I’m not sure what this is from but it’s a great message. For a full sermon on Hell from Piper be sure and listen to his sermon The Echo and Insufficiency of Hell.

HT: Unashamed Workman

[esvbible format="block"]Matthew 14:22-27[/esvbible]

Can there be any more wonderful resolution to a situation than this? To see ghosts in the night and yet find out that it is none other than our Savior? How many ghosts have come our way at the hand of God and we never took the time to recognize the work he was doing through them? How many terrors have consumed us where God stood behind them?

To all of that Jesus says, “Take heart; it is I. Do not be afraid.”

Today marks the fortieth anniversary of the release of the Humanae Vitae, the document from the Catholic church that prohibits the use of artificial contraception (as opposed to birth control by abstinence during fertile periods) in marriage. Joseph Bottum over at First Things has a great article on the document.

While I do not agree with the Catholic church that artificial contraception is always wrong I do believe it is far too common in society. We have turned sex into recreation and pregnancy is simply one of the possible consequences. Contraception helps us to avoid the consequence. I believe if more married couples followed the instructions of the Humanae Vitae some of the sacredness of marriage would return. Sex would not simply be recreation but a life-giving gift. Children might even be considered a blessing.

I more or less agree with the statement at Desiring God about birth control but I strongly feel that couples practicing artificial birth control should be the exception rather than the norm. Human life is sacred. How are we demonstrating this when our marriage practices seek to prevent new human life?

If you have not read the Humanae Vitae I recommend you do so. You will not agree with everything in the document but it offers a wonderful picture of marriage and family.

[esvbible format="block"]Matthew 12:46-50[/esvbible]

It is amazing that someone might be able to call Christ his brother. There are so many titles we can give to him: king, judge, savior, lord, anointed one, shepherd, friend, brother.

Brotherhood with Christ is not an automatic position. We can speak of the brotherhood of humanity which admits all people by virtue of their being human but there is no similar brotherhood with Christ. One does not become blood with Christ by any automatic virtue or characteristic. What Jesus tells us is that obedience makes brothers.

If you want to have Jesus for your brother he tells you how to do it: obey his Father. Don’t just listen to the will of God. Don’t just talk about how good God’s will is. Go out there and actively carry out the will of God – all of it. Live a righteous and holy life, repenting and turning from your sins. Help those who are in need – don’t just feel bad for the needy, find ways to help them! Show love and compassion to the people around you. Give a cup of water to a little child. Visit prisoners. Comfort widows in their distress.

There’s a hymn that says, “I’m so glad I’m a part of the family of God…” but I wonder how many of us live more like black sheep of the family rather than obedient sons and daughters of God working with Jesus Christ to accomplish the will of his Father.

Lord forgive us our rebellion and Lord make us faithful!

I had previously indicated that I was going to move a little quicker over the next five chapters, posting shorter comments on each of the chapters. I have changed my mind and will instead be tackling all five chapters at once. Since the chapters all deal with Scripture it will be a little easier just to take them together. The post will not be a thorough overview of the chapters. Instead I will pick my way through some of the more helpful or perhaps problematic places in the chapters.

That said, instead of several posts coming quick there will be one post covering the chapters that will take me a little longer to get together.

Psalm 18 is one of my favorite texts in the Bible. In it we find the Lord working mightily for his people:
[esvbible format="block"]Psalm 18:6-19[/esvbible]

What an image of God rousing himself to rescue his people, with the whole of Heaven trembling from the force of his might! What enemy can stand before the Lord our God?

But the Psalmist, David, makes an unusual claim:
[esvbible format="block"]Psalm 18:20-24[/esvbible]

How does this line up with what we find elsewhere that no one is righteous, that no one is blameless before the Lord? How can David claim that God acts because David is righteous? Are we finding here evidence that people are capable of living righteously before God and that God will reward them for that righteousness?

It looks that way – until we keep reading.

[esvbible format="block"]Psalm 18:31-33[/esvbible]

God responding to the righteousness in David is God responding to the righteousness he put in David. David did not make his way blameless, God made his way blameless. Anything in David that is praiseworthy, anything that might draw the eye of God, is only there because God has given it. God made his way blameless and made his feet secure.

Request: If you read nothing else in this post, read the last quote from Jonathan Edwards at the bottom.

Pagitt’s book arrived in the mail and while I’m nowhere near ready with a review (have to read farther than the preface for that!) I wanted to post a few comments based on the editor’s note.

Pagitt’s book, A Christianity Worth Believing, has been published through a new series of books called A Living Way: Emergent Visions. Series editor Tony Jones included a forward in Pagitt’s book explaining the series. Here are a few snippets that demonstrate the kind of thinking at the heart of the emerging church:

New ways of being Christian, of being spiritual, of following God have bubbled up…

The problem being that there is nothing new under the sun. There are no new ways of being Christian, of following God. The way is the same as it’s always been. If the path one is following does not resemble the path of old one must ask whether or not he is moving in the right direction. But to be moving in the right direction you have to be headed to a destination. This could be a problem:

…it’s become clear that it is the conversation that matters, not the conclusion; the journey, not the destination.

We might not get anywhere, but at least we’re moving… Certainty, definiteness, firm ideas and a clear vision are things the emerging church tends to cringe away from. I am not even sure what it means to say the conversation, not the conclusion, matters. If you aren’t going somewhere you’ll never get anywhere. This is one reasons Christians are called to fix their eyes on Christ. He is our destination and getting to him is no nebulous journey filled with exploratory conversations and vague travels. He is the end we have in sight and he has already shown us the way to himself. That remains true in this age just as much as in any other.

Doug is an adopted son in the Christian family, and his lack of Christian heritage gives him an unconventional set of eyes and leads him to some unconventional conclusions. He is not beholden to many of the theologies and practices on which many of us were weaned.

In a movement that has done a great deal to throw off “traditional Christianity” someone coming from outside (is Doug really that much of an outsider? He has been “in” the church most of his life…) has certain appeal. In a movement already going away from orthodox Christianity people are all the more willing to respond favorably to someone who will try to once and for all replace the old with something new. Part of the problem is that this new thing isn’t drawn from a firm foundation but comes instead from the conversations of those who don’t believe we should be heading anywhere anyway.

As I read this book I will also be reading Jonathan Edward’s A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections, following Tim Challies’ Reading Classics Together venture. The two books will make an interesting mix. The following quotes come from the introduction of Edwards’ book and will be helpful to keep in mind as I read Pagitt:

It is by the mixture of counterfeit religion with true, not discerned and distinguished, that the devil has had his greatest advantage against the cause and kingdom of Christ, all along hitherto.

By this means he deceives great multitudes about the state of their souls; making them think they are something, when they are nothing; and so eternally undoes them; and not only so, but establishes many in a strong confidence of their eminent holiness, who are in God’s sight some of the vilest of hypocrites.

By this means he brings in even the friends of religion, insensibly to themselves, to do the work of enemies, by destroying religion in a far more effectual manner than open enemies can do, under a notion of advancing it.

And by what is seen of the terrible consequences of this counterfeit religion, when not distinguished from true religion, God’s people in general have their minds unhinged and unsettled in things of religion, and know not where to set their foot, or what to think or do; and many are brought into doubts, whether there be anything in religion; and heresy, and infidelity, and atheism greatly prevail.

This post is part of my series Blogging Calvinism in which I blog my thoughts and reaction to Chosen for Life: The Case for Divine Election by Sam Storms.

In chapter six Storms focuses on the grace of God. He says, “To say that something is done by grace is simply to say that it is done by God.” (77) I understand his point but I think he is being too specific here. A little later he will quote three men who define grace. One of those is also too specific. The quote by Louis Berkhof offered the best general notion of grace: “the free bestowal of kindness on one who has no claim to it.” (79)

Storms is trying to establish early on that grace cannot be grace if it rests in any way on human effort. I agree – but I would want to clarify a few things. For instance, he says that “to inject any human effort or contribution whatsoever is to reject divine grace.” Agreed, but I still believe that one can reject a gift of grace without diminishing the gracious nature of that gift. If God were to freely and graciously give something to me (say, a home in the Bahamas) and I rejected it that would not make his act any less an act of grace. His act being grace does not rest on how I will respond to it. On the other hand, if God told me he would give me a home in the Bahamas if I promised to call myself by his name, that would be grace mixed with human effort or contribution. It is really the latter that is in view in this chapter.

After discussing the goodness, mercy, and grace of God Storms assembles a list of ten characteristics from Scripture about God’s grace. I will list them all and will have comments on several of them.

1. Grace presupposes sin and guilt.
   I have gone back and forth on this point. On the one hand I would say grace is grace whether or not the recipient is unrighteous. If one righteous person does something good for another righteous person independent of that person’s righteousness I think we could still speak of that as an act of grace. I would argue that common grace is given to those who are sinful and guilty but it does not presuppose sin and guilt. Saving grace, on the other hand, presupposes sin and guilt for there would be no saving grace if there were nothing to save. Also, our sin and guilt certainly magnify God’s grace. His grace shines all the more gloriously when we see just how undeserving (or ill-deserving! see next point) we are.
2. Grace sees sinners as ill-deserving, not simply undeserving.
   This was a great point that will help to clarify things later. We do not stand somehow morally neutral before God. We stand as those guilty of sin and worthy of the judgment of God. God’s grace is given to people who deserve the opposite of grace.
3. “Grace ceases to be grace if God is compelled to bestow it in the presence of human merit… grace ceases to be grace if God is compelled to withdraw it in the face of human demerit.”
   I thought this was very compelling. The non-Calvinist notion is that God’s saving grace is extended to all who live and individuals must respond to that grace to be saved. On death a person loses the opportunity to receive saving grace, the possibility of the gift of salvation is removed from them. This means something about the grace of salvation is contingent on something on the human condition. The offer of grace is based on whether or not it is “too late” for us.
   Furthermore, if “being elect” is itself to be described as an act of God’s grace then how can any part of it rest on a human response to the gift of salvation? As I argued before I believe grace is grace regardless of how we respond to it. But can something be spoken of as grace if our response is required? If God elects me based on how I respond to his gift of salvation (the foreknowledge view of predestination) then his election of me is not an act of grace. The initial gift was by grace, the election was by what I did.
4. “Grace cannot incur a debt.”
5. “With respect to justification, grace stands opposed to works… with respect to sanctification, grace is the source of works.”
   While our justification is by grace through faith alone with nothing to do with works, our sanctification is by grace alone to produce works. Another thought, it is the grace of God that enables people to do good, it is not the right choice of people that opens the doors to God’s grace.

6. “This grace that saves is eternal because it is manifested in the historical appearance of Christ.”
   His grace has always been. It is eternal. Before the ages he had this grace for us. But it is on the cross, through Jesus Christ, that grace has been carried out.
7. “This grace is free.”
8. “Grace is sovereign.”
   One cannot speak of God as being unjust if all people do not equally receive grace in the same way. The very fact that it is grace means justice can never make any demand of it. Justice can and does make a demand of us, however, and an amazing thing about God’s grace is how it satisfies his justice.

   Would God be unjust to sovereignly save some and not others? Can God be just if he extends grace to some that he does not to others? But grace is always something free, something unmerited. Justice can demand nothing of it. Grace, on the other hand, can answer the demands of justice. God would be unjust to leave sin unpunished. God would not be unjust to exercise saving grace for some rather than for all, human notions of fairness notwithstanding.

9. “Grace is… the foundation of the means of… our election, our regeneration, our redemption, our justification…”
   Tied to what precedes, each of these things have no basis on a human act or response. But the Bible does demand a response – faith. Storms will touch on this some more in the next point but I am still hoping to see a fuller treatment of whether or not faith itself is a gift. He has talked about it some already but I’d like to see more.
10. Free does not always mean unconditional. Saving grace is unconditional, other graces might be conditional.
    Storms lists quite a few passages demonstrating this. He recognizes that this might seem to undermine everything already said about grace, but quoting Piper he says, “When God’s grace is promised based on a condition, that condition is also a work of God’s grace…” and “God graciously enables the conditions that he requires.” (82) On that last quote I would want to ask Piper if he meant that God enables the condition or if God brings it about (a similar question – does God allow or does God cause suffering?). Enabling something to happen is no guarantee that it will happen. At any rate, the argument behind this point sounds good but I am still waiting to see more Scripture to back it up. ([esvignore]Psalm 18[/esvignore] might be used to demonstrate this, but I’m saving that discussion for another time.)

The chapter closes with Storms drawing all the pieces together. Along the way we find the following statement regarding the non-Calvinist view: “By establishing the condition for election as faith, God is thereby obligated to elect all those who, by means of their now purportedly free wills, believe in the gospel of Christ.” – this is just what I was talking about earlier. This does not deny the necessity of grace, but it would seem to include in our salvation things that are not by grace. All the things leading up to salvation could be spoken of as being by grace – Christ himself, a life long enough to hear and respond to the gospel, friends and family who share the gospel, etc – but at the last the individual is saved not just by an act of God’s grace but by grace followed by a condition that he has merited.

I am now just about halfway through the chapters. In the next five chapters Storms will deal with various Scripture references that touch on sovereign election. I will probably try to pick up the pace on these chapters so my next five posts should be shorter and should go up faster.

I’ve been browsing through some info about Doug Pagitt’s new book A Christianity Worth Believing. I’ve ordered a copy and will post a review once I’ve dug through it. In the meantime I wanted to post a brief comment about something found on the Amazon review, coming from Publisher’s Weekly:

“Conservative critics will no doubt consider this Christianity subtly twisted out of recognition, but postmodern readers struggling with current expressions of faith will see love and hope.”

Odd choice of words. On the one hand you have conservative critics and on the other you have postmodern readers. On the one hand are negative, stodgy, old fashioned people who want to condemn this book and on the other hand are relevant, timely readers who want to consider facts and experience the bliss of love and hope.

Pagitt has posted several YouTube videos about the book. Between the snippet above and the videos below, reading the book should be quite the ride for an old conservative critic like me. But the book isn’t here yet so we will all have to wait and see.

“Those Christianities” get in the way of the kind of Christianity we want today? He is pursuing a Christianity that fits into the world he lives in. I pray that I’m pursuing God who shapes the world we live in.

Evidently people used to say that God lives up in Heaven but now we should say that God lives within and among. Why not return to the omnis and recognize God is everywhere? Early church heretics often failed to properly consider the humanity of Christ. Today’s heretics tend to go the opposite direction, dragging God down to a human (or subhuman!) level.

Pagitt subtly ridicules those who tried to help him understand Christianity. He puts aside what others gave him to help him make sense of Christianity (don’t miss the negative slant he puts on “making sense of Christianity”) and takes up instead… what? We’ll see once I read the book. I have some suspicions.

Amy tells us about the constant childlike connection all people have with God. People are already aware of their sin and it’s that awareness which keeps them from God. She’s right that we are never in a place of no return (in this life) but she is tragically wrong that we should stop focusing on sin separates us from God. We are separated from God, fully and completely, by our sin. The amazing thing is that God did not leave us there. The reason there is never a point of no return is because of what Christ did because of our sin. A few other things worth mention in this vid but I’ll move on.

As far as blatant opposition to truth this is the worst of the videos. Just watch it. But be seated. And try not to yell at the computer, it isn’t its fault. And you might scare the kids.

I believe I am almost justified in accusing the folks at Crossway Books of sin. Hebrews 10:24 tells us to “consider how to stir up one another to love and good works” but all the ESV folks seem to be doing is driving me to impatience.

The object of my impatience is the upcoming ESV Study Bible. It looks like an amazing resource that will be very helpful for those wanting a good all-in-one tool for Bible study. I am already building a mental list of people I plan to buy this for. My budget will be taking a hit in October.

Many people have already written about the ESV Study Bible. I encourage you to visit its homepage and browse around if you want to know more.

Justin Taylor has just posted an excerpt from the study Bible section on Psalms. This is along with previous excerpts from Revelation and Luke. It is not out yet and I am already finding the Study Bible to be useful and helpful. Check it out! And please pray that the Lord might grant me patience as I wait for the October release date.