Reforming West Virginia

Should West Virginians Speak in Tongues? An Overview of Tongues in the New Testament

2012-02-20T14:11:00.003-05:00

1. The occasion of Pentecost introduces tongues as an evangelistic tool provided to the Apostles and some early Christians so they could preach the Gospel to people who spoke other languages (Acts 1:4, 8-9; 2:1-11; I Corinthians 14:21-22). Modern tongues-speakers do not appear to use the gift of tongues for evangelistic or missionary purposes.

2. The term “glossa” in Acts 2 definitely refers to human languages. These are listed as languages such as Arabic, Coptic, Greek, Latin, and various regional dialects (Acts 2:6-11). I Corinthians 14:10-11; 21 describes the languages under discussion as languages in this world that have meaning--"There are all sorts of languages in this world, none of which are without meaning."

3. These languages possessed content or meaning. Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is an example of that content, while I Corinthians 14 describes the content as prayers, thanksgivings, and praise which could edify if translated and could be used to declare the wonders of God. The phrase in verse 2--"in his spirit he speaks mysteries"--makes reference to things that must be made clear in order to be understood. To say that the speaker is speaking only to God and is speaking mysteries is to say that no one else knows what in the world he is saying because there is no interpreter. In every case in which the word is used in the NT, it refers to meaningful truths, not to meaningless sounds. The modern practice of tongues-speaking does not appear to involve "languages" that are human, or that posses grammar, words, or syntax, or that are capable of representing meaning or content.

4. These languages were capable of edifying the speaker, in the same way that prophecy edified the church, and could edify the recipients if understood or translated (I Corinthians 14:4, 16). This means that the languages were understood by the person speaking them (I Corinthians 14:2-4, 14-17, 28). The clause in verse 13--"my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful,"--should be understood to mean "I pray with a spiritual gift, but I produce nothing intelligible or that can be comprehended." It does not mean that the speaker did not know what he or she was saying. In the modern practice of tongues-speaking, there is usually no claim to personal comprehension of what is being said. Therefore, the speaker cannot be edified by the content of his or her "speech." This invalidates tongues that are used for private, personal prayer purposes. Neither is there usually a translator who can provide a translation that will edify others on public occasions.

5. The use of the gift of tongues was subject to the will of the speaker (I Corinthians 14:26-33). The spirits of the prophets are subject to the will of the prophets. In the modern practice of tongues-speaking, tongues sometimes involve a euphoric atmosphere and sometimes a trance-like state. The "Spirit" comes upon the tongues speaker to create a condition suitable for tongues-speaking. Additionally, the use of spiritual gifts in worship services was subject to rules of order (I Corinthians 14:26-40). Paul lists at least three of these: 1) All tongues must be interpreted, 2) must be done one at a time, 3) must not interrupt the order of a worship service. The modern practice of tongues-speaking often violates all three of these principles.

6. Certain spiritual gifts are no longer necessary after passing of the Apostles and the completion of Scripture. Here is an exposition of I Corinthians 13:8-12 that expounds on this.

The Gift of Tongues Has Ceased: An Exposition of I Corinthians 13:8-12

2012-02-20T00:47:00.002-05:00

I Corinthians 12, 13, and 14 address the use of spiritual gifts in the church. A prominent focus is on the gift of tongues. Especially chapter 13 gives an explanation for why the gift of tongues is no longer necessary or available today. Verse 8 explains that some spiritual gifts are permanent and some are temporary:

“Love never fails.”

In other words, love is a permanent gift of God. Verse 13 lists two more permanent gifts—faith and hope. These three “abide” or remain, because they are all permanent. On the other hand, verse 8 also explains that some gifts are not permanent. They are temporary:

“. . . but if there are gifts of [c]prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.”

These three gifts have at least two things in common. They are gifts of revelation and communication. The church of the apostolic era did not possess the complete revelation of God in the form of the NT. This leads to the obvious question, “Without the NT, how did they know what God wanted them to know?” The answer is that God gave certain individuals gifts of revelation and communication—knowledge, prophecy, and tongues.

The gift of knowledge was the provision of divine revelation to individuals directly from God. The later church received its knowledge about God from the Old and New Testaments. The church of the apostolic era had only the Old Testament, so God gave New Testament era knowledge directly to specific individuals. For instance—Paul the Apostle used this knowledge to produce the epistles. Other prophets and apostles did the same. This gift was no doubt tied to the gift of prophecy. Through this gift, individuals preached what God wanted to have communicated to his people. Tongues was closely related to these two gifts—the ability to preach what God wanted preached directly to people who spoke foreign languages. It was primarily a gift for missionary purposes. Verse 9 continues:

“For we know in part and we prophesy in part.”

God gifted the writers of the New Testament to inscripturate the very Words of God so that it could be passed from generation to generation. But in the church of the apostolic era, before the completion of the New Testament Scriptures, God directly revealed knowledge to congregations through people with the gifts of knowledge, prophecy, and tongues-speaking. But God did not reveal everything to any one person. They received “knowledge in part and prophecy in part.” Partial prophecy and partial knowledge. What God gave them to know and preach was exactly what he wanted known and preached at any particular moment.

Verse 8 has already told us that, unlike love, hope and faith, which are permanent, the partial gifts are temporary:

“. . . but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.”

Knowledge, prophecy, and tongues will come to an end because some gifts are permanent and some are temporary.

This leads to the question, “When will the gifts that are temporary come to an end?” Verse 10 explains:

“When the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.”

The juxtaposition of the words “perfect” and “partial” provide the answer. Since the word “perfect” is contrasted with the word “partial,” we understand that the word “perfect” refers to something that is complete. An apple pie with one slice missing is not “perfect” or complete. Another way to say this is that when the goal or purpose (τὸ τέλειον) of the temporary gifts has been achieved, the temporary gifts will end. So “when the perfect comes” means this—when the revelation and communication that comes through knowledge, prophecy, and tongues is complete (i.e., no longer partial) the partial or temporary gifts will cease to be necessary or available. The partial will be done away.

From where do we get our revelation today? How does God communicate to us today? Obviously, through the Word of God in the complete Old and New Testaments. The perfect came when God stopped communicating in partial ways, and when he completed his communication through the prophets and apostles in the form of the Old and New Testaments. Therefore, I believe that the temporary gifts of knowledge, prophecy, and tongues passed away when we had complete in our hands everything that God wanted revealed—namely, the complete Word of God.

In verses 11 and 12, Paul provides two often misunderstood illustrations of this transition of the partial to the complete. He speaks first of a child that matures into a man and forsakes childish ways. According to this first illustration, the church is like a child that grows up and no longer needs what it had when it was child. By analogy, the early church would lose the gifts of partial revelation when it eventually had complete revelation.

The second illustration is that of a mirror. Unfortunately this illustration is frequently given an eschatological interpretation that is completely out of line with the context. It should be viewed as supporting the train of thought that the partial will give way to the complete, and it should be viewed as parallel to the previous illustration. To remove it to the distant future and the return of Christ introduces an element that is foreign to Paul’s flow of thought and not parallel to his previous illustration.

Mirrors of the early church era were not like mirrors today. They were usually polished metal or stone surfaces. Regardless, the reflection could not be compared to the crisp, clear reflections that we use today. The reflection was always dimmer than face to face contact with another person. So to see a reflection in a mirror was to see only a dim image. But to see face to face was to see clearly. The analogy is the same as the first illustration—the partial revelation from God was like a dim image. On the other hand, the complete revelation from God was like seeing someone face to face. The sentence “now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known,” is often improperly stretched, along with the phrase “but then face to face,” to refer to a state of being after we have transitioned into glory. This interpretation therefore interprets the word "perfect" as referring to the time of the second advent of Christ. However, this once again reads into the passage an element that is foreign to Paul’s train of thought and not parallel to the previous illustration. To know as we have been fully known is simply a way of saying that knowledge is full and complete. Before the revelation was complete, the church only knew partially. But after the revelation was complete, the church knew fully what God wanted it to know.

In both of these two illustrations, Paul used prejudicial language. He spoke of childish ways and dim mirrors as if they were far less desirable than maturity and seeing face to face. We are intended to hear a tone in his voice that says, “You don’t want childish ways, do you? You don’t want dim mirrors do you?” The answer that Paul expects through this prejudicial language is “of course not.” The obvious conclusion is this—God has given to us his complete revelation. Why in the world would we ever want to go back to the days of mere partial knowledge, prophecy and tongues?

Glory, To Glorify

2012-02-09T12:33:00.000-05:00

The words "glory" and "glorify" represent complex biblical concepts. The words can be used very simply--glory can simply refer to a shining brightness, and glorify can simply refer to praising God--but the words also have more complex theological and exegetical meanings.

Understanding the more complex ideas behind these words is essential to understanding how and why God operates in this world. It is especially important for understanding why God allows suffering and evil and why God does not elect everyone--two categories of questions that are stumblingblocks to Christian belief in the first instance and to acceptance of reformed theology in the second. The idea behind "glory" and "to glorify" is 1) that God delights in himself and 2) his purposes within the created order are expressions of that self-delight. Here is a simplified overview of these more complex ideas:

Glory = The weight of God’s perfections (the attributes of his being)
To Glorify=

When God glorifies himself it means

To demonstrate or reveal the weight of his perfections

God himself is the ultimate and sufficient audience for this demonstration.
Humankind is the proximal or intermediary audience for this demonstration.

When humankind glorifies God it means

To magnify or draw attention to the weight of his perfections.

The following book is an excellent resource for understanding how and why God operates in this world: God's Passion for His Glory by John Piper

A Helpful Chart of the Ordo Salutis from a Reformed Perspective

2012-02-07T14:22:00.000-05:00

Tim Challies at www.challies.com has produced a wonderful infographic illustrating the Reformed understanding of the Ordo Salutis. What is the Ordo Salutis? Tim gives an explanation here, but in short, the term refers to the logical sequence of the steps of salvation. Click on the picture for a high quality pdf version. I am thinking about getting this printed and mounted for instructional purposes. FedEx can do high quality poster for about $45. A mounted poster is twice that. Not cheap, but would be a useful visual.

Pastor set to preach first sermon in new church building- The Herald Dispatch

2012-02-04T21:50:00.000-05:00

Here is a great article about Redeemer Presbyterian Church's new building in Teays Valley WV. Praise God that he is blessing this congregation in our great State!

Pastor set to preach first sermon in new church - The Herald Dispatch

Biblicism One and Biblicism Two by Carson and Keller

2012-02-04T20:22:00.000-05:00

The following snippet is from a post by DA Carson and Tim Keller found here: http://bit.ly/Ajl3bq

"There is a kind of appeal to Scripture, a kind of biblicism---let's call it Biblicism One---that seems to bow to what Scripture says but does not listen to the text very closely and is almost entirely uninformed by how thoughtful Christians have wrestled with these same texts for centuries. There is another kind of biblicism---let's call it Biblicism Two---that understands the final authority in divine revelation to lie in Scripture traceable to the God who has given it, but understands also that accurate understanding of that Scripture is never supported by bad exegesis and always enriched by the work of Christian thinkers who have gone before."

A Brief Comparison of the PC(USA) and the PCA in West Virginia

2012-01-30T09:59:00.002-05:00

The Presbyterian Church (United States of America) is the modern version of the oldest Presbyterian denomination in the United States. Its overall theology is very liberal, and there are no guarantees that any given church will preach the same Gospel Paul did. That is not to say that none will, but one cannot know without researching individual churches.

My denomination is the completely separate and different Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). Please do not allow the similarity in names to confuse you. The PCA began in the early 1970's when a set of churches forsook the PC(USA) because of its liberal trends. The PCA has remained a theologically conservative denomination in whose churches the Gospel is more or less clearly preached. I am comfortable saying that, in West Virginia, one can visit any PCA church and be assured that you will hear the Gospel as Paul preached it.

The larger, older PC(USA) has some 140 churches throughout the State of West Virginia. There is likely to be at least one in every city in the State. Others are scattered in smaller towns and rural areas. The Presbytery of WV (PC(USA)) website records that 91 of these churches are without ordained pastors. Thirty-eight of these pulpits are vacant. Thirty-two are filled with interim or temporary supply preachers. Twenty-one of these congregations have commissioned lay-pastors instead of ordained pastors. This means that a full 65 percent of these churches do not have ordained ministers. Forty-nine of these churches do have ordained pastors (70% male and 30 percent female).

The PCA has 10 congregations in the state, two of which are mission churches, meaning that they have not been constituted as self-sufficient congregations yet. Four of these churches transferred from the PC(USA) into the PCA. The other six were planted in the state as PCA churches. Three of these churches do not currently have pastors and are filling their pulpits with temporarily supplied preachers. The other seven have ordained ministers working for them. Currently, there are 12 active, ordained teaching elders in the New River Presbytery, although two of these are retired and one of these is without a call.

The greatest likelihood, if one were to attend the next presbyterian church that one sees while driving down the road, is that it is would be a PC(USA) congregation. The differences are very significant though, and I would highly recommend that those interested in attending a Presbyterian church in West Virginia research those differences and seek out a Gospel preaching, Bible teaching congregation. I can assure you that this will be easier to find among the smaller number of PCA churches.

A significant point of information that is becoming important in our part of the world--The PCA does NOT allow for the ordination of gays and lesbians to pastoral ministry. The PC(USA) does. I hope that people will understand that the PCA still preaches, as the Word of God clearly teaches, that unrepentant homosexuality is incompatible with either Christian living or ordained ministry. The PC(USA) and PCA are two separate and distinct denominations. The PC(USA) is by its own admission a broader, liberal denomination that celebrates its differences from the more conservative PCA. The PCA does not ordain gays and lesbians.

Interested in Leaving the PC(USA) in West Virginia?

2012-01-27T01:43:00.002-05:00

Recent events in the PC (USA) have stirred up unrest within the denomination. They have even spawned a new, quasi-separatist denomination of sorts. At their 2011 General Assembly, the denomination voted to give presbyteries the freedom to decide whether or not to ordain gay and lesbian ministers. I suspect that this is also creating a stir within some West Virginia congregations. West Virginia tends to put on a liberal face, while retaining a conservative heart. If that is true in the PC (USA) presbytery, then there is a definite possibility of some confusion among the congregations and their ministers. Some are in the earliest stages of asking “what can or should we do about it?”

Many answered that question forty years ago when dozens of churches pulled out of the PC(USA) to form the Presbyterian Church in America. Those of us who are ordained within this denomination have a ready answer—pull out of the PC(USA). Decades of evidence reveal that the denomination has travelled most of the road toward apostasy. I cannot think of any good reasons for evangelical churches within the denomination to stay. If there was ever hope of reversing the denomination’s devolution, then honest people must admit that the opportunity is now gone. I suspect that the consciences of informed evangelical ministers who remain are clouded with conflict. Perhaps that conflict has not yet boiled down to the level of raw conviction, but there is conflict there none-the-less. Until the conflict turns to conviction, though, many will rationalize staying within the denomination—“I must stay for the sake of true believers who remain.” “I must stay because I am commanded to pursue peace within the church.” “I must stay because this is where God has placed me.” "I must stay in order to be be a catalyst for reform."

I am not saying that there are absolutely no good reasons to stay in the PC(USA). But I challenge those who have not yet seriously considered leaving to examine their motivations. Do you find conflict in your heart? Hints of the Spirit’s communication to your spirit through the Word of God? Do you have, hidden deep inside, a growing suspicion that the denomination is hopelessly apostate? If you do have this conflict within, examine the reasons that keep it from turning into a conviction that must be acted upon. Can you see how that there is good possibility that they are merely rationalizations to cover for an idolatry that keeps you from doing what is right? Is it money? Benefits? Insurance? Retirement? Friends? A good name? Position? Housing? Fear of conflict, pain and difficulty? Nobody likes conflict. But to defy a conscience that has been informed by God’s Word risks damaging that conscience. In due time, you will not even have to work to rationalize staying. In fact, you may find yourself beginning to agree with the apostates.

Now, I admit that I am a PCA guy all the way, so my perspective is one-sided. We made our decision a long time ago. That may mean that I do not today understand the nuances or complexities of why good men, women, and congregations decide to stay in an apostate denomination. Maybe there are really good reasons. I am genuinely interested in knowing them if you have them. I will do my best to understand them.

But what about those who are thinking that they would like a way out. Is it so simple as calling up the clerk of the PCA's New River Presbytery and asking if there is room for another church? Probably not. We have been down that road before--taking in churches from the PC(USA) too quickly--and are discovering that they are not really prepared to deal with the differences. But for those who would like to at least know what those differences are so that they can at least consider the possibilities, here is a short list. Not exhaustive. Just what I have run into in my experience.

First, a PC(USA) congregation that is interested in joining the PCA must be committed to preaching the Bible as the inspired, inerrant Word of God. Drop the higher criticism. No more Deutero-Isaiah. No more, "Maybe Paul was wrong on this point." The Bible is from front to back, word for word, the Word of God, and should be preached as such.

Second, a PC(USA) congregation that is interested in joining the PCA must preach the exclusivity of salvation through the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone. No more passes for those who have never heard. No more finding God's saving grace in other religions.

I picked those two as the most significant because I have found that they are obstacles to many who think they are conservative within the PC(USA). I have learned first hand that their "high-view" of Scripture does not mean the same as in the PCA. Even the most conservative within the PC(USA) would probably be shocked at the strict adherence to inerrancy that is expected in the PCA. And preaching the Gospel is crucial just on the face of it. Frankly, I think there are many PC(USA) churches where the idea of being born again by the power of the Holy Spirit is too old-fashioned, too behind the times, too uncomfortably exclusive and fundamentalistic. But Paul makes clear that no one will believe in Christ unless the Word of God is preached. And there is no other Gospel than the one that he preached.

Third, a PC(USA) congregation that is interested in joining the PCA must be committed to preaching the Word of God. By this I mean expositional preaching that dives deep into verse after verse and brings to light the nuggets of revelation that congregations have missed out on over the years. Along with this should go in-depth theological studies that flow from the conviction that it is crucial for Christians to know what God has revealed.

Fourth, a PC(USA) congregation that is interested in joining the PCA must be committed to the form and faith of the PCA. We are not a one size fits all denomination. We do not have a "Book of Confessions" that contains umpteen different confessions, any one of which will do. The PC(USA)'s Book of Confessions makes room for practically any theological system. But the PCA is committed to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms. That is one, and only one, confession. It is not perfect, but it is fairly comprehensive, and it is our useful standard. Churches that oppose such narrow subscription should probably look elsewhere. But those who are ignorant and not opposed? That is a different story. It is understandable that your church might not be well versed in Reformed theology, but being willing to be taught is far more important than mastery.

Forgive me for sounding caustic in this brief list. I know that these four things alone do not a make a good church. I also know that there are plenty of poor PCA churches that are outshined by some PC(USA) churches on many other fronts. But these are the issues that I have found to be significant initial barriers to just leaving one denomination and joining up with another. I would love to have PC(USA) churches in our presbytery. But I am afraid that if we just opened the doors, the surprises after the joining and receiving would be unpleasant for those who were not braced for the full extent of the differences.

I have learned that the PC(USA) is an entirely different world. It does not really consider itself to be evangelical. Within the seminaries, the experts, commentators, theologians, etc, are a completely different set from those in PCA seminaries. I have discovered that I do not know the names of many of their experts, and they do not know the names of mine. The worlds are so different that they have very few points of intersection. To jump from the one straight into the other would be a massive shock to the system.

But, if you are a congregation led by ministers who believe in the inspiration and authority of the Bible, who preach the Gospel as the only way of salvation, who teach and preach the Bible and theology, and who understand and are committed to Reformed theology, then there is at least some common ground and room to explore the possibilities.

Now, I have been talking mainly about churches or ministers leaving the denomination and transferring to the PCA. It may be that someone reading this is an individual member who is interested in leaving their PC(USA) congregation. In that case, you should know that all we ask is that you profess Christ as your Lord and Savior. Our churches welcome anyone into membership who has been born again. If you have not yet been born again, then visit a PCA church and talk to one of the elders about coming to faith in Christ. They would be thrilled to no end to help you understand the Gospel. If you have been born again, come hoping and asking God for instruction in the Word of God in ways that you may have never experienced before. You may come to realize that you have been far hungrier for God's Word than you ever knew.

The PC (USA) Has Not Done the PCA Any Favors in West Virginia

2012-01-26T15:40:00.002-05:00

The Presbyterian Church (United States of America) is the largest Presbyterian denomination in the United States. The Presbytery of West Virginia’s website says that there are some 140 congregations “tucked among the forested mountains, nestled in the river valleys, found in coal mining camps and villages.” The vast majority of these churches are very small and cannot support qualified pastors. I think it is safe to say that, in spite of the large number of churches, the denomination is struggling in West Virginia.

The PC(USA) is a mixed bag of liberal, moderate, and relatively conservative congregations throughout the nation, although I would guess that the conservatives are in a small minority. I do not know what the spread on the spectrum is like in West Virginia, but I would expect it to be similar to that of the rest of the nation, if not a smidge more conservative. During my time at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, a prominent and well-respected PC(USA) seminary, I have encountered several pastors and faculty who are on the more conservative end of the PC(USA) spectrum. Even the most conservative of these, however, are still far left of the most “unconservative” within my own denomination. Regardless, with so many PC(USA) churches throughout the State of West Virginia, one would like to think that Reformed theology would not be so foreign and irrelevant to West Virginians. But it seems that the presence of so many churches has had little-to-no lasting impact on West Virginians' understanding of and commitment to Reformed theology. I think this is because the PC(USA) long ago left off really preaching the Word of God and the Gospel that it contains.

My own denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), is the second largest Presbyterian denomination in America, but it is growing faster than the PC(USA). However, our ten-congregation presence in West Virginia is still very meager. We are also struggling in this State. This is not for lack of preaching the Word of God, but possibly due in part to some cultural elements unique to West Virginia. Regardless, the longer-term presence of the PC(USA) has not laid any doctrinal foundation whatsoever within our State upon which the PCA can build. The PCA is starting from scratch with regard to the form and faith of Presbyterianism in West Virginia. We have to take back a lot of theological ground that was long ago evacuated by the PC(USA).

Chapter 17: Of the Perseverance of the Saints

2011-12-29T01:16:00.001-05:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. No one who has been saved by the grace of God can completely fall away from that grace. Those who have been called, saved, and accepted by God through Jesus Christ and who have had their lives changed by the Holy Spirit will continue in their faith until the end of their lives. They are saved now and forever.

2. This “perseverance of the saints” doesn’t depend upon human strength and determination. It depends upon God’s free, loving, unchangeable, and eternal choice to save them, upon the Holy Spirit who dwells within them, upon the unfailing effectiveness of Jesus’ righteousness and intercession, and upon the fact that God always keeps his promises.

3. Unfortunately, believers can still fall into sin, sometimes for extended periods of time. The temptations of Satan, the world, and the power of the sin inside them can win out for a while, especially if they fail to take advantage of the weapons God gave them to fight back. Since this displeases God and grieves the Holy Spirit, they may lose some of the blessings and comforts of being a Christian. Their hearts may be hardened. They may struggle to tell right from wrong. They may hurt and embarrass others and bring earthly judgments upon themselves.

Chapter 16: Of Good Works

2011-11-11T22:21:00.001-05:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Good works are only what God has commanded in the Bible. No one has the right to make up additional “good works” that are not grounded in God’s Word, no matter how good their intentions are or how strongly they believe in them.

2. True good works are the result and proof of authentic saving faith. Through good works, believers show their gratitude to God and encourage their brothers and sisters in Christ. By showing that the Gospel can really change lives, good works provide assurance of salvation and leave enemies with nothing bad to say. By good works, believers glorify God because he alone is responsible for their changed lives through Jesus Christ. And since real good works flow from authentic saving faith, the end result will be eternal life.

3. Believers cannot do good works on their own, but only by the power of the Holy Spirit. The work of the Holy Spirit is not a onetime thing—for Christians to have the ability to do good, the Holy Spirit must continue to empower them, to give them the desire and the ability to do good works as he sees fit. This doesn’t mean, however, that Christians can use this as an excuse to avoid good works until they feel some special moving of the Holy Spirit. Christians should always take the initiative to act upon the grace that God has already given them.

4. No one is able to go above and beyond what God requires. Even Christians who reach the highest levels of obedience in this life fall far short of what God expects.

5. Our best works can never earn forgiveness or eternal life from God. They are nothing compared to the glory that is to come. And the difference between us and God is so great that nothing we ever do goes beyond his expectations or makes up for the all the sins we have committed. Even when we have done our best, we have only done what we were supposed to do, like servants who refuse to do more than asked. Our works are good only because they come from the power of the Holy Spirit. But because we are only human, they are still sinful, corrupted by our weakness and imperfection. Even our best works cannot stand up under the judgment of God.

6. In spite of this, God accepts our good works through Christ, because he accepts us through Christ. Our works may be sinful and worthy of judgment in God’s sight, but when he sees them, he sees his own Son. So he is happy to accept and even reward our sincere good works, even though they are stained by human weakness and imperfection.

7. Works done by people who are not born again may very well be the same as what God has commanded in his Word. They may even result in a better life for themselves and others. But they still do not come from a heart purified by faith in Christ. They are still not done in the right way—in submission to God’s Word. They are still not done with the right motive—for the glory of God. In other words, they may be good works, but they are still sinful. They cannot please God and they do not give anyone an advantage in God’s eyes. Having said that, it is even more sinful, and God is even more displeased, when unbelievers fail to do good works.

Prerequisites to Understanding Grace

2011-10-31T05:55:00.004-04:00

In three parts, I have presented three prerequisites to understanding grace that are of particular concern to me as I minister in Appalachia. I have observed that many Christians in Appalachia are at war with these three things, and this hinders their knowledge of God and his grace.

Part 1--Total Depravity
Part 2--Predestination
Part 3--The Glory of God

There are many other topics that could be considered, but I have chosen these three based upon Ephesians 1 and 2. Paul prays there (for Christians no less!) that the eyes of their hearts would be enlightened so that they could know God better. The implication is that they do not know God as well as they could or should. Paul also implies that this "knowing God better" requires a supernatural work--A spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of God.

This is not a gnostic knowledge (a privileged knowledge of God that only certain people can have). This is simply an acknowledgement that depravity operates through remaining corruption even in the minds of believers. As believers, we are tempted to sin and frequently give in to sin. What makes us think that our minds are any less susceptible to sinful thinking about God? Just as we need a supernatural work of grace to overcome temptation, we need a work of grace to think rightly about God. If we coddle our rebellious thinking, we will no doubt fail to know God as well as we could or should.

Paul has in fact laid out precisely what he wants people to understand in order to know God better. He begins Ephesians 1:15 with the words "For this reason...." This means that he has just explained the things that motivate his prayer for the Ephesians in vv. 3-14. And he also implies that without a work of Spirit, a Christian's rebellious nature will reject the things that he has just clearly stated and will continue to explicate through the book.

Many Christians in Appalachia are at war with these three things (in the name of free will). Therefore they do not know God or his grace as well as they should. This failure to know and accept God as he reveals himself is one of the reasons that Reforming West Virginia is so important.

Prerequisites to Understanding Grace (Part 3)

2011-10-31T05:51:00.000-04:00

In this third of three posts, I will point out a third crucial conceptthat is prerequisite to understanding God's grace. There are many others, butthese three are most relevant in the conflict between Reformed theology andfree-will theology within the Appalachian territories. They are in myexperience the most frequent sources of error in the prevalence of free willtheology in West Virginia.

· TheGlory of God—God’s glory motivates everything that he does, including his graciouswork of predestination. Read Ephesians1:3-14 and take note of what brings himglory.

o God exercises his will—he does whathe wants to do.

o His will is described asbeing based upon what would give him pleasure. In other words, God always does what makes him happy.

o The ability to do whatever you want to do isknown as free will. In other words, Godhas complete and total free will. He cando whatever he wants to do, whatever makes him happy. His will is not forced by someone or somethingelse--He works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will. Have you ever noticed that some people thinkthis free will more properly belongs to human beings than to God?

o God used his free will, his right and ability to do whateverhe wants to do, to develop a plan for everything that happens. Before time began, God planned everything that would everhappen. What happens could not happen any other way than the way heplanned it. This plan was based upon his own wisdom and desires withoutany outside influences.

§ Eph. 1:11 In him we were also chosen,[e] having beenpredestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformitywith the purpose of his will.

§ Is 46:¹⁰ I make known the end from the beginning, fromancient times, what is still to come. I say, ‘Mypurpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.’ ¹¹ What I have said, that I will bring about; whatI have planned, that I will do.

o God’splan has an ultimate purpose or goal—his own glory.

§ 5. he^[^b^] predestined us for adoption to sonship^[^c^] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure andwill. 6. To the praise of hisglorious grace.

§ In him we were also chosen,^[^e^] having been predestined according to the plan of him whoworks out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, ¹² in order that we, who were the first to put our hope inChrist, might be for the praise of his glory.

§ 14. To the praise of his glory.

o Everything God does is to the praiseof his glory. His plan is designed toglorify himself. Therefore, predestinationglorifies himself.

§ His plan demonstrates how beautiful, weighty, andvaluable all his perfections are. God’sglory is all about demonstrating his perfections.

o Predestination is an act of God’s grace. God’s motivation for the grace that hebestows upon humanity is to bring himself glory.

o If we deny predestination, or try to explain it away, oravoid it because it is controversial, then we are denying something that Godsays in no uncertain terms, brings him glory.

o For that reason,we need to take the grace of predestination out of closet and put it front andcenter in our instruction and understanding within the church.

In order to understand the grace, weneed to understand our own human depravity. We need to understand that God chooses people who lack any ability tochoose him. We need to understand thatGod’s motivation for this grace is completely and entirely his own glory. Apart from understanding these three things,we will not understand grace as fully as we should.

Prerequisites to Understanding Grace (Part 2)

2011-10-31T05:19:00.001-04:00

In this second of three posts, I discuss asecond crucial concept that is prerequisite to understanding God's grace better. Thereare many others, but these three are most relevant in the conflict betweenReformed theology and free-will theology within the Appalachian territories. They are in my experience the most frequent sources of error in the prevalenceof free will theology in West Virginia.

· Predestination—Accordingto the previous post, we are sinners. Dead in our sins, deservingcondemnation. If we are dead in our trespassesand sins, with no ability to save ourselves, then it stands to reason that noone will be saved, unless God first chooses to save them. Ephesians 1 credits this predestination “tothe praise of his glorious grace (vv. 5-6).” Ephesians 2 stresses that because we are depraved, then our salvation can only be because of his gracious initiative (vv. 1-10).

Note the language in Ephesians 1:3-14 that expressly speaks of God's choosing sinners for salvation- 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to beholy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he[b] predestined us for adoption to sonship[c] through Jesus Christ,in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 tothe praise of his glorious grace, . . .11 In him we were also chosen,[e] having been predestined according to theplan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of hiswill,

o Some try to get around the idea that God choosessome for salvation and allows the rest to be punished for their sins bysuggesting that--

§ Since God knows the future,

§ He knows who will believe and be saved.

§ So God chooses them based upon their choice ofhim.

o This is called conditional election. It is election based upon the condition oftheir first choosing salvation.

§ Ifthis were true, then predestination would not be to the praise of his gloriousgrace.

§ Remember that grace is free. It cannot be based upon something that we have done, or else it wouldnot be grace.

o The Biblespecifically states that God does not choose those who will be saved by basingelection upon what they will do during their lifetimes.

§ Romans9:11--11 Yet, before the twins were born or had doneanything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—shewas told, “The older will serve the younger.”[d] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, butEsau I hated.” 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust?Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, “I willhave mercy on whom I have mercy, andI will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

o Grace means that God did it, and we did not. It was all of him and none of us. If we do notbelieve that God chose us before the foundation of the world, then we mustbelieve that we somehow, someway had it within ourselves to choose God. And that is not grace.

o The testimony of Charles Haddon Spurgeon: “When I was coming to Christ, I thought I wasdoing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea theLord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware ofthis. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths inmy own soul—when they were, as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with ahot iron, and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown on a sudden from ababe into a man—that I had made progress in Scriptural knowledge, through havingfound, once for all, the clue to the truth of God. One week-night, when I wassitting in the house of God, I was not thinking much about the preacher'ssermon, for I did not believe it. The thought struck me,How did you come tobe a Christian? I sought the Lord. But how didyou come to seek the Lord? The truth flashed across my mind in a moment—Ishould not have sought Him unless there had been some previous influence in mymind tomake me seek Him. I prayed, thought I, but then I askedmyself, How came I to pray? I wasinduced to pray by reading the Scriptures. How came Ito read the Scriptures? I did read them, but what led me to do so? Then,in a moment, I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was theAuthor of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, andfrom that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make thismy constant confession, "I ascribe my change wholly to God."”

Chapter 15: Of Repentance unto Life

2011-10-30T00:46:00.001-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Saving faith and saving repentance are free gifts from God that go together. It is just as important for preachers to preach about repentance as it is for them to preach about saving faith.

2. Several things lead sinners to grieve over and hate their sins to the point of repentance: They fear God’s wrath. They see the grossness and offensiveness of their sin in the light of God’s holy nature and righteous law. They understand how merciful God is toward those who repent. As a result, they resolve and strive to walk with God and obey his commands.

3. Sinners should never think that repentance makes up for sin or earns God’s forgiveness. That is a gift of God’s grace alone. On the other hand, repentance is still necessary. No one who refuses to repent should expect forgiveness from God.

4. The smallest sin is enough to condemn a person to hell. But even the greatest sin cannot condemn a truly repentant person.

5. People should not be satisfied with a vague, surface-level repentance. Instead, they should target and repent of their sins very specifically.

6. Those who sin in private should confess to God in private. He is always merciful to those who repent and pray for forgiveness. But those who sin against others should be willing go directly to them to ask forgiveness. If they sin publicly against the whole Church, they should confess to the whole Church. And those who have been wronged should always forgive and welcome them back with open arms.

Prerequisites to Understanding Grace (Part 1)

2011-09-26T10:55:00.002-04:00

Inthree posts, I will point out three crucial concepts that are prerequisite tounderstanding God's grace. There are many others, but these three are most relevantin the conflict between Reformed theology and free-will theology within the Appalachianterritories. They are in my experiencethe most frequent sources of error in the prevalence of free will theology inWest Virginia.

· Human depravity--Thosewho do not understand that human beings are dead in their trespasses and sins,utterly incapable of responding to the Gospel call apart from God's graciousinitiative, will not be able to understand grace as God intends it to be understood.

o Ephesians 2 makes clearthat we were dead in sin, and then gives a powerful description of exactly whatthat means: Follower of the ways of the world and Satan who works withinthe disobedient. Gratifier and follower of fleshly cravings, desires, andthoughts. Deserving of wrath in the very nature of the human being.

o Romans 3 also gives anunmistakable description:

§ Under the power of sin

§ None righteous, no notone

§ No God-seekers

§ All have turned away andbecome worthless

§ No one does good, noteven one

§ Throats that are opengraves

§ Deceitful tongues

§ Poisonous lips

§ Mouths full of cursingand bitterness

§ Eager to murder

§ Ways marked by ruin andmisery

§ No knowledge of the Wayof Peace

§ No fear of God.

o The indictment isprofound and severe. These descriptions give anexplanation for why Jesus says in John 6:44 that “no one can come to me unlessthe father who sent me draws them.”

o After describing the deadstate of human beings in Ephesians 2, Paul goes on to say that God has resurrectedthose to whom he is writing. Because ofthe severe condition of human sinfulness, no one possesses the ability to callupon the name of the Lord unless God through the Holy Spirit resurrects themfrom their dead state. Another way tosay this is that they must be born again, regenerated, or made new. Paul then draws an unmistakable conclusion fromthis act of resurrection—“it is by grace you have been saved (v. 5).” This comment is meant to underline for thereader that in order to understand grace, one must first understand the deadnessof the sinful human being. The meaning ofgrace is made clear in the contrast between the once dead state and the nowresurrected state of the human soul.

o Proponents of free-will theologyinsist that God’s offer of salvation is not really a gift of grace until the sinner reaches out to take the gift. In other words, theybelieve that sinners must have some ability to participate in the salvationprocess, at the very least, by reaching out and taking advantage of the freeoffer of salvation.

o Acommon illustration is this: Proponentsof free will theology believe that we are drowning in the deep end of a pool ofsinfulness and death. God throws a lifepreserver out (salvation through Jesus Christ). All that the drowning person must do is grab hold of the life-preserverto be saved. Paul gives us a verydifferent picture, however. He says thatwe were drowned and dead, laying like rotting corpses upon the bottom of thepool. We possessed no life or ability toparticipate in salvation by grabbing a life preserver. There was no hope until God, figurativelyspeaking, dove into the pool, pulled the corpse to the surface, and theresurrected the corpse. The first gasp oflife that corpse takes is the breath of faith in Christ. In this picture, there is no role for thedead corpse to play in the salvation of his soul. God does all the work from start tofinish. This is why, in Ephesians 2,Paul says talks about the grace of resurrection once again: “For it is by grace you have been saved, throughfaith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to dogood works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”

o Unless believersunderstand that we are dead and unable to participate in salvation apart fromthe grace of God in our resurrection and regeneration, then we will notproperly understand grace. We will, inspite of all claims to the contrary, claim some role for ourselves, andtherefore lay for ourselves a foundation for boasting. “I am different from you because I reachedout for the life preserver. Did you?” This subtle difference makes a significantimpact as we build our theology upon it. It keeps our knees from being bent as low as they should be inworshipful gratitude. It puts an air ofarrogance into the way that we relate to unbelievers, an arrogance that is commonlyaccepted and even integrated into our Christianity. It moves us to misunderstand sanctification,increasing the likelihood of godless legalism and judgmentalism.

o In order to understand grace, we must understandthat we are totally depraved, dead in our trespasses and sins, without hope inGod, apart from his resurrecting mercy.

Chapter 14: Of Saving Faith

2011-09-19T12:36:00.000-04:00

The Westminister Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. The faith that saves the elect is itself a free gift from God. The Holy Spirit works in hearts through the ministry of the Word to produce this faith. It is made even stronger by participating in the sacraments, praying, and hearing the preaching of the Word of God.

2. This faith enables Christians to believe everything God reveals in his Word. They trust that God himself speaks with his full authority in the Scriptures, and they respond appropriately to what he says—when the Bible demands obedience, they obey; when it warns that sin will be punished, they tremble; and when it makes promises about this life and the next, they embrace those promises wholeheartedly. But true saving faith mainly involves this: Christians must accept, receive, and rest upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life because God has promised these things through his grace.

3. Sometimes faith can be strong, and at other times it can be frail. But even though it can be attacked and weakened, it will always win the battle. Most Christians will continue to grow in their faith until they are absolutely certain that they are saved through Christ. Christ was the one who gave them their faith in the first place, and he will make sure it wins out at the very end.

Chapter 13: Of Sanctification

2011-09-19T11:10:00.001-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. God begins the process of sanctification[1] by creating a new heart and spirit in those he has called and regenerated. He continues it by making them holier in the way they live out their lives day by day. This increase in holiness is guided and empowered by the Word of God and the Holy Spirit. It is made possible because Christ’s death and resurrection destroys the power of sin in their lives. Their sinful desires grow weaker and weaker and eventually die, and their ability to practice true holiness grows stronger and stronger. This process of sanctification is part and parcel of being a Christian—those who are not being sanctified in this way will never have the privilege of seeing the Lord face to face.

2. Sanctification makes the whole person holier—both the inner spiritual being and the outward way of life. Nevertheless, believers will never be completely perfect this side of eternity. There will always be some element of sinfulness that remains within. It causes a difficult and constant battle inside of them—their sinfulness wages war with the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit wages war with their sinfulness.

3. In this war, remaining sinfulness can sometimes seem to get the upper hand for a while. But believers have a constant supply of strength from the Holy Spirit. This means that, ultimately, the believer’s new heart and spirit will win the battle. Those who believe in Christ will always grow in grace, becoming holier and holier, as they submit themselves to God.

[1] Sanctification

Chapter 12: Of Adoption

2011-09-12T17:22:00.002-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

God graciously and lovingly adopts everyone he justifies to be his own children. They are adopted when they are united with his only Son, Jesus Christ. Because of Christ, they are counted as his own and enjoy all the freedoms and privileges that go along with being children of God. He gives them his family name and the Holy Spirit that comes with adoption. They can boldly ask almighty God to act on their behalf. Like children, they have the privilege of calling him “Father.” And just like a father should, God responds when they need him most. He protects them, meets their needs, and disciplines them. He will never orphan them because they are sealed until God finishes his redemptive plan on this earth. Now that they are God’s children, they are heirs of the salvation that will last forever and will inherit everything he has promised.

Chapter 11: Of Justification

2011-09-12T14:53:00.003-04:00

The Westminister Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. God declares righteous every person that he brings to himself. This is called justification.[1] Some people believe that God accepts people as righteous because he makes them do good things. No, he accepts them as righteous only because he forgives their sins and accepts Jesus’ righteousness instead of their own. He does not accept them because he makes them better people, or because they do good things. He does not even accept them because they have faith, or believe in Jesus, or do anything else demanded in the Gospel. The only reason they are accepted as righteous is because he gives them Jesus Christ’s righteousness in the place of their own. Only Jesus’ righteousness satisfies God’s justice. Those who receive this righteousness rest in Christ by faith. But even this faith is a gift from God—No one earns righteousness by having faith.

2. Faith is the only means God uses to justify those who rest in Christ and receive his righteousness. But true saving faith is never alone. When God gives faith, he also gives everything that goes along with salvation. Faith that is alone is not really true faith. True faith works itself out in love.

3. God justifies sinners in order to glorify both his justice and his rich grace. He glorifies his justice through Christ’s obedience and death—Christ completely satisfied God’s justice for sinners. Their debt to God is marked “paid-in-full.” God glorifies his rich grace by giving them Jesus as a gift and by accepting Christ’s obedience and death instead of their own. This is grace because justification is a free gift that God is not obligated to give anyone.

4. God’s decision to justify certain people took place before time began. But at the appointed time in history, Christ carried out this decision by dying for their sins and coming back to life so that they could be justified. However, their justification does not take effect until the Holy Spirit actually applies it to them at the right time in their lives.

5. After people are justified, God continues to forgive their sins. It is impossible to lose justification. However, God is still not pleased with them when they sin, just like a loving father is not pleased when a child rebels. Sometimes God will show his displeasure by withholding his blessings and fellowship from them. He does this until they humble themselves, confess their sins, ask for forgiveness, and once again repent and believe in Christ.

6. Old Testament believers were justified the exact same way that New Testament believers are justified.

[1] Justification

Three Aids to Theological Discussion

2011-09-07T13:03:00.002-04:00

Rather than studying passively, letting your eyes move over text mindlessly--as many commonly do--enter into your studies engagingly, with a mind for discussion and interaction. As you are reading make a note of concepts that fall into these three categories:

I want to know more.
I do not understand.
I disagree.

Mark up your text to make your questions clear, and then take them to someone knowledgeable who can discuss them with you. Seldom are our knowledge and thinking sufficient by themselves. The most learned among us need other sources to help clarify thinking. We need to go to others--books, studied ministers, articles--in order to gain our most full understanding. Without this intentional engagement and interaction, we will likely learn poorly or wrongly, especially if we disagree with what we have not fully understood.

To go a step further, it can even be wise, if time and opportunity permit, to explore opposing positions by going to their sources. This is best done after you understand your own position very well. To only read sources that critique opposing viewpoints creates the strong possibility that you will know only an easily disassembled "straw man" of the opposing position. Too many people rely heavily on critiques of opposing perspectives by unreliable sources when forming their own opinions. Ask yourself, "Do I truly understand what I am disagreeing with? Or is it possible that I am disagreeing without fully understanding what I am disagreeing with? Has my source demonstrated that they are thoroughly familiar with what they are critiquing?"

I have run into too many people who are guilty of creating and demolishing straw men when they oppose Reformed theology. Of course, Reformed proponents can be very guilty of this as well. (However, Reformed people often journey out of non-reformed positions in which they were immersed in a first hand knowledge of non-reformed objections.) But more often than not, students who rely only upon sources critical of reformed theology do not fully understand reformed theology. Many times, I have heard the same tired arguments against reformed theology over and again. These people often fail to understand that there is a vast amount of Reformed literature that has answered these objections many times over. Those who fail to acquaint themselves with the Reformed position from Reformed sources before decrying it reveal that they are not serious students of theology. Rather, they are lazy students who are only interested in parroting what they have been told by other likeminded individuals.

The Need for Bi-vocational Presbyterian Pastors in West Virginia

2011-08-25T19:21:00.000-04:00

Thinking recently about how difficult it is to locate Pastors for some PCA churches in West Virginia. Many churches are so small they cannot afford to employ a pastor full time. This means that their pastors must be bi-vocational--working a secular job to provide for their needs while pastoring the church on the side. Tent-makers after the model of Paul the Apostle. No doubt other parts of the country have a similar problem.

Even starting new churches is difficult, especially since it is difficult to raise the money within our borders to sustain a full-time church organizer. Raising money outside our borders is even more difficult. The result is that many of our small churches do not have pastors and there are very few new churches being planted within our state. This is sad, because our state needs a strong Reformed presence. I believe the Reformed Baptists face the same problem.

It is difficult to find people with established careers and solid employment who can take the time to gain the qualifications necessary to become pastors. So I wonder whether a better alternative would be to ask the Lord to work it the other way around--raise up qualified, ordained pastors who are willing to work bi-vocationally. Instead of hoping that laymen with jobs will go through the years of education and training necessary to be ordained, perhaps ordained pastors should consider gaining qualifications to work secularly. The track for either would be difficult, but it seems to me that the track for the latter would probably be easier than for the former. Regardless, without more bi-vocational pastors and church planters, our State will continue to struggle to fill pulpits and plant churches.

Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling

2011-08-12T19:08:00.006-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. When the time is right, God calls those he has chosen for eternal life in a way that guarantees they will answer his call.[1] No one else receives this effectual call. Using the Word and the Holy Spirit, he calls them out of their sinful and dead condition and into the grace and salvation of Jesus Christ. He opens up their minds in a spiritual and saving way, so that they can finally understand things about God.[2] He takes away their heard-heartedness so that they are spiritually responsive to him. With his almighty power, he changes their desire to do evil into a desire to do good. In this way, he guarantees they will answer his call to come to Jesus Christ. Since God has graciously changed their heart’s desires, they willingly come to him without being forced.

2. No one deserves the call that guarantees salvation. God does not look ahead in time to see whether or not certain people are worthy. They can do nothing to bring it about. They cannot even answer his call and grab hold of what he freely gives them until the Holy Spirit resurrects their dead souls and changes their hearts.

3. Chosen infants are saved by Christ alone and have their hearts changed by the Holy Spirit even when they die young.[3] The Holy Spirit has the right, the power and the authority to change hearts at any age. The same is true for anyone else who has been chosen by God and who lacks the mental ability to understand his Word.

4. Those who are not chosen will never come to Christ, even though they sometimes look like they do. They appear to respond to the preaching of the Word, and they may even get some of the benefits the Holy Spirit shares with a lot of people.[4] But in the end, they cannot be saved.

If these people cannot be saved, it stands to reason that no other religion can save them either. People may live their lives the best they know how, or follow the principles of their religion perfectly, but there is no way to be saved apart from Jesus Christ. To believe and teach differently is extremely dangerous and should be rejected in no uncertain terms.

[1]Irresistible grace; effectual call; inward call

[2]Regeneration

[3]Elect Infants

[4]Outward Call

Chapter Nine: Of Free will

2011-08-08T14:15:00.003-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. God created humans with the natural ability to do whatever they want to do. He did not build anything into their nature that forced them to do either good or evil.

2. In the days when Adam (who stood in for all humans) was innocent of sin, nothing kept him from obeying God—he was free to do what he wanted to do. If he wanted to do what pleased God, he could do it. But he could also sin if he wanted to, and if he did, he could lose the freedom to do what pleased God.

3. So, when Adam chose to sin, he and all humans completely lost any desire or ability to do what pleased God. Their nature changed—they were now opposed to doing good, because their ability to do good was dead in sinfulness. They had no power in and of themselves to change back. They did not even know how to begin changing themselves.

4. When God changes sinners back (which he is under no obligation to do),[1] he changes their nature and sets them free from slavery to sin. Even though they do not deserve it, he restores their desire and ability to do good. However, because they still have some sinfulness inside them, they do not always want to do good things—they still want to do evil sometimes.

5. Humans will only be completely free to do good, with no possibility of doing evil, after they have passed from this life into glory.

[1] Grace

Chapter Eight: Of Christ the Mediator

2011-08-06T01:42:00.007-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Before time began, God planned that his one and only son, the Lord Jesus, would bridge the gap between God and humanity.[1] He determined that Jesus would be the ultimate Prophet, Priest, and King, the ruler and Savior of his Church. God gave him everything and made him judge over everyone. Before time began, God gave him a people of his own, to be his heirs. At the appointed time in history, Jesus would pay the price for their sins, call them to himself, give them his own righteousness, set them free from sin, and make them perfect forever.

2. The Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, is God himself. He and the Father are equal, but they are only one being. When the appointed time finally arrived, the Son became human just like everyone else. He had typical human limitations, except that he was completely sinless.

He got his humanity from his mother, the virgin Mary. Because she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus had two natures—he was completely and perfectly God and completely and perfectly human. But he was still only one person. He did not stop being God when he became human, and he was not blended together into someone who was neither God nor human. He is totally God and totally human at the same time—He is Jesus Christ, the only one who can bridge the gap between God and man.

3. Because the Lord Jesus was both human and divine, he was different from the rest of humanity and possessed the unlimited power of the Holy Spirit. He was all wise and all knowing. He was holy, unstained by sin, and never wronged anyone. The Father made certain that Jesus was completely qualified to guarantee salvation and bridge the gap. Jesus’ only desire in all this was to glorify his Father. So the Father gave him all power and authority and commanded him to bridge the gap between God and humanity.

4. The Lord Jesus took this responsibility willingly. When he became a human, he obeyed the law perfectly. He endured horrible spiritual and physical pain. He was put to death on the cross and then buried. His body, however, did not decay. In fact, he rose from the dead on the third day in the same body that he had before he died. He went to heaven, body and all, where he took his place of power and authority at his Father’s side. He is there even now praying for his people. Someday, when it is time for this world to end, he will return to judge both humans and angels.

5. Jesus fully satisfied his Father’s demands by obeying the law perfectly and giving his life, with the Spirit’s power, as the ultimate sacrifice.[2] This fixed the relationship between God and the people the Father had given to Jesus, and it bought them a never-ending inheritance in God’s kingdom.

6. Christ’s redeeming work took place during a specific time in history—after he became a human being. However, its goodness, effectiveness, and benefits were applied to all God’s chosen people throughout history, even those who lived before Christ. In the Old Testament times, this was done through promises, symbols, and animal sacrifices. They proclaimed that Christ fulfilled one of the Bible’s earliest predictions—a woman would have a child who would defeat Satan.[3] So Christ’s sacrifice was actually timeless—he was the Lamb sacrificed before time began. His work applies to all times in history because he is the same yesterday, today and forever.

7. When Christ bridged the gap, both natures played very important roles—for instance, only humans can shed blood, and only God can save souls. But because these natures were perfectly united in a single person, the Bible sometimes credits his human nature with what his divine nature did, and his divine nature with what his human nature did.

8. Christ guarantees that all those for whom he died will be saved:[4] He intercedes for them. He uses the Word to make salvation clear to them. He persuades them to believe and obey by the power of the Holy Spirit. He uses both the Word and the power of the Holy Spirit to govern their hearts. He will not let anything or anyone stand in the way of their salvation. Christ’s ways are more than humans can understand, but he has the authority and the wisdom to do whatever he deems best.

[1] Mediator

[2] Vicarious atonement

[3] Protevangelium

[4] Particular Redemption

Chapter Seven: Of God's Covenant with Man

2011-07-28T02:14:00.009-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. God and his creation are completely different, as if there were a vast gulf between them. Generally speaking, people know they should obey God. But because the distance between them is so great, they do not have the ability to enjoy him on a personal level. So the only way for them to really know God is for him to voluntarily cross the gap between them. He crosses that gap by means of a Covenant.[1]

2. God made the first covenant with Adam, often called the “covenant of works.” He told Adam that he would let him and all his descendents live if he obeyed God perfectly.

3. When Adam sinned, he messed up the first covenant for all his descendents. So the Lord made a second covenant, often called the “covenant of grace.” This covenant was different because it did not depend upon obeying God perfectly. Instead, God offered to give sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ. He only requires that they believe in Jesus to be saved. Since he chose the ones who would be saved before he created the world, he promises to make them willing and able to believe Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit.

4. The Scriptures treat this covenant of grace like the final will and testament of Jesus Christ, because upon his death he left a rich, never-ending inheritance to all those who believe in him.

5. The covenant of grace was presented differently in the time of the law (the Old Testament) and in the time of the Gospel (the New Testament). In the Old Testament, it was presented to the Jews through promises, prophecies, animal sacrifices, circumcision, the Passover lamb, and other symbols and commanded practices.[2] All these things pointed ahead to the coming of Jesus Christ. They were all that was necessary for the Spirit to teach God’s chosen people about faith in the promised Messiah. When they believed in him, God’s people received forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation.

6. In the New Testament, Christ fulfilled all these Old Testament signs and symbols and reduced the commanded practices to the preaching of the Word and two holy ceremonies:[3] Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Although there are now fewer commanded practices that are simpler and less showy, their meaning, witness, and spiritual power are greater. They are also intended for all people-groups, not just the Jews.

Even though the covenant of grace was presented differently in the Old and New Testaments, there is still only one covenant of grace, exactly the same in both periods of time.

[1] Theological Term: Covenant

[2] Theological Term: Ordinance

[3] Theological term: Sacrament

Chapter Six: Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment thereof.

2011-06-02T10:03:00.001-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Satan seduced our first parents to sin when they ate the forbidden fruit.* God, who is wise and sinless, allowed this first sin to happen because he knew how to use it to glorify himself.

2. This first sin had horrible results: Adam and Eve fell from their original righteous state and were no longer sinless. They lost the privilege of fellowship with God. They were spiritually dead in sin. Every part of their bodies and souls, including their minds, was corrupted by sinfulness. **

3. Since Adam and Eve were the first parents, All of their descendants are guilty of the sin they committed.*** They also receive the same punishment—they are spiritually dead in sin, and every part of their bodies and souls, including their minds, has been corrupted by sinfulness. This guilt and punishment comes to them simply because they are Adam and Eve’s natural-born descendents.

4. Because of Adam and Eve’s sin, people do not want to and are not able to do good things. In fact, the opposite is true—they want to do evil things. All of the sins they commit are the result of this depravity.

5. Those who are in Christ have had their hearts changed—their sins are forgiven and their sinfulness is being killed off. But that does not mean that they never sin. While they live on this earth, they will always struggle with sin inside them. Even though they are Christians, they are still sinners and they still commit real sins.

6. God holds people accountable for their own sins and for Adam and Eve’s sin. Both are enough to deserve the wrath of God and the curse that comes from breaking God’s Law. Every sinner deserves to suffer and die spiritually, physically, and forever.

*Theological Term: The Fall.

**Theological Term: Total Depravity.

***Theological Term: Original Sin

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

2011-06-01T23:50:00.003-04:00

Recently I have been working on a plain language paraphrase of the Westminster Confession of Faith. I know that many others have been done this before, but this serves a twofold purpose--First, it helps me study and understand the confession better for teaching purposes. They say that you do not understand something until you can put it into your own words. Second, I know my target language and culture better than others, so my words are chosen to meet a specific need.

I have created a handy-dandy column on the left that will hopefully make this readily available and easy to navigate.

Keep in mind that the framers of the Westminster Confession of Faith were very, very precise in their word choices. I am well aware that by paraphrasing, I am losing that precision. But I am not wanting to be that precise with what I am doing. Sometimes it is the precision that stands in the way of plain understanding. I know full well how common it is to read something and not understand it because of the difficulty of the language. So with simpler, more straightforward language, I hope that a few others at least will develop an understanding of things they once found difficult to read. I am hoping that perhaps, someone might be able to bridge to the greater precision of the original after being introduced through a paraphrase.

Also, I should note that any time one paraphrases, one cannot help but interpret. With interpretation comes the possibility of disagreement. I am not saying that my interpretations are always correct, but they are, nonetheless, how I understand the confession. I have used about six different commentaries while producing this, but I am game to change if someone can show that I have either misunderstood the confession or have used such poor word choice that I am leading people astray from the original intention of the authors.

Regardless, I only want to make the study of the confession more available and enjoyable. Hope it helps.

P.S. At the bottom of each section is a list of terms. After I complete the project, I hope to add a glossary of these terms, giving a fuller explanation for those who want to know more.

P.P.S. Also keep in mind that this whole project is in draft form. I have no doubt that I will need to make clarifying changes or fix unintentional mistakes when all is said and done.

BTW, I would like to reserve Copyrights to my version of the Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language. I have no objections to people using it, if they point people to the source.

Chapter Five: Of God’s Providence

2011-06-01T23:38:00.000-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Not only did God create everything, but he controls everything he created. He keeps it running and directs everything so that it happens according to his plan. He controls the actions of living and non-living things from the least significant to the most important. This control and direction is called “providence.” God planned beforehand exactly what he wants to do, and his providence follows that plan perfectly, wisely, and sinlessly. He can and will do exactly what he wants to do. God’s providence glorifies his wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and mercy, and deserves to be praised.

2. Since God planned everything and causes everything to happen according to his plan, he is the starting point of everything that happens. Everything that happens must happen according to his plan and cannot happen any other way. However, God’s providence causes many things to happen as a result of something else, like dominos that fall in a line. A domino might be the laws of nature, or a choice that someone makes, or something that causes something else to happen. Regardless, everything happens according to God’s plan.

3. Usually God’s providence operates through normal, everyday people and things in a “behind the scenes” kind of way. However, if he wants, he can step in at any time and do things for which there is no human explanation. He can make something happen directly, or he can manipulate circumstances in miraculous ways, or he can defy the laws of nature.

4. God’s providence governed Adam’s first sin and every sin that followed. This control displays God’s almighty power, his mysterious wisdom, and his boundless goodness. He did not merely permit sin to happen, but he stepped in and directed it for his own good purposes. Even so, angels and humans are completely responsible for their own sin. God cannot be responsible, because he is holy and righteous and never causes or approves of sin.

5. For certain periods of time, God occasionally allows his own children to experience different temptations and to struggle with the sinfulness of their own hearts. God has different reasons for this. He might be punishing old sins. He might be showing them how sinful they really are and stopping them from thinking too highly of themselves. He might be drawing them closer to himself and making them more dependent upon him. He might be preparing them to avoid future sins. Whatever the reasons, they are fair and good, because God is wise, righteous, and gracious.

6. God righteously judges some wicked and ungodly people by blinding their spiritual eyes and hardening their hearts. He holds back grace that might otherwise work in their hearts and help them see their sin. He takes back good things that he has given them. He puts them in circumstances where they might be tempted to sin. He does not hold back their sinfulness, but lets it have free reign, so that they are completely defeated by the temptations of the world and the power of Satan. Eventually, their hearts become so hard that there is no hope of their ever softening again.

7. God’s providence governs everything, but there is special sense in which God takes care of his Church. He works everything out in the Church’s best interests.

Chapter Four: Of Creation

2011-06-01T23:36:00.000-04:00

The Westminister Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. In order to display his glory, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit made all things in the physical and spiritual realms out of nothing in six days, and he made them good.

2. The last creatures that he made were human beings—a man and a woman. He made them with souls that could not die and gave them knowledge and the ability to reason. They were righteous and holy just like God. In fact, he made them to reflect himself in many different ways. He built into their hearts a clear knowledge of right and wrong, and he gave them the strength to do what was right. But, he also left them with the ability to do what was wrong if they wanted to. They knew what was right in their hearts, and he also stated the clear command to never eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. When they obeyed this command, they enjoyed wonderful fellowship with God and were privileged to rule over everything else that God created.

Chapter Three: Of God’s Eternal Decree

2011-06-01T23:33:00.001-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Before time began, God planned everything that would ever happen. What happens could not happen any other way than the way he planned it. This plan was based upon his own wisdom and desires without any outside influences.   The fact that he planned everything does not mean, however, that he is the author of sin. It also does not mean that human beings are merely robots.   What it does mean is that God controls and coordinates every part of creation so that what he wants to happen does indeed happen.

2. Even though God knows everything that can possibly happen in the future, he did not plan the future by seeing the options and then ordering them up like someone orders from a menu.

3. According to God’s plan, he displays his glory by choosing some humans and angels to live eternally in his presence while allowing the rest to be eternally punished for their sin.

4. The number and identity of those who have been chosen for eternal life and those who will be allowed to die is set in stone and will never change.

5. God chose those who will live forever before he created the world.   He keeps to himself his reasons for choosing some and not others, but he chose them with a love and grace that was not based upon anything he saw in them. For instance, he did not look into the future and pick them because he saw that they would someday believe in him, or that they were better than other people, or tried harder.   No, God’s grace alone deserves the credit.

6. God chose those who will have eternal life, and he also planned the ways that they would be saved as it best suited him. Even though the elect are guilty of Adam’s sin, Christ redeems them from their sin.   The Holy Spirit ensures that they will believe in him when the time is right. God declares them to be righteous and adopts them as his own children. He begins to work in their lives to free them from sin. He uses his power to keep them from falling away until they are finally saved. They will always believe in Christ.   Only those people that God has chosen will be redeemed in this way. No one else will be called, declared righteous, adopted into God’s family, freed from sin, or saved.

7. According to God’s plan, he has not chosen to save the rest of humanity. No one knows why, but he has the right to do whatever he wants. He uses his power and authority over his creation to demonstrate his own glory. Instead of giving them mercy, he gives them what their sin deserves—wrath and dishonor. God should be praised for this, because it is the right thing to do.

8. We should not allow the mysterious and difficult nature of these teachings to cause us to neglect them. Even though they are difficult to understand and accept, we should believe them because they are taught in God’s Word. If we believe them as God intended they will give us assurance of our salvation—we know that we have been chosen, because the Holy Spirit has ensured that we believe in Christ. In other words, our salvation depends upon God, and not upon ourselves. This teaching should have several effects: We should praise, worship and serve God wholeheartedly; we should be very humble; and we should also be very encouraged that we are able to believe the Gospel.

Chapter Two: Of God and the Holy Trinity

2011-06-01T23:29:00.000-04:00

The Westminster Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Only one true God has ever lived. Nothing can limit him in any way. He is an invisible spirit being and does not have a body or body-parts like humans do. He does not even have feelings or emotions in the same way that humans do. He can never change and fills all space and time at once. He is so different from us that we are unable to grasp how different he is. He has all power and all wisdom. He is completely free of any sinfulness. He can do anything he wants at any time and it will be always be the right thing to do. In fact, he controls all things however he pleases, and whatever pleases him is absolutely good. What pleases him most is his own glory. And yet, everything he does is always full of love, graciousness, mercifulness, and patience toward human beings. He is full of goodness and truth. He forgives sinfulness and never turns away those who really want to know him. At the same time, he hates sin and will punish the guilty because he must always do the right thing when he judges people.

2. God is complete all by himself—his eternal existence, glory, goodness, and happiness are complete in himself. He does not need anything else to make him more complete, not even what he has created—including humans. He does not need his creation in order to get glory, but he instead uses his creation to display his glory. He is the ultimate source for everything and everything exists for him. He has absolute authority and control over everything. He can do whatever he wants for his creation and to his creation.

Nothing can ever be hidden from God. He knows everything perfectly. Nothing that human beings do ever surprises God because he knows everything they will ever do.

Everything that God wants, does, or commands is completely sinless. He deserves everything he asks of his creation. All his creatures—angels and humans included—owe him their worship, service, and obedience.

3. There is only one God, but that one God is made up of three perfectly united and equal persons. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit have the exact same being, power, and timelessness. The Father does not come from any other person. The Son has always and always will come from the Father in a special and unique way. The Holy Spirit has always and always will come from both the Father and the Son.

Chapter One: Of the Holy Scriptures

2011-06-01T23:14:00.009-04:00

The Westminister Confession of Faith in Plain Language

1. Deep down inside, people can tell from the way God created and rules the world that he is good, wise, and powerful.* Since everybody should be able to see this clearly, nobody has any excuse for sinfulness. On the other hand, what is not so clear is how people can be saved from their sinfulness.

So God was pleased to reveal this more clearly in many different ways during Bible times.** Over many years, he spelled out in writing everything he wanted us to know. He put it into written form so that it could be preserved easily, spread around the world, and passed on from one generation to the next. That way it can be readily available to strengthen us against the evil influences of Satan, the world, and human sinfulness. Since God has put everything he wants us to know about himself in the Holy Scriptures, he has stopped revealing these things using any other methods.

2. The name Holy Scripture refers to all of God’s Word that has been written down in the books of the Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament books are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, First and Second Samuel, First and Second Kings, First and Second Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.

The New Testament books are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, First and Second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, First and Second Thessalonians, First and Second Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, First and Second Peter, First, Second, and Third John, Jude, and Revelation.

God produced these books in order to communicate to us what we should believe and how we should live.

3. Some people mistakenly believe that some other books, called the Apocrypha, are also God’s Word. However, these are not a part of the Bible and are no different than any other human books. They were not given by God to tell us what to believe and how to live.

4. We ought to believe and obey the Holy Scripture, not because people say so or the church says so, but because God says so. He wrote it. He is Truth. We should believe and obey it because it is his Word.

5. What the Church says about the Bible might convince us that it is God’s Word, but it is not the main reason we believe it. And several other things might also convince us. For instance, the Bible speaks of spiritual things in a way that captures the imagination. What it teaches has real impact on people’s lives. It is beautiful to read. It all fits together perfectly from the beginning to the end—in fact, it is perfect in every way. Absolutely nothing else can compare.   But these are not the main reasons we believe the Bible to be the Word of God. The faith to believe the Bible is the Word of God comes only from the Holy Spirit. Deep down inside, the Holy Spirit convinces us as we read the Bible that what we are reading is totally true and should be obeyed because it comes from God himself.

6. The Bible contains everything we need to know about how to glorify God, how to be saved, what to believe, and how to live. These things are either stated plainly in the Bible or we can figure them out by using common sense.   Since the Bible already contains everything we need to know, nothing can or should be added to it. No one can come along later and claim that God has revealed something different from or in addition to what he has already said in the Bible. They also cannot place human traditions on par with what the Bible says.

Even though God has revealed these things clearly, the Holy Spirit still has to open people’s eyes and ears for them to understand enough to be saved. And the Bible is not a handbook that spells out how to handle every situation. For instance, there are some practical things about how to worship God and how to organize the Church that God expects us to figure out using common sense. But at all times he expects us to be wise and to never go against what the Bible teaches.

7. Not everything in Scripture is easy to interpret. Some things are much more difficult to understand than other things. However, what the Bible says about salvation is clear enough for all to understand, regardless of whether or not they are educated. It does not take any unusual skill or intelligence to understand what the Bible says we should know, believe, and do in order to be saved.

8. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, which was the language of the Israelites. The New Testament was written in Greek, which was the most widely used language in New Testament times.   God directly inspired these original language versions of the Old and New Testaments and arranged for them to be preserved down through the ages. The Church should use them to settle any disputes about what it is supposed to believe. However, not everyone knows these original languages, so people have the right to have them translated into their own languages. That way they can obey God’s command to study the Scriptures.   Once they have the Scriptures in their own language, they will know how to properly worship God and can receive the hope that the Scriptures provide.

9. The only foolproof way to interpret the Scripture is to compare Scripture with Scripture.   The only true meaning of Scripture is the one intended by God. When the meaning of a passage is unclear, one should rely upon other passages of Scripture to shed light upon it.

10.The Holy Spirit, speaking through the Scriptures, isthe only one who can settle religious disputes between people who disagree. TheHoly Spirit trumps the opinions of Church authorities, ancient theologians,Bible teachers, and private individuals.

*This is called General Revelation—God reveals certain things about himself through nature and through our consciences. However, general revelation does not contain the Gospel. It only contains enough information for humans to know that they have sinned against God and have no excuse.

**This is called Special Revelation—God reveals himself and his plan of salvation more specifically by directly communicating details. During Bible times, special revelation took different forms—for example, God spoke through voices, prophets, and angels. However, God eventually set down all his special revelation into one form—the Scriptures. After he did this, all the other forms stopped, generally speaking.

Do Presbyterians Believe All Other Churches are Wrong?

2010-12-03T01:30:00.000-05:00

The following is an excerpt from the forthcoming book A Presbyterian Primer for Curious Christians. It is an early draft and subject to change.

Denominations differ from each other because of beliefs they hold very strongly. If they did not, there would be no need for separate churches or denominations. Presbyterians do not begrudge other churches the right to interpret the Scriptures according to their own consciences, but that does not mean that Presbyterians believe all denominations are correct. Similarly, other denominations think that Presbyterians are wrong.

The Church was at one time more united in its beliefs under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. But this led the Church far away from the teachings of the Bible. The Protestant Reformation restored the Bible to the hands of the individual Christians. After the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church no longer dictated to every Christian what they should believe. Instead, individuals began interpreting the Bible in different ways. This was a wonderful for Christianity, because it purified the Church and restored very important doctrines that had been missing or corrupted for centuries. But it also came with a price—people frequently disagreed with each other and established different denominations of like-minded people. So this freedom was a mixed blessing--it resulted in less unity across the Church, but the only alternative was to conform to the teachings of a central church authority. Having different denominations is a small price to pay for the freedom to study and interpret God’s Word as individual Christians.

There are a couple of advantages to having different denominations. The first is counterintuitive—they can actually bring unity to the church. After all, if there was only one church or denomination, and everyone within that one church disagreed with everyone else, the church would constantly suffer from chaos and division. So even though different churches may disagree on many things, they have the freedom to teach, preach, and worship in the unity of their own denominations. Additionally, many churches recognize that even though they disagree with other churches on many things, they still agree that the Bible is God’s Word and that Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation. In love and humility, they often cross their denominational boundaries to join with other churches for the sake of ministry to the larger world. The fact of different denominations does not have to mean disunity in the Church. Presbyterians are Christians first, Reformed second, and Presbyterian third. This means that on certain levels, they can cooperate in unity with other churches and denominations while still retaining and teaching their Presbyterian distinctives.

Another advantage to having different denominations is a little more theoretical. Nothing happens by accident. In God’s providence, there are many different denominations with many different teachings. Because Christians are sinful and have a limited ability to understand everything God has revealed, it is unlikely that the whole truth and the most perfect practice is found in only one church or denomination. It may very well be that God has allowed this diversity to occur in order to gift different parts of Christ’s Body with different emphases that together make a whole. Some churches may have gotten some things right that others got wrong. If this is true, then the church as a whole holds itself in check by means of interacting with and challenging the other parts. This sort of activity happens all the time, and has ever since the start of the Church in the first century.

Together, the denominations make up the different parts of Christ’s Body, and as a whole, they accomplish the work of the ministry throughout the world. Such a theory relies heavily upon belief in God’s providence and in the essential unity of the Church Universal. We don’t know exactly why God allows so much diversity in the Church, because none of us are privy to the secret plans of God. But at the least, we are each responsible to interpret, believe, and obey the Bible the best we know how.

No one should be so bold as to think they are always right, but Presbyterians are still captive to their consciences and the Word of God. Because we believe the Bible teaches Reformed theology, we teach it with great conviction. But because we recognize that we are fallible humans, prone to making mistakes, we hopefully teach it with love and humility. One famous Latin phrase that came out of the Reformation was Semper Reformanda, which means, “Always Reforming.” In other words, Presbyterian churches must always be willing to bring their beliefs into line with the Word of God, even if that means confessing that they were wrong.

Having said that, Presbyterian beliefs are not some new invention recently foisted upon the Church. We have the support of a huge portion of the Church both from its earliest years and from the centuries following the Reformation. The Westminster Confession of Faith, the most prominent statement of faith that came out of the Reformation, has over 400 years of widespread acceptance in Presbyterianism and other denominations. Presbyterians have believed and taught the same things for centuries. Even some non-Presbyterian churches have shared similar Reformed beliefs until this very day.

The bottom line is that we teach Presbyterian distinctives without apology within our churches because we believe they are what the Bible teaches. Any other church or denomination with a similar respect for the Bible also teaches its own beliefs within its own sphere of influence. Any church that does this sometimes finds it necessary to teach why they believe other denominations have misinterpreted the Bible. This is not arrogance. It is simply what is to be expected of any church that believes its teachings are based upon the Word of God.

While we believe that every church or denomination has the right to believe and teach its own interpretation of the Bible, we do not believe that all interpretations are equally valid. All interpretations cannot be correct because the Bible cannot teach two opposing things. For instance, it cannot teach that we should baptize babies on the one hand while teaching that baptizing babies is wrong on the other. One of the two interpretations has to be wrong. We understand, however, that many people disagree with us. Often their reasons are very understandable; that is to say, we understand why they believe the way they do.

Sometimes, however, people can believe certain things for very poor reasons. The study of the Scriptures can be complex, and if approached wrongly, can easily lead to wrong conclusions. Sometimes these conclusions can be damaging to the church as a whole. Prime examples of this are Roman Catholicism, liberalism, legalistic fundamentalism, Free Will Theology, an undue fascination with end-times events, and the beliefs of various cults, among many others.

How does one know the difference between a correct interpretation of Scripture and a wrong one? First, an interpretation must be the product of those who truly believe that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior. Non-Christians do not have the Holy Spirit to guide their study. The Bible says that a person without the Spirit cannot accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. This means that they cannot be relied upon to interpret the Bible correctly. Secondly, the interpreter must believe that the Bible is truly the Word of God, inspired by God and without error. Those who do not believe this will inevitably come to wrong conclusions concerning the Bible’s teachings. They do not possess the ability to understand the Bible without dismissing parts and pieces according to their own faithless whims. Thirdly, an interpretation must be the product of learned Bible study. The Bible contains many simple teachings, but it is also a very complex book. Many things are easy to understand, which explains why so many different churches agree on some of the most basic ideas in the Bible. But other things cannot be understood without adequate preparation for Bible study. God has gifted the church with Pastors and teachers whose responsibility it is to study and preach the Bible. These preachers should be prepared either through a quality education or through years of diligent Bible study. Fourthly, correct interpretations take into account different interpretations before settling on any one interpretation. This means that the serious Bible teacher must use a wide variety of resources—like commentaries, theology books, history books, and the original languages—before settling on a firm conclusion. Those who simply repeat what they have been taught without considering what others teach are locked into only one possibility with no guarantees that they are correct. Fifthly, serious interpretations always take into account what the Church has believed throughout history. Older interpretations are not always better, but we cannot act as if we are the first to ever study the Bible. The fact is that good men have been studying the Bible for millennia. We have no right to ignore the product of their studies. If an interpretation is new, or unique, or does not fit with how the majority of godly scholars have interpreted the Bible throughout the ages, one must question whether one’s interpretation is really better than what so many others have believed. The best interpretations are the product of rigorous Bible study by godly scholars confirmed by centuries of historical consensus.

Based upon these criteria, I believe that Reformed church members can trust Reformed interpretations of the Bible. Reformed theology has a very long history in the Church. It is not a flash in the pan, unique, or a new interpretation. It has centuries of support from believing, Spirit-led preachers and teachers who have been well-prepared to dive deep into the Bible’s teachings. Many times they have been better prepared than most preachers are today. Non-Reformed interpretations are much newer, have been held by a minority of Bible preachers, or have even been condemned in whole or part by church bodies over the centuries.

In the end, if we are asked if we believe we are right and someone else is wrong, I believe we would do what most churches do—be honest and firm about our convictions. But, I also hope that we would be humble, recognizing that many fine brothers and sisters disagree for very understandable reasons, and I hope that all of us would always be willing to reform our beliefs as the Holy Spirit convicts our consciences through God’s Word.

No Pegs on Which to Hang Theology

2010-12-02T21:53:00.003-05:00

I have the joy of preaching the Gospel from a Reformed perspective every Sunday. I know however that most of the people to whom I preach have been taught a very non-reformed way of interpreting the Bible from the time they were young. What I find though is that often the people to whom I preach do not recognize that I am preaching something different from what they have been taught most of their lives. This means that they are either not paying close attention, or they are not very knowledgeable concerning what they have been taught. For them to recognize that there is a difference, I have to call attention to the differences by contrasting reformed teaching with what they have been taught. This means that in order for them to recognize the difference, I have to clearly spell out their own prevailing viewpoint, explain how reformed teaching differs, and then clearly state that the former viewpoint was wrong.

I do not like to do this, because it tends to create problems. No one likes to be told that what they have been taught is wrong. It riles people up. I would rather preach the truth, and let it stick into their body of knowledge and become a part of what they believe without controversy. But if one preaches the truth without calling attention to the differences, I find that most people nod their heads as if they had believed such things all along. This means teaching reformed theology without using the buzzwords that they have been taught to look out for. Unfortunately, I think that my teaching either does not stick, or they have developed an ability to just mush it all together under the category of "blessing for the day" without the ability to think critically concerning what they have heard.

How can I explain their inability to recognize the differences? How is it that they can generally agree unless it is pointed out that what they are being taught is in contradiction with what they have been taught? Either they do agree, and they are rejecting what they have been taught, or they do not know how to think critically concerning what they hear from me. Considering the fact that when I do point out the obvious differences, I get negative responses from people, I have to think that the latter is more generally true.

I theorize that it has to do with pegs. I imagine a pegboard hung upon a wall. On that peg board ought to hang all the things that they have been taught, ready to be pulled down and used as they apply their Bible knowledge to their lives. But what I find is that their peg boards are remarkably pegless. That is they have no pegs upon the board upon which they have hung their beliefs. It is a flat board upon which the teaching of any given Sunday is slung. It may stick temporarily, but eventually it slides off into oblivion.

In other words, they have not been taught well. They have not been systematically taught how to understand, interpret, and apply the Bible in a comprehensive way. They do not know how to do theology. They have not been given the knowledge and the tools to make sense of the overall structure and themes of the Bible. No pegs upon the board means that they do not have a structured body of knowledge that usefully allows them to evaluate the teaching that they hear. The peg board, for many people, is a temporary place that holds the thought of the day, but having no pegs, it does not become a part of a larger body of knowledge.

They know how to read a verse and imagine a blessed thought from that verse, kind of like a weekly version of Our Daily Bread. It is good for the moment, something to say amen to, and receive a spiritual blessing from. But they are lacking in anything more complex than this. I speak generally of course. Their are exceptions. But when I see a congregation that nods its head approvingly during a sermon about things that they do not know that they should not believe, considering what I know they have been taught in the past, I have to thing that there is something going on that keeps them from thinking critically concerning the preaching of God's Word. I would feel better if a congregation actually knew that they were being challenged by the Word of God. But they do not seem to recognize it. The result is that they do not leave the sermon with questions in their minds. They have come and gone, unchallenged.

This has nothing to do with intelligence. This can happen to very smart people, and I know that my congregation is filled with many smart and savvy people. It may though have something to do with education. There are very few college-educated congregants in my church. But uneducated people can do theology if they make solid Bible study a priority in their lives. So I am not necessarily criticizing a lack of education. Lack of formal education need not be a stumbling block to a proper understanding of the Bible's theology. However, lack of education can contribute to an inability to do theology. But it can be overcome with diligence, as long as they are not prejudiced against diligent Bible study--Bible study that is admittedly more complex than what they might be used to. Sometimes, cultures that have not been formally educated are prejudiced against complexity. Somehow they have got it into their heads that everything contained within the Bible must be simple or it is not worth their time and attention. They may even distrust an educated clergy. They have gotten on fine without education throughout their lives. "Educated people think they are better than the uneducated," and the uneducated know full well that they are not. And indeed, I agree, they are not better.

In the end, I would have to chalk their peglessness up to decades of inadequate instruction, a failure to demonstrate the importance of solid Bible study that goes beyond blessings for the moment. I know that previous preachers have made efforts to change this for at least the last 25 years, so the inadequate instruction, and the bias against deeper, diligent Bible study must be more culturally endemic, built into the earliest years of the church, and bearing faulty fruit over the decades that followed. This means that those who have fought to change this have been beating their heads against a deeply cultural problem. The challenge then is to put pegs on the board that allows people to think critically, come away from a sermon knowing when they have been challenged theologically, and after hanging new teaching on those pegs, allows them to build an understanding of the Bible's teachings that can evaluate future instruction.

But Do We Have a Choice?

2010-11-14T23:19:00.000-05:00

This was the question that I was recently asked repeatedly. I was cut off again and again when I attempted to give an answer. I felt like I was in a court of law being interrogated by an lawyer who would only accept a yes or no answer. The questioner felt as if I was trying to convolute using theological tomfoolery what should have been a simple response . Unfortunately for the questioner, however, a yes or no answer will not answer the question adequately. This is sometimes the nature of truth. Sometimes a simple answer will allow someone to avoid the truth, and I was unwilling to do that. If you cannot handle the answer, then do not ask the question.

The question concerned whether or not human beings have a choice to be saved or not. To this person it was crucial to preserve some notion of free will at all costs. I told him that he may not like my answer, but he asked the question. It serves no purpose to cloud the truth with reductionist simplicity.

The exchange made me realize that sometimes people are unable to or refuse to understand complicated theology. They are too used to simplicity. My answer was not all that complicated, but it was moreso than what would satisfy the questioner. How does one deal with people such as this? The following describes how I handled the situation. In the end, the questioner and those listening agreed with me, and I believe I did not compromise the truth, although I conceded some terminology just to make my response understandable.

I told him that people did have a choice, if he would like to think of it that way. But I insisted that because of mankind's depravity, they would only choose evil. They are incapable of choosing Christ.
I insisted that salvation from start to finish was the work of God. If I grant that someone has a choice, then I must qualify that statement by insisting that he could not choose God due to his sinfulness.
I told him that God chose all those who would be saved in eternity before the creation of the world. Since mankind is only evil, their only hope to choose righteousness is if God has first chosen them, and then acted upon that by providing them with the Gospel and the operation of the Holy Spirit working through the Gospel and in the heart to enable that heart to choose God. Once cannot choose the Gospel unless God first enables a person to choose the Gospel by the Holy Spirit. This is called regeneration, the resurrection of what was once dead. The people listening agreed that man was dead in his trespasses and sins, and incapable of salvation unless God first acted to save the person.
One person listening in asked me to explain John 3:16 in light of what I just said. I explained that it is true that whosoever will may indeed believe in Jesus Christ. But I told them that we could take that promise and throw it into a room full of unbelievers and all of them would ignore it, unless God first acted to change their hearts to believe. Whosoever will means whosoever will, but the question is who indeed will? It is in fact only those who have been enabled by God to believe. All others will reject Christ.
I explained that God was sovereign over all things, including who will be saved, when they will be saved, how they will be saved, etc. I intended to make clear, and I explained, that a God who is sovereign over all things but who has no power to save someone unless they first allow God to save him or her, is not sovereign. Instead, to believe such a thing is to place man's power, at least in this one area, outside of and even above the authority and power of God. Such a god would have all power except that he is powerless to save a soul. Such a God is no god at all.
Another man asked me to explain what Peter meant when he said that God does not desire that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. I explained that this relates to the promise of mercy made to Noah. God will not destroy this world until all those who are to be saved will be saved. All will not come to repentance, but all the elect will.
Another man explained that he believed that God looked ahead through time, and since he knows all things, he saw who would get saved, and then chose them for salvation. I explained in return that this was a free will cop out, intended to explain away the clear language of Scripture that includes without any debate words such as predestination and election. The Bible teaches that God's choice in eternity was unconditional. He did not merely foresee who would be saved and then choose them based upon their choice. Whom God foreknew he predestined. This means that God knew beforehand exactly who he wanted to save for his own reasons, and then he predestined them to salvation.
I explained that some people are offended by God's electing and saving work through the Holy Spirit almost like it were an act of rape, transgressing the wills of unwilling participants. God, however, did not have to save anyone. He could have sent all to eternal punishment and would have been just and righteous, and good. But God in his mercy saw fit to change the wills of many who do not believe so that they can enter into eternal glory and fellowship and brotherhood, etc. This cannot in any way be equated with rape. No one was ever dragged to heaven who did not want to choose Christ, and no one ever went to hell who chose Christ. How can it be evil to save a soul from damnation?
I told them that even the WCF confesses that these things are difficult to understand, and they should bring us to our knees in humility. The simple fact is that God alone deserves the glory for our salvation. We cannot claim any part of it. Not even our faith; not even our "choosing."

Turns out the person and those who listened agreed with all that I had said, as long as I granted that we have a choice. I do not mind the word, as long as it is caveated with the truth that all mankind will choose, apart from the action of God, is evil. They will not choose salvation. We ended up on the same side, I believe, at least temporarily. It is always possible that their need to preserve the notion of choice will cloud their understanding of the more complicated facets of the explanation at a later time.

The idea of choice is important to many West Virginians. Unless one wants a fight in attempting to explain reformed theology, I would stay away from assertions such as "man has no choice." Instead, it may be better to grant the notion of choice as long two things are clearly presented: 1) Apart from God's work through the Holy Spirit, man will only choose evil. 2) Any notion of choice that infringes upon God's sovereignty reduces God to something less than God, for he must have all power and authority, or he is not God.

Understanding West Virginia Culture: "Family" Churches

2010-10-24T22:17:00.003-04:00

Because many churches in West Virginia develop within closed communities, they develop intensive family relationships within the church body. Please do not think that I refer to the consanguineous stereotypes that West Virginians have been falsely stuck with over the years. What I refer to is the simple fact that within rural, closed communities, different families are more likely to intermarry, often at several different points within the families, creating a larger family. This larger family then intermarries another larger family, creating an even larger family. Genograms of these family relationships can be very complicated. Within these larger families exist all the problems and benefits that all families possess. I discuss the problem of how families and churches within closed communities handle problems in this post.

But I want to consider a problem that I have observed over the years. Is it possible that churches comprised of several deeply intertwined families have an inadequate understanding of what church life is supposed to be like? Is it possible that their church life is more informed by family life than the Spirit or the Word of God? Some thoughts--

I have noticed that these types of churches seem most comfortable with and among their own. They do not tend to engage in serious evangelistic outreach. They are what they are, and do not see much need to change for the sake of outreach to the larger community.
I have noticed that when members of the church community have needs, those needs are typically met by families within the church rather than by the church acting as a church. Those who are not a part of the family can easily feel left out of church life.
Sometimes I have wondered--if the church did not exist, would the relationships between these families be any different than they already are? The same needs might still be met the same ways. It seems possible that the existence of the church might not really be making much of a difference.
I have noted that some of the older generation hold much sway over the younger generation, even over younger adults that ought to be coming into leadership and influence within the congregation. In some ways, the younger generation tends to view the church as their parents' church, and as long as their parents are still in the picture, they are content to let their parents dictate the nature of life in the church. This means that these churches are less likely to reach out using methods that are more accessible to younger generations. The church is stuck in the past and unable to outreach into the present or the future.
Among these older generations there tend to be a few heads of household that hold entire congregations (read "intertwined families") hostage. Their opinions are stated with authority and the expectation that most others will simply go along with them. The price of going against a family head within a family is too costly to the family relationships. Families do not often handle problems by dealing with problems. The tend to try to get past problems in a way that keeps the family peace. After all, "that is just how Uncle So-and-So is; there is little we can do about it without creating an uproar." Therefore the price of going against a family head within a church is also too great.
Visitors to these congregations can sense the family bonds. Over time, these bonds become more obvious as they get to know the congregants. These can and do alienate visitors quickly, leaving them to feel as if they are on the outside, unable to break into the family cliques. Those who have not been exposed to closed communities can view these congregations as strange and aberrant.

I am focusing on negatives, but I am sure there are also some positives, although the negatives might tend to overshadow the positives sometimes. For instance, the family is intended by God to be an analogy of Christian love and church life. It seems then that there ought to be something positive about churches with large intertwined families at least in the form of an earthly analogy to spiritual church life. These families are very efficient at meeting one another's needs. They also obviously care for one another deeply, show real, deep concern for each other's problems, and guard each other lives and reputations with fierce family loyalty.

Is it possible to accentuate the positives and overcome the negatives to produce a church that is not just a mere family but rather a family of God?

Why Do Presbyterians Use a Confession of Faith?

2010-10-16T20:05:00.001-04:00

The following is an excerpt from the forthcoming book A Presbyterian Primer for Curious Christians. It is a rough draft and subject to change.

The Reformed tradition is strongly creedal compared to today's non-reformed churches. This means that Reformed churches and denominations believe that it is appropriate to summarize the message of the Bible in the form of Statements of Faith. These are also known as Creeds or Confessions. These creeds are usually very old, testifying that they have been widely accepted and relied upon for centuries. They are important to Reformed Churches for several reasons:

They are used as teaching tools to instruct church members concerning what the Bible teaches.
They are used as a standard of fellowship and agreement among churches and denominations. Churches that agree with a certain Statement of Faith generally know that their beliefs are similar and compatible.
They are used as a standard to protect the teaching of the church from the changing whims of culture and popular belief.

Objections to Creeds

Some object to the use of creeds claiming, "No Creed but the Bible." However, this objection fails to acknowledge that all Christians, churches, and denominations constantly state their faith by drawing conclusions from, summarizing, and preaching what is contained within the Bible. Unless one is willing to preach using only the words of Scripture and nothing else (in other words, to simply read the Bible aloud), one cannot avoid creating informal statements of faith every time one preaches. Even most modern, non-creedal churches include in their constitutions a brief Statement of Faith. They therefore have no grounds to deny creedal churches a more formal, lengthy, and time-honored Statement of Faith. Whether a church includes a brief summary of beliefs in a constitution, or summarizes Scripture through preaching and teaching, or relies upon the more extensive, time-tested creeds of the larger, older Church, all churches utilize Statements of Faith in some form or another.

The Westminster Confession of Faith

There are several widely-used Reformed creeds. For Presbyterians, the most important is the Westminster Confession of Faith, produced in the 1600's by dozens of godly scholars and preachers whose only desire was to accurately describe the teaching of Scripture for the glory of God and the preservation of his Truth. These scholars also produced the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms. A Catechism is a set of questions and answers used to teach doctrine. Perhaps the most famous catechism question is the first in the Shorter Catechism:

Q. What is the chief end of man?

A. To glorify God and enjoy him forever.

There are many other respected Reformed creeds that are very similar to the Westminster Confession of Faith. Baptist readers might be interested to know that the Baptists used one for several centuries (The London Baptist Confession of 1689). As a testimony to the importance and propriety of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Baptists copied it nearly word for word, changing only those things necessary to distinguish themselves from the Presbyterians. This Baptist confession testifies to the simple fact that the Baptists were originally Reformed. It was not until the 1800's and beyond that the Baptists forsook their heritage by denying and, in many cases, even standing against the Reformed Faith. Thankfully, some rare Baptist churches, usually known as Reformed Baptists, continue to affirm this historic creed.

What Kind of Presbyterian Church Should I Join?

2010-10-16T00:48:00.002-04:00

The following is an excerpt from the forthcoming book A Presbyterian Primer for Curious Christians. It is a rough draft and subject to change.

If you have decided to become a Presbyterian, choosing a church is more a matter of principal than preference. By “preference,” I mean that there may be some things about a choosing church that should be left up to our individual consciences before God. Whether or not the church serves coffee in the basement, uses guitars in worship, or encourages blue jeans instead of suits is more a matter of preference than principal. “Principals,” on the other hand, are those non-negotiables that a church must believe, be, and do according to the Word of God.

Assuming that one will approach the decision prayerfully, there are many obvious questions that one should answer before joining a church. Does the church have informative, spiritual, convicting preaching that digs deep into the Scriptures? Is the church prayerful, peaceful, and loving? Does the church worship Biblically and reverently? Does it have an educational ministry that effectively ministers to your entire family? Will it give you opportunities to use your gifts? Is it a place where you can develop lasting relationships that will allow you to encourage and be encouraged in Christ?

These and many others are exceptionally important questions, but with regard to Presbyterianism in particular, there is at least one other very important thing to consider—there are many different Presbyterian churches and denominations, but not all of them believe the same things. Some of the differences have to do with what is commonly called liberalism.

Like most of the world today, many churches and denominations no longer believe that the Bible is absolute. Absolute means “true at all times, in all places, and for all people.” Over the years, these types of churches have been described as liberal. Typically they are open and honest about their liberalism, taking public stands against many things that are taught in the Bible.

In the 1800’s and 1900’s it became apparent that some Presbyterian denominations were liberal (this was also true of many other denominations). Over the years, different Presbyterian churches split off those denominations because they did not agree with liberalism. This means that, today, some Presbyterian churches and denominations are liberal and some are conservative. How can you know the difference?

Probably the easiest way to determine this is to ask a couple of very important questions:

Does the church or denomination believe and teach that the Bible is inspired, authoritative, and inerrant?
Does the church or denomination believe and teach that faith in Jesus Christ is the only way to receive God’s salvation?

The Inspiration, Authority, and Inerrancy of the Bible

Inspiration means that the Bible ultimately comes from God. Authority means that the Bible is the only rule for faith and practice in the church. What it says is what God wants us to believe and do. Inerrancy means that the Bible, as it was originally written, has no errors in it.

Those who doubt the inspiration, authority, and inerrancy of the Bible often question the miraculous and supernatural parts of the Bible. They might not believe, for instance, that Jesus was actually born of a virgin, or that Jesus healed people, or was actually raised from the dead. They might view many of the stories of the Bible as fanciful legends—the story of creation, the world-wide flood, Jonah and whale, the feeding of the five thousand, to name only a few. Often they will stress that certain parts of the Bible were simply the products of the times in which they were written—since the times have changed, they no longer apply, and we should not longer teach them. Some just ignore the parts they do not like.

The upshot of all this is that they feel the liberty to pick and choose what they believe to be true in the Bible. In effect, they create their own religion using Christian words—Christian in form, but not in power. Of course, this impacts what they teach in their churches. At best, they leave out of their preaching and teaching much of what God wants us to know. At worst, they preach and teach doctrines that go against what God has revealed, especially regarding salvation through Jesus Christ alone.

Salvation Through Jesus Christ Alone

Early on in the history of liberalism, one of the key doctrines that came under attack was the idea that faith in Jesus Christ was the only way to be saved. Unfortunately, this is still very common in liberal churches today. Some may, for instance, believe that Christianity is just one of many different ways to know God. Which religion you choose does not really matter, as long as you choose one. Therefore, Christians do not have the right to tell someone from another religion that their religion is wrong. This is called relativism. Others may believe that Jesus Christ saves all people, regardless of what they believe. This position is called universalism. These teachings make being a Christian or deciding which church to join a pointless matter. If "which religion?" doesn't matter or if God saves all, then why bother?

God’s Word testifies concerning itself—“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17).” God’s Word also testifies concerning Jesus Christ—“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12)." Those who accept the testimony of the Bible concerning itself and Christ, cannot accept either of these liberal conclusions. When you are choosing a church, take time to find the answers to these two questions. The answer will tell you whether or not a particular church will preach the Word of God, or whether it will simply preach the opinions of men and women who have rejected the Word of God. The cost of joining a church that has rejected the Word of God is very high. Not only will you not be taught the Bible, but you will not be taught the Gospel. You will probably even be taught to doubt the Bible. Without the God’s Word and his Gospel, you and your family cannot grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You may be able to guess that I cannot recommend joining a liberal church. If the Bible is not absolute, then all the questions in this book are pointless, and you are wasting your time reading it. If all our beliefs and practices are determined by what we want to believe rather than what the Bible teaches, then it does not matter which church you join. In fact, you should probably wonder whether there is any value in joining a church at all. They Bible says to have nothing to do with those who a present a form of godliness, but deny the power of God (2 Timothy 3:5). They will do more harm than good.

When Did Presbyterianism Begin?

2010-10-13T23:11:00.004-04:00

The following is a rough draft of a chapter from the book A Presbyterian Primer for Curious Christians. It will be further edited for publication.

Most non-Roman Catholic denominations had their start in the years following the Protestant Reformation of the 1500’s (Chapter ???). They are called Protestants because they protested the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. As Christians began to read and study the Scriptures for themselves, they developed their own unique interpretations of what the Bible taught. They joined together to form churches in accordance with their common beliefs. Lutheranism was the first type of denomination , followed by Anglicanism in England and its territories. Presbyterians, Congregationalists and the Baptists followed soon after.

John Knox

Presbyterianism developed under the leadership of John Knox in the 1500’s. Knox was a Scottish minister in the Anglican Church. He believed that the Anglican Church was too similar to the Roman Catholic Church, so he sought to reform it. The kings and queens of England were the official leaders of the Anglican Church, also known as the Church of England. This meant that they could decide what the Church of England believed, how it was structured, and who could be its ministers.

One queen, Mary Tudor, also known as Bloody Mary, liked Catholicism much more than Anglicanism, so she sought to restore the Church of England to its Roman Catholic roots. She ordered the persecution and murder of many ministers who did not want to be Catholic. Many ministers, including John Knox, escaped the country and went to Geneva, Switzerland, where they studied under John Calvin. John Calvin was a very important and influential minister in Geneva who organized the city into what John Knox described as the “most perfect School of Christ that ever was in the earth since the Apostles.” Through John Knox and many others who fled to Geneva, John Calvin’s teachings were eventually spread throughout Europe.

While in Geneva, Knox studied Calvin’s teachings and learned about organizing the church using elders, or presbyters. When he was eventually able to return to Scotland, he brought Calvin’s teachings with him. In Scotland, he worked to organize the church according to what he had learned. The result was the Presbyterian Church. The Presbyterian Church quickly became the most influential religious body in Scotland, to the point of becoming the official Church of Scotland.

The Westminster Confession of Faith

Since Scottish leaders were involved in the British Parliament, the Presbyterian Church became influential England as well. The King of England and the Parliament could not agree on what the Church of England should believe and practice, so parliament called together the religious leaders of the Anglican Church, the Presbyterian Church, and other churches to settle their differences and set up an official creed that all of England could agree upon. These leaders developed what was known as the Westminster Confession of Faith in the 1600’s. The Presbyterians were very powerful and influenced the wording of the confession more than the other denominations. As a result, the Westminster Confession of Faith became the official creed of Scotland and all those who call themselves Presbyterian. However the Confession of Faith did not end up becoming the official creed of the Church of England.

The Puritans

Many people in the British Isles believed that the Church of England was too similar to the Roman Catholic Church. They were called Puritans because they wanted to purify the Church of England. Their reforms were unsuccessful for the most part, so many of them set sail for America in hopes of religious freedom and a fresh start. Presbyterians and Congregationalists came over to America with the Puritans and began organizing churches in the New World. Presbyterianism soon spread throughout the New World. Today, conservative Presbyterians still believe that the Westminster Confession of Faith is the best and most complete description of what the Bible teaches.

What is Presbyterianism?

2010-10-13T01:53:00.005-04:00

The following is a rough draft of a chapter from the book A Presbyterian Primer for Curious Chrsitians. It will be further edited for publication.

Presbyterianism is a type of church denomination. Christianity is made up of different denominations, such as Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, and many, many others. Not all Presbyterian churches are members of the same specific denomination. Just like Baptists have different denominations (Southern Baptist, United Baptist, Missionary Baptist, etc), Presbyterians have different denominations as well. Some of those include the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, the Presbyterian Church in America, and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. There are several different Methodist and Lutheran denominations as well, not to mention all the other types of Christian denominations. Unfortunately, all these specific different denominations came about because they disagreed in some way with the other denominations.

The word Presbyterian comes from a Greek word that means elder. Every Presbyterian church has elders that the congregation has elected. The elders represent the congregation and are entrusted to make many decisions for the congregation. Some Presbyterian denominations rotate through elders, electing new ones every few years, and other denominations elect elders for life. Chapter ??? deals with elders in more detail.

Every type of church denomination has distinctives that make them different from other types of denominations. Presbyterian churches have three major distinctives.

Connectionalism

The first distinctive is called connectionalism. This simply means that we believe that all our churches should be connected with all the other Presbyterian churches within our denomination. No one church should operate independently of the other churches. We believe this because the Bible teaches that there is only one Church. Presbyterians recognize that it is impractical for churches of different denominations to be united together because they believe different things. However, as much as is humanly possible, we try to organize our denominations in ways that unite them with our other churches. It is a shame that different denominations cannot all believe the same doctrines or agree on all the same practices, but within Presbyterianism, we do our best to work out the Biblical ideal of One Church. Ideally, when Presbyterian churches agree on doctrines and practices, they can easily show this unity.

The way that we connect with other churches is through our church structure. Every church is a member of what is called a Presbytery. Presbyteries are made up of all the churches within certain geographical regions. Representatives from each of the churches gather together several times a year at a Presbytery meeting. There they make certain decisions that relate to all the individual churches. Once per year, representatives from the different presbyteries gather together at a General Assembly for the entire denomination. There they gather to make decisions that impact all the Presbyteries.

Even though our churches unite together in presbyteries and the General Assembly, each church still has the right to make most practical decisions all on its own. For instance, Presbyteries approve and ordain ministers, but they do not force churches to have a certain minister. Instead, each church decides which minister they would like to have in its congregation. Each church maintains a significant amount of authority for its own affairs.

The thing that unites Presbyterian churches more than anything else is doctrine (Chapter ???). They work hard to agree upon the same beliefs concerning what the Bible teaches. This is in accord with the Bible’s teaching that there is one body, one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of All (Ephesians 2:4-6).

Baptism

The second distinctive that makes Presbyterian churches different is baptism. Chapter ??? deals with baptism in more detail, but to summarize briefly, Presbyterians baptize both infants and believing adults, and they do it by sprinkling or pouring water on their heads instead of immersing them under water.

Calvinism

The third distinctive of Presbyterianism is called Reformed Theology or Calvinism. Again, Chapters ???? deals with these in more detail, but, in short, Calvinists believe that God is sovereign over all things, including the saving of people’s souls from sin and death. Sovereign means that God is Lord over all things, no matter how insignificant—he has a plan for all of history and the power and authority to accomplish that plan. Saving people’s souls is a significant part of that plan. His plan cannot be thwarted, no matter how hard Satan and evil people may try.

There are other differences, but these three—Connectionalism, Baptism, and Calvinism—are the three most obvious and important.

Stealing Glory from God

2010-10-12T21:49:00.001-04:00

Does Ephesians 1:13 contradict the Calvinistic principle that man is unable to do anything righteous, including believe in Christ?

And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit . . .

Paul wrote the first chapter of Ephesians to underscore the ultimate purpose of our salvation—The praise of God’s glory. What makes salvation a source of Glory for God is the simple fact that it is at every stage his own work, and not our own. If any part of it were our own, we would have something to boast about, and so it is all God’s work, as the passage makes clear.

In order to attribute this glory to God alone, he praises God the Father and the Son in verse 3. The following verses show how this glory is due to God alone. This glory is due to him because he chose us before the creation of the world. In love, he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Christ, and he did this for no other cause than his pleasure and will. All this monergistic (God alone does the work) action is to the praise of his glorious grace, given to us freely in his Son. Our redemption is in accordance with the riches of his grace, that is, once again, lavished upon us for no other cause than his wisdom and understanding. He is the one who revealed his will, according to his good pleasure, purposed once again before the foundation of the world in Christ Jesus. This revelation was at a time of his choosing, and according to no other purpose and cause than what he has determined for his own glory.

Verse 11 says that the first Christians were chosen for the praise of his glory. This choosing was an act of predestination. This predestination was planned by the one who works out everything exactly as he desires it to be, once again, to the praise of his glory. Verse 13 tells us that those who became Christians later were just as much a part of this purpose. They were included in Christ when after they heard and believed the Gospel of their salvation, the Word of truth. Having believed, they were marked with a seal, the Holy Spirit, as a guarantee that they would receive the inheritance that God has promised when he completes that work of redemption for all those who are his possession. To underscore the simple fact that this is all God’s work, and that no one but God deserves the glory, he closes this section by stating that God alone does all this, so that it will be to the praise of his glory.

An obvious implication of all this is that to reserve any part of this work for one’s own self, including the act of believing, is to steal praise from God that he alone deserves and reserves for himself.

Someone has asked me—Doesn’t the fact that Paul says in verse 13 that they were sealed after they believed mean that the work of the Holy Spirit comes after faith? I can only see this as a question that desperately attempts to contradict everything that Paul has said in the previous verses—that God has done all this, from start to finish, for his own sovereign purposes, according to his plan, by his own good pleasure, so that he alone will receive the praise and glory for salvation. The desperate attempt to deny this through verse 13 is simply another effort to retain some glory for man.

There is no glory for man in salvation. Every last bit of it is for God and God alone.

John Calvin on Ephesians 1:13—

But is it not faith itself which is here said to be sealed by the Holy Spirit? If so, faith goes before the sealing. I answer, there are two operations of the Spirit in faith, corresponding to the two parts of which faith consists, as it enlightens, and as it establishes the mind. The commencement of faith is knowledge; the completion of it is a firm and steady conviction, which admits of no opposing doubt.. Both I have said are the work of the Spirit. No wonder, then if Paul should declare that the Ephesians, who received by faith the truth of the gospel, were confirmed in that faith by the seal of the Holy Spirit.

An Analogy: Theology as a Foreign Language

2010-10-09T23:10:00.000-04:00

Today my wife and I were discussing why so many of those in the community in which I minister have such a visceral reaction to the Reformed Faith. They appear to be unteachable, that is, utterly unwilling to consider the possibility that Reformed Theology is actually very clearly taught in Scripture. Their objections are often eisogetical; or rather, they are predisposed to reject a Reformed understanding of Scripture based upon preconceived notions of what the Bible teaches, quite apart from considering the Biblical evidence. When they do consider those passages, they are bound and determined to assert that they do not mean what I am saying that they mean, even if they cannot explain how or why. What I teach cannot be true, regardless of how strong the Biblical evidence appears.

In the course of my discussion with my wife, she brought to mind an interesting analogy. For many people, learning Reformed theology is like learning a foreign language.

How does this analogy work? Consider that a child learns a first language quite effortlessly. They do not need to study or be diligent about it. Eventually, by the effect of total linguistic immersion, they speak the language. It is as easy as pie. They do not even need to understand the grammar of it. It is built into them. Of course, their education will eventually fine tune their understanding of the language and its grammar, but the point remains true. They initially learn the language simply by being exposed to it.

In due time, when people are exposed to a foreign language that they do not know, it is incomprehensible to them. Gobbledygook. They have no ability to relate what they hear with what they already know. If and when they do take it upon themselves to learn this foreign language, it will not be nearly as easy as their first language.. As a matter of fact, it will be arduous for most people. It will take time and diligence.

Our theology often comes to us like a first language. We drink it in from early years through the well-springs of our communities, our entertainment, our churches, our friends. Those who have been taught a certain theology in churches tend to embrace it as a first language. There is no need to understand the grammar of it. It is simply what one accepts and believes. Eventually they will fine tune it through Sunday School and listening to sermons.

When a different theology comes their way, it may very well sound like gobbledygook. The terminology of the new "language" is possibly incomprehensible, not as a matter of word-meanings, or due to a lack of intelligence, but simply because of a lack of familiarity or because it challenges things that they have already implicitly accepted in their existing theology. Continuing with the analogy, the learning of this new theology will be far more difficult than was the learning of the first theology. It will take diligence and study.

None of this is necessitated by intelligence or education-levels. Very intelligent people are not always educated people. Educated people are not always intelligent people. It simply has to do with what one has been immersed in from earliest years. New theology is strange and harsh upon the ears. If people are comfortable and satisfied with their current language, then at best, they may feel no desire or need to learn a different language. At worst, they may take offense at a theology that challenges what they have been immersed in from their earliest years in the Faith.

Some Fundamentals of Reformed Theology

2010-10-08T00:58:00.000-04:00

Those who do not understand the following will oppose Reformed Theology and will instead embrace Free Will Theology:

God is sovereign over all his creation, even man’s sinful choices. Man is still fully responsible for his sinful choices, and God will hold him accountable.

Isaiah 46:10-- I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.

Acts 2:23-- This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

Acts 4:27-28-- Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. 28They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

Man is free to do anything he wants, but is not free to do what he ought. Free Will, as most understand it, is only an illusion.

Matthew 12:33-37-- Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. 34You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. 35The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him.36But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. 37For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned."

Mark 7:21-23-- For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

Unregenerate man only wants to sin and is incapable of doing righteousness, including believing in Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2:1-3-- As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.

Romans 3:10-12-- As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; 11there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one."

I Corinthians 2:14-- The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

In order to be free to do what he ought, including believe in Christ, God must resurrect man’s soul through regeneration. Man must be born again.

John 3:3-- I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.

John 6:35-40--"I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

John 6:44-- "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:64-65-- Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him."

Then and only then may man believe in Christ.

Free Will is not Really Free

2010-10-06T23:23:00.003-04:00

In the book Putting the Amazing Back into Grace, Michael Horton conveniently compiles a list of Scriptures demonstrating the effects of Adam’s sin upon all his progeny. Adam was told, “When you eat of it (the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil), you will surely die” (Gen. 2:17).

Those who embrace Free Will Theology are nearly desperate to retain the right and ability to choose their salvation. To suggest otherwise spawns looks of panic and disgust upon their faces. To suggest otherwise is . . . inhuman. However, the Word of God clearly teaches that our supposedly "free" will is enslaved to sin. It is utterly incapable of choosing salvation. In Adam, we all died—physically, spiritually, and eternally. The dead have no ability to choose salvation. So keep your free will if you want. It is worthless.

Here are some of the Scriptures that Horton compiled to demonstrate this:

Psalm 51:5--Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Psalm 58:3-- Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

Psalm 130:3-- If you, O LORD, kept a record of sins, O Lord, who could stand?

Proverbs 20:9--Who can say, "I have kept my heart pure; I am clean and without sin"?

Ecclesiastes 7:20-- There is not a righteous man on earth who does what is right and never sins.

Ecclesiastes 7:29-- This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes.

Ecclesiastes 9:3-- This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all. The hearts of men, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterward they join the dead.

Isaiah 53:6-- We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way.

Isaiah 64:6-- All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

Jeremiah 17:9-- The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

Mark 7:21-23-- For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'

John 3:19-- This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

John 8:34--Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.”

John 8:44-- You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire.

Romans 3:9-12-- What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one."

Romans 5:12-- Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.

Romans 6:20-- When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness.

Romans 8:7-8-- The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

I Corinthians 2:14-- The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Ephesians 2:1-3-- As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.

Job 14:4-- Who can bring what is pure from the impure? No one!

Jeremiah 13:23-- Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil.

Matthew 7:18-- A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

John 6:44-- "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

2 Corinthians 3:5--Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God.

Understanding WV Culture: Closed Communities and the Family Analogy

2010-09-03T01:06:00.008-04:00

West Virginia has many different types of communities. Some of them are what I would call "closed communities." I am no sociologist, but I will take a stab at exploring a facet of closed communities for the sake of increasing the knowledge of those who live and minister within them.

Closed Communities

By my definition, a closed community is one that is culturally isolated from other communities by virtue of geography, availability of resources, work locations, and family concentrations, among other things. For example, a typical closed community developed around company coal mines. Closed coal communities are not nearly as closed as they once were, but the effects of their isolation still remains through the influence of older generations.

For the most part, the people who lived in those communities worked in, around, and for the company that owned the mine. In return the company provided, supported, or encouraged nearly everything that was needed for life in the community within its borders: doctors, schools, entertainment, department and food stores (known as company stores).

At one time, lack of transportation and the geographical isolation of coal mining communities created a de facto isolation. Transportation was not nearly as necessary or available as it is today. Work was within walking distance, as were schools and everything else the community depended upon. Those who were not within walking distance of work or school either hopped the community coal trains (even children) or carpooled. Attendance at college was not prevalent, but work straight out of high school (and even before) was, so many never had cause to leave. Churches of different denominations sprang up in the same communities within walking distance of each other. Children of yesteryear grew up to marry their neighbors and work for or around the company. The tracing of community genograms is a very difficult task, not because of stereotypical consanguineous marriages, but because the limited number of families within communities tended to intermarry. People married those they knew within the community. Thus different families find themselves interrelated by a wide variety of complicated avenues even today.

These communities no longer exist exactly as I have described, but the vestigial effects still remain. Some of the children of these original company families, now in their 40's and 50's, went to schools outside the community and have gone to college, but many of them have returned to live next to parents, even though they work outside the community. They may have married someone who lived outside the original community, but in all likelihood it was somebody from the next community over. Their children (the third generation) are much more likely to attend college, and due to the breadth of their outside experiences and the need to find work as the times and expedience demand, they will not likely return to live along side their parents. They will go where work takes them. Nevertheless, the closed community culture of the grandparents has a strong influence upon those who leave and those who remain.

The Family Analogy

Vestigial closed community culture presents a wealth of sociological phenomena that could be explored, but I will focus briefly on one application to church life. I call it the Family Analogy. The Family Analogy probably has many different applications and directions of study, but I will focus particularly upon the Family Analogy as it is demonstrated in the handling of conflict.

As a general rule, families handle conflict by trying to avoid it as much as possible. Conflicts inevitably arise and can be very intense, but the method for dealing with difficult people within families does not usually involve reconciliation. Rather, it is to get past the incident as quickly and easily as possible, as if the conflict were water under the bridge. Even those who refuse to like each other will put up with each other, chat superficially, hug and shake hands at family events. Over time, families learn what buttons not to push and assiduously avoid pushing them.

For instance, if old Uncle Barry is consistently difficult to get along with, then families simply learn to step lightly around old Uncle Barry. Instead of aiming for reconciliation, they try to avoid the situations in which conflict arises. After all, Uncle Barry is family, and there is little anyone can do about that. After the blow up, Uncle Barry will still be around, and the family has no choice but to live with or around him. Therefore, they will quickly move past the conflict as if it had not happened, rather than deal with the underlying problems. As a result, from time to time, the same difficulties arise, and the same solutions (or non-solutions) are applied.

This scenario becomes an analogy when considering closed communities. Families may be interrelated in these communities, but this is not the point of the analogy (even though it is a sociological facet to be explored). The point of the analogy is simply that all those within the closed community, by virtue of the fact that they must live with all the others in the same closed community, are a sort of family. And they tend to deal with problems in ways that are analogous to the way families deal with them.

The Family Analogy within Church Sub-Communities

This analogy becomes even more valid and visible within church sub-communities. Churches already tend to be closed communities wherever they are, but this is compounded when one considers those that are closed communities within larger closed communities. Rather than work toward biblical reconciliation--which requires addressing character, dealing with sin, demonstrating repentance and promising forgiveness--churches sometimes do only what is necessary to get past conflict. Conflict can and should become water under the bridge as soon as possible by any means necessary, even if those means do not deal with the heart of the conflict. The result is that the problems continue under the surface, and occasionally blow up (to be bypassed quickly once again), and then everyone can return to smiling and hugging as if nothing had happened. Peace in families is not always real peace. It is avoiding conflict by whatever means necessary, even if it means faking it. The same phenomenon is observable by analogy in closed community churches.

Can People Be Too Reformed?

2010-08-31T14:04:00.003-04:00

Here is an opinion for discussion.

Reformed Theology is not monolithic. There are disagreements among those who otherwise agree upon the Doctrines of Grace. There are some who say that one cannot be Reformed unless one is Presbyterian. Others say that one must hold to a literal six day creation. Others demand that the Lord's Day be celebrated in a very strict sabbatarian fashion. However, these points and many others are not held in universal agreement by those who are otherwise Reformed with regard to the doctrines of Grace. In other words, some people are unnecessarily exclusive of many fine brothers and sisters who disagree with their particular convictions. And, what's more, they tend to be obnoxious about it. Stubborn. Arrogant. This is "too" Reformed in my humble opinion.

There is a tendency among those who are newly Reformed to go through what I call the Hurricane Stage (pronounced hurricun, like the town on I-64). They value their Reformed doctrinal purity so far above the relationships around them, that they blow through upsetting everything and everyone around them. They make no friends for Reformed Theology. Most of us have seen this sort in bible colleges or seminaries. A little too fascinated with the particulars of their recent theological discoveries so that they do not know how to engage in effective ministry.

I do not believe that the way to bring people around to our way (and most of history's way) of understanding the Scriptures is to simply inform them of where they are wrong every time we get a chance. Even when they are silent, Hurricane Reformers seem to exude something that makes their impressions of those they disagree with very obvious. And most of the time, it does not appear loving in the least.

As true as our doctrine may be, it is quite possible to present it lovingly, as Paul has said, "Speak the truth in love." In many parts of our State, our doctrines are not only foreign, they have been fought against by preachers for decades. The result is that many trusting and trustworthy people have come reject the Doctrines of Grace through very little fault of their own. The way to deal with these people is not to simply tell them, with an air of final judgment, that they must repent and believe something totally different from what they have been taught all their lives. They will reject you. I know this all too well.

Instead, these people require patient teaching that works to overcome decades of contrary instruction. This does not happen over night. Those who expect it to will not be able to advance Reformed Theology throughout the State of West Virginia.

If anyone with interest and wisdom comes across this, please discuss it so that we can all become more wise.

The Bills Blog: The State of Reformed Theology in the State of Wes...

2010-08-31T02:53:00.000-04:00

Several different bloggers throughout the State will occasionally post blog entries of interest to the Reforming West Virginia blog. Here is one by Pastor Dennis Bills of Winifrede Presbyterian Church in Winifrede WV.

The Bills Blog: The State of Reformed Theology in the State of Wes...: "How many Reformed churches does West Virginia have? I know there are 10 churches affiliated with the Presbyterian Church in America (my ..."