God's Elect or World's Elite? XXXII

In the previous chapters we have shown how believers, God's elect, are superior to unbelievers, to the world's elite, in all areas of "status" or "calling." The things that determine status, as we have seen so far, include: 1) wisdom 2) knowledge 3) riches 4) speech or utterance. We have seen how God's elect are superior to the world's elite in these things. In this chapter we will see how the believer is "enriched" in nobility, in family and birth, and how this too is an element of their superior calling and status.  Wrote Paul:

"For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence." (I Cor. 1: 26-29)

The word "noble" is from the Greek word "eugenes" and is "an adjective, lit., "well born" (eu, "well," and genos, "a family, race"), (a) signifies "noble," 1 Corinthians 1:26; (b) is used with anthropos, "a man," i.e., "a nobleman," in Luke 19:12 . In the Sept., Job 1:3." (Vine) It also includes the idea of being one of high rank and status, who is superior in riches. 

"Well born" also may include the idea of being a fit specimen of humanity, of excelling in physical and/or mental abilities, of being someone with "good genes," of "good breeding." They have "royal blood," so to speak, or "from good stock." They have illustrious ancestors, family dignity and honor, titles and privileges, and a superior heritage, greater credentials. Another time when this word is used is in a compound word in this passage:

"These (Berean Jews) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17: 11)

"More noble" is from "eugenesteros" and is "eugenes" in the comparative degree. It is only used by Luke and Paul in the new testament. 

There is a difference of opinion among Commentators as to who Luke designates as noble and more noble in the above text. Is the nobility spiritual, what results from spiritual birth, or that which results from natural birth? Does it have reference to a natural or to a spiritual state and condition? Are the noble ones in Berea and Thessalonica believers? Or, are they merely Jews who have not yet become believers in the gospel? If the latter, then the nobility of birth and family must refer to what is according to the flesh, to physical relations. Dr. John Gill in his commentary wrote:

"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,...That is, the Jews at Berea were more noble than the Jews in Thessalonica, as the Syriac version expresses it; for the comparison is not between the native inhabitants of Berea and Thessalonica, but between the Jews that dwelt in these places: and the one being "more noble" than the other, does not refer to their birth, lineage, and descent, as in 1 Corinthians 1:26 few such were called; and besides, both sorts were Jews, and of the same descent; and as for the proselytes in both places, there were some of the chief and honourable women converted in each: but to their minds, dispositions, and manners; the one were more candid, and ingenuous, and open to conviction and susceptive of the word, than the other; and used the apostles with better manners, with more mildness and gentleness, willing to hear what they had to say, without contradicting and blaspheming, and to examine with patience and candour what they delivered." (Gill)

It is interesting how the word "noble" has come to denote not only "well born," but also to have superior personal qualities, morals, and ideals, when one considers that there have been so many "nobles" who have been depraved tyrants. Many times those who are noble in birth and ancestry are rather "ignoble" in morals. How did first century Greeks use the word? Did they use the word "noble" (eugenes) in a sense other than "well born," or of "high rank"? Did they use it in the sense of a noble character as we do today? Did Paul use the word noble in the sense of high moral and ethical standards, of excellent character?   

Both the Berean Jews and the Thessalonian Jews were "noble," albeit the former was "more noble." Gill says it does not refer to physical birth since both Jewish groups had the same ancestry. But, this is not necessarily so, for some Jewish families and tribes had a loftier birth, were "more noble." This is true with the tribe of Judah and the family of David. Consider also how "noble" (eugenes) includes the idea of "high rank" or "lofty social status." Any great leader or wealthy person was therefore a noble even though he may not have come from a noble ancestry. Said one commentator: "This means that the Bereans were of a more noble class than those in Thessalonica; that is, this refers to social nobility." I think that is true; And, if it is true, then the Berean Jews, being "more noble" would denote a higher social status, involving having greater riches, and with great riches comes more "leisure" time, more time for reading. 

Those who are rich and have no need to work have more time to give to reading and for research. Those however who must work long hours daily do not have the leisure time to be able to "search the scriptures daily." They might have to do it in only the little spare time they have. That well could be the meaning of the passage. Luke is saying that the Jews in Berea, being wealthier and having more leisure time than the Jews in Thessalonica, were able to search the scriptures daily. In this sense we may say that full time pastors are "more noble" than most poor working church members because such pastors are able to search the scriptures daily, where members often cannot as a result of long hours working each day. 

If Luke, however, wants to distinguish two types of believers or seekers, then he may well indeed be using "noble" in the sense of "noble character" rather than of social ancestry and status, and this is the more common interpretation. Thus, one commentator says that eugenes "means literally of high or noble birth, but in this context is used figuratively to describe men and women possessing that type of attitude ordinarily associated with well-bred persons, being open, tolerant, generous." (here)

Notice the words "ordinarily associated." How can "noble" denote virtuous qualities when so many nobles have not been so? It is because this is what is the ordinary case, or is what is the ideal definition of noble. In fact, Paul says "not many noble are called," that is, very few of the "well born" and those of "high rank" are believers, are God's elect. Those who have high status in this world and reject the gospel have little or no status with God. However, those who generally have low status in this world and believe the gospel have a high status with God, being of superior rank than unbelievers, being God's elect. The world's nobles and men of rank, though they are now esteemed as being noble and most important, are in the sight of God ignoble and of no importance. 

Who is superior in birth and character, the believer or unbeliever? Who is truly elite? The "chosen ones"? As far as the present age is concerned, unbelievers generally, especially they who are of the elite, of "the high and mighty," are superior to believers. Their status in this world is often superior to the status of believers in the world. Believers, as we have seen, are generally from those "of low degree," from "the common people," chosen by God from among the poor, the weak, the despised, the unimportant, the uneducated, etc., while he rejects those of the worldly elite. Further, as we have seen, the end of this age will see a great reversal of things so that those who are now esteemed by the world as being elite, high born, noble, rich, wise, learned, strong and powerful, etc., will become rejects, of the lowest class forever, bankrupt of all assets and all good, powerless, unimportant, nobodies, eternally forgotten. 

On the other hand, believers are God's elect and as such have a high status. They are high born through being born again of the Spirit. They are noble in birth and character by the presence of the Spirit and by union with Christ. They are rich too, having an inheritance that is befitting "children of God." This wealth can never be lost. They are of high rank too being made "kings and priests unto God" (Rev. 1: 6) and are destined to rule the world with Christ. 

Born Of God

"He came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become (Greek to become through birth) children of God, even to them that believe on his name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1: 11-13 nasb)

Whoever is "born of God" is "well born," noble, "high born." Such is the believer in Jesus. He has received Christ and has obtained the right and privilege of being of God's high born family. John says that this birth of God is "not of blood," though worldly nobility is often connected with bloodlines and family ancestry. It is a birth of the will of God, and not of "the will (decision) of the flesh" nor "of the will of men," that is, being born of God, a child of God, is not determined by a worldly standard. Said James: "Of his own will he gave birth to us by the word of truth." (James 1: 18) In this world it is the rich and high born, those of high rank and status, who are thought to be most "like" God, "divine" in their rank and persons. 

Important people, such as the wealthy, rulers, kings, are like God in their power and authority, in their sovereignty, in their wealth and knowledge, in outward beauty, etc. But, in areas of character and standing with God, they are not always like God, nor "divine," even though they often are addressed as such. Rather, it is the believer in Jesus who is the real "divine" character, the one who is really most like God. Wrote Peter:

"According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust." (II Peter 1: 3-4)

One becomes a partaker of human nature by being begotten and born of human parents. One becomes a partaker of the divine nature by being begotten of God. In birth and human reproduction the child has the likeness of his or her parents. So it was said that Adam begat "a son after his likeness, after his own image." (Gen. 5: 3) Those who have been born of God and of the Spirit, by the word of God, have God's image and likeness as part of the "divine nature" that they received in birth. Paul called this new divine nature "the new man," and which he says "is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him." (Col. 3: 10) God we may say has begotten children, like Adam, "after his likeness, after his own image." In the above words of Peter "life and godliness," or God likeness, is the essence of what is involved in "partaking of the divine nature." Things of the same nature resemble each other. Partaking of the God nature not only involves receiving life and being made in the likeness of God, or becoming godly, but also involves obtaining divine "glory and virtue." It is a taking on of God's righteous character.

When a sinner receives Christ and is born of God he at that time experiences a radical transformation in his soul, heart, mind, and spirit. It is a spiritual and moral transformation, the body being unaffected. His thinking changes. His beliefs change. He now begins to possess "the mind of Christ." (I Cor. 2: 16) Thus, we may say "the nature of his thinking is changed." All this changes who the person is in character, who he is in the very core and center of his being. Before being converted and born of God the sinner has the mind of a sinner, a mind and spirit that is anti Christ. 

When in sin, prior to regeneration and birth of the Spirit, the sinner has only a human depraved nature and is wholly unlike God his Creator. In his habits, his thinking, his behavior, in his ways, he is not like God but more like the Devil. This is how we distinguish between they who are "children of God" and "children of the flesh." (See Rom. 9: 8) The children of the flesh are they who only have a fallen human nature that is "at war with God." Their nature is "of the flesh," and they have "carnal minds" fixed on "things of the flesh," and therefore their immoral conduct comes naturally to them. (Rom. 8: 5-8) All are "by nature children of wrath." (Eph. 2: 3) It requires a new birth and a new nature to become children of God, people who bear his image and likeness. The conduct of a person reveals his character, his nature. Notice these words of the Lord Jesus:

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." (Matt. 5: 44-45)

When Christ exhorts his disciples to a conduct that is pleasing to the Lord he says that they should do it in order that they "may be the children of your Father." But, were they not already children of the Father? Yes, for he says "your Father," denoting the fact that God was already their Father. So, what he means is not that you may become a child of God initially in rebirth but that they may become children of God in their character and in the way they live and behave. In other words Christ is saying to them - "you are children of God, act like one." In fact, those who have been "born of God" continue to be transformed into the image and likeness of their heavenly Father as they grow and mature. Wrote Paul:

"But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit." (II Cor. 3: 18)

Children become like their parents in two ways. One is biological and is the reason why there is resemblance in appearance. The other is through parental instruction and example, a socialization in the spiritual realm, where the child learns the ways and manners of his parents and family. There is spontaneous natural behavior that springs from the divine nature and there is learned behavior where God the Father teaches his offspring to behave and act like a member of the family. Sometimes it is when children have grown up and matured that they most look like their parents. So too with the children of God. As they grow in their Christian life they continue to look more and more like their parents. 

Believers then, have a higher status in birth and ancestry than do the world's elite (who reject God's revelation in favor of their own wisdom), its chosen ones, its heroes and wise ones. As we have seen, the believer now, in some ways, is already superior and of a higher status than unbelievers, no matter how lofty their status in this world, and yet his superiority will be far greater in the age to come. Believers are the truly noble by virtue of their having been born of God and united with Christ. 

THE "OLD WAYS"--WOULD THE WITNESS PLEASE TAKE THE STAND?

    Back when I was a boy, before churches got "sophisticated", I can remember a lot of things. One of them was the preaching. Don't get me wrong, there are various styles of preaching, and God calls different men, all with varying personalities and gifts. Some are more teacher oriented, talking calmly and teaching step by step. Others are exhorters and get very excited, desiring to plead with sinners to come to the fountain of Life. Some are a mixture. But what I remember most, are the "exhorter" style of preachers.

  In Baptist and Methodist churches, especially in the South, preachers would "take the stand". This term goes back to the days before they had pulpits. There was usually just a rail on an elevated stand or platform, much like the "stand" in a courtroom, but in the center rather than to the side. This is where the phrase "would the witness please take the stand" comes from in court proceedings. How fitting that Baptists would call on someone to preach to "take the stand". It is there that the witness of one who has been called, stood to tell the truth, in the court room of faith. In the stand, the preacher would tell of God's promises, His goodness, and His faithfulness. It was from the stand that they would invite the lost to give up and give in to God. 

   Many times at the close of his sermon, the preacher would walk down from the stand, shaking hands with the people, as he continued to preach. Sometimes, the preacher would know one who is lost and in travail, under conviction of sin. He might also know of some who were in a backslidden state, that needed to come home. He might even take the hand of the person. He might say something like "Aren't you thirsty?" or "Isn't it time to come home?". It was often the catalyst some needed to repent, become born again. For others it was the encouragement they needed to come home, and get right with God.

  When I visited the Sandy Creek Baptist Church, which Elder Shubal Stearns had constituted, they told me that this is a practice that he employed. The Sandy Creek Primitive Baptist Church sits right next door. The two churches are so close together, you can look out of the window and see the other church. the Primitives have restored the original log church, and 'the stand" with no pulpit is exactly as it was when Elder Stearns preached there. I commend them for this. But I grieve that restoring the "stand" and log structure to its original state, is important to them, yet they have no desire to "restore" what actually took place on the stand. And what took place was the preaching of the Gospel. The preaching was NOT designed to "comfort" those who were already saved. They needed no comfort, for their thirst had already been satisfied. The preaching that Elder Stearns employed was one that boomed with a mighty voice so strong that sinners sometimes couldn't even wait for an invitation to be given. To some who were already saved, but living a life with little light, he would start out by booming loudly of God's displeasure. It was anything but "comfortable". 

   Near the end of his sermon, it is said that his voice would lower, become very gentle, and his holy tone style of preaching would turn into normal, emotional speech. This description reminds me of my own father, who had a booming voice and when I had done something purposely wrong, I would definitely hear about it loudly. Then my father would lower his voice, tell me how much he loved me, put his arms around me and say "I'm not proud of what you've done, but I am proud that you're my son". This would sear into my conscience both the displeasure and the love of my father. Is this not what preaching is supposed to be? Is it not a warning and assurance of God's love at the same time? Didn't Jesus say that " “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”?

   If a man is going to "take the stand" he ought to tell the truth. If he doesn't, he is a false prophet, and the Scriptures are very clear about what happens to false prophets. If you take the stand only to comfort and lull the people to sleep, you don't know the truth. You open the Scriptures every week and yet are blind to what truth is. You are like Pontius Pilate who asked Jesus "what is truth?" when truth itself was staring him in the face. You "find no fault in Him" yet  you give the crowd what they want. You give them Barabbas instead of Jesus. Ken Mann

Garrett-Gentry Debate

The following is a reprint of a posting from The Baptist Gadfly in which I give the arguments I made in my affirmation of eternal security. You can go to this web page (here) and see the poster for the debate and the large church building in which it was held on the campus of SBTS in Louisville, Ky. I have a lot of memories from this debate! 

Father drove down with my sister from Ohio and were present at the debate. My seminary professor and friend Dr. Mac Griffin and another elder drove from North Carolina to the debate and I have a lot of memories from the long drive up there and back. Dr. Griffin and I had several serious differences and we debated them for the whole time up and back! I was almost hoarse by the time I had to debate with Gentry. So, I really had more than one debate on several subjects! The debate in Louisville was our second debate, the first held with Crossroads Baptist here in Monroe.

OSAS Affirmative

The following is my affirmative case for the doctrine of the final perseverance of the saints, or of once saved, always saved. I did add further evidence in the actual debate.

"The Scriptures teach that a child of God, one saved by the blood of Christ, cannot so sin as to be eternally lost in hell."

By the "scriptures" I mean the inspired writings. By a "child of God" I mean one who has been "born again," one who has been "washed (or "freed from sin") by the blood." (Rev. 1: 5) I mean one saved by the blood of Christ. By "cannot so sin" I mean what John meant when he said, in I John 3: 9, that "whosoever is born of God doeth no sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." And I John 5: 18 - "We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not."

By "sin" I mean to "miss the mark," or to abandon faith in Christ and the gospel. By "lost in hell" I mean "eternally condemned."

What I am essentially affirming is this proposition:

All those chosen by the Father, Redeemed by the Son, and Regenerated by the Holy Spirit, will be finally saved

London Baptist Confession of 1689 (SECTION ON PERSEVERANCE)

2. "This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and union with him, the oath of God, the abiding of his Spirit, and the seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof."

Argument #1 - The Unchangeable Decree of God (or immutability of the decree of election)

True believers cannot be lost because their salvation has been unchangeably decreed, or predestined.

"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." (Rom. 8: 29)

To be "conformed to the image of Christ" is to be "saved." Thus, Paul says that those whom God has foreknown, he has predestined to salvation. The word "predestine" means to "unchangeably decree," or to fix and determine beforehand what is to be done (Acts 4: 39), therefore, the predestined cannot be lost.

"Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will" and "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." (Ephesians 1: 5, 11)

Again, to be "adopted" or made "children" of God is to be "saved." And, God has predestined genuine believers to be eternally saved. Therefore, they will be saved, or else we affirm that what God has predestined to come to pass may not come to pass, and that God is not omnipotent. The elect are therefore saved according to "the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Ephesians 3: 11)

"But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth." (Job 23: 13)

"The LORD of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand...For the LORD of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?" (Isaiah 14: 24, 27)

The "promise" and "decree" are declared to be not only "eternal," but "immutable." (See Hebrews 6: 18)

Thus, if Lord God has determined to save a man, nothing is going to keep God from saving him.

If I substitute my name in the above passages, it would read like this:

"The LORD of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought (to save Stephen Garrett), so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed (to save Stephen Garrett), so shall it stand...For the LORD of hosts hath purposed (to save Stephen Garrett), and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out (to save Stephen Garrett), and who shall turn it back?"

Argument #2 - Saved Once for All Time by the Death of Christ

Those for whom Christ's died particularly, the elect, sheep, or believer, are said, in scripture, to be forever saved without the possibility of being lost. Sinners are said to be saved for no other reason than that Christ died for them.

"What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." (Romans 8: 31-34)

Paul clearly affirms that if Christ died for you, if God gave you his Son, then you will surely be given every other good thing. This, of course, as I shall show, includes the gift of perseverance. My opponent's position is that Paul's reasoning is false. He would not argue, as does the apostle, that the Father's gift of the Son to a person guarantees that he will be given all things.

Further, Paul reasons that no one can be can legitimately "charge" one who is "elect." This shows that Paul believed that election is a permanent blessing. One cannot be elect and then become non-elect.

He also argues that the reason no one can condemn a believer, an elect one, is because Christ died for him! Yet, if Christ dieing for a person does not guarantee his salvation, then Paul's argument is meaningless. The fact that Christ died, rose again, and is seated in heaven, for an elect one, forever secures his salvation. He cannot be condemned!

The act of justification, or of dying to sin, or of being legally freed from it, is permanent, once for all time. The once for all nature of Christ's death, both as he personally experienced it, and as believers experience it, is clearly taught in these verses.

"We who died (once for all) to sin..." (Romans 6: 2)

"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God." (Romans 7: 4 KJV)

What does it mean to have "died to sin"? Likewise, what does it mean to be "dead to the law"?

Three times in Romans chapter six it is stated that Christians are dead, or have died, unto sin. Rom. 6:11 shows what is clearly meant by being "dead to sin." He is legally "freed" from sin. He is justified once for all time.

Every believer, everyone chosen and called, "died unto sin," once for all, representatively, when Christ "died unto sin." The elect were "in Christ" in the same manner in which all are "in Adam" (Romans 5), or as Levi was "in Abraham." (Hebrews 7: 9)

Christians are therefore "dead to sin" as they are said to be "dead to the law." (Romans 7: 4).

"For he that hath died is justified from sin." (Romans 6: 7)

What Paul said of Christ, that "he died to sin once" (Romans 6:10), is also true of every believer.

Baptism is done once, and is never repeated. What does this signify but that one is saved once for all?

1. Once (at; for all)

hapax denotes

(a) "once, one time," 2_Cor_11:25; Heb_9:7,26,27; Heb_12:26,27; in the phrase "once and again," lit., "once and twice," Php_4:16; 1_Thess_2:18;

(b) "once for all," of what is of perpetual validity, not requiring repetition, Heb_6:4; Heb_9:28; Heb_10:2; 1_Pet_3:18; Jude_1:3, RV, "once for all" (AV, "once"); Jude_1:5 (ditto); in some mss. 1_Pet_3:20 (so the AV).

2. Once (at; for all)

ephapax a strengthened form of hapax (epi, "upon"), signifies

(a) "once for all," Rom_6:10; Heb_7:27, RV (AV, "once"); Heb_9:12 (ditto); Heb_10:10;
(b) "at once," 1_Cor_15:6.

Other Verses Signifying the "once for all" nature of salvation, in all its parts.

1. Life given is eternal, or unending. ("Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life" - John 6: 54)

2. The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable. (Romans 11: 29)

3. Gift of the Spirit deposit (escrow) guarantees completion of the contract. (II Cor. 1: 22; 5: 5)

4. Seed remains so that the believer cannot sin. (I John 3: 9)

5. Perfected forever those who are sanctified. (Hebrews 10: 14)

6. Unchangeable and unconditional love of God. (Romans 8: 35-39)

7. Unchangeable promise (Hebrews 6: 18)

Argument #3 - Christ Prays for the Perseverence of his elect and the Father always hears him

"Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always." (John 11: 42, 42)

"But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." (Luke 22: 32)

Notice, he did not say "and if you are converted."

Christ prays for his people to be given perseverance, or be made to endure. In the passage cited from Romans 8, Paul gives another reason why the elect cannot be lost. He says that Christ "makes intercession for us." For what does Christ pray, if it is not for the perseverance of his people?

"Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." (Hebrews 7: 25)

Why are the elect, true believers in Jesus, saved "to the uttermost"? Paul says it is because Christ prays for them. Yet, according to my opponent, Christ may pray for you to persevere and be finally saved, yet it will not avail in many cases.

"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." (I John 2: 1)

When one of the Lord's people sins, what does Christ then ask of the Father? To cast them off forever? Or, does he not pray to the Father to forgive them for his sake? To recover them for his sake? Will the Father deny Jesus?

If Christ prays for the disciples to be given perseverance, they will then, without fail, be given it by the Father, which brings me to my next argument.

Argument # 4 - Perseverance is a gift.

I showed from Romans 8, how the apostle's reasoning was this - if the Father has given you his Son, will give you "all things," and this certainly must include perseverance.

"I assert....that the perseverance by which we persevere in Christ even to the end is the gift of God."

(Augustine - The Works of Aurelius Augustine, vol 15, Anti-Pelagian Works (ed. M. Dods; T and T Clark, 1876). The Latin title is De Dono Perseverantiae, "On the Benefit of Perseverance." 200-201 (chap.33). Augustine cites Rom 8:30; Rom 11:29 in relation to God's predestining the elect)

If perseverance is not a gift of God, then we cannot thank God, or credit God, for our persevering.

Now, John and I both agree that one must persevere to be saved. He must have both faith and perseverance. Notice Hebrews 6: 12.

"That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises."

"Patience" is from the Greek word "hupomene" and means steadfastness, constancy, endurance. Literally it means to "abide under." It means to "bear up under." Thus, it means perseverance or stick-to-it-tiveness.

Every good ground hearer "brought forth fruit with hupomene." (Luke 8: 15) The other types of ground, or hearers, did not have both faith and perseverance.

"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?" (I Cor. 4: 7)

Paul's argument here is that only God can be thanked and credited for our differences, for why we receive, and for why we persevere. God makes the difference.

"Safety (victory) is of the LORD." (Proverbs 21: 31)

That is, it is his gift. Why do we stay safe? Why do we overcome? Why do we persevere? Because God has given victory and perseverance to his people, and has guaranteed their perseverance.

"But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (I Cor. 15: 57)

"And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them." (Ezekiel 36: 27)

"His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips." (Psalm 89: 29-34)

"Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand." (Romans 14: 4 NKJV)

Argument #5 - Unchangeable and victorious nature of regeneration

"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." (I John 5: 4)

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (I John 3: 9)

"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" (I John 5: 4,5)

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" (Romans 6: 1,2)

"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature." (Galatians 6:15)

Argument #6 - The Immutable and unconditional promise of God

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." (John 10: 27-29)

"All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." (John 6: 37-39)

"Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." (Philippians 1: 6)

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8: 35-39)

"The LORD shall preserve thee from all evil: he shall preserve thy soul. The LORD shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in from this time forth, and even for evermore." (Psalm 121: 7, 8)

"And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." (II Timothy 4: 18)

Argument # 7 - Chastened but not Destroyed

"If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail." (Psalm 89: 31-33)

"But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world." (I Cor. 11: 32)

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." (Hebrews 12: 10, 11)

Is God successful in his chastening of his children? Or, does his chastening often fail?

Original posting (here)

Indian Creek Regular Baptist Church (Reily, Ohio)

The above old church building was for Indian Creek Regular Baptist Church near the house where I lived from 1968 through 1973 with my mother and step father and siblings. It is located in Butler county Ohio near a little town called "Reily." When I became a "Primitive Baptist" at 16 years old, my father took me out to this historic old building. He said it was once "one of their churches," and that Elder Gilbert Beebe made a trip in the area during the time of the division over missions and theological education and preached at this church. It was also once pastored by Elder Wilson Thompson, one of the big leaders in the newly formed "Old School" or "Primitive Baptist" denomination. 

In those days I used to visit this old church building, walk in the cemetery and notice the dates and names on the headstones, go into the pulpit, etc. I would envision the people as they assembled here in the early to mid 19th century. It is interesting to me now, looking back, how early on I was interested in "Primitive Baptist" history. I remember how I researched the history of the Baptists in the northwest territory, including Ohio and Indiana, two of three states most connected with my ancestry. Butler county adjoined Indiana. I also used to find old small graves out in the woods around Reily and some had dates going back to the 1700s before Ohio became a state in 1803. I researched the history of Indian Creek church. 

I visited an older couple not far from where I lived who were in charge of the building and grounds for the Parks and Recreation or the Historical Society, I can't remember which. They knew a lot about the history of the church. They were Presbyterians and I can recall the old woman saying to me (I had not been a Christian very long) "I am in the land of Canaan." I don't know why this has stuck with me, but if she were here now I would say "so am I, hallelujah." 

I also in my studies for that area of Ohio and Indiana discovered that there were several "Universalist" church buildings that were also abandoned and under the care of historical societies. So, I have always had an interest in history. In fact I loved all the social sciences in High School and college. Now let me give some citations concerning the history of this church.  

"The Indian Creek Pioneer Church and Burial Ground includes a cemetery, established in 1810 that served as final resting place for the area's earliest settlers and a brick meeting house, circa 1829." (here)

"Indian Creek Baptist Church was organized in 1810 three miles above Reily, Since 1860 there have been no regular services in the church."

"The Indian Creek Regular Baptist Church was established in 1810 as an arm of the Little Cedar Creek Church of Brookville, Indiana. The congregation purchased three acres of land for a burial ground and church and built a log structure here in 1811. Members voted in 1812 that they would receive no person who believed in the principles of slavery. By 1829, membership had reached 150 and the present brick meeting house was built. In the 1840s, membership declined due to conflict over mission activity. The congregation dissolved in 1879 and the land was deeded to the Indian Creek Cemetery Association in 1880. The county park system received the property in 1960 through and with the cooperation of the Butler County Historical Society and the Cemetery Association." (See here)

What a tragedy! 

"Two itinerant Baptist preachers, famous for their work in the early days of the North West Territory served this church well. Elder William Tyner of Brookville, Indiana, a man "of rare worth and a natural born orator" moderated the first meeting of the Church in the cabin of John Morris. That July day Elder Tyner rode horse-back through the dense forest up along the White Water River to the mouth of Big Cedar Creek up that creek, across a divide to Indian Creek. While Elder Tyner was watering his horse in Big Cedar Creek, he saw an Indian with drawn bow on opposite bank, with arrow pointed at Tyner's heart. Elder Tyner stared "for an eternity" before the Indian lowered his bow andmelted into the forest. Elder Thompson living near Lebanon, Ohio moderated many meetings; the most famous one being in early 1829 when the congregation voted to build the present brick meeting house. Elder Thompson was riding home with his family after burying his father in Indian Creek Cemetery, when his horse was swept away by the flood waters of the swollen Big Miami River." (here)

There is no doubt that Elder Thompson had his hand in splitting this church and forcing its closing. He also did the same in other churches. What an infamy! What an epitaph!

How Long Is The "Coming" of Christ?

When was the first "coming" of Christ fulfilled? The day of his conception in the womb by the Holy Spirit? The day he came forth from the womb? Or, does his "coming" denote his entire time on earth? If we think of "coming" as initial arrival, then it would most likely refer to his birth from the womb. However, if we think of "coming" as not only "arrival" but as "presence," then his coming the first time would indeed encompass not one instant in the life of Christ but his entire time on earth. There were stages or parts to his "coming," we might say.

When precisely is the second "coming" of Christ? The day when "every eye shall see him?" Or, when the several events connected with his coming are occurring? Is it when he comes in the sky or clouds? Or, is it when he sets his feet upon the earth, upon the Mount of Olives? Or, when he comes in the battle of Armageddon? Again, if we think of "coming" as initial arrival, then it would describe that first part of coming, but if we think of "coming" as not only arrival or advent but as "presence," then his second coming, like his first coming, would indeed encompass not one instant, or one event, but is what takes place over a period of time. 

Jesus' first coming encompassed thirty three plus years. I doubt his second will encompass that much time; However, it will not be a single instant, a single twenty four hour period, but longer. If the day of wrath and great tribulation is his coming, his presence, then it would indeed be several years. In other words, Christ will be "present" in the judgments that will precede his setting foot on the Mount of Olives.

Historically, the coming (parousia) of a king involved many events and stages. 

What think ye?

Restoring Church Singing & Sunday Schools

Did you know that Baptists in the seventeenth century did not have corporate singing? In "Keach and Hymn Singing: The First Worship War Among Baptists, Part 3" (here at founders.org) by Jeff Robinson, we are told of this. He says:

"Keach had become convinced that singing was an holy ordinance of Jesus Christ and, as Crosby, wrote, “laboured earnestly with a great deal of prudence and caution, to convince his people thereof.” Keach believed that the “want of God’s presence” in the churches was in part due to “the neglect of this great duty” of corporate singing."

He cites these words of Keach:

"Reformation, ‘tis evident, is a hard and difficult Work, and ever was; ‘tis no easy thing to restore lost Ordinances, I mean, such as have for many Years been neglected, and strangely corrupted, through that Antichristian Darkness that hath for so many Ages and Generations spread over the Earth…I must confess, I my self, when first God enlightened me into his Truth, was an opposer of this Sacred Ordinance; but it was not for want of Ignorance, and partly through Prejudice, perhaps to such who I esteem, and ever looked upon since that time, a corrupt people in false in their Church-Constitution, and polluted with human Innovation, or Inventions of Men: the abuse of an Ordinance is subject to raise Men's Spirits to a dislike of the thing itself. But, blessed be God, I have, for near twenty Years last past, been fully convinced of the Truth of the Ordinance I now contend for, and have an equal esteem for it, (through Grace) as I have for any other Truth, knowing every Word of God is pure; and have found no little comfort in the practice of it, publickly in the Church, and in private also."

When Sunday Schools began to proliferate among Christian churches in the early nineteenth century, the Hardshells argued that they were "not of God" because they were a "new thing," an "innovation" in Christian doctrine and practice. Not only were they not specifically mentioned in the new testament as existing in the first churches, but they were not in existence among the Baptist churches prior to the nineteenth century. Ergo, they are against the will of God and his word. Of course, neither of these objections or arguments have any weight.

First, in the previous posting on Sunday Schools we showed how they were not new (a thing I have shown in other posts on this subject through the years). That they had been lost, or gone out of existence, for awhile, we do not deny. But, we believe the church restored them in much the same way she restored corporate singing through the efforts of Keach. No doubt many argued against corporate singing for the same reasons as did the Hardshells over Sunday Schools. It is new to sing in church! But, as Keach showed, it was not new. Rather, it had been the ancient practice and needed to be restored. Don't you see?

Jesus Bishop of Souls

The following is taken from "My Daily Bread" which I wrote back in 2007 (See here)

"For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls." (I Peter 2: 25)

Jesus is Lord over all. He is Lord over all or he is not lord at all. He is Lord over the wicked and the righteous. He governs them by his omnipotence and sovereignty. In this sense all creatures are his "servants." But, though he is Lord OVER all, yet not all credit, own or acknowledge his lordship, and fewer still are glad of it.

He is Lord of the believer, however, in a special way. He is especially the savior of believers. "He is the savior of all men, specially of those who believe." (I Timothy 4: 10) He is Lord and Savior of all, but specially of those who believe and trust in him.

The Lord Jesus Christ, in a special way, by his grace, word, and Spirit, rules and reigns in the heart of a believer, imparting by his presence abundant life and everlasting joy.

Christ is the Shepherd of his sheep, his followers, his people. He is called "the great Shepherd of the sheep" (Hebrews 13: 20) and the "chief Shepherd," and once he has taken a sinner under his supervision and care, that sinner is forever safe. They can never stray too far for "his rod and his staff" will hinder it. (Psalm 23: 4)

Bishop of the soul! What a precious thought! He watches over our hearts and minds (if we have committed them to him) and he has become responsible for their safe keeping. He is no ordinary bishop, but the true Archbishop!

Those who are under the care of the great Archbishop are they who "commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator." (I Peter 4: 19)

A faithful shepherd, bishop and creator is Jesus the Lord! He has never lost a single soul committed to his care! (John 6: 38)

Friends, Jesus is precious! He is just what we need. Look at the mess made when people try to be their own saviors, their own soul's keeper and protector! Call out in humble, trusting faith to Jesus and he will come into your soul and dethrone the evil powers that may be ruling there now.

We are "like sheep" who have "gone astray." (Isaiah 53: 6) We are no longer safe, when we are outside the care of this great Shepherd and Archbishop, but are an easy prey to the wolves.

Friend, who is watching over and protecting your soul? Your heart and mind? In whose hand do you trust for safety and salvation?

The scriptures warn of the "evil shepherds." Satan is such an one. He is a liar and comes to men, pretentiously, as a "false shepherd." (See Ezekiel 34 & Jeremiah 50:6) Do not be deceived in this matter. Come to the real shepherd, one who truly leads his people to "green pastures" of salvation and rest.

I have added a link to this Daily Bread blog. There is a morning and evening short study.