Why Arminian Conditional Election Makes God a Respecter of Persons - John Hendryx

I often hear the charge against those who hold to a Reformed understanding of unconditional election and effectual grace that it cannot be true because it makes God a respecter of persons.
I think it is important to face up to this charge to see if it has any validity. To do this we need to understand how the Bible uses the concept "respecter of persons" and then let it interpret itself as to what it actually means, and then determine whether or not God would be guilty of it if unconditional election were true. Below is a wide sampling of its occurrence in the Scripture:

"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour." (Leviticus 19: 15 KJV)

"Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous." (Deuteronomy 16: 19 KJV)

"For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again; neither doth God respect any person: yet doth he devise means,
that his banished be not expelled from him." (II Samuel 14: 14 KJV)

"Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts." (II Chronicles 19: 7 KJV)

"These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment." (Proverbs 24: 23 KJV)

"To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress." (Proverbs 28: 21 KJV)

"And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear." (I Peter 1: 17 KJV)

"God is no respecter of persons." (Acts 10: 34)

"For there is no respect of persons with God." (Romans 2: 11)

"My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors." (James 2: 1-9 KJV)

Here we have multiple instances of this phrase in both the Old and New Testament. So what are these passages talking about? They are clearly warning the believer against showing favoritism or partiality, because they declare that God Himself does not show partiality or favoritism. And. most importantly, in each of these instances it means neither we nor God give special treatment to a person because of his position, merit, wealth, influence, social standing, authority or popularity. Thus 'respecter of persons' means we are not to favor one person over the other because of ANY superior personal trait in the one favored, and likewise we are not to show prejudice toward those who lack these characteristics.

So when God unconditionally elects a person in Christ does he first determine who he will choose based on their position, wealth, good looks, influence etc? No. By definition unconditional election means unconditional. It is not conditioned on ANYTHING in us or potentially in us. God does not stand to gain from currying anyone's favor ... even those who are in high positions ... because God gave them that position, wealth, authority or social standing to begin with. The Bible unambiguously teaches, therefore, that God is no respecter of persons in election. Those who are chosen are chosen "in Christ" not because God is thinking about what he has to gain by helping them over others.. God has no need for such things, so, by definition, his choosing us cannot be tainted with such a motive.

I want you to notice, however, the last quote from the apostle James that I offered above. In the midst of his commands to be a respecter of persons it asks: "...Hath not God chosen the poor of this world?" James question is rhetorical, of course. Because yes indeed God HAS chosen the poor of the world ... i.e. those who are spiritually bankrupt who have lost all hope in themselves... S0 God is not looking to benefit from those who are already full, but shows special care those who are empty or impoverished. It is therefore not something God is looking for in people but a lack of something. So according to the Bible, showing special favor to the poor is the very antithesis of what it means to show favoritism or respect of persons. God is showing mercy to him who does not deserve mercy and the poor recognizes this fact. The Apostle Paul also says the same thing: "But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God." And then in the next line, Paul emphasizes God unconditional grace: "And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.". Notice Paul here even makes this a matter of boasting whether one acknowledges that salvation is of Christ alone.

Let's take this a step further: it is actually those who defend CONDITIONAL election who make God a respecter of persons. This is because, if it were true that meeting some condition prompted God's decision to elect his people then His choice of them would be based on their wisdom, prudence, sound judgment, or good sense to believe. He would therefore be looking at the character or merit of that person and choosing them because of it. The Bible, on the contrary, declares that we are all ill-deserving and, as such, God reserves the right to have mercy on whom he will, which is not based in any way on the will of the flesh (John 1:13; Rom 9:15, 16). If God is basing his election on who will have faith then this would, in fact, make God a respecter of persons because these persons are meeting God's criteria in order to be chosen.

It is most ironic that those bringing this charge are the very ones who make God a respecter of persons by making God's love and election "conditional". It is the synergist who believes God shows favoritism or partiality because it is based on whether or not that person meritoriously meets the condition God gives him. In synergism God's love for his people is not unconditional but is given only when someone meets the right condition... i.e. whether someone has faith or not. He chooses them only if they believe in him. Isn't that favoritism? This conditional love is quite different than the love we expect from parents in everyday life. Consider, do you love your children because they do something for you? No, of course not. Don't you still love them even when they do something wrong? Of course. As an example, if your child rebelled against you and made you angry then soon after ran out into oncoming traffic would you run out to save him? or would you wait until he used his own will to prove his love to you first? No as a parent who loved their child you would run out to MAKE CERTAIN your child was not hit by a car regardless of the ebbs and flows of your relationship with him. Your love for him and your choice to save him are based on unconditional love. In fact we would consider the parent who first determined the love of their child as a condition to save them most unloving and cursed.

It is important that we further draw out these every day analogies to show how unreasonable this charge against unconditional election is. Consider the very world we live in. In God's perfect wisdom and because of the fall, for His own sovereign good purposes, some people are born into better families, richer countries, healthier bodies, better times, better conditions, more intelligence, etc. Others are born into AIDS, starvation and poverty. We see these "unfair" situations all around us. Does God have nothing to do with where people are born? Did people born into starvation have any say in the matter? Frankly I do not see the Arminian shaking his fist at God for being unfair here. Yet these conditions we see in the world are there because it is part of God's judgment due to the fall. Further, everyone is born equally guilty in Adam and so it is perfectly just that not all get the same benefits in this life when they are born. If this is true of everyday life why is it such a stretch to carry the same idea into eternity? it is hypocrisy not to recognize this inconsistency.

Next, let us consider the example of Jesus himself in Scripture. Jesus chose a specific time and place to come to earth and reveal himself and not other times. He healed some and not others. He raised Lazarus, his friend, but not everyone. There were other families in the world that were just as sad as Lazarus' family...many of them just faithful, just as godly. According to human unaided reason, Jesus singling Lazarus out for resurrection this might appear to show partiality or favoritism. Jesus actually had to power to raise people from the dead and you would think that if this was the case he would help EVERY family which experienced the death of a loved on. This would not be too hard for him. But Jesus did not do so.

By defining favoritism the way Arminians do you would think that Jesus would go around healing everyone, raising everyone, and making no distinctions and divisions whatsoever. Or, you would think he would at least give everyone the choice to have their loved ones raised. But the Jesus presented in the Bible is obviously not the Jesus of Arminianism or Universalism. He's a Jesus who chooses to bring certain people to life and leave others in their own rebellion. Matt 11:27 says, "...no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."

Again Jesus himself plainly teaches that he makes distinctions again in Matt 20:1-16 in the parable of Laborers in the Vineyard when He gives full wages to the laborers who worked an hour. He concludes, "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?' So the last will be first, and the first last." Does this sound like the picture of God painted by Arminians.

In the end the Bible teaches that God chooses to have mercy on some ill-deserving people out of the entire mass of ill-deserving people. God is not obligated, in any sense, to save anyone because none are his children by nature, but by grace when He mercifully adopts them into his family. The others are rebelling against him and reject him, so he leaves them to their own desire. God is all wise and always conspires with his own wisdom in choosing to do what he does. By definition God's choices are always good, even if you cannot see it. If God doesn't satisfactorily explain to you the good reasons He has for what he does, do you thereby condemn Him for it? Well, most of us don't explain all the good reasons we have for what we do to our own child. Am I therefore immoral? There's several answers I could give that my child would not understand. On what basis do you think you could understand any God-justifying reason there is?

God loves his people because he loves them. Is there some better reason OUTSIDE or ABOVE God that should make him do so? The Arminian would have us think so. But to say so is to profoundly misapprehend the nature of who God is. We know God is always good, so if he wills something to be so, it is right irrespective of whether you understand.

Next, consider your own life and how you think you should treat others. Is it is okay to treat your children any differently than you neighbors or do you treat them exactly the same?

The question really is not whether God shows favorites but IN WHAT SENSE does God not show favorites because God chose Abraham out of all the people's of the earth, not because he saw something good in him, nor because he earned God's favor, but because God chose to. He saves the poor, the wretched and the sinners of the earth according to his sovereign good pleasure in Christ.

The Romans 7 Man by Mike Morrow

Most people who classify themselves as reformed in theology interpret Romans 7:14-24 as the normal Christian who is struggling with his sin. This view proposes that the very best the Christian can hope for in this life is a clearer view of his own vileness. The more spiritually mature he is, the more he sees his sins and his own wicked heart and because of that, he casts himself more and more on Christ.

Another view states that the man in Romans 7:14-24 is a carnal Christian. He is a man who needs a second blessing or to yield to Jesus as Lord or to be filled with the Holy Spirit (there are many ways this is characterized). This experience would then lead him into the blessings of Romans 8 .

I do not believe that either of these interpretations is correct. The man Paul describes in Romans 7: 14-24 is not a Christian. He is a man who has come face to face with his own vileness before God. He sees himself as helpless and in the grip of sin. He knows that he can do nothing, in and of himself, to change his situation. He is a man who is a slave to his sinfulness. The biblical reasons for believing this is the correct interpretation are overwhelming to me.

1. Paul specifically says that a Christian is one who has died to sin (Rom. 6:1-3).

2. Paul says that those who belong to Christ have been raised with Him to live in a new resurrection life (Rom. 6:3; 6:11; Eph. 2:4-6).

3. Paul declares that the Christian is not a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20-22).

4. Paul promises that sin shall not have dominion over the Christian (Rom. 6:14).

4. Paul says that the Christian has died to the condemnation that is in the Law (Rom. 7:1-4).

5. Paul states that the Christian no longer lives in the realm of the flesh (Rom. 6:20; 7:5-6; 8:9).

6. Paul reveals that the Christian now lives in the realm of the Spirit (Rom 6:22; 7:6; 8:9).

These are not statements of experience (though these truths always lead to experience). They are statements of position. The saved man has changed worlds and is no longer under the dominion of sin. Neither is he any longer under the condemnation of the Law because of his sin. He is alive in Christ. He is alive in the Spirit.

The man Paul describes in Romans 7:7-24 is quite a different person. He is a man who has been enlightened to his own sinfulness and need for a savior. I believe Paul is describing his own experience when he was under conviction and not yet converted.

1. Paul describes himself as a man who had been convinced of his own sin (Rom. 7:7).

2. Paul says he was one who had been self righteous, but then, by the work of the Law, saw himself a terrible sinner (Rom. 7:7-10).

3. Paul describes himself as a man deceived and dead (Rom. 7:9-11).

4. Paul describes himself as a man in whom death was working (Rom. 7:13)

5. Paul dubs himself a man who was carnal (fleshly), sold under sin (Rom. 7:14).

6. Paul says that he was incapable of practicing what he knew to be right (Rom. 7:15-21).

7. Paul describes himself as one who had no peace (Rom. 7:22-23).

8. Paul says of himself that he was a wretched man looking for deliverance (Rom. 7:24).

Much has been made of the change of tenses between Rom. 7:1-13which is written in the past tense, and Romans 7:14-25 that is written in the present tense, but the Greek language has an historical present which allows one to speak in the present tense about things in the past. English has the same thing.

The major objection to this view seems to be that Paul also described himself as one who agreed with the Law (Rom. 7:15); as one who delighted in the Law of God in his inward man (Rom. 7:22). How can this be reconciled? If you have ever been under conviction you can identify immediately. A person is brought by the Holy Spirit to agree with God’s Law, even when it condemns him. He delights in that Law in the sense that he knows it is true. The correct appreciation of the truth of the Law is what has brought him to this place in the first place, but his delight in the Law is coupled immediately with “O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me. . . .” And the answer is given, “I thank God through Jesus Christ my Lord.”

In context chapter 8 begins with a declaration of ”There is therefore,no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus.” The subject is, and always has been, salvation, not sanctification. It is about there being no condemnation to those who are in Christ. All that the Law could not accomplish in Paul, (or any other sinner for that matter) God did by sending His Son to the cross (Rom. 8:2-3) so that the righteous requirements of the Law might be abounding in us…we who do not live in the realm of the flesh but in the realm of the Spirit. And, you are not living in the realm of the flesh but in the realm of the Spirit if God’s Spirit lives in you. If His Spirit does not dwell in you then you are not a saved person (Rom. 8:9 paraphrased).

Taken from: thetheolog

Cessationism Vs. Continuance

Today among the many Evangelical scholars and pastors, there is a debate revolving around the spiritual gifts, specifically the so-called "sign gifts," which include tongues, healing, prophecy, etc. Many great men and women of God to this day are on either side. We have John Piper and D.A. Carson, great men of the faith and have contributed much to the Church of God, who believe that the sign gifts are still active to this day. Then, we have people like John MacArthur, who openly denies all the sign gifts for this day, but who is also a great man of God who has contributed just as much to the Church as Piper or Carson. Many have fallen into the error of extremes, either believing that the gifts have stopped for good, or that the Church should be as miracle-saturated as the apostolic church. I believe both are unbiblical, personally. One of my good pastor friends, Charles Leiter, wrote an article entitled Cessationism vs. Continuance: The Error of Extremes. Below is his article in its entirety, and I believe it will shed much light on both view, and also give a biblical alternative. I pray that this edifies the Church of God in a way that will accept the gifts when they are present, and will not deny the gifts when the Spirit withholds them.

Throughout the long history of the Christian church one of Satan’s most successful tactics has been the use of extremes. This is especially true regarding the work of the Holy Spirit. No sooner has one branch of professing Christendom been led into an extreme, unbiblical, or even fanatical position regarding the work of the Holy Spirit, than another branch reacts with an equally extreme and unbiblical opposing position. Needless to say, on both sides the Bible is subjected to the most unnatural and contorted interpretations in order to “prove” these positions, since they have arisen, not out of unbiased study of the Scriptures, but in the heat of reaction to the abuses of the opposite extreme.

Illustrations abound, both throughout church history and in our own day. For every charismatic who teaches that tongues are “the one true evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit,” there is someone from an opposing camp who adamantly maintains that baptism in the Holy Spirit is “always nonexperiential.” On the one side are those who gullibly accept every wild claim to the miraculous as a “great work of God”, on the other are those who deny present-day miracles entirely. Some see demons in everything; others see them nowhere. Some say that all the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit were intended to be operative in every local church at every period of time since the apostles; others contend that no supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit was intended to be operative in any local church at any period of time since the apostles.

In this scenario, Satan wins both ways. In the one group, the most grotesque and fanatical events are passed off as the work of the Holy Spirit; in the other, men recoil in horror and deny the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit altogether. Either way, the work of the Holy Spirit is in some way discredited, and men are tricked into formulating their doctrinal positions in response to errors introduced by the devil, not in the terms that the Bible itself sets forth.
--------------------------------------

With regard to the issue of the continuance or cessation of miracles, miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, etc., the Scriptures themselves lead us to neither of the extreme positions set forth above.

Two general guidelines give the basic framework for a biblical understanding of this issue:

I.  A general outpouring, fullness, and manifestation of the Holy Spirit and His gifts characterizes the whole church age from Pentecost to the Second Coming.

1. Acts 2:16-21 (Joel 2:28-32) “This is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: 'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says, 'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT UPON ALL MANKIND; AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY, AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS, AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS; EVEN UPON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT And they shall prophesy. 'AND I WILL GRANT WONDERS IN THE SKY ABOVE, AND SIGNS ON THE EARTH BENEATH, BLOOD, AND FIRE, AND VAPOR OF SMOKE. THE SUN SHALL BE TURNED INTO DARKNESS, AND THE MOON INTO BLOOD, BEFORE THE GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY OF THE LORD SHALL COME. AND IT SHALL BE, THAT EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED.'”

Here Peter quotes the prophecy of Joel with respect to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit that was to characterize the “last days.” It is clear from this passage, as well as many other New Testament Scriptures, that the term “last days” refers to the whole church age. Joel envisions a time period continuing right up to the second coming (“the great and glorious day of the Lord”). This period of time is identical with the period in which “whosoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved”(v.21)—i.e. the whole church age. Pentecost was thus only the beginning of this Scripture’s fulfillment, which promises an outpouring of the Spirit upon “all mankind”, prophesying of “sons and daughters”, visions, dreams, etc.—none of which were fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. A few verses later (v.33, 38-39) Peter again makes it very clear that this promise of Joel extends, not just to first-century Christians, but to Christians of all generations— “all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself.”

2. 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known. But now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”

Here the apostle Paul specifically teaches that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit will be present in the church until the second coming of Christ, when they will then be “done away.” This passage was repeatedly used by the church fathers to prove this very point. The novel idea that the “perfect” which is “coming” refers to “the New Testament canon” is of recent invention and never even occurred to the great commentators of the past, much less to the Apostle Paul or the Corinthians! To any reader who is not trying to prove a point, it is clear that seeing “face to face” refers to personal encounter (Gen 32:20; Exo 33:11; Num 12:18; Dt 5:4; Jer 32:4; 2 Cor 10:1; 2 John 12; 3 John 14), and “knowing fully, just as we also have been fully known” refers to something much more glorious than having a “completed canon”! Are we really prepared to say that, compared to us, the Apostle Paul only “saw in a mirror dimly” and only “knew in part”?

3. Ephesians 4:11-13 “And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.”

It is important to notice that in Paul’s thinking, the supernatural gifts are not given by Christ to the church primarily to accredit the apostles, but to “build up the body of Christ.” These gifts are distributed to “each” (v.7-8) for the building up of the church, until “we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God”—the very “measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.” It should be obvious that the church has not already attained this perfection, nor will it attain it until Christ returns. In other words, this passage sets forth the same truth as 1 Corinthians 13, that the gifts will function to build up the body of Christ until that day when they are no longer necessary, and the church is presented to Christ, “having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing.” (5:27)

4. 1 Thessalonians 5:16-24 “Rejoice always; pray without ceasing; everything give thanks; for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not quench the Spirit; do not despise prophetic utterances. But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil. Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.”

Once again in this passage, we see Paul instructing the church with regard to “quenching the Spirit” and “prophetic utterances,” in the very same breath that he assures them concerning the second coming of Christ! Clearly there was no thought in his mind that spiritual gifts would cease almost two thousand years before Christ’s return.

5. 1 Corinthians 1:4-9 “I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus, that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge, even as the testimony concerning Christ was confirmed in you, so that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Here, again, Paul’s concept of the supernatural gifting of the church until the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ at the second coming is obvious. This, as noted above, is the ongoing characteristic of the church age set forth in Joel’s prophecy.

6. Mark 16:14-20 “And afterward He appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table; and He reproached them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who had seen Him after He had risen. And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it shall not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover. So then, when the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them, and confirmed the word by the signs that followed.”

Here the Lord Jesus Christ sets forth the characteristics of the church age. Supernatural “signs” will accompany, not just the apostles, but the New Testament church as a whole—“those who have believed” (v.17)—the same people referred to in the preceding verse as “those who have believed and been baptized.” (v.16) How long would this situation last? The parallel passage in Mt 28:18-20 makes it clear: “And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ ” From this it is obvious that the great commission (and the promises related to it), though spoken originally to the apostles, is meant to extend to “all the nations” and to continue “even to the end of the age”, not just during the limited ministry and lifetime of the twelve. (When Jesus says, “I am with you always, even to the end of the age,” He cannot possibly be referring to the apostles, who died at least 2,000 years before the “end of the age.”) Thus, we see the same pattern in the Lord’s teaching as in that of the Apostles Peter and Paul in the passages already cited.

7. 1 Corinthians 12-14 and other passages too numerous to mention.
It is a general principle of vast importance that the New Testament was given to the church as its rule of faith and duty. It was not given as a history book to satisfy our curiosity as to how the church used to function (1 Cor 12-14), or what exhortations Christians used to have to obey (1 Ths 5:19-22; 1 Cor 14:1, 12-13, 39 etc.), or what opposition believers used to confront (Acts 16:16-17; 8:7; 19:19, etc.), or what powers Christians used to have in confronting that opposition (Lk 10:17-20; Mt 10:19-20; Acts 16:18; Mk 11:22-24; Mk 16:17- 18). Throughout passages like 1 Corinthians 12-14, which set forth the church under the analogy of “one body with many members,” there is never the slightest hint that some gifts are “continuing” and others are not, or that some are “supernatural” and others are not, or that some are “extraordinary” and others are only “ordinary.” Never is there the slightest hint in these passages that the “sign” gifts (whatever they are) will pass away with the apostles. Nor is it taught or implied that men need apostles to lay hands on them in order to receive these gifts. In fact, Paul specifically reminds the Galatians that God was “providing them with the Spirit and working miracles among them,” not by the laying on of his hands, but by their “hearing with faith.” (Gal 3:2, 5) The same is evident in Acts11:15-17, where God pours out His Spirit independently of Peter, and Peter realizes that he has no right to “stand in God’s way.” Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 14:1,13 Paul instructs the church to “desire earnestly” and “pray” for spiritual gifts as blessings that could be received directly from God, apart from his own presence or intervention.

II. Even though the whole church age is characterized by the supernatural gifts of the Spirit, the profusion and distribution of these gifts rests in the hands of the sovereign Spirit.

1. Not “always,” “all the time,” “everywhere.” It is clear from both the Old and New Testaments that miracles did not occur uniformly throughout the history of the people of God. There are seasons of special activity on the part of the Holy Spirit. It was especially fitting that the events surrounding the giving of the Law (including the exodus from Egypt and the revelation on Mt. Sinai) be accompanied with “mighty signs and wonders” and with the “outstretched arm” of God. (Dt 4:32; Heb 12:18-21) Likewise, it was especially fitting that the coming into the world of God’s only begotten Son be accompanied by unusual manifestations of Divine power, “both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.” (Heb 2:4) As the direct representatives of Christ, the Apostles, in varying degrees, entered into these special manifestations. We are told in Acts 19:11-12, for example, that “God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were even carried from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out.” Likewise, Paul speaks in 2 Corinthians 12:12 of “the signs of a true apostle” that he had performed among the Corinthians “with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.”

At the same time, we need to be careful not to take this argument to an unbiblical extreme, as some have done. Not all of these seasons of special visitation were related to the giving of a new body of revelation. They occurred at other times as well, according to God’s good pleasure, as in the days of Elijah and Elisha. Though Biblical miracles were especially profuse at the time of great revelatory events in Scripture, they were by no means lacking at other times. As Jeremiah 32:17-21 makes clear, God not only “set signs and wonders in the land of Egypt”, but “even to this day both in Israel and among mankind” (v.20) He continued to perform the miraculous. The idea that miracles were given primarily to accredit certain men (such as the Apostles) is simply not in line with the Scriptural evidence. As noted above, the various gifts are given “for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ.” Rather than limiting miraculous powers to a few leaders (men such as Moses or Paul), the biblical desire is to see the Spirit of prophecy spread as broadly as possible amongst the people of God: “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the LORD'S people were prophets, that the LORD would put His Spirit upon them!” (Num 11:26-29) “Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy.” (1 Cor 14:5) [Such prophesying in Old Testament times was no threat to the authoritative revelation given once-for-all by God through Moses. Neither was the prophesying at Corinth any threat to the authoritative teaching given through the Apostles. These utterances were never, even in the early church, received as being on par with Scripture, but rather were to be “judged” (1 Cor 14:29) and “examined carefully.” (1 Thes 5:21) Anything that did not line up with apostolic teaching was to be rejected. (1 Cor 14:37-38; 1 Tim 6:3-5) The same was true of “signs and wonders” in the days of Moses. (Dt 13:1-5) Thus, the argument that the gifts of the Spirit have ceased because the canon of Scripture is complete (or that a continuing manifestation of the gifts would threaten the authority of Scripture) is not a valid one.]

The fact that throughout the Bible the special activity of the Spirit occurs in seasons, coupled with the explicit teaching of 1 Corinthians 12-14 that the gifts of the Spirit are bestowed sovereignly, “just as God desires,” (12:11,18) should keep us from the error of thinking that we should expect equal manifestations of the Spirit at all times throughout church history. The ability to work miracles was not an automatic possession of either the apostles or the early church. (Mt 17:19- 20) Even in New Testament times, Christians were dependent for their mighty successes upon repeated outpourings of the Holy Spirit as God saw fit to grant them. It was only as God “extended His hand to heal” that “signs and wonders took place in the name of His holy servant Jesus.” (Acts 4:29-31) Neither in the early church nor today can men dictate to God when and where He will do His miracles, or what instruments He will use to do them.

The Type of Woman every Woman Should Strive to be, and Every Man Should Seek

Jonathan Edwards, writing about his wife at the age of 13, before being married to her, said this about her:

They say there is a young woman in [New Haven] who is loved of that Great Being, who made and rules the world, and that there are certain seasons in which this Great Being, in some way or other invisible, comes to her and fills her mind with exceeding sweet delight; and that she hardly cares for any thing, except to meditate on him—that she expects after a while to be received up out of the world and caught up into heaven; being assured that he loves her too well to let her remain at a distance from him always. There she is to dwell with him, and to be ravished with his love and delight for ever. Therefore, if you present all the world before her, with the richest of its treasures, she disregards it and cares not for it, and is unmindful of any pain or affliction. She has a strange sweetness in her mind, and singular purity in her affections; is most just and conscientious in all her conduct; and you could not persuade her to do any thing wrong or sinful, if you would give her all the world, lest she should offend this Great Being. She is of a wonderful sweetness, calmness, and universal benevolence of mind; especially after this Great God has manifested himself to her mind. She will sometimes go about from place to place, singing sweetly; and seems to be always full of joy and pleasure; and no one knows for what. She loves to be alone, walking in the fields and groves, and seems to have some one invisible always conversing with her.

Every woman who is in Christ should strive to be this type of woman, and men, we should all seek women like this, if we truly wish to be holy, and pure, and undefiled before our Lord.

Why is The Book of Chronicles Important? A Word from Matthew Henry

Today, while sitting in my Old Testament History & Poetry class, we began to discuss the book of Chronicles and our teacher showed us how important and great the genealogies and the rest of the book are, and it was very helpful. I became more curious and decided to see what my good friend, Matthew Henry, had to say concerning the books of Chronicles. Here is his introduction to the book of First Chronicles from his commentary on the entire Bible:

In common things repetition is thought needless and nauseous; but, in sacred things, precept must be upon precept and line upon line. To me,says the apostle, to write the same things is not grievous, but for you it is safe, Phil. iii. 1. These books of Chronicles are in a great measure repetition; so are much of the second and third of the four evangelists: and yet there are no tautologies either here or there no vain repetitions. We may be ready to think that of all the books of holy scripture we could best spare these two books of Chronicles. Perhaps we might, and yet we could ill spare them: for there are many most excellent useful things in them, which we find not elsewhere. And as for what we find here which we have already met with, 1. It might be of great use to those who lived when these books were first published, before the canon of the Old Testament was completed and the particles of it put together; for it would remind them of what was more fully related in the other books. Abstracts, abridgments, and references, are of use in divinity as well as law. That, perhaps, may not be said in vain which yet has been said before. 2. It is still of use, that out of the mouth of two witnesses every word may be established, and, being inculcated, may be remembered. The penman of these books is supposed to be Ezra, that ready scribe in the law of the Lord, Ezra vii. 6. It is a groundless story of that apocryphal writer (2 Esdr. xiv. 21, &c.) that, all the law being burnt, Ezra was divinely inspired to write it all over again, which yet might take rise from the books of Chronicles, where we find, though not all the same story repeated, yet the names of all those who were the subjects of that story. These books are called in the Hebrew words of days—journals or annals, because, by divine direction, collected out of some public and authentic records. The collection was made after the captivity, and yet the language of the originals, written before, it sometimes retained, as 2 Chron. v. 9, there it is unto this day, which must have been written before the destruction of the temple. The LXX. calls it a book Paraleipomenon—of things left, or overlooked, by the preceding historians; and several such things there are in it. It is the rereward, the gathering host, of this sacred camp, which gathers up what remained, that nothing might be lost. In this first book we have, I. A collection of sacred genealogies, from Adam to David: and they are none of those which the apostle calls endless genealogies, but have their use and end in Christ, ch. i.-ix. Divers little passages of history are here inserted which we had not before. II. A repetition of the history of the translation of the kingdom from Saul to David, and of the triumph of David's reign, with large additions, ch. x.-xxi. III. An original account of the settlement David made of the ecclesiastical affairs, and the preparation he made for the building of the temple, ch. xxii-xxix. These are words of days, of the oldest days, of the best days, of the Old-Testament church. The reigns of kings and dates of kingdoms, as well as the lives of common persons, are reckoned by days;for a little time often gives a great turn, and yet all time is nothing to eternity.

Here is what he also had to say in his introduction to Second Chronicles:

 This book begins with the reign of Solomon and the building of the temple, and continues the history of the kings of Judah thenceforward to the captivity and so concludes with the fall of that illustrious monarchy and the destruction of the temple. That monarchy of the house of David, as it was prior in time, so it was superior in worth and dignity to all those four celebrated ones of which Nebuchadnezzar dreamed. The Babylonian monarchy I reckon to begin in Nebuchadnezzar himself—Thou art that head of gold, and that lasted but about seventy years; The Persian monarchy, in several families, about 130; the Grecian, in their several branches, about 300; and 300 more went far with the Roman. But as I reckon David a greater hero than any of the founders of those monarchies, and Solomon a more magnificent prince than any of those that were the glories of them, so the succession was kept up in a lineal descent throughout the whole monarchy, which continued considerable between 400 and 500 years, and, after a long eclipse, shone forth again in the kingdom of the Messiah, of the increase of whose government and peace there shall be no end. This history of the Jewish monarchy, as it is more authentic, so it is more entertaining and more instructive, than the histories of any of those monarchies. We had the story of the house of David before, in the first and second books of Kings, intermixed with that of the kings of Israel, which there took more room than that of Judah; but here we have it entire. Much is repeated here which we had before, yet many of the passages of the story are enlarged upon, and divers added, which we had not before, especially relating to the affairs of religion; for it is a church-history, and it is written for our learning, to let nations and families know that then, and then only, they can expect to prosper, when they keep in the way of their duty to God: for all along the good kings prospered and the wicked kings suffered. The peaceable reign of Solomon we have (ch. i.-ix.), the blemished reign of Rehoboam (ch. x.-xii.), the short but busy reign of Abijah (ch. xiii.), the long and happy reign of Asa (ch. xiv.-xvi.), the pious and prosperous reign of Jehoshaphat (ch. xvii.-xx.), the impious and infamous reigns of Jehoram and Ahaziah (ch. xxi.-xxii.), the unsteady reigns of Joash and Amaziah (ch. xxiv., xxv.), the long and prosperous reign of Uzziah (ch. xxvi.), the regular reign of Jotham (ch. xxvii.), the profane and wicked reign of Ahaz (ch. xxviii.), the gracious glorious reign of Hezekiah (ch. xxix.-xxxii.), the wicked reigns of Manasseh and Amon (ch. xxxiii.), the reforming reign of Josiah (ch. xxxiv., xxxv.), the ruining reigns of his sons, ch. xxxvi. Put all these together, and the truth of that word of God will appear, Those that honour me I will honour, but those that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. The learned Mr. Whiston, in his chronology, suggests that the historical books which were written after the captivity (namely, the two books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah) have more mistakes in names and numbers than all the books of the Old Testament besides, through the carelessness of transcribers: but, though that should be allowed, the things are so very minute that we may be confident the foundation of God stands sure notwithstanding.

May we remember that God's Word is exactly that, God's Word. It all transforms us into the image of Christ more.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent equipped for every good work. - 2 Timothy 3:16-17