On Suffering as a Christian through Terminal Illness

The following is an article written by Eric Gorski of the A.P. on the young, Calvinist pastor Matt Chandler who was recently diagnosed with a brain tumor. The following excerpt is simply amazing. Click through to read the whole article. Above is a video by Matt in response to the article

Tuesday after surgery. Barnett meets with Lauren and Brian Miller, chairman of the church’s elder board. The final pathology results are not in, but Barnett shares what he knows — the tumor was malignant, fast-growing and mean.

Though he removed what he could see, such tumors send tiny fingers of cells beyond their borders — and eventually a branch will reach back and grow another brain tumor, Barnett says.

Barnett asks Lauren and Miller to keep the diagnosis to themselves for a week so Matt can concentrate fully on recovering from surgery.

On Dec. 15, Barnett shares the pathology results with the Chandlers. Tumors are designated by grade — with Grade 1 being the least aggressive and Grade 4 being the most.

Chandler’s tumor is a Grade 3.

The average life expectancy in such cases, Barnett says, is approximately two to three years. The doctor says later, in an interview, he believes Chandler will live longer because of the aggressive surgery, treatment and Chandler’s otherwise good health.

There’s also a chance that “God smiles upon us” and the cancer goes into remission for years, says Barnett, a devout Christian.

Before the meeting ends, Matt prays that his children and others do not grow resentful.

“Lord, you gave this to me for a reason. Let me run with it and do the best I can with it.”

Barnett says later that he’s witnessed many tragedies and miracles. He has seen how people handle life-changing moments. He called Chandler’s attitude one of the most amazing he’s seen.

Chandler says learning he had brain cancer was “kind of like getting punched in the gut. You take the shot, you try not to vomit, then you get back to doing what you do, believing what you believe.

“We never felt — still have not felt — betrayed by the Lord or abandoned by the Lord. I can honestly say, we haven’t asked the question, ‘Why?’ or wondered, ‘Why me, why not somebody else?’ We just haven’t gotten to that place. I’m not saying we won’t get there. I’m just saying it hasn’t happened yet.”
Later, Chandler clarified that. There was one moment when he looked at a Christmas card, saw a picture of a man who chronically cheated on his wife and thought, “Why not that guy?”

Chandler confessed to Lauren that his thoughts were wicked and wrong.

Monday, Jan. 4, a month after surgery. Morning breaks with 4-year-old Reid singing “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star” at full volume. Matt sits at his laptop in the dining room, nursing a cup of green tea.

He’s preparing to drive to a homeopathic clinic for an infusion of Vitamin C to bolster the immune system, followed by the long drive to downtown Dallas for radiation. He’s in the midst of a six-week program of radiation and chemotherapy, to be followed by a break and more treatment.

Chandler never thought such a trial would shake his faith. But until now, that was just hope in the abstract.

“This has not surprised God,” Chandler says on the drive home. “He is not in a panic right now trying to figure out what to do with me or this disease. Those things have been warm blankets, man.”

Chandler has, however, wrestled with the tension between belief in an all-powerful God and what he, as a mere mortal, can do about his situation. He believes he has responsibilities: to use his brain, to take advantage of technology, to walk in faith and hope, to pray for healing and then “see what God wants to do.”

read the whole thing here

David R. Nienhuis: Biblical Literacy

The whole article is worth a read, although I’ve only excerpted a great couple of paragraphs where Biblical literacy is actually discussed. A good portion of the article deals with the lack of Biblical literacy amongst Evangelicals along with some reasonable diagnosis.

I observe two common problems with students who have become “familiar with the Bible” in this way. First, many of them struggle to actually read the text as it is presented to them on the page. Just last week, several of my Bible survey students expressed their surprise and disappointment that “years of church attendance and AWANA Bible memory competitions” never trained them to engage the actual text of the Bible. They weren’t trained to be readers; they were trained to be quoters. One in particular noted that all these years she had relied on someone else to tell her what snippets of the Bible were significant enough for her to know. But whenever she was alone with the text, she felt swamped by its staggering depth and breadth; so if she read the Bible at all, her method typically involved skimming the Scriptures in search of the passages she already knew and loved. This method of “reading” (if it can be called that) is seriously limited, if not dangerous, because it reduces the Bible to a grab-bag repository of texts that reaffirms the reader’s prior commitments.

Second, this method leads students to uncritically assume that doctrinal reflection is exhausted by the capacity to quote a much-loved proof-text. In doing this they suppose not only that the passage they are quoting is entirely perspicuous as it stands (in complete isolation from its literary and historical context), but also that the cited text is capable of performing as a summary of the entire biblical witness on the matter at hand. In this they are sometimes led to uncritically conclude that Christians who believe differently from them are either incompetent or willfully disobedient. They are therefore often surprised (and occasionally profoundly demoralized) when they read the verse in its actual literary context and discover that the meaning they had come to invest in it is not completely commensurate with the plain sense of the text on the page. Those of my students who are quick to quote Ephesians 2:8-9 (“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God– not the result of works, so that no one may boast”) are sometimes shocked to read the subsequent verse 10 (“For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life”). Those who have memorized Romans 10:9 (“If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved”) are often horrified to read Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:21 (“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven”). In fact it requires both a far more substantive grasp of Scripture and a capacity for careful doctrinal reflection to know how to negotiate the rich plenitude of the biblical witness. Unfortunately my students’ encounter with the Bible’s depth and breadth often leaves those who have been raised to quote verses feeling very insecure in their faith.

So what then shall we do? What is biblical literacy? Coming to an agreed-upon definition is itself part of the problem. I think all would agree that, at base, it involves a more detailed understanding of the Bible’s actual content. This requires: (1) schooling in the substance of the entire biblical story in all its literary diversity (not just an assortment of those verses deemed doctrinally relevant); (2) training in the particular “orienteering” skills required to plot that narrative through the actual texts and canonical units of the Bible; and (3) instruction in the complex theological task of interpreting Scripture in light of the tradition of the church and the experience of the saints. The survey courses we teach at SPU seek to do these very things. But in the end we want to do more than fill believing heads with objective knowledge about the Bible; we want to empower our whole community–students, faculty, and staff–to buck the cultural trends and take up the spiritual discipline of reading Scripture. It is not enough for a Christian university to function as an outpost of the academy; it must also take up the task of serving the church by becoming an abbey for spiritual growth and an apostolate for cultural change. Through our newly established Center for Biblical and Theological Education, we are working to create a reading program–a lectionary of sorts–that will contribute to the formation of readers who come to cherish a relationship not with the “astonishingly malleable Jesus” of American culture, but with the particular God whose story is related in the Bible and celebrated in the Christian church. We want to create a community ethos of habitual, orderly, communal ingestion of the revelatory text. We do so in the hope that the Spirit of God will transform readers into hearers who know what it is to abide before the mirror of the Word long enough to become enscripturated doers; that is, people of faith who are adept at interpreting their individual stories and those of their culture through the grand story of God as it is made known in the Bible.

read the whole thing here

Martin Luther: The Faith of Abraham

The emphasis lies on the words “with faithful Abraham.” Paul distinguishes between Abraham and Abraham… There is a working and there is a believing Abraham. With the working Abraham we have nothing to do. We glory in the believing Abraham of whom the Scriptures say that he received the blessing of righteousness by faith, not only for himself but for all who believe as he did. The world was promised to Abraham because he believed. The whole world is blessed if it believes as Abraham believed.

The blessing is the promise of the Gospel. That all nations are to be blessed means that all nations are to hear the Gospel. All nations are to be declared righteous before God through faith in Christ Jesus. To bless simply means to spread abroad the knowledge of Christ’s salvation. This is the office of the New Testament Church which distributes the promised blessing by preaching the Gospel, by administering the sacraments, by comforting the broken- hearted, in short, by dispensing the benefits of Christ.

…The Pope exhibits a working Christ, or an exemplary Christ. The Pope quotes Christ’s saying recorded in John 13:15, “I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.” We do not deny that Christians ought to imitate the example of Christ; but mere imitation will not satisfy God. And bear in mind that Paul is not now discussing the example of Christ, but the salvation of Christ.

That Abraham submitted to circumcision at the command of God, that he was endowed with excellent virtues, that he obeyed God in all things, was certainly admirable of him. To follow the example of Christ, to love one’s neighbor, to do good to them that persecute you, to pray for one’s enemies, patiently to bear the ingratitude of those who return evil for good, is certainly praiseworthy. But praiseworthy or not, such virtues do not acquit us before God. It takes more than that to make us righteous before God. We need Christ Himself, not His example, to save us. We need a redeeming, not an exemplary Christ, to save us. Paul is here speaking of the redeeming Christ and the believing Abraham, not of the model Christ or the sweating Abraham.

The believing Abraham is not to lie buried in the grave. He is to be dusted off and brought out before the world. He is to be praised to the sky for his faith. Heaven and earth ought to know about him and about his faith in Christ. The working Abraham ought to look pretty small next to the believing Abraham.

Martin Luther, Commentary on Galatians 3.9

Enemies of the Cross (Phil 3.14-4.1)

preached by Iain Boyd on Jan 24th, 2010

J Gresham Machen: The Intellectual Demands of the Christian

I read the whole article, admittedly short, with a reasonably focused intensity.  Machen was summing up what I believe is one of the most desperate needs not only of our pastors, but even of the laity.  Make sure to read the whole thing by clicking through at the end of the post.

Modern culture is a tremendous force. It affects all classes of society. It affects the ignorant as well as the learned. What is to be done about it? In the first place the Church may simply withdraw from the conflict. She may simply allow the mighty stream of modern thought to flow by unheeded and do her work merely in the back-eddies of the current. There are still some men in the world who have been unaffected by modern culture. They may stillbe won for Christ without intellectual labor. And they must be won. It is useful, it is necessary work. If the Church is satisfied with that alone, let her give up the scientific education of her ministry. Let her assume the truth of her message and learn simply how it may be applied in detail to modern industrial and social conditions. Let her give up the laborious study of Greek and Hebrew. Let her abandon the scientific study of history to the men of the world. In a day of increased scientific interest, let the Church go on becoming less scientific. In a day of increased specialization, of renewed interest in philology and in history, of more rigorous scientific method, let the Church go on abandoning her Bible to her enemies. They will study it scientifically, rest assured, if the Church does not. Let her substitute sociology altogether for Hebrew, practical expertness for the proof of her gospel. Let her shorten the preparation of her ministry, let her permit it to be interrupted yet more and more by premature practical activity. By doing so she will win a straggler here and there. But her winnings will be but temporary. The great current of modern culture will sooner or later engulf her puny eddy. God will save her somehow—out of the depths. But the labor of centuries will have been swept away. God grant that the Church may not resign herself to that. God grant she may face her problem squarely and bravely. That problem is not easy. It involves the very basis of her faith. Christianity is the proclamation of an historical fact—that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Modern thought has no place for that proclamation. It prevents men even from listening to the message. Yet the culture of today cannot simply be rejected as a whole. It is not like the pagan culture of the first century. It is not wholly non-Christian. Much of it has been derived directly from the Bible. There are significant movements in it, going to waste, which might well be used for the defence of the gospel. The situation is complex. Easy wholesale measures are not in place. Discrimination, investigation is necessary. Some of modern thought must be refuted. The rest must be made subservient. But nothing in it can be ignored. He that is not with us is against us. Modern culture is a mighty force. It is either subservient to the gospel or else it is the deadliest enemy of the gospel. For making it subservient, religious emotion is not enough, intellectual labor is also necessary. And that labor is being neglected. The Church has turned to easier tasks. And now she is reaping the fruits of her indolence. Now she must battle for her life.

The situation is desperate. It might discourage us. But not if we are truly Christians. Not if we are living in vital communion with the risen Lord. If we are really convinced of the truth of our message, then we can proclaim it before a world of enemies, then the very difficulty of our task, the very scarcity of our allies becomes an inspiration, then we can even rejoice that God did not place us in an easy age, but in a time of doubt and perplexity and battle. Then, too, we shall not be afraid to call forth other soldiers into the conflict. Instead of making our theological seminaries merely centres of religious emotion, we shall make them battle-grounds of the faith, where, helped a little by the experience of Christian teachers, men are taught to fight their own battle, where they come to appreciate the real strength of the adversary and in the hard school of intellectual struggle learn to substitute for the unthinking faith of childhood the profound convictions of full-grown men. Let us not fear in this a loss of spiritual power. The Church is perishing today through the lack of thinking, not through an excess of it. She is winning victories in the sphere of material betterment. Such victories are glorious. God save us from the heartless crime of disparaging them. They are relieving the misery of men. But if they stand alone, I fear they are but temporary. The things which are seen are temporal; the things which are not seen are eternal. What will become of philanthropy if God be lost? Beneath the surface of life lies a world of spirit. Philosophers have attempted to explore it. Christianity has revealed its wonders to the simple soul. There lie the springs of the Church’s power. But that spiritual realm cannot be entered without controversy. And now the Church is shrinking from the conflict. Driven from the spiritual realm by the current of modern thought, she is consoling herself with things about which there is no dispute. If she favors better housing for the poor, she need fear no contradiction. She will need all her courage. she will have enemies enough, God knows. But they will not fight her with argument. The twentieth century, in theory, is agreed on social betterment. But sin, and death, and salvation, and life, and God—about these things there is debate. You can avoid the debate if you choose. You need only drift with the current. Preach every Sunday during your Seminary course, devote the fag ends of your time to study and to thought, study about as you studied in college—and these questions will probably never trouble you. The great questions may easily be avoided. Many preachers are avoiding them. And many preachers are preaching to the air. The Church is waiting for men of another type. Men to fight her battles and solve her problems. The hope of finding them is the one great inspiration of a Seminary’s life. They need not all be men of conspicuous attainments. But they must all be men of thought. They must fight hard against spiritual and intellectual indolence. Their thinking may be confined to narrow limits. But it must be their own. To them theology must be something more than a task. It must be a matter of inquiry. It must lead not to successful memorizing, but to genuine convictions.The Church is puzzled by the world’s indifference. She is trying to overcome it by adapting her message to the fashions of the day. But if, instead, before the conflict, she would descend into the secret place of meditation, if by the clear light of the gospel she would seek an answer not merely to the questions of the hour but, first of all,  to the eternal problems of the spiritual world, then perhaps, by God’s grace, through His good Spirit, in His good time, she might issue forth once more with power, and an age of doubt might be followed by the dawn of an era of faith.

Princeton.

J. Gresham Machen

Princeton Theological Review Vol 11, 1913 pgs 11-15

click here to read the whole thing

St. Paul’s Theological Center, St. Andrew’s Mt. Pleasant

A little over a year ago St. Andrew’s brought over St. Paul’s Theological Center from Holy Trinity Brompton, in the U.K.  St. Paul’s Theological Center was just starting up when I left Oxford.  The former vice-principal of Wycliffe, Graham Tomlin actually left Wycliffe to direct the program at Holy Trinity and now I’m excited that the program is really gearing up just down the road in Mount Pleasant!  Why I’m excited about this program is that the church in North America has largely become atheological, and programs such as St. Paul’s Theological Center bring robust theology back into the life of the church.  If you’re a church leader, passionate for a Christianity of depth, you may want to check this out.  St. Andrew’s, the host church, will have an informational day on Feb 16th from noon to 5:00 p.m.  After that will be a model St. Paul’s evening, where you will be able to sit in on a typical St. Paul’s seminar.  If you stay you will be fortunate enough to hear Graham Tomlin lecture on his specialty, the great reformer Martin Luther.  Total cost for the day is $25.  Check it out for yourself here.  If you’re a member of Trinity, Myrtle Beach then I would encourage you to come with me as I plan on being there and taking it all in.  Below is an excerpt on the goals of St. Paul’s Theological Center from the St. Andrew’s website. 

St Paul’s Theological Center – South Carolina Campus (SPTC-SC) aims to be a new kind of theological institution, dedicated to playing a part in restoring theology to the heart of the church. Its unique quality is the combination of excellence in theology and teaching within the context of vibrant local churches, rather than a seminary or university. SPTC-SC originates from St. Paul’s Theological Centre at Holy Trinity Brompton, London. Its global profile, due to the Alpha Course and related resources that have become widely used worldwide, draws speakers from around the world.

At the heart of SPTC-SC is the local church, its many different ministries, and other associated communities also make it an ideal place for “the rubber to meet to the road.” The local church is the base for mission into the world. Learners study the kind of practical theology and skills which are so necessary if the church is to flourish into the future. Students at SPTC don’t learn to acquire knowledge. They learn practical theology and skills in order to put them to use in their own lives, proclaiming and demonstrating the Kingdom of God wherever they are sent. The school aims to articulate, develop and teach a theology that is true to its Anglican, evangelical, charismatic roots, yet also embraces the best of orthodox, classical theology throughout the church worldwide, whether Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Pentecostal or more.

A new term begins February 2010

Honoring Christ in Your Twenties

My lovely wife sent this article to me via e-mail and I thought it postworthy.  A growing confrontation with many young adults and the call of Jesus Christ on their lives is that young Christians need to aim to become self-sufficient, productive members of society.  This probably requires finishing school or getting a full time job, and eventually moving out and become financially self-sufficient.  This is, as Paul says to Timothy, “to make some return to their parents” (1 Tim 5.4).  The article below is amusing and probing.  So young adults (me included!), are you honoring Christ in your twenties?

LONDON (Jan. 19) — In many countries, over-18s who refuse to leave the family nest are simply called “losers.” But in Italy, they’re known by the quainter term “bamboccioni,” which roughly translates as “big babies.” Millions of young Italians are believed to live this cosseted existence, with their meals cooked and pants ironed by devoted mamas and papas.

Now, a government minister — who has admitted that his mother made his bed for him until he was 30 — has called for a new law that will force this generation of eternal adolescents to leave home when they turn 18. “I don’t see what’s wrong with passing a law that says all over-18s should leave home and not be a drain on their parents’ resources,” Public Administration Minister Renato Brunetta said during an interview with Italian radio.

His demand for new legislation came after an Italian court told divorced father Giancarlo Casagranda that unless he resumed paying $510 a month to his 32-year-old daughter Marina, who lives with her mother, and coughed up $17,100 in arrears, his assets would be confiscated. That stipend was first set in 1997, when Casagranda split from his wife. But he stopped making payments two years ago, believing his daughter was old enough to look after herself.

The bizarre case was brought by Casagranda’s ex-wife, who was able to draw on a Supreme Court ruling that parents, even if separated or divorced, are obliged to pay for their children’s upkeep “until they are self-sufficient.”

Disconcertingly, few young Italian adults fit that description today. While youngsters traditionally quit the family nest later in Italy than in other European nations, job insecurity and soaring unemployment — almost 30 percent of 16- to 24-year-olds are out of work — has sent numbers of stay-at-homers to record levels. According to the daily La Stampa, almost 60 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds live with their folks, compared with the European Union average of 29 percent. The newspaper added that about a quarter of those children lived with their parents because they were students, while 50 percent did so “for economic reasons.”

read the whole thing here

“Lose your religion” (Phil 3.1-10)

preached by Iain Boyd on Jan 10th, 2010

Watch “Taken” starring Liam Neeson tonight at Trinity

Over the next six weeks at Trinity, on Wednesday nights at 6:00 p.m. our associate pastor Iain Boyd will be taking us through some of the most popular movies of 2009 in our film and theology series.  Iain will discuss the underlying worldview of the film, the story it is telling, and bringing it into a conversation with the Gospel.  I hope you’ll join us and be sure to bring a friend.

For a preview of tonight’s film, click the link below.

Abraham Kuyper: The Entire Human Life Before God

Below is an excerpt from Kuyper’s famous Stone Lectures delivered at Princeton University in 1898.  It is therefore surprising to see him writing so insightfully on modernity, particularly modernity’s approach to gender and its abolishing of distinctions in general.  That the praxis of modernity “kills life” is keenly felt in the anxiety of postmodernity, which chooses to playfully mock the outcome of modernity (the loss of humanity) rather than meaningfully engage it.  Enter Kuyper’s Calvinism stage left, where he gives a beautiful summary of the Calvinistic worldview as well as its approach (in brief) to a range of issues. 

Finally Modernism, which denies and abolishes every difference, cannot rest until it has made woman man and man woman, and, putting every distinction on a common level, kills life by placing it under the ban of uniformity. One type must answer for all, one uniform, one position and one and the same development of life; and whatever goes beyond and above it, is looked upon as an insult to the common consciousness. In the same way Calvinism has derived from its fundamental relation to God a peculiar interpretation of man’s relation to man, and it is this only true relation which since the 16th century has ennobled social life, If Calvinism places our entire human life immediately before God, then it follows that all men or women, rich or poor, weak or strong, dull or talented, as creatures of God, and as lost sinners, have no claim whatsoever to lord over one another, and that we stand as equals before God, and consequently equal as man to man. Hence we cannot recognize any distinction among men, save such as has been imposed by God Himself, in that He gave one authority over the other, or enriched one with more talents than the other, in order that the man of more talents should serve the man with less, and in him serve his God. Hence Calvinism condemns not merely all open slavery and systems of caste, but also all covert slavery of woman and of the poor; it is opposed to all hierarchy among men; it tolerates no aristocracy save such as is able, either in person or in family, by the grace of God, to exhibit superiority of character or talent, and to show that it does not claim this superiority for self-aggrandizement or ambitious pride, but for the sake of spending it in the service of God. So Calvinism was bound to find its utterance in the democratic interpretation of life; to proclaim the liberty of nations; and not to rest until both politically and socially every man, simply because he is man, should be recognized, respected and dealt with as a creature created after the Divine likeness.

Abraham Kuyper, Christianity: a total world and life system (Gilliland 1996) pg 20

John Owen: The work of the Trinity in redemption part II

The following is taken from John Owen’s classic The Death of Death in the Death of Christ. I have lifted this text from the CCEL library, however if this peaks your interest in the slightest I would recommend purchasing this version because it has a remarkable introduction to Owen and the book written by J.I. Packer. Owen is difficult to read and his theological discourse is on a level that few are accustomed to operating at these days. Nevertheless, he is worth your time and worth the headache you may receive by trying to hack through his stilted latin grammar. I will put up three posts in the following days from Owen. One on the work of the Father in redemption, one on the work of the Son in redemption, and finally one on the work of the Spirit in redemption. I have already posted Owen’s writting on the Father.  You can find it here.  Below is only a portion of Owen’s chapter on the Son’s work in redemption.  Reading it through again I am always surprised how thorough Owen is. 

All other ways being rejected as insufficient, Christ undertaketh the task, “in whom alone the Father was well pleased,” Matt. iii. 17. Hence he professeth that “he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him,” John vi. 38; yea, that it was his meat and drink to do his Father’s will, and to finish his work, chap. iv. 34. The first words that we find recorded of him in the Scripture are to the same purpose, “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” Luke ii. 49. And at the close of all he saith, “I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do,” John xvii. 4; calling it everywhere his Father’s work that he did, or his Father’s will which he came to accomplish, with reference to the imposition which we before treated of. Now, this undertaking of the Son may be referred to three heads. The first being a common foundation for both the others, being as it were the means in respect of them as the end, and yet in some sort partaking of the nature of a distinct action, with a goodness in itself in reference to the main end proposed to all three, we shall consider it apart; and that is, —

First, His incarnation, as usually it is called, or his taking of flesh, and pitching his tent amongst us, John i. 14. His “being made of a woman,” Gal. iv. 4, is usually called his ἐνσάρκωσις, incarnation; for this was “the mystery of godliness, that God should be manifested in the flesh,” 1 Tim. iii. 16, thereby assuming not any singular person, but our human nature, into personal union with himself. For, “forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also 175himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil,” Heb. ii. 14. It was the children that he considered, the “children whom the Lord gave him,” verse 13. Their participation in flesh and blood moved him to partake of the same, — not because all the world, all the posterity of Adam, but because the children were in that condition; for their sakes he sanctified himself. Now, this emptying of the Deity, this humbling of himself, this dwelling amongst us, was the sole act of the second person, or the divine nature in the second person, the Father and the Spirit having no concurrence in it but by liking, approbation, and eternal counsel.

Secondly, His oblation, or “offering himself up to God for us without spot, to purge our consciences from dead works,” Heb. ix. 14; “for he loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,” Rev. i. 5. “He loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it,” Eph. v. 25, 26; taking the cup of wrath at his Father’s hands due to us, and drinking it off, “but not for himself,” Dan. ix. 26: for, “for our sakes he sanctified himself,” John xvii. 19, that is, to be an offering, an oblation for sin; for “when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly,” Rom. v. 6; — this being that which was typified out by all the institutions, ordinances, and sacrifices of old; which when they were to have an end, then said Christ, “Lo, I come to do thy will.” Now, though the perfecting or consummating of this oblation be set out in the Scripture chiefly in respect of what Christ suffered, and not so much in respect of what he did, because it is chiefly considered as the means used by these three blessed agents for the attaining of a farther end, yet in respect of his own voluntary giving up himself to be so an oblation and a sacrifice, without which it would not have been of any value (for if the will of Christ had not been in it, it could never have purged our sins), therefore, in that regard, I refer it to his actions. He was the “Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world,” John i. 29; the Lamb of God, which himself had provided for a sacrifice. And how did this Lamb behave himself in it? with unwillingness and struggling? No; he opened not his mouth: “He was brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth,” Isa. liii. 7. Whence he saith, “I lay down my life. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again,” John x. 17, 18. He might have been cruciated on the part of God; but his death could not have been an oblation and offering had not his will concurred. “But he loved me,” saith the apostle, “and gave himself for me,” Gal. ii. 20. Now, that alone deserves the name of a gift which is from a free and a willing mind, as Christ’s was when “he loved us, and gave himself for us an offering 176and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour,” Eph. v. 2. He does it cheerfully: “Lo, I come to do thy will, O God,” Heb. x. 9; and so “his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree,” 1 Pet. ii. 24. Now, this oblation or offering of Christ I would not tie up to any one thing, action, or passion, performance, or suffering; but it compriseth the whole economy and dispensation of God manifested in the flesh and conversing among us, with all those things which he performed in the days of his flesh, when he offered up prayers and supplications, with strong cries and tears, until he had fully “by himself purged our sins, and sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high,” Heb. i. 3, “expecting till his enemies be made his footstool,” chap. x. 13, — all the whole dispensation of his coming and ministering, until he had given his soul a price of redemption for many, Matt. xxvi. 28. But for his entering into the holy of holies, sprinkled with his own blood, and appearing so for us before the majesty of God, by some accounted as the continuation of his oblation, we may refer unto, —

Thirdly, His intercession for all and every one of those for whom he gave himself for an oblation. He did not suffer for them, and then refuse to intercede for them; he did not do the greater, and omit the less. The price of our redemption is more precious in the eyes of God and his Son than that it should, as it were, be cast away on perishing souls, without any care taken of what becomes of them afterward.

read the rest here

Paul’s Gospel Reminder (Eph 1.14-19)

preached by Todd Schmidtetter on Jan 3, 2010

Martin Lloyd-Jones: What makes a Christian?

The first paragraph is a spot on description of the current theological scene in the West.  Read on to see how it trickles down to the laity. 

We are living in an age that dislikes precision and definitions. It is an age that is anti-theological, anti-doctrinal and which dislikes propositions and exact knowledge. It is a lazy age in every respect, a sentimental, sloppy age, an age that wants entertainment and dislikes effort. In the whole of life today the principle is ’something for nothing’. We are ready to take but we are not ready to work; we are not ready to give ourselves. It is true all round and it accounts for most of our problems. It is particularly true in the realm of the Christian church. We must therefore deal with this very carefully.

This tendency shows itself in many ways which are generally very plausible. One way is to say that Christianity is something that is so wonderful that it cannot be defined, that it baffles analysis or any attempt to state it in propositions. I am sure you are familiar with that particular view. People say you might as well try to dissect beauty, or an aroma, as to define the Christian faith. It cannot be done, they say. You experience it marvelous and wonderful! But if you try to analyze it, then you destroy it, there is nothing left. You must not bring the rude hands of analysis here.

Another way in which it is put is this: that Christianity is only a matter of one’s spirit. What makes us Christians is our spirit, and if we have an appropriate spirit, then we are Christians. Christianity is an attitude, a view of life, a general statement concerning our personality and our being. There was a slogan not so long ago which said, ‘Christianity is caught, not taught’. You catch the spirit. You feel it in the meeting and you get it. But what is it? Well, you do not know, but that does not matter. You have got it! That is the great thing and you feel much happier and much better than you did before.

Then a third way in which it is put is this: that after all what matters is our general reaction to the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now this is one of the most popular views of all. People say, ‘You read the Gospels and there you see this portrait of Him and, as it were, you meet Him. Now what decides whether you are a Christian or not is this: Do you like Him? Do you want to be like Him? Do you try to imitate Him? What is your reaction to Him?’ You must not come and dissect, and bring your propositions and your theology and say you have got to believe this and not believe that. What matters is your total response to Him, and if you react favorably to Him, then you are a Christian.

The fourth way is the approach that describes Christianity in terms of living. What does it matter what people believe as long as they are living good, Christ like lives, as long as they are generous, ready to make sacrifices, ready to help others, and concerned about the uplift of the race? That is what makes people Christians.

Now this dangerous attitude takes one other form. I put this in a category on its own because I am beginning to think that in some ways it is the most subtle form of all among evangelical people. It is the tendency to estimate whether or not people are Christians, not by what they actually say about their beliefs but by what you feel about them. Now, I do want to make this clear, because I have encountered it a great deal. We attach greater importance and significance to this ‘feeling’ that we may have about them than to the very words that the people themselves use about the Christian faith.

The Hope of Christmas (Isa 61.10-62.3)

preached by Iain Boyd on Dec 27th, 2009

Charles Spurgeon: how to stop scandal in the church

This is an excerpt from a column Spurgeon used to write answering questions from laity.  The question from “Ruth” in this instance was “What can I do to stop scandal in the church?”  Spurgeon’s answer is both wise and humorous. 

We suggest to her that enough cotton in both ears would prevent her hearing it, and the filling of her mouth all the day long with the praise of God would, render it impossible for her tongue to spread it. This would suffice for her personally. She, however, we suspect, rather wants us to suggest a remedy for the habit of scandal in others. Really we do not know of anything short of the grace of God. While hearts remain unrenewed, tongues will be full of bitterness; and in gracious people while corruption remains, there will be a measure of mouth disease too. Dogs delight to bark and bite, “for ’tis their nature to.” None can rule or tame human tongues except the Omnipotent himself. Solomon talked of hot coals of juniper, and such-like fiery remedies, but we question whether they would be effectual even if they could be applied. One rule we endeavor to follow with regard to gossip, viz.: let the thing die a natural death. If any one reports to us that here is a dirty pool near us, we go in another direction, but never dream of sitting down on its margin to take long sniffs, neither do we indulge the practice of stirring it, and poking a pole to the very bottom of it. We told a friend lately, who said that it was our duty to interpose in the squabbles of another church, that we did not carry a brush in our pocket to scrub all the pigs we met with, and we fancied that if we did we should soon get some of the mire on our own hands. Scandal is like the hydra which lives by being killed, and multiplies itself with every cut you make at it. It is like a very bad house to let, which is ill-drained, has a leaky roof, and is generally out of repair;—it is best let alone. If dogs are asleep don’t wake them, they may bark; and if they are barking don’t interfere with them, for they may bite.

read it all here