From "IX Marks: Church Matters"

A help on church leadership and congregationalism. Go here...

John Piper on Returning to Doctrinally Focused Local Church Planting

This quote comes from his 2002 book "Counted Righteous in Christ: Should We Abandon the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness?" Here (pg. 33-34) he considers the centrality of doctrine in local church planting in contrast with the contemporary marketing schemes of many plants. He sets the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ as the doctrinal cornerstone of fervently biblical church planting -

"If I want to see churches planted out from our church and others, why invest so much time and energy in defending and explaining the historic Protestant vision of justification as the imputation of Christ's righteousness? I have answered this already but will say again, I think we have enough churches being planted by means of music, drama, creative scheduling, sprightly narrative, and marketing savvy. And there are too few that are God-centered, truth-treasuring, Bible-saturated, Christ-exalting, cross-focused, Spirit-dependent, prayer-soaked, soul-winning, justice-pursuing congregations with a wartime mindset ready to lay down their lives for the salvation of the nations and the neighborhoods. There is a blood-earnest joy that sustains a church like this, and it comes only by embracing Christ-crucified as our righteousness."

Daniel Akin on "Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility"

This is an edifying article on Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility from the president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. In it he addresses how should Southern Baptists respond to the issue of Calvinism as the subtitle indicates. Read it here...

A few thoughts...

1. As is well known, Calvin did not codify the five points of Calvinism. Akin is absolutely right in pointing this out. They were codified by his closest associates, students, and colleagues who lived in that historical setting - as a response to the disciples of Arminius at the Synod of Dort.

2. In reading some of Calvin's commentary on key passages where the systematized version of Calvinism is at stake, I would argue that Calvin was in fact a Calvinist. Regardless, Calvin was not the first Calvinist, nor is he the first to identify in fetal form the "doctrines of grace". Calvin was fond doctrinally of Augustine.

3. Calvin had no historical reason for codifying or expounding exhaustively the doctrines of grace and, hence, he did not attend to them extensively in his writing. He dealt more with buffeting the Church against the heresies of the papacy, than writing treatises on definite atonement, for example. This, in part, may explain the lack of written evidence concerning Calvin's Calvinism.

4. But we would also be wise to give attention to the codifying of his thought by those who were closest to him, so long as it is in accord with the doctrine of Christ and, thus, biblically balanced as Akin ably states.

5. Beyond these points, I find Akin's assessment of the "five points" well and good, and his pastoral and practical considerations concerning "biblical balance" necessary, edifying, and encouraging. In particular, I wholeheartedly agree with and admire his admonition towards a Godwardness (Point 1), Christ-centeredness, Biblicist position (Point 7), and, as somewhat of an overflow of these things, a fiery evangelical heart and prowess for sinners in this world.

6. I also "Amen!" his call to address these issues with discernment in teaching our congregations. I long to implement a Christian learning/ training center in the mainstream ministry of any church that God would providentially lead me towards. He gets a "Hallelujah!" for making mention of it in the context of youth ministry in order to prepare them for the secular bombardment that awaits most of them. My agreement in these areas is most especially an agreement with God's Word and the injunction to equip the saints for the work of ministry.

7. Lastly, to quote Akin, "Is there a place for differing positions on the issues of election, the extent of the atonement and calling, as well as how we do missions, evangelism, and give the invitation? I am convinced that the answer is yes. Further, I believe we will be the better for it theologically and practically as we engage each other in respectful and serious conversation." I concure with great expectation of further discussion.

8. And in keeping with my nature, I'll add something else after I've written, "Lastly...": Read Spurgeon's quote! In the words of Lloyd off of "Dumb and Dumber" - "It's a good one!" And may God be glorified in Jesus Christ - the J. C.!

Excerpt From "A Narrative of Surprising Conversions," by Jonathan Edwards

This excerpt comes from Edwards treatise on "A Narrative of Surprising Conversions" in "Jonathan Edwards on Revival," pages 30-31. As he recounts the outpouring of the mercy and grace of God in the multiplicity of conversions in that day, he admonishes other ministers to preach and counsel with doctrines that in the contemporary methodology of preaching and counseling might seem contrary, self-defeating, and, at best, paradoxical, but to Edwards bore the pastorally enjoyable fruit of authenticity of conversion. I have interposed breaks in this lengthy paragraph and the parenthesis belong to me as a means of explanation, as well as any italics. He writes:

"Whatever minister has a like occasion to deal with souls, in a flock under such circumstances, as this was in the last year, I cannot but think he will soon find himself under a necessity, greatly to insist upon it with them, that God is under no manner of obligation to show mercy to any natural man, whose heart is not turned to God: and that a man can challenge nothing either in absolute justice, or by free promise, from any thing he does before he has believed on Jesus Christ, or has true repentance begun in him. (This being the case) It appears to me, that if I had taught those who came to me under trouble any other doctrine (than the absolute sovereignty of God in life, death, and salvation, etc.), I should have taken a direct course utterly to undo them (from what the Spirit of God was doing in them, that is, extending to them the grace of fear and spiritual examination leading to conversion. In other words, he did not pamper their presumptions that they were saved, and therefore he continues...) I should have directly crossed what was plainly the drift of the Spirit of God in his influences upon them; for if they had believed what I said, it would either have promoted self-flattery and carelessness, and so put an end to their awakenings (see parenthesis above); or cherished and established their contention and stife with God, concerning his dealings with them and others, and blocked up their way to that humiliation before the Sovereign Disposer of life and death, whereby God is wont to prepare them for his consolations.

And yet those who have been under awakenings have oftentimes plainly stood in need of being encouraged, by being told of the infinite and all-sufficient mercy of God in Christ; and (also being told) that it is God's manner to succeed diligence, and to bless his own means, that so awakenings and encouragements, fear and hope, may be duly mixed and proportioned to preserve their minds in a just medium (middle place) between the two extremes of self-flattery and despondence, both which tend to slackness and negligence, and in the end to (a false sense of)security.

I think I have found that no discourses have been more remarkably blessed, than those in which the doctrine of God's absolute sovereignty with regard to the salvation of sinners, and his just liberty with regard to answering the prayers, or succeeding the pains, of natural men, continuing such, have been insisted on. I never found so much immediate saving fruit, in any measure, of any discourses I have offered to my congregation, as some from these words, Rom. iii. 19. 'That every mouth may be stopped'; endeavoring to show from thence (that text), that it would be just with God for ever to reject and cast off mere natural men."

Treasuring Christ in the Midst of Trials: Philippians 3:1-4:1

Over the past few weeks God has brought me to Philippians 3:1-4:1. Reading it as an entire unit, seeing its focus, and knowing what Paul meant to attend to in it has been extremely pleasant to my own soul. I thought in this blog that I would give a quick glance at this church's circumstances, and the matter that Paul sets before them to strengthen them in the midst of them.

In this letter, one thing becomes apparent: anyone who desires to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution (alright, so that is in 2 Timothy 3:12) - but this is the standard of the Philippian church. They are not perfect as is evident by Paul's prayer for their sanctification and spiritual progression (1:9-11) and chapter 4. But they are not confronted by the apostle concerning anything close to those problems in Corinth, Colossae, Galatia, etc. They have partnered in the Gospel of Christ, praying, giving, and testifying to the grace of God. They herald Christ as Lord as opposed to Caesar. Because of these things, they have enemies, or opponents (1:28), in the face of whom they are not to tremble but be emboldened. They were a persecuted church precisely because they desired to advance the Gospel at all costs.

In chapter 3, Paul puts a face on their opponents: Judaizers (Jewish Christians who asserted that one had to be circumcised and obey the law of Moses plus believe in Christ to be saved; cf. Acts 15:1, 5), and pleasure-seekers or sensualists (3:17-19). And these two groups remain stumbling blocks to this day - the Judaizers are those divisive legalists in your church who would in any way maintain that Christ is deficient to save; the sensualists are those who belong to the world, or are perhaps those who sit amongst you in corporate worship but beyond the church worlds perceive grace as a license to sin.

Paul means to help them endure suffering - notice, he does not tell them to avoid suffering! He has already mentioned it as a grace of God (1:29) and will soon mention it as a worthy consequence of knowing Jesus Christ (3:7-11). He does not mean for them to aim for temporal comfort, but to give them sustenance that will enable them to endure suffering with joy. And what does he recommend to them? The supremacy of Jesus Christ in all things and above all things! This, he says, rightly considered and taken unto sanctification will help you to live and suffer and die - in a manner worthy of the Gospel of Christ (1:27). Hence the title that I've given to this chapter: Treasuring Christ in the Midst of Trials.

I've broken it down into 5 divisions concentrated on the supremacy of Christ and the meditations that come from it that have served to make my soul exceedingly glad. I offer them to you in hopes of the same outcome -

1. The Supremacy of Christ's Gospel as a meditation on Christ's absolute sufficiency in salvation (3:2-7).

2. The Supremacy of Knowing Christ as a meditation on the gift of faith and Christ's perfect righteousness imputed on that basis - and of the supremacy of this satisfying knowledge that enables us to endure the loss of all worldly things (3:2-9).

3. The Supremacy of Christ's Person and Work as a meditation on counting all things as loss in this material world that we may become less hindered and more intimate in knowing Him - whom by grace we already know, i.e., the sanctifying power of treasuring Christ (3:2-11).

4. The Supremacy of Pursuing Christ Above All Else as a meditation of the ultimate goal of the Christian life and the freeing power inherent in it that enables us to be emboldened with the Gospel and perseverant in persecution (3:2-16).

5. The Supremacy of Christ's Triumphant Power as a meditation upon the supremacy of Christ's sovereign kingdom and end as the source of triumphant living in the midst of trials (3:2-4:1).

With these divisions, I would leave you with what has been an encouraging set of brackets around this incredible text: Chapter 3:1 in conjunction with 4:1 provide an awesome tandem of commands to introduce and close Paul's words. "Finally, my brothers, rejoice in the Lord ," introduces this text and the text explains the command so well - why should we rejoice in the Lord in the midst of suffering? Because Jesus Christ is sovereignly and savingly preeminent in and over all things, strengthening His Church to endure with triumphant joy the experiential pain that comes at the hands of men for the sake of the Gospel. And having expounded the supremacy of Christ and how it prepares us to live and suffer and die well, he concludes with another command of encouragement - "Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved." "Rejoice" and "stand firm in the Lord" offer us a solid battle cry in view of the supremacy of Jesus Christ.

I hope these provide you with some edifying thoughts. If so, feel free to comment as always.

From the "New Attitude Blog" ->

Al Mohler on Personal Bible Reading.

I found it light and encouraging; a challenge to examine my daily reading and my motives. You can click on the New Attitude Blog in the right hand column under "Blogs", or click here.

1 John 2:2: Thoughts on Definite Atonement

Here is another offering of a text typically used by those who defend an indefinite atonement. Once more, I am not trying to stir a theological boiler, but rather engage in edifying discussion. After all, in my estimation, what can be more edifying than the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ - and let us type or read that lightly, - that Jesus is our (the sinners) Lord and Savior! His person and work are our exclusive glory and boast (Philippians 3:1-11).

The atonement itself is the crisis of Christ central to the ministry of God's Church. It ought not to be a doctrine of divide, but of great rejoicing. And so I am grateful for the unity found in recent debates between Calvinists and Arminians. Every biblical Christian, by that title, must hold that Christ's cross-work was and is and will always be a perfectly appeasing, penal, substitutionary sacrifice, that is sufficient for all of the sins of the entire history of mankind, in the sight of the Father in heaven. It was rendered in perfect humble obedience to the Father and is the basis from which Christ was super-exalted in His resurrection, ascension, and coronation to the right hand of Power, far above the heavens. And, the eschatalogical judgment will thus be a moral one based upon the sinless righteousness of God offered in Christ that depends on faith in Him - every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Yahweh (Lord) to the glory of God the Father! Oh, the rivers that flow from the service of Jesus Christ, and that to God and for sinners like me and you.

But how is this atonement applied? We looked briefly at 2 Peter 2:1 in order to deal with the term "bought" there and its meaning in relation to the "deniers". Today, I'd like to offer a few thoughts on 1 John 2:2, - "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

1. This verse must be read with the entirety of John's gospel. In his gospel, we find several statements which speak of an indefinite view of the atonement at face value (1:29; 3:16; 12:32, etc.); but we also find several which speak of a definitive view of the atonement (3:16?; 6:36-40 cf. 6:44, 65; 10:3, 11; 17:2, etc.). But there is not much reference to sin or of repentance (see Nathaniel, Nicodemus, the blind man healed, etc.) - John's treatment of Christ's dealing with them is quiet concerning their sin, although, the biblical witness verifies what we hold, namely, that they were in fact sinners, and needed to be reconciled to God. John's gospel is quite silent and generic concerning the atonement landscape and its inherent sacrificial language. But when it is mentioned, it is mentioned broadly, to the world - but often restricted to those who believe out of the world. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life," and thus, God loved the world - the gift of His Son was for the world in many ways - but it is quickly narrowed by the continuation of "whoever believes" - that it is those who believe in this Gift out of the world who will not perish but have eternal life. And not to be one-sided, faith is absolutely something that sinners must do. The work of God is for us to believe in the one whom He has sent (John 6:29). If they don't do it, they will perish. They just won't do it without God enabling them to do it. Faith is God's gift in accordance with His will (Ephesians 1; 2:8).

2. I make that long point to show that when one arrives at 1 John they survey the scene from within the church and not the greater part of the ancient world. He writes, "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin," 2:1. He then means to exhort us to holiness and solemn gratitude by the mention of Christ our Advocate with the Father - a picture of Christ's intercessory conquest on behalf of the Church. And then we come to our verse:

"He is the propitiation for our sins..."

That is, Christ is the propitiation (and expiation) for the sins of the church in John's address, as well as, universally. By His sacrifice, Jesus both reconciled sinners to God and satisfied God's holy anger against our sin. Food for thought: did Jesus do this for every sinner in the history of the world? It puzzles me greatly! How can we say that He has actually done this for every sinner - reconciled them to God and given them the status of a child before His majesty in heaven? We can't! If we continue in this interpretive path, then we either say that Christ actually did this for every sinner but that His atonement wasn't powerful enough to sway the wills of men; or we recant such actuality, and settle for this - that Christ's sacrifice didn't actually do this for the whole world, but only possibly (He made this possible for the whole world); but if we hold to the actuality of His sacrifice, then what do we make of those who die in their unbelief, whom Christ actually died for, reconciled to God and gave a favorable status with the Father by appeasing His wrath against them? What sin will they be condemned for? This leaves us in a great quandry - one that I am unwilling to stay in with better interpretations and God-honoring solutions available.

"...and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

This reads very conclusively. There it is - not the church's only but for the whole world! At this point I will not shift gears and turn to that often used argument that John is referring to Jewish believers in the first half of the text and Gentiles in the second half, although it carries some merit (and I also held on to it for a time).

But the attention in this verse is a carry over from what precedes it - Christ our Advocate with the Father when we, the church, sin. He, Christ our Advocate, is also "the propitiation for our sins." Running parallel with this is 1 John 4:10 - "In this is love, not that we have loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins."

Two things of note: first, we have God the Father specifically commissioning His Son to be the propitiation for our sins - God sent Jesus to propitiate the sins of the Church! Ah, but what of John 3:17 - "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him." You might say, see there...! But what of John 3:18, where we have that remarkable narrowing again - "Whoever believes in Him is not condemned," - so that it appears that in 1 John 4:10, the apostle simply shorthands the intention of John 3:17-18.

Secondly, there is no mention of "and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world" in 1 John 4:10 as there is in 1 John 2:2. Why? Because when he mentioned it in 2:2, it was simply an afterthought for clarification, and he did not need to attend to it again. Why is this important? Because 2:2 is focused on the "propitiation for our sins," - those sins that we commit after we have repented and believed in Christ and been baptized, etc. - and its continuation, therefore, is a statement made with regards to the way in which God forgives sin in general. In other words, there are not a half dozen ways in which God makes propitiation for sin, but only one way - by the Lord Jesus Christ - and that at all times towards all sinners in all places forever. Jesus is the propitiation for our sins and not only ours, but this is how he reconciles sinners to God in general, always and everywhere.

J. Ramsey Michaels writes:

"But having introduced an explicit theology of atonement to deal with the specific problem of 'our' sins now, after conversion and baptism, the author adds, almost as an afterthought, that of course this is God's way of dealing with sin always and everywhere: 'and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.' There is not one 'propitiation' for us and another for the rest of the world, but Jesus...is the only sacrifice, and the only way of salvation for all. The point is not the Jesus died for everyone indiscriminately so that everyone is the world is in principle forgiven, but that all those forgiven are forgiven on the basis of Christ's sacrifice and in no other way." (*1)

I think that this best reflects the meaning of the Bible, of the author, of the epistle itself, and of the text under consideration. Above all, I think it most glorifies our Lord Jesus Christ, and serves to encourage us in view of His sacrifice to advance that Gospel at all costs. Your comments are, as always, welcome...

*1. Michaels, J. Ramsey; Atonement in John's Gospel and Epistles; an essay in The Glory of the Atonement; pg. 117.