It’s always informative to read the perceptions of outsiders on life here – since they don’t have the exact same blind spots as we do. Especially when they’re brothers in Christ – since that means they do have the same basic worldview as us.

So, it turns out that one of the contributors to Credenda-Agenda (I told you it was good) lives in the UK. He’s recently fired-off a few lines about what he sees as ‘the astonishing loss of personal liberty that England has allowed.’ He continues

“But when the nation that produced C.S. Lewis starts taking orders from the NICE to go in and inspect whether people have their hot water heaters turned up too hot and when Mr. Badman instructs parliament to take homeschooling children into the other room to ask them questions about their parents, then this is not just me being North Idaho provincial. This is objectively ludicrous.”

Read the whole thing HERE.

I blogged about Badman HERE.

 

What’s the single best thing you’ve ever read on the Trinity?

I’m currently getting my stuff in order for a three-week doctrine of God course we’re going to be running in early 2010. As preparatory reading I’ve ear-marked Frame, and bought Letham, Bavinck and Chester. For something a little different I’ve also got hold of Treier. I reckon I might just have room for reading/ skimming from one other place (aside from the lecture handouts, mp3s and so on I’ll be consulting).

Suggestions?

What’s the one* thing you’ve read (aside from scripture) that I shouldn’t miss out on?

 

*By ‘one’ I do not intend to thereby exclude the possibility that you may have three best things to recommend. It might be that you can’t recommend ‘the one’ without immediately being drawn to ‘the three’ and vice versa.

 

Well, even though he was born over 500 years ago (and dead not much less than 450 of them), it seems that works are continuing to flow from John Calvin’s pen. Here he is in a recent edition of Christianity Today magazine addressing the modern Roman Church on the issue of indulgences.

Other ‘recent’ works are linked to at the bottom of the article and include this response to the prosperity gospel.

Though dead, he yet speaks, and all that…

It’s been very common to use the words ‘law’ and ‘gospel’ in the following way:

Gospel = promises that save
Law = legal demands that condemn

That’s all ok to some extent as systematic categories. But frankly unhelpful if used as an absolutising gloss for how to understand the words ‘gospel’ and ‘law’ as the NT actually uses them. Romans 2 is a good example of why this is so.

1. Note the way Paul uses ‘gospel.’

v16 – the gospel includes the news of judgment day, and the way that that judgment day will proceed. This should be no surprise for the gospel according to Paul is an announcement about Jesus, God’s Son, that he is Christ and Lord (1:4). As such he will one day judge the secrets of men (2:16).

In this sense, the gospel can be either ‘law’ or ‘gospel’ (in the senses meant above) for someone, depending on whether or not they have faith in Christ. The gospel warns us of our condemnation at the judgment throne of Jesus Christ the Lord.

2. Note the function of the law within this announcement of the gospel

The gospel announces the way that that judgment day will proceed –including the fact that judgment is according to works (v6). Paul speaks very clearly in v7, 10, 13-14,  26, 28-29, of the evidential role that law-keeping will play in God’s final verdict of those who are righteous. Those who are given eternal life on the final day are thus given according (not on the basis of/ as earned by) to their works.

Put another way, the gospel tells me that as judge the Lord Jesus will use the law (2:13) and our obedience or disobedience of it as a yardstick for exposing the reality of our hearts come judgment day.

Again, to use systematic categories borrowed from elsewhere in the reformed tradition, we could say that the gospel includes the announcement that the 3rd use of the law will be very relevant (as evidence) on judgment day. In this sense, the necessity of obedience to law is included in the gospel announcement.

3. Note the role of the law in salvation

Salvation, and more specifically, the inward-reviving, life-giving, regenerating work of the Spirit, is described in this passage in terms of an internalisation of the law. The heart is circumcised, and the ‘work of the law’ is written on the heart (v15, v29). This itself is evidenced by obedience to the law in the lifestyle of the regenerate, hence why obedience and deeds function the way they do on judgment day.  But what’s mostly of note here for our purposes is simply the fact that salvation can be described in relation to the law, whilst at the same time it is being made abundantly clear that it is not mere possession of the written law that does this internalising work but rather the Spirit.

And, if anyone is still confused, let me strongly assert: We are justified by faith alone in Christ alone, and not on the basis of any works we have done. Salvation is entirely of grace, we can merit/ deserve/ earn nothing. Our works function on judgment day as the evidence that we are those who have put our trust in Christ. All I’m saying is that James and Paul agree.

I really like this short post and thought from Peter Leithart. The whole thing’s pretty short, but here’s a quote:

“Athanasius notes that before the incarnation humanity was under the dominion of false gods, enslaved to corruption and idolatry.  The Word took flesh to deliver us from that slavery, and the form of that deliverance was an act of worship”

Yesterday I noticed something for the first time in Revelation. Now I’ve noticed it, it seems obvious.

The representatives of the church down on earth are called angels in each of the letters to the 7 churches. Though ‘angels’ it seems clear to me they are the officers/ elders/ ministers of the 7 churches in Asia. Calling them angels highlights one of the themes of the book – the transition from the old covenant mediated by angels (Hebrews 2:2, Galatians 3:19) to the new covenant in which humanity has (in Christ) attained maturity, entered the heavenly sanctuary and taken a seat alongside the angels in God’s court (Hebrews 2:10-11, Galatians 3:23-26) . Hence angels and men are now co-equal co-workers in the kingdom (19:10).

But, when John ascends into heaven he encounters 24 elders before the throne. It seems that they are somehow representative of the church too (24 = 2×12, 12 apostles, 12 tribes of Israel). They are kings (they sit on thrones, have crowns, 12 is a governmental number), and they are also priests (like the 24 divisions of singers and Priestly divisions of 1 Chronicles 24 and 25), just like the church in 1:6.

What’s interesting about this is that angels are usually ‘in heaven’ whereas ‘elders’ is a standard name for the leaders of God’s people here on earth. So…

The heavenly representatives of the church are called elders, emphasising that they represent, in heaven, the church on earth. They are seated on thrones in the heavenly places, but they are seated there as elders – the heads of God’s people.

The earthly representatives of the church are called angels, emphasising that though on earth, they really are members of God’s heavenly court and part of the starry host which governs the cosmos (Rev 1:20, Genesis 1:16, Daniel 12:3). They are leaders of the people of God on earth, but they do so as ‘angels’ – part of the heavenly cabinet of God, and ministers of his covenant.

The church is earthly and heavenly, heavenly and earthly, and all at the same time. In a book that is all about the prophet’s ascent into the heavenlies to witness worship there and the impact it has on earth, and then climaxes with the marriage of earth and heaven, this can be no accident.

 

One of my favourite occasional reads over the last couple of years has been Credenda/ Agenda. It’s witty, polemical, thought-provoking, and all that sort of thing. Much like a Presbyterian version of The Briefing with a sense of humour*.

Anyway, Credenda (oh yes, you can even shorten the name if you like, it’s that sort of a publication) has now become an almost exclusively online thing. Which means updates are more regular, rather than coming altogether every quarter in one issue. Recent examples include an article on evangelism to Mormons (we have some of those here in Sheffield), and one I really like on ecoguilt.

The website is here. Go have a look. Some stuff will provoke, some will confuse, some will delight. Most will edify in some way or another.

*[Disclaimer: I hereby declare my love for and enjoyment of the Briefing over a number of years. Look, I subscribe, alright? Honestly, with a cherry on top. But it really isn't all that funny, that's all I'm saying!]

Today is Reformation Day. On October 31st 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Cathedral in Wittenberg. This standard procedure for engaging debate would prove a little more inflammatory than Luther thought possible at the time. The Protestant Reformation happened as a result. With this in mind, I’ve been posting some material on people changed by reading the book of Romans, mainly taken from F.F. Bruce’s Tyndale commentary on the same.

3. John Wesley

“In the evening of 24 May 1738, John Wesley ‘went very willingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther’s Preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine,’ he wrote in his journal, ‘while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed.  I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for my salvation; and an assurance was given me that he had taken my sins away even mine; and saved me from the law of sin and death.’ That critical moment in John Wesley’s life was the event above all others which launched the Evangelical Revival of the eighteenth century.”

It is said that Wesley, in serving the gospel, rode 250, 000 miles, gave away £30, 000 and preached 40, 000 sermons.

 

Today is Reformation Day. On October 31st 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Cathedral in Wittenberg. This standard procedure for engaging debate would prove a little more inflammatory than Luther thought possible at the time. The Protestant Reformation happened as a result. With this in mind, I’ve been posting some material on people changed by reading the book of Romans, mainly taken from F.F. Bruce’s Tyndale commentary on the same.

2. Martin Luther

“In November 1515, Martin Luther, Augustinian monk and Professor of Sacred Theology in the University of Wittenberg, began to expound Paul’s Epistle to the Romans to his students, and continued this course until the following September. As he prepared his lectures, he came more and more to appreciate the centrality of the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith. ‘I greatly longed to understand Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,’ he wrote, ‘and nothing stood in the way but that one expression, “the righteousness of God”, because I took it to mean that righteousness whereby God is righteous and deals righteously in punishing the unrighteous…Night and day I pondered until… I grasped the truth that the righteousness of God is that righteousness whereby, through grace and sheer mercy, he justifies us by faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise. The whole Scripture took on a new meaning, and whereas before “the righteousness of God” had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love. This passage of Paul because to me a gateway to heaven.’ The consequences of this new insight which Martin Luther gained from the study of Romans are writ large in history.” [p58-59]

Although the reformation was about more than the doctrine of justification, it was one of the key battle grounds between the Reformers and Rome. In the coming decades many would put their lives on the line for the truth that we are justified by faith alone through grace alone, and not because of any kind of works done by us. Luther’s re-discovery of something at the very heart of the gospel would form a centrepiece in the preaching of that gospel in the western world for the next two centuries – preaching that set people free from sin and guilt, reformed the church, planted churches, sparked revolutions – in short, changed the world.

Tomorrow is Reformation Day. On October 31st 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Cathedral in Wittenberg. This standard procedure for engaging debate would prove a little more inflammatory than Luther thought possible at the time. The Protestant Reformation happened as a result. With this in mind, today and tomorrow I’m going to post some material on people changed by reading the book of Romans, mainly taken from F.F. Bruce’s Tyndale commentary on the same.

1. St Augustine of Hippo

“In the summer of AD386 Aurelius Augustinus, native of Tagaste in North Africa, and now for two years Professor of Rhetoric at Milan, sat weeping in the garden of his friend Alypius, almost persuaded to begin a new life, yet lacking the final resolution to break with the old. As he sat, he heard a child singing in a neighbouring house, Tolle, lege! Tolle, lege! (‘Take up and read! Take up and read!). Taking the scroll which lay at his friend’s side, he let his eyes rest on the words: ‘not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof’ (Rom. xiii. 13b-14). ‘No further would I read,’ he tells us, ‘nor had I any need; instantly, at the end of this sentence, a clear light flooded my heart and all the darkness of doubt vanished away.’ What the Church and the world owe to this influx of light, which illuminated Augustine’s mind as he read these words of Paul is something beyond our power to compute.” [p58]

Augustine went on to be one the most important teachers and Church leaders in the early centuries of Christianity. His thinking on the Church and on the Trinity shaped at least the next 1100 years of Christianity massively, his battle against the legalistic teaching of Pelagius was invaluable in defending the gospel of grace for centuries to come, and even today people still read his sermons.

John Richardson has posted an excellent piece related to the BNP-BBC merry-go-round from last week. I’m going to quote one or two bits from it, but you really should just leave this blog and go read it. Particularly insightful are his comments on why our intelligentsia, government and media, seem to be incapable of dispatching with the BNP with the kind of nonchalant precision appropriate for a teeny-weeny fringe party like they are.

The first is that they are products of an educational system which did not teach them to think. It especially did not teach them to think about positions which disagreed with the popular morality of their educators.

But the other reason why our intelligentsia lack confidence is that, thanks to recent government policy, they have come to rely on force, not on argument. Why bother presenting a case when you can just ban someone from speaking, or blockade the arena where they would appear, or —best of all —pass a law which will make it illegal for them to speak in these terms at all.

We are a society that, like the Question Time audience, cheers and boos to the cues in which it has been coached. And woe betide the person who truly stands out, or goes against the crowd. But sometimes one gets the feeling we are just being set up for the next stage, whatever that might be.

The article he references from the Times is HERE. And I imagine Question Time is still on iplayer.

Pastor Tim Keller, though I’ve never spoken with him personally, has nevertheless helped me enormously in my discipleship the last few years. In fact, Tim Keller’s ministry was one of my entry-points to the creation-affirming, holistic, civilisation-building theology to which this blog is dedicated. It is therefore, in my opinion, great news for Christ’s kingdom that around 150 of his sermons are available for free from his church’s website, HERE. He combines some great things – a love for the Puritans, a generally Kuyperian slant on culture, a dedication to expository preaching, a certain degree of Anglophilia, a dash of Frame’s perspectivalism, love for the urban poor, and a passion for church-planting.

I recently had a conversation with someone who was asking questions about issues around special revelation and whether or not general revelation can save, the salvation of the unevangelised, the justice of God in it all, and implications for our mission and evangelistic practices here in the UK. Part of the problem was some confusing errors this person had heard from a friend (in church leadership nonetheless!) that almost portrayed understanding of the gospel as an add-on for maturation rather than something needful for salvation.

We talked about Romans 1, Psalm 19, Paul’s summary and understanding of the gospel, and of avoiding the error of saying ‘unless you understand this list of doctrines and especially this particular biblical teaching about the mechanics of salvation you cannot be saved’ on the one hand, and the opposite error of saying on the other hand that ‘so long as someone seems to want to serve ‘God’ then they’re in.’ We also talked about why/ how it is that general revelation can’t save, and how (from one perspective) God owes it to no-one that they hear the gospel.

However, a few days later he came back with another question, one that he feared was a deal-breaker to the whole idea that you can’t be saved unless you hear the gospel. The question was ‘but what about “Abraham was justified by faith”?’

And this friend was brought up in a flagship bible-teaching evangelical church, and has been attending Central for over two years. Somehow he’d been able, in all that, to miss the fact that Abraham heard and believed the gospel for his justification (Galatians 3:7-8, Romans 4:13, 18). Of course it’s not that the churches he’s attended don’t believe or preach that. And of course things need saying 50 times before most of any of us ‘get’ it. But that just underlines the point I’m trying to make.

We need to preach the gospel from the OT and preach the OT as gospel.

The 2nd issue of Ecclesia Reformanda arrived the other day through my letterbox. If possible, this one looks even better than the first one. So over the next few weeks I’ll be reading

• Jeffers on Jeremiah 32:37-41 in the baptism debates
• Lloyd on B. B. Warfield’s doctrine of scripture
• White on Romans 2:1-16
• Batchelor on Trinity and Eschatology

You can subscribe to ER here.

I’m reading David Chilton’s commentary on Revelation for some lectures I’m giving here, and stumbled across this excellent quote about predestination.

The opposite of the doctrine of predestination is not freedom, but meaninglessness; if the smallest details of our lives are not part of the Plan of God, if they are not created facts with a divinely determined significance, then they can have no meaning at all. [p100]