This conference is for all who are interested in thinking, writing and studying to the glory of God, regardless of their current education. In 2025, we began discussing the need students had to grow in their academic journey. One of these felt needs was the ability to not only write, but also present and publish an academic paper. While most papers are submitted to a professor for a grade, excellent papers should be shared with the wider community of scholarship. This conference is especially for the aspiring intellectuals of tomorrow, a conference for students to grow in their scholarly ability and connect with like-minded believers. There is currently no academic conference in a Christian context in Canada that allows undergraduate students to not only present, but also be published. Thus, ECS was born.

ECS provides students of all levels the ability to grow in their academic journey by providing them the opportunity to present and publish their academic work across a variety of disciplines. This is for BA, MA/MDIV, and PhD students. Students can join ECS and present their papers to their peers, thereby furthering the scholarship being done in their field. Then, their papers can be submitted to our academic journal for publication, so that they can be shared with a wider international audience. However, this conference is not exclusively for those currently in school. Any and all who are interested in learning how to think, study, and write to the glory of God are welcome to attend!

This conference will benefit those who are not currently students, as our two plenary speakers, Dr. Michael Haykin and Dr. Bill DeJong, will not only present their papers but also explain how they wrote their papers, so that all can learn from them and their scholarship. Today, in Canada, we stand in need of men and women of godly character, who are rooted in Scripture and intellectually robust. We seek to raise up a generation, not simply of scholars, but of Christians who glorify God with their heart, soul, mind, and strength. We long for those who are equipped at ECS to glorify God with their minds and serve faithfully and sacrificially in their local church. Join us on Saturday, September 26, 2026, for a day of rich fellowship and serious scholarship from two acclaimed professors and those emerging in their fields.

Your brother in Christ,

Obadiah Mariona.

The Manna narrative in Exodus, which is repeated in Numbers, unfolds into a biblical and theological understanding of dependence, provision, and testing, all of which are fulfilled in Christ, who perfectly fulfills what is described in the text. To begin, certain topics which are relevant to the passage yet do not fit the scope of this essay include the authorship of the passage, the scientific authenticity of manna, and the details of the theophanic revelation. This commentary will focus on a biblical-theological explanation of the text, primarily highlighting a biblical theology of Manna, written for the Church of God.

Context to the Narrative: 15:22-16:1

To start, some context is needed. This passage is the sixteenth of forty chapters in Exodus. The previous narrative has been the great deliverance out of Egypt. It has been one month since leaving Egypt.1 In the previous chapter, we see the children of Israel rejoice and worship Yahweh for his great deliverance, which climaxes in the song penned in Chapter Fifteen.

For a richer understanding of the narrative flow, consider Chapter Fifteen, verse twenty-one, as the end of the narrative of deliverance and Chapter Fifteen, verse twenty-two, as the introduction to the wandering narrative. This gives great clarity to modern readers of this passage to observe the literary shape of Exodus. In chapter fifteen, deliverance is complete. Now, the people of God are tested in their faithfulness. Justification has happened; now the people are being sanctified. Context is crucial for understanding this text.

Stephen Dempster points out the centrality of Sinai within the Pentateuch, a thematic approach which can critically explain the retelling of the manna narrative within the Pentateuch. He writes;

“The centrality of Sinai is shown by the repetition of similar incidents before it and after it in the text. For example the father-in-law of Moses appears immediately before Sinai (Exodus 18) and immediately after (Numbers 10) there are incidents about Manna (Ex: 16) and quail (Ex: 16 and water (Ex:17) before Sinai and after (Numbers 11:20) there’s also a Sabbath violation before (Exodus 16) and after, (Numbers 1) as well as complaining, (Exodus 15:24; 16:2;16:7-8; Exodus 17:3) these texts are crucial for understanding the Sinai experience but their significance is rarely noted.”2

Dempster places the manna narrative within a larger framework of the whole Pentateuch, which sheds light on its repetition in light of the Mosaic Covenant. This helps understand the place and purpose of the Manna narrative within the Pentateuch.

Reading the Manna Narrative as moving from deliverance, to paradise, to the wilderness of Sin (the Wilderness of Sin has nothing linguistically connected to the English word sin) allows the reader to have some compassion for the people’s grumbling in verse two. However, the legitimacy of the complaint is quickly negated as we shall see shortly. The people came to Elim, which contained 12 springs of water, seventy palm trees. Moreover, this narrative occurs only a month and a half after they had fled Egypt and saw the horse and rider tossed into the sea. It was in the Exodus that they saw the full hand of Yahweh. As Yahweh said, “Let my people go, that they may worship me.” This is where the worship begins, or rather, the test to see if they will indeed worship the true and living God.

Grumbling: 16:2-3

Verse two presents the Israelites’ grumbling against Moses and Aaron. Who are Moses and Aaron? They are the Lord’s servants and representatives. In chapter fifteen, verse twenty-five, Yahweh states he is going to test Israel. This test is seen in the move from Elim to Sin, representative of a move from Paradise to the wilderness. Do they go to the Lord in prayer and petition? Do they pant after the Lord as they pant for bread and water? No, they grumble against the servants of Yahweh, which can be seen as a grumble against Yahweh Himself. This is evident since they are his representatives.

In verse three, the people of Israel use God’s covenant-keeping name, the name of Yahweh, not only to complain, but to go so far as to accuse God of attempted murder. This verse ought to burden the hearts of everyone who reads or hears it read aloud. For if we are to truly observe and glean treasures from this verse, we must first come to terms with ourselves, that we have said such elaborate sentences of complaint to God as Israel has.

They went so far as to say, “Would that we had died by the hand of Yahweh in the land of Egypt.”3 To say it was better to die than to see his glory shown is an act of blasphemy worthy of death. Furthermore, they say, “for you have brought us out into this wilderness to kill the whole assembly with hunger.”4 Such a statement cannot be taken lightly, nor can it simply be glossed over. James Hamilton rightly states, “the language may be hyperbolic, but the hyperbole underscores the Israelites’ depth of emotion—and severe lack of faith. Fear and anxiety have many causes, but they are often rooted in a lack of trust in the Lord.”5

Wellum and Gentry articulated that the Israelites’ testing is due to their status as sons who are called to be a holy and a set-apart nation for Yahweh.6 Such testing as Abraham, Job, and now the Children of Israel endure. He tests them to see if they will obey Him, to walk in his law, to keep the Sabbath, and to trust God for absolutely everything.

Moreover, within a Biblical-Theological framework, one can observe the Ordo Salutis (order of salvation) as a further explanation of the sonship testing.7 Within the Order of Salvation, sanctification comes after justification. He tests them to see if they will walk in his law after their great deliverance, after their baptism through the sea.8 A clear parallel can be made to how the Christian is now tested after the great deliverance of their soul.9

Yahweh’s Glory and Provision: 16:4-12

Verse four serves as the topic sentence of the rest of the chapter, leaving us with two primary thoughts: God will provide for the people, and through his provision, God will test his people. John Durham observes this provision well: “Both the quails and manna are clearly regarded, wherever mentioned in the Bible (Num 11; Ps 78:23–29; Ps 105:40; John 6:31–33; 1 Cor 10:2–4), as miraculously provided.”10

The first test that is given is whether or not they will obey the fourth commandment, “to honour the Sabbath, and keep it holy.”11 Although this commandment is later given at Sinai, God has made the Sabbath within the creational order, and this law was given before the Mosaic Covenant.12 This principle can be richly applied to the lives of readers today; do you keep the Sabbath? Do you consciously go out of your way to obey this command?

Verse six articulates the extensive mercy of Moses and Aaron, yet especially Yahweh. Time after time, God shows Himself to the Israelites so that they may know Him! They already know, yet they require constant reminders. Their environment rages against them, and they have forgotten their God. Is this you, oh weary soul? Why are you downcast? Why do you grumble? “Hope thou in God!”13 The knowledge of Yahweh in verse six is connected to the vision of Yahweh’s glory in verse seven. God states that they shall see his greatness despite their grumbles against Him. This highlights God’s self-glorification as he manifests Himself to reveal his mercy towards an undeserving people.

In the following verses, we see that the mercies and blessings of God are exceedingly abundant. They are “more than we can ask, think, or imagine.”14 He does not cast away the people of Israel; rather, he calls them near. Surely, all the more he will do for those who belong to Him in Christ Jesus. In verse ten, we see the climactic blessing; Yahweh reveals Himself through a cloud in the wilderness. Cole states, “clouds were often the sign of God’s presence, as in Psalm 104:3 where YHWH rides on the clouds.”15

God states he will show his glory, but this is a glimpse of his greater glory to come. Child reflects on this response and revelation, and he states, “The remarkable response is that God honours the murmuring anyway. He promises meat in the evening and bread in the morning. Nevertheless, he meets their request, not to satisfy their grumblings, but in order that Israel may learn who God is through this gracious act of sustenance.”16 Yes, Yahweh reveals Himself so that his people may know Him. This is just a foretaste of the revelation to come later on Mt. Sinai in the Mosaic Covenant and ultimately in Jesus Christ in the incarnation!

Provision from Yahweh: 16:13-19

In verse thirteen, God uses ordinary means, extraordinarily. Concerning Quail, God does not magically create a bird, for quail is already within the creational order of God. Manna and Quail are, however, extraordinarily gathered in a specific place for a specific purpose: to nourish the people of God. Is that not so with the Word of Truth? “Man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of Yahweh.”17 Thus, it is so within the new covenant, by ordinary preaching, God brings about extraordinary means.

The following verses present some difficulties to the modern reader. There is much speculation concerning verse fourteen as to the science behind the dew on the ground. Childs points out that ancient Near Eastern thinkers, as well as biblical sources, viewed dew as descending from heaven.18 Moreover, Manna’s etymology is notoriously difficult to determine, as described in verse 15. It likely means, “what is it”, though it is hard to ascertain.19 Despite difficulties in knowing the etymology or science behind the manifestation of Manna, some have contended it was not intended to be read that way. Some believe it is more helpful to understand it typologically and allegorically rather than strictly literally.

Exploring the hermeneutical method of some ancient writers can help clarify a biblical theology of Manna and its importance in the new covenant. In a brief overview, Manna can be interpreted in three key ways. As a divine food which nourishes the soul, as a type of the Eucharist, and as a type of Christ. Beginning with Philo, Gregory of Nyssa, and Augustine, these authors will provide a brief overview of a typological and covenantal understanding of Manna.

First, Philo, a first-century Jewish Philosopher based in Alexandria, reflected on the narrative and wrote, “The one extends his vision to the ether and the revolutions of the heaven; he has been trained also to look stedfastly for the manna, which is the word of God, the heavenly incorruptible food of the soul which delights in the vision.”20

Second, Gregory of Nyssa, a fourth-century theologian, articulates his thoughts in his work The Life of Moses, describing Manna as a type of Christ, the Word descending from heaven. He states,

The bread which came from heaven is not some incorporeal thing. For how could something incorporeal be nourishment to a body? Neither ploughing nor sowing produced the body of this bread, but the earth, which remained unchanged, was found full of this divine food, of which the hungry partake. This miracle teaches in anticipation the mystery of the Virgin … This bread, then, that does not come from the earth is the Word. He changes his power in diverse ways to suit those who eat. He knows not only to be bread but also to become milk and meat and greens and whatever else might be appropriate to and desired by the one who receives Him.21

Third, Augustine’s work Contra Fastum, specifically book 12, is a biblical-theology of Christological Soteriology within the Old Testament. The following is taken from his explanation of 1 Corinthians 10:1-4:

“Is not the manna Christ, the living bread which came down from heaven, which gives spiritual life to those who truly feed on it? The Israelites died because they received the figure only in its carnal sense. The apostle, by calling it spiritual food, shows its reference to Christ, as the spiritual drink is explained by the words, ‘That rock was Christ,’ which explains the whole. Then is not the cloud and the pillar Christ, who by his uprightness and strength supports our feebleness; who shines by night and not by day, that they who see not may see, and that they who see may be made blind? In the clouds and the Red Sea, there is the baptism consecrated by the blood of Christ. The enemies following behind perish, as past sins are put away.22

In light of these quotes and in light of the divine revelation of Scripture, it can be concluded that strong typologies can be legitimately made from the Manna narrative to properly understand its place and purposes within Scripture. Since the Holy Scriptures are God’s Word in their entirety, one can use the New Testament references to illuminate the original purpose of the Manna narrative. As Augustine quoted 1 Corinthians 10:1-4, other, more overt references in the New Testament include: Matthew 6:11; Matthew 4:4; John 6:35; and Matthew 26:26.

Jesus claims to be the bread of life. The bread of God is given to nourish the covenant people of God. Therefore, Manna can be viewed as a symbol of the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is itself a spiritual symbol that points to Christ, who was the bread broken for his people. Moreover, Manna reveals the Trinitarian relations in the Godhead; since Jesus is the bread broken for us, then it is by Jesus that we know God. As He Himself testifies, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me.”23 Therefore, by the bread of life, we know the Lord of life.

Moving forward, we ought to notice the use of an omer in verse 16, which was a measurement equivalent to 2.2 Litres. This further signifies that Yahweh is a God of order. He uses science, measurements and specifics to provide for his people, ensuring they have nothing left over. Slowing down to see God’s use of an omer to provide for the people can let us rest in the normative means of Grace. God works within the order he has created. Lastly, verse nineteen is a clear command to trust God daily. Do you, oh reader, trust God daily? Do you trust he will provide what you need for tomorrow, not today in preparation, but tomorrow when you immediately need it?

Rebellion: 16:20-29

Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy describes that the evil man’s reward is evil itself.24 In verses twenty and twenty-one, the reward for their selfishness was nothing but worms and filthy bread. Their evilness was rewarded with the fruit of evil, death. Furthermore, evil is a no-thing; evil is the absence of God.25 The absence of God, who is life, leads to the presence of death. Therefore, they had dead bread, for this is the just reward of their evilness. All Sin leads to death, and this death, as seen in the passage, even affects such things as bread. Such a conclusion demonstrates that all of reality is theological and God-breathed.

In verse twenty-one, the Israelites go out morning by morning and receive new mercy.26 His mercies are indeed new every morning, yet, only for a specific amount of time, as they only gather in the morning. Seek the Lord when he is near, as Isaiah declares.27 Therefore, this is the continuation of the test to trust in the Lord daily for their provision. Each day the Manna comes and is not mouldy, filthy or corrupted. Moreover, there is a command to eat it today. Let us be content with what the Lord has given us, as God states here, you will not find what you are looking for elsewhere. In verse twenty-two, if they were faithful yesterday, they will have all they need for today. If God commands his people to rest, he will cease to provide supernatural manna, as verse twenty-three states. Thus, he forces the people to rest within his law.

When they refused to rest, Yahweh said to Moses, “How long will you refuse to keep my commandments and my Laws?”28 Surely here, Moses is in a position as a representative head of the people of Israel. This demonstrates that Moses is a type of messiah, but he is not the Messiah. He is the one accused of refusing the commands, though the people are the ones to disobey. Yahweh has given his commands, and they are not burdensome. He has given us the provision to obey Him. In this passage, it is bread for two days. In the New Covenant, his indwelling Spirit is in us day by day, uniting us more to Him. Moreover, this is an extension of the last verse. How long will you refuse my commands because I have given you provision to keep them? Yahweh clearly argues in a sharply convicting manner that they are without excuse, and the representative head, Moses, is also to bear their burden.

Manna & Memorial: 16:30-36

In verse thirty, the people finally have their rest. God commanded the people to Sabbath, and provided them with the power and provision to keep the Sabbath. This is one of the covenant signs to live well within the land that the Israelites are to inherit. In verse thirty one we see the doctrine of the already not yet, how the manna tastes like honey, which points towards a land flowing with milk and honey. A land which Yahweh has promised to provide. For the honey is given here, before they even enter the land.

Moses commands the people in verse thirty-two to keep the Manna. The reason for keeping it is so that future generations may know Yahweh. This is a clear act of obedience to what Yahweh declared in verses six and eight. God provides so that his people may know Him. His great acts call for a continual memorial for all to know what God has provided for his covenant-keeping people. Thus, as commanded in verses thirty-two and thirty-three, the people of God obey in verse thirty-four, by the hand of Aaron, their representative and chief priest.

Aaron, as the chief priest, is to keep the testimony, to relay the story of God’s provision by manna, to all future generations. How much more is this act completed in Christ, who is our chief priest who sits at the right hand of God, and he testifies to his people for their assurance and to the Father for their propitiation concerning what He Himself has done. He does so that throughout all generations his people will never forget the accomplished work of Jesus Christ.

This testimony applies to verse thirty-five as the people of Israel ate the manna for forty years, till they came to a habitable land. They ate the manna till they came to the border of the land of Canaan. God’s continual faithfulness for forty years ought to astound us! Look at the text, though they were in an uninhabitable land, God provided for their habitation for forty years.

Conclusion

In closing, be blessed and know why God has sovereignly ordained to write about Manna and the people of God. This bread was not only for the Israelites, but Christ has instituted a type of Manna for our benefit today. As St. Ambrose remarks;

God rained down manna and rained down quails upon the Jews, ​but for the Church beloved of Him, the things which He has prepared are those of which it is said: ‘That eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for them that love Him.’ So, lest anyone should say this, we will take great pains to prove that the sacraments of the Church are both more ancient than those of the synagogue, and more excellent than the manna.29

He has instituted the Lord’s Supper for us, as the Israelites did, to feed on blessed bread. May all Christians meditate upon daily. Why should we? As demonstrated in this narrative, God does not take his covenant people at our ugly, despicable complaints; rather, he makes a sweeping declaration of the grace he is about to lavish upon us. Then he commands us to walk in his ways. As noted, Jesus Christ is the true and ultimate bread from heaven. He is our sustenance, our strength. May we take note of this in our daily walk with God.

Also know, God’s actions reflect God’s character. As we see in Exodus 16, his action is pouring out bread from Heaven. This reflects his character of benevolence, of compassion, of a God slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. Therefore, cling to this, dear brethren of God, that our Lord will first miraculously save us, then continually provide for us as his children. First, we are justified, then we are sustained, as we are sustained, God calls us to walk in his law. Beloved of God, if you are reading this, ask yourself, will I walk in his law today, or shall I once more complain as the old man I once was?

- Obadiah Mariona

While all Christians must affirm this, different traditions emphasize different aspects of the Gospel. For instance, some may focus more on the resurrection, while others emphasize the atoning death of Christ. What I will be proposing in this article is that it is an oft-forgotten doctrine that undergirds and unites all that Christ accomplished for our salvation, and that is the believer’s union with Christ. I am not arguing that one must understand union with Christ to believe the gospel, but I am arguing that union with Christ is the key that connects all the benefits of our salvation from beginning to end.

Union with Christ: What is it?

Union with Christ refers to the reality that the Christian, by the Holy Spirit, has been bound to Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit. While this is a broad definition, it gets to the heart of the Christian Gospel. Consider, for instance, the words of the Reformer, John Calvin:

We must now see in what way we become possessed of the blessings which God has bestowed on his only begotten Son, not for private use, but to enrich the poor and needy. And the first thing to be attended to is, that so long as we are without Christ and separated from him, nothing which he suffered and did for the salvation of the human race is of the least benefit to us.2

What Calvin is getting at here is that we receive the blessings of salvation since we are in Christ, who first received the blessings as God’s only begotten Son. Calvin is saying that nothing Christ accomplished, from his incarnation to his return, means anything to us if we are not united to Him as the source of all those blessings. He continues,

To this union alone it is owing, that in regard to us, the Savior has not come in vain. To this is to be referred that sacred marriage, by which we become bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh, and so one with him (Eph. 5:30), for it is by the Spirit alone that he unites himself to us.3

Why did Christ come for us? If we are following Calvin’s logic, it is so that we would be united to Him by the power of His Holy Spirit.

Consider for a minute how we receive the blessings of salvation. Think about regeneration (new life by the Holy Spirit at conversion). How did we receive this? Because Christ was born physically by the Holy Spirit, we must be born again spiritually by the Holy Spirit. Think about justification (God’s declaration that we are righteous). How did we receive this? Christ was fully obedient to the law of God in his life and death and was thus declared righteous. How about adoption?

Christ is the natural Son of God, begotten before time, and he has granted us the right to be the adopted children of God, born again in time. How about the bodily resurrection? We receive this because Christ was first resurrected. I say this to point out that Calvin was on to something with his thesis一unless we are united to Christ himself, we receive nothing of what he accomplished for us.

It is like marriage: in salvation, we are married to God, bound to him by His Holy Spirit.4 Just as a husband is united to his bride and she to him, so we are united to Christ and He to us. Likewise, while marriage brings many benefits, such as being received into a new family, sexual intimacy, and the blessing of children, the chief benefit of marriage is the spouse themselves.

Imagine a husband told his wife that he loved her because of her wealth, or perhaps because of the way that she serves him. In all likelihood, his wife would be discouraged by this because she desires that he would love her for herself. In the same way, when we are united to Christ, we get the benefits of what Christ has accomplished for us (praise the Lord!), but most importantly, we get Him. Just as Christ loves us for nothing we have done, so we should strive to love Christ primarily for who he is through how he has revealed himself in what he has done.

Union with Christ in the New Testament

Space would not permit me to exegete every single passage that relates to Union with Christ in the New Testament; however, it is important to look at several passages that point us towards this understanding of union that I have been arguing for. So for the sake of space, I will look specifically at three passages: one from the Gospels, one from the Letters of Paul, and one from the Letters of Peter. In writing this, I agree with Richard B. Gaffin, who writes:

Nothing is more basic to Paul’s teaching on salvation than the union that exists between Christ and believers, the reality of being ‘in Christ.’ Being united to Christ lies at the basis of all God’s dealings with his people for their salvation from eternity to eternityーfrom their being chosen ‘in him’ before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4-5), to their present life and freedom from condemnation for their sins ‘in Christ Jesus’ (Rom. 8:1-2), to their future glorification ‘with him’ in that union (Rom. 8:17).5

While I agree that this is true of Paul’s teaching specifically, I would furthermore argue that union with Christ is basic to Scripture more broadly.

John 15:1-11

In John 15, we read of the doctrine of union with Christ from our Lord himself. In verses 1-2, John records these words, “‘I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.’” Jesus uses horticulture imagery to communicate a key theological point: there is no life apart from him. Imagine a grape trying to grow apart from its connection to a vine; it is utterly absurd. Likewise, a “Christian” trying to grow apart from Christ and his Church is doomed to fail. Christ reminds us that if we are “in Christ” but not bearing fruit, we will be cut off. This is likely in reference to those who have a false profession but appear nonetheless as Christians. Moreover, just as fruit that is in the vine needs help from an external source to grow more bountifully, so we need the help of our Heavenly Father to grow as we find our life in Christ. Jesus continues:

‘Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.’

Abiding clearly communicates an active participation that takes place from us in Christ. While abiding is not the cause of being in Christ, it is necessary that those in Christ abide. There is no such thing as a passive Christian because we are attached to Christ, who is the source of life and nourishment. Christians are fruit-bearers, which indicates that the process of sanctification, too, can only take place under the banner of union with Christ, as we can do nothing if we are apart from Christ.6

Ephesians 1:3-14

Ephesians 1 is a prime example of Paul’s understanding of our union with Christ by the Holy Spirit. In it, we are told that we have been blessed “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (v. 3). Consider the gravity of this claim in light of our union with Christ: Because you are in Christ, all the blessings of heaven belong to you presently. How can this be?

This is because you have become a partaker of Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, and thus have received all spiritual blessings presently that will be fully consummated when Christ returns. While you do not experience the full realization of these benefits now, it is nonetheless true that experience them in part now and will receive them in full at the bodily resurrection.

Paul continues, saying that “[God] chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him” (v. 4). Just as Christ was chosen of God to be the Holy Redeemer of the world, so we have been chosen in Christ to be the Holy redeemed (see also verse 7). Our election, while happening individually by grace alone, is also indivisibly corporate because it is in Christ that we are chosen. Believers are, as G.K. Beale puts it, “mystically embodied ‘in Christ’ as the elect (i.e., ‘chosen’) to be redeemed (cf. Eph. 1:7) even before ‘the foundation of the world.’7

This passage additionally tells us that we are blessed in Christ with the gift of adoption through him (v.5), the gift of redemption through his blood (v. 7), the gift of a heavenly inheritance (v.11), and the gift of the Holy Spirit (v. 13). For each of these blessings, they are preceded by the clause “in him,” or “in the Beloved,” referring to Christ. I hope it has become clear that it is only in Christ that we receive any benefit of salvation.

2 Peter 1:3-11

The Word of God says,

[God, by] His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.8

The first few lines seem like standard realities of our salvation; God’s powerful grace gives us everything we need to be godly through knowledge of him. He has also indeed granted us great promises (Amen!)... so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature? Hold on (you may be thinking), that sounds questionable. Is Peter saying we become divine through salvation? While that is a potential interpretation of this passage, I believe that would be a misunderstanding.

Rather, I believe this basic syllogism demonstrates what Peter is saying more accurately:

Premise 1: Jesus is Divine

Premise 2: You are united/a partaker in Jesus Christ, the God-Man, through faith

Conclusion: You are a partaker of the divine through faith in Jesus the God-Man

Interestingly, Peter connects becoming a partaker of divinity with God’s precious promises. The logic of this passage also indicates that this statement by Peter is the basis for everything else he will go on to say. It is important to know that Peter’s clause that immediately follows is “for the very reason.”9 Peter’s imperative to supplement faith with virtue and virtue with knowledge is directly connected to his indicative that we have become partakers of divinity.

The theological point that Peter is making here is actually very easy to understand when clarified. God is pure, Holy and unblemished; therefore, as we are conformed to Christ, we become more Godlike in Him. This passage is not arguing that our essence is transformed to divinity, but that we as people are morally transformed to be like God. This is, in part, what it means to be the image of God: to reflect divinity, to be divine-like. None of this, however, is possible apart from union with God himself in Christ.

Conclusion: What is the Significance of This?

While many reading this may already surmise the significance of this doctrine, others may remain unconvinced that a topic such as this deserves a full article dedicated to it. My encouragement to anyone reading this article is to look to Christ. Do you seek forgiveness of sins? Do you want to grow in Holiness? Assurance of Salvation? Redemption you seek? Hope for the future resurrection? Assurance that you are God’s elect? Hope in Christ and trust in His character to fulfill all he has promised. While all these glorious truths are great individually, the doctrine of the believer’s union with Christ shows us a beautiful picture of how the person of Christ is inseparably connected to all these doctrines of our faith. This matters because your whole faith, from eternity past to eternity future, is wrapped up in your union with Christ the Lord by whom you have received all the blessings in the heavenly realms. Christ is yours, and you are his.

For the edification of the Saints

-Owen Ecker

What if the earth were not just beautiful for beauty’s own sake, but it actually demonstrated something about the nature of reality? Namely, that God himself is beautiful in his very essence. So next time you look at the sky, consider that this truly mediates the nature of God and his attributes. While nobody can see God and live, 1 God has revealed himself to be known through what is made. What this entails is both radical and common to all. It is radical because if this is true (which I am inclined to affirm!), this means that we can truly know God through everything he has created. Whether it be the smallest of insects or the largest of mammals, all of creation proclaims not only that God exists, but we can truly know something about him through the means of creation.

This is also common to all because it is just natural. If God is real and has created everything, then we should expect that everything teaches us about him. Scripture testifies to this, saying:

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.2

This passage is often cited to prove the insufficiency of creation to draw people to salvation (and with good reason); however, we miss so much about this passage if we limit our exegesis to this conclusion. Creation is not just the basis by which God judges sinful mankind for their willing rejection of him; it is also a display where God makes Himself known for His people to worship more deeply. Creation, and everything in it are symbols pointing to deeper spiritual realities. For example, Psalm 1 uses the analogy of a tree to contrast the righteous and the wicked:

The purpose of this analogy is not merely to illustrate the life of a righteous man, but to provide a physical example that conveys a spiritual reality. What is the implication of this on your day-to-day life? It means that when you look at a tree, you can know, because God created it, that it is not merely what meets the eye. The tree, by its very essence, demonstrates a heavenly reality because it was created by God, who displays his glory through everything.

The lesson we can learn from a tree is that it grows when nourished by the correct nutrients; therefore, we should grow when nourished with the means of grace. Objects and things are symbols by design, not by accident. Creation, and everything in it, is not abstract with assigned meanings given by human beings, but rather it reveals God’s invisible attributes.

As a practical application of this principle, consider how the regular things in nature every day reveal God to you. Perhaps Scripture already provides an answer, or perhaps you may have to contemplate it in more detail. Consider, for example, Psalm 91:4.

Case Study: Psalm 91:4

As I was reading Scripture recently, I was struck by this reality when I read, concerning God, that:

This passage struck me because of how vividly it uses created things to demonstrate a deeper spiritual reality.

While Psalm 91:4 does not tell us which bird God corresponds to, let us assume that it is a mother hen. It demonstrates that God protects His children like a mother hen protects her chicks. Stop for a second and think of how beautiful this is. The God of the universe, who created all things simply by His Word, cares for you as a mother hen cares for her chicks. How does a mother hen care for her chicks? She covers them with her feathers to protect them from the danger of predators and provides refuge for them under her wings when they are endangered. She also feeds and nurtures them to the point of maturity. How ought we to respond to this?

Know that when you feel particularly discouraged by a prevailing temptation or are perhaps beaten down by the weight of sin that God cares for you as a hen with her chicks. This also provides you with a physical sign of a spiritual reality. When you look at a hen from now on, do not just see the hen; see the mercy of God that he demonstrates through the hen’s care for her chicks. God did not just create hens and then decide to use them as analogies; the very existence of the hen is analogical in nature.4

The Necessity of Scripture

It is necessary, in addressing the nature of created reality, that due to our sinful nature, the human inclination is to worship the created reality rather than the Creator, whom everything points to. We suppress, distort, and reject God’s self-revelation in creation because we love sin by nature.

Romans 1 testifies to this, in which we are told that sinful humanity has rejected God and has, as a consequence, become futile in our thinking. This futility proves itself in that we act contrary to the nature of reality to pursue our disordered passions. “Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.”5

The fact that we worship creation is due to no fault in creation, but is a demonstration of the depravity of our hearts. One need not look further than their own hearts to realize that created things are made idols all the time, from wealth, to sex, to comfort, or to pleasure (just to name a few).

The French Reformer, John Calvin (1509-1564), put it well, saying, “Surely, just as waters boil up from a vast, full spring, so does an immense crowd of gods flow forth from the human mind, while each one, in wandering about with too much license, wrongly invents this or that about God himself.”6 It is for this reason that we need Scripture, as a ‘course-corrective’ for our hearts, that we may see beyond the signs of creation and worship God as the one whom the signs point to. Calvin compares Scripture to a pair of glasses:

Just as old or bleary-eyed men and those with weak vision, if you thrust before them a most beautiful volume, even if they recognize it to be some sort of writing, yet can scarcely construe to words, but with the aid of spectacles will begin to read distinctly; so Scripture, gathering up the otherwise confused knowledge of God in our minds, having dispersed our dullness, clearly shows us the true God.7

This analogy beautifully demonstrates the role of Scripture as it relates to nature. Can an unregenerate man look at creation and understand reality as God has created it? Yes, with the caveat that their understanding will necessarily be obscured because their hearts have not been opened by the Holy Spirit through the Gospel revealed in Scripture in order to rightly see God in creation. Let this be a motivation to us who have seen to use God’s Word to interpret God's world so that we also do not fall into the errors of idolatry by worshipping creation rather than the Creator.

God’s Creation: The Greatest Apologetic

As you read this, the thoughts may already be spiralling in your mind: If God has revealed himself in nature, how do we justify the existence of Atheists? The answer, simply put, is that there is no such thing as an Atheist by nature. Every human being is born into this world with an understanding of who God is, because, as Calvin says, “God has implanted in all men a certain understanding of his divine majesty.”8

God is in no need for someone to demonstrate his existence, for he has justified himself through what is made. The existence of Atheists does not demonstrate a failure in God, but the suppression of this revelation caused by human sinfulness. I am not rejecting the presence of Atheists, I am simply asserting that they are Atheists by choice and by the rejection of created reality.

For this reason, Psalm 14:1 tells us that, “The fool says in his heart, ‘there is no God.’” The height of human folly is Atheism, and we are all tempted towards this when we are drawn to sin, because sin at its heart is unnatural and ignores what is truly good for its own sake. So, when you are engaging with your Atheist, or non-Christian neighbour or friend; demonstrate to them through what is made that Christianity makes sense of the world in a way that their worldview cannot. Demonstrate that the very presence of beauty, goodness, splendour or majesty are all just symbols which point to the deeper reality of the one who created them.9

Conclusion: Worship God for His Creation

How then should we live in light of the beauty of God’s creation? Live in awe and wonder, while being guided by Scripture to worship the God who is beautiful. When you learn a fascinating fact about a tree or an animal, do not stop there! Give glory to God for who he is and how he has revealed himself. Remember, as Calvin said:

that we are called to a knowledge of God: not that knowledge which, content with empty speculation, merely flits in the brain, but that which will be sound and fruitful if we duly perceive it, and if it takes place in the heart…We must therefore be much more profoundly affected this knowledge than if we were to imagine a God of whom no perception came through to us. Consequently, we know the most perfect way of seeking God, and the most suitable order, is not for us to attempt with bold curiosity to penetrate to the investigation of his essence, which we ought more to adore than meticulously search out, but for us to contemplate him in his works whereby he renders himself near and familiar to us, and in some manner communicates himself.10

Is something beautiful? God is more beautiful. Is something Holy? God is Holier. Is something good? God is greater. Is something pure? God is purer. Everything in creation testifies to who God is, so do not stop with the symbol, but look to the one whom the symbol points to.

Grace and Peace,

Owen Ecker.

“My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.”

In the previous section, we expounded on what pride is and the necessary consequences that result from it. Let us now focus on the opposite of such a vile substance, and let us turn to a more worthy and happy subject, Humility. I call you to contemplate the results of humility both in this life and in the life to come.

I must call you first to blush at the message expressed in these texts. For humility is such a powerful and profound subject that seldom does any man who understands the requirements of piety dare to claim for himself. Humility is a subject that is only understood when a man looks outside himself. It is like the tongues of fire that hung upon the heads of the disciples, yet no disciple saw his own fire. It is such a virtue that cannot be found carelessly on the lips of a holy man, only on those of his observers. For a man who is truly inflamed by the fire of humility blushes at the subject. Although a proud man freely boasts about his awesome virtue and his independent piety, a humble man cannot help but shy away from such a subject. To grasp this humility, let us turn to our Lord and observe how he taught on a truly humble life.

Two People, Two Pleas

Our Lord Jesus Christ, in a masterful way, paints a clear picture that highlights the difference between a proud man and a humble man. In Luke 18:9-14, Jesus tells a story about two men who went to pray at the temple.

He (Jesus) told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.

The first man boasted of his tremendous gifts and his estate above other unworthy men. It is good to note that our Lord does not say this man was not who he claimed to be (though he was obviously not). Maybe he was really a man of great devotion superficially. Maybe he was a man who paid his dues and honoured men accordingly in the sight of men. Perhaps he was even the greatest religious teacher, well respected and versed in the law and its demands. On the other hand, there was another man who was the exact opposite of that former fine chap. Perhaps he was guilty of great sins and despised by other pious men. Yet our Lord points out a stark difference between these two men which was more than met the eye.

The proud religious man boasted in his prayers and admired himself above his compeer. Sinful men always compare themselves to their fellow men. Another name for pride is competition. In his prayer, he disassociates himself from sinners and counts his many righteous deeds before God. Yet we can be sure that though his first words were “God,” he never once saw the face of God, nor entered his presence. For though he said prayers, he never truly prayed. His heart was lifted, and though he was a sinner, he saw himself in the most righteous condition and thus found no salvation and justification before God. In his Institutes, Calvin says:

“Scripture uniformly relates, holy men were struck and overwhelmed whenever they beheld the presence of God. When we see those who previously stood firm and secure so quaking with terror, that the fear of death takes hold of them, nay, they are, in a manner, swallowed up and annihilated, the inference to be drawn is that men are never duly touched and impressed with a conviction of their insignificance, until they have contrasted themselves with the majesty of God.”

And so, this fellow never saw God’s awesomeness as those who have previously encountered God.

On the other hand, the tax collector found mercy before God because he was humble. Read the story and observe the dispositions and the positions of these two men. One was proud and stood by himself, and the other was humble and stood afar off and would not even lift his eyes to heaven. A humble man will recognize his position and never make assumptions. When he is before God, he is truly before God. The opinions of men about him, whether good or bad, fade away; he sees the face of God alone and says like David: “Against you, you only have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight” (Psalm 51:4).

This is perfectly illustrated in the stories found in the Gospels. When Peter saw the majesty of Jesus and the miracle performed, he was abashed and immediately his sins flashed before his eyes. He “fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, ‘Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord’” (Luke 5:8 ESV). When the centurion saw who Jesus was, he would not even permit Jesus to come over to his house, but, being afar off like the tax collector, he said he was not worthy. O, that we see him for who he is! For God is the hammer that humbles the nail of human pride. For he will level every mountain of pride we have.

The Victory in Humility

But there is a great victory found in humility. For it is only the humble man who can obtain favour from God. He has promised not only to level the mountains that are lifted but that he will fill up every lowly valley. Those who are truly humble and see themselves as God sees them have a great reward with God. As our text shows us, he will save them. Whatever dangers humble men may face and whatever dire ordeal they fear, their contrite hearts shall be the compensation that, like a sweet aroma, arises to please the holy God and save them from their fears. For as Jesus himself pronounced forgiveness and salvation to the tax collector burdened and sorry for his sins in the sight of God, our sins are also forgiven when we approach God with a humble spirit and with a contrite heart. “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (Psa. 51:17 ESV).

Therefore, the assurance of salvation is meant only for the humble. The text laid before us assures us that we shall be saved by God if we offer him the right sacrifices: humility. The tax collector went home truly justified and righteous before God, whereas the Pharisee went home in his sins. Jesus said that he came exclusively for the unrighteous and to call sinners to repentance. Consequently, those who feel in their heart the emptiness of their sinful nature and call out for salvation can be assured that God has heard them. Sing with the Psalmist:

But for those who say they are without sin and never see a need for salvation or rescue, there is no salvation for them. As Jesus said to Capernaum, which was exalted to the heavens: “You will be brought down to hades” (Mat. 11:23 ESV), so will every proud man and woman be brought very low.

The Blessings of Humility

In the beatitudes, our Lord exalts the virtue of humility and shows us the great rewards that result from it. Those who are poor in spirit will inherit the kingdom of God; those who are meek will inherit the earth. All things belong to those who come to God empty-handed and say to him: “nothing in my hands I bring, simply to thy cross I cling.” For a man who closes his hands because he thinks he has too much, cannot receive the rewards of a king. But when we, like beggars, approach the great King of the universe with open hands, what can be withheld from us? Paul has expressed it with the utmost certainty and the right syllogism: “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?” (Rom. 8:32 ESV). And he continues in another place: “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace” (Rom. 11:6 ESV). But the proud man can never sing the song of the saints: “O to grace, how great a debtor daily I’m constrained to be.” Yet we can rejoice, worship and pray to our great God who has given us the victory. So, brothers and sisters, let us pray.

Prayer

Lord, you are very great, and we are nothing. Your servant Isaiah recorded that Bel and Nebo, the false gods of the Babylonians, bowed down before you. They neither have hands nor mouths. But you, O Lord, are the author both of movement and of speech. You have spoken once, and we have heard twice that all power belongs to you. Thus, teach us to be humble. Help us sit as it were by the pool of Siloam, waiting eagerly for you to come, while trusting in no one and nothing else. Teach us to acknowledge our blindness and, by your command, wash our eyes in the water of your word. O Yahweh, give us sight! And thus, we shall be saved and be witnesses to those in the high courts of this low world. Lead us to their very chambers to witness that you are the Christ and the Son of the living God. Let them marvel and let their blindness be discovered. But let them submit to you. For you have come into this world to judge, that those who do not see, shall see, but those who say that they see would be made blind. You have come into this world to humble the exalted and exalt the humble. To the only wise and humble God, be glory and dominion. Amen!

- Wallace

“For you save a humble people, but the haughty eyes you bring down” - Psalm 18:27

To the humble saints of our Lord.

Introduction

Through this write-up I want to describe how God sees and reacts to one of these two distinct persons. I want to describe God’s disposition towards those who are proud and speak briefly on the consequences that follow a proud man. In a later write-up which shall necessarily follow this, I will speak on the happy estate of the humble and show us what consequences follow their character both in this life and in the next.

This text (Psalm 18:27) laid before us exposes a principle of great consequence and profound depth. The salvific plans of God are summarized here. And those who by experiential knowledge have learned what it conveys will attest unflinchingly to its veracity. For unless experience had painfully taught Nebuchadnezzar the ways of Jehovah in such matters, he would have assumed that he was higher than the highest and continued to exalt himself above measure. But our God is not to be rivaled or compared with, nor can men and angels rise above him, as to compare themselves and thus commit that so great a crime which commenced the irreconcilable war in heaven. For God will share his glory with no other.

However, for our benefit, this text has been placed here to remind us of what character and disposition to assume before God. We know that all scripture has been given for our benefit; that is, for both correction and encouragement and for the perfection of those who would come to God. It is meant to encourage those who eagerly submit to God and wait for him as a servant waits for his master.

Yet – as clearly taught in this text – correction and reprove are meant to humble the lofty opinions of those who have exalted views of themselves or other things above the knowledge of the true God. For James has expressed it ever more clearly elsewhere in Scriptures, he states: “But he gives more grace. Therefore, it says, ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.’” (James 4:6 ESV).

The Nature of Pride

Many have named pride as the mother of all sins and as the root of that bad tree. Other sins are the posterities that suckle on the breast of pride and grow by her poisonous substance; they are the fruits that hang visible on the tree of pride. What was the sin by which Satan, once known in the ethereal world as Lucifer, desired to ascend the mountain of God and likened to be the highest? Was it not this very substance called pride?

Yes, it was. And so, God has always had an enmity against it and it against him. There is no truce that can result between God and pride. The fatal line has been drawn. For Milton’s Satan said about the matter: “Never can true reconcilement grow where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep.” Pride is the antithesis that strives against the reign of the great King of the universe. And God has made his commands clear against it, that he will forever resist the prideful one. But pride has also made its word against God, though inconsequentially.

Consequences of Pride

But that ancient fiend, Satan, who was once in a happy estate, chose to be ruled by it and thus opened the door for it to reign in the world. For he was blessed in his happy estate and perfect in splendour. He was second only to God. Yet his heart was lifted and by desire of what was not his, he exalted himself above what was measured to him. Thus sinners, when they sin, whether they are aware of it or not, follow the patterns of this great adversary and exalt themselves over the highest. Yet, their phantasmal attempts at this cosmic usurpation always proves futile, since God himself is matchless. His subjects, as Isaiah has said, are like grasshoppers and he will, with one word, destroy all living things contrary to his reign.

Yet, although God resists those who venture in prideful affairs, men continue their madness pompously. They rid themselves of knowledge and wisdom evades them. They forget to heed the words of Solomon that to be wise is to fear God and to recognize his proper place. Therefore, because they lack this esteem for God and his majesty, they go about their affairs with the utmost disregard. And in their blindness, they forget to look upon Satan’s sad condition and consider carefully what consequences follow those who by action and desire exalt themselves above God and his word.

For Herod Agrippa I who did not redirect the glory he received from the praises of his subjects to God, found out who was the highest. For, as Josephus records: “On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theater early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, (though not for his good,) that he was a god.” And the physician Luke records for us the account as well: “And the people were shouting, ‘The voice of a god, and not of a man!’ Immediately an angel of the Lord struck him down, because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and breathed his last” (Acts 12:20-21 ESV).

Pride, An Obstacle

This infection of pride is as well the obstacle over which men stumble as they resist salvation. The salvation of the LORD is meant only for those who have seen themselves in their low estate. When they cry out to him, he hears their pleas. But a proud man cannot see his need and thus cannot come to God for rescue. For when a man has fallen into a pit and suffers and yet refuses to be helped by the good Samaritan passing by, his case belongs to the worse category.

For he is doubly blind and does not see, nor does he desire to see. He is so content in his pit that he sees himself to be in a higher position than those offering him a helping hand. In his heart he has ascended above the clouds and from his lofty height touched God’s crown in the middle, as only this mad man can muse and relish upon such a subject. So, because of his imaginations he has resisted the help he needed and closed the pit beyond discovery of good men. In the same way, those who reject salvation found in the gospel turn away from the only help they have because it tells them that they are in a low estate, which displeases them sorely. It tells them that a willingness to accept one’s desperate condition is the prelude to escaping damnation and eternal woe.

A call to Humility

But sinful men full of pride are lofty only in their eyes. They are lower than the ground itself. Their illusion has confused them, and “Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things” (Rom. 1:22-23 ESV). O that men would descend from the heights whereon they stand so flamboyantly and submit to the cross, where sin and pride was crucified and right standing with God purchased, and sing together with Isaac Watts and the lowly saints, “My richest gain I count but loss, and pour contempt on all my pride.”

-Wallace Goodwin

We are saved by faith alone in Christ alone. To Reformed, Protestant, Evangelical Christians, this is an uncontroversial statement. Obviously we are saved by Jesus Christ alone. While we take this truth for granted, let us briefly examine how Christ saved us. To do so, we look to two aspects of Christ’s work for us, what theologians call the active and passive obedience of Christ, and its imputation to us. We will look at these in turn, and end our time reflecting on what that means for us today.

Christ’s Passive Obedience

The passive obedience of Christ is His suffering and dying for our sins. This is not passive like Jesus was a bystander caught up in the scuffle; rather, Jesus consciously committed Himself to His Father’s will to suffer and die for the sake of His people. Jesus prays, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done” (Luke 22:42).1 Jesus says to the Pharisees, “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father” (John 10:17-18). So, Jesus’ suffering and death (from His betrayal in the garden to His death on the cross) was undertaken for us.

This is what the Holy Spirit communicates through Paul when he writes, “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). We will return to this verse later, but the Word is clear: Jesus was made to be sin because our sin was imputed to Jesus. We cannot really understand His suffering unless we see that He was counted as sin. This is what the Holy Spirit revealed through Isaiah: “But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement of our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed” (Isa. 53:5). This is how we were delivered (saved) from eternal punishment in hell, which is the righteous and due punishment for sin (Rom. 6:23). Jesus suffered in our place, which brings our accounts from negative to zero; our debt has been paid. But how do we attain eternal life?

Christ’s Active Obedience

The active obedience of Christ is His perfect keeping (obedience, following) of God’s law as revealed in the Scriptures. In other words, this is Jesus’ holiness lived out, His sinlessness on display. This is how eternal life is attained. To understand why, we must look to Jesus as the Second Adam, and why we needed a second one in the first place. Adam was given a purpose and a command, do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; and God tells him the punishment for breaking this commandment, he will surely die (Gen. 2:17). Adam fails both his purpose and command and, as our natural father, plunged humanity into a state of sin passed from generation to generation.

Now, the Old Testament traces the promised redemption of Genesis 3:15 all the way to Jesus, as given in Matthew’s genealogy (Matt. 1). We are also told that “the last Adam became a life-giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:45), and that “the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). Jesus is the last Adam who gives life where the first Adam brought death.

“Whoever is steadfast in righteousness will live, but he who pursues evil will die” (Prov. 11:19 ESV). We need to be righteous in order to have eternal life; the imputation of Christ’s passive obedience (suffering) only removed our debt, but it didn’t make us righteous. The imputation of Christ’s active obedience (perfectly righteous life) is how we are made righteous. Remember, “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). As Isaiah prophesied, “He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many” (Isa. 53:11). So Jesus, the Righteous Servant of God, lived the perfect life for us. What does that mean for us?

Our Benefit

We know that Jesus Christ not only perfectly obeyed the Law, and not only suffered the punishment of sin, but that He did so for us, and we receive that by imputation. But how does that affect how I live? It is a sure rock to cling to when the ground shakes beneath us. Let your soul be comforted, Beloved! “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1), because Christ said, “It is finished” (John 19:30)! We now bear no guilt of sin before God, for Jesus paid that penalty on the cross for you. We now have freedom from the burden of earning righteousness, for Jesus walked righteously for you.

We are as Joshua standing before the Angel of the Lord, “clothed with filthy garments” (Zech. 3:3 ESV). But the Angel of the Lord, showing our standing before God in Christ, says, “Remove the filthy garments from him. … Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments” (Zech. 3:4 ESV).

When the Accuser seeks to bring a charge against you, you have your defence. When doubt creeps in, you have armour. “I am saved, not because of myself, but because of my Great Saviour. He died gruesomely for me, and He gave me His righteousness! All because He loves me with an unshakeable love!” You can say with the Shulamite, “His banner over me was love” (Song 2:4). We can trust God in all things, because God undertook the greatest rescue mission; not for random people, but for those whom He loves. So trust Him in all things, rest in Him, and walk now in the freedom of new life He has given you.

Prayer

O Lord, we thank You for sending Your Son into the world for us. To live the perfect life, and die the worthy death. You knew we couldn’t save ourselves. And you love us with an unchanging, eternal love. Thank You, Lord, for saving a wretch like me. Thank You for imputing Your righteousness to me. Lord, lead me where You would have me go, and be my strength when I am there. Would those around me come to know You as I do; that they would trust in You. I pray these things in Jesus’ holy name. Amen.

From your fellow servant in Christ,

Chaz Navarro

Introduction

How often should we take communion?1 This is a question that every church must ask, and yet how many churches can articulate a reason behind their regularity? Some churches take communion monthly, some four times a year, some weekly, and some sporadically - whenever the pastor thinks it fits the service. Yet we must ask, what did Christ intend for the Lord’s Supper? Did He design it to be taken with any particular regularity, or did He leave this up to the discretion of each individual church?

Let’s take this a step further. The Lord’s Supper is not the only part of the Sunday service. In evangelical circles, other liturgical elements include the singing of songs and hymns, prayer, preaching, and the reading of the Word. I am sure these elements occur weekly in your churches - but why?

Today’s article seeks to address the regularity of the Lord’s Supper, arguing for weekly communion, by receiving an argument from the great Puritan theologian Thomas Goodwin. Goodwin (1600-1680), who was a Westminster divine, a close confidant and chaplain to Oliver Cromwell, and a leader among the Congregationalists, argues for weekly partaking of the Lord’s Supper in his work Of the Constitution, Right Order, and Government of the Churches of Christ, which was published posthumously in 1696. Goodwin’s argument will be presented, examined, and then put to use for today.

Goodwin on the Ordinances

In book VII, chapter V of Goodwin’s Of The Constitution, etc., Goodwin considers the Biblical design of a church service. He does so by casting his eye to Acts 2:42, which reads,

Goodwin takes this verse as normative for the church today, writing,

“Therefore, what we find the churches to have practised, upon ordinary grounds, that we take for a command of Christ… in this 42d verse of chapter ii. you have the solemn standing worship, which the first church continued in, as a pattern to all that should follow.”2

Thus, Goodwin divides the worship of the church into four ordinances:

1. The Apostle’s doctrine

2. Fellowship

3. Breaking of bread

4. Prayers

Under the third point, Goodwin locates the Lord’s Supper, holding that this breaking of bread is no mere ordinary eating, but links this bread-breaking to the Lord’s Supper.3 Goodwin then links fellowship (translated from κοινωνία) to the distribution to the poor, as elsewhere in Scripture the word κοινωνία is used broadly to refer to this practice. Goodwin further identifies the apostle’s doctrine with the preaching of the Word, and the prayers mentioned here to corporate prayer.

After stating that the Lord has directly laid out the four elements of proper worship in Acts 2:42, Goodwin restates the regulative principle of worship.4 This is the theological principle which holds that worship must be done according to God’s command given in the Scriptures. Scripture regulates worship, and so we do not have the liberty to decide how we worship the Lord. As the Lord’s Supper is of extreme importance, it must be administered as the Lord sees fit. Goodwin then distinguishes between two types of ordinances: occasional and continual.5 This distinction is essential if we are to understand Goodwin’s thought.

Occasional ordinances are to be done continually throughout the church, but they only occur as occasions call for them. In the old covenant, ordinances such as circumcision, personal sacrifices, and cleansing rituals fit this category, and today under the new covenant baptism, church discipline, and excommunication serve as occasional ordinances.6 Interestingly, Goodwin also lists prophesying to be an occasional ordinance, occurring in the congregation “as God stirs up their hearts, and reveals something to them.”7

Continual ordinances, on the other hand, are to be done continually and with regularity as God has instructed His church. These ordinances fit the normative pattern of the church, and so are to be done as the church normally meets together. Under the old covenant, this included the morning and evening sacrifice, the yearly day of atonement, rest on the Sabbath day, and so forth. Now, under the new covenant, this includes preaching on the Lord’s Day, corporate prayer, and, as Goodwin argues, the Lord’s Supper.

If you accept his framework, Goodwin’s case is really quite simple. Goodwin proceeds to identify the Lord’s Supper as a continual ordinance, giving three specific reasons for its regular, weekly observance:

1. The Supper is an act of the whole church, uniting them as one body;

2. There is never a special occasion for the Supper, thus every Lord’s Day is an equally good opportunity to give the Supper;

3. Every church has the ability, if properly stewarded, to celebrate the Supper every Lord’s Day, barring extraordinary circumstances.8

Just as preaching and praying ought to be done and can be done every Lord’s Day, so too the Supper ought to be celebrated every Lord’s Day. Goodwin concludes that this is the normative expectation for churches, but he does give larger churches an exemption if “their congregations be too vast… to administer it to all every Lord’s day.”9

Why does Goodwin see this as so important? It is because through the Lord’s Supper, God’s worship is made complete, and our joy in Him is made sure. Goodwin writes,

And for us, the Supper provides a full provision of the gospel which might not be given as clearly and as regularly in the varied sermons that come through the pulpit. On this point Goodwin writes,

Receiving Goodwin’s argument

What shall we make of Goodwin’s argument? First, his high view of the Lord’s Supper confronts the symbolic position found so commonly among evangelical churches today. So often we fail to value the Supper, simply because we do not understand what is offered to us therein. Many larger churches especially might choose to not deal with the effort of administering the Supper weekly, because they do not see the benefit. But Goodwin reminds us that when the Supper is rightly understood and regularly administered, the saints are greatly blessed.

Goodwin’s argument is not without its faults, however. He makes no mention of corporate singing - a commonplace on Sundays both today and in Goodwin’s time. However, this does not give us reason to think he opposed this. As a member of the committee which oversaw the writing of the Savoy Declaration, it can be safely assumed that Goodwin approved of Psalm-singing in church.12 Yet it does not fit naturally into his scheme of worship drawn from Acts 2:42, although presumably he would see it as a continual ordinance.

Even if Goodwin is guilty of putting too much weight on one verse, his understanding of continual and occasional ordinances holds water. Scripture gives no guidelines as to the frequency of the Supper’s administration. Rather, the Supper is assumed to be a part of Christian gathering on the Lord’s Day, as Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 demonstrate. By understanding the ordinances in this way, and by pairing this understanding with a consistent application of the regulative principle of worship, Goodwin creates a consistent and convincing argument for regular participation in the Supper.

Many churches today, especially evangelical churches, give little thought to how often we take the Lord’s Supper. Whether we take the Supper weekly, monthly, or more sporadically, we rarely make the decision for theological reasons. Rather, what works best for our individual churches turns our hand, and the Supper is ignored for the sake of convenience. Now, we certainly cannot ignore the needs of our churches, but we must not put them above the right worship of God. Goodwin reminds us that when we gather together as a church to engage in worship, our first duty is to worship as God would have us do so. His preferences come first, not our own.

Conclusion

Goodwin shows us that Reformed evangelicals can have a high view of the Lord’s Supper, seeing it as both a beautiful meeting with Christ, and as an integral part of our weekly worship. By receiving theologians like Thomas Goodwin, we can combat our modern tendency towards convenience and man-centeredness, and return to a pure worship of God that leads us to doxological joy. Let’s take Goodwin’s advice and partake of the Supper every time we are gathered together, for as Goodwin wrote, here Christ is “light, and wisdom, and comfort, and all to thee.”13

May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit!

-Adam Heida

PS: If you liked this article, we are curious for how often your church offers communion in the poll below.

Have you ever heard somebody justify an opinion by appealing to an unclear passage of Scripture as their main source of evidence? Perhaps you have been a victim of some brutal proof-texting1 within a local church that has justified blatantly sinful behaviour. The justification for such claims is in the name of “the Bible says so.” Or perhaps you have received a simplistic one-verse response to a very complex theological issue, as if that sealed the deal. While I am sure we have all seen this (or may have been culprits ourselves), I would argue that this is often due to a misunderstanding and misapplication of the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

This article is not intended to be a biblical defence of Sola Scriptura (while that is necessary if Protestants are to be consistent). Rather, this article aims to clarify exactly what Sola Scriptura is in a day when the doctrine is often and unfortunately misconstrued and misunderstood.

Sola Scriptura is arguably the main difference that separates confessional Protestantism from all other forms of Christianity. This is likely due to the fact that for Protestants, Sola Scriptura is the basis for all other doctrines of Christianity. From a grammatical standpoint, Sola Scriptura is a Latin phrase that translates to “Scripture Alone.” It is important to understand what these two words mean in their proper context, because if not, it can lead to deep errors. Sola Scriptura is particularly concerned with the role of infallible authority in the Christian faith.2

The uniqueness of Protestantism is that it places Holy Scripture as the only source of infallible truth and practice necessary for the church and the Christian. Thus Scripture alone is the final authority. This differs from Roman Catholicism, for instance, which argues that both Scripture and Sacred Tradition are constituted as the Word of God. Both Scripture and Tradition, thus, find their source in God himself. Consider the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.’ Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own ‘always, to the close of the age.3

They further argue that “‘[t]he task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone.’”4 According to this teaching, by implication, it is the role of appointed bishops to handle and interpret Scripture for the Church.5

While this subject of Scripture’s relationship to tradition may seem obvious to many reading this article, it is nonetheless crucial to clarify some errors commonly confused with the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, as it is, unfortunately, either given the “straw man” treatment far too often or is frankly misunderstood by many who profess it.

Error #1: Sola Scriptura means that there is no Authority Outside of Scripture Alone

It is this error in particular that I believe is the most subtle. I believe this because it uses words like “authority” and “Scripture Alone” to prove its point. This sounds correct, doesn’t it? Perhaps you are reading this and thinking to yourself: Isn’t that what Sola Scriptura is? This is incorrect simply because it does not consider that Scripture itself names authorities outside of itself. For instance, the Bible lists parents as a genuine authority throughout Scripture, whether it be the 6th commandment or the book of Proverbs, or into the New Testament in which Paul writes, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for it is right.”6

If it is true that Sola Scriptura affirms no authority outside of Scripture, than it would follow that children could not faithfully obey their parents unless they were asked to do things explicitly stated in Scripture. For instance, perhaps a parent sets a child’s bedtime at 9:00 pm. If Scripture were the only authority, then the child could cite the lack of the command for a bedtime as evidence to disobey. This would obviously be absurd and would go fundamentally against parental authority which is clearly established. Likewise, the State is said to be a genuine authority. Scripture states, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”7

If Sola Scriptura stated that there is no authority outside of Scripture, this would be an obvious reason to reject the principle. Furthermore, there are non-Biblical authorities that are nonetheless prudent to obey. Authorities of this nature would include doctors, mechanics, and scientists when they are speaking on subjects they are trained in.

Error #2: Sola Scriptura means that we reject all creeds and just accept the Bible

Perhaps you have heard the saying, “No creed but the Bible.” This statement is erroneous in several ways, but chiefly because it is a contradiction. A creed refers to a statement of beliefs held by an individual or a group of people. To reject all creeds is to reject all statements of faith, which would consequently mean to reject even a creed as small as “we believe the Bible.” The fact is, we all adhere to creeds, some just happen to accept formal ones that have been handed down from our ancestors in the faith. So then, what is the relationship between Sola Scriptura and creeds?

Protestants who adhere to Sola Scriptura would simply affirm that creeds are acceptable as they faithfully summarize biblical teaching. Scripture is the only infallible source of everything necessary for faith and practice, but that does not mean that there are no sources that are genuinely faithful to the teaching of Scripture. According to confessional Protestants, creeds can err, but that is no reason to reject their legitimacy as authoritative documents that summarize Biblical teaching.

Error #3: Sola Scriptura means that the Bible is clear about everything it teaches, and to reject anything it says is heresy.

I suspect that this one is the most contentious of errors. Obviously, heresy exists, is dangerous, and clarity needs to be made in order to refute it. Unfortunately, I believe this zeal to snuff out heresy has led many to label heresy what is not heresy, but rather a matter of interpretation. This error grows out of an understanding of Scripture that is hyper-literal and largely unwilling to recognize that interpretation is necessary when reading the Bible as fallible humans. Scripture’s infallibility does not mean that Scripture cannot be misunderstood.

This may seem obvious, but oftentimes, we have a tendency as Christians to select random verses to prove our point as if that seals the deal simply because we found a series of proof texts. This is necessary for those of us who lean towards a hyper-literal reading of a text, which treats every passage of the Bible as if it were equally clear. This understanding treats Scripture as if there was no need for interpretation, asserting that “the Bible says so, so I believe it.” While we must believe what the Bible teaches, we must remember what Dutch Theologian Herman Bavinck wrote:

Protestants themselves, accordingly, write numerous commentaries, and in the case of even the most important texts they differ in the exegesis. Holy Scripture has to be interpreted. Such interpretation cannot be provided by Scripture itself; Scripture cannot be its own interpreter.8

We must be interpreters of Scripture, because if not, we will fall into a hyper-literalism which fails to see the historical, grammatical, theological, and, most importantly, the Christ-centredness of a passage. We must, like Jesus, see that the whole scope of Scripture points to him as its fulfillment.9 We must search from Scripture what God has intended us to hear from it, or else we will wander into misunderstanding. I want to be clear, however, that this is not a subjective “interpret as you want approach,” that gives the reader total freedom to interpret any passage as they feel. Tied closely to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is the Protestant doctrine of Perspicuity. Bavinck clarifies this well:

[Perspicuity] does not mean that the matters and subjects with which Scripture deals are not mysteries that far exceed the reach of the human intellect. Nor does it assert that Scripture is clear in all its parts, so that no scientific exegesis is needed…It means only that the truth, the knowledge of which is necessary to everyone for salvation, though not spelled out with equal clarity on every page of Scripture, is nevertheless presented throughout all of Scripture in such a simple and intelligible form that a person concerned about the salvation of his or her soul can easily, by personal reading and study, learn to know that truth from Scripture without the assistance and guidance of the church and the priest.10

The Doctrine of Sola Scriptura, professed by confessional Protestants, does not remove the challenge of Biblical interpretation; but it, with its twin doctrine of perspicuity states that Scripture is clear in matters relating to our salvation. By God’s grace we can celebrate and rest in this truth.

I have spent significant time explaining what Sola Scriptura is not, but you may be wondering, “What is the role of tradition and sources outside of Scripture if you accept Sola Scriptura?” I briefly addressed this under “Error #2” but think of it like this: Scripture is the standard. This does not mean that everything that falls outside of Scripture is therefore worthless.

Tradition, reason, and experience can all serve you in ways that help clarify Scripture, but they should never become the standard. Scripture stands alone as the final authority on all subjects relating to faith and godliness. If we are going to be faithful to Scripture, we are forced to acknowledge that God has provided us with other sources of authority that we must honour under, while maintaining the unique seat reserved for Scripture. Consider the words of the Second London Baptist Confession:

The supreme judge for deciding all religious controversies and for evaluating all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, human teachings, and individual interpretations, and in whose judgement we are to rest, is nothing but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit. In this Scripture our faith finds its final word.11

May the Wisdom and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ ever bless your heart.

From your beloved brother in the faith,

Owen Ecker.

Have you ever wondered why we sin? Why our desires never seem to follow what we know to be good? Why we seem to love what we should hate, and hate what we should love? This is because of the doctrine of original sin. Simply put, this doctrine states that when Adam sinned in the garden, his descendants fell with him. By implication, we are born with unnatural desires, or sinful desires. This doctrine also states that we have inherited Adam’s guilt that he earned for himself due to sin. Consider, for example, what the Second London Baptist Confession has to say about our Fall:

What this does not mean is that humankind has ceased to be the image of God. Human beings, while corrupted by the consequences of the Fall, remain precious as the image of God, and the sanctity of human life is maintained. What it does mean, however, is that all our faculties are now bent towards sin because we are under the curse of death, both physically and spiritually.

While all Christians, in one way or another, affirm the doctrine of original sin, it takes different forms in different traditions. For this article, I will examine the Reformed framework that underpins the doctrine of original sin, specifically the covenant of works. Most fundamentally, the covenant of works refers to the covenant agreement that God made with mankind in the garden concerning eternal life on the condition of the total obedience of man. The Westminster Confession of Faith summarizes this, saying,

It is important to remember that this covenant was made with man pre-fall; thus, man did not need saving grace and had the ability and the privilege to earn their standing before God. In other words, humans had true free will to select between good and evil. It is referred to as the covenant of works precisely because it is about man’s works. If man obeyed, it meant favour with God, righteousness and holiness; if man disobeyed, it meant sin, death, and condemnation.

Why a Covenant?

While different traditions within Christianity affirm the doctrine of original sin, many are uncomfortable with the language of “covenant,” as it seems to demand more from Scripture than what we are told. Moreover, we are never told in Genesis 3 that Adam would be blessed if he obeyed, but we are told that if he disobeyed, he would be cursed!

While these are valid objections, I do not believe they sufficiently hold up when they are considered in light of the Canon of Scripture. For example, we are told regarding God’s Old Covenant people in Hosea that “like Adam, they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me.”3 The implication of this is that just as Adam transgressed the covenant with God and was faithless to him, God’s people likewise broke the covenant. Why would God use the language of covenant, rather than law, if there was not an actual covenant broken by Adam?

While law and covenant are connected in Scripture, laws refer to the “do’s” and “do not’s” within their broader covenantal framework. Covenants are the foundation by which God issues commands. Laws state what is required; covenants state the rewards and punishments that follow if not obeyed. Likewise, covenants establish a moral relationship between God and man that are guided by the boundaries of the law. In the Garden of Eden, for instance, the covenant was established as a relationship between God and Adam with the promise of a curse if the boundaries were violated through disobedience.

While we are never explicitly told of a positive commandment by which Adam would receive blessing on the condition of obedience, we can reasonably assume, based on the nature of sin and its generational transmission, that righteousness would have followed a similar pattern. Furthermore, the righteousness of Christ, which is granted to us through faith, also indicates that God rewards those who perfectly keep his law. This is all a fancy way of simply saying that Adam was required to, and could have earned his own righteousness before God had he obeyed him.

What is the Biblical Witness?

In Romans 5, we read a vital passage in relation to this subject. We are told that “just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.”4 This passage solidifies our understanding of sin’s moral transmission. This simply means that we are morally inclined towards sin because of Adam’s sin. Paul continues,

If the previously quoted verse is about sin’s moral transmission, this verse establishes sin’s judicial transmission. This refers to the legal verdict from God by which we stand guilty, based on Adam’s transmitted guilt. Thus, we can conclude from this passage that “all were made sinners” because of the one man’s single act of disobedience. This one man, referring to Adam, and his single act of disobedience, referring to his consumption of the forbidden fruit.

How is that fair?

An objection that is commonly raised to the covenant of works appeals to God’s justice. “How is it fair that we are condemned for something Adam did?” While I understand this objection, it is helpful to remember that the covenantal pattern presented to us in Scripture is established generationally, whether that be physically or spiritually. While space will not allow me to delve into every biblical covenant, consider just a few.

For example, we read in Genesis 6 that God makes a covenant with Noah, which entailed his physical offspring.6 This covenant entailed the construction of an ark that would save them from the waters of God’s judgment on sin. Imagine Noah had failed his task; who would have reaped the consequences? Not only Noah, but his family, likewise. Similarly, we are told in Genesis 17 of God’s covenant with Abraham and his offspring as an everlasting covenant.7

While this referred to Abraham’s physical offspring of the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant, we are told that under the New Covenant, we are the spiritual offspring of Abraham, because “it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.”8 Likewise, Paul elsewhere clarifies the nature of this offspring in Galatians by saying, “it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham.”

In the case of the covenant of works, we are both the physical and spiritual offspring of Adam; thus, it is fitting that we, as creatures, bound together with Adam through our common humanity, are found guilty of his sin. Just as Noah’s whole family would have died had Noah not built the ark, so we, as Adam’s children, are found guilty of sin because our father disobeyed God and fell.

Death in Adam, Life in Christ

While the covenant of works and the doctrine of original sin are not the exact same, it follows logically that original sin is a consequence of the violated covenant of works. Adam was not merely a man in history who is remembered for his mistake; he “was a type of the one who was to come.”9 Romans 5 compels us to see that if original sin, and by implication, the covenant of works collapses, then the doctrine of justification falls with it. Paul writes:

But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.10

If we are not judicially condemned in Adam, we do not need a judicial righteousness achieved by Christ. Likewise, if Adam’s disobedience is nothing more than an imitation of disobedience with no lasting effects, then Christ’s death remains nothing more than an imitation of obedience with no lasting effects. If Romans 5 hasn’t been clear enough, Paul continues, “For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.”11

The primary reason Christ lived a life of righteousness is precisely because of the disobedience that we inherited in Adam. Christ has not just given us a good example of righteousness (although he has), he is our righteousness. Christ is not just the New Adam who passes the test; he reverses the curse of the old Adam by “becoming a curse for us.”12 In Christ, we are given more than what Adam had; specifically, an unfailing righteousness that cannot be taken as his new creation.

Take heart, brother or sister, that because you are in Christ, you have the very same righteousness of Jesus Christ, because he earned it for you. You may wrestle to know the assurance of your salvation; look no further than Jesus Christ. Perhaps you wrestle with sin and question whether God will accept you; take heart that in Christ, you are accepted. You question the love of God for you, a sinner; but take heart that “God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”13 In love, God sent his Son, who came “[not] to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”14

In Adam, the tragedy is that we are all unrighteous covenant breakers, but in Christ, we can have full assurance that we are members of his Covenant, sealed eternally by His pure blood. The Covenant of Works brought death, and for that reason, we needed a New Covenant; a Covenant of Grace…

Grace & Peace be to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord,

Owen Ecker.

Introduction

I do not promise in this very short write-up to explain every detail of our text. Yet I only want to attempt to draw your attention to something desperately needed today. I want to show you two things that prevail with God. My hopes are that it will rather awaken you to assess your own condition and that of the church in this gospel day.

Christ promised to build his church amidst the onslaughts of hell. And there are no doubts that he is keeping this promise. Yet it seems to me that in various generations the church has hung, as it were, on the precipice of spiritual decline. And it goes without saying that we are currently in that state today. If we don’t see it, friends, it only shows that we are doubly blind. The tragedy of the Laodicean church was not merely their blindness, but the unawareness of blindness.1

Christ who promised to build his church, urged them to consider the slippery slope upon which they stood so carelessly. It was Edwards who reminded the church goers of his day that they hung on the very precipice of hell and the only thing stopping them from falling was the mercy of God. Therefore, they must call on God for salvation and deliverance.

The Plea

The general consequence of Edwards’ warning was a great awakening and the outpouring of God’s Spirit because they cried out for help. It is my belief that we are in such times of spiritual decline, and it behooves us to discover our sins and thus tremble in penitential cries to heaven. Remember how earnestly saints who saw the need of their day prayed for revival and awakening.

Remember their groanings and weeping. For they would sooner tarry all night than dwell without the assurance of the presence of God amongst them. Yet, it baffles me that we are presently content to live without the presence of God, and we wonder why we have so little effect on the world.

The text before us is a cry for help in similarly desperate times. Israel was in a terrible situation, and she needed her God to intervene. Similarly, down through the history of the church, men and women, moved by the Holy Spirit, have cried out to God for a divine intervention, as they surveyed the spiritual decline of the church and the sins which had taken root therein. For hundreds of years, the mainstream church clouded the truth, and thus there was immense darkness until Luther, Knox, and their compeers cried out to God for salvation. O where are the men who cry to God today earnestly? O where are the men who have ascended the heights of Zion and seen what glory and blessings God has for his church? Or are we merely theorizers of the truth?

The plea was for help. They could only plead for help because they had seen their present status quo of sin. However, how many of us acknowledge the visible church’s powerlessness and sinfulness before God? Yes, we say, “Lord, help me.” But do we say–look at the text–“Help us…Deliver us”? See the difference, friend. The former is a personal request; the latter is a collective request for a divine intervention.

Do we say with Daniel: “We have sinned and done wrong and acted wickedly and rebelled, turning aside from your commandments and rules”?2 Or are we content to sing in our churches while the truth of God is mocked everywhere else and we lack the power and effectiveness of God’s Holy Spirit to share the Message of reconciliation and salvation, though it is available for a praying church?

One of the most helpful means of God’s blessing in my spiritual walk with him has been to keep a diary. I learned this through reading Augustine’s Confessions and the biographies of Brainerd and M’Cheyne. At the top of every page in my dairy, I paraphrase the words of Daniel: “Unto us, O Lord, belongs open shame, but unto you alone belongs mercy.”3 Until we see this very truth, that we are in a shameful state today, we would then begin to approach the matters as if we were at the gates of heaven and argue why we need God to intervene now.

The Argument

We have seen the pleas, though very briefly, that prevail with God. Let us talk about the arguments. At the outset, someone must stop me and point out the fact that we cannot argue with the Almighty, as to presume to instruct him. Yes, I agree. For he has “an inscrutable understanding.”4

Yet it seems to me there is a kind of argument that prevails with God. It is the kind of argument used by saints in such desperate times down through the corridors of history. Those saints who have discovered the secret that prevails in prayer have often used it and thus argued their way into divine intervention. Yet the modern theorizer void of spiritual fervency, though full of complacency, cannot understand such things. He is ever satisfied with his knowledge and never seeks to advance in spiritual matters–as though God were a two-inch-deep well.

“What is the argument then, brother?” It is simply as the Psalmist writes: “for the glory of your name.”5 This is the argument that prevails with God. When we remind him of his promise to exalt his name in the salvation of his people, he will act and intervene in our present trouble. In other words, when our plea for help is not a cry for our own selfish ends, but rather a deep concern for God’s glory, then we shall prevail with God. Read the history of the great awakening and revivals and observe carefully the arguments they made to God. Were they not imploring him to act for his name’s sake, lest the gentiles and heathens continue to say that God is not the Lord?

Jacob argued with God and prevailed. Moses argued with God upon the mountain and prevailed. Daniel argued with God as he prayed for God to remember his word and his glory, and he prevailed. The Apostles argued with God when they were beaten and reprimanded for speaking about his name, and they prevailed. For God filled them with his Spirit for greater tasks. Edwards, M’Cheyne, Brainerd, Whitefield, Wesley, the Moravian brethren, Blair, and many others earnestly argued with Him.

Prayer

O Lord, alarm us and we shall be alarmed and restored unto Thee! Look now at the dreadful condition of Thy church. Thou died for her and purchased her righteousness before Thee. Yet, behold how remaining sin, false doctrines, and all sorts of demonic influences run amok. However, Lord, through these things, Thou art in control. Therefore, as Thou answered the prayer of the saints when they prayed, “Revive us again, for Thy name’s sake,”6 Remember us today and revive us again for Thy glory! Reveal our sins and let us be bowed very low as in the days of old. Teach us never to forget your works in the previous generations, or to entertain fancies that we are somehow excluded from such blessings and outpourings of your Spirit. Yet raise us up again and restore us to great spiritual exploits as in the days of old. Thou art forever praised, God of power and mercy. Amen.

- Wallace Goodwin.

Introduction

I have seldom read this verse during my personal devotions and not shed tears at the sight of its solemn words. As a result, I have often mused to myself that this verse was written for people like me (I hope for someone like you, too). That is, for people who need restoration and revival of the soul’s dwindling affections (love) for God. But then, I must say from the outset that those people who never fall and never fail have no business with such a text. Those who succeed perfectly to live above the tide of temptation and never once sink in desperation like Peter in the sea of Galilee have no lot in matters of this nature. You should pass on from this write-up as easily as you surmount the fiery darts of temptation.

But then, let me turn to those saints–I mean to you and I–who hear the faithless voice of sin threatening to turn faith’s gaze from the saviour’s voice. In a word, I want to turn to the desperate and depressed; to those who have felt like they have lost their God, as a man loses his only coin in the middle of the night in a faraway country. I want to speak to those who feel like God stands aloof from them and they have no extra tear to pour on the dust on which they so steadily lie. To you I say, come and see how the Psalmist prays.

Ask Questions to God

Firstly, he prays through a question to God. The Psalmist shows us here that it is no strange thing to ask the Almighty questions. My friend, who would you rather ask a question to, than he who has an inscrutable understanding, whose footsteps are locked in the sea? Yet, how many of us go to God with questions as the Psalmist did? Let us copy this godly example and bring our soul’s unrest to God. For it shows that our hearts are desperate for his answers only, and thus he is pleased. It shows that nothing–no earthly statement or principle–will suffice to calm the storms that so fiercely rage within the heart that is depressed.

In those moments when I have felt myself most sinful and miserable, the only thing that has sufficed to lay my troubled soul to rest is the Word of and from God. His Word assures me that I am loved, seen, held, and kept in Christ’s eternal grip. Therefore, friend, loiter in the court room of Jehovah until the righteous judge hears and responds to the questions of your heart.

The Sorrow of Sin

Secondly, the Psalter implicitly states that they were in a state of spiritual bareness because of sin. Israel had lost God’s presence because of her sins. Thus, there was a real sense of sorrow. My friend, this should teach us the obvious lesson that sorrow flows easily from sin as passion from a man in love. For if he is truly in love, he cannot help but have these affections as proof of his love. Therefore, it goes without saying that those who plunge themselves into sin will be sorrowful sooner or later.

However, a man in love without culmination of that love can have his passions undone by channeling that love to a hobby, however hard and long it takes. Yet he who has lost the presence of God, the true joy, through sin is most miserable. He might try hobbies and all sorts of mind-numbing and conscience-escaping tactics, yet none will rest his soul. None will make him forget his barrenness; none make him happy. As a man feels the pain of his lumbar pinching his spinal nerve that carries signals to his legs, so does a man who is in this barren state aching inescapably by sorrow and is constantly without stamina.

Yet by trying to relieve himself from the effects of his sins through things other than his precious Christ, he still proves those simple words of G.K. Chesterton that, “the young man who rings the bell at the brothel is unconsciously looking for God.” At this point, I should pause and cry out in prayer to say: Lord help us to seek you in times of barrenness and the ache of spiritual sorrow. Let us not seek other short-lived pleasures as though they could close up the void carved by separation from you.

Marriage of Glory and Joy

I hope you see the wealth of this text at this point. Sadly, I am forced to leave-out many other things that I could go into. Therefore, I will limit this already-long write-up to this last point of interest to me for the sake of brevity. That is, the twain principles of glory and joy married in a supplication to God. Those who know the Westminster question: “What is the Chief end of man?” Know that the answer marries two principles of tremendous weight and implication.

Answer: “The Chief end of Man is to Glorify God and to enjoy him forever.” We cannot have one without the other. We cannot glorify God and not enjoy him, and we cannot enjoy God and not glorify him. These two are not merely different sides of the same coin; they are the same side of the same coin. And they are what the Psalmist asked for. His plea is that those who have known sorrow would be given the honour of experiencing the might and power of God to revive them back to himself. Thus, in one breath of prayer he exalts God both as the ultimate joy of men and as the ultimate power for men.

Conclusive Prayer

O knower of hearts, O true Joy! Lord, you know our frame and you know where we are presently. You know our condition, even when no one understands the questions that irritate our souls. Teach us that, the things of this world will never satisfy nor do anything to restore us back to you. Teach the church and the nations that we can draw near to the cross and have our souls restored. O how rich this text is, O Lord! And in all these words I know, and you know more than I know, that I have not scratched the surface of any principle laid down so cleverly by your Spirit. Yet you used mud to open the eyes of the blind and a cloth to awaken the dead. What is ink on paper for you? Thus, use these few words to revive us again that we might rejoice in you only. Amen.

- Wallace Godwin

The doctrine of baptism, more than any other doctrine, has caused perhaps the most disagreement amongst Christians. These debates have largely focused on three main points: The subject, the mode, and the meaning. By the subject, I am referring to the who of baptism. Everyone agrees that Christians ought to be baptized. The disagreement is held in contrast between paedobaptists, and credobaptists. Paedobaptists are those who believe in the practice of infant baptism.

Traditions that adhere to paedobaptist views include Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Dutch Reformed (just to name a few). Credobaptists are those who affirm that baptism ought to be given only to those who can give a credible profession of faith, thus excluding infants. Traditions that hold to this include Baptists, Pentecostals, and Brethren (again, just to name a few).

Debate about baptism also addresses the mode of baptism. This question considers how one ought to be baptized. Must one be baptized by full immersion, or are sprinkling and pouring sufficient for it to be a legitimate form of baptism? While both the question of subject and mode are important in interdenominational discourse, they are not the immediate purpose of this article. Instead, what I will be observing is the third category of division: the meaning of baptism. By this, you could say, what happens (if anything) when someone is baptized?

The Biblical Foundation of Baptism

Some argue that baptism is nothing more than an outward expression of an inward reality, so nothing intrinsically happens. Others argue that baptism itself, as a means of God’s grace, causes salvation to occur within a sinner. Regardless of where one stands on this particular question, we all confess through the Nicene Creed that we believe in “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins,”1 even if we disagree on what that means.

While we all confess the Nicene Creed, it is important to know the biblical foundation from which the Creed was written. In 1 Peter 3, we read one of the most puzzling passages in the New Testament:

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.2

1 Peter 3:21 is obviously quite a significant verse. It is one that was a hurdle for me for quite some time, and I suspect I am not alone in that struggle.

First of all, it raises confusion because it explicitly states that baptism saves. Stop here and think to yourself: Would you be comfortable if you heard your pastor say “baptism now saves you?” My assumption is that many Evangelicals would be very uncomfortable with this language, whereas those who may come from a high-church tradition are used to hearing it. And yet, this is not the only instance in the New Testament in which we read of baptism being described using salvific terms.

Acts 2 records Peter’s sermon at Pentecost in which he writes, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”3 Additionally, Acts 22:16 records Paul’s conversion, in which Ananias commands Paul to “rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.”4 For the sake of space, I will not dive into every passage, but there are several others in the New Testament which follow this same line of thought.5 So with this confusion, what does the New Testament teach about the theology of baptism?

Many argue that baptism cannot be more than a symbol because if it were, it would imply salvation by faith plus works, or at least faith plus baptism. After all, Scripture teaches us that justification is by faith alone;6 thus, to say that baptism carries salvific power is to reject justification by faith alone. Is this true though? Is it either, “baptism causes salvation,” or “baptism is just a symbol?” I would suggest that suggesting this is a false dichotomy, and would argue that there is another approach one could take.

Fowler’s Theology of Baptism

Consider the words of Stanley Fowler (even if you disagree with his conclusion):

We need to understand that Paul’s argument in Romans and Galatians is very much about faith versus a wrong way of thinking about works of the law, one might say, about Christ versus misuse of Torah. Nowhere does Paul set faith over against repentance or baptism, as if they were somehow meritorious works. In fact, the culmination of his argument in Galatians 3 includes the affirmation that we are all sons of God through faith (verse 26), followed immediately by a description of that reality in terms of being baptized into Christ (verse 27). Baptism is simply not a ‘work’ in Paul’s sense as expressed in Galatians or Romans. Indeed, the baptizand is in one sense passive and not ‘working’ at all, allowing a divinely prescribed sacred ritual to be performed and accepting that as a marker of faith and acceptance by God. There is nothing meritorious about the act, even though the person chooses to accept the sacrament. Choosing to baptized is no more a meritorious work than choosing to pray ‘the sinner’s prayer.’7

It is common in Evangelical circles to ask when someone “prayed the sinner’s prayer,” or when they “asked Jesus to be your personal Lord and Saviour.” Never would anyone suggest that this is a work of merit, so why do we apply that logic to baptism when it seems to be the more biblical pattern? Fowler’s broader point is that baptism (like how Evangelicals view the sinner’s prayer) is the means that Scripture presents by which a sinner formally receives Christ. By using the word “formal,” I intend to communicate the “ceremonial” way in which sinners receive Christ.

I have heard baptism compared to the coronation of a King. When does the monarch become King? The answer is when the previous monarch dies. Or is it? Do they not become King at their coronation ceremony, when they are sworn in? Both of these statements are true, and nobody would suggest they contradict. Therefore, when is a person saved? It happens by grace through faith as one receives Christ. However, we can also affirm that it happens at baptism because it is the ceremonial/formal means that God has ordained by which the sinner receives Christ and the assurance of grace before the church.

Does this then suggest that baptism is the cause of conversion? Not inherently; it can be true that salvation happens by faith, and simultaneously affirm that baptism saves, because Scripture requires us in some sense to affirm both. While some traditions may affirm “baptismal regeneration,” I am approaching this as someone influenced by the Particular Baptist tradition so my understanding will look different than a Lutheran’s for example. So then what is the relationship between salvation and baptism?

Am I suggesting that one must be baptized to be saved? I agree with Fowler that asking this question misses the mark. Fowler retorts, “Of course [you can be saved], but that is not the right question. It would be better to ask how God intends baptism to function.”8 How does God intend baptism to function? I would argue that baptism is simply the ceremonial/formal act by which we call out to God for the forgiveness of sins. While we do not receive forgiveness because of the act of baptism, it remains true that baptism is the means that God has appointed for his children to call upon his name and receive the benefits of salvation.

Baptism is thus made effectual only by faith.9 Like the Lord’s Supper, baptism does not accomplish anything apart from the grace of salvation, but it nonetheless, by the working of God’s Spirit, is a means of grace made effectual through faith and it grants us deeper assurance of our union with Christ and his Church that we otherwise would not have apart from it.

So is baptism a symbol of our union with Christ? Of course! Does it entail confessing Christ? Of course! But it entails so much more. The New Testament emphasis seems to be on baptism’s relationship with faith rather than our subjective response to it. Fowler writes:

1 Peter 3:21 is more typical than unusual in the New Testament language concerning baptism. Now of course Peter emphasizes that the crucial matter is not the ritual itself (‘the washing of dirt from the body’) but the attitude toward Christ expressed in the act (‘the appeal for a good conscience before God’). And even then the power is not in the human choice to believe but in ‘the resurrection of Jesus Christ,’ to whom faith and baptism connect us.10

It is from this understanding that Peter can command the crowd at Pentecost to “‘Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’”11 It is for this reason that Ananias could tell Paul to “Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.”12

It is not because they trusted in the waters of baptism themselves, but because they trusted in Christ who saves by grace through faith expressed in baptism. Fowler concludes: “In practice we all recognize that the experience of conversion demands the attitude of faith be translated into action (eg. prayer, raising a hand, signing a card, etc.). Other actions may have benefit but, in Scripture, that action is baptism.”13 May baptism be the mark that we look to as the formal means by which we receive Christ.

So What Now?

So what does this mean for your life today? Why do these differences actually matter? It matters because you can know that through baptism, you died with Christ, and through baptism you were raised to new life so that you might walk in righteousness. God has definitively demonstrated this reality to you physically as you received Christ by faith through your baptism in his name for the forgiveness of sins. God has testified to you that you are his by your baptism. Instead of looking back to “a sinner’s prayer” or decision you made to follow Jesus (while important), look to what Christ has done for you in your baptism so that you can say with assurance that through baptism, you have been raised with Christ so that you make walk in the newness of life.14

So does baptism save? Scripture is clear that we are saved by grace through faith, so if you believe the gospel, you are Christ’s. However, if you are a Christian and have not yet been baptized, “why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.”15 Do it, not because you are pure, but “as an appeal to God for a good conscience.”16 Do it, because God has tied the blessings of salvation to be experienced in reality through the act of baptism.17 Do it, not only because Christ has commanded you, but because he calls you to himself to be received by faith and baptism.

Grace to you & peace from God our Father who has washed you white as snow,

Owen Ecker

To the elect of God,

Blessings to you in the name of our Saviour Jesus Christ,

The term “Calvinist” today often puts people on edge. Calvinism has become associated with fatalism,1 hyper-intellectualism, dead orthodoxy, and especially combativeness in debate. We fear the cage-stage Calvinists among us - always looking for debate, having Romans 9 bookmarked in their Bible from overuse.

Unfortunately, many of us view John Calvin in the same light. Today, Calvin is viewed as an aggressive, contrarian, cold figure, who loved the academy far more than the church. Even those who benefit from the richness of Calvin’s theological magnum opus - his Institutes of the Christian Religion - have absorbed such ideas about Calvin’s personality, thus reading him in a dreary light.

Thankfully, this historic misconception is being remedied. Calvin was an extraordinary writer in his day, and many of his writings have been republished in the 21^st century - letters to princes, pastors, kings, and aristocrats; commentaries on nearly every book of the Bible; his Institutes alongside a variety of other theological treatises; confessional and catechetical documents for the upbuilding of the church. Yet, alongside his massive corpus of writings stands his massive body of sermons, all recorded by various scribes directly out of the pulpit of St. Peter’s Cathedral in Geneva.

The Banner of Truth Trust, through the work of translators like Robert White, Rob Roy McGregor, and Kathy Childress, has made available hundreds of Calvin’s sermons. Through these sermons, the pastoral heart of Calvin is revealed to modern-day Christians, introducing us to a man who is warm, compassionate, pastoral, direct, and deeply concerned that every person, no matter who they are, follows Jesus wholeheartedly.

How Calvin Preached

The Reformation recovered and popularized preaching lectio continua, or as we now call it, expositional preaching. This style of preaching had before been used to great effect by Augustine, John Chrysostom, Origen, and others, but had never been refined, and overtime became overshadowed by allegorical and topical preaching. During medieval times, travelling Celtic monks, friars such as Bernard of Clairvaux, and members of the Augustinian and Dominican orders brought Scriptural, and occasionally lectio continua preaching to bear on Europe. Yet a focus on the Order of the Mass gradually overshadowed the role of preaching, and so expositions of Scripture began to fade into the background of everyday church life.

It was the Reformation that restored preaching to its proper place. Church architecture itself demonstrates this - the altar, upon which the eucharistic host was consecrated, worshipped, and distributed, was moved out of the center of the church, and in its place the pulpit stood tall.2 Reformers such as Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, Heinrich Bullinger, Johannes Oecolampadius, and Martin Bucer brought lectio continua preaching into the regular life of their church, describing it as an essential and foundational mark of the true church.3

Of these Reformers, Calvin serves as a stellar example of the importance of expository preaching. Upon arriving in Geneva in 1536, Calvin began to preach lectio continua through various books of the Bible. Calvin would preach over 4,000 sermons during his years in Geneva.4 Calvin would eventually preach twice on Sundays and then once a day, every day of the week, biweekly.

Calvin refused to rush through books, instead laboring over every single jot and tittle of Scripture. Many preachers today rush their way through difficult Old Testament books, but not Calvin - he preached a whopping 343 sermons on Isaiah, 123 sermons on Genesis, 201 sermons on Deuteronomy, 175 sermons on Ezekiel, and 159 sermons on Job, among other books.5 Calvin knew that every word of Scripture was given to the church as a blessing from God, and so every line of every book must be brought to bear on the congregant’s hearts.

Calvin was not merely a preacher, but a churchman, and he saw preaching as deeply connected to the greater liturgy of Christian worship. Calvin’s liturgy (that is, order of service) centered upon the preaching of the Word, and utilized both the Apostle’s Creed and the Lord’s Supper as opportunities to respond to the Word preached.6 Thus, Calvin would preach the Word, the congregation would accept and affirm the preaching through the recitation of the Apostle’s Creed, and then the congregation would partake in the Word as the body of Christ as they consumed both elements of the Supper. Calvin fought for weekly communion, yet was denied by the Council of Geneva.7 He continued to preach many times a week, and led his congregation faithfully to the Supper four times a year, as the Council allowed.

What Calvin Preached

Any reader of Calvin’s sermons will find him or herself face to face with a man quite unlike the harsh caricature described above. Throughout his sermons,8 Calvin reveals himself to be warm, kind, compassionate, zealous for holiness, straightforward, and quite the effective communicator.9

Calvin’s sermons on Isaiah 52:13-53:12, aptly translated from the French by Robert White, show how Calvin brought the great doctrines of salvation, atonement, and satisfaction down to the level of the pew so that all could rejoice in their salvation. The language of Calvin is quite simple and straightforward. He never uses complex language, and speaks always in a way that points the listener to the glory of God. The following quotes show this well,

The prophet expresses this thought more fully in what follows: He will lay down his soul to make satisfaction for sin. In other words, Jesus Christ will disregard his life in order to secure redemption for us, as a price for our sins and iniquities.10

We know also that our Lord Jesus Christ makes up for everything we lack. If we are defiled and full of filth, his blood will wash us and make us clean. If we are immersed in debt, not only to God but to Satan as to our adversary, payment has been made by the death and passion of God’s Son. If we are foul and abhorrent to God, the sacrifice which our Lord Jesus has made has a pleasing aroma, so that all the evil in us is wiped away. This is how we are justified by the knowledge of Jesus Christ.11

Let us open the door, then, to our Lord Jesus Christ, so that through him we may share in the fruit of his death and passion, let us draw near to him by faith. And let us not doubt that when we open our hearts to him, God will add this gift to all the rest, that just as he chose his Son to be our Redeemer, so he will grant us truly to enjoy the benefits he has brought us. This is what we have to remember about this verse.12

If he forgave us without the need for Jesus Christ to intercede for us and to go surety for us, we would take no notice. All of us would shrug it off and would seize the chance to take still greater liberties.13

Calvin was not willing to keep his learning to himself. Instead, he sought to teach his people how to read the Bible. Note in the following quote, from his sermon on Job 4:1-6, how Calvin gives his congregants a hermeneutic with which to understand the rest of the book of Job:

Now we must remember, as I said before, that Job has a good case, but he develops it very badly. His adversaries have a bad case but develop it very well, just as sometimes a bad case can be made to look good, as they do. We need to bear that in mind, for otherwise all the conversations which are recounted for us here would be confusing.14

Throughout these quotes and sermons, Calvin shows that he is no ivory tower theologian. He teaches wondrous doctrines with an eye for the gospel, instructing us to “open the door to Jesus” (certainly not language one would expect from Calvin!) and reminding us of the filthiness and defiling nature of sin. Calvin is not satisfied with a mere intellectual knowledge of Christian truth, he wants those same truths to radically reshape the lives of his congregants, so that they may “share in the fruit of his death and passion.”

And Calvin is not only a doctrinal preacher; he is a pastoral preacher. In his sermons on Job, the heart of Calvin is revealed to be warm, compassionate, and caring, as he teaches his congregants how to approach God in times of great distress and sorrow. See the heart of Calvin in the following quotes:

The wounds God inflicts are medicines for us.15

If we are to be patient in all of our adversities, we must have an appreciation for God’s goodness and rejoice in his grace, knowing that if he afflicts us, it is for our salvation.16

Let us examine ourselves. Let what has entered our hearts be laid open there, and when we have made it known to God, let us be disposed to pray for it according to his will. When we do that and keep in mind that we must not come before God with our heads lifted high and be so bold as to challenge him to do what has struck our fancy, we will necessarily submit to him in all things and at all times. Consequently, if we hold fast to that procedure, our evil desires will be corrected and repressed, and there will be guidance in knowing that man must desire nothing except what he will be bold to ask of God.17

Our requests must always be in conformity with what God has promised us and what he allows us to ask for.18

When we understand God’s goodness and experience his fatherly love, it will soften the afflictions which will otherwise seem harsh and bitter.19

God is always arranging things in such a way that evil is turned to our good and always works for our salvation. And that is why God’s children are to rejoice in the midst of their sorrows, and that is why the psalm says that God cuts the cords of the wicked who draw their plough across the back of the poor church (Psalm. 129:4).20

So let us learn to have confidence in God’s providence, and when we see things so confused in the world that we do not know which way to turn, let us continue to be at peace and rest, knowing that God controls and guides all things in such a way that nothing can prevent the salvation of those faithful to him because he has once received them under his care.21

So many more quotes could be given, but these must suffice. Who could deny that Calvin was indeed a kindly pastor to his flock after reading these quotes? Calvin uses the great doctrines of God’s providence and preservation of His people to help His people understand the hardships that afflict them, all while increasing their confidence in the goodness and power of God. Calvin shows himself to be an able counselor to the Genevan citizens, not at all stunted through his great academic accomplishments.

Conclusion

On his deathbed, Scottish Reformer John Knox (1514-1572) requested John Calvin’s sermons on Ephesians to be read to him. The reader can now surely understand why. From his pulpit through the page, John Calvin preached into the lives of saints even to this day. Far from a cold-hearted figure, Calvin shows himself in his sermons to be the kind of pastor you would want with you through the highs and lows of life. It is my prayer that the sermons of Calvin would see many more publications, for the church today will benefit greatly from the recovery of the old pulpit of St. Peter’s Cathedral.

For the comfort and edification of the saints,

Adam Heida

To the Saints of our Lord Jesus Christ who yearn to see His face.

Preamble

Our God is the Father of Light, this is an incredible reminder of the majesty of our God. It is written for our encouragement to trust and rest in a God who steadfastly loves us. It has two profound meanings: that God is the creator of the stars in the sky, and by this appeal to His greatness, we can trust in Him. Secondly, as the sun never ceases to give forth its light, God never ceases to be who he is and always stays the same. The face that God never changes and is always the same is an incredibly encouraging and peaceful doctrine to rest in. It is called the doctrine of Immutability;1 the fact that God never has and never will change. Let us begin this small devotional by exploring the first meaning; our great God is an majestic Creator.

The Great Creator

Our God is the “maker of Heaven and Earth, of all things visible and invisible.”2 We know from this passage, that God uses scientific means to reveal himself to us which is why he created elaborate galaxies. We know that the works of his hands testify to his glory, for the Psalmist says;

God’s Steadfast love

We all know that the sun and star never stop giving forth light, they do not have an on or off switch, they are constantly shining bright, so too is God constantly shining forth his brightness, goodness, love, and mercy towards us. That’s an incredibly deep truth to ponder, meditate on it for a moment. What do we do in response to God’s great love for us? Well, we are like the earth, and we turn our back to the Sun, we turn away from the bright love of God and look at the darkness of sin. But God is merciful! We know that when the earth turns its back to the sun, there are stars in the sky which give it bright light. We know that James says “with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” In God there is fullness of light, light which never diminishes, only our shift away, changes the perception of the light.

I am sure many of you have gone to summer camp, or far enough away from the city to see a clear starry night. When you are away from the city and go out in the nighttime, the stars and the moon are quite bright on a clear night. Let that be an illustration for you. That even when you give into the temptation and evil desires of your heart. God still shines his love and kindness on us, though we are turned away, as the stars still shine their brightness on the earth.

Doxology

For our God is an awesome God — he is the ruler of the universe. Let us worship him always and forevermore. May each time you gaze upon a starry night stir you to seek the Lord your God. May each sunset in the sky provoke your heart to bring praises to the King of Kings. Let his light shine upon your life, blessing you with peace and satisfaction in him.

Cordially,

Obadiah Mariona.

To the Saints of Our Lord Jesus Christ, May you be blessed and encouraged to dwell upon the glories of our God

As discussed in our last post “A Call to Recover Christian Meditation” we are beginning a series retrieving the practice of a good and godly meditation. We write because we love you, and we desire for you to be in awe of our great God. He has indeed revealed himself to us through his Word; so it is good for us to meditate upon him. In the words of my brother yesterday:

You can read more of his article attached here.

So let us begin, with a historic way of meditating upon God that is largely forgotten today. It is a meditation technique that is not a “do it yourself adventure”1 but firmly based in the Word of God. It is the Lectio Divina!

What is a Lectio Divina?

A Lectio Divina is a historic method of meditating on scripture, it can be done alone and in a group setting. It’s heavily focused on contemplation, and it provides a set-apart time of peace and rest for you to think about God and be blessed by him. It includes large sections of sitting in silence while one ponders God. I was first introduced to Lectio Divina at university and it has been a profound blessing and peaceful way for me to meditate upon the glories of God. I write this for you to be moved by God’s glory and for you to grow in 3 ways; your love of God, your knowledge of scripture, and depth in your prayer life.

Lectio Divina has a rich history, possibly going back to an ancient Hebraic method of scripture and prayer. However we know concretely it was systemized and developed – specifically by Catholic monks. We will walk through a concise overview of the history of Lectio Divina, which will show the different methods and developments over the years, then I shall assign you some homework.

History of the Lectio Divina

Many people in Church history have compiled something similar to a Lectio Divina and developed the practice of Christian meditation. St. Origen, John Cassian, and St. Benedict, are some big names (with some big personalities) who made running away and studying the Bible cool. However, it was Guigo II (also known as Guigo the Carthusian), a Latin Monk, who systematized these 4 parts into one method of devotional reading in his work The Ladder of Monks.2

However, St. Benedict deserves large credit for the influence of this kind of prayer. He has a famous quote “ora et labora" which translates to prayer and work. St. Benedict made praying and work in a monastery trendy and established a tradition of Monks that followed his way of life – they are called Benedictine Monks and are still around today! Cool side note: Often the work Monks did was making beer and wine.3

It was through Gugio II and St. Benedict that this tradition was established, grew, and remains to this day. So praise God for those saints! Benedict and Gugio had two different methods of interpretation which are very applicable today; let's dive into both of them now. Since St. Benedict lived before Guigo; we shall start with him.

St. Benedict’s Method of Meditation

Lectio Divina means Divine reading in Latin. Its purpose is for the readers/listeners to truly meditate on and be blessed by a portion of Scripture. The following is a structure I have taken from Saint Andrew's Abbey a Benedictine Monastery currently thriving just outside of Los Angeles.4

1. Choose a Scripture passage: any text, without concern for length or completion.

2. Silence: use breath, a prayer word, or centering techniques to quiet the mind.

3. Read: slowly and attentively, listening for a word or phrase that resonates.

4. Reflect: and ponder on that word or phrase, letting it stir thoughts to be offered to God.

5. Respond: in prayer, speaking to God with honesty and love from your meditation.

6. Rest: in God’s presence, beyond words, simply being with Him.

7. Return: to the text as needed, the goal is communion with God.

Guigo II Method5

Guigo II systematized the system left by St. Benedict, and some of the Benedictine monks use Guigo’s 4-step process to this day. Guigo’s method (in my understanding) is the standard structure of Lectio Divina today. Scripture is read 4 times and contains 4 parts. The 4 parts are: Lectio, Meditatio, Oratio, Contemplatio. These are Latin words which roughly translate to: Read, Reflect (Meditate), Respond (Prayer), and Rest (Contemplation).6 One section of Scripture is read 4 times and allows the readers/listeners to truly meditate on and be blessed by a portion of Scripture. This method is taken from his work The Ladder of Monks. He describes the four sections as:

Reading is the careful study of the Scriptures, concentrating all one's powers on it.

Meditation is the busy application of the mind to seek with the help of one's own reason for knowledge of hidden truth.

Prayer is the heart's devoted turning to God to drive away evil and obtain what is good.

Contemplation is when the mind is in some sort lifted up to God and held above itself, so that it tastes the joys of everlasting sweetness. Now that we have described the four degrees, we must see what their functions are in relation to us.7

He further comments by saying, “Reading seeks for the sweetness of a blessed life, meditation perceives it, prayer asks for it, contemplation tastes it.”8

Later, he writes, “Reading, as it were, puts food whole into the mouth, meditation chews it and breaks it up, prayer extracts its flavor, contemplation is the sweetness itself which gladdens and refreshes.”9

A Modern Spin on Lectio Divina

We recognize that can be a bit much for modern people in the pew just wanting to be still before God. The following format is much simpler: only three points.10 This has been retrieved from the Anglican tradition and describes a individual and community based method.11

For individuals, read the text three times and go through these three methods:

1. Listen:

   1. Simply hear the text and be blessed by the reading of the Word.

2. Ponder:

   1. Think of a word that sticks out to you, think of how this text is connected to another passage of the Bible. Think of what this means for the character of God. Go down the rabbit hole of the thought; contemplate God.

3. Pray.

   1. Pray in response to this passage. Pray first to God and praise him for who He is and how the Scripture shows us His greatness. Pray according to the text, pray for other people from the foundation of what the text says. Lastly, pray for yourself. If you are reading Psalm 51, pray that God may keep you from sexual immorality.

In a group

1. Read

2. Reflect/Ponder

3. Read

4. Application & Share

Why do a Lectio Divina Today?

Our world is far too fast-paced today. In order to last and live well, we need rest. Moreover, we need to rest in God. This is an incredible way to lead family devotions or a small group at your church. It brings peace and Christian Communion among brothers. Just because it was made by Monks does not mean it was only made for monks. Yes, Monks still use it, but you should too. I know many right now are longing for transcendence and historical rootedness. This is a great practice and application in order to meet with the transcendent God in keeping with our great Christian tradition. Now… for the homework that I promised.

Go and Meditate on God’s Word!

Alrighty then, I’ve rambled on long enough… It's homework time. Take one of the methods (I recommended the Anglican one of Listen, Ponder, Pray, if it’s your first time) and apply it to two verses in Psalm 84. I pray that it blesses and inclines your heart to meditate more frequently on God’s word!

Psalm 84:10-12

Better is one day in your courts

than a thousand elsewhere;

I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God

than dwell in the tents of the wicked.

For the Lord God is a sun and shield;

the Lord bestows favor and honor;

no good thing does he withhold

from those whose walk is blameless.

Lord Almighty, blessed is the one who trusts in you.

PS:

I trust that it was a blessing. May you rest in your understanding of how God views our prayers as written in the Word. Here two sections of Scripture that show the significance of prayer before God – even when it doesn’t feel special, I implore you, pray! For we see in these passages that our prayers are pleasing to God! That reason alone is more than enough to pray.

May you pray ceaselessly to our majestic God,

Obadiah Mariona

Subscribe now

Share

To the Beloved of God,

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Current Problem: A Weak Theology 

There is a direct correlation between our theology of God and our worship of Him. Those who have lost a solid theology of God will drift with the winds of the time and will be blown by the currents of their culture. They will ultimately find themselves in a faith that is starved; that lacks the nourishment to properly worship and live for God.

Now inevitably, any Christian at any time will be shaped, in no small way, by the culture they find themselves in. However, in the West, particularly amongst Evangelicals, this cultural shaping has become particularly troubling. We, as Evangelicals, have lost our historic rootedness and have frequently failed to acknowledge our culture’s influence. When we do acknowledge that our culture can and does shape us, it is often by way of mere lip service, and we willfully ignore just how thoroughly we have been shaped. 

The root cause of this, in part, is a weak theology; particularly a weak theology of God. We, (Western Evangelicals) have not only neglected a solid, rooted, Biblical, and historic theology, but have gone so far as to neglect it proudly. This can be seen in the quippy sayings that are often repeated in our churches, “I just follow Jesus,” “it’s a relationship, not a religion,” “all that matters is love.” Admittedly these are often quick defensive words to protect oneself against the overly zealous, often proud, unloving, Bible-thumper in their church. However, the general sentiment in these statements should be a cause for concern. Why is it that when confronted with a challenge, our first instinct is to minimize our own knowledge and understanding of the God who has saved us, the One whom we confess to love above all else? 

A quick caveat here, I am not saying that all of us should be trained, professional theologians or scholars— most of us in the body of Christ are not called to be such (though unfortunately many still expect that we all should be). 1 Corinthians 12 makes it clear that the body of Christ has many different parts, and this is a good thing! We are gifted uniquely so that we each can play the unique part that God has called us to in the building up of the body. (May the Lord bless each of us as we seek to do his particular calling in each of our lives). However, all this does not negate the fact that each of us is called to know the one who has saved us (2 Peter 3:18). Thus, our theology of God, our understanding of Him, matters!

The problematic instinct to minimize and proudly profess theological minimalism has consequences. A low view of who God is means that our worship and lives will lack a degree of godliness and holiness that we are called to have by Scripture. This will also surely mean that we will be, and will be perceived to be, a people who care little for the Lord. Who cares little to know the One whom we profess we live our lives for. The One whom we say is our greatest treasure and good.

An instinct to minimize, though, does not mean that we will not have a theology. To the contrary, our theology, particularly our theology of God, will be dictated by our own desires. We will inevitably make idols for ourselves in our pursuit of a God who is comfortable for us, and our desire for limited understanding. In doing so, we break the first three of the Ten Commandments.

This is not a hypothetical but really does happen. To give a common example, how many of us have fallen into the error of prioritizing certain attributes of God over others (ie. love over holiness, justice over mercy). Such errors lead to an unbalanced and unbiblical quest for holiness. It means that our worship prioritizes whatever attribute of God we wrongly believe is the most important. Sadly, this is also a likely reflection of the fact that many in Evangelical churches do not even know the attributes of God. Attributes like love, justice, and goodness are likely commonly known, but what about attributes like simplicity, immutability, and holiness? How many attributes of God can you yourself name?

Not only have many forgotten key attributes, but we as Evangelicals have also largely lost a proper understanding of the nature of the attributes of God; specifically how they exist within God. Many conceive of God as a divine puzzle maker, that God starts as a blank slate and somehow adds to Himself 40% love, 20% justice, 10% holiness and so on. We have forgotten that the Bible tells us that God does not merely have all his attributes but is all of His attributes maximally, infinitely, and perfectly. God cannot act out of accordance with His character, and because He is His attributes, He cannot deny even one in His works and acts. Even still, many ignore or openly do away with a Biblical conception of God and His attributes that properly recognizes this. This has only served to further exacerbate the problems that a weak theology of God has brought about. Instead of taking the time to deeply consider the nature of our infinite God, we have sold out for what is easy, and in the process, we rob ourselves of the full grandeur of who our God is.

I could continue in this assessment and highlight further issues, but for the sake of time and my overall argument, I will leave it there.

The Age-Old Reality

The problem of a weak theology of God is not a uniquely modern one; it is a tale as old as time. To know God—the highest good—is the proper end for which all people were created. Yet any knowledge of God, it must be recognized, requires that God first reveal Himself to us. This is because He, as our Creator, is infinite in His being, not able to be comprehended by our minds. Therefore, He must condescend to us, accommodating Himself to our weaker understandings so that we might apprehend some of who He is.1 Calvin, famously, for this reason, says that God “lisps with us as nurses… do with little children.”2

Not only is there a great gulf between an infinite God and His finite creation, but the problem is only compounded by the reality of sin, that we live in a post-fall world. To know God (savingly) also means that He has revealed Himself to us in such a way that the blinding effects of sin, as described in Romans 1, do not prevent us from seeing Him.

Yet God has spoken to us! He has done so by His Word, the Scriptures. And by the saving work of Christ, and through the empowering work of the Spirit, we are now able to understand these Scriptures. It is by attending to these words and by the power of the Holy Spirit that we can understand who more fully who He is. He has given us, His people, Scripture so that we might apprehend and understand who He is. So that we might catch glimpses of the fullness of His attributes. This understanding and these glimpses ought to cause us great joy, knowing all the more the God who has called us His own. As Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck wrote, “our idea of God comes from him; we cannot avoid God’s reality in the world and our lives, even though our hearts’ sense of God is darkened. When we are instructed by Scripture, our sense of God is clarified, we learn anew to know God as he truly is and say Amen! To all his perfections. Every attribute of God is precious to believers.”3

The Solution: Meditate on the Attributes of God

Perhaps it is clear to you where I am going with this, that is the answer I am proposing to our current issue. Before I more fully expound the solution that I am proposing, let me first start by saying that I am not under any illusion that this is the only solution to the problem. Nor do I think this answer fully meets all the challenges that the Evangelical church is facing regarding this issue at present. What it can do is give us a solid biblical base to inform our minds and enliven our hearts to a fuller knowledge of who God is and who God is for us. With this knowledge, we can continue to seek further solutions for the sake of the health and betterment of the church. That the church might know her God all the more.

What I am calling for here in this short series is a recovery of the Christian practice of meditation; specifically, a call to meditate on God. To the average lay Christian, perhaps, there may be some unease with the idea of meditation. Practiced rightly, however, (in the Biblical sense) meditation is not a self-emptying but rather a filling of the mind and heart with a deeper understanding of God by way of a sincere pondering on His works, character, and commands. It is hearing and reading the words of Scripture, and like the enjoyment of a good meal, slowly chewing your way through the very words of God to you. It is delighting in every bite, methodically working through the dish to savour every morsel. Christian meditation is a slow, methodical, thoughtful, prayerful practice. It is meant to fill our head and our hearts with the words of God (found in the Scriptures), by the work of the Spirit, so that we might delight in and be drawn to a deeper, more sincere worship of the living and true God. 

To help us learn how to do this better, I would like to further suggest that we need to recover the practice of mediation. Furthermore, I would like to recover this practice with the aid of the saints of the past. Why would we seek to teach ourselves to meditate when God, through the church’s history, has gifted us great thinkers to help us guide our thoughts? The following articles in this series will highlight some great thinkers from the history of the church. Believers who can aid us as we learn to meditate and think of God more deeply. Saints who can help us know more deeply and personally the God we both worship. I hope that in reflecting with some of these siblings in the faith, that the Scriptures become more alive to us and prove to be our solid guide in our quest for greater understanding and more intimate communion with our God. In doing so, it is also my hope that we learn how to rightly meditate on the Word of God, and in learning how to meditate well, that the church might be edified and built up in the knowledge of her Saviour.

To those who are waiting for the blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Simon Mischuk

To the Beloved of God,

Grace and Mercy be to you in the Lord Jesus Christ.

My Theological Background

In Matthew 26, we are given the words that many of us hear at least once a month: “‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’”1 Growing up in an Evangelical context, I was always taught that the Lord’s Supper is a symbol and memorial of the broken body and shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross. For many years, I mistakenly thought the views on the Lord’s Supper were limited to two: either you believe that the Lord’s is merely a memorial, or you believe in the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that, “it is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament.”2 In other words, this view teaches that when consecrated by the priest, the bread and wine are transformed into a new substance altogether (hence, transubstantiation), and become the physical body and blood of Christ. I have always rejected the latter view, largely due to my Evangelical upbringing. For me it was simple: Jesus obviously was speaking in metaphoric language when he claimed that the bread and wine were his body and blood. This statement was akin to his claim that “I am the door.”3

It was only due to the influence of a well-respected professor of mine that I began to consider another view, which is one that I had neither heard of nor considered. I will call this view “the spiritual view.” After looking into it, I realized that this view was quite popular amongst Evangelicals in centuries past! This view states that when the people of God gather to partake of the Lord’s Supper, they by the Spirit, through faith really receive Christ himself and the effects of his death for us. Consider what the Second London Baptist Confession says about the Lord’s Supper:

Worthy recipients who outwardly partake of the visible elements in this ordinance also by faith inwardly receive and feed on Christ crucified and all the benefits of His death. They do so really and truly, yet not physically and bodily but spiritually. The body and blood of Christ are not present bodily or physically in the ordinance but spiritually to the faith of believers, just as the elements themselves are present to their outward senses.4

Consider the claim that this confession is making. Just as you partake physically of the elements of bread and wine, you partake spiritually of the body and blood of Christ through faith. This differs from transubstantiation as it avoids the claim that the bread and wine themselves are transformed into a new substance. Rather, this view proposes that we ourselves are transformed because we experience true spiritual fellowship with Christ and his Church when we partake in faith. This also differs from the memorial view because, while it maintains that we do remember Christ when we partake, it argues even further, namely, that we have fellowship and communion with Christ himself by his Holy Spirit.

Participation in Christ?

Upon hearing this view, it sounded nice, but I wrestled with the biblical witness of it. It is only when I realized what 1 Corinthians 10:16-22 said that I changed my view on the subject. Paul writes:

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

There are a few things worth noticing in this passage. Firstly, Paul says that the cup of blessing and bread we break is a “participation” in the blood and body of Christ. This is odd language used to describe what happens when we partake in the Lord’s Supper. Wouldn’t it make more sense to say we remember Christ when we partake? This, however, would not fit Paul’s greater argument. He contrasts “the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons” in verse 24. In other words, Paul is arguing that when a pagan offers a sacrifice to a false god, he is actually participating in demon worship, not remembering what their gods have done for them. In other words, when a Corinthian offered a sacrifice to one of the Greek gods, they were having true fellowship with a demon spiritually.

While the effects of this cannot be seen, there is nonetheless communion occurring in the spiritual realm. This individual wraps themselves up in demonic practices and becomes a partner with demons. Just as a pagan participates spiritually with a demon, Paul’s contrast is that Christians participate in Christ and by extension, his body, when they take the Lord’s Supper.

The word “participation” is elsewhere translated as “fellowship,”5 and “sharing.”6 In these passages, there is no indication that what is being communicated is merely symbolic, so why would we apply this idea to the Lord’s Supper? Paul continues in 1 Corinthians 10:17 by saying, “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”7 In commenting on this verse, Bobby Jamieson writes:

Paul is saying that the Lord’s Supper actually makes many one. The Lord’s Supper gathers up ‘we who are many’ and makes us into one body…Paul’s point is that, in the Lord’s Supper, because we all share in fellowship with Christ together, our unity in Christ creates the unified body of the church.8

When a church gathers to participate in communion, something happens. It is not a mere recollection of what Christ has done, but Christ renews his covenant with his Church; the covenant built on his broken body and shed blood.

How do we Approach the Lord’s Supper?

How then are we to approach the Supper? Jamieson, and I believe Scripture argues that we should approach it as if we are receiving Christ himself offered to us in the gospel: by faith and repentance:

Think about what happens in preaching. You show up on Sunday morning already trusting Christ. But when the pastor proclaims Christ from Scripture, the gospel comes to you again in power. In that moment you embrace Christ anew. You trust him more fully. You submit to him more earnestly. You experience forgiveness and peace with God more intensely. Something analogous happens in the Lord’s Supper. Christ is already yours by faith, but when you receive the bread and wine you receive him all over again. The physical signs of bread and wine support and strengthen your faith. In the Lord’s Supper, a believer receives Christ’s benefits anew.9

So why should you accept this view instead of the memorial view? Suppose you had a rough week at home; perhaps you were a little bit more cranky with your kids and frustrated with your wife. Imagine you come to church on Sunday, aware of your sins, and the Supper is offered to you: You can recollect that Christ has died for you! You can remember that Christ has paid for your sins! What gloriously good news to you, a sinner! This is what the memorial view offers to you (which is a blessing).

Now imagine the same scenario, and you receive the Supper and you hear, “take, eat; this is my body,” and “this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” With a spiritual view, you not only can recollect that Christ has died for you and washed you with his blood, but you can truly receive the grace of forgiveness, the strengthening of faith, the mercy of Christ, and the fellowship with his body in a deeper and more intimate way as you tangibly receive the elements of communion. You not only receive forgiveness as you partake in faith, but you receive your Lord himself, by His Holy Spirit, as a foreshadowing of the day when you will receive the Supper with Christ and his family physically in his Father’s Kingdom.10

So whether you had a week where you felt like you were excelling in holiness, or a week where it felt like you were barely making it by, be encouraged that when you come to the Supper by faith, you can truly cling to the promise of Jesus that this is his body for you, to be received by faith. Such a view helps us not only see the Lord’s Supper differently, but the mercy of Christ differently.

May the hope of the crucifixion & resurrection fill you with joy & peace this week,

Owen Ecker

To the Beloved of God,

Strength and courage be to you in the name of Jesus Christ our victorious king.

“So the LORD saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib king of Assyria and from the hand of all his enemies, and he provided for them on every side. And many brought gifts to the LORD to Jerusalem and precious things to Hezekiah king of Judah, so that he was exalted in the sight of all nations from that time onward.” (2 Chronicles 32:22-23)

Context

This passage warmed my heart as I read it. The context is that King Sennacherib of Assyria stormed into Jerusalem to besiege it. When this happened, Hezekiah declared to the people of Judah to“be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or dismayed before the king of Assyria and all the horde that is with him, for there are more with us than with him.” With him is an arm of flesh, but with us is the LORD our God, to help us fight our battles.” While Sennacherib thought he could test the God of Judah by comparing him to other gods, Hezekiah was firm in his conviction that the God of Judah is greater than anything Sennacherib could throw at Judah. Sennacherib was subsequently defeated by an angel sent from God to save Judah, and God proves to his people again that he can be trusted with their lives. It was from this victory over Sennacherib that 2 Chronicles says that Hezekiah was exalted in the sight of the nations.

Devotional

How beautiful is this picture of Christ. How often is it that we face difficulties in our life? How often do we feel discouraged that sin, or a specific temptation or trial seems to prevail? How often does the enemy mock our God and the faithfulness of his provisions? How often does the accuser mock our King for being impotent (powerless) to save and provoke fear in us due to our prevailing trial? May this chapter be an encouragement that while we are often discouraged by the temptations or sins we face, our God is so faithful to us. He is so ready and willing to forgive him as we approach in faith. Furthermore, as the accuser mocks our God and questions Christ's ability to keep us, let us take comfort in the fact that the Lord has defeated Satan. “Who shall bring any charge against God's elect?” Sennacherib thought that mocking the king of Judah would cause the people of Judah to falter in their trust in God, and Satan thinks that mocking Christ our King will cause us to falter, but God is faithful to sustain us through every temptation, trial, and sin because Christ is King and he is victorious over the powers of darkness. Just as Hezekiah was exalted before all nations due to Judah's victory over Assyria, so is Christ exalted before all nations because of his victory of sin and death.

For the Glory of our resurrected King!

Owen Ecker

Grace and peace to you in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Psalm 119:105 famously says, “thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path.” How beautifully bright is God’s Word, which guides us on our pilgrimage to that Celestial City, as the great John Bunyan illustrates in Pilgrim’s Progress. The untamed beauty of God’s Word truly is beautiful, yet throughout church history another sort of beauty has been realized.

The church has developed theological telescopes that zoom in on the light which shines from Scripture to reveal the particularities of our beautiful doctrines in crystal clear focus. Like prisms, the light shining from Scripture is reflected and directed in ways that show its wide array of colour for all to see. These telescopes, these prisms, are called creeds and confessions, and through them the beautiful light of Scripture is displayed in splendor.

To neglect these beautiful ecclesial creations all too often obscures the light shining from the Scriptures, as instead the shadow of ignorance obstructs our view of God’s glory. Recently on X, a video circulated showing various pastors denying that the Holy Spirit ought to be worshiped. Theological immaturity and blatant heresy such as this comes when we neglect these Scripture telescopes and prisms built over the many years of church history. The anti-confessionalism of our day has led to this heresy, and to guard against it we must wholeheartedly embrace the creeds and confessions written throughout the centuries.

This post does not seek to defend the deity of the Holy Spirit - Scripture is quite clear in its affirmation of the Spirit’s deity (Matt 28:19-20; Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor 3:7, 13:14). Rather, this post will defend the need for confessions today. By looking at God’s Word through creedal and confessional lenses, the radiant light of Scripture is revealed to us, and the shadow of ignorance and all its horrid heresy is overcome by brightly shining truth.

The Function of Creeds and Confessions

Throughout church history, creeds have been used to establish the boundary markers of true Christianity. As Christianity spread, so did heresy, and so it became necessary to create simple yet robust statements to define the true faith. This can be seen in Scripture itself. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 functions as a simple creed, testifying to the veracity of Christ’s bodily resurrection. Similarly, Philippians 2:6-11 appears to be an early hymn, testifying to the divinity of Christ, His incarnation, His humiliation, and His glorification. 1 Timothy 3:16 records another creedal statement, which identifies the deity of Christ, the reality of His life, and the importance of His ascension. And Romans 10:9 functions as a simple creedal explanation of the gospel.

It is notable that all these proto-creeds are recorded by Paul. The apostolic world traveler, Paul would be familiar with the shapes orthodoxy took and the challenges it faced along the way. Paul surely shared these creeds widely (and perhaps even wrote some of them himself) in order to maintain orthodoxy and fidelity across long distances.

As the church grew, heresy became more complex and widespread, and both laity and clergy became capable of more rigorous theological reasoning. Eventually, this blossomed into the Nicene Creed, also called the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan, first penned in 325 A.D. and then expanded in 381 A.D. This creed beautifully articulates the triune nature of our God, and through its adoption over the years, Arianism stagnated and died off in both the West and East (despite continued livelihood in Northern Europe through the Visigoths).

Another example of creeds and confessions preserving true doctrine and thus, true worship, is found in the 16^th century. At this time in church history, new errors had crept into the church. Thus, the Reformation broke out, and in time produced many new confessional documents which sought to define true, Biblical doctrine against both Papist and Anabaptist errors. These confessions are wonderfully preserved in James T. Dennison’s four volume Reformed Confessions of the 16^th and 17^th Centuries in English Translation, published by Reformation Heritage Books.

As churches and even some nations adopted these confessions in the British Isles, Denmark, Poland, Hungary, Germany, Romania, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and France, the church was strengthened for generations to come. The confessions were used to train ministers, to guide kings, and to educate laity, and despite difficulties and losses along the way, the church of the 21^st century is theologically richer thanks to the hard theological work done in the 16^th century.

Reclaiming Creeds and Confessions Today

Today, once again, the church has become polluted with heresy. This is seen not only in the aforementioned denials of the deity of the Holy Spirit, but in mediocrity and worldliness in our worship services, in doctrinal compromise for worldly acceptance, in false ecumenicism that neglects the importance of true theology, and more. Doctrine is squandered, worship is infantilized, and piety is under prioritized all for the sake of pragmatism, popularity, and power.

We do not need to lose heart - the gospel is strong and the church shall prevail through all ages (Matt 16:18). However, we must fight, for the worship of God is precious and the truths of God’s Word are glorious. This fight can be won especially through a reclamation of creeds.

Clergy ought to adopt the use of confessions in their own education and ministry. Seminaries should teach creeds and confessions as an essential part of Christian doctrine. How many theology classes actually utilize the historic Christian creeds and confessions? How many church curriculums utilize their own historical confessions? Very few I imagine. How we neglect such great wealth!

Pastors should incorporate creeds and confessions into their worship services. Readings of the Nicene Creed, the Apostles Creed, and the Athanasian Creed are excellent ways to bring rich theology down to the layperson. Further, utilizing confessional documents like the second London Baptist Confession of Faith or the Westminster Confession is an excellent way to teach theology to the laity.

By demonstrating the beauty and importance of these confessional documents, Christians are further encouraged to use them in their own private lives. In devotion and family worship, confessions and especially catechisms can teach vital doctrine to those who would never otherwise pick up a theology book.

All that is to say, reclaiming creeds and confessions can greatly bless the liturgical and devotional lives of laity and clergy alike. And this connects us better to the saints who have come before us. We are not the first Christian generation, and if Christ tarries, we will not be the last. Creeds and confessions connect us to the ancient and universal church of Christ, reminding us that we are not alone in this battle against the forces of darkness.

Conclusion

The 21^st century is rife with doctrinal and moral confusion. This hinders our worship and evangelism, and ultimately smears the glory of God. It is the duty of Christians of every generation to beautify the church for her presentation to her bride (2 Cor 11:1; Rev 19:7-8). We must fulfill our duty by cleansing Christ’s bride of the stain of impure doctrine and compromised practice.

So, go read the creeds! Go study the confessions! Dennison’s four volume set, while comprehensive, is more academically inclined. Instead, I recommend starting with Christ and Creed by Nate Pickowicz. This short, introductory book gives an overview of each ecumenical creed, a small look at the Protestant confessions, and teaches why creeds are important anyways. Go give this short book a read!

In the meantime, let’s strive for doctrinal excellence. O what a glorious day it will be when the worship of the triune God is no longer compromised by poor doctrine!

For the beauty of Christ’s Bride,

Adam Heida