The Godly Man’s Picture Chapter 1

Mike Leake 2 Comments

The point of this book is simple, to paint for us a picture of what a godly man looks like. Thomas Watson will be our Bob Ross. He will begin by explaining the picture that he is going to paint, then paint it, then tell us how to paint it. It will be an exciting journey. In each section we will give a summary of the chapter (The Canvas), provide discussion, and enjoy a few especially vivid quotes (Strokes of Genius).

The Canvas:

Because forgiveness “lays the foundation for all other mercies”, Watson will begin here. In a short chapter Watson provides 5 points concerning forgiveness:

  1. Forgiveness of sin is an act of God’s free grace
  2. God, in forgiving sin, remits the guilt and penalty
  3. Forgiveness of sin is through the blood of Christ
  4. Before sin is forgiven, it must be repented of
  5. God having forgiven sin, he will no longer call it to remembrance

He closes the chapter with two simple points: it’ s deplorable not to be forgiven and precious to have forgiveness.

Discussion:

What do you think Watson means when he says, “When the Lord pardons a sinner, he does not pay a debt, but gives a legacy”? What is this legacy?

Strokes of Genius:

“He who is humbled for sin will value pardoning mercy the more.” (p10)

“Sin shall not be cast in like cork which rises up again, but like lead which sinks to the bottom.” (p10)

“The pardoned soul is out of the gunshot of hell.” (p11)

“Guilt clips the wings of prayer so that it cannot fly to the throne of grace, but forgiveness breeds confidence” (p11)

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 03/07-09

Mike Leake

Brian Thornton has an intriguing quote. Who do you think said it?

This could be a watershed decision by an appeals court in California. The court has ruled that parents have no constitutional right to homeschool their children. I can not articulate a comment on this as effective as Dr. Mohler. I would simply say, “that is just dumb”. Dr. Mohler is a little more articulate, read his take here.

Great story of witnessing and faithfulness to the gospel by Timmy Brister: The Cross Isn’t Sexy.

Michael Spencer, the IMonk, has compiled a list of 10 Reasons He Doesn’t Read Your Blog. It would very helpful to me if my readers would read this article, and e-mail me any suggestions in how I may improve this blog.

I failed to mention this last week. Abraham Piper has a new blog called 22 Words. It is very intriguing. And it takes about 15 seconds to read each post.

There is a very important discussion going on between Rick Love, John Piper, Justin Taylor and a few others. The eye of this hurricaine is found in Love’s signing of A Common Word. He gives reasons why, Piper, Taylor, and others do not quite buy it. Here is Love’s latest explanation. Here is Frank Turk’s (of Team Pyro) response to Love.

Trevin Wax points us to a phenomenal Spurgeon quote admonishing pastors and people alike, to read.

This is a phenomenal post by Ray Ortlund. His central thesis is this: “In the heart of God, moral fervor is beautiful. In the heart of a sinner, moral fervor is complicated.” He then offers a few diagnostics to monitor whether or not he is slipping into moral fervor. Wonderful post.

There is a Real Preachers of Genius video floating around. I thought this one was pretty funny (and sadly true) also:

Why I Am Not a Calvinist (Part 3)

Mike Leake 4 Comments

I really disprove of the title of this post. It offends its author. In my mind saying I am not a Calvinist is almost like saying I do not believe in the biblical gospel. Lest I be misunderstood, I am not saying that Calvinism=the gospel. It does not. But soteriologically speaking I am a Calvinist through and through, therefore to me the issue is very near to the gospel. It pains me to think that many people read the title of this and I get lumped in with those I disagree with theologically. But I deserve the association. I am exploring in this series the truth that even though in my soteriology I may be Reformed, in my practice I am not certain I deserve such a title. Today we will discuss the second petal of the TULIP: Unconditional Election.

In the Westminster Confession (Chapter 3, Sections 3-7) it states:

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.

These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished.

Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace.

As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are elected being fallen in Adam are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.

The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice.

In other words before the foundation of the world God has chosen, for His good pleasure, those whom He would redeem and those He would not. It is an unchangeable decree. It is not based on His foreknowledge. It is not conditional. It’s basis is in the free sovereign pleasure of the Almighty.

This is a very difficult doctrine to swallow. No doubt some of my readers will balk at such arbitrary choosing on the part of God. Yet, I must repeat that I will not discuss the merit or demerit of such a position. I do affirm what is stated here. My concern in this post is not to discuss whether this is true or not. My concern is to determine whether or not the fruits of believing this doctrine are evident in my life. Honestly some are. I am probably exaggerating my faults in some areas and diminishing my faults in others. The truth is, I am the biggest sinner I know. Growth in these areas will only come by the grace of God.

Those that believe in unconditional election ought to be marked by certain fruits. As J.I. Packer helps us see in his Concise Theology that this doctrine is primarily pastoral. As he says, “in Scripture it is a pastoral doctrine, brought in to help Christians see how great is the grace that saves them, and to move them to humility, confidence, joy, praise, faithfulness, and holiness in response”. (149-150) If the biblical doctrine of unconditional election has really penetrated my soul, and if Packer is correct, then I ought to be marked by humility, confidence, joy, praise, faithfulness, and holiness. I ought to be consistently astonished by the grace of God in my life. Am I? Do I REALLY believe this doctrine?

  • This doctrine should also have a bearing on the way that I deal with believers that disagree with this doctrine. If I really believe that God dispenses salvation freely. Is it really right for me to believe that I am a Calvinist because I’m “smart and believe the Bible”? Is it possible that my interaction with Arminians (and those that are somewhere in-between) ought to be marked by humility instead of spiritual elitism? Far too often, I’m right and they are wrong. I can be way too militant in my Calvinism. Therefore, I probably ought to shut my mouth and quit debasing such a doctrine with actions unfitting to its assertions.
  • Do I believe this doctrine when I preach? Do I have a joy in my heart and a confidence that God WILL draw out His elect? Do I believe that one of those “means thereunto” that God has chosen to draw people is the preaching of His glorious Word? If this doctrine is true and it is the “due season” which the Spirit will draw then they WILL come. Ought I not to have confidence in prayer and preaching? Yet sometimes my heart is in such a melancholy state that I must not truly believe this doctrine.
  • A person that believes this doctrine ought to live a life that reflects continual astonishment at the grace of God. I ought to be overwhelmed that He chose me, for no reason other than His good pleasure. I ought to remember that He could have just as easily passed me over, and been fully justice. Yet, I secretly live my life as if I deserve mercy and as if God made a really good choice. Oh, what disgusting pride. A believer in this doctrine ought to never have pride but only a trembling joy. I have pride.
  • If I really understood this doctrine then sin would not look good. I would be so enamored by the grace of God that picked me out of hell that I would not desire to “present my members again to unrighteousness”. Yet, how often do I forget the amazing grace of God?
  • One that is a recipient of such grace, and one that truly believes and understands such grace, ought to be gracious himself. I am not so certain that I am. If I really understand that grace is undeserved then I would stop giving “grace” only to those that “deserve” it. I would be seeking out sinners instead of avoiding them. I do not truly understand grace.

Here is my simple assertion. Calvinists ought to be the most humble, gracious, irenic, confident, joyous, and holy people. Calvinists ought to have speech that is seasoned with the salt of grace and praise should consistently be pouring forth from our lips. Yet what are Calvinists most known by? Our pride, our passion for truth at the expense of people, and our lack of all those graces just mentioned. I am no exception. So, until I begin to more consistently model those graces, maybe I ought not to call myself a Calvinist.

Dear God make me in attitude what I claim to be in doctrine!

Review of John Flavel–The Mystery of Providence

Mike Leake 2 Comments

Author: John Flavel

Pages: 221 pages

Publisher: Banner of Truth

Price: 5.99 USD

Genre: Puritan Paperback

Quick Summary:

As it says on the back cover the purpose of this work is to, “persuade Christians of the excellency of observing and meditating upon [Providence]”. It is especially important to keep in mind the difficulties that would have attended Flavel and his congregants in 1678, when this work was first published. 16 years earlier Flavel was one of the ministers booted out of his congregation in the Great Ejection of 1662. Flavel knew heartache. Yet, Flavel also knew a sovereign God. It is the workings of this Sovereign God in the midst of such heartache that he offers this work.

If you like history you will probably like the first part of this work. Flavel gives very few points of application, yet he tells numerous stories to give us evidence of Providence. This covers a little over the first 100 pages. Then, our author gives what appears to be the main body of this work; encouragement to adhere to our duty of meditating on Providence. Finally, about two-thirds of the way through the book, Flavel will appease our microwave culture by giving numerous points of application.

What I Liked:

Many people tend to like the second and third section the best. I love to hear stories and study history. Therefore, I tend to like the first section a little more. I do appreciate Flavel’s simplicity in building his argument. He does not take us through a ton of loops to overwhelm us with evidence of Providence and then exhort us to respond. He does it simply, I appreciate that. Even though the book is not filled with a ton of new information, it is so overwhelming with examples that it causes you to stop and think. That appears to be one of Flavel’s primary goals; to get us to stop and smell the beautiful garden that God has planted before our eyes. He succeeds.

What I Disliked:

My personality is not the type that enjoys sniffing at roses. If the roses are quickly changing and offering new sensory material for me to take in, then maybe I could hack it. But to spend an hour admiring the intricacies of a bed of very similar roses would, frankly, bore me. At times in reading this work I felt bored. I felt like screaming, “I get it”. Move on to something new John. This, however, is probably less the authors fault and more mine. Would this book have better served us had it been a little shorter and more pointed? I am not certain. Is it better to be overwhelmed by the evidence of Providence or is it better to be stimulated to such a point that it teases your appetite and causes you to taste and see that the Lord is good? We probably need both.

Should You Buy It?

Probably. This is not like a Bruised Reed where I will, like a puppy begging for bacon, urge you to read it. Nevertheless, it is an excellent book to read. I am going to give it a 3 out of 5 stars but it probably deserves better. If you like smelling the roses then you will love it. If you are like me and would rather take a quick glance and then move on to another bed of roses, then you probably need to read it as well. We could use a little slowing down.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars