Are you a good person?
Most of us like to think that we are good people. After all, there are so many other people who are much worse than us. We think we know what is right. We often want to do what is right, but it is hard to do the right thing. Why do we do things that we know are wrong? And why do we feel bad inside when we do things that we know are wrong? How do we measure goodness? And how good is good enough?
The Lord God, who made you and takes care of you, has told us what is right and wrong. One day we will all have to face Him. He will judge everything that we have done, everything that we have said, and even everything that we have thought. Jesus said, “Be ready, for the Son of Man [Jesus Christ] is coming at an hour you do not expect” (Matthew’s gospel, chapter 24, verse 44). How can you be ready? Will you be good enough?
Take a moment to read God’s Ten Commandments:
1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall not make for yourself a carved image – any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
5. Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
10. You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbour’s.
How do you compare to this standard? You might think you can make fun of the standard: “I’ve never coveted anybody’s ox or donkey!” You might think it easy to point to the things that you haven’t done: “I’ve never murdered anyone”. But Jesus taught that the Ten Commandments go much deeper than we imagine. They are as much about our thoughts, our hearts, our attitudes, as they are about what we physically do (if you have a Bible, you can find this in Matthew’s gospel, chapter 5, verses 17-30). Jesus said, “whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment” (Matthew 5.22) and “whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5.28).
No wonder the Bible teaches that “there is none righteous, no, not one” (the letter to the Romans, chapter 3, verse 10). We have all broken the Ten Commandments: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3.23). Is any one of us good enough for God? No!
But that is not the end of the story. Why did God write these Ten Commandments if none of us can keep them? The Bible answers this question. God says that the Ten Commandments – God’s holy law – is our “tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (the letter to the Galatians, chapter 3, verse 24).
How does Jesus Christ fit in, and what does it mean to be justified by faith?
Jesus fits in because “when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (Galatians, chapter 4, verse 4). Jesus Christ, being both God and man, obeyed the law of God perfectly. He lived according to the law, and is the only man who never broke one of God’s Ten Commandments in his thoughts, words, or deeds. Read the accounts of His life in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and you cannot find one instance when He sinned: He was never less than perfect in all that He thought, said and did. But what does that have to do with us?
The Bible teaches that we all have a sinful nature. After all, nobody needs to be taught how to do wrong things – it is the way we are, and we act in accordance with it. But the Bible promises that “through one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous” (Romans 5.19). That verse is talking about Jesus, and means that somehow sinners like us can benefit from the perfect and sinless life that Jesus lived.
If we are to face God in judgment and not be damned for our sins – condemned for all the things that break God’s law – then we need the holiness and perfection of Jesus. This is what it means to be justified: for God to declare us to be right in his sight. For that we need a perfect righteousness. How do we get this righteousness? Through faith in Jesus Christ, his righteousness is put to our account. Then, “justified by faith, we have peace with God” (Romans 5.1). Peace with God! If your conscience tells you that you have done things wrong, and must one day face God, what would you not give to know peace with God?
Don’t try and have peace with God by trying to be better, by trying to keep God’s Ten Commandments better. We cannot keep God’s law: “No one is justified by the law in the sight of God” (Galatians 3.11). That sends us to Jesus Christ for the answer to the question, “What must I do to be saved?” God’s answer is this: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.” This salvation is “by grace . . . through faith” (Ephesians 2.8). “By grace”: it is the gift of God, and not something that we can earn or deserve. “Through faith”: repenting of our sins, and trusting completely and only in Jesus Christ. He lived the life that we should have lived, but could not. He died the death that we deserved, being punished by God for the sins of His people.
Examine your life, examine your heart. Consider the standard of God’s Ten Commandments, and compare yourself to it. Listen to your conscience. Then repent of your sin, and ask God to save you through Jesus Christ.
Gardiner Spring on “Christian Character” available again
Gardiner Spring’s classic work on The Distinguishing Traits of Christian Character is one of the most careful and discerning short works on the marks of true Christianity. Clearly standing in the tradition of Edwards’ Religious Affections and Alexander’s Thoughts on Religious Experience it remains an outstanding treatment of those things which in and of themselves are no sure indications of having passed from death to life, and those things which invariably mark, in some degree, a true child of God.
Solid Ground Christian Books have recently republished this title. It has apparently been edited and updated. To be frank, that does not always improve some of these classics, and it is to be hoped that – in this instance – the editor has done less harm and more good. As long as all is intact, this would prove an excellent addition to the library of pastors who do not have their own copy, and a very useful means of men and women examining their own souls to know whether or not they have a true hope of heaven.
(By the way, Spring is one of those authors of whom – with my limited knowledge – I would presently say, “If he wrote it, you will not suffer by reading it.”)
“Offer now your gift of praise”
Ephraim 7 7. 7 7
Offer now your gift of praise
On this glorious day of days,
Thank God for his boundless love:
Raise your voice to heaven above.
To your Lord a tribute bring:
Praise his Name, give thanks and sing.
On his blessings ever dwell –
Know that Jesus loves you well.
Bow before his throne of grace;
Gaze in wonder on his face;
Let his love your song inspire:
Praise Christ with the heavenly choir.
Shelter now beneath his wing;
Joyful hallelujahs sing.
Having died to bring you peace
Will not Christ your joys increase?
Thank him for his Word of peace.
Glorify his righteousness.
All your vows of love renew,
Knowing that he first loved you.
©JRW
See all hymns and psalms.
Things various
A few bits from around the web:
- Parents, obey your children? Al Mohler draws on and responds to an interesting article about the portrayal of parents generally, and – specifically – their relationship to their children, in popular children’s literature.
- John Piper’s call to the ministry. Justin Taylor gives the details at some length.
- English Language Day. Actually, this was yesterday (13 October). Is this an American thing? Surely not! Still, I don’t know how else I would have found out about it. Apparently, it marks the date in 1362 when a Chancellor opened Parliament with a speech in English. Neat.
- Er . . . that’s it, actually. I thought I had more interesting things in the reader than that, but it’s funny how the discipline of reading and weeding convinces one that perhaps 75% or more of the stuff that flows down the feeds is tripe to be bypassed.
Simeon’s wisdom
Sean Lucas has been reading about Charles Simeon. Here are some pearls of wisdom on evil speaking:
The longer I live, the more I feel the importance of adhering to the rules which I have laid down for myself in relation to such matters.
1st To hear as little as possible what is to the prejudice of others.
2nd To believe nothing of the kind till I am absolutely forced to it.
3rd Never to drink into the spirit of one who circulates an ill report.
4th Always to moderate, as far as I can, the unkindness which is expressed toward others.
5th Always to believe, that if the other side were heard, a very different account would be given of the matter….
The more prominent any person’s character is, the more likely he is to suffer in this way; there being in the heart of every man, unless greatly subdued by grace, a pleasure in hearing anything which may sink others to his level, or lower them in the estimation of the world. We seem to ourselves elevated in proportion as others are depressed.
. . . and on struggles with the heart:
You see yourself guilty of sins which preclude a hope of forgiveness. Your friends have endeavored to shew you that you judge yourself too hardly. In this they have erred for, if they have succeeded, they have given you a peace founded on your own worthiness, a peace that would last no longer than till the next temptation arose in your mind….if they have not succeeded, they have only confirmed you in your views.
I say to you the reverse. Your views of yourself (your own sinfulness) though they may be erroneous, are not one atom too strong. Your sinfulness far exceeds all that you have stated, or have any conception of. ‘Your heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it?’
But I have an effectual remedy for them all–’the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.’ I grant that you are lost and utterly undone. So are all mankind–some for gross sins–some for impenitence–some for other sins. You are lost for the very sins you mention, hardness of heart, indifference, etc…
Do this then, take a book as large as any that is in the Bank of England. Put down all the sins of which either conscience or a morbid imagination can accuse you. Fear not to add to their number all that Satan himself can suggest.
And this I will do. I will put on the creditor side ‘the unsearchable riches of Christ’ and will leave you to draw the balance.
David Brainerd revisited
Justin Taylor draws our attention to two new biographies of David Brainerd.
The first is by Vance Christie, published by Christian Focus, and seems to be a more typical, appreciative biography. John MacArthur gives a glowing endorsement. Expect to be instructed and moved.
The second, by John Grigg, is from OUP, and seems to be of the kind beloved by many modern evangelicals who feel that they are the first to see things clearly, that previous efforts were essentially propaganda, and that our alleged idols have feet of clay. So Brainerd was a sinner. Old news. Doubtless this will be a stimulating (and expensive) purchase. I hope it is as profitable as it is provocative.
Faith and adoption
Justin Taylor gives us a good illustration from John Piper about the God-glorifying nature of faith.
C. J. Mahaney points us to John Owen and J. I. Packer to help us appreciate adoption.
John Newton and John Ryland
Another nugget of information, this time from the John Newton Project. John Ryland Jr. was one of William Carey’s ‘ropeholders’, beloved friend of John Sutcliff, Andrew Fuller, Samuel Pearce, and others of their ilk and kidney. John Newton knew him well (Ryland’s friend John Sutcliff was a pastor in Olney itself, and their paths seem to have crossed often) and wrote to him regularly. And now for the news:
For many years Dr Grant Gordon has been collecting and editing Newton’s letters to John Ryland Junior [1753-1825]. Due out in November, watch for Wise Counsel: John Newton’s letters to John Ryland Jr., Grant Gordon, ed., Banner of Truth Trust, ISBN 978-1-84971-053-5. www.banneroftruth.org. Many of these letters have never been published before. Most will be new to most people.
When Newton entered the ministry at Olney, he met the Ryland Baptist family of Northampton. John Ryland Jr was way ahead of most of us – he had translated the entire Greek New Testament by the age of 8! Newton had a very special concern for young people and took him under his wing.
His early correspondence with Ryland began “Dear lad”. Topics ranged from serious discussions on doctrine to very specific guidance on John Jr’s marriage proposal, punctuated with friendly banter. “While you are thinking of marriage’, his mentor wrote, “I am threatened with a divorce – from my beloved Olney.” Newton shared his own pastoral experience and deliberations with the youngster, inviting him to stay at the vicarage.
As Ryland later carried the responsibilities of a pastor Newton reminded him: “There is no school like the School of the Cross. There men are made wise unto salvation, wise to win souls. In a crucified Saviour are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. And the tongue of the truly learned, that can speak a word in season to them that are weary, is not acquired like Greek and Latin by reading great books – but by self-knowledge and soul exercises. To learn navigation by the fireside will never make a man an expert mariner. He must do his business in great waters. And practice will bring him into many situations of which general theory could give him no conception.”
Newton continued his fatherly role to the point where he could scarcely see to write in his old age. By then Ryland was President of Bristol Baptist College. “My dear friend”, Newton began in 1801, “I am 75 years, 3 months and ten days old. My eyes fail, my engagements increase, my ability to manage them decline. I have been a voluminous correspondent, but I cannot write as formerly. Yet I must chat a little with my old friend, before I quite give up. If, as is possible, this should be my last letter to you, keep it as a memorial of the love I bear you, and of my thankful remembrance of past times, when being within a few miles, we could see each other often, take sweet counsel together, and go the House of our God in company”.
Newton’s practical and Biblical guidance in these letters epitomize the role of spiritual leadership given in Ephesians 4:12 “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ”. You will be in for a rich treat, and for much “wise counsel”, if you get a copy of this new publication, sensitively edited by Grant Gordon, himself a pastor for many years.
Spurgeon’s forgotten sermons
If you appreciate Charles Haddon Spurgeon and have profited from the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit series, you are likely to be interested in this: a volume of 45 Spurgeon sermons from DayOne that might well have constituted the continuation of the series, had it been resumed after WWI. The blurb says:
Here are 45 sermons which were awaiting publication in the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit when it came to an abrupt end in 1917.
The 63 volumes and 3563 sermons of Spurgeon’s New Park Street and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpits were a remarkable achievement, and it was only on account of the shortage of paper and metal caused by the First World War that publication ceased on 10th May 1917.
Many hundreds of sermons were ready and waiting for their weekly publication and notices in the last two sermons indicated that it was the intention to resume publication once peace had been restored. However, only twenty hitherto unpublished sermons were to appear in 1922 in a volume entitled ‘Able to the uttermost’.
It is the purpose of this volume to bring to light the sermons which probably would have appeared in te remainder of Volume 63 and at the start of volume 64 of the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, sermons which originally appeared only in magazine format from 1877 to 1881.
Spurgeon appreciators and afficionados, read a taster or get purchasing!
The preacher’s voice
What looks like an insightful and helpful series by John Catanzaro on caring for one’s voice. He puts care of the voice in the context of one’s general well-being, and does not neglect the broader aspects of the issue.
Those interested in following up this matter might also appreciate Mike Mellor’s Look After Your Voice. Older pastoral theologies, especially those which have some focus on the act of preaching, often give good advice along these lines as well.
Addressing unbelievers
Michael McKinley at 9Marks offers some provocative thoughts on how preachers should address unbelievers present in the congregation:
Address “non-Christians” directly in your sermon, absolutely. But do so in a way that helps people identify whether or not they fit in that category. . . . You can think of other natural ways to help your hearer define what it means to be a Christian by the way you address them. Just don’t call them a “non-Christian”.
The Puritans or the Bible?
Michael Haykin has an interesting and brief post about why he does not feel slavishly bound to follow the Puritans in everything, despite his very high regard for them:
Why do I love the Puritans? Well, it is because of their robust soteriology that is faithful to the Word of God, their awesome biblical piety, and their keen ecclesiology. And after all, my seventeenth-century Baptist forebears were Puritans. But, and this is why we study history, they and their age are not the standard by which we measure biblical fidelity. That belongs to one source: the very one that they loved and sought to uphold—Holy Scripture. It alone is the canon and rule of faith.
So, there are some things in which I do not hesitate not to follow the Puritans. In the big picture, they are small things, but they illustrate that for me Scripture alone can bind my conscience. I wear a wedding ring on my left hand’s ring finger—the Puritans rejected the use of such because of the pagan origins of wedding rings. I do not dispute the historicity of those origins. But it is more important for me to bear witness to the permanence and desirability of marriage in our neo-pagan environment than protest against Norse paganism!
Or with regard to the keeping of days, I find it odd that in a world that is increasingly out of sync with the Gospel story and is utterly ignorant of some of the key events of that story that some of our churches, who would regard themselves as modelling Puritanism for the twenty-first century, fail to take advantage of the traditional church year that recalls Advent, Palm Sunday, Pentecost or Trinity Sunday. Would I re-introduce these days of remembrance into Baptist life? Yes, I would, for they help to remind us of critical aspects of the Gospel. Trinity Sunday, for example, would be an excellent antidote to Baptist churches in which the Trinity is never the subject of a sermon, year in, year out. And Pentecost would help some Baptists overcome their fear of the Holy Spirit!
As you can see, the argument is that he does not need to follow the Puritans where Scripture does not ultimately bind his conscience. I would absolutely agree. However, it is interesting that the piece ends with his eschewing the Puritan pattern of not ‘keeping days’ i.e. following the church calendar.
Unfortunately, at this point the logic of the piece seems to fail. Surely not observing the days of the church calendar is not about Puritanism or the lack of it, but does have to do with biblical fidelity? Why did the Puritans and others like them (before and after) not observe these days? Was it not, at least in part, because they found no commands in the Bible to observe any high days of the “traditional church year”, but rather to observe the Lord’s day and – with varying regularity – that repeated ordinance mandated by Jesus, namely, the Lord’s supper? Is this not part of their “biblical piety” and “keen ecclesiology”?
This note is not an argument for or against the keeping of days, although I myself would tend against it; nor am I saying that a better understanding of the Trinity and less “fear” of the Holy Spirit would be bad things. But, if we are going to say that we follow Scripture first and fundamentally, the issue is not whether the Puritans were right or wrong, or whether their context demanded different applications to ours, but whether or not the Bible actually speaks to the issue in the first place. If it does, reaction (to anything) or tradition (good or bad) is not the issue.
The Westminster Conference 2009: “Calvin, Geneva and Revival”
The Westminster Conference for 2009 – “Calvin, Geneva and Revival” – will take place later this year on Tuesday 8th and Wednesday 9th December at the Whitefield Memorial Church in Tottenham Court Road, London. The brochure will be mailed out shortly, but you can download a pdf copy here (or click the picture on the right) which can be printed out.
The schedule for the conference is as follows, God willing:
- John Calvin’s agenda: issues in the separation with Rome (Garry Williams)
- Calvin as commentator and theologian (Don Carson)
- 1859 – a year of grace (Stephen Clark)
- Elizabeth and Calvin (Robert Oliver)
- Darwin before and after (Ken Brownell)
- The Moravians and missionary passion (Bruce Jenkins)
Polanski and moral judgment
Three interesting pieces on the Roman Polanski case from the Spectator, Al Mohler and Gene Veith. Hollywood’s shifting morality gets appropriately short shrift in all three.
Critiquing criticism
Samuel Johnson weighs in:
Criticism is a study by which men grow important and formidable at a very small expense. The power of invention has been conferred by nature upon few, and the labor of learning those sciences, which may by mere labor be obtained, is too great to be willingly endured; but every man can exert such judgment as he has upon the works of others; and he whom nature has made weak, and idleness keeps ignorant, may yet support his vanity by the name of a critic.
I hope it will give comfort to great numbers who are passing through the world in obscurity, when I inform them how easily distinction may be obtained. All the other powers of literature are coy and haughty, they must be long courted, and at last are not always gained; but Criticism is a goddess easy of access and forward of advance, who will meet the slow, and encourage the timorous; the want of meaning she supplies with words, and the want of spirit she recompenses with malignity.
Words to be warned by. That last sentence applies to more than critics of books.
HT: Challies.
Celebrity Christianity
Careful words of caution from Gary Hendrix on celebrity Christianity.
Trained to laugh
This is an interesting post from Greg Gilbert highlighting an address by John Piper in which, because they had been primed to laugh over the course of the previous hours of speaking, his opening confession of sin (quirky, but not inappropriate in the context) produced gales of laughter from the audience (I think it is an audience, and not a congregation per se). Indeed, the more Piper protests his seriousness, the funnier the audience seems to find him.
Gilbert does not so much draw conclusions as ask questions, and they are good ones.
The duty and privilege of public prayer
My father sends me a little packet of gold dust gathered from Thomas Cobbet, Gospel Incense (Pittsburgh, PA: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1993). This is Cobbet’s fourth reason to enforce the duty of public prayer.
How many of us who act as the mouthpiece of the congregation, or how many of the congregation themselves, entering into the praises and petitions being uttered, appreciate either the great task being undertaken, the immense privileges God extends to us, or the unity of mind and heart, and oneness of spirit that ought to be expressed in public praying? If these things were better understood it would be very difficult to suppress the heartfelt ‘Amen’ that rightly belongs to such public prayers.
Cobbet says that
public prayer is a public profession and confession of God, of the only true God and that one mediator, Jesus Christ; yea, of the oneness of the saints with each other in the same Father and Saviour.
Nor is the least honour to the Lord, as a great King, to have so many several companies of subjects waiting on him with petition for his royal favour; it is a holy joint homage and service for many to join as one man in prayer. Calling upon the name of the Lord, and serving him with one shoulder, are joined. Public prayer is a public profession and expression of one and the same faith, of many in one and the same Father, in one and the same Mediator of the covenant, and in one and the same covenant of grace; it is a joint cry of one and the same spirit, in and from many children’s hearts, calling one Abba Father; it is a common meeting of the several desires of several good hearts in this one common centre. It is a holy burning-glass, wherein the several bright and warm rays of the faith of many suppliants being in an holy wise contracted in one point, breaks forth into a holy fire of love expressions to the Lord, and their own and others souls’ welfare; it is a joint outcry, by reason of a serious sense of the same grievances of many; if others’ sorrows, sufferings, wants, burdens, be not the same with thine or mine, yet in praying this, we make each others’ ails ours, as they do makes ours theirs. We come to pray in public with variety of cases differing from each other in sundry respects; but in public prayer each one’s soul is put, as it were, in another’s stead. Public prayer is a common cry made out by the joint consent of this or that embodied people against some common enemies to their blessed King, his crown, and his dignity. Public prayer is a public condemnation, therefore, voiced by our own mouths against any private discords and divisions, if any such should be amongst us. (59-60)
The earnest man preaching in earnest
Eddie Goodwin at Ardent Cries provides a helpful snippet from John Broadus, as quoted by Alex Montoya:
Some men by nature are shy, timid, and inhibited with regard to their feelings. Unfortunately, our intellectual and reclusive seminary environment appeals to this temperament. In addition, our fear of appearing overemotional, manipulative and nonintellectual makes us want to subdue any manifestation of emotion, excitement, or pathos in our preaching. One’s nature has as much to do with our style of preaching. No one need despair, however. Just read what John Broadus said more than a century ago, which I still believe holds true today:
The chief requisite to an energetic style is an energetic nature. There must be vigorous thinking, earnest if not passionate feeling, and the determined purpose to accomplish some object, or the man’s style will have not true, exalted energy. It is in this sense emphatically true that an orator is born, not made. Without these qualities one may give valuable instruction; without them one might preach what silly admirers call “beautiful sermons”; but if a man has no force of character, a passionate soul, he will never be really eloquent. There are, however, timid and sensitive men who, when practice has given them confidence and occasion calls out their powers, exhibit far more masterful nature than they ever imagined themselves to possess.” (pp.16-17)
May God grant to those who preach souls so taken up with the truth that the heat as well as the light spills over in our pulpit labours.
The deacon a true servant
A helpful post by Russell Moore on the nature and purpose of the diaconal office.
Having your pastoral training cake and eating it
A good call from Al Mohler in many respects:
Nevertheless, count me as one seminary president who believes that the local church is even more important to the education of the pastor. The local church should see theological education as its own responsibility before it partners with a theological seminary for concentrated studies. The seminary can provide a depth and breadth of formal studies–all needed by the minister–but it cannot replace the local church as the context where ministry is learned most directly.
At the same time, I cannot help feeling that Dr Mohler is far more persuasive about the centrality of the church in this regard than he is about the legitimacy of the seminary.
Church membership
Kevin DeYoung has been chuntering about church membership here and here, with R. Scott Clark chipping in also. For various reasons, some of which are implied or described in these posts, membership is often a real issue for many Christians today, and many pastors seeking to be faithful to the revelation of Christ’s will for his church have had to deal with men and women who – more or less aggressively, and with better or worse grounds – have been troubled or offended by the notion and the practice that works out of it. The sense that being part of Christ’s body brings with it obligations and responsibilities as well as blessings and privileges (some falling into both categories simultaneously) is foreign to many today. The outworked reality of the body of Christ is quite foreign to many professing saints.
Nevertheless, the New Testament requires of all Christians a formal, open, solemn, voluntary and enduring commitment to the Lord Jesus Christ, to his truth, and to his church. Such a commitment ordinarily requires church membership in a local church for at least the following Scriptural reasons:
- Fulfilment of Christ’s great commission requires church membership. According to that commission (Mt 28.18-20) there is an inseparable connection between making disciples, baptising them and teaching them. The apostles implemented this commission by gathering baptised disciples into local churches. It was in local churches that baptised disciples were taught all that Christ commanded (Acts 2.38-42; Ti 2.1-10). With the uncertain exception of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8.36-39), the New Testament knows nothing of believing men and women who are not members of local churches.
- The New Testament presents the local church as a distinct group of individuals with certain characteristics. The local church could be counted (Acts 2.41-42; 4.4); be added to (Acts 2.47; 5.14); be called upon to choose leaders and representatives from among themselves (Acts 6.1-6; 2Cor 8.18-19, 23; Acts 15.22); be gathered together officially (Acts 14.27; 15.22); carry out church discipline by vote (Mt 18.17; 1Cor 5.4, 13; 2Cor 2.6); and, observe the Lord’s supper as a corporate assembly (1Cor 11.17-20, 33-34).
- Obedience to Christ’s command to observe the Lord’s supper requires church membership. Since all believing men and women are required by Christ to observe the Lord’s supper (Lk 22.19; 1Cor 11.23-26), and since it is clearly a local church ordinance (1Cor 11.17-18, 33-34, c.f. 1Cor 1.1-2), it necessarily follows that all Christians must belong to a local New Testament church in order to partake Scripturally.
Church membership, with all its blessings and duties, is a matter of submission to the Lord Jesus Christ as the living and ruling Head of the Church, and the demonstration of obedience to his will revealed in the Word of God. In addition, it brings blessing to our own souls and to those of others.
Simplicity in worship
The Thirsty Theologian (HT: Nathan Bingham) provides an excerpt from Leland Ryken’s book, Worldly Saints, showing the Puritan’s understanding of simplicity in worship:
[T]he Puritans simplified church architecture and furnishings. They took images and statues out of churches. They replaced stone alters with communion tables. The multiroom floor plan became a single, rectangular room. The walls were painted white. The physical objects that would have caught one’s eye upon entering a Puritan church were a high central pulpit with a winding stairway to it, a Bible on a cushion on a ledge of the pulpit, a communion table below the pulpit, and an inconspicuous baptismal font.
All this simplicity should not be interpreted as an attempt to avoid symbolism. It was the symbol of Puritan worship, and it was a richly multiple symbol. Here in visual form was the Puritan aversion to idols and human intervention between God and people. Here was a sign of humility before God and His Word. Here was a sign of the essentially inward and spiritual nature of worship. Here was a reminder that God cannot be confined to earthly and human conceptions, that he is transcendent and sovereign. By calling their buildings “meeting houses,” moreover, Puritans stressed the domestic aspect of worship as a spiritual family meeting with their heavenly father.
This triumph of simplicity was not necessarily unaesthetic. The simple is a form of beauty as well as the ornate. Horton Davis calls the simple beauty of Puritan church architecture “a study in black and white etching, rather than the colored and multi-textured appearances of Anglican . . . churches.” A study of Puritan vocabulary shows that “naked” was one of their positive words when applied to worship. In the Puritan Church, the individual worshiper stood “naked” before the light and purity of God’s word and presence. An authority on church architecture writes about Puritan churches, “Clean, well-lighted, they concentrated on the essentials of Puritan worship, the hearing of God’s Word, with no distractions.”
This is a delightful description of what I consider to be something akin to the ideal environment for new covenant worship (sans winding staircases and the like, and certainly involving a proper baptistry rather than a font). Contrary to those (on various sides of various divides) who are getting hung up on the cultivation of atmosphere and the employment of ornate liturgies (and, yes, I know that at that point I am going outside the immediate scope of the quote), there was a development of thought and practice in the decades following the Reformation, and this was part of the result. It is the practical effect of the conviction that the most important thing in worship is God himself, and that we desire no stimulants that might replicate some of the subjective effects of the presence of God without knowing its reality.
