R.C. Sproul's Blog, page 529

The Law of God

Here's an excerpt from The Law of God, an article R.C. Sproul wrote in 1989 for Tabletalk.

Yesterday, a man I met for the first time asked me, "And what is the Lord doing in your life?" (Something about how he asked the question, the tone of his voice, and his manner in it disturbed me.) The manner of asking was a bit too casual, as if the utterance was mechanical. I suppressed my annoyance and answered as if the question were sincere. I said, "He is impressing upon me the beauty and sweetness of His law." The man obviously was not prepared for my answer. He looked at me as though I was from another planet. He visibly recoiled from my words as if I was weird for uttering them.

We are living in an era in which the law of God is not given much attention either by secularists or by Christians. The law, we assume, is a relic of the past, part of the history of Judaeo-Christianity to be sure, but of no abiding relevance to the Christian life. We are living out, in practice, the antinomian heresy.

Continue reading The Law of God.

The Ascension — The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology

Acts 1:6–8 follows the brief introductory prologue and provides the immediate context for the ascension narrative.

So when they had come together. They asked him, "Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."

The apostles have gathered together with Jesus on the Mount of Olives (cf. Acts 1:12) just east of Jerusalem. The apostles then ask Jesus a question about the kingdom, specifically whether he would "at this time" restore it to Israel.i His response is highly significant because it reveals the last words Jesus speaks before his ascension. He does not respond to the apostles' question with a direct yes or no. Instead, he tells the apostles that it is not for them to know "times or seasons." They are not to concern themselves with this question. Knowledge of the time of restoration belongs to God.ii

Jesus then reminds the apostles of the promise of the Father that they are to await in Jerusalem (cf. 1:5). He tells them they will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon them. There is a possible allusion here to Isaiah 32:15. David Pao explains that the possible allusion is significant because in its original context, the reference to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit "signifies the dawn of the Isaianic New Exodus."iii If Jesus is alluding to this text, he is connecting the coming outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost in some way with the fulfillment of this Isaianic prophecy. This is significant because in Isaiah and other prophets the new exodus is a way of describing the coming restoration of Israel. If Jesus is alluding to Isaiah 32:15 here, then his words indicate that the restoration the apostles have asked him about is in fact coming. It will not, however, occur in the exact manner that nationalistic Jews might be expecting.

Jesus then gives the apostles their last commission, telling them they will be his witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the end of the earth.iv Again there are possible allusions to Isaiah (cf. Isa. 43:10; 49:6). As Pao explains,

Acts 1:8…becomes the second part of the response to the question in that it confirms the beginning of the process of the restoration of Israel. This process of restoration is portrayed through the model of the Isaianic New Exodus in which the salvation of the Gentiles becomes part of the program of the reconstitution of Israel.v

In short, the restoration of Israel will involve the fulfillment of the task that has been given to the apostles to accomplish. The restoration of Israel will involve their bearing witness to Christ not only in Israel but to the ends of the earth. Their commission introduces a theme that is important throughout the Book of Acts, namely the progress of the Gospel and the expansion of the Church. The Gospel of Jesus will be taken from Jerusalem to the very ends of the earth.vi

iBarrett explains that this is a "futuristic present." In other words, the apostles are asking, "Are you about to do this now?" [The Acts of the Apostles: A Shorter Commentary (London: T&T Clark, 2002), 5].
ii I. Howard Marshall, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 59.
iii David W. Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 95–96.
iv Many commentators believe this commission acts as a kind of key to the structure of Acts with the apostles preaching in Jerusalem in Acts 1–7, in all Judea and Samaria in 8:1–11:18, and to the ends of the earth in 11:19–28 (See, for example, Bruce 1988a, 36– 37).
v Pao 2002, 92.
vi Brian Rosner makes some important points regarding the progress of the Gospel and the expansion of the Church in Acts: "In describing the progress of the word in Acts several general points may be made: (1) It is not progress in the triumphalistic sense that Acts portrays (contra Conzelmann), for opposition and persecution are pervasive and enduring; (2) the Jewish element of the mission is not removed, as might be suggested by the simple formula of the word going from Jews in Jerusalem to Gentiles in Rome; (3) God is repeatedly given the credit for progress – it is divinely ordained, planned, guided and supported expansion; and (4) the progress theme functions to include the reader in the task of spreading the word, especially with the open-ended ending of the book." ["The Progress of the Word," in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, ed. I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 233].

Adapted from From Age to Age by Keith Mathison. ISBN 978-0-87552-745-1
Used with permission of P&R Publishing Co. P O Box 817, Phillipsburg N.J. 08865 www.prpbooks.com

From Age to Age is available in the Ligonier store.

Twitter Highlights (5/27/12)

Here are highlights from our various Twitter accounts over the past week.

Genuine love for Jesus manifests itself in obedience to His commandments. —R.C. Sproul

— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 21, 2012

Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to ought to answer each person (Col 4:6).

— Tabletalk Magazine (@Tabletalk) May 21, 2012

...the fact that God would choose any is an extraordinary display of grace. —Steven Lawson

— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 22, 2012

Many men proudly ask to be humble: they desire to be humble in order that they may be admired for it (Spurgeon).

— Ligonier Academy (@LigonierAcademy) May 24, 2012

In our natural state, we are completely unwilling and morally incapable of coming to Christ. —R.C. Sproul bit.ly/kB50XT

— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 23, 2012

The Spirit never brings attention to Himself, but always drives attention to Christ and to His accomplishment... —R.C. Sproul

— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 24, 2012

Jesus didn't die for the sins of all people, only to have the Holy Spirit apply the benefits of His work merely to some bit.ly/Jt7Qf2

— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 25, 2012

You can also find our various ministries on Facebook:

Ligonier Ministries | Ligonier Academy | Ligonier Connect
Reformation Bible College | Reformation Trust | Tabletalk Magazine

Does God's Law Change?

His law doesn’t change. The application of it does. Theologians wisely distinguish between natural law and positive law. This distinction, however, must be distinguished from natural law and revealed law. The latter distinction separates what we learn about God’s law from the created order, and what we learn from His Word. The former, however, distinguishes between the underlying, unchangeable principles, inherent in the nature of things, and the specific purposes of a particular law.

The most common example is the Old Testament requirement that one build a fence around one’s roof. Do we still have the requirement? Is the American church under a cloud of judgment for not obeying this law? By no means This is positive law. The natural law is broader- do not put your guests or visitors in danger. In Old Testament Israel the roofs of homes were places for social gatherings. In America that is generally not the case. The consistent law, the principle underlying the specific, the natural law may have as its application here, put a fence around your swimming pool so no one accidentally falls in a drowns. We still are required to pursue the safety of those on our property.

The ceremonial laws are much the same. God told the children of Israel to sacrifice lambs on Passover, so that they would remember God’s deliverance and look to the coming of the Lamb of God. When that Lamb came, the call to remember abides; the natural law does not change. The positive law now changes, such that we remember the once for all coming of the Lamb and His deliverance of us through the bread and the wine of the Lord’s Table.

Under the same heading, the kosher laws follow the same pattern. The positive law said, “Don’t eat the pork.” The natural law said, “Be a set apart and distinct people for Me.” In the new covenant the positive law finds its expression not in our diet, but in our love one for another. The borders of our commonwealth are determined by the faith once delivered, not a blood line that traces back to Abraham. We are still called to be a set apart people, but what sets us apart is what makes us a people, our dependence on the finished work of Christ.

The distinction between positive and natural law, of course, is not always easy to make. We are not free to simply dismiss the outward at will. Consider Nadad and Abihu who apparently thought positive law was this kind of fire and natural law was just fire. Things did not go well for them. One way we can know the difference, however, is when the Bible itself calls for the change. Jesus said the bread was His body broken, the wine the cup of the New Covenant. Jesus told Peter to eat the pork. This is the same Jesus who told us that not one jot or tittle would pass away from the law.  Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. His natural law reflects not only the nature of things, but His own unchanging nature. Circumstances may change. Our Lord does not. Neither then does our obligation to obey whatsoever He commands.

Interpreting General and Special Revelation — A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture

We have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In our last post, we looked at the Reformed distinction between general and special revelation. In this post, we begin looking at another crucial distinction that is regularly overlooked, namely the distinction between God's infallible revelation and our fallible interpretation of that revelation.

As we saw in the last post, Dr. Sproul's students all affirmed that God's special revelation is infallible, but they were not ready to affirm that God's general revelation is infallible. We have already explained why we must affirm that both kinds of revelation are infallible. Here we need to look more closely at why Dr. Sproul's students were reluctant to affirm the same. In his response, Dr. Sproul says:

But what they were getting at was…they were saying not every scientific theory is compatible with the Word of God. And that's true. But historically, the church's understanding of special revelation of the Bible has been corrected by students of natural revelation with the Copernican revolution.

Dr. Sproul explains that his students were hesitant to affirm the infallibility of general revelation because they rightly believed that not every scientific theory is compatible with the Word of God. This is certainly true, but as we have already seen, this is not the question Dr. Sproul asked. Scientific theories are not the same thing as general revelation. General revelation (like special revelation) refers to an infallible action of God (or to the content revealed through that action). Scientific theories are the fallible interpretations of what Christians know to be God's created works.

There are two issues involved in Dr. Sproul's response that must be addressed. First, since general and special revelation both proceed from God, they cannot ultimately conflict. We will address this issue more fully in a future post. The second issue is one we will look at here, and that is the idea that a misinterpretation of one kind of revelation can be corrected by a right interpretation of the other kind of revelation. Few Christians would disagree with the idea that a right interpretation of Scripture (special revelation) can correct a misinterpretation of general revelation, but is the converse true as well? Can a right interpretation of general revelation correct a misinterpretation of special revelation? Does such an idea conflict with our belief in the inerrancy of Scripture?

Article XII of The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy

Since Dr. Sproul specifically mentions how certain interpretations of general revelation have helped the church correct misinterpretations of special revelation, it will be helpful to look briefly at Article XII of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and Dr. Sproul's commentary on it because a misunderstanding of this Article has led to some confusion on this issue. Article XII of the Chicago Statement reads:

We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.

We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.

The denial section of this article is primarily directed toward those who would limit biblical inerrancy to spiritual matters and who would exclude biblical teaching related to matters touching on history or science. For the purposes of our discussion, the correct understanding of the second denial is important. In his commentary on this Article, Dr. Sproul writes,

It is important to note that the second denial, that scientific hypotheses about earth history may not be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on matters such as the creation and the flood, does not carry with it the implication that scientific hypotheses or scientific research are useless to the student of the Bible or that science never has anything to contribute to an understanding of biblical material. It merely denies that the actual teaching of Scripture can be overturned by teachings from external sources.i

The word "actual" in the last sentence is significant. As Dr. Sproul reminds us, scientific discoveries in the late medieval period forced the church to reexamine its interpretation of Scripture regarding geocentricity.

Here the advances of science helped the church to correct an earlier misinterpretation of Scripture. To say that science cannot overturn the teaching of Scripture is not to say that science cannot aid the church in understanding Scripture, or even correct false inferences drawn from Scripture or actual misinterpretations of the Scripture.ii

Dr. Sproul is making the simple point that while science cannot overturn an actual teaching of Scripture, it can sometimes correct a misinterpretation of Scripture. The church, for example, assumed for centuries that the Bible taught geocentricity – the idea that the sun, moon, planets, and stars revolve around a stationary earth. Careful observations of the earth, sun, moon, and stars eventually proved that the sun is at the center of our solar system, that the earth and other planets revolve around the sun, and that the moon revolves around the earth. Did such observations prove that the Bible was in error? No. These discoveries of how God had actually created things merely demonstrated that an interpretation of the Bible was in error.

Dr. Sproul is not saying anything new or strange here. Charles Hodge, the giant of nineteenth-century Reformed theology, said much the same:

It is admitted that theologians are not infallible, in the interpretation of Scripture. It may, therefore, happen in the future, as it has in the past, that interpretations of the Bible, long confidently received, must be modified or abandoned, to bring revelation into harmony with what God teaches in his works. This change of view as to the true meaning of the Bible may be a painful trial to the Church, but it does not in the least impair the authority of the Scriptures. They remain infallible; we are merely convicted of having mistaken their meaning.iii

The Reformed churches have long held that synods and councils are fallible. As the Westminster Confession explains: "All synods and councils since the apostles' times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred…" (XXXI:4). The same is true of individual Christians. We are fallible as well, and we may err and have erred in our individual interpretations of Scripture. Unless a person believes that he or she is an infallible interpreter of Scripture, this is a reality that must be kept in mind.

When we forget the distinction between what God is saying in Scripture and our own fallible interpretations of His Word, we run the risk of subtly replacing God's Word with our word.

We Believe the Bible and You Do Not

As an example, consider the following statement by the great Lutheran theologian Francis Pieper in his Christian Dogmatics: "The difference between the Lutheran Church and the Reformed in the doctrine of Baptism is fully and adequately defined by saying that the former believes God's Word regarding Baptism, the latter not" (vol. 3, p. 269). The problem with this assertion should be obvious (at least to those who are not Lutheran). Pieper considers the difference between the Lutheran church and the Reformed church on this subject to be a result of the Reformed church's refusal to believe the Bible. Historically, the Lutherans have made the same assertion in connection with the words of institution in the Lord's Supper. In his debates with the Lutheran Joachim Westphal, John Calvin was almost driven to distraction by Westphal's repeated claim that Jesus' words "This is my body" allowed of no interpretation. One either believed them or one disbelieved them, according to Westphal.

During my final months at Dallas Theological Seminary, when I was slowly transitioning out of dispensational premillennialism toward Reformed theology, I was repeatedly informed that the only reason I was not a premillennialist was because I didn't believe the Bible (specifically Revelation 20). My friends there could not grasp the fact that my difference with them had to do with a difference of interpretation, not a difference over the authority of God's Word.

Reformed Christians rightly reject the claim that the only reason we do not accept the Lutheran doctrine of baptism or the dispensationalist understanding of the millennium is because we do not believe the Bible. These are disagreements over interpretations of God's Word, not denials of its authority.

In the final words of his commentary on Article XII of the Chicago Statement, Dr. Sproul explains how the distinction between Scripture and interpretations of Scripture applies to biblical passages that have a bearing on scientific issues:

Questions of the extent of the flood or the literary genre of the earlier chapters of Genesis are not answered by this statement. Questions of biblical interpretation that touch on the field of hermeneutics remain for further investigation and discussion. What the Scriptures actually teach about creation and the flood is not spelled out by this article; but it does spell out that whatever the Bible teaches about creation and the flood cannot be negated by secular theories.iv

In short, while scientific theories can help the church correct wrong interpretations of Scripture, they cannot negate what the Scriptures actually teach. Scripture teaches clearly, for example, that Jesus rose from the dead. Any scientific theory that denies the possibility of resurrection from the dead, therefore, is necessarily wrong. Scripture teaches that God is the Creator of heaven and earth and all that is within them. Any scientific theory that claims natural phenomena arose from purely materialistic causes is necessarily wrong.

Dr. Sproul illustrates his point about the fallibility of our interpretations by reminding us of how Luther and Calvin responded to the new astronomical theories of the sixteenth century. In our next post, we will look at this in more detail in order to discover what we might learn from the mistakes of others.

i R.C. Sproul, Scripture Alone (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2005), 152, emphasis mine.
iiIbid., 153.
iiiCharles Hodge, Systematic Theolgy, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982 [1872–73]), 1:59.
ivSproul, Scripture Alone, 154.

See also:

Introduction
All Truth is God's Truth
General and Special Revelation
Interpreting General and Special Revelation

$5 Friday: Calvinism, Heaven & Hell, Romans

This week's $5 Friday sale includes resources that cover such topics as calvinism, the work of Christ, theology, heaven and hell, culture, and more. 

Sale runs through 12:01 a.m. — 11:59 p.m. Friday EST.

View today's $5 Friday sale items.

Help our Military Chaplains Fight the Spiritual Battle

"This small investment has a great return, as every chaplain will minister to countless soldiers with these teaching tools." — R.C. Sproul

Fighting the Spiritual Battle

A soldier needs the right equipment to fight a war on physical terms. Yet we dare not forget the same soldier's need for the right tools to fight the spiritual war against the world, the flesh, and the Devil. While the nations rage against one another, the impact on soldiers and their families is often devastating. Military personnel are stationed throughout the world and are in desperate need of the gospel and solid resources to help believers grow deeper in their knowledge of the things of God. Ligonier Ministries is committed to meeting these overlooked needs.

Soldiers Need Trustworthy Bible Teaching

Protestant military chaplains work hard, yet rarely have enough teaching resources to meet soldiers' needs. They also lack funds to purchase these tools. Such problems make the difficult work of chaplaincy even harder.

Ligonier cares about soldiers and the chaplains serving them. We provide free trustworthy Bible study resources to chaplains twice a year. In 2012, 150 chaplains will receive resource packages containing books, teaching series, and more by Dr. Sproul, our teaching fellows, and other trusted theologians. The chaplains use these tools in the Middle East, Asia, Europe, and elsewhere.

Will You Help Chaplains and Soliders?

Last year donations surpassed the total needed to fully fund the chaplain support program, so we also sent complimentary Tabletalk subscriptions to chaplains and their families. We again want to fund this outreach entirely through this appeal. It takes $10,000 to fully fund our chaplain program, and we rely on friends like you to provide the funds needed to send teaching resources to chaplains around the world. Will you help?

Donating $30 provides one resource package
Donating $60 funds two packages

Testimonials

"Please let Dr. Sproul know that I use the materials weekly. I am a special operations chaplain, and the men that I minister to love good, deep, solid Bible studies, and there are few things out there that can compare with the materials you all send to me. Thank you!"

CHAPLAIN (CPT) CHARLIE SHIELDS
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

Just a few weeks ago we sat down with Rev. James R. Carter and discussed the military chaplains' need for teaching resources and how Ligonier was able to help him. Rev. Carter is senior pastor of New Presbyterian Church in Pompano Beach, Fla. Prior to his call to New Presbyterian Church, Rev. Carter was a member of the U.S. Army Chaplain Corps for more than 20 years, having pastored soldiers, strategic military leaders, and their families at the United States Army War College Memorial Chapel and throughout the world. Click to watch this short video.

Wisdom and Knowledge

Here's an excerpt from Wisdom and Knowledge, R.C. Sproul's contribution to the May issue of Tabletalk.

In college, I majored in philosophy. On the very first day of the very first course that I took in philosophy, the professor wrote the word philosophy on the chalkboard, then broke it down to show its etymological origin. The word comes from two Greek words, which is appropriate, for the Greeks are usually seen as the founding fathers of Western philosophy. The prefix philo comes from the Greek word phileō, which means “to love.” The root comes from the Greek word sophia, which means “wisdom.” So, the simple meaning of the term philosophy is “love of wisdom.”

When I came to understand this meaning, I assumed that by studying philosophy I would learn about wisdom in a practical sense. However, I soon discovered that Greek philosophy stressed abstract questions of metaphysics (the study of ultimate being or of ultimate reality) and epistemology (the study of the process by which human beings learn). It’s true that one of the subdivisions of philosophy is ethics, particularly the science of normative ethics — the principles of how we ought to live. That was certainly a concern of the ancient Greeks, particularly Socrates. But even Socrates was convinced that proper conduct, or right living, is intimately connected with right knowledge.

Continue reading Wisdom and Knowledge.

4 Reasons to Remember your Creator in Middle Age

Although it's young people that are specifically commanded to remember their Creator (Eccl. 12:1), it's probably assumed that middle-aged people will have the sense to do the same. Surely by then we have accumulated enough experience to realize that remembering we have a Creator and that we are creatures is basic wisdom. How then do we respect and remember our Creator in busy, striving, stressed-out middle age?

1. Remember that we are complex creatures

The body is a complex mix of physical material and physical forces - electricity, chemistry, physics, biology, plumbing, gasses, pumps, siphons, lubrication, buttons, switches, receptors, etc.

Then there's the soul, way more complex than the body and completely inaccessible to empirical research methods. Although we have some Biblical data to mine and research, yielding us some basics about the soul's capacities and abilities, so much about the soul remains a mystery.

And then you put complex body and complex soul together and what do you get – multiple complexities!

The interconnectivity of human nature means that the health of the body affects the health of the soul and vice versa, and it's not easy to figure out the contribution of each to our problems! One thing is for sure, we cannot neglect one realm and expect the other not to suffer the consequences.

2. Remember that we are limited creatures

Hopefully none of us think that we are unlimited. However most of us think we are less limited than we actually are. We vastly over-estimate our physical strength, emotional stamina, moral courage, spiritual maturity, volitional muscle, and conscience steel.

Underestimating our limitations and over-estimating our abilities can only have one outcome – weakness, fraying, and eventually breaking. Try it with anything – your car engine, a towrope, your computer, etc. Underestimate the limitations and over-estimate the abilities and you will eventually blow the engine, break the rope, and crash the computer.

We must find out our limits – physical, spiritual, emotional, moral – and work within them. And we must not impose our limits on others, despising those with lower limits or envying those with higher limits.

3. Remember that we are dependent creatures

Even before the fall, Adam and Eve were dependent upon their Creator. They leaned upon him for everything. That was their most basic human experience, and in a fallen world it's even more necessary.

Many of us are theologically dependent but experientially independent. We depend on God with our lips but not with our lives. We say we lean upon Him for everything but He rarely feels our weight. If we don't live as dependent creatures, we are not worshipping our Creator. By our independence, we are worshipping and serving the creature rather than the Creator.

4. Remember that we are fallen creatures

As part of the curse upon us for our first parent's first sin, death entered the creation and even the greatest creature – humanity.

If you thought we were complex before, we are even more complex now. I enjoy fishing, and like all anglers, I "know" that the most complicated and sophisticated reels catch more fish. But, when they break down they make a much bigger mess than standard reels.

That's why complex humanity is in a much worse state than any other creature. That's why nature films focus on animals rather than humanity. Who wants to look at ugly human creatures in all their brokenness when you can see much more beauty in the animal kingdom!

But that's not the end of the story. Remember, middle-agers, our Creator is in the business of re-creating. In salvation, He begins the process of making all things new, including His creatures. In fact, the Creator lived as a creature in the midst of His creation to save His creatures.

Also see:

4 Reasons to Remember Your Creator in Your Youth

David Murray is Professor of Old Testament and Practical Theology at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, and chairman of HeadHeartHand. He blogs at Leadership For Servants and you can follow him on Twitter @DavidPMurray.

Tabletalk Magazine Available on Logos

Tabletalk magazine was formed in 1977 to provide a substantive study tool for believers. Though its format has changed over the years, Tabletalk continues to challenge and encourage readers to dig deeper into the Word of God in order that their lives may be transformed through the renewing of their minds (Rom. 12:1–2). We're thankful to have been able to partner with Logos to bring more than 20 years of this unique resource to Logos users.

With the Logos Bible Software edition of Tabletalk magazine, all Scripture passages are tagged and appear on mouse-over. What's more, Scripture references are linked to the wealth of language resources in your digital library. This makes all 265 issues more powerful and easier to access than ever before for scholarly work or personal Bible study. With the advanced search features of Logos Bible Software, you can perform powerful searches by topic or Scripture reference—finding, for example, every mention of "grace," or "covenant."

Adding a digital index to Tabletalk has been one of our subscriber's most requested features. This is a first step to bring all of the relevant articles and Bible study to even more people.

Click here to learn more.