Loveland Protestant Reformed Church

709 East 57th Street; Loveland, CO 80538

Services: 9:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. (7:00 p.m. June through August)

Vol. 5, No. 6              Pastor: Rev. G. Van Baren                 Phone: (970) 667-9481

Homepage on Internet: http://www.prca.org

Contents:

The Essence of Faith

Turning God’s Grace into Lasciviousness (3)

Is the Authorized Version Perfect?

The Essence of Faith

           When we think of faith, we usually think of the activity of believing and trusting in God and in our Lord Jesus Christ.  Faith is believing and trusting, but before that it is something else.  Faith in its deepest reality and essence is union with Christ.

         This is suggested in the Heidelberg Catechism which, speaks of true faith in terms of "engrafting into Christ" (20), and in the Westminster Larger Catechism, which says that faith is not only assent to the truth of the promise of the gospel, but a receiving and resting upon Christ for salvation (72).  In distinction from the activity of faith, this is sometimes referred to in theology as the power or principle of faith.

         But, does Scripture teach that faith is union with Christ?  It does in such passages as Galatians 2:20, John 17:20, 21, and Ephesians 3:17, and in the very way that Scripture speaks of faith throughout.

         In the NT for example the Greek uses several different expressions, most of which imply that faith brings us into living contact and union with Christ.  Scripture speaks, for example, most often of believing "in Christ."  What else can that refer to but that we are through faith bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh? (Eph. 5:30).  It speaks also and literally of believing "into" Him (Jn. 3:16, 18, Col. 2:5), or of believing "on" Him (Rom. 9:23, 10:11) or "upon" Him (Acts 11:17, 16:31).

         All these passages imply close personal union and fellowship with the Son of God.  Even those passages that speak simply of believing Him imply that we are close enough to Him by faith that we can actually hear Him speaking and know and trust what He says (Jn. 14:11, II Tim. 1:12).  Such is the nature of true faith.

         This, then, is what distinguishes true faith from all its counterfeits.  In many other ways a counterfeit faith mimics a true faith, but there is one thing that cannot be mimicked and that is being in Christ by faith.

         To see faith as union with Christ is also to see that faith must be a gift of God.  If we only ever speak of the activity of faith then we may begin to think that faith has its origin in us and in our will.  But when we remember that it is union with Christ, then it is clear that it must be God's work and gift.  Could we unite ourselves to Christ?  No more than a branch might graft itself into the tree!

         This understanding of faith explains many other things as well.  It explains how the righteousness of Christ becomes ours for our justification through faith.  It explains how faith is the victory that overcomes the world, for it is not some inherent power in faith that overcomes, but the fact that faith puts us into Christ and so brings us into union with His victory over sin, death, the world and Satan.

         What a marvelous thing, then, to be able to say that we have faith!  To say it is to confess that by a wonderful and sovereign work of God we live in Christ and He in us, nevermore to be parted from one another.  Can you say it - that you are in Christ by faith?                                                                     Rev. Ronald Hanko

Turning God’s Grace into Lasciviousness (3)

         For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.  Jude 4.

         In our last two articles we were discussing  an important question sent in by a reader concerning the passage in Jude 4.  I quote the entire question.  “Of course, this verse is one of the relatively few times the NT mentions reprobation.  My question is about the phrase, ‘turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness.’  I have seen this phrase used to teach that God’s sovereign grace is resistible when shown to the wicked reprobate.  I know that that explanation is in error.  But what does the phrase mean?  And why is the phrase used in a verse about the reprobate?  Were the false teachers antinomians who were perverting the truth of salvation by grace to excuse immoral behavior?  Does the ‘grace of our God’ refer to the grace God has shown to the Christians in the church, which the false teachers were distorting, rather than grace that was actually shown to the false teachers (since they received none)?”

         We are ready now to turn to the main question: What is the meaning of the clause, "to turn the grace of our God into lasciviousness."

         The one who sent in the question correctly writes that this expression has often been used to teach the error that God's grace is resistible.

         Apparently, those who support this contention argue that it is God's will and purpose to save these wretched ungodly men, and God would indeed do this if He possibly could; but His grace is resisted and turned into lasciviousness.

         Now we have already noticed that this interpretation is absolutely impossible.  The text quite clearly says that these ungodly men were ordained before for the purpose of creeping into the church to corrupt it.  And we noticed too that God's purpose in this is the good of the church; i.e., to purify the church from a wicked element which is always present.

         But the meaning of the expression taken by itself cannot mean what the defenders of resistible grace want it to mean.  They argue that God's grace is shown to these ungodly men in God's desire to save them.  But that very grace is turned into lasciviousness.  That is impossible.  How can God's desire to save them be turned into lasciviousness?  Can they get a hold on God's desire?  Can they make God's desire their possession, and then corrupt it?  That interpretation just won't work.

         The questioner quoted above strikes at the heart of the matter with the further question: "Were the false teachers antinomians who were perverting the truth of salvation by grace to excuse immoral behavior?"  That is precisely the point.  That some such people are referred to is evident from the fact that these men crept into the church unawares.  They professed to believe the truth.  They

claimed to agree with the doctrinal position of the church, especially that salvation is by grace alone.  But they came in under false colors, for their purpose is to corrupt the church.  And so, while they claim to hold to salvation by grace alone, they commit terrible sins, sins which are further described by Jude in such vss. as 7, 8, 10, 11.

         And so the doctrine of salvation by grace alone is referred to in the text.  This doctrine they turn into lasciviousness.  It is important that we say a few more things about this.  But we shall have to wait until next time.

         But let it now be underscored most emphatically that grace is always irresistible because grace is always particular.  A common grace is in its very nature resistible.  A grace shown to all men (in whatever form that may be) is a grace which is resistible and resisted.  Not all shown that "common" grace are saved, are they?  In their case that grace does not accomplish its intended purpose.  The sovereign and almighty grace of God is then shown to be, after all, in the case of many, weak and ineffective.  Man can and does resist it.

Who wants grace like that?  Not I.                  Prof. Herman Hanko

 

Even many unbelievers agree that the great problem in society is the breakdown of the family.  Scripture emphasizes the importance and necessity of the strong family relationship for other and spiritual reasons.  You will want to read of this in our pamphlet, “Foundations are Shaking” by Rev. B. Gritters.  Write for a free copy.

Is the Authorized Version Perfect?

It is with some trepidation that we take up the question posed by one of our readers: "Are there translation errors in the KJV (king James Version - better known as the Authorized Version or AV), e.g., dates, names, numbers, etc.?"  We are ardent supporters of the AV, as those who have read our literature know, yet we do not believe that any version or translation can be perfect.

         We would add, however, that there are no serious translation errors in the AV, i.e., no errors that affect Biblical doctrines or change the sense of the passage.  The AV is by far the best translation of the Holy Scriptures, not only because it is based on the best manuscripts, but also because the translators themselves were trustworthy men who had the highest possible regard for the Word of God, unlike many today.

         We believe, too, that the multiplication of versions is a great evil.  Not only is the Word not recognized because of the many versions in use, but it is no longer learned and memorized for the same reason.  The many versions, rather than giving the Bible to the people in language they can understand, have effectively taken it away from them.

         Nevertheless, we do not believe that a translation can be perfect.  No translation can perfectly reproduce the sense of every original Greek and Hebrew word or every nuance of meaning.  Nor can a translation retain such things as the word order of the Greek and Hebrew, which is often quite important.

         The teaching that the AV is without mistake and perfect is untenable simply in light of the fact that the AV itself has been revised a number of times.  These revisions have all been minor (today they are mostly a matter of different spellings), but what is errorless should not need revision of any kind.

         Against our position, there are those who hold that the AV translators themselves were inspired, so that their translation is errorless.  This, however, puts us into the charismatic camp, by allowing that infallibility and inspiration continue after the time of the Apostles.  If there can be inspired and infallible translators, there can be inspired and infallible prophets and prophecies as well.  That teaching we utterly reject.

         The position that a translation can be errorless is the teaching of Romanism.  They claim that their Latin version (the Vulgate) cannot even be corrected from the originals.  Cf. Turretin, Institutes, vol. III, pages 112-134.

         This is not to deny God's providence both in the preservation of the Greek and Hebrew text of Scripture and in the providing of such an excellent translation of Scripture.  It is a wonderful providence that the AV was given to the church and was, at least until recent times, used by the whole of the English-speaking church.

         Some object that if the translation is not perfect, then we cannot say that English Bible is God's Word.  But that in no sense follows.  Not only is the AV an accurate translation, but it is a translation of the words God spoke, so that when we read the English version we are reading the Bible and know from it what God will have us to do.

         Also, with the help of a good concordance or some careful study, even without a knowledge of the Hebrew or Greek, one can discover very easily what the Greek and Hebrew text of Scripture do say.  It is not difficult, for example to find out that the word "comfortless" in John 14:18 is not from the ordinary word for comfort, but a word meaning something like "orphans."  Such careful study we encourage.  Rev. Ronald Hanko