Fueling Reformation
Written by R.C. Sproul |
Thursday, November 3, 2022
It is in the gospel and nowhere else that God has given His power unto salvation. If we want reformation, we have to start with ourselves. We have to start bringing the gospel itself out of darkness, so that the motto of every reformation becomes post tenebras lux—“after darkness, light.” Luther declared that every generation must declare freshly the gospel of the New Testament. He also said that anytime the gospel is clearly and boldly proclaimed, it will bring about conflict.
I’m always puzzled when I see church billboards announcing a coming revival. They give the times and the dates when the church will be engaged in revival. But I wonder, how can anybody possibly schedule a revival? True revivals are provoked by the sovereign work of God through the stirring of His Holy Spirit in the hearts of people. They happen when the Holy Spirit comes into the valley of dry bones (Ezek. 37) and exerts His power to bring new life, a revivification of the spiritual life of the people of God.
This kind of thing cannot be manipulated by any human program. Historically, no one scheduled the Protestant Reformation. The Welsh revival was not on anyone’s agenda, nor was the American Great Awakening penciled into someone’s date book. These epic events in church history resulted from the sovereign work of God, who brought His power to bear on churches that had become virtually moribund.
But we have to understand the difference between revival and reformation. Revival, as the word suggests, means a renewing of life. When evangelism is a priority in the church, such outreach will often bring about revival. However, these revivals of spiritual life do not always result in reformation. Reformation indicates changing forms of church and society. Revivals grow into reformations when the impact of the gospel begins to change the structures of the culture. Revival can produce a multitude of new Christians, but these new Christians have to grow into maturity before they begin to make a significant impact on the surrounding culture.
Reformation can involve a change for the better. We must not be so naïve as to think that all change is necessarily good. Sometimes when we feel that we are in the doldrums or that progress has been stultified, we cry out for change, forgetting for the moment that change may be regressive rather than progressive. If I drink a vial of poison, it will change me, but not for the better. Nevertheless, change is often good.
In our day, we have seen the rise of what has been called the “New Calvinism,” which tends to focus primarily on the so-called five points of Calvinism. This movement within the church has attracted a great deal of attention, even in the secular media.
Yet it would be wise to not identify Calvinism exhaustively with those five points. Rather, the five points function as a pathway or a bridge to the entire structure of Reformed theology. Charles Spurgeon himself argued that Calvinism is merely a nickname for biblical theology. He and many other titans of the past understood that the essence of Reformed theology cannot be reduced to five particular points that arose centuries ago in Holland in response to controversy with the Arminians, who objected to five specific points of the system of doctrine found in historic Calvinism. For the purposes of this article, it might be helpful to look at both what Reformed theology is and is not.
Reformed theology is not a chaotic set of disconnected ideas.
-
Do You Ever Wonder Whether You’re a Christian at All?
Neither our assurance as believers nor God’s love for us hinges on our ability to live out certain Christian principles; rather, both depend on what Christ has achieved for us on the cross. Even so, the Bible teaches us to look for evidences of our salvation in the present. If we truly are the Father’s children, we are bound to display a love for others that resembles Jesus’ love for us.
Have you ever had one of those moments where you’ve read how the Bible describes the habits, character, or disposition of a Christian and wondered, “Am I even a Christian?” I expect we all have from time-to-time. Alistair Begg considers the question in this little devotional on Luke 6:27 that is drawn from his book Truth for Life.
When you read the Bible and it describes Christianity, and then you look at yourself, do you ever wonder whether you’re a Christian at all? I know I do.
Neither our assurance as believers nor God’s love for us hinges on our ability to live out certain Christian principles; rather, both depend on what Christ has achieved for us on the cross. Even so, the Bible teaches us to look for evidences of our salvation in the present. If we truly are the Father’s children, we are bound to display a love for others that resembles Jesus’ love for us.
Jesus calls for us to love people in a way that is not related to their attractiveness, merit, or lovability.
Read More -
Why Taiwan Should Be Skeptical of Speaker Pelosi’s Visit
The way that the US undermined Chiang during the Chinese Civil War 1946-1949, and the way it cast aside Taiwan at the United Nations in 1971, is reason enough for Taiwan to be extremely cautious in dealing with the US at present. Beyond rhetoric, and sending defensive arms, the US will likely not fight very hard in Taiwan’s defense going forward no matter what happens regarding Speaker Pelosi’s visit.
Taiwan should not be naïve about the purpose of House Speaker Pelosi’s visit. Not just because China has called the action a red line, and threatened retaliatory action, but because her visit will likely benefit China more than it benefits Taiwan. There is a historical precedent for believing this is true.
The first precedent has to do with the actions of the United States during the Chinese Civil War. Right at the time when it looked as if the US backed troops led by Chiang Kai-shek would defeat the communist leader Mao Zedong, President Harry Truman sent George C. Marshall to China to negotiate a cease fire, and form a coalition government. In short, Marshall’s plan failed miserably. Marshall gave up and went home, and US support began to dwindle little by little.
The 13 month cease fire engineered by Marshall gave Mao time to regroup, reengage Chiang’s Nationalist Army, and gain the upper hand in the conflict. Chiang was forced to retreat toward the East China Sea, and ultimately Chiang, his troops, and his government fled to an island known then as Formosa. Today, we know it as Taiwan.
Chiang subsequently built the tiny island nation into an economic powerhouse that was based on the virtues of Confucianism and the principles of biblical Christianity. It’s worth noting in passing, that Chiang and his wife Soong Mei-Ling, were both confessing Christians, and beloved by missionaries, Christians, and statesmen from all around the world. Yet, in the end Chiang was undermined by US foreign policy.
This brings us to the second historical precedent which should make Taiwan suspicious of Speaker Pelosi’s visit. From the late 1960’s to 1971 the US developed a policy of Rapprochement with Communist China at the direction of President Richard Nixon. Nixon was to visit China in 1972. However, in 1971 he dispatched Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to China to discuss normalizing diplomatic relations between the two countries.
At the same time, the US proposed to the United Nations that they seat delegations from both Communist China and Taiwan. Conversely, the UN responded with resolution 2758 which stated that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was the only legitimate government of China. The resolution also stipulated that Taiwan be replaced by the PRC as a permanent member of the Security Council. Taiwan, and the government of Chiang Kai-shek, were summarily expelled from the United Nations and all other organizations related to it.
Keep in mind, while the US proposed keeping both delegations at the UN, and voted “No” on Resolution 2758, it failed to put up much of a fight when the UN expelled Taiwan. Hence, the US has officially supported the “One China” policy ever since even while offering rhetoric to the contrary.
These two lessons from history should give the government in Taiwan pause as it prepares to receive Speaker Pelosi. The way that the US undermined Chiang during the Chinese Civil War 1946-1949, and the way it cast aside Taiwan at the United Nations in 1971, is reason enough for Taiwan to be extremely cautious in dealing with the US at present. Beyond rhetoric, and sending defensive arms, the US will likely not fight very hard in Taiwan’s defense going forward no matter what happens regarding Speaker Pelosi’s visit. Taiwan, like Ukraine, is caught in the middle of a struggle between two great power countries. It can only win by staying neutral.
There is another, howbeit, unrelated reason Taiwan should be distrustful of the Speaker Pelosi’s visit. In 2019 Taiwan earned the dubious distinction of being the first and only Asia-Pacific country to legalize same-sex marriage, and guarantee LGBTQ rights, including the right for individuals to decide their own gender. Taiwan boasts of the largest Pride parades in the region with over 200 thousand attending in 2021. The country has an extremely large LGBTQ lobby. It is certainly not beneath Speaker Pelosi to exploit this issue and encourage Taiwan to adopt even more of LGBTQ agenda. In Pelosi’s view, this is what it means to be a Western style democracy.
The Church at large should also question its support for these so-called democracies since the meaning of the word “democracy” has gradually been reduced to a single definition: the promotion of same-sex marriage and LGBTQ rights. From the point of view of the West, governments who openly advocate and legislate in favor of these special rights are seen as fully democratic while all others are not. This reductionistic change in meaning of the term has occurred with lightning speed in democracies all around the globe, but perhaps nowhere faster than it has in Taiwan. Keep in mind, Taiwan had its first democratic election in 1996.
To its credit, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan issued a pastoral letter renouncing the legalization of same-sex marriage and the LBGTQ agenda. Catholics did likewise and issued their own paper on the topic. Thankfully, the church in Taiwan thus far has shown remarkable solidarity on this subject. We should all pray that Taiwan will not be further swayed, either politically or morally, by Speaker Pelosi’s visit.
Jim Fitzgerald is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and a missionary serving in North Africa.
Related Posts: -
Leadership in the Church
Written by R.C. Sproul |
Monday, February 5, 2024
If God has placed you in a position of leadership, He has certainly placed you there to continue growing, but He also called you to that position in terms of who you are right now. If God in His providence is behind that call in any sense, He’s calling you because of the gifts, talents, and abilities that you have right now. In that sense, you don’t have to pretend that you’re something you’re not. He’s calling you as you are. He doesn’t want you to stay there; He wants you to grow, He wants you to move, He wants you to progress—but to progress without anxiety, without being uptight about your inadequacies.It’s true that Paul was an Apostle and we are not. Nevertheless, Paul was a minister, and those who serve in the church are also ministers. There is a point of contact between all the men and women who labor in Christian leadership and the Apostle Paul, and we can learn something about techniques, methodology, and priorities from him.
Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:1–5:
And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.
Paul said he did not approach the Corinthians “with lofty speech or wisdom”; in other words, Paul was saying: “When I came to you, I didn’t try to impress you. I didn’t come to you in an attitude of superiority. I didn’t exercise my position of leadership in the context of arrogance or self-exultation.” This must be the first principle of godly ministry and leadership—that we do not assume a posture of superiority, whether in our speech, in our demeanor, or in our attitude. There’s no question that Paul was superior in terms of his knowledge, his gifts, and the strength of his person, but he didn’t appear as one who was superior. He ministered in the context of weakness, as he went on to explain.
“For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). There’s a sense that Paul was speaking hyperbolically, for he spoke about many other things besides the crucifixion. He spoke about the whole scope of theology, the whole counsel of God. But in terms of his priorities and central focus, that which conditioned everything else that he said was Christ and Him crucified. He was determined to know nothing else, and the Greek word translated “to know” suggests not simply intellectual understanding but an intimate, profound grasp. He wanted to know Christ, and that knowledge of Christ drove him into his position of leadership.
Verse 3 is a key to Paul’s success as a minister, pastor, and Christian leader: “And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling.” Whatever else Paul was in terms of his ministry, he was constantly identifying with the weaknesses, fears, and trembling of his people.
Read More
Related Posts:
