Doctrine of the Trinity-Part 4

One of the issues raised as an objection to the Trinity is that the word Trinity does not exist in scripture. Well, neither do we find commonly agreed upon words such as: Divinity, Atheism, or even Rapture. Simply because a term is not found explicitly in scripture does not make the word or the concept it defines unbiblical.

Another common objection is that since God is a God of order (1 Cor 14:33) why would He devise something so confusing. Simply by asking if one thinks that we will necessarily understand all of God and how He works should answer this question (Isaiah 55:8-9; 1 Cor 13:12).

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” ~ Is 55:8-9

“For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.” ~ 1 Cor 13:12

Still others will claim that “Jesus never said He was God” and while those exact words are not found we will see as we go through the scriptures that look at the Trinity that Jesus indeed did claim to be God. When we look at these verses in an upcoming part it will be clear that Christ claimed to be God and those hearing Him speak understood His claims as such.

What I find in most arguments I have heard is that they revolve around the issue of apprehension and comprehension. When the two are conflated, or made equal, then often people try and reformulate doctrines to match what they see as making sense and comprehensible to them. Simply because we do not “get” a doctrine does not make it unscriptural. Because I think that many issues revolve around misunderstanding the difference between apprehending a subject, or in this case doctrine, and comprehending it I would like to touch on the difference. To apprehend something is to see it as so. Thus it is about grasping and seeing the subject in the text. Apprehending a subject is to see that it is there, that it exists in the text. However to comprehend a subject is to understand how it is so, such as how it takes place. As it relates to the Trinity apprehending its truth is to see it is so in the text of scripture while comprehending it is to understand how it takes place. We can apprehend doctrine by carful study but we will not always be able to comprehend a doctrine as God’s ways are not ours (Is 55:8-9).

In this series we will look at the doctrine of the Trinity as it is seen in scripture. This study does not however explain the “How” and that is the issue with most that question the Trinity and or deny it. Again, as we look at the Trinity we are going to look at its existence in scripture and not the manner of God’s accomplishing what the doctrine of the Trinity states. By keeping the foundational pillars (3 divine persons, Equality, Monotheism) in mind and looking at the scriptures methodically we will be able to see, apprehend, the Trinity revealed in them. To do this we will look at 4 areas in the upcoming posts:

I) That there are 3 persons
II) They are all called God
III) There is One God (Monotheism)
IV) Thus they must all be God (Trinity)


Doctrine of the Trinity Series:

Sermon Series on The Doctrine of the Trinity:  Part 1   and   Part 2

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

(all verses used are from the ESV unless stated otherwise)

Doctrine of the Trinity-Part 3

With regards to the trinity it is important to see the result of denying any of the three pillars of the doctrine, which are:

1) Monotheism: There is only one God
2) There are three Divine persons - All being God
-    The three do not make up God
-    As a friend of mine shared in relating an analogy from Dr. Moorcroft: God is not like a cake mix. In that God is not made up of 1/3 the Father, 1/3 the Son and 1/3 the Holy Spirit. But He is all three at all time and all are equally divine
3) The three persons are all coequal and coeternal

The diagram below shows in a pretty basic way that if you deny any one of the three pillars mentioned above it will point you to one of three heresies. By drawing an arrow from the doctrine denied you will see the corresponding doctrinal error.

Explanation of above views:

Modalism (or Sabellianism 3rd Century):
One form of Modalism existing today is “Oneness Pentecostalism” which consists today of the United Pentecostals and United Apostolic Church. They may not word things the same historically as Modalist have but would still fit into the Modalist camp by their denial of the coexistence of three “distinct” yet equal persons. Historically Modalism stresses that the three parts of the Trinity are merely three manifestations, or as I have been told in a comment – “simultaneous aspects of the nature of God”. Modalism, again this may not be how all would relate this, has spoken of God as such:

- God is one and He has manifested Himself in the mode of the Father in the OT
- He then manifested Himself in the mode of the Son at the incarnation
- Then on Jesus departure He manifested Himself as the Holy Spirit

Key is that all never exist at the same time and thus do not coexist. Modalists will claim equality but again they will not agree to not coexistence.


Subordinationism (late 2nd to early 3rd Century):
This is a view of the relationship of the Father to the Son which subordinates the Son to the Father in essence and status. This is not denying the Son is subordinate to the father in way of submission, which is biblical as in 1 Cor 15:28:

“When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.”

The issue to the Subordinationist is that Jesus’ nature is different than the Father. They see Christ as eternal, not created, and divine but not equal to the Father. While the Trinitarian view speaks to all three being equal in power and glory

Polytheism:
Polytheism simply says that there are more than one God. This is the claim that anti-Trinitarians often make towards those who hold a Trinitarian view of God.

Some Historical Heresies

Marcionism (144):
Marcionism claims that Christ came at the Baptism and left at the crucifixion and they believed that the wrathful Hebrew God was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. This is a dualistic view of God that, even if they do not realize it, many professing believers hold today. The Marcionites held that Jesus came to liberate man from the God of the Old Testament.

Arianism (modern day Jehovah’s Witnesses) 4th Century:
Arians deny the deity of Christ and personhood of the Holy Spirit. They see Christ as created being with Jehovah’s Witnesses seeing Christ as Michael the Archangel. As we have already seen this heresy was condemned at the Council of Nicea (325)

Apollinarianism – 4th Century:
This view held that Christ had no human spirit. And that the divine Logos replaced it thus making Christ a “third thing”, a middle being between God and man. Being one part divine (spirit) and two parts (body and soul) human fused into a new nature. Apollonarius was against Arianism but probably fell more into the homoiousians (similar natures) camp. This view was declared a heresy by the First Council of Constantinople in 381 as it denied what is known as the Hypostatic Union: That Jesus is completely man and completely God (John 1:1, 14 & Col 2:9)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Jn 1:1

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Jn 1:14

"For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily," Col 2:9

Nestorianism – 5th Century:
Nestorius held that there were two distinct persons in Christ; one human and one Divine. Making Christ a God-bearing man (double personality) rather than the God-man (theanthropos) and thus got the natures correct but had Christ having two personalities. Nestorius distinguished the human Jesus, who died, from the Divine son who cannot die. This view was condemned at the Synod of Ephesus (431) where it was confirmed that Jesus was one person in two distinct and inseparable natures.

Eutychianism – 5th Century:
This view began as a reaction to Nestorius’ dual personalities view of Christ. This view made the Divine nature absorb the human nature and thus Christ only had one nature. A nature that was not like ours as He had one nature, divine. They sought to elevate the divine nature by minimizing the humanity of Christ. This too was condemned, at the Council of Chalcedon (451)


I list these heresies because I pray you hear the many explanations that people give to explain the Trinity so it conforms to what they feel comfortable with. Also, these heresies show that the arguments and human reasoning used to deny the Trinity are not new. We do not stand alone in the fight to defend what is true.

At the end of the day this all shows that Ecc 1:9 is so true:

“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

In Part 4 we will begin to look at a few arguments against the Doctrine of the Trinity as well as look at what I feel is often a key issue and that is the understanding of the difference between “apprehending” the Doctrine of the Thirty and “comprehending “ it.

(Updated 8/20/10 - Due to a comment I wanted to be more clear above on Modalism)
Doctrine of the Trinity Series:

Sermon Series on The Doctrine of the Trinity:  Part 1   and   Part 2

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

(all verses used are from the ESV unless stated otherwise)

Doctrine of the Trinity-Part 2

In part one I touched on our need to study the Trinity and the importance of a doctrine that to tell the truth, from my perspective, has been minimized in our pluralistic postmodern age. In this part we will look at a little history as this minimization of this important doctrine, which in truth is about the nature of God, has not always been so. As a matter of fact the nature of God was so important that the first great council, the council of Nicea in 325, dealt with this very issue; the nature of God.

The argument at the council revolved around the person of Christ and thus the Council of Nicea in 325 AD addressed the question of – Is Christ Divine? (One of 5 other issues covered but by far the most important). They did not create the doctrine of the “deity of Christ” but merely affirmed it. Also, in this council they did not touch on the person of the Holy Spirit but that is simply because that was not the issue at the time

Some may want to argue that the actual subject of the Trinity was not dealt with at the Council of Nicea. But, while the issue of the Trinity itself was not directly dealt with, the nature of Christ was and that is integral to our understanding of the Trinity. What stirred up the need for a council in large part was that Arius, where the term the “Arian Controversy” came from, had proposed that Christ had been created and had not existed eternally so therefore was not divine as God the Father was. This view had found some supporters but arguments arose in the church to oppose such a doctrine. While Emperor Constantine himself was sympathetic to the beliefs of Arius he wanted to settle the dispute and have political and cultural unity, his main objective in much of what he did. This is one of the places we see God’s hand on the events as again Constantine would have liked to see Arius win the argument but it was not to be.

At the council there were actually three positions
o The homoousians – Who proclaimed that God and Christ were of the same substance
o The Arians – Who proclaimed that God and Christ were of different substances.
o The homoiousians – A group that sought to compromise by claiming Christ was “similar” to God.

The trouble that Arius had with the orthodox view of the nature of Christ’s “substance” was the same we see today. He, as many today that deny the Trinity, sought to mold scripture to make a doctrine that is not easily comprehended comprehensible. In doing that he had to mold scripture to fit his understanding of how he thought things should be.

Mark Noll has noted, “Arius’s appeal to what he considered the logic of monotheism illustrates a recurring tendency throughout Christian history to subject the facts of divine revelation to current conceptions of ‘the reasonable’.”

I share the above glimpse at history, there is much more to read and learn about the Council of Nicea, to show that this is not a new issue & is one that others have struggled through. But it is one where truth can be found. We are to not hold tightly to the Doctrine of the Trinity because of tradition or even because of the Council of Nicea and a vote in the past. But, we should listen to what was said since God was working then as now.

We are to hold tightly to the Doctrine of the Trinity because it is biblical and those that do not hold to it are denying the true nature of Christ. Thus we need to not sit by as some deny this doctrine like it is simply a matter of taste. No this is a matter of the nature of God and we need to defend this doctrine as tenaciously as Athanasius did if necessary who himself was exiled 5 times in his defense of the nature of God. Not because God cannot defend Himself. But, because all of scripture and the promises of God hinge on His nature. If God’s nature can be manipulated by man to fit his whims, as is often done today, then ones hope is in a false god that is not God at all.

Today the issue is not only that the Trinity is denied but that people are not passionate enough about it to defend it at whatever cost. Far too many people are willing to give up this important doctrine for the sake of unity. What I would say is a false unity.

Mathew Henry has said:  "The way to preserve the peace of the church is to preserve its purity."

The purity he speaks of is not just the piety of its people but the purity of its doctrine. Thus it is not by forsaking doctrine but ensuring that the doctrine is pure and undefiled that unity is preserved. The area of the Doctrine of the Trinity is one of those areas we need to unify around. We are not to push it to the back to “just get along” but have a ready defense for who God and his nature, His Trinitarian nature.

Next in Part 3 we will look at some Historical heresies and in doing so you will see that not much has changed in 2000+ years as many of the heresies of the past are alive today.

Doctrine of the Trinity Series:

Sermon Series on The Doctrine of the Trinity:  Part 1   and   Part 2

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

(all verses used are from the ESV unless stated otherwise)

Doctrine of the Trinity - Part 1

To begin this look at the Trinity I would like to look at two historical definitions of the trinity from two of the major confessions. Keep in mind that simply because these confessions support the Trinity does not make the trinity so. It is the biblical support that these confessions are based on and grounded in that makes what these statements say biblical. We simply start here to see how the trinity has been defined and we will look further at this as we move though the subject

From “The 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689”
In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word (or Son), and the Holy Spirit, of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided: the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar, relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him.
(1 John 5:7; Matt. 28:19,2; Cor. 13:14; Exod. 3:14; John 14:11; 1 Cor. 8:6; John 1:14,18; John 15:26; Gal. 4:6.)

From “The Westminster Confession of Faith of 1649”
In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.
(Mat 3:16-17; 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; 1 John 5:7. John 1:14, 18. John 15:26; Gal 4:6).

A somewhat easier description may be:
Within one Being that is God, there exist eternally three coequal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

Or as I have often heard Hank Hanegraaff say:   There are three who’s and one what

Introduction
So why do we need to study the Trinity? Is it not taken for granted? Does not everyone believe in it? Well in short, NO. I have found as I look around the internet and talk to people there are many that deny the Trinity and seem to not think this places them outside the pale of orthodoxy. Some of these may deny the Trinity out of ignorance or having been taught wrongly and they need to be discipled to see the truth of this great doctrine. However there others that teach that the Trinity is false and propagate their heresy where they are able. Some may do this openly such as the Jehovah Witnesses or avoid defining their terms clearly as with the Mormon’s so as to use Trinitarian words but give them decidedly different meanings. But, they do deny its truth. Of more concern are those within the walls of the professing church that teach such heresy and are not held accountable and are often even lauded and followed

As an example from the pulpit; T.D. Jakes is a well known preacher and writer in the evangelical community and while seeking to appear not connected with any denomination he does have connections with the Oneness Pentecostals which are modalists (more on modalsim later) who deny the orthodox definition of the Trinity.

Another example is Benny Him who while often criticized for his “Health and Wealth” doctrine has claimed that the Trinity is actually 9 persons with each person of the trinity having his own personal trinity, see video below.



An example from the sound booth would be Phillips Craig and Dean who are Oneness Pentecostals, Modalists, as well. This is not simply about mistaken individuals but they are all full time minters that happen to sing together and thus by their ministries are to be accountable for teaching heresy. Sadly many listen to their songs and even after finding out that they deny the Trinity justify things by their music being good or the words of a particular song being true. I do not know how many of those that justify their actions would listen to a good song by a Mormon or Jehovah Witness, well today maybe many.

I do not put this out there to simply point out these people but to show that the Trinity, the orthodox view of the Trinity, is not a doctrine that no longer needs to be studied and preached. But that we need even more so in the pluralistic age we live in study and make sure we know the true nature of our God. We need to remember that when we speak of God He is defined by His nature and that nature is Trinitarian. Thus when we speak of Islam, Judaism and others we are not speaking of the same God as they define God’s nature differently.

Sadly there are also so called “Christian” denominations, as alluded to above, that do not hold to the a biblical Trinitarian view of God but for some reason the church as a whole is fearful of calling a heretic a heretic. I think this is where confusion begins in the congregation since if the church does not speak out how are those in its ranks to see the seriousness of the error. This is not so much about labeling but about the correct understanding of God.

As we continue in the study of the Trinity we will get to its proofs but I thought it important to see why we need to study and we will see next why that the church from very early supported and defended this view of God.

Doctrine of the Trinity Series:

Sermon Series on The Doctrine of the Trinity:  Part 1   and   Part 2

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

(all verses used are from the ESV unless stated otherwise)

Authentic Christianity: An Exposition of the Theology and Ethics of the Larger Westminster Catechism

Description of Authentic Christianity: An Exposition of the Theology and Ethics of the Larger Westminster Catechism from the Vision Forum Site:

"Not since 1731 has the Reformed world seen a comprehensive commentary on its most detailed standard of faith, The Westminster Larger Catechism. Even that earlier two-volume masterpiece by Thomas Ridgeley does not rival the depth and breadth of this contribution to Reformed doctrine provided by Dr. Joseph C. Morecraft, III. Culminating a lifetime of learning, preaching, and pastoral care, this five-volume work incorporates the most stalwart of Reformed theology from recent centuries as well as past masters, and exegetes the teachings of the Catechism through potent insight, consistent application, and relentless recourse to God’s Word. In a time when the Church faces many doctrinal challenges, Morecraft’s Commentary calls her back to the foundations of the Reformed faith, directing her to the spiritual power of God’s Word as taught in the Larger Catechism. In a time when even the Reformed lose heart and begin to tinker and modify their understanding of their own standards, Morecraft’s Commentary directs us to a clear confession of faith. In these volumes, Authentic Christianity: An Exposition of the Theology and Ethics of the Westminster Larger Catechism we find relevant solutions to the challenges we face, and the power to transform individuals, families, and entire cultures today.

This 5-volume commentary on The Westminster Larger Catechism practically applies the doctrinal principles outlined in this great document to the ethical considerations of our day. The culmination of a lifetime of study and preaching, Dr. Morecraft’s magnum opus provides potent insights into the core doctrines of the faith as summarized in the Larger Catechism. This monumental achievement by one of the most heroic defenders of the faith alive today is a must for any serious student of theology.

Dr. Morecraft holds a B.A. in history from King’s College in Bristol, Tennessee, an M.Div from Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, Georgia, and a M.Th. and Th.D. from Whitefield Theological Seminary"

Order here or in link above.

A New Documentary

New documentary from the NCFIC is being worked on called Segregation. It will be a documentary “investigating the problems with modern youth ministry and the solution of biblical youth ministry found in the Word of God.”

Read more here: A New Film in Progress

Discipling our Children

I thought I would repost the links to a series I did a little over a year ago on the discipling of our children and some of the questions I often hear with regards to sending ones children to the government schools. I speak of “discipling” with regards to schooling since that is the goal, or should be, of education; yes the government schools are seeking to disciple your children as well. Since the disciple will be like his teacher (Luke 6:40) this should be enough for Christian parents not to send their children to government schools but sadly it often is not.

Below are links to the nine articles:

1) Christian Homeschooling and Charter Schools
2) What is the purpose of Christian Education: Part 1 & Part 2
3) Should the Government be involved in the Education of our children
4) Why are we so easily swayed by the money & items offered by charter schools?
5) Should not my children be in the public school to be lights in a dark place?
6) Why do we need to meet man’s standards for education?
7) Why do we need relief or a respite from the presence of our children?
8) Isn't how we educate our children a preference?
9) What if my husband says he does not want to homeschool?

Around the Web and Blogosphere (7/5/10)

Theological Mediations is a good blog that I recently came across. You can find what the owner of the blog describes as; “primary source documentation that involves my exploration into the revealed will of God as viewed in Calvinistic history.”


You can be praying for a couple families; Pray for the Harris family as Greg Harris’ wife, Sono, was called home to Jesus yesterday. Also keep Joni Eareckson Tada, and her husband Ken, in your prayers as she deals with her cancer. I would also recommend reading an article I read some time ago and one that Joni has linked to on her site entitled: "Don't Waste Your Cancer" by John Piper.


At The New Geneva Leadership Blog there is a good article by Stephen Halbrook called: The Bible Opposes Socialism. The point made in the article are:
1) The Bible’s civil code does not authorize socialism.
2) Socialism violates the Bible’s commands against partiality
3) Socialism is a form of public slavery
4) Socialism is a form of covetousness
5) The New Testament does not sanction socialism
6) Socialism is idolatrous
7) Socialism is symptomatic of a lack of faith in God
8) Socialism opposes “The Golden Rule”
9) The Book of Acts does not support socialism


You can check out the NCFIC Blog to see articles and videos from the NCFIC Road Trip which based on their original schedule should be concluding today.


Israel Wayne has a good article on the Brush Arbor site called: I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag. How many of us know the origin of the Pledge of Allegiance yet we often fight for it tooth and nail. For believers it is imperative that we know its origin and what it means as we are to truly only to pledge allegiance to God and not to any state. You can watch an interview that Kevin Swanson does with Israel Wayne on this article here or listen to it here.


As an aside I have been so busy with little time to write. But I am working on converting a study on the Trinity that I did a few years ago to a number of blog posts and hope to have they done in the next week or so.

NCFIC Road Trip - Oakhurst Stop (6/21/10)

We just returned from spending the weekend in Oakhurst California. We got to Fresno Saturday and then spent the Lord’s Day worshiping with Christ Community Bible Church (CCBC). It was a great time of worship and fellowship.

Then Monday (6/21) after taking a drive around Bass Lake we met at CCBC for some great teaching and fellowship. It is my understanding there were around 240 people, adults and children, at this “NCFIC Road Trip-Oakhurst” stop which was a great turn out especially considering it was on a Monday afternoon/evening. CCBC did a great ob of hosting this event keeping things on schedule and even providing an evening meal between sessions where families could gather to meet together. This was especially appreciated as so often at conferences there is so much to pack in that fellowship can often be cut short but not here.

The sessions were broken down with the men and sons meeting together for the first 2 hours or so and the women and daughters meeting for a tea at the same time. After the initial sessions we all gathered together for a meal then all gathered for a final two talks as one large group.

As I only heard the men’s talks and the final talks I cannot comment on the women's talks but from what I understand they were very good. I will post a link to my wife and daughter’s blog when they get a post up on the women’s part of the meeting. In the first talk Scott Brown spoke on Building a Biblical Family. In his talk Scott, with his usual passion for the sufficiency of scripture, spoke on 12 areas that need to be dealt with to build a biblical family. Those areas are, and I given some, not all, of the scripture references given:

1) Examining Ones Heart to be Sure of Ones Salvation – II Cor 13:5; II Cor 5:17;Matt 7:16
2) Observe the Sabbath Day – Deut 5:12-15; Ex 20; Neh 13; Heb 4
3) Listening to the Preaching of the Word of God - Acts 2:42
4) Celebrating as a Family – Deut 12:12; Ps 127 – 128
5) Doing business with Sin – Job 1:5; Col 3:5
6) Dealing with the “One Another’s” in the church – Eph 4
7) Conducting Family Worship – Ps 78; Jn 4:23-24
8) Praying Family Prayers – Matt 6:33
9) Working Together – Prov 10:4-5
10) Saturating the Family in the Law & Love of God – Deut 6:1-9
11) Studying History Together – Deut 31:7
12) Make a God Centered Marriage – Gen 1:27-28; Gen 2:18; Prov 31

Peter Bradrick then spoke, mainly to the younger men, about the need to see we are in a battle. One of the great points he made is that we so often allow the young to use youth as a time of play while in reality it is the only time they have to prepare for adulthood. This is especially important for believers as youth is a time not for amusement but a time to prepare for the battle. A time that is lost if not used for God’s glory. He also spoke of areas that so often attach to young men. Areas such as: being absorbed in the culture of sports, simply hanging out with other young men accomplishing nothing and also the attitudes of apathy, pride and the pursuit of pleasure. This is a message that needs to be shared and instilled in all young men.

The time with the men was concluded with another message from Scott Brown on “Common Infections in the Family Integrated Church. These were areas that in some form or fashion are in many “Family Integrated Churches” but that should not be there and thus need to be corrected and dealt with in some fashion. The 12 items spoken on, and with explanations of each were:

1) Neglecting the Gospel – the exalting of Christ by “all” of His word
2) Misunderstanding Family Integration – especially in making it the centerpiece of the church
3) Misunderstanding Equipping & Evangelism in the Church
4) Lack of Biblically Qualified Leadership
5) Home Churching – especially as it relates to biblical leadership that scripture points to with regards to the church
6) Doctrinal Confusion
7) Fuzziness in Biblical Womanhood and the Influence of Feminism
8) Disrespecting Authority – often by having no authority
9) Lack of a Love for Scripture
10) Inward Focus that causes a Neglect in Ministry to the Lost
11) Absence of Humility
12) Lack of Love for the Church

After a great meal and fellowship we all gathered together to hear another talk from Scott Brown and Peter Bradrick. Scott spoke first and his topic was on Reformation in the Church. In covering the topic he did so in three sections:

Characteristics of Reformation
1) A Work of God, Not Man
2) Often follows Seasons of Idolatry & Sinfulness
3) Fueled by Desperation
4) Touched off by the Preaching of the True Gospel
5) Propelled by a Hunger for God
6) Outward Changes Followed by the Inward Conviction of Sin
7) Marked by an Unusual Love for Scripture
8) Ignites a Love for the Gathering of God’s People
9) Produces Opposition

Modern Signs of Revival
1) Clarification of the True Gospel & Preaching of it
2) Resurgence of Expository Preaching
3) Doctrinal Awareness
4) Revival of Biblical Fatherhood
5) Large Families
6) Rejection of Feminism
7) Modest Dress
8) Early Manhood
9) Dating Culture Rejected
10) Generational Retention
11) Biblical Counseling Movement
12) A Wave of Books on Family based on the Sufficiency of Scripture
13) Rejection of Evolutionary Speculation
14) New Churches Planted that Reject Age Segregation
15) Censure, Rejection & Persecution

What Kinds of Reforms are the NCFIC Seeking
As the talk went long this section was gone through rather quickly but some of the reforms sought were areas such as the use of the regulative principle and other areas that further promote the items listed above.

Peter Bradrick closed the conference speaking on the youth group culture the church is so enamored with. The NCFIC has been working on a documentary that should be out this year on the subject as well as Scott Brown is putting out a book on the subject. Both of which will in all likelihood meet with resistance because they go against the churches culturally accepted norm even if it is not a biblically supported norm. Peter touched on a number of areas but the picture that was painted was one of the need to return to how God wants youth to be nurtured and discipled which is by equipping families and primarily fathers. I am sure more will be said on the subject as the two new resources from the NCFIC come out.

What a great time this was and many thanks to Christ Community Bible Church for doing a fine job of putting on the conference. If you are ever in the Oakhurst area this is a great church to spend the Lord’s Day.

CCBC Contact info:
Christ Community Bible Church in Oakhurst, California
Oakhurst Community Center
39800 Road 425 B.
Oakhurst, CA 93644
Michael Cox (mcox@sti.net)

If you have an opportunity try and attend one of the remaining NCFIC Road Trip stops.  You can find the the cities still to be visited here.

Here are a few pictures from Monday:

 Scott Brown

 Peter Bradrick

Defending The Christian Worldview Against all Opposition

Well things have been quite busy and with preparing a sermon each week and work there has not been much time to write. However I do get to drive 30 minutes each way to work and to redeem that time I have been listening to some CD’s by Greg Bahnsen that I think every believer would greatly benefit from.

The series I am just finishing is called: Defending The Christian Worldview Against all Opposition. This set is in 2 parts with Series 1 being called: Weapons of our Spiritual Warfare and Series 2: Destroying all Speculation

Coming from a Presuppositional apologetic framework Mr. Bahnsen does a masterful job of teaching how to defend the Christian Worldview. While there are some terms that may be foreign to those that have not dealt with apologetics, philosophy or logic I think they are explained in a manner that will make them clear. This set is a must for homeschooled families because not only does it teach how to defend the faith but in the process teaches important principles of logic and reasoning that are often sorely missed by many believers.

While there is some repetition between the two Series I think this only helps to further instill the concepts & principles being taught. Also, as you go through the two series you will find previous concepts and ideas being built on so that you are even better equipped. I will be listening to this series again so as to refresh and hone my ability to defend my faith.

One regret I have after listening to this series is that I never got to hear Dr. Bahnsen, and I live in Southern California. While Dr. Bahnsen is with the Lord we still have his teaching and I for one have been greatly blessed by it.

Included in Series 1:
1. Faith or Reason?
2. Faith and Reason
3. Foundational Faith
4. Just the Facts
5. Faith, Facts, and Worldviews
6. What is Philosophy?
7. Types of Worldviews
8. A Critique of Atheism
9. The Unbeliever is a Believer
10. A Quick Course in Comparative Religion
11. Mormons and Muslims
12. Two-fold Apologetic Approach

Included in Series 2:
1. Arbitrary Arguments
2. Inconsistent Arguments
3. Presuppositional Tension
4. Preconditions for Intelligently
5. Proof and Persuade
6. The Evolutionary Worldview
7. The Problem of Evil
8. Competing Religious Claims
9. An Internal Critique of the Koran
10. Circular Reasoning

This series can be bought as a set, here, or individually, here- Series 1 , Series 2

$25 OFF at Vision Forum

Good through June 1st:    $25 off coupon when you spend $75+

Around the Web and Blogosphere (5/21/10)

If you like Bluegrass check out the Wintons, actually even if you are not a fan of bluegrass check them out. You can listen to their music here. You can also buy a download of the music at BlueBehemoth. They were just interviewed by Kevin Swanson: Music Genres Capable of Integrating the Generations. Here is their Purpose Statement:

"It is our desire to faithfully proclaim the Gospel in word and deed. At the same time, we want to perform a concert in a professional manner using both gospel bluegrass and family-friendly traditional bluegrass music which portrays a family that is seeking to glorify the Lord. While we want our concerts to be entertaining, we have determined that we are not a family that exists for entertainment purposes, but a family that desires to communicate to others the love of God and His active work in our lives as well as His desire to work faithfully in the lives of others. During our concerts we plan to communicate the saving grace of Jesus Christ, the blessing of families ministering together, the purpose of having a family vision, the fruitfulness of multi-generational faithfulness, and the goal of living separate and deliberate lives for the Lord. We also hope to share about the blessings of adoption, both in a natural and spiritual sense."



Devon Maddox at The Salt Room writes on: Sovereign Church Growth. He has a great quote by David Wells from his book The Courage to be Protestant:

“The truth is that there is nothing in our postmodern world that is a serious threat, or an insurmountable obstacle, to the will of God. This is true of his saving will as well. He is sovereign in the way he begets faith today as he is over the sparrow that flies or falls. He will grow the church. Today, we no longer seem to believe this, and want to aid his cause by our weak and foolish capitulations.”

How true this is as the church today seeks after all but God for growth. Actually, the whole idea of “growth” is often an issue as well. Of course the professing church today would not admit to this lack of trust but actions often speak louder than words and those actions say the church today does not trust God to grow His church. Personally I think this problem stems from a faulty view of God’s sovereignty; a view that places God as being restrained by our desires and will and not the other way around.



At Lane’s Blog there is a post: Election as Taught in the Bible. This post lists some of the Scriptural evidence for the doctrine of election. Also below is a video that is posted along with this list.

Around the Web and Blogosphere (5/12/10)

R.C. Sproul Jr. posts on: What Is Reconstructionism? What Is Theonomy? In many circles, even reformed ones, the mention of “theonomy” or “reconstructionism” raises a myriad of objections but I have found that most of these come from a misconception of what it is. As R.C. states, and others before him have stated: ““Autonomy or theonomy!”……We will either have man’s law, or God’s law and only a fool would choose man over God.”


How far are we in the US from this: It’s Getting Dangerous Out There — A Preacher Is Arrested in Britain. Are pastors, and laymen for that matter, in the US ready to preach the truth, all of it, in the face of prison? If we do not do so now in the face of not much more than ridicule how we will do it when true persecution looms.


At the NCFIC website there is a good message from Jeff Pollard called: The Trap of Family Idolatry. Those that think the NCFIC worships the family should listen to this message as Jeff Pollard deals with what he calls “Familyolatry” and how to avoid it.


Steve Camp writes on: TREASURING THE TREASURE OF GOD'S WORD...the infallible divine plumbline for all matters of life and godliness. He deals with preaching out of the word of God rather than simply out of ones good thoughts and opinions, no matter how correct they may be.

Grace & Genesis 38

Last Lord’s Day (4/24) I preached through Genesis 38. It is one of those passages that can be uncomfortable as it shows man in all his sin. The passage looks at the life of Judah while Joseph was off in Egypt. As one person I read commented, this is sort of a “meanwhile back at the ranch” passage. Telling of what Judah, the one the line of Christ was to come through, was doing while his brother was enslaved in Egypt.

As I studied the passage I wondered how to deal with the sin of Er, Onan and Judah. How do I deal with this, especially with small children present, so as to be above all faithful to the text but also sensitive to those hearing the text? The more I read the passage the more it became clear that the sins of Judah and Onan are reveled as they are to show the grace of God. The sins do not have to be excessively expounded on as they stand by themselves and thus simply need to be read as presented in the text. What needs to be emphasized in this chapter is the grace of God. The revelation of the grace of God to use a man such as Judah, and for that matter Tamar, to bring about the one to crush the head of the serpent (Gen 3:15) is striking.

If you were to simply read Genesis with no understanding of what was to come you would think that Joseph was the one the line of Christ was to flow through. Is not Joseph a picture of Christ? Is not he the one that is pictured as more righteous? But no, God works through the imperfect to bring about the perfect. God works not as man but as God to do what most glorifies Him. We should not be surprised by this with all that we see in Genesis up to Chapter 38, but we usually are. So grace is a major part of Chapter 38.

Moses is writing this to the Hebrews preparing to cross the Jordon back into the Promised Land after 40 years in the wilderness. He is telling them not to be proud as if who they were was why God worked through them. Moses is showing how their heritage is one of sin but that it was God’s choice to work through them thus they had no reason to boast or pat themselves on the back. This is much as we should feel when we realize there is nothing in us that requires God to choose us. While I have heard many claim that the Doctrines of Grace can lead to pride, that is false. If pride comes out of your understanding of election you have misunderstood it. What should come out of a correct understanding of God’s calling is humility as we should clearly see we have nothing to boast about.

If we are truthful with ourselves our lives are much more closely aligned with that of Judah than Joseph and thus as with Judah it is only by grace God would call us to Himself. If you are truly one of God’s children you have been chosen by His grace not your merit and thus cannot boast (Eph 2:8-9).

This is not an excuse to live as Judah and simply expect God’s grace as the passage has a second feature and that is one of contrast. The contrast between the life of Judah and that of Joseph. Thus we are to see the grace of God to call us as we live as Judah. As well as to see our call to live, by God’s power, as Joseph.

So the sin that is portrayed in this passage is used to accentuate God’s grace. A grace seen from the beginning to the end of His word. There is not more grace in the Older Testament than in the Newer. It is all of grace that God would work though any of us. Let us truly understand that and seek to live, again by His power, in a way that most glorifies Him, as is laid out in His word.

If you would like to listen to last weeks sermon you can hear it here.

2010 European Virtual History Tour & MP3 Collection

If you could not make it to the Vision Forum Faith and Freedom Tour across Europe this may be the next best thing: The 2010 European Virtual History Tour & MP3 Collection, for $59 (Special offer ends May 3, 2010 ):

This special package allows you and your family to gain new understanding, context, and inspiration by receiving in-the-field video highlights from this historic tour across Europe, and be the first to hear the messages on MP3 from our journey (receive over 40 messages at the special pre-tour package price).

The tour begins on May 2, and runs through May 15.

Here is what you get with your Online Tour Pass:

1. Daily Lectures and Messages: Exclusive daily video messages from the locations that built Western Civilization on subjects ranging from military history to theology to architecture;

2. Interactive Study Course: You can send your questions in to our teachers who will answer many of them via video which will be posted and made available through a private link;

3. Study Material: During the tour, we will pose regular study questions and direct you to additional resources to expand your studies;

4. Advance MP3 Collection of all the audio recorded in the field;*
*The live recordings from the field will be unedited.

To sign up you can do so here: 2010 European Virtual History Tour & MP3 Collection (Special offer ends May 3, 2010. )


Virtual Tour and Online Study Course from Vision Forum.

All We Need is Love?

Repost From American Covenanter

All We Need is Love?

Dead men speaking from the grave on modern heresies

By Horatius Bonar, 1809-1889

Some speak as if the servant were greater than the Master, and the disciple above his Lord; as if the Lord Jesus honoured the Law, and His people were to set it aside; as if He fulfilled it for us, that we might not need to fulfill it; as if He kept it, not that we might keep it, but that we might not keep it, but something else in its stead, they know not what.

The plain truth is, we must either keep it or break it. Which of these men ought to do, let those answer who speak of a believer having nothing more to do with Law. There is no middle way. If it be not a saint's duty to keep the Law, he may break it at pleasure, and go on sinning because grace abounds.

The word duty is objected to as inconsistent with the liberty of forgiveness and sonship. Foolish and idle cavil! What is duty? It is the thing which is due by me to God, that line of conduct which I owe to God. And do these objectors mean to say that, because God has redeemed us from the curse of the Law, therefore we owe Him nothing, we have no duty now to Him? Has not redemption rather made us doubly debtors? We owe Him more than ever; we owe His holy Law more than ever; more honour, more obedience. Duty has been doubled, not cancelled, by our being delivered from the Law; and he who says that duty has ceased, because deliverance has come, knows nothing of duty, or the Law, or deliverance. The greatest of all debtors in the universe is the redeemed man, the man who can say, 'The life that I live in the flesh I live by faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me.' What a strange sense of gratitude these men must have, who suppose that because love has cancelled the penalties of the Law, and turned away its wrath, therefore reverence and obedience to that Law are no longer due! Is terror, in their estimation, the only foundation of duty, and when love comes in and terror ceases, does duty become a bondage?

'No,' they may say, 'but there is something higher than duty, there is privilege; it is that for which we contend.'

I answer, the privilege of what? Of obeying the Law? That they cannot away with; for they say they are no longer under Law, but under grace. What privilege, then? Of imitating Christ? Be it so. But how can we imitate Him whose life was one great Law fulfilling, without keeping the Law? What privilege, again we ask? Of doing the will of God? Be it so. And what is the Law but the revealed will of God? And has our free forgiveness released us from the privilege of conformity to the revealed will of God?

But what do they mean by thus rejecting the word 'duty', and contending for that of 'privilege'? Privilege is not something distinct from duty, nor at variance with duty, but it is duty and something more; it is duty influenced by higher motives, duty uncompelled by terror or suspense. In privilege the duty is all there; but there is something superadded, in shape of motive and relationship, which exalts and ennobles duty. It is my duty to obey government; it is my privilege to obey my parent. But in the latter case is duty gone, because privilege has come in? Or has not the loving relationship between parent and child only intensified the duty, by superadding the privilege, and sweetening the obedience by the mutual love? 'The love of Christ constraineth.' That is something more than both duty and privilege added.

Let men who look but at one side of a subject say what they will, this is the truth of God, that we are liberated from the Law just in order that we may keep the Law. We get the 'no condemnation', in order that 'the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us' (Rom. 8:4). We are delivered from 'the mind of the flesh', which is enmity to God, and not subject to His Law, on purpose that we may be subject to His Law (Rom. 8:7), that we may 'delight in the Law of God after the inward man' (Rom. 9:22), nay, that we may 'with the mind serve the Law of God' (Rom. 7:25),that we may be 'doers of the Law' (James 4:11). These objectors may speak of obedience to the Law as bondage, or of the Law itself being abolished to believers; here are the words of the Holy Ghost. The Law of God is just the Law of God, that very Law which David loved, and in which David's Son delighted; and it would be well for such men meekly and lovingly to learn what delighting in it, serving it, doing it are.

'Do we make void the Law by faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the Law' (Rom. 3:31), that is, we set it on a firmer basis than ever. That Law, 'holy, and just, and good,' thus doubly established, is now for us, not against us. Its aspect towards us is that of friendship and love, and so we have become 'the servants of righteousness' (Rom. 6:18), yielding our members servants to righteousness (Rom. 6:19). We are not men delivered from service, but delivered from one kind of service, and by that deliverance introduced into another, 'that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter' (Rom. 7:6), as 'the Lord's freemen' (1 Cor. 7:22), yet Christ's servants (1 Cor. 7:22). Thus obligation, duty, service, obedience still remain to the believing man though no longer associated with bondage and terror, but with freedom, gladness and love. The Law's former bearing on us is altered and, with that, the nature and spirit of the service are altered, but the service itself remains, and the Law which regulates that service is confirmed, not annulled.

Some will tell us here that it is not service they object to, but service regulated by law. But will they tell us what is to regulate service, if not law? Love, they say. This is a pure fallacy. Love is not a rule but a motive. Love does not tell me what to do; it tells me how to do it. Love constrains me to do the will of the beloved one; but to know what that will is I must go elsewhere. The Law of our God is the will of the beloved One, and were that expression of His will withdrawn, love would be utterly in the dark; it would not know what to do. It might say, 'I love my Master, and I love His service, and I want to do His bidding, but I must know the rules of His house, that I may know how to serve Him.' Love without law to guide its impulses would be the parent of will-worship and confusion, as surely as terror and self-righteousness, unless upon the supposition of an inward miraculous illumination, as an equivalent for law. Love goes to the Law to learn the divine will, and love delights in the Law, as the exponent of that will; and he who says that a believing man has nothing more to do with Law, save to shun it as an old enemy, might as well say that he has nothing to do with the will of God. For the divine Law and the divine will are substantially one, the former the outward manifestation of the latter. And it is 'the will of our Father which is in heaven' that we are to do (Matt. 7:2), or proving by loving obedience what is that 'good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God' (Rom. 12:2). Yes, it is 'he that doeth the will of God that abideth for ever' (1 John 2:17). It is to 'the will of God' that we are to live (1 Peter 4:2), 'made perfect in every good work to do His will' (Heb. 13:21), and 'fruitfulness in every good work' springs from being 'filled with the knowledge of His will' (Col. 1:9,10).

God's Way Of Holiness. Horatius Bonar. Evangelical Press 1979, 12 Wooler Street, Darlington, Co. Durham, DL1 1RQ, England. First Published 1864. Pages 68-88.

The Saint and the Law. Horatius Bonar.
http://www.gospelpedlar.com/articles/Christian%20Life/saintlaw.html

Teach Me, O Lord, Thy Way of Truth

Below is a hymn I came across in the Trinity Hymnal that I had not sung before, but will from now on:

Teach Me, O Lord, Thy Way of Truth - #451
From Psalm 119:33-40

Teach me, O Lord, thy way of truth,
And from it I will not depart;
That I may steadfastly obey,
Give me an understanding heart.?

In thy commandments make me walk,
For in thy law my joy shall be;
Give me a heart that loves thy will,
From discontent and envy free.?

Turn thou mine eyes from vanity,
And cause me in thy ways to tread;
O let thy servant prove thy Word
And thus to godly fear be led.

Turn thou away reproach and fear;
Thy righteous judgments I confess;
To know thy precepts I desire;
Revive me in thy righteousness.

Denominations or Associations?

I recently finished reading Denominations or Associations?: Essays on Reformed Baptist Associations edited by James M. Renihan and highly recommend this book .

I have always struggled with the autonomous view of ecclesiology that many Baptists hold to. To me it never seemed to hold up to what we see of the early church in Acts 15. It seems from scripture that while the local churches were not dependent on other churches they were in some fashion interdependent as Acts 15 shows. This interdependency is sadly lacking in the Baptist church today and even in Reformed Baptist circles. I have for some time thought that there needed to be a manner in which churches interacted that was more scriptural. That manner of interaction is clearly put forth in this book.

The book is made up of a number of essays that touch on various aspects of how Reformed Baptist churches should associate and most involve the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith and article 26 that deals with The Church, specifically section 15:

26:15. In cases of difficulties or differences, either in point of doctrine or administration, wherein either the churches in general are concerned, or any one church, in their peace, union, and edification; or any member or members of any church are injured, in or by any proceedings in censures not agreeable to truth and order: it is according to the mind of Christ, that many churches holding communion together, do, by their messengers, meet to consider, and give their advice in or about that matter in difference, to be reported to all the churches concerned; howbeit these messengers assembled, are not intrusted with any church-power properly so called; or with any jurisdiction over the churches themselves, to exercise any censures either over any churches or persons; or to impose their determination on the churches or officers.
( Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23, 25; 2 Corinthians 1:24; 1 John 4:1 )

In looking at this section it becomes clear that the word “communion” used in the context of the time refers to an association of churches that went far beyond simply eating together or partaking in some variety of activities. This association, or communion, instead extended to the he health and vibrancy of the church by having a mutual association that in many ways contradicts the often over emphasized autonomy of the local church we see today.

The book looks at the time of the LBC and shows the thinking of such associations as the Abingdon Association (1652). It is in looking at scripture the LBC and the associations of the time that we get a clear picture that the Baptist church, particularly Reformed Baptist churches, of today has moved away from its moorings. It is a move that needs to be reversed for the church to be what God intendeds it to be; an interdependent family of believers and not the independent autonomous group it often is. I think this independence not only affects the church as a whole but the mindset begins to filter down to the individuals and creates issues at that level as well.

I highly recommend this book and would pray that this is the direction the church, and especially Reformed Baptist Churches, would head.

Great Authors Webinar Series

Vision Forum is having a Great Authors Webinar Series from April 15th to May 27th:

Gather your family for seven engaging evenings of learning online as part of Vision Forum’s exclusive Great Authors Webinar Series. Hear live lectures from seven leading authors discussing their timely books, and engage in interactive Q&A — all part of an intimate online discussion with your favorite Christian authors. A valuable supplement to any home school program, this special webinar series offers a great opportunity for families to study important subjects together — a powerful educational tool for home education, church, and family.

The Great Authors Webinar Series — featuring Doug Phillips, Dr. George Grant, Dr. John Morris, Douglas Bond, Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr., Kevin Swanson, and Dr. Voddie Baucham — will cover a broad range of topics: from biblical economics to creation apologetics; from an inside look into the lives of important culture-changers such as Margaret Sanger and John Calvin, to practical points of cultural and family reformation, and more.

• April 15 – Doug Phillips – Why Poetry Matters — Poems for Patriarchs
• April 22 – Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr. – Biblical Economics and the Christian Family
• April 29 – Dr. John Morris – The Truth about the Fossil Record
• May 6 – Dr. George Grant – The Most Dangerous Woman of the 20th Century
• May 13 – Douglas Bond – The Wonderful and Mysterious Life of John Calvin
• May 20 – Kevin Swanson – The Future Christian Republic
• May 27 – Dr. Voddie Baucham – How to Be a Man

You can also get the books spoken of in the webinar at a discount if you order them when you register.  Of course you can buy the set separately but the cost when registering for the seminar is much less.

The Ah the Life blog is having a drawing to give a free passe to this series.

Coming Soon: The Documentary IndoctriNation

Trailer for Colin Gunn’s new documentary IndoctriNation.




Some other clips from the IndoctriNation website:





You can see more clips on the website, here.