Search This Blog

Friday, July 28, 2023

New Gospel or No Gospel

Introductory Essay to John Owen’s Death of Death in the Death of Christ by J. I. Packer[1]

 

This introductory essay is worth every moment the reader will take to digest every thought of the late Dr. J.I. Packer.  In these initial paragraphs Dr. Packer sets the stage by comparing two Gospels.  It is not a comparison of heresy versus orthodoxy, because both “Gospels” have the similar content and words.  The difference lies in what and how the “Gospels” are communicated.  In his own words he writes, “The whole perspective and emphasis of gospel preaching has changed.” This new Gospel has been categorized as “attractional”, “user-friendly”, “relevant”, or “therapeutic”.  I have found that you have to attend or observe services of this type rather than try to categorize them.  But in Dr. Packer’s words they are centred upon this “new Gospel”.  Note Packer’s comparison:

 

“. . . Without realising it, we have during the past century bartered that gospel for a substitute product which, though it looks similar enough in points of detail, is as a whole a decidedly different thing. Hence our troubles; for the substitute product does not answer the ends for which the authentic gospel has in past days proved itself so mighty. 

 

The new gospel conspicuously fails to produce deep reverence, deep repentance, deep humility, a spirit of worship, a concern for the church. Why? We would suggest that the reason lies in its own character and content. It fails to make men God-centred in their thoughts and God-fearing in their hearts because this is not primarily what it is trying to do.One way of stating the difference between it and the old gospel is to say that it is too exclusively concerned to be “helpful” to man—to bring peace, comfort, happiness, satisfaction—and too little concerned to glorify God.

 

The old gospel was “helpful,” too—more so, indeed, than is the new—but (so to speak) incidentally, for its first concern was always to give glory to God. It was always and essentially a proclamation of Divine sovereignty in mercy and judgment, a summons to bow down and worship the mighty Lord on whom man depends for all good, both in nature and in grace. Its centre of reference was unambiguously God.

 

But in the new gospel the centre of reference is man. This is just to say that the old gospel was religious in a way that the new gospel is not. Whereas the chief aim of the old was to teach men to worship God, the concern of the new seems limited to making them feel better. The subject of the old gospel was God and His ways with men; the subject of the new is man and the help God gives him . . ..”

 

As I have attended or watched these “new Gospel” churches I sense I have been drawn into a spiritualized Ted-Talk. However, in Pauline thought there is really just one Gospel.  So, this so-called “new Gospel” is actually no Gospel at all.  Attendees leave psychologically and emotionally pumped up devoid of God-centred thoughts, Christ-centred pursuits, or Word-driven behaviours. 

 

 

 



[1] https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/packer_deathintro.html

Tuesday, June 13, 2023

I Shall Return!

It was several years ago that I stood at the head of a grave. Resting on its supports was the coffin containing the remains of a believer. As in rural Alberta the graveyard was in the proximity of the home farm.  That day as I lifted my head to the horizon, I saw the farm.  This was the farm that the deceased had lived upon all his life.  This was his last home before his death. In a strange sort of way I wondered, because of the promise of the New Heaven and New Earth, would this be the very site where my deceased Brother would return in eschatological glory, at the Second Coming?  That’s a little far out, I know, but still I relished the idea of this notion.  From then on, the burial of a Believer became significant to me.  In hindsight, in my capacity as a Christian minister I was required to conduct many funeral services.  But it was the burial service of a Christian that brought me the happiest of thoughts. “We will return and inhabit this earth, all new and perfect, dwelling in exponential glory.”

 

Now let me make two disclaimers before I continue.  This article does not engage the debate between body burial and cremation.  I assume here that whether the body is embalmed or not, cremated or not, a burial still takes place. Secondly, I assume an eschatological agreement that the final state of redeemed mankind is to be residents of the New Heaven and New Earth.  Although we speak of Heaven as home, it is not.  The current Heaven that is far better and with Christ is a staging area for all who die before the Second Coming, where at that time all of God’s people from all ages will dwell on earth in service to our King.  

 

“And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.’” - Revelation 5:9–10 (ESV).

 

The point I attempt to make is that there is a direct connection between the burial of a Christian and the future hope of the Christian. As Dan Vos writes, “The practice of burial stems from our beliefs in the value of the human body and the reality of the resurrection of the dead.”[1]  Early Christian tradition also adds the important feature (important at least to this discussion) that burial take place on consecrated ground. “After the establishment of the parish as the centre of the Christian spiritual life, the possession of a cemetery, as well as the baptismal font, was a mark of parochial status. During the Middle Ages, religious orders also constructed cemeteries around their churches. Thus, the most common use of churchyards was as a consecrated burial ground known as a graveyard.”[2]

 

Undoubtedly the first Biblical illustration of burial is found in the story of Abraham.  Abraham never owned land in Canaan as his offspring did.  When Sarah died, he acknowledged that to the Hittites. He worked a deal with the Hittites to purchase “for the full price . . . A burying place.” (Genesis 23:9, ESV). One might say that the only land Abraham owned in the Promised Land was a burial plot (Genesis 23:20, ESV).  “Abraham’s purchase of the field and cave meant that his descendants would own this land in perpetuity. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Rebekah, and Leah would later be laid to rest in this cave.” Genesis 23:20 (ESV Study Bible).  Paul writing to the Romans extends that hope of Abraham further, when he writes, “For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith.” Romans 4:13 (ESV).  We can assume then that in the mind of Abraham, he bought Sarah’s burial plot in faith that one day God fulfill His promise to give his descendants, not only the land of Canaan, but the world itself.  S.G. Degraaf notes, “Abraham buried Sarah. For him her grave was a guarantee that his seed would inherit the land and possess it forever. One day Sarah and her children would be glorified there.”

 

The hope of the promise of possessing the land, also is found in a future heir of Abraham, Joseph. We read in Genesis 50:25–26 (ESV): “Then Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, ‘God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here.’ So Joseph died, being 110 years old. They embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.”  Joseph is confident that the God who brought His people to Egypt will most certainly lead them out. When Joseph died his body was embalmed and entombed in a coffin.  Later, after hundreds of years of slavery and oppression, Moses led Israel out of Egypt and we note: “Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear, saying, ‘God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones with you from here.’” - Exodus 13:18–19 (ESV). Later we read in Joshua 24:32 (ESV

 

“As for the bones of Joseph, which the people of Israel brought up from Egypt, they buried them at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money. It became an inheritance of the descendants of Joseph.”

 

It was Shechem where Abraham pitched his tent and built his first altar in the Promised Land and received the first divine promise (Genesis12:6, 7).  It was here that Joseph’s body was buried.  The writer to the Hebrews records:

 

“These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.” - Hebrews 11:13–16 (ESV).

 

Why did Joseph desire to be buried in the Promised Land?  One important reason is that Joseph’s choice of burial site was an act of faith in the promise of God that Abraham’s descendants would possess the land where he had been buried.  But Hebrews 11 expands our understanding to include the reality that the patriarchs believed not only would God give them the land of Canaan but in fact the whole world. Most people read Hebrews 11:13f and think that these men of faith were desirous of heaven — heaven being that intermediate state.  But it is far more likely that the patriarchs were looking for heaven on earth.  Nick Batzig, pastor of Church Creek PCA in Charleston, North Carolina and Associate Editor for Ligonier Ministries, Table Talk, writes: “God promised Abraham land, but--contrary to the opinions of many--this was a promise of the inheritance of the New Heavens and the New Earth that believers get in union with Christ. Abraham actually never inherited any of the land.”[3]

 

Therefore, Joseph set a typological pattern within the Old Testament story of Redemption, to insist his body be buried in the land of promise. Christians therefore can, in faith, seek to be buried in the hope of the promise, that is the earth, which is the Promised Land of the New Covenant believer.  “Burial,” as Batzig affirms, “Is an act of faith” “In short, a burial of the body of a believer is, in the truest sense, the last great act of faith that a believer may exhibit with his or her life.”[4]

 

Now let me be clear: I am not trying to invent or enforce a new doctrine.  Far be it from me to do so.  But I do propose that because of the compelling illustrations from Scripture, combined with the doctrine of the New Heavens and New Earth, there are sufficient implications to encourage a Christian to look upon his or her’s final wishes and affirm that their burial be viewed by friends and family as their final confession of faith.  As said by General MacArthur, “I shall return.”  On Oct. 20, 1944, General Douglas MacArthur waded ashore on Leyte Island in the Philippines and fulfilled his promise to return. General MacArthur’s forces in the Philippines were nearly decimated.  On withdrawing in seeming defeat, he arrived in Australia making his famous declaration: “I came through and I shall return.”  Return he did.  

 

In a sense the act of burial is a declaration, “I shall return.”   It is a final act of faith.  

 

As we place the remains of our loved ones who have died in Christ in the ground, it would be theologically sound, liturgically fitting, and pastorally encouraging to re-iterate this act of faith, “They shall return.” Often the minister’s words go something like this:

 

“Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his great mercy to take unto himself the soul of our dear brother here departed, we therefore commit his body to the ground; earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust; in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life through our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change the body of our low estate that it may be like unto his glorious body, according to the mighty working, whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself.”  

 

Why not consider this amendment?  “. . . in the sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal fellowship with God, when Heaven comes to Earth, when the Christian hope is realized, and “God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. . . . His servants will serve him. They will see his face” (Revelation 21:322:3–4). 2 Peter 3:13 (ESV)[5]tells us that the new heaven and new earth will be “where righteousness dwells.” The creation of the new heavens and new earth brings the promise that God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” (Revelation 21:4).[6]

 

The intermediate state is not our final hope. Our hope is found in the Final State, dwelling with God forever and ever on Earth. Like Abraham and Joseph, we temporarily bequeath our remains to the earth, in burial, believing the promise, “I shall return.”




 

Monday, May 1, 2023

My Shepherd Will Supply My Need

This song based on Psalm 23 is "My Shepherd Will Supply My Need" written by Isaac Watts, who wrote many hymns based on the Psalms.

My Shepherd will supply my need;
Jehovah is His Name;
In pastures fresh He makes me feed
Beside the living stream.
He brings my wand’ring spirit back
When I forsake His ways,
And leads me, for His mercy’s sake,
In paths of truth and grace.

When I walk through the shades of death,
Thy presence is my stay;
A word of Thy supporting breath
Drives all my fears away.
Thy hand, in sight of all my foes,
Doth still my table spread;
My cup with blessings overflows;
Thine oil anoints my head.

The sure provisions of my God
Attend me all my days;
O may Thy house be mine abode,
And all my work be praise!
There would I find a settled rest
While others go and come,
No more a stranger or a guest,
But like a child at home.

This is a beautiful rendition:  https://youtu.be/WTalmqydV2w 



Sunday, April 2, 2023

Palm Sunday, and Why the ‘Date’ Is So Significant

Here is an important observation by Karen Engle, author of the blog by the same title posted on Logos Bible Software Blog. [1]   There is a distinct possibly that we miss the full significance of Palm Sunday when we celebrate as the crowd did. 

Passover has been Judaism’s transformative event ever since. It’s celebrated every year on Nisan 15—falling in March or April on our Gregorian calendars. It was on this date Israel left Egypt and passed through the Red Sea—the date God redeemed the Israelites out of slavery. 

On “the tenth day of this month” (Nisan 10, the first month of the Israelite calendar),  each family was to choose a one-year-old lamb “without blemish” (no defect), bring it into their home, and care for it for five days. On Nisan 14, they were to slaughter it just before sundown and put its blood on the lintel and doorposts of their home

 

Six days before Passover puts Jesus in Bethany on Nisan 9 (Nisan 15 minus 6 days). “The next day” would have been Nisan 10—the same “date” the Israelites were to bring “lambs without blemish” into their homes. Almost 1,500 years after the first Passover in Egypt, Jesus entered Jerusalem on a donkey, on Nisan 10.

 

The people missed the full significance of the circumstances. What they didn’t see was God’s selection of Jesus Christ as the final Passover lamb to be slaughtered.”




__________________________________________

1. https://www.logos.com/grow/palm-sunday-and-why-the-date-is-so-significant/

 

Tuesday, January 31, 2023

Against Autonomy

This is an excellent article.  I’m posting it because it is superior and in accord with a post that I wrote entitled: “ We Are People Who Together Form A Community” that you can read HERE.   

Click on the title to read this article:

Against Autonomy

Monday, January 9, 2023

I’ll Praise the God of Merciful Plight!

This hymn, with an added refrain and verse by Zac Hicks [1] based on Psalm 30:5 & Job 1:21, was originally written by Frances Ridley Havergal in 1879, who is most famous for her hymn, “Take My Life and Let it Be” and "Like A River Glorious". This hymn teaches us that worship is a choice more than a feeling…that the hope of what God has in store is worth holding onto, no matter the circumstances.  [2]

https://youtu.be/86WyqeJL3ew

Light after darkness, gain after loss,
Strength after weakness, crown after cross;
Sweet after bitter, hope after fears,
Home after wandering, praise after tears.

Sheaves after sowing, sun after rain,
Sight after mystery, peace after pain;
Joy after sorrow, calm after blast,
Rest after weariness, sweet rest at last.

Refrain
Weeping may remain for a night
But joy arrives in morning’s new light
I’ll praise the God of merciful plight
Still I will praise him, still I will praise him, my God.

Near after distant, gleam after gloom,
Love after loneliness, life after tomb;
After long agony, rapture of bliss,
Right was the pathway, leading to this.

Refrain

You give and you take away
In darkness still I will say:
“A good God I serve this day.”
Still I will praise you, still I will praise you.

Refrain

___________________________________________________________

1. https://zachicks.com/light-after-darkness/

2. This is from a daily email I receive from Hymn of the Day, January 9, 2023.  https://hymnoftheday.com/


Tuesday, December 20, 2022

We Are People Who Together Form A Community

Some might say that “confession is good for the soul”.  I think that’s right.  Even better is it to say that self-consciousness is good for the soul.  In the words of that stalwart Highland theologian, Robert Burns: “O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!" This forms the context of why I engage in writing this article.  

The calendar has turned on my first year of retirement.  I said to a friend recently that in reflection it appears that I think more as a retired soldier than a retired pastor.  In other words I think my military paradigms were quite active even in pastoral ministry.  Staff at church seemed to see that clearer than I did, especially when they would make sport of my desire for order, precise protocols and decorum.  It also affected the way I viewed the Church and participation within the church (The change in case is intentional.).  When people would float in and out of the local church, even for seemingly logical reasons, it would bother me.  When some abandoned the community in protest (e.g., COVID-19 policies) I was very provoked.  I categorized such fluidity as disloyalty.  Loyalty surfaced as one of my most important ideals.  This conviction became more obvious when I was recently reading, THE PATROL, SEVEN DAYS IN THE LIFE OF A CANADIAN SOLDIER IN AFGHANISTAN by Ryan Flavelle .  He writes, 

 

“At that moment I realized just what an important thing choice is. Not the choice between shopping at Walmart or shopping at Superstore, but the ability to choose whether to participate in things that directly affect your safety. I had given up that right. I was going to get into the back of that LAV, stand air sentry, cross my fingers and toes, and hold on. That was my only choice.

 

The cold, hard reality of military life is that no one makes any effort to treat you as an individual. You are a soldier; that is all. It is refreshing to be reminded that no matter what our third-grade teachers taught us, we are not all unique and delicate flowers; we are people who together form a community . . . In the military we are painfully aware that each one of us is merely a cog in a much larger machine . . . The military doesn’t view us as unique, and it doesn’t need to.”

 

Of course I would err to take Flavelle’s accurate view of military life and apply it directly to Christian communion without some nuancing.  The New Testament certainly acknowledges the individual, individual gifts, individual genders, culture, etc.  But the New Testament also points to community, to oneness, and to one another-ness.  In our culture that emphasizes individuality, freedom, autonomy, etc., we would do well to heed the community aspects to our Christian faith.  Much of the New Testament is written to us in our plurality, not individuality.  The most basic prayer starts, “Our Father . . ..”   

 

Just like it is unique to military life to see the whole as more important than the part, it is also unique to life in the Christian community.  The initiatory act of baptism symbolizes that.  One might wonder if the militant Church on earth wouldn’t be more effective if people would acknowledge that certain individual freedoms are forfeited the moment one becomes part of Christ’s Body. Today we have a weakened Church because everyone wants to be treated as an individual.  Thus they live and make choices mainly on what satisfies their needs and their desires.  It might be a time to make ourselves nothing and see the glorious “larger machine” that we are “merely cogs” within. 

 

I recently overheard a spouse say, “I get to be me!”   Perhaps a better marital ideal is, “I get to be us.”  The same is true for the Church.  So I don’t apologize for my military influence that places loyalty to the Church in such a prominent place.  And if you still float between churches like shopping between Walmart and Superstore, I’m still provoked by your heightened view of your own self-prominence.  


There are good reasons to leave a church.  That discussion is not part this article.  Tim Challies has an excellent Blog on that topic.  Akin to marriage, when we go into a fellowship with the notion that we can remain autonomous and leave when we want to we start at the wrong place.  When we start at the point of “may death do us part” we are on the right path to true Church life.  It is counter-cultural but it is Scriptural: the whole is more important that the sum of its parts.