The Lost Art of Seeking Wisdom

Every time I come to Proverbs 1 in my reading of Scripture, I find myself wondering why it is I don't spend more time seeking wisdom from God's Word. The plain teaching of the first few verses of Proverbs is that we who believe must be about this business. The flesh is so weak, though.

The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel:

To know wisdom and instruction,

to understand words of insight,

to receive instruction in wise dealing,

in righteousness, justice, and equity;

to give prudence to the simple,

knowledge and discretion to the youth—

Let the wise hear and increase in learning,

and the one who understands obtain guidance,

to understand a proverb and a saying,

the words of the wise and their riddles.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge;

fools despise wisdom and instruction.

(Proverbs 1:1-7 ESV)

The impact of refusing to seek true wisdom and instruction is evident all around us as the world spins like a sailboat without a rudder... yet we too fall prey to the temptation to just 'go with the flow' and not moor ourselves tightly to the bedrock of Christ and God's Holy Word. Wisdom is to be found as we do so... and it is to be valued above all earthly possessions.

Covenant Radio: Interview with Rev. Wes White on The Federal Vision

On Covenant Radio tomorrow, Bill and I will be conducting a very important and interesting interview with Rev. Wes White (see his blog here) concerning his former identification with Federal Vision teaching, and his leaving it behind - we'll also be discussing current challenges in orthodox Reformed and Presbyterian communions that the Federal Vision teaching presents. We have been looking forward to this program for a very long time - so we are particularly pleased to bring it to you. This is a program I'm sure our Covenant Radio listening audience won't want to miss - so please check us out at http://www.covenantradio.com. Expect the program to be uploaded sometime on Friday, and if you're a subscriber you'll have it soon thereafter.

Sola5 Radio is Back!

For those who actively listened early this year to Sola5 Radio, which is a 24/7 venture of Covenant Radio, and were disappointed to see it go off the air, we've got news!

We're starting up Sola5 Radio again, which for those unfamiliar with our previous broadcasting, is an online radio station (click here to listen - bookmark it!) dedicated to bringing music, both jazz and classical, hymns and psalms, as well as solid Reformed teaching and preaching, to our internet audience. We regularly rebroadcast programs from the Reformed Forum (Christ the Center), Scott Clark (Heidelcast and Office Hours) and our own Covenant Radio programs, and also sermons from pastors such as Joel Beeke, David P. Murray and Alan Cairns, among others. The Lord's Day schedule will be non-stop preaching and psalms. On the other six days of the week we'll play a mixture of teaching, podcasts, and the other music in our grab bag.

We hope you'll take a listen and use Sola5 for the purpose we've intended it - enjoyment and edification - to be a service to the church and to the world. Again, click here to listen, and for our program guide, look to our blog (http://sola5.wordpress.com) as we set things up again (we're in "test" mode now, but plan to be basically running full time and introduce more teaching into the mix as time goes on).

You can also join our Facebook group, and sign on for Twitter updates by following the Twitter feed Sola5Radio.

Soli Deo Gloria!

Colquhoun on Union with Christ

The doctrine of Union with Christ, which Reformers and Puritans such as John Calvin and John Owen saw as absolutely foundational to our understanding of soteriology, is under serious question and even attack in some conservative circles today. There are claims among some that real, saving union with Christ is effected at baptism - and that the non-elect, who ultimately are not saved, nevertheless enter into real union with Christ if they are baptized... and then lose those saving benefits which somehow they had in Christ for a time. This is completely foreign to the theology of the Reformation, and in particular of John Calvin - whom some of those who make the above claims somehow think they can lay claim to as a forefather in their understanding of Biblical truth.

John Colquhoun, in the first sermon in a recently published collection entitled Sermons on Important Doctrines emphasizes the permanence of union with Christ. He first writes of the intimate connection between the hypostatic union of human and divine natures in the person of Christ, with the personal, mystical union of Christ and the believer:

"the Lord... declared that no gracious relation between Him and our nature could be secure and permanent unless it were assumed to a subsistence in Himself. This union (TKP: the hypostatic union), then, is the sure foundation of the church's saving relation to God as a God of grace, and of the conveyance of gracious influences to its true members; and so long as that foundation stands, the safety, holiness and happiness of believers shall be secure. Now, the only begotten of the Father assumed our nature so that it might, in personal union with Him, be secured, and that our persons might never be in danger of losing conformity to Him or communion with Him." (p. 18, Sermons on Important Doctrines)

Colquhoun, writing on the doctrine of the Incarnation, links the two unions - the hypostatic and the mystical - in a necessary relationship. He argues that our union with Christ is grounded on the fact that Christ was both God and Man - united in one person - and hence the second union cannot exist without the first. Further, the permanence of the one union (the hypostatic) is seen as a ground for the permanence of the second union (the mystical). We know Christ is coming back in the same body He arose in (witness Acts 1). We know that union, of God and Man in the person of Christ Jesus is permanent... so too is the union of Christ with His elect. Later on, Colquhoun clarifies this doctrine in the following paragraph:

"Is the union of the divine and human nature in the person of Christ a sure foundation of His people's perseverance in the union with Him and conformity to Him? Let believers then be encouraged to press toward th emark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. This personal union is, and will continue to be, an everlasting security for the perpetuity of the mystical union between His person and the persons of believers. It will be as easy for an enemy to ascend the celestial throne and tear asunder the glorified humanity from the divine person of our exalted Immanuel, as it will be to dissolve the union that subsists between Him and the weakest member of His body. 'Because I live, ye shall live also.'" (p. 22, Sermons on Important Doctrines)

The idea that God might unite some to Christ who ultimately will not be glorified and have perfect, sinless communion eternally with Him in the new Heavens and Earth is inconceivable to Colquhoun, and, I should think, to any who take seriously the promises of Scripture. "he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. 1:6) How can anyone seriously argue that one might attain a saving union with Christ, but then lose it at some later time? Is Christ one who abandons His sheep? Truly? Is this what people are really willing to believe, who accept the lie of the Federal Vision "temporary saving union" teaching? It is impossible for me to understand this, if Scripture is taken seriously, and Christ is given His due. That any united to Him truly might be torn away flies in the face of Scripture (e.g. John 10:27-28, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand." or John 6:37, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.") There are no lost sheep. All those in His flock are THERE - and none truly there, united with and under their Shepherd, are lost. The doctrine of "temporary saving union" is simply folly (and that's putting it lightly)

Today on Covenant Radio: J. Mark Beach on Piety's Wisdom

Later today on Covenant Radio, We're pleased to be speaking with Dr. J. Mark Beach, Professor of Ministerial and Doctrinal Studies and Dean of Students at Mid-America Reformed Seminary in Dyer, Indiana. In addition, he is an associate pastor at Redeemer United Reformed Church, also in Dyer.

Today we'll be speaking with Dr. Beach about a recent book of his published by Reformation Heritage Books, entitled “Piety’s Wisdom: A Summary of Calvin’s Institutes with Study Questions”. This book is a very important contribution to literature for the church - a study guide to introduce people to the teaching of John Calvin in his magnum opus, the Institutes of the Christian religion. Please check the Covenant Radio website for ways in which you can subscribe to our podcast, as well as check out show notes and download previous shows.

Imputation of Christ's Righteousness: Flavel in The Method of Grace

A dear friend and I read together weekly and discuss reading, most often from John Flavel's works. Today in our passage from The Method of Grace, which is found in his collected works, volume 1, one of the things we came across was the following treatment of Christ's saving benefits, which I found particularly illuminating and edifying. In this particular section (the first sermon in the Method of Grace series) Flavel is expositing 1 Cor. 1:30,

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.

In this sermon, Flavel goes on to explain these benefits to believers, and makes a clear distinction in terms of the method by which God applies these benefits of Christ to us who believe. He clearly argues (and I'll blog on this later together with some material from John Colquhoun, who I quoted yesterday) for these saving benefits being tied strictly to the union of Christ with His elect people, and then describes God's method of application:

"Prop. 8. Lastly, Although the several privileges and benefits before mentioned are all true and really bestowed with Christ upon believers, yet they are not communicated to them in one and the same day and manner; but differently and divers, as their respective natures do require.

These four illustrious benefits (TKP - namely, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, a la 1 Cor. 1:30) are conveyed from Christ to us in three different ways and methods; his righteousness is made ours by imputation: his wisdom and sanctification by renovation: his redemption by our glorification." (p. 24, Volume 1, Works of John Flavel)

Warning shot across the bow to the Romanist and legalist... the various saving benefits of Christ are NOT one and the same, and are NOT delivered in the same way. Justification and Sanctification are NOT identical, nor are they applied to believers in the same way - they require different methods of application quite simply because they are different benefits. He continues:

"I know the communication of Christ's righteousness to us by imputations is not only denied, but scoffed at by Papists*; who own no righteousness, but what is (at least) confounded with that which is inherent in us; and for imputative (blasphemously stiled by them putative righteousness, they flatly deny it, and look upon it as a most absurd doctrine, every where endeavouring to load it with these and such like absurdities, That if God imputes Christ's righteousness to the believer, and accepts what Christ has performed for him, as if he had performed it himself; then we may be accounted as righteous as Christ. Then we may be the redeemers of the world. False and groundless consequences; as if a man should say, my debt

is paid by my surety, therefore I am as rich as he.

* a phantom sprung of Luther's brain - Stapleton"

(p. 24, Volume 1,Works of John Flavel)

Don't we hear this objection today, or those like it? If Christ's active obedience - if His righteousness in life - is imputed to us, are we not then encouraging licentiousness? Are we not denying God His right to expect us to obey the Law? Are we then not making ourselves out to be worthy as Christ? I do hear on today the statement made by FV sympathizers that the purpose of Christ's obedience was only to qualify Him as the sacrificial lamb, and therefore that His obedience cannot be imputed to us. (how far off is this from the objection Flavel just attributed to his opponents?) Rather, as the statement I quoted from Colquhoun yesterday argues, this flatly fails when it is considered that all men are bound to obey God perfectly, and that perfect record of obedient living must be ours. Christ obeyed FOR HIS ELECT.

I love the addition of the scoffing comment that Flavel footnotes by Stapleton - imputation of Christ's righteousness is apparently a "phantom sprung of Luther's brain". I guess I'm a Lutheran. (and that accusation is also levied against those who argue for a right appreciation of the Law-Gospel distinction that is a hallmark of classic Reformation orthodoxy)

Of this imputed righteousness, Flavel goes on to comment:

"it is inhesively in him, communicatively it becomes ours, by imputation, the sin of the first Adam becomes ours, and the same way the righteousness of the second Adam becomes ours, Rom. 5: 17. This way the Redeemer became sin for us, and this way we are made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. 5: 21. This way Abraham the father of believers was justified, therefore this way all believers, the children of Abraham, must be justified also, Rom. 4: 22, 23. And thus is Christ's righteousness made ours.

But in conveying, and communicating his wisdom and sanctification, he takes another method, for this is not imputed, but really imparted to us by the illuminating and regenerating work of the Spirit: these are graces really inherent in us: our righteousness comes from Christ as a surety but our holiness comes from him as a quickening head, sending vital influences unto all his
members.

Now these gracious habits being subjected and seated in the souls of poor imperfect creatures, whose corruptions abide and work in the very same faculties where grace has its residence; it cannot be, that our sanctification should be so perfect and complete, as our justification is, which inheres only in Christ. See Gal. 5: 17. Thus are righteousness and sanctification communicated and made ours..." (p. 25, Volume 1,Works of John Flavel)

We've got to understand these things rightly... justification is the declaration of God that we are just before Him- purely declarative, purely an attribution of righteousness that comes ONLY (and CAN come ONLY) by imputation. That righteousness with which we are imputed must be perfect, for that is what God requires - not the righteousness of man, of "genuine" obedience, or of "sincere attempts", but pure, spotless righteousness of the Lamb of God! Because this is the righteousness God requires, it cannot come but by gracious imputation of it - by a pure act of granting it to us, and declaring it upon us by the Holy judge of all.

Sanctification has no part to play in our being declared righteous - it is wholly different, having a wholly different method of application and a wholly different purpose. Flavel speaks to this clearly when he argues that the holiness of sanctification is brought forth in us indeed, but is imperfect, because we are sinful creatures still, and imperfect in our very being. Nevertheless, sanctification is a real grace communicated to believers by the working of the Holy Spirit in us. Progressively we learn the ways of the Lord, and progressively our sin gives way to more righteousness and conformity to the Son of God... this is a progressive work that is not complete this side of Heaven... and again, as such, it cannot be the basis for any declaration of righteousness by God. This must be understood - or we confuse and destroy the message of the Gospel and the message of Christ's work for us and in us.

Two-fold Grace in Christ from Colquhoun

If you can pronounce the author's name, you're in a small minority :)

Yesterday afternoon, looking for something to read in between my perusings of The Marrow of Modern Divinity and Caryl's Exposition of Job, I picked up a book entitled Sermons on Important Doctrines by John Colquhoun (1748-1827), a pastor of the Scottish Secession church, and one upon which the writings of the Marrow brethren had enormous impact. Several of his works, like this one, have been republished in the past few years by Don Kistler, to whom I give hearty thanks for this and other evidences of his service and love for the church. His new publishing effort is Northampton Press.

Colquhoun is also the author of a very important work, A Treatise on the Law and the Gospel, that I intend to acquire and blog about in the near future.

In the first sermon from this volume, Colquhoun writes about the nature of Christ as the Incarnate Word, preaching from John 1:14. I appreciated his remarks concerning the identity of Christ as "Word of God", because, as he wrote,

"As it is by Him that God declares His thoughts or will to His people, so it is by Him that they express their thoughts and desires to God. The Man Christ Jesus is the only Mediator between God and men. It is by Him, therefore, that believers offer the sacrifice of praise and thanks to God continually. He spoke for His people in the council of peace, and covenanted to pay the price of their redemption. He speaks for them in His intercession, and presents their prayers and performances accepteable to His eternal Father." (p. 3, Sermons on Important Doctrines)

Normally the use of the term "Word of God" to describe Christ I think of exclusively in terms of His meditating God's presence to us... but Colquhoun ties it also to Christ's mediation of our desires, praises and prayers to God. Keenly insightful, I think, and helpful as we consider Christ as truly the mediator between us and our Heavenly Father. He spoke for us and speaks for us today - He covenanted for us - covenanted to stand in our place, firmly, and without fail, when prior to time the pactum salutis was enacted. There is no failure in Him - and no failure in His atonement for us, those of us united to Him.

This theme of redemption comes up again (as also union, but I'll blog on that tomorrow) several pages later into the text of Colquhoun's sermon, as he presents reasons for Christ to have come in the flesh. His second point concerns Christ's necessity of being made "under the law" in order to redeem us. Colquhoun writes,

"He engaged to become a Surety for those who were, in the everlasting covenant, given to Him; and, as sustaining that character, to pay their debt of perfect obedience for life by obeying the precepts of the law as a covenant of works in their stead, and their debt of complete satisfaction for sin by enduring for them the full execution of the condemning sentence of the law." (p. 14, Sermons on Important Doctrines )

Here, the twofold work of Christ - the two-fold grace of God in Christ's life and death are held forth as precious elements of the Gospel! Christ indeed covenanted with the Father that His full and spotless righteousness would be ours, those whom the Father had given Him, and that we would be acceptable before God - having the perfect righteousness of obedience and having given perfect satisfaction for our sins. This is simply double imputation... but precious to God's people.

Colquhoun goes on further to elaborate:

"The disobedience of those who are naturally obliged to obedience could not be compensated but by the obedience of Him who was not naturally nor originally obliged to obey." (p. 15, Sermons on Important Doctrines)

This is one of the Federal Vision hallmarks - that Christ's active obedience cannot be transmitted to us, because He needed to obey for Himself, and could henceforth not be said to obey for the elect in their place. Yet Christ is said by Paul to be "made under the law" at the right time, so that He might become subject to that which he, as God-Man, was not naturally nor originally subject to. His obedience was FOR us, as the Surety. Colquhoun continues:

"But because what the Son of God engaged to do in the room of His elect could not have been obedience had he not been under the law and bound to obey it, He therefore assumed the human nature so that as man He might be capable of yielding obedience, which as God only He could not be. On account of the dignity to which His human nature was advanced, in consequence of its union with the divine nature in His person, He was under no obligation to obey for Himself because His human nature never existed by itself, but, from the moment of its assumption, subsisted always in His divine person; notwithstanding, as He was hereby capable of obedience, He became bound to obey as a Surety for the elect. Besides, as in the character of Surety for them, He had engaged to bear the execution of the curse of the Law for the satisfaction of divine justice, He becames man so that the sword of justice might have an opportunity of smiting Him." (p. 15, Sermons on Important Doctrines)

Christ both obeyed and died for His elect... for both were necessary for our salvation. I appreciate the keen insight Colquhoun evidences here, and the applicability to today's controversies. When Christ's identity as standing in our room both under obligation of obedience and necessity of satisfaction for sin is missed... all manner of dangerous error can (and does) arise, as indeed it is. Colquhoun's exposition is both precious encouragement and necessary prophylactic against error.