We must hold fast the full deposit of truth and sound words as it has been once delivered in the Scriptures. This is emphasised throughout the Pastoral Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth.
We must not seek to hold merely the bare minimum; we have not been called to reduce the burden for our own ease. The Church must hold to all that it has received. If we do not maintain our heritage what deposit of truth will there be for future generations? We must seek to hold fast in order to pass the deposit of truth on to the succeeding generation, that is truly guarding or preserving it. That is truly holding fast.
The Church must be agreed on the confession that it is collectively holding fast (Hebrew 10:23 & Philippians 3:16) hence the value of the Westminster Confession and Catechisms which are accurate summaries of the truth. Hence also the value of subscribing all of these truths and professing them to be our own personal confession, ‘holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience’. There is a sacred deposit of truth, the form of sound words. This must be maintained and asserted at all costs. Many believe that the old truths are outworn and must give place to new ideas. They believe that we can improve on what we have received. They believe that we must lower the biblical standard so that we can arrive at something more acceptable to a greater number of people. Needless to say, this is not holding fast the truth.
One vital way of holding fast in this connection is the instruction of the young within the Church. They must receive the knowledge of the truth. A great encouragement in this work is Isaiah 59:21: “My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever”. This promise guarantees the continuance of a profession of the truth but it does not thereby take away our responsibility to instruct our seed. That responsibility is enjoined in Deuteronomy 29:29 “those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law”. This is a solemn duty and privilege. Fathers, elders, ministers must catechise the children of the visible Church so that they are immersed in the truth. (Deut 6:1)
Friday, May 14, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
The National Debt and our debt of sin
As fears rage over the national deficit in Greece (here)and its implications in other countries not least Britain - you may benefit from reading an article here that considers not only the National Debt but the reality of our debt of sin of which we ought to be reminded.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Voting and the Bible
Bigger turnouts. Tactical voting. Evidence-based voting.
By now you will have voted, spoilt your ballot paper or not voted.
The Christian Institute produced a video encouraging Christians to vote with the question "How should Christians think biblically when considering ‘how’ or even ‘whether’ to vote?" The video was entitled "Voting and the Bible in 210 seconds". Their election briefing is invaluable but I'm not sure about the video. It refers to lots of bible passages but almost none directly relevant to voting. They are about praying for governments instead. The link above also links to a Southern Baptist document "Why Should Christians Vote?". This document does not do much better. One can be salt and light in society without casting a secret vote. It seems as if they are saying that these are the best passages it is possible to find in the bible with the closest fit with the issue.
The Bible does not use the words vote or voting. There is, however, a lot about government and national duty. Romans 13:1-14 doesn't really prescribe voting as a duty or active citizenship, more a subjection to the just authority of governments. One can render these duties unto Caesar without voting. It's hard to think that if Christians had the vote at this time they would have voted for the persecuting regime of Nero.
It would be an entire mistake to think that the Bible has nothing to say about choosing rulers simply because it does not refer to ballot by universal suffrage. It speaks frequently about the choice of rulers by a people and nation. Part of the difficulty is that people don't want to go to the Old Testament and find it. Deut 1:13 says "Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you". Exodus 18:21 "thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens". We also read "he that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God"(2 Sam. 23:3). Psalm 82 further describes the duties of rulers. The qualifications for a ruler could not be clearer and even if we allow for the fact of a changed situation from the nation-state of Israel as constituted by the Mosaic covenant, there are definite principles of general equity to apply here. Why do we have covetous and unjust rulers? Because they are neither men of truth nor men that fear God. In other words we cannot separate the Bible's mandate for voting from the Bible's requirements as to whom we can give a mandate for government.
Democracy means that power is invested in the people and that they loan out that power or delegate it to rulers. They give them the authority to implement their manifesto. That includes everything that they disagree with as well as everything they can support. It includes everything that they have said that they will leave untouched as well as all their explicit commitments.
If a party reneges on their manifesto commitments I can justly complain. If, however, they do what they have committed to and leave untouched that which they have left unaddressed, how can I complain? It goes further than this, however, because if I have given them the power to do that which is evil or to ignore existing evils they are doing that in my name and authority. I have become partaker in other men's sins. I have become involved in national sins. I can no longer point the finger at those who commit such things as Scripture condemns or at the government which fails to restrain them because I have a critical role in ensuring that this state of affairs is maintained (Exodus 23:2).
The default position of many Christians appears to be that of the tactical vote. Tactical voting has been described recently as voting with your head and not your heart. Choosing the best of the worst because you want to prevent those who would be worse from getting into power. Laying aside one's principles to vote for someone that you would not usually vote for and do not agree with entirely. This may work well in the expediency that discounts truth but the Christian is under an absolute duty not to do evil that good may come.
The duty of nations as nations and the duty of their governments is abundantly clear in Psalm 2. Are we giving power to those who are fighting against Christ as well as his law? In voting I am entering into a moral contract with the party voted for. It is entirely disallowed and condemned in Scripture that we should make a covenant of unity (as opposed to a peace treaty) with the enemies of God and his laws in this way (2 Chron. 16.1-10; 2 Kings 16.7,10; 2 Chron. 28.16-23; 2 Chron. 18.3; 2 Chron. 19.2; 2 Chron. 20.35). 2 Chron. 19:2, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?" What happens in voting is that we help politicians to do evil, but not to do good: while they help us do evil, and hinder us from doing good. Isaiah 8:12, 13: 'Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread'. Will we not be joined to them in the temporal judgement that they receive if we are joined with them in this moral contract (Is. 13:15)? We cannot have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness in this but rather reprove them.
To give a position of honour to a rejecter of God's law is not only not seemly (Prov. 26:1), it is like putting a dangerous weapon into their hand (Prov. 26:6&8) with which they can only injure or kill. Such rulers may be set up by "not by me" says the Lord (Hosea 8:4 and Ps. 94:20). They may be valid rulers but not lawful. We are not promoting Christian political parties as such but we are promoting a careful examination of conscience as well as policies and manifestos. Let us hope that some Christians across the country have been able to vote for candidates that are fit as well as willing to promote God's law. We fear that this will not have been universally the case, however. It is not just hung parliaments that create unholy alliances.
By now you will have voted, spoilt your ballot paper or not voted.
The Christian Institute produced a video encouraging Christians to vote with the question "How should Christians think biblically when considering ‘how’ or even ‘whether’ to vote?" The video was entitled "Voting and the Bible in 210 seconds". Their election briefing is invaluable but I'm not sure about the video. It refers to lots of bible passages but almost none directly relevant to voting. They are about praying for governments instead. The link above also links to a Southern Baptist document "Why Should Christians Vote?". This document does not do much better. One can be salt and light in society without casting a secret vote. It seems as if they are saying that these are the best passages it is possible to find in the bible with the closest fit with the issue.
The Bible does not use the words vote or voting. There is, however, a lot about government and national duty. Romans 13:1-14 doesn't really prescribe voting as a duty or active citizenship, more a subjection to the just authority of governments. One can render these duties unto Caesar without voting. It's hard to think that if Christians had the vote at this time they would have voted for the persecuting regime of Nero.
It would be an entire mistake to think that the Bible has nothing to say about choosing rulers simply because it does not refer to ballot by universal suffrage. It speaks frequently about the choice of rulers by a people and nation. Part of the difficulty is that people don't want to go to the Old Testament and find it. Deut 1:13 says "Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you". Exodus 18:21 "thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens". We also read "he that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God"(2 Sam. 23:3). Psalm 82 further describes the duties of rulers. The qualifications for a ruler could not be clearer and even if we allow for the fact of a changed situation from the nation-state of Israel as constituted by the Mosaic covenant, there are definite principles of general equity to apply here. Why do we have covetous and unjust rulers? Because they are neither men of truth nor men that fear God. In other words we cannot separate the Bible's mandate for voting from the Bible's requirements as to whom we can give a mandate for government.
Democracy means that power is invested in the people and that they loan out that power or delegate it to rulers. They give them the authority to implement their manifesto. That includes everything that they disagree with as well as everything they can support. It includes everything that they have said that they will leave untouched as well as all their explicit commitments.
If a party reneges on their manifesto commitments I can justly complain. If, however, they do what they have committed to and leave untouched that which they have left unaddressed, how can I complain? It goes further than this, however, because if I have given them the power to do that which is evil or to ignore existing evils they are doing that in my name and authority. I have become partaker in other men's sins. I have become involved in national sins. I can no longer point the finger at those who commit such things as Scripture condemns or at the government which fails to restrain them because I have a critical role in ensuring that this state of affairs is maintained (Exodus 23:2).
The default position of many Christians appears to be that of the tactical vote. Tactical voting has been described recently as voting with your head and not your heart. Choosing the best of the worst because you want to prevent those who would be worse from getting into power. Laying aside one's principles to vote for someone that you would not usually vote for and do not agree with entirely. This may work well in the expediency that discounts truth but the Christian is under an absolute duty not to do evil that good may come.
The duty of nations as nations and the duty of their governments is abundantly clear in Psalm 2. Are we giving power to those who are fighting against Christ as well as his law? In voting I am entering into a moral contract with the party voted for. It is entirely disallowed and condemned in Scripture that we should make a covenant of unity (as opposed to a peace treaty) with the enemies of God and his laws in this way (2 Chron. 16.1-10; 2 Kings 16.7,10; 2 Chron. 28.16-23; 2 Chron. 18.3; 2 Chron. 19.2; 2 Chron. 20.35). 2 Chron. 19:2, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?" What happens in voting is that we help politicians to do evil, but not to do good: while they help us do evil, and hinder us from doing good. Isaiah 8:12, 13: 'Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread'. Will we not be joined to them in the temporal judgement that they receive if we are joined with them in this moral contract (Is. 13:15)? We cannot have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness in this but rather reprove them.
To give a position of honour to a rejecter of God's law is not only not seemly (Prov. 26:1), it is like putting a dangerous weapon into their hand (Prov. 26:6&8) with which they can only injure or kill. Such rulers may be set up by "not by me" says the Lord (Hosea 8:4 and Ps. 94:20). They may be valid rulers but not lawful. We are not promoting Christian political parties as such but we are promoting a careful examination of conscience as well as policies and manifestos. Let us hope that some Christians across the country have been able to vote for candidates that are fit as well as willing to promote God's law. We fear that this will not have been universally the case, however. It is not just hung parliaments that create unholy alliances.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
James Begg on the Scottish Reformation
Next to the advent of our blessed Saviour, the Reformation from Popery is the most remarkable and glorious event recorded in modern history. The momentous consequences which have resulted from it to unnumbered multitudes can only be read in the annals of eternity.
Yet it is singular that this great event in Providence, to which Scotland owes so much, should never till now have received anything like a formal national acknowledgment. In 1660, when the first hundred years of the Reformation had passed away, no notice was taken of that event, the country being involved in a virtual revolution by the restoration of Charles II. In 1760, when
another eventful hundred years had finished their course, Scotland was sunk in profound torpor under the ecclesiastical dominion of men who have never at any period indicated much sympathy with the spirit of John Knox. Now, however, that 1860 has come, that a new spirit has breathed through the land, and that Rome is making determined efforts to regain her former ascendancy in Scotland, it is matter of earnest thankfulness to God that in a variety of ways the Reformation has been, and is likely to be, worthily commemorated, and the kingdom stirred up on the subject of its dangers and duties to its utmost depths.
[In 2010 the anniversary is given very little notice]
The apathy of the people of Scotland, so far as it exists on the subject of Romanism, is mainly to be traced to the want of zeal on the part of many ministers; and it is pretty evident that were the Reformation to be achieved now, some of them would not be found in the van of the
struggle. " If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, how wouldst thou contend with horses; and if in the land of peace, wherein thou trustedst, they have wearied thee, what wouldst thou do in the dwellings of Jordan?"
We shall prove ourselves most unworthy descendants of the great Reformers and of God's great
mercies, if we do not seek by every means to stay the plague of evil. Let us especially pray that God himself, with whom is the residue of the Spirit, and who has been so gracious to
our land in ages past, making it the source of unnumbered blessings to the world, may not hide His face from us now, notwithstanding our great unworthiness, but may bring back our captivity like the streams of the south, cause us to see good according to the days in which we have been afflicted, and the number of the months in which we have seen evil, and make our latter end to be more glorious than the beginning. "Return, Lord, for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine
inheritance."
Yet it is singular that this great event in Providence, to which Scotland owes so much, should never till now have received anything like a formal national acknowledgment. In 1660, when the first hundred years of the Reformation had passed away, no notice was taken of that event, the country being involved in a virtual revolution by the restoration of Charles II. In 1760, when
another eventful hundred years had finished their course, Scotland was sunk in profound torpor under the ecclesiastical dominion of men who have never at any period indicated much sympathy with the spirit of John Knox. Now, however, that 1860 has come, that a new spirit has breathed through the land, and that Rome is making determined efforts to regain her former ascendancy in Scotland, it is matter of earnest thankfulness to God that in a variety of ways the Reformation has been, and is likely to be, worthily commemorated, and the kingdom stirred up on the subject of its dangers and duties to its utmost depths.
[In 2010 the anniversary is given very little notice]
The apathy of the people of Scotland, so far as it exists on the subject of Romanism, is mainly to be traced to the want of zeal on the part of many ministers; and it is pretty evident that were the Reformation to be achieved now, some of them would not be found in the van of the
struggle. " If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, how wouldst thou contend with horses; and if in the land of peace, wherein thou trustedst, they have wearied thee, what wouldst thou do in the dwellings of Jordan?"
We shall prove ourselves most unworthy descendants of the great Reformers and of God's great
mercies, if we do not seek by every means to stay the plague of evil. Let us especially pray that God himself, with whom is the residue of the Spirit, and who has been so gracious to
our land in ages past, making it the source of unnumbered blessings to the world, may not hide His face from us now, notwithstanding our great unworthiness, but may bring back our captivity like the streams of the south, cause us to see good according to the days in which we have been afflicted, and the number of the months in which we have seen evil, and make our latter end to be more glorious than the beginning. "Return, Lord, for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine
inheritance."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
