Posted on 01/05/2010 8:25:32 AM PST by Alex Murphy
I wasn't born and raised in the Reformed church. In other words, I am a Reformed immigrant. Like many people in the Reformed church today, I migrated out of broad based evangelicalism and non-denominationalism. Many of my friends, both ministers and laypeople, have had similar immigration experiences.
Recently, at the funeral of my father-in-law, I had the opportunity to get reacquainted with many of my Reformed immigrant friends. Much to my surprise, I found myself having a very similar conversation with this group. They shared with me that they felt like something was missing in their Reformed experience. While they were all satisfied with the doctrine, worship and government of the church they spoke of a missing intangible element. They had trouble articulating the exact nature of this missing element. I suggested a variety of terms to give it a name and the one that seemed to come closest was "joy." These immigrants perceived the Reformed church to be suffering from a deficiency of spiritual joy.
These conversations got me thinking. I did my own assessment of my Reformed experience and, I must admit, I had to agree that "joyful" was not one of the first adjectives that came to my mind to describe it. Then I began to contemplate why the Reformed church seems to be lacking in the joy department. My contemplation yielded two main reasons.
The Reasons
First, I think the Reformed church is joyfully deficient because of the immigration wave of which I am part. Over the past twenty years the Reformed church, particularly through the efforts of men like R.C. Sproul, has been very successful in drawing people out of evangelicalism and assimilating them into the ranks of the Reformed. What attracted these immigrants were the things that they perceived as woefully deficient in evangelicalism. These included things such as irreverent worship, imprecise doctrine and sloppy to non-existent church government. In other words, most of the immigrants to the Reformed world made their migration because they were dissatisfied with evangelicalism. They were evangelical malcontents. This means that many people in the Reformed church today fought their way into it. They entered into the Reformed church with strong convictions and bearing the bruises of their evangelical exodus. This type of soil is not naturally enriched with joy. This type of soil requires joy to be cultivated and we've not been doing a great job at it.
Second, I think we are joyfully deficient in the Reformed church because we are perpetually circling the theological wagons. The Reformed church seems continually occupied with the task of theological preservation, a struggle that resembles Tolkien's battle at Helm's Deep. We are simply forever consumed with survival and we don't have time to focus on neglected, but seemingly less vital, topics like joy. For example, when it comes to the topic of worship we don't spend our time pontificating on the joy of worship, but rather we exhaust ourselves, appropriately so, with topics like the regulative principle. When it comes to the topic of justification, we expend our resources, again appropriately so, in defending its forensic nature rather than on the joy which flows from it. The end result is often joyfully deficient theological precision.
The Remedy
So how do we remedy this deficiency of joy in our ranks? We do what the Reformed have always done-we turn to God's holy Word. There is no doubt that the Scripture emphasizes joy in the life of the believer. This is not the namby-pamby joy of the world, but real spiritual joy that can only be experienced by those who are in Christ. The great Dutch Puritan, Wilhelmus a Brakel, defined this spiritual joy as follows:
This spiritual joy consists in a delightful motion of the soul, generated by the Holy Spirit in the heart of believers, whereby He convinces them of the felicity of their state, causes them to enjoy the benefits of the covenant of grace, and assures them of their future felicity.
Note that Brakel's definition directly links this joy to the "benefits of the covenant of grace." Exposure to God's covenant Word and covenant deeds should yield joy in God's people.
This is exactly what happened in the days of Nehemiah.
In Nehemiah 8 we are given the privilege of witnessing an ancient worship service which was celebrated after the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt. The people begged for God's Word and they listened to it attentively. The congregation of God's people felt the piercing power of his Word and they also felt the weight of their sins. This led them to mourn and grieve.
But then something quite extraordinary happened, Nehemiah, Ezra and the Levites commanded the people to stop their mourning. Nehemiah told them why they must do this, "Do not grieve, for the joy of the LORD is your strength" (Nehemiah 8:10, emphasis mine). With these words the worship service ended and the Scripture records what the congregation did next, "Then all the people went away to eat and drink, to send portions of food and to celebrate with great joy, because they now understood the words that had been made known to them" (Nehemiah 8:12, emphasis mine).
This account from Nehemiah demonstrates that spiritual joy flows from a proper understanding of God's covenant Word. But this text also teaches us that the ministry has an important role to play in encouraging that joy among God's people. When ministers read and preach God's holy Word, particularly God's law, we must always speak to God's people like Nehemiah. We must say to them "Do not grieve, for the joy of the LORD is your strength" (Nehemiah 8:10). We must remind them of the source of their joy.
In the Reformed church we need to do a better job of emphasizing this spiritual joy in our own lives, in our congregations and in our pulpits. We must remind our people that, just like our righteousness, spiritual joy is not something we can create or produce. It is an alien joy. It comes from our communion with God and it is only made possible through the propitiation of Jesus Christ. We must remind God's people that it is God who sovereignly bestows this gift upon his children. We must tell them that this joy is so powerful that it can be experienced even during our trials (James 1:2) and at all times (Philippians 4:4). We must commit ourselves to proclaiming to God's people the "benefits of the covenant of grace." This is exactly what I plan to do in 2010. I plan on emphasizing this Reformed joy in my preaching in 2010. I hope you will consider joining me in reminding God's people that the joy of the Lord is their strength!
Anthony T. Selvaggio is presently serving as a Teaching Elder in the Rochester Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA), Rochester, NY. His published work includes The Prophets Speak of Him: Encountering Jesus in the Minor Prophets, (Evangelical Press, 2006), What the Bible Teaches About Marriage (Evangelical Press, 2007), A Proverbs Driven Life (Shepherd Press, 2008) and 24/7 Christian: Expository Thoughts on James (Evangelical Press, 2008). He also edited and contributed to The Faith Once Delivered (P & R Publishing, 2007).
Small problem...the gender of Peter is masculine and the gender of the "rock" upon which Jesus will build His church is feminine. He is referring to something other than Peter.
Your post is an incisive proof of free will: surely an all-powerful God would have made you say something intelligent....
So if the church is built on Christ, Christ must have been a girl..... mmmmkay..... Either that, or the church was built on the foundation of an actual girl.... Mary, perhaps....
It would seem that your argument is built on sand rather than rock.
This is the kind of response expected by thoughtful Catholics. It would seem the Catholic claims has been built upon Rome's errors for many years. They should repent, if possible.
I read that passage as the rock the Church is built upon is found in Mat 16:16—The confession that Jesus is the Christ.
The problem with that reading being that Jesus renames him from Simon to Peter ("the rock") in response to that confession.
The Church is often referred to as the "bride of Christ" -- it's a grafting of one to another. Christ (as his parables often state) is the groom... which leaves us humans to form "the Church." And Jesus named Peter as the first human leader.
er... you do understand that I did nothing more than take your comment to its immediate logical conclusion? If you're going to talk about "errors," you might want to start closer to home.
If the available evidence doesn’t clearly define what “God” is, then why would there be a problem with however someone tried to fill in the gaps? By judging those attempts to be skewed, doesn’t that mean that you believe there is available evidence? Otherwise, how would you know it is skewed?
Why do you say we have a tendency to place ourselves in opposition to God, if the evidence isn’t clearly there? How do you know the placement even is in opposition?
Sorry, I meant relative, not relevant.
Actually Martin Luthers text on "Bondage of the Will" that He did believe in Free will, but that it was limited. As a reformed person, I believe Man has free will between Sin and Iniquity and that Man does Not do Good on his own. Christ said "Apart from me you can do Nothing" (John). So for those apart from Christ, they are incapable of doing anything Good to please God, since they do not do it by Faith. The Apostle Paul echos this in saying "Anything apart from Faith is Sin" (Romans). Thus All mankind is shut up in sin just as the Apostle Paul said (Romans)
Psalm 14, Psalm 53 and Romans 3 says that "No one Seeks for God" - that the default nature of mankind is Not to Seek God. Therefore something has to happen for someone to have desire to Seek him. That answer is found in John chapter 6, where Christ says "No one comes unto me except the Father draws him".
I argue with you that Mankind has Free will but will not by default choose to seek God unto Salvation with it. But like Adam and Eve will run away from the things of God and thinking about Him. God made Salvation Open upon the cross, but Mankind rejected it "He came unto his own and His own received Him not".
Thus God had to provide Salvation with His own arm and draw Men "From every Tribe and Tongue", the Elect of His own choosing for Mankind was Dead in Trespasses and Sin and had no value in themselves or in what they would do.
The amazing thing is that God is still in the business of resurrecting Hearts and Minds so that they can hold faith and is still irresistibly drawing men and women to Himself into a relationship of Love. It is He alone that deserves praise for there was nothing in ourselves of that which we would do "that no one should boast".
Ask yourself "Who Gets the Glory" with the Doctrine of Free Will? Is it Man who Chooses (Man gets the Glory), or is it God who Sovereignty Elects and draws?
Gotta go ... If I have time later, I’ll try to respond to your questions (which I know are intended to be leading, but still...).
Thanks. What would they be leading to?
So what you’re saying is, if a person reads Romans 9, where Free Will (at least in its Greek form) gets pretty well trashed by Paul, and they conclude that it was necessary for God to contravene human will via divine election if salvation was to happen at all, then they are worshippers of some deity other than the Almighty Father of Jesus Christ? Because they believed his Apostle’s words at face value?
Because if that’s what you’re saying, then you are making a theologically precise conception of God a prerequisite to salvation, and I would think that was big news, because your conception relies more on Greek philosophy than Scripture. So then maybe the Greeks were the true venue of divine revelation?
But if, as Jesus says, salvation is of the Jews, then the decidedly Greek conception of a completely indeterminate freedom of human will should at least be questioned by those who wish to subject themselves to divine revelation. What does Scripture say?
Daniel 4:35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, “What have You done?”
No one can restrain his hand, except via the exercise of Free Will Almighty, of course, which can turn back the desires of God as if they were nothing, according to you.
Perhaps you think, John said “whosoever will, may come,” and any knowledgeable Calvinist will agree with you wholeheartedly. Are you surprised? Many who think they understand Calvinism have only ever been shown the caricature and do not understand the reality. The question is never whether people who repent and believe will be saved. We have His word that they will.
The question is one of reflection: Why did this person believe, and another not. They are both sinners, by which we mean they both have a will bent to sin. Now if their will is dead to righteousness, if they do not have the gift of faith, how can they believe? Belief is the first act of faith. Belief is the anti-sin. Without faith there cannot be belief.
And I do not mean belief as the intellectual assent James speaks of, which falls short of salvation. But I mean the Abrahamic belief that takes God at his word and acts accordingly, which God accounts as righteousness. That is faith in action, and it is the gift of God. Without it we lie as dead as a doornail in the tomb of our sin. Without the call of God, there would be for us no stirring to life, no rhythm of breathe, no sitting up and taking nourishment. As with Lazarus, we are as unfree as we can possibly be, until His voice shatters the night of our death and floods our darkened souls with His light. The new birth, at least as Jesus described it, is not so much a cooperative process as the gift of new life where none was before, and where none was sought. As Paul says, none are righteous, and none seek God. Romans 3:11.
Therefore, while you may prefer the Greek model of an arbitrary freedom of human will, I will set my course to follow Scripture. If you think that results in the worship of a false god, I would only ask you to provide Scripture references which prove your case, namely, that a disagreement among otherwise faithful believers about what God did or didn’t do before any of them were born is sufficient grounds to consider them unbelievers in the true God. In my Bible, the test for such disavowals of fellowship is much stricter. Someone, for example, who disputes that Jesus is the one and only Savior, or that he rose from the dead, or that there is a God of righteousness whose law has been broken and with whom we must be reconciled if we are to be saved. Cutting people out of the faith on grounds not specified in Scripture is easy to do, and we have been doing it to each other for centuries, but that doesn’t make it right.
I believe Man has free will between Sin and Iniquity...
Iniquity is sin, isn't it?
Therefore something has to happen for someone to have desire to Seek him. That answer is found in John chapter 6, where Christ says "No one comes unto me except the Father draws him".
But Titus also points out that all have the grace to come to God. Thus we may all make the choice to approach Him.
Don't forget that Christ Himself taught that Man may approach God in his sinful state with the story of the Prodigal Son. Luke 15 spells that out pretty clearly.
Ask yourself "Who Gets the Glory" with the Doctrine of Free Will? Is it Man who Chooses (Man gets the Glory), or is it God who Sovereignty Elects and draws?
I say that God gets all the glory there--able to convince free wills and hardened hearts not to follow the easy path, the path of all our desires?
Ask yourself this--Does God actually get any glory at all if He must direct us like puppets to love Him? What is love, if it doesn't come freely, of our own decision?
Um, please see post 53. I have responded. Awaiting your response.
I might hold a slightly different perspective. If I understand you correctly (and I may not), you are of the impression that it is just a matter taste. One can believe what the men of the Catholic Church say about the Bible OR one can believe what these other men say the Bible is about.
Did I get that right, or are you driving at something else?
Without referring to other Scriptures and comparing to what other passages teach, then yes, I can understand where that viewpoint would come from.
All Scripture is useful for teaching--you can't just pick and choose which passages you care to believe in. What if this same mythical person just reads Titus 4:11? All men are now acceptable to God. Again, it needs to be balanced against other Scripture to see what is really being said, as Scripture does not contradict itself.
Calvinists have said in the past that "dead men can do nothing, so God must do everything." Yet Christ Himself teaches the opposite. As the Son approached his Father's house, his Father said "My son was dead--now he's alive!" (paraphrasing, of course). Yet the Father did not start him on the road to return. The son did that all by himself.
John said “whosoever will, may come,” and any knowledgeable Calvinist will agree with you wholeheartedly. Are you surprised?
No...
The question is one of reflection: Why did this person believe, and another not.
...because of this statement. Calvinists have a hard time understanding why people choose their own sin over the salvation of Christ. So they make up all this theology about the lack of free will and it's not the fault of the sinner to not choose Christ.
And I do not mean belief as the intellectual assent James speaks of, which falls short of salvation.
Correct. That is only one-third of the total required. Mind, heart, soul.
As Paul says, none are righteous, and none seek God. Romans 3:11.
Correct, under the law, none of us are righteous.
However, under grace, we may become righteousness. His Righteousness. And Titus 4:11 allows that. And Christ's teachings show that it is possible for us to approach God while still a sinner--of our own will.
Very Good, that is correct. But Titus also points out that all have the grace to come to God. Thus we may all make the choice to approach Him.
The Door is Open, but Mankind, being Dead in Trespasses and Sin, Spiritually Deaf, Dumb and Blind, with the Nature of the Old Man, will not. It is a matter of the will, the will of Mankind says "Not interested, there is no God (but Me)".
Look at what the Apostle John said "children born not of natural descent nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." (John 1:13). John is asserting that the new birth is not a matter of a human decision, but God's doing. You do not birth yourself.
Thus be assured, that if you present scriptures and get any kind of realistic question, God may have been working in that person and you should present the Gospel, the Good News that the Lord Jesus Christ has paid the penalty of Sin, for folks like us, and set us Free to live in Him.
God gets all the Glory, for it is He that Loved folks like us, when we were "Yet, dead in Trespasses and Sin". God was active while you were dead. God gave you a new heart, and a new mind that could hold faith and gave you "ears to hear", resulting in a heart convicted of sin and ready to confess belief upon the Saviors Work, that confession showing that Salvation is Present.
Most people say "I confessed God and he gave me a new heart and a new mind". But the truth is as Jeremiah 31:33 said "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people." It is God who Writes, Not Man.
Yes, you did. I appreciate that. I was writing that post while waiting for some work things here to compile, etc. It had been a while since I had refreshed the page.
Sorry, but I find that to be unbiblical. Luke 15 pretty well says otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.