Praying for God to Save the Lost

I want to introduce this article by taking us back some forty-one years to the initial publication of what soon became an evangelical classic: J. I. Packer's Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God (IVP, 1961). The book was an expansion of the address Packer delivered to The London Inter-Faculty Christian Union (LIFCU) on October 24, 1959, at Westminster Chapel. What makes Packer's book so instructive for us today is the utter incredulity on his part, in 1961, regarding a theological perspective that today, in 2002, is widespread and pervasive in its influence.   

Packer begins his defense of divine sovereignty in salvation by appealing to what he believes is, or at least should be, an evangelical consensus on the practice of prayer. He appears to assume that no one who embraces a high view of Scripture could possibly think otherwise. It is more than simply that we pray, but also how and what we specifically ask God to do that Packer believes supports his understanding of the activity of God in saving a human soul.    Continue at Sam Storms

No Perseverance, No Salvation

So what are we to make of Hebrews 3:5-6, which many believe calls into question the security of our salvation as the children of God? Look at the text.

“Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, but Christ is faithful over God’s house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.”

Merely saying or declaring that one is a Christian amounts to very little. In fact, it may be an act of self-delusion and self-deception. All through the NT we come across what can only be called “false faith”. False faith is a form of “belief” in Christ that never fully takes root in the heart. There may be an initial season of joy and excitement and Bible study and church attendance, but it is followed, at some point, by drifting away from the Lord and falling into unrepentant sin and idolatry.  Continue at Sam Storms

The Kingdom of God: Already but Not Yet - Part I

The view presented below is held by premillennialists (those who believe in a 1,000 year earthly reign of Christ between his second coming and eternity), amillennialists (those who believe the millennium is occurring now, in heaven, among the saints with Christ, and who believe the second coming will be followed immediately by the eternal state), as well as some postmillennialists. Although these groups disagree over the nature and timing of the millennium, they are in agreement in their rejection of dispensationalism and their affirmation of one people of God.

A.        The People of God and the Promise of the Kingdom

1.         There is in God’s redemptive purpose one people, the elect. This single body of elect people, however, when viewed within the context of biblical history, is comprised of differing individuals and assumes diverse forms. Beginning with Gen. 12, however, God selected out from among all the peoples of the earth one man, Abraham, and pledged Himself to him and his seed to be their God. Thus beginning with Abraham and extending to the first advent of Christ the elect of God were found almost wholly within the bounds of one ethnic body, Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.   Continue at Sam Storms

 

 The Kingdom of God: Already but Not Yet - Part II

 

 

THE KINGDOM OF GOD: PRESENT REALITY OR FUTURE HOPE?

Friendly Fire: Tom Schreiner and Sam Storms Debate Cessationism

Tom Schreiner and Sam Storms have both published essays this morning at The Gospel Coalition discussing whether the miraculous gifts are still in operation today. Tom Schreiner argues the cessationist position–that miraculous gifts have ceased. Storms argues the continuationist postion–that prophecy, tongues, and the rest continue. I think both essays have a constructive tone even as they straightfowardly disagree with one another.

The essays are too short to cover the issues exhaustively. Nevertheless, I think that Schreiner has the stronger argument. For me anyway, the arguments for the continuationist position continue to fall short biblically. At the end of the day, this all comes down to what the Bible teaches, and on that point cessationists and continuationists are still at loggerheads. In any case, I’ll leave it to you to read their essays and form your own opinion. For a longer for argument in favor of the cessationist position, I recommend Dick Gaffin’s classic work Perspectives on Pentecost.  HT: Denny Burk

Tom Schreiner – “Why I Am a Cessationist”

Sam Storms – “Why I Am a Continuationist”

What I Wish I'd Known: Reflections on Nearly 40 Years of Pastoral Ministry

What follows has been adapted from a brief talk I delivered to the Oklahoma chapter of The Gospel Coalition on October 2. Here are 10 things I wish I'd known when I first started out as a pastor.

1. I wish I'd known that people who disagree with me on doctrines I hold dearly can often love God and pursue his glory with as much, and in some cases more, fervency than I do. The sort of intellectual pride that fuels such delusions can be devastating to ministry and will invariably undermine any efforts at broader Christian unity across denominational lines.

2. I wish I'd known about the inevitable frustration that comes when you put your trust in what you think are good reasons why people should remain loyal to your ministry and present in your church. I wish I'd been prepared for the feelings of betrayal and disillusionment that came when people in whom I'd personally invested so much love, time, and energy simply walked away, often with the most insubstantial and flimsiest of excuses.   Continue at Sam Storms

...But What about Grudem / Piper / Carson?

A couple of poor souls have unintentionally given us golden examples of why it is valid to fault the best for giving cover to the worst.
A number of dainty souls didn't like, and fretted anxiously about, this Twitter hashtag. Our focus isn't the hashtag itself, or all the broken tea-cups it's caused. 

With those in mind, scan the rest of my Tweets under the hashtag. You know, if you want to.

Leave aside whether you think this is wise, loving, winsome, effective, ambassadorial, ecumenical, or eco-friendly or likely to produce global warming. I only have one question: given the limitations of 140 characters, and given that I have dozens of long-form essays on record and internationally-accessible, are my criticisms accurate and vitally important criticisms of the distinctives of Charismaticism/"continuationism"?    Continue at Dan Phillips

What does the Bible say about Ancestral Sin, Generational Spirits, and Curses?

Many charismatics and proponents of deliverance ministry often speak of ancestral sin and the generational demonic spirits that they believe frequently accompany it. Appeal is made to Exodus 20:5-6 -

"You shall not worship them [i.e., false gods or idols] or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing loving kindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."

Several things should be noted about this text.

Nothing is explicitly said here about the passing down or generational transference of demonic spirits. The threat articulated here is the judgment of God, not the perpetuation of a demonic presence in a family line.

It is crucial to observe what the text says about those on whom this judgment comes. It is "those who hate Me" who are subject to this punishment. Nothing is said about innocent victims of ancestral rebellion. Along these lines, we must take into consideration Deut. 24:16 - "Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin" (cf. Ezek. 18:2-4,20). The point is this: if you do not "hate" God, this threat is not applicable to you. We should also note that divine "blessing" or the experience of "loving kindness" does not extend automatically to the children of godly people but only to "those who love Me [God] and keep My commandments."

Finally, the emphasis in the passage is on God's mercy, not his wrath. The point is that whereas the effects of disobedience last for some time, the effects of loving God are far more extensive ("to a thousand generations").    Continue at Sam Storms

Jesus is the Focal Point, Terminating End, and Comprehensive Consummation of the OT

From Same Storms’s new exhaustive treatise on Amillennial perspective, Kingdom Come:

First, Jesus is the Temple.

The glory which once shined in the tent/tabernacle/temple of old, veiled in the mysterious cloud, was simply a fore-glow, a mere anticipatory flicker, if you will, of that exceedingly excelling glory now embodied in the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ (cf. Col. 1:19) (beside this sentence in my book, I penciled in all caps, “AMEN”).  

God no longer lives in a tent or tabernacle built by human hands, nor will he ever.  God’s glorious manifest presence is not to be found in an ornate temple of marble, gold, and precious stones, but rather in Jesus.  Jesus is the glory of God in human flesh, the one in whom God has finally and fully pitched his tent.

The point is that the temple of the Old Covenant was a type or foreshadowing of the glory of Christ.

“Divine space is now no longer located in a place but in a person,” says Gary Burge.

It would be an egregious expression of the word imaginable redemptive regression to suggest that God would ever sanction the rebuilding of the temple (p. 18-21)

Second, Jesus fulfills the Feasts.     Continue at Greg Gibson

IMAGE

 

What Cessationism Is Not

Much ado has been made (both on this blog and elsewhere) about the recent “anti-cessationist” comments of a popular Seattle-based pastor. I don’t desire to enter a war of words, or become embroiled in an online controversy. But I do hope to make a helpful contribution to the conversation.

Over the last few years, I’ve enjoyed investigating the historical record regarding the charismatic gifts, especially the gift of tongues. And I can only hope that the above pastor, and his co-author, will treat the material responsibly in their upcoming work on the subject. (Who knows, maybe they’d be open to a two-views book?)

I would also hope that, in the process of critiquing the cessationist position, the authors do not create a straw man version of cessationism. (I’ll admit that, based on what I’ve read so far, I’m afraid the straw man is already under construction.)

Nonetheless, in an effort to dismantle a fallacious misrepresentation before it is built, I offer the following four clarifications about what cessationism is not:

* * * * *

Cessationism is not anti-supernatural, nor does it deny the possibility of miracles.    Continue at Nathan Busenitz

See also: Spiritual Gifts in Church History (4)

"In Christ Alone," the Wrath of God, and a sad day for the PCUSA

In a recent issue of The Christian Century (May 1, 2013; written by Mary Louise Bringle) it was reported that the Presbyterian Committee on Congregational Song (PCOCS), operating under the authority of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A. (PCUSA) evaluated the theological merits of the popular worship song, In Christ Alone (written by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend). Evidently they are preparing for the release of the denomination’s new song collection, Glory to God.

As you probably know, the second stanza of the song contains the line, “Till on that cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” An earlier version of the denomination’s hymnal had changed it to read, “Till on that cross as Jesus died, the love of God was magnified.” Although no one would deny that God’s love was magnified in the death of Christ for us, Getty and Townend, much to their credit, refused to approve the change. The committee, wrote Bringle, was faced “with a choice: to include the hymn with the authors’ original language or to remove it from our list.”

The final vote was six in favor of retaining the song with its original wording and nine against. The “No” votes prevailed and the song was removed.  Continue at Sam Storms

The Mark of the Beast

Today’s (5-4-13) headline of the Life section of my local newspaper (The Oklahoman) could hardly be missed: “Marks of the Beast? Scanners prompt biblical concerns.” The related headline also declares: “Technology renews questions on end time, ‘mark of the beast’” (by Carla Hinton).

The article mentions a local woman who “said she was concerned that biometric palm scanners used by her hospital employer to collect patient information were too similar to the ‘mark of the beast’ referenced in the biblical Book of Revelation” (page 1D). Other concerns were raised “about biometric digital photographs such as those used for driver’s licenses in several states. Parents of students in some school districts across the country have become alarmed about vein scanners and student I.D. cards that include a biochip implant system, or radio frequency identification (RFID) chips, to track students on school grounds at all times” (ibid.). Reference is also made, not unexpectedly, to one’s Social Security number as “a possible precursor to the ‘mark of the beast’” (ibid.).

So what are we to make of this? My answer probably won’t be well liked, but I’m growing weary of this sort of thing. In my new book, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative, I address the matter at some length. So I’ve decided to take selected portions of my discussion on the topic and say something about this ever-present hysteria among many Christians.   Continue at Sam Storms

Serving the Church Joyfully, not Under Compulsion

I’ve always found it interesting that Peter warns Elders in the local church never to pastor or lead the flock of God “under compulsion, but willingly” (1 Peter 5:2).

Why would anyone ever submit to pressure to serve as an Elder? What could possibly motivate a man to serve under compulsion? Here are some possibilities.

• his love or desire for the praise and approval of others
• his desire to avoid the disdain and rejection of those whose approval and respect he craves
• he sees ministry as an opportunity to become famous and well-known and acknowledged in public
• he yields to pressure put upon him by parents, educators, mega-church leaders
• he feels incompetent to do anything else in life
• he mistakenly believes that a life of ministry merits favor with God

No one should ever be pressured into serving as an Elder. God wants our ungrudging service. Note well the use of the cognate noun translated “under compulsion” in 2 Corinthians 9:7 with regard to giving – “Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”   Continue at Sam Storms

Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative

My new book on biblical eschatology, Kingdom Come, is now available, at least to those in the U.K.! The reason I know is that I am in the U.K. speaking at a conference called New Word Alive and the book is here at my side. I couldn’t be more pleased. Christian Focus Publishers has done a marvelous job in its production and I think you’ll enjoy it. It is only available in hardback and is a mere 589 pages in length! Sorry for that, but I had a lot to say. I’ve been told that copies are aboard a ship at this very moment and the book should be available in the U.S. around the first of May. You can place a pre-order with Amazon by clicking on the link below on the right hand side of the home page.

Here are some of the endorsements provided by some names you may recognize. I’m incredibly blessed by their kind and encouraging words.

“Evangelicals continue to be divided over eschatology, and such divisions will likely continue until the eschaton. For some, premillennialism is virtually equivalent to orthodoxy. Sam Storms challenges such a premise with a vigorous defense of amillennialism. Storms marshals exegetical and theological arguments in defense of his view in this wide-ranging work. Even those who remain unconvinced will need to reckon with the powerful case made for an amillennial reading. The author calls us afresh to be Bereans who are summoned to search the scriptures to see if these things are so.”

Thomas R. Schreiner, James Buchanan Harrison Professor of New Testament Interpretation The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky   Continue at Sam Storms

IMAGE

Why I Changed My Mind About Baptism

Editors' Note: What doctrine or issue have you changed your mind about? The Gospel Coalition posed that question to several pastors, theologians, and other thinkers in order to gain a better understanding of what leads to shifts along the theological spectrum [see Sam Storms's "Why I Changed My Mind About the Millennium"]. Gavin Ortlund continues this new series with an explanation of how he changed his view on baptism.

I was baptized as an infant in the Church of Scotland. After my family moved back to the United States, I was raised in various Presbyterian churches, eventually working at two Presbyterian churches during college and then attending a Presbyterian seminary. As I look back, I have nothing but gratitude for my time among Presbyterians; in fact, I often miss that world!

The issue that propelled me out of Presbyterianism was the doctrine of paedobaptism (infant baptism). Once I sensed God's call to ministry, I conducted an intensive study of this issue since I knew it would affect where I could be ordained. During my final semester of college, I read everything I could get my hands on that addressed the question. Throughout my first year of seminary, I continued reading and also dialoguing with my paedobaptist friends. I remember conversations that lasted well into the night. I remember long office hours with professors and a few spirited discussions in class. I remember entire afternoons struggling with books like Pierre-Charles Marcel's The Biblical Doctrine of Infant Baptism, Paul Jewett's Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace, and countless others on both sides of the issue. By April of that year, my convictions had solidified against paedobaptism, and I (somewhat reluctantly) changed my church affiliation and was baptized (dunked in a river, to be precise).

It was helpful to formulate my convictions about baptism in a setting where almost everyone saw it differently than I did. In seminary I heard countless defenses of the Reformed paedobaptist argument from godly people whom I trusted and respected. I think I was able to see the paedobaptist view sympathetically, as an insider sees it. Though the issue is complex and many factors were involved, in the end it was a relatively simple insight that proved decisive for me. In conversations with friends, I learned to state my primary dissatisfaction with the Reformed (sometimes called "covenantal") argument for paedobaptism in the form of a question.   Continue at Gavin Ortlund

Why I Changed My Mind About the Millennium

Editor's Note: What doctrine or issue have you changed your mind about? TGC posed that question to several pastors, theologians, and other thinkers in order to gain a better understanding of what leads to shifts along the theological spectrum. Sam Storms launches this new series with an explanation of how he changed his views on the millennium.

Although I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and was regularly exposed to Scripture, I can't recall ever hearing anything about a "millennial" kingdom, much less the variety of theories regarding its meaning and relationship to the second coming of Christ. Like many of my generation, my initial exposure to biblical eschatology was in reading Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth during the summer of 1970.

Not long thereafter I purchased a Scofield Reference Bible and began to devour its notes and underline them more passionately than I did the biblical text on which they commented. No one, as I recall, ever suggested to me there was a view other than that of the dispensational, pretribulational, premillennialism of Scofield. Anyone who dared call it into question was suspected of not believing in biblical inerrancy.   Continue at Sam Storms

“Problems with Premillennialism,”

My departure from Premillennialism was gradual and came as a result of two discoveries as I studied Scripture. First, I devoted myself to a thorough examination of what the NT said would occur at the time of Christ’s second coming (or Parousia). What I found was a consistent witness concerning what would either end or begin as a result of our Lord’s return to the earth. Sin in the lives of God’s people, corruption of the natural creation, and the experience of physical death would terminate upon the appearance of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, the resurrection of the body, the final judgment, and the inauguration of the New Heavens and New Earth would ensue. But why is this a problem for Premillennialism? Good question.

If you are a Premillennialist, whether Dispensational or not, there are several things with which you must reckon:

You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming. The reason for this is that all Premillennialists must account for the rebellious and unbelieving nations in Revelation 20:7-10 who launch an assault against Christ and his people at the end of the millennial age. Where did these people come from? They must be the unbelieving progeny born to those believers who entered the millennial age in physical, unglorified bodies. Not only they, but also the believing progeny born to those believers will be subject to physical death (notwithstanding the alleged prolonged life spans experienced by those who live during the millennial reign of Christ). Keep Reading...

Image