Are There Different Degrees of Reward in Heaven?

By J. Warner Wallace 8/29/2014

     As Christians, we believe we are saved solely by the grace of God. God sets us apart for salvation based not on anything we could do (or have done), but based instead on the free gift of salvation offered by the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Our works play no role in our salvation. We cannot earn our way into Heaven, this is a gift of God, so no man or woman could ever boast they earned a place in Heaven with God:

(Eph 2:8–9) 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.  ESV

     But there are a number of non-Christian theists who believe salvation comes as the result of human effort in combination with the work of God (Jewish believers or Mormons for example). My Mormon friends sometimes complain orthodox Christianity ignores the behavior of believers altogether. After all, do we actually think that all believers are acceptable to God no matter what they do or how they behave? If someone simply says they believe and then lives a life exhibiting little or no evidence of their belief will they still go into Heaven? Isn’t the Mormon notion of levels of Heaven a more equitable and fair position on the nature of the afterlife?

     The beliefs of Christians are often mischaracterized. While we, as Christians, don’t believe our works have anything to do with our entry to heaven, we do understand our works have everything to do with our reward once we get there. This is clear from the Biblical record of Scripture. The Apostle John reminds us of the importance of “works” while we are here on Earth:

(Jn 9:4–5) 4 We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”  ESV

     So, why is it so important for us to “work”? Is it so that we can earn our Salvation? No, the passage we just read in Ephesians makes it clear our Salvation is not the product of our work. The issue here is not Salvation; it is reward. Christian orthodoxy describes Heaven sees as a place where rewards are distributed to the saints in accordance with the nature of their lives on earth.

     To be fair, not everyone in Christendom agrees with this idea. Some would argue all heavenly reward is measured out equally to those who are saved. So let’s examine both cases and see if we can determine the truth from a Biblical Perspective:

James "Jim" Warner Wallace (born June 16, 1961) is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has authored several books, including Cold-Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, in which he applies principles of cold case homicide investigation to apologetic concerns such as the existence of God and the reliability of the Gospels.

• Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

• God's Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe

• Alive: A Cold-Case Approach to the Resurrection

• Cold-Case Christianity for Kids: Investigate Jesus with a Real Detective

• Keeping Your Kids on God's Side: 40 Conversations to Help Them Build a Lasting Faith

• Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith

The Curious Theology Behind The Hymn “It Is Well With My Soul”

By Jack Lee 10/27/2014

     I heard Albert Mohler mention this briefly on one of his Daily Briefings so I googled to see what I could find. You need to read all of the article if you are interested.

     Should tragedy ever find me I hope, and pray, that grace would be there to carry me through it. I know it has the potential. There is a never-ending fountain of it flowing for me; “grace upon grace” I believe the scriptures call it. It’s an absolutely incredible truth for any and every Christian; it’s beautiful. It’s inspired 1000’s of hymns, one of which has always been strangely over-pious and curious to me. I refer to “It Is Well With My Soul” by Horatio Spafford.

     The first time I heard the story behind the hymn, I felt like a Christian wimp. How could someone have that much faith and respond that way midst such tragedy? I know grace and God can do amazing things, but to respond with such faith when you’ve lost 5 children is beyond me. I can’t help but put myself in that situation and know I would not respond that way. I would be crestfallen, angry, broken, and probably feel lost. I would be desperate and destroyed. It hurts me to even think about it. Yet, this was Mr. Spafford’s situation and he responded by writing one of the most memorable Christian hymns of all time.

     However, there is some new research that suggests Horatio Spafford, author of “It Is Well With My Soul” might not be the example of faith we all thought he was.

     The Story Behind The Hymn | If you are not familiar with the story, I’ll give you the short version. Or if you are more of a visual person, you can watch a short youtube video on it here.

     Basically. there was this chap named Horatio Spafford. He was a rather wealthy businessman that lived in Chicago in the mid 1800’s. He was a married man with 5 children.

     You need to read all the article to get the full story. So often things are not what they seem. There is also a book about it. American Priestess: The Extraordinary Story of Anna Spafford and the American Colony in Jerusalem

Click here to go to source

Take Up and Read: Loving Wisdom

By Kenneth Richard Samples 2/6/2018

     This current blog series on Reflections is intended to encourage Christians to read more vigorously by providing a beginner’s guide to some of the Christian classics in such fields as theology, philosophy, and apologetics. My hope is that these introductions to important Christian texts will motivate today’s believers to, as St. Augustine put it, “take up and read” (Latin: Tolle lege) these classic books.

     This week’s book, Loving Wisdom: Christian Philosophy of Religion by philosopher Paul Copan, is an excellent introduction to the philosophy of religion from a Christian perspective. Copan’s presentation of the Christian theistic worldview is philosophically and theologically sophisticated, but also accessible. This is my go-to book on the various topics relating to the philosophy of religion.

     Why Is This Author Notable? | Paul Copan is a Christian philosopher, theologian, and apologist. He serves as professor of philosophy and ethics at Palm Beach Atlantic University. A prolific author, Copan has written and edited over 25 books in such fields as philosophy of religion, apologetics, theology, and biblical studies.

     What Is This Book About? | Loving Wisdom offers a robust and readable presentation of the historic Christian worldview combined with a defense of the faith. Copan addresses various theological, philosophical, and apologetics issues in five parts.

     Part one explores and defends the triune nature and attributes of the biblical God. Part two examines a variety of arguments for God’s existence as well as for the reality of miracles. Part three focuses on such challenging topics as evil, sin, hell, and the alleged hiddenness of God. Part four explains the critical Christian doctrines of the incarnation and atonement and illustrates Jesus’s uniqueness among the world’s religious leaders. Part five tackles such issues as the body-soul relationship along with faith, doubt, and hope.

Philosopher and theologian Kenneth Richard Samples has a great passion to help people understand the reasonableness and relevance of Christianity's truth claims. Through his writing and speaking as senior research scholar at Reasons to Believe (RTB), he encourages believers to develop a logically defensible faith and challenges skeptics to engage Christianity at a philosophical worldview level.

     An intellectual even at a young age, Kenneth's journey to faith in Christ began in earnest during his teenage years as he wrestled with a deep sense of longing and restlessness. His older brother's suicide spurred his efforts to seek answers to life's "big questions." Eventually, he began reading the Bible and attending church, but it was his sister's gift of Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis that helped Kenneth to truly understand the Christian Gospel and to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. From then on, he pursued an intellectually satisfying and deeply personal faith.

     Today, Kenneth focuses on demonstrating the unique compatibility of Christianity's great doctrinal truths with reason and logic. He is the author of several books, including God Among Sages, Christian Endgame, 7 Truths That Changed the World, A World of Difference, and Without a Doubt. He leads RTB's Straight Thinking podcast and also writes Reflections, a weekly blog dedicated to exploring the Christian worldview. Kenneth has spoken at universities and churches around the world on such topics as religion and worldview, the identity of Jesus, and Christian apologetics. He also makes frequent guest appearances on radio programs such as The Frank Sontag Show, Issues Etc., and Stand to Reason, lectures as an adjunct professor at Biola University, and teaches adult classes at Christ Reformed Church in Southern California.

     An avid student of American history, Kenneth earned a BA in social science with an emphasis in history and philosophy from Concordia University and an MA in theological studies from Talbot School of Theology. Prior to joining RTB in 1997, Kenneth worked for seven years as senior research consultant and correspondence editor at Christian Research Institute, where he regularly cohosted The Bible Answer Man, a popular call-in radio program founded by renowned apologist Dr. Walter Martin. In addition, Kenneth's articles have been published in Christianity Today, Christian Research Journal, and Facts for Faith, and he holds memberships in the Evangelical Philosophical Society, the Evangelical Theological Society, and the International Society of Christian Apologetics.

     Kenneth lives in Southern California with his wife, Joan. They have three children.

• 1     God among Sages: Why Jesus Is Not Just Another Religious Leader
• 2     A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test (Reasons to Believe)
• 3     God among Sages: Why Jesus Is Not Just Another Religious Leader
• 4     Christian Endgame: Careful Thinking about the End Times
• 5     Christianity's Most Dangerous Idea (Ebook Shorts)

A Survey Of Old Testament Introduction

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Supposed Doublets and Parallel Accounts

     2. As to the diverse flood narratives (  Gen. 6–8  being parceled out between J and P), it should be observed that the unbiased reader is unable to detect any diverse elements in these three chapters as they stand in the MT, and that divergences are made possible only by an artificial process of dissection. It is only an unproved assumption to insist, as Wellhausen did, that the general command to take two of every species into the ark (P) is incompatible with the exceptional provision to take seven pairs of every “clean” species (J). To the ordinary reader, the basis for the distinction is plain enough, and by no means involves irreconcilable viewpoints. The same thing is true concerning the number of days during which the flood lasted. It is contended that J makes out the flood to be forty days in length (  Gen. 7:12, 17; 8:6  — plus two more weeks for the sending out of the dove), where P makes it 150 days (  Gen. 7:24 ). But a consecutive reading of the whole narrative makes it apparent that the author put the length of the downpour itself at forty days, whereas the prevalence of the water level above the highest portions of the land surface endured for 150 days (for  7:24  does not say that it rained during that entire period).

     Allis points out (FBM, pp. 95–97) that only in the three major points of emphasis in the flood narrative is it possible to make out “parallel accounts,” namely: the sinfulness of man as the cause of the flood; the destruction of all flesh as the purpose of the flood; the rescuing of a representative remnant of man and beast from the destruction of the flood. These three elements are stressed by the characteristic Hebrew device of restatement in slightly different terms after suitable intervals in between. But outside these three elements it is almost impossible to make out parallel accounts which do not depend upon each other for missing details. For example, according to the critical analysis, J makes reference to the ark without any explanation as to its construction. Only P records the entering of Noah and his family into the ark (  Gen. 7:13–16a ), except that J states Jehovah shut them in the ark (even though the author of J apparently does not state how they got in there). Only J knows about the sending forth of the birds for reconnoitering purposes (  8:6–12 ); P says nothing about it.

     It is fair to say, therefore, that the actual data of the text are easily reconcilable with unity of authorship, but furnish serious obstacles to division into two divergent sources. It is also peculiar, if the  Genesis  flood narrative is made up of two strata separated by nearly four centuries in origin, that the Babylonian account of the flood (found in the Gilgamesh Epic) includes both J elements and P elements in its version of the episode. Thus, it speaks of the measurements of the ark (a P element), and of the sending forth of the birds (a detail from J), and of the offering up of a sacrifice of thanksgiving after the flood was over (likewise from J). The Babylonian parallels make the conclusion almost unavoidable that both the J portion and the P portion of  Gen. 6–8  are of equal antiquity, and go back ultimately to the same oral tradition as did the Utnapishtim episode in the Gilgamesh Epic. The Babylonian account in turn shows noteworthy dependence upon a centuries-older Sumerian account.

     Other alleged doublets in  Genesis  may be discussed more briefly. There are said to be three accounts of the naming of Isaac (  Gen. 17:17  — P;  18:12  — J; and  21:6  — E). But there is no particular reason why both Abraham and Sarah should not have laughed with incredulity, as each in turn heard the prediction of his birth, and then at last laughed with joy.

     4. As for the two accounts of Joseph’s abduction to Egypt — the J account that the Ishmaelites bought him (  Gen. 37:25 ), and the E account that the Midianites took him (  37:28 ) — this duality of names simply points to a fact well known to the author’s contemporaries, that the Midianites were accounted a subtribe of the Ishmaelites. In  Judg. 8:24  we read concerning the kings of Midian, Zebah, and Zalmunna, and their followers: “For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.” Originally, to be sure, Midian was descended from Abraham by Keturah (  Gen. 25:2 ), but the Ishmaelite tribes and Keturah tribes seem to have become interrelated in north Arabia because of their common descent from Abraham.

     5. The two episodes where Abraham passed off Sarah as his sister, before Pharaoh (  Gen. 12:10–20 ), and before Abimelech of Gerar (  Gen. 20:1–18 ), are alleged to be variant forms of the same original legend. But the supposition that men never make the same mistake twice, or yield to the same temptation more than once, is, to say the least, naive, especially when we consider the fact that Abraham came out financially better off on both occasions.

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 19

12 Who can discern his errors?
Declare me innocent from hidden faults.
13 Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in your sight,
O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.

Guard your hearts at all costs in the war with porn

By Brian Renshaw

     Pornography is one of the greatest dangers facing the church today. I could offer you statistics and case studies showing the devastating effects pornography is having on our church leaders but that is not needed. You know the dangers and the widespread effects of pornography. Based on statistics alone there is a reasonable chance that some reading this are physically addicted to viewing pornography. If you are not already addicted there is a greater chance that you have at least viewed pornography recently and on the verge of addiction.

     As students pursuing (or currently in) ministry we are called to a higher standard. We will be leaders in our churches where our people will be looking to us as an example. Too often in the church our leaders fall prey to sexual temptation. One well-known pastor recently admitted to an “inappropriate relationship” and numerous pastors and church leaders names have appeared on the recent Ashley Madison list.  In addition to the obvious personal and familial destruction, the people in our churches can begin to distrust the gospel and think less of the people who should be leading them.

     “TELEIOSNESS” AND JAMES | In one of the most practical books of the New Testament James, the brother of Jesus, exhorts his people to pursue of life of “teleiosness”—or in simpler terms, “wholeness.” This idea of wholeness means that our outward actions and our inward thoughts are in complete agreement with each other. “Teleiosness,” often translated as “perfection,” is not about “doing all the right things” but rather orienting our lives in line with Christian virtue. This the pursuit of holiness that is central to the Christian life.

     Along with this idea of wholeness, James also says teachers will be held to a “stricter judgment” based on their position within the church (Jas. 3:1). Granted, this is in the context leading up to a small discourse concerning our speech, but I think it can be applied more universally. As teachers and preachers of the gospel, ours is a calling to holiness. Our lives, should be marked with a wholeness in the same way that Christ showed us in the gospel stories.

     If we are engaged in pornography our life is not marked by “teleiosness” but rather “dipsychosness” (Jas. 4:8) or “double-mindedness.” Our outward actions may be righteous and holy but our lives are marked by a deep and dark addiction—pornography. We could list all the verses that pertain to sexual sins and apply that here but if you are reading this then you likely know that sexual sin is one that can erode the soul of even the godliest person.

Do Large Christian Conferences Really Make a Difference? Reflections on Urbana 15

By MarkKate Morse 1/21/2016

     Though I’m a conference speaker and have attended a wide-variety of large conferences, I’m a little skeptical about their long-term transformative value. Perhaps 10-20 years ago, large conferences were powerful arenas for God’s purposes. But now with so much available to people in the digital age and with younger people’s needs so different, are they worth the effort and cost?

     At times these events today can feel pretty “staged.” And sometimes they nourish an unholy need for a busy, success-oriented, me-centered gospel. We go from talk to talk, and eat and eat and eat words. We can’t stop stuffing ourselves with ideas and good feelings, but then none of it nourishes us. We barf it up on the way home. We spent money and time, but we have little to show for it in transformed lives or ministries. For this reason many groups, including Missio Alliance, have tried to re-imagine how conferences might be transformative without this gorging on ideas and input.

     So, what did I think of the most mega of mega Evangelical conferences of our day, Urbana? I was invited to be a platform speaker at Urbana in St. Louis, December 27-31, 2015. Urbana 15 had 16,000 persons in attendance with up to 8,000 streaming online. The primary events were held in the Edward Jones Dome where the Rams’ football team played. Urbana is geared towards college students, and first began in 1946 in Canada. It occurs once every three years with the express purpose of inviting students to be a part of God’s mission on campuses, in local communities, and around the world. So, what did I think about my experience of it? Can large conferences make a difference?

      I would have to say, yes. Urbana 15 did for these reasons:

     Prayer and Bible Study Always First – The scale of Urbana required an extraordinary amount of planning and managing of event details. The team planned for 3 years for this one event. But what moved me was how from the very beginning of the planning through to the very end, two things were constant: prayer and reflective Bible study. Individuals and teams of people set aside time to pray for the event, the participants, and those involved from the beginning of the planning through to the end. I had a prayer person assigned to me months before Urbana, who prayed for my preparation, and who checked in with me. During the event she was close by, so I could go to a prayer room and meet with her to pray. One entire evening was given to prayer for the Persecuted Church and for the Persecutors. The main floor was cleared so everyone could come to the field of the dome to pray around pillars representing persecutions world-wide. The students prayed for 30 minutes.

     MaryKate Morse, PhD, is professor of Leadership and Spiritual Formation in the seminary at George Fox University. Currently she is the Lead Mentor for the Doctor of Ministry in Leadership & Spiritual Formation. Raised in the Air Force, MaryKate lived in various states and overseas. She completed her BS in Secondary Education and English Literature at Longwood University in Virginia. With her husband, Randy, and small children she lived in the Andes Mountains of Bolivia and Peru doing ministry and social projects with the Aymará Indians. Upon return she did a Masters in Biblical Studies and an MDIV at Western Evangelical Seminary (now GFES). She began teaching, studied spiritual formation and direction, and was certified as a spiritual director and recorded as a pastor with the Evangelical Friends. MaryKate completed her doctorate at Gonzaga University where she studied the characteristics of renewal leadership as modeled by Jesus. She continues to explore how spiritual formation and effective leadership result in the transformation of individuals and communities especially for evangelists and front-line leaders in diverse cultural environments. After her doctorate she planted two churches and served in various administrative positions at the university including Seminary Associate Dean, Director of Hybrid programs, and University Director of Strategic Planning. She is a spiritual director and leadership mentor and coach, conference and retreat speaker, and author including Making Room for Leadership: Power, Space, and Influence and A Guidebook to Prayer. MaryKate is married to Randy and has three adult children and five grandchildren. She enjoys being with family, hiking, reading, exploring new places, and playing with her puppy, Tess. Books by MaryKate Morse:

Making Room for Leadership: Power, Space and Influence
A Guidebook to Prayer: 24 Ways to Walk with God

The Problem Of The Old Testament

By James Orr 1907

VI. LINGUISTIC AND OTHER ALLEGED GROUNDS FOR SEPARATION (cont)

3. One of the strongest of the evidences — because not depending on single words — relied on to prove the distinction of J and E, and the validity of the documentary hypothesis generally, is the occurrence of “duplicate” narratives of the same event (“doublets”), and to this subject we may now finally refer. Duplicates, or what are held to be such, are pointed out in the case of JE and P, as in the two narratives of creation,  Gen. 1–2:3  (P),  2:3  ff. (J), and the twice naming of Bethel,  Gen. 28:19  (J),  35:15  (P), cf. ver.  7  (E); but also between J and E, as in the twice naming of Beersheba,  Gen. 21:31  (E),  26:33  (J), the two flights of Hagar,  Gen. 16:4–14  (J),  21:9–21  (E), and specially in the stories of the denials of their wives by Abraham and Isaac,  Gen. 12:10–20  (J),  20.  (E),  26:6–11  (J). 1 Similar duplications are thought to be found in the Mosaic history. The presence of such differing and so-called contradictory accounts is held to prove distinct sources.

On these alleged “duplicate” narratives the following remarks may first be made generally:—

(1) Narratives of the same event may be different in point of view and detail, without being necessarily, as is constantly assumed — “contradictory” or “discordant” (creation, flood, etc.2).

(2) Similar acts may be, and frequently are, repeated under new circumstances. E.g., in the cases of Bethel and Beersheba above, the second narrative expressly refers back to the first (  Gen. 35:9,  cf. on E below;  26:15, 18 ). This close interrelation of the different parts of the narrative (JEP) is one of the most striking facts about it.

(3) It weakens the argument that “duplications” do not always occur in different documents — as on the theory they ought to do — but in no inconsiderable number of cases fall within the limits of the same document. Thus E has a second visit to Bethel as well as P (  Gen. 35:6, 7 ); J has two denials of wives — see below; alleged duplicate accounts of the Korahite rebellion are found in  Num. 16:3–10  (P),1 etc. Criticism is driven here to farther disintegrations.

(4) This suggests, lastly, that, even were the similarity of incidents as clear as is alleged, it would not necessarily prove different authorship. The same author might find varying narrations in the traditions or sources from which he drew, and might himself reproduce them in his history. Suppose, to take a favourite instance, that the narrator of the life of Joseph found the merchants to whom Joseph was sold described in one of his sources as Ishmaelites and in another as Midianites, is it not as likely that he would himself introduce both names (  Gen. 37:27, 28, 36; 39:1 ), as that a later “redactor” should weave together the varying histories of J and E? Even this hypothesis is not necessary, for we have independent evidence that “Ishmaelites” was used as a wide term to include “Midianites” (  Judg. 8:24 ). In Hagar’s flights (in second case an expulsion), — one before the birth of Ishmael, the other when he was grown up to be a lad, — it seems plain that tradition had preserved the memory of two incidents, connected with different times and occasions, and each natural in its own place.

Without delaying on other instances, we may take, as a test-case, the most striking of all these “doublets” — the denial of their wives by Abraham and Isaac — and subject that, in closing, to a brief analysis. The results will be instructive, as throwing light on critical methods, and as showing how far from simple this matter of “duplicates” really is.

(1) We have first, then, to observe that what we have here to deal with is not two, but three incidents (not duplicates, but triplicates) — one denial in Egypt (  Gen. 12.  Abraham), and two in Gerar (chap.  20.  Abraham,  26.  Isaac). Of these narratives, two are classed as Jehovistic (  Gen. 12; 26 ), and one is classed as Elohistic (chap.  20 ). In strictness, therefore, on the duplication theory, we seem bound to assume for them, not two, but three authors; and this, accordingly, is what is now commonly done. It is allowed that “the narrative in chap.  12.  shows the general style and language of J,” but “it can hardly be supposed that the story of Abram passing off Sarai as his sister at Pharaoh’s court, and that of Isaac dealing similarly with Rebekah at Gerar, belonged originally to the same series of traditions.” The former story, therefore, must be given to some later representative of the J “school.” We have here the critical process of disintegration in a nutshell.

(2) We have next to look at the phenomena of the divine names. In  Gen. 12:10–20,  Dr. Driver, in words formerly quoted, tells us that “the term Jehovah is uniformly employed.” In point of fact, it is employed only once (ver.  17 ), and, strikingly enough, it is employed once also in the Elohistic narrative (chap.  20:18 ) in a similar connection. In the third narrative (  Gen. 26:6–11 ), the divine name does not occur at all, though the context is Jehovistic (vers.  2, 12 ). So uncertain, indeed, are the criteria, that, according to Dillmann, Wellhausen actually at first gave  Gen. 12:10–20  to E (same as in chap.  20 ). Now, he gives the section, as above hinted, to a later writer on the ground, for one thing, that Lot is not mentioned as accompanying Abraham to Egypt (Lot’s presence, however, is plainly assumed, cf. chap.  13:1 ). As respects the third narrative (  Gen. 26 ), so far from there being disharmony, the opening verse of the chapter contains an express reference to the going down of Abraham to Egypt in the first narrative (  Gen. 12:10 ); but the whole text of this passage (vers.  1–5 ) is made a patchwork of by the critics. Finally, in chap.  20  it remains to be explained how a Jehovist verse comes to stray into the story of E at ver.  18 . It is easy to say “redactor”; but one desires to know what moved a redactor to interpolate into his E context the mention of a fact for which he had no authority, and to employ in doing so a divine name out of keeping with his context.

(3) The facts as they stand may be summed up thus. All three scenes are laid in heathen courts. In the first and third stories, the divine name is not used in the body of the narrative (in the third is not used at all); in the first and second, the name “Jehovah” is used towards the close (chaps.  12:17; 20:18 ) in connection with the divine action in inflicting penalty. As two of the narratives are allowed by the more moderate critics (e.g., Dillmann, Driver) to be by the same writer (J), there is no need, on the mere ground of duplication, to assume a different writer for the third story. All three stories may well have belonged to the original tradition. Nor do the conditions require us to treat the stories as simply varying traditions of the same incident. There are resemblances, but there are also great differences. From both chaps.  12  and  20  it appears that it was part of Abraham’s settled policy, when travelling in strange parts, to pass off Sarah, still childless, as his sister (chap.  12:13; 20:13:  on the half-truth by which this was justified, cf. chap.  20:12 ). This of itself implies that the thing was done more than once (cf. “at every place,” etc.); if, indeed, chap.  20:13  is not a direct glancing back to the former narrative. What Abraham was known to have done, Isaac, in similar peril, may well have been tempted to do likewise. In the story about Isaac there is, in fact, as above noticed, a direct reference to his father’s earlier visit to Egypt (chap.  26:1 ).

The Problem of the Old Testament

Genesis 46; Mark 16; Job 12; Romans 16

By Don Carson 2/13/2018

     ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT THINGS to grasp is that the God of the Bible is both personal – interacting with other persons – and transcendent (i.e., above space ant time – the domain in which all our personal interactions with God take place). As the transcendent Sovereign, he rules over everything without exception; as the personal Creator, he interacts in personal ways with those who bear his image, disclosing himself to be not only personal but flawlessly good. How to put those elements together is finally beyond us, however frequently they are simply assumed in Scripture.

     When Jacob hears that Joseph is alive, he offers sacrifices to God, who graciously discloses himself to Jacob once again: “I am God, the God of your father. Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make you into a great nation there. I will go down to Egypt with you, and I will surely bring you back again. And Joseph’s own hand will close your eyes” (Gen. 46:3-4).

     The book of Genesis makes it clear that Jacob knew that God’s covenant with Abraham included the promise that the land where they were now settled would one day be given to him and to his descendants. That is why Jacob needed this direct disclosure from God to induce him to leave the land. Jacob was reassured on three fronts: (a) God would make his descendants multiply into a “great nation” during their sojourn in Egypt; (b) God would eventually bring them out of Egypt; (c) at the personal level, Jacob is comforted to learn that his long-lost son Joseph will attend his father’s death.

     All of this provides personal comfort. It also discloses something of the mysteries of God’s providential sovereignty, for readers of the Pentateuch know that this sojourn in Egypt will issue in slavery, that God will then be said to “hear” the cries of his people, that in the course of time he will raise up Moses, who will be God’s agent in the ten plagues, the crossing of the Red Sea, the granting of the Sinai covenant and the giving of the law, the wilderness wanderings, and the (re) entry into the Promised Land. The sovereign God who brings Joseph down to Egypt to prepare the way for this small community of seventy persons has a lot of complex plans in store. These are designed to bring his people to the next stage of redemptive history, and finally to teach them that God’s words are more important than food (Deut. 8).

     One can no more detach God’s sovereign transcendence from his personhood, or vice versa, than one can safely detach one wing from an airplane and still expect it to fly.

Don Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, and co-founder (with Tim Keller) of The Gospel Coalition. He has authored numerous books, and recently edited The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures (Eerdmans, 2016).

A Pilgrim's Progress Gen 46-47

Excerpt from The Hand of God: Finding His Care in All Circumstances by Alistair Begg

     Genesis 46–47 contain at least four crucial, dramatic scenes that capture the action and take us the next few steps in the unfolding of this incredible story of God’s providence.

     The primary character in this portion of the drama is Jacob rather than Joseph, but it’s important that we follow Jacob at this point because he is about to move to Egypt and be reunited with Joseph. These events also trace God’s hand at work in Joseph’s life.

     Jacob Was Stunned By Events | Scene one begins at the end of Genesis 45. Jacob’s sons returned from Egypt and informed him, “Joseph is still alive! In fact, he is ruler of all Egypt (v. 26).

     “Jacob was stunned; he did not believe them” (v. 26). After more than twenty years of believing Joseph to be dead, this news was too much for Jacob to process.

     Confused by What He Heard | We don’t know if the brothers simply rushed in and blurted out their announcement with no warning, or whether there was some sort of preamble to this stunning news that is not recorded in the Scripture.

     We can imagine the confusion in Jacob’s mind at this point. As far as he was concerned, the death of Joseph was the most wrenching event of the past two decades. It must have taken him a long time to reconcile himself to the idea that his beloved boy, whom he had watched go off that day as a seventeen-year-old, was not coming home.

     If you had asked Jacob, he would have been able to describe the events of that day with all the passion of a father’s heart. He could have told of his anticipation that Joseph would be home before too long and yet of his awareness of the dangers of the trip. He could have told you what it had been like to wave to Joseph until he was beyond the horizon and out of sight.

     You may know that many of the rail platforms in Britain are very long. The trains start off slowly, and you can wave goodbye to your loved one for quite a while. But once the train disappears, you won’t see the person, no matter how long you stand there.

     I suspect that’s what it had been like for Jacob as he watched Joseph disappear over the horizon. And then he had waited for Joseph to come home, but he never came.

     And now, twenty-two years later, the same characters who had brought Joseph’s torn, bloodstained coat to Jacob were standing before him telling him his son was alive. No wonder he was stunned. He had two decades worth of information stored in the computer of his mind telling him Joseph was dead. He just couldn’t process the new information. Then, while he was trying to come to terms with the fact that Joseph was alive, his sons added a second, equally indigestible layer to the information cake he was struggling to swallow. “He is ruler of all Egypt” (v. 26).

     Can’t you just see him trying to grapple with this inexplicable mystery?

     As the boys unfolded their tale of Joseph’s kindness and his instructions to bring the family to Egypt, Jacob reeled in unbelief. But then they took him outside and showed him the carts laden with the goods Joseph had sent with them.

     Convinced by What He Saw | If what Jacob heard confused him, what he saw convinced him. His driveway was filled with carts and donkeys loaded down with good things, and he knew they didn’t belong to him.

     Furthermore, these carts weren’t Canaanite carts. The steering wheels were on the wrong side, if you like. Their markings and features told Jacob these were foreign carts.

     Jacob surveyed the scene and it suddenly sank in that what his sons were telling him was true. “I’m convinced!” he cried out. “My son Joseph is still alive. I will go and see him before I die” (Genesis 45:28).

The Pilgrim's Progress From This World To That Which Is To Come;
Delivered Under The Similitude Of A Dream

By John Bunyan 1678

THE NINTH STAGE

2. It is good, also, that we desire of the King a convoy, yea, that he will go with us himself. This made David rejoice when in the Valley of the Shadow of Death; and Moses was rather for dying where he stood, than to go one step without his God.

Exod. 33:15 And he said to him, “If your presence will not go with me, do not bring us up from here.   ESV

O, my brother, if he will but go along with us, what need we be afraid of ten thousands that shall set themselves against us?

Psa. 3:5–8 5  I lay down and slept;
I woke again, for the LORD sustained me.
6  I will not be afraid of many thousands of people
who have set themselves against me all around.

7  Arise, O LORD!
Save me, O my God!
For you strike all my enemies on the cheek;
you break the teeth of the wicked.

8  Salvation belongs to the LORD;
your blessing be on your people! Selah   ESV

Psa. 27:1–3 1  The LORD is my light and my salvation;
whom shall I fear?
The LORD is the stronghold of my life;
of whom shall I be afraid?

2  When evildoers assail me
to eat up my flesh,
my adversaries and foes,
it is they who stumble and fall.

3  Though an army encamp against me,
my heart shall not fear;
though war arise against me,
yet I will be confident.   ESV

But without him, the proud helpers fall under the slain.

Isa. 10:  Nothing remains but to crouch among the prisoners
or fall among the slain.
For all this his anger has not turned away,
and his hand is stretched out still.   ESV

     I, for my part, have been in the fray before now; and though (through the goodness of Him that is best) I am, as you see, alive, yet I cannot boast of any manhood. Glad shall I be if I meet with no more such brunts; though I fear we are not got beyond all danger. However, since the lion and the bear have not as yet devoured me, I hope God will also deliver us from the next uncircumcised Philistine. Then sang Christian,

“Poor Little-Faith! hast been among the thieves?
Wast robb’d? Remember this, whoso believes,
And get more faith; then shall you victors be
Over ten thousand-else scarce over three.”

     So they went on, and Ignorance followed. They went then till they came at a place where they saw a way put itself into their way, and seemed withal to lie as strait as the way which they should go; and here they knew not which of the two to take, for both seemed strait before them: therefore here they stood still to consider. And as they were thinking about the way, behold a man black of flesh, but covered with a very light robe, come to them, and asked them why they stood there. They answered, they were going to the Celestial City, but knew not which of these ways to take. “Follow me,” said the man, “it is thither that I am going.” So they followed him in the way that but now came into the road, which by degrees turned, and turned them so far from the city that they desired to go to, that in a little time their faces were turned away from it; yet they follow him. But by and by, before they were aware, he led them both within the compass of a net, in which they were both so entangled that they knew not what to do; and with that the white robe fell off the black man’s back. Then they saw where they were. Wherefore there they lay crying some time, for they could not get themselves out.

     CHR. Then said Christian to his fellow, Now do I see myself in an error. Did not the shepherds bid us beware of the Flatterer? As is the saying of the wise man, so we have found it this day: “A man that flattereth his neighbor, spreadeth a net for his feet.”

Prov. 29:5  A man who flatters his neighbor
spreads a net for his feet.   ESV

     HOPE. They also gave us a note of directions about the way, for our more sure finding thereof; but therein we have also forgotten to read, and have not kept ourselves from the paths of the destroyer. Here David was wiser than we; for saith he, “Concerning the works of men, by the word of thy lips I have kept me from the paths of the Destroyer.”

Psa. 17:4  With regard to the works of man, by the word of your lips
I have avoided the ways of the violent.   ESV

Thus they lay bewailing themselves in the net. At last they espied a Shining One coming towards them with a whip of small cords in his hand. When he was come to the place where they were, he asked them whence they came, and what they did there. They told him that they were poor pilgrims going to Zion, but were led out of their way by a black man clothed in white, who bid us, said they, follow him, for he was going thither too. Then said he with the whip, It is Flatterer, a false apostle, that hath transformed himself into an angel of light.

Dan. 11:32 He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action.   ESV

2 Cor. 11:13-14 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.   ESV

So he rent the net, and let the men out. Then said he to them, Follow me, that I may set you in your way again. So he led them back to the way which they had left to follow the Flatterer. Then he asked them, saying, Where did you lie the last night? They said, With the shepherds upon the Delectable Mountains. He asked them then if they had not of the shepherds a note of direction for the way. They answered, Yes. But did you not, said he, when you were at a stand, pluck out and read your note? They answered, No. He asked them, Why? They said they forgot. He asked, moreover, if the shepherds did not bid them beware of the Flatterer. They answered, Yes; but we did not imagine, said they, that this fine-spoken man had been he.

Rom. 16:17-18 17 I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.   ESV

     Then I saw in my dream, that he commanded them to lie down; which when they did, he chastised them sore, to teach them the good way wherein they should walk,

Deut. 25:2 then if the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with a number of stripes in proportion to his offense.   ESV

2 Chron. 6:27 then hear in heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel, when you teach them the good way in which they should walk, and grant rain upon your land, which you have given to your people as an inheritance.   ESV

and as he chastised them, he said, “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous, therefore, and repent.”

Rev. 3:19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.   ESV

This done, he bids them to go on their way, and take good heed to the other directions of the shepherds. So they thanked him for all his kindness, and went softly along the right way, singing,

“Come hither, you that walk along the way,
See how the pilgrims fare that go astray:
They catched are in an entangling net,
Cause they good counsel lightly did forget:
’Tis true, they rescued were; but yet, you see,
They’re scouged to boot; let this your caution be.”

     Now, after awhile, they perceived afar off, one coming softly, and alone, all along the highway, to meet them. Then said Christian to his fellow, Yonder is a man with his back towards Zion, and he is coming to meet us.

     HOPE. I see him; let us take heed to ourselves now, lest he should prove a Flatterer also. So he drew nearer and nearer, and at last came up to them. His name was Atheist, and he asked them whither they were going.

     CHR. We are going to Mount Zion.

     Then Atheist fell into a very great laughter.

     CHR. What’s the meaning of your laughter?

     ATHEIST. I laugh to see what ignorant persons you are, to take upon you so tedious a journey, and yet are like to have nothing but your travel for your pains.

     CHR. Why, man, do you think we shall not be received?

     ATHEIST. Received! There is not such a place as you dream of in all this world.

     CHR. But there is in the world to come.

     ATHEIST. When I was at home in mine own country I heard as you now affirm, and from that hearing went out to see, and have been seeking this city these twenty years, but find no more of it than I did the first day I set out.

Eccles. 10:15  The toil of a fool wearies him,
for he does not know the way to the city.   ESV

Jer. 17:15  Behold, they say to me,
“Where is the word of the LORD?
Let it come!”   ESV

     CHR. We have both heard, and believe, that there is such a place to be found.

     ATHEIST. Had not I, when at home, believed, I had not come thus far to seek; but finding none, (and yet I should, had there been such a place to be found, for I have gone to seek it farther than you,) I am going back again, and will seek to refresh myself with the things that I then cast away for hopes of that which I now see is not.

     CHR. Then said Christian to Hopeful his companion, Is it true which this man hath said?

     HOPE. Take heed, he is one of the Flatterers. Remember what it cost us once already for our hearkening to such kind of fellows. What! no Mount Zion? Did we not see from the Delectable Mountains the gate of the city? Also, are we not now to walk by faith?

2 Cor. 5:7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.   ESV

     Let us go on, lest the man with the whip overtake us again. You should have taught me that lesson, which I will sound you in the ears withal: “Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.”

Prov. 19:27  Cease to hear instruction, my son,
and you will stray from the words of knowledge.   ESV

I say, my brother, cease to hear him, and let us believe to the saving of the soul.

     CHR. My brother, I did not put the question to thee, for that I doubted of the truth of our belief myself, but to prove thee, and to fetch from thee a fruit of the honesty of thy heart. As for this man, I know that he is blinded by the god of this world. Let thee and me go on, knowing that we have belief of the truth; and no lie is of the truth.

1 John 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.   ESV

     HOPE. Now do I rejoice in hope of the glory of God. So they turned away from the man; and he, laughing at them, went his way.

     I then saw in my dream, that they went on until they came into a certain country whose air naturally tended to make one drowsy, if he came a stranger into it. And here Hopeful began to be very dull, and heavy to sleep: wherefore he said unto Christian, I do now begin to grow so drowsy that I can scarcely hold open mine eyes; let us lie down here, and take one nap.

     CHR. By no means, said the other; lest, sleeping, we never awake more.

     HOPE. Why, my brother? sleep is sweet to the laboring man; we may be refreshed, if we take a nap.

     CHR. Do you not remember that one of the shepherds bid us beware of the Enchanted Ground? He meant by that, that we should beware of sleeping; wherefore “let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.”

1 Thess. 5:6 So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober.   ESV

     HOPE. I acknowledge myself in a fault; and had I been here alone, I had by sleeping run the danger of death. I see it is true that the wise man saith, “Two are better than one.”

Eccl. 4:9 Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their toil.   ESV

Hitherto hath thy company been my mercy; and thou shalt have a good reward for thy labor.

     CHR. Now, then, said Christian, to prevent drowsiness in this place, let us fall into good discourse.

     HOPE. With all my heart, said the other.

     CHR. Where shall we begin?

     HOPE. Where God began with us. But do you begin, if you please.

     CHR. I will sing you first this song:

“When saints do sleepy grow, let them come hither,
And hear how these two pilgrims talk together;
Yea, let them learn of them in any wise,
Thus to keep ope their drowsy, slumb’ring eyes.
Saints’ fellowship, if it be managed well,
Keeps them awake, and that in spite of hell.”

     Then Christian began, and said, I will ask you a question. How came you to think at first of doing what you do now?

     HOPE. Do you mean, how came I at first to look after the good of my soul?

     CHR. Yes, that is my meaning.

     HOPE. I continued a great while in the delight of those things which were seen and sold at our fair; things which I believe now would have, had I continued in them still, drowned me in perdition and destruction.

     CHR. What things were they?

     HOPE. All the treasures and riches of the world. Also I delighted much in rioting, reveling, drinking, swearing, lying, uncleanness, Sabbath-breaking, and what not, that tended to destroy the soul. But I found at last, by hearing and considering of things that are divine, which, indeed, I heard of you, as also of beloved Faithful, that was put to death for his faith and good living in Vanity Fair, that the end of these things is death,

Rom. 6:21–23 21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.   ESV

and that for these things’ sake, the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience.

Eph. 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.   ESV

     Pilgrim's Progress (Illustrated): Updated, Modern English. More than 100 Illustrations.

The Continual Burnt Offering

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

February 13

Thy heavenly grace to each impart,
All evil far remove,
And shed abroad in every heart
Thine everlasting love.

Oh, still restore our wandering feet
And still direct our way;
Till worlds shall fail, and faith shall greet
The dawn of endless day.

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     3. But, above all, the true substance of Christ is most clearly declared in those passages which comprehend both natures at once. Numbers of these exist in the Gospel of John. What we there read as to his having received power from the Father to forgive sins; as to his quickening whom he will; as to his bestowing righteousness, holiness, and salvation; as to his being appointed judge both of the quick and the dead; as to his being honoured even as the Father, [247] are not peculiar either to his Godhead or his humanity, but applicable to both. In the same way he is called the Light of the world, the good Shepherd, the only Door, the true Vine. With such prerogatives the Son of God was invested on his manifestation in the flesh, and though he possessed the same with the Father before the world was created, still it was not in the same manner or respect; neither could they be attributed to one who was a man and nothing more. In the same sense we ought to understand the saying of Paul, that at the end Christ shall deliver up "the kingdom to God, even the Father," (1 Cor. 15:24). The kingdom of God assuredly had no beginning, and will have no end: but because he was hid under a humble clothing of flesh, and took upon himself the form of a servant, and humbled himself (Phil. 2:8), and, laying aside the insignia of majesty, became obedient to the Father; and after undergoing this subjection was at length crowned with glory and honour (Heb. 2:7), and exalted to supreme authority, that at his name every knee should bow (Phil. 2:10); so at the end he will subject to the Father both the name and the crown of glory, and whatever he received of the Father, that God may be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28). For what end were that power and authority given to him, save that the Father might govern us by his hand? In the same sense, also, he is said to sit at the right hand of the Father. But this is only for a time, until we enjoy the immediate presence of his Godhead. And here we cannot excuse the error of some ancient writers, who, by not attending to the office of Mediator, darken the genuine meaning of almost the whole doctrine which we read in the Gospel of John, and entangle themselves in many snares. Let us, therefore, regard it as the key of true interpretation, that those things which refer to the office of Mediator are not spoken of the divine or human nature simply. [248] Christ, therefore, shall reign until he appear to judge the world, inasmuch as, according to the measure of our feeble capacity, he now connects us with the Father. But when, as partakers of the heavenly glory, we shall see God as he is, then Christ, having accomplished the office of Mediator, shall cease to be the vicegerent of the Father, and will be content with the glory which he possessed before the world was. Nor is the name of Lord specially applicable to the person of Christ in any other respect than in so far as he holds a middle place between God and us. To this effect are the words of Paul, "To us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him," (1 Cor. 8:6); that is, to the latter a temporary authority has been committed by the Father until his divine majesty shall be beheld face to face. His giving up of the kingdom to the Father, so far from impairing his majesty, will give a brighter manifestation of it. God will then cease to be the head of Christ, and Christ's own Godhead will then shine forth of itself, whereas it is now in a manner veiled.

4. This observation, if the readers apply it properly, will be of no small use in solving a vast number of difficulties. For it is strange how the ignorant, nay, some who are not altogether without learning, are perplexed by these modes of expression which they see applied to Christ, without being properly adapted either to his divinity or his humanity, not considering their accordance with the character in which he was manifested as God and man, and with his office of Mediator. It is very easy to see how beautifully they accord with each other, provided they have a sober interpreter, one who examines these great mysteries with the reverence which is meet. But there is nothing which furious and frantic spirits cannot throw into confusion. [249] They fasten on the attributes of humanity to destroy his divinity; and, on the other hand, on those of his divinity to destroy his humanity: while those which, spoken conjointly of the two natures, apply to neither, they employ to destroy both. But what else is this than to contend that Christ is not man because he is God, not God because he is man, and neither God nor man because he is both at once. Christ, therefore, as God and man, possessing natures which are united, but not confused, we conclude that he is our Lord and the true Son of God, even according to his humanity, though not by means of his humanity. For we must put far from us the heresy of Nestorius, who, presuming to dissect rather than distinguish between the two natures, devised a double Christ. But we see the Scripture loudly protesting against this, when the name of the Son of God is given to him who is born of a Virgin, and the Virgin herself is called the mother of our Lord (Luke 1:32, 43). We must beware also of the insane fancy of Eutyches, lest, when we would demonstrate the unity of person, we destroy the two natures. The many passages we have already quoted, in which the divinity is distinguished from the humanity, and the many other passages existing throughout Scripture, may well stop the mouth of the most contentious. I will shortly add a few observations, which will still better dispose of this fiction. For the present, one passage will suffice--Christ would not have called his body a temple (John 2:19), had not the Godhead distinctly dwelt in it. Wherefore, as Nestorius had been justly condemned in the Council of Ephesus, so afterwards was Eutyches in those of Constantinople and Chalcedony, it being not more lawful to confound the two natures of Christ than to divide them.

5. But in our age, also, has arisen a not less fatal monster, Michael Servetus, who for the Son of God has substituted a figment composed of the essence of God, spirit, flesh, and three untreated elements. First, indeed, he denies that Christ is the Son of God, for any other reason than because he was begotten in the womb of the Virgin by the Holy Spirit. The tendency of this crafty device is to make out, by destroying the distinction of the two natures, that Christ is somewhat composed of God and man, and yet is not to be deemed God and man. His aim throughout is to establish, that before Christ was manifested in the flesh there were only shadowy figures in God, the truth or effect of which existed for the first time, when the Word who had been destined to that honour truly began to be the Son of God. We indeed acknowledge that the Mediator who was born of the Virgin is properly the Son of God. And how could the man Christ be a mirror of the inestimable grace of God, had not the dignity been conferred upon him both of being and of being called the only-begotten Son of God? Meanwhile, however, the definition of the Church stands unmoved, that he is accounted the Son of God, because the Word begotten by the Father before all ages assumed human nature by hypostatic union,--a term used by ancient writers to denote the union which of two natures constitutes one person, and invented to refute the dream of Nestorius, who pretended that the Son of God dwelt in the flesh in such a manner as not to be at the same time man. Servetus calumniously charges us with making the Son of God double, when we say that the eternal Word before he was clothed with flesh was already the Son of God: as if we said anything more than that he was manifested in the flesh. Although he was God before he became man, he did not therefore begin to be a new God. Nor is there any greater absurdity in holding that the Son of God, who by eternal generation ever had the property of being a Son, appeared in the flesh. This is intimated by the angel's word to Mary: "That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God," (Luke 1:35); as if he had said that the name of Son, which was more obscure under the law, would become celebrated and universally known. Corresponding to this is the passage of Paul, that being now the sons of God by Christ, we "have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father," (Rom. 8:15). Were not also the holy patriarchs of old reckoned among the sons of God? Yea, trusting to this privilege, they invoked God as their Father. But because ever since the only-begotten Son of God came forth into the world, his celestial paternity has been more clearly manifested, Paul assigns this to the kingdom of Christ as its distinguishing feature. We must, however, constantly hold, that God never was a Father to angels and men save in respect of his only-begotten Son: that men, especially, who by their iniquity were rendered hateful to God, are sons by gratuitous adoption, because he is a Son by nature. Nor is there anything in the assertion of Servetus, that this depends on the filiation which God had decreed with himself. Here we deal not with figures, as expiation by the blood of beasts was shown to be; but since they could not be the sons of God in reality, unless their adoption was founded in the head, it is against all reason to deprive the head of that which is common to the members. I go farther: since the Scripture gives the name of sons of God to the angels, whose great dignity in this respect depended not on the future redemption, Christ must in order take precedence of them that he may reconcile the Father to them. I will again briefly repeat and add the same thing concerning the human race. Since angels as well as men were at first created on the condition that God should be the common Father of both; if it is true, as Paul says, that Christ always was the head, "the first-born of every creature--that in all things he might have the pre-eminence," (Col. 1:15, 18), I think I may legitimately infer, that he existed as the Son of God before the creation of the world.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion