” section of each head of doctrine, the Canons take up some of the more technical and specific teachings of the Dutch Arminians which prompted the Synod of Dort to be called in 1618. The second error identified under the second head of doctrine is the Remonstrant (Arminian) notion that the death of Christ did not actually establish a covenant of grace between God and his elect, but that the atonement merely makes provision for God to into enter into such a covenant with his creatures on the ground of God’s choosing—whether that be faith or works.

This reluctance to understand the covenant of grace as necessarily tied to Christ’s mediatorial work is fallout from the Arminian view of the atonement, which is a species of what is known as the “governmental theory.” The so-called governmental theory of the atonement teaches that the death of Christ supposedly demonstrates God’s love, along with his right to order his universe as he sees fit. In this scheme, the cross of Christ is not seen as a satisfaction of God’s justice, and therefore, a necessary act if sinners are to be saved. Instead, the cross is understood in terms of God’s arbitrary decree that a sacrificial death would be accepted as a payment for sin instead of some other equally valid way.

This means that it was not necessary for Christ to die if God’s elect are to be saved, but that God determined to do things in this way since his rule over the universe and his love for sinners would be most clearly manifest. As the moral governor of his universe, God saw fit to save in this manner. But he was under absolutely no necessity of doing so.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident . . .

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America,

When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More