Jason K. Allen's Blog, page 12

Salvation in No Other Name: Recovering the Exclusivity of the Gospel Pt. 1

Known as the silent killer, each year colon
cancer claims close to 50,000 American lives.[1] Though treatable if detected
early, colon cancer is known as the silent killer because, if not screened for,
it will grow unnoticed, undetected. By the time it is discovered
symptomatically, it is often too late to be cured.

Like colon cancer, I’m convinced there is another slow, silent,
growing malignancy within the church. The malignancy is particularly
catastrophic, brining with it ruinous consequences.

It hollows out the gospel message, undercuts the Great
Commission, and undermines the entire logic of collaborative missions and
ministry. The malignancy to which I am referring is the slow, subtle rejection
of the exclusivity of the gospel.

By the Numbers

Recent research conducted jointly by Ligonier Ministries and
Lifeway Research makes clear this challenge. For example, 45% of Americans
think that “there are many ways to get to heaven” and 71% agree that “an
individual must contribute his/her own effort for personal salvation.”[2]

Defining Exclusivity

Historic Christianity, throughout its creedal formulations, has
affirmed the exclusivity of the gospel. In fact, this was Jesus’ self-assessment
when he unequivocally asserted, ““I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man
comes to the father but through me.”[3]

By exclusivity of the gospel, we mean that only those who
personally, consciously, explicitly, and singularly confess Jesus Christ as
Lord can possess eternal life. Let’s consider these qualifiers more closely.

Personally: Salvation comes
to us individually, when one follows Christ. No one gains eternal life because
of someone else’s faith, or by his or her affiliation with a family, church,
ethnic or national group. Each sinner must come to repent of his or her sins
and believe the gospel personally.

Consciously: To inherit the
Kingdom one must do more than reflect the ethic of Christ; one must consciously
embrace him, knowingly and intentionally following Jesus. There are no
anonymous Christians, regardless of Karl Rahner’s assertion otherwise.
Authentic believers know whom they are following.

Explicitly: One’s faith must be
placed in God’s Son, Jesus Christ, not just generically in God. As Peter
declared in Acts 4:12, “There is salvation in no one else; for there is no
other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be
saved.”

Singularly: Faith in Jesus alone
saves, and saving faith must be placed in him alone. The singularity of Christ
as one’s faith object is especially important on the mission field, where
missionaries encounter religions, such as Hinduism, where they are happy to add
Jesus to their pantheon of gods. We do not add Jesus to our portfolio of faith
objects. Christianity is not a both/and proposition; it is either/or.

Of course, when converted one is not necessarily thinking
through these categories, like boxes to check. Rather, the point is one cannot
reject or negate these gospel distinctives.

Challenges to
Exclusivity

Why is the exclusivity of the gospel losing popularity? There
seem to be a number of reasons. First, globalization has brought the nations
near to us. This nearness should have increased our burden for the lost, but it
seems to have done the opposite.

Second, the forward march of postmodernity continues to
undermine absolute truth claims, especially one so audacious as the exclusivity
of the gospel—that of the 7,000,000,000 inhabitants of Earth, only those that
hear and believe the message of Christ can be saved.

Third, political correctness limits our willingness to offend,
and asserting the full gospel message is the most offensive of truth claims.
Political correctness finds the notion of a literal hell as insufferably backwards,
and has re-envisioned it as a mythological—or nearly unoccupied— place.

Alternatives to
Exclusivity

While universalism is often contrasted with
exclusivity, it is actually not commonly accepted. There is just something
disconcerting, even to thoroughgoing secularists, about the possibility of
Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden spending eternity with Billy Graham. Even our
most naturalistic instincts desire some sort of eternal reckoning.

More common alternatives are pluralism and inclusivism. Pluralism
argues there are many ways to God, and one should earnestly follow the
religious path revealed to you. Inclusivism maintains that Christ is the only
Savior, but his provision can be accessed through other religions.

Ron Nash, in his Is Jesus the Only Savior?,
helpfully summarizes pluralism, inclusivism, and exclusivity in two questions:
Is Jesus the only savior? Must people believe in Jesus Christ to saved?
Pluralism answers both questions “no”; inclusivism answers the first “yes” and
the second “no.” Historic Christianity answers both “yes.”[4]

Of the many who attend evangelical churches yet deny the
exclusivity of the gospel, pluralism or inclusivism—though they may not know
these terms—is probably their ideological home. While they may not intend to
reject historic Christianity, operationally, many of our church members—and our
churches—are there.

Conclusion

To be a preacher is to be a decision maker. Each week preachers
determine what to include in a sermon and what to leave out. Time simply does
not allow one to say everything that could be said about every passage.
Preachers intuitively triage their text, their sermon, and their congregation,
asking themselves, “What can I assume they know and affirm, and what must I
assert and advocate?”

Perhaps this triage has led too many pastors to assume their
church members understand and embrace the exclusivity of the gospel. We can no
longer assume this. We must assert and advocate the exclusivity of the gospel.
As part II will demonstrate, the stakes are too high for us not to do so.

______________________________________________________________________________

[1]http://www.cancer.org/cancer/colonand...

[2] Ligonier Ministries, in partnership with LifeWay Research,
“The State of Theology: Theological Awareness Benchmark Study,” 4. Available
online: http://gpts.edu/resources/documents/TheStateOfTheology-Whitepaper.pdf.

[3] John 14:6.

[4] See Ron Nash, Is Jesus the Only Savior? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994).

*This article was originally published on December 9, 2014

The post appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Lord’s Day Meditation: As Ye Have Received Christ Jesus the Lord” by C.H. Spurgeon

Lord’s Day Meditation: As Ye Have Received Christ Jesus the Lord” by C.H. Spurgeon (Morning & Evening, November 8, Morning)

“As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord.” (Colossians 2:6)

The life of faith is represented as receiving–an act which
implies the very opposite of anything like merit. It is simply the acceptance
of a gift. As the earth drinks in the rain, as the sea receives the streams, as
night accepts light from the stars, so we, giving nothing, partake freely of
the grace of God. The saints are not, by nature, wells, or streams, they are
but cisterns into which the living water flows; they are empty vessels into
which God pours his salvation. The idea of receiving implies a sense of
realization, making the matter a reality. One cannot very well receive a
shadow; we receive that which is substantial: so is it in the life of faith,
Christ becomes real to us. While we are without faith, Jesus is a mere name to
us–a person who lived a long while ago, so long ago that his life is only a
history to us now! By an act of faith Jesus becomes a real person in the
consciousness of our heart. But receiving also means grasping or getting
possession of. The thing which I receive becomes my own: I appropriate to
myself that which is given. When I receive Jesus, he becomes my Saviour, so
mine that neither life nor death shall be able to rob me of him. All this is to
receive Christ–to take him as God’s free gift; to realize him in my heart, and
to appropriate him as mine.

Salvation may be described as the blind receiving sight, the
deaf receiving hearing, the dead receiving life; but we have not only received
these blessings, we have received Christ Jesus himself. It is true that he gave
us life from the dead. He gave us pardon of sin; he gave us imputed
righteousness. These are all precious things, but we are not content with them;
we have received Christ himself. The Son of God has been poured into us, and we
have received him, and appropriated him. What a heartful Jesus must be, for
heaven itself cannot contain him!

The post Lord’s Day Meditation: As Ye Have Received Christ Jesus the Lord” by C.H. Spurgeon appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Winter 2019 Commencement Address: “Truths Worth Contending For”

Transcript:

Again, it’s such a delight to have each one of you on the
campus at Midwestern Seminary today rejoicing with us at what God has done
through the lives of these graduates and what He will do in the future. We are
a hopeful people because of Christ. That hope is made all the more sure because
of people just like you, who Christ has called to serve His church. This
morning in the context of commencement, I am preaching a sermon entitled:
“Truths Worth Contending For: Biblical Inerrancy.” We’re beginning a series
on this campus in the context of graduation and convocation over the next
couple of years where I will be preaching on particular topics, doctrinal
topics, of particular urgency and relevance. This morning we begin where we
should begin: biblical inerrancy. Now I acknowledge on the front end the
context of commencement for such an address presents certain limitations,
namely constrictions of time and the awareness that our crowd today, many of
you came primarily for a celebration of graduates, not a doctrinal
presentation. But the context of commencement also provides certain
opportunities. Most especially for an institution of higher learning,
commencement is perhaps the biggest, the grandest stage that we have to offer.
And our topic today, biblical inerrancy, merits such a stage. Indeed as a
Southern Baptist institution, the topic of biblical inerrancy demands a grand
public stage. To our faculty and seminary community this morning it is a
reminder and reassertion of one of our central foundational truths, biblical
inerrancy, we cling to it, and why we must contend for it. To our guests today,
biblical inerrancy simply put is the belief that the Bible is without error. It
is an argument for the truthfulness of God’s Word, that the Bible is indeed His
Word. It is divinely inspired, comprehensively truthful, and thus authoritative
for life and doctrine. And it is from this inerrant Word that we can know our
inerrant Savior, Jesus Christ. And so we preach and believe in this place that
Jesus Christ, as we have sung, is indeed God’s only Son.

He is the second member of the Trinity, the eternal Son of
God. He was born of a Virgin Mary. He lived a sinless life. He performed signs
and wonders. He died on the cross for the sins of many. He was raised from the
dead on the third day. He shall return to judge the living and the dead. And only
those who place their faith through repentance in Jesus Christ have hope of
eternal life through Him. We know that truth and so many others from God’s
Word. To our graduates this morning, during your time here, we have done our
best in the purest and noblest sense of the phrase to indoctrinate you.

You chose that when you chose a confessional institution;
as Midwestern Seminary and Spurgeon College are. You purchased that when you
paid tuition. Biblical inerrancy is high on the list of items you have been
taught. You have encountered it early and often in your studies here and it’s
good for you to encounter it anew as we send you out for a life in ministry not
built on the inerrant Word of God is one built on sand. Indeed biblical
inerrancy is a truth worth contending for. In the months ahead we will also be
considering topics like the sufficiency of Scripture, the exclusivity of the
Gospel, penal substitutionary atonement, biblical complementarianism, biblical
marriage and many others. So it’s good and fitting and right that a theological
institution places front and center theological matters for ourselves. These
are truths worth contending for. To contend. Of course, that word takes us to
that little epistle, the epistle of Jude, where Jude opens that little letter
and calls his readers to contend earnestly for the faith once and for all
delivered to the saints. To contend earnestly for the faith once and for all
delivered to the saints. In the New Testament and the ancient world to contend
often appears in athletic or military contexts referring to a struggle or an
intense effort.

It is a present infinitive conveying ongoing action. We
are to contend continually. We transliterate the underlying Greek word into the
English word “agonize” or when verbalized “agonizing.” Not
to read contemporary uses or meaning back on the Greek, but it does give us a
sense of color. To contend earnestly, to appeal, to exhort, to encourage, to
contend earnestly for the faith entrusted to you. To entrust is to hand
something down, to pass something down with expectation of care, of
preservation, of stewardship, of protection, to contend for the faith. Here is
the apostle’s teaching, most explicitly, the preaching of the Gospel and the
collection of Christian doctrine, which was so quickly taking shape for that
faith once and for all. It is remarkable how quickly in the New Testament, the
early church, the apostolic teaching had come together, codified, congealed
into a recognizable body of truth.

Clear enough to know what it is and what it isn’t. Clear
enough to preach, to teach, to contend for it. Clear enough to know when it’s
been deviated from. Clear enough to know what and when we must contend for it.
We are not theological reductionists or doctrinal minimalists. Yes, we contend
for the heart of the Christian faith, but we contend for so much more. The
faith once and for all delivered to the saints. There’s a personableness to
this responsibility. It matters. You would contend for food for your children.
You contend for truth for the church. The spiritual wellbeing of the saints,
Jude reminds us, the spiritual wellbeing of the church depends on the
contention, the faithful contending of Gospel ministers. Contending. We should
mull this over together this morning. To contend for the faith, to contend for
truth, to contend for sound doctrine is a good and biblical activity. To
contend is a good and biblical word. To contend is virtuous.

It is noble, it is spiritual, it is essential. To contend
for the truth is what Christians ought to do. To contend for the truth is what
ministers are called to do. It’s what seminary instructors are paid to do and
it’s what you graduates have been equipped to do. Let’s tease this out for a
moment. To contend may include conflict. It may include fighting and even
schism if need be, but contending doesn’t necessarily include that. It means to
advocate, to articulate, to persuade, to appeal on behalf of, to set forth. And
we know in this arena, extremes always exist. On the one end is pugilism,
historically framed as fighting fundamentalists. We’re not called to be
pugilistic, belligerent, controversialists, needlessly polemical. If social
media is any indication, contemporary evangelicalism has a surplus of such. On
the other end is a passive, a weak, a timid faith. Those who appreciate being
liked so much, they’re willing as it were, to enter into a theological
nonaggression pact and float lazily down the river of doctrinal compromise.
There’s another way, a better way, a way I seek to practice by God’s grace and
a way I pray you will too. It is to be a cheerful contender, a happy warrior, a
person who is not looking for a doctrinal fight, but is prepared and willing when
called upon to engage one. We ought not be on the lookout for something to
fight over, but we should always be on the lookout for the truths we need to
contend for. Not poised to fight, but prepared and willing to do so. In the
spirit of 2 Timothy 2:24-25 we’re reminded this is a heart disposition as well.
Paul writes, “The Lord’s bond servant must not be quarrelsome but be kind
to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those
who are in opposition. If perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the
knowledge of the truth.”

Remember after all, we are trying to win a brother, not
win an argument. We are to contend in public, I believe, and to engage on
social media in such a way as like a pastor would a church member to the flock
to care, to counsel, to warn, to occasionally rebuke, but to never be
condescending or shrill or misrepresenting the other position intentionally. As
to that, fair warning, to contend is to run the risk of being labeled a
controversialist, a pugilist. The stakes are high, however. Undoubtedly you
will get mugged on social media. You will be perceived as cranky at times, as
misunderstood by many and even misrepresented by some, which is always a
delight. But I give you permission this morning, especially you Gospel
ministers not to sweat that too much. Be willing to ignore it. Be willing to
press on and know that to be in the arena is to contend and to contend is to be
misunderstood and misrepresented, but that is a risk we must be willing to take.

Ultimately, our aim is to please God, not man. Priority
number one is to protect His truth, not our ministry reputations. How to know
what to contend for, what makes the list? That’s a million dollar question, is
it not? The truth of the matter is we cannot always be advocating for
everything. To do so is to insufficiently contend for anything. You’ll
adequately contend for nothing. Our friend Albert Mohler has helpfully spoken
of theological triage and I suppose we intuitively do something along those lines.
For me, I often think along the lines of Stephen Covey’s four quadrants.
Stephen Covey, if you know his writings, he’s not a theologian. In fact, I
don’t even think he’s a Christian. But his quadrants for leadership and work
management I have found helpful when thinking about this category. Covey breaks
down life and work in four categories: what is important and urgent, what is
important and not urgent, what is urgent and not important, what is not urgent
and not important. As to contending, we should live in the first two quadrants:
important and urgent, important and not urgent and work hard to avoid the
latter two categories of urgent but not important and certainly avoiding not
urgent and not important. One final note as we think about contending on the
front end of the sermon, nature does indeed abhor a vacuum. We must speak right
and articulate the truth. We cannot assume the truth for what one generation
neglects the next generation so often rejects. This I know: unsound doctrine
always sprouts in the soil of ambiguity. It flourishes where doctrinal teaching
and preaching doesn’t. Like kudzu it overtakes where failure to contend for
sound doctrine exists. That is why we must be careful listeners and careful
speakers. We must listen for the passive tense, root out vagueness, ask people
to clarify their statements, to define their terms. Some argue we should not
assume the worst of others. I argue we shouldn’t assume anything in others.
Talk, dialogue, query. Ask them to help you understand their position. Be
charitable, be patient, be careful, but don’t be derelict, especially if you
carry the titles of doctor or reverend. Now, all of that is by way of
introduction.

This first topic demands something of a prolegomena and
thus we’ve had it. Why we contend. Biblical inerrancy. My aim this morning is
not so much to defend the Bible. I resonate with St. Jerome who famously said,
“Defend the Bible? That is like defending a lion.” It is not even so
much to make the case that the Bible is inerrant. It is rather to make the case
that the fact that the Bible is inerrant is a truth worth contending for.

As to the first, what is biblical inerrancy? I’ve already
said that it means simply that the Bible is without error, which is an accurate
definition, but we can be more thorough than that. More accurately it is to say
that the Holy Spirit super intended the biblical authors such that the original
autographs were free from error. More to the point John Frame has written,
“To say the Bible is inerrant is simply to say that it contains no false
assertion.” The Baptist Faith and Message, which is appropriate for us to
cite in this context, argues this, “The Holy Bible was written by men
divinely inspired and is God’s revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect
treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its
end and truth without any mixture of error for its matter. Therefore, all
Scripture is totally true and trustworthy.” A touch more elaborative
statement, I can point you to the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy
in Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, those who know it know it is rather
long. I will not read all of it, especially not its affirmations and denials,
but I will pluck out three paragraphs to further elaborate here. The Chicago
Statement argues, “That as God, who is himself truth and speaks truth
only, He has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost
mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy
Scripture is God’s witness to Himself. Holy Scripture being God’s own Word
written by men, prepared and super intended by His Spirit is of infallible
divine authority in all matters upon which it touches. It is to be believed as
God’s instruction in all that it affirms, obeyed as God’s command and all that
it requires, embraced as God’s pledge in all that it promises. Being wholly and
verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all of its teaching.
No less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of
world history, and about its own literary origins under God and its witness to
God’s saving grace and individual lives.” Here of course the references to
the original autographs, the original manuscripts. I have been indulging myself
for the past couple of weeks in genealogical research and I was talking to a
friend at ETS and he mentioned that he had done some geological research on ancestry.com
and I said, “I’ve always wanted to do that.” And he told me about
ancestry.com, I looked into it and I found myself in that moment profoundly
thankful in a targeted way for the work of Mormons behind that effort and have
over the past week and a half or so be able to go back up the family tree, and
you begin to split, but some family lines going back into the 17th century.

Hope to go back further. Interesting thing about those
family trees. If you inaccurately confirm a relative who isn’t a relative, then
the next line up is what? Inaccurate. And it sends you off on a tangential of
people that none of which are your ancestors. Inerrancy is kind of like that.
If the Bible is impure at its fountainhead, if the Bible was errant as given by
God, then imagine the corruption and inaccuracies that have accumulated along
the way. For fuller treatment still, I would point the ambitious ones in the
room to books like “The Erosion of Inerrancy” by G.K. Beale,
“The Heresy of Orthodoxy” by Andreas Köstenberger and Michael Kruger,
for the most ambitious in the room I would point you to “The Enduring
Authority of the Christian Scriptures” edited by D.A. Carson. Yet my
personal favorite, and we’ll reference this again later, is “Baptists and
the Bible” by Russ Bush and Tom Nettles.

“Dr. Allen, if inerrancy requires such careful
definition, is it needed? This word itself, it’s sticky. We have to work for
it. We have to clarify it. We have to define it and it’s a stumbling block to
many anyway.” Well, let me remind us this morning if you avoid a word
because it needs careful definition there will be precious few words left that
matter in theology or any other discipline. “Inerrancy” is an
essential word. It is not a shibboleth as has been argued by some in the
eighties and nineties in particular. Others have argued that to assert
inerrancy as a perennial word and a word doctrine to contend for perennially is
a tendentious understanding of history. It’s a novel understanding. This word
was ginned up in the early 20th century, initially in the fundamentalist
modernist controversy and then took on new heights in the Baptist battles of
the late 20th century. Does the word “inerrancy” matter? Absolutely.

It is that truth and that word, “inerrancy,” both that are
worth fighting over. It’s not just an appropriate word, it’s an essential one.
It’s an indispensable theological term because it is more difficult to nuance
away. There’s less wiggle room with it. You can’t play games with it. There’s
not established elasticy to it like other words that erstwhile did speak to the
superiority and truthfulness of the Bible. Words like inspiration, infallibility,
and authority. The truthfulness of Scripture indeed has been a consistent
belief of the confessing church throughout the history of the church. Augustine
to St. Jerome, who translated the Vulgate, wrote in 405, “I confess that I
believe most firmly that only the authors of the canonical books of Scripture
were completely free from error. And if in these writings I’m perplexed by
anything which appears to me contrary to the truth, I do not hesitate to
conclude that either the manuscript is faulty or the translator has not caught
the meaning of what was said or I myself have failed to understand it.”

In other words, if there’s a problem, it’s with you not
with the text. Most compellingly, John Woodbridge’s book “Biblical
Authority: A Critique of the Roger’s/McKim Proposal” convincingly
demonstrates the persistency of inerrancy both in concept in term throughout
church history. In our own context, the Southern Baptist context, the book
“Baptists and the Bible,” which was published in 1940 by Russ Bush
and Tom Nettles, is an indispensable work on this topic. They argued and
demonstrated that throughout Baptist history, this high view of Scripture has
been asserted and reasserted and reasserted. I point each one of you to it. So
the point this morning heretofore is there are truths worth contending for.
There even are truths worth dividing over. Inerrancy is such a truth. Our
doctrine of inerrancy, we develop it and we can only have it through the
doctrine of divine inspiration. We must note that divine inerrancy, biblical
inerrancy is only possible because of divine inspiration and in this regard,
one of the touchstone passages, 2 Timothy 3 verse 16 where Paul writes that all
Scripture is inspired by God. All Scripture is given to us by God from his inner
most being. It’s breathed out and we develop from this verse and others the
doctrine of the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. That God indeed has
inspired it and that inspiration covers the words themselves, meaning they are
God’s words is thus true. And the plenary doctrine of inspiration is that all
of those words are true, not some of them. All of them are true. This of course
does not negate the human authors’ writing style, et cetera, but it recognizes
that God inspired the author in such a way as to include what He wanted,
exactly what He wanted and communicated and captured it in the work of the Holy
Spirit. It is not to argue that inerrancy is precision-ism.

We acknowledge round numbers and general statements and
assorted ambiguities in the text. Moreover, it’s not a dictation theory of
inspiration that does happen in places in Scripture. Additionally, inerrancy
doesn’t preclude grammatical irregularities in the extant manuscripts, but even
the critics acknowledge these are largely due to issues of transmission and
translation. In other words, these are man’s mistakes, not God’s. And even
critics acknowledge with some 5,000 ancient manuscripts, it corroborates its
accuracy that what we have is unlike any other ancient document. Inerrancy, it
matters. I grew up in a conservative Southern Baptist church. The Bible was
preached every week. I was in church most every Sunday hearing the Bible
preached. And as a kid you tend to, you tend to normalize your experience. You
assume that every family is like your family. And you have a sleepover with
another family and you realize they are rather different than your family in
many ways.

You, at least I assumed every church was like my church. I
didn’t have any theological categories, but I knew the Bible was important and
we believe the Bible and Jesus was important and he was God’s Son and we should
put our faith in Him and we’re supposed to tell other people about Jesus. And
so I just kind of assumed, “I guess all churches believe that. Surely they
do.” And I went to college my freshman year in a Jesuit setting at Spring
Hill College in Mobile, Alabama. And I went to class and I wasn’t even a
believer yet at the beginning of the semester, I became a believer in the
course of that semester, but not because of that class. But I was there and the
priest who was speaking began to talk about the Old Testament and just began to
matter of factly talk about the inaccuracy of the Old Testament, the
figurative, symbolic, allegorical nature of Genesis 1 through 11 and I’m just
there thinking, “Why not? I thought God created, and Adam and Eve were
real, and the flood happened.” And so there’s a class of 40 or 50 students and
you know they are typical college students, but there are three or four or five
of us whose head is spinning and asking, “Well, wait a minute, but this is
God’s Word.” And we found ourselves that day being ridiculed by the
professor. I remember one sweet young lady, a few rows over, raised her hand
and said, “My daddy is a Baptist preacher. My daddy has taught me since I
was a little girl the Bible is God’s Word. You’re telling me it’s not
today.” And he said, “That’s exactly what I’m telling you, dear. It
doesn’t matter what your daddy taught you.” This is a real life issue.

It’s a matter of real concern and when a church loses the
Scriptures, it loses the Gospel. When a denomination loses the inerrant Word,
everything begins to collapse within. And we can’t help but think about this
topic without reflecting on our own denominational context in the Southern
Baptist Convention. This year marks the 40th anniversary of the beginning of a
major conflict that would roil our denomination in the 1980s and 1990s. And
inerrancy became the focal point of that controversy for two reasons. Number
one, inerrancy was perceived to be the most essential point because flowing out
from it flows so many other doctrinal topics. And number two, practically it
was a simplifying, clarifying issue. The easiest for the people in the pew to
grasp and easiest for them to understand how grave the situation was. We’ve
been reminded anew in recent years that all of our leaders have clay feet,
including some of the personalities associated with the Conservative
Resurgence.

Yet that does not in any way undermine the necessity of
that effort. The justness of that cause or the paramount importance of those
issues then or now. At Midwestern Seminary, even closer to home, our own
denominational and institutional history occurred on this campus. Ralph
Elliott, the Elliot Controversy, the very first professor to sign our statement
of faith, wrote a book that would roil the denomination entitled, “The
Message of Genesis” when the opening pages just begin to teach the
documentary hypothesis–strait laced theological liberalism. We have in this place
a stewardship to always serve, never with that memory too distant. What is
more, that document that was signed, that confessional statement contained
literally an asterisk to it which created a hole in it that one could drive a
truck through. A confessional statement with an asterisk is no confessional
statement at all. So why must we have an inerrant Bible?

I am moving as quickly as I can. I shall move even more
quickly. Number one: the Bible self’s attestation. Throughout Scripture, the
authors refer to it as God’s truth. The Bible claims to be inerrant. Jesus
himself would say things like, “Truly, I say to you until heaven and earth
pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the law until all
is accomplished.” In John 10:35 Jesus says, “The Scriptures cannot be
broken.” In John 17 Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them by Thy Word. Oh
Lord, Thy Word is truth.” Or to put it more bluntly, given the Bible’s own
truthfulness and claims to truth, if Scripture is actually errant, brothers and
sisters, we have far greater problems at hand. Then it must not just be errant
or inaccurate but also misleading. In other words, if it’s errant, it’s thus
unworthy of our study, of our care, of our obedience.

Reason number two: issues of epistemology. If we don’t
have a true text, we do not have a certain Word. If the Bible is errant, then
where do we go for truth, for instruction, for spiritual nourishment? If the
Bible isn’t entirely true, who discerns what is? The slippery slope isn’t a
slope. It’s a deadly cliff. Just observe the Jesus Seminar of recent past.
There are others who claim to be more charitable than the Jesus Seminar,
though. And the argument goes something like this, “We can’t trust it at
every point, but it’s largely trustworthy.” Imagine being married to a
spouse who you couldn’t trust all the time, but you can mostly trust. Imagine
having an employee that wasn’t entirely trustworthy, but more often than not
was. Imagine having a medicine bottle that wasn’t always accurate, but most
days was. Imagine having a cardiologist who tended to be right. You see, if we
can’t trust the Bible at every point, we can’t trust it at any point. Third:
the authority of Scripture is linked to its inerrancy. Authority is eroded if
an errancy is questioned. That’s the point after all, right? If you don’t like
its truth claims, its moral expectations, you undermine it all together. If you
don’t want to be under its authority, if you don’t want it to tell you how to
live and who you are to marry, how you are to order the most intimate details
and aspects of your life, then the way you deal with that is to reject it
altogether and you’re able to reject it by denying it as God’s Word, by denying
that it is inerrant. Number four: why we must have an inerrant Bible: the
integrity of God. A Bible that can’t be trusted gives us a God who can’t be
trusted. Think with me, brothers and sisters, if God created all that is, if He
reigns in his sovereignty over all the cosmos, if He has accomplished
redemption for His people, it is but a small thing to preserve a text for His
church.

A Bible that can’t be trusted gives us a God who can’t be
trusted. Fifth: we need an inerrant Bible to know and follow Christ accurately.
Where else should we go, can we go, for the saving knowledge of the person, the
work of Jesus?

“Don’t give me the Bible, just give me Jesus,”
some might say. Brothers and sisters, we have no Jesus to give but the Jesus of
Scripture. When I hear, “Don’t give me the Bible, just give me
Jesus,” I hear, “Don’t give me the Jesus of the Bible. Permit me to
make one. Please make one up for me that’s more compatible.” Six: the
history of theological and denominational decline reminds us of the centrality
of inerrancy. I don’t have time to recount the Downgrade Controversy, the trajectory
of mainline Protestantism, the Southern Baptist Convention, Dean Kelley,
“Why Conservative Churches Grow,” and all the rest I would like to
speak to this morning along these lines. But let me just drive home this point
that Scripture is the norming norm as the Reformers argued. We know the
soundness of every other doctrine by measuring it against the Word of God and
every church, every denomination, every movement, every category and collection
of Christians who’ve moved away from the Word of God have moved away from the Gospel,
have moved away from everything the Bible teaches and holds dear as far as why
we exist, as relates to evangelism and the Great Commission, it always leads to
ruin. So much so we argue seventh: that inerrancy undergirds evangelism and
missions, the exclusivity of Christ. Can you give up on inerrancy but hold onto
the Gospel? I suppose possibly, but only briefly. We’re saved by the Gospel of
Christ, not the doctrine of inerrancy. But mark it down. When one generation
rejects scripture, the second always seem to reject the gospel.

Eighth: why do we need an inerrant Scripture? Those of us
who minister know this better than others. Our cultural moment demands a sure
Word and the more counter-cultural Christian witness is, the more pressure the
church feels. “I am not sure” does not buck up the troops. “I
think it might be what God said” isn’t a clarion call for faithfulness. And
ninth: inerrancy is a simplifying truth. If you will decide that once and for
all and believe it with all that you are, it will simplify a thousand other
doctrinal and ministerial conversations and topics that you encounter along the
way. My mind goes back to Billy Graham and that great story he tells about when
he was wrestling with the truthfulness of Scripture and got alone before God on
the mountain and opened the Word and was convinced in his heart that the Bible
was true. And he would talk about that turning point in his life in ministry
and how that propelled him onto faithfulness and to a life of gospel service.
Contending for the truth, biblical inerrancy.

My favorite quotes concerning Christian ministry and
contending for the faith is attributed to Martin Luther. I think he wrote it. I
hope he did. If not permit me to romanticize about him in this moment. Writing,
“If I profess with the loudest voice, the clearest exposition, every
portion of the truth of God, except precisely that little point which the world
and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ however
boldly I may be professing Christianity. Where the battle rage is, the loyalty
of the soldier is proved and to be steady on all the battlefield besides, is
mere flight and disgrace to him if he flinches at that one point.” To
contend for the truth, what else would we do? We are called to a life of
consequence, of courage, of bravery, of sacrifice, of commitments. I’m reminded
of Thomas Macaulay “The Lays of Ancient Rome,” “Then out spake
brave Horatius/The captain at the gate:/To every man upon the earth/Death
cometh soon or late./But how can man die better/Than facing fearful odds,/For
the ashes of his fathers,/For the temple of his gods?” We are to keep the
faith, to proclaim the Gospel, to preach the Word, to contend for the faith
once and for all delivered to the saints. Brothers and sisters, and especially
graduates, there are truths worth fighting for. There are truths worth living
for. There are truths worth dying for. Thank you.

The post Winter 2019 Commencement Address: “Truths Worth Contending For” appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Lord’s Day Meditation: “And Ye Shall Be Witnesses Unto Me” by C.H. Spurgeon

Lord’s Day Meditation: “And Ye Shall Be Witnesses Unto Me” by C.H. Spurgeon (Morning and Evening, November 8, Morning)

“As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord.” (Colossians 2:6)

In order to learn how to discharge your duty as a witness
for Christ, look at his example. He is always witnessing: by the well of
Samaria, or in the Temple of Jerusalem: by the lake of Gennesaret, or on the
mountain’s brow. He is witnessing night and day; his mighty prayers are as
vocal to God as his daily services. He witnesses under all circumstances;
Scribes and Pharisees cannot shut his mouth; even before Pilate he witnesses a
good confession. He witnesses so clearly, and distinctly that there is no
mistake in him. Christian, make your life a clear testimony. Be you as the
brook wherein you may see every stone at the bottom–not as the muddy creek, of
which you only see the surface–but clear and transparent, so that your heart’s
love to God and man may be visible to all. You need not say, “I am
true:” be true. Boast not of integrity, but be upright. So shall your
testimony be such that men cannot help seeing it. Never, for fear of feeble
man, restrain your witness. Your lips have been warmed with a coal from off the
altar; let them speak as like heaven-touched lips should do. “In the
morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand.” Watch
not the clouds, consult not the wind–in season and out of season witness for
the Saviour, and if it shall come to pass that for Christ’s sake and the
gospel’s you shall endure suffering in any shape, shrink not, but rejoice in
the honour thus conferred upon you, that you are counted worthy to suffer with
your Lord; and joy also in this–that your sufferings, your losses, and
persecutions shall make you a platform, from which the more vigorously and with
greater power you shall witness for Christ Jesus. Study your great Exemplar,
and be filled with his Spirit. Remember that you need much teaching, much
upholding, much grace, and much humility, if your witnessing is to be to your
Master’s glory.

The post Lord’s Day Meditation: “And Ye Shall Be Witnesses Unto Me” by C.H. Spurgeon appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

The Gospel, Marriage, and Family

What makes a good Christian marriage? At its core, it is two
good Christian people, joined together in holy matrimony. Yet, a good Christian
marriage is so much more than this. Two good Christian people are essential for
a strong, Christian marriage—but that is not enough.

By tracing marriage all the way back to the beginning, to Adam
and Eve in the garden of Eden, we can find God’s divine plan for marriage
revealed in His creation as He worked to bind Adam and Eve to one another.

Completion: God saw man’s loneliness, knew it was not good, and created “a helper corresponding to him.” The Bible teaches us that, on occasion, God sets apart individuals for a lifetime of singleness, but that is the exception, not the norm. For most of us, we experience relational emptiness only satisfied through the spouse God gives us.Compassion: Created from himself, Adam saw in Eve “bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh.” In marriage, the two become one, because the two once were one. Thus, matrimony is to be marked by a sweet communion, a relationship of love, care, and compassion.Commitment: So attracted are we to our spouse that, in the covenant of marriage, “a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife.” This commitment is a permanent one, wherein we say “no” to all others for all time when we say “yes” to the chosen mate God has given us.Closeness: Within the covenant of marriage, the man and woman know a closeness, an exhilaration of love that can never be known outside of marriage. As they “become one flesh,” they can be “naked, yet [feel] no shame” because they are abiding in God’s divine plan, a union sanctioned by him.

This completion, compassion, commitment, and closeness that God
ordained for marriage unions sets the stage for godly and holy marriages.

But what happens when conflict arises in our marriages?

Ephesians 5:22-33 outlines the key themes that every husband and
wife should embrace on a daily basis to live out the love of God to their
spouse and continue to grow their marriage to a healthier, godlier state.
 

Submission: The wife is called to lovingly submit to her husband, as he submits to Christ. The pattern is to be one of gracious headship, of the husband leading his wife and family as he follows Christ. Deviating from this pattern, either through the wife’s rebellion or the husband’s passivity or heavy-handedness, hinders the marriage.Sacrifice: The husband is to give himself sacrificially for his wife. The model for such sacrifice is the greatest sacrificial act of all: Jesus’ death for the church. Such sacrificial love makes the wife’s gracious submission to her husband not only possible, but desirable.Sanctification: Note also, the husband is called to further his wife’s own sanctification. The marital union fosters Christian growth for both the husband and the wife. Within marriage, we learn to die to ourselves and to put the needs of others first. Additionally, the marital union provides a healthy, holy context for our sexuality to be expressed, enjoyed, and celebrated—a sanctifying step in and of itself. As we grow in Christ, we grow in our love for one another, and vice versa.Servant-leadership: Lastly, men, as we lead our wives, we do so with the heart of a servant-leader. There is no room for bravado or lording our spousal role. Rather, we are to be the type of servant-leader every woman longs to follow, putting our wife’s interests, and, most of all, Christ’s interests, first.

Remember, God has a divine plan and pattern for your marriage, and a divine picture he wants to convey. This is all for your good, for the health and prosperity of your family, and for his glory. Like every other area of your life, you cannot improve upon God’s best. It is perfect—beyond improvement. Do not crash into the wave; ride it.

*This article was originally posted on February 7, 2018

The post The Gospel, Marriage, and Family appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Lord’s Day Meditation: “Behold, I Have Graven Thee upon the Palms of My Hands” by C.H. Spurgeon

Lord’s Day Meditation: “Behold, I Have Graven Thee upon the Palms of My Hands” by C.H. Spurgeon (Morning & Evening, November 7, Morning)

“Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands.” (Isaiah 49:16)

No doubt a part of the wonder which is concentrated in the
word “Behold,” is excited by the unbelieving lamentation of the
preceding sentence. Zion said, “The Lord hath forsaken me, and my God hath
forgotten me.” How amazed the divine mind seems to be at this wicked
unbelief! What can be more astounding than the unfounded doubts and fears of
God’s favoured people? The Lord’s loving word of rebuke should make us blush;
he cries, “How can I have forgotten thee, when I have graven thee upon the
palms of my hands? How darest thou doubt my constant remembrance, when the
memorial is set upon my very flesh?” O unbelief, how strange a marvel thou
art! We know not which most to wonder at, the faithfulness of God or the
unbelief of his people. He keeps his promise a thousand times, and yet the next
trial makes us doubt him. He never faileth; he is never a dry well; he is never
as a setting sun, a passing meteor, or a melting vapour; and yet we are as
continually vexed with anxieties, molested with suspicions, and disturbed with
fears, as if our God were the mirage of the desert. “Behold,” is a
word intended to excite admiration. Here, indeed, we have a theme for
marvelling. Heaven and earth may well be astonished that rebels should obtain
so great a nearness to the heart of infinite love as to be written upon the
palms of his hands. “I have graven thee.” It does not say, “Thy
name.” The name is there, but that is not all: “I have graven
thee.” See the fulness of this! I have graven thy person, thine image, thy
case, thy circumstances, thy sins, thy temptations, thy weaknesses, thy wants,
thy works; I have graven thee, everything about thee, all that concerns thee; I
have put thee altogether there. Wilt thou ever say again that thy God hath
forsaken thee when he has graven thee upon his own palms?

The post Lord’s Day Meditation: “Behold, I Have Graven Thee upon the Palms of My Hands” by C.H. Spurgeon appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

The Gospel and the Church

Have you ever heard someone say, “I am into Jesus, but not the church”? Or, put another way, “I am a Christian, but I do not believe in going to church”? Over my years as a pastor, I have encountered phrases like these many times.

Yet, what I intuitively knew then, and have come to understand more fully now, is that Christianity is inextricably linked to the local church. In fact, the local church is the New Testament’s expression of Christianity. The New Testament depicts the Christian and the local church together, like hand in glove.

However, as I continue to serve the church more broadly now as a seminary president, I consistently bump into common misconceptions about the purpose of the local church, the role that believers should play in it, and how it fits in with Scripture—misconceptions that keep well-meaning believers from the benefits of membership with a local church.

Misconception 1: Individualism and Institutionalism Extremes

First, and most common in evangelical circles, is spiritual individualism. This extreme so prioritizes a personal relationship with Christ that it forgets the role of the church. Conversion is a personal encounter with Christ and growth in Christ is fundamentally the same thing. One is nourished spiritually through books, conferences, podcasts, para-church ministries, and Bible studies.

The other extreme is an institutional approach to Christianity. In its most unhealthy form, it is seen in traditional Roman Catholicism that holds “no salvation outside the church,” and necessitates receiving the sacraments for salvation.

Both of these extremes miscommunicate the Christian life. Conversion is an individual experience that is intended to become a congregational reality. Here is the point: when you were saved, you were saved into the church. When you were baptized, you were baptized into the church. When you believed the gospel, Jesus did not only rescue you; he transplanted you into the church.

Misconception 2: Church Universal vs. Church Local

Another common misconception concerns the church universal and the church local. The church universal refers to all the redeemed, globally. The church universal also refers to the invisible church because we ultimately are not able to know who or how many comprise it.

Yet, most every reference in the New Testament is about the church local. By local church, I mean a group of Christians who are a part of a collective, covenant group, who meet together for worship and ministry.

Misconception 3: The New Testament and the Church

When you survey the New Testament you see it is all about the church. In Matthew 16, Jesus declared, “I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overpower it” (Matt. 16:18). Jesus fulfilled this promise through his own death, having shed his blood for the church (see Acts 20:28).

The book of Acts begins with the birth of the church through Peter’s preaching at Pentecost. The storyline of Acts is the church metastasizing, spreading throughout the Mediterranean region—and beyond—through the apostles’ preaching.

The New Testament epistles were all written to or about churches. In them, the authors explain what churches are to believe and teach, and how they are to minister and organize themselves. At the end of the New Testament—the book of Revelation—the apostle John records Jesus’ seven letters to seven churches and punctuates the Bible’s conclusion with Jesus’ dramatic return for his bride, the church.

In fact, Jesus likens the church to himself. In Acts 9, the apostle Paul—also known as Saul—had a dramatic encounter with Jesus. Paul was no yet a Christian, and Jesus confronted him while he was on his way to persecute Christians. Jesus asked, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (v. 4). Effectively, Jesus equated the church with himself; how one views, engages, and treats the church reflects how one views, engages, and treats Jesus.

The New Testament makes following Christ and local church participation essentially synonymous.

So what’s holding you back from investing in or joining a local church?

It’s important to understand that there is no perfect church. That is because the church is comprised of sinners—redeemed sinners. So don’t let the imperfections of fellow believers turn you into a perennial church shopper and keep you from the benefits, fellowship, and mission opportunities that the local church offers.

*This article was originally published on February 21, 2018

The post The Gospel and the Church appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Lord’s Day Meditation: “This is the Blood of the Testament” by C.H. Spurgeon

There is a strange power about the very name of blood, and
the sight of it is always affecting. A kind heart cannot bear to see a sparrow
bleed, and unless familiarized by use, turns away with horror at the slaughter
of a beast. As to the blood of men, it is a consecrated thing: it is murder to
shed it in wrath, it is a dreadful crime to squander it in war. Is this
solemnity occasioned by the fact that the blood is the life, and the pouring of
it forth the token of death? We think so. When we rise to contemplate the blood
of the Son of God, our awe is yet more increased, and we shudder as we think of
the guilt of sin, and the terrible penalty which the Sin-bearer endured. Blood,
always precious, is priceless when it streams from Immanuel’s side. The blood
of Jesus seals the covenant of grace, and makes it forever sure. Covenants of
old were made by sacrifice, and the everlasting covenant was ratified in the
same manner. Oh, the delight of being saved upon the sure foundation of divine
engagements which cannot be dishonoured! Salvation by the works of the law is a
frail and broken vessel whose shipwreck is sure; but the covenant vessel fears
no storms, for the blood ensures the whole. The blood of Jesus made his
testament valid. Wills are of no power unless the testators die. In this light
the soldier’s spear is a blessed aid to faith, since it proved our Lord to be
really dead. Doubts upon that matter there can be none, and we may boldly
appropriate the legacies which he has left for his people. Happy they who see
their title to heavenly blessings assured to them by a dying Saviour. But has
this blood no voice to us? Does it not bid us sanctify ourselves unto him by
whom we have been redeemed? Does it not call us to newness of life, and incite
us to entire consecration to the Lord? O that the power of the blood might be
known, and felt in us this night!

The post Lord’s Day Meditation: “This is the Blood of the Testament” by C.H. Spurgeon appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

The Gospel, the Christian, and the Past

Every person has a past. I do. You do. Everyone does. By
past, I mean things we have done at a previous point in our lives that cause
regret and embarrassment, if not outright shame. It is that laundry list of attitudes,
actions, and events you aren’t proud of.

How do you view your past? Has it held you captive,
fearfully awaiting punishment from God?

Here’s the thing: it’s not just you. Everyone’s past is
marked by, at least to some degree, foolish words, reckless decisions, and
sinful acts. Everyone’s! Many would-be followers of Christ and even many
Christians live with persistent, suffocating guilt. They question whether
Christ will truly forgive them for what they have done. They feel they will
never measure up spiritually, and thus are assigned to second-class Christian
status. But nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, the apostle Paul’s life proves it.

We know Paul as the man who wrote thirteen New Testament
letters and traversed the Mediterranean region on three major missionary
journeys. This mighty man of the faith planted numerous churches, won
multitudes to faith in Christ, and laid the doctrinal foundation on which the
church has ministered for nearly two millennia. The apostle Paul was a
missionary-theologian unlike any other the world has ever known.

But before we meet the Paul in Acts 9 where he encounters
the risen Christ, is gloriously converted, and then commissioned as an apostle,
we hear of him in Acts 7. This passage records one of the most diabolical
scenes in all the Bible—the stoning of Stephen, the first martyr of the early
church. In that setting, we find Paul, then known as Saul, holding the coats of
the stone throwers, rooting them on.

Then, overflowing with hatred and rage, Saul goes to
Damascus to persecute even more Christians. On that roadway, the resurrected
Christ appears to Saul, confronts him, and subsequently calls Saul to himself
and commissions him into ministry.

The Apostle Paul, perhaps the greatest Christian to ever
live, was also the man with worst past.

So what was Paul’s secret to overcoming his past? The key is
that he looked forward to Christian service, not backward in guilt, shame, or
regret.

Paul testified, “But one thing I do: Forgetting what is
behind and reaching forward to what is ahead, I pursue as my goal the prize
promised by God’s heavenly call in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:13–14).

However, there is also a difference—a massive difference—
between overlooking your past and forgetting about it. Paul never overlooked
his past. He wrote extensively about man’s sinfulness, including his own.

So what does that mean for you and your past?

View your sin as God views it: God has
separated your sin as far as the east is from the west; he’s cast it into the
sea of his forgetfulness. Remember, Jesus did not reluctantly accept Paul. On
the contrary, he intentionally sought Paul and enlisted him into Christian
service.Rejoice in God’s providence: Whatever
your background, whatever your past, rejoice in God’s plan for your life. He
led you by superintending your steps and bringing you to a point of conversion.
His providence is always good, beyond improvement. Thus, he crafted your story,
including your past, for his own, optimum glory.  Own your testimony: Do not see your past
as an embarrassing prologue to be buried, but as a glorious story to be
leveraged for the kingdom. Remind people, as you remind yourself, that if God
can save you, he can save anyone. Rejoice in the mire from which you were saved;
celebrate publicly God’s goodness in your life. As you do, you’ll encourage
others and embolden yourself.

Friend, be encouraged. The grace of God overcomes your past and enables your growth in the future.

*This article was originally published on February 1, 2018

The post The Gospel, the Christian, and the Past appeared first on Jason K. Allen.

Lord’s Day Mediation: “I Will Pour Water upon Him Who Is Thirsty” by C.H. Spurgeon

Lord’s Day Mediation: “I Will Pour Water upon Him Who Is Thirsty” by C.H. Spurgeon (Morning and Evening, November 6, Morning)

“I will pour water upon him that is thirsty.” (Isaiah 44:3)

When a believer has fallen into a low, sad state of feeling,
he often tries to lift himself out of it by chastening himself with dark and
doleful fears. Such is not the way to rise from the dust, but to continue in
it. As well chain the eagle’s wing to make it mount, as doubt in order to
increase our grace. It is not the law, but the gospel which saves the seeking
soul at first; and it is not a legal bondage, but gospel liberty which can
restore the fainting believer afterwards. Slavish fear brings not back the
backslider to God, but the sweet wooings of love allure him to Jesus’ bosom.
Are you this morning thirsting for the living God, and unhappy because you
cannot find him to the delight of your heart? Have you lost the joy of religion,
and is this your prayer, “Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation”?
Are you conscious also that you are barren, like the dry ground; that you are
not bringing forth the fruit unto God which he has a right to expect of you;
that you are not so useful in the Church, or in the world, as your heart
desires to be? Then here is exactly the promise which you need, “I will
pour water upon him that is thirsty.” You shall receive the grace you so
much require, and you shall have it to the utmost reach of your needs. Water
refreshes the thirsty: you shall be refreshed; your desires shall be gratified.
Water quickens sleeping vegetable life: your life shall be quickened by fresh
grace. Water swells the buds and makes the fruits ripen; you shall have
fructifying grace: you shall be made fruitful in the ways of God. Whatever good
quality there is in divine grace, you shall enjoy it to the full. All the
riches of divine grace you shall receive in plenty; you shall be as it were
drenched with it: and as sometimes the meadows become flooded by the bursting
rivers, and the fields are turned into pools, so shall you be–the thirsty land
shall be springs of water.

The post Lord’s Day Mediation: “I Will Pour Water upon Him Who Is Thirsty” by C.H. Spurgeon appeared first on Jason K. Allen.