PETER BECK: "The Most Important Thing I Learned in Seminary"

I met Peter Beck at the annual Evangelical Theological Society conference in San Antonio, TX a few years ago. At the time, he was finishing his PhD at SBTS. A fellow historical theology student, his primary subject of study was Jonathan Edwards. His dissertation topic was Edwards's theology of prayer. When we met I was struck by Peter's kindness, demonstrated in his willingness to interact with an awkward fledgling historical theology student like myself.

Recently Dr. Beck was called to be an Assistant Professor of Religion at Charleston Southern University. He also started a blog called Living to God. His latest post entitled "The Most Important Thing I Learned in Seminary" is excellent. I encourage all you current and recovering (I say this with deep affection for my seminary studies. I wouldn't trade them for the world.) seminary students out there to check it out. Here's an excerpt:

Seminary is a great blessing. I made lasting friends. I grew in my faith. I learned much about God and His word. I also learned a lot about myself and human nature. Here’s a few of the things that I learned along those lines:

1 - Doing all things for the glory of God includes studying.
2 - There are a lot of very smart people out there.
3 - There are a lot of very lazy people out there.
4 - Numbers 2 and 3 often apply to the same people. Thus, number 1.
5 - Some people think they know everything and insist on proving it.

But, the most important thing that I learned in seminary about myself was that I don’t know everything. The more I learned the more I realized that I had so much more to learn. As one friend put it, “the more I learn, the dumber I feel.”

12 QUESTIONS THAT HAVE SHAPED CHURCH HISTORY (1): "How Has God Revealed Himself unto Salvation?"

As the early Christian church grew in influence, criticisms of its doctrine were mounted from within and without. Christian teachers penned answers to these criticisms in defense of the truth. It was an age of apologists.

One of the first challenges the Christian church grappled with had to do with the doctrine of revelation. How has God revealed himself unto salvation? How is that revelation accessed? Who may access it? These were just a few of the questions raised during the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. At stake was not only the church's understanding of divine revelation but the corollary doctrine of authority.

Four false teachings were particularly threatening to the doctrinal purity of the church with respect to the question at hand: (1) Gnosticism, (2) Ebionism, (3) Marcionism, and (4) Montanism. Let's look at each in turn.

Gnosticism

Gnosticism (from the Greek gnosis, “knowledge”) answered the question of how God has revealed himself unto salvation by constructing a concept of higher, secret, or special knowledge. It is through the attainment of special knowledge that God reveals himself to a select few unto salvation. Jesus was a man who taught this special knowledge.

Provenance

There are two principle sources of information on Gnosticism: The Nag Hammadi documents discovered in 1945 (c. 2nd century AD) and the writings of the Christian apologists against Gnosticism (c. 2nd century AD). The Nag Hammadi documents basically break down into creation/redemption/apolcalyptic accounts, liturgies, acts of the apostles, sayings and acts of Jesus, and other miscellaneous writings. Some popular Gnostic authors were Valentinus, Heracleon, Ptolemaeus. Christian apologists opposing Gnosticism include Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus. Irenaeus is perhaps best known for his defense against Gnosticism in a work entitled Against Heresies (c. 182-188 AD). See especially:

• Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 10
• Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 26
• Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 2
• Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 22
  

General Characteristics

• Syncretistic- Willing to incorporate many elements of various religions.
• Elitist- Promoted an “inner circle” mentality. Some were able to attain the secret knowledge easily (i.e. the spiritual persons), others had to work hard to attain it (i.e. the psychic persons), and others had no ability to attain it (i.e. the material persons).
• Dualistic- Reality consists of two fundamental principles which equally oppose one another, the material and the spiritual. The spiritual is the good; the material is the bad.
• Works righteousness- Sin is ignorance. It is manifested in the corruptible (i.e. material) world. Salvation is escaping the material and entering the spiritual by attaining enlightenment before death.
• Asceticism/Libertinism- Some Gnostic ascetics believed that enlightenment could be lost. Other Gnostic libertines believed that enlightenment could not be lost.
  

Ebionism

Ebionism (possibly from the Hebrew ebonim, “poor,” and/or the supposed founder Ebion), a Jewish-Christian sect, answered the question of how God has revealed himself unto salvation by only affirming the authority of part of Scripture. Rejecting the legitimacy of the Pauline teaching on faith, the Ebionites stressed the Old Testament, selections from the Gospel of Matthew, and the Epistle of James. Jesus was a prophet anointed by God to reinterpret and reestablish the law of God.

Provenance

The principle source on the Ebionites comes from the Apologist Epiphanius’ writing Panarion. According to Epiphanius, the Ebionite sect began with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Epiphanius quotes what he calls a “Hebrew gospel,” which contemporary scholars have pieced together and call The Gospel of the Ebionites. (100-160 AD). It appears to be made up of excerpts pieced together from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Irenaeus also attests to the existence of the Ebionite gospel. See especially Panarion: 30.13.1-8, 30.14.5, 30.16.4-5, and 30.22.4.

General Characteristics

• Legalistic- salvation was by keeping the moral law (similar to the early Judaizers).
• Ascetic- committed to a lifestyle of poverty (key verses: Matt. 5:3; Lk 4:18, 7:22; Deut. 18:15)
• Denied the deity of Christ, teaching that Jesus was a man anointed by God as a prophet at his baptism because of his life of perfect obedience.
• Venerated Jerusalem
  

Marcionism

Marcionism was begun in the mid-2nd century (c. 144 AD) by the disenfranchised churchman Marcion, a wealthy shipowner in Sinope on the southern coast of the Black Sea. He answered the question of how God has revealed himself unto salvation, along with the Ebionites, by only affirming the authority of part of Scripture. However rather than rejecting most of the New Testament like Ebionism, Montanism rejected the Old Testament and much of the New Testament. Marcion constructed his own NT consisting of selections from the ten Pauline Epistles and selections from the Gospel of Luke. Jesus was a revelation of the good redeemer God of love, the Father. The OT god was evil, vindictive, capricious, and wrathful.

Provenance

The principle source on the teachings of Marcion is the defense penned by his chief opponent Tertullian entitled Against Marcion. Tertullian quotes Marcion’s commentary on the NT, Antitheses, extensively in his work. See especially Against Marcion, Book 1, Chapter 2.


General Characteristics

• Shared affinity with Gnosticism.
• Antinomian- The OT law is the oppression of the evil Creator God, a capricious God of wrath and judgment (opposite the Ebionites). The NT teaching on faith is the way of righteousness. It is the way of the redeemer God of love revealed by Jesus Christ.
• Dualistic- OT fundamentally discontinuous with the NT. The OT teaches about the evil creator (i.e. of the bad material world) God of wrath and judgment. The NT teaches about the good redeemer (i.e. of the good spiritual world) God, the Father, of love.
• Denied the humanity of Christ- The flesh (i.e. material) is unclean; the spirit is clean. Jesus was not born; he appeared. He did not really suffer; he only appeared to suffer.
  

Montanism

Monstanism was begun in the late 2nd century by Montanus, a recent Christian convert in Phrygia of Asia Minor. Montanus answered the question of how God has revealed himself unto salvation by affirming the authority of the Scriptures and the authority of the “New Prophecy.” Montanus along with two prophetesses claimed to be part of a line of Christian prophecy in Asia Minor that stretched back to the Apostle John.

Provenance

The principle source on the teachings of Montanus are excerpts from an anonymous anti-Montanist apologist quoted in Eusebius H. E. 5.16-17.

General Characteristics

• Gifts/Signs/Miracles- Taught that the prophecies, miracles, and gifts of the apostolic church had waned due to moral laxity. They spearheaded the first restorationist movement in Christian history, intending to renew the spiritual gifts of healing and tongues-speaking as well as the continuance of revelation through ecstatic prophetic utterance. Montanism shares many affinities with the modern Charismatic movement.
• Apolcalypticism- Stressed the immanent return of Christ to the extent that they were prone to making false predictions.
• Prominence of women in leadership
• Asceticism- Religious fanaticism, one’s “spirituality” was judged by one’s extravagance.
  

Summary and Conclusion

As we have seen, the doctrine of revelation unto salvation which undergirds the doctrine of authority was something the early Christian church debated. The question "How has God revealed himself unto salvation?" received three false answers from four different groups that became particularly prominent:

• Elitist view- Gnostics answered by affirming an elitist view of revelation, isolating the revelation of God unto salvation as being for a select group alone, thus denying Scriptural perspicuity.
• Truncated view- Ebionites and Marcionites answered by positing a truncated view of revelation, thus denying Scriptural unity.
• Supplementary view- Montanists posited a supplementary view of redemptive revelation, affirming the legitimacy of the Scriptural-Apostolic account when supplemented by further prophecies (e.g. the Montanists), thus denying Scriptural sufficiency.

Three Attributes of Divine Revelation and Related Heresies in the Early Church

The chart above demonstrates the orthodox position, which affirms the unity, perspicuity, and sufficiency of redemptive revelation. It also demonstrates the failure of the alternate views. Gnosticism denied the perspicuity of redemptive revelation. Ebionism and Marcionism denied the unity of redemptive revelation. Montanism denied the sufficiency of redemptive revelation.

Christian apologists wrote in defense of a perspicuous, unified, and sufficient redemptive revelation--the Scriptural-Apostolic account. That revelation was regarded as authoritative by definition.

FRIDAY EDWARDS EXCERPT: Rains of Refreshment after Durations of Drought

Commenting on Israel's return to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity, in "Sermon Eleven" of A History of the Work of Redemption Edwards writes:

'Tis observable that it has been God's manner in every remarkable new establishment of the state of his visible church, to give a remarkable outpouring of his Spirit; so it was on the first establishment of the church, the Jews at their first coming into Canaan under Joshua, as has been observed. And so it was now in this second settlement of his church in the same land in the time of Ezra. And so it was the first establishment of the Christian church after Christ's resurrection, God wisely and graciously laying the foundation of those establishments in a work of his holy Spirit for the lasting benefit of the state of his church thenceforward continued in those establishments (266).

Then, on God's centuries-long silence between the Old and New Testaments he writes:

Soon after [Malachi's prophecy], the spirit of prophecy ceased among that people till the time of the New Testament. Thus the Old Testament lights, the stars of that long night, began apace to hide their heads, the time of the sun of righteousness now drawing nigh. We before observed how the kings of the house of David (withdrew) and the cloud of glory (was taken away). And now at last the spirit of prophecy ceased. The time of the great prophet of God was now so nigh, it was time for their typical prophets to be silent and shut their mouth! (269)

THE POWER OF THE DARK SIDE . . . FORE!

Ever since moving from the Baptist tradition to Presbyterianism, my Baptist brothers have kidded me about joining the Dark Side of the force. I'm not sure about the origin of the Dark Side designation. Maybe its the cool robes many Presby ministers wear. I suppose they do look a little Vader-esque. Anyway, I've enjoyed playing the part of "Sith Lord" in those conversations. But you know Presbyterianism, being heavily influenced by the Scots, is also known for its ministers' love of golf. Now, thanks to Spike TV, the power of the Dark Side has been married with the great game of golf. This is the best coupling since peanut butter and jelly.

{HT: P&P]

It appears as though the Dark Side designation may be attaching itself to the Anglo-Catholic tradition as well.

HOUGH CALLS US TO HATE

Last night I was browsing through The Graze, Redeemer Presbyterian Church's youth blog. My friend Brian Hough is the youth pastor at Redeemer. I encourage you to go check it out. Brian has a wonderful ability to shoot and edit movies to include short annotations, fitting background music, and slow-mo segments. Funny stuff!

I ran across this excellent post from Brian entitled "May We Hate More Deeply":

I know it sounds odd, but this morning I was praying to the Father for a deep sense of hate to reside in my heart. You see I love too much, if you really knew me you would know that my love is too strong and my hate is too weak. You must know there is a catch to this though, surely you think I’m not praying to hate people or groups of people and you are right. This odd prayer of mine is the result of reading underlines and stars in Proverbs eight and nine this morning. As I read the well known Psalm 9:10, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom” I asked the usual question. What is the fear of the LORD? What does that mean? Fear Him like Daniel with the lion? Like a robber in my home? Like a disappointed father? Some misunderstood awe that has nothing to with fear at all? Then I remembered that a few minutes earlier I had read another instance of fear and not fear in general, but what I really want to understand, fear of the LORD. In Proverbs 8:13 fear is labeled, here Scripture does not speak about awe or lions, but speaks of hatred. The verse reads, “The fear of the LORD is hatred of evil.” The author of this Holy Scripture goes on to elaborate on this saying that he hates pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech. Finally it clicked for me and I hope it is now clicking for you. To fear God is to hate evil in all its various forms. While we ought to desire a deep love for God we also must pray for a hatred for all things against God as they are two sides of the same coin. To be wise is to be full of deep hate towards evil, anything not according to Scripture. To have wisdom is to have a hatred for pride and arrogance and perversion and all evil. So I hope you will join me today in our prayer to the God of all the universe to develop in you a deep hatred for evil as well as a deep love for Him in the name of Christ. May our hatred not be removed from our lives, but strengthened and redirected at those things which God Himself hates. Then we will be wise.

IS THE NEW COVENANT UNBREAKABLE?

I ran into this article at Reformation Faith Today. It is originally from Third Millennium Ministries:

Question

Concerning the topic of baptism, in Jer. 31, is the main point that the new covenant will be unbreakable? And if so, why, as in the PCA book of church order, do we say when baptizing our children that they will grow up to either be covenant breakers or covenant keepers?

Answer

No, the new covenant is not unbreakable — at least not yet. The “new covenant” is better translated ”renewed covenant” (both the Hebrew and Greek words for “new” in the phrase “new covenant” may be translated either way). The point that Jeremiah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is that since the covenant has been broken it needs to be renewed. That’s why the mention of “which they broke.” Nevertheless, through Jeremiah God does offer that he will forgive all his people and make sure they all know him.

We are currently in the new covenant (cf. Heb. 8), but we have not yet received all the blessings of that covenant. For example, we still have to teach people about God. It is not the case that everyone knows him, or that all the elect have been converted. Only when this happens will we will be able to say that everyone knows the Lord and is forgiven. As will all the covenant blessings, we await Christ’s return for the ultimate fulfillment of this great hope. At that time, Christ will purge the wicked from his people, and glorify believers. This is how we will end up with a people of God in which it can be said that everyone knows the Lord.

The PCA BCO speaks of baptizing in these terms because it rightly understands that the visible church is in covenant with God, and that our children are part of the visible church. When we baptize anyone, including our children, one of the things we signify is that the person baptized is in covenant with God. If that person rejects Christ, he/she is accountable to fulfill all the stipulations of the covenant on his own (one of which, of course, is to receive Christ!) — this is the same as being without Christ outside the church, except that being in covenant with God places us in line for greater judgment. If the person baptized receives Christ, he/she is counted a covenant keeper in Christ and inherits the full covenant blessings (in due time).

Regarding the new covenant, it may be helpful to mention that the Hebrew and Greek words for “new” may also be translated “renewed.” Being Reformed, I prefer this second translation because it highlights the fact that there is one covenant under various administrations rather than multiple covenants. In the Bible we see covenant renewal taking place at such times as when God reaffirms his commitment to his people, and when he restores his covenant people to a good relationship with him after they have been disciplined. So in one sense, the covenant in the Old Testament was regularly being “renewed.”

When Jeremiah spoke of the coming “new covenant,” he was looking forward to the time when God would restore Israel to a right relationship with himself after having disciplined them in exile. When the Restoration began (at the Cyrus Decree), God did begin to renew his covenant with Israel in some very significant ways: he allowed the people to return to the Promised Land; he allowed the temple to be rebuilt; he began blessing the works of their hands; he offered to install Zerubbabel as Davidic king. But because the people did not remain faithful even in the midst of this renewal process, God did not follow through with all of the blessings that he had offered to give them in the renewal. As a result, while some renewal and blessings were realized, the restoration effort ultimately failed and renewal was not finally had. The Restoration continued the pattern of Israel’s history: God was faithful, God was merciful, God gave and blessed; but the people rebelled and thus did not receive the full covenant blessings.

When Christ came, his work achieved what Israel’s pasts works had not. He kept the terms of the covenant and thus secured full covenant renewal. The prior “renewals” had all been partial and ephemeral because the people had never managed to keep the covenant. But Christ’s work was different. His obedience was complete, and his administration of the covenant is lasting. Thus, the covenant renewal under his administration will be a complete renewal. I say will be because it isn’t finished yet. We have begun in earnest the final process of restoration and covenant renewal, but we have yet to realize many of the blessings offered in the new covenant (such as the resurrection of our bodies, our glorification, the final judgment and destruction of Christ’s enemies, the new heavens and earth, etc.). It is right to say that we are now in the new or renewed covenant, but it is also important to realize that we still need Jesus to come back before the renewal will really be complete.

Answer by Ra McLaughlin

Check out Thirdmill's Q&A section for some very good articles like this: What is Covenant Theology?

12 Questions That Have Shaped Church History (Syllabus Schedule)

Above is the centerpiece of a monument known as the Reformation Wall in Geneva, Switzerland. The four statues are representations of the Protestant reformers (from left to right) William Farel, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and John Knox. These are men to whom my church tradition (Presbyterian and Reformed) traces its roots. By God's providence, they lived during the time in which the doctrines that have come to define the P&R tradition were most significantly developed. The Reformation Wall is a reminder that Christian doctrine is historical. Theology is historical.

I have been wanting to develop an introduction seminar to the history of Christian doctrine since taking my first church history class with Dr. John Hannah almost three years ago. It was then that I fell in love with the discipline of historical theology.

Earlier this year I got my chance to do just that by co-teaching a Spring semester Midweek (Wednesday evening) class with Jared Nelson at Park Cities Presbyterian Church. It was called "12 Questions That Have Shaped Church History." The course basically follows a chronological line from the early second century to the present. We learned later in the course that we had more classes available than we initially thought, so the 12 questions became 14. I put together the syllabus as well as nine of the fourteen lesson plans and lectures.

I spoke with Jared yesterday. He suggested that we post our lecture notes on our blogs. What follows is the syllabus schedule:

1. How has God revealed himself unto our salvation? (Gnosticism, Ebionism, Marcionism, and Montanism) (Jay Bennett)
   
2. How can God be both one and more than one? (Modalism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, and Niceno-Constantinopolitan Trinitarianism) (Jared Nelson)
   
3. How can divinity be united with humanity? (Docetism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism [Monophysitism], and Chalcedonian Christology) (Jay Bennett)
   
4. What is the moral capability of fallen humanity? (Pelagianism, Augustinianism, Cassian Semi-pelagianism, and Orange Semi-augustinianism) (Jared Nelson)
   
5. How is the grace of God mediated to his people? (Authority, Novation/Donatist controversies, Filioque controversy, Rise of Papacy, and the Development of the sacramental system) (Jay Bennett)
   
6. Why did Christ die? (Anselmic satisfaction, Abelardian moral influence, Lombardian eclecticism, and Duns Scotus’ nominalism) (Jared Nelson)
   
7. How can I be assured of my salvation? (progressive justification, sola fide, and the Protestant Reformation) (Jay Bennett)
   
8. How are the full benefits of Christ's atonement acquired? (Roman Catholicism, Arminianism, Amyraldianism, Grotianism, and Calvinism) (Jay Bennett)
9. What is the basis of Christian unity? (The English Reformation, the Elizabethan Settlement, and the rise of Puritanism) (Jay Bennett)
   
10. What is true religion? (The First and Second Great Awakenings) (Jared Nelson)
    
11. What is true freedom? (Enlightenment Arminianism and Edwardsian-Calvinian Free Will) (Jay Bennett)
    
12. How do I know [God]? (Enlightenment philosophies and the rise of German liberalism) (Jay Bennett)
    
13. What is true? (Modernism v. Fundamentalism) (Jared Nelson)
    
14. What next? (American evangelicalism into the 21st century) (Jay Bennett and Jared Nelson)
    

My reason for framing each class according to a specific question was twofold. First, posing a question significantly aids in communicating the importance of the lecture topic, which is a vital aspect of any introductory level seminar. For instance, a teacher might entitle a lecture "Medieval Atonement Theories" rather than "Why did Christ die?" But if he doesn't immediately lead the students to understand that the question being grappled with in the development of atonement theories was "Why did Christ die?" then he runs the risk of losing his non-initiated students to apathy. Second, posing specific questions helps to focus the teachers' and students' attention. One of the difficulties of teaching is staying on track. It is often very tempting to explore tangents that, while potentially worthy topics of study in themselves, don't actually serve to further the study of the topic at hand.

I think the class was well done. The Lord was gracious to us. We had a good group of faithful students who seemed to remain interested and learn much. Teaching this class with Jared was a highlight of my year at PCPC. I pray our triune God was glorified as his people grew in their knowledge and love of him and his work in the history of the Christian church.

Over the next few weeks I will be posting my lecture notes adapted for the blogosphere. We also incorporated powerpoint into the lectures in order to make use of charts and other graphics. I will do my best to intersperse the most pertinent slides within each post. Feel free to comment. Suggested improvements are welcomed.

FRIDAY EDWARDS EXCERPT: Why Has God Ordained that Evil Thrive in His World?

It's been a while since my last post. I've been in Georgia visiting family. We end our family visit Saturday afternoon by leaving for Florida. There we will spend two days getting to know the town of Quincy and the people of New Philadelphia Presbyterian Church (PCA). New Philadelphia has invited me down to visit in lieu of a call to be their pastor. Andrea and I are looking forward to visiting Quincy.

I have prepared a sermon for Sunday morning. I may post the manuscript in several parts in the near future, but for now, here's the basic info:

Text: Daniel 4:28-33 (The humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon)
Title: "The Kingdom Has Departed from You"
Themes: Divine sovereignty, Humility
Thesis: God humbles the self-exalted and exalts the humble.

This afternoon I read sermon ten of Jonathan Edwards's A History of the Work of Redemption. Providentially, Edwards comments on the rise of Babylon in sermon ten. Commenting on why God allows kingdoms like Babylon to rise to such power in the world, Edwards writes:

God suffered the devil to do his utmost to establish his interest by setting up the greatest, strongest, and most glorious kingdoms in the world that he could, before the despised Jesus overthrew him and his empire. Christ came into the world to bring down the high things of Satan’s kingdom, that the hand of the Lord might be on every one that is proud and lofty, and every high tower, and every lofty mountain . . . And therefore these things were suffered to rise very high, that Christ might appear so much the more glorious in being above them (249).

Indeed, Edwards writes:

God suffered Satan’s kingdom to rise to so great a height of power and magnificence before his Son came to overthrow it, to prepare the way for the more glorious triumph of his Son. Goliath must have on all his splendid armor when the stripling David comes against him with a sling and stone for the greater glory of David’s victory” (248).

PIPER: Relating Knowledge and Godliness

If you can be godly and wrong, does truth matter? John Piper posted an excellent article today exploring the relationship between knowledge and godliness. Here's an excerpt:

All godliness is owing to truth, that is, to God as he is truly known. Truth, known with the mind and loved with the heart, is the way God produces all godliness. You will know the truth and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).

WHAT IS MINISTERIAL SUCCESS?

Last night I interviewed with a PCA church in South Carolina that is searching for a solo pastor. Here's one of the questions they asked:

In your view, what is success in Christian ministry?

I responded by first pointing out that the question is answered in widely divergent ways within the broader American evangelical tradition. This is evidenced by the multi-million dollar Christian book industry which is largely driven (e.g. purpose-driven) by books that purport to answer this question. Then I recalled a moment during my internship at Park Cities Presbyterian Church this last year that I think epitomizes ministerial success.

I was out of the office one afternoon making hospital visits with pastor Ron Williams. We visited a long-time member of PCPC at a rehabilitation hospital. He was an elderly man, probably in his 80's, suffering from an intestinal blockage. He was weak, confined to his bed, and had been near death multiple times. As a former lawyer, he was a man of many words. Several times he expressed his appreciation to us for just being there to listen to him talk. As we listened, I was struck by the joy this man had. Even in the midst of great suffering and the imminent threat of death, he had a sweet spirit of thankfulness and gladness. He was content in Christ.

As we left his room that day and walked back to the car, I remember telling Ron what an encouragement it was to witness God's work in this man's life. I believe very few people reach the latter stages of life and endure that level of suffering with contentment. Most become bitter and depressed. This man's joy in the midst of great suffering was a clear testimony of God's unassailable love for him. This is ministerial success: contentment in the midst of suffering. It is reserved for those whom God has chosen to inseparably unite to his Son by faith.

As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:36-39).

Why are we more than conquerors?

Because we have achieved a certain level of significance or influence? No.

Because God has united his elect to his Son Jesus Christ. We are more than conquerors because we are his. In this blessed truth we can rest content, even in the midst of great suffering.

JOHN BUNYAN: Uncertainty as a Sign of True Sincerity

From the great English Baptist Puritan pastor John Bunyan:

Not to see, and yet to believe; to be a follower of the Lamb, and yet to be at uncertainty, what we shall have at last; argues love, fear, faith, and an honest mind, and gives the greatest sign of one that hath true sincerity in his soul (Advice to Sufferers, [Swengel, PA: Reiner Publications, 1976 reprint], 21).

DISPATCHES FROM HELM'S DEEP

Paul Helm has posted a set of articles for the month of July at Helm's Deep.

Analysis 16 - Aspirational Theology on N.T. Wright's doctrine of justification.
4 - Calvin and Covenant Theology, part 4 of a series on Calvin due to be published in book form August 18.
Analysis Extra - 'The Phenomena' on the Princetonian doctrine of Scripture.

Here's an excerpt from "Calvin and Covenant Theology":

So the covenant between God and man, the device through which God by his promise binds himself to Abraham at first and through him to a chosen people, to be their defender and Saviour, is one covenant differing only its various dispensations. 'The covenant made with all the fathers is so far from differing from ours in reality and substance, that it is altogether one and the same: still the administration differs'. In both dispensations believers had the hope of immortality, the covenant was established not by their merits but by God's grace; and finally, Christ is revealed as the Mediator of this covenant. . . .

This theology found later expression in the work of the Dutch theologians Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669) and Herman Witsius (1636-1708), and in numerous other theologians such as the Englishman John Ball (1585-1640), and was given precise confessional expression in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647). . . .

This methodical arrangement of the biblical revelation under the overarching concept of the covenant has a number of pedagogic advantages. The resulting theology has one readily understandable theme and a number of variations. Covenanting is the activity of people: the three persons of the Trinity agreeing together in the covenant of redemption, the Lord establishes a covenant with Abraham, and so on. Such theology is conveyed not in abstract categories (such as election, predestination, redemption, grace) but in personal terms: promising, trusting, obeying, sending, giving, and redeeming.

Is such covenant theology a legitimate development of Calvin's theology? Perhaps it is, if by that question is meant, would Calvin have become a covenant theologian had he lived longer? Yet while this question is not pure speculation, it is fairly speculative. What we know for certain is that while Calvin's theology is broadly covenantal in the way already described, there are important aspects of it that the more developed covenant theology is at odds with. So in order to have become a fully-fledged covenant theologian Calvin would have had to have changed his mind on some of these matters and made up his mind on others. We can mention them briefly. . . .

And check out this quote from Geoffrey Thomas in Helm's sidebar:

Is dead orthodoxy one of the top seven perils attacking the gospel church in Britain today? In my judgment it's not even one of the heads of the beast that comes out of the sea. There are seven more dangerous foes before we encounter dead orthodoxy. Let's not tilt at windmills. Let's be as orthodox as we can; even if some of the work we study is as dry as dust it is still gold dust.