Tag Archives: Grace

An Irrational Question (Romans 6:1)

14 Thursday Jun 2018

Posted by in John Bunyan, Romans, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Romans 6:1(ESV)

 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?

Paul has developed the doctrine that (1) human beings are accountable to God; (2) that humans beings are rebellion against God, and that no good acts can atone for the rebellion; (3) but God has graciously made provision for our reconciliation by giving Christ in our place:

Romans 5:8–11 (ESV)

8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For 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. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

This then leads to a possible conclusion: If God gets glory by graciously forgiving me of my sin, then would it not make sense to continue sinning so that God can continue to forgive with the result that he will bestow more grace and thus get more glory?

Paul answers the question with the Greek words, “μὴ γένοιτο”. It is difficult to get exactly the correct tone and translation: This is something that could not possibly be true, it is not a possible state of affairs — maybe better: “How irrational!” (I recall reading a book about the translation of the Bible. The author tells a story about translating this passage in a class in Britain. One student “adventurously” translated it, “not bloody likely” — which some of the feel.

Now Paul will provide a number of arguments for why sin is not a possible response to grace. But I want to draw out the sheer irrationality of that question. Sin from grace is reckless, thankless, evil, spiteful, a denial of forgiveness in the first place, illogical, unnecessary — but it is sheer irrationality at heart.

There is a passage in Bunyan’s Holy War which shows the irrationality of sin from grace. We come to a portion of the story where the Prince has retaken the Town of Mansoul, that had been in rebellion and under the sway of Diabolus. The rebel leaders are captured and brought to the Prince:

And thus was the manner of their going down. Captain Boanerges went with a guard before them, and Captain Conviction came behind, and the prisoners went down bound in chains in the midst; so, I say, the prisoners went in the midst, and the guard went with flying colours behind and before, but the prisoners went with drooping spirits. Or, more particularly, thus: The prisoners went down all in mourning; they put ropes upon themselves; they went on smiting themselves on the breasts, but durst not lift up their eyes to heaven. Thus they went out at the gate of Mansoul, till they came into the midst of the Prince’s army, the sight and glory of which did greatly heighten their affliction. Nor could they now longer forbear, but cry out aloud, O unhappy men! O wretched men of Mansoul! Their chains still mixing their dolorous notes with the cries of the prisoners, made noise more lamentable. f199 So, when they were come to the door of the Prince’s pavilion, they cast themselves prostrate upon the place. Then one went in and told his Lord that the prisoners were come down. The Prince then ascended a throne of state, and sent for the prisoners in; who when they came, did tremble before him, also they covered their faces with shame. Now as they drew near to the place where he sat, they threw themselves down before him.

When questioned, they admit their guilt, their inability to make restitution and the fact they deserve death. Then something wonderful happens:

Then the Prince called for the prisoners to come and to stand again before him, and they came and stood trembling. And he said unto them, The sins, trespasses, iniquities, that you, with the whole town of Mansoul, have from time to time committed against my Father and me, I have power and commandment from my Father to forgive to the town of Mansoul; and do forgive you accordingly. And having so said, he gave them written in parchment, and sealed with seven seals, a large and general pardon, commanding both my Lord Mayor, my Lord Will-be-will, and Mr. Recorder, to proclaim, and cause it to be proclaimed to-morrow by that the sun is up, throughout the whole town of Mansoul.

But forgiveness was not the end of the Prince’s pardon:

Moreover, the Prince stripped the prisoners of their mourning weeds, and gave them ‘beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, and the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness’ (Isa. 61: 3) Then he gave to each of the three, jewels of gold, and precious stones, and took away their ropes, and put chains of gold about their necks, and ear-rings in their ears. Now the prisoners, when they did hear the gracious words of Prince Emmanuel, and had beheld all that was done unto them, fainted almost quite away; for the grace, the benefit, the pardon, was sudden, glorious, and so big, that they were not able, without staggering, to stand up under it.

Having received grace, pardon, restoration and elevation from their Prince — against whom they willfully and shamefully rebelled — would it not be complete madness to think that further rebellion would be fitting? Rebellion after restoration would be the act of a madman.

If you were to receive a priceless gemstone and then were to take it and fling it into the ocean, you would accounted insane. It would be irrational to destroy great wealth. How much more irrational would it be for the forgiven prisoners to rush back into town and burn it down.  Sin is irrational in at all times. It thrice irrational to rebel against grace.

 

 

 

The Spiritual Chymist, Meditation XXVII

30 Wednesday May 2018

Posted by in Faith, Faith, Uncategorized, William Spurstowe, William Spurstowe

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

(From the Spiritual Chymist, William Spurstowe, 1666)

Upon the Weapon Salve

Who was the author of this weapon salve, cannot certainly be affirmed. Some attribute it to Paracelus who was very pregnant in mysterious inventions: others to one Parmensis Anshelmus, an Italian, who was called a “Saint” as Simon Magus of old, the great power of God, though both were no better than sorcerers. But whoever he were, the ointment is much famed (yet not altogether unquestioned) for its strange manner of healing and curing wounds, differing from other physical applications in a double respect: the one is that it is applied not other person who receives the wounds, but to the active instrument that inflicts it, which is a subject not at all capable of sickness of sanity, or ease or pain, and so cannot be receptive of the alternative power of the ointment; which, if it work by virtual contact must necessarily have the intermedial bodies to participate of it.  The other is, the salve cures at distances which are inconsistent with the rule of a mediate contact: it heals the patient when he is a hundred miles off, as well as when he is hear; and the it requires a vicinity of place, as well as a right disposition of the medium.

Now these difference, though they have served to heighten its esteem in the apprehensions of many, and have given learned men who are great admirers of sympathies to write for it or to be fautors [patrons] of it; yet others of no less worth and repute have divided from them and have slighted it as an empty vanity or censured as a magical impiety. 

For my part, I am not satisfied with such subtle niceties as are used to defend it, of common and universal spirits which convey the action of the remedy to the part and conjoin the virtue of bodies far disjoined; neither can I think it worthy of such speculations: it commonly healing only simple wounds, and such, which being kept clean need no other hand than that of nature and the balsam [anything healing] of the proper part.

But there is a weapon salve of which it is easy to speak much, but impossible to say enough: so full it is of divine and mysterious wonders, if we consider what it is, or what the cures are which it effects, or what the distance is in which it operates.

Would you know what this salve is? The blood of Christ crucified, whose sufferings do all turn to the advantage of believers: 

The blood is his, 

but the balm is theirs; 

the thorns are his, 

but the crown is theirs; 

the price is his, 

but the purchase is theirs.

Would you hear what cures it does? It heals inveterate ulcers and mortal wounds; it extinguishes the fiery darts of Satan. It eases pressures; it destroys yokes, and what not that rise to let [stop] or bar to a believer’s life or happiness. 

Would you know the extent of its virtue, and at what distance it operates? Paul tells us that by the blood of the cross he has reconciled all things to himself, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven. [Col. 1:20]

There is no person that can stand so remote or be at any such angle or corner of earth but he may partake of the influence of it, if he do but cast an eye of faith toward heaven and be as fully healed as any other. Like as to the stunned Israelite who lay in the utmost part of the camp did receive equal benefit by looking to the brazen serpent with him that stood next unto the pole upon which it was erected.

O therefore let not any who are exercised with spiritual conflict cast away their confidence, but fight the good fight of faith unto the end. For though they be not invulnerable, yet none of their wounds are incurable. The blood of Christ is more powerful to save, than sin or other enemies to destroy; else the great end of Christ’s coming into the world of being a physician to the sick, a deliverer to the captive, a healer of the broken hearted would be in vain and all the saints must still be in their sins. 

Set then faith on work you that faint and droop in your minds; and say not, who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring this salve unto us that we may live? Or who shall go over the sea for us and bring this sovereign balm [all powerful medicine] of Gilead [Jer. 8:22] unto us that we may e healed by it.

Do but believe and the cure is wrought. Faith is the instrument which makes a virtual contact between Christ and every believer: It receives healing grace from him, and straightways conveys it uno the subject in which it is to terminate. 

For as futuriton [existing in the future] in respect of the existence of things is no prejudice to the eye of faith in beholding of them in the present; so neither is distance of place any hinderance to the efficacy of the touch of faith, but that it may forthwith transmit the sanitive efflux of Christ’s blood [Christ’s blood pour out makes holy] unto him, who by faith touches him [touches Christ].  The woman that labored many years of the bloody issue in the same instant that she touched the hem of Christ’s garment, get in herself, that she was healed of her plague. [Mark 5:24-34]

But I am jealous, that while I commend this sacred remedy, some presumptuous sinner who is more apt to abuse grace, than a wounded spirit to improve it [make use of it]should make no other use of it than to think he may sin securely and need not fear what bruises and wound he contracts, seeing the cure is certain and speedy.

I can therefore, do no less than express myself in a holy indignation against such who would make the precious blood of my Savior subservient to their lusts, desiring rather to be freed from the danger than from the dominion of sin.

O my soul, come thou not into their secrets; unto their assembly mine honor be not thou united:  Cursed be their lusts, for they are vile, and their desires for they are devilish. [Gen. 49:6-7] Let me bless God who has made me whole, and sin no more lest a worse thing come unto me. [John 5:14]

The danger of preaching salvation by grace (MLJ)

14 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by in Grace, Justification, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Romans, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

There is a sense in which the doctrine of justification by faith only is a very dangerous doctrine; dangerous, I mean, in the sense that it can be misunderstood. It exposes a man to this particular charge. People listening to it may say, ‘Ah, there isa  man who does not encourage us to live a good life, he seems to say that there is no value inner works, he says that “all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.” Therefore what he is saying is, that it does not matter what you do, sin as much as you like.’ There is thus clearly a sense in which the message of ‘justification by faith only’ can be dangerous, and likewise with the message that salvation is entirely of grace. I say therefore that if our preaching does not expose us to that charge and to that misunderstanding it is because we are not really preaching the gospel.

Martin Lloyd-Jones, Romans 6, The New Man (Sermon One, Romans 6:1,2), p. 9. But it is precisely that “misunderstanding” which leads to the question and answer of Romans 6:1-2 “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead in sin live any longer in it.”

What is the business of grace? Is it to allow us to continue in sin? No! It is to deliver us from the bondage and the reign of sin, and to put us under the reign of grace. So when a man asks, “Shall we therefore continue in sin that grace may abound?” hr id merely showing that he has failed to understand either the tyranny or the reign of sin, or the whole object and purpose of grace and its marvelous reign over those who are saved.

The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment, Study Guide 10.2

13 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by in Contentment, Jeremiah Burroughs, Study Guide, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Note: I have rewritten this study guide and added a new series of questions at the end. The new lesson is found here

 

This is a continuation of a Study Guide on Jeremiah Burroughs The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment. The previous post may be found here:

There is a Great Deal of Grace in Contentment:

The second point made by Burroughs has to do with the “grace” which is poured out in contentment.

To understand this argument, it will be necessary to understand that the Puritians routinely used the word “grace” in a different manner than it is typically used by contemporary Christians. In contemporary usage, the word “grace” often refers only to the initial act of God’s saving work, “For by grace you have been saved” (Eph. 2:8). More broadly, it is God’s mercy towards our remnant sin.

When Puritans used the word, they routinely referenced God’s grace as the various operations of God’s good will toward us and work in us.

Consider the following passage from John Owen:

If we neglect to make use of what we have received, God may justly hold his hand from giving us more. His graces, as well as his gifts, are bestowed on us to use, exercise, and trade with.

John Owen, The Works of John Owen, ed. William H. Goold, “The Mortification of Sin,” vol. 6 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, n.d.), 13. And:

By causing our hearts to abound in grace and the fruits that are contrary to the flesh, and the fruits thereof and principles of them. So the apostle opposes the fruits of the flesh and of the Spirit: “The fruits of the flesh,” says he, “are so and so,” Gal. 5:19–21; “but,” says he, “the fruits of the Spirit are quite contrary, quite of another sort,” verses 22, 23. Yea; but what if these are in us and do abound, may not the other abound also? No, says he, verse 24, “They that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.” But how? Why, verse 25, “By living in the Spirit and walking after the Spirit;”—that is, by the abounding of these graces of the Spirit in us, and walking according to them.

 

John Owen, at p. 19. Grace is something that God does in us and through.  Grace is not merely the disposition of God nor just our realization of God’s disposition, but grace God’s good work. That is why Burroughs writes in this section, “That in Contentment there is much exercise of grace“.

Contentment is to be prized by the believer, because in action evidences much of God’s good work in our lives.

1. Before we analyze Burroughs’ argument, why would evidence of God working in one’s life be desirable? In this prayer from The Valley of Vision, the unknown author refers to his preconversion life as “graceless”:

O Lord, I am astonished at the difference between my receivings and my deservings,

between the state I am now in and my past gracelessness,

between the heaven I am bound for

and the hell I merit.

Edited by Arthur Bennett. The Valley of Vision (Kindle Locations 213-215). The Banner of Truth Trust. What does “graceless” mean? Does that help understand what clear knowledge of God’s grace would be a comfort and encouragement?

A.  Burroughs writes:

Much exercise of grace, There is a composition of grace in Contentment, there is faith, and there is humility, and love, and there is patience, and there is wisdom, and there is hope, all graces almost are compounded, it is in oil that hath the ingredients of all kind of graces, and therefore though you cannot see the particular grace, yet in this oil you have it all;

B.What are the various things which Burroughs lists as separate graces? What makes up the “composition of grace”?

C. Use your knowledge and a concordance to find passages in the Bible which extol each faith, humility, love, patience, wisdom.

D. How do each of these “graces” contribute to being content? For example, how does humility make one more content, make contentment possible?

E. Based upon what you have considered, how is it a joy and encouragement to find evidence of each of these graces in your life?

F. How do these graces contribute to the strength and exercise of the other graces? How does love contribute to patience, and so on?

 

Thomas Manton: How does the sin of a believer differ?

09 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in Sanctification, Sanctifictation, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Having explained that a “blessed man” is not perfectly holy, Manton next takes up the related question: If a believer is not perfect, then how does a believer differ? Or as he puts, “”Wherein doth grace now discover itself, where is the difference?”

He lists six ways in which true grace in a believer’s life causes the believer to differ:

First,

In that they cannot fall into those iniquities wherein there is an absolute contrariety to grace, as hatred of God, total apostasy, so they cannot sin the sin unto death, 1 John 5:16.

The believer may become entangled in this world, but he will not reject his Savior.

Second, “They do not sin with a whole heart.” He demonstrates this from Psalm 119:176,

176  I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek your servant,

for I do not forget your commandments.

There is this contradiction in the psalmist: he does stray but does not forgo and forget the commandments of God. It is not a complete plunging into rebellion.

This is observed in the next two elements: frequency and duration:

Third, “It is not their course; not constant, easy, and frequent.”

Fourth, “When they fall they do not rest in sin.”

This is not perfection. But, the believer is bothered by sin: it is not comfortable: it is not a place to rest. The believer in sin cannot have the rest of others, because he is not at home in sin. “They may fall into the dirt, but they do not lie and wallow there like swine in the mire.”

Fifth, “Their falls are sanctified. When they have smarted under sin, they grow more watchful and more circumspect. A child of God may have the worse in prælio, in the battle, but not in bello, in the war.” It is an interesting thing that believers who have fallen into sin are oddly safest from sin, because sin when recognized brings humility and humility is the enemy of sin.

Sixth, the manner and course of life:

Grace discovers itself by the constant endeavours which they make against sin. What is the constant course a Christian takes? They groan under the relics of sin; it is their burden that they have such an evil nature, Rom. 7:24.

 

In all of these things we see the same principle: Grace produces a disgust with sin and a desire for God. This desire may waiver in the moment, but it will return in the main. If you shake a compass, the needle will flutter, but it will return to true north (as Manton says).

It thus paradoxically the one who is most troubled by sin, who sees the most sin in his life that most likely the child of God.

ACBC Conference Day One: “Life is Thorny”

04 Tuesday Oct 2016

Posted by in 2 Corinthians, affliction, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

I am here at the ACBC Conference in Indianapolis. The opening plenary session was by Heath Lambert. He spoke on 2 Corinthians 12:1-10 and discussed grace and necessity of biblical counseling. He entitled the message “The Sufficiency of God’s Grace for Counseling”.

He began by speaking of the defining element of Biblical Counseling. While sufficiency of Scripture is a fundamental aspect Biblical Counseling, he suggested that the sufficiency of God’s grace was The Fundamental Element of Biblical Counseling.

We do not know the precise nature of the “thorn” Paul suffered. And even though we don’t know the nature of the thorn, we do know the reason, to prevent pride, to keep Paul humble. We indeed will all suffer pain, we will all suffer thorns: “Life is thorny”.

Paul has received this particular thorn (along with a great many other graces”).

Paul prays relief from the pain. God responds by providing Paul grace. God’s grace included leaving Paul in sorrow.

What then is grace? It is unmerited favor, but it is is more.

I. Grace is not the removal of pain.

Three times Paul pled for the removal of the thorn, and three times God refused. Three times I pled, BUT God ….

Sometimes problems remain broken; sometimes problems do not resolve. If we do not understand 2 Corinthians 12 we can wrongly conclude that God is not gracious.

II. Grace is received in the midst of pain.

God gave Paul the power to endure the pain Sometimes we desire pain relief more than grace. But grace is what we experience we feel we cannot take another step.

III. You only know this grace when you are weak AND you admit that you are weak.

We easily and often believe relief is more important than righteousness. Our trouble is that we are beset with self-righteousness. Self-righteousness can only be shattered by afflictions.

We receive the necessary grace only when we both suffer & boast in our weakness, “I will boast of nothing but my weakness.”

IV. None of this is about me; it is all and only about Christ

True grace makes me concern only about Christ.

Conclusion:

It is better to be conformed to Christ than to be at ease. My response to affliction depends upon whether I wish to be first.

This leads to a true test of whether I am a Christian: What do I do when faced with suffering? I cannot know whether I am a Christian until I am afflicted. One may love the gift more than the giver: since all good things come ultimately from God, I may love God only because I love what he gives.

Grace takes place when God in his favors leads one into a season of pain then sustains one in it.

God’s grace is sufficient for counseling, because it is sufficient for our pain.

There is a criticism of Biblical Counseling: That we withhold help from people in need. Often this criticism lies that we refuse medical help. That is never true: Biblical Counseling is never contrary to medical help (nor medicine. ACBC only speaks poorly of medicine when the trouble is not medical.)

One problem with this criticism is the implicit belief that grace always equals relief. This is not so.

First, all non-biblical methods must fail. Despite the greatest medical care, one will eventually die. The greatest counsel of any sort (even biblical) may not bring about relief (and all relief will be short term).

But grace is guaranteed. Even when everything fails, grace is sufficient and guaranteed.

How do we receive grace? Paul receive a word. God’s grace is sufficient. Paul didn’t know how to receive this grace until he received this word. The Scripture is sufficient for counseling, because the Scripture permits us access to grace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John Newton, How to Preach the Doctrines of Grace.4

20 Monday Jun 2016

Posted by in Ezekiel, John Newton, Preaching, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

14782681464_7d077fcdc3_o

IV. OBJECTION: THEY ARE DEAD

At this point, Newton raises the principle objection: According to Scripture, the human being without the operation of the Spirit is spiritually dead and thus utter unable in an of his own effort to respond with faith & obedience (Ephesians 2:1-3):

to exhort an unregenerate sinner to repent or believe, must be as vain and fruitless as to call a dead person out of his grave.

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 176. To this Newton gives four responses:

A. If God tell us to call them, we must.

To this it may be answered, That we might cheerfully and confidently undertake even to call the dead out of their graves, if we had the command and promise of God to warrant the attempt; for then we might expect his power would accompany our word.

Ibid. Newton presses this point by referencing Ezekiel’s vision of the valley of dry bones (Ezk. 37).  God commanded Ezekiel to prophesy to a valley filed with dry bones:

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone. 8 And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them. 9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.Ezekiel 37:7–10 (ESV)

And, thus, if God commands us to speak, we do not not need to worry ourselves about the outcome.

B.  The effect is not from the preacher but from the Spirit

Preaching does not save. Rather, the Spirit using the words of the preacher does:

none of the means of grace by which he ordinarily works, can produce a real change in the heart, unless they are accompanied with the efficacious power of his Spirit

Id., at p. 177.

C.  The argument proves too much

Even when it comes to the redeemed, nothing can be done rightly without the power of the Spirit. Repentance from sin — even for a redeemed believer — is a supernatural work:

There is no power below that power that raised Christ from the dead, and that made the world, that can break the heart of a sinner or turn the heart of a sinner. Thou art as well able to melt adamant, as to melt thine own heart; to turn a flint into flesh, as to turn thine own heart to the Lord; to raise the dead and to make a world, as to repent. Repentance is a flower that grows not in nature’s garden. ‘Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil,’ Jer. 13:23. Repentance is a gift that comes down from above

Thomas Brooks, The Complete Works of Thomas Brooks, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 1 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; G. Herbert, 1866), 31. As Newton explains:

in each of these cases, we press them to acts for which they have no inherent power of their own; and, unless the Lord the Spirit is pleased to apply the word to their hearts, we do but speak into the air; and our endeavours can have no more effect in these instances, than if we were to say to a dead body, “Arise, and walk:” for an exertion of Divine power is no less necessary to the healing of a wounded conscience, than to the breaking of a hard heart; and only he who has begun the good work of grace, is able either to revive or to maintain it.

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 178.

D. We are speaking to men, not machines

That a man cannot do everything does not mean he can do nothing:

Though sinners are destitute of spiritual life, they are not therefore mere machines. They have a power to do many things, which they may be called upon to exert. They are capable of considering their ways: they know they are mortal; and ….

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 178. It is right to implore them to do what they can do:

though the Lord only can give them true faith and evangelical repentance, there seems no impropriety to invite them, upon the ground of the Gospel promises, to seek to him who is exalted to bestow these blessings, and who is able to do that for them which they cannot do for themselves;

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 179.

V.  CONCLUSION

Newton gives two bits of advice at the end. First, have a plan to preach through all of Scripture. If we follow and preach what is in the text, then we will have the proper portions and manners of preaching:

We need not wish to be more consistent than the inspired writers, nor be afraid of speaking as they have spoken before us. We

Ibid.

Finally, our preaching must be done in love, seeking the life of those to whom we preach:

Your soul will go forth with your words; and while your bowels yearn over poor sinners, you will not hesitate a moment, whether you ought to warn them of their danger or not.

Id. at p. 180.

 

John Newton: How to Preach the Doctrines of Grace.3

17 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by in John Newton, Preaching, Repentance, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

III.  The Scriptural Testimony

Having considered the practical effects based upon his observation, Newton looked to the Scripture example:

But, not to insist on this, nor to rest the cause on the authority or examples of men, the best of whom are imperfect and fallible, let us consult the Scriptures, which, as they furnish us with the whole subject-matter of our ministry, so they afford us perfect precepts and patterns for its due and orderly dispensation.

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 175.

A.  Jesus

Jesus is unquestionably the greatest example of how to properly present the “Gospel”.

  1.  Jesus did not “tickle ears”

The Lord Jesus was the great preacher of free grace, “who spake as never man spake;” and his ministry, while it provided relief for the weary and heavy laden, was eminently designed to stain the pride of all human glory. He knew what was in man, and declared, that “none could come unto him, unless drawn and taught of God;” John 6:44–46.

Ibid.

2.  Yet Jesus did call to repentance.

Newton gives three examples of Jesus preaching which some might consider “legalistic” as opposed to “grace”:

John 6:27 (ESV)27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.”

John 12:35 (ESV)35 So Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going.”

Luke 13:24–27 (ESV)24 “Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. 25 When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’ 26 Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.’ 27 But he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you workers of evil!’

These passages show Jesus commanding people indiscriminately to obey the call of God. To these passages, one could easily append others:

Mark 1:14–15 (ESV)14 Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

This example is especially appropriate, because it calls all to repent in the direct context of proclaiming the “gospel”.

B.  The example of the Apostles

1.No one can fairly accuse the Apostles of having a Pelagian view of human ability

Consider their letters. For example, Paul writes:

Romans 9:16 (ESV) 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.

John writes:

John 1:12–13 (ESV)12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

2.  The Apostles repeatedly called for repentance

There are numerous examples in Acts of an Apostle preaching repentance:

Acts 3:19 (ESV) 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,

Newton relies primarily upon the case of Simon Magus. This is a particularly strong example, because Simon Magus was unquestionably an unbeliever at the time Peter calls him to repentance:

Peter’s advice to Simon Magus is very full and express to this point; for though he perceived him to be “in the very gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity,” he exhorted him “to repent, and to pray, if perhaps the thought of his heart might be forgiven.” It may be presumed, that we cannot have stronger evidence that any of our hearers are in a carnal and unconverted state, than Peter had in the case of Simon Magus; and therefore there seems no sufficient reason why we should hesitate to follow the Apostle’s example.

Id at p. 176.

John Newton: How to Preach the Doctrines of Grace.2

16 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by in John Newton, Preaching, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Having laid out the question and the options, Newton next evaluates the positions, first in the light of experience, second in the light of Scriptural examples:

II. Judgment by Experience

He calls this test, “the discernible effects of each.”

A.  Those who call repentance

Those preachers who call for repentance are most likely to see conversion:

those ministers whom the Lord has honoured with the greatest success in awakening and converting sinners, have generally been led to adopt the more popular way of exhortation and address;

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 174.

B. Those who do not call for repentance

These preachers may help those already within the fold, but see fewer conversions: “[T]heir labours have been more owned in building up those who have already received the knowledge of the truth, than in adding to their number.” (Ibid.)

 

C. The inference

From this observation, Newton draws the following inference:

this seems at least a presumptive argument in favour of those, who, besides stating the doctrines of the Gospel, endeavour, by earnest persuasions and expostulations, to impress them upon the hearts of their hearers, and entreat and warn them to consider “how they shall escape, if they neglect so great salvation.” For it is not easy to conceive, that the Lord should most signally bear testimony in favour of that mode of preaching which is least consistent with the truth, and with itself.

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 175.

John Newton: How to Preach the Doctrines of Grace. 1

14 Tuesday Jun 2016

Posted by in John Newton, Preaching, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

(Letter VII)

A minister asked John Newton whether a preacher should call upon one who is not regenerate to repent and believe the Gospel:

IN a late conversation, you desired my thoughts concerning a scriptural and consistent manner of addressing the consciences of unawakened sinners in the course of your ministry. It is a point on which many eminent ministers have been, and are, not a little divided; and it therefore becomes me to propose my sentiments with modesty and caution, so far as I am constrained to differ from any from whom in general I would be glad to learn.

John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1, “Letter VII” (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 173.

To understand the weight of the question, one must understand that prior to coming to salvation, a human being – although a morally significant actor – is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1). Jesus said, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Accordingly, one can be saved only if God graciously goes first and brings one to life.

The complex of doctrines which speak to the inability of unregenerate human beings to come to God, but graciously going first and saving his enemies, is known as the doctrines of grace.

The rub of the question is logical consistency: If an unregenerate man cannot repent, then why should I call upon him to repent? As Newton explains, the question misstates the case and misapprehends the doctrines of human inability and God’s gracious ability.

I.The Two Options

Newton begins with the two basic options.

A. The Preacher Who Makes no Call to Repent.

Some think, that it is sufficient to preach the great truths of the word of God in their hearing; to set forth the utterly ruined and helpless state of fallen man by nature, and the appointed method of salvation by grace, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; and then to leave the application entirely to the agency of the Holy Spirit[.]

In their effort to avoid “legalism” (the belief that human effort will be meritorious before God), such men do not call upon the unregenerate to respond. They are concerned they will “contradict themselves, and retract in their application what they had laboured to establish in the course of their sermons.”

B. The Preacher Calls for Repentance

There are a second class of preachers who hold just as fervently to the doctrines of grace and yet who call for repentance. As Newton says, such men:

think it their duty to deal with sinners as rational and moral agents: and as such, besides declaring the counsel of God in a doctrinal way, to warn them by the terrors of the Lord, and to beseech them by his tender mercies, that they receive not the grace of God, in a preached Gospel, in vain.[1]

 

(In the next post, we will look at Newton’s evaluation of the two positions, both from an experiential and a Scripture point of view.)

 

 

[1] John Newton, Richard Cecil, The Works of the John Newton, vol. 1 (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1824), 174.