Vol. 79; No. 9; February 1, 2003
EDITORIAL POLICY
Every
editor is solely responsible for the contents of his own articles. Contributions of
general interest from our readers and questions for "The Reader Asks" department
are welcome. Contributions will be limited to approximately 300 words and must be neatly
written or typewritten, and must be signed. Copy deadlines are the first and fifteenth of
the month. All communications relative to the contents should be sent to the editorial
office.
REPRINT POLICY
Permission
is hereby granted for the reprinting of articles in our magazine by other publications,
provided: a) that such reprinted articles are reproduced in full; b) that proper
acknowledgment is made; c) that a copy of the periodical in which such reprint appears is
sent to our editorial office.
SUBSCRIPTION POLICY
Subscription
price: $17.00 per year in the US., US $20.00 elsewhere. Unless a definite request for
discontinuance is received, it is assumed that the subscriber wishes the subscription to
continue, and he will be billed for renewal. If you have a change of address, please
notify the Business Office as early as possible in order to avoid the inconvenience of
interrupted delivery. Include your Zip or Postal Code.
BOUND VOLUMES
The
Business Office will accept standing orders for bound copies of the current volume. Such
orders are mailed as soon as possible after completion of a volume year.
l6mm microfilm, 35mm microfilm and 105mm
microfiche, and article copies are available through University Microfilms international.
For new subscribers in the United States to the Standard Bearer, there is a special offer: a ½ price subscription for one year--$8.50. Those in other countries can write for special rates as well to: The Standard Bearer, P.O. Box 603, Grandville, MI 49468-0603 or e-mail Mr. Don Doezema.
Each issue of the Standard Bearer is available on cassette tape for those who are blind, or who for some other reason would like to be able to listen to a reading of the SB. This is an excellent ministry of the Evangelism Society of the Southeast Protestant Reformed Church. The reader is Ken Rietema of Southeast Church. Anyone desiring this service regularly should write:
Southeast PRC
1535 Cambridge Ave. S.E.
Grand Rapids, MI 49506.
Table of Contents:
Meditation - Rev. James Slopsema
Editorial - Prof. David J. Engelsma
Letters:
Marking the Bulwarks of Zion - Prof. Herman Hanko
All Around Us - Rev. Gise J. Van Baren
Taking Heed to the Doctrine - Rev. Steven Key
Go Ye Into All the World - Rev. Arie denHartog
All Thy Works Shall Praise Thee - Mr. Joel Minderhoud
Day of Shadows - George M. Ophoff
Book Reviews -
News From Our Churches - Mr. Benjamin Wigger
Rev. Slopsema is pastor of First Protestant Reformed Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Now therefore the sword
shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the
wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife.
Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee
out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto
thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
For thou didst it
secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.
And David said unto
Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said unto David, The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not
die.
Howbeit, because by this
deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born
unto thee shall surely die.
The one black mark on what otherwise was the
illustrious career of David was his sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband
Uriah. We are all familiar with this account. David took Bathsheba in adultery while the armies
of Israel were fighting the Ammonites. When
Bathsheba conceived, David attempted to cover up his sin.
First, he brought Bathshebas husband, Uriah, home from battle so that the
child would appear to be his. When that
failed, David arranged to have Uriah killed in battle.
Immediately after this, David took Bathsheba to wife, thinking he had effectively
covered up his sin.
David lived in
impenitence, until finally the prophet Nathan visited him.
Nathan presented David with the sad tale of a poor man who lost his treasured lamb
to his cruel, rich neighbor. David responded
in righteous indignation, swearing an oath that this rich man should die for taking his
neighbors one, precious lamb to feed his guest.
And Nathan replied, Thou art the
man.
Now we read of the
judgment of God that would fall upon David for his sin.
Although God forgave David, there were still consequences that David had to live
with for the rest of his life. It is well
that we understand this, so that we take sin seriously.
According to the prophet Nathan there would be serious consequences to Davids
sin.
First, the sword would not
depart from Davids house (v. 10). This
means that violence would fill the house of David, so that family members would die
violent deaths. And this word of God was
certainly fulfilled. Absalom murdered Amnon
for the rape of his sister Tamar. Absalom
attempted to take the throne from his father, David, and was killed by Joab in the ensuing
battle. Solomon ordered the death of
Adonijah, who persisted in his attempt to gain the throne after the reins of government
were transferred from David to Solomon. What
grief this brought to David and his house.
Secondly, God would raise
up evil against David out of his own house and would take the wives of David and give them
to his neighbor, who would lie with them in the sight of the sun (vv. 11, 12). This was fulfilled when Absalom went in unto the
ten concubines that David had left behind in the palace when he fled from Absalom. What humiliation this was for David.
Finally, the child of
David and Bathsheba, conceived in adultery, would die.
This word of God took place immediately.
These judgments of God for
Davids sin were strikingly appropriate. There
is an unmistakable similarity between the sin of David and the judgment that befell him. David sinned by killing Uriah with the sword; the
sword would never depart from Davids house. David
sinned by taking another mans wife in adultery; Davids wives would be taken by
his neighbor, and that openly. And the child
of Davids adultery would die.
What was true of David is
always true.
Sin always has it
consequences.
Galatians 6:7
states the
principle very clearly: Be not
deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. This passage sets forth a simple rule of
agriculture. That which you sow, you will
also reap. Sow corn and you will reap corn. This is true also spiritually. If you walk in obedience to God, you are sowing
seed from which you will reap a harvest of many blessings.
However, if you despise Gods law and trample it underfoot, you will reap the
bitter consequences of Gods judgment. This
is always the case. There are no exceptions. Sometimes it does not appear that way. There may be those around us who seem to sin with
impunity. We ourselves may turn to a
particular sin without coming to any discernible harm.
This leads some to develop a casual attitude towards sin. Sin, they think, is really not so bad. Others are even emboldened to sin. Yet, if we could see things as God does, we would
know differently. Every sin has its judgment
of God. Sin always has consequences.
And there is often a
direct relationship between the sin committed and the judgment that God brings upon it, so
that the one uniquely fits the other. The
judgment of God upon the person who abuses his body through drunkenness or gluttony is to
take away his health and bring him to an early grave.
God judges the chronic liar by making sure no one believes him anymore. Gods judgment on the adulterer is a ruined
marriage. But perhaps the most devastating
judgment of God upon sin is that God leads the children to follow in the sins of their
parents, so that the sins of the parents come back to haunt them.
Be not deceived; God is
not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Gods people often view these judgments of God in their own lives as
punishment. When tragedy of some sort befalls
them, the question is frequently asked, Why is God punishing me? And when there is an obvious connection between
some adversity and a sin or weakness in the life of the child of God, the statement often
heard by pastors is, Gods punishing me, isnt He?
Yet this was not true for
David. Nathan assured David that the Lord
had put away his sin, i.e., forgiven him.
There are two things
noteworthy about this forgiveness. First,
this forgiveness came only in the way of repentance and confession. For quite some time David lived impenitently,
seeking to cover up his sin, even in his own conscience. Yet, as
Psalm 51
indicates, he found no peace.
His soul was deeply troubled. When
finally Nathan confronted him with his sin, David repented and confessed. And immediately Nathan assured him of Gods
forgiveness. The second noteworthy thing
about Davids forgiveness is that David escaped the punishment of God. Gods punishment for adultery and murder was
death. Yet God assured David through the
prophet that he would not die. He would
escape the punishment for this sin.
This is always the way it
is for Gods people. Make no mistake: God does punish sin. He punishes all sin, even the sin of His people. In fact, He does so to the extreme, with
everlasting punishment of body and soul in hell. This
is the stark reality of Gods justice. But
God in His great mercy has punished His Son, Jesus Christ, for the sin of His people. All the punishment for their sin was endured at
the cross. There is none left. And so it is that when we confess our sin in true
repentance and lay hold of the cross by faith, we may be assured that our sins also are
forgiven and that there is no punishment for these sins.
What fell upon David and
what comes to us, as consequences of our sins, is Gods chastisement.
There is a great
difference between punishment and chastisement. Punishment
is the work of Gods justice to destroy the sinner.
This punishment falls on all those who are without Jesus Christ. Chastisement is the work of Gods love and
mercy to afflict this sinner in order to correct him and turn him from his sin. It is a work of salvation.
It was the chastisement of
God that fell upon David.
Nathan pointed out two
terrible things about Davids sin.
First, David had despised
the Lord in this sin. This is very striking
in light of the fact that David is set forth in Scripture as a man after Gods own
heart. How was it, then, that David despised
the Lord? This was due to his sinful nature,
which he retained even as a great man of God. The
born-again heart loves the Lord; the flesh despises Him.
Through neglect of the Word and prayer, Davids flesh gained control for a
time, so that he despised the Lord. This
contempt focused especially on the commandments of God.
David held the Lords commandments in contempt, so that it became a small
thing to trample them under his feet. This
alone explains such horrible sins in the life of such a great man of God.
The second thing Nathan
pointed out concerning Davids sin was that David had given great occasion to the
enemies of the Lord to blaspheme. This
certainly is not difficult to see. Here the
Lords anointed, the one who represents the Lord Himself, stoops to commit such
horrible things. The enemies of the Lord
laughed and spoke evil of Him.
But this may not be. God will not allow His people to despise Him. Neither will He allow His name to be blasphemed
by His enemies on account of His peoples behavior.
So David must be corrected. The best
way to correct such a foul attitude and direction of life is by affliction. In infinite love and perfect wisdom, God laid
these afflictions on David so that he would not only come to repentance but would never
continue in these sins again.
This is how God always
deals with His beloved people. When they
begin to despise Him, and show that by trampling underfoot His commandments, the Lord in
His love corrects them. He rebukes them with
His Word. But it is often necessary to
correct them with the sad consequences of sin.
And it always is the work
of His love and mercy to save His people from their foolish sins.
Let us then take sin
seriously. Sin is nothing to take lightly. The child of God will not perish in his sin. The Lord will certainly keep His own. But He might accomplish that preservation of His
own by chastising him with many stripes.
For those who are
suffering the consequences of their sin (and who is not?), God has this to say: My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction
(Prov. 3:11).
Humble yourselves
therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you
(I Pet. 5:6, 7).
Prominent,
influential ministers, professors of theology, and ruling elders in reputedly conservative
Reformed and Presbyterian churches in North America are openly attacking the cardinal
truths of salvation by grace alone all of the cardinal truths of salvation
by grace alone on the basis of the doctrine of a conditional covenant.
Central in the
contemporary debate is biblical justification. This
is as it should be. Justification, or the
forgiveness of the guilty sinner, is the heart of the gospel of grace. It is to be expected that enemies of grace will
assault the heart. The doctrine of
justification by faith alone is, as Luther taught the churches of the Reformation, the
article of a standing or falling church. It
follows that the churches of the Reformation that now fall do so by denying the very
article in which once in the mercy of Christ they stood.
Justification
by the Works of Faith
The distinct, powerful
movement now deeply troubling the true churches of Christ and the saints of God in North
America teaches that justification is by faith and by the good works faith performs. It appeals to
James 2:21
and
James 2:25,
which
teach that Abraham and Rahab were justified by works and not by faith only. The movement harmonizes these passages with Pauls denial in
Romans 3
and 4 that we are justified by the deeds of the law by
explaining that Paul and James have two different kinds of works in view. When Paul denies that we are righteous by good
works, he refers exclusively to works done apart from faith and works intended to
merit. James, on the other hand, affirming
justification by good works, refers to the good works that flow from faith. The truth, therefore, according to this movement,
is that we are in fact righteous before God partly on the basis of our own good works
our good works that are the fruits of faith.
The righteousness of the
guilty sinner, the righteousness of his justification, the righteousness of his standing
before God in judgment, is, and must be, in part, his own good works!
Insofar as the movement
still practices caution in its teaching of justification by faith and works (and it
behooves a movement that intends to deny justification by faith alone in churches holding
Lords Days 23 and 24 of the Heidelberg Catechism and Articles 21-24 of the Belgic
Confession to be as vague, ambiguous, and slippery, that is, deceptive, as possible, even
in our doctrinally ignorant and apathetic time), the movement is exposed, unmistakably, by
its harmonizing of Paul and James. The
movement immediately raises suspicion by its quick and emphatic appeal to James in the
matter of justification. Every teenage
catechumen in a Reformed church that teaches its youth the essentials of Reformed doctrine
knows that in the great controversy of the Reformation over justification Rome sat in
James 2
.
But
James 2
is inspired Scripture, not apocrypha, nor a right strawy epistle. Appeal to
James 2,
therefore, does not in itself expose a teacher, or a movement,
as heretical.
Harmonizing
Paul and James
What exposes the
movement under discussion as heretical in the article of justification is its harmonizing
of James and Paul by affirming two kinds of works. The orthodox harmonizing of
Romans 3:28
and
James 2:20-26
affirms two kinds
of justification. As is evident in the
Romans passage itself, justification in Paul is Gods (legal) reckoning of the
obedience of Jesus Christ to the account of the guilty sinner, the man or woman who in
this judgment appears only as one who is ungodly. Justification
in Romans is the forgiveness of sins. This
justification is by means of (not: because
of, or on the basis of!) faith only. The
sinners own works, whether works before salvation or after salvation, whether works
apart from faith or works produced by faith, whether works done to merit or works done out
of thankfulness, have nothing whatever to do with his justification, except that all of
them need to be forgiven.
Justification in
James 2,
by contrast, is the justified sinners exhibition of the truth of his faith and of
the reality of his justification by this true faith alone, both to himself and to others,
by the good works that true faith always performs in obedience to the command of God. The James passage itself makes plain that it is
speaking of justification in a quite different sense from that which justification has in
Romans. The passage in James begins this way: Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I
have works: shew me thy faith without thy
works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works (v. 18).
By insisting that Romans
and James both speak of justification in the same sense, but that they have different
kinds of works in view, the advocates of the movement now disturbing the Reformed churches
let the cat out of the bag. For
them, justificationjustification in the sense of ones becoming righteous
before God, justification in the sense of the forgiveness of sinsis partly by and
because of the good works of the sinner himself. The
sinners righteousness with God is in part his own good works. The stipulation is that these good works be those
that proceed from faith, not those done apart from faith and in order to merit.
Writing in the Spring
2002 issue of Reformation & Revival Journal, Norman Shepherd, a leading
proponent of the movement in conservative Reformed and Presbyterian churches that
overthrows the system of salvation by grace alone contained in the Three Forms of
Unity and in the Westminster Standards, says this about justification in Romans and
James:
As evangelicals we often try to dodge this attack
[of Rome against the Reformations confession of justification by faith alone] by saying that these verses [in
James 2
] are not talking about justification by faith in the
forensic, soteric sense that Paul talks about it in Romans and Galatians. The Westminster Confession, however, does not use
this dodge. Instead, the Confession
acknowledges that James is talking about faith and justification in the same sense that
Paul uses these terms when he denies that justification is by works (p. 80, emphasis
added).
This harmonizing of
Romans and James commits Shepherd and his disciples to the doctrine of justification by
faith and works. Shepherd expresses this
doctrine as his own in his recent book, The Call of Grace: How the Covenant Illuminates Salvation and
Evangelism (P&R 2000). With reference
to the obedience that God required of Israel in the Mosaic covenant, obedience consisting
of doing Gods commandments, obedience that Shepherd describes as Israels
obligation, Shepherd writes: Obedience
is simply faithfulness to the Lord; it is the righteousness of faith (compare
Rom. 9:32)
(p. 39, emphasis added). Later,
Shepherd repeats this gross false doctrine: The righteousness of faith is the obedience of faith
(Rom. 1:5;
16:26), and is therefore
simultaneously covenant privilege and responsibility (p. 76).
The Obedience
of Christ Alone
The truth about the
righteousness of faith is that it is the obedience of Jesus Christ in our stead and on our
behalf, and the obedience of Jesus Christ alone. The
truth about the righteousness of faith is that it is this obedience of Christ imputed to
the account of the guilty sinner through faith alone.
The truth about the righteousness of faith is that it does not consist of any work
of the sinner himself, not his works apart from faith, not his works of faith, and not his
faith itself as a work. The truth about the
righteousness of faith is that as soon as one work of the sinner himself is added to it,
be that work never so small and insignificant, even a weak sigh of sorrow over sin, the
righteousness is no longer the righteousness of faith, but the sinners own
righteousness. And both it and he are damned.
We
Heartily Believe
[the] Doctrine
in the
Catechism
There is no excuse for
Shepherd. He is a Reformed minister, bound
by Lords Days 23 and 24 of the Heidelberg Catechism.
There is no excuse for Reformed people deceived by Shepherd and his allies. They know, or ought to know, Lords Days 23
and 24 of the Heidelberg Catechism.
Q. 59. But what doth it profit thee now that thou believest all this?
A. That I am righteous in Christ, before God, and an heir of eternal life.
Q. 60. How art thou righteous before God?
A. Only by a true faith in Jesus Christ; so that, though my conscience accuse me that I have grossly transgressed all the commandments of God, and kept none of them, and am still inclined to all evil; notwithstanding, God, without any merit of mine, but only of mere grace, grants and imputes to me the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ; even so, as if I never had had nor committed any sin: yea, as if I had fully accomplished all that obedience which Christ has accomplished for me; inasmuch as I embrace such benefit with a believing heart.
Q. 61. Why sayest thou that thou art righteous by faith only?
A. Not that I am acceptable to God on account of the worthiness of my faith, but because only the satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ, is my righteousness before God; and that I cannot receive and apply the same to myself any other way than by faith only.
Q. 62. But why cannot our good works be the whole or part of our righteousness before God?
A. Because that the righteousness which can be approved of before the tribunal of God must be absolutely perfect, and in all respects conformable to the divine law; and also, that our best works in this life are all imperfect and defiled with sin.
Justification by faith
alone heart of the gospel, article of the standing or falling church, precious
comfort of poor sinners in the daily judgment of this life and regarding the final
judgment to come, grand testimony to the worth of the life and death of the Savior,
doctrine that glorifies the triune God, who worked out His own righteousness in the
obedience of Jesus Christ and who magnifies His marvelous mercy in imputing this
righteousness to His own for Christs sake!
Attacked and denied today
in Reformed and Presbyterian churches!
On
the basis of a conditional covenant!
... to be continued
Having read the editorial,
He Shines in All Thats Fair (Standard
Bearer, Dec. 1, 02), I was disappointed to read about the lesbian group being
allowed to sing at Calvin College. It is hard
to imagine the rapid influence of the gay agenda in our society and even within our
Christian community. I dont entirely
agree with you though in blaming all of this on common grace. Naturally, holding to the common grace doctrine
gives these wolves in sheeps clothing a loophole to leverage in their evil ideology. But Calvin College had the right and duty to call
a spade a spade regardless of their view of common grace.
What God forbids, we forbid.
Extremes can be taken on
both sides of this issue. On the one extreme
side, one could become a hermit and avoid all contact with the world, or one could
associate only with Christians and read or watch only Christian material, news, or
programs. On the other extreme side of the
issue, one could wallow in all the vomit of our sick society to glean the whole beans. Thankfully, for Christians who struggle with this
issue of common grace, no matter which side we are on, most of us find ourselves avoiding
the extremes, being faithful to our Lord, albeit, not perfectly, and finding the Lord
still using us as His witnesses. Let us pray
for each other that the Lord may protect us from these evil extremes, and that He may
continue to use us as His witnesses and in the building up of His kingdom until He
returns.
Carl R. Smits
Lansing, IL
Prof. Hanko is professor emeritus of Church History
and New Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary.
Jerome
Bolsec, as we saw last time, was an enemy of the truth of sovereign predestination. When he went so far as to interrupt a worship
service in Geneva in order to oppose the preaching of that truth, he was arrested by the
civil authorities for disturbing the peace. The
Venerable Company of Pastors in Geneva urged the city Council to examine Bolsecs
doctrinal positions, and to seek the advice of other cantons in Switzerland to arrive at
the truth of the matter. As it turned out,
however, the other Swiss churches were a disappointment.
They agreed with the ministers in Geneva on the doctrine of unconditional election,
but were of a mind to advise toleration of those who opposed the perplexing
doctrine of reprobation.
The End of the
Matter
Two events ended the
matter. The Council refused to accept the
advice of the churches from the neighboring cantons, and instead condemned the views of
Bolsec. Nevertheless, the sentence passed
upon Bolsec was almost certainly less severe than it could have been: Bolsec was banished
from Geneva, under pain of being whipped if he returned.
The second consequence
of the poor advice of the Swiss cantons was the preparation of a tract by Calvin entitled
On the Eternal Predestination of God, in which Calvin set forth his mature and fully
developed views on sovereign, eternal, and double predestination. It, along with another tract on the doctrine of
providence, has been published under the title Calvins Calvinism.* This tract is
sometimes called the Consensus Genevensis or Genevan Agreement. It was given this name because it expressed
the position of the Genevan churches.
Jerome Bolsec was banished
from Geneva on December 23, 1555. He never
returned to the city, but he did return to the Roman Catholic Church, where he rightly
belonged; for his doctrine was that of Rome, not of the Reformation, and his views were
Semi-Pelagian and not Calvinistic. Before he
died, he wrote a biography of Calvin that was full of slander, evil stories, and terrible
accusations. The biography would have died at
birth, I am sure, if it had not been for the fact that the Romish Church took hold of it
and promoted it as a genuine story of the life of Calvin and the kind of man he was. But at last, even Roman Catholic scholarship,
bound by scholarly integrity if not love for Calvin, killed it.
Conclusion
It is difficult to
imagine, but it is, in fact, true, that there are men within the Reformed churches who
come to Bolsecs defense and criticize Calvin for the Bolsec affair. Calvin is, e.g., charged with a hatred for Bolsec,
not out of disagreement with Bolsecs theological position, but out of a
determination to defend his own position as dictator of Geneva. Calvin is charged with seeing in Bolsec a threat
to his domination in the city and church, and with using his power and influence to rid
the city of someone whom he considered a challenger to his absolute sway within the
canton.
One cannot take such a
stand without calling into question Calvins theology.
And so, this also is done. Calvin is
charged with gross error in his position on predestination, and Bolsecs position is
honored and set forth as the truth of Scripture. The
enemies of sovereign predestination are legion.
But, more seriously,
Reformed and Presbyterian writers would prefer that the entire episode of Calvins
dealings with Bolsec remain unknown. These,
and there are many, claim that a position similar to that of Bolsec was really
Calvins position; that Calvin never really taught what is said to be Calvins
theology; and that later theologians (among whom are mentioned Theodore Beza, the fathers
at Dordt, the Westminster divines, Turretin, Kuyper, Hoeksema to name but a few)
have rashly and wrongly twisted Calvins theology into something Calvin never taught
or intended. These books (and there are many)
do not want to talk about the Bolsec controversy, for they are unable to explain
Calvins condemnation of Bolsec when, according to them, Calvin held views almost
identical to Bolsec.
And, as if that bit of
historical legerdemain were not sufficient, even the theologians present at the Synod of
the Christian Reformed Church in 1924 sought support for the well-meant gospel offer by
claiming that it was taught by Reformed writers in the most flourishing period of
Reformed theology when, in fact, it is the very doctrine that was part and
parcel of Bolsecs views so strongly condemned by Calvin.
If anyone disputes
this analysis of the situation, he need only read Calvins Treatise On the
Eternal Predestination of God. It is all
there. While Bolsecs name is not
mentioned, and while another enemy of sovereign predestination, Pighius by name, is
mentioned in that treatise, the fact remains that the treatise was occasioned by the
heresy of Bolsec and the sympathetic treatment of Bolsec by the other Swiss theologians.
Every genuinely orthodox
theologian from Calvin to today has agreed that Calvins teachings on election and
reprobation are the teachings of the Word of God. All
who have even a superficial understanding of the great church father Augustine also agree
that Calvin did not bring into theology an innovation, a new doctrine, something invented
by him, but that he taught nothing more than Augustine himself had taught and insisted was
crucial to the truth of the sovereignty of God in His work of grace in salvation. The great Synod of Dordt and the Westminster
Assembly, both representing the best theologians that the age knew and, perhaps, that the
world has ever seen assembled within a few years of each other, put its stamp on
Calvins teaching as being in all parts biblical.
Why do men refuse to
accept what is so obviously the case, namely that election and reprobation are biblical,
confessional, and the teachings of the Reformers? The
answer can only be that man wants no part of the absolute sovereignty of God. He prefers to salvage some remnants of his
tattered pride and place some responsibility for his salvation in his own hands. He refuses to admit that God is sovereign also in
the damnation of the wicked. He refuses to
acknowledge that God does all His good pleasure and reveals in all the works of His hands
that He alone is God.
The church has never
claimed that this is an easy doctrine. It is
not easy to understand; it is not easy to preach; it is not easy to hold and confess. It crushes all human pride. It leaves man nothing and God everything. It insists that not man rules, not even in his own
affairs, but that God, the Creator, the Sustainer of all, is also the Potter, who is
sovereign over the clay to make vessels of honor and dishonor as it pleases Him. God wills the salvation of the elect in Jesus
Christ, and that decree of election is the fountain and cause of faith, of all
good works, and of the fullness of salvation in Christ.
But God also wills the damnation of the reprobate to everlasting hell in the way of
their sin as manifestation of His supreme justice and infinite holiness.
It is, in the final
analysis, impossible that one maintain the sovereignty of God in election (as many try to
do) and deny the sovereignty of God in reprobation. To
deny the latter will result in a denial of the former.
Calvin understood that. Dordt
understood that. Dordt insisted that election
and reprobation were one decree, though with two sides: That some receive the gift of faith from God
and others do not receive it proceeds from Gods eternal decree
(Canons
I, 6).
Let those churches and
ministers who preach the whole counsel of God and claim to be Calvinists preach also the
doctrine of eternal, unchangeable, and sovereign reprobation and maintain it against all
opposition.
* It is available from the Reformed Free Publishing Association.
Rev. VanBaren is a minister emeritus in the
Protestant Reformed Churches.
The Grand Rapids Press, December 9, 2002, reports on an
instance where an individual, refusing to work on Sunday, was fired from her job. The government filed a lawsuit against the
employer, claiming this persons civil rights were violated.
The federal government is accusing Meijer Inc. of violating the civil rights of a cake decorator who was fired after refusing to work on a Sunday.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Debra Kerkstra of Allegan, who is a member of the Christian Reformed Church.
Meijer failed to provide a reasonable accommodation to the known religious practices of Ms. Kerkstra, the EEOC said on a document filed recently in U.S. District Court.
In response, the giant retailer said a day off for Kerkstra would have caused an undue hardship for the company on one of the busiest days of the week.
Kerkstra, 37, was fired in May 2001 after a year at the Plainwell store in Allegan County.
While not speaking specifically about the case, Meijer spokesman Brian Breslin said workers covered by the union contract can be required to work any day.
A person decides whether they want to accept the terms of employment. If they do, theyre accountable to keep their part of the bargain, Breslin said. Im not aware of any exceptions.
We cant do for one what we cant do for all, he said. You have to have consistent work rules. Thats why you have a labor contract.
The government, however, contends Meijers Plainwell store was comfortable knowing Kerkstra didnt want to work Sundays when she was hired in April 2000. Then a year later, a new boss gave her a Sunday shift.
Kerkstra found another employee who was willing to decorate cakes that day, but the store director refused to allow the switch, the EEOC said. She didnt report to work as scheduled, was suspended for three days and eventually fired.
It is of interest that the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in 1977, requires
companies to try to accommodate religious practices of workers. On that basis, it appears, Meijer might be held in
violation of Ms. Kerkstras civil rights.
The case (and the Civil
Rights Act) is of interest to Protestant Reformed workers especially since it will
not allow forced union membership or Sunday labor when such is refused on the basis of
ones religion.
In the case of Ms.
Kerkstra, there appears to be several reasons why her case is not as strong as it might
be.
First, she evidently became a member of the union in order to
work at Meijer. Meijer points out that the
union member is bound by the rules of that union which required the member to work
on any day when Meijer demanded this.
Secondly, she worked
one Sunday at the grand opening of the store.
Meijer argues that Ms. Kerkstra is inconsistent now when she refuses to work on any
more Sundays. The Press reports,
Kerkstra is ashamed and embarrassed and regrets that decision, the EEOC
said.
Thirdly, Ms. Kerkstra is a
member of the Christian Reformed denomination, which now permits work on Sunday (as well
as union membership).
Companies which intend to
demand Sunday work are clever. In the case of
Ms. Kerkstra, she was asked to work just the Sunday of the grand opening. These same companies soon go a step further: work just one Sunday a month there are
still 3 or 4 other Sundays for worship in church. But
it is obvious: one who works just one Sunday,
or one Sunday a month, has lost all moral right to refuse additional Sunday labor for
consciences sake.
Nor, one would think,
would the comments of Henry DeMoor, Calvin Theological Seminary professor, be of
assistance. He sets forth a view that is
surely contrary to that which had earlier and emphatically been taught in his
denomination. The Press reported:
Henry DeMoor said the church has long recognized Sunday as a day of worship free from servile works except those involving charity and necessity.
There would be considerable sympathy for her among a number of Christian Reformed people, said DeMoor, an expert in church policy.
But in view of current society, its hard for me to embrace that principle, he said. If every Christian insisted were not going to work on Sunday, I suspect there wouldnt be enough people to do the work.
Ethically, a better position might be to tell church elders they work one Sunday a month. If they say they are conscious of the Fourth Commandment and honor it as much as they can, Im sure elders would be satisfied, DeMoor said.
That is a striking
morality presented. One simply must tell the
elders, Well honor the commandment as much as we can. And to condone Sabbath work because otherwise
there would not be enough workers!! If there
were not enough workers, the stores might have to remain closed on Sunday.
And, to follow through on
the morality DeMoor proposes, one who takes Gods name in vain rather frequently can
assure the elders that he is conscious of the Third Commandment and will honor it as much
as he can. Then elders should be satisfied. And one who commits adultery can assure the elders
that he is conscious of the requirement of the Seventh Commandment and will honor it as
much as he can! The elders should be
satisfied (and maybe God would be too?).
Is this, too, what is
being taught at the Seminary to those who must go forth as ministers of the gospel?
One can be thankful that
there is yet considerable sympathy for her (Kerkstra) among a number of Christian
Reformed people. That Ms. Kerkstra has
maintained her convictions, though not consistent in the application of those convictions,
is reason for commendation she did this though it cost her her job. One can be thankful as well that the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 protects the Christian who insists on walking according to his religious
convictions.
At the same time, we must
be aware that those who promote Sunday labor do so carefully, little by little, until they
have won over the opposition or compelled it to submit.
A number of years ago
(1989) I wrote to D & W Food Centers (a Grand Rapids-based grocery chain) about their
intent to open their stores on Sunday. A nice
letter was written in answer explaining why they regarded this a necessity. They pointed out:
We plan to phase in the Sunday openings over roughly a two-month period, beginning in April. In all, 11 stores around Grand Rapids and in Grand Haven will begin seven-day operations during that time frame. However, the stores located in Jenison, Grandville, and Fremont will not be opened on Sunday. We feel that at present D & W can best serve those communities by continuing our six-day operation. As do most prudent people, we follow the maxim that teaches, never say never, but we can say that we have no plans to open those three stores in any time in the foreseeable future.
In making the decision to open more of our stores on Sunday, the needs and feelings of our 2,300 associates were uppermost in our thoughts. They make a commitment to our organization and our customers every day, and have the right to expect the same in return. At D & W we have that commitment, which includes a strong respect for religious beliefs. Because of this, we will not require any of our associates to work on Sunday if doing so would violate their religious principles. There will be no test involved, no need to prove religious convictions. We trust their integrity. Those who choose not to work on Sunday because of their religious beliefs will not be penalized for making that decision or compromise their opportunities to advance with D & W.
But obviously it did not
work out that way. One who will not work on
Sunday probably would not be hired. If one
works in such stores, there is little or no possibility for advancement. The law of the land which does not allow for this
religious discrimination is ignored.
Civil Rights
and Union Membership
World
magazine, a Christian weekly news magazine, has a cover
story in its Nov. 30, 2002 issue titled: Look (Out) For the Union Label. The article gives instances of people who refused
to pay union dues or to join the union at all. This
was done with the claim that they could not conscientiously join or pay union dues on
religious grounds. One instance:
Kathleen Klamut doesnt want her money used to keep abortionists in business. A psychologist with the Ravena City School District in Ohio, she has fought state and local teachers unions in a dispute over dues deducted from her paycheck that go to elect pro-abortion candidates. But when she requested to have all of her dues diverted to charity, as is her right under law, the union said noeven though Mrs. Klamut had won a similar, two-year battle in the Louisville, Ohio, district in 1999. In March 2002, Mrs. Klamut filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
The article gives several
other examples of individuals who also objected to membership dues used to fund liberal
causes especially abortion, homosexuality, restrictions on parental choices in
education, etc. Then it points out:
As unions have made good on their initial objectives shorter work days, safe working conditions, and so on many have moved on to funding liberal causes such as abortion-on-demand and school-based sexual-health clinics, opposing conservative causes such as school choice and welfare reform, and strongly supporting liberal candidates. Federal Election Commission records show that union political action committees over the past decade gave more than $362 million to Democrats and only $25 million to Republicans. Union leaders say theyre representing their members, but about one-third of union members voted Republican in this months elections.
Now, heres the perspective of Dennis Robey, who works in an agency shop state. In his 25th year as an industrial arts teacher in the Huber Heights City School District near Dayton, Ohio, Mr. Robey was an active member of Huber Heights Education Association, the Ohio Education Association, and the NEA until 1995. But that was the year he found in his school mailbox an NEA publication called Deceptions by the Radical Right Against the National Education Association.
As
I read the publication, I decided that I needed to look further into what the union stood
for, Mr. Robey told the U.S. House Committee on Education and Workforce Subcommittee
in June 2002. He did look into it and
found himself in direct religious opposition to official NEA resolutions on
reproductive freedom, confidential school-based family planning, and
restrictions on parental choices in education. Mr.
Robey, a Church of God member in Springfield, Ohio, learned from the Focus on the Family
magazine Teachers in Focus that he could request from the union a religious
accommodation which can include an exemption from union membership, and from
paying to the union some or all required fees.
Workers are entitled to such accommodations under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The act prohibits employers and labor unions from discriminating against workers or adversely affecting their employment based on religion. Following passage of the act, the EEOC ruled that companies and unions must make reasonable religious accommodations that do not result in undue hardship on the business. Failure to do so is religious discrimination. Congress put an even finer point on the matter with the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act. That law defines religion as including all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief .
as Mr. Robey found out, such rights do not prevent unions from denying religious accommodation requests, challenging workers religious beliefs in court, or, at minimum, dragging their feet for years. From 1995 through 2000, he requested each January that his agency fees be diverted to charity. (Workers may also request nonmonetary accommodations such as time off for Sabbath or other religious observances.)
Mr. Robey was harassed
with paper work in which he had to prove his claims; his dues were withheld and placed in
escrow, and when finally paid, it was without interest for the period the money was
withheld. So it went until recently
when there was an EEOC-brokered conciliation agreement in which the NEA and its Ohio
affiliates agreed to cease paper-grilling of religious objectors.
The article points out:
Supreme Court case law holds that unions must provide to their members a detailed accounting of how dues are spent. But Robert Hunter has reviewed about 200 accounting reports from the Michigan Education Association, the United Auto Workers, the Association of State, Federal, City and Municipal Employees, and other unions. He said most were vague at best and, sometimes, untruthful about the percentage of dues unions spend on political activities. The U.S. Supreme Court found in one case that 78 percent of dues were not necessary for the union to complete its collective bargaining activities; in another case the figure was 90 percent.
Mr. Hunter believes unions deliberately withhold from workers information on their objector rights to protect their political cash flow.
The article concludes with
reports on two of the cases:
Meanwhile, Florida electrical technician Robert Beers is still fighting the machinists union. But school psychologist Kathleen Klamut on Nov. 19 received a letter from the Ohio Education Association. The letter granted her religious accommodation request, but added, We are not acknowledging the sincerity of your professed beliefs, nor are we acknowledging that the law requires us to grant this accommodation.
NRTW director of legal information Dan Cronin said the letter showed that even when the law is put right in the unions face in black and white, they will still deny it. Its obvious that as long as they hold these kinds of attitudes, unions will continue to discriminate against people of faith. It shows why we have to keep fighting.
Children of God who have
problems with employers or unions about Sunday work or who have problems with union
membership itself ought to remember that the law of the land is still on their side
protecting them against this religious discrimination.
One should not hesitate to seek the protection of the government when employers
insist on this religious discrimination.
Rev. Key is pastor of the Protestant Reformed Church
of Hull, Iowa.
We
have seen that justification is the act of Gods grace by which He imputes
righteousness to the sinner. God justifies
the ungodly!
We are immediately faced
with the question: How is this possible? We recognize that there must be a ground for that
divine verdict that has proclaimed our righteousness.
What is that ground? What is the basis
for Gods declaring us righteous?
That is an important
question. The answer to that question will
reflect upon the very being of God.
The ground of our
justification is nothing less than the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ and His
perfect satisfaction on the cross.
Not in Us
This righteousness is not
something imputed to us because of what we have done.
If you look at
Philippians 3:9,
you will note the contrast between the righteousness which is of God and
what Paul, upon reflection in his own life, saw as mine own righteousness, which is
of the law. The contrast is important. As Paul came by grace to see, it is a contrast as
sharp as that between light and darkness, the truth and the lie, heaven and hell. It is a contrast, however, that many seem unable
to grasp.
The greater part of
the church world today whether we speak of Roman Catholicism or Protestantism
wants to say that righteousness is by faith and works.
When we insist that God
justifies the ungodly through faith alone and that our works play no part in our
justification, the Roman Catholic Church pronounces us anathema. This doctrine, after all, was the fundamental
issue at the time of the Reformation.
The Council of Trent
was Romes formal response to the biblical teachings of Luther and the Reformers. Over against the Reformation teaching of
justification by faith alone for the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ, Rome
responded with a position that made works an essential part of justification.
According to the
infallible decrees of Trent, justification is a process whereby the sinner is
actually made righteous. Justification
is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the
inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts by which an unrighteous
man becomes righteous (Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, sess. 6, chap.
6).
Rome speaks therefore
of an infused righteousness by grace, which enables a person to do good works. These works then are the basis for the
declaration of righteousness by God, and are necessary to obtain as well as to
preserve justification. And because the
sinners good works are themselves insufficient to obtain perfect righteousness,
purgatory is necessary.
If anyone says that the guilt is remitted to every
penitent sinner after the grace of justification has been received, and that the debt of
eternal punishment is so blotted out that there remains no debt of temporal punishment to
be discharged either in this world or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the
kingdom of heaven can be opened let him be anathema. (Ibid., sess. 6, canon 30)
While teaching that God
justifies sinners by His grace, and even maintaining that such justification comes through
the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Romes position stands at sharp odds with the
Reformers doctrine.
If anyone says that men are justified either by
the imputation of the righteousness of Christ alone, or by the remission of sins alone, to
the exclusion of the grace and love that is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy
Spirit and is inherent in them; or even that the grace by which we are justified is only
the favor of God let him be anathema. (Ibid.,
sess. 6, canon 11)
The contrast, therefore,
between the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and that of the Protestant Reformers is
very sharp. Each side accused the other of
preaching another gospel. So it
is. We can appreciate the forthrightness of
Rome for boldly expressing it in those terms. We
do not hesitate to say the same the Roman Catholic Church has another gospel than
that which we preach.
For that very reason it is
astounding that Protestantism and modern evangelicalism have made a steady march back to
Rome.
Part of this is a
desire in evangelical circles to seek a certain church unity regardless of the cost. Romes position concerning justification has
not changed. But there are evangelicals who
desire a certain measure of unity with Rome, and who have shown themselves willing to
sacrifice even the truth of justification to obtain that unity. This has come to expression in recent years
especially in the ecumenical documents Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The
Christian Mission in the Third Millennium, and The Gift of Salvation.* In these
documents, the signatories showed a willingness to concede the truth of justification by
faith alone as a non-essential doctrine, not central to the gospel.
Besides these noted
concessions to the Roman Catholic error, there is also prevalent in evangelical churches a
teaching of works-righteousness. This is just
as prevalent today as it was in Jesus day and in the years prior to the great
Reformation, and is in fact probably the most direct danger to us. Please note that we have yet to treat the
relationship between justification and good works, and the importance of good works in the
life of the Christian. But repeatedly the
idea is expressed that what really matters before God is not what we believe, but how we
serve Him and our fellow human beings. It is,
after all, living the golden rule that counts in our standing before God.
The reason for this way of
thinking is easily explained. By nature we
love and are most eager to secure our own righteousness and take credit for our own status
of being right before God. Although we may
not publicly boast of our goodness, there is this thought that we are pretty good when we
are faithful in our church attendance, loyal to church and Christian education, liberal in
our contributions, and so on. We love to
regard ourselves as a step ahead of the sinners around us, and as standing before God with
some merit in how we have lived.
This natural and very wicked attitude is exposed by the apostle Paul with a personal example in
Philippians 3.
The Testimony of
Philippians 3:9
From the beginning Paul
had recognized his responsibility to God. He
believed that the God of the Old Testament Scriptures was his King and Judge, to whom he
owed implicit obedience and to whom he would have to answer for the way he lived. The Scriptures had taught him this, and his own
conscience echoed the demand.
But Paul also had a very
mistaken perception of his ability and a faulty concept of sin and depravity.
Having received the law of
the Old Testament, Paul believed from his early youth that he could keep and in fact did
keep that law perfectly. In his heart he
repeated the prayers of the Pharisees whom he followed and who were his teachers: God, I thank thee that I am not as other men
are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers. I fast
twice in the week; I give tithes of all that I possess. In his spiritual blindness he thought that God
should be pretty proud of him.
But when the Spirit began
to work in him on that road to Damascus and in the days following, it became clear to Paul
that Gods commandment is exceeding broad, reaching vastly farther and searching
infinitely deeper than he had conceived. This
very religious man had taken into consideration only his outward life, and even there only
the letter of the law. When he saw the
absence of outward, positive transgression, he thought all was well. But upon conversion he saw that God desires truth
in the inward parts. God demands perfect
purity and consecration of the heart, out of which come all the issues of life
(Prov. 4:23).
How shocking it was to
Paul that when God made inquisition concerning spiritual obedience, this religious man had
nothing with which he could plead righteousness. He
was condemned! In his own conscience he was
condemned! He had nothing but his own
righteousness, which was of the law. And that
law condemned him!
The law can never justify
us. By the works of the law we can never be
righteous. It condemns us all the time. The supposed righteousness of his own, which Paul
thought he had derived from keeping the law, was a delusion! Therefore by the deeds of the law there
shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin
(Rom. 3:20).
God brought Paul to the
knowledge of that one only salvation, salvation which shows in one view Gods
abhorrence of sin and determination to sustain His own perfect holiness, and at the same
time the infinite richness of His love and grace. God
gave him to see that righteousness which is through the faith of Christ, the
righteousness which is of God by faith (Phil. 3:9).
Justification is the
righteousness which is ours in Christ Jesus: Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe
(Rom. 3:22).
The eternal Son of God as
the representative Head of His people worked and accomplished for us a perfect
righteousness which is imputed to us for His sake. God
counts the righteousness of Christ as the personal righteousness of all those who are in
Christ by faith.
That perfect and eternally
sufficient righteousness is enjoyed by all who believe in Him. Or, as the apostle puts it in
Philippians 3:9,
we
no longer walk around with the supposed and utterly insufficient righteousness that is of
the law. But to us who are in Christ belongs
the righteousness that is of God, conceived and proclaimed and given by Him through faith. Though personally unworthy, we are justified in
Christ, vitally united to Him by faith.
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law
(Rom. 3:28).
Our righteousness is entirely the righteousness of
someone else. Christ Himself is our
righteousness.
When you have the
righteousness that is of God, therefore, you have a righteousness that is firmly grounded. He conceived of it from eternity, and willed it in
His unchangeable counsel from before the foundation of the world. Eternally He conceived of the relationship
between Himself in Christ and the people He would take to Himself. And He realized it in His Son. In Immanuel, God with us, God united Himself with
our flesh and blood in the person of the Son. In
an act of love inconceivable to us in all its ramifications, the Son of God assumed our
relation to the demands of the law, took upon Himself our sins, assumed our guilt and
shame, was nailed to our cross, descended into our death, and bore the wrath of God unto
everlasting hell. There is the perfect
satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ for His people. Do you see it as your own?
*
The document Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The
Christian Mission in the Third Millennium was given extensive review by David J.
Engelsma in the Standard Bearer in vol. 75, beginning January 15, 1999.
Rev. denHartog is a Protestant Reformed
minister-on-loan to Singapore.
Recently I had the
privilege of teaching a course on missions in the Bible School of the Evangelical Reformed
Churches in Singapore called the Asian Reformed Theological School (ARTS). I had to prepare a series of eighteen lectures for
this course. I plan to revise a few of these
lectures for use as Standard Bearer articles, in the hope that they might be
beneficial to others. In doing this I have no
desire to put myself forth as an authority on the subject of missions. I have been given the opportunity and great
privilege to serve on the mission field for a number of years. I am thankful to the Lord for the things we have
by His grace learned. We also find that we
are always learning more, always again searching the Scriptures, and testing the
principles according to which we do our work as we face its difficulties and complexities. In our ARTS course on missions we tried to address
some of the most important issues commonly faced by the church as she seeks to carry out
her missionary calling.
The best place to begin a
course on missions is the so-called great commission given by our Lord. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always,
even unto the end of the world. Amen
(Matt. 28:19, 20).
From this passage we are
reminded forcefully that the mandate to preach the gospel and carry out the work of
missions is given to the church by direct commandment from the Lord Himself. It is clear from this commandment, especially from
its attached promise, that the church must be faithful to continue the great commission
even to the end of the world. The work of
missions is the work of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
He has redeemed His elect church by His great sacrifice on the cross. It is His purpose that His church be gathered from
the nations of the world. He Himself, by the
almighty, sovereign power of His grace and Holy Spirit, saves His people through the means
of the preaching of the gospel and gathers them into the unity of faith by the same power
as His beloved church. The Lord Jesus Himself
also equips and empowers the church to accomplish this mighty and wonderful work which is
of such great significance for the history of the world.
Only because this is true is this work always victorious. Knowing this truth is the great encouragement and
incentive to the church to be faithful to her Lord.
We do well to begin by
considering the occasion on which Christ gave this great commission. He did so after the victory of His cross and
resurrection. Through His cross Christ made
the great sacrifice and atonement for the sins of His people, even all those whom God the
Father had given to Him. He fulfilled all
righteousness on their behalf. On the cross
Christ fully accomplished the great work of reconciliation.
By His cross Christ also destroyed principalities and powers, putting them to open
shame. He laid the foundation of
righteousness and peace with God for His glorious kingdom.
After His cross Jesus arose, triumphing over death and hell. Jesus was proven to be the eternal Son of God and
the mighty Lord of salvation.
Jesus gave the great
commission just before His ascension into heaven. Before
Him at the time of the giving of the great commission were His disciples, the
representatives of His church whom He called to be His apostles. Some are of the opinion that this was the occasion
of Jesus appearing to the five hundred at once. As the Lord had prayed in His High Priestly prayer recorded in
John 17,
these would
be left in the world. They would not be taken
out of the world. They would be left in the
world to testify of His glorious name and of the wonderful work of His salvation through
the preaching of the gospel.
Jesus was looking forward
to His exaltation to the highest heaven above principalities and powers in heaven and
earth. In heaven Jesus is now crowned with
glory and honor and power. He has been made
the Lord of lords and the King of kings, the ruler of all the nations of the earth. All power and authority in heaven and earth have
been given to Him. It is from the perspective
of the anticipation of this exaltation that Jesus could and did give the great commission
to His disciples, commanding them to go throughout all the world to preach the gospel. As the exalted Lord Jesus, He also assures His
church of the certain prospect of the final and glorious triumph of His kingdom. He will come again at the end of the ages as the
glorious exalted Lord, the great God and Savior of His people. He will come to raise up the dead, and to bring
His beloved church to be with Him in glory and cause her members to be citizens of His
everlasting kingdom of glory in the new heavens and earth. Such is the great significance
of the occasion of the giving of the great commission.
Before His ascension into
heaven, Christ promised to give the Holy Spirit to His church. This was implied already by the Lord in the
promise joined to the great commission: Lo,
I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.
This promise was given by the Lord again immediately before His ascension into
heaven. But ye shall receive power,
after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in
Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth
(Acts 1:8).
At the time of His
exaltation the Spirit of God was given to the Lord.
It is only by the sovereign and almighty power of the Spirit of the exalted Lord
Jesus Christ that the church will be able to fulfill the great commission. It is only by the power of this same Spirit that
all those who are ordained by the Father unto eternal life will believe unto salvation. All of these truths are really wonderful and
tremendously significant for the work of missions.
The great commission was
given to the disciples of the Lord, and through them to the church of all the ages of the
New Testament era. This is significant
because on this basis we know and maintain that the work of missions is specifically and
emphatically the work of the church. The
disciples, at the time of the giving of the great commission, represented this church. The work of missions is not the work of a
self-appointed man or some society or parachurch group organized by no higher authority
than its own. The church alone has the
Lords authority to do the work of missions. The
gospel of salvation was given to her, for her to preach.
She is not to bring the word of a mere man but she is to preach faithfully the
Lords own Word.
Furthermore, the work of
missions has as its purpose the gathering of the church of Christ. It is not merely the purpose of missions to gather
thousands and millions of unrelated Christians all over the world. The Lord says, I will build my church, and
the gates of hell shall not prevail against her.
It is the purpose of Christ that those who believe the gospel be gathered and
formed as His church. That church was chosen
in Christ before the foundations of the world. Her
members were redeemed through His cross. These
must be gathered together for the worship of the name of the Lord and the showing forth of
His glorious praises in the earth. Through
the preaching of the gospel the saints of God must be called out from the world and
brought to conversion and faith in Jesus Christ. These
must be nurtured in the truth of the Word of the Lord, growing up together in Him as one
man unto the full measure of the stature of the body of Christ.
Before they were given the
great commission, the disciples had been called and prepared by the Lord Himself. None were ever called and trained and prepared
like these disciples of the Lord. They would
become the apostles of the Lord, sent out directly by Him into the world. They would be instrumental in laying the
foundation of the whole New Testament church. They
had seen the Lord Jesus Christ and beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten Son
of God full of grace and truth. They were
with Him personally during most of His earthly ministry.
They heard His wonderful words and saw the amazing demonstrations of His almighty
power and authority in the miracles He performed before their eyes. They were on earth at the time when Jesus made His
great sacrifice on the cross, though at the time they did not understand what it all
meant. When the Spirit was poured out they
would understand, and they would be commissioned to preach the gospel of the cross of
Jesus Christ. They saw Him as the glorious
resurrected Lord who appeared several times to them.
Some of them were even eyewitnesses of the glory that the Lord would possess in His
kingdom after His exaltation. They saw the
foreshadowing of this glory on the Mount of Transfiguration.
Through the apostles of
the Lord, by the authority given to them, and according to the word of the Lord, others
would later also be ordained to the work of the preaching of the gospel. This is significant for the understanding of the
great commission. The great commission is to
be carried out through the ministers of Christ called by Him, ordained by Him, filled with
His Spirit, and taught by His Word.
to be continued.
Mr. Minderhoud is a teacher in Covenant Christian
High School and a member of Hope Protestant Reformed Church, Walker, Michigan.
And if they
were all one member, where were the body? But
now are they many members, yet but one body.
In
a previous article we examined a nerve cell and considered two basic parts of it
the dendrites and the axon. We recall that
the dendrites are the long tentacle-like branches at the beginning of the nerve cell,
whose function it is to receive stimuli from various sources. The axon is the insulated wire that
transmits electrical signals from their point of origin (the dendrites) to the end of the
nerve cell, where they will be sent on to the next cell.
In those two parts we saw the handiwork of God.
We saw how God made our bodies in a most intricate way and that He continues to
guide and direct all the minutest parts of our body that they work together in harmony.
In this article we again
consider the nerve cells, but this time we consider the third basic part the
synaptic knobs and the chemical messengers they contain.
Here again we see Gods power and wisdom as He governs these chemical
messengers and as He weaves the body together with an amazing unity a picture of
the unity within the Body of Christ.
The Synaptic
Knobs
The end of an axon
branches into many thin extensions. At the
end of these extensions there are tiny knobs filled with chemicals. These knobs, called the synaptic knobs, are the
third major part of the neuron. They are
particularly interesting because they are necessary for the transmission of the electrical
impulse to the next cell, whether that cell be another nerve cell or a cell from a muscle
or gland.
Within our bodies a series
of nerve cells are used to connect the brain to the other cells in the body. There is incredible wisdom in such a design. Each neurons dendrites spread and branch to
a thousand or more cells waiting for an electrical message from them. Once a message has been received, it is passed
along the neuron to the synaptic knobs. Each
neuron can terminate with a thousand or more synaptic knobs, and the impulse can be sent
to thousands of other cells. In this manner, a single electrical impulse can communicate
messages to other members of the body rapidly and efficiently a marvelous means
used to unite a body made up of multitudes of other members.
An amazing aspect of this
whole process is that the synaptic knobs transmit the electrical signal to neighboring
dendrites or other cells without actually touching them.
In fact, there is always a gap between synaptic knobs and other cells. God created this gap, called the synapse, between
each nerve cell and every other cell, and ordained certain chemicals to bridge that gap
and communicate the electrical signal to the other cells.
The synapse is about one millionth of an inch wide a relatively great
distance when considering the minute size of nerve cells.
When an electrical impulse comes to the end of the axon, it reaches the synaptic
knobs and causes them to burst and to release the chemicals within them. These chemical molecules are called
neurotransmitters. Because none of these
chemicals are found on the surface of the next cell, the neurotransmitters are drawn to
it. This process is called diffusion. Molecules are always in motion and tend to bump
into each other and spread away from each other from areas of high concentration to areas
of low concentration. This explains why, for
example, if a bottle of perfume would break in a room, in short order the entire room
would smell of perfume. The molecules of
perfume will diffuse through the air in a room from areas of high perfume molecule
concentration to areas of low perfume concentration.
This also explains why the sodium ions we discussed in the last article rushed
through the open gates in the walls of the axon. The
sodium ions diffused from the areas of high sodium ion concentration to the areas of low
sodium ion concentration.
We marvel to see the
wondrous, orderly ways in which God works. God
speaks and the molecules always move in the same orderly way a way which we call
diffusion.
These chemicals, the
neurotransmitters, diffuse across the synapse and are received by special molecules,
called receptors, on the surface of the dendrites of the next nerve cell, or other
neighboring cells. Once the neurotransmitter
is received by the chemical receptor, the next cell is stimulated to transmit the
electrical impulse. Thus, the electrical impulse has been transmitted successfully and
continues on its journey.
How does a neighboring
cell receive these neurotransmitters? Consider
an analogy of a toy that a young child plays with, in which the child must place objects
of particular shapes into spaces that correspond with those shapes. The receptor molecules on the surface
of the neighboring cells are circular or square holders that will
receive only particularly shaped molecules. Certain
neurotransmitters can bond only with certain receptors.
The neurotransmitters are sent from the synaptic knobs, diffuse towards the
neighboring cell, and are received by these specifically designed molecules that have the
correct shape to bond to the neurotransmitters. In
Gods wisdom and sovereign design, the neurotransmitters have a particular shape,
ensuring that the correct message is passed along.
Once the electrical
message has been passed on, the cell no longer has need of the neurotransmitter and it
must be removed from the cells receptors so that the message will not be sent over
and over again, continually. God ordained
enzymes to be present in the fluid of the synaptic gap that detach the neurotransmitter
from the receptor molecule. Once removed, the
neurotransmitter is either returned to the synaptic knobs where it can be used again, or
it is broken down into smaller parts and used elsewhere in the body. By this means the cell is prevented from receiving
perpetual stimulation.
Types of
Neurotransmitters and Their Antagonists
There are many types
of neurotransmitters in the body. Many
stimulate the next cell in the body to continue an electrical impulse. Probably the most common neurotransmitter is
acetylcholine (as-e-til-KO-len), which communicates to the muscle cells that they are to
contract. For example, when one puts his hand
on a hot pan, a message eventually arrives at the muscles of the arm commanding them to
contract so that the arm moves. Acetylcholine
is the neurotransmitter that bridges the gap and delivers the message from the neuron to
the muscle cells. There are other
neurotransmitters whose job it is to tell the next cell to do nothing or to stop doing
something. These are inhibitory
neurotransmitters. Sometimes they tell a
muscle cell not to contract, or they tell a gland not to secrete a hormone. This too shows the handiwork of God to fashion
molecules in such an intricate way that the cells of the body will do one thing when in
contact with one neurotransmitter but will do the very opposite thing when in contact with
a differently shaped neurotransmitter. We see
many different members with different purposes a picture of the Body of Christ that
is composed of many members with differing functions and roles in that Body.
Finally, we must see the
effect that poisons and other chemicals have on this communication process within the
nervous system. Some neurotransmitters are
blocked by various chemicals that enter our bodies. For
example, a botulin toxin (bacterial poison) affects the neurotransmitter that communicates
between the nerve cells and muscle cells. This
chemical makes it difficult for the neurotransmitter to communicate to the muscle cells,
and therefore the muscle cells do not contract as they should. Paralysis can result. Another bacterium, known as the tetanus toxin, can
affect the neurotransmitters in the synaptic gap:
Many of the bodys muscles occur as paired sets . When one set contracts, an opposing set is stretched. Bend your arm at the elbow and you can feel two such sets (biceps and triceps) in your upper arm. When the biceps contracts, inhibitory signals (inhibitory neurotransmitters) are sent to the triceps and it relaxes. The tetanus toxin blocks the release of inhibitory signals so both sets of muscles contract! Within four to ten days, paired muscles attempt to work in opposition to each other. This is the start of spastic paralysis the muscles simply cannot be released from contraction. The increase in muscle tension (spasms) can be violent enough to break bones in the body. Fists and jaws may undergo prolonged clenching (hence the name lockjaw, which is sometimes used for the disorder). The back may become paralyzed in a permanent arch. Muscles of the respiratory system and heart also may undergo spastic paralysis, in which case the affected individual nearly always dies.1
Some neurotransmitters are
sent out at faster rates by chemicals we consume. One
such example is caffeine. It causes
neurotransmitters to be sent to the next cell at a faster rate than the nerve cell
normally sends them. Therefore, the adjacent
nerve cells are stimulated at faster speeds. This
has the end result of an overly active and responsive person, who at night may be so
stimulated that he or she is unable to relax and fall asleep.
Some chemicals that enter
the body mimic the neurotransmitters, so that our bodies respond to these chemicals and
stimulate actions our brain never initiated. Nicotine
is one such chemical. It is a chemical that
mimics or acts like acetylcholine. It takes
over, creating responses apart from the natural workings of the body.
All Thy Works
Shall Praise Thee
The entire nervous
system is marvelous. The multitudes of
connections and chemical communications that occur each second in the nervous system in
order to regulate and control day-to-day activities is mind-boggling. Consider the following quote from Dr. Brand and
Philip Yancey in their book, In His Image, as they speak about the complexity of
the brain itself:
(All) visual images, all sounds, all touch and pain sensations, all smells, the monitors of blood pressure and chemical changes, the sensations of hunger all the noise from the entire body occupy only one-tenth of one percent of the brains cells. Each second those fibers (bringing messages from the rest of the body jm) bombard the brain with a hundred million messages . Another two-tenths of one percent of cells control all motor activities: the motions involved in playing a piano concerto, speaking a language, dancing a ballet, typing a letter, or operating a video game . Physiologically, the whole mental process comes down to these ten billion cells spitting irritating chemicals at each other across the synapses or gaps. The web of nerve cells defies description or depiction. One cubic millimeter, the size of a pinpoint, contains one billion connections among cells; a mere gram of brain tissue may contain as many as four hundred billion synaptic junctions. As a result, each cell can communicate with every other cell at lightning speed . Even in sleep the nerve cell community never stops chattering.2
What do we make of all
this? Such intricacy and complexity woven
together within our bodies does not exist on its own accord. The evolutionist would remove God as the creator
of these members. The deist would remove God
from the day-to-day upholding and governing of these tiny members of the body. By the grace of God, we see such folly. We know from the testimony of Scripture that God
speaks and these creatures too have their being. God
speaks and they move. What a powerful God is
our God, who can create such an amazing creature and continue to govern every aspect of
it! To God be all glory and honor!
It is well worth our time
to see the wondrous works of God in the human nervous system in order to show the beauty
and unity within our bodies. We have seen
dendrites, axons, sodium pumps, and neurotransmitters working harmoniously together in
millions of nerve cells in the body. Many
members, all placed in their particular places by God, serving their distinct God-ordained
functions, work together and unite a body that otherwise would be a collection of
individual and disjointed parts that would accomplish nothing. Our physical bodies vividly demonstrate unity. God uses the human body and its many members as an
appropriate picture of the Body of Christ and the unity that exists, howbeit imperfectly
in this life, within that Body.
Amidst all this order and
unity we see the ravages of sin. Poisons
disrupt the chemical messengers of the nervous system.
This disruption, in turn, affects the other bodily systems so that the body does
not properly accomplish its tasks. We see the
effects of sin in the Body of Christ, too. Sin
is also found in the church, causing dissension and disruptions within and among
congregations and denominations.
We have begun to see in a
small way how the human body demonstrates unity and how sin brings disharmony, but much
more could be said. We hope, the Lord
willing, to discuss this more in the next article as we further contrast the unity in the
body with the disharmony brought by sin.
1. Starr, Cecie and Ralph Taggart. Animal Structure and Function. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., Belmont
California, 1992. (pp. 557-558).
2. Brand, Dr. Paul and Phillip
Yancey. In His Image. Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, 1984. (pp. 127-128).
George Ophoff was Professor of Old Testament Studies
in the Protestant Reformed Seminary in its early days.
Reprinted here, in edited form, are articles which Ophoff wrote at that time for
the Standard Bearer.
We
ended our previous article by demonstrating that the shadows of the old dispensation were
vehicles of much valuable instruction to the believers of the new dispensation. It is plain that, to the inspired writers of the
New Testament church, the symbols were images of truths brought into full view with the
coming of Christ. Their writings bring to
light that they were inclined to set forth the truth in language which reflected the
shadows of the old covenant. The types and
symbols, the meaning of which had been veiled in the day of shadows, served the inspired
writers of the new dispensation as so many molds into which the truth was cast and
presented in concrete form. This goes to show
that the method of training adopted by God has produced the results contemplated by
Jehovah.
Unfolding of
the truth
Let us say a word at this
juncture about Gods method of instruction. It
is a method of gradual unfolding of the truth. Not
until the fullness of time were the realities of the gospel brought into full view. The truth possessed by the church in its infancy
was but a bud. In this bud, however, were
hidden the various elements constituting the counsel of redemption, viz., 1) God; 2) the
man with Jehovah, or the seed; and 3) the blood. In
subsequent ages, that bud of truth was gradually made to unfold. It is the prerogative of the church of the new
dispensation to behold the truth in full bloom.
Why must the church in the
old dispensation be content with the bud? Because
man is a finite creature. He has his
limitations and infirmities. These were
multiplied by sin. Add to this, that the
church was in its infancy when it first came into the possession of the truth. Then, too, the things which God has prepared for
those who love Him, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have they entered into the heart of man
(I Cor. 2:9).
He who is suddenly
transported from a quiet environment into a new, strange, and busy world will be greatly
perplexed by the things he hears and sees. If,
on the other hand, one is gradually led into that world and given fair time to familiarize
himself with the objects which present themselves to view, no distress will be
experienced. So it is with the realities of
the gospel. They would have dazzled and
greatly perplexed the church had they suddenly been presented to it in all the fullness of
their splendor, majesty, and power. Therefore
the body was preceded by its shadow. With it
the believers had to become familiar. In
Gods own good time the body came.
Further, let it be
repeated, that the truths of the economy of redemption were presented to man in concrete
form. The things which fill the world in
which man lives and moves were made the images of the realities of heaven. These realities, therefore, were placed within
mans reach. Truth, so presented, can
easily be laid hold on by the mind.
The extent of
the shadows of the old dispensation
We now enter upon a
new phase of our subject, namely, the extent of the typical field of the old dispensation. Are the typical materials confined within the
boundaries of the ceremonial law, or do they extend beyond these? In other words, do the terms shadow and
figure apply only to institutions and prescriptions of the ceremonial law, or do these
terms, according to Scripture, also signify events and personages? The Scriptures contain several indications that
historical events of the old dispensation may foreshadow truths of a higher realm. In the First Epistle of Peter is found this
passage:
By which also he (Christ) went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometimes were disobedient, when once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ (I Pet. 3:19-21).
The apostle
informs us that the flood stood in typical relation to baptism. The waters of the flood purged the earth of a
wicked generation and preserved Noah and his family, the holy seed, the nucleus of a new
race. For this reason the deluge can serve as
a figure of baptism, which signifies the washing away of the filth of the carnal nature by
the blood of Christ, by which also the seed of new life is fostered.
According to the apostle
Paul, Hagar and Sarah together with their offspring are figures, the former of the false,
the latter of the true church. The passage
reads as follows:
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free (Gal. 4:21-31).
In the epistle to the
Hebrews the carnal Israelites who fell in the wilderness are referred to as a type of the
unbelievers of the new dispensation who do not attain to heaven.
But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the words were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To-day, after so long a time; as it is said, To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief (Heb. 3:17-4: 11).
It will also be
observed that in this Scripture the land of Canaan is a figure of heaven.
These Scriptures prove
that one should look beyond the boundaries of the ceremonial law when searching for
typical materials. That much of the
historical material of the book of the old covenant has typical significance is also plain
from the prophetical writings of the Old Testament. In
depicting the better things to come, the prophets often availed themselves of the
characters and events of history. But
it could do so on the twofold ground that it perceived in these essentially the same
elements of truth and principles which were to appear in the future; and in that future
anticipated a nobler exhibition of them than had been given in the past (Fairbairn). So David connects the historical Melchizedek with
Christ. The former is a type of the latter.
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. The Lord hath sworn and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. The Lord through thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath (Ps. 110:1-5).
Elijah is presented by the
prophet Malachi as an image or type of Christ:
Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse (Mal. 4:4-6).
The best proof is found in
the prophetic writings of Isaiah.
For Zions sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalems sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth. And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name. Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God (Is. 62:1-3).
In the latter
portions of Isaiahs writings we find the prophet intermingling so closely together
the past and the future, that it is often difficult to tell of which he actually speaks. He passes from Israel to the Messiah, and again
from the Messiah to Israel, as if the one were but a new, higher, and nobler development
of what belonged to the other. And the church
of the future is constantly represented under the relations of the past, only freed from
the imperfections of former times, and rendered in every respect more blessed and
glorious (Fairbairn).
The very fact that the
book of Psalms continued to have value for the church of the new covenant is due only to
the fact that both dispensations, the old and the new, are pervaded by the same truths and
principles. In a sense it is true that the
entire Old Testament dispensation stands in a typical relation to the new.
With Reverence
and Awe: Returning to the Basics of Reformed Worship, by D. J. Hart and John R.
Muether. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishers, 2002. 203 pp. $12.99. (paper). [Reviewed
by Prof. Robert D. Decker.]
The fact that a Protestant
Reformed believer will not agree with every detail in this book does in no way detract
from the books valuable contribution to the whole subject of distinctively Reformed
worship. This is a good book, which ought to
be read by every believer who wishes to engage in worship that is pleasing to God because
it is worship that is in harmony with Gods will as revealed in the inspired,
infallible Scriptures.
Not only in the sphere of
what may be called broadly evangelical churches, but also among Presbyterian
and Reformed denominations the contemporary church is plagued by worship wars. We hear of contemporary worship, seeker-sensitive
worship services. There is a wide variety of
worship styles among the churches. Theres
even blended worship, which is an attempt to combine the new worship styles with the old,
traditional worship. How did we get to this
point, the authors ask? We are where we are
because of a couple of false assumptions. One
is that traditional worship is too somber and sober, too unemotional. We need to experience the joy of salvation in our
worship. Another false assumption is that we
need to attract the unconverted. Our worship
must not make them feel uncomfortable.
The authors contend we
need to get back to the basics of Reformed worship. We
must begin with theology, because good theology must produce good worship. Defective theology
yields inferior and inappropriate forms of worship.
This is why the Westminster divines began with a Directory of the Public Worship of
God!
Good theology is biblical
theology, and biblical theology begins, continues, and ends with the sovereignty of God. Our worship, if it be biblical, will of necessity
be theocentric. Proper worship will be in
harmony with the sound doctrines of Gods Word, e.g., mans total depravity and
Gods sovereign and particular grace. Never
will our worship be separated from the sound doctrine of Gods Word. Its in this context that the authors make a
point that ought to give the Reformed believer who leans in the direction of
seeker-sensitive worship pause.
Ironically, however, there is a sense in which what we propose in this study is profoundly seeker-sensitive. We do not mean that we hope to please any browsers who might step into our sanctuaries on Sunday morning. Rather the seeker we intend to please is the one whom Scripture describes as the seeker of acceptable worship. In his conversation with the Samaritan woman, Jesus says that those who worship God in spirit and truth are the kind of worshiper the Father seeks (John 4:23). This is the seeker-sensitivity that the Bible requires and that Reformed worship has traditionally pursued (p. 21).
The authors correctly
point out that the church is eccleesia, i.e., called out. The church, as church, is called out of the world,
separated from the world by God. Also and
especially in her worship the church is separate from the world and in the fellowship of
God. The world out of which the church is
called into Gods fellowship is the world of unbelief and sin. As called out, the church is to be holy and,
therefore, the church is against the world, antithetical to the world!
This truth has three
implications for the churchs worship: 1) The wisdom and ways of the gospel will
appear foolish to those who are enemies of God. 2)
The contrast between the church and the world will be most obvious when the church is at
worship. 3) True worship will be odd, and
even weird, to the watching world (pp. 33, 34).
For this reason, the
authors contend, the church must be unapologetic in her worship and must not cater to
those bound to ridicule her ways as foolish (p. 34).
Christians cannot expect unbelievers to be comfortable in services of worship that are alien to the ways of the world. User friendly or seeker-sensitive worship is not an option for the people of God. In fact, worship that demonstrates the separateness of the church is what Machen called merciful unkindness because it testifies to the world of the hope that is within us. If the world mocks us, so be it. True worship is for the church, not for the world (p. 35).
The worship of the church
is inseparably related to the purpose of the church.
The purpose of the church is not:
1. to right the wrongs of society (nineteenth century
liberalisms social gospel).
2. the Church Growth movement, i.e., to
grow in numbers by means of up-tempo music, choruses, dramatic skits, liturgical dance,
etc.
3. merely to win converts.
The purpose of
the church is to nurture disciples of Christ. Hence,
worship involves preaching and sacraments. And
the church must believe that God will indeed save them that believe by these
means!
Further, the church is
saved in order to worship God in the way of glorifying Him and enjoying Him. This is evident, the authors assert, from the
marks of the church: pure preaching, proper observance of the sacraments, and exercise of
discipline (Belgic Confession, Art. 29). These
marks constitute proper worship. Also the
third, inasmuch as preaching is the chief key of the kingdom of heaven (Heidelberg
Catechism, Q. 84).
In the fourth chapter of
the book the authors bemoan the fact that American Protestants no longer observe the
Sabbath. This chapter is a must read. We, too, must take heed lest we fall
regarding Gods holy day. It is
fulfilled in Christ. The Sabbath is the
Lords Day and is to be devoted to spiritual rest: the public worship of God, morning
and evening!
In their defense of the
regulative principle, the authors affirm that this principle is taught in the
Westminster Standards, in the Heidelberg Catechism, and in the Belgic Confession. Calvin, too, held this principle. Hence, the regulative principle is not a Puritan
invention. The authors present a fine defense
of the regulative principle against its critics (cf. pp. 81-84).
The book stresses that
worship is for the praise of God by His people. This
praise of God takes place by the means of grace: preaching, sacraments, and prayer. By these means God enables His people to worship
Him and receive in their worship His blessings as they grow in sanctification. All of this takes place corporately, in the
communion of the saints in the church, and never apart from the church (cf. pp. 131-144).
In the tenth chapter the
authors make a distinction between the elements, circumstances, and forms of
worship. The elements that are commanded by
God, from which we may not subtract and to which we may not add, are: reading and
preaching the Word, sacraments, prayer, song, and collection. How often we sing is circumstance determined by
the session/consistory. What we sing, psalms or hymns, is a form.
While in their discussion
of Song in Worship (chapter 11) there is sharp, biblical criticism of
contemporary music, as well as a bemoaning of the loss of Psalm singing and an
advocating of frequent Psalm singing, the authors come short of advocating exclusive
psalmody and of prohibiting choirs and special music.
There is an error on page 110, where the reference
Ephesians 4:12
ought to be
Ephesians 4:11-12.
The authors, however, are to be commended for
their careful working with Scripture and the Presbyterian and Reformed confessions. The book is well documented, and its value is
enhanced by a general index, a scripture index, and an index of the confessions.
Again, this is a good book. This reviewer has added it to the Select Bibliography of his class in Homiletics/Liturgics, and it will be required reading for his students in that class.
The Shorter
Catechism, With Scriptural Proofs and Notes, by
Roderick Lawson. Christian Focus, 2002. Pp.
80, (paper). [Reviewed by Prof. Herman
Hanko.]
Those of us who were born and
raised in the tradition of Dutch Reformed theology know very little, as a general rule, of
Presbyterian history, doctrine, and creedal development.
We know very little of the work of the Westminster Assembly and of the three creeds
they prepared. Especially in these days when
our churches are having increased contact with Presbyterian churches, especially the
Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Australia, it is well that we know something of this
grand tradition of Calvinism as well as of our own.
Perhaps the best known and
most loved creed prepared under the auspices of Westminster is the Shorter Catechism. Who can forget the memorable words with which
this creed begins: What is the chief
end of man? Mans chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. The creed
is memorized by thousands, enjoyed by tens of thousands, and serves as a handbook of
Christian doctrine to saints in all parts of the world.
It is the creed with which one ought to begin in a study of Presbyterianism.
This little book will
be an excellent book with which to start. It contains the entire Shorter Catechism,
scriptural proofs for every question and answer (proof texts are quoted in full), and
brief comments by the editor. Some of these
comments are very much to the point. In
question and answer 7, the decrees of Gods counsel are defined. The editor comments: The decrees of God are
his purposes, or what he has from eternity determined to do. And this answer tells us that God has so
appointed everything that comes to pass. Nothing
happens by chance. Everything is arranged
upon a plan, and that plan is the plan of God. He
makes all things work together for good to them that love him, and for evil to them that
hate him.
I do not have the price of this small book, but it can be purchased for a minimal amount, I am sure, and it is small enough to push in a pocket or purse to be read and pondered while one is in a doctors waiting room or hoping his malfunctioning car will soon be fixed. It is simply written and can be used by young people as well as adults. Perhaps the book will whet ones appetite for other more meaty books on the Westminster Assembly, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Shorter Catechism.
Mr. Wigger is an elder in the Protestant Reformed Church of Hudsonville, Michigan.
School
Activities
The student body of Covenant
Christian High School in Grand Rapids, MI was encouraged by their Student Council to
express the true meaning of Christmas by contributing to a collection of gift certificates
from area stores for needy families in the area PR churches.
The Christmas program of
South Holland Protestant Reformed School in South Holland, IL was presented December 19 in
South Holland PRC. The students developed the theme Very God and Very Man, based on
I Timothy 3:16.
On December 19 the
students of Faith Christian School in Randolph, WI presented their annual Christmas
program under the theme Jesus, Name Above All Names. We can also mention here that the next morning,
December 20, the students and teachers of Faith continued to develop that theme by
caroling at various homes of shut-ins in the area of the school.
The students of Heritage
Christian School in Hudsonville, MI took a collection this past Christmas season for
Herrick Presbyterian Covenant School in Tasmania.
With thankfulness to our
heavenly Father, our seminary reports that there are six young men presently in college
who have expressed interest in entering the ministry of the Word.
Denomination
Activities
We are
also happy to report that the Reformed Witness Hour, in response to their urgent request
for operating funds, has received in the last month $30,000 in gifts from its listeners
and supporters, and that soon the program will be aired on short wave radio in Eastern
Europe. Progress is also being made in
beginning a broadcast in the Chicagoland area.
Mission
Activities
In news from the Philippines, we find that Rev. A. Spriensma was busy leading a conference at the missionary house on the subject of Reformed Church Government on December 26-28. In all there were 23 men who attended. They were from the Daet/Labo area, from the island of Negros, and from Manila, and a new contact came through the Reformed Witness Hour broadcast. Rev. Spriensma presented eight lectures in two days. Much lively discussion and many questions followed each lecture. The Spriensma family housed most of these men at their home for the duration of the conference, and, with help from one of the ladies of the Berean Church of God Reformed, provided for their meals as well. The conference reportedly went well.
Congregation
Activities
On
January 1 the internships of Mr. Paul Goh and Mr. Bill Langerak officially came to an end. From announcements in the bulletins of Bethel PRC
in Roselle, IL and Southeast PRC in Grand Rapids, MI, where these men served, we can
safely conclude that these men will be missed. May
the experiences gained over the past six months serve them well in the future as, the Lord
willing, their graduation from our seminary is now only a few short months away.
On January 4 the men of
Bethel PRC in Roselle, IL resumed their monthly discussions on book readings by discussing
the book, I Kissed Dating Good-Bye, by Josh Harris. A special invitation was extended to the young men
of the congregation to attend.
Evidence continues to
indicate that Trinity PRC in Hudsonville, MI is gaining in membership. For one thing, their council decided to add one
elder and one deacon in the new year, so that they now have five elders and four deacons. For another, they now have enough
post-high-school young adults to organize their own Bible Study.
The Choir of Georgetown
PRC in Hudsonville, MI presented their Christmas program on Sunday, December 8.
Sunday evening, December
29, Rev. Dale Kuiper preached his farewell sermon at Southeast PRC in Grand Rapids, MI,
and on January 1 became one of our denomi-nations emeriti ministers. Rev. Kuiper was ordained into the ministry in 1967
and served six of our congregations, besides serving as home missionary for two years. For his last sermon as Southeasts pastor, Rev. Kuiper preached from
I Corinthians 2:1-5
under the theme, A Minister Looks Back
with the Flock to See. 1. What His Determination Was. 2. What His Method Was. 3.
What His Purpose Was.
Evangelism
Activities
The Evangelism Committee of
Trinity PRC in Hudsonville, MI asked their congregation to help them put together a
community-wide mailing. The mailing consisted
of a flyer introducing Trinity to the neighborhood, and an insert inviting them to
Trinitys services on December 22 and 25.
Minister
Activities
Rev. and Mrs. Doug Kuiper, serving our church in Randolph, WI, were
blessed with the birth of a baby boy, Jared William, on December 26.
On January 1, Rev. Dale
Kuiper became emeritus, but will continue to serve Southeast PRC in Grand Rapids, MI on a
part-time basis. Southeasts
council and congregation approved a plan that will keep the Kuipers in their parsonage
until about April 1. Rev. Kuiper will preach
the evening services. He will also do some
catechism teaching and leading of societies. Prof.
R. Dykstra will be preaching the morning services. Of
course, this could all change if Southeast receives a pastor before April 1.
Rev. M. DeVries declined
the call to serve as our churches second missionary to Ghana.
Rev. C. Haak declined the
call to serve as pastor of Faith PRC in Jenison, MI.
Reformed Witness Hour
Topics for February
Date
Topic
Text
February 2
Joyful Mothers
Psalm 113:9
February 9
Submissive Wives
Colossians 3:18
February 16 Our Prayer as Husbands and Wives
Psalm 27:4
February 23 Our Prayer for Our Children
Psalm 114:11, 12