By Timothy Raymond –

From time to time the Credo blog will seek to point its readers to some of the most helpful sermons we’re aware of.  We’ll be doing this, firstly, to encourage your own pursuit of holiness, and secondly, to provide models of the kinds of preaching we believe most needful in the contemporary church.

 We kick off this series with an offering from Dr. Sinclair Ferguson, Senior Pastor of the historic First Presbyterian Church of Columbia, SC and professor of theology at Redeemer Seminary in Dallas.

The sermon we’ve selected is entitled “The Lord Our God, The Lord is One: The Simplicity of God“, a message preached at the 2004 Ligonier Ministries National Conference.  While the message addresses the unity and harmony of all God’s attributes, the sermon especially dwells on God’s self-sufficiency.   I watched this message recently and it very well might be the most profound sermon I’ve ever heard.  After contemplating the absolute uniqueness of our Lord, the only possible response can be worship.  If part of the sermon sounds strangely familiar, you might be interested to know that Christian Rapper Shai Linne included an excerpt from this message on his recent The Attributes of God album.  To watch the video of this sermon, go here.  Enjoy!

Timothy Raymond is an editor for Credo Magazine. He has been the pastor of Trinity Baptist Church in Muncie, Indiana since April 2006. He received his MDiv from the Baptist Bible Seminary of Pennsylvania in 2004 and has pursued further education through the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation. Tim grew up outside Syracuse, NY and previously served at Berean Baptist Church, Nicholson, PA (member and teacher during college and seminary) and Calvary Baptist Church, Sandusky, Ohio (seminary internship location). Tim met his wife Bethany at college, and they were married in May 2001. Tim enjoys reading, weight-lifting, wrestling with his three sons, and attempting to sleep.

Our readers may be interested to know that Dr. Ardel Caneday, Professor of New Testament Studies and Biblical Studies at Northwestern College in St. Paul, Minnesota and regular blogger here at Credo, recently contributed a chapter to a new book entitled Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart (Kregel Academic, 2012).  Dr. Caneday’s chapter is entitled, “How Can I Live Out the Biblical Worldview in a Culture that Does Not Share that Worldview?” (Chapter 7).  He introduces the discussion by writing:

“In the mix of worldviews present in today’s culture, Christianity has historically had varying degrees of impact. Because of Christianity’s influence upon the world’s cultures, biblical concepts and terminology have significantly (but not at all perfectly) transformed many aspects of culture, especially within Western cultures. Even with the rise of modernism more than a century ago, much of Christianity’s influence has remained intact, especially within the realm of public discourse.

“In recent decades, however, the encroachment of philosophical pluralism upon the West has increasingly altered public discourse. Many of the worldviews present today share what amounts to philosophical pluralism’s common mantra: ‘There is no such thing as absolute truth.’ While allowing for Christianity as one belief system among many, those who have come to share this common mantra may not realize that their own worldviews owe much to (and are often distortions of) the biblical worldview. Yet, they now insist that those Christian beliefs from which they receive so many benefits can hold no universal or exclusive claims to truth. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that those who embrace various forms of philosophical pluralism routinely and heavily borrow and use Christian terminology in ways that imitate and counterfeit—but subtly subvert—the biblical view of the world and of life. Consequently, evangelical Christians are in danger of mistakenly embracing and endorsing several counterfeit concepts and causes as though those things were virtuous, Christian, and even biblically grounded.Because we who are Christians reside in this world, we continually encounter both non-biblical and anti-biblical ideas and thinking that attract our attention, even at times seducing us by the allure of these ideas to let down our guard of biblically grounded critical thinking, to embrace false beliefs partially if not wholly.”

After considering the biblical and theological teaching on the subject, as well as practical ramifications, Dr. Caneday concludes his chapter by saying:

“So, the current culture replaces universal virtues with individualized values and makes uncertainty the most prized form of humility. Tolerance toward people with whom we disagree, perhaps even vigorously, has been replaced in the public square with tolerance for ideas, except for the idea of absolute truth. This in turn means that anyone who does not tolerate ideas and beliefs that formerly were universally condemned stands condemned as intolerant. This is where true followers of Jesus will find themselves. But this is no surprise. Inevitably everyone who lives a godly life in Christ Jesus will encounter controversy, for to live the Christian life necessarily entails controverting the culture in which we live (cf. 2 Tim. 3:12).

“Following Christ Jesus as his disciples requires us daily to pick up the instrument of death to self, the cross, and to deny ourselves (Luke 9:23). As we endeavor to live out the biblical worldview, if we lose sight of this and instead desire to save ourselves from pluralism’s frown, rebuke, and hostilities, we will lose our lives forever in perdition. We must be willing to endure inconveniences and even hostilities for the sake of Christ and the gospel, for otherwise of what benefit is the biblical worldview that we desire others to embrace? The gospel’s consolation to us is that all who lose their life for Christ’s sake will be saved (Luke 9:24).”

For all those concerned to live out biblical Christianity in a world of radically diverse perspectives, Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart  may be a very helpful resource.

Timothy Raymond is an editor for Credo Magazine. He has been the pastor of Trinity Baptist Church in Muncie, Indiana since April 2006. He received his MDiv from the Baptist Bible Seminary of Pennsylvania in 2004 and has pursued further education through the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation. Tim grew up outside Syracuse, NY and previously served at Berean Baptist Church, Nicholson, PA (member and teacher during college and seminary) and Calvary Baptist Church, Sandusky, Ohio (seminary internship location). Tim met his wife Bethany at college, and they were married in May 2001. Tim enjoys reading, weight-lifting, wrestling with his three sons, and attempting to sleep.

By Dillon T. Thornton -

“I need to repent of my repentance.”
–The Valley of Vision

I’ve done a lot of stubborn and stupid things in my life. I remember one event in particular that occurred when I was a devious tot—I placed a 911 call and fabricated a story about my house being on fire!  Needless to say, when my parents found out, I was bludgeoned appropriately. They also made me take a trip to the local fire department and apologize to the firemen for the lie I had told. But then my parents took me home, sat me down, and explained to me that as important as it was for me to apologize to the firemen, it was even more important for me to apologize to God—because all sins, even the made-up stories of mischievous little ones, are sins against a holy God.  This is the first time I remember someone teaching me about the importance of confession of sin.

In Psalm 32, David demonstrates the importance of confession of sin.  Specifically, he teaches us about genuine confession and the joy of forgiveness. The psalm can be divided into three main sections. First, David gives us the key principle of the entire psalm and the reason for his opening praise—genuine confession of sin leads to the joy of forgiveness (vs. 1-2).  Then, David provides a personal testimony—he tells us how he came to experience this joy of forgiveness (vs. 3-5).  Finally, David turns to the congregation and teaches them (and us) the lessons learned from this experience (vs. 6-11).     

The Key Principle: Genuine Confession of Sin Leads to the Joy of Forgiveness (vs. 1-2)

The psalm begins with a pronouncement of blessing.  The term “blessed” is often used as a reference to the joy that God-given security produces.  This is only the second time in the Psalter that a psalm has begun with the word “blessed.”  The first was in Psalm 1, where it is said, “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked” (Ps. 1:1). Here, in Psalm 32, the word “blessed” is reserved for the one who has walked the wicked path, but has truly repented and now knows the joy of restoration.

In these opening verses, synonyms are piled up to emphasize the subject of sin. “Transgression” refers to willful rebellion or revolt against God.  The verb is sometimes used in military contexts where a rebel willfully crosses a boundary (e.g.: 2 Kings 1:1; 3:5; 8:20).  “Sin” refers to missing the mark of God’s standard.  Judges 20:16 is especially helpful in illustrating the meaning of the verb; it describes stone slingers who “miss the mark” they are aiming at.  “Iniquity” indicates a turning aside from the way God wants.

Verses 1-2 also contain a merciful trio:  three terms that highlight the mercy of the Almighty.  “Forgiven/Lifted” refers to God’s removal of sin.  When sin is confessed and “lifted,” God removes it “as far as the east is from the west”(Ps. 103:12).  It also means that God no longer “remembers” it against the sinner, that is, God will not act against the sinner.  “Covered” has some overlap, but this term specifically refers to the withdrawal of God’s wrath; the LORD no longer brings up the sin as a ground for His displeasure (Ps. 85:2-3).  “Not counted” means that sin is not reckoned to us. Forgiveness comes as a result of confession (as v. 5 will make clear), but it is crucial for us to notice the word “deceit” here in the psalm.  Only when our confession is honest and devoid of all “deceit” will the joyful state of forgiveness be experienced.  The final words of this opening section are quite serious.  Since the confession of sin is the act of a sinner, the confession itself can be sinful. How is this? When we go through the motions of confession but don’t truly mean it, we are deceitful.  When we acknowledge sin with our lips but we fail to forsake sin with our lives, we are deceitful.  Only when confession is free from guile will it be genuine, and only genuine confession will lead to forgiveness.  

A Personal Testimony:  David Remembers the Time When He Genuinely Confessed His Sin and Found the Joy of Forgiveness (vs. 3-5)

(1) The Absence of Confession Leads to Spiritual Depression (vv. 3-4). David’s unrepentant state is first described as a state of “silence.” The context makes it clear that this “silence” is the absence of confession.  David no doubt said many things during this unrepentant state, but the words that needed to be spoken most, words of confession, he kept bottled up inside. 

David also uses powerful images to describe his terrible condition of spiritual depression that set in as result of his silence.  First, he says, “My bones wasted away.”  “Bones” refers to what is in the boney framework (his entire self).  David compares his dire state to the process of corrosion or deterioration.  His entire life deteriorated.  Second, David speaks of his “groaning.”  In addition to the “wasting away,” David perpetually cried out in agony as a consequence of living with his sin and his guilt. Third, David explains that “[God’s] hand was heavy upon me.”  God is Spirit; He has no physical hands.  This is a figure of speech in which arms and hands are attributed to God to indicate His strength and power.  David wants us to know that God’s power was working against him.  Finally, we are told that David’s “strength was dried up as by the heat of summer.”  Here, David compares his time of spiritual depression to the tormenting heat of summer. A person does not have to stay in the summer sun for very long for the body’s moisture to completely evaporate, and this is David’s final image for his former unrepentant state.  David shows us that the intense weakening of the spiritual life inevitably follows the unhealthy practice of bottling up one’s evil within the soul.

(2) Authentic Confession Leads to Spiritual Deliverance/Forgiveness (v. 5). Eventually, God got David’s attention, and authentic confession was the result.  To indicate the comprehensiveness of his confession, David uses the same three words that appeared in the opening section—“sin,” “iniquity,” and “transgression”—and attaches a different verb to each of them.  Now, we have a confessional trio:  three terms expressing David’s penitence.  “Acknowledged” does not mean that David somehow made God aware of his sin; rather, it indicates that David admitted his sin to God.  He didn’t inform God of his sin, he agreed with God that he was sinful. Additionally, David did not “cover” his iniquity.  The same term is repeated from v. 1.  David does not “cover” his sin (here in v. 5), meaning that he approaches God sincerely, with nothing to hide.  The result is that God will “cover” the sin for him (v. 1), meaning that the LORD, in His great mercy, no longer brings up the sin as a ground for His displeasure (Ps. 85:2-3).  Finally, David “confessed” his transgressions.

Let us pause to notice a beautiful formula here:  any sin committed by a believer + authentic confession of that sin = automatic forgiveness! David shows us that when the sinner authentically pours out his heart to his LORD, immediately there is forgiveness.  The indivisible unity of v. 5 is:  the sinner genuinely confesses and the LORD graciously forgives.

The Response of God’s People:  All Who Genuinely Confess Their Sin Will Find the Joy of Forgiveness (vv. 6-11)

Having personally experienced the glorious forgiveness of God, David next and naturally turns to God’s people and instructs them based on the personal lessons he has learned. The joy of forgiveness, you see, is not something to be kept to oneself.  We find three specific applications in this final part of the psalm.

Application # 1:  Pray to the LORD and Be Restored (vv.6-8).The better translation here is just “at a time of finding” (rather than “at a time when you may be found,” as the ESV has it), because no object is specified in the Hebrew text.  The point is that the time of finding is when the sinner is seeking.  When we are convicted of our sin, we should immediately act and confess.  We must never hesitate, because hesitating leads to spiritual depression and divine discipline, as the opening verses of the psalm make clear.   

The final part of v. 6 assures those who do not hesitate in the genuine confession of sin and the seeking of restoration that they will be protected. “The flood of great waters,” a common image within the Psalter (Ps. 46, 69, 88), is an implied comparison; God’s inevitable judgment is compared to a great flood.  The one who seeks the LORD without hesitation will not be swept away when God’s judgment comes crashing down.    

The theme of God’s protection of the penitent continues in v. 7.  In vv. 3-4, David was seen hiding from God, but here he is hiding in God and is forever secure.  In vv. 3-4, David envisioned God’s hand of oppression.  Now, he envisions God’s hand of preservation.  Finally, in vv. 3-4, David sat in silence. Now, he is surrounded by shoutsof victory and deliverance.

The divine words David received at the time of his confession are relayed to the people in v. 8.  God’s response is primarily a promise of instruction concerning the path in which the godly should walk.  Here, our third trio appears, an instructional trio:  three terms highlighting God’s guidance.  God promises to guide the penitent by “instructing,” “teaching,” and “counseling” them.  The major emphasis here is on the divine instruction itself, which the truly penitent person will submit to.  Thus, the link is established between confession (acknowledging sin to God) and repentance (forsaking sin and walking the path of God). 

Application # 2:  Avoid Stubbornness and Trust in God’s Faithfulness (vv. 9-10). David knows that stubbornness hinders the restoration of God’s people.  He was the stubborn mule in vv. 3-4.  Now, he warns God’s people not to be like horses or mules that—due to their stubbornness—often have to be forced to cooperate.  They are “curbed” or restrained with bit and bridle.  The point is that God’s people are to avoid pride and stubbornness, or God will force them to cooperate. 

God’s people are urged to trust in Him, rather than stubbornly resisting Him. In contrast to the abundant pain experienced by the wicked, those who trust in God find abundant love.  The phrase “steadfast love” refers to God’s loyal love, His covenant love.  We who are believers must remember:  God has broken into our lives and formed a forever relationship with us. This means that, regardless of our sin, we can trust in the LORD, for He is “abounding in steadfast love to all who call upon [Him]” (Ps. 86:5).  At this point in the psalm, it becomes clear that confession of sin to God is a demonstration of faith in God.  Confession is the action of trust that God is a God who keeps covenant.

Application # 3:  Praise the LORD, All You Who Have Been Restored (v. 11). The only response fitting for those who have experienced the LORD’s steadfast love and the joy of forgiveness is exuberant praise. Therefore, the final call of the psalm is for the “righteous” and the “upright”—those who belong to the LORD and follow whole-heartedly after Him—to sing praises to God.  The psalm concludes with a doxological trio:  three terms pointing us to our praiseworthy LORD. The restored sinner is to  “rejoice,” “exult,” and “shout.”  The cluster makes it clear that the godly, mindful of all the benefits of the LORD (forgiveness, protection, instruction), will praise Him!

Conclusion and New Testament Connections

The primary message of Psalm 32 is that all who genuinely confess their sin will find the joy of forgiveness.  But we must remember that the psalm teaches that our confession must be “genuine.”  This means that we turn to God sincerely (vv. 2b, 5), immediately (v. 6a), and humbly (v. 9). So, we should all ask ourselves a few questions.  

• Do I regularly search myself for sin, truly acknowledge the sin I find, and then forsake the sin and turn to God in service?
• Am I slow to confess my sin to God?
• Am I stubborn and prideful, or do I freely turn to God, trusting in His steadfast love?

Remember the beautiful formula of our psalm:  any sin committed by a believer + authentic confession of that sin = automatic forgiveness!

In closing, we must never study an Old Testament passage without considering how it relates to the New Testament.  Numerous New Testament passages speak to these themes of confession and forgiveness.  In Ephesians 1:7, Paul writes, “In him (Jesus) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.”  Forgiveness of sin is found in Christ alone.  But we must make sure we understand something very important here: we are justified only once, but we need to be forgiven each day.  Through faith in Christ, we are saved from the penalty of sin, but not from the presence of sin.  And though—if you are a believer—your standing with God will never change, your service in God’s Kingdom is continually hindered by sin.  Therefore, genuine confession of sin is vital and should be continual in the life of every believer, for when “we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (I Jn. 1:9). So, run!  Run to God freely and you will find the joy of forgiveness!

Dillon T. Thornton is a graduate of Beeson Divinity School (M.Div.) and a student at The University of Otago (Ph.D. candidate).  He is an ordained pastor/teacher within the Southern Baptist tradition, with over ten years of diverse ministry experience.  He has published a number of articles in pastoral periodicals, including Preaching magazine.  Dillon is currently serving and studying in Dunedin, New Zealand.

One conference that is just around the corner is The Cross Shaped Christian Life – Clarus ’12 (a regional conference of TGC). D. A. Carson and our own Fred Zaspel will be the main speakers. The conference is from March 9-11 at Desert Springs Church in Albuquerque, New Mexico. You can view the entire conference schedule here. Sign up now!

In the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone,” we interviewed Robert Peterson, Professor of Systematic Theology at Covenant Theological Seminary, on inclusivism. He is the Series Editor for Explorations in Biblical Theology Series, P&R and he is Co-editor, with Christopher W. Morgan, of Theology in Community Series, Crossway Publishing . He is the author of Salvation Accomplished by the Son: The Work of Christ, Calvin and the Atonement, Our Secure Salvation, Election and Free Will, Faith Comes by Hearing, among many others. 

How did you first become interested in studying the subject of inclusivism?

By studying and writing concerning eternal destinies, especially hell, for many years.

What is inclusivism, how is it different than pluralism and exclusivism, and why is it important for Christians to think biblically about this issue?

Like exclusivism, inclusivism rejects pluralism, the view that all religions lead to God. Also like exclusivism, inclusivism holds that Jesus is the only Savior of humankind. But unlike exclusivism, inclusivism does not hold that one must trust Jesus as Lord and Savior in this life to be saved. Inclusivists have a variety of reasons for this position, although not all inclusivists hold to all of the reasons. It is important for Christians to think biblically about this issue because the necessity of unsaved persons hearing the gospel in this life is at stake.

Who are the major players in each camp?

There are three major inclusivists: (1) Clark Pinnock (A Wideness in God’s Mercy, now deceased) and (2) John Sanders (No Other Name) defended inclusivism as open theist Arminians. (3) Terrance Tiessen (Who Can Be Saved?) defends inclusivism as a Calvinist. Daniel Strange answered Clark Pinnock’s inclusivism in The Possibility of Salvation among the Unevangelised. Christopher Morgan and Robert Peterson co-edited Faith Comes by Hearing: A Response to Inclusivism, in which nine contributors answered the inclusivism of Terrance Tiessen.

How does Scripture answer the question, “Must a person explicitly believe the gospel of Christ in order to be saved?”

Scripture’s answer: Yes, especially based on key biblical texts such as John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Romans 10:17-18. For example, Jesus says in John 14:6, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Likewise, Peter says in Acts 4:12, “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

What about those who never hear the gospel?

They are lost and therefore we need to get them the gospel. After writing Hell on Trial in 1995 I became a board member of a mission board. After co-editing Faith Comes by Hearing I began to support Trans World Radio which beams the gospel into many places where missionaries are not welcome.

Is there a category for “holy pagans” in the Bible?

No. Inclusivist Terrance Tiessen admits that all the biblical figures others have claimed to be “holy pagans” (that is, people somehow saved apart from special revelation) actually had special revelation according to scriptural witness.

What role does general and special revelation play in the debate?

Exclusivists claim that special revelation, even the gospel, is necessary for salvation. All inclusivists claim that it is possible for unsaved persons to be saved through a positive response to general revelation. The problem is Scripture does not indicate that there is such a response, e.g., in Romans 1.

Does inclusivism damage the biblical understanding of evangelism and missions?

In fairness I must admit that some inclusivists support evangelism and missions. But I am concerned that if inclusivism continues to grow, it will indeed harm evangelism and missions. Why should believers risk their lives or their children’s lives if unsaved persons do not need to hear the gospel to be saved?

How has inclusivism impacted evangelicalism today and will such a view be around in the future?

Inclusivism has indeed impacted evangelicalism today as many Christians have found it attractive. I expect it to grow in the future as more and more people base their faith on what they want to be true rather than on the teaching of Scripture, which is sometimes hard.

What advice would you give to pastors and students as they, in the words of Jude, “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints”?

I would advise them to work hard to consistently and deliberately base their beliefs on Scripture rather than on their desires. I would encourage them to love inclusivists and to treat them as they would want to be treated. I would encourage them to invest their lives in promoting the gospel of Christ at home and abroad.

Read other interviews in Credo Magazine today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

In the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone,” Steve Cowan, Professor of Philosophy, Louisiana College, has written a helpful review of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith, by Douglas Groothuis. Cowan writes,

Christian Apologetics is a truly masterful work. It covers almost all of the major apologetics issues that an apologetics instructor could want and does so in a readable way. My complaints are only two. First, after going to significant lengths to explain the “hypothesis testing model” and define the criteria for assessing worldviews more precisely than any other text does, Groothuis never explicitly applies those criteria to Christianity or any other worldview. The rest of the book proceeds along the standard lines of classical apologetics. Second, there are some topics that would have been welcome in a book that claims to provide a “comprehensive” case for Christianity. For example, chapters on the coherence of the divine attributes and a fuller treatment of the coherence of the trinity. Of course, the book would have to be even longer to accommodate these suggestions. However, perhaps abbreviated versions of chapters 6 and 7, and a discussion of fewer theistic arguments could have allowed these other topics.

These criticisms are trivial, though, when compared to the overall product. I highly recommend this book for use as a primary textbook in apologetics courses.

Read Cowan’s entire review here.

This review is from the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone.” Read other reviews like it today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

Last week David Platt preached at chapel at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The sermon was powerful and here is what he said:

Nothing is more encouraging in our fight against temptation than knowing that we have a victor in Christ who has already conquered sin and Satan in our place.   In Tempted and Tried, Russell D. Moore expounds upon this great truth. 

Jared Moore reviewed Russell Moore’s book.  Jared Writes,

In Temped and Tried, Russell Moore frames the temptation of Christ within redemptive history and as the answer for the daily temptations all Christians encounter. Christ’s example is not merely our example to follow, but his example is our answer to temptation. We look to his gospel, the good news of his death and resurrection, to reconcile us to his Father. We are not left alone to fend for ourselves for we have one who has conquered, is conquering, and will conquer the evil one. In other words, we cannot triumph over temptation, only Jesus can (195).

Christians exist in a wilderness of temptation where possible pitfalls lurk around every corner and where we least expect it (Ch. 1). Temptation is subtle and leads gradually to a great fall. Justifying a “small” sin eventually encourages us to justify “greater” sins. Sins we would not have committed in the beginning, we are desensitized to embrace later (Ch. 2). As sinners, we want what we want, but it can never satisfy. We must long for eternity more than we long for the temporary. Christ heard his Father’s voice louder than his growling stomach when tempted in the wilderness. Having been made sons and daughters through Christ’s blood, we must hear our Father’s voice louder than our appetites as well (Ch. 3).

Read the rest of Jared’s review here. 

By Matthew Barrett -

[photo by Keitha McCall]

In my previous post, I explored the first half of C. S. Lewis’s “Introduction” to On the Incarnation, by Athanasius. In that article we sat at the feet of Lewis and benefitted from his wisdom when it comes to reading books, particularly the old books that have been tested in the classroom of church history. In this second article we shall go deeper, looking at what Lewis has to say about doctrine and devotion.

But how could they have thought that?

One of the major reasons to primarily soak ourselves in the old books rather than the new books is because generations of Christians in ages past saw certain truths that we need to hear afresh in our own day. We “need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period.” Each generation, including that of the 21^st century, has characteristic blind spots. It is blindness, says Lewis, about which our posterity will ask, “But how could they have thought that?” And since it is a blindness, it is snug, making itself at home in those nooks and crannies of our thought where we least expect it. No one is exempt from this blindness. However, “we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books.” What then is the solution? Lewis answers: “The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books.”

Be careful though. History has a way of being romantic. And romance is tricky. While reading the old books—sitting in the classroom of the theological giants before us—is essential, there is no secret magic about the past itself. Here I am going to take a little rabbit trail away from Lewis to make the point Lewis is trying to make. Many in our day are enchanted with the earliest fathers. Now I love the early fathers, but the point here is that there can be an assumption that those closest to the apostles knew best. After all, they lived in the “golden age” of Christianity. In this line of thought, Tertullian trumps Luther any day. Such an assumption, however, is easily refuted. Just read 1 and 2 Corinthians. The early church was a mess at times…and they had the apostle Paul! The point is the same one Lewis is making. There is no magic about the past. “People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as well.”

So why then all the fuss about reading the old books? People may have made as many mistakes but, as Lewis observes, not the same mistakes. “They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing; and their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us. Two heads are better than one, not because either is infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction.” So when we read the theologians of the past, we are reading them not only to learn from their success but from their mistakes. Their mistakes will teach us. Their mistakes will expose our own, and, if we are humble and willing, correct our own.

Doctrinal Books More Helpful for Devotion

So far we have seen that it is important to read the old books as their authors do not make the same mistakes that we make today. The old books shed light on our blind spots. That said, what kind of books should we be reading? Surely we do not read for reading sake (though there may be a place for this), but as Christians we read to know God more, and by “know” I do not mean mere intellectual knowledge but personal affection.

It is typical for readers to think categorically. If we want to learn about the tough stuff of the Christian faith, go to the big theology books. And if we want to be stimulated in our affections for Christ, go to the devotional books. Lewis, however, explodes such an assumption.

For my own part I tend to find the doctrinal books often more helpful in devotion than the devotional books, and I rather suspect that the same experience may await many others. I believe that many who find that “nothing happens” when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a tough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.

Amen, Lewis. Amen. Much of the problem in our own day is that we have divided orthodoxy from orthopraxy, doctrine from devotion. The former we have called “intellectual” while the latter we have assigned to the heart. But this is all topsy-turvy! Theology is meant to birth doxology. If you read about the atoning work of Christ, whereby he took upon himself the wrath we deserve, and you are not moved to worship God for his great love and glorious grace, then either your heart is hard or you are reading a bad piece of theology.

J. I. Packer explained in his inaugural lecture, “An Introduction to Systematic Spirituality,” as Songwoo Yountong Chee Professor of Theology at Regent College, doctrinal study is not muddied by introducing devotional concerns. We must not divorce “knowing true notions about God and knowing the true God himself.” If we do, then theology will induce “spiritual pride” and produce “spiritual sleep.” “Thus the noblest study in the world gets cheapened.” I am with Packer, “I cannot applaud this.”

Therefore, along with Lewis and Packer, let us arrange a marriage, a marriage between systematic theology and our spirituality. Read not only the old books, but the old theology books, for they will ignite the flames of the heart in worship towards God. I close with Packer, who himself is leaning on Aquinas. “Theology is taught by God, teaches God, and takes us to God. So may it be, for all of us.”

 Matthew Barrett (Ph.D., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is the founder and executive editor of Credo Magazine. Barrett has contributed book reviews and articles to various academic journals, and he is the author of several forthcoming books. He is married to Elizabeth and they have two daughters, Cassandra and Georgia. He is a member of Clifton Baptist Church in Louisville, KY.

One of the most important issues in the debate over inclusivism is how it impacts missions and evangelism. Does the inclusivist view undercut the biblical motivation for missions? In the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone,” Timothy Beougher argues that it indeed does. First, a little about Dr. Beougher. Timothy K. Beougher (Ph.D., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) is Billy Graham Professor of Evangelism and Church Growth (1996); Associate Dean; and Director of Research Doctoral Studies, Billy Graham School of Missions and Evangelism, at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Prior to coming to Southern Seminary, Dr. Beougher served for six years as Assistant Professor of Evangelism at the Wheaton College Graduate School and was the Associate Director of the Institute of Evangelism at the Billy Graham Center of Wheaton College. He has written and edited numerous materials related to evangelism, discipleship, and spiritual awakening, including Overcoming Walls to Witnessing, Training Leaders to Make Disciples, Evangelism for a Changing World, Accounts of a Campus Revival: Wheaton College 1995, and Richard Baxter and Conversion. He has ministry experience as an evangelist, church planter, pastor, and interim pastor.

Beougher begins his article as follows:

With none to heed their crying

For life, and love, and light

Unnumbered souls are dying

And pass into the night.

 

Or do they?  Do all people who die without acknowledging Christ as their Savior really “pass into the night?”  Or should that hymn, which embodies traditional evangelical thought about the fate of those who die apart from trusting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, be abandoned along with other “outdated” beliefs?  Should traditional Christian teaching concerning the exclusivity of the gospel be “brought up to date,” modified to fit the tolerant spirit of the times?

The heart of the matter can be summed up with this question:  “Must persons exercise conscious faith in Jesus Christ in this life in order to be saved?”  While historically evangelicals have answered that question with a resounding “yes,” some professing evangelicals in recent years have answered the question with a firm “no.”  While various positions could lead one to answer “no” to that question (e.g. a belief in “post-mortem evangelism” or a belief that there are many ways to God), this article focuses on the belief known as inclusivism.

Inclusivism teaches that while Jesus is the only Savior, people do not need to hear and respond to the gospel message to be forgiven, but can be saved by “implicit” faith in Christ.  According to inclusivists, “explicit” faith in Christ in this life is not necessary for salvation.  It is possible, they argue, for someone who has never heard of Christ to benefit from His atoning sacrifice and be saved.  This teaching opposes the historic Christian position know as exclusivism (also variously called restrictivism or particularism), which argues that explicit faith in Christ in this life is necessary for salvation.

This article does not presume to describe all aspects of the inclusivist position or all the arguments set forth by its proponents, nor will it give corresponding critiques of all those issues from the exclusivist position. The purpose of this article is to ask and answer the question, “Does a belief in inclusivism weaken motivation for missions and evangelism?”

Read the rest of Beougher’s article today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

Here are two videos where NT scholar G. K. Beale gives an overview of his new book, A New Testament Biblical Theology (which by the way is 41% off at Westminster Bookstore!!).

HT: Dane Ortlund

By Paul Helm–

While true Religion, and sound Learning have a single friend remaining in the British Empire, the works and name of Gill will be precious and revered. – A. M. Toplady

John Gill I reckon the best, as well as the most learned, of all the Hyper-Calvinists. The rabbinical and the patristic were fairly blended in him. He mistakenly charges us with what he calls “Duty-Faith”, but he was a good and reverent man. – ‘Rabbi’ Duncan

The great Baptist pastor/theologian John Gill is generally given the thumbs down at present. I’m guessing, but I think that his has chiefly to do with his alleged ‘hyper-calvinism’, and with the general demise of systematic theology among Reformed or Calvinistic Baptists. I think, also, that his aloofness from the Evangelical Revival does not recommend him to some, though others who were actually engaged in that work, such as A.M. Toplady, rather than those who merely admire it from afar, greatly valued Gill. But his denial of the ‘free offer of the Gospel’, (if indeed he did deny it) is enough to damn him in the eyes of some. There’s also the portrait above, sometimes reproduced in black and white, of a bewigged and sour-looking Gill, which hardly attracts.

In this post I should like to offer some words of praise for his work, and a short reassessment, referring both to his Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity, (1769-70) his mature theological work, as well as his earlier The Cause of God and Truth (1733-8) Besides these there is his multi-volume Exposition of the Old and New Testament and many other shorter pieces of writing, such as his exposition of the Song of Songs, and a number of Tracts, many of which are substantial. But I shall say nothing about these in what follows. It is said that he wrote more than 10,000 pages, all in his own hand.

Richard Muller, in his Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, frequently mentions Gill, and he is in my view entirely correct to include him in his magisterial survey of Reformed Orthodoxy. However, Gill is not a scholastic theologian in the true sense. For while the arrangement of his theological work generally follows that of many scholastically-minded theologians, his style is clear and flowing, utilising the technical terms of systematic theology in the same easy, clear, unassuming yet confident way in which he gives evidence of his vast learning. He is a covenant theologian, but while this motif is prominent it is not all-controlling as it is with some of the Dutch covenant theologians. His meaning is generally clear. His style seems to have arisen from his preaching and expositions and his great knowledge of Scripture. If the style of John Owen puts you off, (‘a continent of mud’, according to Robert Hall), try Gill.

Here I shall briefly try to assess the charge of ‘hyper-Calvinism’. The criteria of ‘Hyper-Calvinism’ are generally thought to be the denial of the place and use of the law in the Christian life, the doctrine of eternal justification, whether belief in the Gospel is a duty, and the denial of the ‘free offer’ of the Gospel. According to Peter Toon, (Hyper Calvinism 145) it’s also characteristic of hyper-Calvinism to deny the distinction between the secret and the revealed will of God, but Gill certainly upholds that distinction. (BDD 71f., CGT 278, 286) What these features appear to have in common is an under-emphasis on human responsibility and initiative amounting to a denial of such responsibility in some respects; and of course, a correspondingly heightened emphasis on sovereign grace in election, justification and regeneration.

Care is needed in approaching this territory. For while some of these matters, such as eternal justification, are straightforwardly doctrinal, others of them, such as the preaching of the law and its uses, and the ‘offer’ of Christ, have to do with practice, with ministerial or pastoral emphasis. Making an emphasis is a matter of judgment, and does not necessarily indicate the denial, as a matter of principle, of the opposite emphasis. Someone may judge that a situation requires emphasis upon the law, or on warning and rebuffing an enquirer rather than warmth and encouragement. Christ’s teaching about the narrow gate, the fact that many shall strive to enter in and shall not be able (a text that, I imagine, is rarely preached on at present), or his rebuffing of the Syro-Phoenician woman, might be said to be tactical rather than principled, as is shown by the warmth of his invitations in other situations.

Let’s look at our three criteria in turn.

The use of the law. The issue here is whether the moral law of God is to be understood as providing the ethical standard for the believer, and is the Christian life characterized by a sense of obligation to keep that law. Or is Christian conduct placed on an altogether different footing, such the believer’s indwelling by the Holy Spirit, his being ‘free from the law’ or even (as in extreme circumstances) the fact that Christ is not only our justification but our sanctification too. Gill’s understanding is clear and unambiguous, it seems to me. Writing of the ‘liberty of the sons of God’ in his treatment of adoption (BDD VI.9), the believers’ freedom from the law, he says that they are free ‘from it, as a covenant of works, obliging to work for life; but not from it a rule of life, walk and conversation’. (525) This position is borne out by what he writes, at greater length, of ‘Various Duties, Personal, Relative, Domestic and Civil’ and offers a ‘Compendium’ of the Ten Commandments, in the last Book of BPD (IV.6)

Eternal Justification. Gill discusses justification in two places, in his doctrine of God, and in the application of redemption. His discussion of the doctrine of God is in terms of a distinction between the eternal being and decrees of God, (Books I and II) and the external works of God , creation, providence and redemption in time. (Book III-VII). He provides a vigorous defense of eternal justification, appealing, among others, to Ames and Thomas Goodwin, and arguing against Turretin. God’s will to justify his elect is his justification of them (203); this will ‘resides in the divine mind, and lies in his estimating, accounting and constituting them righteous, through the righteousness of his Son….from eternity’. (203) But there seems to be a bit of confusion here. God’s decree of election is his electing of his people; but it is hard to see how the decree to justify his people is their justification, any more than decreeing the building of the Tower of Babel is the building of it. Strictly, God’s decree is not ‘of justification’, but ‘to justify’, something which, Scripture tells us, takes place in time; in Christ, who was raised for our justification, and through faith, which gives us peace with God.

Gill does not deny, of course, that there is a sense in which justification takes place in time, but that sense is modified somewhat in the light of his formulation of eternal justification. He denies that faith is in any sense the cause of justification, not even the instrumental cause (204), and faith is the ’evidence and manifestation of justification’. (204) Earlier, in CGT, he seems to allow an instrumental role to faith; it is the hand by which the promise of pardon is received (e.g. 288). Perhaps he changed his mind. But in a discussion later in BDD, in his treatment of faith, he states that faith ‘receives the blessing of his justifying righteousness from him (Christ)…faith puts on the robe of righteousness and rejoices and glories in it’. (743). So there is some wobbling here, some inconclusiveness. For a reason which is not clear Gill expends a disproportionate amount of effort to maintaining and vindicating eternal justification.

Still, even if Gill does hold to eternal justification, this seem to be a mark of ‘high Calvinism’ rather than ‘hyper Calvinism’, certainly not a decisive feature on the ‘hyper’ issue. Thomas Goodwin is not routinely thought of as a hyper-Calvinist even though he espouses the idea of eternal justification in his Objects and Acts of Justifying Faith.

The ‘Free Offer’. From time to time there is agitation about the ‘free offer’, and even the precise language that the preacher may permit himself to use to the unconverted. Perhaps he may say, speaking generally, ‘God loves you’, or even ‘Christ died for you’; and perhaps it is better not to say ‘Christ died for you’ but rather ‘Christ is dead for you’. Or perhaps not. But it looks like this road leads only to the briar patch. Obviously no single sentence or short formula will do the trick, since what a person says in the pulpit or elsewhere depends upon what else he says, as we have already seen.

What of Gill himself? At least in his Body of Divinity he underlines the importance of preaching to men and women indiscriminately. For example, ‘He hath set for Christ in his purposes to be a propitiation through faith in his blood for the remission of sin; and he has sent him to shed his blood to obtain it, and has exalted him as a Saviour to give it, and to him give all the prophets witness, that whosoever believes in him shall receive it’ (733) And he has a robust attitude to evangelism. The ministry of he gospel is ‘for the enlargement of the interest of Christ in the world; and it is by means of the gospel being preached to all nationals in all the world, that the kingdom of Christ has been spread everywhere…’ The ministry ‘is for the conversion of sinners; without which churches would not be increased nor supported, and must in course fail, and come to nothing’. (931) There are places in which Gill rejects the ‘free offer’—the ‘offer, or tender of the new covenant’—but appears to distinguish this from ‘offers of Christ, and tenders of the gospel’ which he also distances himself from, though in less robust terms. (CGT 339).

Idiosyncracies and emphases which we may regard as unguarded and in need of qualification are not a sufficient reason for us to close our minds to all that Gill has to offer.

John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity (1769-70), Reprinted by the Baptist Standard Bearer, 1984, (BDD)
John Gill, The Cause of God and Truth, (London, Tegg, 1838), (CGT)
Peter Toon, Hyper-Calvinism, (London, The Olive Tree, 1967)

Paul Helm was educated at Worcester College, Oxford, and was for many years a member of the Philosophy Department of the University of Liverpool. From 1993-2000 he was the Professor of the History and Philosophy of Religion, King’s College, London. In 2001 he was appointed J.I. Packer Chair of Philosophical Theology at Regent College, Vancouver. He is presently a Teaching Fellow there. Helm is the author of numerous journal articles and books. Some of his most well-know books include Calvin and the Calvinists, Faith and Reason, The Trustworthiness of God, The Providence of God, Eternal God, The Secret Providence of God, The Trustworthiness of God (with Carl Trueman), John Calvin’s Ideas, Calvin at the Centre, and Calvin: A Guide for the Perplexed. 

By Luke Stamps–

I recently came across this passage from Robert Louis Wilken’s book The Spirit of Early Christian Thought: Seeking the Face of God.  In it, Wilken describes how early Christian theology served the piety and worship of the church.  Every Christian theologian (which is to say, every Christian) would do well to remember this inseparable link between true theology and the worship of God.

“All the figures portrayed in this book prayed regularly and their thinking was never far removed from the church’s worship.  Whether the task at hand was the defense of Christian belief to an outsider, the refutation of the views of a heretic, or the exposition of a passage from the Bible, their intellectual work was always in service of praise and adoration of the one God.  ‘This is the Catholic faith,’ begins an ancient creed, ‘that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity.’ Often their treatises ended with a doxology to God, as in Augustine’s On the Spirit and the Letter: ‘to whom be glory forever. Amen.’ They wished not only to understand and express the dazzling truth they had seen in Christ, by thinking and writing they sought to know God more intimately and love him more ardently. The intellectual task was a spiritual undertaking. In the oft-cited words of the desert monk Evagrius, ‘A theologian is one who prays, and one who prays is a theologian” (pp. 25-26).

Luke Stamps is a Ph.D. candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in systematic theology. Luke is a weekly contributor to the Credo blog and also blogs at Before All Things. Luke is married to Josie, and they have three children, Jack, Claire, and Henry. Luke is a member of Clifton Baptist Church in Louisville, KY.

HT: Dane Ortlund

By Brent Parker -

Nearly a week ago a significant Christian scholar passed away.  His death seems to have not attracted a great deal of attention (Peter Head seems to be the one who first brought attention to the sad news), but the death of R T France will certainly leave a void in NT studies, especially in regard to studies in the gospels. 

France was a prolific NT scholar with particular concentration on the Gospels of Matthew and Mark.  Anyone wanting to study the Matthew’s gospel in depth will not want to pass up France’s Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher where he adeptly addressed issues such as the setting, literary character of Matthew and provided helpful chapters on critical themes in Matthew such as the role and meaning of “fulfillment,” the nature of Israel and the church in Matthew’s portrait, and the person and work of Jesus in Matthew’s gospel.  These keen insights and thorough study of Matthew may also be found in his major Matthean commentary.  One of France’s most significant articles on Matthew was “The Formula-Quotations of Matthew 2 and the Problem of Communication,” New Testament Studies 27 (1981): 233-51 (also reprinted in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts, edited by GK Beale). In this article France demonstrated that beyond the “surface meaning” of the text that could be recognized by the most naïve reader, Matthew deliberately composed a chapter with rich bonus meanings that could be caught by those who shared the scriptural erudition of Matthew’s use of the OT.  One other work that I personally benefited from was the required reading of France’s top notch commentary in my Mark exegesis course at Southern Seminary. The Gospel of Mark (NIGTC) requires its readers to have a knowledge of Greek, but France’s overview of Mark, for example on the messianic secret and the sandwiching technique of Mark, were always insightful and helpful, as was his thorough and evenhanded treatment of the text of Mark’s gospel throughout the commentary.  France also wrote thoughtfully on the topic of inerrancy and how that issue related to biblical studies and critical scholarship.

More information about France as well as a thorough list of his written works may be found on the website of the Committee for Bible Translation for the NIV.  France was an honorary member of the CBT. 

We mourn the loss of R T France, but are so thankful for his life and the fruits of his labors in providing an array of contributions that have helped us to be better readers of the gospels and in turn, more devoted to Jesus Christ.

Brent Parker is a P.h.D. candidate at The Southern Baptist Theologoical Seminary.

By Matthew Claridge–

With a fair share of poetic justice, Dr. Fred Zaspel has been riding to the defense of one of the Faith’s greatest defenders of the last 150 years, B.B. Warfield. His much acclaimed The Theology of B.B. Warfield has introduced a new generation of readers to the intellectual powerhouse of this Old Princetonian. Zaspel is now turning us to the warm faith that guided Warfield’s drive and committed orthodoxy in Warfield on the Christian Life: Living in Light of the Gospel, the first title in Crossway’s series “Theologians on the Christian Life” due out on March 31st.  The book amounts to a spiritual biography of Warfield centered, naturally enough, on his dependence and lifelong reflection on the truth of the gospel. Warfield’s practical application of the great doctrines of salvation and sanctification will gives the church a deeper respect for the man himself and a deeper awareness of the riches we have in Christ. But don’t take my word for it, consider the following:

“We are already indebted to Fred Zaspel for his work on The Theology of B. B. Warfield — a book that has introduced a new generation to the voluminous writings of a Princeton scholar who was both New Testament interpreter and systematic theologian. Warfield’s style feels a tad impenetrable to many contemporary readers, but through Zaspel, Warfield, though dead, still speaks. But can any devotional and practical guidance come out of old Princeton? Zaspel’s latest contribution, B. B. Warfield on the Christian Life: Living in Light of the Gospel, does not simply answer with a resounding affirmative, but again faithfully unpacks Warfield and shows him to be a theologian of head and heart. Above all, Warfield is an integrated thinker, so he is ideally equipped to show how that which is central to the Bible, the Gospel of God, rightly shapes the Christian’s entire life. And Zaspel makes this accessible.”

–D.A. Carson. Research Professor of New Testament. Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, IL.

“Following the publication of Warfield on the Christian Life it will be impossibly difficult to continue to claim that Princeton Theology was ‘all head but no heart’, or that Warfield himself was little more than an Enlightenment rationalist.”

–Paul Helm. Teaching Fellow. Regent College, Vancouver. Author of The Providence of God, John Calvin’s Ideas, and Calvin at the Centre.

 

“B B Warfield looms large in the Protestant imagination as a theologian, one of the giants in the land.  What is less well-known are the details and dynamics of his own approach to the Christian life.  Fred Zaspel has already written a substantial volume on Warfield as theologian; now he opens up for us the world of Warfield’s practical Christianity.  Once again, fans of the great Princetonian are in for a treat – and are deeply and delightfully in debt to Dr. Zaspel.”

–Carl R. Trueman.Paul Woolley Professor of Church History. Westminster Theological Seminary, PA.

 

“If the only thing Dr Fred Zaspel accomplished in these pages was to point us to B.B. Warfield’s masterpiece sermons in his too-little-known Faith and Life, he would have done the church yeoman service.   But he has done much, much more!  In Warfield on the Christian Life we are given the privilege of sitting at the feet of a Christ-centered, Bible-saturated, Gospel-loving theologian of the first rank and learning how to say “To me to live is Christ.”   A very welcome addition to what promises to be a valuable series.”

–Sinclair B Ferguson.First Presbyterian Church. Columbia, SC.

 

“Scripture and history show that spirituality rests wholly on a foundation of revealed truth, cordially received and loved. The best theologians have always been the most profound, and trustworthy, promoters of vital piety and transformation of life. We look to Augustine, Anselm, Calvin, Bunyan, and Edwards and a host of Puritan pastor-theologians as determinative of the truth of this observation. Now we must include B. B. Warfield in that imposing list of those that make clear the path, not only to live by the Spirit, but to walk by the Spirit. Fred Zaspel has condensed the marvelous insight contained in the Theology of B. B. Warfield  and served it up as foundational to a robust practice of piety analyzed in this present work. Zaspel had laid out both the doctrinal and exegetical expertise of Warfield in showing how seriously he pursued true worship as the summum bonum of life. From divine revelation to the imitation of the Christ and the consummation of Christian hope, the Christian finds substantive truth on his side and is assured by that truth that God Himself is near, to protect, direct, and finally perfect all the sheep for whom Christ died.”

–Tom J. Nettles. Professor of Historical Theology. The Southern Baptist Thelogical Seminary, KY.

Interview by Oren Martin –

In light of the debate over hell, universalism, and pluralism, should priority be given to certain attributes of God (e.g., holiness, love)?

It is the elevation of some attributes over others that has created  much, if not all, of the confusion over the reality of hell and the fate of the unevangelized. What is needed is a recovery of the doctrine of divine simplicity which states that God is always and totally who he is all the time, that he is simultaneously ALL that ALL of his attributes reveal. When we give priority to one attribute over another, we ignore the biblical presentation of God and end up distorting the character of God to the point of creating a God based on our own preferences, sensibilities, and desires. The biblical word for such creation is idolatry. Ironically, when we emphasize one attribute over another, like love over holiness, we not only distort who God is, but ironically we do not even get the attribute we are emphasizing correct. A telling example of this is Rob Bell’s book, in which he criticizes the doctrine of hell, appropriately titled, “Love Wins.” Bell presents an ultimate being, void of holiness, justice, and righteousness, based largely upon his own sentimentalities. The result is a god who more closely resembles a neighbor we think we would like to have than a transcendent being worthy of devotion, fear, and praise.

The key to holding love and holiness together is to allow God to define not only who he is, but to allow him to define the nature and scope of each of his attributes. The biblical presentation of the love and holiness of God is coherent and it is manifest beautifully at the cross of Christ. Fortunately, the God who spoke the universe into existence and sovereignly governs it is not limited by my capacity to understand exhaustively who he is and what he does.

How can the discipline of biblical theology help in rightly seeing the Holy Spirit’s work in the world and/or other religions?

The discipline of biblical theology encourages us to look to the Bible for the categories and vocabulary of theological inquiry. When we develop a biblical theology of the Holy Spirit, we find that the divine presentation of the work of the Spirit focuses on the glorification of the Son (John 16:4). This is not only the case now, but has been since creation and will be through to the consummation of all things. Many pluralists and inclusivists are currently turning to Pneumatology to justify their proposals. They hope that the Spirit might work in and through other religions (apart from the Son) to save those who have not placed their trust in the Son. The problem with this is that the Bible’s own presentation of the Holy Spirit will not allow for that kind of separation. Biblical Theology forces us to recognize that the Bible is not pre-theoretical, but provides the forms and content of its own interpretation. Our theological inquiry and systematic constructions must be submitted to the authority of Scripture. Faithful Christians are not free to conjure up scenarios or experiment with new ideas, no matter how “compassionate” or “hopeful” the motivation, that run contrary to God’s own self-revelation.

How do the religions of the world fit into God’s plan of redemption? Is there truth in non-Christian religions?

These are really two different questions. With regard to the first, I would say that insofar as other religions do not tell the story of Jesus then they do not play a necessary role in God’s plan of redemption. In that way, they “fit” into God’s plan of redemption the way that sin and idolatry do. I appreciate Daniel Strange’s definition of non-Christian religions: “Non-Christian religions are sovereignly directed, variegated and dynamic human idolatrous distortions of divine revelation behind which evidence demonic deception. Being antithetically against yet parasitically dependent upon the truth of the Christian worldview, non-Christian religions are ‘subversively fulfilled’ in the gospel of Jesus Christ.” [D. Strange, "For their Rock is not as our Rock," ETS National Meeting, 2011] With that definition in mind and in answer to the second question, we should expect there to be some truth in other religions. It would be folly and ignorance to deny it. We are all created imago Dei and we are all witnesses to God’s powerful self-revelation through creation and conscience. For example, other religions contain insights that mirror biblical wisdom on such topics as ethics, virtue, family maintenance, social justice, financial planning, etc. But Christianity, at its core, is not any of these things. Unless the story of Jesus is told, as presented by Jesus through his apostles, and unless there is encouragement and divine enablement to follow Jesus, then it is to that degree that other religions are fatally misleading, regardless of how “helpful” they may appear to be.

How should a Christian respond to the so-called universal atonement texts (e.g., John 12:32; Heb. 2:9; 1 John 2:2)?

By reading those texts in context. Unless one gets incredibly lucky, cherry-picking individual verses to justify a theological position while ignoring the immediate, book, and canonical contexts is always a recipe for disaster. A quick check of the context of these verses may not settle all the disputes about the extent of the atonement, but it is sufficient to reject universalist positions that demand that these verses teach that all will certainly be saved.

For example, John is crystal clear in both his Gospel and in his letters that only those who believe in Jesus will be saved and there is a horrific judgment that awaits those who are not reconciled to God (John 1:11-12; 3:16; 5:24, 39; 8:24; 10:25-26; 11:26; 20:31; 1 John 1:1-3, 7; 5:10-13). The writer of Hebrews is also emphatic on the same points (Heb 2:2-3; 6:4-6; 10:26-31). So the affirmations that Jesus draws all people to himself (John 12:32), that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2), or that Jesus tasted death for everyone (Heb

2:9) cannot entail a universal reconciliation without exception. To cut directly to the chase on these examples, the contexts teach that Jesus draws all without distinction, both Jew and Gentile to himself (John 12:32), that the cross has universal and cosmic implications (1 John 2:2), and that Christ died and a bona fide offer of the gospel is available to all people (Heb 2:9), but not all will believe (note the limiting “many sons” who are brought to glory in 2:10).

What should be our response to the question, “What about those who have never heard the gospel?”

Exactly what the Bible says – Go tell them! Honestly, it is frustrating to me that some Christians treat the awesome mandate to share the gospel as if it were an embarrassing problem to overcome by philosophizing and theologizing over the state of the unevangelized (which tragically helps no one, least of all the unevangelized). The gospel solves the problem of human sin; it does not create problems! A few inclusivists and most pluralists are on record stating that religious others would be better off not hearing the gospel – it is far better to let them work out their “piety” within the framework of their own religious traditions. But the cross of Christ is a stumbling block, not because it distracts others from reaching God on the alternative path that they are on, but because humans are so sinful that the only means of salvation available is offensive to their fallen and pride-filled sensibilities. And yet, by the grace of God, when those who are called hear the gospel, they repent, believe and are saved. The biblical response to the question, “What about those who have never heard?” is an emphatic and unqualified “Go tell them!”

Todd Miles (B.S., M.S. in Nuclear Engineering at Oregon State University; M.Div., Western Seminary; PhD in Systematic Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Associate Professor of Theology at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon. Before his doctoral studies Miles was a Research Engineer at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for ten years. Now Miles teaches Systematic Theology, Hermeneutics, and Ethics at Western Seminary. Miles is married to Camille and they have six children, Natalie, Ethan, Levi, Julius, Vicente, and Marcos. Miles serves as an elder at Hinson Memorial Baptist Church in Portland. Miles is the author of A God of Many Understandings? The Gospel and Theology of Religions (Nashville: B&H, 2010).

This interview is from the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone.” Read others like it today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

By Chris Castaldo - 

The doctrine that “Outside the Church there is no salvation” (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus), first expressed by the third century martyr/bishop, Cyprian, and to this day by the Roman Catholic Magisterium, is a matter of much confusion. At face value (when expressed by Rome) it points to the Catholic Church institution as the single location where humanity encounters divine grace. But it’s not that simple. In what follows, we will briefly consider how the exclusivity of Cyprian’s dictum relates to the inclusive emphasis of today’s Catholic Church.

The Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1964, is a helpful place to start:

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. (Lumen Gentium, 2.16; cf. Gaudium et Spes 1.22)

The necessary foundation of implicit knowledge is “invincible ignorance”—the state in which one is without access to Christian revelation. This is, for example, the pigmy, aborigine, or post Christian European who has never heard the gospel. Since such people have not received an opportunity to understand and respond to the explicit teaching of Christ, they are “inculpable.” Assuming this ignorance is genuinely outside of their control (that it is not due to prejudice or neglect) and that there is perfect contrition and a desire to do God’s will, then, moved by divine grace, these persons may pursue and lay hold of salvation through their conscience.

Perhaps the biggest exponent of this concept was the twentieth century theologian, Karl Rahner:

The “anonymous Christian” in our sense of the term is the pagan after the beginning of the Christian mission, who lives in a state of Christ’s grace through faith, hope, and love, yet who has no explicit knowledge of the fact that his life is orientated in grace-given salvation to Jesus Christ… There must be a Christian theory to account for the fact that every individual who does not in any absolute or ultimate sense act against his own conscience can say and does say in faith, hope and love, Abba within his own spirit and is on these grounds in all truth a brother to Christians in God’s sight. (Theological Investigations, Vol. 14, Chp. 17.)

This view seeks to reconcile God’s universal will, as expressed in passages such as 1 Tim 2:4 (that “God desires all people to be saved”) with the necessity of faith in Christ (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus). It implies that all people have some opportunity to believe, precisely because God is at work in all people. Where is the locus of this work? It is through general revelation, which includes other religions and one’s moral sensibilities. It may even apply to the atheist insofar as such a person is motivated by grace with sincere contrition. How the atheist is said to believe in God introduces the category of anonymity. Thus, because it is God who manifests himself through one’s conscience, a person can genuinely believe, even though he or she perceives the object of belief to be something other than God. Accordingly, one’s encounter with transcendent reality (anonymous as it may be) is regarded as a divine experience.

The theory of anonymous Christianity has fit like hand-in-glove in today’s relativistic culture where the subjective reputation of truth is the plat du jour.  In this epistemological universe, doctrine is regarded as the product of one’s own creation. Perhaps it is for this reason that sociologists of religion at Catholic University recently reported that 88% of American Catholics say “how a person lives is more important than whether he or she is Catholic.”  In addition to demonstrating the practical significance of theology, it offers new meaning to Cyprian’s nulla salus.

Chris Castaldo serves as director of the Ministry of Gospel Renewal for the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. He is the author of Holy Ground: Walking with Jesus as a Former Catholic and a main contributor to Journeys of Faith: Evangelicalism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Anglicanism (January 2012). He blogs at www.chriscastaldo.com.

This column comes from the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone.” Read other columns and articles like this one today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

By Timothy Raymond

There have been a small handful of books that have so affected the course of my life that I view them more as encounters than as simple words on paper. In God’s mysterious providence, the book Preaching and Preachers by Martyn Lloyd-Jones certainly falls into this category. Since this year marks the 40th anniversary of its publication, I thought I might join Kevin DeYoung, Ligon Duncan, and Adrian Reynolds and offer a few of my own reflections on this monumental work.

 I started reading Preaching and Preachers almost immediately after being called to my present church as preaching pastor. I’d love to say that that was intentional, but it wasn’t (at least as far as my planning went). I had heard many people say great things about the book (e.g., John MacArthur claiming it was one of the most influential books he had ever read) and picked it up, perhaps simply because I had nothing better to read at the time. However, in retrospect, I don’t think I could imagine a better book to help get a new preacher off on the right foot. For some reason, the book turned out to be a combination of meeting with a guru on a mountaintop and a pummeling by the Incredible Hulk. One section so disturbed me (in a sanctifying way) that I had to put the book down and literally walk away from it, afraid of it. Having read much in the field of homiletics, Preaching and Preachers remains in my top 5 favorite books on preaching and definitely the most enjoyable book on the subject I’ve ever read.

 To commend this volume to those of you who may have never read it, those of you who may have read it decades ago, or those of you questioning the power and relevance of preaching for the health of the contemporary church, here are three areas where the book powerfully encouraged and exhorted me:

1. An Exalted View of the Primacy of Preaching – To read is Preaching and Preachers to encounter a view of preaching that’s almost surreal. MLJ viewed preaching as the heart of the life of the local church and wasn’t afraid to say so. (Was MLJ ever afraid of anything?) To him, everything else could fail, so long as the sermon confronted the congregation with the voice of God. Perhaps his view of preaching is a bit hyperbolic, but then again, maybe it’s not. God did choose to do miracles through MLJ’s sermons, and listening to or reading his sermons today gives credibility to his claims. For those of us who struggle to keep our congregations awake or who doubt whether or not preaching can actually connect with the modern man, Preaching and Preachers is a wonderful encouragement to keep at it.

 2. A Sacred View of the Calling to Preach – Another area where MLJ stands out as unusual is in his view of the calling to preach. For MLJ, no one autonomously seeks this privilege for himself; the Lord seeks out and sovereignly calls His preachers, in a manner analogous to His summoning of Old Testament prophets. It was this area where the Lord so fearfully disturbed me. For MLJ, to seek to be a preacher without a divine summons approximates the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I imagine it was this view of the calling to preach that gave MLJ’s words the gravity and power no one can deny. Even in print today, God’s Spirit seems to unusually brood over MLJ’s words. And I can attest that no preacher, living or dead, has so thrashed my conscience as MLJ.

 3. An Urgent View of the Necessity of Unction – Due in part to the theological tradition in which I was raised, this was a subject I was almost completely ignorant of. Concisely, unction refers to God supernaturally pouring out His Spirit on a preacher while in the act of preaching, resulting in an experience that’s easier felt than described. If you’ve ever been in a sermon like this, you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about. Everyone I’ve asked testifies that this was their experience sitting through RC Sproul’s sermon at the 2008 Together for the Gospel Conference entitled “The Curse Motif of the Atonement.” You lose any sense of time, you forget that there are people sitting around you, you feel as if your chest is about ready to implode, you almost forget to breathe or blink, and you’re simply held captive to God speaking to you through the preacher’s words. In most cases, that’s an experience of unction. Now MLJ, like Spurgeon and many of the Puritans before him, believed that unction is the great secret to preaching and that God sovereignly gives unction in response to the desperate prayers of preachers. You need not agree with his exegesis or his theology of reoccurring post-conversion Spirit baptism (I certainly don’t) to agree with his major premise. (For a better defense of the Spirit’s work of unction, see Al Martin’s Preaching in the Holy Spirit.) Really imbibing this idea has completely transformed my prayer life and view of preaching. I pray daily that God will pour out His Spirit the upcoming Sunday. As I approach the pulpit I do so with the clear awareness that unless the Spirit falls, my words will be spoken to a valley of dead bones. I owe this directly to Preaching and Preachers.

Preaching and Preachers is certainly not a perfect book. It is amusingly dated in certain places and dogmatic on a few things you might find odd (e.g., MLJ was strongly opposed to the audio recording sermons). It also isn’t very strong on how to transition from exegesis to exposition. However, if you’re looking for a swift boot to the pants to preach the Word in season and out, I can’t imagine a better book than Preaching and Preachers.

Timothy Raymond has been the pastor of Trinity Baptist Church in Muncie, Indiana since April 2006. He received his MDiv from the Baptist Bible Seminary of Pennsylvania in 2004 and has pursued further education through the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation. Tim grew up outside Syracuse, NY and previously served at Berean Baptist Church, Nicholson, PA (member and teacher during college and seminary) and Calvary Baptist Church, Sandusky, Ohio (seminary internship location). Tim met his wife Bethany at college, and they were married in May 2001. Tim enjoys reading, weight-lifting, wrestling with his three sons, and attempting to sleep.

For you last minute shoppers out there, here is a book sure to be a success!

The Christian Lover: The Sweetness of Love and Marriage in the Letters of Believers. By Michael A. G. Haykin.

In The Christian Lover: The Sweetness of Love and Marriage in the Letters of Believers, Dr. Michael A. G. Haykin declares that “reading expressions of love from the past can be a helpful way of responding to the frangibility of Christian marriage in our day.” To that end, he brings together letters from one or both parties in twelve significant relationships from church history. The correspondents include such notables as Martin Luther (writing to his wife Katie), and John Calvin (expressing to friends his grief over the death of his wife Idelette). Lesser-known writers include Helmuth von Moltke, who wrote to his wife as he faced execution as the hands of the Nazis in 1945. The contents range from courtship communications to proposals of marriage to final words before dying, but most have to do with the events of everyday life. Dr. Haykin, professor of church history and biblical spirituality at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., provides an introduction to each set of letters and draws practical applications for today’s believers based on the expressions of love made by the correspondents. In the end, The Christian Lover is a celebration of marriage, an intimate window into the thoughts of men and women in love with both God and one another.

Also listen to Michael Haykin talk with the Reformed Forum about The Christian Lover.