Money From Nothing

By R.C. Sproul Jr. 8/1/2009

     I’m connected to royalty. Granted, it’s a rather thin point of union. In less than six degrees, though through enough marriage links that there is no legal tie, I am connected with the king of the tropical island, Yap. Yap is best known not for its sandy beaches nor its pineapple harvest, but for its money. They do not traffic there in sea shells. Neither is their money pure gold. Instead their coinage is great wheel-shaped stones that are hollow in the middle, some as tall as a coconut tree. What can we learn from this about the people of Yap? First, that they are not given to hasty exchanges. It takes a commitment to trade goods and services for stones. As cumbersome as barter can be, it’s likely more easy than rolling a ton of rock down to the local bank. Second, while neither thieves nor robbers are apt to make off with the booty, it is likewise likely that there isn’t a great deal of foreign trade. That is, not many outside of Yap would want this money.

     You can discern a great deal about a given people by studying their money. These United States, for roughly three fourths of our history, used gold for money. And we prospered like no other country before us. Granted, as the years went on, the connection between paper dollars and the gold that was supposed to be behind them grew more and more tenuous. Nevertheless, we used to be able to say that this thing or that was “solid as a dollar.” What we meant was that it was as solid as the gold behind a dollar. It could be counted on.

     It was Nixon who fully and finally made the greenback truly a green back, that is, backed only by the ink with which it was printed. Since that time, our money has been as dishonest and unstable as we are. Now our money is debt backed by debt. Federal Reserve notes are not worth the paper they’re printed on. In more recent years we’ve gone high tech in our dishonesty. Paper “money” represents a tiny portion of the “money” we use every day. Instead our money today consists in the ethereal world of cyberspace as a simple collection of zeroes and ones, all of which in the end is worth nothing but zeroes.

     In a perverse way, our folly makes perfect sense. That is, our understanding of wealth and money matches up nicely with how we view the whole universe. We live in a culture that believes it lives in a universe that just popped into existence. Why should not the god of our age, the state, pop more wealth into existence? If everything came from nothing, why not just make more? The tables turn on us, however, when we realize that’s exactly what we have — nothing — and mountains of it.

     We in the church have drunk too deep of the “wisdom” of the world. We not only join in the feeding frenzy at the trough of the nanny state, but we spend our hours bickering over this or that policy proposal. If we are Democrats, then we hate the previous president who created money from nothing. If we are Republicans, we hate the current president for doing the same. We watch the headlines, putting our fingers to the wind, and sell each other on sundry schemes for profiting on the coming economic meltdown.

     What we’re supposed to be doing, however, is seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. What we’re supposed to be doing is simple enough — we’re supposed to be working. We’re supposed to be faithfully exercising dominion, bringing all things under subjection, ruling over all things. We’re not supposed to chase lying money but to do honest work. The wisest man, outside of our Lord, who ever lived told us: “Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do. Let your garments always be white. Let not oil be lacking on your head. Enjoy life with the wife whom you love” (Eccl. 9:7–9a). This is honest living.

     There is nothing new under the sun. The world around us, as it always does, is self-destructing. It is has built its culture on sand. And as the foundations of the city of man begin to crack, our hearts are troubled because we have forgotten where our citizenship lies. By all means we ought to pray for the peace of Babylon. By all means we ought to be a prophetic voice to the world around us. But, in the end, we do all of this from a position of peace. We are not only a people of unfathomable wealth but are immutably so. Our treasure is in heaven where it cannot be devalued. We have been given the pearl of great price, which is worth more than all the wealth in the world, whether it be measured by round, hollow stones or by trillions of dollars. Our wealth is not backed by the Federal Reserve. It is not backed by gold. Our currency is the Rock of Offense.

     We are all connected to royalty, immediately. We are the bride of the King. His kingdom knows no end. And we reign with Him, seated in the heavenly realms.

Will Man Rob God?

By R.C. Sproul 8/1/2009

     In the last book of the Old Testament, God spoke through the prophet Malachi. He raised a provocative question: “Will man rob God?” This is somewhat startling because it suggests something that on the surface would appear to be impossible. How could anybody rob God of anything? Does it mean that we storm the ramparts of heaven and break into the inner sanctum of the divine treasury and help ourselves to things that God alone possesses? Such a thing is manifestly impossible. The strongest robber in the world could never scale the heights of heaven and defile the possessions of an omnipotent God, and so the very idea of robbing God seems absurd. Yet God gives answer to this question immediately dispelling any absurdity connected with it. He explains pointedly how indeed it is possible for human creatures to be guilty of theft against God. He answers his question, “Will man rob God?” saying, “Yet you are robbing me.” The Israelite response is: “How have we robbed you?” To which God replies, “In your tithes and contributions” (Malachi 3:8). God announces that to withhold the full measure of the tithe that He requires from His people is to be guilty of robbing God Himself. Because of this, He pronounces a curse upon the whole nation and commands them afresh to bring to Him all of the tithe.

     When we think of tithing in Old Testament categories, we understand that the requirement involves returning to God the first fruits of one’s prosperity. We are required to give ten percent of our gross annual income or gain. If a shepherd’s flock produced ten new lambs, the requirement was that one of those lambs be offered to God. This offering is from the top. It is not an offering that is given after other expenses are met or after other taxes have been paid.

     Recently, I read an article that gave an astonishing statistic that I find difficult to believe is accurate. It declared that of all of the people in America who identify themselves as evangelical Christians, only four percent of them return a tithe to God. If that statistic is accurate, it means that ninety-six percent of professing evangelical Christians regularly, systematically, habitually, and impenitently rob God of what belongs to Him. It also means that ninety-six percent of us are for this reason exposing ourselves to a divine curse upon our lives. Whether this percentage is accurate, one thing is certain — it is clear that the overwhelming majority of professing evangelical Christians do not tithe.

     This immediately raises the question: “Why?” How is it possible that somebody who has given his life to Christ can withhold their financial gifts from Him? I have heard many excuses or explanations for this. The most common is the assertion that the tithe is part of the Old Testament law that has passed away with the coming of the New Testament. This statement is made routinely in spite of the complete lack of New Testament evidence for it. Nowhere in the New Testament does it teach us that the principle of the tithe has been abrogated. The New Testament does teach us, however, that the new covenant is superior to the old covenant. It is a covenant that gives more blessings to us than the old covenant did. It is a covenant that with its manifold blessings imposes greater responsibilities than the Old Testament did. If anything, the structure of the new covenant requires a greater commitment to financial stewardship before God than that which was required in the old covenant. That is to say, the starting point of Christian giving is the tithe. The tithe is not an ideal that only a few people reach but rather should be the base minimum from which we progress.

     Church history also bears witness that many in the early church did not consider the tithe as having been abrogated in the new covenant. One of the earliest (turn of the second century) extrabiblical documents that survives to this day is the book of the The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis, and Commentary. The Didache gives practical instruction for Christian living. In the Didache, the principle of the giving of the first fruits or the tithe is mentioned as a basic responsibility for every Christian.

     A second argument that people give to avoid the tithe is that they “cannot afford it.” What that statement really means is that they cannot pay their tithe and pay all the other expenses they have incurred. Again, in their minds the tithe is the last resort in the budget. Their giving to God is something that is at the bottom of their list of priorities. It’s a weak argument before God to say, “Lord, I didn’t tithe because I couldn’t afford it” — especially when we consider that the poorest among us has a higher standard of living than ninety-nine percent of the people who have ever walked on the face of the earth.

     There are many more excuses that people give to avoid this responsibility, yet the New Testament tells us: “Let the thief no longer steal” (Eph. 2:28a). If we have been guilty of stealing from God in the past by withholding our tithe from Him, that behavior must cease immediately and give way to a resolution to begin tithing at once, no matter what it costs. It’s an interesting phenomenon in the life of the church, that people who in 1960 gave a dollar to the offering plate every week, still give that same dollar today. Everything else in their living costs has been adjusted to inflation except their giving. We also have to remind ourselves that if we give gifts to God, we cannot call them tithes if these gifts fall beneath the level of ten percent.

     One of the sad realities of failure to tithe is that in so doing we not only are guilty of robbing God, but we also rob ourselves of the joy of giving and of the blessings that follow from it. I have yet to meet a person who tithes who has expressed to me regret for being one who tithes. On the contrary, I hear from them not a sense of judgment towards those who don’t give but rather a sense of compassion toward them. Frequently, I hear tithers saying, “People who don’t tithe just don’t know what they’re missing.” It is a cliché and a truism that you can’t out-give God. That statement has become a cliché because it is so true. In the text in Malachi, we find something exceedingly rare coming from the lips of God. Here God challenges His people to put Him to a test: “Put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need” (3:10). Have you put God to that test? Have you tried Him to see if He will not open heaven itself and empty His own treasuries upon you? We need to stop robbing Him and thus receive from Him the blessing that He promises.

Robert Charles Sproul, 2/13/1939 – 12/14/2017 was an American theologian, author, and ordained pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America. Dr. R.C. Sproul was founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian education and discipleship organization located near Orlando, Fla. He was also copastor of Saint Andrew’s Chapel in Sanford, Fla., chancellor of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Dr. Sproul has contributed dozens of articles to national evangelical publications, has spoken at conferences, churches, and schools around the world, and has written more than one hundred books. He also served as general editor of the Reformation Study Bible.

God Loves a Cheerful Giver

By James Harvey 8/1/2009

     I love the movie Chariots of Fire. Now over twenty-five years old, the movie remains a compelling testimony of God blessing the faithful use of our gifts and talents. The film chronicles the life of Eric Liddell, a Scottish missionary who was an Olympic-caliber sprinter. At one point in the movie Eric discusses his love of running with his sister Jennie. She is concerned that running is interfering with his call to the mission field. Juxtaposing his own sense of purpose to serve with his love of running, he says to Jennie: “I believe that God made me for a purpose, but He also made me fast, and when I run, I feel His pleasure.” When we use the gifts God gives us for the purpose He intends, we do indeed feel His pleasure. Eric Liddell was made to run. We have been made — made new in Christ (2 Cor 5:17) — to give. When we use our money as God intends, giving a generous portion to His kingdom work regularly, we will feel God’s pleasure because we are doing what we are made to do. When we feel pleasure in giving, we will be cheerful givers. Paul tells us that God loves a cheerful giver. The beauty of the gospel is that God supplies the grace to achieve in us the very thing that He loves. God provides grace to us that we might give cheerfully, feeling His pleasure.

     God’s grace abounds to us in every good work of giving (2 Cor. 9:8). Our Father’s ultimate goal for us is that we be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:29). Jesus is the supreme example of a cheerful giver. So when Paul urges the Corinthian church to support their impoverished brothers and sisters in Jerusalem, he turns to Jesus’ example: “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich” (2 Cor. 8:9).

     God loves a cheerful giver because those who feel pleasure in giving display the glorious grace of His Son. His grace abounds to us in giving because in the act of giving we are being moved toward the image of Christ. Every time we give to a kingdom work, we can know a joy and peace in entrusting ourselves to the grace of our Father and being moved by grace toward the image of His Son. We shall not trade this joy for all the riches in the world.

     God’s grace alleviates our fear of loss of value and dignity. Our flesh and our culture demand that we find our value and dignity in our material wealth. But we are freed from this bondage and are now being conformed to the image of Christ. Once again, Jesus is our example. In His incarnation Jesus was “born in a low condition.” In His life on earth He underwent “the miseries of this life, the wrath of God, and the cursed death of the cross” (WSC 27). Jesus voluntarily assumed a lower status. So, in following Him we do the same. We give that which we possess even when it requires that we assume a lower station in the eyes of the world (Phil. 2:6). We trade bigger cars, homes, and bank accounts for the work of God’s kingdom. The riches we possess we give away as needed for the kingdom because Christ’s goals have become our own — His gracious giving has become the pattern for our lives, and His everlasting inheritance has become our reward (1 Peter 1:4).

     God’s grace blesses our giving with righteousness. Christ calls us to see our giving in terms of “sowing” and “reaping” (2 Cor. 9:6). We are to view our money as “seed” entrusted to us from God. He intends a portion of this seed to be sown in the service of His kingdom to generate gracious spiritual fruit — a “harvest of your righteousness” (v. 10). We sow money at the grocery store to reap an immediate harvest of food. We sow money to provide for our children’s needs. We sow money in investment accounts to reap (so we thought) future gains. Paul says that we are to sow money for the kingdom of God as well. And, just as in every other type of sowing, we will reap according to what we sow (v. 6). In contrast to so many of our other financial investments, our investments in God’s kingdom always bear fruit. God grants a harvest of righteousness when we give. He conforms us to Christ, the ultimate giver. Our giving results in praise to God for those who receive the gift, either directly or through the ministry of another. This harvest of righteousness is part of an enduring righteousness (v. 9), which lasts forever. We have a cheerful satisfaction in knowing that our investment in God’s kingdom will bear fruit according to His promise.

     God’s grace is able to meet our future needs. We fear that if we give to the kingdom of God we will jeopardize our future (or our children’s future). We need not fear because God is sovereign. Paul reminds us that God is the one who supplies bread for food. He knows our need for daily sustenance. He will provide for us to have enough for our own needs and still have something to share with others (vv. 9–10). We need not fear the future. God’s grace abounds to provide for us.

     We are made in Christ to give. As Calvin says, “For as we are not born for ourselves merely, so a Christian man ought neither to live to himself, nor lay out what he has, merely for his own use.” Start giving regularly and bountifully to the kingdom of God. When you give you will feel His pleasure, for “God loves a cheerful giver” (v. 7).

Christ in the Old Testament

By Keith Mathison 9/1/2009

     The relationship between the Mosaic covenant and the new covenant remains one of the most controversial and difficult topics in theology. As the notable American theologian Jonathan Edwards said, “There is perhaps no part of divinity attended with so much intricacy, and wherein orthodox divines do so much differ as stating the precise agreement and difference between the two dispensations of Moses and Christ.” There are those who so emphasize either discontinuity or continuity that the problem is solved by oversimplifying it. Most Christians, however, recognize that there are elements of continuity as well as discontinuity. The difficulty arises when we attempt to be more exact.

     One of the most helpful books for those who are wrestling with the issues involved is Vern Poythress’ The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses. Dr. Poythress is professor of New Testament Interpretation at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where he has taught since 1976. In The Shadow of Christ, Dr. Poythress looks at the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, explaining how the Mosaic law looks forward to Jesus Christ and how it is fulfilled by Him in His person and work.

     The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses is divided into two major parts. Part one is titled “Understanding the Different Aspects of the Law,” and part two is titled “Understanding Specific Penalties of the Law.” After a brief introductory chapter on interpreting the Old Testament, the remaining chapters of part one deal with specific issues such as the tabernacle, the sacrifices, the priesthood, the land, and the Law, explaining how each prefigures Jesus Christ. The tabernacle, for example, was where God Himself dwelled with Israel (Ex. 25:8). In various ways it prefigured Christ’s coming to dwell with His people (John 1:14).

     The Old Testament sacrifices, of course, foreshadowed Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice on the cross (Heb. 10:1–18), while the Old Testament priesthood prefigured Christ’s work as our one, true High Priest (Heb. 8). The land is a significant aspect of the Mosaic law, so understanding its place in the new covenant is crucial. Poythress explains that the land has symbolic connections in several directions. It is not only a shadow of the new earth, it is a paradigm for the entire present earth. Regarding the instructions of God found in the Law, Poythress spends a good amount of time explaining the difficulties of properly interpreting them and offers his own solutions to several typical examples.

     Part two deals at length with various judicial penalties and punishments found in the Mosaic law. Some may find such a discussion off-putting, but the issues are relevant as modern states deal with crime and punishment in their own contexts. Does the Old Testament offer guidelines for modern states? Such questions rose to the level of controversy in American Reformed circles in the 1970s and 1980s with the rise of the Reconstructionist movement and theonomy. Poythress faces the relevant issues directly in the chapters of part two.

     In these chapters Poythress addresses the nature of just penalties for crimes. He specifically deals with questions of justice in relation to crimes involving theft, sexual issues, and the taking of human life. He addresses questions concerning deterrence and rehabilitation and offers a persuasive critique of prisons as a just means of punishment in most criminal cases. In the final chapter of part two, Poythress offers a very helpful explanation of what Matthew teaches regarding the fulfillment of the Law by Christ (Matt. 5:17–20). The book concludes with three appendices. The first addresses the question whether the state should punish false worship. The second is a lengthy critique of theonomy, in particular the version espoused by Greg Bahnsen. The final appendix addresses the meaning of the Greek word translated “fulfill” in Matthew 5.

     It is unlikely that any reader will agree with every detail of Poythress’ exegesis or every detail of his explanation of the Mosaic law. Those who emphasize continuity and those who emphasize discontinuity will both disagree at some point, as will most of those who fall somewhere in-between. Every reader, however, will be forced to think about the law of God and how it relates to the Christian believer. Every believer will be forced to meditate on the Law and think about how it reveals Christ. There are few books that will assist readers with these important issues as much as this one will. I encourage all who love Scripture to read it and learn from it.

Click here to go to source

Per Amazon, Keith A. Mathison (MA, Reformed Theological Seminary; PhD, Whitefield Theological Seminary) is dean of the Ligonier Academy of Biblical and Theological Studies and an associate editor of Tabletalk magazine at Ligonier Ministries. He is editor of When Shall These Things Be: A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism and associate editor of The Reformation Study Bible. He lives in Lake Mary, Florida, with his wife and children.

• 1     Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope
• 2     The Shape of Sola Scriptura
• 3     Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper
• 4     From Age to Age: The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology
• 5     Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?
• 6     A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture
• 7     Not a Chance: God, Science, and the Revolt against Reason
• 8     When Shall These Things Be?: A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 68

28 Summon your power, O God,
the power, O God, by which you have worked for us.
29 Because of your temple at Jerusalem
kings shall bear gifts to you.
30 Rebuke the beasts that dwell among the reeds,
the herd of bulls with the calves of the peoples.
Trample underfoot those who lust after tribute;
scatter the peoples who delight in war.
31 Nobles shall come from Egypt;
Cush shall hasten to stretch out her hands to God.
32 O kingdoms of the earth, sing to God;
sing praises to the Lord, Selah
33 to him who rides in the heavens, the ancient heavens;
behold, he sends out his voice, his mighty voice.
34 Ascribe power to God,
whose majesty is over Israel,
and whose power is in the skies.
35 Awesome is God from his sanctuary;
the God of Israel—he is the one who gives power and strength to his people.
Blessed be God!

Why You Can Embrace Disillusionment

By Aimee Joseph 3/7/2017

     Stomach in knots. Clenched fists. Heart pounding. Tear-stained eyes. I expected to be hurt in life, but I didn’t expect it from you. You were a safe place, a trusted confidant.

     Many of us have experienced the sinking sensation that comes from being hurt by those we love—and trusted—most.

     Life provides countless moments of disillusionment. Spouses hurt each other in vulnerable places. Friends betray our trust. Churches leave us with wounds.

The Role Of The Law

By Sinclair Ferguson

     All progressive revelation echoes and advances prior revelation. This broken law was given in a specific interim formulation at Sinai. Now the same law is written in our hearts, the fruit not of creating grace, or of the commands of Sinai, but of the shed blood of Jesus. That shed blood brought Mosaic ceremonies to an end by fulfilling them; it marked the finale of the civil laws of Israel as God’s people now entered a new epoch and became a spiritual nation in all lands, and no longer a socio-political people group preserved in one land.

     This, then, seen from various angles, is how mainstream Reformed biblical theology saw the role of the law.

     Paradoxically, today it is often statements like those of the Confession of Faith that are accused of a lack of biblical-theological perspective, for failing to understand the place of the law in redemptive history. But to this the Westminster Divines would surely be entitled to respond, “But how can you read the prophets and say they did not understand these distinctions? Were they not the mouthpieces of God, saying: ‘It is not sacrifice and burnt offering that come first, but obedience’? Did they not thereby distinguish ceremonial law from moral law?”

     Here again we see a parallel between Old Testament prophecy and Old Testament law. The prophets predicted the Christ who would come to save his people. But it was only when those prophecies of his coming passed through the prism of his presence that the whole truth became clear. These “unified” prophecies were in fact always looking forward to a two-stage coming of his kingdom, the first at the incarnation and the second at the consummation. So it is with the law: only in the light of Christ do we clearly see its dimensions.

     As the perfect embodiment of the moral law of God, Jesus Christ bids us come to him and find rest (a term loaded with exodus echoes). (See: Ex. 33:14; Deut. 12:9; Josh. 1:13, 15; Isa. 63:4) He also bids us be united to him through faith in the power of the Spirit, so that as he places his yoke (of law) on our shoulders we hear him say, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

     So we are Ephesians 2:15–16 Christians: the ceremonial law is fulfilled.

     We are Colossians 2:14–17 Christians: the civil law distinguishing Jew and Gentile is fulfilled.

     And we are Romans 8:3–4 Christians: the moral law has also been fulfilled in Christ. But rather than being abrogated, that fulfillment is now repeated in us as we live in the power of the Spirit. (Here it should be noted that the New Testament contrasts the letter with the Spirit but never the substance of the moral law with the Spirit.)

     In Christ then, we truly see the telos of the law. And yet as Paul also says, “Do we abrogate the law by teaching faith in Christ? No. We strengthen it. For Christ did not come to abolish it but to fulfill it, so that it might in turn be fulfilled in us.” That is why in Romans 13:8–10, Ephesians 6:1, and in other places the apostle takes for granted the abiding relevance of the law of God for the life of the believer.

     The Old Testament saint knew that while condemned by the law he had breached, its ceremonial provisions pointed him to the way of forgiveness. He saw Christ as really (if opaquely) in the ceremonies as he did in the prophecies. He also knew as he watched the sacrifices being offered day after day and year after year that this repetition meant these sacrifices could not fully and finally take away sin—otherwise he would not need to return to the temple precincts. He was able to love the law as his rule of life because he knew that God made provision for its breach, pointed to redemption in its ceremonies, and gave him direction through its commandments.

     It should not, therefore, surprise us or grieve us to think that the Christian sees Christ in the law. He or she also sees it as a rule of life; indeed, sees with Calvin that Christ is the life of the law because without Christ there is no life in the law.

     We appreciate the clarity of the law only when we gaze fully into Christ’s face. But when we do gaze there, we see the face of one who said, “Oh how I love your law; it is my meditation all the day” (Ps. 119:97.) —and we want to be like him.

     This is not—as the antinomian feared—bondage. It is freedom. The Christian rejoices therefore in the law’s depth. He seeks the Spirit’s guidance for its application, because he can say with Paul that in Christ through the gospel he has become an “in-law.” (Again the principle is that he is ennomos Christou, “in-law” through his marriage to Christ. One might think here of the way in which, for example, the Rules of Golf, authoritatively issued by the United States Golf Association and The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, are never regarded as “legalistic” by those who play golf. And to be an “antinomian” golfer and ignore the rules leads to disqualification. Fascinatingly, the governing bodies of golf publish a surprisingly large book giving guidance on the details of the application of the rules to every conceivable situation on a golf course—and to some that are virtually inconceivable! The rules, and their detailed application, are intended to enhance the enjoyment of the game. My edition (2010–2011) extends to 578 pages with a further 131 pages of index. The person who loves the game of golf finds great interest and pleasure, even delight, in browsing through these applications of the Rules of Golf. It should therefore not greatly stretch the imagination that the Old Testament believer took far greater pleasure at a higher level in meditating on and walking in the ways of God’s law. It is passing strange that there should be so often among Christians a sense of heart irritation against the idea that God’s law should remain our delight. Our forefathers from Luther onward grasped this principle, and, as a result, through the generations those who made use of the standard catechisms learned how to apply God’s Word and law to the daily details of life. It is a mysterious paradox that Christians who are so fascinated by rules and principles that are necessary or required in their professions or avocations respond to God’s ten basic principles with a testy spirit. Better, surely, to say, “Oh how I love your law!” It should be no surprise that there appears to be a correlation between the demise of the law of God in evangelicalism and the rise of a plethora of mystical ways of pursuing guidance, detaching the knowledge of God’s will from knowledge of and obedience to God’s Word.)

     At the end of the day the antinomian who regards the moral law as no longer binding is forced into an uncomfortable position. He must hold that an Old Testament believer’s passionate devotion to the law (of which devotion, curiously, the majority of Christians feel they fall short) was essentially a form of legalism. But it is Jesus himself who shows an even deeper intensity in the law by expounding its deep meaning and penetration into the heart. (Matt. 5:17–48)

     Neither the Old Testament believer nor the Savior severed the law of God from his gracious person. It was not legalism for Jesus to do everything his Father commanded him. Nor is it for us.

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Appendix 1 | Old Testament Chronology

     The dates marked with an asterisk are especially important for Old Testament introduction. Essentially this list follows the chronology of J. B. Payne’s Outline of Hebrew History. Some minor adjustments may be warranted in the light of more recent discovery, but the dates given below are at least approximately correct.

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

The Continual Burnt Offering (Mark 2:27-28)

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

June 26

No curse of law, in Thee was sov’reign grace,
And now what glory in Thine unvailed face!
Thou didst attract the wretched and the weak,
Thy joy the wand’rers and the lost to seek.
--- G. W. Frazer

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     17. Wherefore, let it be a fixed point, that the office of the sacraments differs not from the word of God; and this is to hold forth and offer Christ to us, and, in him, the treasures of heavenly grace. They confer nothing, and avail nothing, if not received in faith, just as wine and oil, or any other liquor, however large the quantity which you pour out, will run away and perish unless there be an open vessel to receive it. When the vessel is not open, though it may be sprinkled all over, it will nevertheless remain entirely empty. We must be aware of being led into a kindred error by the terms, somewhat too extravagant, which ancient Christian writers have employed in extolling the dignity of the sacraments. We must not suppose that there is some latent virtue inherent in the sacraments by which they, in themselves, confer the gifts of the Holy Spirit upon us, in the same way in which wine is drunk out of a cup, since the only office divinely assigned them is to attest and ratify the benevolence of the Lord towards us; and they avail no farther than accompanied by the Holy Spirit to open our minds and hearts, and make us capable of receiving this testimony, in which various distinguished graces are clearly manifested. For the sacraments, as we lately observed (chap. 13 sec. 6; and 14 sec. 6, 7), are to us what messengers of good news are to men, or earnests in ratifying pactions. They do not of themselves bestow any grace, but they announce and manifest it, and, like earnests and badges, give a ratification of the gifts which the divine liberality has bestowed upon us. The Holy Spirit, whom the sacraments do not bring promiscuously to all, but whom the Lord specially confers on his people, brings the gifts of God along with him, makes way for the sacraments, and causes them to bear fruit. But though we deny not that God, by the immediate agency of his Spirit, countenances his own ordinance, preventing the administration of the sacraments which he has instituted from being fruitless and vain, still we maintain that the internal grace of the Spirit, as it is distinct from the external ministration, ought to be viewed and considered separately. God, therefore, truly performs whatever he promises and figures by signs; nor are the signs without effect, for they prove that he is their true and faithful author. The only question here is, whether the Lord works by proper and intrinsic virtue (as it is called), or resigns his office to external symbols? We maintain, that whatever organs he employs detract nothing from his primary operation. In this doctrine of the sacraments, their dignity is highly extolled, their use plainly shown, their utility sufficiently proclaimed, and moderation in all things duly maintained; so that nothing is attributed to them which ought not to be attributed, and nothing denied them which they ought to possess. Meanwhile, we get rid of that fiction by which the cause of justification and the power of the Holy Spirit are included in elements as vessels and vehicles, and the special power which was overlooked is distinctly explained. Here, also, we ought to observe, that what the minister figures and attests by outward action, God performs inwardly, lest that which God claims for himself alone should be ascribed to mortal man. This Augustine is careful to observe: "How does both God and Moses sanctify? Not Moses for God, but Moses by visible sacraments through his ministry, God by invisible grace through the Holy Spirit. Herein is the whole fruit of visible sacraments; for what do these visible sacraments avail without that sanctification of invisible grace?"

18. The term sacrament, in the view we have hitherto taken of it, includes, generally, all the signs which God ever commanded men to use, that he might make them sure and confident of the truth of his promises. These he was pleased sometimes to place in natural objects--sometimes to exhibit in miracles. Of the former class we have an example, in his giving the tree of life to Adam and Eve, as an earnest of immortality, that they might feel confident of the promise as often as they ate of the fruit. Another example was, when he gave the bow in the cloud to Noah and his posterity, as a memorial that he would not again destroy the earth by a flood. These were to Adam and Noah as sacraments: not that the tree could give Adam and Eve the immortality which it could not give to itself; or the bow (which is only a reflection of the solar rays on the opposite clouds) could have the effect of confining the waters; but they had a mark engraven on them by the word of God, to be proofs and seals of his covenant. The tree was previously a tree, and the bow a bow; but when they were inscribed with the word of God, a new form was given to them: they began to be what they previously were not. Lest any one suppose that these things were said in vain, the bow is even in the present day a witness to us of the covenant which God made with Noah (Calv. in Gen. 9:6). As often as we look upon it, we read this promise from God, that the earth will never be destroyed by a flood. Wherefore, if any philosophaster, to deride the simplicity of our faith, shall contend that the variety of colours arises naturally from the rays reflected by the opposite cloud, let us admit the fact; but, at the same time, deride his stupidity in not recognising God as the Lord and governor of nature, who, at his pleasure, makes all the elements subservient to his glory. If he had impressed memorials of this description on the sun, the stars, the earth, and stones, they would all have been to us as sacraments. For why is the shapeless and the coined silver not of the same value, seeing they are the same metal? Just because the former has nothing but its own nature, whereas the latter, impressed with the public stamp, becomes money, and receives a new value. And shall the Lord not be able to stamp his creatures with his word, that things which were formerly bare elements may become sacraments? Examples of the second class were given when he showed light to Abraham in the smoking furnace (Gen. 15:17), when he covered the fleece with dew while the ground was dry; and, on the other hand, when the dew covered the ground while the fleece was untouched, to assure Gideon of victory (Judges 6:37); also, when he made the shadow go back ten degrees on the dial, to assure Hezekiah of his recovery (2 Kings 20:9; Isa. 38:7). These things, which were done to assist and establish their faith, were also sacraments.

19. But my present purpose is to discourse especially of those sacraments which the Lord has been pleased to institute as ordinary sacraments in his Church, to bring up his worshippers and servants in one faith, and the confession of one faith. For, to use the words of Augustine, "In no name of religion, true or false, can men be assembled, unless united by some common use of visible signs or sacraments" (August. cont. Faustum, Lib. 9 c. 11). Our most merciful Father, foreseeing this necessity, from the very first appointed certain exercises of piety to his servants; these, Satan, by afterwards transferring to impious and superstitious worship, in many ways corrupted and depraved. Hence those initiations of the Gentiles into their mysteries, and other degenerate rites. Yet, although they were full of error and superstition, they were, at the same time, an indication that men could not be without such external signs of religion. But, as they were neither founded on the word of God, nor bore reference to that truth which ought to be held forth by all signs, they are unworthy of being named when mention is made of the sacred symbols which were instituted by God, and have not been perverted from their end--viz. to be helps to true piety. And they consist not of simple signs, like the rainbow and the tree of life, but of ceremonies, or (if you prefer it) the signs here employed are ceremonies. But since, as has been said above, they are testimonies of grace and salvation from the Lord, so, in regard to us, they are marks of profession by which we openly swear by the name of God, binding ourselves to be faithful to him. Hence Chrysostom somewhere shrewdly gives them the name of pactions, by which God enters into covenant with us, and we become bound to holiness and purity of life, because a mutual stipulation is here interposed between God and us. For as God there promises to cover and efface any guilt and penalty which we may have incurred by transgression, and reconciles us to himself in his only begotten Son, so we, in our turn, oblige ourselves by this profession to the study of piety and righteousness. And hence it may be justly said, that such sacraments are ceremonies, by which God is pleased to train his people, first, to excite, cherish, and strengthen faith within; and, secondly, to testify our religion to men.

20. Now these have been different at different times, according to the dispensation which the Lord has seen meet to employ in manifesting himself to men. Circumcision was enjoined on Abraham and his posterity, and to it were afterwards added purifications and sacrifices, and other rites of the Mosaic Law. These were the sacraments of the Jews even until the advent of Christ. After these were abrogated, the two sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which the Christian Church now employs, were instituted. I speak of those which were instituted for the use of the whole Church. For the laying on of hands, by which the ministers of the Church are initiated into their office, though I have no objection to its being called a sacrament, I do not number among ordinary sacraments. The place to be assigned to the other commonly reputed sacraments we shall see by-and-by. Still the ancient sacraments had the same end in view as our own--viz. to direct and almost lead us by the hand to Christ, or rather, were like images to represent him and hold him forth to our knowledge. But as we have already shown that sacraments are a kind of seals of the promises of God, so let us hold it as a most certain truth, that no divine promise has ever been offered to man except in Christ, and that hence when they remind us of any divine promise, they must of necessity exhibit Christ. Hence that heavenly pattern of the tabernacle and legal worship which was shown to Moses in the mount. There is only this difference, that while the former shadowed forth a promised Christ while he was still expected, the latter bear testimony to him as already come and manifested.

21. When these things are explained singly and separately, they will be much clearer. Circumcision was a sign by which the Jews were reminded that whatever comes of the seed of man--in other words, the whole nature of man--is corrupt, and requires to be cut off; moreover, it was a proof and memorial to confirm them in the promise made to Abraham, of a seed in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed, and from whom they themselves were to look for a blessing. That saving seed, as we are taught by Paul (Gal. 5:16), was Christ, in whom alone they trusted to recover what they had lost in Adam. Wherefore circumcision was to them what Paul says it was to Abraham--viz. a sign of the righteousness of faith (Rom. 9:11):--viz. a seal by which they were more certainly assured that their faith in waiting for the Lord would be accepted by God for righteousness. But we shall have a better opportunity elsewhere (chap. 16 sec. 3, 4) of following out the comparison between circumcision and baptism. [615] Their washings and purifications placed under their eye the uncleanness, defilement, and pollution with which they were naturally contaminated, and promised another laver in which all their impurities might be wiped and washed away. This laver was Christ, washed by whose blood we bring his purity into the sight of God, that he may cover all our defilements. The sacrifices convicted them of their unrighteousness, and at the same time taught that there was a necessity for paying some satisfaction to the justice of God; and that, therefore, there must be some high priest, some mediator between God and man, to satisfy God by the shedding of blood, and the immolation of a victim which might suffice for the remission of sins. The high priest was Christ: he shed his own blood, he was himself the victim: for in obedience to the Father, he offered himself to death, and by this obedience abolished the disobedience by which man had provoked the indignation of God (Phil. 2:8; Rom. 5:19).

22. In regard to our sacraments, they present Christ the more clearly to us, the more familiarly he has been manifested to man. ever since he was exhibited by the Father, truly as he had been promised. For Baptism testifies that we are washed and purified; the Supper of the Eucharist that we are redeemed. Ablution is figured by water, satisfaction by blood. Both are found in Christ, who, as John says, "came by water and blood;" that is, to purify and redeem. Of this the Spirit of God also is a witness. Nay, there are three witnesses in one, water, Spirit, and blood. In the water and blood we have an evidence of purification and redemption, but the Spirit is the primary witness who gives us a full assurance of this testimony. This sublime mystery was illustriously displayed on the cross of Christ, when water and blood flowed from his sacred side (John 19:34); which, for this reason, Augustine justly termed the fountain of our sacraments (August. Hom. in Joann. 26). Of these we shall shortly treat at greater length. There is no doubt that, it you compare time with time, the grace of the Spirit is now more abundantly displayed. For this forms part of the glory of the kingdom of Christ, as we gather from several passages, and especially from the seventh chapter of John. In this sense are we to understand the words of Paul, that the law was "a shadow of good things to come, but the body is of Christ" (Col. 2:17). His purpose is not to declare the inefficacy of those manifestations of grace in which God was pleased to prove his truth to the patriarchs, just as he proves it to us in the present day in Baptism and the Lord's Supper, but to contrast the two, and show the great value of what is given to us, that no one may think it strange that by the advent of Christ the ceremonies of the law have been abolished.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion