Some Thoughts

From Chapter 3:

Unlike [Finney's] system of the [anxious] bench that made the conversion experience “the all in all of the gospel economy,” the [system of the] catechism was designed to care for believers over the entire course of their lives, from birth to death. Nevin’s theory of the catechism did not hide the significant stylistic differences between the bench and the catechism, which involved contrasts such as number of converts versus greater spiritual maturity or mechanical techniques for attracting converts versus natural and organic means of generating faithful devotion. “It is in the kingdom of grace,” he explained, “as in the kingdom of nature; the greatest, deepest, most comprehensive and lasting changes are effected constantly not by special, sudden, vast explosions of power, but by processes that are gentle, and silent, and so minute and common as hardly to attract the notice of the world.” Or to put it another way, “The extraordinary,” in the case of the catechetical system, “is found ever to stand in the ordinary, and grows forth from it without violence so as to bear the same character of natural and free power.” As such, the catechism was not opposed to revivals. Rather, the system of catechetical religion involved a different notion of revival, one where the church enjoyed “special showers of grace” through the regular ministrations of the pastoral office.

- Darryl Hart,  John Williamson Nevin : High Church Calvinist (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2005), p. 99.

Nevin and Hart use the term ‘catechism’ as symbolic of an altogether different view of piety, church life, conversion, etc. This view, established (ordained?) long before Finney’s day, revolves largely around the family, pastoral visitation, catechesis, and Word and Sacrament ministry.

Romans 1:18 [show] [18]For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. (ESV)
– 21 is a key text for a right understanding of epistemology. In it God reveals the truth about unbelieving thought:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Rom. 1:18-21 [show] [18]For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. [19]For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. [20]For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [21]For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (ESV)
, ESV)

I recently read an interpretation of this passage which, in my opinion, starts off right-on, but then goes too far:

Of central relevance is the key phrase, “who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.” Here “suppress” means to hold in restraints, to hold under. The phrase “the truth” (with the article) refers to all that is really true, to the inner essence of things—not simply to truth about God, but to all truth, in every area and in every respect, especially in its essential interrelatedness. The phrase “by unrighteousness” suggests that various forms of unrighteousness are used to enwrap and smother the truth, to push it down, so that people do not come to know the inner essence of things. (Nelson Kloosterman. “A Biblical Case for Natural Law : A Response Essay.” Ordained Servant 16 [2007].)

This verse does not say that unbelievers suppress the truth about “..all that is really true…all truth, in every area and in every respect…” Unbelievers do not suppress the truth that 2+2=4. They do suppress the fact that 2+2=4 inherently and essentially reveals a providential ordering of the universe which the one, true Creator established of nothing and maintains of his own will. The fact that 2+2=4 is true is not separable from the fact that 2+2=4 reveals God. The revelation of a Creator is not the result of a deductive reasoning process that happens after realizing the truth of 2+2=4. There is no “pre-critical” truth and “post-critical” conclusion: 2+2-4 inherently reveals God at the very moment one sees it. The sin of the unbeliever is involves both separating the fact of 2+2=4 from what it reveals about God, then in his embrace of the former while denying the latter. Yes, it truly is somewhat lunatic to embrace a fact and reject it at the same time: the unbelieving mind is truly fractured. He wants the kingdom, but he doesn’t want God in it. The eyes of the believer work the same as the eyes of an unbeliever. The difference is that believers accept and embrace what is clearly revealed.

There is an ethic of seeing.

Excursus: I am intentionally teaching my son to see in a certain way: to see the hand of God in all things.

Recently, we were standing near the edge of a parking lot after sunset, waiting for my wife to finish up in a department store. It was dark, and the sound of frogs and birds and bugs in the neighboring forest was quite loud. He was, shall we say, “concerned” about the situation, this combination of darkness and loud, strange noises. I wanted him to see it (and hear it) differently. “Ethan, do you hear that?” “Yeah.” “Do you know what that sound is? Those are bugs and birds and frogs. Do you know what they’re doing?” He looked into the darkness with wide eyes and said “Yeah” (which he says to all questions he doesn’t quite understand yet). I said, “they’re singing. They’re singing to God, just like you do at night.” He kept looking intently and said “dey singin’ Desus woves me?” “Yep, something like that. And they’re praying – do you know what they’re praying?” “Yeah.” “They’re praying, ‘thank you, God, for this place to sleep; and for feeding us today; and for keeping us safe; and for our families; we love you, God. Good night.” “Yeah.” Ever since then, when he grows ‘concerned’ about the darkness and the night-noises, he now reminds me: “dey singin to God, wight Dada? dey singin Desus woves me.’” “Yes, they are bud. Just like we do. Nothing to be afraid of.” (And yes, that’s really what they’re doing.)

Another time we built a toy fire truck together – a gift from my mom. I said, “Ethan, do you know what that is?” “Issa Fie Twuck.” “That’s right. Do you see what it means?” “Yeah.” “Men built that truck. Do you see that one, small basket at the top of the crane – big enough for only a person or two? Men built this machine, all this engineering and design, they made improvement over improvement, they chose certain materials over others, they made measurements and poured out sweat to build this thing – all to save a single human life. Men saw a problem – lives lost in tragic fires – and a desire welled up within them to somehow right this wrong. They knew they could reach people in danger on the first or second floor. But they wanted to get there faster, so they put it on wheels, and they wanted to reach people all the way up, so they made the ladder super high. All to save a life. This compassion and nobility conspired with their genius to construct a device of amazing precision and even poetic beauty. They did it because we’re all like God: we create, we value life, and we express love for those in danger by rescuing them – even risking our own lives to do so.” Seeing the image of God in man, the creative ingenuity mixed with great compassion – this is how I want him to “see” a simple thing like a fire truck. Even it reveals God.

When you look out the window, are you annoyed at the clouds, or do you think “my town’s gardens and trees must need watering today. Without those gardens and trees, God’s creatures couldn’t eat, and we wouldn’t have air to breathe. Bring on the rain, then. We’ll see a cloudless sky again soon enough.”

(End of excursus.)

Romans 1 [show] Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, [2]which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, [3]concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh [4]and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, [5]through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, [6]including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, [7]To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. [8]First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world. [9]For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you [10]always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God's will I may now at last succeed in coming to you. [11]For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you-- [12]that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith, both yours and mine. [13]I want you to know, brothers, that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles. [14]I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. [15]So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. [16]For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. [17]For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith." [18]For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. [19]For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. [20]For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [21]For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. [22]Claiming to be wise, they became fools, [23]and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. [24]Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, [25]because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. [26]For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; [27]and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. [28]And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. [29]They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, [30]slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, [31]foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. [32]Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. (ESV)
exposes the fractured, broken, rebellious, and anxious mind of the unbeliever, who is confronted by the inescapable reality that everything without, and everything within, reveals God. Revelation of God is as inescapable as the presence of God: we’re submerged in it, and we are a revelation of God (“made in His image”). The unbeliever attempts to embrace facts like 2+2=4 while rejecting what it essentially reveals: God is, and He is not silent. This does not at all mean that he suppresses mathematics. We can even trust him about mathematics – I’m quite certain that many of my math teachers must have been pagans – enough to grade our exams and show us how to do math better than we do. Where he is completely untrustworthy, however, is when he begins to speak about the meaning of math, the origin of math, the implications of math, etc. Then his lunacy surfaces. But he has no reason to suppress that 2+2=4 – after he has wrongfully separated the fact from its ultimate meaning. All this to say, I think Kloosterman reads something into the text that isn’t there. There is an ethic of seeing, but it’s not quite as extensive as he suggests: there is such a thing as common grace.

Here is, I think, an unhelpful / misleading depiction of the Presbyterian form of government (Grudem, Systematic Theology):

not so good

Here is, I think, a better one:

better

The (one) church is ruled by (all) its elders.

The local assembly of elders is called the “Session”, the regional assembly of elders is called the “Presbytery” and the national assembly is called “General Assembly” – but none of these is an entity per se, and none are ‘higher’ than the other per se. The larger assemblies of elders have greater authority simply because they are what they are - larger assemblies of elders. Or, if you like, they are higher only because they are broader.

My diagram is better because the regional  ’presbytery’ and national ‘general assembly’ have no essentially different kind power than any local session – they are simply greater assemblies of elders. It is a difference of degree, not kind: there are more of them meeting together. They’re simply elders whether meeting locally, regionally, or nationally. And, my diagram is better, I suggest, because I start with the one church, instead of with the many, particular churches.

Thoughts and questions are most welcome.

From The Presbyterian Guardian. 31.1 (1962) : 11.

Some fascinating stuff so far this year; choosing ‘best of year’ is going to be tough. (For comments on the below, you are welcome to visit my online library.)

January:

• K. Scott Oliphint, The Battle Belongs to the Lord
• Various, Justified : Modern Reformation Essays on the Doctrine of Justification
• Darryl G. Hart, Deconstructing Evangelicalism
• David VanDrunen, Living in God’s Two Kingdoms
• Bruce Metzger, Tell the Truth : The Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by Whole People

February:

• Russell Moore, Adopted for Life
• Mark Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind
• Dorothy Sayers, Letters to a Diminished Church: Passionate Arguments for the Relevance of Christian Doctrine
• N. D. Wilson, Notes from the Tilt-a-Whirl

March:

• Joseph Ellis, Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation
  
• John Piper, God is the Gospel
• Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life
  
• Noll / Hatch / Marsden, The Search for Christian America
  

April:

• Nathan Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity
  
• J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism

May:

• Michael Horton, The Gospel Commission
• Michael Cromartie, No Longer Exiles: The Religious New Right in American Politics
  
• Mark Noll, The Civil War as a Theological Crisis

June:

• George Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture
• Darrly G. Hart & John Muether, Seeking a Better Country : 300 Years of American Presbyterianism
• Danny Hyde, In Defense of the Descent

Quick re-cap of the last half of 2010. Note that I had a lot of bench time and medical leave in Aug and Dec.

The Rev. Jason Stellman, writing at Creed Code Cult, sums it up nicely:

…both Wright and Piper fail. Piper’s failure is due to plucking his TULIP from its native covenant soil and thus planting justification and imputation in mid-air, and Wright’s is due to his insistence upon a kind of covenantal nomism which may have faithfully described Israel’s typological situation under Moses in the land, but falls woefully short of capturing the believer’s situation under the new covenant.

(source)

The two-covenant / two Adams hermeneutic of redemptive history, perhaps even better than the three-fold Creation, Fall, Redemption hermeneutic, is the better solution to this whole shebang. (See WCF vii.)

Just came across this in my reading last evening:

As the resurrection of Jesus anticipates and secures the general resurrection, so the death of Christ, usually represented by Paul as an atonement, occasionally appears as securing and embodying in advance the judgment and destruction of the spiritual powers opposed to God, thus bringing the other great eschatological transaction within the scope of the present activity of Christ and the present experience of believers, Rom. viii. 3; I Cor. ii. 6 (where notice the present participle …: “who are already coming to nought “).

From the article “The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit”, by Geerhardus Vos, found in Biblical and Theological Studies, collected essays from the faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary. (Available for free on Google Books!)

I’m familiar with the idea that the resurrection of Christ is the first fruits of our own resurrection, and that there is a kind of organic solidarity between the Head (Christ) and His body (the Church) – that, to quote Scripture, “because He lives, we also shall live.” But I had never thought about how the judgement of the Cross (which He took on Himself in our stead, Isa. 53 [show] Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? [2]For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. [3]He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. [4]Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. [5]But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. [6]All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned--every one--to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. [7]He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. [8]By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? [9]And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. [10]Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. [11]Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. [12]Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.
) is also a ‘down payment’ or first fruits of the cosmic judgment that awaits the rest of the old creation – unbelievers included. As surely as he was raised, so shall we be raised. As surely as he was judged (in our place), so shall the enemies of God be judged. Just as our resurrection has already begun, so also has their judgement.

That’s a scary thought, if one isn’t in Christ. God’s wrath is still pending – and dare I say – growing full, looming ominously, intensifying fiercely – until that day of full consummation which he has appointed. Let us check ourselves. See whether we are in the faith. For there is therefore now no condemnation for all those who are in Christ – but for those who aren’t? The day of their ferocious (though just) judgement, has already begun. The clouds, dark and heavy with justice, have already started to gather…

Just realized I forgot to put up a reading recap for the first half of this year. Comments on the following are available here, for any interested. It will be obvious, I think, which month I was home and between work assignments…

January

• Jason Stellman, Dual Citizens : Worship and Life Between the Already and the Not Yet [pretty good]

February

• Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov [good, long]
• Cornelius Van Til, The Confession of 1967 (rare) [standard Van Til]

March

• Greg Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics [decent explanation and defense]
• Doug Wilson, Federal Husband [short and insightful]
• Doug Philips, Masculine Mandate [great corrective to Eldredge's Wild at Heart]
• Jerry Bridges, The Bookends of the Christian Life [edifying]

April

• Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom [highly recommended - poli-econ]
• Marilynne Robinson, Gilead [superb fiction]
• Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney : A Southern Presbyterian Life [very good bio]
• Maureen Ogle, Ambitious Brew : The Story of American Beer [engaging, interesting]
• John Calvin, Golden Booklet of the True Christian Life [classic]
• P. G. Wodehouse, Stiff Upper Lip, Jeeves [fun]
• Robert A. Peterson, Adopted by God : from Wayward Sinners to Beloved Sons [ok]
• Marilynne Robinson, Home [more superb fiction]

May

• N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope [sheep and goats]

June

• Ronald Wallace, Calvin’s Doctrine of Word and Sacrament [surprisingly good]