Chelsea Hauk, a reporter with Bryan County Now–a division of the Savannah Morning News, was kind enough to interview me today with regard to the work involved with planting New Covenant Presbyterian Church. Chelsea asked a really great question at the end of the interview. You can listen here.
There has been a fair bit of discussion about the so-called “two kingdoms” doctrine in Reformed circles of late. Two books have recently been released that get at the topic from a (theologically informed) historical vantage point. The first is by University of Chattanooga history professor William J. Wright and is entitled Martin Luther’s Understanding of God’s Two Kingdoms: A Response to the Challenge of Skepticism and can be found here. Professor Wright seeks to untangle Luther’s doctrine from its associations with Christian passivity in the face of Hitler and the rise of National Socialism in Germany.
The second book is by Westminster Seminary California professor David VanDrunen and is entitled Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms: A Study in the Development of Reformed Social Thought and is obtainable here. Dr. VanDrunen seeks to explore the historical use of the two ideas within Reformed theology: natural law and two kingdoms. There is no doubt that both doctrines found a place within early stages of development in Reformed theological circles. So how do the doctrines function? If the idea of natural law is not merely a Roman Catholic or Enlightenment doctrine, how was the doctrine formulated and understood within Reformed circles? What accounts for its falling out of favor with Reformed theologians? The same kind of questions could be asked of the two kingdoms doctrine. Is it not the quintessential Lutheran doctrine that undermines sovereign Lordship of Christ over all his creation? Perhaps, perhaps not.
In questions like these readers need to distinguish the historical question from the theological question (this is not to argue for neutral history, but to not allow one’s theology to dictate what a particular historical person said or did not say). We need to first ascertain just what given theologians held before we can make theological assessments or evaluations. When a sound historical assessment of sources has been made we may have to reevaluate long and dearly held assumptions. But we cannot and ought not to assume we can make theological evaluations until we have done our homework. After all, the Reformed faith did not begin in the 19th or 20th century and it is not immediately obvious that later developments are necessarily improvements to earlier formulations. Later developments may be improvements or they may be regressions or simply misunderstandings of previous theological formulations. At the end of the day, readers do not have to agree with these authors, but they will need to give them serious consideration.
John 10:36-38 Do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.
Romans 1:4-7 And was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ should be boasted in as He is the Son of God – a divine member of the Trinity. No one has, or ever can use this term except Christ, because of the fact that He alone is the living Son of God. And this must be boasted in so that His supremacy is made even more glorious.
The Son’s relation to the Father is presented with the term “Son of God” to declare that the perfect revelation of the Father is now forever given to mankind. Jesus Christ is titled the Son of God in the sense that He is one of the members of the Trinity. This claim was made on the occasion of His baptism in Mark 1:11, “And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased,’” and by the angel Gabriel announcing in Luke 1:35, “‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy– the Son of God.’” This title showed that Jesus Christ was the actual Son of the Trinity and the actual Son of God. Jesus used this to teach His disciples the fact that talking to the Son of God was the same as talking to the Father.
The believer must see that how they view and know Jesus Christ as the actual Son of God is of great importance. It is helpful to see Paul’s theology of this doctrine and its centrality to his preaching and teaching to the churches. From the moment of Paul’s salvation, Paul knew that it was the Son of God who called him. We see constantly that this Son of God was central to his salvation. In Galatians 1:15-16 Paul says, “But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone.” This understanding was not only central to his salvation, but also to his preaching as seen in Acts 9:20, “And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, ‘He is the Son of God’” and in 2 Corinthians 1:19, “For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we proclaimed among you, Silvanus and Timothy and I, was not Yes and No, but in him it is always Yes.” Paul saw the importance of keeping Christ as the Son of God the absolute truth in salvation and in teaching through the Word.
The believer must see that the Son of God claims to be what the title says – the very Son of God. In Christ’s oneness, and in His equality, He can claim to be the Son with authority. The believer can boast in knowing that what Christ claimed about Himself was true: that He Himself is the way, the truth, and the life. The believer can boast that they serve a Christ who is in tune with, and always knowing, the Father perfectly. This is important to the believer because often times they feel distant from the Father. But knowing that this Son of God constantly and perfectly intercedes, helps to bring light to knowledge of – and communion with – the Father. The believer must boast that Jesus Christ is the living Son of God because only when the believer sees and knows the truth that lies in Him for salvation, can they be fully satisfied in Him. This is done in boasting in Jesus Christ and who He is – and not the believer’s self. Of even further importance in this very title is that it sent Jesus Christ to the cross, paying for the believer’s sin. This title is what Christ was accused of being wrong about; but because of it – He was indeed the Son of God – He provided a way for man to come to God.
Dogmatics takes for its starting point the certainty of God’s existence. Everything else is details. For Bavinck the outset of Christian theology has one thing in common with the long history of critical reflection on God’s existence: he is unknowable. But nonattainability of the knowledge of God is not the same as nothing. As long as scripture remains objectively center we worship whom we know.
The greatest dangers to theology are words and a devaluation of mystery. If theology becomes an exercise of rhetoric or replaces its objective vision (revelation) for the subjective impression (positivism) theology degenerates into anthropology (Fichte). The evolutionary theory in Bavinck’s day, for example, held that YHWH was a Hittite mountain God adopted by the Hebrews and localized on Mt. Sinai. But God is represented as the Creator (Gen. 2:4b) and “descends” from heaven at the scene of Babel (Gen. 11:5, 7) and “accompanies” Abraham and Jacob on their journeys. Point is, concludes Bavinck, that Old Testament revelation is preparatory, external in nature, “it does indeed furnish true and reliable knowledge of God, but not a knowledge that exhaustively corresponds to his being.” Signs of his presence are darkness (Ex. 20:21; Deut. 4:11; 5:22; 1 Kg. 8:12; 2 Chron. 6:1) possibly to show that natural light does not represent his brilliance.
Who is lost in the cloud of unknowing? From Plotinus to Erigena negative expressions of God’s being are more accurate though less satisfying. Scholasticism expressed God’s attributes in great detail but lost incomprehensibility in the shuffle. The Lutheran and Reformed, says Bavinck, lost sight of the significance of the doctrine yet the Remonstrant/Socinian wing did much worse, “Eternal life, they maintained [Rationalism/Socinianism] does not consist of knowing God but in doing his will.” Who God is becomes unimportant.
Next week we will look at Bavinck’s analysis of God’s incomprehensibility in the shift from theology to philosophy.
It is commonplace, in many Reformed churches, for ministers to use Hebrews 13:20-21 as a benediction at the end of a worship service. It is perhaps my favorite of all the benedictions we use. But as is true with all Scripture, we sometimes have a tendency to read over–and even memorize–portions of Scripture thoughtlessly. Such was the case, in my experience, with the phrase in Hebrews 13:20: “Now, may the God of peace, who brought again from the dead through the blood of the everlasting covenant, our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, make you complete…” What does it mean when the author of Hebrews says that God the Father raised Jesus from the dead through the blood of the covenant? John Owen, in his Exposition of Hebrews, gives one of the most satisfactory explanations of this all important phrase. He explains that the blood of the cross made the resurrection possible. Owen noted:
2. The blood of this covenant is the blood of Christ himself, so called in answer to the blood of the beasts, which was offered and sprinkled in the confirmation of the old covenant; whence it is by Moses called the blood of the covenant, Exod. xxiv. 8; Heb. ix. 20. See that place and the exposition. And it is called the blood of this covenant, because, as it was a sacrifice to God, it confirmed the covenant, and as it was to be sprinkled, it procured and communicated all the grace and mercy of the covenant, to them who are taken into the bond of it.
3. But the principal inquiry is, how God is said to bring Christ from the dead through the blood of the covenant, the shedding whereof was the means of, and the way of his entrance to death. Now the mind of the Holy Ghost herein will appear in the ensuing considerations.
1st. By the blood of Christ, as it was the blood of the covenant, the whole will of God, as to what he intended in all the institutions and sacrifices of the law, was accomplished and fulfilled. See ch. x. 5—9. And hereby an end was put to the old covenant, with all its services and promises.
2dly. Hereby was atonement made for sin, the church was sanctified or dedicated to God, the law was fulfilled, the threatenings of death executed, eternal redemption obtained, the promises of the new covenant confirmed, and by one offering they who were sanctified, are perfected for ever.
3dly. Hereon, not only way was made for the dispensation of grace, but all grace, mercy, peace, and glory was purchased for the church, and in the purpose of God was necessarily to ensue. Now the head and well-spring of the whole dispensation of grace, lies in the bringing Christ again from the dead. That is the beginning of all grace to the church ; the greatest and first instance of it, and the cause of all that doth ensue. The whole dispensation of grace, I say, began in, anil depends on the resurrection of Christ from the dead, which could not have been, had not the things before mentioned been effected and accomplished, by the blood of the covenant. Without them he must have continued in the state, and under the power of death. Had not the will of God been satisfied, atonement made for sin, the church sanctified, the law accomplished, and the threatenings satisfied, Christ could not have been brought again from the dead. It was therefore hereby that he was so, in that way was made for it to the glory of God. The death of Christ, if he had not risen, would not have completed our redemption ; we should have been yet in our sins. For evidence would have been given that atonement was not made. The bare resurrection of Christ, or the bringing him from the dead, would not have saved us; for so any other man may be raised by the power of God. But the bringing again of Christ from the dead, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, is that which gives assurance of the complete redemption and salvation of the church. Many expositors have filled this place with conjectures to no purpose, none of them so much as looking towards the mind of the Holy Ghost in the words. That which we learn from them is,
Obs. VII. That the bringing back of our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Shepherd of the sheep, from the state of the dead, through the blood of the covenant, is the great pledge and assurance of peace with God, or the effecting of that peace, which the God of peace had designed for the church.
Obs. VIII. The reduction of Christ from the dead, by the God of peace, is the spring and foundation of all dispensations, and communications of grace to the church, or of all the effects of the atonement, and purchase made by his blood.—For he was so brought again as the Shepherd of the sheep, to the exercise of his entire office towards the church. For hereon followed his exaltation, and the glorious exercise of his kingly power in its behalf, with all the benefits which ensue thereon, Acts v, 30, 31; Rom. xiv. 9; Phil. ii. 8—11; Rev. i. 17, 18, and the completing of his prophetical office by sending of his Holy Spirit to abide always with the church for its instruction, Acts ii. 33, and the discharge of what remains of his priestly office in his intercession, Heb. vii. 25, 26, and his ministering in the sanctuary to make the services of the church acceptable to God, Heb. viii. 2; Rev. viii. 4. These are the springs of the administration of all mercy and grace to the church, and they all follow on his reduction from the dead, as the Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the covenant.
Obs. IX. All legal sacrifices issued in blood and death, there was no recovery of any of them from that state. There was no solemn pledge of their success. But their weakness was supplied by their frequent repetition.
Below is the audio and video from the Sunday morning sermon preached at New Covenant Presbyterian Church in Richmond Hill, GA. The text was Acts 2:1-13 and the title was “When Jesus Shows Up at Pentecost.
When Jesus Comes to Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13) from Nicholas T. Batzig
Big news, as one of my mentors, Phil Ryken, accepts the call to be the new President of Wheaton College. You can read about it here, here and here. Pray for Tenth Presbyterian Church as they will now need to find someone suitable to replace such a faithful and gifted man.
Last Sunday Evening I preached a message on Romans 5:6-11 at New Covenant Presbyterian Church. The title of the sermon was “Much More Then.” Having gone back and listened to it I’ve come to realize that I did not preach the text as fully or carefully as I should have. Can you figure out what was left out? It is a lack of reference to a crucial part of Paul’s argument.
Much More Then (Romans 5:6-11) from Nicholas T. Batzig
Here is the link to the audio of my recent interview with Dr. Michael Haykin, concerning his book The Christian Lover. I believe that all Christian couples will benefit from the things that Dr. Haykin has to say and from this unique book.
Not that it really matters, but the latest theological abstraction from Union Theological Seminary has to win some kind of prize. Feminist theologian Margaret R. Miles will be delivering the 2010 Sprunt Lecture at the Seminary’s campus in Richmond, VA. The subject? A theology of the breast. Miles argues that the crucifixion was a violent act and is therefore an inappropriate reminder of the love of God. Miles suggests that a woman’s breast is a far more appropriate illustration. I for one am a bit confused–not because I fail to see the difficulty an unbeliever has with seeing the love of God demonstrated in the death of His Son; nor because I fail to see the biblical data in which God’s love for His people is likened to the nurturing of a breast-feeding mother; but because most feminists don’t strike me as the type who have children, let alone who breast feed them. Does this seem contradictory to you? Breast feeding is not the typical action feminists are crying out for. Having a professional career and a girlfriend seems more in step with the feminist agenda. As Mark Driscoll noted, many women are liberated by the feminist movement, only to find that they are now as perverse as the men they wanted to be like. The reason the breast-feeding illustration works biblically, is because God defines, in His word, the distinct roles that men and women have, and the mothering and nurturing role that women play by nature. And, incidentally, the message of the cross is the way that God continually breast-feeds His people. You can read more about Miles forthcoming lecture series here.
HT: Jim Cassidy
“Mystery is the lifeblood of dogmatics” are Bavinck’s opening words to the doctrine of God. Even when a confirmed believer moves past the sophomore debates of faith v reason and proofs for God’s existence faith, moving toward understanding, faces the incompressibility of knowing God. The great question here at the outset of our journey is: How is reading Bavinck anymore of a help?
The tensions between modern life’s this-world scientific orientation and the pietistic other-worldly contemplation was a concern Bavinck was a pains to address. These two worldviews have inherent dangers to genuine faith; the former slips easily into asceticism and solitude while the other degenerates into, “cold Pelagianism and unfeeling moralism.” These issues, warns Bavinck, directly affect worship and the quality of religious life for those around us.
Bavinck writes with the conviction that God has certainly spoken and revealed himself to the creation from within and without. This is no mere academic exercise: God’s revelation is personal, inviting faith and communion with him through Christ and the Spirit. Our series continues with Bavinck’s view of God’s incomprehensibility right here, next week.
Among the multitude of expositions on the Apostle’s Creed, written throughout church history, one in particular has not received the attention it deserves. Herman Witsius, best known for his The Economy of the Covenants (part 1) and (Part 2), published an exposition of the Apostle’s Creed under the title Sacred Dissertations on the Apostle’s Creed (Part 1) and (Part 2). If you are interested in doing further study of Witsius’ work you will find an Analysis of the Economy of the Covenants and On the Character of a True Theologian to be helpful.
Dr. Benjamin Shaw makes several significant points about covenantal baptism here. They deserve the most serious consideration by anyone who desires to understand more fully the biblical nature of covenantal signs and seals. I would also recommend that you listen to the audio lectures by Edward Donnelly and Bill Shishko. They are two of the finest defenses from modern theologians. If you want to read more thorough treatments from the annals of church history, I would recommend John Holt Rice’s essay on the subject, and the sermon Stephen Marshall preached before the Westminster Assembly.
Dennis Johnson, Professor of Practical Theology at Westminster Seminary California, has an article over at Third Millennium Ministries on how he came to change his mind about infant baptism. You can read the article here.
Many people have incorrect thoughts about the purpose of Pentecost. You will sometimes hear Christians praying that the Spirit will come in the same way as He came at Pentecost. It is certainly a good and right thing to desire a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the church. But Pentecost held a very special place in redemptive history. It is as special and unique an event as the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ–a one-time event. Eric Alexander explains the significance of Pentecost in the following way:
This particular Pentecost in Acts 2 came fifty days after that day to which the Old Testament Passover had pointed, when the Lord Jesus was lifted up and offered himself as a full and sufficient sacrifice for sin. We cannot understand the significance of Pentecost apart from the offering up of Christ as our sin bearer. In this sense, the day of Pentecost is a vital part of the redeeming work of Christ, because the coming of the Holy Spirit was to accomplish in us what Christ had accomplished by his death for us. Thus, we could think of the giving of the Spirit in Acts 2 as part of Jesus’ saving work which consists in his leaving heaven’s glory, his lowly birth of a virgin, his perfect life of obedience, his atoning death on the cross, his resurrection, ascension and establishment at God’s right hand, his gift of the Holy Spirit, his present intercession, and his coming again in power and great glory.
In this context, the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was a once-for-all event, no more repeatable than Jesus’ birth, death or resurrection. It ushered in the last days (Acts 2:17). But the gift of the Holy Spirit is given to every believer who repents and receives the forgiveness of sins (2:38). In this sense, every true believer has a personal pentecost at the time of regeneration.
Then the Holy Spirit comes to indwell us, to apply the benefits of Christ’s death to us and to raise us into newness of life so that Christ’s life may be lived out in us. No more does God only dwell in the Temple at Jerusalem. From Pentecost on, the apostles say to every believer, “Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit”.
Second, Pentecost was a celebration of the giving of the Law. Some scholars think that the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai was fifty days after the Passover. Certainly in later Judaism there was a close connection between Pentecost and the giving of the Law. The association is significant, because the giving of the Law was designed, by an external standard, to form the lives and characters of God’s redeemed people. And God came down upon Sinai in mighty Power with thunder, lightning and fire.
But God’s ultimate Purpose to write his Law in the hearts of men and women: “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.” (Jer 31:33) lt is this Promise which is being fullfilled at Pentecost, as Paul makes clear in 2 Corinthians 3:7-8.
It is well for us to remember in all our thinking about Pentecost and the coming of the Spirit is that the central ministry of the Holy Spirit is to write the law of God in the hearts of men and women.
Third, Pentecost was also called the Feast of First Fruits. It was the time when the first ears of ripe corn were offered to god. The first fruits were part of the harvest, as well as the promise of its fullness. Do you see how Perfectly God chooses times and seasons? This Pentecost was to see the first-fruits of the harvest of the gospel, and that harvest is still being gathered all over the world today. The end of the harvest will not be until the return of Christ in glory.
So Pentecost is not only a saving event – bringing the application of the death of Christ to our lives; it is not only a moral event – designed to change our character; it is also a missionary event. That is the significance of the reference in Acts 2:5 to people from every nation under heaven gathered in Jerusalem.
You can read the whole talk here.
Below is the audio and video from the Sunday morning worship service at New Covenant Presbyterian Church of Richmond Hill, GA. The text was Acts 1:12-26 and the title, “Better By the Dozen.”
Better By the Dozen (Acts 1:12-26) from Nicholas T. Batzig on Vimeo.
There is an interesting theological purpose in the historical account in Acts 1:12-26. At first glance it doesn’t seem to be anything more than an historical recollection of the apostasy, suicide and replacement of Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed our Lord. But the place of this record in the book of Acts, the nature of the apostles’ prayer, and the Scripture that Peter appeals to all bring a much more significant purpose into view. Jesus has told the apostles to wait for the promised Holy Spirit, whom He would pour out on them ten days later at Pentecost. The Spirit would give them power to fulfill the evangelist ministry in the world. They had been specifically chosen to establish the New Covenant church, the new Israel, throughout the world. As such there would be 12 of them. With His initial choice, Jesus had picked the 11 found in the upper room after his resurrection, and He had chosen Judas. It was obviously no surprise to Him that Judas would betray Him. Peter, in this place, appeals to verses out of two Psalms in order to explain the necessity of replacing Judas:
And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples (altogether the number of names was about a hundred and twenty), and said, 16 “Men and brethren, this Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus; 17 for he was numbered with us and obtained a part in this ministry.” (Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out. 19 And it became known to all those dwelling in Jerusalem; so that field is called in their own language, Akel Dama, that is, Field of Blood.)
“For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
‘ Let his dwelling place be desolate,
And let no one live in it’;
and,
‘ Let another take his office.
It is extremely important to note that the Holy Spirit predicted the replacement of Judas as an apostle. It was not simply the betrayal that was prophesied of, but the Spirit (incidentally, the same Spirit for whom the apostles were waiting) foretold the apostolic replacement. The question we ought to be asking is, “Could the 11 apostles not have fulfilled the Great Commission?” Apparently not! Why then did he need to be replaced? There must be 12 apostles because Jesus had reconstituted Israel and was going to establish the New Israel through the 12 new heads of His church. The Old Covenant church was marked by 12 tribes, the New by 12 apostles. This is no incidental detail. Our Lord purposefully planned the work of redemption so that we would be convinced of the Divine origin of the Gospel. The choosing of a twelfth apostle, to replace Judas, was part of this divine plan.
Over at the Riddleblog there is a post by Richard Muller, in which he considers what it means to say you believe in the five points of Calvinism. Muller suggests that there is much more to the historical Reformed faith than a bare confession of adherence to the so-called “five points of Calvinism”–which, incidentally, did not originate with John Calvin. At a time when many are coming to a fuller acceptance of the biblical teaching on the sovereignty of God in all spheres, the efficacy of the atonement Jesus made at Calvary, and the principles of human depravity and inability, Muller raises several important issues to which those who profess a commitment to biblical reformation would be wise to give serious consideration. You can read the post here.
David Murray has a post over at Head, Heart, Hand in which he draws a valuable pastoral lesson from the skill with which Larry King carries out his interviews. You can read it here.
If you have never heard sermons by Ian Hamilton you are missing out on a great spiritual blessing. Iain is the minister of Cambridge Presbyterian Church in Cambridge, England. I find his sermons to be an outstanding example of substantive, passionate, Christ-centered, applicatory, textual, expositional preaching. He really is one of the best preachers in the church today. If you are looking for someone to listen to, or are in the process of preparing a sermon series, I highly recommend you take the time to listen to some of his sermons. You can find them all here.
Presbyterian Mission in Haiti has posted a list of relief efforts they are helping accomplish. If you are interested in helping provide relief, but are concerned about know where funds will go, the following is a breakdown of the needs that PMH is seeking to meet according to order of priority. PMH is a trustworthy organization, supporting Gospel-centered missions:
Darryl Hart and Camden Bucey have a discussion on Christian Epistemology and Two Kingdoms Theology here.
John 10:25-30 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.”
The oneness that Christ has with the Father demonstrates to the believer what type of relationship they too can have with the Father, as they boast in the truth that the Son is one with the Father.
Jesus Christ bears witness to God in His person, will, and work. This means for the believer that what Christ accomplished on earth and is doing today in the heavens is the same will which God agrees with and has providentially willed throughout eternity. This is exactly what Christ said in John 14:10-11, “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.” Christ claims to have done the work and will of His Father perfectly, and that nothing He had done was done without full acceptance and in full agreement with the Father. Passages, such as Hebrews 1:3, “He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power” and Colossians 1:15, “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation,” are filled with the truth that Jesus Christ is not only the radiance and imprint of His Father, but the same image that His Father is – the fullness of deity.
Although Christ came in human form, He was still one with God’s will, plan and work in redeeming those He came to save. Christ, before all times and while on earth, was in tune always with His Father, knowing what He willed and planned for His destiny upon the cross. Even in fully human form Christ was yet fully divine and was one with God. This is best described in Hebrews, where it reads, “He is the radiance of the glory of God.” Jesus Christ is the exact radiance of what God the Father is like. How is this teaching of any importance for the believer? The believer serves a Christ that is one with the Father. Jesus Christ – the God-man – paid death upon a cross for sinners. This is something to boast in – that the believer can serve Jesus Christ, who is one with the Father, and that there is no other religion that can claim this. Jesus Christ’s literal death upon that cross was God dying in the flesh for His creation so that it may be lifted high and exalted for the glory of God. This is accomplished when the believer sees that this oneness Christ had with God is something that they too can enjoy when serving Christ. In Christ, whom the believer boasts in and finds their pleasure in, is the truth that they become one with Christ, one with God – and there it lies. The believer here needs to see this oneness that Christ has – and had here on earth – and find bliss in that Christ has always been one, and will always be one, with His father God, for eternity. The believer doesn’t boast in a Father and Son who may disagree at times or argue like mere humans. This oneness that Christ has is not like anything the believer can ever imagine, even when compared to the likes of marriage or of an earthly father, mother or child. For this is one thing that the believer can only dream about having until the day of consummation; and can boast that they serve a Christ who is accordingly one with His Father, God, in all things and at all times.
Readers will likely be familiar with the ministry of Dr. Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C.
Dr. Dever has also established an outreach designed to reinvigorate the local church, namely 9 Marks. 9 Marks sponsors a journal and a series of books. The latest book is entitled The Church and the Surprising Offense of God’s Love: Reintroducing the Doctrine of Church Membership and Discipline. The book can be obtained here. Authored by Jonathan Leeman, an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist Church, director of communications for 9 Marks and editor of the e-journal, the book is very engaging.
Insofar as the gospel presents the world with the most vivid picture of God’s love, and insofar as church membership and discipline are an implication of the gospel, local church membership and discipline in fact define God’s love for the world. That, in one sentence, is the argument of this book. Along the way we will observe that the very things that offend us about church membership root in the things we find offensive about God’s love itself.
What’s striking, therefore, is how most evangelicals have pushed the question of church structure into the category of nonessential and therefore of nonimportance. The gospel is important, even essential, we say. Church structure is neither. And since questions of church structure only divide Christians…it’s best to leave it out of the conversation altogether. Right?
What if that’s wrong? What if God, in his wisdom, actually revealed both content and form, both a message and a medium, both a gospel and a polity, perfectly suited to one another? Couldn’t pushing questions of church structure into the category of ‘what respectable evangelicals shouldn’t hold strong opinions about’ eventually undermine the gospel itself? (From the introduction and back cover)
While we Presbyterians will no doubt differ on certain aspects of church polity with the author, it is a bracing tonic to read an author who actually thinks the church is not incidental to the progress of the gospel. In this day and age of so-called “revolutions” it is encouraging to see such an important subject tackled with biblical conviction.
The book contains 376 pages and has a very helpful outline of the whole book as an appendix. Remember that church discipline is another name for pastoral care and shepherding. It is not an optional extra.
It’s been more than 2 months since we ended our year long series in Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics. We covered two of the volumes and some material from ‘Philosophy of Revelation’ and ‘The Certainty of Faith.’ As the new year takes shape it feels like the work is only half done. Personally I can’t read Bavinck without some sense of guilt for not sharing it.
So if we get ten positive responses from those interested in more Herman Bavinck we will bring back the series. Please post “yes” to the comment field on this post between now and Friday for continued articles on Bavinck’s Doctrine of God (vol. 2). Cheers
Texts, Contexts, Cultures is a new departure in graduate research and training in Ireland. It offers candidates a multi-disciplinary PhD programme delivered in co-operation between Arts and Humanities research institutes at Trinity College Dublin, University College Cork and NUI Galway. The programme investigates the most basic component of Arts and Humanities research – the text as material object.
Texts, Contexts, Cultures offers a structured research path to the completion of a fourth level degree. It allows candidates to engage with the research knowledge and skills of scholars from three universities. It encourages candidates to develop their research interests, ideas and skills in challenging, supportive interdisciplinary contexts. Their research interests develop through a series of foundation year modules which are delivered at participating institutions by online learning media and video conferencing. PhD candidates have the benefit of wide-ranging guidance from supervisory panels comprised of leading scholars in discrete and related fields, as well as opportunity to share and present research at unique academic events.
Texts, Contexts, Cultures offers candidates extensive opportunity to develop national and international research networks through a series of seminars and colloquia. Across the network of participating institutions, students participate in the events and programmes of the Long Room Hub (the international resource for Arts and Humanities research at Trinity College Dublin), The Moore Institute for Research in the Humanities and Social Studies at NUI Galway and at The Graduate School of the College of Arts, Celtic Studies and Social Sciences at UCC. Participants also take advantage of the postgraduate exchange scheme available through the island-wide collaboration, Humanities Serving Irish Society.
Texts, Contexts, Cultures is designed to prepare students for life after graduation. Participants benefit from a career training scheme that provides thorough preparation in research skills transferable to a wide variety of settings. They also have access to placements and mentoring systems in a broad range of some of the most exciting contemporary organisations in media, the cultural and creative industries, public administration and academe.
Candidates must apply directly to the institution from which they wish to graduate, and may apply for its relevant funding schemes. The closing date for all schemes is 1 April 2010. Full details are available at www.textscontextscultures.ie.
Handing out resumes and shuffling investments have two things in common: uncertainty and Ecclesiastes 11:6. John Trapp (1601 – 1669) noted that the only works guaranteed to succeed in this life are pure acts of mercy and kindness. He’s right. But it can be such a frustrating answer to those who have lost 1/3 of retirement or can’t get even one interview. For those of us asking, “What is God doing?” Trapp’s exposition needs attention. Trapp’s concern here is the contrast between the wonder of uncertainty and the comfort of faith against the anxiety and despair of unbelief.
Ecclesiastes 11:5 contrasts two kinds of knowledge: natural phenomena and the knowledge of God. Ancient Israel did not have pediatric science or the technology to predict the weather forecast for a whole week as enjoyed today. The point is not the difference between scientific progress and religious faith. The point Ecclesiastes 11:5 is making is something like, “the more we learn the less we know.” This is especially true when it comes to knowing God. Writing in a post-Hamlet climate Trapp places the progress of his age on par with Qoheleth’s: what a work is man! The microcosm of life in the body is, “and abridgment of the visible world, as the soul is of the invisible.”
Like most Puritans, Trapp was not caught in the headlights of uncertainty. The mystery of life presented in the text does not stop at unknowing but acknowledges trust in God as the antithesis to the works of God’s providence:
“Do thou that which God commandeth, and let things fall out as they will, there is an overruling hand in all for the good of those that love God (Prov. 3:5; Isa. 58:7). The Apostle (2 Cor. 8:2) useth a word for liberality, which properly signifieth simplicity; and this he doth in opposition to that crafty and witty wiliness of the covetous, to defend themselves from the danger, as they take it, of liberality (generously*).”
* Sincerely is likely the meaning of aplotes. See Kittel’s TDNT for a defense of generously.
New Covenant Presbyterian Church had its first morning worship service yesterday. We began a series on the book of Acts. The first sermon was titled “The Acts of the Ascended Christ.”The text was Acts 1:1-11. You can watch the video below.
If you have never read T. D. Bernard’s The Progress of Doctrine you really must do so as soon as possible. It is a treasure chest of rich theological exposition with regard to the development of doctrine in the New Testament. It is a New Testament introduction of sorts. This work was highly commended by Reformed Presbyterian ministers at the time of its release, though Bernard was himself an Anglican minister.
In his Apocalyptic Writings (WJE Online Vol. 5) Jonathan Edwards explained that the Holy Spirit is the principle blessing purchased by Christ in the work of redemption. He wrote:
The sum of the blessings Christ sought, by what he did and suffered in the work of redemption, was the Holy Spirit. So is the affair of our redemption constituted; the Father provides and gives the Redeemer, and the price of redemption is offered to him, and he grants the benefit purchased; the Son is the Redeemer that gives the price, and also is the price offered; and the Holy Spirit is the grand blessing, obtained by the price offered, and bestowed on the redeemed. The Holy Spirit, in his indwelling, his influences and fruits, is the sum of all grace, holiness, comfort and joy, or in one word, of all the spiritual good Christ purchased for men in this world: and is also the sum of all perfection, glory and eternal joy, that he purchased for them in another world. The Holy Spirit is that great benefit, that is the subject matter of the promises, both of the eternal covenant of redemption, and also of the covenant of grace; the grand subject of the promises of the Old Testament, in the prophecies of the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom; and the chief subject of the promises of the New Testament; and particularly of the covenant of grace delivered by Jesus Christ to his disciples, as his last will and testament, in the John 14, John 15 and John 16 chapters of John; the grand legacy, that he bequeathed to them in that his last and dying discourse with them. Therefore the Holy Spirit is so often called “the Spirit of promise,” and emphatically “the promise, the promise of the Father,” etc. (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4 and Acts 2:33, Acts 2:39; Galatians 3:14; Ephesians 1:13 and Ephesians 3:6).
This being the great blessing Christ purchased by his labors and sufferings on earth, it was the blessing he received of the Father, when he ascended into heaven, and entered into the Holy of Holies with his own blood, to communicate to those that he had redeemed. John 16:7, “It is expedient for you, that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” Acts 2:33, “Being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear.” This is the sum of those gifts, which Christ received for men, even for the rebellious, at his ascension. This is the sum of the benefits Christ obtains for men by his intercession (John 14:16–17). “I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth.” Herein consists Christ’s communicative fullness, even in his being full of the Spirit, and so “full of grace and truth” [John 1:14], that we might of “this fullness receive, and grace for grace” [John 1:16]. He is “anointed with the Holy Ghost” [Acts 10:38]; and this is the ointment that goes down from the head to the members. “God gives the Spirit not by measure unto him” [John 3:34], that everyone that is his “might receive according to the measure of the gift of Christ” [Ephesians 4:7]. This therefore was the great blessing he prayed for in that wonderful prayer, that he uttered for his disciples and all his future church, the evening before he died (John 17): the blessing he prayed for to the Father, in behalf of his disciples, was the same he had insisted on in his preceding discourse with them: and this doubtless was the blessing that he prayed for, when as our high priest, he “offered up strong crying and tears,” with his blood (Hebrews 5:6–7). The same that he shed his blood for, he also shed tears for, and poured out prayers for.
I had the privilege of preaching a New Year’s sermon for 2010 at Kirk of the Isles (PCA) in Savannah, GA. The text I preached was Exodus 12:1-30. the institution of the Passover. The title of the message was New Year’s Redemption. You can listen to it here.
There is a legitimate, as well as an illegitimate, approach to a biblical theology of numbers in Scripture. The majority of those who have approached this subject have, by and large, delved into the realm of the speculative and imaginative,–perplexing or leading astray their readers. O.T. Allis, first Professor of Old Testament History and Exegesis at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia (1929-1930), wrote a small booklet on the subject of numerology in which he noted the commonly occurring abuses in some of the more well known attempts to make sense of numbers in the Bible. You can read his work here. An abuse, however, ought not necessitate an abandonment of the subject. In fact, it must be argued that a large portion of our Bibles (specifically the ceremonial portions of the OT, and the symbolic books of the Old and New Testaments) can only be understood accurately by employing principles of biblical numerology. The purpose of this post is to help give several principles to help guide the interpreter of Scripture in this regard.
The starting point, in seeking a biblical theology of numbers, is to consider the very first place numbers are found in Scripture. This is, of course, Genesis 1–the first chapter of the first book of the Bible. In “six days” the Lord “created the Heavens and the Earth and all that is in them.” It is there that we learn that God rested on the “seventh day ” and “blessed and sanctified it.” The pattern of a seven day week, in which work is done on six and rest is obtained on one, is established at creation and is reiterated in the promulgation of the Decalogue (Ex. 20; Duet. 5). The number seven stands out at once for its obvious uniqueness in the creation account. It is the day of completion or perfection. The Living God completed His eternal plan for creation, and then pronounced a blessing on the following day. There is an eschatological purpose to the Sabbath day as well. The idea of rest intimates fulfillment and completion. Adam was to enter into the Sabbath rest that lay before him, by his obedience to the commandment of God. He would have entered that rest by fulfilling his labors–even as God entered His rest by completing His work. The number seven appears throughout the Torah with regard to the ceremonial feasts and festivals in Israel’s typical redemptive system. Festivals often lasted seven days, and, in some cases, an eighth day of celebration came on the heels of the fulfillment of the seven day observance. The seventh was, of course, the day of consummation. The eighth day, received its significance in relationship to the seven that preceded it.
In the Torah, the eighth day is first mentioned at the institution of the covenant sign of circumcision. The LORD commanded Abraham to circumcise all the males of his house, from the youngest to the oldest. If a new born child came into the family, he was to be circumcised on the eighth day. Some have sought to explain the significance of this by saying that clotting was the highest on the eighth day, therefore, God chose that day for the act of circumcision. That sort of argument is less than satisfactory. It presupposes that God’s actions are according to the course of nature and not according to theological significance. God does not act arbitrarily, now does He act with determination because of the laws of nature which He set. When God acts in redemptive history, there is theological precision and meaning to His decrees. The eighth day, on a seven day week, is the first day. The first day denoted beginning or creation. The eighth day denotes a new beginning or a new creation. In the New Covenant, the Sabbath is changed from the seventh to the first. Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week. The apostle John tells us that He appeared to His disciples “eight days later.” Resurrection day was the first (or the eighth) day. When God commanded circumcision on the eighth day He was promising to bring about a new creation–to cleanse the heart of man–through the cutting away of the filth of the flesh, through the circumcision of Christ. The cross was a bloody circumcision. Our sins were washed away by His blood. Far from being a scientific or a arbitrary, the command to circumcise on the eighth day pointed forward to the redemptive work of God.
The book of Revelation, for instance, cannot be understood without a biblical numerology. The express employment of the number 7 (i.e. 7 Spirits, lamps, stars, trumpets, bowls, seals, etc.), multiples of 10 (i.e. ten horns, 1000 years, etc.), multiples of 12 (i.e. 12 tribes and 12 apostles = 144[000] etc.) must be understood as having spiritual significance (for a detailed treatment of these numbers see G.K. Beale’s the Book of Revelation and William Hendriksen’s More than Conquerors).
While so much more could be said about the theological significance of numbers in Scripture, what has been said ought to suffice as proof that this is no mere fanciful speculation. Abuse of a numerology must be jealously guarded against, but not the exclusion of a legitimate approach.
This is a 3:21 excerpt of a talk that Jay Adams gave at a NANC Conference. It is based on the last two verses of the book of James. The introduction to this message is pretty funny!
Have you ever noticed that just about every song Johnny Cash wrote with Scriptural lyrics comes from the book of Revelation?
Most of you have probably not heard of Euan Murray. He’s a rugby player (a real man’s sport). He’s a Scotsman. And he’s a Christian. Unlike many Christian athletes he has reversed the trend of playing sports on Sunday. He used to, but doesn’t any more.
Murray plays rugby at club level for Northampton and at international level for Scotland. This Sunday he will be sitting out the international game between Scotland and France–a game for which he would otherwise have been selected. He won’t be watching it on the TV either – he says “Christ doesn’t want [rugby games] to be played on Sundays”. Read the rest of a remarkable interview with him here.
Euan is an encouragement to British Christians – he’s taken a public stand for the Lord. A few years ago another high profile Christian, British athlete, by the name of Jonathan Edwards (Olympic gold medallist, world record holder) started competing on the Lord’s Day having once made a public stance to the contrary. You can read about Edwards’ apparent apostasy here. Is it wrong to conclude that the first seeds of this rebellion against God were sewn when he changed his mind over competing on the Lord’s Day? God alone knows where the decline began, but its a legitimate question nevertheless.
Pray for Euan Murray (and for Jonathan Edwards!) that he might be kept by our gracious God from turning away from His commitment to Christ by dishonoring the Law of God. And pray that his witness, small though it may be would be blessed by God.
John Trapp’s (1601 – 1669) commentaries were Spurgeon’s personal treasure. As biblical scholarship progresses the minister and serious student continue to benefit greatly from consulting Trapp’s thought, suggestions and devotional contributions. For years I waited patiently for a set of Trapp. After finally obtaining one, my dad–equally thrilled at my find–asked to borrow it. Now, having waited so long, I’ve finally re-obtained the set and hope to add Trapp to our project on Puritan exegesis.
Ecclesiastes 11:6 has a peculiar phrase not found elsewhere in the OT: “This or that” (hazeh ʾow-zeh). The labor of sowing seed as a literal representation of agricultural life or figurative of procreation does not contain certainty. We can’t know, says Qoheleth, the intimate details of the work of God, (i.e. we can’t predict the success or failure of our work.) The knowing or not knowing the outcome of one’s industry in ‘this or that’ is here compared to God’s knowledge. The human perspective is drastically limited: one act or another may succeed, or perhaps both will. There’s reason to diversify.
For Trapp the solution to life’s uncertainty is simple. “At all times be prepared for every good work (Tit. 3:1) … sow mercy in the morning, so it likewise in the evening, as those bountiful Macedonians did, to the shame of those richer but harder Corinthians (2 Co. 8:3; Phil. 4:16).” Nothing is more certain, says Trapp, than the fruits of love’s labor. The advance of blessedness is accompanied by God’s superintendence (Heb. 6:10) even if only one leper in ten returns the favor.
Independent Presbyterian Church, in Savannah, GA, will be hosting a conference on the Lord’s Supper this Thursday, February 4th and Friday, February 5th. Dr. Hughes Oliphant Olds will give three lectures dealing with Calvin and Knox on the doctrine and administration of the Lord’s Supper as well as presentations from Terry Johnson and Ron Parrish. If you are anywhere near the Savannah area, I would highly recommend this conference. The schedule is as follows:
Thursday – Feb 4
-starting at 4pm – Dr. Olds – “Calvin’s Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper”
-starting at 7pm – Dr. Olds – “Calvin’s Celebration of the Lord’s Supper”
-Reception following from 8-9pm
Friday – Feb 5
–starting 9am – Terry Johnson – “The Theology of the Lord’s Supper and Its Administration”
–starting 10:15am – Ron Parrish – “John Willison and the Evangelical Use of the Lord’s Supper”
–starting 11:30am – Dr. Olds – “John Knox and the sign of the Table”
Eric Alexander very wisely notes the foundational and temporary functions of the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts:
If we are to understand the New Testament’s teaching on the Holy Spirit we must concentrate on the teaching of Jesus in the Gospels, and on the systematic exposition in the Epistles—rather than on the narrative in the Book of Acts. A great deal of confusion in our thinking has been derived from a sense that the full range of experiences described in the Book of Acts ought necessarily to be our own. We have to remember that the narratives in the Book of Acts are primarily historical, and not doctrinal, treatises. For this reason we must try to gather together some of the teaching of John’s Gospel on the ministry of the Holy Spirit; and out of all the riches there to focus our attention upon four titles given to the Holy Spirit.” (Eric J. Alexander The Work of the Holy Spirit in Our Hearts)
The apostle Paul was dealing with the problem of division in the church in 1 Corinthians 1. He introduces the idea of Christian unity with the words, “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?” This conflict sets the stage for everything that Paul goes on to write in the remainder of the chapter. Believers in Corinth were once part of the lost and perishing world, divided into two groups–Jews and Gentiles. That division was seemingly irreparable. Paul proceeds to explain that the Gospel was weakness to the Jew, on the one hand, and foolishness to the Gentile, on the other. The one thing that these two groups had in common was their spiritual opposition to the Gospel. God was creating a new division through the death of His Son. That new division consisted of those perishing and those being saved. Christ broke down the middle wall of separation and made, out of the two groups, one new man. By doing so He has drawn a new line in humanity (Gen. 3:15). The cross is the great divider. It now divides, everywhere, those who are being saved from those who are perishing.
In his book, The Screwtape Letters, C. S. Lewis wrote:
“We have a tendency to think, but not to act. The more we feel without acting, the less we will ever be able to act, and, in the long run, the less we will be able to feel.”
I have often thought and felt a lot of things while listening to sermons or while reading Bible-saturated books or while looking at horiffic pictures of starving children on the internet or while watching footage of disasters like the recent earthquake in Haiti. During these times I have felt conviction of sin, joy in Christ, sorrow for the hurting, and compassion for the needy.
But how persistently do I act Biblically and faithfully in response to what I have felt while hearing, reading, and seeing? How persistently do you?
May our great and merciful Heavenly Father have mercy upon us for the sake of Christ. May He supernaturally cause us to act as we should for His great name sake so that Jesus Christ will truly be shown to be all in all in our lives. Oh LORD, what would you have us to do? Please grant us the grace to do it, no matter what.
Adolphe Monod’s Living for the Hope of Glory has been one of the most influential Christian works I’ve read. Deeply affected by Monod’s story as well as the spiritual mindedness with which his writings are marked, I have returned to his writings time and time again. Most of Monod’s writings remain in French, though I recently discovered one that was translated into English in the mid-19th Century. You can read and download Monod’s St. Paul: Five Discourses on Google Books. Thomas Peck, a great 19th Century Southern Presbyterian theologian, recommended Monod’s discourse on Fatalism out of this work. Enjoy!
In case you didn’t have the $6000 plus it cost to attend, you can now buy the sermons preached this past summer in 2009 from John Calvin’s pulpit from Ligonier. The Speakers include none other than my buddy Joel Beeke, and many more like; Iain Campbell, Bryan Chapell, Ted Donnelly, Ligon Duncan, Sinclair Ferguson, Robert Godfrey, Martin Holdt, Hywel Jones, Steven Lawson, Peter Lillback, Henry Orombi, Philip Ryken, Derek Thomas, and Geoffrey Thomas.
Can a centuries-old pulpit still broadcast life-changing messages? These do. If the life of one who is dead may still speak (Hebrews 11:4), there is little reason to think that echoes of that earlier message cannot enrich still. July 5–10, 2009 witnessed an international quincentenary of the birth of John Calvin, called Calvin500, purposefully held in the church building that witnessed so much of his reform. Fifteen expository messages were delivered during Calvin500, and they provide both models of preaching as well as a primer to re-introduce Calvinism to a modern world. Some of these preachers are at the apex of their ministries, others still on the ascent. The echoes continue; after all, in the beginning was the Word. That Word which was with God and that was God is proclaimed by these sermons. The truths from this Genevan pulpit are the same as those trumpeted by Calvin himself. Our prayer is for this Word to return to God with his intended blessings.
Many of our readers will already be familiar with the Texts and Studies of Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought series ably edited by Richard A. Muller. This is a valuable series that has contributed greatly to a better understanding and appreciation of the details of Reformation era theology and theologians and the profound riches of the Reformed Scholastic era as well.
The latest addition to this august series is Reformed Thought on Freedom: The Concept of Free Choice in Early Modern Reformed Theology. You can find the book here. Co-edited by Willem J. van Asselt, J. Martin Bac, and Roelf T. te Velde, the book has an excellent introduction explaining the recent growth in post-Reformation studies and the context of Reformed scholastic discussion of free choice.
The remainder of the book contains chapters of primary source material by Girolamo Zanchi, Franciscus Junius, Franciscus Gomarus, Gisbertus Voetius, Francis Turretin, and Bernardinus de Moor. These were theological heavyweights in their day and we are the poorer for not having read them. The book concludes with a helpful summary.
This is an excellent series and this volume in particular will add to our understanding of this contentious issue. My own experience with reading Reformed scholastics is that you come away amazed at the comprehensiveness of their treatment of a subject. One may not agree with them but one must reckon with their analysis.
Ligonier Ministries has done a fine job of gathering some of the best audio critiques of the New Perspectives on Paul. You can find them all here. I especially recommend Sinclair Ferguson’s lecture The New Perspective on Paul and Related Issues and Guy Waters’ Christ the Center interview on N.T. Wright and the New Perspective on Paul (part 1) and (part 2).
As we move forward in our worship at New Covenant Presbyterian Church, I am planning on starting a sermon series on the Acts of the Apostles. This seems to be fitting with a new church. The book of Acts can be summarized as “the acts of Jesus Christ through His apostles by the Holy Spirit.” It is filled with all the excitement and wonder of the dawning of the new age and the ministry of the Spirit in the New Covenant. It lays the foundation for the nature of the church, the life of the church, and the evangelistic ministry of the church. The following are some of the books and commentaries on Acts that I have found helpful. If you have any others please feel free to mention them:
1. Thomas Peck Miscellanies of Rev. Thomas Peck (Includes a series of sermon on various portions of the book of Acts)2. Horatio B. Hackett A Commentary on the Original Text of the Acts of the Apostles (An outstanding exegetical commentary on the book. Interestingly, my father went to Horatio B. Hackett Middle School in Philadelphia, PA. I wonder how many know that it is named after this orthodox evangelical scholar?)
3. Paton J. Gloag A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of Apostles
4. Charles J. Vaughan The Church of the First Days
5. John Dick Lectures on Some Passages of the Acts of the Apostles
6. Horatius Bonar Light and Truth: The Acts and Larger Epistles
7. John Calvin Commentary on Acts #1
Commentary on Acts #2
8. Dennis E. Johnson Let’s Study Acts
9. David G. Peterson The Acts of the Apostles
10. J.A. Alexander The Acts of the Apostles
Reformed Forum Podcasts