Wednesday, September 30, 2020

Conversion Entails Spiritual Change

"If conversion to Christianity makes no improvement in a man’s outward actions—if he continues to be just as snobbish or spiteful or envious or ambitious as he was before—then I think we must suspect that his “conversion” was largely imaginary; and after one’s original conversion, every time one thinks one has made an advance, that is the test to apply. Fine feelings, new insights, greater interest in “religion” mean nothing unless they make our actual behavior better; just as in illness “feeling better” is not much good if the thermometer shows that your temperature is still going up."

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 207

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Dave Armstrong's Utter Hypocrisy On Sola Scriptura And Private Interpretation

        Roman Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong claims that Sola Scriptura is not an adequate means of resolving heresy and mentions William Lane Craig's upholding of Monothelitism as an example to prove his point:

        "The Protestant appeals to his own (sometimes heretical) interpretation of Scripture, which for him trumps any apostolic tradition of the Church; thumbing his nose even at (Craig’s phrase) “Nicene orthodoxy.” It’s a prime example of how sola Scriptura can lead to heresy (has no final answer against it): even very serious heresy involving the theology of God: theology proper, and Christology. This is what can and does happen by denying the infallibility of the Church and ecumenical councils."

        The irony of Dave Armstrong's reasoning is that he himself appeals to the Scriptures in refuting this christological heresy:

       "Jesus distinguishes His human will from His Divine Will, but completely subordinates the former to the latter. According to Ludwig Ott in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (p. 148), here are the scriptural proofs of the orthodox Catholic (and mainstream Protestant) position (with one or two of my own added) [Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42; John 5:30; 6:38; John 4:34; 5:19; 8:29; 14:31; Romans 5:19; Philippians 2:8; Hebrews 10:9; John 10:18; Matthew 7:21; 12:50; 18:14; John 6:39-40; etc.]."

        If the principle of Sola Scriptura is inadequate to address Monothelitism, then what purpose or reason is there for this Roman Catholic apologist to use Scripture to refute this theology? He is, in essence, contradicting himself. His argument is self-refuting.

        The only way Scripture alone would be insufficient to refute Monothelitism is if it had nothing to say on that subject at all. However, plenty of arguments against this doctrine can be made from Scripture itself and thus it is sufficient to address heresy.

Examining The Catholic Doctrine Of The Real Presence In Light Of Scripture

        "Christ becomes present in the Sacrament of the Altar by the transformation of the whole substance of the bread into His Body and of the whole substance of the wine into His blood...This transformation is called Transubstantiation.” (Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 379)

        The Apostle Paul's language of "proclaim His death" and "until He comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26) logically suggests that the body of Jesus Christ is physically absent from the world at this point in time. He will return again to establish everlasting peace. If transubstantiation is true, then this passage of Scripture has been violated and devoid of substance because Christ would be coming down from heaven on a daily basis by the command of ordained ministerial priests.

        The Lord Jesus Christ told His disciples that they would not see Him in the flesh after His ascension into heaven (John 7:33; 16:10; Acts 1:8-9). If He comes down from His throne at the command of a priest, then He would be contradicting Himself because He would be descending on a daily basis for believers to behold under the appearance of bread and wine.

        Paul stated that Christ is sitting at the right hand of God the Father (Colossians 3:1). If he believed in the Roman Catholic doctrine of the real presence, then it would have been perfectly reasonable for him to provide an exception to that idea. But he does not. Paul said elsewhere, "...even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him in this way no longer." (2 Corinthians 5:16).

        If belief in the real presence of Jesus Christ during communion is meant to be an article of the Christian faith, then why is this notion not found in the biblical accounts of the Last Supper? These contexts do not say anything about Him being physically present in the church in future generations. Jesus warned His disciples of people who would claim to have encountered Him after His physical departure from this world and to not be fooled by seemingly miraculous signs performed in such scenarios (Matthew 24:23-26).

        What can be inferred from the text of Scripture is Christ being present amongst believers in a spiritual sense (Matthew 18:20; 28:20). He is made present in our minds as we bring into remembrance the significance of His atoning work. Christ does not need to come down from heaven to be orally consumed in order to impart grace or nourish our faith.

Saturday, September 26, 2020

Distinguishing Between Water Baptism And Baptism Of The Holy Spirit

Which Spirit also filled John the Baptist even from his mother’s womb; and it fell upon those who were with Cornelius the centurion before they were baptized with water. Thus, cleaving to the baptism of men, the Holy Spirit either goes before or follows it; or failing the baptism of water, it falls upon those who believe.

Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.)

Friday, September 25, 2020

One Reason Baptismal Regeneration Is False

"And what wilt thou determine against the person of him who hears the word, and haply taken up in the name of Christ, has at once confessed, and has been punished before it has been granted him to be baptized with water? Wilt thou declare him to have perished because he has not been baptized with water? Or, indeed, wilt thou think that there may be something from without that helps him to salvation, although he is not baptized with water? They thinking him to have perished will be opposed by the sentence of the Lord, who says “Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before my Father which is in heaven;” because it is no matter whether he who confesses for the Lord is a hearer of the word or a believer, so long as he confesses that same Christ whom he ought to confess...therefore nobody can confess Christ without His name, nor can the name of Christ avail any one for confession without Christ Himself."

Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.)

Thursday, September 24, 2020

Why People Need Not Be Baptized Twice

And so there was this same presumption concerning Christ in the mind of the disciples, even as Peter himself, the leader and chief of the apostles, broke forth into that expression of his own incredulity. For when he, together with the others, had been asked by the Lord what he thought about Him, that is, whom he thought Him to be, and had first of all confessed the truth, saying that He was the Christ the Son of the living God, and therefore was judged blessed by Him because he had arrived at this truth, not after the flesh, but by the revelation of the heavenly Father; yet this same Peter, when Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders, and priests, and scribes and be killed, and after the third day rise again from the dead; nevertheless that true confessor of Christ, after a few days, taking Him aside, began to rebuke Him, saying, “Be propitious to thyself: this shall not be;” so that on that account he deserved to hear from the Lord, “Get thee behind me, Satan; thou art an offence unto me, because he savoured not the things which are of God, but those things which are of men.” Which rebuke against Peter became more and more apparent when the Lord was apprehended, and, frightened by the damsel, he said, “I know not what thou sayest, neither know I thee;” and again, when using an oath, he said this same thing; and for the third time, cursing and swearing, he affirmed that he knew not the man, and not once, but frequently denied Him. And this disposition, because it was to continue to him even to the Lord’s passion, was long before made manifest by the Lord, that we also might not be ignorant of it. Again, after the Lord’s resurrection, one of His disciples, Cleopas, when he was, according to the error of all his fellow-disciples, sorrowfully telling what had happened to the Lord Himself, as if to some unknown person, spoke thus, saying of Jesus the Nazarene, “who was a prophet mighty in deed and in word before God and all the people; how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and fastened Him to the cross. But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel.” And in addition to these things, all the disciples also judged the declaration of the women who had seen the Lord after the resurrection to be idle tales; and some of them, when they had seen Him, believed not, but doubted; and they who were not then present believed not at all until they had been subsequently by the Lord Himself in all ways rebuked and reproached; because His death had so offended them that they thought that He had not risen again, who they had believed ought not to have died, because contrary to their belief He had died once. And thus, as far as concerns the disciples themselves, they are found to have had a faith neither sound nor perfect in such matters as we have referred to; and what is much more serious, they moreover baptized others, as it is written in the Gospel according to John.

Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.)

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

The Example Of the Apostles As An Argument Against Baptismal Regeneration

"...but all the disciples, to whom, though already baptized, the Lord afterwards says, that “all ye shall be offended in me,” all of whom, as we observe, having amended their faith, were baptized after the Lord’s resurrection with the Holy Spirit…the baptism of water, which is of less account provided that afterwards a sincere faith in the truth is evident in the baptism of the Spirit, which undoubtedly is of greater account."

Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.)

Tuesday, September 22, 2020

Baptism Is Not A Requirement For Salvation

And there will be no doubt that men may be baptized with the Holy Ghost without water, as thou observest that these were baptized before they were baptized with water; that the announcements of both John and of our Lord Himself were satisfied, forasmuch as they received the grace of the promise both without the imposition of the apostle’s hands and without the laver [baptismal font], which they attained afterwards. And their hearts being purified, God bestowed upon them at the same time, in virtue of their faith, remission of sins; so that the subsequent baptism conferred upon them this benefit alone, that they received also the invocation of the name of Jesus Christ, that nothing might appear to be wanting to the integrity of their service and faith.

Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.)

The Forgiveness Of God For Lapses In Faith

And now blush if thou canst, Novation; cease to deceive the unwary with thy impious arguments; cease to frighten them with the subtlety of one particular. We read, and adore, and do not pass over the heavenly judgment of the Lord, where he says that He will deny him who denies Him. But does this mean the penitent? And why should I be taking pains so long to prove individual cases of mercies? Since the mercy of God is not indeed denied to the Ninevites, although strangers, and placed apart from the law of the Lord, when they beseech it on account of the overthrow announced to their city. Nor to Pharoah himself, resisting with sacrilegious boldness, when formerly he was stricken with plagues from heaven, and turning to Moses and to his brother, said, “Pray to the Lord for me, for I have sinned.” At once the anger of God was suspended from him. And yet thou, O Novation, judgest and declarest that the lapsed have no hope of peace and mercy.

A Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian by an Anonymous Bishop

Monday, September 21, 2020

Atheism And The Origin Of Life

  • The Big Bang Theory:
         -States that the universe began as a very hot, small, and dense ball of cosmological matter, called a singularity, which expanded and transformed into what we call the universe. The universe is continuing to cool down as it continues to spread out further.
          *Why did this happen?
          *Where did the particles of matter which helped to cause the explosion of matter come from? How did everything originate? Something cannot come from nothing.
          *What caused the big bang to go into motion? Something cannot put itself into motion.
          *It would be more reasonable to believe in an uncreated first cause, God.
  • Oscillating Universe Theory:
         -States that the universe expands from a singularity, collapses back again, and repeats the same cycle for all eternity.
          *The universe is not closed and consequently continues to expand outward. In fact, the accelerating force has kept on increasing. We have no evidence for a decreasing speed.
          *A beginningless series of events is logically impossible. The concept of an eternal universe is irrational at face value, for that would mean we could never have reached a point in time when this paper could be written.

Saturday, September 19, 2020

Noting The Contrast Between Faith And Works In Romans 4

        Abraham was not justified before God on the basis of good works but by faith in order that self-righteousness be kept at bay (Romans 4:1-3).

        Justification in the sight of God is not earned as a result of what one has done but is received with the empty hand of faith (Romans 4:4-5). He is not glorified in man being prideful because that is a state of heart He condemns.

        Abraham was declared righteous on the basis of his faith rather than his circumcision (Romans 4:9-12). Faith is contrasted with circumcision, which is a type of good work.

        The promise of God to Abraham and his descendants comes not through the Law but by faith (Romans 4:13).

        The promises of God to those who have faith would be made of no effect if righteousness came through the Law (Romans 4:14).

        Faith is consistent with grace in order that the promises of God to Abraham and his descendants be brought to fulfillment (Romans 4:16). The Law brings forth condemnation (Romans 4:15).

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

John 6:47 And Soul Sleep

If "a person" ends at death there can be no such thing as "eternal life" for persons who die. Those persons are gone, period. This is not the teaching of the New Testament. Jesus said,

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life (Jn. 6:47).

In Greek, "has" is present, indicative active, indicating eternal life is a present reality.

Dale Ratzlaff, Truth about Adventist "Truth," p. 63

Answering Jimmy Akin On Sola Scriptura And The Bereans

  • Discussion:
          -Roman Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin wrote an article on the text of Acts 17:11-12 as it relates to Sola Scriptura and why he thinks that text should not be cited to support the doctrine. Following are his remarks alongside with a critique:

          "...the contrast isn’t between the skeptical Bereans, who insisted on Scriptural proof of what Paul was saying, and the credulous Thessalonians, who accepted it without question. Instead, the contrast is between the open-minded Bereans, who were willing and eager to examine the Scriptures and see if what Paul was saying was true, versus the hostile Thessalonians, who started a riot and got Paul in trouble with the authorities, even though he had proved from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ."

          Acts 17:11-12 does indeed support Sola Scriptura in that the Bereans had tested the validity of the Apostle Paul's message by comparing it to the Old Testament Scriptures. If this method of discernment is not allowable, then it would make no sense at all for Luke to give these people a good reputation by calling them noble. Contrasting the response of certain people from Thessalonica does not change the argument. In fact, the context records Paul himself as appealing to those same Scriptures as the final court of authority in debating Jews (Acts 17:1-3).

          "There is also another reason why this passage isn’t a good proof text for sola scriptura, which is this: The Christian faith contains doctrines that aren’t found in the Old Testament. What’s why even those who favor doing theology “by Scripture alone” don’t favor doing it “by the Old Testament alone.” While the Old Testament does contain prophecies that point forward to Jesus as the Messiah, the Christ, it doesn’t contain the whole of the Christian faith."

          Saying that Paul and Silas did not have a compiled New Testament in their hands is nothing but a red herring. The fact that Jesus Christ was proven from the Old Testament to be the promised Jewish Messiah does not refute Sola Scriptura. The original intent of an author does not rule out a present application to broader conditions. It is therefore not out of bounds to cite Acts 17:11-12 as a supporting text for Sola Scriptura. It can be inferred from this text that written revelation is the only safe and reliable guide for doctrine. The question regarding the extent of the canon, while related, is a separate issue.

          The Bereans had used the Old Testament Scriptures to discern the message delivered by Paul and Silas. They had a love for God and His Word in their hearts. The Scriptures were searched out by these people in humility and eagerness. However, in Roman Catholicism it is maintained that scriptural proof is not necessary in order for a dogma to be true. The "laypeople" are not allowed to interpret Scripture for themselves:

          "The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him." (CCC # 100)

          This kind of ideology is not in line with what we see taking place during the encounter with the Bereans and them accepting the gospel message. These people obviously knew nothing of a Papal system which became prominent in later centuries. The Old Testament Scriptures were indeed sufficient for the purposes of Paul as he witnessed to Jews and the Bereans as they verified the message that he delivered.

Monday, September 14, 2020

Why God Cannot Tolerate The Presence Of Sin

        There are many idols in our society. One in particular that is prevalent throughout the world of evangelicalism is a god who cannot render judgement because of his love and thus condones sin. Is such a deity even worthy of paying homage to?

        If God is unable to judge sinners as a result of being overwhelmed by sentiment, then He must be a weak and miserable God. He would be slave to His emotions. If God were to accept the sinful ways of mankind, then He would cease to be righteous and just. He would be very much like us.

        Such a portrayal of God does not come about in consequence of thinking critically about the biblical text and taking it in its entirety. The love of God is made evident as He provides for both the just and the unjust:

        "...for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Matthew 5:45)

        If, however, we fail to take into account the character of God in its entirety, then we will inevitably reach a wrong conclusion as to who He is and worship a false god. It is a truth that God judges the wicked (Revelation 20). He is holy by His very nature.

Sunday, September 13, 2020

Christ Our Wisdom And Righteousness

        "But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption." (1 Corinthians 1:30)

        Jesus Christ is the fountainhead of salvation and all graces that follow from therein. He is the outward manifestation of God's love and mercy.

        He imparts to us wisdom regarding salvation, which is demonstrated through His work on the cross.

        We receive a righteous standing before God on the basis of Christ's imputed righteousness.

        Sanctification is progressive. Redemption refers to our future glorification where we will be made perfect as Christ Himself is perfect.

        In the Old Testament, the Law is called wisdom and righteousness (Deuteronomy 4:6; 6:25). Christ is our wisdom and righteousness.

        Following are comments by Matthew Olliffe in light of objections to 1 Corinthians 1:30 being cited as a supporting text for imputed righteousness:

        "The LXX (or Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT made 200 BC) has several instances where the same verb for “become” has two or more noun complements—the same construction found in 1 Corinthians 1:30. Yet, in each of these examples from the LXX, each instance of the completing noun describes or implies a distinguishable process that is appropriate to it, despite the fact that syntactically the two or more nouns are complements of the one verb. The examples are LXX Exod 9:28; 19:16; [cf. Rev 8:5,7; 11:19; 16:18]; Lev 22:13; 2 Chron 17:5; 18:1; 32:27; Ps 108:9; Prov 4:3; Sirach 4:29. They show that a process implied by one complement need not be inferred into—and should not be imposed upon—another complement in the construction, just because they complete one and the same verb. Rather, it is the meaning of the noun itself constituting the complement that determines the specific process that is to be implied."

Thursday, September 10, 2020

A Backdrop For Understanding Eating Flesh And Drinking Blood In John 6

These ideas would be quite normal to anyone brought up in ancient sacrifice. The animal was very seldom burned entire. Usually only a token part was burned on the altar, although the whole animal was offered to the god. Part of the flesh was given to the priests as their perquisite; and part to the worshipper to make a feast for himself and his friends within the temple precincts. At that feast the god himself was held to be a guest. More, once the flesh had been offered to the god, it was held that he had entered into it; and therefore when the worshipper ate it he was literally eating the god. When people rose from such a feast they went out, as they believed, literally god-filled. We may think of it as idolatrous worship, we may think of it as a vast delusion; yet the fact remains these people went out quite certain that in them there was now the dynamic vitality of their god. To people used to that kind of experience a section like this presented no difficulties at all.

Further, in that ancient world the one live form of religion was to be found in the Mystery Religions. The one thing the Mystery Religions offered was communion and even identity with some god. The way it was done was this. All the Mystery Religions were essentially passion plays. They were stories of a god who had lived and suffered terribly and who died and rose again. The story was turned into a moving play. Before the initiate could see it, he had to undergo a long course of instruction in the inner meaning of the story. He had to undergo all kinds of ceremonial purifications. He had to pass through a long period of fasting and abstention from sexual relationships.

At the actual presentation of a passion play everything was designed to produce a highly emotional atmosphere. There was carefully calculated lighting, sensuous incense, exciting music, a wonderful liturgy; everything was designed to work up the initiate to a height of emotion and expectation that he had never experienced before. Call it hallucination if you like; call it a combination of hypnotism and self hypnotism. But something happened; and that something was identity with the god. As the carefully prepared initiate watched he became one with the god. He shared the sorrows and the griefs; he shared the death, and the resurrection. He and the god became for ever one; and he was safe in life and in death.

Some of the sayings and prayers of the Mystery Religions are very beautiful. In the Mysteries of Mithra the initiate prayed: "Abide with my soul; leave me not, that I may be initiated and that the holy spirit may dwell within me." In the Hermetic Mysteries the initiate said: "I know thee Hermes, and thou knowest me; I am thou and thou art I" In the same Mysteries a prayer runs: "Come to me, Lord Hermes, as babes to mothers' wombs." In the Mysteries of Isis the worshipper said: "As truly as Osiris lives, so shall his followers live. As truly as Osiris is not dead, his followers shall die no more."

We must remember that those ancient people knew all about the striving, the longing, the dreaming for identity with their god and for the bliss of taking him into themselves. They would not read phrases like eating Christ's body and drinking his blood with crude and shocked literalism. They would know something of that ineffable experience of union, closer than any earthly union, of which these words speak. This is language that the ancient world could understand--and so can we.

William Barclay, The Gospel of John (Volume 1), p. 221-223

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

Does Unlimited Atonement Necessitate Universalism?

        Christ's death for all men denotes divine judgement to the same extant because we have all been commanded to repent and believe on the gospel (Mark 1:15; Acts 17:26-31).

        Just as the Jewish people had to look at the bronze serpent in order to be physically healed, so we must turn to Christ in order to have our spiritual infirmities removed (Numbers 21:9; John 3:14-16). Thus, no decision to receive salvation means no application of soteriological benefits.

        God made atonement even for those whom He foreknew would not repent because of His love and graciousness. He blessed Adam and Even in the Garden of Eden even though He knew beforehand that they would fall. He sent prophets to admonish the Jews even though He knew beforehand that they would reject them.

        God is, in the present tense, bringing about all things to His glory (Romans 8:28-30). If He specifically determined that the benefits of the cross be applied to all who repent and believe, then the gospel and His power are not undermined by belief in unlimited atonement.

Monday, September 7, 2020

A Biblical Presentation On The Doctrine Of Adoption

        Adoption is the act of God by which He considers us to be members of His eternal family. We are deemed His children by faith. Adoption is a legal term, figure of speech used to describe a change in our standing before Him. Like justification, it is an undeserved, unmerited favor of God:

        "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)

        It is not by physical descent or by human efforts that one becomes a child of God, but by faith. He took action to redeem us by sending God the Son into this world. We obtain an inheritance in heaven that cannot perish or fade away.

        Interestingly, the New American Bible Revised Edition has this footnote on a manuscript variant reading of John 1:13:

        "...The variant “he who was begotten,” asserting Jesus’ virginal conception, is weakly attested in Old Latin and Syriac versions."

        The Apostle Paul used adoption as a metaphor to communicate that we as believers partake of the inheritance that belongs to Jesus Christ:

        "and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him." (Romans 8:17)

        "But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons." (Galatians 4:4-5)

        Christ has possession over everything. We shall partake in His glory and riches as we have been included as members of the kingdom of heaven (John 17:22; 2 Corinthians 8:9). We are adopted as children of God in Christ:

        "He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will." (Ephesians 1:5)

        His shed blood brings about both our justification and adoption by God the Father. We belong to Him and He belongs to us.

Accurate Medical Knowledge And The Law Of Moses

"The Laws of Moses, described in detail in Exodus and Leviticus, are exact and nearly complete from the sanitary point of view, and actually little has been added or retracted from these laws during the last thirty-five centuries....Although the Hebrews were great hygienists and were to be admired for their food sanitation (many of our modern laws), we cannot help but notice that they accepted the theological concept of disease...Did the leaders-intelligent men of the standard of Moses-recognize the cause of disease as being other than theological, but in order to hold the people, did they push the truth into the background and nourish mysticism and the theological concept of etiology?"

Russell A. Runnells et al., Principles of Veterinary Pathology, cited in Evidence for Faith: Deciding the God Question, contributor William J. Cairney, p. 141

Saturday, September 5, 2020

More Than Conquerors In Christ

How has God shown himself to be "for us"? Verse 32 answers this with some of the greatest truths of the gospel. The Father did not spare His own Son! He "delivered Him over to us all." Interestingly the phrase "in our behalf" (ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν) is placed first, putting some kind of emphasis upon the substitutionary element of the atonement of Christ in behalf of "us." As Murray put it,

The Father contemplated all on behalf of whom he delivered up the Son in the distinctiveness of the sin, misery, liability, and need of each. If we had been submerged in the mass, if we had not been contemplated in the particularity that belongs to us, there would be no salvation. The Father had respect to all of us when he delivered up the Son.

The giving of the Son on behalf of God's people is the fullest, most inarguable demonstration of His being for us that could possibly be given. And in light of the giving of His Son in our place, does it not follow that He will not along with Him freely give us all things? His point is obvious: God is for us and will not withhold from us anything necessary to life and godliness. He has given us Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, who has become to us our all-in-all. Murry commented,

If the Father did not spare his own Son but delivered him up to the agony and shame of Calvary, how could he possibly fail to bring to fruition the end contemplated in such sacrifice. The greatest gift of the Father, the most precious donation given to us, was not things. It was not calling, nor justification, nor even glorification. It is not even the security with which the apostle concludes his peroration (vs. 39). These are favours dispensed in the fulfillment of God’s gracious design. But the unspeakable and incomparable gift is the giving up of his own Son. So great is that gift, so marvellous are its implications, so far-reaching its consequences that all graces of lesser proportion are certain of free bestowment.…Since he is the supreme expression and embodiment of free gift and since his being given over by the Father is the supreme demonstration of the Father’s love, every other.

James R. White, The God Who Justifies, p. 247-248

Wednesday, September 2, 2020

Romans 3:22 And The Deity Of Christ

"A testimony to the deity of Christ is found in the use of the term "faith" here in Romans 3:22. When Paul speaks of saving faith in Romans 4:5, the object is "the God who justifies," and in context this would be the Father. Yet here we have saving faith expressed with the object being Jesus Christ. Surely such faith could not be placed in a mere creature."

James R. White, The God Who Justifies, p. 188