A Scottish Christian Heritage

I just finished reading A Scottish Christian Heritage by Iain Murray. Grant it, I’m prejudice. I like reading Murray and I like Scottish history and especially Scottish Christian history but, this work was outstanding. As always, Murray’s style is a pleasure to read and the content was illuminating, revealing and inspiring. The chapter on Chalmers alone was worth the price of the book! Get a copy, sit in your favorite chair with your favorite beverage and start consuming this book. This work is truly masterful and an absolute joy to read.

Westminster Wednesday

This week we push on to number 16 of the Westminster Shorter Catechism.

Q: Did all mankind fall in Adam's first transgression?

A: The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself, but for his posterity; all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him, in his first transgression.

Here, we move into the nitty-gritty of sin. We need to as we must have a clear understanding of sin or we will fail to have a clear understanding of Christ's finished work on the cross.

Let's return to Whyte's commentary on the catechism for this:

Adam—A Hebrew word signifying red, ground colour. But the generic term Adam becomes in the case of the first man a denominative. The name may possibly have been given to embody the history of his creation. Some scholars hold, on the other hand, that the name comes from a similar Hebrew root, meaning likeness; and that the allusion consequently is to the divine fiat: "Let us make man after our likeness."

not only for himself, but for his posterity—" With Adam as a publick person" (Larger Catechism). Read Rom. v. 12-19. "God made and appointed Adam to be a public person, yet not so out of mere will, but that it had also for its foundation so natural and necessary a ground, as it was rather a natural than a voluntary thing. . . . Now the natural necessity upon which this designation of him to be a public person was made is this: God had, as the author of nature, made this law of nature, that man should beget in his image or likeness. . . . So then, in this first man the whole nature of man being reposited, therefore what befalls this nature in him by any action of his, that nature is to be propagated from him" (Goodwin).

by ordinary generation—This exception is taken because of the extraordinary generation of our Lord in His incarnation. His birth was so ordered by God that He was the Son of man, one of the human race, and yet that the entail of original sin did not embrace Him. God, in ways we cannot fathom, but at the same time in ways that show us that a singular exception was here made to the otherwise universal traduction of original sin, sent His Eternal Son in our nature, and yet did not send Him through Adam. The birth of Christ was rather a creation of a new humanity than a propagation and sanctification of the old. His flesh was the flesh of Adam's race, sanctified and united to the personality of the Son of God. Adam was the type of Christ, but he was not His father.

"The man Christ was not included in that representation which Adam made as head of the covenant of works (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45); and that, because Christ came not in virtue of the blessing of fruitfulness, given while the covenant of works stood entire, but in virtue of a special promise made after it was broken (Genesis 1:28; 3:15). Adam's sin, then, could not be imputed to the man Christ, since Adam did not represent Him in the covenant" (Boston).

"The formation of His human nature was the effect of miraculous, supernatural creating power; therefore he was no more liable to Adam's sin, as being man, than a world of men would be, should God create them out of the dust of the ground, which would be no more miraculous or supernatural than it was to form the human nature of Christ in the womb of the Virgin. Now, as Jesus, so formed, would not be concerned in Adam's sin, or fall, whatever similitude there might be of nature; even so our Saviour was not concerned therein" (Ridgley).

all mankind. . . sinned in him—That is to say, we were so in Adam that what he did we did, not indeed as to the act, but as to its consequences. Human life is full of this vicarious, solidary way of acting and suffering, and this was the first and most terrible example of it. "To be guilty of Adam's sin, meant in the Latin anthropology, to be guilty of the Adamic sin. It implied the oneness of Adam and his posterity, and a guilt that belonged to the sum total, only because the sin was the act of the sum total" (Shedd). There are three very powerful and exhaustive articles on Imputation in the first series of the Princeton Essays. But see any high-class Calvinistic or Puritan theologian on Adam in relation to the human race. See under Imputation in any sound system of theology.

fell with him—"Fell with him in that first transgression" (Larger Catechism). "O thou Adam, what hast thou done? For though it was thou that sinned, thou art not fallen alone, but we all that come of thee" (2 Esdr. 7:48; Romans 5).

"Both death and I

Are found eternal, and incorporate both;

Nor I on my part single, in me all

Posterity stands curst. Fair patrimony

That I must leave ye, sons! "—MILTON.

"It is improper to say, Adam's eating of the forbidden fruit was personally and inherently an act of mine. It was personally his, and imputatively mine: personally his, because he did it; imputatively mine, because I was then in him. Indeed, the effects of his personal eating is found in my person; to wit, defilement and pravity" (Bunyan).

in his first transgression. Those divines who go most deeply into these matters, believe that they have sufficient scriptural and theological ground for holding that Adam's headship ceased with his fall. See Romans 5:18, Revised Version.

Use."Our very nature is sinful. Herein is the importance of the doctrine of original sin. It is very humbling, and as such the only true introduction to the preaching of the gospel. Men do not like to be told that the race from which they spring is degenerate. We know how ashamed men are of being low born or discreditably connected. This is the sort of shame forced upon every son of Adam. ‘Thy first father hath sinned' is the legend on our forehead" (Newman).

Out With the Old and In With the New

So, what should we make of the following?:

From this one example, we may judge what is to be thought of the whole class—viz. that the whole sum of righteousness, and all the parts of divine worship, and everything necessary to salvation, the Lord has faithfully comprehended, and clearly unfolded, in his sacred oracles, so that in them he alone is the only Master to be heard. But as in external discipline and ceremonies, he has not been pleased to prescribe every particular that we ought to observe (he foresaw that this depended on the nature of the times, and that one form would not suit all ages), in them we must have recourse to the general rules which he has given, employing them to test whatever the necessity of the Church may require to be enjoined for order and decency. Lastly, as he has not delivered any express command, because things of this nature are not necessary to salvation, and, for the edification of the Church, should be accommodated to the varying circumstances of each age and nation, it will be proper, as the interest of the Church may require, to change and abrogate the old, as well as to introduce new forms. I confess, indeed, that we are not to innovate rashly or incessantly, or for trivial causes. Charity is the best judge of what tends to hurt or to edify: if we allow her to be guide, all things will be safe. - Institutes, Book IV, Ch. 30, paragraph 3, emphasis mine.

Calvin, here, is approving of change, advancement, improvement in the church. We cannot continue to worship as we once did in the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries or we shall fail in our mission to evangelize the world. We must adapt, we must "as the interest of the Church may require, to change and abrogate the old, as well as to introduce new forms." To cling to forms or traditions for the sake of them is defeating God's purposes and therefore our own. We must forge ahead and modernize our forms of worship, albeit carefully, but modernize we must. We should not, as Calvin states above, "innovate rashly or incessantly, or for trivial causes." Innovation should come cautiously and through much prayer.

Modern theologian John Frame concurs. Some time ago I posted from his Worship in Spirit and Truth where he wrote on page 8, ...And we should make sure that our worship is edifying to believers (1 Cor. 14:26). First Corinthians 14 emphasizes the importance of conducting worship, not in unintelligible "tongues," but in language understandable to all. Even an unbeliever, when he enters the assembly, should be able to understand what is taking place, so that he will fall down and worship, exclaiming, "God is really among you" (vs. 25). So, worship has a horizontal dimension as well as vertical focus. It is to be God-centered, but also to be both edifying and evangelistic. Worship that is unedifying or unevangelistic may not properly claim to be God-centered. Further he points out on page 67, ...Scripture also tells us, and more explicitly and emphatically, that worship should be intelligible, It should be understandable to the worshipers, and even to non-Christian visitors (1 Cor 14, especially vv. 24-25). And intelligibility requires contemporaneity. When churches use archaic language and follow practices that are little understood today, they compromise that biblical principle.

Church leaders should give careful thought to and make much prayer over this issue. Change is necessary, it is part of life. As we change, society changes and the world changes the church cannot allow herself to be left behind.

Too Funny

The minister at Auchengonnie Parish Church really should have had new reading glasses and occasionally misread the church notices he had to announce. Like the week when he said "The church elders would appreciate it if the ladies of the congregation would lend them their electric girdles for the pancake breakfast next Sunday." Fortunately, the ladies supplied their griddles instead.

Thanks to Scottie for the joke.

John Piper on the Bridge Collapse

As the Desiring God offices are so close to the bridge collapse in Minnesota, I'm glad John Piper choose to blog on this tragedy. He has such a good perspective in these situations. Here's just a bit of what Piper had to say: The meaning of the collapse of this bridge is that John Piper is a sinner and should repent or forfeit his life forever. That means I should turn from the silly preoccupations of my life and focus my mind’s attention and my heart’s affection on God and embrace Jesus Christ as my only hope for the forgiveness of my sins and for the hope of eternal life. That is God’s message in the collapse of this bridge. That is his most merciful message: there is still time to turn from sin and unbelief and destruction for those of us who live. If we could see the eternal calamity from which he is offering escape we would hear this as the most precious message in the world.

Take a few moments to read the whole post here.

Westminster Wednesday

This week we come to Q&A #15:

Ques. What was the sin whereby our first parents fell from the estate wherein they were created?

Ans. The sin whereby our first parents fell from the estate wherein they were created, was their eatmg the forbidden fruit.

Thomas Vincent instructs us:

Q. 1. Why did God forbid our first parents to eat of this fruit?A. Not because there was any intrinsical evil in the fruit of the forbidden tree, it being as indifferent in itself to eat of this tree as any other tree in the garden; but God did forbid them to eat of the fruit of this tree, to try their obedience.
Q. 2. Could this sin, of eating the forbidden fruit, be very heinous, when the thing in itself was indifferent?A. 1. Though the eating the fruit was indifferent in itself, yet when so expressly forbidden by God it ceased to be indifferent, but was absolutely unlawful, and a great sin. 2. This sin of eating the forbidden fruit was such a sin as included many other sins, as it was circumstantiated.
Q. 3. What sins did the eating of the forbidden fruit include?A. The sins included in our first parents' eating the forbidden fruit were—1. Rebellion against God their sovereign, who had expressly forbidden them to eat of this tree. 2. Treason, in conspiring with the devil, God's enemy, against God. 3. Ambition, in aspiring to a higher state, namely, to be as God. 4. Luxury, in indulging so much to please the sense of taste, which did inordinately desire this fruit. 5. Ingratitude to God, who had given them leave to eat of any tree of the garden besides. 6. Unbelief, in not giving credit to the threatening of death, but believing the devil, who said they should not die, rather than God, who told them they should surely die, did they eat of this fruit. 7. Murder, in bringing death, by this sin, upon themselves, and all their posterity. These, and many other sins, were included in this sin of our first parents' eating of the forbidden fruit; which did render it exceeding heinous in the sight of God.

Every Friday

Wow, we need to start watching for the Fabulous Friday posts over at Trophies of His Grace. Some good books there at a good discount. Thanks, Steve! I've just ordered (not from this sale) two Iain Murray books, Revival and Revivalism and Evangelicalism Divided: A Record of Crucial Change in the Years 1950 to 2000. I'm really looking forward to delving deep into both of these books. You can never go wrong with anything written by Iain Murray.

Assurance

I found a great article a few days ago by Augustus Toplady on assurance. That's one of those issues we never seem to get right as Christians or even as Reformed Christians. We tend to not be confident because that would be arrogant and therefore presumptous or we continue to try to earn our salvation through works which offers some, although false, assurance. Take a moment to read a few quotes from Toplady's article, Assurance and Perseverance:

SOME would fain persuade us that it is impossible for us to receive knowledge of salvation by the remission of sin. Such a denial is very opposite to the usual tenor of God’s proceeding with His people in all ages. The best believers, and the strongest, may indeed have their occasional fainting fits of doubt and diffidence, as to their own particular interest in Christ; nor should I have any great opinion of that man’s faith who was to tell me that he never had any doubts at all. But still there are golden seasons when the soul is on the mount of communion with God; when the Spirit of His Son shines into our hearts, giving us boldness and access with confidence by the faith of Him. ...“But is it not enthusiasm to talk of holding intercourse with God, and of knowing ourselves to be objects of His special love?” No more enthusiastical (so we keep within Scripture-bounds) than it is for a favorite child to converse with his parents, and to know that they have a particular affection for him. Neither, in the strictest reason and nature of things, is it at all absurd to believe and expect that God can and does and will communicate His favor to His people, and manifest Himself to them as He does not to the world at large (John 14:21). ...I know some who have, for years together, been distressed with doubts and fears, without a single ray of spiritual comfort all the while. And yet I can no more doubt of their being true believers than I can question my own existence as a man. I am sure they are possessed not only of faith in its lowest degree, but of that which Christ Himself calls great faith (Matt 8:10); for they can at least say, Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldest come under my roof; but speak the word only, and Thy servant shall be healed. Faith is the eye of the soul, and the eye is said to see almost every object but itself; so that you may have real faith without being able to discern it. Nor will God despise the day of small things.—Little faith goes to heaven no less than great faith, though not so comfortably, yet altogether as surely. If you come merely as a sinner to Jesus, and throw yourself, at all events, for salvation on His blood and righteousness alone, and the grace and promise of God in Him, you are as truly a believer as the most triumphant saint that ever lived.

...Next I shall warn you against another limb of Arminianism totally contrary to sound doctrine; I mean that tenet which asserts the possibility of falling finally from a state of real grace. God does not give, and then take away. He does indeed frequently take away what He only lent; such as health, riches, friends, and other temporal comforts: but what He gives, He gives forever. In a way of grace, the gifts and calling of God are without repentance (Rom 11:29). He will never repent of bestowing them, and every attribute He has forbids Him to revoke them (Luke 10:42). In Hebrews 13:5, He says, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.” And in John 10:27-28, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them and they follow Me; and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of My hand.” ...As an excellent person somewhere observes, “Our own unbelief may occasionally tear the copies of the covenant given us by Christ, but unbelief cannot come at the covenant itself, Christ keeps the original deed in heaven with Himself, where it can never be lost.” ...Remember who it is that has made you to differ from others; and that a man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven (John 3:27). Not unto us, therefore O Lord, not unto us, but to Thy name alone be the praise of every gift, and of every grace ascribed; for Thy loving mercy, and for Thy truth’s sake.

You can read more about Toplady here.

Westminster Wednesday

Let's move on to question 14. Seems such a simple question and yet we need to be sure we have a full understanding of what sin is.

Q: What is sin?

A: Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.

James Fisher and John Flavel both do well explaining this Q&A for us. Let's delve into Fisher first:

Q. 1. In what consisted man's apostasy from God?
A. In sinning against him, Lam. 5:16.
Q. 2. How does it appear that there is such a thing as sin in the world?
A. The God of truth declares, that all have sinned, Rom. 3:23; the broken law cries for vengeance against transgressors, and by it is the knowledge of sin, Gal. 3:10; Rom. 3:20; conscience, God's deputy in every man's bosom, tells him he is guilty, Jer. 14:7; the reign of death, and the groans of the creatures round about us, Rom. 8:22, all bear testimony that there is such a thing as sin in the world.
Q. 3. Can there be any sin, where there is no law?
A. No; "for where there is no law there is no transgression," Rom. 4:15.
Q. 4. Of whose law is sin a transgression?
A. Of the law of God.
Q. 5. What may be understood by the law of God?
A. All the precepts, or commandments, God has given to man as a rule of his obedience.
Q. 6. Where is this law of God to be found?
A. There was a bright and fair copy of it written upon the heart of man in innocence; but that being, in a great measure, lost by the fall, God has written again to us the great things of his law, in the scriptures of truth, Psalm 147:19, 20.
Q. 7. Are all the laws of God mentioned in scripture, of binding force now under the New Testament?
A. No; the ceremonial law, which was a shadow of good things to come, is now abrogated since the coming of Christ in the flesh; and many of the judicial laws, in so far as they had a particular relation to the state of the Jewish nation, are laid aside; but the moral law is perpetually binding on all mankind, in all ages and periods of the world, Psalm 119:160.
Q. 8. Does God require a perfect conformity to this law?
A. Yes; for there is a curse pronounced against every one that continues not in all things written in the book of the law to do them, Gal. 3:10.
Q. 9. Why is the nature of sin expressed by a want of conformity to the law?
A. To let us know that our very natures, since the fall, are sinful, Isa. 1:5, 6; that we are now quite destitute of that original righteousness and holiness, which we had at our creation, Gen. 6:5; and that every swerving from the holy law, even in omitting what it commands is sin, as well as in committing what it forbids, Isa. 43:22.
Q. 10. Why is sin called a transgression of the law?
A. Because the law is the boundary of all our actions; and whenever we sin, we break the boundary and limit that God has set us, and so are exposed to the curse of the law, Eccl. 10:8; Gal. 3:10.
Q. 11. Does the law of God extend to the first motions of sin in the heart?
A. Yes; for, says the apostle, Rom. 7:7 -- "I had not known lust, except the law had said, `Thou shalt not covet,'"
Q. 12. How many kinds of sin are there?
A. Two kinds; original and actual.
Q. 13. What do you understand by original sin?
A. The sin of our nature, which is called original sin, because we were "shapen in iniquity, and conceived in sin," Psalm 51:5; and because it was the first sin of man, and is the original and fountain of all actual sin, Matt, 15:19.
Q. 14. What do you understand by actual sin?
A. Every thing that is inconsistent with, and contrary to the law, in thought, word, or deed, 1 John 3:4.
Q. 15. How are actual sins divided?
A. Into sins of omission and commission.
Q. 16. What is a sin of omission?
A. It is a neglecting, or forgetting to do that good which the law commands, James 4:17.
Q. 17. What is a sin of commission?
A. It is a doing of what the law of God forbids, Psalm 51:4.

This is quite excellent. And now Flavel's exposition:

Q. 1. What is meant by the Law?

A. The commands and Rules flowing from God's Sovereignty, whereby his will is manifested, and the Creature bound to obedience.
Q. 2. Where is this Law written?

A. It is written either in the heart. Romans 2:15. Which shows the work of the law written in their hearts, which we call the law of nature. Or in the Bible, which we call the written Moral Law.
Q. 3. What conformity is due to this Law of God?

A. A twofold conformity is due to it. First, Internal, in our hearts. Secondly, External in our lives; and the want of either is sin. 1 John 3:4. Whosoever commiteth sin, transgresseth the also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law.
Q. 4. How doth it appear that the want of internal conformity is sin?

A. Because the law requires it. Mark 12:30. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength; for this is the first commandment. And condemns the want of it. Romans 7:7. What shall we say then? is the law sin? God forbid: nay, I had not know sin but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Q. 5. Is nothing a sin but what is against God's law?

A. No, nothing can be a sin but what God hath either expressly , or by consequence forbidden in his word.
Q. 6. Wherein lies the evil of transgressing God's law?

A. The evil of sin principally lies in the offence and wrong done to God, whose sovereignty it labours to shake off, and despises his will. Psalm 51:4. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight.
Q. 7. What further evil is sin?

A. It highly wrongs the Sinner's Soul, by defacing, defiling, and damning it. Proverbs 8:36. But he that sinneth against me, wrongeth his own soul, all they that hate me, love death.
Q. 8. Wherein is the evil of sin manifested?

A. It's manifested in the death of Christ, the Terrors of Conscience, and Torments of Hell.
Q. 9. What course must the sinner take to recover himself out of his misery?

A. Repentance towards God, Faith towards Christ; and both evidenced by new obedience. Acts 20:21. Testifying both to the Jew, and also the Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.
Q. 10. What may we infer from hence?

A. That we have infinite cause to bless God for Christ's Satisfaction of the Law for our sins.

It is crucial to understand sin as a Christian. Without a proper understanding of sin, it's history, it's nature, how it works in us and how Christ has saved us from it, we cannot truly know the joy of the Christian life as God would have for us. We need to meditate on the richness of the finished work of Christ on the cross so that we can fathom the depths of His mercy and grace.

Speaking of God...

“…Theology has become a bad word in Christian circles. It seems that theology is linked in people’s minds with cold, dead religion that cares more about principles and matters of the head than deeds and matters of the heart. It is associated with fundamentalism and with cold conservatism. Yet if we look at the meaning and etymology of the word we cannot help but conclude that God requires all Christians to be theologians.
Theology is good. And not only is it good, but it is critical to the Christian walk and is an expectation of God. The word theology is derived from two Greek words. The root “theos” means God and the suffix “-ology” comes from the Greek word for speak. So what theology really means is “speaking of God” or as has become the more accurate definition, “the study of God.” It is impossible for us to grow closer to God (ie “sanctification”) if we do not learn more about Him. While all we need to know to be saved is our own depravity and God’s grace, to grow in that grace we need to learn more about God - about His character and attributes, about our place before Him, and about His will for our lives…”

(HT:Challies)

Photo Credit

Christ and Wine

The Rev. Jim West has written:

Wine should be enjoyed as a gift from God. Why did Jesus turn the water into wine? Because the drinking water was bad-was that the main reason? This is the thinking of many. …We may also turn the speculation about bad water around. If the water was bad, and if the governor of the feast thought that only the worse wine remained, why did not Christ turn the bad water into good water? Instead, our Lord created wine.
Jesus created wine so that the attendees at the wedding might have a good time! He did it so that they might be refreshed and rejoice in the gift of God! According to the writer in Christianity Today [pg. 26, June 18, 1990], only a sick person would want someone to drink. Jesus Himself wanted His disciples to drink, to enjoy wine as God’s gift.
Beer and wine are enjoyable gifts of God. This is the teaching of Psalm 104 which is a praise psalm. The Psalmist writes:
You cause the grass to grow for the livestock and plants for man to cultivate, that he may bring forth food from the earthand wine to gladden the heart of man, oil to make his face shine and bread to strengthen man’s heart. [vss.14-15].
Wine makes us glad. Wine refreshes. Both wine and beer are given by God as creation gifts. If we despise wine, we are snubbing the Lord’s gifts. In Jotham’s Parable of the Trees the vine says to the trees, “Should I lave my wine, which cheers God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?” (Judges 9”13). Wine cheers the heart of man, but it especially chhers the heart of God Himself! When Christ made the wine, He rejoiced in His creation. But when Christ drank the wine, He Himself was cheered by it. - From Drinking with Calvin and Luther, pages 40-41.

There are so many small blessings in life that we enjoy or can enjoy if we open ourselves up to them. Wine and beer (good beer) are just such a blessing. We are told not to be drunk, but there are numerous scriptural citings of enjoying wine or being permitted to enjoy wine.

Ken Gentry sums up his article, Does Scripture Permit us to Drink Alcoholic Beverages this way, When all is said and done, we must distinguish the use of wine from its abuse. Sometimes in Scripture gluttonous partaking of food is paralleled with immoderate drinking of wine (Deut. 21:20 ; Prov. 23:21). But food is not universally prohibited! Sometimes in Scripture sexual perversion is paralleled with drunkenness (Rom. 13:13 ; 1 Pet. 4:3). But all sexual activity is not condemned! Wealth often becomes a snare to the sinner (1 Tim. 6:9–11), but the Scripture does not universally decry its acquisition (Job 42:10–17)! Each of these factors in life is intended by God to be a blessing for man, when used according to His righteous Law.
It would seem abundantly clear, then, that the Scriptures do allow the moderate partaking of alcoholic beverages. There is no hesitancy in Scripture in commending wine, or embarrassment in portraying its consumption among the righteous of Biblical days. Wine is set before the saints as blessing and gladness (Deut. 14:26; Ps. 104:14–15), even though it may be to the immoderate and wicked a mocker and curse (Prov. 20:1; 23:29–35).

We need to stop calling alcohol consumption sinful. This in itself is sinful. I believe this misconception is part of the larger question of just what does it mean to live a holy life?

Take some time to read West's book. Think through the issue and let Scripture, not what you've been told, not what you've heard in sermons and not you're presuppositions, be your guide.

What I Have Learned Attending Church

Perhaps that title should read What I have Learned Attending Some Churches as not all churches inculcate the following but far too many do. Here’s the list of things I’ve learned:

To contemplate my sin more than the mercy of God
To be a legalist even in a Reformed church
To be overly introspective
To fear God’s wrath more than enjoy His mercy and forgiveness
To live in the past rather than in the present

Obvioulsy, those things are wrong & I have come to see that I must learn from the past, live in the present (under God's forgiveness) and look to a bright future (with God's mercy). God is not sitting in heaven just waiting for me to sin to send me the holy zap. Conversely, we read in Hebrews 4 that we can “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.” Yes, we need to spend some time examining ourselves however, in our darkest hour we should remember the mercy of God and that He is working all things together for our good. In John Piper’s Pleasures of God he writes concerning this:

He [God] will keep on doing good. He doesn't do good to his children sometimes and bad to them other times. He keeps on doing good and he never will stop doing good for ten thousand ages of ages. When things are going "bad" that does not mean God has stopped doing good. It means he is shifting things around to get them in place for more good, if you will go on loving him. He works all things together for good "for those who love him" (Romans 8:28). "No good thing does he withhold from those who walk uprightly" (Psalm 84:11). "It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I might learn your statutes" (Psalm 119:71)....
But the promise is greater yet. Not only does God promise not to turn away from doing good to us, he says, "I will rejoice in doing them good" (Jeremiah 32:41). "The Lord will again take delight in prospering you" (Deuteronomy 30:9). He does not bless us begrudgingly. There is a kind of eagerness about the beneficence of God. God is not waiting for us, he is pursuing us. That, in fact, is the literal translation of Psalm 23:6, "Surely goodness and mercy shall pursue me all the days of my life." God loves to show mercy. He is not hesitant or indecisive or tentative in his desires to do good to his people. His anger must be released by a stiff safety lock, but his mercy has a hair trigger. . . .
But still the promise is greater. Finally, God promises that this rejoicing over the good of his people will be with all his heart and with all his soul. . . . When God does good to his people it is not so much like a reluctant judge showing kindness to a criminal whom he finds despicable; it is like a bridegroom showing affection to his bride. And add to this, that with God the honeymoon never ends. He is infinite in power and wisdom and creativity and love. And so he has no trouble sustaining a honeymoon level of intensity; he can foresee all the future quirks of our personality and has decided he will keep what's good for us and change what isn't; he will always be as handsome as he ever was, and will see to it that we get more and more beautiful forever; and he is infinitely creative to think of new things to do together so that there will be no boredom for the next trillion ages of millenniums. . . .
There is a condition we must meet in order to know him as our God and be a part of the wonderful covenant in which he never turns away from doing us good but rejoices over us with all his heart and all his soul. That condition is to put our hope in him as the all-satisfying Refuge and Treasure. God takes pleasure in this response with all his heart, because it magnifies the glory of his grace and satisfies the longing of our soul.

It’s time for change. Living a holy life does not mean living an unhappy life. It’s time to revisit Q&A #1 of the Westminster Shorter Catechism: What is the chief end of man? Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever. It’s time to start enjoying Him now, enjoying His mercy, His forgiveness, His promises and His constant care and oversight.

Westminster Wednesday

WSC #13

Q: Did our first parents continue in the estate wherein they were created?

A: Our first parents, being left to the freedom of their own will, fell from the estate wherein they were created, by sinning against God.

Thomas Vincent's expostion on the Shorter Catechism is as good a commentary on the catechism as can be found and inexpensive, too. Its certainly worth the few bucks to purchase this book and keep it handy. On Q&A #13 he expounds, Q. 1. What is meant by the freedom of the will?A. By the freedom of the will is meant, a liberty in the will of its own accord to choose or refuse; to do or not to do; to do this, or to do that, without any constraint or force from any one.
Q. 2. How many ways may the will be said to be free?A. The will may be said to be free three ways. 1. When the will is free only to good; when the will is not compelled or forced, but freely chooseth only such things as are good. Thus, the will of God (to speak after the manner of men) is free only to good; he can neither do nor will any thing that is evil. Such also is the freedom of the wills of angels, and such will be the freedom of all the glorified saints in heaven; there neither is, nor will be, any inclination of the will unto any evil thing for eve; and yet good will be of free choice. 2. He will may be said to be free only unto evil, when the will is not constrained, but freely chooseth such things as are evil and sinful. Thus, the will of the devil is free only unto Sin; and thus the wills of all the children of men in the world, whilst in a state of nature, are free only unto sin. 3. The will may be said to be free both unto good and evil, when it sometimes chooseth that which is good, sometimes chooseth that which is evil. Such is the freedom of the wills of all regenerate persons, who have in some measure recovered the image of God; they choose good freely, through a principle of grace wrought in them by the Spirit; yet, through the remainder of corruption, at some times their wills are inclined to that which is sinful.
Q. 3. What freedom of will had man at his first creation?A. The freedom of will which man had at his first creation, was a freedom both to good and evil. Though the natural inclination and disposition of his will was only to good, yet, being mutable or changeable, through temptation it might be altered, and might become inclinable into evil.
Q. 4. How were Our first parents left to the freedom of their own wills?A. Our first parents were left by God to the freedom of their own wills, when God withheld that further grace (which he was nowise bound to give unto them) which would have strengthened them against the temptation, and preserved them from falling into sin.
Q. 5. How did our first parents fall, when they were left to the freedom of their own wills?A. Our first parents, being left to the freedom of their own wills, through the temptation of the devil, who spake unto them in the serpent; through the desirableness of the fruit of the forbidden tree to their sensual appetite; and through the desirableness of being made wise, and like unto God, by eating thereof' under their rational appetite; and through the hopes of escaping the punishment of death threatened by God; they did venture, against the express command of God, to eat of this tree. The woman being first beguiled and perverted by the devil, did eat; and then the mall, being persuaded by his wife and the devil too, did eat also. "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die; for God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof' and did eat; and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat."— Gen. 3:4-6. "The serpent beguiled Eve, through his subtlety." — 2 Cor. 11:3. "The woman being deceived, was in the transgression."— 1 Tim. 2:14.
Q. 6. What was the state in which our first parents were created, from whence they fell?A. The state wherein our first parents were created, and from whence they fell, was a state of innocency. "Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright, but they have sought out many inventions."— Eccles. 7:29.
Q. 7. Whereby did our first parents fall from the state wherein they were created?A. Our first parents fell from the state wherein they were created, by sinning against God.

Encouraging a Blogger

This is a great post on Encouraging a Blogger. If you have not read it please take moment to do so. I find the first point the most encouraging and try to do this myself.

A Few Thoughts on Suffering

I was privileged to hear a very fine sermon on suffering yesterday by Dr. Dave Collings at Christ Church, Columbia Station, Ohio. A couple of take-aways for me were 1) we live in a world that does everything that it can to avoid suffering. It believes more knowledge will help avoid suffering but just the opposite is true. A simple example of this is that to be healthy we must exercise and for many of us exercise is suffering. The point is, though, more knowledge actually brings more suffering. 2) Suffering is difficult to live through whether it be mental or physical suffering. But when it is over we can say that it was sweet as it drew us nearer to the Lord in some way and we experienced God's grace to a new degree. I experienced this myself some years ago going through a painful back surgery. Looking back I see God's grace in that time, drawing me nearer to Him and our family closer together.

More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. Romans 5:3-5.

Entering the Realm of the Imponderable

To declare that calling God "He" or "Lord" would encourage wife beating is so foolish and ridiculous it's just unbelievable. To quote the Daily Mail article, Church of England leaders warned yesterday that calling God 'He' encourages men to beat their wives.
They told churchgoers they must think twice before they refer to God as 'He' or 'Lord' because of the dangers that it will lead to domestic abuse. And later we read, Church of England leaders warned yesterday that calling God 'He' encourages men to beat their wives.
Finally, a voice of reason, Simon Calvert declares, The Bible says God has both female and male characteristics but it does not feel inhibited about referring to God as male." Simon Calvert of the evangelical Christian Institute think tank, said: "They appear to suggest seriously that we should ditch many centuries of Judaeo-Christian teaching because of some half-baked feminist theory." The guidelines - Responding to Domestic Abuse -say that centuries of Christian teaching have led to "questionable assumptions" about the Bible and moral teaching.

We need to pray for the COE and those who seriously distort Scripture in this fashion. Pray that the light of God's truth will shine in their hearts so they may understand that that the real issue in domestic abuse is sin and not referring to the Lord in the male gender.

Photo credit

Calvin Quote

I believe the Reformed anti-drinking crowd would do well to study their Reformed history particularly where it comes to the personal views of the likes Luther, Calvin and many of the Puritans. Here is another example of Calvin's opinion of wine:

We are nowhere forbidden to laugh, or to be satisfied with food, or to annex new possessions to those already enjoyed by ourselves or our ancestors, or to be delighted with music, or to drink wine (III, XIX, 9).

Alexander Whyte

Besides Thomas Boston I have been quoting Alexander Whyte off & on in the Westminster Wednesday series of this blog. He was a great and interesting man. You can read a bit about him here and buy his book, “Lord teach Us To Pray” from this ministry for only $5. (I have no affliation with this website or ministry.) For more information on Whyte and his story, which I find inspiring, click here.

Thomas Boston

Thomas Boston has long been a favorite of mine. Reading his memoirs is inspiring, encouraging and convicting. The picture above is of the Ettrick Valley where Thomas Boston served a good many years. From the ccel.org website we read of Boston, In 1707, Boston was transferred to the parish of Ettrick, where he found the people sadly divided by separatism. The Cameronians, who repudiated the Revolution Settlement of 1688, stood aloof from his ministry, and, while among the parishioners generally there was much zeal for the church, there was but little vital godliness. Not until 1710, three years after his induction to Ettrick, did Boston dispense the sacrament of the Lord's Supper there; and, indeed, even after laboring for a further five years there, he concluded that all had been in vain. But when, in 1716, he received a call to Closeburn, his people at Ettrick showed the utmost anxiety at the prospect of losing their minister. But the transferral never took place. Boston stayed at Ettrick and witnessed a great work of grace in what had been a spiritual wilderness. It is noteworthy that whereas at his first dispensation of the Lord's Supper there, only some 60 persons communicated, at his last communion, in 1731, the number of participants was 777.

It was during his Ettrick ministry that his Fourfold State was first published, and by it his ministry was extended far and wide. But the doctrinal content of those discourses had been greatly influenced by his discovery, in a humble home in Simprin, of Edward Fisher's treatise The Marrow of Modern Divinity. This little book had the effect of giving Boston a fuller insight into the grace of God as the sole cause of salvation; and it immediately "gave a tincture," as he put it, to his preaching.

You can read more about Boston's life here.

Photo credit

Books, Books and More Books

Just a point of clarification for the few readers I have. The links to Amazon for books I mention are purely for your convenience. Should you avail yourself of them is solely up to you. I’m not trying to make a killing on books, in fact, I’ve made very little, I mean very little, on the sale of books through the links. When I’m reading about a book or an article that quotes a book I find that I appreciate the web or blog author having a link on their site for my convenience. Hence, I do the same for the 3.5 (or is it 3.7 now?) of you that read this blog.

Thanks,
RR

Westminster Wednesday

Wednesday is here again - what a fast week it's been. Here we go with #12...

Q: What special act of providence did God exercise toward man in the estate wherein he was created?

A: When God had created man, he entered into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of perfect obedience; forbidding him to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.

Here we begin to see the working of God's plan for us. Matthew Henry laid this out for us when he wrote:

1. Did God make man happy as well as holy? Yes: for he put him into the garden of Eden, Gen. 2:15. Did he provide comfortably for him? Yes: for he said, I will make him a help meet for him, Gen. 2:18. Did he admit him into communion with himself? Yes: for he then blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, Gen. 2:3. Was God well pleased in him? Yes: for his delights were with the sons of men, Prov. 8: 31.
2. Did God give him a law? Yes: The Lord God commanded the man, Gen. 2:16. Did he give him a command of trial? Yes: Of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it, Gen. 2:17. Did he assure him of happiness, if he obeyed? Yes: for of every tree in the garden (even the tree of life,) thou mayest freely eat, Gen. 2:16. Did he threaten death upon his disobedience? Yes: for in the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die, Gen. 2:17.
3. Was this God's covenant with Adam? Yes: for we read of those who, like Adam, transgressed the covenant, Hos. 6:7 (margin). Was, Do this and live, one branch of that covenant? Yes: for the man that doeth them, shall live, in them, Gal. 3:12. Was, Fail and die the other branch of the covenant? Yes: the soul that sinneth, it shall die, Ezek. 18:4. Was this the covenant of innocency? Yes: for the law was ot of faith, Gal 3:12. Was there a mediator of this covenant? No: for it is the better covenant that is established in the hands of a Mediator, Heb 8:6.

Psalm 37 from the Scottish Psalter

Psalm 37:1-5

A Psalm of David

1 For evil-doers fret thou not
thyself unquietly;
Nor do thou envy bear to those
that work iniquity.
2 For, even like unto the grass,
soon be cut down shall they;
And, like the green and tender herb,
they wither shall away.
3 Set thou thy trust upon the Lord,
and be thou doing good;
And so thou in the land shalt dwell,
and verily have food.
4 Delight thyself in God; he'll give
thine heart's desire to thee.
5 Thy way to God commit, him trust,
it bring to pass shall he.

Photo credit

Westminster Wednesday

Trusting Providence is crucial in the Christian's life. Hence, this is one of my favorite Q&A's.

Q: What are God's works of providence?

A: God's works of providence are, his most holy, wise, and powerful preserving and governing all his creatures and all their actions.

Thomas Boston has written some encouraging words on this for us:

1. Beware of drawing an excuse for your sin from the providence of God; for it is most holy, and has not the least efficiency in any sin you commit. Every sin is an act of rebellion against God; a breach of his holy law, and deserves his wrath and curse; and therefore cannot be authorised by an infinitely-holy God, who is of purer eyes that to behold iniquity without detestation and abhorrence. Though he has by a permissive decree allowed moral evil to be in the world, yet that has no influence on the sinner to commit it. For it is not the fulfilling of God's decree, which is an absolute secret to every mortal, but he gratification of their own lusts and perverse inclinations, that men intend and mind in the commission of sin.
2. Beware of murmuring and fretting under any dispensations of providence that ye meet with; remembering that nothing falls out without a wise and holy providence, which knows best what is fit and proper for you. And in all cases, even amidst the most afflicting incidents that befall you, learn submission to the will of God; as Job did, when he said, in consequence of a train of the heaviest calamities that happened to him, "The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away, blessed be the name of the Lord," Job 1:21. In the most distressing case say with the disciples, "The will of the Lord be done, Acts 21:14.
3. Beware of anxious cares and diffidence about your throughbearing in the world. This our Lord has cautioned his followers against, Matt. 6:31. "Take no thought (that is, anxious and perplexing thought), saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?" Never let the fear of man stop you from duty, Matt. 10:28, 29.; but let your souls learn to trust in God, who guides and superintends all the events and administrations of providence, by whatever hands they are performed.
4. Do not slight means, seeing God worketh by them; and he that hath appointed the end orders the means necessary for gaining the end. Do not rely upon means, for they can do nothing without God, Matt. 4:4. Do not despond if there be no means, for God can work without them, as well as with them; Hos. 1:7. "I will save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen." If the means be unlikely, he can work above them, Rom. 4:19. "He considered not his own body now dead, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb." If the means be contrary, he can work by contrary means, as he saved Jonah by the whale that devoured him. That fish swallowed up the prophet, but by the direction of providence, it vomited him out upon dry land.
5. Lastly, Happy is the people whose God the Lord is: for all things shall work together for their good. They may sit secure in exercising faith upon God, come what will. They have ground for prayer; for God is a prayer-hearing God, and will be inquired of by his people as to all their concerns in the world. And they have ground for the greatest encouragement and comfort amidst all the events of providence, seeing they are managed by their covenant God and gracious friend, who will never neglect or overlook his dear people, and whatever concerns them. For he hath said, "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee," Heb. 13:5.

The second admonition above is so important for us as it's so easy to slip into murmuring and complaining when things don't go our way. We must stop and remember who God really is in the midst of life's most difficult moments. We must place all our confidence in Him and submit our will to His so we can affirm God's promise that He will never leave us or forsake us.
S.D.G.

Meditation

I have recently posted the Psalms in an effort to give thought to the reading and meditation of God's Word, sometimes lacking in my life and indeed all of our lives. We spend far too much time running from one event to another, enjoying one hobby after another, indeed, even the busyness of service to the Lord can keep us from properly meditating on Him.

George Swinnock (1627-1673) defines meditation as "a serious applying the mind to some sacred subject, till the affections be warmed and quickened, and the resolution heightened and strengthened thereby, against what is evil, and for that which is good." This being true, we need to spend time meditating on Him, which thereby induces spiritual growth in us.

Some good reading on meditation can be found here and here. Take some time to meditate on God's goodness and mercy in our lives today. ...we would do well to heed Gurnall's plea to "retire often to muse on some soul-awakening meditations," remembering that "if you seek her as silver and search for her as for hidden treasure; then you will discern the fear of the LORD and discover the knowledge of God."

Photo credit

Psalm 6 from the Scottish Psalter

Psalm 6

To the chief Musician on Neginoth upon Sheminith,A Psalm of David.

1 Lord, in thy wrath rebuke me not;
Nor in thy hot rage chasten me.
2 Lord, pity me, for I am weak:
Heal me, for my bones vexed be.

3 My soul is also vexed sore;
But, Lord, how long stay wilt thou make
4 Return, O Lord, my soul set free;
O save me, for thy mercies' sake.

5 Because those that deceased are
Of thee shall no remembrance have;
And who is he that will to thee
Give praises lying in the grave?

6 I with my groaning weary am,
I also all the night my bed
Have caused for to swim; and I
With tears my couch have watered.

7 Mine eye, consumed with grief, grows old,
Because of all mine enemies.
8 Hence from me, wicked workers all;
For God hath heard my weeping cries.

9 God hath my supplication heard,
My pray'r received graciously
10 Shamed and sore vexed be all my foes,
Shamed and back turnèd suddenly.

Photo credit

Westminster Wednesday

Q&A #10 is up this week. Let's hit it.

Q: How did God create man?

A: God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures.

Genesis 1:27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Revelation 4:11. Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
Colossians 3:10. And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. Ephesians 4:24. And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
Genesis 1:28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

We quoted Alexander Whyte last week and I think we should do it again this week.

God created man—As if to mark off and signalize the creation of man from that of all the other creatures, there is a striking change in the manner in which the sixth day's work is recorded. Hitherto the Creator had spoken "by the word of His power," and all things immediately became as he commanded. But when we are introduced to the work of the sixth day, we discover a remarkable modification in the narrative; and instead of a creative command, as on the preceding days, there is heard the language rather of counsel, deliberation, and resolution. The Creator now speaks as if a work was about to be wrought altogether distinct from, and immeasurably superior to, all that had hitherto been made. For God said : "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: . . . So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him: male and female created He them." And with more detail in another place: "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." All which produces on the reader, and must have been intended to produce, the impression that man by his peculiar creation is separated off on all sides from connection with the rest of the creatures, except as completing them and being their monarch and their end. In the posture of deliberation and mutual counsel in which God reveals Himself when proceeding to create mankind; in His so signally connecting mankind with the Godhead through putting man in possession of the Divine Image; and in the royal, and, so to speak, divine position He gave Adam over all the rest of creation—in all this there was secured for man a clear and indubitable charter of his divine origin and heavenly relationship.

man—"The sense is thinking animal, from Sanskrit man, to think; the animal with mind" (Skeat).

after his own image—An image is any imitation, resemblance, or similitude of another thing. It is anything drawn, painted, sculptured, or otherwise fashioned to represent some person or thing. And such is the capacity of the word "image", that it is applied in a great number of senses, and is put to a great variety of uses, one of the noblest of which we are now to elucidate. There was a twofold act or process in the creation of man; and accordingly two substances enter into his complex constitution. "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Now in searching in man for the divine image that was impressed upon him in his creation, we at once pass beyond all that in man which was "made of the dust of the ground." For no formation of dust, not even when it is refined and elaborated into flesh and blood, can carry an impression of the image of God. It is not therefore in man's body, erect, noble, fair, beaming with intelligence and girded with strength as it is, that the divine image stands; but in his soul, in his mind and conscience and heart, or as the Catechism has it, in his "knowledge, righteousness, and holiness." At the same time, the doctrine of the divine imsge in man cannot now be fully and thoroughly studied in Adam: we must see it preserved and exhibited in a yet greater than he, if we would understand it even as it originally existed in him. We must go above Adam to Him who made him, to Him who is eternally "the express image of the Father's person." Indeed, most that we know of Adam's state before his fall, we learn afterwards from the provision made in the "second Adam" to restore and reinstate man in his lost knowledge, righteousness, holiness, and dominion.

"So then after all the other things, Moses says that man was made in the image and likeness of God. And he says well, for nothing that is born on the earth is more resembling God than man. And let no one think that he is able to judge of this likeness from the character of the body; for neither is God a being with the form of a man, nor is the human body like the form of God, but the resemblance is spoken of with reference to the most important part of the soul, namely, the mind. . . . But as it is not every image that resembles its archetypal model, since many are unlike, Moses has shown this by adding to the words, ‘after His image' the expression, ‘in His likeness,' to prove that it means an accurate impression, having a clear and evident resemblance in form" (Philo: a contemporary of our Lord).

And in a very remarkable fragment of his lost works the same writer says: "Why, then, does God use the expression, ‘In the image of God made I man,' as if He were speaking of that of some other God, and not of having made him in the likeness of Himself? This expression is used with great beauty and wisdom. For it was impossible that anything mortal should be made in the likeness of the Most High God, the Father of the universe; but it could only be made in the likeness of the Second God, who is the Word of the other; for it was fitting that the rational type in the soul of man should receive the impression of the Word of God."

"Spirits only are made in God's image, as if of His race, or as children of His house, since they only can serve Him freely, and knowingly act in imitation of the Divine Nature. One spirit alone is worth more than a whole world, since it not only expresses that world, but knows it also, and is governed in it as God orders. So that it seems, th at whilst every substance expresses the universe, other substances express the world rather than God, but spirits express God rather than the world" (Leibnitz; see Howe's Blessedness of the Righteous, chap. iv.).

in knowledge—In man as he came from the hand of God, there was a rich fountain of knowledge springing up within him. There was in him a deep well of intuitional truth, which secretly filled his understanding, and heart, and conscience. God has all knowledge by intuition, by direct and immediate vision; and He made man in His own image in this respect, that man had immediately and intuitionally a knowledge of God, and duty, and doubtless of many other things that we now have to toil painfully after if we would attain to it. Men learned in the matters of the mind assure us that there is still a deep well of intuitional truth, a fountain of innate ideas that opens spontaneously in every human soul. Our father Adam drank of this well, and in spite of all that has been done to choke it, it still rises within the soul. The Light that shone so fully on Adam at his creation, still lighteth every man that cometh into the world. "Adam's heart was the common ark of mankind, and though the tables be lost, yet our ignorance doth not make the law of none effect. For the law of nature for ever binds; that is, all that was written in Adam's heart, because it was thereby then published in him, and to him for us" (Goodwin).

righteousness—In etymology and in fact, righteousness means rectitude, obedience. Righteousness is a relation, a relation of conformity in all respects to the law under which any one is made subject. And accordingly the text teaches that man was created in the most perfect conformity to the moral law, under which as a creature of God be was for ever to live. Measured immediately on his creation by that divine law, man was pronounced by His Maker and Lawgiver and Judge "very good." It is in this sense that our divines speak of Adam's "natural justification."

and holiness—For the root and original meaning of this noble and inward word, see Answer 4.
Man's original righteousness and holiness corresponded somewhat to his justification and sanctification in his redeemed and evangelical estate. His holiness, if it is possible to say so, was something more personal, more inward, and more spiritual than even his righteousness. His holiness was, and was to be, the hidden root of his outward righteousness; his root and sap and fatness as a tree of righteousness, the planting of the Lord. He would stand in righteousness, in fruitfulness, and in acceptance only as his holiness was preserved unimpaired and untainted. Bengel seems to favour this distinction when he says that righteousness corresponds to the Divine Will; holiness, as it were, to the whole of the Divine Nature. "The parts of the image of God impressed on man's soul were knowledge on his mind, righteousness on his will, and holiness on his affections" (Boston). On what it is that constitutes holiness, see a characteristically clear and powerful discussion in Jonathan Edwards' Religious Affections, Part iii. sect. iii.

dominion over the creatures. This last feature or accompaniment of the Divine Image is borrowed in as many words from God's fatherly and "prolifical benediction" pronounced over Adam and Eve: ‘‘And God blessed them, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (see Psalm 8.).
"God appointed man lord of the world, and this authority was given to Adam's posterity as well as to himself. And hence we infer what was the end for which all things were created, namely, that none of the conveniences and necessaries of life should be wanting to man. In the very order of the creation the paternal solicitude of God for man is conspicuous, because he furnished the world with all things needful, and even with an immense profusion of wealth, before he formed man. Thus man was rich before he was born. But if God had such care for us before we existed, He will by no means leave us destitute of food and other necessaries of life, now that He has placed us in this world. And if He often keeps His hand closed toward us, to what is this to be imputed but to our sins?" (Calvin).

And here's this week's Q&A in Scots Gaelic:

Cionnas a chruthaich Dia an duine?

Chruthaich Dia an duine, fear agus bean, a rèir a iomhaigh fèin, ann an eòlas, fìreantachd, agus naomhachd, le uachdaranachd os ceann nan creutairean

Renegalia 6-27-07

It's been a busy week at the Renegade household filled with trips to the Ohio Scottish Games, seeing our grandson and a good case of the stomach flu for both me and Mrs. Renegade. As Summer is upon us the 3.5 of you that read the blog daily will notice that the posts will not be as frequent. Things will pick up again as Summer ends.

Westminster Wednesday

Hitting #8 & 9 this week. Let’s get to it.

Q: How doth God execute his decrees?

A: God executeth his decrees in the works of creation and providence

Q: What is the work of creation?

A: The work of creation is, God's making all things of nothing, by the word of his power, in the space of six days, and all very good.

From Alexander Whyte we read:

creatlon—The act of creating: especially the divine act of bringing all things beyond the Divine Nature into existence. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

"Chaos heard His voice: him all his trainFollowed in bright succession to beholdCreation, and the wonders of His might."—Milton

"In brief, all things are artificial; for Nature is the art of God" (Religio Medici).

out of nothing—"The clause ‘out of nothing' is vital in defining a creative act "(Shedd). This is directed against those ancient heathen speculations which taught that matter was eternal: that there were two necessary and eternal beings, God and matter. But it is the teaching of the Bible and of the Catechism that there is only one necessary and eternal Being, and that He is the absolute Creator of everything beyond Himself. On Romans 11:36, Goodwin remarks: "Not so much as a first matter was existing to His hands." And in his extraordinarily able and suggestive treatise, Of the Creatures, he says: "All things were once nothing, and all afflictions and miseries are smaller vacillations or reelings of the creatures toward their first nothing. . . . The whole creation is built upon a quagmire of nothing, and is continually ready to sink into it, and to be swallowed up by it, which maketh the whole or any part of it to quake and quiver when God is angry, as Jeremiah then did (10:24)."

"The Divine Father, by the strange fecundity of His omnipotent power, first made the clay out of nothing, and then made man out of that" (Pearson). For a refutation of the Aristotelian maxim, that out of nothing nothing can be produced, see Pearson, Art. i.

in the space of six days—See Cruden's analysis under day.

"According to the commonly received chronology, our globe has existed only a few thousand years. According to geologists, it must have existed for countless ages. And again, according to the generally received interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis, the process of creation was completed in six days; whereas geology teaches that it must have been in progress through periods of time that cannot be computed. . . . It is of course admitted that, taking this account by itself, it would be most natural to understand the word day in its ordinary sense; but if that sense brings the Mosaic account into conflict with facts, and another sense avoids such conflict, then it is obligatory on us to adopt that other. Now it is urged that if the word ‘day' be taken in the sense of ‘an indefinite period of time,' a sense which it undoubtedly has in other parts of Scripture, there is not only no discrepancy between the Mosaic account of the creation and the assumed facts of geology, but there is a marvellous coincidence between them" (Hodge).

Immediate are the acts of God, more swift

Than time or motion: but to human ears

Cannot without process of speech be told;

So told as earthy notion can receive."—Milton

all very good. Manes (whence Manichaism), a Persian philosopher, taught the dualistic doctrine of creation. He held that there are two eternal principles or powers, the one good and the other evil; and that all creation, visible and invisible, material and spiritual, has sprung from those two sources. Those two sources, so ran the dualistic doctrine, were eternally and essentially contrary the one to the other, wherefore they were named light and darkness, good and evil, God and matter. This doctrine worked much mischief in patristic times: Augustine's early life was devoted to its promulgation, and the doctrines he preached were only too well illustrated in his life. The Bible doctrine of creation overturns all such speculation. "The being of God is a kind of law to His working: for that perfection which God is giveth perfection to that He doth" (Hooker).

Psalm 31

Psalm 31

1In thee, O LORD, do I put my trust; let me never be ashamed: deliver me in thy righteousness.
2Bow down thine ear to me; deliver me speedily: be thou my strong rock, for an house of defence to save me.
3For thou art my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name's sake lead me, and guide me.
4Pull me out of the net that they have laid privily for me: for thou art my strength.
5Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth.

Photo credit

Calvin on Psalm 104:15

I have been debating a fellow at another blog about drinking and rather than continue on there I thought I would post something about it here. He made a few points, none of them biblical but all based on personal prejudices. He can’t seem to understand that just because someone has a drink doesn’t mean he will get drunk. He infers that after the first drink (which is not a sin) its then easier to have the second and third and then you’re drunk (which is a sin). It doesn’t work that way. He points out that if I am Reformed then I should know that all should be done to the glory of God. Amen! I agree with that.

Let’s look at what John Calvin has to say concerning this in his commentary on Psalm 104:15:

And wine that cheereth the heart of man. In these words we are taught, that God not only provides for men’s necessity, and bestows upon them as much as is sufficient for the ordinary purposes of life, but that in his goodness he deals still more bountifully with them by cheering their hearts with wine and oil. Nature would certainly be satisfied with water to drink; and therefore the addition of wine is owing to God’s superabundant liberality. The expression, and oil to make his face to shine, has been explained in different ways. As sadness spreads a gloom over the countenance, some give this exposition, That when men enjoy the commodities of wine and oil, their faces shine with gladness. Some with more refinement of interpretation, but without foundation, refer this to lamps. Others, considering the letter î, mem to be the sign of the comparative degree, take the meaning to be, that wine makes men’s faces shine more than if they were anointed with oil. But the prophet, I have no doubt, speaks of unguents, intimating that God not only bestows upon men what is sufficient for their moderate use, but that he goes beyond this, giving them even their delicacies.

So, it is lawful and indeed an added blessing, if you will, to enjoy the gift of wine. God wants us to enjoy wine, it’s explicit in this verse. How can someone argue that? God gives us what we need and then even more.

Calvin continues:

The words in the last clause, and bread that sustains man’s heart, I interpret thus:...“Make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof;”for if we give full scope to the desires of the flesh, there will be no bounds. As God bountifully provides for us, so he has appointed a law of temperance, that each may voluntarily restrain himself in his abundance. He sends out oxen and asses into pastures, and they content themselves with a sufficiency; but while furnishing us with more than we need, he enjoins upon us an observance of the rules of moderation, that we may not voraciously devour his benefits; and in lavishing upon us a more abundant supply of good things than our necessities require, he puts our moderation to the test. The proper rule with respect to the use of bodily sustenance, is to partake of it that it may sustain, but not oppress us. The mutual communication of the things needful for the support of the body, which God has enjoined upon us, is a very good check to intemperance; for the condition upon which the rich are favored with their abundance is, that they should relieve the wants of their brethren. As the prophet in this account of the divine goodness in providence makes no reference to the excesses of men, we gather from his words that it is lawful to use wine not only in cases of necessity, but also thereby to make us merry. This mirth must however be tempered with sobriety, first, that men may not forget themselves, drown their senses, and destroy their strength, but rejoice before their God, according to the injunction of Moses, (Leviticus 23:40;) and, secondly, that they may exhilarate their minds under a sense of gratitude, so as to be rendered more active in the service of God. He who rejoices in this way will also be always prepared to endure sadness,whenever God is pleased to send it. That rule of Paul ought to be kept in mind, (Philippians 4:12,) “I have learned to abound, — I have learned to suffer want.”

So here we see that when God so blesses us we are not to over indulge, i.e., get drunk. With blessing comes responsibility. God has given us wine to “make us merry. This mirth must however be tempered with sobriety, first, that men may not forget themselves, drown their senses, and destroy their strength, but rejoice before their God, according to the injunction of Moses, (Leviticus 23:40;).” Well said! Thus, it is not a forgone conclusion that drinking, sooner or later, will lead to drunkenness or even to just one episode of drunkenness. When we drink we are to employ self-control. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that if you do not drink, then you are missing out on an intended blessing from God. Perhaps its time for the non-drinking Christian crowd to re-think their non drinking position.

What better way to end this post then with the conclusion of Calvin's commentary on this verse:

Moreover, when men have been carefully taught to bridle their lust, it is important for them to know, that God permits them to enjoy pleasures in moderation, where there is the ability to provide them; else they will never partake even of bread and wine with a tranquil conscience; yea, they will begin to scruple about the tasting of water, at least they will never come to the table but in fearfulness. Meanwhile, the greater part of the world will wallow in pleasures without discrimination, because they do not consider what God permits them; for his fatherly kindness should be to us the best mistress to teach us moderation.