#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
#10
#11
#12
#13
#14
#15

Editors Note: I am ashamed to admit that I forgot about this book. Thanks to Josh Walker for making me painfully aware of this unbelievable oversight. So I guess its top 16 now!

HT: Iain Campbell

There is another aspect of his ministry that is often overlooked (of the same essence as that which he has so often commended in the life and ministry of Richard Baxter). Ferguson has, on several occasions, alluded to the fact that Baxter would “set time bombs in Kidderminster” by illustrating divine truth with everyday objects in the city. The brilliance of this method was that, no matter where someone walked in the city they would be reminded of something Baxter had said in a sermon. Like Baxter before him, Sinclair Ferguson exhibits the ability to draw from Scripture and bring it to bear on the experiences and objects in the world. Without trivializing transcendent truths, he demonstrates their experiential relevance in the world in which we live.

All the strengths that Sinclair Ferguson brings to his biblical expositions are found in the articles republished in Reformation Trust’s recently released, In Christ Alone. Written over a twenty year period, articles from Eternity Magazine and Tabletalk have been edited and organized into a manageable volume. Even the cover art, designed by Geoff Stevens, demonstrates the time and effort that went into making this volume so impressive. In Christ Alone is a welcomed addition to the Reformation Trust series.

A consideration of the chapter titles alone suffice to stir the readers’ interest. While the book is divided into six sections, it could really be subsumed under two: Christ’s work for the Christian; and, Christ’s work in the Christian.

In the first part of the book, Ferguson sets forth the glories of Christ in His Divine person and work, both in His humiliation and exaltation. Here the reader will find invaluable exegetical insights for his own preaching and teaching ministry. Among the most useful material, found in the first section, is the chapter, “He Stoops to Conquer. Here Ferguson draws the parallel between what Jesus exhibits in His washing the disciples feet in the upper room, and the grand truth of Philippians 2: 5-11. He writes:

The foot-washing scene follows (13:1–17). Its inner meaning will not be understood until later (13:7). But it becomes clear to John, as he explains (13:1): Jesus is revealing the heart of both His identity and His ministry. In a remarkable way, the event is an acted parable for which Paul’s great exposition in Philippians 2:5–11 provides the theological commentary (33).

The second section focus’ more closely on the nature of the Gospel. Chief among the articles in this section is the chapter, “Hebrews, Does it Do Anything for You?” Sadly, many in the evangelical church do not understand the book of Hebrews. What has often been called the key to unlocking the Testaments, is now largely viewed as itself a locked box. Ferguson sums up the nature and value of the book in the following succinct way:

…there is no letter in the New Testament that tells us more about Christ and His work; chapter after chapter unfolds—ten in all—before we come to the hinge that brings the unknown author from exposition of Christ (“holy brethren . . . consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus,” Heb. 3:1) to application (“Therefore, . . . let us . . . ,” Heb. 10:19, 22) (45).

The second section of the book also contains one of the most thought-provoking chapters. Playing off the central theme of the Bible–the appearances of Christ–Ferguson titles this chapter, “Christ of the Three Appearings.” The reader is automatically drawn in, wondering what this title could possibly mean. Continuing on with an exposition of certain portions of the book of Hebrews, he writes:

Hebrews is a key to the entire Bible, a road map to the whole history of redemption, as its opening verses make clear. And from time to time—as in those lofty opening verses—the author provides us with remarkable, and in some senses “simple,” summaries of the saving plan of God. In addition, he occasionally provides outlines that help us to see our own lives in the context of God’s ongoing purposes. One such summary comes in Hebrews 9:24–28. Within a few sentences, the author uses the verb appear three times with reference to three distinct events in the ministry of the Lord Jesus. He mentions them in the order of the argument he is pursuing; their significance underlines the way in which he thinks of Christ’s work.

First, Christ has appeared once for all to put away sin by His sacrifice
(Heb. 9:26b).

Second, Christ now appears in the presence of God on our behalf
(Heb. 9:24).

Third, Christ will appear to save those who are waiting eagerly for Him (Heb. 9:28) (49-50).

Ferguson proceeds to trace out these “three tenses” of the word “appear,” as they are found in the verses above. This chapter is an outstanding example of the insight and creativity with which the author approaches theological exposition.

Section three is an appropriate advance in the connection between the work of Christ for us and the work of Christ in us, as Ferguson comes to focus on the Person and work of the Spirit. It is by the Holy Spirit of Christ that the saving work He accomplished at Calvary is applied to the hearts and lives of believers. Those familiar with Sinclair Ferguson will know that he has done a considerable amount of work on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. In this section of the book, Ferguson employs a biblical theological approach to support the interpretation of the symbolism of the “living water” spoken of in John’s Gospel. He writes:

In John 4:13–14, Jesus said He is the One who gives the living water of the Spirit. Well-known Old Testament passages would then lie behind the statement that the Scriptures would be fulfilled:

1. The descriptions of Moses smiting the rock from which water rushed (Ex. 17:1–7; Num. 20:1–13).
2. Ezekiel’s vision of the new temple to which God’s glory returned (Ezek. 43:1–5) and from which rivers flowed (Ezek. 47:1–12).

Perhaps both are in the background here. Jesus is the smitten Rock (1 Cor.10:3–4). It is from the smitten Lord that the Spirit is given to us. Is this why John pointedly mentions that when Jesus’s side was pierced, water as well as blood flowed (John 19:34)? Jesus is also the temple to which glory returns (John 1:14). He is resurrected as the true tabernacle-temple in whom God’s glory is restored. It is from within Him, risen and glorified, that the Spirit comes to the disciples in the symbolism of Jesus’s breath (John 20:22) (77-78).

The Scriptures often draw the closest connection between Christ and the Spirit. For instance, in John 14 Jesus speaks of the Spirit as being “another helper.” Here Ferguson notes:

Jesus promises to send the Spirit as “another Helper” (John 14:16). Our English word another can mean two things—“another of the same kind” or “another of a different kind.” The Greek language has different words for these ideas. Here, “another” translates the Greek allos, which in this context means “another of the same kind.” The Spirit is a Helper just like Jesus!

While the Son and the Spirit are personally distinct, they are entwined with one another. Jesus is Teacher, Jesus is Guide, Jesus is Counselor, Jesus goes to make a home for His disciples. The Spirit is another like Jesus: He teaches, guides, counsels, and brings orphans into the home and heart of God. Moreover, because He is Spirit, He does this by personally indwelling our spirits in a mysterious yet wonderfully real and powerful way (81).

The section on the Holy Spirit also includes a chapter on revival that proves to be an intriguing exhibition of Ferguson’s ability to weave historical and theological truth together in a creative yet precise manner. Though written on a popular level, the author does not shy away from the difficult portions of the New Testament’s references to the Spirit of God.

The fourth section of the book, “The Privileges of Grace,” affords the reader a rich treatment of such a full range of topics as union with Christ to assurance of salvation. In the middle of this section lies another masterful biblical theological exposition of a portion of John’s Gospel–the account of the first miracle of our Lord. Drawing the close connection between this miracle at Cana and the events that follow in chapters 3 and 4, Ferguson explains that Jesus was teaching His disciples that He came to bring “new wine,” the “new Temple,” the “new birth,” and the “new water.” What was the point of the miracle at the wedding in Cana? Ferguson explains, “On the one hand, He was showing the inadequacy of the provisions of the old order. The sacrificial system could not bring the joy He offered. The old water gave only ceremonial forgiveness, and therefore short-lived and fading joy. But on the other hand, the Lord was demonstrating that in the gospel there is new wine that offers lasting joy (Isa. 55:1–3). Jesus Himself gives that wine (129).”

The fifth section in this volume, introduces the reader to some of the more interesting subjects with which the author deals. It is here that two of the least expected chapters in this book appear. “Eating Black Pudding,” and “Playing the Second Fiddle Well.” While in no way less important than the other chapters, they are somewhat unusual expositions in their own right. “Eating Black Pudding” is an attempt to explain Christian liberty in light of the blood laws and the teaching of the book of Acts. “Playing the Second Fiddle Well” is also a bit unusual–not because of the subject matter it covers, but on account of the manner in which the author approaches the subject of selfless serving. Giving consideration to the role that Barnabas played during the apostolic era, Ferguson suggests:

An inability to encourage someone else is usually rooted in an absorption with self that is blind to the needs or gifts of others, or a pride that cannot bring itself to praise God’s grace in them. It is interesting, in this connection, to observe that the Barnabas-quality was also present in Paul’s later “second fiddle,” Timothy: “I have no one else like him, who takes a genuine interest in your welfare.” How sad that Paul adds “everyone looks out for his own interests, not those of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 2:20–21, NIV). Is one of the reasons for the failure of some Christian leaders simply that they themselves have never been led? Is it that they have never humbled themselves under another’s leadership? Could it be that they do not know what grief their own unhumbled leadership is bringing to others (184-85)?

The final section of the book deals with the reality of spiritual warfare in the life of the Christian. It is the world, the flesh and the devil that are in view. The call is for a serious acknowledgment of our dependence on God for our victory over these enemies. Relevant to the discussion of spiritual warfare is the importance of the warning passages of Scripture. In his chapter, “Danger: Apostasy,” Ferguson suggests that many students of theology have “never taken the ‘warning passages’ in Scripture with full theological seriousness (213).” The reason for this is generally a lack of understanding concerning the nature of these warnings, and their subsequent importance in the life of the professing Christians. Returning again to the book of Hebrews, Ferguson warns:

be on your guard against the neglect of grace (2:3); be careful that your heart is not hardened by the deceitfulness of sin (3:13); and see that you do not fall prey to disobedience (3:18; 4:6) and do not lack faith (4:3). Beware a careless attitude to the importance of fellowship (10:25); guard against sinning deliberately (10:26); do not shrink back in the face of difficulties (10:38); and do not “refuse Him who speaks” through His mighty Word (12:25).

There is a path to hell from the gates of heaven. Sadly, some have not come by the way of grace, faith, and repentance. They may have been self deceived. That is why Hebrews sounds the note of self-examination. Make sure your profession of faith involves the possession of Christ (215-16).

The conclusion of this volume is special as well. It is a memorial of Al Groves–the late professor of Old Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Dr. Ferguson describes his admiration of and gratefulness to Professor Groves for his focus on union with Christ in life and death. It is a moving testimony of the reality of God’s grace in the life of His people. Our life really is “hidden with Christ in God.” All the blessings of this life, and the life to come, are found in union with Christ.

Sinclair Ferguson has the gift of communicating the deepest and most profound theological truths in the most simple and clear fashion. This volume in particular exhibits this ability. The reader will find page after page of valuable insights into and expositions of Scripture. The author is like a householder who “brings out of his treasury things new and old.” This writer is not able to express adequately how thankful he is for this volume, nor the benefit that it will be to pastor and people alike. It will be undoubtedly a great help to anyone who wishes to know more about the riches of the blessings that are ours “in Christ alone.”

Last night, almost 7 years after that event, I was sitting on my bed expressing my worries about the church plant. “How are we going to get support;” “If we can’t gather a core group we won’t have a church;” “What am I going to do?” These were the things coming out of my mouth. At that very moment, I opened the Daily Light and began to read the evening devotional I read almost 7 years ago that day. The Lord again reminded me to trust the One who feeds birds who do not labor for food, and in whom we live and move and have our being. Oh, that I would remember this lesson every day of my life. It is one of the greatest lessons we could ever learn. We have a Father in Heaven who cares deeply for us. He provides for our every need. He has so ordered nature to exhibit His care and preservation that we ought always to make the connection between His care for objects of lesser value and greater value. Above all He provided His Son as a sacrifice for sin. I am exceedingly thankful that He continues to teach me this lesson.

There is still plenty of time to register for the Great Bavinck Giveaway! Subscribe by April 20 to be included in the drawing for a free copy of Bavinck’s ‘Saved by Grace’ (RHB, 2008). See the March 16 post for details. Our last post examined the outset of the Reformed ‘Covenant’ view of grace. Bavinck suggests it’s the middle way between the high Roman Church and the Anabaptist view on the opposite end.

There is a ‘cog’ between transmitting grace and receiving grace for salvation. It is a very important cog. It’s where to place the first moment of ‘regeneration’ in the order of salvation. The question is: does regeneration happen before or after ‘calling’? Many within the Reformed camp assume regeneration happens before baptism and others similarly hold that it could also (not to exclude the former possibility) occur a few days into one’s life, as in the case of covenant children who die in infancy. That rule, explains Bavinck, is the concession that regeneration happens apart from the agency of the Word, or through the Word; it’s a matter of degree, not principle. What’s the point? The Reformed believe that grace is free: The Lord has instituted signs and wonders to accommodate the means of grace e.g. the Word and Sacrament which proceed from Christ by His Spirit. Sounds good, right?

On the other hand, argue the Anabaptists generally, the Sprit is opposed to nature. Regeneration precedes ‘calling’ through the Word. This means the Holy Spirit works directly, effectually, and irresistibly in the human heart in opposition to the Word or other material means. The church, they contend, does not itself mediate grace. Nor does the minister directly convey grace to the believer. The scriptures for that matter do not contain the actual reality of grace, but from the Holy Spirit alone. In sales, it’s ideal to successfully cut the middle man. But in this case this is no way to save.

Bavinck grants that not everyone responds to the Word, or Church ministry in a saving manner but that does not render the ministry of the word “empty and useless”. Supposing the Anabaptist view of grace excludes all means of instrumentality, the person and work of Christ is historically unimportant – especially in the sense that Christ is the mediator of the new covenant. Spiritual life would begin and end in ‘secret’ or ‘internally’ with possibly no exterior means to verify its truth or existence, even perhaps a way to describe it. If the Anabaptist conception is correct the outworking of sanctification confined to exclusive separation from the world in all manner of dress, custom, and community.

Bavinck’s criticism sounds hard, but many if not a majority of non-Reformed evangelical circles constantly struggle with conceptual tensions between the sacred and secular in work (vocation) and cultural interactions. The place of calling and regeneration in the order of salvation determines more than doctrinal consistency. For Bavinck, the social aspect at the center of the debate affects the social impact of the ministry of the church and potentially leaves one’s personal relationship with scripture, sacrament, and church, at a very unnatural distance.

Alan Keyes explains the details of the present push and dangerous nature of “hate crime” legislation here .

Similar legislation is presently being pushed for in Scotland, and has been in place for years in England and Wales.

The greatest danger bound up in this kind of legislation is the threat it will be to ministers who are seeking to faithfully minister God’s word.The Scripture has “confined all under sin so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.” While telling someone about their need for salvation from sin through faith in Jesus Christ is the most loving thing you can do, this kind of legislation will say that it is a hate crime to say anything against another person’s lifestyle.

Someone might object, “Doesn’t the Bible teach that the church will suffer persecution, and that it will be good for the health and life of the church.” Well, the Bible also says, “As we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially those who are of the household of faith (Gal. 6:10),” and “If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men (Rom. 12:18).” The Scriptures also say, “Deliver those who are drawn to death, and hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter (Prov. 24:11),” and “Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in the power of your hand to do so (Prov. 3:27).” I certainly affirm that the church will suffer persecution. Jesus said, “A servant is not greater than his Master…If they hated Me they will hate you also.” And, while the church often thrives in times of suffering and persecution, if we are filled with the Spirit of Christ and faithful to His word in times of freedom it may thrive as well. At the beginning of 2 John we read, “Beloved I pray that you may prosper and be in health, just as your soul prospers (2 John 1:2).” For a more thorough discussion of seeking the physical and earthly well being of others see this post.

Please prayerfully consider signing this petition.

Anyone who has ever studied Hitler will tell you this: No one, even at the highest levels of his government, had any idea as to the extent of damage and suffering he would inflict on the world and his own people. The suffering caused by sin has a similar analogy; Adam and Eve had no idea how sin would plunge the world into this melancholy subject. It’s a moot point to say that suffering is universal. If sin were taken out of the equation suffering would be reduced to a much smaller dimension in human life. Bavinck makes this case by pointing out the variety of sins, both spiritual and material in nature, and contrasts it with the calamity of natural disaster. With hurricanes, famine, thorns and such, all manner of superstition follows near all natural phenomena. Here Bavinck beautifully presents us with a dilemma; how do we differentiate and also reconcile scientific and biblical explanations of universal suffering that is otherwise entrenched in folklore and superstition? What to do. What to do.

On one side there is a scientific, rational, explanation for death and suffering. Darwinians, for example, are foremost among those who affirm death is natural it is built into the natural world. The idea that Satan is behind the bushes and in the thunderclouds is Christianized pagan superstition. But is death natural and suffering the norm of life? No, says Bavinck, “it violates the inner nature of a human being (Job 14:1-12).” Sin has devalued human life creating a tension between the natural and unnaturalness of death. Only a faith rooted in scripture, and not a rationalist outlook, overcomes superstitious outlooks that distort a true, godly, and yes, scientific perspective on sin and suffering. How so? Bavinck’s analysis here (chapter 4) unfortunately doesn’t reach a firm conclusion. On the one hand Bavinck complains that in his day the most precise scientific thinking on all levels, which had abandoned scripture faith, turned to hypnotism, astrology, and the occult. This initially sounds a little silly but there is something to it (the Nazis were obsessed with the occult). Yet on the other Bavinck buries the reader under a mass amount of ‘proof texts’ losing the clear voice of his central thesis.

So Bavinck reaches a great summit but stops for the sheer magnitude of the view. What are we to think? Is death final? Is it a natural part of the world? We will have to wait until the next chapter: the Covenant of Grace in Jesus Christ.

Matthew opens with the words: “The book of the generations of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the Son of Abraham.” Why only mention David and Abraham? Simply put, they were the two Israelitish covenant heads who were organically related to Christ. Jesus did not come from Moses’ seed, but he did come from Abraham and David. Note also the way that Matthew mentions David first, then Abraham. As the genealogy unfolds he starts with Abraham, moves to David, goes through the exile and finally comes to the fulfillment of the promises. This structure sets the grid for understanding Matthew’s Gospel.

Matthew could have chosen to take the genealogy back to Noah and Adam (as Luke chooses to do) but it appears that he wanted to stop at Abraham to explain the Israel/Christ typology. This is further developed by the reference to Hosea 11:2 in Matthew 2, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.” Then by the baptism, the temptation in the wilderness, the Sermon on the Mount, the feeding of the multitudes, the references to David and Solomon, the pronouncement of ‘woes’ on the leaders of Israel, and His death on the cross (i.e. the great exile).

In summary, Jesus, the Son of Abraham, is therefore the true Israel. He go does down into Egypt, come up from Egypt, passes through the waters (see 1 Cor. 10:1-2 for a reference to the crossing of the sea as baptism), goes into the wilderness, goes up on the mountain to deliver the law, miraculously multiplies bread from heaven, parallels the life of David and his mighty men when he walks through the grain fields on the Sabbath with His disciples, parallels the life of Solomon with His wisdom and His entry into Jerusalem on a lowly animal, parallels the ministry of the prophets by pronouncing ‘woes’ on the rulers of Israel, and is finally cut off (i.e. exiled)from the land of the living, at the cross, on account of disobedience–i.e. He is made a curse because of the disobedience of His people.

This is some of the strongest evidence that Jesus was the true Israel, God’s Son who obeyed in every way that Israel disobeyed, and who, by His obedience merited the blessings that Israel forfeited by its disobedience. I would also suggest that Matthew’s purpose, as so many have argued, was not to write to a Jewish audience so as to win them to faith in Christ, but it was to show that Jesus is the true Israel. Now, I know that some may disagree with this and may chalk it up to being something fanciful or allegorical, but the evidence is there, and unless it can be clearly refuted ought to be given serious attention.

In our last few posts we’ve been plowing through Bavinck’s analysis of original sin and what was lost by the fall. Human beings did not become ‘sub’ creatures after breaking the covenant or works, but something changed. The original relationship and integrity with God was destroyed when sin took advantage of the commandment. Here is a brief look at Bavinck’s analysis of the nature of sin in what he describes as ‘mystery in variety’.

Sin is not mere heredity, explains Bavinck, it is universal and cannot be summed up in one type of transgression. From a host of scriptural examples, everyone from Augustine to the scholastics argued that the first sin of humans was ‘pride’ or ‘disobedience’ (Rom. 5:9). Protestants emphasize doubt and unbelief occasioned in Eve’s trial. Bavinck asks; was it really one thing or another? Original sin contained within itself a whole variety from disobedience, to self-elevation, pride, homicide, theft, covetousness. It triggered in a range of emotions, feelings and thoughts within the intellect, will, and body. We might say that sin is similar to reading: it takes the whole person to do it. One of the great mysteries of sin is how it is imputed through Adam. Sin is not a physical substance; if it were then it would have been positively created by God and, “[sin] has no efficient but only a deficient cause” (Augustine). Supposing sin is like to a disease or disposition that is ‘handed down’ merely describes symptoms and characteristics; the essence is more elusive.

Whatever it is, sin initiated and continued separation from God. It breaks the health of relationships: Adam blamed Eve, Cain killed Abel, and the world crucified Christ. It is grace, says Bavinck, that after the fall humanity still retained the consciousness that things ought to be different. There is a notion that human beings should conform to the law of God but the reality of that desire is the reverse. The conscience is not the consciousness of communion with God, but rather the “subjective proof” it has been broken. Here we are confronted with a grave dilemma: is the silence of conscience peace or separation ? Bavinck argues the more the conscience functions (develops) and is articulated the more it validates the scriptural view of humanity (Rom. 2:14-16).

Bavinck has presented a very weighty matter for consideration. He has a strong case and quite a command of the data …but … what? Some have put forward that Bavinck’s view of God’s law is much more positivistic than Calvin intended (Helm). A comparison between Bavinck’s treatment of universal guilt (the outset of chapter 3) and Calvin’s (especially Ins . Bks. I. xvi & II.vii) views on providence and natural law indicates the parting nuance. The perspective here is not ‘should I lose sleep over this?’ but rather, ‘I should study this when I can’t sleep.’

Our three part series on the superadded gift (SG) was pretty difficult and challenging. This was especially true in our small group study but we’re still friends despite any differences as we wrestle through Bavinck’s analysis and (to quote Thomas Watson) the treachery of our own hearts. This post briefly recaps and reflects on Bavinck’s main points on the superadded gift.

Bavinck’s method for writing typically follows the pattern of thesis, antithesis, followed by synthesis (Jaarsma). He starts, for instance, at basic definitions of terms (sin, freewill), demonstrates how they are used by various writers and movements (Pelagius, Augustine, Mysticism, Pantheism), and follows through their interpretations from theory to practice (Roman Catholic view of concupiscence, superadded gift). In our reading Bavinck was very successful in handling the distinction between human freewill and the divine command. Pelagian and semi-Pelagian views of human freewill are always at odds with divine sovereignty, unevenly matched in comparison, and never definite. Anyone who has ever worked on the problem has probably said or heard, “but I have freewill, I can choose to believe” at any point within the topic. Bavinck is basically saying, ‘yes, you have freewill; it is an integral part of human nature. But there is a distinction, an order, and progress in the relationship between God and the creature. God gives freewill, God also gives a command: those are independent but not mutually exclusive. The original relationship and integrity with God was destroyed when sin took advantage of the commandment.’ Here, Bavinck’s presuppositions sticks close to its guns: God has revealed his will despite sin and rejection.

By the conclusion of chapter two, and the summary opening of chapter 3, Bavinck’s analysis of the SG is hard to follow. At first he seems to agree with the general 19th century view that the SG was a ‘bridle’ to keep the ‘war’ of flesh/spirit at bay. After demonstrating the doctrine from Augustine to Trent he presents the antithetical views of the Reformers, especially Calvin. Chapter 2 concludes with discussions of imputation and total depravity, losing sight of the SG until the next chapter. The problem created a lot of work trying to nail Bavinck down; what looks like inconsistency is merely one of organization. This small detail created a little uncertainty in our readings but well worth the effort. He agrees that the SG kept the flesh and spirit at bay, but the drift of his analysis of total depravity and the ethical-spiritual nature of sin seem inconsistent or perhaps just groaning under the weight of the data.

“Grace to you and peace, from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits before the throne, and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and freed from our sin with His own blood and has made us kings and priests to our God.”

There are several significant details in the salutation. In the first place, it is a Triune blessing. Grace and peace come to the people of God from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is not so clear on the surface, because of the way in which each Person of the Godhead is spoken of, or from the order in which each member of the Godhead is mentioned.

John describes the Father as “Him who is and who was and who is to come.” He is the everlasting God. The One who has no beginning and no end. Though the Father is not mentioned by any particular name, and though this same description is applied to Jesus in verse 8, the construct necessitates this interpretation. The Father has already been mentioned at the beginning of the book by the name “God.” It is surely taught in Scripture that the Father and the Son are each God in every way that makes Him God. Deity is clearly attributed to the Spirit as well, in such places as Acts 5 where it is said that Ananias and Saphira have lied to the God by lying to the Holy Spirit. But, in the realm of redemption (i.e. the work of the economic Trinity) the Father is often referred to simply as “God.” The other confirmation is the reference to the Spirit and the Son in the subsequent verses.

John goes on to say that grace and peace come from the “seven Spirits who are before His throne.” Why is the Spirit spoken of as the “seven spirits?” It would appear, by the close proximity of the description of the churches to whom this prophecy is given, that the Spirit is to be understood as the perfect gift to the church. John is writing to the “seven churches.” It is the “seven spirits” given to the “seven churches.” The number seven obviously has a symbolic meaning. God created in six days and rested on the seventh. It is the number of completion, perfection or wholeness. According to Solomon, there are six things that God hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him. Surely there are more than seven things that are an abomination to the infinitely holy God. Surely God hates all evil. This is the point of using the number 7. Again, it is said by Solomon, “For the righteous falls seven times and rises again.” The righteous may well fall many more times that seven–even as much as seventy times seven–but the point is that no matter how complete his falling may seem he will rise again. So, in the book of Revelation the Holy Spirit of God, who works His perfect work in the church, is termed the “seven Spirits.”

The second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ–the One whom this revelation is all about–is mentioned in the third place in this salutation. Note the way that John gives Him a three fold description. He is “the faithful witness, the first-born from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth.” This is interestingly a description of His role as Prophet (i.e. the faithful witness), Priest (i.e. the first-born from the dead), and King (i.e. the ruler over the kings of the earth). He is the center of all revelation, and so, it is fitting that a further description of His work is attached to this salutation. The reason He is not mentioned in the second place in this greeting is because the Spirit wants us to recognize that the blessings of God comes through the Person and Work of Christ. While the book of Acts is really the “Acts of the apostles of Jesus Christ by the Spirit, ” this is the Revelation of Jesus Christ .” He is the One who has loved us and freed us from our sins by His own blood. The Father and the Spirit were not the Agents of that most necessary means of providing forgiveness. It is only by the blood of the Lamb. This is a glorious salutation. Grace and peace only come from the Father and the Spirit through the dying love of Christ.

The latest addition to the Reformed Expository Commentary is a real gem. This series continues to impress me as I work my way through the various volumes. I use them for personal worship as well as for Bible study and sermon preparation. The Incarnation in the Gospels is unique in that it is a topical study rather than a commentary on one book in particular. As the reader should be able to tell from the title, this book concentrates on Christmas season sermons. While I realize that there are varying views on the legitimacy of the celebration of Christmas, this series of sermons and worship helps should make it clear that a concern for the birth of our Lord is a biblical concern and so Reformed churches can celebrate Christmas. I love the Puritans, but their rejection of Christmas and Easter, along with other church holy days, was arguably the throwing of the baby out with the bath water (inasmuch as one reason for the rejection of Christmas was its close association with the Roman Catholic Church). The Scriptures give us two accounts of the birth of our Lord and so preaching on it is not only legitimate, but a necessity.

The Incarnation in the Gospels contains twelve advent season sermons. Dan Doriani provides us with four sermons from Matthew, Phil Ryken with four sermons from Luke, and Rick Phillips with four sermons from the gospel of John. I found myself caught up with the gospel narratives in each sermon. These sermons get at the heart of the matter of our Lord’s birth-the birth was the beginning of our Lord’s redemptive work but by no means its end. If I may put it this way: the cradle was for the cross! In fact, this point is made quite well in the preface to the book where six orthodox beliefs are set in bold relief with the final one noting that “[t]he birth of Jesus is no end in itself, but is part of the fulfillment of God’s plan of redemption. Jesus exercised the offices of prophet, priest, and king in his role as mediator, and especially took on human flesh that he might suffer in that flesh, offering himself as a substitutionary sacrifice, to atone for the sins of his people” (xi). There is no danger of sentimental fluff covering over the truth of the Scriptural accounts in these sermons. The wonder, excitement, and glory of the incarnation are highlighted in a most wonderful way here.

And there is more. Not only do we possess these fine sermons, but the book contains four appendecies. Mark Dalbey provides a very helpful discussion of issues related to Christmas season worship in the local church and Rick Philips offers a sample Christmas eve service of lessons and carols. An especially delightful aspect of this book is that it contains recent Christmas carols by Paul Jones, James Montgomery Boice, Eric Alexander, Derek Thomas, and Phil Ryken. When I received this volume in the mail my daughter was practicing her piano and so I prevailed upon her to play these and they are quite singable. The book conludes with Dan Doriani’s meditation on Christmas customs and a Scripture index.

This is an excellent resource and will service as an attractive introduction to the Reformed Expository Commentary set. I should note that these sermons are all drawn from the forthcoming volumes on Matthew (now available here), Luke, and John. This collection of sermons reminds us of the glory that is Christmas as properly understood. Gloria in Excelsis Deo! ]]> http://feedingonchrist.com/the-incarnation-in-the-gospels/feed/ 1 http://feedingonchrist.com/phil-ryken-on-women-and-the-deaconate/ http://feedingonchrist.com/phil-ryken-on-women-and-the-deaconate/#comments Wed, 03 Dec 2008 13:55:00 +0000 Nicholas T. Batzig http://www.feedingonchrist.com/2008/12/phil-ryken-on-women-and-the-deaconate/ Read more→]]> Phil Ryken has just written a post, over at Ref21, vindicating his position on women and deaconal ministry. You can read it here.

For those interested, I did make a point to defend Phil on the Bayly blog a few months back since I was at the special Saturday meeting of the Philadelphia Presbytery which was called to consider how to proceed on the request of Liberty Church and their involvement in this matter. While Tenth has women involved in their mercy ministry they do not ordain them to the office of deacon. In keeping with BCO 9-7 (It is often expedient that the Session of a church should select and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in any distress or need) the only issue for Tenth is what they should call those women. At one point Dr. Ryken stood up and recommended something to the intent that the Presbytery should petition the GA committee concerning what title should be used in reference to these women serving in a commissioned capacity.

Though I may not hold the exact view as Dr. Ryken on this particular matter, I know that he has not pushed for or supported the ordination of women to the office of deacon. I hope that people will be careful in what positions they impute to others. This is a good lesson for all of us. We are often too quick to misrepresent another man’s views.