my-place-in-his-world-january-february-2004

GOSPEL BLUES ❘ RICK WARREN INTERVIEW ❘ POPE'S JUNK

MODERN REFORMATION

MY PLACE IN HIS WORLD DECISION MAKING AND THE WILL OF GOD VOLUME

13, NUMBER1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2004, $5.00

C J

A

N

U

O A

R

Y

/

F

N

E

B

R

U

A

T R

Y

2

0

E 0

4

|

N V

O

L

U

M

T E

1

3

S N

U

M

B

E

R

1

MY PLACE IN HIS WORLD Decision Making and the Will of God

17 Pilgrims in Providence: Does God Have a Wonderful Plan for My Life?

Is there a master plan guiding human history? Yes, but humanity struggles to determine the difference between a preprogrammed Matrix-like fatalism and God’s personal preserving and guiding of his creation.

The Triune God is personally and effectively at work, bringing about his good and perfect plan.

By A. Craig Troxel Plus: The Will of God

24 Can I Know God’s Will for My Life?

Several popular television shows have played with the idea of the future being made known to an average-Joe, often via the medium of a newspaper. Is that how we conceive of knowing God’s will?

True knowledge may look a bit different than what we have been expecting.

By Paul Helm Plus: I’ll Pray About It

30 My Father’s Voice Our constant search for guidance and direction often reflects a “me-centered” theology. Take your eyes off yourself and fix them upon your only hope, Jesus Christ. Only through knowing God as he is revealed in Jesus may we have any hope of living a God-pleasing life.

By Charles S. Mallie Plus: Why We Seek to Know God’s Will COVER PHOTO BY STONE/JASON HAWKES

In This Issue page 2 | Letters page 3 | Between the Times page 5 | Speaking of page 9 Preaching from the Choir page 10 | Council Counsel page 12 | Ex Auditu page 13 | Resource Center page 22 We Confess page 36 | Free Space page 37 | Reviews page 40 | On My Mind page 44

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1

I

N

|

T

H

I

S

|

I

S

S

U

E

MODERN REFORMATION Editor-in-Chief Michael Horton

Reaching for the Ring

C

an there be any more depressing subject for Christians than “knowing God’s will”? Many Christians I know are certain that the mistakes they made at one time or another have somehow prevented the “perfect” will of God from being

fulfilled in their lives. Now, their decision making processes are paralyzed by the fear that they will somehow miss out again on the best that God has for them.

Why do so many of us think this way? Take a look at the selection of books available in your local Christian bookstore. Are you Wild at Heart?

Will you trust The Dream Giver to bring you into the “‘Promised Land’ of God’s will”? You mean you still aren’t Experiencing God! No wonder we often despair of knowing the right magic words to unlock the secret will of God for our lives, every single one of these books purports to tell us how, but there’s something just a little bit different to emphasize in each one.

There must be a better way of understanding our life purpose as God’s sons and daughters.

The articles in this issue of Modern Reformation cut through the chaff and remind us that knowing and doing God’s will are often much easier than our evangelical brothers and sisters would have us believe. Presbyterian pastor A. Craig Troxel starts off the issue by taking us to the Book of Proverbs to explain how God rules and governs the world he created. Baptist theologian Paul Helm helps us understand that living by faith often means living without a clear understanding of God’s blueprint for our lives.

Lutheran pastor Charles Mallie brings the issue home by encouraging us to listen to the Father’s voice as he tells us about himself in his Word as

Next Issue: March/April 2004: Forgiven The classic error of man-centered theology is a misunderstanding of forgiveness. We either think that we must do something to earn God’s forgiveness or we think that we must do something to keep God’s forgiveness. Contributors include Don Matzat, James White, Robert Yarbrough, Shannon Geiger, and Patricia Anders.

2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

a means of redirecting our misplaced attention back toward Jesus. (As is frequently the case in our pages, you will notice distinct theological positions taken by each author that may or may not be shared by the others. The editors make every effort to emphasize areas of common agreement, but we encourage each author to speak from his own theological confession. If you find yourself disagreeing with an author, use that opportunity to reflect on why you hold the theological positions you do and how you should relate to those in other branches of Reformational Christianity.)

If the carousel ride of contemporary Christian living is getting you down and you don’t have the heart to reach for the brass ring anymore, we invite you to find your way to the nearest ride exit and rest in the arms of your Savior who personally “preserves and governs all his creatures and their actions” as the Westminster Shorter Catechism says.

There are a few changes in this new year of Modern Reformation. A new column features your questions and answers from our Council members. In this issue, Baptist pastor Ken Jones addresses unconfessed sin in the life of a believer. We have also expanded our music and news departments, “Preaching From the Choir” and “Between the Times.”

Thank you for your continued support of Modern Reformation. If you’re tired of wearing out your copy of the magazine by passing it around among your friends and family, send us a list of their names and we’ll be happy to give them a complimentary copy to try for themselves.

Executive Editor Mark R. Talbot Managing Editor Eric Landry Alliance Council Gerald Bray ❘ D. A. Carson Mark Dever ❘ J. Ligon Duncan, III W. Robert Godfrey ❘ John D. Hannah Michael Horton ❘ Rosemary Jensen Ken Jones ❘ John Nunes J. A. O. Preus ❘ Rod Rosenbladt Philip Ryken ❘ R. C. Sproul ❘ Mark R. Talbot Gene E. Veith ❘ Paul F. M. Zahl Department Editors Brian Lee, Ex Auditu, Reviews Benjamin Sasse, Between the Times William Edgar, Preaching From the Choir Staff ❘ Editors Ann Henderson Hart, Staff Writer Diana S. Frazier, Contributing Editor Alyson S. Platt, Copy Editor Lori A. Cook, Layout and Design Celeste McGhee, Proofreader Contributing Scholars Charles P. Arand ❘ S. M. Baugh Jonathan Chao ❘ William M. Cwirla Marva J. Dawn ❘ Don Eberly Timothy George ❘ Douglas S. Groothuis Allen C. Guelzo ❘ Carl F. H. Henry Lee Irons ❘ Arthur A. Just Robert Kolb ❘ Donald Matzat Timothy M. Monsma ❘ John W. Montgomery John Muether ❘ Kenneth A. Myers Tom J. Nettles ❘ Leonard R. Payton Lawrence R. Rast ❘ Kim Riddlebarger Rick Ritchie ❘ David P. Scaer Rachel S. Stahle ❘ David VanDrunen Cornelis Van Dam ❘ David F. Wells Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals © 2004 All rights reserved. The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals exists to call the church, amidst our dying culture, to repent of its worldliness, to recover and confess the truth of God’s Word as did the Reformers, and to see that truth embodied in doctrine, worship and life.

For more information, call or write us at: Modern Reformation 1716 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 546-3696 ModRef@AllianceNet.org www.modernreformation.org ISSN-1076-7169

SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION

Eric Landry Managing Editor

US US Student Canada Europe Other

1 YR $22 1 YR $15 1 YR $25 1 YR $40 1 YR $45

2 YR $40 2 YR $45 2 YR $75 2 YR $85

L

E

T

T

It is always refreshing to receive correction on quotations and beliefs attributed to famous people, such as Martin Luther respecting music (“Give Luther a Rest,” September/October 2003). As one who has used both examples when discussing the hot-button issue of worship music, I stand corrected for my misrepresentation of Luther.

Despite the mistaken attribution of the quote and the song’s origin to Luther, the point of the statement remains valid. While Luther is no longer guilty of misrepresenting God’s music, the intention of Mr. Nabholz remains to invoke Luther in condemning the “‘music people like’” on a “thousand evangelical radio stations.” It remains to be proven that “the music God likes” must be accompanied by an organ and/or piano only, or meets the musical criteria of a Bach or Beethoven.

Indeed, I am still clueless as to whether there even exists “Christian music.” Rather, is not “Christian music” merely music with Christian lyrics? Would Luther dislike certain types of music, or the Christian lyrics? In any event, Mr. Nabholz uses an historical inaccuracy to take a poke at music that he believes Luther would dislike. It would have been much more helpful for the reader if he would have not ventured into supposition.

The correction was enough.

Rodney Nelson Richland, Washington

E

R

S

Mark Nabholz responds: It is obvious from Luther’s writings that he believed worship music should be used only with the greatest care. He considered music a “precious, worthy, and costly treasure given to mankind by God.” Luther was influenced by and openly admired the greatest art music composers of his time, was a capable and trained musician himself, and cultivated music within the church to the highest art possible. He wrote in 1538, “when man’s natural musical ability is whetted and polished to the extent that it becomes an art, then do we note with great surprise the great and perfect wisdom of God in music, which is, after all, His product and His gift.” He continues, “A person who…does not regard music as a marvelous creation of God, must be a clodhopper indeed and does not deserve to be a human being; he should be permitted to hear nothing but the braying of asses and grunting of hogs.” These statements (and a multitude more) indicate the high probability that Luther would grunt his disapproval of the current state of music in the church.

There is no greater need in the contemporary church than to know that we are saved apart from works of the law. Although this is the message of the Bible, the church seems to have forgotten it as Pelagius makes a surreptitious return. The September/October 2003 issue of Modern Reformation did an extraordinary job revealing the false notions that have emerged recently. I count myself fortunate that the authors in that issue were faithful to the message of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin and have passed it on to our own generation. I am sure that the men and women of the Council of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals often find themselves persecuted for defending classical Reformation theology. They should be esteemed and revered for remaining faithful to Scripture’s central message. Praise God! He is faithful in preserving his church even though it has been compromised by what R. C. Sproul calls the most anti-intellectual generation the church has ever seen.

Damian M. Romano Malta, NY

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3

I get confused when I read Reformed theologians sounding very dispensational when discussing the redemption purchased for us by Christ. I believe that Mark Talbot, in his article, “Why All the Fuss?” (September/October 2003), misappropriated the Old Covenant’s lawful intent.

He recalled for us that God’s promise to Abraham came before the 430 year “belated” Law of Moses.

But then Dr. Talbot made this “speed bump” of a statement. He said, “The law had a condition attached to it; namely, if someone were to keep it—that is, keep it perfectly—then that person would attain righteousness and live.” Was God’s stipulation to the law—“do this and you will live” (Lev. 18:5)—one in which justification was promised to the lucky winner? I understand that’s how Paul revamped the verse to make his point but I do not think that is how we should read Moses.

The Law was not given to show a man “how-to-besaved” (that’s Dispensational); it was given to show the saved man how to live (that’s Reformed). We are instructed in the Westminster Confession of Faith (7.5) that the covenant of grace was administered in various ways previous to Jesus’ coming, ways which were nonetheless “sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit” (a la regeneration; i.e. ante-John 14 and Acts 2). Section 7.5, then, seems to oppose any “salvation by works” theories one might espouse and propagate (Ahem! Judaizers take heed!). And it would also seem to disqualify Dr Talbot’s correlative statement just sentences later, “Thus, God’s people would gain life through the indwelling of his Spirit, rather than through keeping Moses’ law.” As if that was its intent.

Travis Matthew Finley Millersville, MD

I appreciate Modern Reformation and read it from cover to cover. It is of great benefit to me and others who love Scripture, the church, and desire to see the relevancy of Christ in a complex world.

Precept studies are effective in doing this also.

Your January/February 2003 interview with Kay Arthur (“Line Upon Line”) was particularly interesting in this regard. My experience with Precept is through their studies of the Epistles. As one reared on Reformed theology, I was able to resolve easily the inconsistencies. This has not been the case in the Old Testament studies, which have been troubling. Your interview shed light on the problem: the fulfillment of God’s promise to Israel. Precept is coming from a direction alien to Reformed theology. Even with its inconsistencies, however, I am thankful for Precept. They have helped me open God’s Word, so that I may know truth for myself. Wasn’t this the reason the reformers died as martyrs?

Linda Kennett Midland, MI

Join the Conversation!

Modern Reformation Letters to the Editor 1716 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 215.735.5133 fax ModRef@AllianceNet.org

Mark Talbot responds: My thanks to Mr. Finley for his concern for correct doctrine. I don’t think we really disagree about the law’s function, since I don’t think and didn’t claim that anyone other than the second Adam would ever fulfill it perfectly; and so the point of the Mosaic dispensation, including the pronouncement at Leviticus 18:5, was simply to drive home to the Israelites their need for a Savior who would accomplish for them what they could not accomplish for themselves. Moses’ law also showed the saved Israelite how to live and, shorn of its ceremonial and sacrificial portions, still does that for us today. But the Old Covenant’s intent, Mr. Finley and I agree, was never for it to be a means for human beings, apart from Christ’s work, to gain salvation. I think we do disagree, however, about the status of Paul’s interpretation of Moses; the apostle’s interpretation of Old Testament texts should be normative for us, because he by divine inspiration gives us their true interpretation.

4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Letters under 200 words are more likely to be printed than longer letters. Letters may be edited for content and length.

B E T W E E N | T H E | T I M E S

Should Boykin Get the Boot?

Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin, Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, has been at the center of a political firestorm since late October when journalists discovered that he has been making speeches at churches and prayer breakfasts in recent months, putting a religious spin on the war on terrorism.

An evangelical, Boykin is reported to have said that America’s real enemy in the battles with bin Laden and Hussein is actually “a spiritual enemy…called Satan.” He has apparently suggested that our “Christian nation” must “come against them in the name of Jesus” to be successful militarily, and he has recounted his 1990s experiences fighting Somali (Muslim) warlords by explaining his certainty that we would prevail because Boykin’s “God was bigger than his [opponent’s] God…; my God was a real God and his was an idol.” With editorialists calling for his dismissal, the White House has distanced itself from the general’s comments, but Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has signaled that Boykin will not be fired.

NO.

YES.

America is a free country, and Islam is dangerous. So why can’t the general say so?

First, let’s acknowledge the simple truth that the dominant form of religiously motivated violence in the world today is Muslim.

The politically correct crowd likes to hint that all observant religious people— unhelpfully grouped under the increasingly ahistorical label “fundamentalists”—are equally prone to religious violence. Recall the New York Times editorial last summer castigating Franklin Graham for calling Islam “wicked,” and calling on President Bush to repudiate “religious zealots” like Graham at home before making any further “demand that Saudi and Yemeni leaders repudiate their own zealots.” Never mind the messy fact that Graham’s Samaritan’s Purse was then building hospitals in Afghanistan while Muslim groups were plotting to blow up Red Cross hospitals in Iraq.

Religious persecution is surely not confined to any one region or creedal oppressor. Various traditions continue to clash in the Balkans. Religious and ethnic groups strike and are struck in Israel/Palestine. Muslims—and to a lesser degree Christians—are suffering increasing attacks at the hands of Hindus in parts of India. Communists and former communists continue to tyrannize all manner of theists and spiritualists in

Boykin’s comments were not just imprudent—which he conceded in an official apology.

They were inappropriate, perhaps insubordinate.

The question of whether he was right about the nature of Islam is entirely beside the point. What matters—and what he deserves to be in hot water for—is the fact that he made these comments not as Jerry Boykin, lay church member, but as General Boykin in his official capacity, wearing military garb, and reportedly enlisting a taxpayer-funded aide to help prepare his presentations.

All Reformational Christians affirm the proposition that believers have both churchly and secular callings. Gen. Boykin lives in two kingdoms, and he can legitimately hold a multiplicity of views based on his different roles and offices.

But when he puts on his uniform, he is paid by someone else, and he has an obligation to keep his personal judgments, including religious beliefs, to himself. Believers surely cannot say or do things in our jobs that contradict our moral or theological convictions—for instance, we cannot run a brothel or proselytize for Hinduism—simply by claiming that we are wearing our “9-to-5” hat, rather than our “Christian” one. But admitting that one’s secular calling cannot undermine one’s confession does not mean one is required (or

[ C O N T I N U E D O N PA G E 6 ]

[ C O N T I N U E D O N PA G E 7 ]

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 5

B E T W E E N | T H E | T I M E S

No [ C O N T I N U E D F R O M PA G E 5 ]

China, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, North Korea, and Cuba.

But there can be no debate that the vast majority of the world’s trans-national religious bloodletting originates with Muslims, and most often targets Christians. Just a few examples from recent months: • In the southern Philippines, where rebel groups have been fighting for an independent homeland for the country’s five million Muslims since the early 1970s, the violence has become more specifically anti-Christian in the post-9/11 era as the United States has increased aid to the Catholicmajority government. Two groups in particular, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the bin Laden-affiliated Abu Sayyaf, have begun to target clergy for torture and murder.

Christian children have been used as human shields in battle and, in March 2003, Muslims set up roadblocks on the island of Mindanao, shooting the Christian males they identified.

• Hridoy Roy, a well-known Bangladeshi evangelist, was martyred by Muslims after showing a film version of Luke’s Gospel in April 2003.

• In Pakistan, where Christians assembled for worship have been murdered on multiple occasions in recent years, a new “Blasphemy Law” specifically criminalizes the desecration of any “place of worship.” Nonetheless, international groups report that local police often refuse to enforce the statute.

• Complicated laws in Saudi Arabia simultaneously require that all citizens be Muslim and yet permit non-Muslims to worship in private. In practice, though, this latter right is rarely honored and humanitarian organizations report that Christians are increasingly being beaten, arrested, and deported.

• In Sudan, two decades of civil war have ravished the entire country, killing nearly two million. But the government’s current policies of “Islamization” of public institutions have allowed local officials to exacerbate the suffering of Christians and certain indigenous religious groups by denying them relief supplies and basic services until they convert to Islam.

The murder, rape, and forcible conversion of evangelical Christians have been widespread in rural villages.

• In the story perhaps most often bungled by international media—with bizarre suggestions that the not-quite-officiallydeclared civil war is somehow equally the fault of Muslims and Christians—Muslims in Nigeria attempting to “purify” their country have killed hundreds of Christians in the last year, mostly in the northern and central regions. New Shari’a laws

6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

have encouraged machete-wielding attackers, who draw no distinctions between men and women, or between adults and children. Voice of the Martyrs, an international advocacy group, reports of cases where the terrorists shoot pregnant women in the stomach. In the city of Kaduna alone, over 120 church buildings have been destroyed since the end of 2002.

• Similar accounts could be offered of the situation in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Muslim regions of Malawi—and on the list goes.

It goes without saying that Christians also often act in a despicable manner. As recent experience in Yugoslavia well demonstrates, many people wear “Christian” as merely a tribal badge just like others wear the label “Muslim” as simply a social and ethnic identifier, rather than as a confession and a belief system. And no fair-minded Christian can casually dismiss the European Crusades on the Middle East from the eleventh to the fourteenth centuries as outliers in church history. Indeed from Constantine’s alleged conversion in the fourth century through to the seventeenth century development of a clear Protestant doctrine of the spirituality of the church (the belief that the only “weapons” God has given to the church are words and access to the Sacraments— never the state’s tools of physical coercion), many Christians wrongly assumed that Christ’s Kingdom would come by believers’ wielding the sword.

But important as these qualifications undoubtedly are, they don’t change the fact that Muslim hands, with self-avowed religious motivations, carry out most of the world’s religious oppression. By and large, when Christianity spreads in a given region, there is renewed tolerance of all religions. Much to the chagrin of Western secular elites, this “tolerance” doesn’t take the form of assuming that all religions are equally true (the pundits mean equally false). But it does generally assume that all people are created with equal dignity, and thus that they have the right to decide religious matters free from state interference. By contrast, when Islam spreads, various forms of Shari’a law tend to be implemented. Non-Muslims are reduced to a second-class status, and Muslims in particular are threatened with death if they convert from the faith.

In a charitable construction, this is the heart of what Gen. Boykin said. It may not be polite, but we’re better off having someone admit that the emperor isn’t wearing clothes.

This is not to deny the serious problems evident in Boykin’s own theology. Reformational Christians do not assume God’s blessing on all our endeavors. Scripture plainly teaches not to tightly link temporal success and God’s will, with the Psalmist laboring over the question of why the wicked so often prosper. But acknowledging the deficiencies of Boykin’s nationalistic understanding of Christianity does not mean that his assessment of Islam is inaccurate. ■

Yes [ C O N T I N U E D F R O M PA G E 5 ]

even allowed) to spell out all personal views at work.

Gen. Boykin heads an office at the Pentagon responsible for identifying “high-value targets” like Hussein and bin Laden, so obviously his position requires that he make many judgments about America’s enemies. And the complexity of his mission is heightened by the fact that his boss, the president, so often speaks of the enemy in this war as something other than Islam—a religion which Bush frequently characterizes as “peace-loving.” What does that mean? Is it true? And if not, is Boykin implicitly being asked, in the exercise of his duties, to suggest that Islam isn’t wicked?

And might this not be equated, at least to a degree, with being asked to defend a religion you regard as indefensible?

The two most frequently cited journalistic explanations of Bush’s rhetoric on Islam are that he is simply politicking or that he is theologically relativistic—with a spirit somewhat akin to President Eisenhower, who supposedly said he wanted Americans to be people of faith and he didn’t much care which faith they espoused. The commentariat accuses the current president of simple pandering, recognizing that America’s growing Arab population, especially in swing states like Michigan, is not yet aligned with either major party. Recall that in the campaign of 2000, well before 9/11, then-Governor Bush, while talking about “America’s faith,” would regularly speak of “churches, synagogues, and mosques”—something national officials had not previously done so consistently.

Illustrating the second common reading of the president, as champion of “faith in general,” the New York Times has asked if “Mr. Bush is simply more comfortable with religious people [including Muslims] than with nonbelievers.” As evidence supporting this possibility, Times executive editor Bill Keller cites a Bush comment in a meeting with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the devote Muslim now ruling Turkey: “You believe in the Almighty, and I believe in the Almighty. That’s why we’ll be great partners,” the president allegedly explained.

But there is a third way to interpret Bush’s comments. An Administration foreign affairs official, who asked not to be identified, tells MR that there is a more complicated explanation for the way the White House speaks about Muslims: The president is trying to create the “rhetorical space” into which a more tolerant international Islam might grow. By talking as if there is such a thing as a coherent “liberal Islam,” the president intends to help mainstream those Muslims who advocate an Islam where “jihad is interpreted

spiritually rather than literally.”

U.S. policy is obviously not creating this non-violent version of Islam from scratch. It is already prevalent in firstworld universities—even if it is difficult to understand how Westernized proponents of this brand of Islam explain the Koran’s militaristic passages. While exhortations to “fight those who do not believe in Allah” may lend themselves to a spiritual reading, there are also texts more directly demanding that the faithful “slay the idolaters.”

That is not the president’s problem, counters the Administration official. His job—a wholly political job—is to protect his people by building up nations and systems that do not threaten Americans, and by isolating nations and systems that do. And, according to Daniel Pipes, one of America’s preeminent students of Middle Eastern politics, most Muslims in the world do not want jihad, they do not want war with other religions. Of the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims, Pipes estimates that less than 150 million truly believe in the warmaking brand of Islam.

The problem is that these non-violent Muslims, although they may constitute ninety percent of the religion’s practitioners, lack political leaders and popular writers.

Paradoxically, President Bush may be attempting subtly to become one of the world’s most important proponents of a liberal—indeed peace-loving—version of Islam.

What should Reformational Christians make of a political attempt to shape a religion, if this is an accurate interpretation of the White House’s objective in calling Islam a religion of peace? In terms of evangelism and apologetics, Christians will note that there is no virtue in putting an inaccurately charitable face on Islam, especially as it continues to experience the global revival that began in the early 1970s.

On the other hand, as citizens of this world, it is appropriate for Christians to acknowledge that some worldviews demonstrate greater respect for neighbors and for the order of God’s creation than do others. While both fail to acknowledge Jesus as the God-Man who redeems us from sin, liberal Islam is much less of a threat to this-worldly innocents than is bin Laden’s variety. Thus, even though we do not want our politicians to be making pronouncements on the truthfulness of different religions, there is something to be said for civic leaders coaxing any dangerous religion to be a little less violent.

Whether this is indeed what the president is up to is a matter for debate. But it is not a matter for Gen. Boykin to debate, at least not in uniform in public. When Bush and other government officials are seeking to convince moderate Middle Eastern regimes that the war on terror is not a war on Allah, the last thing they need is an American general undermining their efforts at this-worldly peace by characterizing this or any other secular war as an epic spiritual battle. ■

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 7

B E T W E E N | T H E | T I M E S

What Shall We Then Read? recent survey by Duke Divinity School and the National Opinion Research Center examines the reading habits of American clergy outside of time specifically spent in sermon preparation. Of the denominations broken out, Episcopalians read the most, at five hours per week; Nazarenes reported the least, at two hours. When asked to name their favorite authors, mainline and conservative Protestants’ lists look quite different, with mainliners touting Henri Nouwen, William Willimon, Frederick Buechner, Max Lucado, and Eugene Peterson, while evangelicals cheer Lucado, John Maxwell, Charles Swindoll, John MacArthur, and Warren Wiersbe. But when asked to name the specific books they had read most recently, the titles were a good deal more similar.

A

The evangelical top five: 1) Bruce Wilkinson’s Prayer of Jabez (second on the mainline list) 2) Jim Cymbala’s Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire 3) Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’ Left Behind series (fifth among mainliners) 4) Cymbala’s Fresh Faith 5) Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Church (sixth among mainliners)

There was similar overlap among periodical literature.

The evangelical top seven: 1) Leadership (second among mainliners) 2) Christianity Today (fifth among mainliners) 3) Pulpit Helps 4) Newsweek (eighth among mainliners) 5) Proclaim 6) U.S. News and World Report 7) Readers Digest

Mainline clergy read Christian Century most frequently, as they have for decades, and their most frequently listed “last book read” was J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series.

61:39 SUM + of the = TIME

Ratio of women to men in the pews of American churches on any given Sunday morn-

ing.

8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Religious News in Brief…

In a move some critics are quietly equating with “court packing,” an ailing Pope John Paul II has handed out thirty-one new red hats, the symbolic means by which a new cardinal is created. With the move, the 83-yearold pontiff raised to 194 the membership of the College of Cardinals, the body from which the next pope will be chosen. 135 members, including 26 of the newcomers, are under 80 years old and thus eligible to vote in the election of John Paul’s replacement. The pope had previously affirmed the papal rules that the number of electors should never exceed 120.

In anticipation of a late November meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) in Atlanta, the board of trustees and the faculty of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary voted in October to condemn open theism as "an egregious biblical and theological departure from orthodoxy." Open theism, which denies God's exhaustive definite foreknowledge, has been rapidly gaining ground within Evangelicalism over the last decade. ETS at its annual meeting was expected to vote on whether open theists should be tolerated or expelled from the evangelical academic community. The Southern Seminary statement, adopted unanimously, was intended in part to remind ETS of historic Christian teaching on the suddenly controversial subject. [As this issue of MR went to press, ETS voted not to expel the two leading open theists. A two-thirds majority is required to expel a member. 63% voted to remove John Sanders, and only 33% voted to remove Clark Pinnock-so both retained their membership. — EDS.] McGill Baptist Church of Cabarrus County, North Carolina, has been kicked out of the Baptist State Convention for baptizing two practicing homosexuals and admitting them to church membership. The state association had previously disciplined clergy for blessing same-sex marriages, but this is the first known North Carolina case where discipline has been taken against a congregation for failing to require repentance. Steve Ayers, pastor of McGill Baptist, justified his actions to reporters by claiming, “Jesus told us to fish for people.

It’s not our job to sort the fish. He’ll take care of any sorting.” The case could be a forerunner of broader action against liberal clergy, as religious associations sympathetic to homosexuality have recently been advising United Methodist clergy that they can avoid their denominational edicts against homosexual activity simply by adopting a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Speaking of...

P

eople of the Philippines: I have returned. By the grace of Almighty God, our forces stand again on Philippine soil…. The hour of your redemption is here…. Rally to me…. As the lines of battle roll forward to bring you within the zone of operations, rise and strike. Strike at every favourable opportunity.

For your homes and hearths, strike! For future generations of your sons and daughters, strike! In the name of your sacred dead, strike! Let no heart be faint. Let every arm be steeled. The guidance of Divine God points the way. Follow in His name to the Holy Grail of righteous victory.

General Douglas MacArthur, October 17, 1944

I

fear that many people seek to hear God solely as a device for securing their own safety, comfort and righteousness. For those who busy themselves to know the will of God, however, it is still true that “those who want to save their life will lose it.” My extreme preoccupation with knowing God’s will for me may only indicate, contrary to what is often thought, that I am overconcerned with myself, not a Christlike interest in the well-being of others or in the glory of God. Dallas Willard, Hearing God, 28

G

od isn’t speaking to me. He won’t give me assignments. He didn’t tell me who [sic] to marry. He was obstinately silent when I had to decide whether to take my current job. He doesn’t give me secret knowledge about other people or situations. In short, He isn’t doing for me what seemingly the rest of the evangelical church claims He is doing for them. Why not me? What have I done wrong? Why this slight? Everyone else has all this extra revelation straight from God. They’ve got intense feelings, and power, and special instructions and don’t have to make any of their own decisions. God tells them what to do and when to do it. In fact, some of them claim they don’t do anything until it is clear what God wants them to do. If I waited for God to tell me what to do, I would never get out of bed. All I’ve got is a Bible and the Holy Spirit within me (at least, I hope He’s there. I can’t feel Him moving about, but the Bible says He’s there).

Bill MacKinnon, “No Voices in My Head,” www.internetmonk.com

G

od’s will is determined by His wisdom which always perceives, and His goodness which always embraces, the intrinsically good.

C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, 100

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 9

P R E A C H I N G | F R O M | T H E | C H O I R P E R S P E C T I V E S

O N

M U S I C

I N

T H E

C H U R C H

The Dark Valley Before the Banquet Table: Understanding the Blues

W

hite people have been both fascinated and scared by the blues since the

but to triumph over it in hundreds of ways.

The beginning. This powerful, streamlined genre has a depth and realism not expression, “Jim Crow,” came to characterize the racist always found in white folk and popular music. Whites came in droves to conventions of Reconstruction. But its origins hear Bessie Smith, even though her blues were often are in the best-known pieces of minstrel theater, and open social critiques of the rich and powerful. Her its central character. Tim Rice wrote Jump Jim Crow most inspired achievement may have been Poor somewhere around 1828, and it was enormously Man’s Blues, written (exceptionally) by herself, in popular, along with his other plays. Jim Crow was 1928, before the crash and the Great Depression: the consummate trickster, able to subvert racial burdens imposed by the paternalistic system of Mister rich man, rich man, open your heart chattel slavery practiced until the bloody Civil War and mind, officially ended it.

Mister rich man, rich man, open your heart Early blues artists embodied this and mind, resourcefulness. But so do the many musicians in successive generations right down to the present Give the poor man a chance, help stop these hard, hard times. time. Music has a way of transcending earthly While you’re in your mansion, you don’t know limits and reaching into people’s hearts. The blues, what hard times means, partly because of its simplicity, partly because of its While you’re in your mansion, you don’t know passion, could speak out against social evils without turning to bitterness or to gray realism. A blues what hard times means, Poor working man’s wife is starving; your wife is musician doesn’t have the blues, he is the blues. living like a queen.

This does not mean that blacks were all good and innocent victims, nor that all whites were evil tyrants.

Smith was herself a stately woman, something of One of the persistent insights of the blues is the a diva, though rough and aggressive too, and always universal tendency toward cruelty. Hypocrisy is an a fierce advocate of economic and racial justice. equal opportunity sin. Little Stevie Wonder Though her personal life was not peaceful, she was as combined gospel with blues to make a series of strong big-hearted and generous as her lyrics were carping. statements about oppression, moving from pointing The blues originate way back to the rhythms of the finger at one race to pointing the finger at the work in the cotton fields and shipyard levees. They powerful, much in the spirit of Mary’s Magnificat: go back to mothers, the famous Mammies celebrated in African American folklore, rocking their babies as Heaven help the black man, they sung about the hardship of life in this world. if he struggles one more day.

From the beginning, in considerable part because of Heaven help the white man a strong Christian influence, blacks developed a sort if he turns his head away. of resiliency, not to say a creatively rebellious spirit Heaven help the man, which enabled them not only to survive oppression who kicks the man who has to crawl

1 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Heaven help us all.

Now I lay me down, before I go to sleep.

In a troubled world, I pray the Lord to keep; keep hatred from the mighty, and the mighty from the small.

Heaven help us all.

Blues and jazz musicians often worked very hard to prove that their music was not racially defined.

Benny Goodman deliberately hired blacks in his quartet. Dizzy Gillespie said there were only two kinds of music: good music and the other kind! He steadfastly refused to listen to radicals advocating a sort of ethnic cleansing of his own racially mixed band. Charlie (“Bird”) Parker loved Stravinsky.

Mick Jagger loved Muddy Waters.

Although the churches, both black and white, worried about the music, chiefly because it was worldly, and often crude, there was in fact a strong kinship between spirituals, gospel music, and the blues. T-Bone Walker remembers first hearing a blues-like piano in the Holy Ghost Church of Dallas. Georgia Tom Dorsey, a blues singer who would become the greatest of the gospel composers recalled the “moaning blues” he heard in the clubs, and the “moaning spirituals” heard in

church. Ethel Waters, after a long career as a blues singer, turned to the church, and sang for Billy Graham’s campaigns. The point is, that while there are crucial differences between the lyrics and functions of blues and gospel music, there are deeper similarities, musically and spiritually, rooted in the black experience of creative response to race and class oppression.

When one compares the blues to certain white groups, either from the rock scene or from the Contemporary Christian Music industry, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the latter suffers from the happiness syndrome. That is, while there is a gladness of sorts, there is not the deep joy, preceded by the deep misery sung about in the blues. It is as though we wanted to rush to the banquet table before going through the valley of the shadow of death. The blues is not good clean fun. It is hard-hitting, and sometimes inappropriate for Christians. But the bulk of it is a poignant reminder along the lines of the Book of Job, that in the world we have trouble. And understanding that is a fitting prelude to believing we are in a world which Jesus has overcome.

William Edgar (Dr. Theol., Universite de Genéve) is professor of apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia, PA) and an accomplished musician. Dr. Edgar is the new editor of this column.

Resource Reviews Reformed Music Journal Brookside Publishing, Editors: Peter Janson and Norma Kobald. 23062 Fraser Hwy, Langley, Contact: nkobald@shaw.ca

BC V2T

2Z2, Canada

Readers of Modern Reformation may not be aware of the resources available specifically in the area of music with a Reformation point of view. One of the best is the modest little periodical, Reformed Music Journal, published quarterly. It covers a range of matters, from line-by-line analysis of church music to more philosophical questions, such as whether we can still use the organ, whether Protestants may use all music that is Roman Catholic, and even, why we go to church.

In some issues a theme is developed, such as the use of ancient music in modern worship. Sometimes reports of symposia are given. In the January 2003 issue, for example, the Second Symposium on Calvin’s Psalter hosted by the Lasco Library at Embden in 2001 was reviewed. The gathering examined the advancement of the Psalter in Germany and England. Among the rich gems in the presentations, one learned about Calvin’s personal use of the Psalms, the resistance to the Psalter in Germany, the way the Psalms were originally sung, and the protest against using the Ave Maria at the royal wedding in Holland of 2001, despite the fact that Calvin himself defended it as being simply Scriptural.

This journal is especially helpful to church organists who are concerned about issues from repertoire to registration.

But pastors and ministers of worship should also profit greatly from its thorough investigation of hymns and Psalm tunes.

All in all, it is a marvelous resource.

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1 1

C

O

U

N A

C

F O R U M

I F O R

L

| C

Q U E S T I O N S

O A N D

U

N

S

E

L

A N S W E R S

The Reverend Ken Jones

Death and Sin

“W

hat happens to a Christian who dies with a known, yet unconfessed sin in his life? Does he die in an unforgiven state? If he dies unforgiven, then what is the result?”

REV. KEN JONES

Senior Minister Greater Union Baptist Church Compton, California

Council Counsel is a new column featuring questions from our readers and answers from the Council members of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals.

If you have a question you would like answered in this space, please send it to modref@alliancenet.org

This question reflects a very common misunderstanding of at least four important things: 1) the doctrine of justification, 2) the doctrine of sanctification, 3) the biblical teaching on the confession of sin, and 4) the interpretation of 1 John 1:9.

A Christian is a person who has been regenerated by the Holy Spirit (John 1:12-13; 3:58; Eph. 2:1). As such this person is justified, which means he or she has been declared righteous because of the imputation of the perfect righteousness of Chris. In other words Christ’s perfect obedience is credited to this person, which is apprehended by faith (Rom. 3:24-26; Eph. 2:8-9).

In justification a person is not made righteous but is declared so, so that he or she is “covered” by the righteousness of Christ (Phil.3:9). It is this imputed righteousness that gives us a right standing before God and since Christ’s righteousness is perfect and unchanging the person that has faith in him never loses that right standing.

In sanctification those who have been justified are being conformed to the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29-30, Eph. 2:10, Phil. 2:13). That is, they are being made righteous which means they will consciously seek to do the will of God in thought, word, and deed. There are, however, a few things to be noted about our pursuit of holiness in this life.

First, our holiness in this life will never be perfect (Isa. 64:6, Luke 17:10). Second, our performance of good works is not what sustains our right standing with God. What sustains us is the righteousness of Christ, which is why Paul says that he “became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30). Contrary to what many evangelicals

1 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

think, we are not saved by faith and then sustained by our own good works. This would require all of our good works to be perfect in and of themselves and that is simply not the case. Third, our good works are done in faith and have no merit apart from Christ who is our mediation and High Priest (1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 13:15-16).

As for the confession of sin, it is evident from the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. 6:9-13; Luke 11:2-4) that this should be a regular part of the Christian life, but there is no inherent power in the act of confession. This leads us to consider 1 John 1:9, “If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” The Greek word translated as “confess” means “to agree, acknowledge, or give assent.” When we are brought to faith we are enabled by the Holy Spirit to confess Jesus as Lord (1 Cor. 12:3). In other words, we confess that we are sinners under the just wrath of a holy God and by faith we confess that Jesus has lived for our obedience and died for our sins. It is this faith driven confession that united us to the atoning works of Christ. What John is alluding to in 1 John 1:9 is the repentance that is an ongoing part of our sanctification. As Christians regularly attend the appointed means of grace, their sins are regularly revealed and they in turn confess those sins and repent. As previously stated, we never reach a state of sinless perfection in this life. Therefore, every Christian that dies does so with unconfessed sin.

The distinction between known and unknown sins is an empty one in light of the holiness of God. Our confidence and our assurance is in our confession of Christ alone for salvation. But we must be careful not to make confession a work upon which the sustaining power of Christ’s atonement is contingent.

E E

|

X X

A

M

P

L

E

S

A O

F

C

U H

R

I

S

T

D -

C

E

N

I T

E

R

E

T D

S

E

R

U M

O

N

S

Romans 13:11–14

In View of the Time, Put on Christ!

Romans 13:11–14: And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.

Keeping the Goal in View In J. R. R. Tolkien’s trilogy The Lord of the Rings, we read about the struggle between good and evil.

On the side of the good are Frodo Baggins, a hobbit, and his friends. On the side of evil are the dark Lord, Sauron, and his evil host. The story is one in which the good who are weak overcome the evil ones, who are strong. Frodo and his friends prevail by keeping the end of their mission in view.

Frequently straying, they repeatedly must realign themselves with their ultimate goal and find strength in the truth, which compels them.

The journey Christians find themselves in is much the same. We struggle in this life as strangers and aliens, but we do so under the shadow of the cross. The shadow the cross casts over us means that we suffer—yet this same shadow points us to the power of the cross, the power of the blood of Jesus Christ. The Son of Man who suffered is also the Son of God, risen and glorious. He will return one day to end all suffering and hardship and to bring in the new heavens and the new earth. That final and glorious day is already in view, and grows brighter with each passing age.

This turning of the ages is exactly what Paul has in mind when he writes the concluding words of Romans 13. He begins by saying, “besides this,” referring back to what he began to say at 12:1. In these two chapters Paul is discussing how Christians should live in light of Christ’s work of redemption, and he concludes by explaining how our lives must be informed by the time—that is, the age and the day to come. In light of the times

From TOM MORRISON

in which we live, Paul states that we must avoid vices and live rightly. In order to understand Paul’s exhortation clearly, we must attend to two things. First, Paul’s idea of the “Day of the Lord” and the two ages. Second, how important it is for us to cast off darkness and put on light by putting on Christ.

The Day of the Lord Paul talks about our salvation being “nearer now than when we first believed,” and “the day being at hand” (13:11–12a). Both of these phrases refer to the second coming of Jesus Christ.

Other places in Scripture refer to this as the “Day of the Lord” or the “Day of Jesus Christ.”

The Old Testament prophets spoke of this day as being awesome because God would judge the nations and save his people finally. Joel says that there will be wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes (Joel 2:29–31).

This day was first seen at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out. While this event was critical to the formation of the New Testament church, it also spoke of the final day of the Lord.

The book of Revelation records this day as the final judgment when earth and sky flee from the presence of God. The first heaven and the first earth pass away and the new heaven and the new earth are formed. All of this coincides with the second coming of Jesus Christ who judges the Pastor High Desert United Reformed Church Apple Valley, California

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1 3

living and the dead. When he returns, the wicked will despair but the righteous will rejoice, because the One in whom they have placed their hope has come! He is the one who helps the city of God when morning dawns (Psalm 46:5).

The Psalms and the Prophets use light and especially the metaphor of the dawn to instill hope in Christians—hope that there is, and will be, final deliverance. Paul reminds the Roman Christians— and us as well—that the final day of the Lord compels us to wake from our sleep. We must be sensitive to the imminent return of Christ and the new, final state he ushers in. The fact that all of us have a tendency to sleep or to be dull to these things, however, brings us to the distinction between the present evil age and the age to come.

The Two Ages “The night” refers to the present evil age from which Jesus Christ is delivering us, according to Galatians 1:4. This evil age is filled with works of darkness and moral vice, and it represents the pull in the wrong direction we feel from the world, the flesh, and the Devil. The present evil age is characterized by unrestrained sin, which one usually attempts to hide in the darkness. Paul further describes this in 2 Timothy as the time “when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (4:3–4), when “evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (3:13).

The present evil age is not neutral toward God, but moves directly away from him. The people Paul described in Romans 1 had exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature instead of God. Therefore these people became hopelessly conformed to the power of sin and live for it. The present evil age conforms a person to its character of wickedness; all will be swept away by its tide unless they cling to Christ.

This is why Paul said in Chapter 12 that we must not be conformed to this age, but rather be transformed by the renewing of our mind. If we are not being transformed in this way, then we will be deceived, thinking that false doctrine and sin are truth and righteousness. The renewed mind listens to sound doctrine, which compels it simultaneously to reject the wickedness of the world and live for Christ.

Living for Christ is only possible if one lives in the age to come. Paul says in Ephesians 1 that Christ reigns in this age and the age to come. Both ages began with the resurrection and ascension of

1 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Jesus Christ. When Christ rose from the dead, he proved that he had defeated sin, death, and the Devil. Because Satan’s reign was cut off by Christ’s reign, he increasingly had to resort to deception and lies in order to threaten Christians, though he is powerless to touch us. “This age,” to which Paul refers, is the present evil age, in which evil vices and deception are a great threat, as he warns us in 2 Timothy.

“The age to come,” however, is the new redemptive reality brought into being by the glorious events of Jesus Christ’s ministry: his work on the cross, resurrection from the dead, ascension into heaven, and sitting at God’s right hand.

Christ’s work reconciled us to God, turning God’s anger away from us and crediting Christ’s righteousness to our account. When Christ finished his work on the cross he ushered in the age to come, which means that we are seated with Christ right now in the heavenly places. Because we are a part of the age to come, right now we already are reigning as priests of God and of Christ (Rev. 20:6).

We read all about the treasures of heaven in Revelation—the refreshment of the river of life, the shade of the Trees of Life and the heavenly temple, which has no need for the sun or moon, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb. As a Christian, we enjoy these things right now but still not yet fully. That is, we can know the comfort and treasures of salvation now, but the fullness and completeness of these gifts of salvation will not be known until we are with Christ in glory.

In this way Paul tells us that we live in both the present evil age and the age to come. He says that we must be wide awake to the reality of the age to come. Yes, we experience the effects of sin daily, which sometimes weighs us down. But we keep going because we know the day of salvation, the day of Jesus Christ, is coming.

Walk Properly According to the Age to Come In much the same way, we must keep our focus on the future, cast off evil ways, and put on Christ.

It makes sense to live rightly according to God’s law, since there is an end for which we are living.

“Walking properly” and “putting on Christ” are essentially the same things. First, to walk properly is to live according to the age to come, which is one in the same as “being filled with the Holy Spirit” (Eph. 5:18) and “walking by the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16).

This means that we don’t just follow the law of God because we’re trying to be good people. Rather, we follow God’s law out of gratitude for what Christ has done for us. We conform ourselves to what is true of us in Christ. If we are justified, declared as

righteous as Christ, then it makes sense to adjust our thinking and actions to that new reality.

In view of what we’ve said about our future heavenly treasures, we should seek to enjoy those treasures now. Loving God and neighbor in the power of the gospel is a delightful thing. Honoring God’s name in our conversations helps us to see, in part, that purpose for which we were created, to honor and worship God. To make a meal for someone who is sick helps us remember that we were created to contribute to our neighbors in this world.

The opposite of walking properly is to walk in orgies, drunkenness, sexual immorality, sensuality, quarreling, and sensuality. This behavior conforms to the present evil age, and these sins are not consistent with who we are in Christ. Lust, for instance, as Henry Fairlie writes, “gives rise to blindness of intellect in response to divine things … hatred of God as an Avenger of such sins; love of this world and its pleasures; [and an] inordinate fear of death.”

Indeed, all sins are misdirected or perverted love. We were created to love God and neighbor, and this original design remains despite the fallen state. The Fall, however, takes that love and turns it inward so that we naturally worship ourselves, hating God and neighbor. Knowing this, we are to “cast off the works of darkness”—we are not to participate in evil vices, which are consistent with the present evil age. Rather, we are to put on the armor or the weapons of light, that is, we are to put on Christ.

Put on Christ To live rightly in this evil age is only possible if we appropriate what is true of us in Christ. We have already put on Christ when we were baptized into him, when we were washed with Christ’s blood for the forgiveness of our sins, and justified through faith by receiving the righteousness of Christ. We were also washed by the Spirit of Christ, renewed, set apart, and united to him. In every way, we’ve been claimed by Christ.

In our passage, Paul says that we must put on Christ in a different sense, by embracing him again and again as we struggle in this life. The church father Chrysostom understood this as “to follow him in the way of discipleship and to strive to let our lives be molded according to the pattern of the humility of his earthly life.”

The world saw Christ merely as a suffering, defeated man; by faith, we see him as God’s suffering servant whose stripes heal us and compel us to live for him. The world saw Christ hanging on the cross and mocked him; by faith, we know that he was working salvation for us on that cross.

The world scorns suffering and curses God because of it; by faith, we embrace suffering and identify with Christ in it.

This pattern of humiliation to which we conform is the cross we must bear in this life. By it, we cast off darkness and put on the armor of light.

We can do so only because we are clothed in the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.

Conclusion The Fall of humanity has twisted and perverted what God created good. Because of this fall, we are like spoiled children grabbing what we can for ourselves and shunning our parents. We want too much and are stingy with all we have. We try to fill up our lives with things that glitter to get rid of the hole we have inside. We fight and bicker with each other in the process. Despite this struggle we persevere in faith only because of the grace God gives us through Jesus Christ. We persevere because, as the psalmist, we see the day dawning in the east. We know that the final day of salvation draws near and promises an end to our battle.

In The Lord of the Rings, Frodo Baggins and friends keep going because they know their final day of salvation approaches. At one critical point in the story, Frodo’s friends are encouraged because they see that the dawn is bringing in a morning full of hope. They see light glimmering: “Far, far away, in the South the clouds could be dimly seen as remote grey shapes, rolling up, drifting: morning lay beyond them” (III, 137). Soon thereafter, they experienced their victory and then, rest.

Brothers and sisters in Christ, far, far away a light dawns for us. This light signifies the final day of salvation, which Christ is bringing in even now.

We already know salvation, but have not experienced it fully yet. However, the darkness of the evil day is waning as the morning dawns.

When the day has fully dawned, we will be at rest, seeing Christ face to face, worshiping him, around the throne with ten thousands of ten thousands who have also found rest from their travels.

Tom Morrison (M.Div., Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary) is pastor of High Desert United Reformed Church in Apple Valley, CA (www.highdeserturc.org)

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1 5

M Y P L A C E I N H I S W O R L D | Decision Making and the Will of God

Pilgrims in Providence: Does God Have a Wonderful Plan for My Life? s if it weren’t challenging enough to live by the Ten Commandments and the two Great Commandments (see Matt. 22:34–40), somewhere along the line someone decided that we also needed an additional “Four Spiritual Laws.” So now, right after “God so loved the world,” many Christians add, “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.” But is this “spiritual law” found in Scripture? This is an important question because many—from Herodotus following the thread of fate in history through Neo attempting to understand his preprogrammed life in the Matrix—have believed there is a master plan guiding human history. People are comforted by the idea that their lives are meaningful because they are parts of a larger plan or a greater purpose than what currently meets the eye.

Some Christians may think that belief in a predetermined plan is equivalent to belief in God’s sovereignty. But belief in determinism and belief in a divine determiner are quite different. We should zealously maintain this difference, especially when we consider questions regarding God’s will for our lives and the doctrine of providence.

Bare determinism is a form of fatalism, making fate and destiny the decisive factors instead of God. In other words, bare determinism subverts the idea that God is personally and actively “preserving and governing all his creatures, and all their

A

BY A. CRAIG TROXEL J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1 7

actions” (Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q. 11; cf.

Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 27). In theological discussions of providence, we may refer to God as the “primary” or “first cause” among “secondary causes” in order to avoid pantheistically confusing God and creation. Yet this language can mislead us by tempting us to think primarily in philosophical categories and not according to biblical doctrine. Scripturally, any notion that removes or depersonalizes God or lessens his active involvement in his creation with his creatures falls short. For Christians, it is not just a matter of traveling the course set before us and simply following God’s commands. There is also the matter of our trusting our loving heavenly Father because we know that God is continuously guiding, leading, protecting, sustaining, and watching over each of us in special ways.

Yet fear, uncertainty, and confusion can often, as G. C. Berkouwer observes, “whelm up with remarkable force in the hearts of believers”—con-

sider Job, the Psalms, and Ecclesiastes. And then we may find ourselves asking, “Does God have a plan for my life?” and “Can I know God’s will for me?” Questions like these concern God’s providence and the sovereignty of his will. We understand a portion of God’s will because God has revealed it to us in his written word. Yet we cannot apprehend a lot of his will because the Lord has chosen not to reveal it. Here theologians distinguish between God’s “revealed will” and his “secret will.” They ground this distinction in texts such as Deuteronomy 29:29: “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” In accordance with God’s revealed will “a man plans his course,” but in his secret will “the Lord determines his steps” (Prov. 16:9, NIV). What Scripture reveals can be known; and all Christ’s disciples are called to obey his Word because it is what God prescribes. But

The Will of God: General Para

F

ew would dispute that “the will of God” is a big issue for any Christian. After all, it is referred to explicitly some four dozen times in the New Testament. God’s will should regulate our prayers (Matt. 6:10). Doing his will is requisite for fellowship with Christ (Mark 3:35). It is required for entrance into his kingdom (Matt. 7:21). Living out his will is perhaps the very highest of Christian priorities (Rom. 12:2).

But is knowing God’s will a matter of getting the big picture from Scripture’s general teaching? Or should we expect personal and specific divine counsel for most, if not all, personal decisions?

In favor of the personal view, John 14:26 is often cited: “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” (NIV). There is plenty of evidence that God can steer his people in quite personal and specific ways: • Jesus wrestled with the Father’s personal will for him in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:42).

• Paul was called to be an apostle by God’s will (1 Cor. 1:1, 2 Cor. 1:1, Col. 1:1, 2 Tim. 1:1).

• The Corinthians responded favorably to Paul “in keeping with the Lord’s will” (2 Cor. 8:5).

• A matter as personal and private as sexual purity is “God’s

1 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

will” (1 Thess. 4:3).

• Christians should have knowledge of God’s will and stand firm in it (Col. 1:9, 4:12).

In that light, why not view John 14:26 as sanction for a maximal understanding of God’s will as knowable for every decision in every aspect of life?

Several factors counsel caution here: • John 14:26 records Jesus’ words to the eleven apostles, the foundation of God’s household (cf. Eph. 2:20), on the night he was betrayed, not to believers at large at all times afterward.

• John 14:26 promises assistance in recalling things Jesus said. Only those who followed him during his earthly days fit that description.

• John 14:26 with its promise to “teach you all things” is more likely to underscore apostolic didactic authority than to imply a carte blanche for the decisions that we make because we deem them to be God’s will.

Not even Jesus regarded his self-consciousness as immediately and fully congruent with the Father’s at all times. Otherwise, why would he have agonized in prayer like he did when he chose the

the indiscernibility of God’s secret will can make it challenging to live by providence because we sometimes find ourselves in difficult situations that defy explanation or appear purposeless. Is the solution simply to resign ourselves to God’s predetermined and established plan? Is faith in God’s providence and sovereign will nothing more than confession of a predetermined plan? The book of Proverbs provides an answer.

A Proverbial Plea for Providence n Proverbs, the believer finds both general principles and specific counsel to walk wisely in “the fear of the LORD.” Although we are separated from this book by chasms of time and culture, it continues to hold our interest through its terse sayings and ironic quips about money, marriage, parenting, lust, laziness, honesty, arrogance, and verbosity. It speaks to us in arresting ways, as when it notes the slow cruelty of a constant drip (see Prov.

I

27:15), the comic sadness of sloth’s delusion (see Prov. 26:13), the surefire bloody nose of strife (see Prov. 30:33), or the seasickness of denied addiction (see Prov. 23:34–35). We can’t walk away from this collection of sayings without having felt their sting, their humor, their irony, their cleverness, and, most of all, their poignant exposure of our daily foibles and culpable folly.

But just when we have stereotyped Proverbs as a collection of sayings that equips the believer with self-confidence and understanding for walking according to God’s revealed will, Proverbs 3:5–6 surprises us with its admonition, “Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.” This is not what many of us would expect from this particular book. It sounds contrary to what we take to be the book’s tenor and purpose to build up our understanding so that we might direct our own paths wisely.

amenters or Personal Direction?

Twelve (Luke 6:12)? Even after praying all night, one of those he chose was “a devil” (John 6:70). It was no easy thing, even for Jesus, to determine God’s will, or to accept it when it emerged.

Think of Gethsemane.

How much more should we be prepared to “live by faith, not sight” (2 Cor. 5:7)? Must we not concede that at times God’s will is to withhold fuller knowledge of his will?

Since Scripture speaks frequently of individuals (and not just of Jesus or apostles) knowing and doing God’s personal will, we should be hesitant to rule out God’s prerogative to break into the loop of our decision-making process when he sees fit. We should not despair of particular personal guidance at junctures where God acts unmistakably to provide it.

Yet humility requires that we recognize the inherent gap between human and divine wills. We must be willing to claw laboriously in search of the latter in prayer. And how about when God wills to insert a Judas into our lives? Too much glib use of John 14:26 overlooks Peter’s insight into how much “the will of God” may be to thrust his people forth into dire straits (1 Pet. 3:17, 4:19). I have heard many christen their decisions as God’s will with “I feel a peace about that.” Few correlate God’s will with loss, pain, grief, or death. But God’s will in Christ is frequently a cross.

John 14:26 hardly supports a doctrine of cognitive soothsaying by Christians who want automatic assurance that a decision

newly emerged in their thinking was actually first hatched by the mind of God. At best, taken in conjunction with broader New Testament teaching, it confirms God’s desire and ability to deal with his people in highly personal and bountiful ways. It reminds us of why we go to Scripture again and again for divine guidance, not to some inner self: Christ and the Scriptures he sanctioned have the words of eternal life, not our sin-sullied psyches.

And it braces us to reaffirm that discovering God’s will may play havoc with the self-realization that our culture conditions us to crave. It is rather self-abnegation that seekers of God have the best warrant to expect as God’s will, if what Jesus predicted his disciples would pass on in John 14:26 is any clue.

Robert Yarbrough (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen) is Associate Professor and New Testament Department Chair at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. His publications include Encountering the New Testament (with Walter Elwell), John (Everyman’s Bible Commentary), and numerous shorter studies and translations of German works. He teaches twice annually at Emanuel University in Romania and at the Center for Biblical Studies in Khartoum, Sudan.

by ROBERT YARBROUGH J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1 9

God, In Whom We Trust roverbs 3:5–6 contrasts the trust that we must place in God with the trust that we must never place in ourselves, even if our understanding is grounded upon divinely inspired proverbs. These two verses remind us that we must commit ourselves and our ways wholly to God and that we may securely rely upon God’s promise to preserve and govern us in all of our ways. They don’t direct us merely to trust in God’s purposes but to rest upon God himself. Our comfort is not primarily found in the idea of a predetermined path but in our trust in a loving Lord. We are called to trust in the One who is trustworthy and who carries out his purposes in a most holy, wise, and powerful way. This makes all the difference when I have just lost my job, or when your best friend has been diagnosed with a terminal illness, or when our church is going through an ugly controversy. How truly comforting it is in such circumstances to turn for aid to an infinitely powerful, resourceful, and compassionate God, instead of bracing ourselves with the idea that God has a wonderful plan for our lives! We can look to him with childlike faith, resting in his well-proven, steadfast, and faithful love.

We must not lean upon ourselves or our own understanding. The key contrast here is between us and the Lord, between our understanding and his.

Some things are trustworthy, like the Lord. Some things are not, like our own understanding. Placing this proverb in the context of the entire book underlines the point that, in spite of all the wisdom and godliness that we may gain from Proverbs, yet if we lean upon our own wisdom—no matter how wellformed it may be—and do not fear the Lord and trust in him, then we have missed the book’s point. As it says, “Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool” (Prov.

28:26). God’s secret will is beyond our comprehension. We cannot spy out God’s wonderful plan for our lives. So seeking to establish our plans in the strength of our sanctified wits is to trust in what is creaturely, darkened, and often unreliable. Simply to think is not to put “confidence in the flesh,” but to put confidence in our own thinking is surely of the flesh.

P

Acknowledging God roverbs 3:5–6 calls us to trust entirely in God’s care, with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength. Our commitment must be total and exclusive. The commandment to have no other gods before him means that giving God most of our heart is not the same as giving him all of it.

Such faith demands that we give ourselves completely to what he desires by obeying his commands. But, here again, we must not think of our obedience as separate from God and his providen-

P

2 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

tial care. We trust ourselves both to what God wants and to what he is doing. We have bet our life on God’s revealed truth and on his person.

Such a comprehensive commitment—“in all your ways”—means that we must rely upon God for every step of our pilgrimage. We must submit to God all of our beliefs, decisions, choices, motives, intentions, and plans, whether they are major or minor, present or future. And we must do this during those pleasant days when the path is level, fair, comfortable, easy, and leads to “green pasture,” as well as when it proves to be unpleasant, hedged in with thorns, cross-carrying, and traverses the valley of the shadow of death.

One way that we exercise this trust in God’s providence is by acknowledging him in all our ways.

In a sense, Scripture is here encouraging us to “practice the presence of God.” But there is more in view. To acknowledge God means not merely to be conscious of him and his constant care over us but also to consult him. Wise people consult others for counsel and advice (see Prov. 15:22). Just as Israel was to follow the Lord’s guidance when traveling in the wilderness and to seek the Lord’s will before going to war, so we are to acknowledge him in life’s seasons of pleasure and of adversity alike. If we are not to lean upon our own wisdom, then we must seek God’s.

We acknowledge God on bended knee and with open book. We take our difficulties, worries, decisions, plans, and endeavors to him in prayer.

We may even set aside certain seasons for fasting because we are especially keen to acknowledge him and his will. Fasting does not make our decisions more sanctified or infallible; it simply emphasizes that we are not relying on our own strength but on his. Of course, searching, studying, pondering, and memorizing the Scriptures teaches us how to acknowledge and recognize God’s will, power, wisdom, and goodness in practical ways.

By implication, neglecting prayer or God’s Word read or preached involves living as if God is not there or as if he is silent. Not to seek God’s face, comfort, peace, wisdom, and truth involves living as if there is nothing to acknowledge but our own understanding. Consider Abraham, who would not pitch his tent without building an altar. We, too, must not sojourn without acknowledging the Lord.

Acknowledging God’s Good Providence he heart of the doctrine of providence is that God is the one who preserves and governs all of his creatures and creation. But the comfort of God’s special providence is that he is looking after us, his Christian children, in even

T

more distinctive and particular ways. He not only knows our individual lives and needs, but he is directing our unique paths—he will make our ways straight. This “straight” has a moral sense. A bad person is crooked. John the Baptist prepared “the way of the Lord” by making “his paths straight” (Mark 1:3). The Lord makes our paths the right ones and the best ones. And so we pray that he will not lead us into temptation and that he will steer us clear of crooked ways that lead to destruction.

The paths of Christians will not always be into green pastures but they are always the best way to glory because God is in control. When David describes God’s special providence over his life in Psalm 23, he begins not by referring to God as his strength or his rock or his fortress or his deliverer or his refuge or his shield or his stronghold or his horn of salvation. Instead, he refers to him as his Shepherd. He derives comfort chiefly from the fact that God is watching over him in a way similar to the way a good shepherd leads, protects, cares for, and watches over his sheep. Our individual paths have indeed been ordained by God, but we walk these preordained paths confident in the person who empowers us to travel them by his Spirit and grace, especially when they become arduous. God is just; and his will for us is right. He is all-wise; and his will in our lives is reasonable.

He is faithful; and what he allows in our life is endurable (see 1 Cor. 10:13). He is abundantly good; and what he sets before us is best.

In this sense, Proverbs 3:5–6 is the Old Testament equivalent of Romans 8:28: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” Paul did not write this as a promise to be claimed by those who are passively fatalistic in character but for those who actively love God. For instance, Joseph’s pathway led through a cistern, the bonds of slavery, and a dungeon. It was far from pleasant and surely at many times inscrutable to Joseph, who may have wondered what the living God was doing. But when the sun came out, he refused to be bitter about God’s will for his life, and he confessed to his brothers that, despite their intentions, God meant it all for good (see Gen. 50:20; 45:8). Like Israel in the desert, our paths through life’s wildernesses may not always be the shortest, but they are always sanctified and sanctifying. They may not be pleasant, but they are perfect for God’s purposes. As Sinclair Ferguson says, ours is a “path to glory, through tribulations.” Even as we direct all of our heart, soul, mind, strength, and ways to him according to his revealed will, God has directed all of our paths straight to himself according to his

secret will. We may not know it, but we know him and can trust him for it.

Further Up and Further In o matter what our circumstance may be, we need to hear again the call of Proverbs 3:5–6 to lean not on ourselves but to trust in the Lord. If we are walking the wrong path—the wide and well-traveled one that leads to destruction—then we must realize that we must lean upon Jesus Christ who alone is the way. If we have wandered from the narrow and less-traveled path because we have begun to lean on our own insight, wisdom, strength, and limited understanding, then we need to hear once again that God is to be acknowledged in everything. Or if we are discouraged and weary because lately we have seen nothing but desert and dark valleys, then we need to remember that God will, in his own perfect time, make our paths straight. We need to be encouraged that the Lord will do what he has promised and will guide us every step along the path that he has ordained.

The Lord has proven his faithfulness to his people as he has shepherded them. When Israel came to the Red Sea and was cornered by Pharaoh’s army, God led them through what seemed an impossible obstacle. Israel could not have discerned his secret will in advance, but they could trust him for it. When the children of Israel traveled through the wilderness, God fed them with the bread of heaven and brought water gushing from the rock. He faithfully led them by cloud and fire. They did not know where he would lead, but they could trust in Israel’s Shepherd. He was committed to bring them into the Promised Land; and he made good on that promise.

So also the Good Shepherd leads, protects, feeds, and strengthens us, his present flock, by his Word and his Spirit. The Lord promised his disciples that the Spirit of Truth would guide them into all truth (see John 16:13); and Scripture promises that we will be led by the Holy Spirit (see Rom. 8:14). The way our Shepherd directs us is through his Spirit working by and with the written Word of God in our hearts and minds. Thus we know the voice of our Good Shepherd and we are able to follow his lead. Thus God’s Spirit reminds us to trust in the Lord’s promises and good providence until our life finishes its appointed course and we are led into our heavenly inheritance. Whether the Lord leads us “beside quiet waters” or whether the waters of the sea “roar and foam,” we must not fear any evil, for he is with us, in our midst, and we shall finally dwell in the Lord’s house forever.

We ought to be encouraged that there is a plan, but

N

[ C O N T I N U E D O N PA G E 2 9 ]

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 2 1

R

E

S

O

U

R

C

In Print January/February Book Recommendations How to Read Proverbs Tremper Longman III The author shows how the Book of Proverbs are memorable capsules of wisdom, chiseled in words and polished through use by those who have traveled that path ahead of us. Most importantly, he shows how Christ is the climax and embodiment of wisdom.

B-LONG-5, $13.00 Finding the Will of God: A Pagan Notion?

Bruce Waltke Bridging the gap between scholar and lay person, the author warns against unbiblical practices for divining God’s will and encourages readers to live God’s will as he has revealed it through Scripture.

B-WALT-1, $15.00 Step by Step: Divine Guidance for Ordinary Christians James Petty With passion and clarity, the author argues that wisdom, spiritual discernment, and insight enable the Christian to know God’s will and make God-honoring decisions.

B-PETT-2, $15.00 Decisions, Decisions: How (and How Not) to Make Them Dave Swavely Helping readers unlearn bad habits first, the author then unveils a biblical proposal to answer one of the most difficult questions facing Christians: How can I know what God wants me to do?

B-SWAV-1, $12.00 Decisions: Finding God’s Will J.I. Packer Can you know what God has in store for you? In a comforting style, the author examines important biblical passages that help Christians make the large and small decisions of life.

B-PAC-30, $6.00 Book Reviews Greg Gilbert Gilbert reviews some of the best (and worst) books on guidance available in the Christian marketplace. His thoughtful, balanced reviews can be found on the website for 9Marks Ministries, a ministry of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, whose pastor is Alliance Council member, Dr. Mark Dever. www.9marks.org To order, complete and mail the order form in the envelope provided. Or, use our secure e-commerce catalog at www.AllianceNet.org. For phone orders call 215-546-3696 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. ET (credit card orders only).

2 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

E

C

E

N

T

E

R

On Tape From the Alliance Archives Parables of Wisdom and Folly HE Ultimately, living a life pleasing to God means BIBLE living a life of wisdom. In this two tape series, STUDY Dr. James Boice exegetes four of Jesus’ parables HOUR and shows how following Jesus is not always a matter of divine imperatives, but of earthy wisdom.

C-PWF, 2 TAPES IN AN ALBUM, $13.00

T

God’s Will for Your Life This ten tape series by Michael Horton explores the Ten Commandments. Are these antiquated laws of Israel even relevant for our age? Horton shows how believers in every age benefit by following the commandments that God set down in stone, which summarize his holiness and righteousness.

C-WTC-S, 10 TAPES IN AN ALBUM, $53.00 Knowing God’s Will This tape, featuring Michael Horton, Kim Riddlebarger, and Rod Rosenbladt, explores the first question that every Christian asks themselves: now what? If gratitude is the only proper motivation for sanctification, how are we best to serve him? Join the hosts of the White Horse Inn as they tackle the tough questions that we all face.

C-W533-34, 2 MESSAGES ON ONE TAPE, $5.00 How to Know the Will of God These two messages by Dr. James Boice summarize Scripture’s teaching on this important subject. The second message deals exclusively with knowing God’s will in difficult situations—an experience with which we can all resonate!

C-2127-38, 2 MESSAGES ON ONE TAPE, $5.00

TSTUDY BIBLE HE

HOUR

The Providence of God This special recording features members of the Alliance Council discussing the doctrine of Providence. A biblical understanding of God’s governing and guidance will give us the proper foundation for our own faltering steps toward following God’s will for our lives.

C-POG-SD, $6.00 Guidance and the Will of God Does God have a perfect will for our lives that we are called to discern and live out? If so, how should we seek God’s guidance when determining where to live, whom to marry, or what to do in any given situation? Contemporary Evangelicalism presents many different ways to discern these things, but how do those methods measure up to Scripture? This thought provoking four part series addresses these and other questions pertaining to decision making and the will of God. Titles include “How NOT to know God’s Will”” “God's Will, Hidden and Revealed,” “Human Decisions and Divine Sovereignty,” and “How to Pray ‘Thy Will be Done.’”

C-GAWOG-S, 2 TAPES IN AN ALBUM, $13.00 CD-GAWOG, 2 COMPACT DISCS, $15.00 The Alliance Resource Catalog In each issue of Modern Reformation the editors suggest tape and book resources relevant to the topic. For more selections of tapes, videos, books and booklets (some of which are only available through the Alliance) please visit the Alliance website at: www.AllianceNet.org or call 215-546-3696 to request a copy of the resource catalog.

Subscribe to Modern Reformation Magazine Six times a year, Modern Reformation will sharpen and challenge you.

Why not subscribe today?

U.S. One year $22 (MR1YR) Two years $40 (MR2YR) U.S. Student One year $15 (MRS1YR) Two years not available Canada One year $25 (MR1YR) Two years $45 (MR2YR) Europe One year $40 (MR1YR) Two years $75 (MR2YR) Other One year $45 (MR1YR) Two years $85 (MR2YR) To subscribe, complete and mail the order form in the envelope provided. Or call 215-546-3696 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. ET (credit card orders only). All subscriptions must be paid in U.S. currency. Subscriptions begin within six weeks of ordering.

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 2 3

M Y P L A C E I N H I S W O R L D | Decision Making and the Will of God

Can I Know God’s Will for My Life? n John Buchan’s novel The Gap in the Curtain, five men, under the influence of the brilliant German physicist and mathematician Professor August Moe, glimpse pieces of information in the pages of a future issue of The London Times. Mayot has a vision of the front page of the paper and sees the name of the next prime minister. Tavanger views an item from the City page reporting an important merger. Reggie Daker sees an account on the Court page of the departure of an archaeological expedition with himself as a member. Sir Robert Goodeve and Charles Ottery read the announcement of their own deaths.

Do these men learn thereby a part of God’s will for their lives? Is this the sort of thing that Christians are after when they ask, “Can I know (or how can I know) God’s will for my life?” What

I

kind of an answer are Christians looking for? Are you seeking to find a gap in the curtain that otherwise veils the future from us?

Presumably you want not simply to be assured that God wills a certain sort of life for you but to know what his will for your life actually is. And the idea is that if in this way you know what God’s will is for your life, then this will not only reduce your level of stress but you shall also be liberated and energized. Maybe the thought is: Knowledge is power; so if you have knowledge of the future, then this will empower you.

What Would It Mean to Know God’s Will? et’s think a bit more about this will of God. What sort of a will is it? Is it a vision of your future, such that Goodeve and Ottery have?

Or is it a wish list, a list of things that God wants

L

by PA U L H E L M 2 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

for you but that might not come about? What use would it be to know that wish list? It would tell you something about God, but since God’s wish list may not be granted, knowing what it is may not have much usefulness.

When you ask what God’s will is for your life, you may want a peek through a gap into the future, the future that has been mapped out by God, perhaps in every detail. Or maybe you seek a peek of a future whose broad contours (you think) are fixed, God leaving it to you and to others to fill in the details. The gap is to be opened up by some direct intimation from God himself. Suppose, in some Buchanesque way, you were granted a glimpse into such a future. Suppose you are granted a glimpse of a future that is one of unalloyed success, happiness, and personal fulfillment.

Suppose that in this way God makes known his will for your life. What then? Perhaps the idea is that if the God-given picture of the future is one with which you concur, then fine. But if it is one that you don’t like, then you have the time, now, in the present, to do something about it. Yet this idea is, of course, false. If what Buchan’s characters saw was the actual future, then they are powerless to change it.

Yet this idea of God’s will for your life may amount to something rather different. It may be that you are convinced not only that God has a plan for your life but that God has a perfect plan.

And the object of knowing what that perfect plan for your life is (if only God will somehow disclose it) is to align yourself with it and so enter into the enjoyment of this sublime future. God’s will for you has the character not only of a blueprint, but of an optimally good blueprint. (Perhaps of the sort of life that, if you were God, you would wish for yourself!) What is troubling here is the idea that if you are not granted present knowledge of what God’s perfect plan is, then you’ll miss out on it and have to make do with second best. And who wants a second-best life?

But perhaps your idea of achieving knowledge of God’s will for your life is not the blueprint idea but the wisdom idea. You may be convinced that the way to know God’s will for your life is for you to acquire the gift of discernment so that, among the many competing paths that it seems you may travel, you can discern the one that most closely corresponds to God’s will for your life.

Or, finally, it may be that you believe that knowing God’s will for your life involves hearkening to his voice. It may be that you are convinced that the way to know God’s will for your life is to be so attuned to his Spirit that he will help you to understand what he intends for you—to under-

stand God’s perfect plan—and then strengthen your resolve unfailingly to follow it.

Christians and Christian teachers argue about these ways of knowing God’s will. Which is true or which is better? Is it the “blueprint” way or the “wisdom” way or the “spiritual discernment” way?

Yet each, as they are often popularly presented, has the same basic flaw: They overreach themselves.

They flatter only to deceive. They make claims— claims about the depth and reach of our knowledge of the future of our own lives—that Scripture does not support.

Guidance and Divination hat is not wrong with all of these approaches is their idea that God has a plan for your life. Scripture clearly and emphatically teaches that God does have a plan.

Indeed, the word “plan” is perhaps the wrong word to convey the biblical teaching at this point simply because it is not strong enough. A plan may not be implemented. The best of plans may remain on the planning board or gather dust on the top shelf. But God’s will for his children will be implemented, down to the last detail. “And we know that in all things God works together for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28, NIV). There is not only a “perfect plan” but it is a plan that is even now being carried out.

Nor is the problem that God cannot know the future or disclose future things to you. In the Old Testament God revealed his will for the future to seers, sometimes in dreams, as the histories of Joseph and of Saul, for instance, show. Concern over whether you are warranted in searching for God’s perfect plan for your life should not lead to the idea that God folds his arms and never guides us. Far from it, as we shall see.

So what’s wrong with wanting to know that plan in its full detail? Several things. First, it is a striking fact that (as far as I can see) the New Testament never suggests that the apostles believed they ought to know God’s perfect will for their lives.

There are no incidents recorded, no conversations, and no prayers that could be reasonably interpreted as an attempt to gain insight into God’s plan for someone’s life. There are many things that the apostles pray to know, but knowing God’s plan for their lives is not one of them.

Further, nowhere (as far as I can see) do Christ or any of the apostles teach that individual Christians or the church collectively should attempt, by whatever means, to know God’s plan for them as individuals or for the church. There are many apostolic commands, but these are not among them.

Moreover, the attempt to know in detail God’s

W

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 2 5

perfect plan reverses the whole temper and spirit of the Christian life as the New Testament represents it. For the basic idea of Christian faith is that it is not sight. Take the paradigm believer, Abraham.

Did God have a perfect plan for Abraham’s life?

Yes, he did. Did Abraham know what God’s perfect plan for his life was? No, he did not. Was Abraham in total darkness as to what that plan was? No, he was not. For example, he had the Lord’s promise that he would be the father of many nations. And,

by God’s grace, he had faith in that promise.

Trusting God and believing that God had a perfect plan for his life, he nevertheless went from Haran not knowing where he was going (see Heb. 11:8).

Abraham is the father of the faithful. And so Christians, like Abraham, are called to live by faith, not by sight. Not in total ignorance of God’s plan for them but in considerable ignorance of the details. This has always been the Christian church’s default position:

Leader of faithful souls, and guide Of all that travel to the sky, Come and with us, even us, abide, Who would on thee alone rely, On thee alone our spirits stay, While held in life’s uneven way.

Deep in unfathomable mines Of never-failing skill He treasures up his bright designs, And works his sovereign will.

Scripture’s general teaching is that we do not know what a day will bring forth (see Prov. 27:1), that we ought to acknowledge that the plans we make are subject to God’s will (see James 4:13–17), and that, no matter how good our plans are, they won’t prevail if they are not a part of God’s perfect plan for our lives. We now know only in part (see 1 Cor. 13:12). The Christian’s life is a mixture of certain-

I’ll Pray A

P

resident George W. Bush has told the press that he prays about policy issues before acting. The San Diego Chargers pray before each game (not that it shows any signs of having a marked effect). We will often pray that we get this job or that special house, even though that means that someone else loses it to us. Sometimes we wonder whether God really cares about all of these details and are especially confused when it comes to whether God can be expected to root for the home team over the visiting team.

We are told cast our cares on the Lord and yet don’t always quite know how to do that. There are those who believe that the simple fact that the president prayed over an issue entails his having got the policy right. Paul tells us, “Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God” (Phil. 4:6). Doesn’t that mean that when the game goes into overtime and our beloved team is about to be cut from the playoffs we can shoot up a prayer that the rival team’s kicker miss the goalposts? Undoubtedly there are Christians praying on the other side as well: do we just cancel each other out? These thoughts lead some to the other extreme: assuming that prayer does not really matter when it comes to the everyday stuff of life.

These two extremes are to be avoided in considering the work of the Spirit in our lives, particularly in the matter of his leading and guidance through prayer. On the one hand, we must avoid the tendency to relegate the Holy Spirit to the edges of our Christian

2 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

experience. We must remember that “together with the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified” (Nicene Creed). The Spirit does direct our paths. “If we live by the Spirit,” Paul writes, “let us walk by the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25). In other words, if we have been regenerated and united to Christ by the Spirit (the indicative), we are to keep up with the Spirit in the pursuit of godliness (the imperative). The Spirit indwells believers as a “down payment” and “deposit” (Eph. 1:14), giving us the “firstfruits” of our full salvation to come—and even though we may not know God’s secret will for our lives, the Spirit does and “the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words … according to the will of God” (Rom. 8:26–27). Furthermore, we are encouraged to pray for wisdom in the practical circumstances of life (James 1:5).

On the other hand, we must avoid the temptation to regard the Holy Spirit as a freelance operator working independently of the Word. In this age, the Spirit does not inspire new revelations but illuminates our hearts to understand what he has already given us. In the Scriptures we have “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” (2 Pet. 1:3–4). We are given wisdom regarding a whole range of practical concerns, but we are not told whom to marry, where to live and work, or whether we should invest in stocks over bonds. “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us

ty about the “big picture” together with uncertainty about many of its details.

In his book on guidance, Bruce Waltke claims that it is a form of divination—and consequently a pagan and not a Christian notion—for us to seek to know in advance what God’s plan for our lives is, no matter whether we do so by obviously foolish ways such as opening the Bible at random or by reading tea leaves or in some more sophisticated way. Although Waltke’s claim may at first appear to be extreme, it is plausible on reflection, for divination attempts to get inside the inner workings of the divine mind or the inner workings of the universe. When Christians attempt to divine God’s perfect plan, we attempt to usurp the place of our Creator-Redeemer by inquiring into those “secret things” that belong to God and, correspondingly, we tend to neglect “the things that are revealed” that do belong to us (see Deut. 29:29).

This has another side. What happens to us

when, having tried to discern God’s perfect plan for us in any of the ways we have sketched, we fail to discern it, as fail we must? We will undoubtedly feel let down. We may also feel guilty because we may believe that this failure is our fault. We may blame ourselves because of our sin or for a failure of skill or technique to carry out what we believe to be the correct procedures satisfactorily. Or we may blame God for misleading us. Unfortunately, we may come to believe that our failure is a matter of God punishing us for failing to be “in his will.”

So Where Do We Begin? f we are not called to divine God’s blueprint for our lives, then what are we called upon to know? And what are we called upon to do?

The New Testament answers these questions.

Here we should first note that the phrase “the will of God” can be understood in various ways. As we have seen, it can refer to God’s plan—what he

I

About It and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut. 29:29).

From Genesis to Revelation we find practical wisdom and guidance for our lives and the Spirit who inspired these commands inwardly illumines our understanding and, through the gospel, animates our will to follow them. But when it comes to the “secret things”—what God has decreed for us from eternity, we are given the freedom to exercise sanctified discernment, with many possible paths open to us in most cases. The Spirit, therefore, leads and guides us, to be sure, but it is mediated through his Word and the “common grace” wisdom that God gives to all people—even nonbelievers, through experience, education, and the insight of family and friends.

A common misunderstanding of the Spirit’s leading in our day is that believers (a) can decipher God’s secret plan by way of “hunches,” “nudges,” and “promptings” and (b) can step out of God’s perfect will (i.e., secret plan) by not following these clues.

This view is often based on Romans 12:2: “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” In the Authorized Version that most older believers learned, it reads, “that you may prove that perfect will of God.” But in context, Paul is calling for godly discernment that comes from a familiarity with God’s Word. God’s “perfect will” here is not his secret will (although that, too, is cer-

tainly perfect), but his revealed will in the Scriptures. It is by being tested or trained in God’s Word that we learn what is “good and acceptable and perfect.”

“I’ll pray about it” can become a cliché that shifts the burden from our own responsibility for making choices and can also be used to claim divine sanction for one’s choices and actions. I’ve actually had a parishioner justify her affair and separation from her husband with the words, “But I prayed about it.” It is one thing to pray that one’s friend will be healed of cancer or that God will give us wisdom for a major project coming up, and quite another to use our having prayed about something as a “get out of jail free” card.

Realizing that God is most concerned about our salvation and growth in grace, our prayers should reflect his heartbeat more than our laundry list. At the same time, the laundry list does matter. God does care. And even if we pray for the wrong things, the Spirit intercedes on our behalf for the right things. He knows God’s will, even if we don’t.

Michael Horton (Ph.D., Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, and the University of Coventry) is professor of apologetics and theology at Westminster Seminary California (Escondido, California), and chairs the Council of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals.

by MICHAEL HORTON J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 2 7

purposes for me or for you or for the universe in general. Much of God’s will, understood in this sense, is hidden from us. Even when people have had future things about their lives supernaturally disclosed to them, these have been fragmentary, and perhaps what is revealed—as with Joseph’s dreams—is somewhat short of detail. By a divinely-delivered dream, Joseph learned that his brothers would bow down to him, but exactly when and where and under what circumstances was not disclosed.

But the phrase “the will of God” understood in another way is much more central to the New Testament’s teaching about guidance. When Paul told the church members at Thessalonica not to be vindictive, always to rejoice, to pray continually, and to give thanks to God in all circumstances, he added “for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you” (see 1 Thess. 5:15–18). He makes similar connections between God’s will and the avoidance of immorality (see 1 Thess. 4:3) and drunkenness (see Eph. 5:15–18). This sense of God’s will does not refer to God’s detailed plan for a Christian’s life but rather to the proper manner or style of Christian living. What is God’s will for me? Part of God’s will is that I should not be vindictive or prayerless or joyless or debauched.

But that is only the beginning. Christ and the apostles teach us about our manner of life and what should motivate it, as well as about what we should do and what we should avoid doing in order that

God for the church and for me as part of the church. Discerning God’s will for our own lives is the (fallible) process of thinking and deciding about our own personal circumstances in the light of our developing a Christian character.

Other ways of knowing God’s will are extensions of these. Ought we to trust our own judgment, or our own feelings, and to follow the desires of our hearts? When these judgments, feelings, and desires are conditioned by the virtue-producing effects of the Word and Spirit of God, then of course. But not if the feelings are like those of a spoiled child who does not want its will to be crossed and whose single aim in life is to have a frictionless, pampered existence. Ought a person who needs guidance ask the opinion of his friends?

Of course he may, but in most cases he would be wise to do so only when his friends are themselves experienced Christians.

Can a Christian Be Outside God’s Will? his question perplexes many Christians because we may see God’s will for us as a sort of tightrope on which we must learn to balance. If we fall off it, then we may think that dismay, failure, and loss of direction must inevitably result. But if we can—by keeping our eyes and ears open to God’s intimation of his will— retain our footing on the rope, then our lives as Christians will be faithful to God and so will be successful and personally rewarding. Thus, we need to be able to peer through the gap in the curAnd so "knowing the will of God" is not something that happens in a flash; it is the tain, if we are to keep in God’s will.

Is it by now becoming lifelong process of coming to know the revealed will of God for the church and for clear that this sort of response to the question is me as part of the church. not only wrong but harmful?

God does have a will and a we may live not after the flesh but after the Spirit plan for our lives. But, paradoxically, the means of (see Rom. 8:4). And by doing so they are announc- doing God’s will is not to know the path before we ing God’s will for the Christian church. This will begin to tread it but, by God’s own help, to know embrace our continued commitment to Christ and what sorts of thing God requires of us as his people his kingdom, the inculcation of love, patience, dis- and then do those things. We know God’s revealed cernment, watchfulness, zeal for the truth, respect will for us only fitfully and fallibly. Our capacity to for the powers that be, love for wives and hus- deceive ourselves and falter in our resolve is very bands, love for children, how to deal with suffering great. Is this then a counsel of despair? No, for it and setback, developing the mind of Christ, and so is through our imperfect attempts to follow the on. It includes the development of a habit of pattern of Christian living that we are given in prayer for strength and discernment about all these God’s Word that we shall grow in grace and knowlthings. Our cultivating such dispositions and activ- edge (see 2 Pet. 3:18) and that our character as ities constitutes our coming to “know the will of Christians will develop. Even our miserable failGod.” And so “knowing the will of God” is not ures—failures that are to be acknowledged and something that happens in a flash; it is the lifelong confessed—are nevertheless mysteriously ordained process of coming to know the revealed will of by matchless divine wisdom and find their place

2 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

T

among the “all things” that work together for good to those who love God. This is why Paul says that God’s will for Christians is not that we should know in advance God’s perfect plan for our lives, but “that [we] should be sanctified” (1 Thess. 4:3, NIV).

Can Christians be outside God’s will? If this means, can Christians fail to be faithful according to the standards and teaching of the New Testament, the answer must be that—alas!—we can and frequently will be outside God’s will. On such occasions, we live not after the Spirit but after the flesh (see Rom. 8:4). But if this question means, can Christians so act that God will abandon them and no longer have any time for them and no longer have plans for them, then the answer is almost too obvious to need stating. “Can a woman forget her nursing child, that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you. Behold, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands” (Isa. 49:15–16).

God himself says: “I will never leave you or forsake you” (Heb. 13:5, quoting Josh. 1:5). ■

Paul Helm (M.Phil., Oxford University) is emeritus professor at University of London and professor and J. I. Packer Chair in Theology and Philosophy at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia.

For more on these topics, see Paul Helm, The Providence of God (InterVarsity, 1993), especially Chap. 5, “Providence and Guidance”; J. I. Packer, Knowing God (InterVarsity, 1973), especially Chap.

20, “Thou Our Guide”; and Bruce Waltke, Finding the Will of God (Vision House, 1995, reprinted by Eerdmans, 2002).

Copies of this article are available for purchase by calling (215) 546-3696 or by ordering online at www.modernreformation.org

Pilgrims in Providence [ C O N T I N U E D F R O M PA G E 2 1 ]

not one ruled by fate. Our Triune God has ordained our steps, but more importantly, he is more than able and willing to watch over us so that we will not fall away. Our Captain, God the Son, has gone before us in his death and resurrection to secure our safe passage on this journey into the celestial Promised Land, where he will lead us to those heavenly “springs of living water” (Rev. 7:17). Our Comforter, God the Spirit, testifies that God will make our present difficult paths straight because we are his children and no one can snatch us out of his guiding hand (see John 10:28).

Our God and Father loves us and has foreordained our paths. They will not always appear to us now as parts of a wonderful plan, but they are indeed parts of an exquisitely good and perfect plan. Our responsibility is not merely to trust God about this plan, but to trust in God himself, the living God who has gone to such great measures to bring us to himself. ■

A. Craig Troxel (Ph.D., Westminster Theological Seminary) is Pastor of Calvary Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Glenside, Pennsylvania, and Lecturer in Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia, PA).

In this article, Dr. Troxel consulted the following sources: G. C. Berkouwer, The Providence of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1952), pp.

141–160; Christopher Dawson, from “The Christian View of History,” in The Dynamics of World History, ed., John J. Mulloy (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956); Herman Bavinck, The Doctrine of God (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1977), pp.

223–241; Paul Helm, The Providence of God (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1993); and Sinclair B. Ferguson, Discovering God’s Will (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1981), pp. 23–24 Copies of this article are available for purchase by calling (215) 546-3696 or by ordering online at www.modernreformation.org.

@ MR RECOMMENDS…

Looking for small group resources? Log on now to www.modernreformation.org for study questions related to this article..

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 2 9

M Y P L A C E I N H I S W O R L D | Decision Making and the Will of God

My Fathe W

hen I was a child, I spoke as a child, I acted like a child, for I was in fact a child. But as I grew, I learned to put away childish things. I grew into maturity by learning to listen to my Father’s voice. He taught me who I was and why I was created. My life before I became a Christian was my life as a child. I did what pleased me. I acted out of my thoughts, my desires, and my

will. But then, by God’s grace, I heard my Father’s voice. The harsh tone of God’s law got my attention and called me to question my standing and my self-assurance. God’s gift of truth made me see clearly in the law’s mirror my soul’s condition. It was true! I was a sinner! Then the calm reassurance of his promise led me to believe and trust that things would be all right. God had not left me to deal with my sin on my own; rather, he had taken it upon himself to deal with the guilt of my own personal rebellion. He himself shouldered the responsibility. No, more than that, he became the very nature of my offense. He who knew no sin became sin for me. Listening to his voice I learned that he had rescued me from a selfish rebellion that merited eternal torment. This was rescue of which none greater can be conceived.

Those who have heard the call of their Father, through Jesus’ voice, know that our salvation rests entirely in his nail-scarred hands. It is finished! The work is done! Let me say that again. The work is done! The marriage supper of the Lamb in his kingdom which has no end has been prepared for us and our place at his table is sure. The cup of salvation has been filled with the wine of Christ’s joy, which he pours out with a lavish wrist. His cup of suffering that he once prayed would be withheld has now become the cup of blessing that he freely offers.

Yes, we’re saved. By grace, salvation is ours! But now what? Too often Christians find themselves

3 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

saved from the terrors of hell and damnation—of trying to work out their salvation by trying to earn God’s forgiveness—only to be put right back on the treadmill of doing good works to impress God and show him how grateful they are. This is really nothing more than trying retroactively to earn the gift or trying to show him that we were really worth saving after all. Let me save you a lot of time and energy: The only thing that impresses God is the blood of his Son. That’s it! Nothing else! God is holy; we are not. God cannot look upon sin, but he can look upon the perfect sacrifice of his Son. So God is not terribly impressed with any of our works. Our prayers, our offerings, and our thanks are only accepted because they, too, have been redeemed by Jesus’ blood. Everything we are and do is only acceptable and pleasing to God because Christ’s righteousness has been imputed to us.

When God looks upon you, he sees Christ. Hang on to this thought as if your life depended on it.

If you’re hanging on to anything else right now, if my words are making your lips curl and your stomach muscles tighten, then I suggest going to your local coffee shop, ordering whatever soothes your nerves, and reading Romans 1 to 8 over and over again. Recite the mantra of Romans 4:5 until it is seared in the synaptic mesh of your mind.

Keep in mind that belief and faith are given by God. It is created ex nihilo by the sheer power of God’s Word (see Rom. 10:17).

If you can swallow the truth about what does

by CHARLES S. MALLIE

er’s Voice and doesn’t impress God, then you are close to getting your eyes off your own feet and fixed on Jesus, which is where they need to be to finish this race.

But what does it mean to lead a God-pleasing life and what sort of biblical framework helps in making everyday decisions that both honor God and serve our neighbor?

God’s Will and God’s Character he answer is not what you might think.

The answer is to listen. Listen to the Father’s voice. Hear his Word preached, read, spoken, sung, chanted, or whatever. But listen. Listen often, and listen carefully. Listen to what Scripture tells you about God’s character.

Listen to what it says about him and what he’s done for you.

Yet right about now you are probably saying, “Wait a minute! How can listening to what God says about himself help me to live like a Christian?”

When I find myself thinking along these lines, I need a gentle reminder. Even when I recognize that nothing impresses God but his Son and that I need to fix my eyes on Jesus, I manage somehow to focus back on myself and what I can do and how I should do it. Do you see how clever our sin nature is? Can you appreciate the subtlety of the deception? Our drive to search for answers by looking inward is uncanny. Our inclination toward selfimprovement is absolutely astounding. But it is not helpful because the direction is entirely backward.

The answer to how to make wise, God-pleasing decisions is not found in more careful observation of ourselves as our favorite subject of study, but in knowing God better. The direction is outward and upward, not inward.

T

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3 1

The key to knowing how you should act in the world is for you to know God’s character intimately. The subject of Christianity is Christ, not his creation. Knowledge of the Father’s will—not just for you and how you should behave but for all of creation—flows from who he is. Notice the direction. Even how we are to get along in the world is part of the order of his creation, which is an extension of his will. Very simply, what God wills and creates reflects who he is. “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” (Rom. 1:20). If creation reflects God’s power and divine nature, then what do you suppose the Incarnation, which has its fullest expression in the atonement, reflects? In a word, grace. Again, the direction is outward—and in this case downward—from God to us.

We, as a part of the creation order, were made

in God’s image and likeness. Before the fall, we reflected that order. As redeemed creatures, we are now a part of the new creation, and hence reflect something of who God is, in Christ. To know, then, what lies at the center of God’s personality is invaluable for those inclined to ask “What would Jesus do?” Why? Because the answer to the question “How should I then live?” depends upon how you view God, and upon how you understand his attitude of graciousness toward fallen sinners— even saved ones.

Look Outward and Upward, Not Inward hen it comes to living the Christian life—whatever that means—we will inevitably act out of what we think Christians should do. With regard to decision making, we humans tend to think in terms of black and white, good and bad, right and wrong. The chief problem with this approach is that most of us

W

Why We Seek to

I

have no doubt that the drive to know and do God’s will comes from a pious desire to obey God and enjoy the blessings of a life lived in close fellowship with him. But despite these good intentions, one cannot deny that this quest is full of anxiety, no matter how much one tries to “Let go and let God.” There is anxiety associated with trying to figure out God’s hidden will, the anxiety of wondering whether this will, once intuited, is in fact correct, and the anxiety of imagining what evil awaits the wayward saints who wander outside God’s will. That piety and anxiety should go hand in hand may seem strange, but not if one thinks of the piety of Shakespeare’s Caesar, who bids his priests to make a sacrifice to determine the likelihood of success, and then spends the better part of his morning debating the significance of the heartless beast, and other portents. Seeking God’s will—or the will of the gods—is indeed a type of piety, but it is a piety of pagan origins, promising future comforts pending our own seeking and doing.

The Heidelberg Catechism, however, holds forth true Christian comfort not as something we attain, but as something we possess in Christ. This comfort is not in doubt—perfect love casts out fear—but is rather the result of knowing for certain three gospel truths: how great our sin and misery is, how we have been delivered from sin and misery, and how we are to thank God for this deliverance. In providing true Christian comfort, each of these truths oppose the anxiety-ridden search for God’s hidden will.

3 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

The catechism begins with the magnitude of our sin and misery. You would be hard-pressed today to find a Christian who daily confesses his “natural tendency to hate God and neighbor,” as the catechism understands our bondage to sin. Yet this is the depth and seriousness of our sin, and the daily confession of this fact transforms how we think about God’s will. Forget about whether God would have Suzy attend East Tulsa Community College or Northwest Nebraska Christian Technical Institute.

The greatest obstacle to her walk with Jesus is this nagging tendency she has to hate him and her neighbors. This tendency remains even after her new birth in Christ, though surely continuing to pass away until she attains perfection in the resurrection.

Suzy can never know for sure whether she has made the correct choice about college; should she interpret success in East Tulsa as sinful self-indulgence or divine blessing? Yet she can be absolutely certain that each of her waking moments is characterized by grievous sin. According to God’s righteous judgment, this sin will not go unpunished, either in this world or the next. Now that’s a source of anxiety.

Which naturally raises the question of deliverance. The gospel assures us that the entirety of the punishment we deserve has fallen upon a substitute, our Lord Jesus Christ. He has set us completely free and made us right with God. The blessing of fellowship with God does not, therefore, depend upon our knowing and doing his hidden will; it is not the result of walking daily in

tend to look inward to the moral law written on our hearts as our guide for how to live and act. So what’s wrong with this? It is that it falls squarely into the theological category of law, and the law has only one purpose: to expose our sin. Even though the law is a guide for how we should live, it does not give us the ability to live as we ought.

“None is righteous, no, not even one” (Rom. 3:10).

That includes Christians, too. God’s law tells you how you should live, but the real problem is your inability to fulfill its requirements. Too much introspection about your Christian life and you’ll find yourself flirting with agnosticism. Why? Because on some deep level you will realize that you just don’t measure up and it is easier to walk away from Christianity than to keep on living the lie of trying to do the right thing. How many Christians do you know who have been brought into the fold only to walk out the back door later because they didn’t measure up in some way? If you focus on

yourself and look inward to see how you should live, this is what you, too, may do. God’s law can tear down mountains; it is surprising that those directed back to God’s law last as long as they do.

Christianity is not about us or our behavior, it is for us, in spite of our behavior.

We Lutherans are often accused of having no real doctrine of sanctification, but the contrary is the truth. We understand sanctification only in and through justification and never the other way around. The two are not separate; sanctification flows from justification and never stands by itself.

In other words, only believers are able to live as Christ would have them. The question is, How do we do this? And the answer is, The same power in the word of the gospel that brings life to the sinner also conforms the believer to the image of Christ.

Lutherans readily acknowledge that we are being conformed to Christ’s image, but we understand that this regenerative power is effected by the word

Know God’s Will his paths. Rather, it is something Christ by his Holy Spirit grants us through faith when we hear the gospel, something of which we have a sure conviction and deep-rooted assurance. Remarkably, this blessing is our possession while we are yet wicked sinners, long before we could ever hope to properly discern God’s will for our lives, much less do it. Furthermore, this blessing includes the Good Shepherd’s promise to watch over us and protect us from wolves, it includes the promise that not a hair can fall from our heads without our heavenly Father’s will, and it includes the promise that all things must work together for our salvation— even a foolish decision to attend Northwest Nebraska Christian Technical Institute.

The third gospel truth reminds us that seeking and doing the revealed will of God is not unimportant, but it is properly understood as a grateful response to our deliverance. Obedience is no route to the blessings of fellowship with him. Rather, obedience itself is a blessing of our fellowship and union with Christ, and a result of the principle of new life which his Spirit has implanted in us. Further, gratitude alone is not a source of true Christian comfort; the desire to please God is no guarantee of Godly behavior. Sinners ever remain in need of God’s revealed will to channel our desire to please him.

The catechism’s discussion of gratitude highlights the opposition between Christian and pagan understandings of God’s will, or gods’ will. God’s will revealed in his Law both shapes the

beginning of our sanctification and produces in us an everincreasing awareness of our own sinfulness. The mature Christian is both more holy and more aware of his sin, with the result that he looks more steadfastly upon Christ as his sole hope of salvation. In other words, God’s will provides Christian comfort by reminding the Christian of his sin and misery and how Christ has delivered him from it, not by shaping his life decisions.

In contrast, seeking guidance from God’s hidden will holds forth future pleasures only as a result of walking obediently in the Lord’s paths. It doesn’t turn our gaze to Christ, but rather leads to constantly examine our motivations and decisions in the light of current events. Anxiety necessarily follows from such a quest, and any comfort one may attain by thinking themselves to be in God’s will is sure to be false and fading. By holding forth such false comfort, this way of Christian living proves itself to be worse than a foolish distraction, for it undermines the true Christian comfort we have in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Brian Lee (Ph.D., Calvin Theological Seminary) is a Research Fellow at the H. Henry Meeter Center for Calvin Studies in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Dr. Lee is the reviews and Ex Auditu editor for Modern Reformation magazine.

by BRIAN LEE J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3 3

FYI

Law and Gospel: When God gives orders and tells us what will

done. He died for us. He died to rescue us from the happen if we fail to obey those orders perfectly, that is in the eternal punishment that our sin and rebellion deserves. category of what the reformers, following the biblical text, He died to give us life and life more abundantly. He called law. When God promises freely, providing for us because of Christ's righteousness died to set us free.

In Christ, we are free from the status he demands of us, this is in the category of gospel. worrying about how our life measures up or whether we are making the right decision of the gospel, even in its material forms of bread and about this or that. Christianity is not about us, it is wine or the waters of baptism. Sanctification draws for us. The real answer to “How do I live a Godupon God’s power. Its source is God’s forgiveness. pleasing life?” is not about behavior; it is about And its direction is, again, from him to us. being. If you are a Christian, then your life is GodSo the real trick to living the Christian life is not pleasing because God is pleased with the sacrifice to focus on the Christian life, but to focus on Christ, of Christ on your behalf, which you wear like a the source of our life. To do otherwise is to look Teflon suit. There is nothing we can do to impress inward. If you don’t understand why that is coun- him. Nothing! Remember? His sacrifice is so graterproductive, then you will simply trade one rule cious that even on our worst days—the days that book for another. The new rule book will be filled we seem to make every wrong decision there is— with phrases such as “prayer life,” “Christian walk,” we can rejoice that Christ died for the whole mess and “quiet time.“ None of these things is wrong in of it. The truth of the gospel is a radical message itself, but if any of them become new rules for what of forgiveness that actually saves sinners, eases conwe should be doing, rather than reflections of our sciences, and soothes souls. This is a God I would new life in Christ, the results are oppressive. enjoy hearing more about, how about you?

What we must constantly bear in mind But this can confuse Christians. If there is noththroughout life is that Christ’s blood is sufficient to ing we can do to impress God, then it doesn’t realcover all of our sins, even the ones we make as ly matter what we do, right? No, not exactly. Paul believers—in fact, especially the ones we make as dealt with this confusion, too. When it comes to believers. Keeping this in mind keeps us aware of Christian freedom, there will always be those who our forgiveness, which is real release and real free- will understand freedom as license. Are we free to dom. This is crucial because only those who are sin? Here we must make a difficult distinction: We free in Christ are free enough to reflect his grace, are free, and we do sin; but we are not free so that which necessarily results in the Spirit operating we may sin. As Paul put it, “Should we go on sinunhindered in and through us. The power of the ning that grace may abound? May it never be!” gospel is that it not only redeems your soul but also (Rom. 6:1–2, author’s translation). your life. If the gospel—our own forgiveness in The people Paul was addressing apparently Christ—is the center of who we are, then we will thought that there was nothing they could do to reflect this in our lives. Our lives are bound up in impress God, and so they went right back to pleasthe gospel. This is why Christians need to hear it ing themselves. Selfishness! Again, the focus is again and again. back on the self and the old sinful nature. Others thought that their salvation entailed their now Really Free obeying Jewish ceremonial laws (see Acts 15 and ome Christians are always looking for some Galatians). Both extremes betray a confusion sort of calculus or catchphrase to guide them about who we are as redeemed creatures. Both through each day and help them with all of reject what God wants reflected in our lives by their decisions. I hear this in my own congrega- turning inward and then manifesting their confution, “Just give me a Christian principle I can put sion either by carnal sin or by adopting principles into practice!” I’m sorry, but life in Christ doesn’t that are contrary to grace. work that way. Coke or Pepsi? What would Jesus do?

Boxers or briefs? What would Jesus do? Freeway or surface Serving God streets? What would Jesus do? … I don’t know what Jesus any people want to serve God, but don’t would do, but I do know he wouldn’t do it in an SUV! Do know how. Sometimes their confusion you see why this breaks down? The real answer to is honest, genuine, and really quite What would Jesus do? is what Jesus has already astute. On some level, they have recognized that

S

M

3 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

God really doesn’t need their help. Nothing in God needs, period. In fact, God is quite the opposite. God is a giver; he creates; he sustains; he provides; he rescues; he saves; he resurrects. He is a good gospel Dad, who likes to give gifts to his children. God gives; we receive. It is the center of who God is, this attitude of graciousness. Notice the direction: notice the source and notice the recipient. God doesn’t need your help, but your neighbor might.

When Adam was created in the image and likeness of God, how do you suppose he expressed that? Adam was a caretaker; he worked the ground. He gave things their identity by naming them. He took care of Eve. He was her provider and protector, even if he did let his guard down.

Adam reflected God’s gracious character by giving of himself to Eve. You see this in the order of creation: Adam cared for Eve, and the expression of his care was to provide for her and to protect her.

His godly character was seen in his reflecting God’s character in and through his vocation as a husband.

What was true for Adam is also true for those reborn into Christ’s image. Vocation is still the vehicle for expressing God’s grace in our lives.

What is your primary vocation? Are you father, mother, sister, brother, son, or daughter? Are you a mechanic, a nurse, a doctor, or a lawyer? Can you see how to reflect God’s graciousness in your vocation? A mechanic fixes things, a nurse watches over patients, a doctor heals, a lawyer advocates— and so on. So when it comes to making practical decisions about how to serve God, you should consider your vocation. Does being the best father you can be to your children outrank climbing the corporate ladder? You are free in Christ to choose one, or the other, or both. The choices themselves are not inherently sinful when taken in isolation.

Your course of action, however, should be charted according to your point of origin. Who are you?

Or, better yet, whose are you? If your life is grounded in the gospel and your focus is outward on him and your neighbor, then you will reflect his grace in your life. And at day’s end, the choices you have made—good, bad, and ugly—are all redeemed by Christ’s blood which covers you.

So how should we—sinners called into the grace of God and redeemed in spite of our rebellion—live? We should endeavor to keep our eyes focused on what is before us, eternally and temporally. Eternally, we must be sure of our salvation in Christ. We must be free from fear. The peace that the world cannot give, and that we cannot create in ourselves, comes from hearing our Father name us as his children, who have been adopted according to the promise (see Rom. 9:8). Only then do we

reflect God’s grace. Temporally, our daily situations always afford us opportunities to boast of our Father’s goodness, and we reflect his character when we are gracious and kind to others. The vehicle for this is our vocation.

No magic key unlocks these great treasures; it is only the gentle voice of your Father in heaven who continually reassures you of how much he loves you. So much so, that no matter what you do in this life, you will forever be his beloved child. ■

Charles S. Mallie (M.Div., Concordia Theological Seminary) is pastor of St. Paul’s Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) in Laguna Beach, California.

Copies of this article are available for purchase by calling (215) 546-3696 or by ordering online at www.modernreformation.org.

@ MR RECOMMENDS…

Looking for small group resources? Log on now to www.modernreformation.org for study questions related to this article.

SPEAKING OF

S

cripture teaches me that this pleases God and that this is

God's eternal will: that men

believe in Christ and rely on

His suffering, blood, and death.

— Martin Luther, Works, 16:346

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3 5

We Confess…

M

ay Your will be accomplished, as it is Heaven, so may

it be on Earth. What does this mean? Truly, God’s good and gracious will is accomplished without our prayer. But we pray in this request that it be accomplished among us as well. How does this happen? When God destroys and interferes with every evil will and all evil advice, which will not allow God’s Kingdom to come, such as the Devil’s will, the world’s will and will of our bodily desires. It also happens when God strengthens us by faith and by His Word and keeps living by them faithfully until the end of our lives. This is His will, good and full of grace.

The Third Petition, Martin Luther’s Small Catechism, 1529

W

hich is the third petition? “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”; that is, grant that we and all men may renounce our own will, and without murmuring obey thy will, which is only good; that every one may attend to, and perform the duties of his station and calling, as willingly and faithfully as the angels do in heaven.

Lord’s Day 49, Heidelberg Catechism, 1563

W

hat do we pray for in the third petition? In the third petition, (which is, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven,) acknowledging, that by nature we and all men are not only utterly unable and unwilling to know and do the will of God, but prone to rebel against his Word, to repine and murmur against his providence, and wholly inclined to do the will of the flesh, and of the devil: we pray, that God would by his Spirit take away from ourselves and others all blindness, weakness, indisposedness, and perverseness of heart; and by his grace make us able and willing to know, do, and submit to his will in all things, with the like humility, cheerfulness, faithfulness, diligence, zeal, sincerity, and constancy, as the angels do in heaven.

Question and Answer 192, Westminster Larger Catechism, 1648

3 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

F

R F

O

R

E D

I

A

L

E O

G

U

E

| O

U

T

S S

I

D

E

P O

F

A O

U

R

C C

I

R

C

E L

E

S

An Interview with Rick Warren

A Purpose Driven Phenomena Best-selling author Rick Warren was named by Christianity Today as the most influential pastor in America. His book, The Purpose Driven Life sold eleven million copies its first year and has remained on the New York Times best seller list for forty-four weeks. Warren’s book has now become a popular spiritual growth campaign with over ten thousand participating churches. Among those churches are over a thousand Reformed, Presbyterian, Lutheran, and Episcopal/Anglican congregations.

What motivates churches not normally associated with mass evangelical movements to embrace Warren’s teaching? Modern Reformation asked Warren, a subscriber, to comment.

MR: Can you briefly define the purpose driven life? Is it different from the ordinary Christian life?

RICK WARREN Founding Pastor Saddleback Community Church Lake Forest, CA

RW: The first answer of the Westminster Shorter Catechism is the best definition of the purposedriven life: “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him for ever.” That is our purpose, pure and simple. I just took longer to say it in the book.

The first chapter, “It All Starts With God,” and the opening sentence of the book, “It’s Not About You!” makes it clear that we were made by God, and for God, not vice-versa. Chapter seven, “The Reason For Everything” is about soli deo gloria. The purposedriven life is a God-centered life so I wouldn’t call it “the ordinary Christian life” because that lifestyle isn’t ordinary at all. Very few Christians I know live a truly God-centered life on a daily basis.

MR: What motivated you to take the message of your book, The Purpose Driven Life, and create a systematic campaign called “Forty Days of Purpose” to be used in churches across the country?

RW: I love helping other pastors, especially bivocational ones. Since my father ministered in small churches all his life, I’ve always had a heart for guys who serve churches that are too small to pay a full time salary so they work another full time job during the week. I dedicated The Purpose Driven Church book to them, and for the past twenty years I’ve tried to help them with resources. Ministry is difficult and we need to help each other out wherever possible.

We are blessed to be a blessing to others.

I deeply believe that in our relativistic world we need more doctrine, not less. But because the world no longer speaks our language, we theologians must also be translators. Like missionaries, the truth cannot set people free unless we share it in their language.

There is absolutely nothing new in The Purpose Driven Life. It is the “faith once delivered unto the saints.” All I did was try to put it in a very simple, understandable format that captures people’s attention for six weeks. It is a “stealth catechism” of sorts. It’s just a tool to help pastors grow their people.

I love to teach theology without using theological terms (any seminary student can do that) and without telling unbelievers it is theology!

For that reason, I intentionally labored to be as plain, uncomplicated, and simple as possible in writing the book. By simple I don’t mean shallow or superficial—the word means clearly understandable.

Einstein once said “Your brilliance isn’t worth much unless you can explain it in a simple way.” It’s quite easy to be complex and confusing with doctrine but it takes hard work to state truth in the simplest, shortest way. Jesus was the master at this. He stated profound truths in simple ways. Today, in our attempt to impress others, pastors and professors are more likely to do the opposite!

Regarding the campaign—we’ve done an annual spiritual growth emphasis at Saddleback each fall for years. The power of focusing all our prayers, our sermons, and our studies on a single theme like faith (Heb 11) or love (1 Cor. 13) has incredible benefits. “40 Days of Purpose” was the most life-changing campaign in the history of our

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3 7

church. The number of people involved in weekly home Bible study groups grew from 8,000 to over 23,000. Membership, giving, worship attendance, and people involved in ministry and mission projects all exploded exponentially. As a result, over 4,500 of our members were sent out on a mission project somewhere in the world in the last twelve months. People who think Saddleback is a shallow, compromising megachurch just don’t know the facts. The membership requirements at Saddleback are so high most American church members could not join us, and we actively practice church discipline.

“40 Days of Purpose” brought such revival and renewal to our congregation we offered it to a few other churches. Those churches exploded with spiritual growth too. The word got out, and the rest is history. This is a sovereign move of God that caught us all by surprise. We certainly didn’t manufacture or plan this. In fact, our staff has been playing “catch-up” with the demand from other churches all year long.

MR: Does the “Forty Days of Purpose” campaign reflect any particular theological stance or is it theologically neutral?

RW: It is impossible to be theologically neutral.

However, it is possible to love, respect, and appreciate the ministry of godly brothers who have theological differences with you. On earth we “see through a glass darkly” so we all need a large dose of humility in dealing with our differences. God’s ways are awesome and far beyond human mental capabilities. He has no problem reconciling the supposed theological conflicts that we debate when ideas don’t fit neatly into our logical, rational systems (Isa. 58:8-9).

Theologically, I am a monergist and firmly hold to the five solas of the Reformation. It’s pretty obvious from the book that I believe in foreknowledge, predestination, (see chapter two, “You Are Not An Accident”) and, especially, concurrence—that God works in and through every detail of our lives, even our sinful choices, to cause his purposes to prevail. Proverbs 19:21 (NIV) is one of my life verses.

It’s been fascinating to see how people interpret my book through their own theological lenses. On the same day this week I received an email from a Presbyterian brother accusing me of “being an Arminian” and another email from a Lutheran brother criticizing me for being “too Calvinistic!” I just remind myself that even Jesus could not please everyone, and I refocus on living for an audience of One. I’m a fourth-generation Baptist pastor. My great grandfather was led to Christ by Charles

3 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Spurgeon, attended Spurgeon’s college, and was sent by Spurgeon to America to pastor. So I guess God predestined me to be a Baptist! I would ask readers for grace in three areas: First, the book contains much of what I believe, but is does not contain ALL of what I believe about any particular doctrine. I actually removed over 400 pages of material that I wrote, but decided not to include. Exhaustive studies exhaust people. The book is a devotional, not a dissertation.

Second, the book is not intended to be a systematic theology. Saddleback’s systematic theology is another book called Foundations. It is a nine month doctrinal course, written by Pastor Tom Holladay and my wife Kay, for our congregation. To my knowledge, Saddleback may be the only church in America that requires a nine month systematic theology course for anyone who wants to serve on our staff or as a lay leader in our church. Over 5,000 members have completed Foundations in the past ten years, and we have over 3,000 more members studying the course right now. Saddleback members are doctrinally astute.

Third, the book is about the Christian’s walk, not justification. I did include a simple call to Christ in case unbelievers picked up the book (which thousands have). But to know my full view of the doctrines of grace, you’d need to have heard my two year, verse-by–verse exposition through Romans. We’ve gone through Romans twice since I started Saddleback.

MR: As part of the “40 Days of Purpose” campaign, your staff provides participating churches with a number of important resources: transcripts of sermons, outlines, music, Sunday school curriculum, marketing materials, etc. Is it desirable to create clones of Saddleback worship services in churches across the country?

RW: It is neither desirable nor even possible to “clone” any church, because the church is people— and no two people are alike! Anyone who has read The Purpose Drive Church or attended a Purpose Driven Church seminar knows that we are adamantly opposed to wholesale copying of Saddleback’s style of ministry. While fulfilling the five purposes of God is not optional, every church must have its own unique thumbprint. Every idea needs to be filtered through your personality, the culture of your congregation, and the context of your community.

At the same time, it is wise to learn from other churches. Everyone shouldn’t have to reinvent the wheel! Whenever I find a church that is more effective in worship, evangelism, discipleship, ministry, or fellowship, I want to learn how to do it, too. God has not called us to be original at

everything we do, but he has called us to be the most effective we can be. (Vance Havner tells of a pastor who boasted “I’ll be original or nothing!” and ended up being both!) One reason God resists the proud is because they are unteachable—their ego prevents them from humbly using an idea or program that God is blessing elsewhere.

MR: But, shouldn’t pastors do their own work and ensure that their services fit within their own theological convictions about the corporate worship of God? RW: Of course! We only offer suggestions and “Forty Days of Purpose” is just a six week tool. But just as pastors all read the same commentaries and still come up with different messages, there is nothing wrong with giving pastors helps to get started on a particular theme.

MR: You have recently launched a new campaign, the “P.E.A.C.E. Plan,” which you’ve called the beginning of a new Reformation. You’ve distinguished between the first Reformation’s return to correct doctrine (the “message”) from this new Reformation’s return to purpose (the “mission”). Can we really separate the message from the mission?

RW: No, we cannot separate our message and mission, but unfortunately most churches have done exactly that. Most Christians do not behave the way they claim to believe. Our deeds do not always match our creeds. We are only hearers, not “doers of the Word.” The typical believer never shares his faith, never helps the poor, never visits those in prison, and never does many of the other things Jesus commanded us to do. We have overdeveloped ears, mouths, and brains, but underdeveloped hands, feet, and hearts.

You measure the strength of an army by how many soldiers are fighting on the front lines, not how many are being fed in the mess hall or attending discussions. In the same way, the strength of a church is measured by its sending capacity, not its seating capacity. How many members are we actually mobilizing for ministry and missions? Maturity is never an end in itself.

Maturity is for ministry and mission.

The reformers were definitely mission-minded.

They not only intended the recovery of the biblical, first century faith, they also passionately intended to convert those who confused grace and works.

But today, many churches, including Reformational ones, are quite self-centered and have little or no interest at all in making the effort to reach out and evangelize the world. The church that doesn’t want to grow is saying to the world, “You can go to hell.”

The P.E.A.C.E. plan is an effort to return the

responsibility for world missions back to where it rightfully belongs—in every local church.

Today, most local churches are sidelined and uninvolved when it comes to missions. The message from most mission and parachurch organizations to the local church is essentially “Pray, pay, and get out of the way.” I believe that any organization that marginalizes or minimizes the local congregation’s responsibility to “Go” or bypasses the local church’s moral authority to fulfill the Great Commission, is out of sync with the strategy God intended and modeled in the Book of Acts.

The P.E.A.C.E. plan is a strategy to have every one of Saddleback’s small groups (currently over 2000 strong) help Plant a church, Equip leaders, Assist the poor, Care for the sick, and Educate the next generation somewhere in the world. We’ve been asked by Campus Crusade for Christ to develop a template to plant a new church everywhere the Jesus film is shown overseas. Once we figure out the template we’ll give it away to other churches, just like we’ve done with everything we’ve developed.

MR: Two key aspects of the P.E.A.C.E. plan concern solving global social ills. If we reinvent the church’s mission so that it is primarily responsible for assisting the poor and curing the sick will the message of the church begin to resemble Protestant Liberalism’s “Social Gospel”?

RW: I don’t believe this is a matter of “reinventing” the church’s mission, but a matter of returning to the mission Jesus gave his church 2000 years ago.

To disobey what Jesus told us to do is sin.

Historically, the church has always led the way in both word and deed, in both mission and ministry, in both evangelism and acts of compassion and justice.

It is time to stop reacting to Rauschenbusch’s outdated liberal co-opting of social ministry. He’s been dead over eighty years.

It’s time for the church to be the church!

In closing, I’d like to mention that I have personally benefited from the writings of a number of the Alliance council, especially D. A. Carson, Michael Horton, Mark Dever, Gene E. Veith, Phillip G. Ryken, Mark Talbot, and R. C. Sproul. I’d like to commend them and thank them for their works.

I read every issue of MR, and I think it is a magazine that is needed in our world today. I would appreciate your prayers for my wife Kay who is battling cancer these days. God bless you all.

[This interview has been slightly edited for length.

To read the unabridged interview, please visit www. modernreformation.org.]

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3 9

R

E

V

I

E

W

S

BOOKS | The Justification Reader

Celebrating Consensus on Justification…Too Soon?

T

homas Oden’s Justification Reader aspires to demonstrate a broad consensus on the

which the reformers concur.

In attempting to produce doctrine of justification, spanning the entire history of the church and all a work accessible to laymen, however, Oden has branches of the Christian faith: East and West, Roman Catholic and Protestant, knowingly opened himself up to criticism from many Reformational and Pentecostal. As a corners. The task he attempts is vast in scale: both “reader,” the book intends to provide a to present the classic Christian view of salvation, transparent catalogue of common church and to show its substantial support across millennia teaching with quotations from Lactantius and traditions—all in only 168 pages! The layout to Luther, Chrysostom to Calvin, while of the book—it has copious paragraph headings giving confessional documents their due. and a nine-page table of contents—is unhelpful in These are lofty goals, and the ecumenical bringing clarity to a very densely packed argument. reach of this book may exceed its grasp. Further, Oden does not distinguish between his Yet a lay reader can pick up this volume two tasks of defining the doctrine and and learn two very important things: both demonstrating its consensus. To be fair, both tasks the basic outlines of the doctrine of appear to be necessarily interwoven for him, but this justification, and the strong support this results in an often confusing argument.

The density of the argumentation also tends to doctrine enjoys over twenty centuries of church history. For this, Oden deserves minimize the “reader” component. Because the much credit. snippets are brief, the distinctive voice of each Indeed, no one is a better guide to the patristic source is almost always lost. Those resistant to witness to justification. Choice quotations are Oden’s argument can claim with good cause that The Justification selected from a vast corpus of ancient literature to editor’s voice dominates this consensual Reader illustrate broad agreement among Eastern and conversation. For instance, it begs credulity when

by Thomas Oden Western fathers in three areas: Justification, Grace he asserts that Origen grasped God’s merciful Eerdmans, 2002 Alone, and Faith Alone. These citations reflect a disposition toward the ungodly “just as clearly as” 168 pages (paperback), $18.00 breadth of reading beyond the capabilities of both Luther (52). Luther’s central claim in this regard lay readers and scholars and often bring to light was that God justified sinners while they yet previously untranslated texts. Given Oden’s work remained ungodly, i.e., that those justified were as general editor of the Ancient Christian Commentary therefore at the same time sinner and saint—simul justus on Scripture, it is not surprising to find that many of et peccator. The two texts Oden elicits from Origen these quotes come from biblical commentaries. merely suggest that God showed favor to us even This bears out his claim that patristic justification before we were saved, when we were still teaching, though not necessarily “grasped in a full “ungodly”: “We were ungodly before we turned to and perfect way,” was “an ecumenical teaching, God, and Christ died for us before we believed;” taught wherever Paul’s letters were rightly taught “By saying that Christ died for us while we were yet and commented upon seriously”—a judgment with sinners, Paul gives us hope that we will be saved

4 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

through him, much more so now that we are cleansed from sin and justified against the wrath which remains for sinners.” Luther’s simul justus et peccator is lacking in these quotes, which rather imply precisely the equation between “justifying” and “cleansing from sin” that Luther opposed.

A more basic problem with this book is its general approach to doctrinal development.

According to Oden, Reformation debates over justification helpfully rescued the patristic consensus on justification from medieval scholastic distortions. But the nature of this aid unhelpfully added a polemical element to the church’s teaching that has led to five centuries of disunity. Oden believes that since he can demonstrate fundamental agreement between these two traditions, there is no good reason to sustain Reformation polemics. Because the Reformation agrees with the fathers on justification, it could not possibly have added anything to the church’s understanding of justification that we can’t do without today.

Yet, it is possible to agree with Oden that the reformers recovered a patristic consensus on justification and still draw a different conclusion. If this recovery also clarified church teaching and removed genuinely harmful ambiguities in order to forestall repeating the medieval error, it cannot merely be bypassed as a troublesome polemical episode in church history. The reformers themselves clearly affirmed their own continuity with the fathers, yet were compelled to say more than the fathers on justification because of the errors they saw around them. There is a patristic parallel in the doctrine of the Trinity. Fourthcentury trinitarianism does not disagree with the preexisting consensus, but it says more in trying to rule out an erroneous interpretation of this consensus. Since he rules out similar progress with regard to justification, Oden is left arguing against those who affirm it as necessary to the church’s well-being, including the reformers themselves.

The result is one where modern ecumenical aims trump the sixteenth-century judgments of both Protestant and Roman Catholic theologians. While The Justification Reader strengthens the Protestant claim to unoriginality, it weakens their claims for the doctrine of the standing and falling church.

Brian Lee Book Reviews Editor

The Story We Find Ourselves In: Further Adventures of a New Kind of Christian

by Brian D. McLaren San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003 198 pages (hardcover), $21.95 Reading Brian McLaren makes me feel a little like Hilary Clinton listening to President Bush’s State of the Union speech in 2001: thrilled that the administration is advocating a prescription drug program for seniors, but wondering—as the bandwagon rolls by—“Hey, wasn’t that my issue!”

Like Clinton must have felt, I am grateful that McLaren is advocating issues I care about, but concerned that what he will end up with may make matters worse.

In The Story We Find Ourselves In, Brian McLaren picks up the fictional story of Neil Edward Oliver (Neo) and Daniel Poole where it left off in A New Kind of Christian (Jossey-Bass, 2001). Here Neo and Dan continue to struggle with issues of faith and postmodernity in suburban Washington, D.C., and the Galapagos Islands. The heart of the book is the “love story” between Neo (a former pastor turned high school science teacher) and Kerry Ellison (an agnostic Australian biologist). Neo and Kerry’s friendship grows as Neo tells Kerry the Christian story and helps her understand how her own life relates to the grand narrative of God as Creator and Redeemer.

McLaren and his characters are at their best when engaging non-Christians in talks about God and this world. Especially effective is the way Neo tells the Bible’s story to Kerry. It is simple but also complex. It is too much for a brief “evangelistic” encounter. Neo tells the story to Kerry (and later to Dan Poole and his family) as it is meant to be told: in the context of friendship and trust, with the purpose of incorporating the individual into the Bible’s own story of creation, crisis, calling, communication, Christ, community, and consummation.

While this puts McLaren apparently “on the side of the angels” in this endeavor, threads of the novel also seem to deny or ignore important aspects of the story the characters tell—the parts that make the story “Christian.” One of the most tragic examples of this tendency is seen when Dan Poole casts the ashes of a loved one over the water near the Galapagos Islands. As he does so, he remarks that the character “doesn’t need these ashes anymore.” Her identity, her personhood had been “uploaded like software, from the medium of

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 4 1

molecules to a new medium.” She had been “preserved, saved and cherished in the mind of God.” For all the wonderful discussion about the importance of creation itself in God’s story of redemption, the novel ends on a strange Gnostic note with no conception of or need for a bodily resurrection.

In another scene, Neo explains what “judgment” means. Despite his earlier insistence that forgiveness is a gift “by grace, through faith” he bases God’s final judgment not on Christ’s own works of active and passive obedience, but on how individuals have lived up to God’s “hopes and dreams for our world and my life in it.” Only those who have done well and become someone good will hear God’s positive assessment and invitation to enter into the joy of the new creation. Is this really good news?

While this and other aberrant theological elements of the novel are troubling—for example, the positive assessment of Process Theology; the scene in which all the main characters share in a private administration of the Sacraments, including rebaptizing one character—this book still offers much to careful and discerning readers. Take seriously the author’s invitation to use your dissatisfaction with the characters’ questions and answers by constructively articulating better answers to questions pressed upon the church by a world that finds itself at odds with the Bible’s story of creation and redemption.

Eric Landry Managing Editor

Girl Meets God: On the Path to a Spiritual Life

by Lauren F. Winner Algonquin Books, 2002 303 pages (hardcover), $23.95 In her spiritual memoir, Girl Meets God, Lauren Winner writes with refreshing wit and occasional eloquence about her pilgrimage from Orthodox Judaism to evangelical Protestantism (in this case, the Episcopal church). This twenty-something graduate student draws on a wide breadth of knowledge—both personally and professionally— to discuss a variety of religious experiences. Her father was a Reform Jew and her mother a lapsed Southern Baptist. “No one in my family … talked about God,” she admits. Winner, herself, is now finishing a Ph.D. in American religious history at Columbia University.

4 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

The book’s organization follows the church calendar, beginning with Advent and moving through Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Holy Week, Eastertide, Pentecost, and back to Advent. This is a useful device to tell Winner’s story. Reared in Charlottesville, Virginia, Winner highlights the novelty she experienced as an observant Jew in what Flannery O’Connor referred to as the “Christ haunted south.” She embraced orthodox Judaism passionately. “If the Torah was true, then we should spend all our time reading it, and all our life living it.” As would any good writer, she adds the specifics: “ I began attending Orthodox services every day; rose at 6:00 a.m. to study a treatise on hilchot Shabbat, the Sabbath laws; worked part-time at the kosher deli; declared to my parents that I couldn’t eat off their plates …” Winner’s love of the Old Testament animates the pages of the book and should be a challenge to all Christians who find themselves more comfortable and conversant in the New Testament. She speaks of “living in the text,” and indeed peppers her text with many Old Testament figures an stories.

Yet it is while grappling with the Incarnation that Winner truly understands “the radical secret of God becoming man.” She explains that, “The Incarnation, that God took flesh, is the whole reason I am not an Orthodox Jew.” As such, Good Friday helps her learn the lesson that “one grave and theological term, incarnation, most poignantly meets that other grave and theological term, atonement…. On this basic fact all orthodox Christians can agree: through Christ’s atoning work on the cross, we fallen sinners are reconciled with God.” These are moments of great insight and profundity. More often her style is clever and breezy as she romps through life facing the pride of life, and the lusts of the eye and flesh.

At the risk of sounding like a Presbyterian version of Saturday Night Live’s church lady, Winner’s breezy style may also make readers cringe. For instance she often refers to Jesus with too much familiarity, as her buddy, or worse a wooing boyfriend. Her bedroom is filled with pictures of him. For whatever reason, the reverence and awe she shows in her Jewish phase is not evident in her evangelical identity.

Yet with all her excesses and eccentricities, this very self-aware Virginian-turned New Yorker, who at various times refers to herself as “chic,” “sophisticated,” and “learned,” in the end, relates best to the words on an early American sampler, which she says shaped the education of countless girls in New England. It is, she says “the essence of the Christian story” and hers: “In Adam’s fall, we sinned all,” and “Christ is my salvation.”

This forty-something reviewer looks forward to another installment of Lauren Winner’s spiritual autobiography in, say, about twenty years. If the title is Woman Grows in Grace it may even be better than her first.

Responsible Conduct: Principles of Christian Ethics

by J. Douma, translated by Nelson D. Kloosterman Presbyterian & Reformed, 2003 228 pages (paperback), $14.99

Ann Henderson Hart Philadelphia, PA

SHORT NOTICES Moral Darwinism: How We Became Hedonists.

by Benjamin Wiker InterVarsity Press, 2002 327 pages (hardcover), $14.00 Benjamin Wiker has a provocative thesis about the moral disorder of modern times. The problem all goes back to the ancients, specifically the Greek philosopher, Epicurus, who spearheaded a materialist philosophy that exalts natural causes as the final judge of truth, goodness, and beauty. In Wiker’s own words, Epicurus (from whom the word epicurean comes), “purposely and systematically excluded the divine from nature, not only in regard to the creation and design of nature, but also in regard to divine control of, and intervention in, nature.” In turn, this became the premise for much of modern science whose victory Charles Darwin’s account of the natural world secured.

Consequently, the dominance of scientific explanations of the universe, most of which deny a divine presence, lead to a derelict morality thanks to the liberation that men and women believed they enjoyed in a God-free world.

The book is valuable if only because it demonstrates the consequential character of ideas—even old ones. And readers interested in the way that ancient philosophy continues to influence modern life, and in the historical dots connecting ancients and moderns, should by all means consult this intriguing book. At the same time, well before Epicurus or modern science, even in the Garden of Eden, men and women had trouble following the will of their divine maker.

This is not meant to discount Wiker’s thesis. It is only a reminder that a certain strain of Greek thought and Darwinism cannot bear all the responsibility for modern sinfulness.

For many believers discussion of Christian ethics usually begins and ends with the Ten Commandments. This tendency finds much support from the catechetical literature the Christian churches have produced throughout their history. The basic structure of a catechism has included three main parts: an explanation of the Apostles’ Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Decalogue. But as J. Douma makes clear in this informative book, the subject of Christian ethics is much larger and perhaps even more interesting than simply figuring out what the Ten Commandments require or forbid. In a thirteenchapter book (a number that should tempt adult Sunday school teachers to use in class) Douma treats the subject from a variety of angles, from the standard exposition of the Ten Commandments and the use of Scripture in ethical reflection, to such topics as Love, Adiaphora, and Consciences.

Even if readers do not always agree with Douma’s conclusions, his book provides a very useful orientation to the variety of considerations that bear upon the Christian’s responsibility to do God’s will. The one defect that deserves some comment is Douma’s limited attention to the function of the law in the life of the believer. His discussion of the way in which the law functions as a form of thanksgiving (e.g., following the Heidelberg Catechism’s outline of Guilt, Grace, and Gratitude) could be more elaborate. This reservation aside, Douma’s book is a helpful guide to the very large enterprise of Christian ethics.

J A N U A R Y / F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 4 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 4 3

O R U M I N A T I O N S

N F R O M

|

M

A L L I A N C E

Y O F

|

C O N F E S S I N G

M

I

E V A N G E L I C A L S

N C O U N C I L

D M E M B E R S

R.C. Sproul

Power and the Pope’s Junk

O R.C. SPROUL

Chairman, Ligonier Ministries Orlando, Florida

n February 18, 1546, . Martin Luther, the titanic magisterial reformer of

pants and our blessed Lady’s chemise; go there Christendom, died. Ironically he died in the town of Eisleben in the presence and squander your money, buy indulgence and the of his dear friend Justus Jonas. Eisleben became then not only the site of pope’s secondhand junk …

Aren’t we stupid and crazy Luther’s birth, but also of his death. … while anybody can go to baptism and the During his stay in Eisleben, Luther exercised his pulpit … But those barbarous people say: preaching ministry. In all likelihood his last sermon What, baptism, sacrament, God’s Word? — was preached on Monday, February 15, attended by Joseph’s pants, that’s what does it! a thronging multitude from all over the countryside.

One of the supreme ironies of the Reformation was In his last public sermon Martin Luther preached that Luther was protected by Frederick the Wise, Elector on his favorite topic, the gospel. His opening remarks of Saxony. This same Frederick, desiring to make were: “This is a fine Gospel, and it has a lot in it” (see Wittenberg a major religious and commercial center in Luther’s Works 51:383f). His text was Matthew 11:25- Germany, spent a fortune in amassing a relic collection of 30 concerning the truth of the gospel being revealed over 19,000 items, whose indulgence value was equivalent to just under two million years in Purgatory. to babes and hidden from the wise and prudent.

In Luther’s later years he frequently warned that Yet despite his love and appreciation for Frederick, the glorious light of the gospel that was recovered Luther never ceased preaching against the folly of during and by the Reformation (Post tenebras, lux) will indulgences. His crisis experience at the Lateran Church be in every age in constant peril of falling into eclipse. in Rome during his visit of 1510 awakened him from He understood that wherever the gospel is preached seeking the power of God in relics and pilgrimages.

To this day the sacred steps in Rome at the with clarity and boldness, it elicits controversy and hostility. Luther knew that being lovers of peace and Lateran (Scala Sancta) attract hundreds of thousands desiring freedom from controversy, preachers will of pilgrims annually to receive the current valuable have a tendency to mute that gospel that produces indulgences. The people seek the “power of the such strife. The church will tend to look elsewhere Keys” before the power of the gospel. than the gospel to find “power” for its people.

Are Protestants any different? We may eschew In his last sermon Luther rebuked the people for the pope’s secondhand junk while at the same time leaving the gospel behind to seek power elsewhere: we seek the “Toronto Blessing” or the “slaying in the In times past we would have run to the ends Spirit” at the hands of Benny Hinn. We seek power of the world if we had known of a place where in our methods and strategies of church growth, our we could have heard God speak. But now innovative programs, our new forms of worship. We that we hear this every day in sermons… we look for the power of God everywhere but where he do not see this happening. After all, there is has placed it. As Paul declared in Romans 1:16, “For preaching every day… so that we grow weary I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the of it…. All right, go ahead dear brother, if you power of God to salvation for everyone who believes.” don’t want God to speak to you… then be The pants of Joseph are impotent. Only the wise and look for something else: in Trier is Word and Sacrament can do what Joseph’s pants our Lord God’s coat, in Aachen are Joseph’s could never accomplish.

4 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G