Particular Redemption

I woke up this morning with an interesting email greeting me as I turned on my laptop and drank a cup of hot tea. It had to do with the death of a friend's grandpa. She said she didn't know if he was saved and blamed herself for not doing more. She even mentioned that "part of me wished all it took was being a good person." These words came from someone I know understands who the Lord really is and has a firm grasp on Truth and Grace. So since I posted comments about God's Sovereignty last month we can take the next step and see how that applies in the area of Soteriology (the study of salvation).

The one issue I would like to address today is "Whom did Christ die for?"

If Christ died for everyone’s sin then why would a person go to hell for the very sins Christ already died for? In legal terms that would be called double jeopardy. In our American society of easy-believism and man exalting belief systems, the “worth” of the cross is focused on the value of people not on God. This is the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches.

So….Who did Christ die for? Did He die for every single human being to ever live, or did He only die for those that the Father had chosen to save? Did Christ come to merely open the possibility of salvation for everybody, or did He come to actually guarantee the salvation of the "elect" by His death? Is it even important to know the answer to these questions? Is this simply a peripheral issue or something much more important? If we think that these questions are merely a matter of "non-essential debate" and are of no awesome significance to our lives, our worship, our view of God, and our hope in evangelism, we are very far off base.

The extent of the atonement is of crucial importance because it is inextricably tied up with what Christ actually did when He died. If we have a wrong understanding of the extent of the atonement, we will have a wrong understanding of what the cross even was, and what it was intended to do. I doubt that anyone who calls themself a Christian would be willing to say that a wrong understanding of those points is of no real significance. As we investigate the biblical arguments that Christ died only for those who would believe in Him that is, He died only for those that the Father had chosen to bring to faith we will see the crucial significance of the issue and exactly how it affects our view of Christ's entire mission.

The view that Christ died only for the elect we will call successful redemption. The view that He died for all humans without exception we will call universal redemption. The three Persons of the Trinity are always in perfect agreement so it is a marvelous thing that our salvation is a work of the whole Trinity, each Person emphasizing a special role, and not one in opposition to another. Understanding this will not only give good evidence for successful redemption, but will allow us to be more specific in the thanks we give to God for our salvation.

God the Father is the chief agent who planned redemption. He chose whom would be saved (Ephesians 1:3-11), predestined His Son to be the Savior (Matthew 12:18; 1 Peter 1:20) sent His Son into the world as Savior (John 3:16; 17:3; 1 John 4:14), laid upon Christ the punishment for sins (Isaiah 53:6, 10; Romans 3:25), rose Him from the dead (Romans 10:9; Acts 3:26), and then exalted Him to His right hand (Acts 2:32-36; Ephesians 1:20-23; Philippians 2:9).

God the Son is the chief agent who accomplished redemption. He willingly assumed the role of mediator the Father had given Him (Philippians 2:6-8; Hebrews 10:6, 7; John 6:38), became man (John 1:14), as the God-man offered Himself up to the Father as the sacrifice for sins (Hebrews 9:14; Ephesians 5:25-26), rose from the dead (John 10:18), and assumed His position at the right hand of God (Hebrews 1:3) where He now intercedes for the elect (Romans 8:34) and reigns as king (Ephesians 1:20-23; Revelation 1:5), one day to return to claim His church (1 Thessalonians 4:16-18) and judge the living and the dead (Acts 17:31; John 5:22-23).

God the Holy Spirit is the chief agent who applies redemption. He convicts the world of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:7-11), brings the elect to faith so that they can receive the benefits won for them (John 6:63; 3:3-8) and is given as the pledge of our inheritance (Ephesians 1:14) and seal of our security (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30). He concurred with the Father and Son in each of their roles. He was involved in the incarnation (Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:35), the sacrifice of Christ (Hebrews 11:14), the resurrection, and empowered Christ for His ministry (Luke 4:14).

There are many riches to be found in studying the various roles of each Person of the Trinity. But what I wish to call attention to is the fact of election. There can be no doubt that the Father has chosen precisely who will believe and thus be saved (John 6:37; Luke 10:21-22; Acts 13:48; Romans 8:29-30; 9:15-16; Ephesians 1:4, 5, 11; 2 Timothy 1:9), and it therefore follows that He has also decided who will not believe and thus not be saved (Romans 9:17-23). The first thing to realize is that scripture is clear that man is not inocent and "ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". Every human being is born condemned and at emnity with God due to the sin nature inherited from Adam and it is not long before that nature begins to bear fruit of unrighteousness. So it is not that God passes over otherwise nice people who would like to go to heaven, it is all humans are in rebellion and none of them are seeking God nor do they love Him. God steps in and redeems some for His glory and purposes.

Would it be consistent for the Father to predestine only the elect to be saved, but then send the Son to die for and thus attempt to save every individual in the world? That would seem to be a contradiction in God's plan. For then God would be purposing to save only the elect, but then intend by Christ's death to save every individual in the world. Thus, it seems inescapable that the Father sent Christ to die only for the elect. And since the Trinity is always unified in purpose, we know that if the Father sent the Son to die only for the elect, then the Son only died for the elect. For the Son would not attempt to do anything that was contrary to God's plan.Christ's purpose was to save This is where we see revealed the great difference in the opposing ways universal redemption and successful redemption view the death of Christ.

The big question is: What were God's intentions in Christ's death? Did Christ die for the purpose of making certain the salvation of all those whom He died for, or did He die only with the purpose of making it possible for all humans to be saved if they will only "do their part"? There are three options before us in regards to the purpose of Christ's death:

Option #1. The first option is that Christ intended to secure the salvation of every human to ever live. But if this was Christ's intention, then He failed, since many people will never be saved (Matthew 25:46). Since God can never fail (Job 42:2), we must rule this option out.

Option #2. Because of the obvious force of this objection, most who believe in universal redemption will agree that Christ did not intend to secure the salvation of every human to ever live. But, they argue, that does not destroy their system. For, they respond, He only intended to make it possible for everybody to be saved. In other words, Christ did not die to actually and really save anybody, but only died in order to make all humans able to be saved. He didn't die to actually save us, but to only make us savable.

The errors of option #2. The errors of this belief are huge. I hope that they are self-evident, that just the thought that Christ's death was only intended to make us savable, and not actually saved, makes clear to you the terrible mistake of universal redemption. But it is important to make explicit the errors of this understanding of the purpose of Christ's death. First, it denies that Christ is a Savior who actually saves. For, on this view, the work of Christ wasn't sufficient to gain our salvation for us. It wasn't enough. Rather, the work of Christ needs us to add something to it, namely our faith. Thus, our salvation is not coming fully from Christ rather, it is coming partly from Christ and partly from ourselves. In contrast to this, the glories of successful redemption are evident, as J.I. Packer brings out: "Christ did not win a hypothetical salvation for hypothetical believers, a mere possibility of salvation for any who might possibly believe, but a real salvation for His own chosen people....The cross's saving power does not depend on faith being added to it; its saving power is such that faith flows from it. The cross secured the full salvation of all for whom Christ died."[1]

Second, universal redemption seems to deny the personal nature of Christ's death. If Christ didn't actually die to save me, wherein lies the comfort of saying that "Christ died for my sins. Christ loved me and gave Himself up for me" (cf. Galatians 2:20)?

Third, the Scriptures utterly oppose the teaching that Christ only died to make it possible to save us, but did not die to actually secure the salvation of anyone. Luke 19:10 informs us that Christ did not come to merely make possible salvation, but came "to seek and to save that which was lost." Christ did not come into the world to make all humans able to be saved, but came into the world to actually save people: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Timothy 1:15). The following list of Scriptures should serve to make clear enough that Christ's intention was to secure salvation for those that He died for:
1. Christ died to deliver believers from this evil age, as God had willed: Galatians 1:4
2. Christ died to redeem and purify believers: Titus 2:14.
3. Christ died to sanctify and cleanse the church: Ephesians 5:25-27.
4. Christ died to actually remove God's wrath: Romans 3:25.
5. Christ's death doesn't make it possible for us to be reconciled to God, but actually does reconcile us to God: Romans 5:10.
6. Christ actually obtained eternal redemption by His death: Hebrews 9:12.
7. Christ's death actually secured redemption: Ephesians 1:7.

Thus, the Scriptures are clear that Christ didn't die to simply make salvation possible; He died for the purpose of actually saving those that He died for! Since God's purposes cannot fail (Job 42:2; Isaiah 46:10), we must conclude that everybody that Christ died for will be saved. Yet, we know that not everybody will be saved (20:15). Therefore, Christ did not die for everybody. For if He did, then either His purpose failed, or everybody will be saved both of which Scripture denies.

The biggest problem with this view is it means the Father sent His Son on a gamble (leaving it all up to fallen man) with the very real possibility that the death of Christ would redeem nobody. This is utterly unthinkable!.

Option #3. These three objections to option number two decisively prove the truth of option number three "successful redemption". Christ intended to save everybody He died for, and was successful in accomplishing His purpose. Since not everyone is saved, Christ did not therefore die for everyone. "Calvary, in other words, not merely made possible the salvation of those for whom Christ died; it ensured that they would be brought to faith and their salvation made actual. The Cross saves. Where the Armninian [one who believes in universal redemption] will say: `I could not have gained my salvation without Calvary,' the Calvinist [one who believes in successful redemption] will say: `Christ gained my salvation for me at Calvary.' The former makes the Cross the possible means of salvation, the latter sees it as the actual procuring cause of salvation, and traces the source of every spiritual blessing, faith included, back to the real transaction between God and His Son carried through on Calvary's hill."[2]

In summary, we see that if Christ died for everybody, then either He intended to secure everyone's salvation by it but failed in His purpose (which we saw to be inadequate as option one) or else His death was not intended to secure the actual salvation of those that it was for (which we saw to be inadequate as option two). But if we accept the biblical teaching that Christ's death was intended to accomplish the salvation of those that He died for, then we must conclude that He did not die for everybody.

I hope it is clear from this analysis why it is so important to believe in successful redemption and reject universal redemption. I am not concerned about successful redemption because of some twisted desire to confine the boundaries of divine mercy, but because it is the only way to "safeguard the central affirmation of the gospel that Christ is a redeemer who really does redeem."[3]

The nature of Christ's death reveals the extent of Christ's death We saw above that the extent of Christ's death is necessarily linked up with the intent of Christ's death. In addition to this, we will now see that the extent of Christ's death is necessarily linked up with the nature of Christ's death what He did when He died. The way we view the nature of Christ's death will determine the way we view the extent of Christ's death. As we will see, belief in universal redemption requires one to seriously distort and lessen the Biblical teaching on what Christ actually did when He died.

To begin, we must ask a question: Why does God send people to hell? Because His wrath is upon them (Romans 2:5), they are sinners (Romans 3:23), He is their enemy because of their sins (Psalm 5:5), and because they have a penalty to pay for their sins (Romans 6:23). This should be evident. The barrier between God and humankind is sin. Because God is holy, our sin brings out His wrath upon us and makes us His enemies. And because God is just, He is required to make sure that our sins get the penalty they deserve.With that in mind, we need to ask a second question: What did Christ do when He died? Several things, which if they were going to be effective had to be designed to resolve the above problems our sin has created. First, the Bible teaches that Christ was our propitiation (Romans 3:25-26; 1 John 3:10). This means, as all the dictionaries define it, that He took away God's wrath. Second, the Bible teaches that Christ's death was our expiation (2 Cor. 5:21; John 1:29; 1 Peter 3:24; Hebrews 1:3). This means that is took away our sins. Third, the Bible teaches that Christ's death reconciled us to God (Romans 5:10-11). This means that it made God favorable to us, removing the hostility and separation between us. Fourth, the Bible teaches that Christ's redeemed us (Mark 10:45; Revelation 5:9; Galatians 3:13-14; Ephesians 1:7; Romans 5:9). This means that it paid the penalty for our sins, as well as securing our deliverance from the pollution of our sins (Titus 2:14; 1 Corinthians 6:20). And fifth, Christ did all of this by sacrificing Himself in the place of those whom He died for (Mark 10:45; 1 Peter 3:18).[4] These five biblical truths about Christ's death show very clearly that His death removed everything that was sending us to hell. But if it did this, then His death has infallibly secured the salvation of everybody He died for. If Christ died for you, you cannot perish for His death has removed everything that was causing you to perish. For example, our sins have made us enemies of God. But Christ's death reconciles us to God, thus removing the enmity. Would God condemn someone that has become His friend by the blood of His Son?

Again, hell means being eternally punished by God's wrath. But Christ took away God's wrath for everybody He died for. Therefore, if Christ died for you, you cannot go to hell because God has no wrath to pour out on you. Some people try to respond to this: "Yes, I agree with the Biblical teaching on the nature of the atonement. But that only means that Christ took away God's wrath even for those who perish through unbelief." Do you see the utter inconsistency of this view? It cannot honestly say that Christ's death actually took away God's wrath from those people--for many of those that Christ died for must endure God's wrath forever in hell. Can we really say that Christ took away God's wrath from those people who suffer under God's wrath forever in hell? Let's stop speaking with forked tongues! To say that Christ removed God's wrath from everybody, yet many people suffer under God's wrath for eternity, is a contradiction. If you hold to the view that Christ died for everybody in the same way, you must believe, in order to be consistent, that therefore Christ's death did not actually take away God's wrath, take away sins, bring about reconciliation and obtain redemption--but instead only made it possible for those things to happen. As we have seen, Scripture expressly contradicts this view.

Perhaps one of the clearest arguments for successful redemption regards the penalty for our sins. Would it be just for God to make double payment on our sins? In other words, if Christ paid the penalty for the sins of those who finally perish, wouldn't it seem unjust for God to punish those people once again for their sins again in hell? Furthermore, I would argue that it is not only unjust for God to obtain double payment, but impossible. For example, let's say that "Bob" owes $4,000 to the bank, which his friend decides to pay back for him. Would it then be possible for the bank to come to Bob the next day and try to collect payment? No!, for there is no payment to collect, the debt is already paid and thus gone. In the same way, Christ's death paid the penalty for the sins of the elect, and thus guaranteed their salvation. Let me sum up this basic line of argument in one concept. Why is it that people go to hell? Because of their sins. What did Christ do when He died? He took away our sins. How, then, can anyone perish for whom Christ died?

Some people will try to respond to that question like this, they argue, "Yes, Christ took away the sins of everybody, and therefore nobody will ever be punished for their sins. Therefore, people do not go to hell because of their sins. They go to hell only for rejecting Christ." This objection doesn't work. First of all, the Scriptures clearly teach that people go to hell both for their sins and for rejecting Christ. After listing a whole list of sins in verse 5, Colossians 3:6 says, "For it is on account of these things that the wrath of God will come." Thus, people in hell are not simply punished for rejecting Christ (if they have heard of Him), but are also punished for their sins. For this reason, Christ's death could not have removed their sins. Second of all, isn't the rejection of Christ itself a sin? If it is, didn't Christ, on this view, die for it? If He did, how can anyone perish? But if it isn't a sin to reject Christ, then why does it cause people to perish? Do we wish to hold that people go to hell for something that isn't even a sin? If one wishes to say that Christ died for all the sins of unbelievers except their sin of unbelief, then they would be saying that Christ did not die for all of the sins of all humans which is awfully close to the very thing they are trying to oppose.

As can be seen from all of this, the biblical teaching on the nature of the atonement requires that we believe in successful redemption. Universal redemption requires one to twist the whole nature of the biblical view of the atonement. All of the elect were in union with Christ when He died This argument is very simple (though it may take some reflection to first grasp), so I will simply list its steps:

1. All those whom Christ died for, died with Christ: 2 Corinthians 5:14.
2. All those who died with Christ are raised with Christ to salvation: Romans 6:5, 8.
3. Not everybody is raised with Christ to salvation: Revelation 20:15.
4. Therefore, not everybody died with Christ.
5. Therefore, Christ did not die for everybody--for everybody whom Christ died for, died with Christ (principle #1), but not everybody has died with Christ (principle #4).

Would Christ have died to save those who were already perishing? Did Christ die to save those who were already in hell when He died? It would be strange that Christ would endure the pains of propitiation in the place of, and in order to save, those who already were in hell when He died. Look at Luke 16 for the truth on how the dead wereexisting in the story of the rich man and Lazarus. If we admit that Jesus did not die for those who were already eternally lost, we are in effect admitting that He did not die for everybody. It is only a short step from admitting that Christ did not die for those who had perished in the past, to admitting that Christ did not die for those who were destined to perish in the future.

Christ's death was successful: Romans 8:31-34 is a very glorious passage: "What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies; who is he one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us." To analyze this passage, let us walk through a series of questions. In verse 31, who is the us? Obviously, it is believers and believers only. All unbelievers will be eternally condemned by God and have His wrath upon them even now (John 3:36), and thus one could hardly say that God is "for them." In verse 32, who is the us? Due to the continuation of thought, it must be the same as the "us" in the previous verse all believers, and believers only. But do you see what this means? It means that Paul is saying that Christ died for believers, and only believers. For since in verse 31 "God is for us" refers only to believers, then the same construction in verse 32 ("...delivered Him up for us all") means all believers, but only believers. But there are even deeper ways that this passage teaches successful atonement. Look at verse 32. Is there anybody that Christ died for that will not be given "all things"? Clearly not, for Paul says that if God delivered up His Son for you, then He would certainly give you everything else that is good for you. And surely this "all things" would include eternal life. Therefore, Paul is affirming that if Christ died for you, you will most certainly be saved for if there were people that Christ died for that never got saved, then Paul could not say that God gives "all things" to everybody that Christ dies for. Therefore, Christians can have great comfort and encouragement. For the sake of clarity, let me restate the argument from a different angle. In verse 32, Paul is basically saying this: if God gave his own Son for you, He will give you everything else as well. But if Christ died for all people, this argument vanishes. For everybody does not get "all things" because many people will go to hell. Thus, Christ did not die for these people who perish, because Paul says that if Christ died for you, God will also give you all things--which certainly includes salvation! "If God gave his own Son for unbelievers who in the end are lost, then he cannot say that the giving of the Son guarantees 'all things' for those for whom he died."[5] Continuing on to verse 33, what is Paul saying when he asks "Who will bring a charge against God's elect?" He asking a rhetorical question. The answer is: No one can bring a successful charge against them. He then gives some reasons for this in verses 33 and 34. What are they? One of those reasons Paul gives for the fact that God's elect will never be condemned is that Christ died for us. Would this reason still be a good one if Christ died for all people? Obviously not, for Paul's argument is basically: "Christ died for us, therefore we will never be condemned." But this argument vanishes if Christ died for the non-elect as well. If people can perish whom Christ died for, Paul could not point to Christ's death for us as the guarantee that all of the elect will be saved.

The effectiveness and extent of the atonement in Revelation 5:9-10 is another excellent verse: "And they sang a new song, saying, `worthy art Thou to take the book, and to break its seals; for Thou wast slain, and didst purchase for God with Thy blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. And Thou hast made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth.'" First, look carefully at verse nine. Did Christ ransom everybody in every people group? No, He did not for if He did it would not say that the ransomed are taken out from every people group, which clearly means Christ ransomed some people from every people group. Thus, we see from verse nine that Christ's redemption is limited in its scope. Now look carefully at verse ten. What happens to those who are ransomed? It says that Christ makes them to be a kingdom and priests to God. The same people who are ransomed are said to be made a kingdom and priests which is the same as saying that all of those whom Christ ransomed become saved. There is nobody that Christ died for that will not finally be saved, because this verse says that those whom He died for are made into a kingdom and priests to God. Thus, we see from verse ten that Christ's redemption is effective in nature. So once again we see how the extent and effectiveness of redemption go together. Because the atonement is effective in nature, everybody that it is intended for will be saved (v. 10). Since not everybody will be saved, the atonement must also be limited in its extent (v. 9).

As I said before, the reason it is important to know that Christ did not die for everybody is for the sake of preserving in our hearts and minds the great truth of the effectiveness of the atonement that Christ, through His death, saves everybody He died for. This view, which we have called "successful redemption," has sometimes been called "limited atonement" because it states that Christ did not die for everybody. But don't let the fact that the word "limited" is used in one of the names for this view mislead you. One simply cannot escape limited atonement, since not everybody is saved. The atonement is limited in either its extent or its effectiveness.

If Christ died for everybody, His death is unlimited in extent--but limited in effectiveness because it is not of its nature to guarantee the salvation of everybody that it was intended for. On the other hand, if Christ died only for the elect, then His death is limited in extent--but unlimited in success. Considering the fact that not everybody is saved, what is more glorious to Christ? Which is more loving to His people? Which gives more comfort to His elect? And, of course, which view is supported by the Scriptures we have seen?

The love of Christ for His church is seen in Ephesians 5:25-27. For the sake of space, I will not give a detailed analysis of this verse. But I encourage you to look it up for yourself and consider the following questions. Did the death of Christ have specific beneficiaries? Who did Christ love and give Himself up for (v. 25)? Why did He do this (v. 26)? From what you see in this passage, was the death of Christ intended to simply make their salvation possible, or to make it actual?This passage is also important because it sheds great understanding on the love Christ has for His people. The love He has for His church is compared to the love that a husband has for his wife. The view that Christ died for all people, His bride as well as those who are not His bride, seems to greatly lessen His love for the church. For the greatest expression of love one can give to someone is to lay down his life for them (John 15:13). Therefore, if Christ died for the non-elect and the elect in the same way, it would mean that He loves them in the same way. But that would be like a husband who says, "Sure, I love my wife. But I love her in the same way that I love every other woman!" His wife would definitely not feel very loved! Fortunately, Ephesians 5:25-27 tells us that Christ loves His church like His own body, and like a husband loves his wife. Therefore, He loves us in a richer and deeper way than He loves those who do not belong to His church. If this is not true, I simply cannot grasp what God is trying to tell us in this passage.

Christ laid down His life for His sheep: John 10:15 Jesus says, "...I lay down My life for the sheep." According to this verse, who did Christ give His life for? The answer is clear; for the sheep. By implication, we rightly infer that He therefore did not lay down His life for the goats (cf. 10:26). One may respond to this: "This verse does teach that Christ gave His life for the sheep, but that doesn't mean that He died only for the sheep." There are two main problems with this objection. First, in this same context we read "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me, and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish" (vv. 26-28). This verse says that Jesus gives eternal life to His sheep. Now, nobody would say to this verse, "Sure, Jesus gives eternal life to His sheep. But that doesn't mean only His sheep He gives eternal life to all people"! It is very evident that when Jesus says he gives eternal life to the sheep, He clearly means the sheep and only the sheep. Therefore, it seems best to conclude that when he says, in this same context, that he dies for the sheep, he must mean only the sheep.

Second, remember that God divides the world into sheep and into goats that is, into non-believers and believers (compare 10:15 with 10:26). It is a common use of language that when somebody divides something into two groups and says "I will do this for group A," it is clear that he is not going to do it for the other group. For example, if I say "There are poor people and rich people in San Diego. I am going to give food to the poor people" it is clear that I mean only the poor. It would be a terrible butchering of my words to try to argue: "He doesn't mean only the poor, he's going to give food to the rich people also!" Thus, since Scripture divides all people into either sheep or goats, and says that Christ died for the sheep, so we must conclude that He did not die for the goats.

The death of Christ is the foundation of the intercession of Christ. Christ's prayers on behalf of his people are founded on the fact of His death on behalf of His people (1 John 2:1-2). Therefore, the intercession of Christ must have the same extent as the death of Christ (cf. Romans 8:34). Since Christ does not intercede for all, it shows that He did not die for all. But how do we know that Christ doesn't intercede for all? By a simple argument:
1. Christ's prayers are always answered (John 11:22, 42).
2. Not everybody is saved.
3. Therefore Christ is not interceding for all.

The clear Biblical teaching on the extent of the atonement is too forceful to be denied. But many may be wondering how this fits with passages which seem to speak of Christ as dying "for the whole world" and other passages sometimes brought against this view. Rather than lengthening this post, I will simply say that, in my experience, scriptures used in opposition to successful atonement are by no means legitimate objections. Rather, they are entirely consistent with successful atonement when rightly interpreted.

In conclusion, a correct understanding of successful redemption has many wonderful applications that can be divided into two groups. Successful Redemption keeps us from the inaccurate views of Christ's death that stem from Universal Redemption. The teaching of universal redemption obscures the glory of Christ's atonement, gives us a deficient view of what it means for Christ to be Savior, diminishes our understanding of the uniqueness of God's love for His church, makes our salvation ultimately depend upon what we do for ourselves rather than Christ's cross, and weakens the ground of our assurance. Unfortunately, because universal redemption is such a common belief in the modern church, "Our minds have been conditioned to think of the Cross as a redemption which does less than redeem, and of Christ as a Savior who does less than save, and of God's love as a weak affection which cannot keep anyone from hell without help, and of faith as the human help which God needs for this purpose. As a result, we are no longer free either to believe the biblical gospel or preach it."[6] Elsewhere Packer says, "So far from magnifying the love and grace of God, [universal redemption] dishonors both it and Him, for it reduces God's love to an impotent wish and turns the whole economy of `saving' grace, so-called (`saving' is really a misnomer on this view), into a monumental divine failure. Also, so far from magnifying the merit and worth of Christ's death, it cheapens it, for it makes Christ die in vain.

Lastly, so far from affording additional encouragement, it destroys the Scriptural ground of assurance altogether, for it denies that the knowledge that Christ died for me (or did anything else for me) is a sufficient ground for inferring my eternal salvation. My salvation, on this view, depends not on what Christ did for me, but on what I subsequently do for myself."[7] To think that Christ died to save those who will perish cuts the nerve of our comfort. If Christ died for them, and they perished, what hope is there for us?

Successful Redemption opens for us the wonderful benefits of an accurate understanding of Christ's death. First, as we come to hold to the truths of successful redemption, we can now more properly exalt Christ. For we rejoice that He was perfectly successful! Everybody that He died for will be saved! He didn't simply make us savable, He actually saved us! Praise Him deeply for this!

Second, understand that your faith is a fruit of Christ's death. Christ secured your salvation by His death, and therefore He bought everything that was necessary to make sure it was applied to you. Therefore, Christ didn't die for you because you believe. You believe because Christ died for you. Because of this, we can recognize the true place where your salvation is completely founded--Christ's death, not your own act of faith. It is true that God applies the work of Christ to the elect through their faith, and apart from faith in Christ no one will be saved. But when we recognize that even our faith is a fruit of His death, we have greater security and can give Christ greater thanks. On the other hand, if we deny successful atonement, then redemption does not ultimately rest on Christ or His cross, but on our own act of faith which we generate as our own independent act.

Third, this truth gives deep consolation and comfort to believers. Our salvation has a solid rock--the death of Christ. Christ's death was successful and thus it secured our salvation. To know that my salvation does not ultimately rest upon myself, but on Christ, is great consolation and comfort.

Fourth, draw hope and assurance from the death and intercession of Christ. Trust Christ more, recognizing how dependant upon Him you are.

Fifth, this truth exalts the love of Christ for you. His death is the ultimate expression of His love. If He died for all, it would mean that He loved all in the same way. But He doesn't. You are special to Him if you are counted among His church. His death for us in particular reveals the height of this great love.

Sixth, as in everything we learn about Christ, let your increasing love for Him compel you to serve others. "For the Son of man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many." "The greatest among you shall be the servant of all."

References
1. J.I. Packer, Introductory Essay to John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, in The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, by John Owen (Banner of Truth, 1995) p. 10. Emphasis added.2. Packer, p. 7.3. Packer, p. 5.4. For further study on the nature of Christ's death, see my article The Nature of the Atonement. 5. What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism, Bethlehem Baptist Church Staff, Minneapolis, MN. 6. Packer, p. 13.7. Packer, p. 12.

So as you can see it is not simply a “logical” issue but a deeply rooted scriptural one with huge ramifications. Unfortunately the atonement is the most attacked doctrine of our day and it is time people began to contend for its wonderful freeing truths.

Blessed be His most excellent redeeming name!

Tough Questions About Sovereignty Part II

I will try and give a Biblical answer to each of the questions posted under comments from part 1 for your consideration.

“All scripture is God breathed and useful for teaching etc…” so the best way to get a handle on any issue is to see the entire teaching on the subject throughout both the old and new testaments. We would then compare all the texts (in context), search out the historical settings, customs etc. and come up with what God has to say on the matter. You have to remember that Israel only had the OT by which to know God. In the previous article you will see quotes from the entire Bible in order to give a fully rounded perspective. The old and new covenants never contradict each other. I also intentionally left out many new testament verses as they might have been construed so as to accuse me of pushing a reformed perspective, which this issue is certainly not. For example, Romans 9 says “God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy and the rest He will harden”.

I do not believe that man is a robot or is “forced” to do things he does not wish to do. Actually, the fact that we make sinful choices is proof of our sinful nature. We are free to make choices and do as we wish, but not everything we wish. The reason for that is due to our finite abilities and circumstances which we do not control. Simply put, man is free within the scope of his nature. That means that I am free to do or choose whatever I wish within my abilities to do it. For example, I may wish to fly but my nature is not that of a bird so if I jump off the building frantically flapping my arms I am still going to hit the ground. My desire to fly is hindered by my nature. I may wish to go surfing today but get a flat tire so my plan is thwarted by circumstances beyond my control. The insurance companies get it and call these “acts of God”.

A man might want to change the day of his death, hinder the second coming, prevent the crucifixion etc. all of these things are controlled by God and not men. There is only one being who can do whatever He wants, however He wants and whenever He wants and that is God. This is because He is Almighty. If a man wills one thing and God wills another it is obvious whose will is going to be done.

Just because God allows us to make decisions that we think are totally free does not mean that 1) He doesn’t know them and 2) He had no part in the controlling of the circumstances that influenced them. To say either of these is untrue is to believe in unbiblical theology like Modalism or some form of deism that states God started everything and then left it to its own devices. Otherwise you have a God who doesn’t know all things and that is a far bigger issue. The Truth Project does a good job on this and it is always one of the lessons that gets the most debate (the other being Who Is Man)

In light of this, a common objection is "If God controls all things, then why should I do anything? We don't control history anyway. Therefore, we can just sit back and do nothing." The objector is saying that the logical outcome of belief in the absolute sovereignty of God is what we will call "indifferent fatalism"--the view that we should do nothing since God controls everything.

Why doesn't belief in God's sovereignty lead to indifferent fatalism? And if God is absolutely sovereign, how can our choices have real meaning? These are very good questions that a proper understanding of God's sovereignty will answer.

First we need to understand the difference between fatalism and what is called compatibilism. Compatibilism is the view that God is absolutely sovereign (as explained above) and yet our choices have real meaning and we are responsible for them. The Bible is clear that God is in control and we are responsible for our actions because we willingly do them. Fatalism, on the other hand, teaches that no matter what you choose or do, things will turn out the same. For example, if it is determined that Bill will get an "F" on his test tomorrow, then no matter how hard he studies or how well he knows the material, he will fail. His choices do not really affect what will happen.

Compatibilism, in contrast to fatalism, says that our choices really do affect the future, and that if different choices had been made, the future would have been different. On this view, if Bill doesn't study, he will fail. But if he does study hard, then his studying will be the means that brings about a good grade. In regards to God's sovereignty, this means that God does not just ordain the ends and then say "this will happen no matter what." No, God also ordains the means to His planned end (for example, God ordains that Bill will study as the means to the good grade).

Our decisions are each links in the chain of means ordained by God to bring about His planned ends. If different decisions had been made, the consequences would have been different. But God works to ensure that the means He has ordained will most certainly occur so that none of His purposes can fail. This makes human decisions truly significant and vital. This is exactly what the scripture means by “God works in you to WILL and to DO for His pleasure” Phil. 2:13. It should now be more clear why the absolute sovereignty of God does not amount to fatalistic indifference. In short, Bill should study because that is the means that God uses to bring about his good grades.

The second reason to reject fatalistic indifference is that it is self-contradictory. The person who is fatalistically indifferent would be saying "Because God decides what will happen, I will stop making choices." But the choice to stop making choices is itself a choice! The other option is God has no plan and leaves everything up to us hoping things work out. That is ridiculous and nobody who names the name of Christ believes it.

God made us in a way that we are decision-making beings. We will always make one choice or another in any given situation--we cannot help but to make choices when confronted with alternatives (we have no choice in the matter!). For example, when confronted with the option to eat either a piece of pie or a piece of cake, it is impossible for me to not make some sort of choice. I will either have the pie, the cake, or neither. If I refuse to make a choice, I am still making a choice--the choice not to eat. Indifferent fatalism is false because it is impossible--it self-destructs in a self-contradiction. Impossibilities are entirely un-applicable, for trying to apply fatalistic indifference is to deny it. For this reason it cannot be the logical application of belief in God's absolute sovereignty.

Clearly, God's sovereignty does not remove the need for and reality of our choices. But what if a person "modifies" their position of fatalistic indifference and tries to use God's sovereignty as an excuse to remain in sin?

One could take God's sovereignty and (mis)apply it this way. That would be sin. But just because a teaching can be misapplied does not make it false. Shall we also conclude that the truths of eternal security and justification by faith alone are false because some people try to use them as an excuse for sin? (See Romans 6:1-2 for how Paul would respond to such a misapplication of these truths.) A person could decide to not seek God or not obey Him because "everything is up to Him anyway." But does that make indifference and passivity the logical outcome of believing in God's sovereignty? Couldn't belief in God's sovereignty be taken just as easily in the other direction and be properly applied to encourage zealous obedience instead of indifferent fatalism? Since we must make a choice either to live righteously or live sinfully, on what basis can one say that God's sovereignty leads logically to a choice of human laziness/sinfulness instead of a choice for human godliness? Paul says something applicable here: "And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say), `Let us do evil that good may come'? Their condemnation is just" (Romans 3:8).

Instead of saying "God is sovereign, therefore I will not bother to seek Him and do righteousness" one could with equal logical consistency say "God is sovereign, therefore I will zealously obey Him at all times because I know He will most certainly bless my obedience with great fruit. And I know that He will victoriously uphold me with His strength and perseverance since He is not only in control but also a holy, merciful God who loves righteousness." One path or the other will be chosen. We cannot not choose.

But how are choices made? Answering this question will take us to the real issue at stake. As humans, we make choices according to our greatest desire of the moment--we choose what we think is the best option at the time. This means that our choices reveal our character, since it is our character which produces our desires and therefore determines what we will consider the best option. A good character will generally desire good things, and a bad character will desire bad things. What we choose therefore reveals the condition of our heart.

Therefore, if we use God's sovereignty as an excuse for sin, it reveals the wickedness in our heart. If we correctly apply this doctrine, however, and see the freedom it gives us to diligently obey, it reveals the goodness that God is working in our hearts. If we try and use God's sovereignty as an excuse for sin, we need to go to Him and repent instead of concluding that God is not really sovereign after all.

God's sovereignty is actually a very freeing doctrine for us. It frees us to obey with joyful trust, security, and peace. As a believer, we should think like this: "Since God is sovereign, no obedience can harm my relationship with God and therefore no obedience, no matter how "foolish" it looks to the world and no matter the consequences, can ultimately harm me." Isn't that how Paul used the doctrine in Romans 8:28-36 ? He said "all things work together for good to those who love God" in verse 28 and then proceeded to explain the security this gives us through zealous, risk-taking obedience because "nothing shall separate us from the love of Christ."

Look at the way Paul applies the sovereignty of God to our obedience in Philippians 2:12-13: "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." According to Paul, the foundation of our obedience is the fact that God is ultimately the one who puts in us the willing and working of obedience. Paul did not say "God puts the willing and working in you, therefore stay in bed." On the contrary, he saw the sovereignty of God as deep, encouraging reason for risk-taking obedience!

Having understood how we make choices, we are now in a position to understand how God can control all things, and yet bring about His plan in a way that preserves human accountability and freedom. Proverbs 16:9 says "The mind of the man plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps." This verse seems to affirm human freedom and God's absolute control over our freedom--in the same breath. How can this be consistent?

As we saw earlier, we always choose according to our greatest desire--we always choose the option that we most prefer. This makes every choice determined (it is determined that I will choose the option that I find most preferable), yet free (since we are not being forced to choose, but are choosing what we want to). Furthermore, the act of choosing is always accompanied, subconsciously or consciously, with the process of thinking through the situation and the desires we have in order to realize which option we want the most. Once we realize which option we most prefer, we will then always decide upon that option. For example, when given the option of chocolate or white cake, I cannot and do not spontaneously determine that I will desire the white cake. Rather, I thoughtfully recognize that my greatest desire is for the white cake. Our choices are free and truly our choices because we think through the situation for ourselves and come to the conclusion about which choice is best through our own thought processes. Thus, "the mind of the man plans his way."

God, however, can still be ultimately in control and thus "direct our steps" by regulating our situations and thus the information that we base our choice upon. Since we will always choose the option that our mind finds most preferable in light of the situation, God can simply make the circumstances such that the option we find most preferable (and thus the option we will choose) is the choice that He ordained for us to make. Our choice is free and truly ours since it is a result of our own reasoning and thought processes ("the mind of the man plans His way"), but God still controlled it because He ordered and directed the information our thought processes were based on to ensure that the choice we make is what He had willed ("the Lord directs His steps").

If someone ever tries to use God's absolute sovereignty as an excuse not to seek God or obey Him, the solution is not to tell them that "God really is not sovereign--you have the freedom to choose against God's eternal purposes." Sinners, the Bible says, by nature flee from God and seek any excuse to justify their flight. An attempt to use God's sovereignty as an excuse to continue in sin reveals the persons' sinfulness and need for God's grace. God's sovereignty is not the cause of indifference--sin is the cause. We should not lay blame where it does not belong.

So what we must do is not appeal to freedom in an attempt to convince the person that they must obey, but point out their sin to them and go to our knees and pray "God, I know you control all things. Therefore I pray that you would change my friend's heart and cause him to seek you. Please give him a desire for you." God is the answer to an unbeliever's flight from God, not anything else. The sovereignty of God is not a persons’ problem, it is their only hope.

It has been my prayer that this will be helpful to you and shed even a small bit of light on these issues. How this relates to Salvation is another story that everyone has an opinion on but both sides should agree with this part. So I would say this for your two questions:

1) A person is responsible for their sin because they choose it willingly. Grace by definition is not owed to mankind therefore if God withholds grace He has wronged no man. God could have prevented the crucifixion but He didn’t. The people betrayed Him freely and are thus guilty, yet the Bible is clear this was God’s plan. The fact Jesus forgave his disciples (and us for that matter) for abandoning Him is a testimony to His grace.

2) The law was a tutor to point us to Christ. Redemption is probably the greatest illustration of this.. Jesus said “be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect”. That is an impossible command regardless of how much I try. It is given to show me the need for righteousness, which is not in me but must be imputed if I am to stand before God blameless. Again, He gives us what He commands. He put us in His family, He made us acceptable, He forgave us, He commands us to love each other….we fail through sin and rebellion but He works back in us to will and to do so we repent etc…. The expert on the matter is Jesus Himself who said "apart from me you can do nothing!"

Blessings to all who belong to the Lord,

Tough Questions About Sovereignty

As a pastor we are often asked really tough questions by both skeptics as well as beleivers. Recently this question came to me via email. I thought I would share it and the reply I sent in the hopes it may help someone else who has similar questions about our great God. This is quite long so get a good cup of tea and read on.

Question: "My son was asking me a question that surrounded the issue: Since God is perfect, yet He created man who is fallen and satan who was evil in Heaven and on Earth, did His original perfect plan fail since Jesus had to die for sinners? And if evil existed before man was ever created why did God create us? How did perfection and evil coexist and how could a perfect God end up with such imperfect beings.....angelic or human? The way things have turned out for humanity could not possibly be what God's perfect plan initially was or is it? Did His plan fail?"

Reply: This is a very difficult set of questions you are posing so please read this very carefully and prayerfully in order to grasp what I am trying to convey. The premise we will start with is God’s plan has not, cannot and will not fail. This is easily proven by reading the scriptures. I expect what your son is really asking is how all these things fit together in the character and nature of God. I will attempt to address the most common issues and objections I hear and if I leave something out or you wish a further elaboration then please let me know. This is a hard topic and most people take a while to struggle through it. I actually just finished a class on this topic last year so here is some of what we went through.

So, is God in control? If so, what does it mean to say that God is in control? These are two very important questions because the answers affect how we view God, how we view the world, and how we view ourselves. The answers are found by examining the Biblical teaching on the “Providence of God”. God's Providence--sometimes called His sovereignty--simply refers to His preservation of creation and His control over creation, which He does for the purpose of bringing about the greatest glory to Himself.

Preservation, the first aspect of Providence, is the activity of God whereby He preserves all created things in existence. In other words, it is his moment by moment activity of keeping the universe in existence. Hebrews 1:3 says Christ "upholds all things by the word of His power." Colossians 1:17 says that "in Him all things hold together." The universe only continues in existence because Christ keeps it in existence. If He were to cease His preserving activity, everything would cease to exist.

The second aspect of Providence is what answers the question, is God in control and what does that mean? A proper understanding of this aspect of Providence can be a rock of strength in suffering, a source of humility in godliness, and a blazing fire of amazement in worship. Therefore, we will examine the Biblical teaching on this in detail. After examining this truth, the third aspect of Providence should be clear--that God is directing history towards the goal of His greatest glory and His people's greatest good.

The first thing we need to understand about God's rule over the universe is that none of His purposes can fail: "I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure'" (Isaiah 46:9-10). It is absolutely certain that God will achieve everything that He wants in His creation. Nothing that God wants accomplished will be left unfulfilled--that is what God means when He says He will accomplish all of His "good pleasure" because His "purpose will be established." Thus, it also follows that nothing can ever happen which would ultimately keep God from fulfilling everything that He wants.

Some say that God does not have any unstoppable purposes in regards to human history, because this would entail that humans are not in control of history. Scripture, however, poses no such limitation on God. In fact, in the very next verse God applies His purposes to the realm of human activity: "Calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of My purpose from a far country" (Isaiah 46:11). Furthermore, it would be of almost no meaning for God to say that none of His purposes can be thwarted if His purposes had nothing to do with one of the most important areas of the universe--human history and human decisions! The impossibility of God's purposes failing is significant and revealed in the Bible precisely because it applies to our very lives.

Many other verses confirm that God's purposes in regards to human history cannot fail. "The Lord nullifies the counsel of the nations; He frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the plans of His heart from generation to generation" (Psalm 33:10, 11). God has not given control of history over to humans. Instead, this verse is clear that God takes action to frustrate human plans whenever He desires--which means whenever they are not in line with His plans. Since God's counsel must "stand forever" and since God will, as Isaiah says, accomplish all of His "good pleasure," He will frustrate all human plans that will not lead to the fulfillment of His plans. From this it follows that the only things which He will allow to happen are things which will ultimately contribute to the fulfillment of His plans.

So, while the plans of human beings fail, God's purposes cannot fail because they must "stand forever." And since God's plans are always accomplished, He never changes them--they endure "from generation to generation." There are no plan B's with God.

Proverbs 19:21 confirms that while the plans of human beings are not always accomplished, God's plans always succeed: "Many are the plans in a man's heart, but the counsel of the Lord, it will stand." Clearly, "There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the Lord" (Proverbs 21:30). The great Biblical character Job, after his extreme trials and great suffering, learned the great lesson that "Thou canst do all things, and that no purpose of Thine can be thwarted" (Job 42:2). Similarly, the apostle Paul asks rhetorically in Romans 9:19, "who resists His will?" The answer, of course, is no one.

It is clear that God can accomplish whatever He wants. But how specific are his plans? Does God simply have general plans that will be fulfilled, or does He have specific purposes in regards to every detail of life? The answer seems to be that God's purposes are specific--His Providence is in the details.

First, if God "can do all things" and "none of His purposes can be thwarted" (Job 42:2), then if follows that for anything that occurs, God could have prevented it if He had wanted to. Thus, if God allows something, it must be because it was part of His plan. For whenever one is able to prevent something that he wants to prevent, he will prevent it. Thus, God only permits what He has purposed--what He wants, in some sense, to occur.

Second, God must control the details of life in order to ensure that His general plans will be fulfilled. If there is even the slightest and most insignificant thing outside of God's control, it would have the ability to mess up God's "bigger" plans. Who has not been amazed at how the difference of a few "insignificant" seconds, for example, can sometimes mean the difference between the significant issue of life and death?

Third, and most importantly, Scripture is clear that God's purposes are specific and very detailed. Job 14:5 says that man's "days are determined, the number of his months is with Thee, and his limits Thou hast set so that he cannot pass." God has determined how long each person will live; you cannot die until God's purposes for you on earth are finished. This is good news, for it means that if you are alive, it is for a reason.

John the Baptist informs us that, "A man can receive nothing, unless it has been given him from heaven" (John 3:27). Everything you possess is a gift from God. Every meal you are provided with, is because God decided to give it to you. Every shirt you have, friend you have, and talent you have is ultimately a gift from God. If God had not decided to give it to you, you would not have it.

God causes people to be favorable towards us (Daniel 1:9; Genesis 39:21) or to not be favorable towards us (Exodus 14:7). He determines who will be rich and who will be poor: "The Lord makes poor and rich; He brings low and He also exalts" (1 Samuel 2:7). He gives children (Psalm 127:3) or withholds children (1 Samuel 1:5). A woman cannot conceive unless God decides that she will (Ruth 4:13).

God controls the affairs of nations: "He makes the nations great, then destroys them; He enlarges the nations, then leads them away" (Job 12:23). "For the kingdom is the Lord's, and He rules over the nations" (Psalm 22:28). The land boundaries of each nation and their period in history are all determined by God: "and He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation" (Acts 17:26). Not only that, God also determines which specific individuals will be the leaders in each country: "And it is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men, and knowledge to men of understanding" (Daniel 2:21). "The Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom he wishes..." (Daniel 4:17). God made it absolutely clear to King Nebuchadnezzar that he was not ultimately in charge, rather "it is Heaven that rules" (Daniel 4:26). Paul even tells us that the wicked Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus had been "raised up" by God so that He could show His power in defeating Him (Romans 9:17).

God controls the wind and lightning (Psalm 135:7), the snow and the rain (Job 37:6-13), and directs the stars in their courses (Job 38:32). Forest fires, hail, and storms are all under his command: "Fire and hail, snow and clouds; stormy wind, fulfilling His word" (Psalm 148:8). The sun does not simply rise on its own each day, rather God "causes His sun to rise" (Matt. 5:45). Neither does the grass grow on its own, but God "causes the grass to grow" (Psalm 104:14). God feeds the animals (Matthew 6:26; Psalm 104:27-29) and indeed controls even the most seemingly insignificant death of a sparrow (Matthew 10:29). God sends rain and withholds rain (Amos 4:7-10). There is nothing in the universe left to chance: "The lot is cast in the lap, but its every decision is wholly from the Lord" (Proverbs 16:33). Nothing in all creation--the weather, the stars, the plants, the animals, the affairs of nations, the role of dice, and the specific details of our lives--is outside of the sovereign control of God.

God controls everything If God's plans never fail, and if His plans are specific (not just general), then it follows that God literally controls every detail of our lives and every detail of the universe. This is exactly what dozens of verses directly and explicitly teach.

First, the Scriptures are clear on who is not in control. Jeremiah said, "I know, O Lord, that the way of human beings is not in their control, that mortals as they walk cannot direct their steps" (Jeremiah 10:23, NRSV). Humans are not in control. In fact, we do not even have ultimate control over our slightest actions, for "mortals as they walk cannot direct their steps." But if humans do not direct their steps, who does? Proverbs 16:9 tells us: "The mind of the man plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps." It is God who is in control! And his control is specific, not just general because it extends to the very steps of individuals. Every move you make, every step you take has been determined by God. Proverbs 19:24 says "man's steps are ordained by the Lord, how then can man understand his way?" Further, even the very words we say are controlled by God: "The plans of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord" (Proverbs 16:1).

Daniel 4:35 is another very clear verse that God controls all things. "And all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does according to his will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth; and no one can ward off His hand or say to Him, `what hast Thou done?'" First, notice that God is not just able to do His will, but actually does His will both among the angels (the "host of heaven") and with human beings ("the inhabitants of earth"). Thus, all of God's creatures are under His control. Second, notice that nothing can prevent God's will from being accomplished ("no one can ward off His hand"). Scripture knows nothing of God limiting his control so that humans can have ultimate self-determination. This verse (as well as all of the others we have seen) teaches the exact opposite--the will of God is always done. Third, Nebuchadnezzar found that God's sovereign majesty was good news. We should share his attitude: "Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise, exalt, and honor the King of heaven, for all His works are true and His ways just, and He is able to humble those who walk in pride" (v. 37).

Romans 11:36 says, "For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen." This is another clear verse that God is controlling ("bringing about") all things according to His plan. John Reisinger explains this verse very well: "There are three different Greek prepositions in that verse. They show the truth of God's absolute and total sovereignty. The verse states that all things, without any exception are: 1. from (The Greek is ek and means `out of, or out from') God; 2. all things are through (The Greek is dia and means `by means of, or because of') God; and; 3. all things are to (The Greek is eis and means `into') God. In other words, all things have their source in God's decrees or purposes, and all things that happen do so only because God's power has brought them to pass, and finally, everything that God plans and then brings to pass will ultimately bring glory to him since they all move into him or unto him as their final end. Now that is the Biblical truth about our sovereign God. That is acknowledging that `God can do anything He wants to do, any time He wants to do it, any way He wants to do it, for any purpose He wants to accomplish.'

The next verse we will look at is Proverbs 21:1: "The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; He turns it wherever He wishes." Jerry Bridges elaborates on this verse: "In Solomon's time the king had the most absolute of all wills...There was no legislature to pass laws he did not like or a Supreme Court to restrain his actions. The king's word was the last word. His authority over his realm was unconditional and unrestrained. Yet this Scripture teaches that God controls the king's heart. The stubborn will of the most powerful monarch on earth is directed by God as easily as the farmer directs the flow of water in his irrigation canals. The argument, then, is from the greater to the lesser--if God controls the king's heart surely he controls everyone else's." This becomes even more significant when we recognize that from the heart flow "the springs of life" (Proverbs 4:23). The deepest depths of every single individual and every decision they make are controlled by God.

Psalm 139:16 makes a very similar point: "In Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them." This verse not only teaches that God has ordained how long you will live, but the Hebrew word translated "ordained" suggests a much stronger meaning. The meaning is that of being shaped, or formed. "David is affirming that God wrote the script of his life in the great book of God's intentions before the actual events began to unfold, indeed, before David was even born. And, mixing his metaphors, David also says that the days of his life were formed or shaped, suggesting the action of a potter shaping the clay. He means that his life, considered not only as a whole but also right down to his daily experience, was determined (what other word fits?) ahead of time."

Lamentations 3:37 asks rhetorically, "Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it?" (NIV). The answer expected is, no one. There is nothing that comes to pass through human agency unless God has ordained it to happen. If you say to your friend, "Let's go to Burger King for supper," it will not happen unless God has ordained it to occur. If someone threatens to hurt you, take courage, for it cannot happen unless God has ordained it.

God's control over all things raises many questions for us. Perhaps the biggest one is in regards to evil. Does God ordain evil as part of His plan? In light of the verses we have examined above, the answer must be yes. If God controls all things, then it must be that evil is a part of His plan. There are also many specific Scriptures which make it clear that God controls evil.

Psalm 105:25, speaking of the Exodus, says of the Egyptians that God "turned their heart to hate His people, to deal craftily with His servants." After a time of unfaithfulness, Israel asked God, "Why, O Lord, dost Thou cause us to stray from Thy ways, and harden our heart from fearing Thee?" (Isaiah 63:17). In Revelation 17:17 it is said that the wicked kings who will wage war against Christ (which is sin) will ultimately be doing the purpose that God had put in their hearts: "For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purposes by having a common purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God should be fulfilled." Lamentations 3:37-38 is a direct statement that God decrees not only good things, but also bad things: "Who is there who speaks and it comes to pass, unless the Lord has commanded it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both good and ill go forth?" God says that He is "the One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these" (Isaiah 45:7).

When all of Job's children were killed, he acknowledged the sovereign control of God behind the evil situation. Job did not say that "The Lord gave, and Satan took away." He said "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21). Some argue that God is not ultimately behind the bad circumstances in our lives, and therefore Job was wrong to attribute his calamity to God. However, the author of the book, who was inspired by God and therefore infallible, affirms Job's statement: "Through all his Job did not sin nor did he blame God" (v. 24). At the end of the book we once again see the author's agreement with Job. When describing Job's restoration, he says that Job's friends came and "consoled him and comforted him for all the evil that the Lord had brought on him" (Job 42:11). The book of Job makes it clear, however, that God's control over evil does not deny the activity of Satan and the reality of wickedness in human hearts. Further, God never does evil and cannot be blamed for evil. However, God has not left the sources of evil to simply do as they please. He has them on a leash and they can only act if God specifically decides to allow it. Since the evil that Satan causes is only by the specific permission of God, then it is correct for Job to ultimately attribute his suffering to God's plan.

The evil spirit that tormented Saul was said to be "from the Lord" (1 Samuel 16:14). In punishment for David's sin, "The Lord struck the child that Uriah's wife bore to David, so that it was very sick" (2 Samuel 12:15-18). If natural or man-made disaster occurs, it is ultimately because God had planned it, for Amos 3:6 asks rhetorically, "Does evil befall in a city, unless the Lord has done it?" Physical infirmity and disease are not outside of God's plan either: "Who has made man's mouth? Who makes him dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?" (Exodus 4:11). No person in this world was ever born blind that God had not planned for him to be blind; no person was ever deaf in this world that God had not planned for him to be deaf--If people do not believe that, then they have a strange God who has a universe which has gone out of gear and He cannot control it."

Perhaps the clearest example that God ordains sin is the crucifixion of Christ. It was sin for the Jews and Romans to crucify Christ, for He was the innocent Son of God. Yet, what Christian would deny that the crucifixion of Christ was brought about by God? Scripture is clear that "It was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer" (Isaiah 53:10). Acts 2:23 says that Jesus was "delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God" even though it was "by the hands of godless men" that He was put to death. The acts of Herod and Pontius Pilate, the Jews and Gentiles, in crucifying Christ were sin. Yet Scripture says that "Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel [did] whatever Thy hand and Thy plan predestined to take place" (Acts 4:28).

The sovereignty of God over evil raises many questions for us. First, how can a holy, good God allow/ordain sin? Very simply, God does not ordain sin for its own sake, but in order to bring about a greater good. For example, God did not will the crucifixion simply for the sake of bruising His Son, but because it was the means for bringing salvation to the world. Another example is the case of Joseph being sold into slavery. It was sin for Joseph's brothers to throw him in the well and then sell him into slavery. But many years later when Joseph finally encountered his brothers again, he said "And now do not be grieved or angry with yourselves, because you sold me here; for God sent me before you to preserve life...Now, therefore, it was not you who sent me here, but God" (Genesis 50:5, 8). Joseph being sold into Egypt was not simply allowed by God, but was actually brought about by God as part of His plan. This does not make God sadistic nor does it excuse Joseph's brothers of their sin. Why? Because God's intentions were for good, but Joseph's brother's intentions were for evil. "And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about his present result, to preserve many people alive" (Genesis 50:20). This is a necessary truth in order to properly understand God's Providence. When God ordains bad things to occur, it is not because He delights in suffering and evil in itself, but it is because He is working to bring about a greater good.

As Piper says "God has the capacity to look at any event through two lenses, a wide angle lens and a narrow angle lens. When God looks at an evil act through the narrow lens, He sees it for what it is in itself and abhors it. But when God steps back and looks at that event in the wide angle lens, He sees it in relation to all the events flowing up to it and flowing out from it. He sees it in relation to the good that He plans to bring out of it and its overall place in His wise plan. It is in this sense that He wants it to occur and thus decrees it".

Thus, God's control over all things is good news, not bad news, because God is good, loving, and just and is therefore working all things for the greatest good. God's Providence is not random, but is directing all things toward a goal--His greatest glory and His children's greatest good. Thus, God's Providence is something we can trust and rejoice in. It is good that we are not in control of history, for surely God knows better than we do!

The second question that God's sovereignty over sin raises is, does this take away human responsibility and put the blame on God for evil? The Bible is clear that the answer is no. God cannot be blamed for sin, and humans are responsible for the sins that they commit. God stands behind good and evil in different ways. God is behind good in such as way as all of the credit for it goes to Him. But He is behind evil in such a way that, though it is part of His sovereign plan, none of the blame for it is chargeable to Him. We do not need to understand how these truths can fit in our minds, but if we are going to believe the Bible must believe them both.

For example, God used the wicked Assyrian nation to carry out His judgments, yet judged them for sinning because their intentions were evil (see Isaiah 10). The case of Pharaoh is another example. In Exodus 7:2 God tells Moses to command Pharaoh to let Israel go. But God also says that He will harden Pharaoh's heart so that Pharaoh will not let the people go (v. 3). God, however, does not regard this as taking away Pharaoh's responsibility, because when Pharaoh refuses to let Israel go, God judges Egypt for this sin (vv. 14-25). Some say that Pharaoh hardened his heart first and that God only acted in response to this. But this view misunderstands the whole narrative of the Exodus. God says that He hardened Pharaoh's heart so "that I may multiply My signs and wonders in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 7:3), not because Pharaoh hardened his heart first. Further, God's promise to harden Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 4:21) comes long before we find Pharaoh hardening his own heart (which we read of first in 8:15).

In 1 Chronicles 21:1 we read that "Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel." The parallel passage in 2 Samuel 24:1, however, tells us that God incited David to take the census. David, however, is regarded as responsible for his sin, saying "I have sinned greatly in what I have done" (2 Samuel 24:10). His responsibility is further shown in that God judged him for this sin (24:15). "In this one incident the Bible gives us a remarkable insight into the three influences that contributed in different ways to one action: God, in order to bring about his purposes, worked through Satan to incite David to sin, but Scripture regards David as being responsible for that sin." If we are to remain faithful to the Bible, we must hold these two truths together: humans are responsible for their sins, yet every sin committed was allowed by God as part of His plan.

Atheists often argue against God's existence from the problem of evil. Their argument goes as follows: If God is all loving, He would have prevented evil from entering the universe; if God is all powerful, He could have prevented evil; evil exists, therefore there is no such God.On the contrary, I will argue as follows: If God is all loving, He would allow evil to enter the universe; If God is all powerful, He could allow evil without being guilty of evil Himself, and He could make evil work for the greatest good; therefore we have great reason to praise the God who exists!

There are two errors that must be avoided concerning the problem of evil. The first error would be to believe that God is the source of evil. This terrible error would blame God for evil and hold that evil was produced by God out of His own nature. The second error would be to believe that evil occurred apart from God's sovereign plan. This position would hold that evil entered the universe because God was helpless to prevent it, and thus it overthrew the purposes of God. The position the Scriptures seem to teach is that mankind is to be blamed for and is the source of evil, while nonetheless the entrance of evil into the universe was ordained by God as part of God's plan from the beginning. God could have prevented evil from entering into the universe had He desired to, but chose not to prevent it for wise and holy reasons.

Let's probe this issue a little further. God is not the author of evil because He created the universe good. In its original state, there was nothing evil or sinful in the universe. Evil first entered God's creation as a result of the disobedience of the angels who rebelled. Evil then entered the physical universe and human race as a result of mankind's sin in Adam. God is not the source of evil or sin; evil is a result of the disobedience of God's creatures. For these reasons, God cannot be blamed for the existence of evil--all responsibility for the presence of sin and evil in the human race falls upon mankind. All responsibility for the presence of evil in the spiritual realm falls upon the angels who rebelled.

But in order to have the full picture, we cannot stop here and conclude that God was powerless to prevent evil. Since God is sovereign and He "works out everything in conformity with the counsel of His will" (Ephesians 1:11), none of His purposes can be thwarted (Job 42:2). Therefore we must conclude that evil did not occur apart from the purpose and plan of God. The ultimate reason that evil occurred is because God planned it, not because His creatures are able to overthrow His plans. These two truths we must hold: man is responsible, yet God is absolutely sovereign and controls all things.

Last of all it is necessary to understand that evil is not permanent. It was defeated at the cross and will be quarantined in hell for eternity at the final judgment. Then God will create a new heavens and new earth where only righteousness and purity will dwell forever.

We are now in a position to ask the question, Why did God willingly choose to allow evil into the universe? How is this consistent with His love? Without claiming to exhaust the mystery here, I offer this answer: God allowed evil because the temporary presence of evil in the universe would result in the greatest glory to His name. And since God's glory is what most benefits His people, it is loving for God to seek His glory to the highest extent in all that He does. Therefore it is loving for God to allow the temporary presence of evil in the universe. Let's examine these points more closely.

The glory of God is the shining forth of the splendor and greatness and infinite value of His perfect character. When God glorifies Himself, He is not making Himself more glorious (that is impossible), but calling attention to and displaying His infinite greatness. How does evil seem to fit into God's plan to glorify Himself? Part of the answer seems to be this: many of God's attributes can be more clearly and brightly displayed to us if there is sin and therefore evil in the universe.

For example, God's mercy is His goodness and help shown to those who are in a miserable plight. But God could not show mercy if there was no sin and evil in the universe, because then there would be no one in a miserable plight to need mercy.

In addition, the greatness of God's mercy is highlighted by the fact that those whom God chooses for His saving mercy are saved out from the most awful and terrifying situation possible--being under the almighty wrath of God. How could God's mercy appear fully as his great mercy unless it was extended to people who were under his wrath and therefore could only ask for mercy? God's mercy is magnified by delivering us from under His wrath.

So we see that in the just punishment of sinners, God's mercy is fully highlighted to those whom He has saved. The punishment of sinners (which could not have happened if God had not allowed evil) is also an occasion for God to glorify Himself through the vindication of His justice, demonstration of His wrath, display of His power, and purity of His holiness which will not tolerate sin. This also works to reveal the riches of God's glory to the vessels of mercy: "What if God, in order to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory..." (Romans 9:22, 23, RSV. cf. Proverbs 16:4, "The Lord has made everything for its own purpose, even the wicked for the day of evil").

The wrath of God is the righteous assertion of His holiness against sin. If we could not see that God is so holy that He hates sin and thus reacts against it with His wrath, we would not know as fully the purity and zeal of God's holiness. For only in contrast to sin (and thus His holiness reacting against this sin as wrath to vindicate His righteousness) is the purity of God's holiness most intensely highlighted. If there were no sin upon which God could pour His wrath eternally, He could not assert the full range of His holiness because He could not show that, in His holiness, He hates and despises all that is unholy.

God's judging of sin and reacting in wrath to punish it eternally in hell demonstrates the infinite value of His perfections. Why? Because the infinite penalty of attacking God's glory--eternal punishment in hell--reveals the infinite value of the glory that was attacked. Thus, hell is ultimately an eternal display of the infinite value of God's glory. While this certainly does not mean that God delights in the sinner's suffering in and of itself, He does delight in it in the sense that it is a vindication of His righteousness and display of His power. This is how Ezekiel 33:11 ("I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked") fits with Deuteronomy 28:63 (where God tells Israel that if they disobey He "will delight over you to make you perish and destroy you; and you shall be torn from the land where you are entering to possess it").

Having seen that God's decision to allow sin was for the purpose of fully displaying the greatness of His perfections to an extent that He could not otherwise have done, we are led to look at the next question in greater detail: Why must God display the full range of His character? This is because doing so most magnifies His worth. If God did not display, for example, His mercy, then He would not be fully magnifying His character because there would be some of His character that is not expressed. And if God did not magnify His character to the fullest possible extent, God would not be acting in perfect righteousness. Why is this? It is because God is the most precious, valuable being in the universe. Therefore, He must delight in and value Himself above anything else. From this it follows that if God did not seek to display His honor and perfections above all else, He would not be placing infinite worth on what is infinitely valuable. He would be putting something before Himself, which would mean putting something less valuable before the more valuable, which would be unrighteous.

In fully displaying His glory (which, we have seen, requires sin), God is being most loving. Why? First, if He did not do this, we would not know Him "fully, just as I also have been fully known" (1 Cor. 13). Put simply, we wouldn't know God as well if He did not display who He is to the fullest possible extent. And it seems that it would be most loving for God let us know as much of Himself as He can. Also, it is truly loving of God to seek His praise to the highest possible extent (which, as we have seen, would require the brilliance of His mercy highlighted by demonstrating His wrath). Why is this? In our lives, there is a pattern that we see: We tend to praise what we prize. Enjoyment of something overflows into praise. Go to a great movie sometime, and when you leave the theater, what are you usually talking with your friends about? How great the movie is! You are praising it. It also seems as if our enjoyment of something is not complete unless we are able to praise it. If your friends said, "Be quiet, I don't want to hear about it," your enjoyment of the movie would not be complete. So praise is necessary for full, complete enjoyment. If God did not seek His praise from us then our enjoyment of Him would not be made full -- it would be incomplete since it wouldn't overflow into praise. The way for God to win the most praise from us is to fully display His character. So if God wants us to fully enjoy Him and prize Him, He must seek His own praise through us so that our enjoyment of Him will overflow into praise and complete our joy.

John Piper summarizes these truths well: "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." So even in our enjoyment (and resulting praise) God is glorified. Thus, God seeking our good and God seeking His praise are really one and the same pursuit, since our good/joy yields praise to His name.

Further, in order for us to truly value God's great mercy and gift of eternal life, it is good for Him to highlight the unconditional freedom He has in bestowing mercy. His unconditional freedom makes it absolutely clear that He owes mercy to no one. If everyone got saved, He could not show His unconditional freedom in showing mercy and it might seem as if we were entitled to salvation. If you think you are entitled to something, it is hard to see it as a free, undeserved gift. And it is hard to be grateful and thankful for it if you think it is owed to you. God's freedom in mercy rebukes our sense of entitlement and thus evokes gratitude.

Exodus 33 declares the sovereign freedom of God in showing mercy. In this chapter, Moses asks to see God's glory. God says (among other things) that He will show His glory and that "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." This is a Hebrew expression called idem per idem which stresses the absolute freedom of the agent in doing the action--He can do it however He wants, constrained by nothing outside of himself. Thus, God is saying that one aspect of His glory is absolute freedom to grant mercy constrained by no reason that is outside of His own will. He will give mercy in whatever way He wants. Then God says that He will pass by Moses and proclaim His "name." To the Hebrews, one's name was who they were. It was your very identity. When God proclaimed His name, He said that He was "abounding in lovingkindness and mercy." So one aspect of God's character, His glory, is that He is merciful. But this also draws us back to 33:19--where it says that God is absolutely free in His bestowal of this mercy. Thus, it is God's glory and essence to be absolutely free in His giving us mercy by not being constrained by anything outside of His own will. His will alone determines who gets mercy, and therefore His mercy is unconditional.

If God gave mercy to all, it seems that He would not be displaying that His essence is to be absolutely free in giving mercy. And as we've said, God's freedom in giving mercy rebukes our entitlement and evokes gratitude, thus causing us to value heaven as a true gift of grace. Lastly, as we saw earlier, in order for there to be mercy, there must be people in a miserable plight to need it, which requires sin.

Thus, we have seen how God's love and goodness would cause Him to allow evil into the universe, for in due time this will lead to truly the best of all possible worlds where God's attributes are most displayed, God is most glorified, and eternity is truly valued. Perhaps some may be troubled by the fact that even evil, in the long range, results in glory to God. It may be troubling to think that such a terrible thing as evil was permitted by God for His glory. But look at the other option--that evil ultimately worked to defeat the glory of God. Wouldn't evil truly have the upper hand if God was unable to overrule it for His greatest glory and His people's greatest good?

Biblical Worship Part 1

I am often asked by students "what is worship?" and "why would God want that if He is self-sufficient and doesn't need anything?" Now that is a really great question so what I will do is give an overview today and then come back with some specifics later.

The church exists to fulfill three priorities: worship, edification, and evangelism. Each priority corresponds to a relationship in which we exist:

1) to God,

2) to other believers, and

3) to the world without Christ.

A biblical church exists: to reflect the grace of God back to him in worship, (this is more, but not less, than singing) Romans 12:1-2 , 1 Cor 10. It also exists to apply (teaching and modeling) the grace of God to each other for edification in faith, service and love 1 Cor 14:26, and to extend the grace of God to unbelievers in domestic evangelism and frontier missions (great commission Matt 28:19)

Jesus totally devastated the worship of the most religious people in Israel with these words from the prophet Isaiah: "This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines (so teaching is also worship if it is done properly) the precepts of men". Instead of asking for clarification the leaders defended their pride with anger.

Since God inhabits the praises of His people (Ps 22:3) then whether worship is done biblically is the difference between whether the people encounter God or go through dead motions in vain. Since God “opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble” it is essential that a church follow biblical precepts with “gifted and called” people leading or the congregation will not encounter God. The responsibility and implications of that are staggering. To withhold the presence of God from the people is a grievous sin. In churches where this happens the people soon become cold, find church boring and eventually let their hearts loose in the world which devastates their faith and destroys their testimony.

The love of God is not God's making much of us, but God's saving us from self-centeredness so that we can enjoy making much of Him forever (worship). And, our love to others is not our making much of them, but helping them to find satisfaction in making much of God. “ “In His presence is fullness of Joy”(Ps 16:11). To not provide a venue for the expression of that joy is like going to the Superbowl to watch your favorite team play and be told you can’t cheer if your team scores. The “cheering” is what makes the game great in the first place. The application to church is obvious.

Psalm 149:1 says, "Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise in the assembly of the faithful!" We are commanded to sing God's praises in the assembly of the faithful—in the church! The greatest commandment is simply to love God (Matt 22:38) so worship is the means to express that we are in compliance with that command. If there is no worship then there is no love; if there is no love there is no salvation ( 1 Cor 16:22 “If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed (damned) ).Phil 4:4 “Rejoice in the Lord always, again I say rejoice” is not an optional command for the charismatic.

Part of a church’s job is to teach in such a way as to stir affections for God and provide a venue for their expression. Here is just one example of hundreds where you see it played out with the Word evoking worship. Ps 119:9-16 “How can a young man keep his way pure? By living according to your word. (OK David, what does that look like?) I seek you with all my heart (he feels something); do not let me stray from your commands. I have hidden your word in my heart that I might not sin against you. Praise be to you, O Lord; teach me your decrees. With my lips I recount all the laws that come from your mouth. I rejoice in following your statutes as one rejoices in great riches. I meditate on your precepts and consider your ways I delight in your decrees; I will not neglect your word.” David expresses his delight in God’s Word in worship. To not worship is to fail to truly honor God and His Word.

Matt 4:8-11 “Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them; and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! for it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'" Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and ministered to him". There is one main truth that we should see from this text, namely, that worshiping God is the duty of every human being. The basis of the truth is this: if the Son of God counts it his duty to obey the command to worship God, then how much more must we count it our duty to obey this command? Jesus himself quoted in the book of Hebrews (2:12) “in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises”. Again, if this is a priority of Jesus what does that mean for us as his people?

Worship is an end in itself so that makes it more of a priority than evangelism or edification. The reason it's number one is that everything else churches do are a means to this end. When all other goals serve one goal, that goal is NUMBER ONE.

Edification Is Not the End

The priority of nurture, teaching and edification is not the ultimate end of faith. It is a means of building faith toward God and love toward man. But the reason faith is valuable is because it focuses on God and magnifies His all-sufficiency (Romans 4:20) otherwise what use is it as even the "demons believe and tremble"?. And the reason love is valuable is because it is the overflow and evidence of faith and leads people to give glory to God (Matt 5:16). So spiritual growth is not the ultimate end. It is crucial. But it is not number one.

Evangelism Is Not the End

If growth is not the end then is it evangelism? No, its aim is the ingathering of God's people from every tongue and tribe and people and nation into the joy of worship. So missions and evangelism are not the number one priority. They are a means to the end of number one. Only the priority of worship is not for any greater purpose than itself. It is an end in itself.

Rom 15:8-9 “For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God's truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs so that (the goal) the Gentiles may glorify God for his mercy, as it is written: "Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to your name."

Rom 15:5-7 May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that (the goal) with one heart (affection) and mouth (expression) you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God.

What does eternity consist of:
Rev 22:3-4 “no longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him.” Rev 7:11-12 “All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God”.

God does not tell us to worship Him because He has self-esteem issues. If God is love then He must promote and give what is best (not sloppy seconds). When He looks around to see what is best He finds there is nothing better than Himself; thus He is ruthlessly self promoting. "For My glory" is the repeated cry of scripture! We can pollute that when we make things such as Calvary a testimony of our worth instead of a testimony to the worth of God who was sinned against (Romans 3).

Christians are to worship because God is glorified towards the creature in two ways:
1) When we think rightly about Him. (the result of line by line accurate teaching of the word)
2) That knowledge moves from the head to the heart and is rejoiced in (worship). To only have the first is to not glorify Him and basically say that He is not “worth being excited about” or “unworthy”.

When churches put “duty of service” over “delight in His person” the train wreck will eventually come. Deut 28:47-48 “Because you did not serve the Lord your God with joyfulness and gladness of heart, because of the abundance of all things, therefore you shall serve your enemies whom the Lord will send against you”. The joy of a Christian is a reflection of the value of God. God takes this very seriously and thus spends a great deal of His word addressing it.

May all of our hearts be restless until they find Jesus as the treasure He is.