For Whom Did Christ Die?

by Daniel R. Hyde

“For you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth” (Rev. 5:9–10). 

What a song. What a Savior! Jesus Christ is the object of our praise because we were the objects of His passion. He gave Himself for us, and so we give ourselves for Him. And we should go on singing this song to this Savior for this reason forever and ever. And we will. Yet in this age, there is controversy. Not all Christians believe that Jesus died intentionally and efficaciously for His people alone. As we come to the end of this series on Christ’s death to satisfy the justice of God, the big question is, for whom did Christ die? I want to examine with you how this song of the saints in heaven answers this complex theological question.

THE BIBLICAL DESCRIPTIONS

Notice two things described in Revelation 5:9–10 that are described by many other biblical passages as well. First, the Bible describes Jesus Christ as dying to accomplish every aspect of our salvation. The heavenly choirs praise the Lamb. And in their praise we see the connection between what Christ did—“For you were slain . . . you ransomed people for God”—and what it has accomplished—“you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God”—and what it will accomplish in the future—“they shall reign on the earth.” The eternal song does not say merely that Jesus died. The song also does not say that Christ died only to make redemption a hypothetical for all who choose to believe or a potential salvation for every single man, woman, and child. In other words, this song does not say Jesus died with the intent to make all people savable but to save no one in particular. No, the reason for praise is that Jesus “ransomed people for God.” He actually paid the price to set particular captives free, to release specific prisoners. Jesus actually “made them a kingdom and priests to our God.” Jesus’ death definitively accomplished something.

There are several more descriptions akin to this one. For example, Jesus Christ’s death is described in the following ways throughout Scripture:

• As accomplishing the obedience God required for us (Rom. 5:19)
• As accomplishing expiation—the removing and sending away of our sins from before the face of God (Heb. 1:3; 9:14; 10:10, 14)
• As accomplishing propitiation—the turning away of the justice and wrath of God toward us (Rom. 3:25)
• As accomplishing reconciliation—the bringing together of God and us into a relationship of peace and love (Rom. 5:10)
• As accomplishing redemption—leading us out of the slavery of sin (Matt. 20:28; Rom. 3:24–25; 1 Cor. 1:30; Gal. 3:13; Col. 1:13–14; Heb. 9:12; 1 Peter 1:18–19)

The second aspect to the description of Jesus Christ’s death in Revelation 5:9–10 is that He actually died in the place of particular people. Let me illustrate. It’s hard for us to make the connection between what happened decades ago on D-Day on the beaches of Normandy and ourselves today. That is, we have a hard time thinking of those men so long ago as dying in our place. For the most part, we don’t know them, and they didn’t know us. But when someone in our lives actually steps in front of a car, comes between us and a bullet, or enters a fire to rescue us, it’s personal and it’s powerful. That’s what Jesus did. He is not an abstract person who died for an abstract, faceless mass of people He did not know personally and individually. No, He personally died for each and every one of those He loved from before the foundation of the world.

We hear this in the heartfelt cries of heaven praising the Savior who actually “ransomed people for God,” but notice how specific this ransom was for particular people. The song goes on to say that the ransomed people come “from every tribe and language and people and nation.” Literally, the text says the Lamb redeemed “out of every tribe and out of every language and out of every people and out of every nation.” He gave His life for those people specifically, and not others. Even more, the song celebrates this with the pronouns: “You have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth” (Rev. 5:10, emphasis added).

Again, there are many more descriptions just like this one throughout the Bible. Read the following passages and see how they describe Jesus as dying effectually for a particular people:

Jesus did not just make salvation possible for all, but those He saves, He effectually saves: “The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” (Luke 19:10). “If while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life” (Rom. 5:10). “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). Jesus “gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father” (Gal. 1:4). “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses” (Eph. 1:7).

Jesus laid down His life for His people: “And you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people” (Luke 1:68). “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20).

Jesus laid down His life for His sheep: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. . . . I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep” (John 10:11, 14–15).

Jesus gave His life for many, not all: “The Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28). “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28).

Jesus laid down His life for His church: “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish” (Eph. 5:25–27).

Jesus laid down His life for His elect: “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?” (Rom. 8:32–35).

Jesus prays for His people, not for the world: “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours” (John 17:9).

All this shows us is that Jesus’ death was a substitution. If He died in the place of all people, then all people will be saved. If He was substituted for some, then those will be saved.

THE BIBLICAL OBJECTION

What about all the “all” passages in the Bible that, some say, suggest Jesus died for everyone without exception? There are several passages, but what I want to say is that the “all” passages must be read with their context in mind as well as with all the rest of Scripture in mind. As I mentioned before, “all” doesn’t always mean all people without exception, or every single individual who has ever lived. Sometimes “all” means what it means here in Revelation 5:9–10, where all kinds of people are being described as redeemed. Other times, “all” means all nations—the Jews along with the Gentiles. Alongside the passages that speak of the particularity of Christ’s death, you can see that the best reading of Scripture is that Jesus gave Himself as a ransom for all kinds of people, Jews and Gentiles, “from every tribe and language and people and nation.”

Look at John 3:16–17. Notice that the purpose of God’s sending His Son is explained with two purposes clauses: “that whoever believes in him should . . . have eternal life” and “in order that the world might be saved through him” (emphasis added). If the “world” in verse 16 is every human being, then every human will be saved, because verse 17 says He saves the world. We know that cannot be the case because not everyone is saved. So, the “world” must refer not to all people but to something else. What is the “world?” It’s the “world” of darkness and unbelief (see John 1:10). God loved this world of fallen and rebellious sinners despite its hatred of Him. Even further, God’s love extends not only to sinful Jews but to the entire world of sinners, including the Gentiles in all corners of the earth (John 4:42; 11:51–52; 12:32; Rev. 5:9). The point of John 3:16–17 is that God’s love is so immense that any sinner who believes shall be saved. It speaks of the sufficiency of Jesus.

Look also at 1 John 2:1–2. The nature of “propitiation” is to turn away God’s wrath. If this text means every human, then it means the wrath of Almighty God is no longer upon anyone. When John says, “and not for ours only, but . . . the whole world,” he is speaking either as he spoke in John 3:16–17 of the sufficiency of Jesus or as he echoed our Lord’s words in John 17:20: “I do not ask for [the disciples] only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word.”

Finally, look at 1 Timothy 2:4–6. The context is not Christ’s death but prayer in public worship. Paul commands prayer “for all people” (v. 1). His concern is not for every individual person, but for all “all sorts and conditions of men” (Book of Common Prayer). He specifies prayer for government officials as if to say, “Pray for them so that we can continue praying for everyone else.” God does desire the salvation of “all people,” that is, all kinds of people. He is concerned not only with Jews but with Gentiles, with the rich and the poor, with white and black, with aristocrats and workers, with men and women. If God’s will or desire here concerns every individual, then what about other texts of Scripture that speak of His will or desire in choosing some and not others? God is not confused, so His desire for the salvation of all is reconciled with His electing choice when we understand that He wants all kinds of people saved.

THE BIBLICAL BENEFITS

Why does all this matter? I want to conclude by offering three biblical benefits to affirming the intentional and effectual satisfaction of God’s justice by Jesus Christ on the cross for His elect.

First, it gives us assurance and confidence that our Savior has been for us from eternity, on the cross, and into eternity. That assurance and confidence can say, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain” for me, “and by your blood you ransomed” me “for God from” this “tribe and” this “language and” this “people and” this “nation, and you have made” me “a kingdom and” a “priest to our God, and” I “shall reign on the earth.”

Second, it gives us reason to worship. He actually and personally died for me to actually and powerfully accomplish my redemption from the slavery of sin and the kingdom of Satan.

Third, it gives us reason to preach, evangelize, and bear witness in the world. If Jesus Christ actually, personally, and powerfully died for some “out of every tribe and out of every language and out of every people and out of every nation,” then there are particular people in every tribe, every language, every people, and every nation who must come to repentance and faith.

What a song is being sung in heaven even now. Let’s make it our song here on earth. This part of the Canons of Dort ends with these words:

This plan, arising out of God’s eternal love for his chosen ones, from the beginning of the world to the present time has been powerfully carried out and will also be carried out in the future, the gates of hell seeking vainly to prevail against it. As a result, the chosen are gathered into one, all in their own time, and there is always a church of believers founded on Christ’s blood, a church which steadfastly loves, persistently worships, and—here and in all eternity—praises him as her Savior who laid down his life for her on the cross, as a bridegroom for his bride. (2.9)

The tribes, languages, peoples, and nations are right outside our doors. What are we waiting for? Jesus’ death is sufficient for an infinite number of worlds of sinners; tell them, knowing that God will effectually apply it to His people by His mighty grace.

-----------

Rev. Daniel R. Hyde is pastor of Oceanside United Reformed Church in Oceanside, Calif. He is author of several books, including the forthcoming Grace Worth Fighting For: Recapturing the Vision of God’s Grace in the Canons of Dort.

So Loved

by John MacArthur

John 3:16 may or may not be the most familiar verse in all of Scripture, but it is surely one of the most abused and least understood. The verse is so well known that the reference alone is thought by some to be a sufficient proclamation of the gospel.

Arminians extract the phrase “God so loved the world” from its context and use it as an argument for universal atonement, meaning Christ’s death made redemption possible for all. More extreme universalists push the same argument even further. They claim the verse proves that God loves everyone exactly the same, and that all will be saved—as if John 3:16 negated all the biblical warnings of condemnation for the wicked.

To think like that is to miss the point completely. The immediate context gives the necessary balance: “Whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (v. 18). Surely, that is a truth that needs to be proclaimed to our generation with at least as much passion and urgency as the message of God’s love and mercy.

Moreover, John 3:16 does not focus on the extent of the atonement; the verse is a statement about the magnitude of God’s love. Here is a profound wonder: God loved “the world”—this wicked realm of fallen humanity—so much that He sacrificed His only begotten Son to pay the price of redemption for all who believe in Him.

The Apostle John was staggered by the magnitude of God’s love and its implications. He stressed it so much that he is often called “the Apostle of love.” This comment from 1 John 3:1 makes a fitting commentary on the central point of John 3:16: “See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God.” The language is as simple as the truth is profound: “how great.” John doesn’t employ a dozen adjectives, because all the superlatives in human language wouldn’t even come close to declaring the full truth. He simply calls our attention to the inexpressible wonder of it.

The Apostle Paul was captivated by the same truth: “God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). And when the Apostle Peter mentions “things into which angels long to look” (1 Peter 1:12), one of the pressing questions they surely must ponder is why God would pour out His love on fallen humanity. Why would He choose to love finite, fallen, sinful human beings at the cost of His own Son’s life? Why didn’t God just write us all off as wretched sinners, make us the objects of His wrath, and display His glory in judgment against us? It is a mystery even angels might find bewildering. Fallen humans alone are the recipients of divine mercy: “It is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham” (Heb. 2:16). “God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment” (2 Peter 2:4).

Having redeemed us and guaranteed us entry to heaven, couldn’t He have given us a lesser position? Yet, He has made us joint heirs with Christ. Indeed, He has given us His very best. He has bestowed on His people the most priceless, eternal blessing in all the universe—His own beloved Son. Therefore, we can be absolutely confident that He will withhold no good thing from us (Rom. 8:32).

Have you ever truly pondered the mystery of such great love? Why is it that God’s greatest love isn’t bestowed on the angels who never fell and who faithfully throughout all of time have been loyal to love and worship the God who made them? In short, why would God even love us, much less pay so high a price to demonstrate His love?

Frankly, the answer to that question is still shrouded in mystery. It is an immense, incomprehensible wonder. Beyond the fact that His love for sinners will redound to His glory, we do not know why God chooses to love fallen sinners. And I must confess, together with each true child of God, that I do not know why God chose to love me. It is certainly not because He finds me deserving of His love. In other words, the reasons for His love are to be found in God alone, not in those whom He loves.

This is a tremendously humbling truth. God’s love is graciously, freely bestowed, not merited by anything we can do. Boasting is excluded (Rom. 3:27). There is no occasion for human pride in the doctrine of God’s love—only sober-minded humility, deep gratitude, and the quiet reverence of a faithful, obedient heart.

John 3:16 Teaches Limited Atonement

by James N. Anderson | 2 April 2018 

Yes, it really does. Hear me out.

John 3:16 is commonly cited against the Calvinist doctrine of limited atonement (LA).[1] The argument is simple: LA teaches that Christ made atonement only for the elect, but this best-known verse in the Bible says that God so loved the world that he sent his Son. That implies a universal atonement, for all mankind, not one limited in its extent.

The WorldThat seems like a knockdown argument on the face of it, but on closer examination it turns out to be very weak. In John’s writings “the world” (ho kosmos) rarely if ever carries the sense of “all mankind” or “every human who ever lived.” It certainly doesn’t mean that in 3:16 because that would make nonsense of the immediately following verse. (Try replacing “the world” with “all mankind” in verse 17 to see the point.) Rather, “the world” typically means either (i) “the created universe” (as in John 17:24), (ii) something like “the fallen creation in rebellion against God” (e.g., John 3:19; 13:1; 15:19; 17:13-18; 1 John 2:15-17) or (iii) “all nations” as opposed to the Jewish people alone (as in John 4:42). Whatever the exact sense in 3:16, there’s nothing that conflicts with LA.

So John 3:16 doesn’t count against LA. Perhaps most Calvinists are content to leave it at that, but I think we can go further and argue that it actually supports LA.

The debate over LA is often characterized as a debate over the extent of the atonement. For whom did Christ die? For everyone or for the elect alone? But this isn’t quite right. The real issue concerns the intent of the atonement. For what specific purpose did God send his Son into the world to make atonement? Was it God’s purpose to try to save everyone (knowing that not everyone would be saved) or to save his chosen people (knowing that they would indeed be saved)? Was it God’s plan to make salvation generally available, in a indefinite fashion, or to actually save a definite group of people?

It’s the intent of the atonement that determines the extent of the atonement. What’s more, John 3:16 tells us something quite specific about what God intended in sending his Son.

The second half of 3:16 reads in Greek (transliterated):

hina pas ho pisteuōn eis auton mē apolētai all echē zōēn aiōnion

The first word, hina, means “so that” or “in order that”; it typically introduces a purpose clause that gives the reason for something or its intended consequence. The immediately following phrase, pas ho pisteuōn eis auton, is sometimes translated “whosoever believes in him,” but that’s quite misleading because it suggests a note of indefiniteness and conditionality which isn’t in the text. The more literal translation would be “every one believing in him” or “every believer in him.” The word pisteuōn is the substantival participle form of the verb pisteuō (to believe) which elsewhere in the NT is commonly rendered in English as simply ‘believer’ or ‘believers’ (e.g., Acts 5:14; 1 Cor. 14:22).[2]

All this to say, what John 3:16 tells us is that God sent his one and only Son in order that (i.e., with the intent that) every believer in him (i.e., every Christian believer) would not perish but have everlasting life. In other words, God’s plan of atonement was directed specifically at those who believe (a group coextensive with the elect, on both the Calvinist and the Arminian view). There’s nothing hypothetical, conditional, or indefinite here. The Son is sent with the definite purpose of saving a definite group of people. And that’s just what the doctrine of limited (definite) atonement asserts. John 3:16 isn’t merely consistent with LA. It implies it.

The same idea can be seen in the parallel verse in 1 John 4:9:

In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.

Again we’re told that the Father, motivated by love, sent his only Son into the world with a specific purpose: “so that (hina) we might live through him.” To whom does ‘we’ refer here? John is writing to fellow believers, of course. The divine action is specifically directed at believers. That’s the intent behind the incarnation and the atonement.

On a practical note, this should be tremendously encouraging, and should drive us to thanksgiving and worship, because it has this profound implication: if you’re a believer in Jesus Christ then God had you specifically in mind when he sent his Son into the world. God’s express purpose was that you, along with every other Christian believer, should not perish but have everlasting life. You were part of the plan all along — and God’s plans never fail. Hallelujah!

Loved before the dawn of time,
Chosen by my Maker,
Hidden in my Saviour:
I am His and He is mine,
Cherished for eternity.

Notes

1. I prefer the labels ‘definite atonement’ and ‘particular redemption’ but I’m going to stick with the traditional label for this post. 
2. Daniel Wallace cites John 3:16 as an illustration of the substantival participle; see Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 620.

DEFINITE REDEMPTION: JESUS CHRIST DIED FOR GOD’S ELECT

By J.I. Packer (from Concise Theology) 

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep (John 10:14-15). 

Definite redemption, sometimes called “particular redemption,” “effective atonement,” and “limited atonement,” is an historic Reformed doctrine about the intention of the triune God in the death of Jesus Christ. Without doubting the infinite worth of Christ’s sacrifice or the genuineness of God’s “whoever will” invitation to all who hear the gospel (Rev. 22:17), the doctrine states that the death of Christ actually put away the sins of all God’s elect and ensured that they would be brought to faith through regeneration and kept in faith for glory, and that this is what it was intended to achieve. From this definiteness and effectiveness follows its limitedness: Christ did not die in this efficacious sense for everyone. The proof of that, as Scripture and experience unite to teach us, is that not all are saved. 

The only possible alternatives are (a) actual universalism, holding that Christ’s death guaranteed salvation for every member of the human race, past, present, and future, or (b) hypothetical universalism, holding that Christ’s death made salvation possible for everyone but actual only for those who add to it a response of faith and repentance that was not secured by it. The choices are, therefore, an atonement of unlimited efficacy but limited extent (Reformed particularism), one of unlimited extent but limited efficacy (hypothetical universalism), or one of unlimited efficacy and unlimited extent (actual universalism). Scripture must be the guide in choosing between these possibilities. 

Scripture speaks of God as having chosen for salvation a great number of our fallen race and having sent Christ into the world to save them (John 6:37-40; 10:27-29; 11:51-52; Rom. 8:28-39; Eph. 1:3-14; 1 Pet. 1:20). Christ is regularly said to have died for particular groups or persons, with the clear implication that his death secured their salvation (John 10:15-18, 27-29; Rom. 5:8-10; 8:32; Gal. 2:20, 3:13-14; 4:4-5; 1 John 4:9-10; Rev. 1:4-6; 5:9- 10). Facing his passion, he prayed only for those the Father had given him, not for the “world” (i.e., the rest of mankind, John 17:9, 20). Is it conceivable that he would decline to pray for any whom he intended to die for? Definite redemption is the only one of the three views that harmonizes with this data. 

There is no inconsistency or incoherence in the teaching of the New Testament about, on the one hand, the offer of Christ in the gospel, which Christians are told to make known everywhere, and, on the other hand, the fact that Christ achieved a totally efficacious redemption for God’s elect on the cross. It is a certain truth that all who come to Christ in faith will find mercy (John 6:35, 47-51, 54-57; Rom. 1:16; 10:8-13). The elect hear Christ’s offer, and through hearing it are effectually called by the Holy Spirit. Both the invitation and the effectual calling flow from Christ’s sin-bearing death. Those who reject the offer of Christ do so of their own free will (i.e., because they choose to, Matt. 22:1-7; John 3:18), so that their final perishing is their own fault. Those who receive Christ learn to thank him for the cross as the centerpiece of God’s plan of sovereign saving grace.

The Synod of Dort

by W. Robert Godfrey

Does Calvinism have five points? Is that a silly question? No. It is a good question. And the answer may surprise. The answer is yes and no!

Yes, Calvinism has five points—obviously. We have books on the five points. Tabletalk has had articles on the five points. We even talk about TULIP as a way of remembering the five points: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.

And yet we can say, “No, Calvinism does not have five points.” The five points are not a summary of Calvinism. If you want a summary of Calvinism, you must turn to one of its great confessional documents such as the Belgic Confession or the Westminster Confession of Faith. Those confessions cover many more subjects than those covered in the five points. Calvinism has many more points than five.

So, where did the “five points of Calvinism” come from? It is particularly appropriate to ask that question now, because 2018–19 marks the four-hundredth anniversary of the five points of Calvinism. (If you are missing the celebrations of the five-hundredth anniversary of Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses, this will give you something to go on celebrating.) The five points actually originate as a Calvinist response to the Arminians in the Netherlands after the death of Jacobus Arminius, a response that culminated in the Synod of Dort (1618–19).

The Reformed Church in the Netherlands had emerged in the midst of great struggles. The first preachers of Calvinism there were French speaking, coming from Geneva in Calvin’s time and from France. Initially, the early Reformed churches there experienced significant persecution. Because of this persecution as well as other tyrannical actions, a revolt began against King Philip of Spain, who also ruled over the Netherlands. Both the Dutch state and the Dutch Reformed church were born at about the same time in the midst of great conflict. The state of the Low Countries was ultimately split in two, roughly corresponding to modern Belgium in the south (remaining Roman Catholic) and the Netherlands in the north (predominately Reformed). That northern country became a republic known as the United Provinces.

The Reformed church attracted a strong popular following, but not a majority of the population. Its dominant position came in part from state support in the United Provinces, which favored the Reformed church and outlawed the Roman Catholic Church. The Reformed church very much followed the teachings of Calvin and the emerging Calvinist orthodoxy. It also followed Calvin in wanting a measure of self-government for the church, independent of too much state interference. Many within the state government, however, wanted to keep strong limits on church independence, because Calvinists sometimes became too strict and too demanding.

While the church as a whole was quite orthodox and disciplined, there were those who dissented. Some were publicly disciplined, but others seem to have dissented quietly or privately. The most famous of these quiet dissenters was Jacobus Arminius.

Arminius was a brilliant student, studying for a time in Geneva in the days of Theodore Beza, Calvin’s successor as the most prominent minister there. Arminius returned from Geneva to serve as a Reformed minister in the church of Amsterdam from 1588 to 1603. In 1603, he was appointed to be a professor of theology at the most distinguished Dutch university at Leiden. He served there just six years until his death in 1609. Throughout his career as a pastor and professor, he wrote several works critical of aspects of Calvinist theology, but he did not publish any of them in his lifetime.

Although he did not publish, Arminius did influence fellow ministers and students by his teaching. After his death, in 1610, some forty-two ministers signed a petition to the state asking for toleration and protection for their views. They knew that their views would be disciplined in the churches and so appealed for the state to protect them from ecclesiastical discipline.

These Arminians in their petition, or “Remonstrance,” summarized their theological deviations from Calvinism, for which they sought toleration, in five points. The original five points were the five points of Arminianism: conditional election, unlimited atonement, serious depravity, resistible grace, and uncertainty about perseverance.

When word leaked out about this Remonstrance, the Calvinists reacted sharply and angrily. They began to insist on the calling of a national synod to evaluate and judge the five points of the Arminians—the last thing the Arminians or many leaders of the state wanted. For eight years, these issues were debated, and the churches were increasingly stressed and troubled.

Finally, after a coup d’etat in the state, the national synod was called to meet in the city of Dordrecht in November 1618. The Arminians complained that they could not receive a fair trial at such a synod, so the Dutch invited representatives from Reformed churches throughout Europe to come as delegates. The great Synod of Dort became a truly international synod. Delegates came from Great Britain, various parts of Germany, German-speaking Switzerland, and Geneva. The synod was a very distinguished gathering of many of the best Reformed minds in Europe. The synod had about ninety ecclesiastical delegates and met for nearly six months.

The great result of the work of the synod is known as the Canons of Dort. Canon is from a Greek word for a rule. The Canons of Dort are the rules of the Synod of Dordrecht, giving the Reformed answer to the five points of Arminianism.

The Canons of Dort are divided into “Heads of Doctrine,” answering the Arminian points. Each of the heads is divided into several articles, positively developing the Reformed teaching on that point. And at the end of each head is a section called the “Rejection of Errors,” answering specific Arminian errors.

Following the order of the Arminian five points, the Synod’s first head of doctrine was on election. The canons answered the Arminian teaching of conditional election. Conditional election means that God elects a category of people to life if they meet His chosen qualification. The Arminians stressed that faith is the foreseen qualification in order to be numbered among the elect. In this theology, faith is turned into the one good work required of man.

In contrast, the canons teach that election depends only on the good pleasure of God. Faith is the gift of God given to those who are elect, not the foundation of election. God is sovereign in every part of salvation according to His eternal purpose.

The second head of doctrine was on the extent of Christ’s saving work on the cross. The Arminians insisted that Christ had died for all of the sins of all people. They wanted to be able to say to everyone, “Christ died for all your sins.” The question that must be asked is, If Christ died for all the sins of all persons, are all saved? No, the Arminians say, because you have to believe in Christ to share in the benefits of His death. But, as John Owen showed so brilliantly in The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, if unbelief is a sin, then Christ died for it, and if unbelief is not a sin, then you cannot be condemned for it. But the Arminian error is more than teaching a theology that does not make sense. The greatest error is that it makes Christ a potential Savior rather than a complete one.

The position of the canons on the death of Christ has often been characterized as teaching a limited atonement. The canons were not primarily on the limited nature of Christ’s death but on the effectiveness of it. Christ did not die to make salvation possible but to make it actual. As the Belgic Confession put it, Christ is not half a Savior. While the value of the death of Christ is inherently infinite and so sufficient to save the whole world, His intention in dying was to pay for all the sins of the elect alone. The death of Christ will certainly save the elect.

The synod combined the third and fourth heads of doctrine because the Arminians’ third point seemed to teach total depravity, which is to say, the complete helplessness of mankind lost in sin. Only in combination with their fourth point does it become clear that their teaching of the resistibility of grace actually undermines their contention of total depravity.

The canons in response stress the complete lostness and helplessness of sinners and so the absolute necessity of irresistible grace to renew and enliven the hearts of the elect dead in sin. Taken together, the third and fourth heads of doctrine examine carefully the fallen human condition and the ways in which grace works in the hearts and lives of God’s people.

The fifth head of doctrine responds to Arminian uncertainty as to whether those enlivened or regenerated by grace will certainly persevere in grace or may fall away from grace and life. The canons strongly teach that God preserves His elect in grace so that they will persevere in grace and faith to the end. All of these teachings of the canons are intended to comfort and reassure Christians “that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6).

For many Christians today, the teachings of the Canons of Dort seem narrow and irrelevant. In a world where many reject Christ altogether and where Christian cooperation in missions and cultural endeavors seems so important, some Christians think that we can ignore or at least marginalize such theological concerns. Such a position appeals to many. But is it right? The Canons of Dort proclaim a God-centered, Christ-centered religion that is more needed today than in the seventeenth century. God’s sovereignty and Christ’s perfect atonement are our only hope and confidence. Truly, the Synod of Dort preserved the Reformation. Luther had said that he would rather have his salvation in God’s hands than in his own. Dort reiterated and clarified that truth. Christ alone and grace alone indeed. Here is something truly to celebrate.

---------

Dr. W. Robert Godfrey is a Ligonier Ministries teaching fellow and president emeritus and professor emeritus of church history at Westminster Seminary California. He is also the featured teacher for the six-part Ligonier teaching series A Survey of Church History and author of several books, including Saving the Reformation.

In but Not of the World

by Mez McConnell

We are probably one of the most connected generations of all time. We can speak to people across the globe on our phones. We can e-mail them, FaceTime them, text-message them. We live in a world that seeks connection, wants community, preaches peace and tolerance, and loves diversity. One world united together in love—that’s the political dream of our day.

And many churches and professing Christians eat this up. Let’s get all religions together under one roof. Let’s forget our differences. We are all the same underneath, right? Let’s not highlight our differences. Let’s focus on what brings us together. Yet, this flies in the face of Paul’s words to the church in 2 Corinthians 6:14: “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.”

That’s not very loving, is it? In the first half of verse 17, he is even more damning: “Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord.” Go out from them. Separate from them. That sounds a bit intolerant, right? It doesn’t seem loving. Yet this kind of language is all over the Bible. James 4:4 is equally strong: “You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” So, what is going on here? Why is the Bible so harsh? How can we live as Christians and be separate from the world? Should I be thinking about buying a plot of land in the desert and starting a Christian commune?

When Paul wrote these words, the church in Corinth was a mess. So-called Christians were engaged in open sin and all sorts of moral and theological compromise. Paul was keen to remind them that a relationship with Jesus was to be exclusive. So, for example, Christians could not claim to worship Jesus and visit the temple prostitutes that were common in Corinth in the first century.

To drive his point home, Paul asks five questions in a row: “What partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols?” (2 Cor. 6:14–16).

The expected answer to these questions is “none” or “nothing.” Christians live to please God. Unbelievers live to please themselves.

Christians are called to walk in the light. Unbelievers walk in darkness. Colossians 1:13 puts it this way: “[God] has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son.” Jesus is the light of the world, and believers are drawn to Him like moths to a candle, but as for the rest of mankind, they “love[d] darkness rather than light because their deeds [are] evil” (John 3:19).

But is it really true that a believer and an unbeliever have nothing in common? Some Christians feel they have more in common with unbelievers than with fellow church members. They support the same sports team. They have the same politics. They like the same TV shows. But Paul is not talking about what we have in common as people in general. He is talking spiritually. If Jesus has nothing in common with Satan, then the sons of God have nothing in common with the sons of Satan. A non-Christian does not view the world the way we do. We place value on spiritual truths and spiritual things, and they are concerned with the material and this world. They do not live with the afterlife in mind.

Paul reminds us in Ephesians 4:17–19:

Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.

So what does this all mean? Is the Bible saying that in order to avoid being corrupted by the world, we shouldn’t hang out with non-Christians? No. How would we carry out the Great Commission without deep relationships with unbelievers? Think about Jesus. He got into all sorts of trouble for hanging out and eating with sinners. In 1 Corinthians 5, the command is not to associate with one who calls himself a Christian yet lives like an unbeliever. We need more true Christians willing to have friendships with unbelievers, not fewer. The problem is that if we do not separate ourselves from compromised “Christians,” our witness is spoiled.

Some Christians think the answer to worldliness is to shop at Christian stores, go to Christian barbers, and go on Christian holidays. They then wonder why they find it hard to evangelize unbelievers. Others think going out drinking and clubbing with unbelievers to show them how cool we are is the way forward. I don’t know one person who has been converted through this type of “ministry,” but I know of countless Christians who’ve tainted their witness through drunkenness and immorality.

So, how do I know whether I am in a situation that means I ought to completely separate from someone who is not a believer? Here are some things to think about.

When I am with these nonbelievers, do I find myself becoming tempted and falling into sinful behavior?

When I am with non-Christians, am I standing up for the Bible and the Christian way of life or am I keeping my head down and going with the flow so as not to cause offense?

Are the friendships and relationships I have drawing me closer to Jesus or leading me further astray?

Of course we can be friends with non-Christians, but we will never share a spiritual intimacy with someone who doesn’t recognize Jesus as King and Lord. We want to live clearly Christian lives in front of the watching world.

----------

Rev. Mez McConnell is senior pastor of Niddrie Community Church in Edinburgh, Scotland, and founder and director of 20schemes. He is author of several books, including Is Anybody Out There?

What is Amillennialism?

by Ed Jarrett

Christ is returning for his church. On that, nearly all Christians agree. But there is no universal consensus as to what that second coming will be like. Over the history of the church, there have been a number of frameworks developed to describe Christ’s return and the events surrounding that return. And at the center of each of these is a short passage in Revelation 20:1-10.

This passage describes the binding of Satan; the resurrection, judgment, and a thousand-year reign of martyrs along with Christ; followed by the loosing of Satan, a final battle, and judgement on Satan. The thousand-year period in the middle of this passage is termed the millennium. And each of the major frameworks is identified by how they understand this period.

Premillennialists understand Christ’s return to come prior to this millennial period. Postmillennialists and Amillennialists understand Christ’s return to occur after the millennial. They differ in that Postmillennialists see the millennial as a physical reality on earth while Amillennialists see it as a spiritual reign in heaven.

What is Amillennialism?

Amillennialism is actually misnamed. The ‘a’ at the beginning means ‘no’, indicating the proponents of this position believe there will be no millennial reign. But that is not accurate. A better title would be something like ‘realized millennialism’, indicating that we are currently in the millennium.

Amillennialism is not new. Many throughout the history of the church have held it. And by the time of Augustine, it had become the dominant view of the church. It is still the dominant view of the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and many Protestants. And it was the view of the reformers, including Calvin and Luther.

Amillennialism understands the Kingdom of God proclaimed by Jesus and his apostles to be synonymous with the millennial kingdom of Revelation 20:4-6. The kingdom of God is a present-day reality with Christ ruling from heaven. And it is a kingdom populated by all those who have given their lives to the lordship of Jesus.

The Millennium

So how do Amillennialists understand these 10 verses in Revelation 20 that talk about Satan’s binding, the thousand-year rule of Christ, followed by the release of Satan? First, we do not understand them to be symbolic. They are describing real events. Secondly, we do understand that there is much symbolism throughout the book of Revelation. And, finally, that Revelation was written to give encouragement to the church of its day. While it does point to end times, it was also about what was happening in the first century.

Satan’s Binding

Satan’s binding seems to usher in this thousand-year rule. So, when does this binding occur? While some will point to this being a future event, the Bible gives plenty of clues to indicate that it has already occurred.

• In Matthew 12:28-29 the strong man (Satan ?) is tied up and his house robbed.
• In John 12:31 Jesus, just prior to the cross, says that the time for judgment has come. And the prince of this world would be driven out.
• In Colossian 2:15 Paul says that Jesus triumphed over satanic powers by the cross.
• In Hebrews 2:14-15 we read that Christ, by his own death, destroyed the power of the devil.
• And, in 1 John 3:8, John says that Christ appeared to destroy the work of the devil.

Satan’s influence over the world seems great right now. But he is bound and limited in his ability to deceive the nations. But that binding will come to an end at some time in the future. 

The First Resurrection

Revelation 20:4-6 is less about a thousand-year rule and more about what it calls the first resurrection. This resurrection involves only believers. Believers who have given their lives for Jesus and refused to worship the beast. These believers will reign with Christ for this thousand years and will not be harmed by the second death. The rest of the dead do not come to life until the thousand years are over.

So, who are these who participate in the first resurrection? While some would argue that they are limited to only tribulation martyrs, Amillennialists believe that these include all believers who have died. In Philippians 1:23 Paul expresses that he longs to depart and to be with Christ. He anticipates that at his physical death he will enter the presence of Christ. 

We see this resurrection not as being a one-time event at some point in the future. But rather as an ongoing harvest of believers. Each of us, when we leave this life, is ushered into the presence of Christ and rule in his kingdom.

Duration of the Millennium

Amillennialists believe that the millennium is a heavenly rule inaugurated at the death and resurrection of Christ and concluding at his return. The thousand-year span given in Revelation 20:1-10 is not a literal thousand years. Rather it symbolizes a long period. It represents the entire church age from the cross to the second coming.

The Last Battle

In Revelation 20:7-10 Satan is released from his prison, deceives the nations, and gathers them together to do battle. He leads his army against the camp of God’s people, but fire from heaven destroys his army and Satan himself is cast into the Lake of Fire. The same Lake of Fire holds the Beast and the False Prophet, and that will hold those whose names are not written in the Book of Life.

But this is not the only great battle mentioned in Revelation. In Revelation 16:12-14 the sixth angel pours out his bowl, and a great army gathers for the battle on the great day of God almighty. There is no mention of this battle being fought. But it would seem to be the same battle described in Revelation 20:7-10.

In Revelation 19:19-20 the Beast and False Prophet gather the kings of the earth and their armies to do battle against a heavenly rider on a horse. A rider that appears very much to be Jesus. And the result is the same as the battle in Revelation 20:7-10. Destruction and the Lake of Fire. Rather than three separate battles, these all appear to be the same battle mentioned three different times.

This battle is fought at the end of the age, and ushers in the final resurrection and judgment of the dead along with the New Heaven and Earth. It represents Satan’s final attempt to thwart God’s plan for his creation. 

Summary of Amillennialism

Amillennialists believe in a literal reign of Christ, along with his resurrected saints. But we believe this reign is a heavenly one rather than on the earth. We believe it is a present-day reality. And that it involves all believers, in particular, those who have died and are with Christ. 

-----------

Ed Jarrett is a long-time follower of Jesus and a member of Sylvan Way Baptist Church. He has been a Bible teacher for over 40 years and regularly blogs at A Clay Jar. You can also follow him on Twitter or Facebook. Ed is married, the father of two, and grandfather of two lovely girls. He is retired and currently enjoys his gardens and backpacking.

In the World but unlike the World

by John MacArthur

If you had no knowledge of Scripture but simply watched popular evangelicalism, you might reasonably infer that the church is under some order to imitate the world as closely as possible. Every popular fad or movement soon has a “Christian” counterpart. Every product logo will eventually be mimicked with a religious slant, silk-screened onto a T-shirt, and sold to evangelicals as a witnessing tool. Every hit movie will become the basis for countless sermon series. And every new trend in popular music will soon be integrated into the worship band’s repertoire.

Evangelicals nowadays desperately want to be fashionable, but so many of them don’t seem to care whether they are biblical. They take far more care to be politically correct than they do to be doctrinally sound.

To borrow a phrase from James 3:10, these things ought not to be so.

The New Testament is full of texts that contrast the church with the world in the starkest possible terms. No wonder. These are rival domains, locked in irreconcilable opposition, at war with one another for mastery of human souls. Christ is Head of the church (Eph. 5:23), and it confesses Him as its Lord. But “the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19).

The church has no calling to try to broker a truce with the world. Jesus said believers can expect no more friendly reception from the unbelieving world than He received. “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you,” He said. “If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18–19).

Repeated attempts to reverse that reality have proved disastrous for the church. To try to appease popular opinion or win the friendship and affection of the world by imitation, flattery, compromise, accommodation, or any other means is actually treason against Christ. It is high rebellion against our heavenly Father, because “if anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:15). And it is a brazen attempt to subvert the work of the Holy Spirit because “the spirit of the world” is antithetical to “the Spirit who is from God” (1 Cor. 2:12).

Scripture leaves no wiggle room here: “Friendship with the world is enmity with God.” And “whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God” (James 4:4).

There’s no hint of a contradiction between that principle and the best-known verse in all of Scripture—“God so loved the world.” John 3:16 describes God’s incomprehensible love for people in this world despite their sin. That verse and its context describe the amazing, tenderhearted willingness of God to save sinners such as us from the condemnation we deserve, highlighting the inexplicable grace that made such a costly sacrifice even “while we were enemies” (Rom. 5:10).

But make no mistake: the world itself remains systemically and fundamentally at enmity with God. Its political systems are in the grip of Satan, who is called “the ruler of this world” (John 12:31) and “the god of this world” (2 Cor. 4:4). The world’s values are corrupt (2 Peter 1:4). The whole world is full of lust and evil pride (1 John 2:16). Its dogmas are full of lies (Col. 2:8). Its very best philosophies are sheer folly (1 Cor. 3:19). This world is fallen, hopelessly corrupt, and slated for judgment (1 John 2:17).

We do, of course, share God’s compassionate love (and a true empathy) for people who are enslaved by the passions and pleasures that dominate this world (Col. 3:3). The spiritual battle we wage against the world consists of tearing down strongholds of earthly ideologies in order to liberate people from their captivity (2 Cor. 10:4–5).

But believers are commanded not to love the world itself or the lusts and the pride that dominate all the world’s systems (1 John 2:15). In fact, true holiness starts with a refusal to conform our thinking to this world’s values or ideas (Rom. 12:2). Christians must strive to be different. We don’t belong to this world. “Our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20). One of the hallmarks of true faith is a confession that we are “strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (Heb. 11:13). And one of the traits of our faithfulness is that we don’t accommodate to the world. Although we are in the world, we are not to be of the world.

Perhaps you have heard that saying many times. It echoes Jesus’ prayer for His people in John 17:14–16:

“I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.” (Emphasis added)

This does not mean, of course, that Christians should wear some external costume that sets us apart, like the Pharisees’ broad phylacteries. It means we should be different in character, thoughts, and actions—holy and Christlike, in a world that hated (and still hates) Christ and His righteousness.

Jesus said believers are the salt of the earth. Salt in that culture was used for more than flavor enhancement. It was the best preservative for curing meats. Its antibacterial properties also made it useful in the treatment of wounds. Believers are supposed to have a similar influence in the world. True holiness exemplified by a faithful church has that effect—counteracting the corruptions of evil in the world.

Jesus also said we are the light of the world. When the church proclaims the truth of God’s Word, we radiate the true light that dispels spiritual darkness.

But when believers imitate the world or embrace worldly values, the saltiness is lost and the light is hidden. Let us strive to be distinctive in this world of darkness and corruption. After all, we “are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession,” and our singular calling is to “proclaim the excellencies of him who called [us] out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Peter 2:9).

----------

Dr. John MacArthur (@JohnMacArthur) has been pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, Calif., for the past fifty years. He is the featured teacher on Grace to You, and he has written numerous books, including The Gospel according to Jesus.

Not Our Home

by Nicholas T. Batzig

After a decade of church planting and pastoring in the beautiful Southern coastal city of Savannah, Ga., my family and I moved on to a new place to begin a new ministry and a new season of life. As our time in Savannah came to a close, my heart began to fill with sadness over the fact that we were leaving behind beloved friends, a house we loved, and a delightful city. At the same time, I was reminded of C.S. Lewis’ statement about “pleasant inns” in his book The Problem of Pain. He wrote, “The settled happiness and security which we all desire, God withholds from us by the very nature of the world: but joy, pleasure, and merriment, He has scattered broadcast. . . . Our Father refreshes us on the journey with some pleasant inns, but will not encourage us to mistake them for home.” We are meant to feel this whenever God in His providence carries us from one place to another. We are also meant to feel this when we see the turmoil in the world around us.

As believers, we are called by God to train our minds and hearts to firmly latch onto the biblical teaching that we are passing through this world as pilgrims and strangers. We can never allow ourselves to become comfortable here. We are merely sojourners passing through this world on our way to glory. From the first promise of redemption in the garden (Gen. 3:15) to the glorious heavenly vision of the City of God (Rev. 22), the totality of the Bible focuses on the pilgrimage for which God has redeemed His people.

When God called Abraham to leave his family and his homeland, he “went out, not knowing where he was going” (Heb. 11:8). “By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise” (11:9). Moving from place to place, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob walked by faith in the promises of God. The Lord had promised Abraham that he would inherit the land; yet, the only land he ever possessed during his pilgrimage was a tiny plot that served as a burial place for him and for his wife, his children, and his grandchildren. The act of burial was the last great act of faith. It proved that he was looking for something better—the hope of the resurrection. Abraham never had a permanent home until he died. When he died in faith, he settled in “the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10).

Joseph also lived and died as a pilgrim and stranger on the earth. Abraham’s great-grandson spent the better part of his life as an alien in a foreign land. He was cut off from his earthly family until the end of his father’s life. He was instrumental in the rest of his brethren coming and dwelling in a foreign land. When he died, Joseph “made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones” (Heb. 11:22). By charging his brethren to take his bones up from Egypt and into the promised land (which would not occur until some four hundred years after he died), Joseph was teaching the Israelites that there was a better city—one for which God would raise him up, body and soul.

After Moses fled from Egypt into the wilderness of Midian, he married the daughter of the Midian priest Jethro and fathered a son with her. Moses named his firstborn son Gershom (literally meaning “stranger there”). Scripture teaches us the rich biblical theological meaning of this name in Exodus 2:21–22, where we read: “Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah. She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom, for he said, ‘I have been a sojourner in a foreign land.’”

We discover the secret to spiritual pilgrimage when we read:

These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.(Heb. 11:13–16)

The writer of Hebrews set out the history of the exilic status of old covenant saints to comfort suffering new covenant believers. There is a parallel between the experiences of old and new covenant saints. Throughout the new covenant era, Christians have had their homes and possessions taken from them. Many have been persecuted and martyred. Like the prophets before them, they were men and women “of whom the world is not worthy.” The world may not have been worthy of them, but “the world to come” was prepared for them (Heb. 2:5). The common status of all believers in this world is that of being “sojourners and exiles.” When the Apostle Peter wrote to the early church, he addressed them as “elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.” James, writing to the new covenant church, addressed believers as “the twelve tribes in the Dispersion.” These allusions to the “pilgrim” motif bring the concept to the forefront of the church’s identity in the world.Jesus came to make us heirs of the world to come.

There is, however, another pilgrim and sojourner in the Scriptures upon whom we must fix our gaze. Jesus Christ—the Son of Abraham and greater Moses—was the ultimate sojourner and pilgrim on the earth. This was not His home. He came from His Father in glory and returned to His Father in glory. It was He who told His disciples, “I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me” (John 6:38). As He went to the cross, He told them: “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. And you know the way to where I am going” (John 14:2–6). Jesus is the heavenly Sojourner, traveling through the foreign land of this fallen world to the eternal inheritance He came to possess by way of the cross. He came to inherit the world by passing through the world and finishing the work of redemption. The Old Testament saints typified the coming Redeemer. Jesus is “the Pilgrim of pilgrims, the Sojourner of sojourners, the Hebrew of the Hebrews, the One appointed from the foundation of the world to be a pilgrim as they were, to be a sojourner as they were—the One who would incarnate a Hebrew’s life; the One who would sojourn in flesh and blood though he was from all eternity not flesh and blood, but eternally very God of very eternal God.”

When the Son of Abraham came, He traveled throughout the promised land and yet had “nowhere to lay his head” (Luke 9:58). Like Abraham, He never settled into any one place in the promised land. Unlike Abraham, He didn’t even possess His own burial place.

In tempting Christ in the wilderness, the devil offered to give Him the world. Having taken Jesus up to a high mountain, he offered Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment if He would just bow down and worship him. Rather than succumb to the evil machinations of Satan, the Son of God trusted the promise of His Father to give Him “the nations for His inheritance and the ends of the earth for His possession” (Ps. 2). But, He would do it in accord with his Father’s command. Jesus fulfilled the legal demands of the covenant by keeping the law, and He took the curse for those who broke the covenant. To receive the promised inheritance of “the world”—which God had given to Abraham and his seed (Ps. 37:11, 22; Rom. 4:13; Matt. 5:5; Gal. 3:16)—the Son of God had to travel through this world as a stranger. He ultimately had to be exiled from the presence of His Father on the cross (Matt. 27:46). During His sojourn in Israel, the covenant Lord was dealt with as if He was a “stranger” from the gentiles. The chief priests and elders used Judas’ betrayal money to purchase a “field as a burial place for strangers,” as a cemetery for those who belonged outside the camp of God’s people (Matt. 27:7). The body of the Savior would have ended up in a trash heap—with the other crucified gentiles and criminals—were it not for Joseph of Arimathea’s providing a more dignified burial place for Him (Matt. 27:57–60; see Isa. 53:9). The eternally glorious Son of God was treated as a stranger among His own people (John 1:10–11). But He came to make us heirs of the world to come. He came to fulfill the hope of Abraham, Joseph, and Moses. He entered that state of sojourning to secure redemption for His people. He identifies with the true sons of Abraham who also pass through this world as sojourners. In the words of Henry Van Dyke:

Thou wayfaring Jesus a pilgrim and stranger,
Exiled from heaven by love at Thy birth
Exiled again from Thy rest in the manger,
A fugitive child ‘mid the perils of earth
Cheer with Thy fellowship all who are weary,
Wandering far from the land that they love
Guide every heart that is homeless and dreary,
Safe to its home in Thy presence above.

*This is an adapted version of a post that was originally published at Tabletalk Magazine.

ABOUT POST AUTHOR

Nicholas T. Batzig

Nick Batzig served as the founding pastor of New Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Richmond Hill, GA. Currently, he is a pastor at Wayside PCA on Signal Mountain, TN, and an associate editor for Ligonier Ministries. Formerly, Nick served as the editor of Reformation21 and the Christward Collective--sites of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. He frequently writes for Tabletalk Magazine, Reformation 21, He Reads Truth, and the Christward Collective. Nick was also the host of East of Eden, a podcast devoted to the Biblical and Systematic Theology of Jonathan Edwards. You can friend him on Facebook here and follow him on Twitter @nick_batzig

Where Would We Be Without TRUTH?

by C. R. Carmichael | May 4, 2020

“The church has lost her testimony! She has no longer anything to say to the world. Her once robust declaration of TRUTH has faded away to an apologetic whisper.” — A. W. Tozer (1897-1963)

In my earlier essay Why The World’s Dark Business Is Booming, I described how the world’s ancient business of moral chaos has grown into a mega-monopoly of soul-crushing power. With its unabated glorification of sin and self, the industry of this world has succeeded in supplying products of discord to the masses in order to ensnare them with a false sense of freedom and protection. Self-agency and temporal security may be the world’s sly promise, but tyranny over humanity is the tragic end result.

Sadly, this evil world conglomerate has come to dominate today’s global market because of one simple fact: It has capitalized on the current devaluation of biblical stock and a depreciation of the Gospel proclamation. The world’s only legitimate competition, the Truth-bearers of Jesus Christ, have too often shuttered their factories of bold witness and settled for a curiosity shop that plies its religious trinkets among the world’s seducing lies, with little awareness of their dangerous compromise.

Looking over this barren landscape of Christian appeasement, one can easily see a massive segment of our population living in spiritual confusion because they believe the world can provide the solution to their struggles. Without truth to guide them, however, they will continue to toil under such satanic delusion. So who is there to help them out of the chaos? Where are the fearless disciples of old who, under penalty of death, reached out to the lost and dared to proclaim truth against the lies of this world? And why are some professing Christians today outsourcing truth to the world’s business, where it will always be retooled into a cheap knock-off for mass consumption?

Perhaps we have forgotten that God’s plain truth, without our vain embellishments, is the only spiritual balm that can truly soothe the soul of a brokenhearted, sin-sick person in this chaotic world. It alone brings an abiding, comforting peace during the trials of life because it speaks directly to the eternal hope found only in Jesus Christ and the salvation He secured. In Philippians 4:7, in fact, we have this wonderful promise: “The peace of God, which passes all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

In light of humanity’s desperate need for God’s peace, can you imagine if truth were completely erased from our midst? It is too dreadful to contemplate! Yet think of the catastrophic condition of humanity if the world existed without the revelation of God’s truth. Like wayward Israel, the people would be “destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6), and would soon cry out in anguish like Isaiah, “Woe is me, for I am lost!” (Isaiah 6:5).

Imagining A World Void Of Truth

According to the Scriptures, a world void of truth would be a desolate place. Fallen mankind would have no avenue of promise to find redemption and reconciliation with God. Without truth, there would be no regeneration; for it is by “the word of truth” that we are begotten and born again (James 1:18; I Peter 1:23). Without truth, there would be no justification; for we are justified by faith, which faith consists in crediting God’s truth, and so gives peace with God (Romans 5:1). Without the truth, there would be no sanctification; for the Lord himself says, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). Without the truth, there would be no salvation; for “God hath chosen us to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (II Thessalonians 2:13).

In such an unsound world, where would you find the threefold graces of the Spirit: Faith, Hope, and Love? Without truth, there would be no faith; for the work of faith is to believe the truth (II Thessalonians 2:13). As the Bible teaches us, “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ,” which is truth in all its power (Romans 10:17). The difference between true faith and the world’s delusion is striking: Faith believes God’s truth, and delusion credits Satan’s lies (II Thessalonians 2:11-12).

Without truth, there would be no hope; for the province of hope is to anchor in the truth of God’s word (Hebrews 6:18-19). This led David to say in Psalm 119:74, “I have hoped in Your word.” Indeed, it is “through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures that we have hope” (Romans 15:4). And where do we most clearly hear of this hope? It is heard in the word of truth, the Gospel (Colossians 1:5), which fixes our hope on the living God, even Jesus Christ, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers (1 Timothy 4:10).

And finally, without truth, there would be no love; for it is “the love of the truth” which separates the saved from the unsaved (II Thessalonians 2:11-12). Indeed this love of truth transforms believers into Christ-bearers who are then compelled to speak the truth in love to those who are perishing, for they now know that “grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17).

Thus we see the tragic consequences of abandoning truth. Without truth, all the people on the earth would be lost in a stormy tempest of lies without a lighthouse to guide them to safe harbor. They would have no faith to chart their course, no hope in which to anchor their souls to God, and no love to fill their sails. Is this not the dire situation we are beginning to witness in the world today? How many poor souls are now living in fear instead of faith, anguish instead of hope, and anger instead of love?

The Bible teaches us that truth brings faith, hope, and love to full flower, but emphasizes that above all, love is the greatest of the three (I Corinthians 13:13). In I Corinthians 13:6, we learn: “Love does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth.” In other words, love is delighted when truth is spoken, and therefore love is eternally married to truth. Love adores and promotes truth, just as those who bear God’s love in their hearts adore and promote truth. Truth, then, is firmly fixed upon the only love that has the power to destroy the depraved business of this world.

Boldly Speaking The Truth In Love

As devoted disciples of Christ, therefore, we are duty-bound to join with a loving God in His desire to save people from all walks of life by bringing them a precious knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4). We will speak the truth in love, growing in every way more and more like Christ (Ephesians 4:15), with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth (2 Timothy 2:25).

This is not a complicated procedure, as some professors who cling to worldly devices would have us believe. Quite simply, we should raise up truth in all its simplicity and purity so the world can clearly behold it, and then witness how God uses it for His glory. One can surely plant the seed of truth, another might even water it, but God produces the growth and spread of His truth by His own glorious might. We, in turn, receive the joy of watching God at work in the process of redemption and praise Him when we see His truth bear spiritual fruit.

To do otherwise negates the divine power of God in truth. We need to remember that it isn’t our job to make the truth more palatable or attractive to the masses. Gospel truth is not grounded in a vacillating, sentimental emotion that gratifies the carnal passions of self-centered sinners. Rather, our Gospel message must be grounded in a love of biblical proportion that does not demur from the hard edges of God’s truth: a truth which will always scrape against the world’s silky sensibilities and self-righteous flesh. The apostle John, in fact, challenges us to base our love, not in empty or flattering words, but in deed and in truth (1 John 3:18). Why? Because if we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is no longer in us (1 John 1:8).

Ultimately the truth is impressed upon people by the power of the Holy Spirit, and not our carnal efforts. When the Spirit opens the people’s eyes, it is to see the truth (Ephesians 1:18, 19). When He opens their ears, it is to hear the truth (Isaiah 55:3; Luke 9:44). When He opens their hands, it is to lay hold of and embrace the truth (Proverbs 4:13; Hebrews 6:18). When He guides their feet, it is so they may walk in the truth (3 John 4:1-4; Psalm 119:45; Luke 1:6). When He opens their mouths, it is so they may feed upon the truth, the living truth, yea, upon Jesus Christ who is truth itself (John 6:35, 14:6).

Truth, therefore, is the instrumental cause of all the blessings on the earth, the divinely-appointed means whereby God’s blessings become manifested mercies. Only truth, by active proclamation, can enter into and be received by all the graces of the Spirit as they come forth into living exercise to bring salvation to lost souls caught up in this dark chaotic world.

Truth, after all, is Jesus Christ Himself. And if we find ourselves without truth, then we will find ourselves without Jesus. Hence, at the thought of such a woeful and wretched condition, we join with the apostle Paul to exclaim: “God forbid!”

----------

(Some “Without Truth” passages taken and expanded upon from J. C. Philpot’s “Through Baca’s Vale”)

Why The World’s Dark Business Is Booming

by C. R. Carmichael | May 1, 2020

“To have one foot on the land of truth, and another on the sea of falsehood, will involve a terrible fall and a total ruin.” — Charles H. Spurgeon

Have you noticed that the citizenry of this world, with all our global connectivity and technological advancements, seem to be shifting more and more into a trajectory of chaos and uncertainty? Why is this? Surely in an age of scientific precision and meticulous social engineering, we should be achieving a high level of stability. Yet, obviously from our current state of cultural upheaval and political warfare, we seem completely unable to reign in the darker elements of our nature. A gathering swell of violent rage, fear, depression, and a growing lust for drugs, alcohol, and pornography are tearing at the moral fabric of our society. But why?

Perhaps we should seriously considered the distinct possibility that all the guiding philosophies of this world have unionized to cobble together a central message that drives us into the moral chaos in which we find ourselves. Like a fat-cat global conglomerate, the world and its board of directors have fine-tuned their mission statement and built a business model around it to achieve its vision of complete domination in the marketplace of souls. And like a scheming conglomerate, it has engaged in a massive PR campaign to transmit their corporate message into every mind and heart on the planet.

The problem with this international cartel, however, is that the world, by its very fallen nature, does not peddle in truth. It profits only in duplicity, deceit, and lies. To hide that inconvenient fact, the world has to engage in propaganda to fool the masses and bend them to its will through subtle indoctrination. Sadly, the world has succeeded in many ways to grow its market share through the compost of social media, Hollywood entertainment, amusements, consumerism, safe spaces, and other distracting toys which placate the people with a false sense of happiness and well-being.

And yet, deep down, the people are still by and large unsettled. Why? Because the world wants you to shelve the perfection of God and His truth and replace it with its own flawed products of narcissism, hedonism, and self-actualization. Indeed, the world’s company motto comes in various forms, but advertises the same point: Self Above All; Do As Thou Wilt; To Thine Own Self Be True! The end result of this marketing campaign is inevitable: the rise of paganism, fantasy, and the idols of individual beliefs; the blurring of gender lines; the obliteration of all sexual boundaries; the tossing aside of human life for one’s convenience; and the denigration of Jesus Christ and vilification of His devoted followers.

Of course, disharmony always reigns in individuals when their quest for self-satisfaction displaces God and His truth. This is why people still live in turmoil, hopelessness, and fear despite the world’s best efforts to sedate them with their pharmacopoeia of comforting lies. The world might offer them a safe haven to practice their selfish pursuits, but at what cost? Tyranny, it can be shown, always grows strongest on the backs of underlings who are willing to trade in their God-given moral compass for the benefits of consequence-free living and doses of fleeting pleasure. Without God and His truth, however, the people are trapped in a totalitarian state of satanic deceit. They are slaves to their sins. And in their innermost being, they know it.

No More Business With The World

As Christians in the midst of this godless tyranny, we need to directly address the rising influence of the world and the sad reality of mankind’s enslavement to it. We need to understand that we can no longer do business with this devious world syndicate and still expect to persuade its loyal customers to return to God and His truth. Seeking the admiration of men through compromise with the world will never work, even if done out of sincere love for the lost. Why? Because our godly love for the lost has no power if we fail to please God, first and foremost, with an unwavering devotion to His truth.

The apostle Paul reminds us of this point when he rhetorically asked, “Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men?” Obviously, there are no two ways about it. If we are pleasing men, Paul rightly concluded, then we are no longer servants of God (Galatians 1:10).

Similarly, A. W. Tozer put the issue like this: “All conformity to the world is a negation of our Christian character and a surrender of our heavenly position… One compromise here, another there, and soon enough the so-called Christian and the man in the world look the same… When the Church joins up with the world, it is the true Church no longer but only a pitiful hybrid thing, an object of smiling contempt to the world, and an abomination to the Lord!”

London’s Archibald G. Brown, a co-laborer with Charles Spurgeon, certainly witnessed the beginnings of this modern-day Christian compromise when he noted in 1889 that “the devil has seldom done a cleverer thing than hinting to the church that part of their mission is to provide entertainment for the people, with a view to winning them.” For speaking the truth, Brown was soon falsely accused of being a “sour bigot” and a “kill-joy.”

These days, of course, the hip new strain of namby-pamby evangelism is grounded in the “Best Life Now” philosophy that turns preachers into nothing more than stand-up comedians, tonic salesmen, and self-help gurus. By whispering sweet-nothings into itching ears, these compromising shepherds have abandoned the potency of God’s pure truth and replaced it with a watered-down concoction that will never quench one’s thirst for righteousness. One might sadly ask, how many lost souls have been unmoved by such a weak cocktail and remained in their self-serving folly, even unto death?

Militant For The Truth

In stark contrast to these worldly appeasers, Jesus’ true disciples are called to be militant saints—a striking expression once coined by Spurgeon. No, not militant as in being physically combative against flesh and blood, but spiritually so against the cosmic powers of this dark world and the forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:12). We must therefore gird our loins with God’s truth and renounce the hidden things of shame from which this dark world profits. In open protest, we must walk in the picket line of righteousness, without partaking in the world’s craftiness or deceit, but commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God as children of the Light, the fruit of which consists of all goodness, righteousness, and truth (II Corinthians 4:2; Ephesians 5:7-9).

We must not overthink how to do this or burden ourselves with an elaborate strategy. Our duty as Christians is really quite simple when we stand upon God’s holy word. We are called to be truth-bearers for Christ, and not secret shareholders in the business of this world. Once and for all, we must fully grasp this biblical precept: the only commodity that can bankrupt this dark world and release its corporate dominance over wayward souls is TRUTH, as revealed in His creation and in His holy word; and specifically, the truth of Jesus Christ, “as the truth is in Jesus” (Ephesians 4:21).

As Jesus boldly testified to Pilate before His crucifixion: “For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice” (John 18:37).

This declaration of truth by the Savior is the active principle that separates Christians from the world and provides the only true remedy for the desperate state of mankind—and even more so in the 21st century. This truth is the essential weapon forged by God against the world’s satanic forces, and is divinely sharpened to cut to the quick and lay us bare before our Creator (Hebrews 4:12-13). As such, we must wield this holy instrument at all times or fail in our service to God. Without apology, we need to jam the sword of truth into the perverse machinery of this world and grind its gears to a halt with the power of the pure, undiluted Gospel, which brings salvation to those who believe (Romans 1:16).

After all, as Harriet Beecher Stowe once concluded with such eloquent simplicity, “The truth is the kindest thing we can give folks in the end.”

Love of the world

by Mike Ratliff  | May 7, 2019

1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:1-2 ESV)

One of the markers of Christian genuineness is separation from the World. This isn’t a physical removal from planet Earth or a disintegration of the body of a Christian. A genuine Christian’s character should be in a continual upgrade unto Christlikeness. That means that as he or she cooperates with God in their sanctification, working out their salvation with fear and trembling, their character will take on more and more of Christ’s character. They will love what He loves and hate what he hates. God is love, but He hates a certain type of love.

18 “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. John 15:18-19 (NASB) 

15 Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. 17 The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever. 1 John 2:15-17 (NASB) 

If professing believers love the very thing that hates the truth of God’s sovereignty, His genuine character–not the one they have made up, and all genuine Christians who proclaim these truths then they prove either that they are very immature Christians or the love of the Father is not in them. The word “love” used here, in the Greek, means “affection and devotion.” John is telling us that genuine Christians will not habitually have affection and devotion for the world or the things in the world.

I know many professing Christians who believe that death is a tremendous tragedy. They love their life here more than anything else. They pursue entertainment in everything they do seeking to be fulfilled in sports, or movies, or recognition for working hard in church. On the other hand, John tells us in the passage from 1 John that if we habitually love the world like that then we are in the process of revealing that we are disingenuous Christians.

Why does God hate love for the world and the things in the world? God, not the world, must have first place in His children’s hearts. (Matthew 10:37; Philipians 3:20) We must remember that what God is against here is not planet Earth, but the invisible, spiritual system of evil dominated by Satan. This world system keeps people in bondage, blinds their hearts, and opposes God and all that belong to Him.

These evil forces bring to bear the three motivations for people to sin. These are seen in v16. It says, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.” The  word “lust” carries with it a connotation of desiring that which is wrong to have. The first lust is “of the flesh.” Immature Christians are suckers for this. They have not learned that we must deny ourselves, take up our crosses and follow Christ as a way of life. Instead they battle with their sin nature’s number one target for self-gratification – the flesh. This lust is best understood as that which creates a “passion” for whatever it is that is wrong to have. The second lust is “of the eyes.” This speaks of a desire to possess something or someone that is not theirs. This is akin to covetousness. It seems that our path to Christian maturity starts with dealing with these two lusts. We must conquer our passions and desires to posses the things of this world. If we don’t then we are revealing our love for these things and that means we don’t have the love of the Father in us. This is frightening! Have you examined yourself in this area? The third motivation to sin is pride of life. This speaks of having power. The rich are powerful are they not? Don’t power brokers in this world also possess the things in this world that most of wish we had?

If we are in love with the world and things in the world as John speaks of in this passage then we will also be dominated by these three motivations to sin. On the other hand, if we are being sanctified, working out our salvation with fear and trembling, all three of these things will come under attack. God will not allow His children to be idol worshippers. Their idols must come down. They must be cast into the fire.

As we grow in grace, these battles will continue, but victories will grow more and more frequent. Some of us will battle this, and lose, to the end. However, I deeply desire victory over my besetting sins of seeking passion, possessions, and power. How can we do this. I probably sound like a recording that repeats over and over again, but here it is: We must cooperate with God in our sanctification. We must work out our salvation with fear and trembling. We must seek purity. We must love God more than life itself. We must put our love for Him above all things and everyone else. We must love Him with our entire being. Why?

1 See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. 2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. 3 And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure. 1 John 3:1-3 (NASB)

Beloved, we must take this to heart. This purity speaks of being cleansed from the contamination of this world. If we are pure here it is because we are not conformed to this world, but have become transformed by the renewing of our minds. In so doing, we have drawn near to God, He has drawn near to us, and we have learned to discern His will and we obey Him in all we do, by His grace.

Soli Deo Gloria!

Resisting the Spirit of the Age

by Matthew P.W. Roberts

We live in an age that believes it has outgrown religion. Today’s secularists believe that they have set themselves free from the delusions of invented deities, and that the march of human freedom is now unstoppable. Such is the spirit of our age. And many Christians are baffled over how to respond, for the Bible shows us how to grapple with false religion but is silent on how to engage the threat of “no religion.”

But the Bible’s refusal to see “no religion” as a threat, or even as a possibility, is in fact the key to this. For if, as Paul says in Romans 1:25, sin is indistinguishable from idolatry, then secularism must be the worship of false gods as well.

According to Paul’s speech to the Athenian pagans in Acts 17, the foolishness of idolatry is that it worships gods “formed by the art and imagination of man” (v. 29). And on that score, there is a huge irony in the belief of our age, in which human freedom to determine our own law, morality, and destiny is revered as the ultimate good, that it has left religion behind. Because this idea of “freedom” as an ultimate value is itself a product of “the art and imagination of man.” In short, “freedom” has become, in our secular world, just another deity, one invented, as all idols are, as a means to justify our rejection of the living God. Secularism is nothing so novel as the rejection of religion. It is simply a repetition of the same old human impulse to invent a new one.

The trouble is that the tame gods we invent to serve us never stay tame for long. We hoped they would serve us, but we end up serving them. And so it is with the idolizing of “freedom.” As time has gone on, it has demanded greater and greater sacrifices of those who worship it. It has demanded the end of moral norms on sexual behavior, the right to kill our children, and the destruction of marriage. It demands the silencing of those who don’t agree with its demands. Right now, it is demanding the freedom to define who we are even in the face of the scientific realities of male and female, thus demanding that we give up on the very possibility of objective truth. And, of course, it will not stop there.

But doesn’t “freedom” enable us as Christians to believe what we want without persecution? Not when it is treated as an ultimate good. For then it only grants permission for Christians to worship our God provided we accept that “freedom” is the truly fundamental thing, that the worship of the Holy Trinity is optional while adherence to the doctrines of “freedom” are not. In other words, it will protect Christianity only so long as we accord our God second place in the divine pantheon. “Freedom” lays claim to the first.

For that reason, it is only a matter of time before this secular religion, far from guaranteeing the right to worship the Christian God, will in the end forbid it. For “freedom” requires what God forbids and vice versa. Faithfulness to Jesus Christ means defying this deity when it demands that we sign up ourselves and our children for its morality and its mantras. Idols, in the end, can tolerate subordinates but not rivals. The deity of “freedom” will no more be an exception than was Caesar in the days of the New Testament.

So, then, this is the spirit of our age. How are we to respond? In the same way, of course, that Christians in every age are called to respond to the reigning idols of their day. Let’s go back to Paul in Acts 17.

First, we must get God right (vv. 24–25, 29). The God of the Bible is the only, the true, the ultimate God. There are no fundamentals of human civilization deeper than Him. We must see the secular version of “freedom” not as our friend or a safeguard for our private religion, but as a false, invented deity to be decried and to be denied the worship it desires. There will be no defeating of identity politics and all the horrors of our secular age in any other way.

Second, we must get history right. The “progress” of “freedom” assumed by our age is an illusion and a lie. Rather, history is leading unstoppably from the resurrection of Christ to His return to judge the world (v. 31). The story of now is the story of the risen Christ calling people to turn from idols to serve the living and true God (1 Thess. 1:9–10). We live waiting for that day. We therefore need to lose our fear of persecution. It is to be expected for those who refuse to worship the idols of this age. But it will be temporary, and at its end is a crown of glory.

Third, we must get the gospel right. For too long, conservative Christians have presented the gospel as if it were an option, one of the ways in which those who hear us may exercise their (unquestioned) service of the god “freedom.” But the Bible never speaks in this way. Rather, God “commands all people everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). We don’t ask the world to give people permission to worship the Christian God; we proclaim to the world the imperative to worship the Christian God. And attached to that imperative is the promise of mercy to all who come to do so through Christ.

We resist the spirit of the age by refusing to worship the idols of the age. And we do this by trusting, obeying, and worshiping the one true God of this and every age, who has called us to know Him forever through His Son and by His Spirit.

-----------

Dr. Matthew P.W. Roberts is minister of Trinity Church York in York, England, and former moderator of the British Presbytery of the International Presbyterian Church.

The World

by John Tweeddale

One of the most surprising twists of John 3:16 is that we are told God loves the world. We might be tempted to think that there is much about the world for God to love. After all, what’s not to admire about cityscapes and farmlands, fine cuisine and backyard barbecues, classical symphonies and folk ballads, Renaissance paintings and kindergarten squiggles? The world we know is filled with texture, intrigue, opportunity, and cheer. The problem is that for all that is good and interesting and beautiful about the world, it is overrun with sinners. Ever since Adam and Eve rebelled against God in the garden, the world has become a wasteland. No matter how wonderful the world may appear, it is not worthy of God’s redeeming love.

Understanding how undeserving the world is of God’s love is the key to John 3:16. Only then will we appreciate the unexpected gift that God gives. This point was well made many years ago by the esteemed theologian Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield. In his sermon “God’s Immeasurable Love,” Warfield probes the meaning of the term “world” (Greek kosmos) in John 3:16 in order to plumb the depths of God’s love.

What is the meaning of “world” in this passage? Drawing from the insights of Warfield, there are four possible answers.

In the first place, many people believe that “world” means all people without exception. In other words, when John 3:16 says that God loves the world, it means that He loves every person, head for head, equally. The logic goes something like this: God loves every person; Christ died for every person; therefore, salvation is possible for every person. However, this view seems to suggest that God’s love is impotent and Christ’s death is ineffectual. Otherwise, the natural conclusion of this position would be that every person is actually saved rather than just potentially saved. If God loves every person, and Christ died for every person, and God’s love is not impotent, and Christ’s death is not ineffectual, then the only conclusion one can draw is that salvation has been secured for every person. Yet this viewpoint contradicts the Bible’s teaching on God’s judgment as is evidenced by the immediate context in John 3:17–21.

Second, others argue that “world” means all people without distinction. This option emphasizes that God loves more than one type of person or ethnic group. The death of Christ on the cross was not only for Jews but also for Gentiles. The love of God is not confined to national boundaries but extends to all kinds of nations, tribes, cultures, tongues, and peoples. To this, all God’s people––Arminian and Calvinist alike––say a hearty “Amen.” While this view has the benefit of being undoubtedly right and fits within the larger context of John’s gospel concerning the global identity of the “children of God” (e.g., John 1:9–13; 4:42), it doesn’t quite capture the jolting contrast between “God so loved” and “the world” that John 3:16 deliberately draws.

Third, a popular nuance of the previous option among Reformed theologians is to argue that “world” in John 3:16 refers to the elect. Throughout John’s gospel, Jesus emphasizes the particularity of His grace. “All that the Father gives me will come to me” (6:37). “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me….I lay down my life for the sheep” (10:14–18). “If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (15:19). “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours” (17:9). And so on. The point is that God’s people are chosen from an unbelieving world. Again, this view strikes an important note by underscoring the biblical doctrine of election, but the focus of the term “world” in John 3:16 is not so much on the identity of God’s people but on the nature of God’s love.

This leads us to the final option. A solid case can be made for believing that “world” refers to the quality of God’s love. Warfield convincingly states:

[World] is not here a term of extension so much as a term of intensity. Its primary connotation is ethical, and the point of its employment is not to suggest that the world is so big that it takes a great deal of love to embrace it all, but that the world is so bad that it takes a great kind of love to love it at all, and much more to love it as God has loved it when he gave his Son for it.

The world represents sinful humanity and is not worthy of God’s saving love. Apart from the love of God, the world stands under God’s condemnation. But in Christ, believers experience God’s surprising, redeeming, and never-ending love. John 3:16 is not about the greatness of the world but about the greatness of God.

----------

Dr. John W. Tweeddale is academic dean and professor of theology at Reformation Bible College in Sanford, Fla., and a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.