Douglas J. Douma's Blog, page 3

GHC Review 52: William James and John Dewey

[image error]

William James and John Dewey, by Gordon H. Clark, Hobbs, NM: The Trinity Foundation, 1995, 129 pp.

This is a combined edition of two of Clark’s earlier works.

For a review of William James see here.

And for a review of John Dewey see here.

 

For the previous review in this series see here.

For the next review in this series see here.

GHC Review 51: Lord God of Truth

[image error]

Lord God of Truth, Gordon H. Clark, Hobbs, NM: The Trinity Foundation, 1994, 47 pp.

There are some complications with the bibliographic header above. The volume as printed actually contains two books, Clark’s Lord God of Truth and Augustine’s Concerning the Teacher. Then, while the book has a first edition copyright 1986 and second edition copyright 1994, I believe it was originally printed only as the second edition. And finally, though I listed the page total as 47 that is only for Clark’s section; with Augustine’s section added it runs to 95 pages.

The only reference to Lord God of Truth in Clark’s correspondence is in a letter to John Robbins dated 1984 (no day, no month) saying “Lord God of Truth is not yet typed.” This probably indicates that the writing of the book was completed in that year. The last couple years of Clark’s life were remarkable for the quantity (if not the quality) of his writings. Though he was in his eighties, the uptick in production can perhaps be attributed to his diminished professorial workload. When he moved permanently to Colorado in 1984 he would no longer teach, but have the last year of his life dedicated to writing.

Actually, another reference to the book, with a slightly different working title is found in a letter of Clark’s to Greg Reynolds, dated 12/9/1983. Clark writes, “Then too I am working on The God of Truth – emphasize truth and Augustinianism + of course attacking empiricism. But today’s semi-orthodox Christians are almost ignorant of church history and have no idea of the contrast between Plato-Augustine and Aristotle-Aquinas.”

As for the book itself, following the introduction it starts with a critique of the empiricism of John Locke and Thomas Aquinas. Clark then proceeds to Augustine and references his De Magistro, the original Latin title of Concerning the Teacher. Clark notes that Augustine “may not have purged his thought of all empirical elements.” (p. 13) “Nicholas Malebranche (1638–1715) developed non-empirical Augustinianism.” (p. 13) Malebrancheis quoted: “Man is not his own light. His substance, far from enlightening him, is itself unintelligible to him. … The human spirit … can indeed see the light, but cannot produce it … they can discover eternal truths, immutable and necessary, in the divine Logos. … it is solely the divine Logos who enlightens us, by the intelligible ideas which he possesses, for there are not two or several wisdoms, two or several universal reasons.” (p. 14) This matches “the Augustinian principle that our only Teacher is the Logos.” (p. 14)

Clark notes that Jonathan Edward provides “some Scriptural support for the doctrine of divine illumination.” (p. 17) Edwards speaks of a divine and supernatural light immediately imparted to the soul. Immediate, and hence sensation cannot be the means. “Both men [Malebranche and Edwards] show that Christianity cannot be empirical.” (p. 18)

A chapter on “Sensation” argues that the purpose of the senses is not knowledge acquisition. “Malebranche, following Augustine, defines the purpose of sensation to be that of preserving the body from danger.” (p. 18) Clark then addresses various Biblical verses claimed to give credence to sensation as knowledge producing.

Chapter 6 is on “Causality and Causation.” Clark argues “Experience at best teaches us that one event follows another. It never shows that one causes the other. Experience gives sequence, not causality.” (p. 24) Causes only produce effects if no other causes intervene. “Scripture does not teach mechanism, but asserts that the word is governed teleologically by purposes that cannot be restrained nor understood.” (p. 27)

Continuing the critique of empiricism, chapter 7 opposes the theory of images or “Imagination” and chapter 8 discusses “Induction.”

The final chapter, Chapter 9 on “Lord God of Truth” concludes the volume with some positive comments on Clark’s own view. These are the last words Clark would write on his theory of knowledge. And, while I think his theory is in many ways incomplete or at least not adequately explained, there is still much to learn from it, and it seems to be more promising than the epistemology of other Christian thinkers.

See also:

https://douglasdouma.wordpress.com/2018/02/23/gordon-clark-and-the-philosophy-of-occasionalism/

https://douglasdouma.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/robert-l-reymond-and-gordon-h-clark/

For the previous review in this series see here.

For the next review in this series see here.

Sermon on Acts 20:17-27 – “Embrace the Whole Counsel of God”

Dillingham Presbyterian Church – March 17, 2019

Scripture reading:

[Act 20:17-27 ESV] 17 Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church to come to him. 18 And when they came to him, he said to them: “You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials that happened to me through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. 22 And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, 23 except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. 24 But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. 25 And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again. 26 Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, 27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.

Introduction

As a witness is sworn in a law court to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so a preacher is to preach the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That, is a preacher is to preach the whole Bible, all of God’s revealed word to mankind. Nothing is to be overlooked.

In our passage today from the books of Acts, we find this whole truth to be called “the Whole Counsel of God.” [REPEAT: The Whole Counsel of God] And it is upon this important concept that today’s sermon will be centered – “Embrace the Whole Counsel of God.”

The passage in view is known as “Paul’s Address to the Ephesian Elders.” The context here near the end of the book of Acts is that Paul is hastening on his travels to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost. And he has made it to Miletus on the coast of Asia Minor. He decides not to visit Ephesus, where he had lived for 2 and half years before, but he asks the elders of Ephesus to come visit him where he is, in Miletus. And when they visit, Paul gives them the address that is this present passage. It is, in a sense, a departing message from Paul. Whether Paul knew it or not, (and he seems to have known to an extent) his days were soon coming to an end.

Key in this address, Paul tells the Ephesian Elders, “I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable” and again “I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.”

Soon Paul would be arrested and placed in jail and then some time later sent to Rome, where eventually he would meet his demise. But his mission—his divine mission—had in at least one sense already been accomplished. He had declared to the churches the whole counsel of God.

And Paul says that because of this, he is innocent of the blood of all. Here he apparently is reflecting on the words of the prophet Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 3:18-19 If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul.

By preaching the Whole Counsel of God, Paul has thus surely warned of the wrath of God to come. And so even if some of those who heard him did not turn from their wickedness, Paul is not at fault.

Now, a traditional sermon has 3 points (and sometimes a poem), and it takes about 30 minutes to deliver. In today’s sermon I’ve actually got 9 points (and sadly no poem), and if my math is correct then, having 9 points should mean I’ll finish in less than an hour and a half. Well, keeping the points short, perhaps we’ll finish closer to the traditional duration.

And so we have 9 points. Which, to follow along and benefit yourself more fully, you may take care to write down. 9 Points regarding the meaning and application of this term: The Whole Counsel of God. [REPEAT]

Point 1. The Whole Counsel of God is the Minimum to be preached.

Paul says he did not shrink from declaring the whole counsel of God. He did not shrink from declaring anything that was profitable. He testified to the gospel of the grace of God and proclaimed the kingdom of God. There is nothing he left unsaid. He proclaimed the whole truth.

Preaching the Whole Counsel is a weighty task. And so some have thought it sufficient to limit the presentation to the certain fundamentals.

This was the was the error of the Fundamentalists a century ago. The Fundamentalists were Godly Christians who combatted the rising tide of unbelief in the church. But with the focused limited to only five fundamental points of doctrine they tended to ignore the rest. They tended to ignore the whole counsel of God. Granted the five fundamentals were of great important. These are great truths:

1. The inerrancy of the Scriptures

2. The virgin birth

3. The reality of miracles

4. The substitutionary atonement

5. Jesus’s bodily resurrection.

These are great doctrines. And because we agree with them there is that sense in which we in the Reformed Presbyterian world are in fact “Fundamentalists.” But we should never end there, with only 5 points. There are many other important doctrines in the whole counsel of God. And we are to preach all of them.

I once knew a Lutheran pastor in Colorado and to him I mentioned this idea of the necessity of preaching the Whole Counsel of God. He retorted that such was impossible. But I suspect he didn’t have the Biblical reference in mind as to what the term meant. Surely it is impossible to preach all things in one sermon. And it is impossible to preach that which God has not revealed. But the Counsel of God is that which He has revealed. And over time a faithful minister can preach through the entire Scriptures. He can, in fact he must, strive to preach everything, skipping nothing. Giving due respect to the Word of God.

So it is clear that the Whole Counsel of God is the minimum to be preached. But, it is also the maximum. This is our second point.

Point 2. The Whole Counsel of God is the Maximum to be preached.

We are not to go beyond the Scriptures. We don’t mix some Bible with some Greek mythology, or some Koran, or some Buddhist writings. We don’t mix the Bible with the latest scientific surveys. The Bible Alone is the Word of God.

Paul did not say “I’ve told you all the wisdom of the Greeks, and Jews, and peoples of all nations.” Rather, he said, “I’ve relayed to you the whole counsel of God.” Not of man, but of God.

That the whole counsel of God is the maximum to be preached means that only Biblical truths are to be preached. These are to constitute the message.

This also means that we have Christian freedom in those things not restricted by the Scriptures. You can work the type of job you choose, you can choose the house you want to buy, the clothes you want to wear, drink the type of drink you want, and eat the type of food you want. In fact, when people, churches, or ministers put obligations on you over and above those found in the whole counsel of God then they have erred in over-burdening you. There is great liberty in the whole counsel of God.

And so with these first two points together we can say: preach no more and preach no less than the Word of God written in the Scriptures. [REPEAT: preach no more and preach no less than the Word of God written in the Scriptures.]

And of this word of God, the Gospel plays a central role. That gives us our third point.

Point 3: The Gospel is an important part of the Whole Counsel of God.

Note that I didn’t say the Gospel is ALL of the Whole Counsel of God. It is an important part—the most important part—but limiting all sermons to just the Gospel would be to ignore (or even reject) all else that God has so graciously revealed to us in His Word.

Surely sermons must definitely contain a gospel message, for the gospel is the power of salvation unto all who believe.

From a sermon I gave a couple of years ago on 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 I have the following definition of “the Gospel.” I’m always glad to find a better definition, but I think this one is pretty good:

The Gospel is that Jesus died and rose again, showing him, based on the Old Testament prophecies, to be the promised messiah and Lord, ushering in the kingdom of God with its justice and peace, and forgiving the sins of God’s people so that they are seen as righteous in His sight.

So important is the Gospel in fact that Paul is able to summarize what he says is his “course and ministry” by saying that his goal is “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.” Surely he is testifying to other truths about God as well. But the Gospel is paramount.

So we might summarize this third point in saying, “Preaching the Gospel ALONE is NOT SUFFICIENT for the Christian pastor. He must preach the Whole Counsel of God. Still, preaching the Gospel is NECESSARY. It must be preached, because “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” and “How are they to hear without someone preaching?”

So the Whole Counsel is to be preached, and nothing more, and the Gospel is to be included. But to take a step back, our fourth point is even more elementary:

Point 4. The Whole Counsel of God is to be understood.

The contents of the Bible were written to be understood. The histories of the Old Testament, the letters of the New, and all else contained in the pages of the Bible; all was written to convey a message. An understandable message.

Some things no doubt are hard to understand. And Peter admitted so. But with diligent study more and more of the Bible is understood. And the most important Scriptural truths are repeated many times and in many ways to ensure we understand them. This is what the Confession tells us:

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all: yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them. – WCF 1:7

We actually find this term “The Whole Counsel of God” in our confession. It reads:

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. – WCF 1:6

So, unlike the Roman Catholic church, which teaches that only professional theologians—their own—can understand the Scriptures, we contend that the Scriptures were written for all people to understand and to benefit from. Thus, all people are to read the Scriptures.

But not only is the Bible to be read and understood; it is to be believed. This is our fifth point:

Point 5. The Whole Counsel of God is to be believed; even those parts we might not like.

So do not fight the Scriptures, accepting only that which you like. But embrace the whole counsel of God, for God has revealed it all for your knowledge and benefit, and to His glory.

A good way to make sure nothing is missed is to read or preach by the method called the Lectio continua. This is the practice of reading or preaching Scripture in sequence. Lectio continua. When going through a whole book and skipping nothing, then even something you might not like will be covered. And you will find the opportunity to correct your thoughts and replace them with the teachings of God’s Holy word.

Going through a book then is of great value. But I’m temporarily breaking my own rule here preaching an isolated sermon and a topical sermon at that! Yet is of great value to mostly work directly through a book of the Bible so that nothing is missed. Skipping nothing, even those parts you might not like.

Some people don’t like the doctrine of election. We preach it regardless.

Some people don’t like deviant sexual practices being called a sin. We preach it regardless.

Some people don’t like to hear that God has put husbands in a place of authority in a family. We preach it regardless.

It is much like the food that we eat. Children don’t like vegetables, but vegetables are good for you. And some adults even come to like vegetables! That is hard for children to imagine I know. I’ve never quite come to like vegetables. Maybe that means I’m not yet fully an adult.

If there is something you don’t like in the Scriptures, I recommend that you study the issue. You will find that there is great wisdom in the way God has ordered things. And once you’ve found that, you might even find that you have come to like what you previous did not.

So the Whole Counsel of God is to be believed.

And this naturally leads to our next point:

Point 6. We must live out also the whole counsel of God.

Salvation is by faith, not by works. But, understanding and believing the things of God, you now have the great joy of living out the whole counsel of God.

There are some who want to restrict the idea of “religion” to rituals. But true religion encompasses and effects EVERYTHING you do in life.

And some might have the tendency to restrict “religion” to Sundays. But true religion encompasses every day, and every moment of our lives.

God’s counsel should effect not only the way we pray, but the way we talk, the way we act, the way we teach our children, and the attitude we take when doing things even as mundane as doing the dishes. This is my go to example – when you’re doing the dishes, do them for the Lord. Do your work unto the Lord, giving praise to Him at all times.

All of your life should be arranged to the purpose of glorifying God and enjoying Him.

You should organize every element of your life around the teachings of Scripture. Your work, your rest (especially on the sabbath), your family life, and your personal devotions.

Let the whole counsel of God be your guide.

Point 7. Following the Whole Counsel of God means that we are to Fear God, not man.

Another way to say this is: We must teach what Christ commanded to be taught; not what people might consider “relevant.”

That is, we are not to change our ways to conform to the world, but we are to conform our minds to the mind of Christ.

And we should, in doing this, find that all of Scripture is relevant because:

“[As Paul tells us in 2 Timothy] All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”

All Scripture is profitable. And if it all is profitable then it all is relevant.

It is breathed out by God, and thus

It is profitable for teaching, for knowledge.

And it is profitable for training in righteousness.

It is not of man, but of God.

Point 8. Christ Himself is the Wonderful Counselor.

In all of this, we find that Christ Himself is the Wonderful Counselor.

In that famous messianic verse in Isaiah 9, we read

[Isa 9:6 ESV] 6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Christ Himself is our Wonderful Counselor. We receive comfort from His Word knowing that it is from Him who loved His people such that He would die on the cross for us.

And so we are to praise Christ for His counsel.

Point 9. It is with God’s Word that we are to counsel others.

And finally, we come to our ninth and final point. And it didn’t even take me an hour and a half. It is with God’s Word that we are to counsel others. Do not rely on you own wisdom to counsel others, but point them to God’s word. Seek His answers. Seek His counsel, for you, for your spouse, for your family, and for your friends. Have the mind the Christ. Seek His counsel.

We find in Colossians 1:28 the verse saying “Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ.”

The wisdom here proclaimed is Jesus Christ.

Paul says that Him we proclaim, with all wisdom. With the whole counsel of God. Not just the fundamentals. But a life renewed according to His knowledge and His righteousness.

Conclusion

And so, for all of these reasons we are to Embrace the Whole Counsel of God.

And so, as I close, I want to note one more passage. The Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20. This is a very well-known passage. But if we emphasize certain important words in this saying, then you’ll see that this idea of preaching the Whole Counsel of God did not begin with Paul, but was said by Christ himself. And was commanded by Christ himself.

It reads:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe ALL THINGS that I have commanded you. – Matthew 28:19-20

ALL THINGS. Let us not shrink from declaring anything that is profitable. Let us not shrink from declaring the Whole Counsel of God. And, we pray, let us embrace the Whole Counsel of God. Amen.

GHC Review 50: New Heavens, New Earth

[image error]

New Heavens, New Earth, by Gordon H. Clark, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1993, 238 pp.

This book is a combined edition of Peter Speaks Today and II Peter, A Short Commentary. These two books were already combined once before as 1 and 2 Peter. Probably the rarity of that volume led The Trinity Foundation print the material again as New Heavens, New Earth.

Situations like this show the difficult of counting up how many books are attributed to Gordon Clark.

For the previous review in this series see here.

GHC Review 49: An Introduction to Christian Philosophy

[image error]

An Introduction to Christian Philosophy, by Gordon H. Clark, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1993, 125 pp.

This was the very first book of Clark’s that I read. I happened upon it one day in an Amazon search for books on “Christian Philosophy.” It was largely over my head on the first read through, but something intrigued me enough to read it again and again and to buy and read volume after volume of Clark’s books. An hour of reading during my lunch break from my engineering job got me through most of these books over a few years.

An Introduction to Christian Philosophy I later found out is a reprint of earlier material. It is part of the festschrift The Philosophy of Gordon H. Clark. For a review of the material in this book see the Wheaton Lectures section here:

Since that book is now rare, it is more accessible in this paperback edition, or look for Clark and His Critics where it is also found.

For the previous review in this series see here.

For the next review in this series see here.

GHC Review 48: The Holy Spirit

[image error]

The Holy Spirit, Gordon H. Clark, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1993, 98 pp.

A draft of this book is in Dr. Clark’s papers at the PCA Archives. There it is called “Concerning the Holy Spirit.” It appears to have been written some time after 1980. A reference in the published text to “early 1983” (p. 64) possibly helps date the volume, but the draft could be earlier.

Clark wrote to John Robbins on Dec. 3, 1984, “You also say you would like to publish Christ and the Holy Spirit. I do not remember writing that title. Do you mean Concerning the Holy Spirit (123 pp)? You suggest I send it to you in six months.”

This is the only reference to the book in Clark’s correspondence.

From this book then Clark gave five “Lectures on the Holy Spirit” at Sangre de Cristo Seminary, the audio of which is available on the website of The Trinity Foundation.

Early on Clark mentions books on the Holy Spirit by each Abraham Kuyper and John Owen. He praises both books, but references Owen’s book more frequently throughout this volume.

In the first chapter of the book an important view of Clark’s is mentioned. That is, he believes that we should “relinquish” the word nature and replace it with the term definition. This eliminates ambiguity.

One thing I realized while reading the first chapter is that Clark commonly argues by starting off with weaker and less clear verses, builds his case, and then lays the hammer down with the most pertinent verse or verses. This approach from the lesser to greater is opposite the way probably most theologians argue but it seems to me to be more effective.

The second chapter defends the teaching that the Holy Spirit is a person. I’m grateful for this chapter since it is a subject I’ve not found anyone else cover in such detail. The Biblical evidence cited certainly overwhelms the Sabellianism of the Oneness Pentecostals. Of course, it has implications on other doctrines as well. Less directly but just as assuredly it shows the errors of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. And, perhaps more surprisingly, Clark notes a couple of times in the book that the Apollinarian view of Christ is common among students and even seems to be Billy Graham’s view. Incidentally, this is one doctrine (Apollinarianism) that Clark’s work on The Incarnation so clearly avoids. Jesus has a human soul and human mind (as well as a divine mind) as the Church has always taught; or at least clearly taught since the First Council of Constantinople.

If in The Atonement Clark did not clearly indicate the involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Covenant of Redemption, he explicitly says so here in the third chapter on “The Work of the Spirit.” He writes, “It is the cooperation of the Spirit with the Father and the Son in establishing the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Redemption.” (p. 27) “1 Peter 1:2 says, ‘Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctification of the Spirit.’ We see therefore not merely a passive acquiescence in another Person’s plan, but an active participation in it.” (p. 27)

I like Clark’s view of prayer books: “though vigorously objecting to compulsory imposition, I regard the prayers, with the exception of one phrase in the whole book, of the Reformed Episcopal service as exceptionally commendable.” Likewise, it is hard to been entirely opposed to using the Book of Common Prayer. We’ve been praying some of the prayers from that book at our Thursday morning prayer service and have found it quite wonderful. Clark notes, “Dear reader: Do not think that I despise the collects [prayers in Book of Common Prayer]. I wish all Presbyterians would use them.” (p. 55)

In his classic logical style, Clark writes, “It is worthwhile to note that Mary was not sinless. In the Magnificat (Luke 1:47) Mary rejoices in God her Savior. Had she been completely without sin, she could not have had a Savior.” (p. 60)

A long quote on holidays is worth noting: “Scripture does not authorize us to celebrate Pentecost. The same is true of Christmas. It began as a drunken orgy and continues so today in office parties The Puritans even made its celebration a civil offense. And yet an argument for celebrating Pentecost was, “Don’t all Christians celebrate Christmas and Easter?” No, they do not. My father’s family and church never celebrated Christmas, nor did the two Blanchard administrations in Wheaton College. But what about Easter? Surely we must celebrate Easter, shouldn’t we? Yes indeed, we should, as the Scripture commands, not just once a year in the spring, but fifty-two times a year.” (p. 65) Well, it might be worth pointing out that Clark has Christmas and Easter sermons in his files that he gave at the church he pastored in Indianapolis. Were these sermons given without celebrating those days?

Another interesting comment is found on page 75 and fits in with Clark’s paper “The Proposal to Abolish the RPCES.” He writes, “The Reformed Presbyterian Church was once a faithful Calvinistic Covenanter body. But by 1982 it had so deteriorated that it committed suicide.”

Of course being a book on the Holy Spirit the modern speaking in tongues movement is castigated. The final chapter is on errors of Pentecostalism.

For the previous review in this series see here.

For the next review in this series see here.

GHC Review 47: Sanctification

[image error]

Sanctification, by Gordon H. Clark, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1992, 100 pp.

This is another volume that was originally a chapter in Gordon Clark’s systematic theology.

I’ve written some about his view of sanctification in these two previous posts:

https://douglasdouma.wordpress.com/2017/10/24/sanctification-clark-robbins-and-piper/

https://douglasdouma.wordpress.com/2017/10/29/sanctification-and-its-means/

Clark’s Sanctification continues to agree with and confirm what I wrote in those two articles. For example, in the introduction he notes the broader of the two uses of the term “salvation” when he explains, “salvation is a broad term that includes regeneration, justification, adoption, sanctification, and glorification.” (p. 1) And, he writes, “Sanctification is neither instantaneous, nor is a man passive therein. … It is indeed dependent on the contiguous power of God, but it is also the activity of the regenerated man. Both God and man are active.” (p. 1) And, in the first chapter, “Believing is indeed an act of the human self, caused by God to be sure, and totally impossible except for regeneration and God’s gift; but it is nonetheless a human volition.” (p. 3.)

Clark then works through the aberrant theories of sanctification of Pelagius, Rome, and John Wesley. Ryle is better, though not without some issues especially with the doctrine of assurance.

A chapter on perseverance notes that “this doctrine [of perseverance] is so frequently and forcefully stated, in both the Old and New Testaments, that it is hard to explain how any Christian can be an Arminian.” (p. 39) “Arminians are forced to invent utterly ridiculous misinterpretations.” (p. 43)

Next is a chapter on the significance of the sacraments with respect to the doctrine of Sanctification. “Protestants are wiling to say that the sacraments are effective means of grace. But the grace and the effect are not what Rome says they are.” (p. 52) “Baptism signifies purification, and the Supper pictures Christ’s death. The sacraments are also seals which confirm our faith, and as such are means of grace.” (p. 52) “Sacraments are not to be celebrated apart from the Word.” (p. 53)

What follows are the most extensive of Clark’s comments in any of his writings on the subject of Baptism (and then on Communion as well). A number of Baptists, apparently lacking a philosopher in their own midst, have extensively adopted Clark views, and this is positive gain. But Clark’s full system is the Westminster Confession and its view of Baptism is essential to its system. I’ve actually found it more common for Baptists to discard their Arminiansim for Calvinism than to discard their insistence on “believer’s baptism” (more accurately described as “professer’s [and I’m spelling this correctly] baptism”) and its pairing with immersion and accept the Reformed view. [Incidentally, I can only imagine that the pair of credobaptism with immersion is an historical artifact, for there is no logical connection.] Anyways, Clark’s conclusion on the one matter is that “Scripture nowhere requires immersion; that no clear cases of immersion are described; that sprinkling and pouring were common, and hence to insist on immersion is to add to God’s requirements.” (p. 59) Clark’s defense of baptizing infants is the fairly standard argument:

“The basic authority for baptizing infants is found in the terms of the Abrahamic covenant. Infants, male infants, were circumcised. Now, as the Lord’s Supper grew out of and replaced the Passover meal, so baptism replaced circumcision. The most definite passage on the subject is Colossians 2:11, 12 where baptism is called the circumcision of Christ. The less definite but more pervasive material concerns the continuance of the Abrahamic covenant, as found in Galatians 3:15ff.” (p. 61)

Clark explains further, “The correct principle of interpretation is not the Baptist one of discarding everything in the Old Testament not reasserted in the New; but rather the acceptance of everything in the Old not abrogated by New Testament teaching. Therefore to be more explicit, e it noted that the Old Testament church and the New Testament church are the same church. Not only does Acts 8:38, “the church in the wilderness” so assert, but even clearer is Romans 11:17-24. There was a root; one of its branches was Israel; this branch was broken off; a Gentile branch from a wild olive tree was grated into the good root; and God can and will at some future date graft back the natural branches into their own olive tree. The whole, as Galatians 6:16 indicates, is the Israel of God. Since, now, children were members of the ancient church, and were given the sign of the covenant, so also now.” (p. 61-62)

And finally, “Anyone who wishes to exclude infants from the church is under obligation to show that the New Testament alters the procedure that dates back at least to Abraham. It is the Baptist who must bear the burden of proof. He must explain how it comes about that children who were members of the church before the time of Christ, are now excluded from the church. All other Christians are satisfied with the household baptisms of Acts 16:15, the jailer in Acts 16:33, and the household of Stephanus in 1 Corinthians 1:16.” (p. 62)

On the topic of the Lord’s Supper, Clark’s most interesting argument is against Rome and Luther. He writes, “If the Scripture says that the bread is the body, it does not say that the wine is the blood. What Jesus said, and the words Paul reports are, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood.’ Now, if one wish to insist on literal interpretation, it is not the wine but the cup, a silver vessel, that is—what? Not the blood of Christ, but the new testament in his blood. Hence a literal silver cup is literally the New Testament.” (p. 77-78)

Referencing Hebrew 9:25-28 and Hebrews 7:23, Clark strongly argues against the Roman re-sacrificing of Christ. Lastly on the Lord’s Supper, Clark notes that he might be “too generous toward Zwingli.” (p. 84-85) Clark in a sense tries to rescue Zwingli in saying that a memorial view might not be “merely” so. He writes, “It is hard to explain a memorial of Christ’s death that is nothing more. Surely participation in such a service produces some spiritual result.” (p. 81) “Are we not nourished or edified by understanding the significance of the sacrament?” (p. 81)

In the final chapter on “The Christian Life” there is a reference to a confusion in Van Til: “Barth makes God the ‘totally other’; but there are also some who even clearly assert that God can be known, and ye so emphasize incomprehensibility as to contradict their more orthodox assertions. One such theologian, who indeed uses the phrase ‘thinking God’s thoughts after him’ denies the phrase in another place by insisting that God’s knowledge and the knowledge possible to man do not coincide at any single point.” (p. 87-88)

For the previous review in this series see here.

GHC Review 46: Essays on Ethics and Politics

[image error]

Essays on Ethics and Politics, by Gordon H. Clark, ed. John Robbins, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1992, 198 pp.

This is a must have volume for anyone interested in the writings of Gordon H. Clark. It contains forty-three essays previously published in various journals.

A lot of these essays were eye-opening to me when I first read them about ten years ago. Now, having read Clark’s writings and gained both a seminary degree and some ministerial experience, I find many of these essays rather elementary. Or, I should say rather Biblical. What once felt like Advanced Calculus now is as comfortable as addition.

Though this volume was published in 1992, John Robbins made efforts to publish a collection of Clark’s essays as early as 1976. In a letter of 10/9/1976 to John Robbins, Clark wrote:

“Your reference to the possible publication of my essays interests me very much, naturally. But you were not too specific, no doubt because you do not know what it would entail. For example, would you be interested in articles on Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus, already published years ago in the philosophical periodicals? Would you be interested in some ecclesiastical controversies of the 1940s? I have four lectures I have given publicly, but have not published. And there are a few others that can be polished a little to make them suitable. Besides these there are chapters in several books that Carl Henry edited. I am not sure whether you could obtain permission or not. Then there must be details that you have thought of. If you wish, I would be happy to hear more of your plan.”

Two more letters that year from Robbins to Clark show progress being made on collecting published articles of Clark’s, including some later used in Essays on Ethics and Politics. It is unknown to me why the essays were not published sooner, but the record shows Clark’s interest in such a project.

Reproduced in this volume is Clark’s essay “Determinism and Responsibility.” This, in fact, I would contend is the single most important essay he ever wrote. It solves one of the most challenging theological questions that has plagued theologians for centuries and paves the way for Clark’s later writing on “God and Evil.” Clark writes, “by calling a man responsible we mean he may be justly punished by God, for this definitional truth is the key to the explanation of why a man is responsible for the act God determined him to do.” (p. 45)

The essay “The Puritans and Situation Ethics” is one that Clark presented and of which the audio is available here.

Probably the overriding theme of Clark’s ethics in these essays is “Divine Command Theory.” He never uses that term, but his view can be described as such. That is, right and wrong are known to man only as God has commanded them. All non-revelational attempts to discover ethics are bound to fail. We must rely on the Word of God.

For the previous review in this series see here.

For the next review in this series see here.

 

You can now support me on Patreon!

You can now support me on Patreon! – https://www.patreon.com/douglasdouma

The first help I could use is not even monetary. Can one of my readers perhaps help explain to me how to make the “widget” on the right side of my blog for Patreon be more than a grey link? That is, I’d like to make it so that it opens up the link without having to copy and paste it. Currently I’ve got a “Custom HTML” widget there with my patreon website link. To make things completely official and fancy with a Patreon “plug-in”  I’d have to upgrade to the WordPress “Business Plan” for $25/month. Thats more than I want to do at present. So I’m looking for cheaper options to make the patreon link available and easy.

GHC Review 45: Today’s Evangelism

[image error]

Today’s Evangelism, Counterfeit or Genuine?, by Gordon H. Clark, Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1990, 122 pp.

The time of the writing of this book is somewhat of a mystery to me. Which “Today” its title is in reference to is hard to determine. Nowhere in Clark’s letters is the book mentioned. A full typed draft of the book is found in four folders at the PCA archives. From the draft it is seen that the original title was “Evangelism and Emotion.” There is no date on the draft, but a letter from 1969 included in the folder might indicate a terminus ante quem. If references to any later books or events can be found in the manuscript (or in the text of the book which appears to be essentially identical) that would push out the date of its composition.

Of historical interest to me as Clark’s biographer is that he began an example by saying, “When I was a graduate student, a highly respected professor suddenly died of ptomaine poisoning.” (p. 4) Here he is referring to food poisoning, and the subject in mind is almost certainly his dissertation advisor William Romaine Newbold who died in 1926. If so, this confirms information I’ve found elsewhere about the cause of Newbold’s death.

In this volume there is more discussion of the topic of emotion than anywhere else in Clark’s writings. His main point is that evangelism is not to be measured on its emotionalism, but on its message—the evangel, the gospel.

Clark makes the interesting contention that “reliance on emotion and feeling was the source of modernism.” (p. 25). More completely, he says, “the Pietistic influence [emotionalism] combined with secular philosophy in Friedrich Schleiermacher to produce what we now call modernism.” (p. 27) “Christianity,” on the contrary, “is based on the Bible, on divine revelation, not on emotion.” (p. 32)

Chapter Five “What is Evangelism?” has an extended critique of the views of John Stott. A number of major errors are pointed out. For example, in opposition to Paul, Stott wrote, “Our objective is not to unfold to him [the unsaved person] ‘the whole counsel of God’ but to proclaim the essential core of the Christian gospel.” (p. 46) And even worse, Stott denied propitiation when he wrote, “We emphatically do not believe that He did this to placate and buy off he anger of God.” (p. 49) Clark finds a book by J. I. Packer to be a considerable improvement over Stott. Yet, “There are nonetheless certain points on which I believe Mr. Packer to be woefully wrong.” (p. 56) Included in Clark’s critique is that Packer believes that there are insoluble antimonies in the Bible. (p. 57)

Clark’s chapter on “Faith” is similar in argument to his Faith and Saving Faith.

The next chapter is a short one on “Assurance.” Here Clark has four points: (1) “assurance is possible” (p. 90), (2) “The Gospel promises the possibility of assurance.” (p. 92), (3) this certainty, as the WCF says, is founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation and witness by the Holy Spirit in us, and (4) “although salvation can never be lost, assurance can.” (p. 95) As to the last point, clearly Clark does not believe that assurance is essential to faith. Rather, he believes, faith can lead to assurance.

In one of only a few references in his writings to Francis Schaeffer, Clark notes positively “an excellent example” from the former’s The God Who is There.

Overall, this book is pretty good but it doesn’t say much that hasn’t already been said in other volumes of Clark’s. Perhaps had it come out when it was first written it would have been the first place in Clark’s writings to see some of these ideas and therefore a more significant book.

One more thing. The cover seems to be poorly designed. Two of the four men pictured there (Pat Robertson and Robert Schuller) aren’t even mentioned in the book.

For the previous review in this series see here.