The Great Stores of God’s Provision
As we look back on the race we ran, we will see that the God who planned our days, the God whose providence knew the end from the beginning, laid out his provision for us at exactly the points we most needed it, the points we would otherwise have been most likely to be disqualified.
I recently read an account of one of the world’s most dangerous and demanding races. Over the course of a week, participants must run nearly 300 kilometers over scorching desert terrain. Once they set out, they are expected to remain mostly independent and to follow a track that has been staked across flatlands and dunes, dry river beds and infrequent oases. To ensure participants have the provisions they need, the race organizers leave stores of food, water, and medical supplies at a number of locations. The racers set out smartly with great pomp and vigor, then stagger and stumble bedraggledly across the finish line 6, 7, or even 8 days later.
These being modern times, each of the racers carries a GPS tracker with him so he can later trace his route and analyze his progress. Each of the racers sets out with his mind fixed firmly on the finish line, and each would insist that he has spent a week exerting superhuman effort in running straight toward it. Yet the GPS would show that while his route has led from beginning to end, it actually led through each one of those supply stations. And, in fact, both are true. His single-minded devotion to the race led him to each of the locations where he could be resupplied.
The Bible often compares this life to a race—a race in which we are to be every bit as focused, every bit as single-minded, every bit as driven to reach the finish line. “One thing I do,” says the Apostle Paul. “Forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” “Let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,” says the author of Hebrews. The Christian life is a long and grueling race through a wearying desert world.
You Might also like
-
“I Believe In … The Forgiveness Of Sins”
Written by R. Fowler White |
Wednesday, July 27, 2022
Evidently, in our day, too many don’t share God’s view of sin. Instead, they insist that they’re good by nature and can earn God’s acceptance, having no need to seek from Him the forgiveness of sins. The truth is, however, that we sinners have a debt to God that we cannot pay. As such, our only hope is in God Himself, who graciously credits the full payment of debt to all who receive and rest on Christ alone. Wrapped in the robe of righteousness that He provides, we exult in our God, confessing as one, I believe … in the forgiveness of sins.As we come to Article 10 of the Apostles’ Creed—I believe … in the forgiveness of sins, we’re still in what we take to be the third section of the Creed, where the focus is on the person and work of God the Holy Spirit. It might strike us as odd that the forgiveness of sins is placed in this section. After all, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assumes that we will make our requests for pardon to our Heavenly Father (Matt 6:12). Meanwhile, the Apostle Paul tells us that it was Christ the Son who purchased forgiveness for us in His cross work (Eph 1:7). Nonetheless, we also remember that the Spirit’s ministry is to prove the world of sinners wrong about sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:7-11). In God’s application of salvation to sinners, we can say that the Spirit makes the first move necessary for us to receive forgiveness. So, what is it that we confess when we declare, I believe in … the forgiveness of sins?
To unpack this article we’ll start with this question: do we share God’s view of sin? In Scripture, of course, God talks about sin and condemns it as failure to conform to His nature and moral law in our actions, attitudes, affections, and nature. In briefer terms, sin is failure to be or do as God requires. Sin is also described as a debt. In the Lord’s Prayer, the forgiveness of sins is the forgiveness of debts. We should know why our sins are debts. It’s because we owe God obedience; that is, we have a debt of obedience to Him, particularly when we disobey. Our disobedience, in truth, expresses hatred of and indifference to God and His requirements, quite the opposite of what we owe Him. Recognizing the reality of personal sin, then, is affirming that we aren’t what God requires us to be, and we don’t do what He requires us to do. In fact, we can’t be or do good as He requires (Eph 2:1-3; Rom 3:23; 5:18-19). Yet, as recently as 2020, almost two-thirds of people surveyed believe that most people are good by nature. Friends, if this survey is accurate, deception about human nature is rampant. The Apostle John is clear: If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. … If we say that we have not sinned, we make God a liar and His word is not in us (1 John 1:8, 10). The Apostle Paul is blunt: none is righteous, no, not one; … no one does good, not even one (Rom 3:10, 12). The point? Only by affirming God’s view of sin can we also rightly affirm the forgiveness of sins as we confess it in the Creed’s tenth article.
Read MoreRelated Posts:
-
A Pure Church
Worship in this life that is shaped by our covenant relationship with God through the gospel, the spiritual realities of heavenly worship, sanctifies us into a pure church who live in light of that relationship as we wait for our blessed hope. By reenacting what we are in Christ, Christian worshipers become what we are.
Though during this present age kingdom and cultus (God’s worshiping community) are separated, God intends one day to join them together under the rule of his Anointed One. The question for us is, of course, where we currently fit in this plan of God for a holy theocracy, a perfect union of kingdom and cultus under the kingly rule and priestly ministry of the Second Adam.
The book of Hebrews addresses both kingdom and cultus in this present age. First, the author quotes God’s declaration in Psalm 8 that he intends for man to exercise regal dominion over all the earth; however, “At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him” (Heb 2:8). The First Adam failed, and still all things are not yet in subjection to the son of man. But, “because of the suffering of death,” Jesus is “crowned with glory and honor” (Heb 2:9)—he has earned the right to rule; Christ is, as Psalm 110 states, presently seated at the Father’s right hand until the Father makes his enemies his footstool. The perfect eternal kingdom has been promised and already ensured, but it is not yet a consummated reality. Christ sovereignly rules over all creation as the Son of God, and Christ presently rules over his redeemed people, but the consummation of his rule over all things on earth as the Son of Man will happen when he comes again, when “the kingdom of this world”—that is, the common grace kingdom—“will become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ” (Rev 11:15).
In other words, if we want to look to the Old Testament for an analogy to our present situation as Christians in this age, we are more like the sojourning patriarchs and the exiled Hebrews than either the Edenic or Mosaic holy theocracies. And, of course, this is exactly how the New Testament portrays us. Peter specifically calls us “sojourners and exiles” (1 Pet 2:11). “Our citizenship is in heaven,” Paul tells us (Phil 3:20); we are “citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (Eph 2:19). Like Abraham on his pilgrimage or Daniel in Babylon, Christians participate in the common grace aspects of the earthly kingdoms in which we dwell, but we “desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one” (Heb 11:16); we long for the heavenly Jerusalem above our highest joy (Ps 137:6). And that heavenly Jerusalem will one day descend to the earth, uniting kingdom and cultus as was God’s intention from the beginning.
Yet Hebrews also reveals to us the nature of our worship in this age as well. The author proclaims at the end of chapter 12,
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, 23 and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. (Heb 12:22–24)
This is the heavenly palace/temple Isaiah and John envisioned, the place where God himself sits enthroned, surrounded by heavenly beings.” To this higher kingdom where God reigns Christian worshipers come to the reality, to the true worship of heaven itself. Paul describes this reality for Christians in Ephesians 2:6 when he states that God has “raised us up with [Christ] and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” Christ is seated in heaven as the king/priest, and since we are in him by faith, we are with him there. And he tells us how just a few verses later in Ephesians 2:18: “For through [Christ] we . . . have access in one Spirit to the Father.” We have access to the Father because in one Spirit through Christ, we are actually there, in the presence of God in heaven.
Pure Worship
This biblical understanding situates us in this present age as dual citizens. As members of the human race we are citizens of common grace earthly kingdoms, and so we participate as such. But ultimately we are a called out cultic community with “an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for [us], who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (1 Pet 1:4–5). Consequently, as Peter goes on to say, “as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct. . . . Conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers” (1 Pet 1:15, 17–18).
Read More
Related Posts: -
Where Is There Side B in the PCA?
Throughout this time many in the PCA have publicly promoted Revoice while at the same time claiming that Side B does not exist within the denomination. They have said that rather than change our Constitution to address a non-existent issue that we should make use of the AIC Report on Human Sexuality because it gives us the tools to rightly address the issues we are facing.
It has been almost 5 years since the Revoice Side B Conference was born in the PCA. That first Revoice Conference (July 2018) featured speakers promoting the beauty of “queer treasure” and attendees cuddling, petting, and at least one walking around with a portion of his genitals hanging out of his shorts. The PCA has been debating and seeking to deal with Side B (Gay) Christianity within the denomination ever since. Thankfully the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) of the PCA has denounced many of the teachings of Revoice. Still the debate persists.
Throughout this time many in the PCA have publicly promoted Revoice while at the same time claiming that Side B does not exist within the denomination. They have said that rather than change our Constitution to address a non-existent issue that we should make use of the AIC Report on Human Sexuality because it gives us the tools to rightly address the issues we are facing.
I agree that the AIC Report is a fine work on Biblical Sexuality with some great tools. I taught a 12 week class with it that I commend to you. However, the AIC Report has no Constitutional Authority and men have (not surprisingly) disagreed with what it allows and forbids. Additionally, since it does not use the term Side B, how do we know what the AIC Report on Human Sexuality thinks about Side B Gay Christianity?
Dr. Tim Keller, one of the main authors of the AIC report explains that “the PCA’s Ad-Interim Committee on Human Sexuality considered this Side B view and clearly rejected it.”
The problem is in how one defines Side B. One PCA Pastor on Twitter, based on a decades old conception of Side B, boldly states that “they agree same-sex sexual unions are out of bounds. Under these terms, the PCA is & always has been Side B.”
Is that all that Side B is? Let’s attempt to define Side B and in so doing show that the least common denominator for Side B is more than abstaining from same-sex sexual unions. Secondly, we’ll show evidence for how this definition is occurring in the PCA and has been allowed to occur.
DEFINING SIDE B
I have defined Side-B in this way:
“Side B Gay Christianity… says that while“being gay” or having a “gay orientation” is a valid category of personhood and identity,
Scripture clearly forbids the acting out of those desires.
They advocate for a “gay but celibate” way of life.”*I was attacked for this definition and article until
Tim Keller offered his own definition:“People attracted to the same sex, though remaining celibate
in obedience to the Bible,
still can call themselves ‘gay Christians’ and see their attraction as a part of their identity which should be acknowledged like one’s race or nationality….”*This is the view that Keller says is rejected in the PCA AIC Report on Human Sexuality.
Dr. Greg Johnson, PCA Pastor and Side-B proponent in the PCA defines Side B this way:
“What makes someone Side B is simplyThe rejection of homoerotic desire and practice
as sin, coupled with
The acknowledgement that a homosexual orientation is deeply rooted and unlikely to go away in this lifetime.”Religion News, reporting on these issues, defines Side B this way:
(Side B is) “openly LGBTQ Christians who,while embracing their sexual orientation,
also believe God designs sex and marriage
to occur exclusively between a man and a woman.”Q Christian Fellowship, which took over the Organization that created the term Side B, defines it this way:
“Any theology whichaffirm LGBTQ+ identities,
yet maintains that Christians should refrain from same-gender sex
for a variety of personal and/or theological reasons.”You’ll notice how all of these definitions include MORE than simply “being attracted to the same-sex but being celibate because the Bible forbids it.” There is an identity component included in Side-B that in some sense is more than descriptive of the person’s experience.
This was an education for some in the PCA who thought Side B just meant that “same-sex sexual unions are out of bounds.” As a matter of fact, it seems that PCA pastors are the only people who still affirm that limiting definition of Side B. Perhaps they aren’t up on the debate or the community even as some of them exist within the community.
What About Rosaria and Becket?
Rosaria Butterfield and Becket Cook, Reformed Christians who have and do struggle with SSA, have written and spoken extensively on their journey and the dangers of the Side B position.
They both claim that this Side B ontological and anthropological error is what is going on in the PCA, Revoice, and Greg Johnson’s teaching.Would we be so arrogant to think we know better than this sister and brother in Christ as to what Side B is and how that relates to the PCA?
When in an online dialogue with Greg Johnson about Side B, I asked him if Side B is simply that “same-sex sexual activity is immoral” why does Rosaria Butterfield reject it. He responded:
“Rosaria rejects sexual orientation as a category. That’s what makes her different from Side B.”- Greg Johnson, November 30, 2021
By this statement alone we must reject the assertion by the uninformed that “Side B is just same-sex attracted but a commitment to the Biblical Sexual ethic.” By Johnson’s own admission, a rejection of orientation as a category puts one outside of the Side B camp. One thing to note is that Johnson doesn’t say what type of category it is. Is it a category of experience? Personhood? Being? Identity? He doesn’t say.
Thankfully, Rosaria tells us. She explains the Side B that she Rejects:
“Sees sexual orientation as an accurate category of personhood (i.e., there is such a thing as a gay person – that gayness describes who someone actually is)…To the Side B Christian homosexuality is a sexuality – one of many.”
So, there you have it. Greg admits the difference is that Rosaria rejects sexual orientation as a category and Rosaria tells us that she rejects orientation as a category of personhood.
The issue here is one’s view of anthropology and is therefore theological in nature and not simply one’s use of language.
SIDE B IN THE PCA
Even though some claim “The PCA has always been Side B,” there are some who say that Side B isn’t happening in the PCA. If that’s the case, why would Becket Cook and Rosaria Butterfield say it is? According to Keller, “there is not One PCA court– not one session, presbytery, or agency– that has ever endorsed Side B Christianity.” Those are carefully chosen words, but what type of “endorsement” is Keller asking for? Is he implying that Side B can’t be allowed to exist in the PCA unless an official body makes a public declaration they are on board with Side B? Let’s see if there is any evidence of the Side B that should be rejected in the PCA.
Members of Memorial Presbyterian Church Tell Us
Why would Dr. Nate Collins, a Member at Memorial PCA (the Church that Greg Johnson Pastors) and cofounder of Revoice, identify as “A Gay Man” while he is married to a woman and why would his Wife (Sara Collins) claim that what Keller says is rejected by the AIC Report regarding Side B is precisely what is going on at their Church?
Read More
Related Posts: