Lent Is Not For Getting Closer to God

1. Giving up food or drink or anything else cannot bring you closer to God, no matter if you do it before Easter or in the middle of September. Only Christ’s death on the cross can bring us to God (1 Peter 3:18).

2. Jesus didn’t fast for 40 days & nights in the wilderness so that you could have something to do after Valentine’s Day. He did it to “fulfill all righteousness” in redemptive history and establish Himself as the Second Adam and true Israel (Matthew 3:15).

3. Human regulations are of some value and possess an appearance of wisdom, but are powerless to bring about holiness or transformation. That is what the Gospel does (Colossians 2:20 – 23; 1:13-14).

Calvin on Lent

Then the superstitious observance of Lent had everywhere prevailed: for both the vulgar imagined that they thereby perform some excellent service to God, and pastors commended it as a holy imitation of Christ; though it is plain that Christ did not fast to set an example to others, but, by thus commencing the preaching of the gospel, meant to prove that his doctrine was not of men, but had come from heaven.

And it is strange how men of acute judgment could fall into this gross delusion, which so many clear reasons refute: for Christ did not fast repeatedly (which he must have done had he meant to lay down a law for an anniversary fast), but once only, when preparing for the promulgation of the gospel. Nor does he fast after the manner of men, as he would have done had he meant to invite men to imitation; he rather gives an example, by which he may raise all to admire rather than study to imitate him.

In short, the nature of his fast is not different from that which Moses observed when he received the law at the hand of the Lord (Exod. 24:18; 34:28). For, seeing that that miracle was performed in Moses to establish the law, it behoved not to be omitted in Christ, lest the gospel should seem inferior to the law. But from that day, it never occurred to any one, under pretence of imitating Moses, to set up a similar form of fast among the Israelites.

Nor did any of the holy prophets and fathers follow it, though they had inclination and zeal enough for all pious exercises; for though it is said of Elijah that he passed forty days without meat and drink (1 Kings 19:8), this was merely in order that the people might recognise that he was raised up to maintain the law, from which almost the whole of Israel had revolted.

It was therefore merely false zeal, replete with superstition, which set up a fast under the title and pretext of imitating Christ; although there was then a strange diversity in the mode of the fast, as is related by Cassiodorus in the ninth book of the History of Socrates: “The Romans,” says he, “had only three weeks, but their fast was continuous, except on the Lord’s day and the Sabbath. The Greeks and Illyrians had, some six, others seven, but the fast was at intervals. Nor did they differ less in the kind of food: some used only bread and water, others added vegetables; others had no objection to fish and fowls; others made no difference in their food.” Augustine also makes mention of this difference in his latter epistle to Januarius. (From Institutes 4.12.20)

The Reformed Pastor

The power of a divine life, reigning within you, can never dispose you to neglect your studies, or to use with a slack hand the means you possess for making your education for the ministry thorough and complete. It is not when led by the Spirit of God, that the theological student is found out of place and out of time, as it respects the literary engagements to which he is bound in an institution like ours; slighting his lessons, absenting himself from recitations, despising rules, careless of punctuality, wasting his time with unprofitable visits, and sacrificing his intellectual strength to the vain spirit of the world. … [Your studies] are entitled to more than all the zeal they have yet received at your hands.

Selecting Music for the Glory of God

Dear Zion,

Last month in this column we saw that there is nothing more important than God’s glory. Everything we do is to be done for His glory (I Corinthians 10:31). So if this is true, how should we think about our worship services, especially the songs that we sing? How should God’s glory affect our worship music?

First of all, we should note that, if the singing portion of our worship services (and we do much more in worship than just sing!) is for God’s glory, then that means it is not for us or about us (Psalm 115:1)! It’s about our Triune God! We come to “worship Him in the beauty of His holiness” (Psalm 29:2). So often, it easy to find ourselves thinking, “This song doesn’t speak to me,” or “I don’t care for the style of this song.” But the problem with both of those thoughts is that the subject is me and not God! Biblical worship is about pleasing the Lord of Hosts and doing His will, not about pleasing myself and having my way (Matthew 26:39; Romans 12:1-2). If you ever think to yourself that you simply cannot worship God because of a distaste for the music that is being sung, ask yourself this: am I here to worship God for His glory, or am I here for my personal preferences and my glory?

So if we recognize that God is supreme in worship and that we come to please Him, what does that tell us about the kinds of songs we ought to sing? A principle that all Christians must learn to become emphatic about is that our songs must have biblically faithful lyrics. Above all, we must be careful that what we say or sing in our worship services falls in line with God’s Word and brings glory to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It might seem like nearly all songs today – whether hymns or Christian pop played on the radio – are quite biblical or spiritual in their lyrics. But we must be cautious. Scripture warns us over and over again that simply using spiritual sounding language is no guarantee that it is pleasing to God (Jeremiah 6:14; Matthew 7:22-23). Jesus warned His disciples not to be like the hypocrites that offered pious sounding words in their worship (Matthew 6:5-7). Going through hymnals, it is often amazing to see what songs have been included, and yet – based on their words – these songs have no business being used in worship. The same can be said of some contemporary songs as well.

One sure fire way to make sure our lyrics are pleasing to God is by using words that the Holy Spirit inspired. We can sing the words of Scripture! The Apostle Paul encourages us to “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God” (Colossians 3:16). When we sing “The Lord’s My Shepherd” or “All Creatures That On Earth Do Dwell,” we are singing Psalms 23 and 100 set to verse and music. Psalm singing has a long pedigree in Christian – and especially Reformed – churches and to the extent that we can sing God’s Word back to Him, it roots Christ in our hearts and glorifies Him. Even when we sing songs that are not direct quotations of Scripture, it is important that the lyrics, theme, and general message reflect biblical truth.

But what about the musical tune? Scripture may give guidelines on the what of our singing (the lyrics), but our Bibles don’t come with melodies or four part harmonies. What about the how of singing (the tune/arrangement)? Much could be said on this topic, but we can certainly all agree that the music should 1) correspond to and, 2) enhance the lyrics. Probably all of us can agree that Psalm 23 should not be accompanied by heavy metal rock ‘n’ roll, and that Psalm 2 should not be sung to the tune of “Jesus Loves Me, This I Know.” When a melody and arrangement matches the energy and direction of the lyrics, even those of us who aren’t very musical recognize a happy harmony exists between tune and text. We will consider this concept further in future articles.

Praying with you for Christ to be glorified in our singing and in our lives,
Pastor Brian

John Murray on Creation as Analogical Days

From his Principles of Conduct, Murray discusses the importance of Sabbath principles. In his discussion, Murray’s language struck my ears (eyes?) as sounding similar to the language often employed when defending the analogical day view of Creation. He says:

The seventh day referred to here [Gen 2:2-BJL] is unquestionably the seventh day in sequence with the six days of creative activity, the seventh day in the sphere of God’s action, not the seventh day in our weekly cycle. In the realm of God’s activity in creating the heavens and the earth there were six days of creative action and one day of rest. There is the strongest presumption in favour of the interpretation that this seventh day is not one that terminated at a certain point in history, but that the whole period of time subsequent to the end of the sixth day is the sabbath of rest alluded to in Genesis 2:2 …. God’s week, if we may use that term, is not a cycle, it is a once-for-all accomplishment… Does this [Gen 2:3-BJL] refer simply to God’s sabbath, or does it refer to a weekly day of rest in the cycle and sequences of our time?… Even in Exodus 20:11 it is difficult to ascertain whether the sabbath referred to is expressly the seventh day in the realm of God’s activity or the seventh day in man’s weekly cycle. But the significant feature of this verse is that, whichever interpretation we adopt, the sabbath of God’s rest is the reason given for the sabbath of man’s rest, the recurring seventh day of the week. And this would carry with it the inevitable inference that God blessed and sanctified the seventh day of our week precisely because he sanctified the seventh day in the realm of his own creative activity… In the transcendent realm of God’s opera ad extra, on the grand plane of his creative action, he rested on the seventh day. God’s mode of operation is the exemplar on the basis of which the sequence for man is patterned… there is strong presumption in favour of the view that it refers specifically and directly to the sabbath instituted for man.
(emphasis original) pp. 30-32 

Now, I don’t claim to know which position Murray maintained when it comes to the Creation debate. (A quick glance at his Collected Works and Principles didn’t turn up any answers. Does anybody know? Which groups generally claim him? I was assuming he would be fairly “vanilla” on this subject.) And I’m not saying that his language here necessitates that Murray held to an Analogical Day view. But differentiating between “the sphere of God’s action” and “our weekly cycle,” and “God’s week” being a once-for-all accomplishment as opposed to the cyclical nature of “our time” does seem to put Murray as holding that the Creation Week was archetypal and our weeks are antitypical. He acknowledges the difficulty of discerning between “the realm of God’s activity” and “man’s weekly cycle” in the 4th Commandment, which would imply that the Creation Week is on another register from creaturely experience.

Again, I’m sure this language doesn’t pigeonhole Murray. In fact, he may be purposefully distancing himself from an Analogical view when he concludes that the blessed sabbath of Gen 2:3 is in fact the sabbath that humans participate in.

Is Murray a supporter of the Analogical Days view? What other position might his language support? If you find another reference, be sure to leave work and page number in the comments below!

Deconstructing Middle Earth?

I’ve always been a Tolkien fan, having been exposed to The Hobbit when I was young and then reading The Lord of the Rings as a jr. higher. No, thank you for asking, I wasn’t a nerd.

But I did fall head over heals for Arda and Tolkien’s mythos so much so that I didn’t go on a date until I was 25 memorized Elvish language and devoured The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales. So imagine my cautioned interest when I heard that Russian paleontologist Kirill Yeskov penned “The Last Ringbearer,” a re-imagining of Tolkien’s trilogy. Translated by Yisroel Markov, Yeskov’s vision of Middle Earth does away with what he perceives to be a romanticized and naive morality in Tolkien’s yarn, and instead speculates from a Mordor-centric understanding. Here, Gandalf is a war-monger who is trying to hold back the civilizing and modernizing effects of Mordor’s innovation.

All this makes me as equally intrigued as suspicious. What do you think? Is such fiction harmless and good for the franchise? Or can such a retelling with such a strong anti-Tolkien lens bear any fruit?

Salon.com – “Middle Earth According to Mordor” Lauren Miller analyzes whether Yeskov’s work is “fan fic” or a parody that hits closer to home.
“The Last Ringbearer” – translated and download

Ridderbos Uses Circumcision to Understand the Law for Christians

Ridderbos_PaulOutlineTheologyRidderbos reflects on “how much Christ, the law, the Spirit, and love constitute a unity may appear from a comparison of the following parallel pronouncements.” I found his insights illuminating, and tried to reconstruct some of what he shows below.

Galatians 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.
Galatians 6:15-16 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision but a new creation.  And as for all who walk by this rule [= canon], peace and mercy be upon them,
1 Corinthians 7:19 For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God.

 

Philippians 3:3 For we are the real circumcision Who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh

The true “[S]pirituality” that the New Covenant in Christ produces is the work of love as it keeps the commandments of God born out of regeneration in the Spirit.

Paul: An Outline of His Theology p. 285ff.

Just In Case You Missed ‘Em

With the overwhelming influx of information available, discerning readers must become selective in what they give their time to read. Just in case you missed ’em, here are some links I found valuable, and hope you will also.

John Owen on Pastoral Prayer
Looking for further resources on how to pray better? Rev. Danny Hyde discusses Owen’s thoughts on public prayer at Meet the Puritans, including how to “improve” upon Christ’s gifts and what it might mean to “study prayer” and “pray while we study.”

Ussher on the Corporate Nature of Baptism
“Thus if we were wise to make a right use of [attending to the sacrament]; we might learn as much at a Baptism as at a Sermon.”

Apostasy Now
The always interesting Lauren Winner writes for Slate to query whether it is even possible to apostasize from mainline Christianity. “Would that America’s Protestant mainline could produce an apostate. For one might say that a group that lacks the necessary preconditions for making apostates can’t make disciples either.” Perhaps you’ve never thought it a good thing, but could you be kicked out of your church? Is there a proportionate relationship between the severity of exclusion and the warmth of inclusion?

Spiritual Alzheimers
“…when you can remember Him no more, God will remember you. ‘Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you. Behold, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands.’”

Contra Accountability Groups
Tullian says “Reminders Are More Effective Than Rebukes” when it comes to living out the Christian life.

Dennis Johnson on Preaching the Gospel
From his magnum opus Him We Proclaim, “…the same gospel that initially called us to faith is the means that perfects us in faith.”

The Bavinck Institute
A wealth of resources. How did I just now hear about this?! Download The Bavinck Review, surf for dissertations on Bavinck that may be downloaded, and find information on a debate regarding Bavinck’s view of Two Kingdoms theology.

The Fun Cult
“Entertainment is a huge American idol. Q/A #1 of the American catechism is this: ‘The chief end of man is to glorify fun and enjoy it forever.'” Bonus: great Trueman quotes on deconstruction of entertainment.