John Calvin- Pastor, Theologian, Tyrant? Part 2

If you haven't seen the first article I wrote on this matter- here it is.


Those who hate the doctrines of grace will go to great lengths to attempt to smear all that is labeled Reformed. Ad-hominems will be thrown, red herrings will be shot. A common attack is to portray John Calvin as the pope of Geneva. As if Calvin had this supreme authority in Geneva that was absolute. This is historically inaccurate.


They speak as if Calvin were the reason we ascribe to Reformed Theology and not holy writ. I've yet to understand this sort of argumentation. Yet, Calvin has been smeared, and accused of things that certainly aren't true.


Here is a prominent Christian historian (Owen Chadwick) on the matter:


"His first efforts to organize the Church were stopped by exile, from 1538-1541, for Geneva never wished to be organized altogether as Calvin preferred" (Pg. 83)


"In a measure the magistrates had already been forced to allow the right to excommunicate, as a condition of Calvin's return from exile. They sought to restrict it not only by these ambiguous addittions but by insisting that a civil magistrate preside at the consistory, baton in hand, as a sign that he was acting as a civil magistrate and not simply as a leader. Calvin at last succeeded in removing the baton 1561. The council always retained more control of the elections of the consistory than he wholly approved..." (Pg. 84-85)


" For Calvin was not the absolute ruler of Geneva pictured by legend and his enemies. There were many matters on which he could not achieve all that he wanted. He wanted the pastors to take the first steps in choosing the pastors, and the council insisted on being associated with the work of selection from the beginning. He wanted the pastors to be present when the council elected the elders, and succeeded in achieving this during his last few years, though the old practice was restored eight years after his death. He wanted the punishment of harlots to be severe, and it was never so severe as he thought proper." (Pg. 87)


" He was not popular. He was the kind of man who has only disciples or opponents; it was impossible to be neutral about him. He was known and beloved by a few intimates." (Pg.88)


There is some sort of intellectual honesty that you expect from fellow Christians. I expect distortion of truth from those who suppress the knowledge of God, but I have yet to get use to this from those who profess Christ as Lord.


Source: Here is the book


In Christ, Awretchsaved

Dealing With Favorite Emergent Proof Texts: John 17:3

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent" (John 17:3).

When dealing with the Emergent crowd, it will be a very short period of time before John 17:3 is brought in to the argument. I have found it to be their favorite proof text and it is put forth  as the only element of eternal life. They wish to avoid mentioning eternal judgment as the opposite of having eternal life. For them eternal life does not include deliverance from God's judgment. Thus, they quickly point to John 17:3 and say, "See eternal life means to have an interactive relationship with God." Now of course this verse does emphasize eternal life as being relational. No doubt about that. But is that all? What of the person that does not possess this eternal life? Does the lord mention anything else about eternal life and those who do not receive it? Yes he does. Back in John 3 he contrasts eternal life with suffering God's judgment and he does so again in John 5. 

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God"  (Jn 3:16–18). 

"For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life" (Jn 5:21–24).

So the concept of eternal life means that one has passed from a condemned enemy of God, to a pardoned and loved child of God. We go from having enmity with God our judge, to having a loving, relational, intimate fellowship with God our Savior. They want to teach the latter without teaching the former, if not outright denying it. They camp out in john 17:3 and a handful of other verses but cannot account for the whole counsel of God. And if they venture to the passages that speak of perishing they re-define it to mean "to come to ruin" (whatever that means?); all this to fit their own unbiblical theological construct.

Having dealt with that issue, the high-priestly prayer of our Lord is for the glory of God in the person's of the Father and Son in the perfect life and substitutionary death of Christ, for His those that the Father has given Him. Stated differently- the glory of God, in the union of Christ, with the elect. Obviously,  God's glory is the ultimate theme V. 1, 4, 5, 10, 22, and 24. 

How is God glorified? In Himself (v. 5). God, by nature, is glorious. But how does he glorify Himself in a world that has rebelled against Him? Chiefly through the perfect obedience and sacrificial death of His Son, which is the foundation or basis for the union of believers with Him (v. 4-5, 10-11). 

The Lord's prayer for us also includes: keeping us (v.8-12), our complete fulfillment of our joy (v.13), protection fromm the evil one (v.15), for our sanctification in the truth of God's Word (v.17-19), for the love of God to be demonstrated for His people, to the rest of the world, in the Christ Jesus. Oh, how He loves us!

The Lord's prayer in John 17:3 is for believers. It is not for unbelievers something Christ says explicitly in v.9:  "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours." So it is not fair for them to use this as the primary emphasis of their "evangelism." Although eternal life is taught in this prayer it does not explicitly talk about how one receives this eternal life. It is implicit (v8) but we must go elsewhere to see the call to repentance and faith in Christ, to receive the gift of eternal life.

John 17:3 has a context. But the Emergent people love to ignore context and isolate certain passages in order to maintain their humanism. I do not see them dealing and explaining, from the surrounding verses in John 17, the idea that God elects some to have a relationship with Him and rejects others (V.2, 6-10) nor do I see them teach that Christians will he hated by the world, not loved or liked, for Christ's sake (v. 14). It is fairly clear that they have one agenda in mind- to promote their own cause at whatever cost. 

"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Ti 2:15). Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,

Fernando

Debate On!

Starting tomorrow, the debate, delayed from last Monday, will begin.

See my facebook status update for information. This is the link to the debate page:

This is the link to my page where the update should be - somewhere (so many feeds to the page). Seems to be working...



In His grace, all glory to God - Bill

John 3:1-8 - Introduction

Having recently finished teaching through this chapter, it seemed good to me to share that which came from that study with my brethren. This introductory material will be followed by the study of the rest of the chapter, until we get to the end.

John 3:1-8: Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” ESV

Now we are coming to one of the key passages that speaks of God’s work in bringing to life that which was dead – the spirit of man, which is so radically corrupt, that it must be brought low, and even to a co-crucifixion in the death of He who created it, as to His humanity (Romans 6:1-14; Galatians 2:20-21; Colossians 2:11-12; 3:1-3). Having read these passages, it should be needless to say that we have died, but we cannot stop there, for out of death to that which was dead, comes the life that lives unto God.

I said, in the study of John 1:12-13, that I consider those verses to be an introduction to these verses of chapter 3, and so I do – though the exposition of those verses completely established the truth that God must give us the gift of being His children, which is another way to say eternal life, here, we have the truth of the work of the Spirit in that salvation, and that it is a new birth, or birth from above (for so the passage regarding the new birth may be translated, which in itself is very telling, as the new birth is both new, and from above), cannot be doubted, so we look to that which the text states very plainly about how this birth of that which was dead was accomplished, as God gives us to understand it, after a few more introductory notes.

In saying that which was dead was put to death by being baptized into the death Christ suffered on the cross, and buried with Him in that, a truth of the nature of man, before the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, becomes clear: when we say that the nature of man is radically corrupt, we are not speaking of it as being inactive – indeed, it is active every moment of every day, suppressing the truth about God in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18), so this marks that which relates to activity towards the true worship of God (John 4:23-24); this seeking of God is an active thing, and is not to be taken as if it were anything else, for those God seeks, He finds, according to His decree from before the beginning of the world or time (Ephesians 1:1-11; 2 Timothy 1:9-11; Titus 1:1-3). Being spiritually dead, while compared to being, literally, a corpse (Ephesians 2:5; Colossians 2:13), does not mean that man cannot act in a manner that is “alive” – that is, that a man cannot make choices, cannot do things, for he is yet animated by the very God he despises, though he protest that he believes, yet not according to the truth of God; though he says there is no God, thereby declaring himself a liar in the statement of the negative (for there must be something he makes this statement about for it to be a meaningful statement).

No, being a “corpse,” spiritually, means that there is no activity of the spirit of man which strives towards pleasing His Maker according to that spirit and truth which we cited above – there is no fear of God before His eyes, He will not seek God (Romans 3:10-12; 18). This is spiritual death: the human spirit has not the ability to seek God, nor the desire, or inclination, and remains an enemy of God – when we are told that “You will find Me, when you seek for Me with all your heart” (Jeremiah 29:13), such must be understood in the harmonious context of all of Scripture (Ezekiel 36:22-32) – here, in this chapter of John, we will find that such seeking with all one’s heart is impossible, unless that heart be a new one, given by God, regenerated by the Spirit of God, as well as other absolute statements about how salvation comes about, and how a man cannot initiate it by the movement of his dead-in-sin will – God continually frustrates the efforts of those who will not consider these great statements of Scripture which show His sovereignty in all the work of salvation, from beginning to end, and this insults those who want to believe that they have some control over the working of the almighty God of all.

So, here we have Nicodemus, a man of authority of the highest religious authority in Israel (more on this in the coming verses), coming to Jesus by night to have a discussion with Him. We remember those who do their deeds in the darkness do so at night (as indeed we will learn again in this very chapter), and this is because they are of the darkness that does not overcome or comprehend the light – in this sense, we can say that Nicodemus came under cover of darkness, or night, so as not to be known by those He taught, or His contemporaries in the Sanhedrin.

Yet that he did come to Jesus speaks of that which I believe we will later learn of this leading teacher of the Jews – as I said before, so I will say again: there is that which is of God’s election which keeps those whom He will regenerate (according to His divine counsel from before the world began), coming back to inquire of these things, to think of these things, to wonder about these things – as I also stated, this is the work of God, which we cannot see prior to salvation, for He promises no such vision of the marks of His election to us, but commands us to go, preach, teach, make disciples; still, what we find here is in the written record of that which reflects the life of our Lord and Savior, and will be revisited in a much later chapter, so the indication is of God in His Scriptures, not of man judging whether another has visible signs of redemption showing, as some who are heretics have believed.

Proclaiming the unmatchable excellence of the glory of God to all - Bill Hier

Bob Dewaay On The Emergent Church

Here are some quotes form Bob Dewaay's great book on the Emergent Church (the title is perfect): The Emergent Church: Undefining Christianity

"But theirs is a theology of "hope". They evidently believe that Peter was dead wrong when he predicted the demise of the earth in a future conflagration of God's judgment. They rather believe that God is re-creating the world now with our help. So the mission has to be defined in terms of making the world a better place for all. Brian Mclaren is a Christian, he says, because he believes God is saving the world, and that means "planet earth and all of life in it." In a backward chain of reasoning, the pagan world determines their practice; their practice determines their theology; and their theology is one of hope because they decided it is the one they like best because it states that the world has a universally bright future with no pending, cataclysmic jugment." (Location 554 0f 3207 Kindle Edition)


"According to Mclaren's reading of the gospel's, the church got it wrong. It historically understood that it was supposed to preach the gospel, which would rescue people from God's wrath against their sin through application of the blood atonement. But finally-after all these years- Jesus' message is understood by a select few who are better readers than those who have gone on before. They have discovered that Jesus never intended that we warn people about how to escape future judgment and how to receive the gift of eternal life so they will join Him when they die. He never intended for us to think that we needed Him to do something for us in order to avoid going to hell. He actually was hoping we would go to work to help God fulfill His dreams of a better world." (Location 569 of 3207 Kindle Edition)


"Mclaren's hopeful theology is the only thing, in my opinion, that separates the rest of The Secret Message of Jesus from the old-fashioned social gospel of theological liberalism. As I have read his book I found the social gospel on nearly every page. When people practice the social gospel (working to make the world a better place by promoting and practicing ideas common to both theological and political liberalism) they supposedly help God's  "dreams" come true. This idea of helping God solve the world's problems has been promoted by various streams of liberalism for more than s century." (Location 584 of 3207 Kindle Edition)


" As I continue to read the literature being published by the leaders of the Emergent Church it becomes clear to me why they have so much disdain for systematic theology. What we just saw in comparing Mclaren's teaching on God's "dreams" and Biblical material about God's sovereign decrees (see Is. 46:9-10, Eph. 1:11, Ps. 119:89-91,; Ps. 115:3) is a good case in point. If Mclaren were forced to be "systematic" in his use of Scripture he would be required to deal with passages like those I cited. But he does not. He tells us how he reads the gospels and what he has gleaned, but he sees no need to give account for any other material in the Bible even though other passages contradict to his own teachings. That is how he is able to sustain his social gospel-by neglect of the whole counsel of God." (Location 607 of 3207 Kindle Edition)


"The way Emergents read the the church's mission means that the reader determines the meaning;the biblical authors do not.What they have determined is that one need not be a Christian to participate;salvation has nothing to do with avoiding future judgment or goin to heaven;holistically saving planet earth is essential;changing society as a whole is essential;the church has not gotten the mission right in 2,000 years or even understood what it was;and that the Emergent Church is the best hope that,finally,God will be able to have His dreams fulfilled." (Location 667 and 676 of 3207 Kindle Edition)

"We have a choice: We can follow the mission that Jesus gave the church as understood by the Apostles who gave us the New Testament, or we can become "missional" and find a more appealing mission by consulting  other religions and our own "missional" community's sensibilities. The one is very clear and has been normative for 2,000 years. The other is confused, fuzzy and unclear and was recently discovered by some innovative men. If we choose the latter we also are choosing to that Jesus' warnings about hell are false. That is a most dangerous choice to make." (Location 736 of 3207 Kindle Edition) 


The Emergent folks love to hover around their select passages (Matthew 4:23, 9:35, 24:14, Mark 1:14-15, Luke 9:1-6, Matthew 4:17, John 3:16, Mark 2:5, Luke 7:48, Mark 2:28, John 12:47 and John 17:1-3 being their favorite). Note how they hover in the Gospels. But they distort those passages making them completely nonsensical and dislike Paul because he contradicts their man centered theology.


 "For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears. And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified." (Ac 20:27–32) Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando

Legacy Of The Lost; The Heresy of Charles Grandison Finney

In the annals of modern church history – and by this I mean the late 17^th to the later 18^th Centuries – there has been no greater heretic than Charles Grandison Finney.

This LINK will provide the reader with the opportunity to not only view a unbiased, fair look at Finney’s duplicitous methods of obtaining to the ministry of a Presbyterian church he not only disagree with strongly, but using the language of the lawyer who would get his client off with any trick, outright lied to obtain his ordination.

It is a sad fact that not only has the damage that Finney did in his own lifetime not been repaired, but that his works – washed a bit more clean through modern editing, though not without the obvious heresy that permeated His lifetime of ministry – still available on many pastoral bookshelves, have yielded the present climate of love and unity at all costs, most especially among non-denominational churches, but also of many independent splinters from long established denominations.

In fact, it is fair to say that the current climate of humanistic relativism that is sweeping the visible (though not the invisible) churches that go by various names, all saying they are followers of Christ, can be traced back to the humanistic legal language and philosophies of this man: Some are an active rebellion to the impossible perfectionism this heretic spoke of, while others continue to follow his heinous legalism.

This man denied the most basic tenets of Protestantism, bringing his followers back into the type of bondage that Rome imposes on those who hold to their dogmas.

He denied the vicarious atonement of Christ, whereby Christ’s sins were imputed to His people and His righteousness to them (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:30-31; 2 Corinthians 5:21), thus making it necessary for a sinner to have a “righteousness greater than the Pharisees,” which righteousness even the apostle Paul, and all others of the New Testament, never claimed (cf. Philippians 3:9). He thus laid a house on sand which can never stand against the tide of God’s wrath on judgment day.

I could go on, but the article above, with the links it contains at the bottom of the article, and this LINK to Finney’s unabridged 1851 edition of His Systematic Theology (without the modern day white-washing of editors trying to tone down the heretical errors so prevalent in it), provide detailed information that every professing Christian who truly loves God our Father, knowing His Son, our Lord, did for us what we could never do for ourselves, should consider a MUST READ. (It would be better named A Manifesto of Man's Sovereignty Over God.)

The heritage of this heretic lives on in far too many churches, not the least of which is the non-denominational denomination that is widespread throughout the world, touting various versions of this heresy, or counters to it that have lapsed into antinomianism in reaction to this perfection-by-man’s effort to attain right standing with God, which, of course, God tells us is impossible for man, but not for God.

To say that the current climate of ignorance of what the Scriptures truly teach, and the antipathy of those who, quite simply, do not care, is due, in large part, to this man’s legacy, is an understatement of the greatest proportion.

May God have mercy on the visible church, the covenant vehicle He has set up, which has gone after as many idols of the imagination as ever the Israelites did in carving and fashioning such from wood and metal (cf. Isaiah 44:10-20; Romans 1:18-32).

Those last verses lay out the folly and the results of those who have become their own greatest idol: Man, who at the height of his folly, thinks the same lie as in the Garden of Eden: “I shall be like God.”

God have mercy on the visible church in America, and those nations we have imported this idolatrous garbage of Pelagian self-worship too, as well, and all the false gospels that are, in one way or another, a part of the legacy of this Wolf in Sheep’s clothing who can only devour those taken in by the variety of false, damning gospels that have been spawned as a result (Galatians 1:8-9).

By His Grace To God’s Glory Alone – Bill Hier

Theology And Real Life?

To some this is a contradictory statement. Theology is the study of God, and if everything exist because of God, through God and in God, then to say that theology isn't real life is indeed contradictory.

What is real life? Real life is waking up in the morning and not wanting to go to work. Real life is feeling the warm sun on your back on a cool morning, a good cup of coffee, and then feeling a deep appreciation that you even have a job. Real life is what we all know it to be- real life- struggle, pain, love, happiness, etc... It doesn't need much explaining. Question is how do we mesh the grand theology of God and real life together? The key is not separating them. Jesus is our mediator. God became man, died in our place, and rose from the dead because of our justification... Therefore we must submit to Jesus (God) in order to properly "hold" to a proper theology- an effectual and sanctifying theology...

I was a former universalist. Simply put I took arminianism to it’s logical conclusion. If Jesus died for the sin of the whole world then the whole world would be saved. To say otherwise would be blasphemous. So since coming to reformed theology, particular atonement was no stumbling block for me, I welcomed it with open arms... Since Jesus died for “all” (people from every tribe, nation and tongue), He would indeed redeem those whom He came to save. This was one of the most enlightening times of my life... No doubt. In this beatiful doctrine of particular atonement, I had never seen Jesus so highly lifted up before. I thank my boys two paragraphs down for that...

My dad introduced me to reformed theology after He stumbled upon a video from Pastor Jim Mclarty from salvationbygrace.org entitled What Did Jesus Accomplish On The Cross. My dad was also a universalist at the time, but little did he know, he was about to be reformed. It was not soon after, that he confronted me with the doctrine of God's sovereignty. I did not take this doctrine in as easily as the doctrine of limited atonement. I fought it and fought it, until I found no way around it. God is God I am not. God is Good I am not. God is holy, I am a sinner. I deserve nothing, to God be the glory alone. Who am I to think I can do something? I am dead in sin, Jesus is alive in righteousness. It was when I took the theology of the bible in that I truly submitted my self to God. And to this day I consider myself (in the most derogatory term) a Calvinist :) For all those haters out there, Calvinist is just another word for biblical... J/k, but seriously :)

So with piles of sermons and books from McArthur, Mohler, Piper, Sproul, Driscol, Chandler, Chan, Harris, Mahaney, Clark, White, Spurgeon, Edwards, Luther, Calvin, among others, and about 4 years later... I have officially jumped in way over my head.

I have spent years inside a books and sermons on a theology that has been preserved by God through these godly men of old and recent, that have impacted my way of thinking and life forever... But how do we take this theology to the market place, community, and our culture, and even more, making it truly effective in our own lives?

This is what I have come to understand. You can’t tell “personal doctrine” to some one, you have to tell them the gospel. You can’t bank your whole thought process on a chapter in the Bondage of the Will without first submitting your life to Christ first; ultimately when you tell someone about it, you will be telling them of a “personal doctrine” and not Jesus, even if it’s about Jesus. Though people can be saved by God through my pride or ignorance, this is just about my own sanity while delving in such rich doctrine from these men and the bible.

So to say it short: we need to know doctrine to know the gospel, and we need the gospel to keep our minds in check from prideful knowledge. But the good new is... If you study reformed theology long enough, your bound to become somewhat of a genius... What else could happen? Your studying the real and only theology... Your studying God. Submit to the gospel, tell the gospel, the doctrine will work it’s way in...

"In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God..." John 1:1

"He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it." Titus 1:9

"... so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine..." 1Tim 1:3

"so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God." Col 1:10

"...the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator." Col 3:10

Yours in Christ,
Chris Fincher