John Owen on Stirring the Mind.
In his treatise “Meditations and Discourses on the Glory of Christ,” John Owen offers five “directions” for stirring up the minds of believers to contemplate the glory of Christ (chapter 4):
- Let us get it fixed on our souls and minds, that this glory of Christ in the divine constitution of his person is the best, the most noble, useful, beneficial object that we can be conversant about in our thoughts, or cleave unto in our affections.
- Our second direction unto the same end is, that we diligently study the Scripture, and the revelations that are made of this glory of Christ therein.
- Another direction to this same end is, that having attained the light of the knowledge of the glory of Christ from the Scripture, or by the dispensation of the truth in the preaching of the gospel, we would esteem it our duty frequently to meditate thereon.
- Let your occasional thoughts of Christ be many, and multiplied every day.
- The next direction is, that all our thoughts concerning Christ should be accompanied with admiration, adoration, and thanksgiving.
There is a beautiful progression in these five directions. Owen begins by holding out the beauty of Christ as the highest end we could possibly pursue (1), and then directs us where to find that vision of Christ—the Scriptures (2). But he is not content to allow such a vision of Christ to remain in our times in the Word (whether through personal reading or hearing the Word preached and taught); he exhorts us to frequently reflect/meditate on the beauty of Christ that we have seen in the Word (3). Such meditation and reflection should not be limited to devoted time in the Word and prayer, but should spill over into our “occasional thoughts” throughout the day (4). He then concludes with the reminder that such reflections should not be merely an intellectual exercise, but should be joined with our affections (5).
Add comment July 14, 2009
Theology Terms Tuesday – Dispensationalism?
Dispensationalism is a theological system that teaches biblical history is best understood in light of a number of successive administrations of God’s dealings with mankind, which it calls “dispensations.” It maintains fundamental distinctions between God’s plans for national Israel and for the New Testament Church, and emphasizes prophecy of the end-times and a pre-tribulation rapture of the church prior to Christ’s Second Coming. Its beginnings are usually associated with the Plymouth Brethren movement in the UK and the teachings of John Nelson Darby.
The dispensations
- the dispensation of innocence (or freedom), (Genesis 1:1 – 3:7), prior to Adam’s fall,
- of conscience, (Genesis 3:8 – 8:22), Adam to Noah,
- of government, (Genesis 9:1 – 11:32), Noah to Abraham,
- of patriarchal rule (or promise), (Genesis 12:1 – Exodus 19:25), Abraham to Moses,
- of the Mosaic Law, (Exodus 20:1 – Acts 2:4), Moses to Christ,
- of grace, (Acts 2:4 – Revelation 20:3), the current church age, and
- of a literal earthly 1,000 year Millennial Kingdom that has yet to come but soon will, (Revelation 20:4 – 20:6).
Each one of these dispensations is said to represent a different way in which God deals with man, specifically a different testing for man. “These periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God’s method of dealing with mankind, in respect to two questions: of sin, and of man’s responsibility,” explained C. I. Scofield. “Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment – marking his utter failure in every dispensation.”
Add comment July 14, 2009
IVES New Video.
My friend Kyle is in a band. They are called IVES. Right now IVES is wrapping up a new record. Check out this preview. It’s worth your time.
Add comment July 11, 2009
Stellar Ties.
My friend is releasing his own line of ties. They are sweet, and they come with matching cuff links. You should buy the set. I am going to.
Add comment July 10, 2009
Theology Terms Tuesday on Thursday – Covenant Theology Vs. New Covenant Theology.
From the Reformation Theology Site:
NCT is pretty much an in-house debate among (reformed) baptists and, the idea or system, I believe, has its roots in a reaction to legalism in some Reformed Baptist circles. Here are a couple of views they hold in contrast to Covenant Theology:
1) NCT rejects the covenant of works,
2) NCT rejects the active obedience of Christ. That is Christ’s full obedience to all the prescriptions of the divine law…making available a perfect righteousness before the law that is imputed or reckoned to those who put their trust in him.
3) NCT embraces only the passive obedience of Christ: Christ’s willing obedience in bearing all the sanctions imposed by that law against his people because of their transgression being the ground of God’s justification of sinners (Rom. 5:9), by which divine act they are pardoned.
4) So they (NCT) rejects the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to sinners being related to his having fulfilled the law. Rather the righteouenss he imputes to sinners is simply from the fact that he is God. So the emphasis is on his death and not on his life.
Wheras a covenant theologian would affirm Christ lived the life we should have lived and died the death we deserve, the NCT theologican would only subscribe the the second half of that statement. They would reject the idea that Christ fulfilled the covenant of works from our side. In our view (CT) this significantly downplays the necessity and importance of the incarnation.
Note: Whlie the above represent many within the NCT camp, I understand that it does not describe all streams of thought in NCT. Apparently some have moved closer to CT in these areas and differ only in that Christ having fulfilled the law makes the moral law no longer binding on the believer.
2 comments July 9, 2009
Some Piper Thoughts on Free Will.
Before the fall of Adam sinless man was able to sin. For God said, “In the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:17).
As soon as Adam fell, sinful man was not able not to sin, since we were unbelieving,and “whatever is not from faith is sin” (Romans 14:23).
When we are born again, by the power of the Holy Spirit we are able to not sin, for “sin will have no dominion over you” (Romans 6:14).
This means that what Paul calls “the natural man” or “the mind of the flesh” is not able not to sin. Paul says this in Romans 8:7-9
The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (See also 1Corinthians 2:14).
How then shall we think of free will?
It is not a saving power. In his freedom to will, fallen man cannot on his own do anything but sin. Such “free will” is a devastating reality. Without some power to overcome it’s bent, our free will only damns us.
We could stop here and turn with joy to the gospel truth that God overcomes our resistance, gives us life, wakens our dead inclination for Christ, and freely and irresistibly draws us to himself (John 6:44, 65; Acts 13:48; Ephesians 2:5; 2 Timothy 2:25-26).
But it sometimes helps to answer objections. One common objection is that, if we “cannot” do what is right, and “can only” do what is sin, then we are not acting voluntarily and cannot be praised or blamed.
Here is part of John Calvin’s answer to this objection:
The goodness of God is so connected with his Godhead that it is not more necessary to be God than to be good; whereas the devil, by his fall, was so estranged from goodness that he can do nothing but evil.
Should anyone give utterance to the profane jeer that little praise is due to God for a goodness to which he is forced, is it not obvious to every man to reply, “It is owing not to violent impulse, but to his boundless goodness, that he cannot do evil?”
Therefore, if the free will of God in doing good is not impeded, because he necessarily must do good; if the devil, who can do nothing but evil, nevertheless sins voluntarily; can it be said that man sins less voluntarily because he is under a necessity of sinning? (Institutes, II.3.5)
Add comment July 9, 2009
Imputation by Leithart.
JT writes:
Peter Leithart some “partial, exploratory, perhaps incoherent thoughts on imputation”–which I think are pretty intriguing. The argument is that biblically there is never any space for “legal fiction.” For those who have thought about such things, feel free to offer any comments about his proposal.
Add comment July 9, 2009
A New Wishlist Item: Korg’s Pandora Toneworks
Add comment June 25, 2009
Vos – The New Creation.
“The biblical redemption aims at a new creation and nothing less than that. Therefore, all the threads of purposeful finality are made to run together in the redemptive revelation of grace; all the rays of original eschatological light and splendor are refocused in it. The dignity of God as Redeemer postulates it and the truly pious soul will not, cannot, conceive of it otherwise. The promise reminds God of and, as it were, confronts him with the fact that he cannot abandon the works of his hands, that he must perfect what he has begun. This is but another way of saying that eschatology is the crown of redemption both from God’s and man’s side.”
“The Eschatology of the Old Testament
Add comment June 23, 2009
Theology Terms Tuesday – Lordship Salvation
Lordship salvation is the position that receiving Christ involves a turning in the heart from sin and, as a part of faith, a submissive commitment to obey Jesus Christ as Lord. It also maintains that progressive sanctification and perseverance must necessarily follow conversion. Those who hold to the doctrine of perseverance of the saints see this not only as a requirement, but an assured certainty according to the sustaining grace of Christ.
The doctrine of lordship salvation has implications for evangelism, assurance, and the pursuit of holiness. The grace of God in salvation not only forgives, but transforms, and a lack of obedience or transformation in a person’s life is warrant to doubt that they have been born again. The grounds for assurance include not only the objective promises of God (like John 3:16), but also the internal testimony of the Spirit (Romans 8:16) and holiness the Spirit produces in our lives (1 John 2:3-4,19).
The non-lordship salvation position is popularly known by critics as “easy believism”, and by adherents as “free grace”. However, proponents of Lordship salvation frown upon this usage of the term “free grace”, as the free grace spoken of the Bible both justifies the sinner and transforms the heart unto obedience.
Add comment June 23, 2009
Bahnsen on the Laws of Logic
“The laws of logic are not conventional or sociological, they have a transcendental necessity about them, they are universal, they are invariant and are not material in nature…” – Bahnsen from The Great Debate
Add comment June 22, 2009
The Hermeneutical Spiral Surveyed.
In an age where relativism runs rampant and contextualization appears to be normative, proper hermeneutics is found to be essential when one is trying to unlock the author’s original intent of scripture. Osborne in his book, The Hermeneutical Spiral, does a fine job of laying a proper methodology to the art of hermeneutics. Let us discuss and critique Osborne’s methods so we may apply his standards to our studies.
First Osborne defines hermeneutics as an art, science, and spiritual act. This threefold definition deems noteworthy because it helps apply a lens in which we may approach hermeneutics. In his definition of hermeneutics as an art Osborne states, “it is an acquired skill demanding both imagination and an ability to apply the “Laws” to selected passages or books.” I have found this to be true even in the limited time I have had in sermon preparation. The art of hermeneutics is only to be mastered by repetition and the application of standards. As with all other arts, hermeneutics requires a consistent and extensive, life long, practice; without such the “acquired skill” may fade. Secondly, he defines hermeneutics as a science. This definition allows us to see that it is logical and that there is an orderly process in which we approach it. If hermeneutics were to not be defined as a science it would be prone haphazard practices that would lead to improper interpretation. The last definition we see is spiritual act. Osborne states that it is “the most important” lens in which we approach hermeneutics. Because scripture is “God breathed” it is infinite in nature which requires illumination. Without God releasing “flashes of insight”, as Osborne states, we may not be able to apply the principles (ethical and logical) of scripture to our lives as well as others.
Osborne’s method to hermeneutics appears to be rational and effective. He states that one is to consider the larger context within which a passage is found. In this larger context we can subdivide categories; first, is the historical context.
Within the historical context we should consider the following: authorship, date, the group to which the text is addressed, and the purpose as well as theme. To obtain this information one would primarily use secondary sources. One should proceed with extreme caution when using such resources, largely because there may be a tendency to then interpret through the perspective of one’s source. In the same breath if we do not know the historical context in which a text was written, we are apt to read in twentieth-century grammar and logic; which may not apply.
Second, we are to consider the logical context. This may be found by applying the following method: charting the book, diagramming the paragraph, and arcing. These three methods that Osborne lays out provide a solid foundation to the science of hermeneutics. First, when one charts a book he discovers systematic themes, words, and phrases used. This helps discover the overarching context to any direct texts that are within a book. Without this method it would be effortless to misconstrue individual passages within a text. Second, one is to diagram the paragraph. This consists of breaking sections down to the phrase and word levels. When this is accomplished one can visualize the thought flow of a paragraph then further break down grammatical details. Finally, arcing allows us to break down relationships between sentences and their corresponding structure. He states that it may be more effective to use this method when studying the Old Testament parallelisms.
Overall Osborne’s methods seem to be fluid in thought and practice. We ought to highly consider and apply his principles to our studies not only for greater theological whit, but for application of the text to our lives as well as others. Osborne states, and I fully agree, “The final goal of hermeneutics is not systematic theology but the sermon. The actual purpose of Scripture is not explanation but exposition, not description but proclamation.” The benefit of hermeneutics is that we get systematic theology and sermon, explanation and exposition, description that leads to proclamation.
Add comment June 19, 2009
A Theological Tree of Life – Vos.
“To take God as source and end of all that exists and happens, and to hold such a view suffused with warmth of genuine devotion, stands not only related to theology as the fruit stands to the tree: it is by reason of its essence a veritable theological tree of life.”
(The Pauline Eschatology, p. 61)
Add comment June 19, 2009
