Home » Posts tagged 'sanctification'
Tag Archives: sanctification
Announcement for and Thanks to Thomas Ross on What Is Truth Blog
Biography
Many years ago I met Thomas Ross as a young man. My wife and I moved to the San Francisco Bay Area two weeks after we married in August of 1987. Thomas grew up in San Francisco with a single mother. We came into contact when he was still college age. He had already received Christ, graduated from University of California at Berkeley at the age of 19, and was training to serve the Lord by attending Fairhaven Baptist College (read his testimony tract, his story in html, and his resume).
Thomas Ross came back to the San Francisco Bay Area and served with and at the church I started, Bethel Baptist Church, for several years. I acted as a proxy father to him in his betrothal and marriage to Heather Roberts and stood as his best man in his wedding. He and Heather settled in Wisconsin to minister at Muckwonago Baptist Church under her father, Rhon Roberts, for many years before coming back to California in 2020 after my wife, parents, and I moved to Oregon to start Jackson County Baptist Church in Medford.
What Is Truth and Faithsaves.net
I began What Is Truth? Opinion Based Upon the Bible (also kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com and kentbrandenburg.com) in 2005 and Thomas joined me in 2012 when we were at the old blog address. He started writing or publishing every Friday. As many of you reading here know, I normally write on Mondays and Wednesdays and he writes or publishes here on Fridays. Thomas and I write with different styles and some different content, but we believe essentially the same. We’re almost identical in our belief and practice.
Thomas also has his own website, faithsaves.net, with a wealth of material mainly written by him. I would assess that among independent Baptists almost no one has published as much biblical, scholarly material as Thomas Ross. It is also very helpful, practical, and free at his site. It is a great service to God and the faith and conduct of true Christians and New Testament churches.
Doctrine of Sanctification and Debates
No one in evangelicalism, I would safely say, has done as much work on the doctrine of sanctification. The material by Thomas Ross on biblical sanctification surpasses anything else I have seen. No one knows this subject better than he. I point especially to his one thousand plus pages in his PhD dissertation. The title is The Doctrine of Sanctification: An Exegetical Examination, with Application, in Biblical, Historic Baptist Perspective, to which is Appended a Historical, Exegetical, and Elenctic Evaluation of Influential Errors, Particularly the Keswick Theology (free pdf of it).
In recent years, Thomas began doing scholarly debates. He has taught college and seminary classes and posted them free at his youtube channel. He debates high level scholars on the other side with biblical and historical arguments on many different topics. I was there for the first of his debates in 2005 against Church of Christ foe, Larry Hafley, on the subject of baptismal regeneration. Out of it came his book, Heaven Only for the Baptized? The Gospel of Christ vs. Pardon through Baptism. It is the best book available against baptismal regeneration, a false doctrine that has damned millions to Hell.
Evangelism
Filling a great need in churches, Thomas wrote several evangelistic Bible studies, again available for free at his website. You can also watch them on his youtube channel. He also wrote several various tracts and pamphlets for the purpose of doing spiritual warfare with different strongholds against the true gospel.
No one that I have ever known or met is more evangelistic than Thomas Ross. As scholarly and well-learned as he is and as hard as he worked to become like this, nearly every day he either preaches the gospel to someone or gives one or multiple gospel tracts to people. When he was much younger, I would stop at a gas station to get gas. By the time I left the station, Thomas had given a gospel tract to everyone at the station. If he is on public transportation, someone on the bus or train will probably hear the gospel from him before he arrives at his destination.
I could write many more positive paragraphs about Thomas. However, I am writing this post to announce that Thomas is leaving the What Is Truth blog and writing here with me for the foreseeable future. I will still host his posts here and hopefully edit the format of all of his, so that they become easier to read. You may have noticed that he has not published here for a few weeks. You can still read his writings that will continue to accumulate at faithsaves.net.
Future for Thomas Ross
What are the future plans of Thomas Ross? The Bible says: “teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom” (Psalm 90:12). For quite a while, Thomas has pondered if he should keep writing on the blog or use that time, instead, for other projects for God’s work. He is not done with writing, Lord willing, but he now has other projects to which he wants to devote himself.
One,
Thomas wants to finish his dissertation on the Biblical doctrine of sanctification. He is almost done, but he needs to finally finish. You can still click on the link above to get everything he did so far.
Two,
Brother Ross wants to write a multi-volume historic Baptist systematic theology. He would rather stand before Christ with this done, but fewer blog posts written, than more blog posts, but that work not completed. You can check faithsaves.net at least on the first and fifteenth of each month to see what is new there from him. He also intends to keep adding useful material on his KJB1611 YouTube channel and his KJBIBLE1611 Rumble channel. You can and should subscribe to those and check in regularly if you are not already doing that.
Three,
Thomas Ross needs to prepare college and seminary classes that need to get done.
Four,
Thomas wants to do some more debates. Debating James White, or Dan Barker, or Shabir Ally, or Douglas Jacoby requires proper preparation, which can be very time-intensive.
Last,
Lord-willing, still living in San Francisco, CA and taking care of his dear mother, Thomas and Heather want to evangelize with the goal of helping an independent Baptist church start there.
All these above goals will take far more time than what Thomas has to do them even without writing here on Fridays. He will move on from here from henceforth. Please pray for him. You can contact him directly at his website — that’s the easiest way.
Conclusion
I would contend that Thomas Ross is perhaps the greatest scholar among independent Baptists. Scholarship-wise he is on the level with any evangelical scholar. This is not his talking, but my saying this. He’s never said anything like this to me. I don’t believe anyone has worked harder or committed more to learning scripture than him either. He continues at an incredible pace, especially with his circumstances. He does it in relative anonymity to maintain his convictions and stand.
With his abilities and work ethic, if Thomas Ross were an evangelical or conservative evangelical, he could make a living teaching in some seminary and then writing books. He could be very well known and a feather in the cap of graduate schools across the country. He chose not to do that. His convictions and commitment to his belief and practice excluded him from that. Not many men would do that. Almost no one, maybe no one, has done that. I commend him for that sacrifice. For many years, he accomplishes what he does by working as a security guard and then economizing as efficiently as anyone with whatever funds he gets.
No doubt, Thomas wishes a loving goodbye to his readers on the blog. He would be glad to write that himself, but I chose to wrap up his time here with my thoughts about him. Know that he wishes you good will and blessing as he and you move into what God has for him and you.
So, I bid Thomas Ross a fond adieu here at my blog. Farewell to him to his future life and endeavors.
A New Alternative List to the Points of Calvinism (Part Five)
Part One Part Two Part Three Part Four
The last point of Calvinism is
5. PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS
He That Overcometh
That language sounds right to me, but especially like “total depravity,” the first point, it depends on how one explains it. Why it seems good is because of certain scriptural language, chiefly two in particular. One, the New Testament describes the truly saved person as him or he “that overcometh” (Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21; 21:7). In an explicit way, 1 John 5:4-5 say:
4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. 5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?
True believers will overcome or persevere. One of the ways you know a person is not a true believer or who possesses saving faith is that he will not overcome. If it’s true, real, or living faith, it will persevere or overcome. What does someone overcome? Scripture would most characterize it as trials, temptations, snares, or tests, brought by Satan or the world system that Satan orchestrates. Jesus explained it in the parable of the soils as the sun beating on the soil, the stony or rocky does not have root and cannot endure.
Abiding in the Vine
Two, Jesus used the metaphor of abiding in the vine (John 15). Often, because of a wrong view of sanctification, evangelicals messed up this doctrine. “Abide” (meno) comes from a simple Greek word that means “remain.” Truly saved people, people with true saving faith, will abide or remain. They will not defect like Judas or Demas (2 Tim 4:10).
The reason true believers remain, that is, don’t lose their salvation, is that God keeps them. Once in His hand, no man can pluck them out of His hand (John 10:27-30). He keeps them by His power (1 Peter 1:5). Paul expresses it this way in Philippians 1:6:
Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ.
God began the work of saving grace and He will complete it. Despite the testing of Satan, Job persevered, which testified of His saving righteousness.
Perseverance contrasts with a form of eternal security doctrine that eliminates an enduring or steadfast faith. True and saving faith through the New Testament does endure all the way into eternity. The eternal life of eternal security resulting through faith in Christ continues as more than just a quantity of life, but also a quality of life. The eternal life received by saving faith proceeds from the nature of God. That life of God will characterize the one who possesses it according to His moral attributes.
Regeneration and Perseverance
Is everything that I have described the actual doctrine of the perseverance of the saints? I’m afraid not. For Calvinists, unless regeneration preceded faith, then man’s contribution would have mixed with God’s in a non-saving way. Regeneration as a consequence of faith, Calvinists say, will not persevere. Man thus contributes to and fails at staying saved.
Endure to the End, Shall Be Saved
In other words, every point of Calvinism fits with all the others, so that if one is wrong, all are wrong, no matter how much each one is right. Some thing or many things are right within each point, but enough is wrong to make the point itself in general wrong. Perhaps no point is more right of the points of Calvinism than the perseverance of the saints. Jesus said in Matthew 24:13:
But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
“Shall be saved” is a future tense verb. This is ultimate salvation, what some call “eschatological salvation.” It takes in justification, sanctification, and glorification. If God truly justifies someone, he will endure to the end. Even though it is God keeping and sanctifying, the New Testament describes the cooperation of the believer in this. Paul commands the believer to ‘work out his own salvation with fear and trembling’ (Philip 2:12). Peter explains this as ‘giving diligence to make your calling and election sure’ (2 Pet 3:10).
To emphasize some modification of Calvinism, I will rename this point
5. GOD’S PRESERVATION OF HIS SALVATION GUARANTEES MAN’S COOPERATION WITH IT
Many Calvinists wouldn’t disagree with that point. Many non-Calvinists, who claim belief in eternal security, would reject it. Man cannot cooperate without the will and work of God in saving him. If God does save him, he will cooperate with what God does. This fulfills the teaching in Romans 8:29. Whom God foreknew, He predestined to conform to the image of His Son. Every man God justifies, He also sanctifies.
From my reading of Calvinists, I contend that the points of Calvinism do not change the plan of salvation. I hope you noticed that I didn’t say, “the doctrine of salvation.” A Calvinist would receive and would not reject that (1) every man is a sinner, (2) he deserves a penalty for sin, (3) Jesus paid that penalty, and (4) he must believe in Jesus Christ. I’m saying that Calvinism itself does not change the gospel. The points of Calvinism in themselves do not result in a false gospel or salvation by works. According to historians, Baptists have been more Calvinist than Arminian. I write that, less an endorsement of Calvinism, but as it is a repudiation of Arminianism.
I reject a lot that Calvin believed, his ecclesiology, eschatology, infant sprinkling, and more. The corrupt doctrine in the points of Calvinism, although I’m saying is not a false gospel, has bad consequences. The points of Calvinism as taught by historical Calvinism leads people astray on numbers of doctrines. All false doctrine causes problems. Every problem for every church and every Christian comes to some misalignment with or deviation from the true teaching of the Word of God. This includes several various aspects of the points of Calvinism.
A BETTER LIST
You don’t need Calvinism or Arminianism. Certain aspects of both you’ll find in the Bible. I call on everyone to reject both. Either will send you a wrong direction. Instead latch on to what scripture really teaches, which I hope you will see in the alternative points I provided.
Maybe you don’t even need a list or five points. I’m not saying you do. However, if you’re going to have a list of points, I contend mine is better than Calvinism or Arminianism. It will allow for whatever truth either of those doctrinal positions provide. Instead of conforming to a system, perhaps mine will conform to the full counsel of the Word of God. Let’s review them (look back through the series as all of these points were longer there).
- SPIRITUAL BANKRUPTCY
- ELECTION ACCORDING TO FOREKNOWLEDGE
- AVAILABLE SUBSTITIONARY SACRIFICE
- SUFFICIENT GRACE TO SAVE
- PRESERVED SAINTS COOPERATE
You’re not going to get the fun acrostic T.U.L.I.P. here. I didn’t even try (SEASP?). I warn you, don’t anyone call these the “five points of Brandenburgism.” Okay? And despite not having a pretty flower to remember, just stop and smell some roses while you review these five instead.
The Validity and Potential Value of a Liturgical Calendar (Part Four)
Being Intentional
When you intend to do something — some people today call that “being intentional” — you might plan it or schedule it. Does scripture regulate or legislate intentionality? This thing of being intentional even has a definition: “making deliberate choices to reflect what is most important to us.” King David begins Psalm 101 with intentionality:
1 I will sing of mercy and judgment: unto thee, O Lord, will I sing.
2 I will behave myself wisely in a perfect way. O when wilt thou come unto me? I will walk within my house with a perfect heart.
3 I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me.
When you intend to do it, you might schedule it. That’s good. It’s how you ‘redeem the time’ (Eph 5:16). How do you seek something first? You’ve got to move it up in priority on purpose. You will and then do of God’s good pleasure. This is sanctification. It’s how you keep something holy.
If I want to ensure I do something, I put it on a “to-do” list. For the year, I write those actions on a calendar. For an entire church, as a church leader, I have a church calendar. What goes on that calendar? I could put a “Jumper Day” on the calendar with intentionality. Jumpers are those inflatable fun houses, serving as a kind of trampoline. Let’s say instead, I intentionally schedule into the year of the church a spiritual emphasis. Let’s call it a “liturgical calendar.” Every year the church emphasizes scriptural events in the life of Christ and other biblical themes.
Using the Calendar
The Psalms are a guide for writing hymns. The prayers of the Bible are a guide for what to pray. In the Old Testament, God weaves into the year a means by which Israel will remember what God did. This included the weekly Sabbath and then festivals. This is a model, not for continuing to follow a Hebrew calendar, but for what to do with a calendar.
Israel began to observe also an event the occurred after the completion of the Old Testament, the Feast of Dedication. It celebrated an event in the intertestamental period. Israel then added that Feast to the Hebrew calendar. Jesus too observed the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22ff). Like the other Feasts, the Feast of Dedication helped Israel remember what God did in saving Israel during the time of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Macccabees.
The New Testament church schedules services on Sunday. Scripture doesn’t say how many, but many churches meet three times on Sunday: Sunday School, Sunday morning, and then Sunday evening. They might hold a midweek time too. Through example, scripture regulates a Sunday gathering for the elements of New Testament worship. It does not regulate how many meetings.
Keeping Holy
A believer can keep his speech holy. He can keep his deeds holy. A true Christian can keep his thoughts holy. He can also keep his motives holy.
Paul says the believer can yield his members, his body parts, as instruments of righteousness unto God or yield them as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin (Romans 6:13). Yielding his body parts as instruments of righteousness unto God is how he presents his body holy unto God (Romans 12:1). Someone can “worship God in the spirit” (Philippians 3:3) or not do that.
Sanctification in the Truth
Sanctification in the truth starts with thinking and understanding what God says in His Word. More than a hearer, he must also be a doer. This requires volition, a readiness of will. It also means a delight in what God said, a holy affection.
Sanctification in the New Testament follows the example of Jesus. In John 17:19, Jesus prayed to God the Father:
And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
Jesus provided the perfect example to follow, and the Apostle John writes in his first epistle (2:6):
He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
Walking as Jesus walked is not arbitrary. It is looking to the scriptural example of Jesus. Also as John Owen wrote:
To see the Glory of Christ is the grand blessing which our Lord solicits and demands for his disciples in his last solemn intercession, John 17: 24.
The Glory of Christ
In 2 Corinthians 4:6, regarding sanctification, the Apostle Paul writes:
For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
A church centers on the Person of Jesus Christ and Christ changes the church by its seeing of Him. To conform to the image of the Son a church must see the image of the Son.
I’m contending for purposeful, intentional seeing, thinking, and understanding the glory of Christ. The New Testament emphasizes certain events in Christ’s life. To be sanctified by the example of Jesus, to walk as He walked, and to see His glory, you must focus on Him. Jesus appeared on earth in real history in real time. He was here. In His time here, He accumulated important events in His life. The gospels, Acts, the epistles, and Revelation talk all about them. Put those on the calendar.
Keep Your Year Holy
Validity and Value
Don’t emphasize the events of Christ’s life according to their traditional dates on the calendar. Do emphasize them on their traditional dates. I like my emphasis on the calendar better than your no emphasis.
Putting the events of Christ’s life and other important biblical themes on your calendar is a way to keep your year holy. I’m saying there is a value to it. It is a means by which to accomplish many requirements for the believer from the New Testament. It’s not the putting it on a calendar that accomplishes the seeing, thinking, and understanding of the truth. It is the actual doing of seeing, thinking, and understanding.
Words mean things. The keeping in keeping something holy means something. This year I handed out a Bible reading calendar. Scripture doesn’t regulate the calendar I handed out. The calendar is how someone might keep things holy. Someone can have a calendar and remain unholy. I’m saying a calendar is valid and of value.
Remember and Emphasize
I didn’t hand out a fun-time-a-day calendar to our church. Our calendar did have one verse for each week for scripture memory. Scripture doesn’t regulate that. Does scripture regulate scripture memory? I’m guessing people won’t be arguing over a Bible reading calendar and a scripture memory calendar. Neither are in the Bible.
Believers should assume that they can keep something holy. They are told to keep things holy. Yes, in the Old Testament God instructs Israel to keep the Sabbath holy (Exodus 20:8). By what I read some people write, you might think that I’m writing this series for the purpose of keeping the word “Christmas” holy or keeping a date for Christ’s birth holy. I’ve not written anything like that.
I believe it’s been clear what I’m advocating. Some argue against it with what seems to be red herrings and straw men. I say, let’s be purposeful about remembering or emphasizing the events of Christ’s life during the year. A church can schedule more than that, but I support the use of a liturgical calendar to keep the church year holy.
Sanctification: Bible, Keswick, Wesleyan, Pentecostal Views
Confusion on the nature of progressive sanctification is widespread today. What are the basic differences between the views on sanctification taught in the Bible and the views of sanctification promoted by the Wesleyan (Methodist, Holiness), Keswick (Higher Life), Pentecostal (Assemblies of God), and what I call the Weak on Repentance (“free grace,” anti-Lordship) movements?
As part of the series on how to lead an evangelistic Bible study (the studies themselves are here), I provide an overview of these five different positions (one true, four false) in the video below, which can also be watched and commented on YouTube here.
–TDR
Changes in Personal Belief and the Effects on Relationships (part two)
Very often I tell people that I don’t know if I’m done changing in doctrine and practice. As I get older, I am changing less, but I haven’t found that changing ends. I think I’m done and then I encounter something else or another way I might need to change.
Changes
Other people always want me to change. When I evangelize I encounter others every week who want me to change in my beliefs, and I don’t. When I try to help others change, I cannot in good faith attempt to do that without the willingness to change myself. If I was not willing to change in a discussion of doctrine, I would call that, being closed minded. I expect open mindedness from others who I want to change, so I must be willing too.
In all my years of working for the Lord in and through churches, I have watched many changes on the landscape of churches and religious institutions in the United States. As I grew up, I rarely heard an expository sermon. Then I would attend preaching meetings and hear little exposition. Now I hear exposition for half the sermons at the same conference. I see this as a good change.
I have also seen many bad changes, so many that churches are worse today than ever. The worst changes are not doctrinal so much. They are cultural. The culture of church in the United States changed. It sadly followed the world, the spirit of the age. This then affects the whole country in a very negative way.
Changes in doctrine and practice followed the culture in the United States. Many churches don’t even know they changed. It occurred slowly over a long period of time, like watching a toddler grow up to a teenager. It was slow, but the outcome is very noticeable.
Change and Relationships
Because change can be bad, very bad, sometimes any change, especially if it isn’t a more conservative one, can seem bad. As a parent, maybe you have changed the rules or the code of conduct at home. You gave the children more liberty than they had. You had good intentions for loosening up on the standards. That could look like a change for the worse to some people. In fact, a parent may change his approach to teach discernment, so a way of helping his children.
Very often someone won’t change because of its potential effect on his relationships. Others will criticize him for changing. They may threaten him not to change. He doesn’t want to face that. Almost every change I’ve ever made affected relationships and sometimes in a major way.
When someone takes one position and changes to another, it might look like something is wrong. Why did he change? The truth doesn’t change. He believes and practices the truth. Is he forsaking the truth in some way?
Sanctification
I agree that the truth doesn’t change. It doesn’t. We must change though. It’s part of our sanctification. 2 Corinthians 3:18 says:
But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit.
You can see that Paul uses the controversial “C” word, “changed.” Jesus doesn’t change. You must though.
It is even harder to change something as a leader. Whenever you change as a leader, people you’ve led will question the change.
Knowledge
When a leader changes in an area that he himself taught or preached, so that people followed, it might be very hard for the followers. This is one reason why as a leader you have to be very sure about something you teach or preach. Nonetheless, it can and will happen. You thought you understood fully. You thought you did. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:12:
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Belief and practice relates to knowledge, something Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 12-14 among the spiritual gifts. Even though God gifts in knowledge, a person on this side of glory still sees through a glass darkly. He has knowledge. He still needs more knowledge until his glorification. Not until he sees Jesus face to face will he not need knowledge anymore.
Replay
Mulligan
I haven’t played golf much, but I understand playing golf and hitting some bad shots. It will happen. Among those who play golf as a hobby or for exercise, they understand the idea of a mulligan. Everyone knows you will hit a tee shot into the woods. You tee up another ball and start over. You give yourself a mulligan.
Even if you try to get everything right as a leader, you still need a few mulligans. You see through a glass darkly. You are trying to see through a glass clearly. If you are a preacher, did you ever preach a sermon, and you had to come back and correct something you said? I have. I hate it when I have to do it. Very much, I would rather not do that. I’m always afraid that I’ll lose the trust of the people if I come back to make the correction.
Editorial Process
Readers probably relate to the editorial process. You edit and find mistakes. When you think you have them all, you read again and find more mistakes. You edit. When you think you’ve got that all done and then give the piece to someone else to read, he finds many more mistakes. You publish the piece. Readers find more errors in the published document, something you hate the worst. It’s too late. Corrections must occur now in the next edition.
Some might say that we don’t get any mulligans in real life. I would say, hopefully we do. We all need mulligans in this life. Christians should understand that better than anyone.
Dress Rehearsals
A statement I often use is this: “Life has no dress rehearsals.” At various times of my life, I directed dozens of plays and programs. I’m not promoting drama as an element of worship. We had dress rehearsals for the plays and programs in our school. I am glad we had them.
It’s true that life doesn’t often have a dress rehearsal. Sometimes I thought I believed exactly right. It wasn’t until later that I found that a particular belief came from a tradition and I didn’t know it. I thought I had studied that myself. Once I did study it, I wondered how I defended that position.
Defending Positions
Tradition
Sometimes what will happen is that we have a belief or practice based upon a tradition and we teach it or preach it. At some point someone challenges the belief or practice. Rather than admit that we got that from tradition, we scrape up some arguments to defend the tradition. The tradition, maybe not a scriptural teaching, becomes more entrenched.
I’m not opposing all tradition. Paul uses the word (2 Thess 3:6) in a positive manner. Tradition isn’t enough for keeping the position though. Bad traditions can continue when we defend all traditions.
Inconsistency or Principled?
I’m fine with the word, inconsistent. It closely relates to another good word, principled. I noticed that some of the same people who attacked the January 6 protestors defended the Tennessee capital protestors. The attack was inconsistent. It wasn’t principled.
If we get further information about some position or issue and it merits a change, it is principled to change. It is not inconsistent. Changing might be easier. It could be harder. Whether it is easier or harder to change may not relate to consistency or principle. It relates to the reaction of other people and your future relationships.
Further Information
Let’s say that in the morning, you tell your children they must go to bed at 9pm. You get home at 9:15pm. Your children are still up. You say, “Get to bed.” The oldest child asks, “Can I ask you a question?” You say, “Yes.” He says, “Mom said we could stay up, because school was cancelled for tomorrow.” That’s new information that you didn’t have. You can change. You can think about what you said before, understand that you didn’t have all the information, and you can change your position. It isn’t inconsistent.
Evaluation of Leaders
Paul saw division in the church at Corinth. One major reason for division was bad evaluation of leaders. When leaders think of the evaluation of others, it can affect what they do in either a good or a bad way. I am not saying that they shouldn’t listen. Paul called the leaders, the “ministers of Christ” (1 Corinthians 4:1).
“Ministers” translates the Greek word for “galley slaves.” The galley slaves work together on the oars, moving the ship forward, because they have one master. He calls out the rhythm of the oars. This simplifies the process for them. They’ve got one person to please. The person most important to please as a leader is Christ Himself.
“I’m sorry” vs. “I repent”
We often hear someone say, “I’m sorry,” after doing something wrong, or something that the person does not think is wrong but the person he is speaking to thinks is wrong.” When one man says “I’m sorry” to another, the response can cover the range from “I’m sorry that I sinned against God and against you, because this is a godly sorrow, it will lead me to repent,” to “I’m sorry that you feel the way you do right now,” to “I’m sorry I got caught sinning,” to “I’m sorry that you are bothering me with your ridiculous complaint, and I wish you would go away and leave me alone–I didn’t do anything wrong.”
“I’m sorry.”
That range can be seen in the texts that contain the word “sorry” in Scripture.
For example, Saul wants people to feel sorry for him when he is plotting evil, pursuing innocent David, and killing other righteous people right and left:
1Sam. 22:8 That all of you have conspired against me, and there is none that sheweth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse, and there is none of you that is sorry for me, or sheweth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me, to lie in wait, as at this day?
King Herod was sorry when he was asked to behead John the Baptist:
Matt. 14:9 And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her.
In fact, Herod was not just a little bit sorry. He was really sorry:
Mark 6:26 And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her.
Herod was “sorry.” Really sorry. He could have said to John, “I’m sorry about this,” and then gone ahead and ordered the guard to chop off the Baptist’s head. He was “sorry,” but he certainly did not “repent.” Being even “exceeding sorry” is not the same thing as being repentant. Being “sorry” is simply saying that you have “sorrow” over something–whether that thing is your sin, or whether you are sorry that you didn’t get away with your sin, or whether you are sorry you can’t sin even more, is not expressed.
“I repent.”
Scripture does not say that if one sins against a Christian brother, he is supposed to say, “I’m sorry.” It does not say that when a child sins against another child, the sinning child should be made to say “I’m sorry.” Scripture says that when one sins against another, the sinning party is to say, “I repent.”
Luke 17:4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
This is not the place to do a comprehensive study of the Biblical doctrine of repentance, but the evidence provided here and in many other places indicates that genuine repentance always results in a change. If I sin against you and say, “I repent,” I am telling you that what I did was sinful, and by God’s grace I will not do it any more. I have sinned against heaven and in your sight.
If I say “I’m sorry,” I may mean the same thing as “I repent.” On occasion being “sorry” is associated with repentance:
Psa. 38:18 For I will declare mine iniquity; I will be sorry for my sin.
2Cor. 7:9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
The sorrow of the Corinthians did lead to their repentance–that was good. But note that Paul specifically states that he was not glad that they had been made “sorry.” He was only glad that they had repented as a result of that sorrow. So even here, where sorrow and repentance are associated, they are still distinct.
Have I ever said “I’m sorry” when I meant “I repent”? Yes, I certainly have. Do I condemn parents who tell their children, when the children sin against another, “Say you are sorry!” No, I do not condemn such parents. If someone sins against me and then says, “I’m sorry,” must I think the best (1 Corinthians 13) and assume he means “I repent,” and therefore forgive him, as commanded in Luke 17:4? Yes, I certainly must forgive him, even though he did not say what Christ told him to say: “I repent.”
However, maybe we all ought to reevaluate our use of language in the light of Scripture, and start saying “I repent” instead of “I’m sorry” when we sin against another person (and also use this language when we confess our sins to the Lord). Saying “I’m sorry” is easier than saying “I repent.” There is a lot more wiggle room in “I’m sorry.” Maybe we should start telling our children to say “I repent” instead of “I’m sorry.” This is the pattern in Scripture, and it is always good to stick as closely to Scripture as possible.
–TDR
Jehovah’s Mercy is Holy–Chesed to the Chasidim
A core term for Jehovah’s mercy or lovingkindness in the Old Testament is chesed (חֶסֶד). This crucial term for the mercy Jehovah shows His people appears in texts such as:
Gen. 19:19 Behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, and thou hast magnified thy mercy, which thou hast shewed unto me in saving my life; and I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die:
Ex. 34:6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
Ex. 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
Psa. 13:5 But I have trusted in thy mercy; my heart shall rejoice in thy salvation.
Psa. 23:6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.
Psa. 26:3 For thy lovingkindness is before mine eyes: and I have walked in thy truth.
Psa. 118:1 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: because his mercy endureth for ever.
and many other texts.
The Hebrew chesed, “mercy/loving-kindness/goodness,” is related to the word chasid (חָסִיד), meaning “holy/godly/faithful.” The ultra-orthodox Jews who claim (falsely, unfortunately, as you cannot be holy and reject the Messiah, the Holy One that did not see corruption, but was raised from the realm of sin and death, Psalm 16:10, after His sacrificial death, Psalm 22; Isaiah 53) to be especially holy are called the Chasidim, practicing Hasidic Judaism. This word chasid appears in texts such as:
Deut. 33:8 And of Levi he said, Let thy Thummim and thy Urim be with thy holy one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, and with whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah;
1Sam. 2:9 He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.
2Sam. 22:26 With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful, and with the upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright.
Mic. 7:2 The good man is perished out of the earth: and there is none upright among men: they all lie in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net.
Psa. 4:3 But know that the LORD hath set apart him that is godly for himself: the LORD will hear when I call unto him.
Psa. 12:1 Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.
Psa. 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
What is the significance of this connection? The man who is the recipient of Jehovah’s chesed–His covenantal mercy and loving-kindness–becomes one who is holy, chasid, and who himself practices chesed, mercy, towards others. There is no such thing as someone who has received Jehovah’s saving chesed but is not a chasid, a holy man. Are there degrees of holiness? Certainly. Can believers experience spiritual decays and backslidings? Sadly, yes. Is there such a thing as one who has received Jehovah’s saving mercy who is not holy–one who has received chesed who is not chasid? No, emphatically not.
This fact should encourage those who have received Jehovah’s blessed chesed to pursue holiness in a greater way–it is what God saved you for. He has united you to the resurrected Holy One (Psalm 16:10) and you are judicially holy and certain to grow in practical holiness, practicing chesed yourself, being merciful as your heavenly Father has shown you mercy, since the Holy Spirit sweetly influences your mind, will, and affections. You have received God’s chesed and have become a chasid.
If you are not a holy one, but are still a sinful, unchanged worldling, do not deceive yourself into thinking that you have received Jehovah’s chesed. All who have received His chesed become chasidim, holy ones. Mercy and holiness from the holy God of mercy are inextricably joined.
Someone who does not understand basic Bible teaching like this is not “apt to teach” (1 Timothy 3) and should learn the basics of Christianity before he has any business in the Christian ministry.
–TDR
Simeon and Anna As Examples of Looking and Waiting for the Coming Lord
Believing in Jesus Christ is looking for Him. If you are not looking for Him, then you are not believing in Him. He is real. What is looking and waiting for Jesus Christ?
Jesus Christ is coming back. That is His plan for the earth. True believers fit into that plan. They want that.
Believing in Jesus Christ means believing in His Person, receiving Him as Lord, God, and Savior. John 20:31 explains it as “believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and the believing yet might have life through His name.” “Christ” carries with it the three: Lord, God, and Savior. You believe that “Jesus is the Christ.”
Part of being “the Christ” is coming back and setting up a kingdom on the earth as part of the completion of salvation. Salvation includes the kingdom. When a believer lives His life, He lives it looking forward to the Christ setting up His kingdom. The coming of Christ arrives between this life and the kingdom. No kingdom comes without the coming Lord.
How do we believe in the Christ? By looking and waiting for the coming Lord. We have examples of those looking and waiting for the first coming of the Lord. We don’t know almost anything about the life of Simeon except that he looked and waited for the coming Lord, which is described in Luke 2:25-35:
25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.
26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.
27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,
28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:
30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;
32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
33 And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
34 And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;
35 (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.
Simeon looked for the “Lord’s Christ.” This is the true Christ, the one the Lord would anoint as King over all the earth in fulfillment of the Davidic covenant (2 Samuel 7:12-13). Simeon knew he would see Christ, but we should still take this belief as a model. We know that Simeon’s looking changed his behavior, because he was “just and devout,” the former being toward man and the latter toward God. True faith endures. Simeon kept looking and waiting for the Lord’s Christ, because true faith endures. Enduring faith in the coming Lord sustains just and devout living.
The Greek word “devout” is eulabes, a compound Greek word with eu (“good”) labes (from lambano, “taking” or “receiving”), which means “taking hold well.” This is to be careful and sure in the reception. Someone who stops looking and waiting for the coming Lord is not being careful or sure in his reception. He is not taking hold well. Simeon did take hold well and then he literally took hold of the Lord’s Christ in his own arms.
Looking and waiting for the Lord’s Christ in a major way means identification. Someone has to be right about who the Christ is. He must take the right view about the history of the world: how it started, what went wrong, and what the future plan is. This is the message of scripture and someone must acquiesce to the Bible as God’s Word and then surrender to its message. It centers on the Christ. If someone sufficiently ignores the message of the Bible, doesn’t humble himself before it, not adequately recognizing its divine origin, he will not look and wait for the Christ.
Looking and waiting for the Lord’s Christ is more than just identification, but it is at least that. If you get the wrong identification, then you will miss the Christ. Your Christ must be the true Christ. He can’t be a Christ of your own choosing, but the actual, true Christ predicted in scripture. That’s the one for which Simeon looked and waited.
Anna provides an example too for looking and waiting for the coming Lord in Luke 2:36-38:
36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;
37 And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.
38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.
Even though Anna’s life dramatically changed with the death of her husband, when she was very young and only seven years married, she sustained purpose in life by looking and waiting for the coming Lord. Her life wasn’t over. She still had much for which to live. She “looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” Jesus was that redemption.
For Anna, looking for that redemption in Jerusalem meant not departing from the temple and serving God with fastings and prayers. Like Simeon, she instantly recognized the Lord’s Christ and gave thanks. Only those thankful for the future kingdom, which is under Jesus as Lord, will look and wait for the coming Lord and that coming kingdom.
Simeon and Anna provide two good examples and looking and waiting for the coming Lord. The Lord is coming back. That expectation should drive all of us to a right belief and practice and affection.
Righteous: Declared in Romans 4:17 and Made In Romans 5:19
“Justification” is a scriptural term, one used very often, but not as much as the term, “salvation.” When someone is justified, he is saved, but that doesn’t explain his entire salvation. It’s the first part of salvation. When someone is justified, he is said to be “declared righteous.” That is the language of justification. John Owen wrote in 1797:
[I]t is the righteousness of Christ, and not our own, on account of which we receive the pardon of sin; acceptance with God; are declared righteous, and have a title to the heavenly inheritance.
For the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, unto a person in himself ungodly unto his justification, or that he may be acquitted, absolved, and declared righteous, is built on such foundations, and proceedeth on such principles of righteousness, wisdom, and sovereignty, as have no place among the actions of men, nor can have so, as shall afterwards be declared.
I readily allow that there is a very great agreement between justification and pardon, in their efficient, impulsive, and procuring causes, in their objects, or subjects, in their commencement, and manner of completion: the same God that pardons the sins of his people, justifies them, or accounts them righteous; the same grace, which moved him to the one, moved him to the other; as the blood of Christ was shed for the remission of sins, so by it are we justified; all who are justified are pardoned; and all who are pardoned, are justified, and that, at one and the same time; both these acts are finished at once, simul & semel, and are not carried on in a gradual and progressive way, as sanctification. But all this does not prove them to be one and the same, for though they agree in these things, in others they differ; for justification is a pronouncing a person righteous according to law, as though he had never sinned; not so pardon: it is one thing for a man to be tried by law, cast, and condemned, and then receive the king’s pardon; and another thing to he tried by the law, and, by it, to be found and declared righteous, as though he had not sinned against it.
Divines generally make justification to consist in the remission of sins, and in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness; which some make different parts; others say, they are not two integrating parts of justification, or acts numerically and really distinct, but only one act respecting two different terms, a quo & ad quem; just as by one, and the same act, darkness is expelled from the air, and light is introduced into it; so by one, and the same act of justification, the sinner is absolved from guilt, and pronounced righteous.
DECLARED RIGHTEOUS
(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even] God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. 23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
Although the sinner is justified by the justice of Christ, inasmuch as the Redeemer has merited for him the grace of justification (causa meritoria), nevertheless he is formally justified and made holy by his own personal justice and holiness (causa formalis), just as a philosopher by his own inherent learning becomes a scholar, not, however, by any exterior imputation of the wisdom of God (Trent, Sess. VI, can. x). To this idea of inherent holiness which theologians call sanctifying grace are we safely conducted by the words of Holy Writ. To prove this we may remark [on] the word justificare.
Our word justification (from the Latin justificare composed of justus and facere, and therefore meaning “to make righteous”), just as the Holland rechtvaardigmaking, is apt to give the impression that justification denotes a change that is brought about in man, which is not the case. In the use of the English word the danger is not so great, because the people in general do not understand its derivation, and in the Holland language the danger may be averted by employing the related words rechtvaardigen and rechtvaardiging.
MADE RIGHTEOUS
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
The Meaning of “Done” and the Work of Christ
I didn’t hear language until recently both in preaching and in reading of the existence of only two religions, one “do” and the other “done.” This nice turn of phrase might help someone who thinks salvation is by works. A popular leader in “new revivalism,” comparable to the label “new Calvinism,” wrote a book titled, “Done.”
In a sense, depending upon the explanation, the “done” versus “do” aphorism is true. With a different explanation, it can also be false though, and dangerous. What I read, very often it is. Many who emphasize “done” and not “do” are wrong, mainly in their watery, pliable definition of “done.” The ambiguity provides for doctrinal perversion.
It makes good preaching to turn to the words of Jesus, “It is finished” (tetelestai, perfect passive), the work of salvation done by Christ on the cross. With the popularity of a new and false view of sanctification, many Christian leaders now say that since salvation is done, when you sin, just preach the gospel to yourself, so you won’t feel burdened down by the guilt. Tetelestai is perfect passive (not to get super Greeky with you), not the aorist tense, completed action. With the perfect, the work is done, but the results are ongoing. Jesus works, but His work doesn’t stop working.
Paul wrote in Philippians 2:13, “it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” He’s not done working in you. “It is finished,” but the results are ongoing. How do you know your salvation is done? Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew7:21). “He that doeth.” That’s not “done;” that’s “do,” “doeth.” For the one who is really “done,” he will “do.” When someone isn’t doing, then his salvation isn’t done.
The work that Jesus does transforms the actual life, not some kind of fanciful, chimerical life, not actually lived. Some of the “done” people say, Jesus lives it, and you just claim what He did as if it was you. Some reading this may say that you’re not believing that. You are when you lump sanctification with justification. How you know you’re saved is that He keeps saving you. Evidence. It shows up. God provides measurables.
Partly why Jesus’ righteousness doesn’t show up in the the “done ones” is that they did not repent, unless a deconstructed, dumbed down repentance. They changed their mind about their not trusting in what Jesus did. They repented of depending on self. This is the so-called repentance of the Pharisees that diminishes righteousness, what Paul called, ‘establishing your own righteousness and not submitting unto the righteousness of God’ (Romans 10:1-4).
Salvation is “done,” don’t get me wrong. What does “done” mean? When God saves someone, He changes him, makes him a new creature (2 Cor 5:17). Sin doesn’t dominate him any more (Roman 6:14). The eternal life he possesses is more than a quantity of life, but a quality of life. The epistle of 1 John says the life of God indwells the done one (1 John 1:1,2, 5:11), what Peter described as partaking of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4).
Very often, modern purveyors of “done” mean, even if for only practical purposes, their salvation is all set regardless if they practice sin as a lifestyle. Any hint that a life is going to change and salvation means “do” and not “done.” As a consequence of this false view, he becomes cemented in sinning, because he sin with no repercussions.
The apparent, albeit wrong, alternative to “done” says receive salvation through Christ’s death after trying to be a good person and living a righteous life. A biblical alternative is that salvation isn’t done until the believer is glorified, and when his salvation is truly done, Christ indwells Him and continues saving him. When God doesn’t indwell someone and transform him, he can only still “do,” except in a dangerous way, fooled in thinking the Lord saved him, when He hasn’t.
Recent Comments