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)
Pastor: Rev. Garry Eriks Phone: (970) 667-9481

Vol. 7, No. 17

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

Contents:
A Sudden and Unexpected Coming
Christ's Sorrow Over Jerusalem's Sins
Whom Do Signs Follow?

A Sudden and Unexpected Coming

If the "rapture" is not secret, why do we read of Christ's coming as sudden and unexpected (I Thess. 5:1-9)? He comes, Scripture says, as a thief in the night (Matt. 24:34; II Pet. 3:10; Rev. 3:3; 16:15). What could be more secret or unexpected than that?

The truth is that Christ comes as a unexpected thief only in relation to the ungodly and unbelieving. I Thessalonians 5:1-9 makes this abundantly clear. There Paul speaks of "them," the ungodly, in distinction from "you," that is, the saints. He tells us that inescapable destruction shall come upon them (vs. 3), "but ye, brethren, are not in darkness that the day should overtake you as a thief" (vs. 4).

The wicked are not expecting the final judgment and the coming of Christ. Though many of them have heard that He is coming and know that God will judge the world, they hold this truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:16). They are the scoffers of whom Peter speaks (II Pet. 3:1-8). Because God does not pour out His wrath on them immediately they conclude He will not judge them at all. Nor do they recognize the judgments He does send on them now as judgments (AIDS, earthquakes, famines, wars).

Such people are also found in the church. There they are represented by the five foolish virgins of Matthew 25 (vss. 1-13). When Christ does come they are sound asleep, and without oil, and are excluded from the wedding feast as a result. They belong to the church and have the name of believers (virgins), but are in fact hypocrites and unbelievers.

God's people are not taken completely unawares (further proof that the "rapture" is not secret), and are in fact, though always imperfectly, watching and waiting for the coming of Christ, believing that He shall certainly come as He has promised. They are not in the darkness of unbelief and sin, as I Thessalonians 5:4 reminds us.

Nevertheless, even they do not know the day or hour of Christ's coming (Matt. 24:36, 42; 25:13; Mk. 13:32). To them also Christ says, "In such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man cometh" (Matt. 24:44).

For this reason we have the urgent calling to watch and wait and pray. Matthew 25:13 speaks of that calling. So does I Thessalonians 5: "Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.... Let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation" (vss. 6, 8).

This warning is needed! The five "wise" virgins are also sleeping when the bridegroom comes (Matt. 25:5). They have oil in their lamps (the Biblical symbol of the Spirit of God), but they themselves are slumbering. It is with this in mind that Jesus says in another place, "When the Son of Man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" (Lk. 18:8) and that in connection with a call to fervent, frequent prayer.

That we need this warning should be evident in the fact that we are often careless, and live as though Christ will never come. Indeed, the thought of His coming right now, more often than not would fill us with dismay. Let us then watch and pray, that we enter not into temptation.

Rev. Ronald Hanko

Christ's Sorrow Over Jerusalem's Sins (1)

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Matthew 23:37.

A reader asks: "Will you please re-explain this passage?" I am happy to do that because it is an important and interesting passage which has often been misinterpreted. Apparently, I explained the passage in an earlier issue, but that was long ago and it will not hurt to look at the passage once again. Note that a parallel passage is found in Luke 13:34.

* * * *

The interesting aspect of the interpretation of this passage is found in the fact that it is usually used as proof for the well-meant gospel offer. The well-meant gospel offer teaches that God expresses in the gospel His desire to save all that hear the gospel, and even God's desire to save all men, even those who do not hear it. And, closely connected to this idea, is also the idea that God's expressed desire to save all men is indicative of His love, compassion, grace, and mercy towards all men. Such love, compassion, grace, and mercy are, therefore, common; and it is at this point that the defenders of the well-meant offer also hold to a common grace, or common love, mercy, and compassion.

The ground for this view of the text is said to be found in the fact that Jesus Himself expresses His desire to gather Jerusalem's children as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings. Nevertheless, Jesus' desire is frustrated by the unwillingness and unbelief of the citizens of Jerusalem. Jesus is willing; the Jews are not. Jesus wants to save; the Jews persist in unbelief. Jesus longs to have them all in heaven; the Jews nonetheless go to hell because they will not believe in Christ.

* * * *

Now, apart from any other question, two things are perfectly obvious in this presentation.

In the first place, it is so obviously Arminian in character that it remains a mystery how anyone professing to hold to the Reformed faith or, even, Calvinism, can possibly maintain it. It teaches openly and simply that Jesus is unable to accomplish what He wills, because man frustrates His desire. Thus, man's hard and rebellious will is decisive. It overrules the will of Christ. It determines the outcome of the whole matter of salvation.

If man is able to frustrate the desires of Christ by his disobedience and refusal to accept Christ's overtures, then he also has the power to accept these overtures and receive Christ by the choice of that same will.

This, it seems to me, is so simple that a small child can understand it.

But let it be understood very clearly that this whole conception is neither Reformed nor Calvinistic, but is simply a wholesale sell-out of the Reformed faith to the blatant Arminianism condemned by the Synod of Dordt and by Reformed churches since Dordt.

Nor do the plaintive and somewhat pathetic accusations of "hyper-Calvinism" made against those who deny the well-meant offer alter one whit the fact that those who hold to the well-meant offer have sold out the store and no longer have the right to claim to be Reformed.

It is interesting to note as well that those who have adopted the well-meant offer have also made some significant concessions to Arminianism in other areas. We could, for example, mention the compromises in the doctrine of total depravity which well-meant offer defenders have made. But especially the crucially important doctrine of sovereign election and reprobation, the benchmark of all true Calvinism and of the Reformed faith, is denied in whole or in part. The denial of sovereign reprobation is probably the reason why a relatively recent issue of Pink's book, "The Sovereignty of God," is a truncated version without any mention of Pink's doctrine of reprobation, a doctrine which Pink believed to the end of his life, and which he had included in his book.

The second remark is equally obvious. Whatever the text may mean, the defenders of the well-meant offer have no right to appeal to it as expressing a desire of Christ to save all men, when the text says nothing of the sort. Those who hold to the well-meant offer read the text as if it said: "How often would I have gathered thee together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

But the text does not say that. And it must not be made to say that. The text makes a very obvious and careful distinction between Jerusalem and Jerusalem's children. Christ expresses His desire to save Jerusalem's children, but Jerusalem did all in its power to prevent this. That is the meaning of the text -- on the very surface of it.

Does this mean that Christ was unsuccessful in gathering Jerusalem's children? Of course not. He gathered Jerusalem's children during the days of His earthly ministry, and He gathered Jerusalem's children after He was ascended into heaven and poured out His Spirit upon the church. On that first day of the New Testament era, no less than 3000 of Jerusalem's children were gathered.

But there is more to the text. We shall take another look at the same passage in the next issue. Why not save this issue in a handy place so that you can look it up when the next issue arrives? Prof. H. Hanko

Whom Do Signs Follow?

A reader has asked about Mark 16:15-18. Her question is too long to reproduce here, but concerns the reference of verse 17. Does that verse, she asks, refer to every believer, to all believers during the time of the Apostles, or to the Apostles themselves? She asks especially whether the believers in verse 16 and verse 17 are the same people.

As most of our readers know, the Charismatics and Pentecostals part ways here with those who believe that the special gifts of the Spirit have ceased. These people are convinced that these Mark 16:17 refers to gifts that continue yet today and are to be sought by every believer. Those who believe that they do not continue, teach that they were "signs of the Apostles" (II Cor. 12:12) which ceased at the end of the Apostolic age.

Over against Pentecostalism, some teach that the believers in Mark 16:17 are only the Apostles, since vs. 17 literally says: "And these signs shall follow them that have believed" and it clearly refers to all Christians.

Nevertheless, while these signs follow all believers, there is no evidence in the text (1) that all believers were able to do, or required to do these signs; and (2) that they would continue beyond the time of the Apostles.

It needs to be pointed out that if these signs continue today, then all of them do, including taking up serpents and drinking of deadly poisons. It is wholly arbitrary to claim some of the gifts and not others - to believe in tongues and not in serpents, or to claim the gift of healing and not that of drinking poison.

To avoid this difficulty, some Pentecostals argue that the taking up of serpents and drinking of poison are to be understood figuratively. The serpents, then, are a reference to Satan, and the poison to false teaching. The trouble is, that the same thing can then be done with the other signs. Why, then, is the healing not the salvation of souls, spiritual healing, and the speaking in tongues, simply the preaching of the gospel in foreign lands? We believe that all these signs are to be understood literally.

The signs themselves give us some clue, however, that they are "signs of the Apostles" (II Cor. 12:12). If the different signs are listed with those who actually performed them, this becomes abundantly evident:

(1) Casting out of devils - recorded only of Paul the Apostle (Acts 16:18), Philip, one of those ordained by the Apostles, and of the 70 who were sent by Jesus (Luke 10:17).

(2) Speaking with new tongues - this gift was conferred on the 120 at Pentecost (Acts 2:3,4,11,26); on the house of Cornelius in connection with Peter's preaching (Acts 10:46), and on a few believers at Ephesus by Paul the Apostle (19:6). It is interesting to note, however, that in Acts 8, the gift of the Spirit had to be bestowed by the Apostles (vss. 14-17). Even Philip could not give it, though he was able to do miracles.

(3) Taking up serpents without harm - recorded only of Paul (Acts 20:3-6).

(4) Drinking of poisons - no incident recorded in Scripture.

(5) Healing the sick - recorded only of the Apostles and of those ordained by them.

Help to spread these truths by forwarding this document to at least ten other people!

Last modified: 02-May-2002