The Stuff We All Agree on When It Comes to Origins

By J. Warner Wallace 9/19/2016

     I get the chance to speak around the country and talk about how we, as Christians, assemble circumstantial evidence related to the reliability of the Gospels and the existence of God. As a result, I meet all kinds of Christians who hold a variety of views related to the Genesis creation account. Many are “Literal Day” creationists, while others lean toward some version of “Gap Theory”, “Day-Age Creation Theory”, “Creation Revelation Theory”, “Progressive Creation Theory”, “Genesis Creation Day Theory” or “Genesis Literary Theory” Creationism. Some believe that the universe is very young, others that it is very old. Some believe that God created everything in the form we see it in today (as the result of some form of “instantaneous” creation); others that God shaped His creation through some process of progressive interaction. When you ask these folks about the Bible, all of them will tell you that they believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God. All will agree that the Bible is the final authority. All will tell you that they believe what the Bible teaches. Christians simply disagree on how to interpret the first book of Moses.

     I’m sensitive to the variety of views held by Christians on this matter. I see the reasonable nature of every view; I recognize that each approach to Genesis chapter one has its own virtues and its own liabilities. I’m not discouraged by this reality, but encouraged that there are so many reasonable resolutions. I am discouraged, however, when we allow our fallen human nature to get the best of us. Rather than finding areas of agreement, most of us choose to divide over areas of divergence. Regardless of your position related to the Genesis account, I’d like to point out the areas where all of us, regardless of creation theory, agree. As Christians, we all affirm the following premises:

     God originated everything (all space, time and matter) supernaturally

     God created the material universe (and our world) in incremental steps over a period of time (six literal days or six “ages”)

     God was actively involved in the creation of all life (life is not the result of an unguided natural process)

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

Can Christians claim to have the One, True God?

By Ryan Pauly 8/2/2016

     You don’t have to spend very much time interacting with atheists on the internet before you hear this objection: “There are almost 5,000 gods being worshiped by humans, but don’t worry… only yours is right.” The picture above was sent to me on Twitter last week in response to my blog about God’s hiddenness. There are other very popular forms of this argument. Richard Dawkins claims that Christians are atheists when it comes to Zeus, Thor, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and many others. Dawkins just goes one god further than the Christian. So the claim is either than I’m an atheist when it comes to 4,999 gods or that I’m dumb for claiming to have truth when I reject so many other options.

     The reason this argument is so popular on the internet is that it is easy. It fits into a 140 characters for Twitter and can easily be turned into a meme. Here are examples I found from a very quick search on Twitter.

     “There have been nearly 3000 Gods so far but only yours actually exists. The others are silly made up nonsense. But not yours. Yours is real.”

     “there are thousands of religions practices. thousands of gods worshiped. but don’t worry. yours is the only right one.”

     “30,000 religions and 5000 versions of Christianity and only ‘yours’ is the right one-you are a joke.”

     When Ryan isn’t teaching or studying, he enjoys speaking at churches, youth groups, schools, and conferences. His writing has been featured at crossexamined.org and thepoachedegg.net, and he is also a contributor for the updated version of the popular Apologetics Study Bible for Students, Trade Paper which will be released in 2017. Along with his writing, you can tune in to the Coffeehouse Questions radio show hosted by Ryan every Wednesday from 4:30-5 pm on Active Reliance Radio.

Scriptural Teaching On God and Time

By William Lane Craig 2/10/2017

     1. Is there any Scriptural reason to suppose that God was timeless before creation (or when creation did not exist)? Yes, indeed! Johannes Schmidt argues for a biblical doctrine of divine timelessness on the basis of creation texts like Genesis 1.1 and Proverbs 8.22-23.[1]

     Genesis 1.1 states, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” According to James Barr, this absolute beginning, taken in conjunction with the expression “And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (v. 5), indicating the first day, may very well be intended to teach that the beginning was not simply the beginning of the physical universe, but the beginning of time itself and that, consequently, God may be thought of as timeless.[2]

     Certain New Testament authors may be taken to construe Genesis 1.1 as referring to the beginning of time. The most striking New Testament reflection on Genesis 1.1 is, of course, John 1.1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.” Here the uncreated Word (logos), the source of all created things, was already with God and was God at the moment of creation. It is not hard to interpret this passage in terms of the Word’s timeless unity with God--nor would it be anachronistic to do so, given the first century Jewish philosopher Philo’s doctrine of the divine Logos (Word) and Philo’s holding that time begins with creation.[3]

     As for Proverbs 8.22-23, this passage is certainly capable of being read in terms of a beginning of time. Here Wisdom, personified as a woman, speaks:

A Survey Of Old Testament Introduction

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Supposed Doublets and Parallel Accounts (cont)

     Hebrew Style One Answer to Doublets

     Part of the answer to the theory of doublets may be found in the nature of Hebrew literary style. O. T. Allis has pointed out that there are three traits of Hebrew style which are well known to have been practiced by individual Hebrew authors but which can easily be exploited by modern division-minded critics for dissection into hypothetical “sources.” These three traits are paratactic sentence structure, repetition of elements of major importance, and poetic parallelism.” A few words of explanation are appropriate at this point.

     1. Paratactic sentence structure refers to the characteristic technique of Hebrew rhetoric by which subordinate or interdependent ideas are linked together by the simple connective and (w˓e-, Hebrew). For example, in  Gen. 1:14 , where the idea expressed in an Indo-European language would employ a purpose clause, “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven in order to serve as signs and seasons,” the Hebrew author says: “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven … and they shall be for signs, and seasons.” Or again,  Isa. 6:7  literally reads, “Lo, this has touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin is being atoned for.” But what  Isaiah  meant to convey here was, “Lo, this has touched thy lips in order that thine iniquity may be removed and thy sin be atoned for.” This same Hebrew particle (we) and may be used to convey the temporal idea of “when,” or the circumstantial idea of “while,” or the consequential idea of “then,” or the epexegetic idea of “even” or “that is to say.” The versatility of we- is universally conceded by Hebrew grammarians. But a dissection-minded critic may easily carve up these component elements of a Mosaic sentence on the supposition that fragments of diverse sources have been clumsily glued together by a later redactor who simply used an and to link them together. If a Hebrew author had written his material in classical Greek, for example, or in Latin, much of this divisive analysis of the Wellhausian school would have been well-nigh impossible, for in those languages subordinate conjunctions or participles are customarily employed to express the same ideas as Hebrew expresses in paratactic form.

     2. The second trait is the tendency to repeat in slightly varied form those elements of the narrative which are of especial importance. One example of this technique has already been given in connection with the flood narrative. It was there pointed out how the repetition of the three major points of emphasis has furnished divisionists with their only convenient material for dissection, whereas the rest of the account shows no evidence whatsoever of multiple sources. Somewhat similar is the series of chapters recounting the ten plagues ( Ex. 7–11 ). In some cases a plague is fully described in five characteristic parts: threat, command, execution, supplication for removal, and cessation. For Source Critics it is a perfectly simple matter (although purely artificial) to parcel these out among hypothetical authors. Thus the threat and cessation are given to J, while the command and execution are assigned to P. But in the case of the less grievous plagues, the description is briefer and they have to be distributed more or less intact to one source. Hence the plagues of lice and of boils are assigned to P without anything left over for J or E. By this arbitrary arrangement, J knows only of seven plagues, P comes up with only five, and E with only four (plus a fifth which is only threatened but never carried out). Consequently no two of these sources agree as to the number or nature of the plagues, and each of them needs the information contained in the others in order to complete the series of ten.

     3. A third characteristic of Hebrew style which lends itself to artificial source division is poetic parallelism. Parallelism is the term given to the balanced structure of paired clauses which is employed so extensively in Hebrew verse, such as  Ps. 24:1 : “The earth is Jehovah’s and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.” As can be seen from this example, corresponding synonyms are employed in the two members of the parallelism: “earth” corresponds to “world,” and “fullness” corresponds to “they that dwell therein.”

     Careful examination of the alleged doublets and parallel accounts — so stressed by Kuenen and Wellhausen as criteria for source division — tends to show that these phenomena are capable of a far more natural and unforced explanation of the basis of single authorship than is possible on the theory of multiple sources. The JEDP hypothesis does not really square with all the evidence, and it treats much of its allegedly supporting data in a way that would never be admissible in a court of law. Moreover, the methodology of this type of literary criticism is all the more suspect because it proves to be so facile an instrument for dividing up even compositions which are universally acknowledged to be of single authorship.

     Green gave an excellent illustration on this in his “documentarian” analysis of the parable of the prodigal son in  Luke 15.18  In this parody of Wellhausen’s technique, he points out that source A and source B agree that there were two sons, one of whom received a portion of his father’s property, and was subsequently reduced to penury through his own extravagance. But only A distinguishes the sons as elder and younger; B makes no mention of their relative ages. In A the younger obtained his share of the inheritance by solicitation, while his father retained the rest for himself; according to B the father divided up the inheritance between the two sons on his own initiative. A states that the prodigal remained in his father’s neighborhood and reduced himself to penury by riotous living; in B he went to a distant country and spent all his property, but did not indulge in any unseemly excesses. Green carries this through exactly in the manner of S. R. Driver, complete with characteristic A words and B words which have been inserted in the wrong place by a bungling redactor. Green then proceeds to do the same thing with the parable of the good Samaritan. Being thoroughly versed in the methodology of the Wellhausian school he handles his material as if he were an accredited member of the guild, and thus demonstrates its artificiality.

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 20

6 Now I know that the LORD saves his anointed;
he will answer him from his holy heaven
with the saving might of his right hand.
7 Some trust in chariots and some in horses,
but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.
8 They collapse and fall,
but we rise and stand upright.

9 O LORD, save the king!
May he answer us when we call.

How Do You Obey God When He Asks You To Do the Impossible?

By Michael J. Kruger 2/13/2017

     In all of the many Star Wars films (and there are too many now), one of my favorite segments is where Yoda is training the young Luke Skywalker in The Empire Strikes Back.

     After Luke fails to lift his X-wing fighter out of the swamp by using the Force, he complains to Yoda, “You want the impossible.” Then he walks off into the woods to pout.

     Of course, Yoda then proceeds to lift the X-wing fighter out of the swamp himself and sets it on dry land. Luke stares in amazement, “I don’t believe it.”

     Yoda’s reply is classic, “That is why you fail.”

     While the quasi-Gnostic, New Age worldview of the Star Wars saga makes me hesitant to use it as an example, I have to say that a good lesson can be learned in this instance.

Why is their Something Rather than Nothing?

By Stuartgrayuk 2/14/2017

     I found this discussion on prime time US TV to be pretty fascinating! I’m always pleased to see when discussion about God comes out of the private places and into the public square where it belongs.

     Ricky’s a sharp and witty comedian…and I do enjoy his irreverent humor. But I honestly find his atheism troubling. Not because I find his arguments compelling…its just the way he immediately seems closed to the idea of God.

     I thought Colbert asked a great question out of the gate on his show…and he let Ricky off very lightly by allowing him to sidestep his good question.

     Why is there something instead of nothing? | Why does the universe exist at all? Why are we here?

     Ricky’s response was, “That makes no sense at all…surely the bigger question is not why, but how?”

The Problem Of The Old Testament

By James Orr 1907

CHAPTER VIII | Difficulties and Perplexities of the Critical Hypothesis: The Question of Deuteronomy

“The Book of  Deuteronomy  in and for itself teaches nothing new.… How could Josiah have been so terrified because the prescriptions of this book had not been observed by the fathers, and the people had thereby incurred the wrath of Jahweh, if he had not been aware that these commands were known to them?” — GRAF.

“I am still certain that the finding of the book of the law in the eighteenth year of Josiah is neither meant, nor is, to be understood of the first appearance of the Book of  Deuteronomy , originating about that time.” — DELITZSCH.

“Our review of sources has convinced us that it [ Deuteronomy ] draws from old Mosaic tradition, which in fact in many places goes back demonstrably into the Mosaic time, and par excellence to the person of the lawgiver. It goes so far as to incorporate such ordinances as no longer suited the writer’s own time, but only suited the time of the conquest and settlement in Canaan.” — OETTLI.

“Leaving out of account isolated passages, especially the close,  Deuteronomy  is a whole proceeding from one and the same hand.” — RIEHM.

THE questions we have been engaged in discussing with relation to J and E, while interesting as an object-lesson in criticism, and, in their bearing on dates, important, are secondary in comparison with those which yet await investigation — the age and origin of  Deuteronomy  and of the so-called Priestly Code. It will be remembered that the Graf-Wellhausen school does not pretend to settle the age and relations of documents or codes by critical considerations alone. Criticism is to be guided, and its conclusions are to be checked, at every step, by history. A parallel, it is alleged, can be traced between the course of the history and the successive stages of the legislation. Up to the time of Josiah, it is held, no trace can be discovered of the existence and operation of any body of laws but that of the Book of the Covenant in  Ex. 20–23 . With the finding of “the book of the law” in Josiah’s reign, there enters a manifold influence of the spirit and teaching of the Book of  Deuteronomy , strongly reflected in the later literature — for instance, in  Jeremiah ; but no sign is yet shown of the peculiar institutions of the Levitical Code. These first begin to be visible in the sketch of the restored temple and its ordinances in  Ezekiel  (chaps.  40  ff.), and emerge as a definitely completed system in the law-book which  Ezra  brought with him from Babylon, and gave to the post-exilian community in Jerusalem. Thenceforth they rule the life of the nation. The ingenuity of the new scheme is undoubted, and the acceptance it has won is sufficient evidence of the skill with which it has been expounded and defended. But is it really tenable? Many reasons — not the least cogent of them derived from the course of criticism itself — convince us it is not. We shall deal in this chapter with the application of the theory to the Book of  Deuteronomy. 

I. STATE OF THE QUESTION AND GENERAL VIEW

The Problem of the Old Testament

The Gospel for the Hopeless: An Interview with John Barros

By John Barros 11/01/2015

     Tabletalk: What is “Who Will Stand“? What led you to start this ministry??

     John Barros: I’ve been ministering at the Orlando Women’s Center for eleven years. I’m blessed beyond anything I could have imagined as I have been able to see God turn the hearts of hundreds who saw no hope. I started the website whowillstand.net to encourage other men to “adopt” their local abortion clinics and see the Lord work there as He does here.

     TT: What is a typical day of ministry like at the abortion clinic?

     JB: We pray for those on their way to the clinic, asking God to work on their hearts. When they arrive, we introduce ourselves, letting them know we are here for them and that God sent us to call them to trust Him. We give them the “In the Womb” tract and a card to the local crisis pregnancy center, which will do an immediate ultrasound. God turns many hearts right away.

     When others go into the clinic for their paperwork, I preach. The building is twenty-five feet from the sidewalk. They hear every word. God uses His Word to move people’s hearts and open ears. Usually within an hour, someone begins asking questions or chooses life.

     We stay until the end. We have seen some literally “get off the table” and come out. God doesn’t work on our timetable.

     TT: What is the most common misconception evangelical Christians have about men and women who procure abortions?

     JB: That they don’t know what they’re doing. God has written His law on everyone’s heart. That’s why they’re so angry to find us here. Second Timothy 2:25–26 says, “In humility [correct] those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will” (NKJV). People come in knowing what they’re doing, yet are spiritually blind, caught in a trap laid by the devil.

     Baby sacrifice has been with us throughout history. There’s a demonic battle that has gone on since the days of Baal worship. Ephesians 6:12 says, “We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places.” We come with the only answer to spiritual blindness: the gospel (Rom. 1:16). The Lord in His grace goes to the “gates of hell,” calling them to repentance. People respond to this almost every day.

     TT: In the church’s response to the abortion crisis, what has the church done right? What has the church done wrong?

     JB: I’m blessed to be a member of Saint Andrew’s Chapel in Sanford, Fla., which has organized prayer support as well as Bible studies and groups that pray for the ministry at Orlando Women’s Center. All our pastors — R.C. Sproul, Burk Parsons, Don Bailey, and Kevin Struyk — preach against abortion, encouraging us to fight. They encourage us to get out on the street to love our neighbors and plead the cause of the widow and orphan. They even come to encourage us on the street. The students of Reformation Bible College are also encouraged to come. There’s not an hour that Orlando Women’s Center is open that a member of Saint Andrew’s isn’t there. When a woman chooses life, she’s turned over to a group of ladies from the church. They love and encourage her and see what her needs are. Sometimes a deacon is needed to see what kind of material needs there may be. We also have baby showers, etc. Many of the women live far from the church. We pick them up on Sunday mornings for worship. Saint Andrew’s serves them both physically and spiritually. We host a Bible study for those who have had an abortion and have come to Christ but wrestle with guilt.

     Sadly, I think most churches don’t do anything. Francis Schaeffer said, “Every abortion clinic should have a sign in front stating, ‘Open by the permission of the church.’ ” If the church were to rise up with a united front, would there be any more abortions? Dr. James Pendergraft, the owner of the abortion clinic where I minister, said, “If it wasn’t for the evangelical church sending me their daughters, I’d be out of business.” Most people who come to kill their babies claim to be Christians. The church needs to repent of our apathy.

     TT: How can Christians and churches serve women who are thinking about having an abortion? How can they serve women who have already had an abortion?

     JB: First, the church needs to preach truth. Proverbs 6 says God hates the hands that shed innocent blood. It’s not a political theory of abortion that God hates. It’s the “hands,” the people involved in killing vulnerable babies. God is the author of life. God shows us that these little babies are precious gifts that He has a claim on. The church also has an obligation to serve the parents. If we want these babies to live, we must help with spiritual and tangible needs. Our deacons do the “nuts and bolts” work with those who need help—coming up with budgets, helping them to find services, and looking for jobs.

     The church serves those who have had abortions by telling them the truth. If God has granted them repentance, they need to know that they’re forgiven, that 1 John 1:7 tells us the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us of all sin, including the sin of abortion.

     TT: What objections do you hear most often from men and women when you are trying to persuade them not to proceed with an abortion? How do you answer those objections?

     JB: First, ” ‘Thou shall not judge’ and you are judging me.” I tell them I love them and am there not to judge but to warn and help them. The close second is, “This is my choice, my legal right.” I explain that God’s law prohibits the muder of babies, that just because something is legal under man’s law doesn’t make it right.

     TT: Suppose a local church wants to do more to combat abortion and minister to those who are considering going through with an abortion. Where do you start?

     JB: The first step would be to find out when they’re open. Go before the clinic opens, offering help when the women arrive. I use the “In the Womb” tracts and a flier from a local crisis pregnancy center. Every abortion mill is different logistically, so they would have to adapt. I have some friends who minister at a clinic where they have to be some distance away. God’s been good; they see fruit even under these conditions. The main thing is to let the women know you love and care about them. The rest will fall into place.

     TT: Tell us about someone to whom you have recently ministered who has been changed by the gospel.

     JB: Last week, a young lady named Jenny pulled in. I offered her some brochures. She rolled down her window, and I told her about this place and that we could help. She listened as I warned her about what God says about abortion and how He sent me to call her to trust Him. She trembled, saying, “I’m not doing this.” I called the others to pray with her. After that, she wanted to talk more, saying she’s a Christian who’d fallen into sin. Her mother is a believer, and she was afraid to tell her of her baby. I said she could have gone to other clinics in Orlando, but God sent her to this one so that she could hear Him say, “Trust Me.” She sobbed uncontrollably and said she’d woken up that morning praying that God would send someone to stop her. She and her boyfriend later went to True Life Choice and had an ultrasound. They saw their baby together, and God touched her boyfriend too.

     She called later, still nervous about her mother. I put her in touch with a dear lady in the church who agreed to go with Jenny to tell her mother. Before she could get there, Jenny called, grateful for our prayers and saying she’d told her mother and that everything went well. On Sunday, Jenny and the girl’s mother came to Saint Andrew’s to worship. Her mother thanked me for saving her grandbaby. I reminded her that only Jesus has the power to save. There is nothing like this ministry.

Click here to go to source

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

CHR. This was a revelation of Christ to your soul indeed. But tell me particularly what effect this had upon your spirit.

     HOPE. It made me see that all the world, notwithstanding all the righteousness thereof, is in a state of condemnation. It made me see that God the Father, though he be just, can justly justify the coming sinner. It made me greatly ashamed of the vileness of my former life, and confounded me with the sense of mine own ignorance; for there never came a thought into my heart before now that showed me so the beauty of Jesus Christ. It made me love a holy life, and long to do something for the honor and glory of the name of the Lord Jesus. Yea, I thought that had I now a thousand gallons of blood in my body, I could spill it all for the sake of the Lord Jesus.

     I saw then in my dream, that Hopeful looked back, and saw Ignorance, whom they had left behind, coming after. Look, said he to Christian, how far yonder youngster loitereth behind.

     CHR. Aye, aye, I see him: he careth not for our company.

     HOPE. But I trow it would not have hurt him, had he kept pace with us hitherto.

     CHR. That is true; but I warrant you he thinketh otherwise.

     HOPE. That I think he doth; but, however, let us tarry for him. (So they did.)

     Then Christian said to him, Come away, man; why do you stay so behind?

     IGNOR. I take my pleasure in walking alone, even more a great deal than in company, unless I like it the better.

     Then said Christian to Hopeful, (but softly,) Did I not tell you he cared not for our company? But, however, said he, come up, and let us talk away the time in this solitary place. Then, directing his speech to Ignorance, he said, Come, how do you do? How stands it between God and your soul now?

     IGNOR. I hope, well; for I am always full of good motions, that come into my mind to comfort me as I walk.

     CHR. What good motions? Pray tell us.

     IGNOR. Why, I think of God and heaven.

     CHR. So do the devils and damned souls.

     IGNOR. But I think of them, and desire them.

     CHR. So do many that are never like to come there. “The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing.”

Prov. 13:4 The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing:
But the soul of the diligent shall be made fat.   ESV

     IGNOR. But I think of them, and leave all for them.

     CHR. That I doubt: for to leave all is a very hard matter; yea, a harder matter than many are aware of. But why, or by what, art thou persuaded that thou hast left all for God and heaven?

     IGNOR. My heart tells me so.

     CHR. The wise man says, “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool.”

Prov. 28:26 He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool:
But whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered.   ESV

     IGNOR. That is spoken of an evil heart; but mine is a good one.

     CHR. But how dost thou prove that?

     IGNOR. It comforts me in hopes of heaven.

     CHR. That may be through its deceitfulness; for a man’s heart may minister comfort to him in the hopes of that thing for which he has yet no ground to hope.

     IGNOR. But my heart and life agree together; and therefore my hope is well-grounded.

     CHR. Who told thee that thy heart and life agree together?

     IGNOR. My heart tells me so.

     CHR. “Ask my fellow if I be a thief.” Thy heart tells thee so! Except the word of God beareth witness in this matter, other testimony is of no value.

     IGNOR. But is it not a good heart that hath good thoughts? and is not that a good life that is according to God’s commandments?

     CHR. Yes, that is a good heart that hath good thoughts, and that is a good life that is according to God’s commandments; but it is one thing indeed to have these, and another thing only to think so.

     IGNOR. Pray, what count you good thoughts, and a life according to God’s commandments?

     CHR. There are good thoughts of divers kinds; some respecting ourselves, some God, some Christ, and some other things.

     IGNOR. What be good thoughts respecting ourselves?

     CHR. Such as agree with the word of God.

     IGNOR. When do our thoughts of ourselves agree with the word of God?

     CHR. When we pass the same judgment upon ourselves which the word passes. To explain myself: the word of God saith of persons in a natural condition, “There is none righteous, there is none that doeth good.” It saith also, that, “every imagination of the heart of man is only evil, and that continually.”

Gen. 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.   ESV

Rom. 3   ESV

And again, “The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth.”

Gen. 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.   ESV

Now, then, when we think thus of ourselves, having sense thereof, then are our thoughts good ones, because according to the word of God.

     IGNOR. I will never believe that my heart is thus bad.

     CHR. Therefore thou never hadst one good thought concerning thyself in thy life. But let me go on. As the word passeth a judgment upon our hearts, so it passeth a judgment upon our ways; and when the thoughts of our hearts and ways agree with the judgment which the word giveth of both, then are both good, because agreeing thereto.

     IGNOR. Make out your meaning.

     CHR. Why, the word of God saith, that man’s ways are crooked ways, not good but perverse; it saith, they are naturally out of the good way, that they have not known it.

Psa. 125:5 As for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways,
The LORD shall lead them forth with the workers of iniquity:
But peace shall be upon Israel.   ESV

Prov. 2:15 Whose ways are crooked,
And they froward in their paths:   ESV

Rom. 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.   ESV

Now, when a man thus thinketh of his ways, I say, when he doth sensibly, and with heart-humiliation, thus think, then hath he good thoughts of his own ways, because his thoughts now agree with the judgment of the word of God.

     IGNOR. What are good thoughts concerning God?

     CHR. Even, as I have said concerning ourselves, when our thoughts of God do agree with what the word saith of him; and that is, when we think of his being and attributes as the word hath taught, of which I cannot now discourse at large. But to speak of him with reference to us: then have we right thoughts of God when we think that he knows us better than we know ourselves, and can see sin in us when and where we can see none in ourselves; when we think he knows our inmost thoughts, and that our heart, with all its depths, is always open unto his eyes; also when we think that all our righteousness stinks in his nostrils, and that therefore he cannot abide to see us stand before him in any confidence, even in all our best performances.

     IGNOR. Do you think that I am such a fool as to think that God can see no further than I; or that I would come to God in the best of my performances?

     CHR. Why, how dost thou think in this matter?

     IGNOR. Why, to be short, I think I must believe in Christ for justification.

     CHR. How! think thou must believe in Christ, when thou seest not thy need of him! Thou neither seest thy original nor actual infirmities; but hast such an opinion of thyself, and of what thou doest, as plainly renders thee to be one that did never see the necessity of Christ’s personal righteousness to justify thee before God. How, then, dost thou say, I believe in Christ?

     IGNOR. I believe well enough, for all that.

     CHR. How dost thou believe?

     IGNOR. I believe that Christ died for sinners; and that I shall be justified before God from the curse, through his gracious acceptance of my obedience to his laws. Or thus, Christ makes my duties, that are religious, acceptable to his Father by virtue of his merits, and so shall I be justified.

     CHR. Let me give an answer to this confession of thy faith.

     1. Thou believest with a fantastical faith; for this faith is nowhere described in the word.

     2. Thou believest with a false faith; because it taketh justification from the personal righteousness of Christ, and applies it to thy own.

     3. This faith maketh not Christ a justifier of thy person, but of thy actions; and of thy person for thy action’s sake, which is false.

     4. Therefore this faith is deceitful, even such as will leave thee under wrath in the day of God Almighty: for true justifying faith puts the soul, as sensible of its lost condition by the law, upon flying for refuge unto Christ’s righteousness; (which righteousness of his is not an act of grace by which he maketh, for justification, thy obedience accepted with God, but his personal obedience to the law, in doing and suffering for us what that required at our hands;) this righteousness, I say, true faith accepteth; under the skirt of which the soul being shrouded, and by it presented as spotless before God, it is accepted, and acquitted from condemnation.

     IGNOR. What! would you have us trust to what Christ in his own person has done without us? This conceit would loosen the reins of our lust, and tolerate us to live as we list: for what matter how we live, if we may be justified by Christ’s personal righteousness from all, when we believe it?

     CHR. Ignorance is thy name, and as thy name is, so art thou: even this thy answer demonstrateth what I say. Ignorant thou art of what justifying righteousness is, and as ignorant how to secure thy soul, through the faith of it, from the heavy wrath of God. Yea, thou also art ignorant of the true effects of saving faith in this righteousness of Christ, which is to bow and win over the heart to God in Christ, to love his name, his word, ways, and people, and not as thou ignorantly imaginest.

     HOPE. Ask him if ever he had Christ revealed to him from heaven.

     IGNOR. What! you are a man for revelations! I do believe, that what both you and all the rest of you say about that matter, is but the fruit of distracted brains.

     HOPE. Why, man, Christ is so hid in God from the natural apprehensions of the flesh, that he cannot by any man be savingly known, unless God the Father reveals him to him.

     IGNOR. That is your faith, but not mine, yet mine, I doubt not, is as good as yours, though I have not in my head so many whimsies as you.

     CHR. Give me leave to put in a word. You ought not so slightly to speak of this matter: for this I will boldly affirm, even as my good companion hath done, that no man can know Jesus Christ but by the revelation of the Father: yea, and faith too, by which the soul layeth hold upon Christ, (if it be right,) must be wrought by the exceeding greatness of his mighty power,

Matt. 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.   ESV

1 Cor. 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.   ESV

Eph. 1:17–19 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,   ESV

the working of which faith, I perceive, poor Ignorance, thou art ignorant of. Be awakened, then, see thine own wretchedness, and fly to the Lord Jesus; and by his righteousness, which is the righteousness of God, (for he himself is God,) thou shalt be delivered from condemnation.

     IGNOR.You go so fast I cannot keep pace with you; do you go on before: I must stay a while behind.

     Then they said,

“Well, Ignorance, wilt thou yet foolish be,
To slight good counsel, ten times given thee?
And if thou yet refuse it, thou shalt know,
Ere long, the evil of thy doing so.
Remember, man, in time: stoop, do not fear:
Good counsel, taken well, saves; therefore hear.
But if thou yet shalt slight it, thou wilt be
The loser, Ignorance, I’ll warrant thee.”

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

The Continual Burnt Offering

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

February 15

Isaiah 55:3  Incline your ear, and come to me;
hear, that your soul may live;
and I will make with you an everlasting covenant,
my steadfast, sure love for David.

Thou Holy One of God!
The Father rests in Thee;
And in the savor of that blood
That speaks to Him for me,
The curse is gone—through Thee I’m blest,
God rests in Thee—in Thee I rest.

The slave of sin and fear,
Thy truth my bondage broke;
My willing spirit loves to bear
Thy light and easy yoke;
The love that fills my grateful breast,
Makes duty joy, and labor rest.

Soon the bright, glorious day,
The rest of God shall come!
Sorrow and sin shall pass away,
And I shall reach my home!
Then, of the promised land possessed,
My soul shall know eternal rest!
--- J. G. Deck

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     CHAPTER 15.

THREE THINGS BRIEFLY TO BE REGARDED IN CHRIST--VIZ. HIS OFFICES OF PROPHET, KING, AND PRIEST.

The principal parts of this chapter are--I. Of the Prophetical Office of Christ, its dignity and use, sec. 1, 2. II. The nature of the Kingly power of Christ, and the advantage we derive from it, sec. 3-5. III. Of the Priesthood of Christ, and the efficacy of it, sec. 6.

Sections.

1. Among heretics and false Christians, Christ is found in name only; but by those who are truly and effectually called of God, he is acknowledged as a Prophet, King, and Priest. In regard to the Prophetical Office, the Redeemer of the Church is the same from whom believers under the Law hoped for the full light of understanding.

2. The unction of Christ, though it has respect chiefly to the Kingly Office, refers also to the Prophetical and Priestly Offices. The dignity, necessity, and use of this unction.

3. From the spirituality of Christ's kingdom its eternity is inferred. This twofold, referring both to the whole body of the Church, and to its individual members.

4. Benefits from the spiritual kingdom of Christ. 1. It raises us to eternal life. 2. It enriches us with all things necessary to salvation. 3. It makes us invincible by spiritual foes. 4. It animates us to patient endurance. 5. It inspires confidence and triumph. 6. It supplies fortitude and love.

5. The unction of our Redeemer heavenly. Symbol of this unction. A passage in the apostle reconciled with others previously quoted, to prove the eternal kingdom of Christ.

6. What necessary to obtain the benefit of Christ's Priesthood. We must set out with the death of Christ. From it follows, 1. His intercession for us. 2. Confidence in prayer. 3. Peace of conscience. 4. Through Christ, Christians themselves become priests. Grievous sin of the Papists in pretending to sacrifice Christ.

1. Though heretics pretend the name of Christ, truly does Augustine affirm (Enchir. ad Laurent. cap. 5), that the foundation is not common to them with the godly, but belongs exclusively to the Church: for if those things which pertain to Christ be diligently considered, it will be found that Christ is with them in name only, not in reality. Thus in the present day, though the Papists have the words, Son of God, Redeemer of the world, sounding in their mouths, yet, because contented with an empty name, they deprive him of his virtue and dignity; what Paul says of "not holding the head," is truly applicable to them (Col. 2:19). Therefore, that faith may find in Christ a solid ground of salvation, and so rest in him, we must set out with this principle, that the office which he received from the Father consists of three parts. For he was appointed both Prophet, King, and Priest; though little were gained by holding the names unaccompanied by a knowledge of the end and use. These too are spoken of in the Papacy, but frigidly, and with no great benefit, the full meaning comprehended under each title not being understood. We formerly observed, that though God, by supplying an uninterrupted succession of prophets, never left his people destitute of useful doctrine, such as might suffice for salvation; yet the minds of believers were always impressed with the conviction that the full light of understanding was to be expected only on the advent of the Messiah. This expectation, accordingly, had reached even the Samaritans, to whom the true religion had never been made known. This is plain from the expression of the woman, "I know that Messiah cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things," (John 4:25). Nor was this a mere random presumption which had entered the minds of the Jews. They believed what sure oracles had taught them. One of the most remarkable passages is that of Isaiah, "Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people," (Is. 55:4); that is, in the same way in which he had previously in another place styled him "Wonderful, Counsellor," (Is. 9:6). [253] For this reason, the apostle commending the perfection of gospel doctrine, first says that "God, at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the prophets," and then adds, that he "has in these last days spoken unto us by his Son," (Heb. 1:1, 2). But as the common office of the prophets was to hold the Church in suspense, and at the same time support it until the advent of the Mediator; we read, that the faithful, during the dispersion, complained that they were deprived of that ordinary privilege. "We see not our signs: there is no more any prophet, neither is there among us any that knoweth how long," (Ps. 74:9). But when Christ was now not far distant, a period was assigned to Daniel "to seal up the vision and prophecy," (Daniel 9:24), not only that the authority of the prediction there spoken of might be established, but that believers might, for a time, patiently submit to the want of the prophets, the fulfilment and completion of all the prophecies being at hand.

2. Moreover, it is to be observed, that the name Christ refers to those three offices: for we know that under the law, prophets as well as priests and kings were anointed with holy oil. Whence, also, the celebrated name of Messiah was given to the promised Mediator. But although I admit (as, indeed, I have elsewhere shown) that he was so called from a view to the nature of the kingly office, still the prophetical and sacerdotal unctions have their proper place, and must not be overlooked. The former is expressly mentioned by Isaiah in these words: "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me: because the Lord has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he has sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captive, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord," (Is. 60:1, 2). We see that he was anointed by the Spirit to be a herald and witness of his Father's grace, and not in the usual way; for he is distinguished from other teachers who had a similar office. And here, again, it is to be observed, that the unction which he received, in order to perform the office of teacher, was not for himself, but for his whole body, that a corresponding efficacy of the Spirit might always accompany the preaching of the Gospel. This, however, remains certain, that by the perfection of doctrine which he brought, an end was put to all the prophecies, so that those who, not contented with the Gospel, annex somewhat extraneous to it, derogate from its authority. The voice which thundered from heaven, "This is my beloved Son, hear him" gave him a special privilege above all other teachers. Then from him, as head, this unction is diffused through the members, as Joel has foretold, "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions," (Joel 2:28). Paul's expressions, that he was "made unto us wisdom," (1 Cor. 1:30), and elsewhere, that in him "are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," (Col. 2:3), have a somewhat different meaning, namely, that out of him there is nothing worth knowing, and that those who, by faith, apprehend his true character, possess the boundless immensity of heavenly blessings. For which reason, he elsewhere says, "I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified," (1 Cor. 2:2). And most justly: for it is unlawful to go beyond the simplicity of the Gospel. The purpose of this prophetical dignity in Christ is to teach us, that in the doctrine which he delivered is substantially included a wisdom which is perfect in all its parts.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion