The truth concerning man's relation with God is one which deserves our attention and our understanding. Nothing can be more important than one’s standing before God. It is very literally a matÂter of life and death.
There is a relationship of fellowship between God and his people. That relationship has been called a "covenant relationship." This concept is fundamental unto a proper understanding of our duties and responsibilities before God and with men. Within the church it becomes very plain that some sort of beautiful relationship exists between God and this people of his church. It is also to be clearly understood that this relationship exists only because of and through the cross of Jesus Christ.
"Covenant" involves a coming together, a dwelling under one roof. The term emphasizes that God and his people have a basis for unity. This, we believe, is the purpose of God's revelation outside of himself—that a people might eternally dwell with him in Christ.
The Lord’s Supper in the dialogue of worship was not always understood the scriptural way we have described it in these articles. In our previous article we examined how Rome views the Lord’s Supper in worship. In this article we want to understand how and why the Reformation was used of God to restore the church to a proper understanding of the Lord’s Supper in worship.
Restoration of the gospel
When the Reformation returned the church to the truth of the gospel, everything changed also in worship. In God’s sovereign mercy, Martin Luther, who had access to Scripture, began to see the truth of the Word of God. Particularly, he saw that Scripture taught the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross that effectually atoned for the sins of all His people, so that they are justified by an imputed, alien righteousness alone.
Pastor de Cock briefly addresses the gathering, pointing them to the seriousness of the moment and of the step they were contemplating. Then they all kneel in prayer to commit their cause to the Lord and to beseech him for grace that they may make their decision in the consciousness of his favor. For their help is in the name of the God of Jacob.Â
It was only a little band!Â
They did not belong to the noble and the wise and the rich of this world. They did not belong to those who counted for something in this world. But "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are" [1 Cor. 1:27].Â
It was by this little flock of small and despised folk that a step was taken and a decision reached which would prove to be of tremendous historical significance for the Reformed Churches—in fact, for Zion of all ages, for eternity. Read More
We must not imagine that the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints and of the assurance of that perseverance was a new doctrine established by the Synod of Dordrecht in 1618–‘19. It was not. The doctrine of perseverance was not new for the church in general, nor was it new to our Reformed creeds and for our Reformed churches. I need only remind you of the fact that this doctrine finds expression in a most beautiful context in that jewel of our Heidelberg Catechism, Q&A 54, concerning the holy, catholic church. The 54th answer concludes with the well-known words, "...and that I am and forever shall remain, a living member thereof." There, in just a few words, you have both the doctrine of perseverance and the doctrine of the assurance of perseverance. And the fathers of Dordt were well aware of this, and thus aware of the fact that the Arminians militated against the adopted confession, as is plain from their reference to Q&A 54 in article 9 of the fifth head of doctrine:Read More
The second chapter of the book of Esther is very revealing, if one does not approach it with a mind biased by the general notions concerning the principal characters in the book but lets the facts speak for themselves. It reveals nothing but deeds of unbelief both on the part of the Gentiles mentioned, of whom it can be expected, but also of the Jews, who knew the law and the prophets. And while this chapter already is revealing, what follows in the remaining chapters also underscores what we wrote before, namely, that not one of the persons mentioned by name in the book was a believer. Indeed some reveal that they know that there is a God, but without exception all show that they have no faith in God. Let us look carefully at what the one true God makes known to us in this chapter. Read More
In any great undertaking there are certain basic rules or principles which need to be followed if the endeavor is to be capped with success. The pilot must know the principles of aeronautics; the draftsman the principles of engineering; the surgeon the principles of human physiology. Such is also the case in the great enterprise of producing unspiritual young people. Here, too, one's goal is most easily achieved, and success guaranteed, when these basic rules are taken into consideration. Application of these time-tested laws, either singly or in any combination, is sure to bring about the desired goal. Any consistency in applying the rules is sure to make the devil cheer and the world applaud. By the same token the Holy Spirit will be grieved and the cause of Christ's church in the world dealt a severe blow.Â
What are these rules, the practice of which is most effective in producing unspiritual young people, a virtual serpent's brood? Read More
To understand the meaning of irresistible grace we must go back in history to the time of the Arminian controversy. The very term irresistible cannot be understood, except in that light.Â
The Arminians taught resistible grace. In their third article they seemed to maintain an orthodox doctrine of man's depravity, although more than appearance this was not. And in their fourth article they made it very plain that the grace of God in their system of doctrine is dependent on the will of man. Man, after all, is able to resist the operation of God's grace; and if he is able to resist, he is also able not to resist. The choice rests with him, and the efficacy of God's grace depends on the willingness or unwillingness of the sinner.Â
This is very plain when one reads Articles 3 and 4 of the Arminians together.
I am glad to read that you find between us areas of agreement. Especially important is that you can accept calling faith a ‘doing,’ though only “as long as calling faith a ‘doing’ only means that faith is an activity, but in no way, shape, or form means that faith is a work."
Thank you for publishing my letter and revised letter in the March 1 and March 15, 2019 issues of the Standard Bearer, even though the letter exceeded the length allowed by SB policy. (As for your apology for publishing the wrong letter originally, apology accepted—no harm done and no hard feelings.) Thank you as well for your thorough response to my letter in two installments in those same issues. We are agreed that these matters are of greatest importance and are worthy of the space devoted to them in the pages of the SB. I ask for your indulgence in allowing me to respond once more, since this letter again goes beyond policy.
The subject of God's providence and sin places us before an unfathomable mystery. This we readily concede and confess. And we have no intention of comprehending and understanding this mystery. On the one hand, man is a free responsible being. He performs iniquity because he loves it. He is unmolested in his sinning, is never forced or coerced. Besides, he never wills or desires anything else than sin, does not rest until and unless he commits evil, is a slave of iniquity, but always a very willing slave. He is always free, only however in this moral sense of the word. He is never sovereignly free. On the other hand, God is the living God. He alone is God. We cannot afford to lose this truth. If we lose this truth we lose God. And, losing God, we lose all. Read More
There is an essay by a well-known British author of this century entitled "Creed or Chaos?"² In the essay the author defends the use of creeds in the church, and the title of the essay very aptly describes the urgency of maintaining and defending our creeds. The only alternative is ecclesiastical chaos. History has proved that, especially in the last century. The church has moved off her creedal foundation, has separated herself from the church of the past and from the word of God, and is no longer protected from the chaos that the floods and winds of doctrinal change, spiritual ignorance, and worldliness bring. Read More
We will notice, this time, what God requires of us in the single life. Probably most of the young people reading this, as well as some of the young adults, are single. Although this article applies to those who are older and unmarried, it certainly applies to you who are younger, even to those who are dating and not yet married.Read More
Youth in the Lord, the last time we met together we saw that the strength of youth and the beauty of youth is the spiritual adornment of obedience. The earmark of the child of God is obedience unto one's parents in the Lord, for the Lord's sake, for this is right. This was based on the word of God as recorded in Ephesians 6:1–3. We concluded our discussion last time by pointing out that obedience is well-pleasing unto the Lord, that he loves obedience.Â
Question 56. What believest thou concerning "the forgiveness of sin"? Answer. That God for the sake of Christ's satisfaction, will no more remember my sins, neither my corrupt nature, against which I have to struggle all my life long; but will graciously impute to me the righteousness of Christ, that I may never be condemned before the tribunal of God.—Heidelberg Catechism, Lord's Day 21
No condemnation!
There is therefore now no condemnation, not in this present time nor in the great day of days as I stand before the tribunal of the Most High God! My sins are forgiven! I am righteous in Christ!
