Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 02/19

Mike Leake 1 Comment

Are we still under the Law? Nathan Busenitz attempts to answer that question. Today we are treated to Part 1 in his series. His thesis will be that the apostlic saints saw that we are “no longer under any part of the Mosaic law”. He will prove this by making four points. We are treated to his first point today; “the biblical saints saw the Mosaic law as a solitary unit.” Check it out, here. You can also read the introductory post, here.

Trevin Wax is asking his readers to come up with Gospel Definitions. How would you define the gospel? He also offers advice on How the older gen. can mentor the younger.

In the category of This is What Happens When We Make Man the Center: the Daily Dose delivers an article about Easter. Joshua responds to a church marketing flier that says, “Easter: It’s All About You”. I understand what they are attempting to say. But whenever we make that which is secondary, the primary thing, we run the risk of idolatry.

Ed Stetzer has a great article on Ethnicity in the SBC.

Michael Patton continues his series on the Emerging Church. Today he tries to tack jello to the wall, or in other words, define the emerging church.

John Piper posts his son Karsten’s poem on Luke 18:25. It is phenomenal.

Phil Johnson continues his discussion on total depravity. Today he asks, How did we Inherit Adam’s Sinfulness?

If this guy is serious, then I apologize; it deserves not laughter but rebuke. If it’s a joke, then it’s a really good one. Because I am giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, and do not see how it cannot be a joke, I post it. (HT: Reformed Mafia)

Along the same lines John Piper discusses his hatred of the prosperity “gospel”. (HT: purgatorio)

The Suicidal Exchange of Licentiousness

Mike Leake

I just realized that I never put the sermon from January 30th online. In our five-part series on Enjoying the Gospel, this is the third sermon. We have previously discussed that The Gospel is Meant to be Enjoyed. Our second and third sermon was dedicated to two pitfalls in enjoying the gospel. The Impossible Burden of Legalism and The Suicidal Exchange of Licentiousness. As always, this is a somewhat rough copy and the actual delivery of the sermon is sometimes a little different than what you read.

The Mystery of Providence Chapter 7

Mike Leake

Chapter 7 concludes the first section of Flavel’s work. In this first section Flavel has purposed to give us overwhelming evidence of the Providence of God in the direction of His saints. This chapter serves to illuminate for us the working of Providence in our sanctification. Flavel is quick to remind us that the Spirit is the “principal agent” in this work, and “all the providences in the world can never effect [sanctification] without Him.” Nonetheless, God does use various means to procure our sanctification.

Flavel gives the most attention in this chapter to “providential afflictions” that God uses to rip sin out of our lives. As he says, “…yet sin is too hard for the best of men; their corruptions carry them through all to sin. And when it is so, not only does the Spirit work internally, but Providence also works eternally in order to subdue them.” (101) Because of this remaining corruption, Flavel says, God will bring afflictions to “purge and cleanse” sin from our lives.

After giving time to showing these providential afflictions at work, our author exposes areas of our remaining corruption. He discusses four areas that corruption rears its ugly head:

  1. In our pride and and the swelling vanity of our hearts when we have a name and esteem among men
  2. In raising up great expectations to ourselves from the creature, and planning abundance of felicity (happiness) and contentment from some promising and hopefuly enjoyments we have in the world
  3. In dependence upon creature-comforts and tangible props (things that hold us up)
  4. In good men by their adherence to things below and their relectuance to go hence.

Under each of these headings Flavel shows how Providence brings afflictions (among other things) to cure these remaining corruptions. It appears that our author digresses (although happily) into a discussion on the amazement that such a mighty God would deal with such worms as us. As he closes his digression, and moves to considerations, he crafts a beautiful statement: “The blood that runs in our veins is as much tainted as theirs in hell.” To prove this he gives to considerations. In their constitution and natural dispotion, and in their outward condition they are as much like us as we care to admit.

We close this grand section on considering (yea, marvelling) at the works of Providence upon such “vile, despicable worms as we are!” Yet, “how ancient, how free, and how astonishing this act of grace! This is that design which all providences are in pursuit of, and will not rest till they are executed” (107). Flavel concludes this section by giving us six proofs of this very thing:

  1. Does not the gift of His only Son out of His bosom show this, that God makes great account of this vile thing, man?
  2. Does not the [attention] of His providential care for us show His esteem of us?
  3. Does not the tenderness of His providence show His esteem of us?
  4. Does not the variety of the fruits of His providence show it?
  5. Does not the ministry of angels in the providential kingdom show it?
  6. Does not the providence of which this day calls us to celebrate the memory, show the great regard God has for his people?

Discussion:

After this chapter (and really this section) I am left asking as David did, “what is man that you are mindful of him?” I think Flavel’s hope was to overwhelm us with evidence of the providential care of the Almighty. He has done so with me.

Do you agree with the statement, found on page 100? “There is in all the regenerate a strong propensity and inclination to sin, and in that lies a principal part of the power of sin”. Is there still a “strong propensity” in those that the Holy Spirit lives in? Are we not said to be dead to sin, and “delivered from this body of death”?

What response do you have to Flavel’s statement that, “the blood that runs in our veins is as much tainted as theirs in hell”?

Why I Am Not A Calvinist (Part 2)

Mike Leake 12 Comments

Again, this is not a confession that I do not adhere to the doctrines of grace. As far as my theological beliefs I am indeed a Calvinist. This series, however, is exploring 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 explore the doctrine of Total Depravity and its implications.

In the Westminister Confession (Chapter 9, Section 3) it states, “Man, by his fall Into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.”

In other words because of the Fall, every man born into the world is born into a state of sin. Because of this we have lost all ability of our will to do any spiritual good. This means that because our hearts are so corrupt, we will NEVER desire, for the correct reasons, to do that which is spiritually good. Nor will we ever desire to take hold of Christ or venture out in faith. It is because of this inability and corruption that “no man will come to the Father unless drawn” (John 6:44). Without Jesus we are altogether opposed to the good. We are dead in our sin. We cannot convert ourselves, nor even put ourselves in the place for such a thing to happen.

John Piper builds upon this by showing four ways in which man’s depravity is total:

  1. Our rebellion against God is total. Apart from the grace of God there is no delight in the holiness of God, and there is no glad submission to the sovereign authority of God.
  2. In his total rebellion everything man does is sin.
  3. Man’s inability to submit to God and do good is total.
  4. Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment.

Everyone of these I agree with, doctrinally speaking. However, I am left to ask myself whether or not I REALLY believe what this says. What are the implications of such statements?

  • Whenever I preach the gospel (whether in personal evangelism or corporately) the only hope that my hearer(s) have of responding to the gospel is the sovereign work of God in regeneration. Therefore, I ought to spend much time in prayer. I do not.
  • No matter how catchy, exegetical, expository, or true my sermons are they will never convert a person unless the Father draws them. Therefore, I ought to faithfully proclaim the word of God and leave the results to God. I should never be discouraged but only driven to more prayer. I get discouraged.
  • There will be no “glad submission” nor a treasuring Christ without the Spirit’s work. I should never be suprised when our students do not treasure Christ as they ought. Yet, I am astonished.
  • The only hope that we have of not being cast in hell is the work of Christ and the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, no outreach program, no purpose statement, no mission project, no books given to the community, nothing but God will bring about conversion. I might get this one. But, again, my soft knees reveal that I do not.
  • Unregenerate men will not do good. Therefore, it should not come as a suprise that our politicians are passing laws to allow abortion. The school shootings should not suprise us, nor should we think they will change through policies. It does not matter if Mike Huckabee, Barak Obama, or even the Apostle Paul is the President of the United States. Unless the Holy Spirit works in the hearts of people there will still be abortions (though maybe illegal), there will still be school shootings, there will still be immorality in our land. No political strategy or political leader can save us from the tyranny of our own hearts. I think I actually get this one. So maybe I am actually 1/40th a Calvinist in practice.
  • It is natural for people to be jerks. Therefore, I should not be offended (at least as deeply) when people are doing what they do by nature. Yet, I find myself not liking people. I ought to instead pity them and pray for them.
  • This depravity is so deep and each act of rebellion is deserving of hell. That means that every moment that a sinner stands outside the blood of Christ he is heaping sin upon sin to his account. He is adding to the wrath of God that will be meted out upon himself. Therefore, this ought to move me to love people and passionately share the gospel. Knowing that it is only through the Word and the Spirit working through this Word that men will be converted. Yet, I watch television and play Madden on PS2. Do I really believe in hell? Do I really believe that the totally depraved will be cast there unless God rich in mercy saves them?
  • Every act of rebellion is an offense to God. We know that those of the Reformed persuasion are constantly talking about the glory of God. Every act of rebellion is a trampling of that glory. Ought a Calvinist be passionate about stamping out every act of rebellion? Ought we not preach as a dying man to dying men?

So, until I pray, plead, and proclaim like a Calvinist I should not dare call myself one. Dear God, make me in action what I profess to be in doctrine!

Read Part 3…