“So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” (Ephesians 5:17)

by Pastor Patrick Cho

Almost every person tries to determine what he or she is supposed to do with his or her life. Some simply trust in their own intuition and go with their gut or listen to their heart. Others seek out the experience of others and find out what worked for them. Some turn to superstition, even trusting in fortunes and horoscopes. In the end, for them there really can be no sense of real certainty because they are basing these decisions on things that are subjective and changing.

The Christian has a source of authority in God who clearly communicates His will to us in His Word. Sadly, many Christians, instead of trusting in the revealed and inspired Word of God, trust in similarly subjective means of ascertaining some “divine plan” for their lives. This is not to say that God cannot and does not use our everyday experiences to teach us and help us grow. It also is not to say that God would never work things (e.g., desires, “open doors,” etc.) in our lives to serve as indicators of what we ought to do. Ultimately, all Christians need to trust that God has clearly communicated His will to us in His Word.

Of course, the Bible will not contain specific step by step instructions to follow on every decision in life. It will not tell you the name of the person you are to marry or the specific career you should pursue, but it will give you the general principles you need to know in order to make those decisions to the glory of God. For instance, it will tell you the kind of person you ought to marry AND the kind of marry-able person you ought to be (cf. Prov. 31:30; Titus 2:2). It will tell you what a strong and healthy marriage looks like (cf. Eph. 5:22-33). It will warn you against the kinds of people you should not marry. It will instruct you as to your own spiritual maturity and preparedness for marriage. It will define marriage and explain the purpose behind marriage (cf. Gen. 2:24), and so on. The Bible similarly provides instructions and principles for life concerning the pursuit of a career.

What God has revealed in His Word is perfectly sufficient to address every major decision in life. This is true to the extent that believers are not dependent upon any other outside source of revelation. We do not need to wait on dreams or listen for an audible voice. We do not need to “lay out our fleece” or ask God for a sign. He has given us all the wisdom we need in the counsel of His Word. In fact, to question the counsel of Scripture is to question the wisdom of God.

In the final chapter in Fundamentals of the Faith, the topic of study is the will and guidance of God. It is important to begin by distinguishing between the sovereign will of God and the commanded will of God. A helpful chart is provided within the chapter to list characteristics of each aspect of God’s will. God’s sovereign will concerns His overall ultimate control over everything that is. He is the only Creator who governs all of creation. In this sense, nothing happens outside of God’s sovereign will because God is perfectly sovereign, and no one and nothing is greater than God. God’s sovereignty encompasses all that takes place, good or evil, hidden or revealed. God’s sovereign will cannot be resisted or thwarted.

God’s commanded will involves all that God has revealed in His Word. These are His righteous requirements of all men and especially for His people. Unlike His sovereign will, His commanded will can be disobeyed and resisted. His Law reveals what His perfect will is for His people since He will never lead His people to sin or tempt them to evil (James 1:13). Perhaps the two most familiar commands given to His followers are the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20) and the Great Commandment (Matt. 22:37-40). Instructions such as these help believers understand what they need to do and how they ought to live.

Having provided a clear communication of His commanded will in Scripture, the Bible promises that God will also guide His people through their lives. He does this today by His Spirit working through His Word. As you submit to the authority of God and His Word, His will can guide you like a lamp lighting up a dark path (Ps. 119:105). God also guides through a person’s conscience or personal conviction. The believer’s conscience and conviction must be informed by the truth of God’s Word. Otherwise, it can be misleading and deceptive. Finally, God provides guidance through His providence. The believer can push forward in life with the certainty of hope they have in Christ that this life is not the end and that God will cause all things to work together for good to those who love Him and are called according to His purpose (Rom. 8:28).

The pursuit of godly wisdom and discerning God’s will for your life begins with searching the Scriptures. This does not mean that the Bible is some magic book that will reveal secrets in some mystical way. It is not like some words will simply pop out on a page to tell you what you need to do. But as you become more and more familiar with what the Bible teaches, you will become better grounded in who God is, what He is like, and what He desires of His people. You will be able to discern truth from error, right from wrong, and even what is best from what is just ok. Praise God for the revelation of His will!

by Pastor James Lee

In Part 1, we embarked on a walk around the neighborhood to consider two common ways we mock God in neglecting our stewardship of our short time here on the earth – Two principles in which we need forgiveness as much as we find so much grace and fresh opportunity. First, I argued that complaining about time is complaining about God. And, fresh off of that meditation, I was again humbled to read Albert Mohler write, “We can be humbled by limitations of time without gaining any real wisdom in terms of its stewardship… I can feel the passing of time in my bones, and that knowledge makes me want to be a more faithful steward of time tomorrow than I was today. Time will tell.” Personal application is ongoing! But now let’s consider a second, of many common ways, we sometimes mock God in our sanctification.

2. Neglecting the Fact That Sowing One Thing Reaps More of the Same Thing

Proverbs 4:23 exhort us, “Watch over your heart with all diligence, for from it flow the springs of life.” Jesus proclaimed in Matthew 15:19, “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.” Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 4:7-8, “But have nothing to do with worldly fables fit only for old women. On the other hand, discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness; for bodily discipline is only of little profit, but godliness is profitable for all things, since it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. It is a trustworthy statement deserving full acceptance.”

We’re all disciplined. The question for each of us is: in what? Are we disciplining ourselves for godliness? Is our spiritual health the highest priority of our lives? There is no quick fix for godliness or secret sauce to spiritual growth. It takes steady persevering faith. Donald Whitney was right when he said that, “We discipline ourselves in what we delight in.” I loved sports growing up, so that playing volleyball for hours at the school gym, then again at the beach later the same day, was summer happiness. But running on a treadmill feels like I’m a lab rat running endlessly to nowhere; so gym workouts aren’t nearly as enjoyable. If we love something, our discipline in it doesn’t seem like discipline because we delight in it. If genuine love of Christ resides in our hearts, we will discipline ourselves for godliness.

I recently went to the garden department at Home Depot. I bought some cherry tomatoes to grow over the summer and a dwarf Meyer lemon tree for our patio. I’m confident about growing cherry tomatoes because we’ve had success with them in the past, but the lemon tree has been a nervous study about the right kind of container, potting soil mix, frequency of watering and fertilizer, sun exposure, pruning, and other factors. Likewise, each of us might need particular truths from the sufficient Word, to apply at any given moment. It’s not always one size fits all, as some would lead you to believe. Nevertheless, whether you have special dietary needs because you’re diabetic, or you’re a world class marathon runner, every one of us needs to eat and drink, or we’ll be dead. There is an inevitable link between what we put into our bodies and our health. All plants require sunshine, water, and nutrients from the soil. Any child knows that if you plant carrot seeds in a garden, you will harvest carrots. You don’t expect to get broccoli. There is an inevitable link between what we put into the ground and what we take out of it or produce later.

The same is true in our spiritual lives. We can’t neglect His Word, dependence on His Spirit, fellowship with His people, etc. and expect to be spiritually healthy. The Bible gives us a simple yet profound principle that is crucial to all healthy change and spiritual growth. It is found stated or illustrated in countless examples. One example is in Galatians 6:7-10:

Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary. So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith.

Not exactly a sweeping revelation. There is nothing new or innovative under the sun. We reap what we sow. As it’s true in agriculture, it’s also true in our spiritual lives. What you see in your spiritual life today is the direct result of what you’ve put into the soil of your life in days past. What you see in your marriage today is probably a result of what you put or didn’t put into your marriage in days past. What you see in your grades today is likely the result of your study habits, diligence, or lack thereof, in days past. God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. Note that it’s of spiritual consequence, Paul says “God is not mocked;” that’s strong warning.

Do you know why some Christians make great strides in their walk with God while others are stagnant and mechanical and passionless? It isn’t because they lack some special godliness gene. It isn’t because of gifting, or of personality, or of upbringing, or some special event or circumstance or mentoring or lack of any of it. Of course, where godliness exists, it’s His grace and our dependence. But the difference is a matter of what each has planted into the soil of his or her own heart. Godliness isn’t a mysterious spiritual state that only an elite few or super-Christians can reach. We reap what we sow. Holiness is a harvest. And every Christian will bear genuine fruit over the course of time. But even as true believers, if we sow to our sinful desires, what the Bible calls the “flesh”, then we are told we will reap corruption. If we eat Snickers Bars and Chili Dogs all day every day for years, we will gain fat, develop diabetes, and suffer from heart disease. If we watch TV everyday after we work more than we study God’s Word, pray, and care for our family, then we will reap eventually the corruption that comes from eating that mental junk food. Then the spiritual weeds and rust that come from neglect will sprout and surface instead of godliness. If you neglect the spiritual disciplines and walking personally with God, don’t be surprised when you make sinful choices and change your life priorities waiting for a more convenient day. Don’t think that a little sexual innuendo, a lustful glance, or a casual fantasy won’t reap negative results no matter how small.

Paul presents us with two fields to sow in. One represents the Spirit and a life lived to depend on and please God. The other represents our sinful desires or the unredeemed “flesh.” Each of us can choose which field to plant seeds in. At any given moment we can go from one field to the other, kneel down, and sow seeds in one or the other. Where we sow, we reap. I recently planted some flowers in a little plot of dirt next to our garage for Sandy, and they’re blooming at the perfect time. I’ve been really intent on seeing them do well and not dying on me. I prepped the soil well, but no matter how pristine it is at the beginning, the wind is always blowing, so the spores from weeds inevitably will make their way there. The minute I see them, I pull those evil suckers from their roots. We can’t prevent the weeds, but we can prevent them from taking deep root and spreading. Same is true spiritually. All of us are in progress, and totally dependent on the Lord, but we must still be vigilant. Therefore, ultimately, you and I have two choices – sow to your flesh or sow to the Spirit, there is no in-between or neutral. In other words, if we are not sowing towards godliness, then we are by default going to be sowing to our sinful desires. To be inactive in growing your spiritual vitality and vision is to be actively diminishing it, and for some, destroying it. We should not merely “rest” in the gospel as a revived, yet subtle antinomianism would suggest. Our sinful desires and deeds are actual seeds that land in the soil of our hearts. They don’t just go away. They take root. They grow up. And unless we’re removing them, eventually they reap a harvest of spiritual disaster.

The late John Stott wrote, “Some Christians (foolishly and irrationally) sow to the flesh every day and wonder why they do not reap holiness.” What do you eat and pursue in your life? All of life’s choices – media consumption, career paths, books we read or books we don’t read, how we respond to anger or stress or difficult people, the use of money and our investment of it to the Satan-inspired lie of self-security or for His eternal kingdom, whether we embrace or avoid evangelism, what parenting principles we believe and practice (if you’re getting all your advice from your past or peers or psychology rather than the Bible, then what are you reaping?). And it’s not ever a lack of mentors as some of us might complain, it’s lack of the Word of God. Mentoring helps, but only so far as it reflects His Word. Plenty of bad mentors out there. And we may not pay the price now, but to a degree we will. And who will we blame when that day comes? We’ll probably find someone. But who can we blame? In reality, no one but ourselves. So the choice is simply this. Sow in the field of righteousness and grow holiness and expand witness and glorify God. Or sow in the field of the flesh and grow corruption and spiritual ineffectiveness, apathy, and shame. None of us will do this perfectly. It’s not perfection; it’s direction. Therefore, what direction are you and I sowing?

Joshua Harris wrote, “Growing in holiness is not about all the things you should avoid; it’s about the wonderful things you can and should be doing instead.” Not just putting off, but putting on. Not just saying no, but saying yes to something much better. Because no matter how much you exercise and eat salad, if you eat Krispy Kremes and bacon every other hour, you’re not going to be healthy. No matter how much you may externally attend a Sunday Service, it’s not going to undo all the real damage you’ve sown during the rest of the week. If you do not make it your direction and habit to humble yourself and strive to sow to please God and grow godliness gradually in your life, then you will never be a positive influence on the lives of others, you will never be a godly husband that your wife respects, you will never have anything lasting or substantial to teach your children, you will never be godly no matter how much you wish or claim to be so. Discipline yourself towards godliness. Stop making the excuses about being too tired or disliking reading or being too busy or justifying being in the path of sinners. Because if you sow that way, then that’s what you’ll reap. We can’t necessarily undo all our past choices or escape their consequences, but thankfully God’s grace is not negated and rescues. But starting today, I mean right now – we can ask God for His mercy and enablement – to daily commit to sow to please the Spirit. Every potential choice, every thought, every conversation, every deed, can be done to glorify God and it will lead to a harvest of eternal life and godliness. None of us will get it right all the time, but what we do get right will be blessed.

Has entertainment and “rest” become a “right” rather than a gift and responsible stewardship to be used for God’s glory? Did you know that recreation is “re-creation”, that its intended purpose is for renewal, not escape, and certainly not as a cover for one’s spiritual laziness? Yes, we can enjoy to the glory of God, and we need a healthy theology of rest, but I wonder if that is even pondered theologically and prayerfully. Too often, I observe that recreation has become something counter to what might please the Lord, in the sinful choices that professing believers engage in, that they’d blush embarrassment if they realized the Lord was actually in their midst, in terms of what they watch and where they go or how they reason it’s OK to participate in. But even when our enjoyment is legitimate and not inherently sinful, I’m not so confident that it’s saturated by gratefulness to the Lord and rejoicing in Him and not just His gifts? Have your plans somehow become more important than God’s plans? Has God’s Word become less important than the daily news or your favorite sports team’s scores? Have you become comfortable in not chasing after godliness as though your life depended on it? Have other things pushed aside the priority for Christ?

You reap what you sow. Sow laziness, reap the consequences. Sow neglect of your spouse, reap the consequences. So sinful culture, reap its approval. Sow pornography or the unedifying advertisement, reap the consequences. Sow bitterness and prejudice and greed, reap the consequences. Sow material wealth over storing up your treasure in heaven, reap the consequences. Sow anger, reap the consequences.

There are God-honoring priorities, but really only one! Mary had chosen the better of worship… and then she worked expressing that worship. First and foremost is our relationship to Christ – devotion to Him, our own soul care, a vibrant, growing, passionate walk with Christ has no substitute – it is absolutely essential and we must view and practice it as such. Paul rebuked the Corinthians, “But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.” Jesus rebuked Ephesus in Revelation 2, “But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.” Get this right, and everything else falls into place. Get it wrong, and everything else slowly falls apart… or worse, it deceives and desensitizes you. Yes, our Father disciplines us, if we’re truly His, but we love Him too.

Martin Luther said once, “I have much to do today, Therefore I will spend the first three hours in prayer.” That’s the first thing that goes for me, if I’m honest. But from experience, prayer actually makes us more productive. It actually allows us not only to get the most necessary things done, but more things done in general. The godliest people in church history always prioritize prayer and were known for their private prayer. It might not always be long, but does it come first and does it come often? If so, then soon we’ll find that our prayer life becomes more intimate, more powerful, more consistent, and lengthier in substance. Our joy will increase, our contentment will grow, our faith will be strengthened… irrespective of circumstances. Our life will be a more like a continual spring of loving God and loving others, than a tank that always feels empty.

How about you dear brethren? Are you tempted to think otherwise? Is He your daily bread? Is He your all in all? Will your coworkers, your children, your friends say of you – he really loves Jesus, she really loves Jesus. J. Oswald Sanders gave this practical challenge, “Suppose that we allot ourselves a generous eight hours a day for sleep (and few need more than that), three hours for meals and conversation, ten hours a day for work and travel on five days. Still we have thirty five hours each week to fill. What happens to them? How are they invested? A person’s entire contribution to the kingdom of God may turn on how those hours are used. Certainly those hours determine whether life is commonplace or extraordinary.”

Are you and I redeeming the time? Are we truly, truly seeking to be faithful over being successful? We reap what we sow. But here’s encouragement – if you sow to the Spirit, you will also reap a harvest if you do not give up. Don’t get weary. As you sow to please the Spirit, a harvest of righteousness will begin to grow. Godliness will grow. That’s the promise from God Himself. It’s the one investment in life that always reaps happy dividends! It may not sprout up overnight, and sometimes you may feel like you’re not changing as fast as you desire. But you will. Endure. Because our hope for change is based on God’s grace. Yet, it requires the obedience of faith in God’s goodness. What are you sowing to at the present? There are only two choices: to please the Spirit or to please your flesh. Make a life of growing godliness the field where you sow.

“But we proved to be gentle among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. Having so fond an affection for you, we were well-pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become very dear to us.” (1 Thessalonians 2:7–12)

“As mothers are absolutely and indisputably essential to the well- being of children, so spiritual leaders who minister with a mother’s gentleness, intimate affection, sacrificial love, and unselfish labor are essential for the health of the church.” (John MacArthur)

by Pastor John Kim

This is not something you often hear regarding church leadership, that you should reflect the character of a mother. But the apostle Paul shares about this kind of perspective, something that is very much needed in today’s churches, especially as you hear about pastors these days who have been dismissed from their churches due to a harsh spirit, a domineering spirit, where people are being spiritually abused and severely traumatized due to a lack of love.

There is something about a mother that resonates universally – from the time you are born, your mother is the one who will not only take care of you, but love you, and gently, tenderly, affectionately be there for you. This is not just a sentimental thing – to be gentle, tender, and affectionate is not something that will always come naturally.

Sure, there are times when a mother sees her child and thinks, “Oh how I love this child!”
There are other times when a mother sees her child and can’t help but think “I can’t handle this craziness!” To choose to be gentle, tender, and affectionate is not based on someone being deserving or worthy but it is a deliberate choice to work toward being that way.

Paul uses the imagery of a mother going through labor in his ministry towards the church:

“My children, with whom I am again in labor until Christ is formed in you-” (Galatians 4:19)

The word “labor” here in this verse is the word used for the labor pain at the birth of a child. It is the most intense and prolonged pain that only a mother who has given birth can truly understand. But it is a pain that is embraced and endured because the mother knows what will be the end result – the birth of a child.

It is as if Paul says, not only did I labor to see you be brought to spiritual life but that he is also laboring to see them grow in Christlikeness.

This is what the perspective of a mother should bring to the leadership of the church. It is a long term commitment not only to the beginning stages but to the long-term growth of a congregation where there should be a very clear and unmistakable sense where the leaders show a gentle, tender, and affectionate care for the members.

Gentleness

The abuse of a baby is one that is completely inexcusable. To hurt one that is incapable of defending himself, to be so hard-hearted that you would inflict pain on a little one is something that most people would find deplorable.

Instead you can imagine the kind of treatment that a baby would receive, especially when he or she is just born. You can only expect there to be a gentle handling of that baby by all involved.

In many churches today, you do not see this kind of mentality toward people. In fact, it is only maybe in the nursery that you might see it, but I would like to use the nursery ministry as a very visible way to drive home this point. What if parents were to walk in the nursery and see the nursery workers treating their little ones in a rough manner? What if they were just yelling at the child and handling them harshly? There is no way you would put them in the nursery, would you? What would you expect in the nursery? I can tell you what you should expect in the nursery – you should see that there are those who have committed themselves and prepared themselves to be gentle – gentle toward a child that will typically come in crying, not wanting to be there, not immediately cooperative, not willing to to share, not willing to listen to instructions, but still be gentle toward them. Why? Because that is the kind of character you are to display to these little ones.

But to be gentle is not limited to the children. The apostle Paul is talking about the church.
He is sharing how he and his team did not come with flattering speech (2:5) and they were not there to seek glory from men (2:6). He did not assert even his apostolic authority in ministry but instead ministered to them as a mother would to her children.

To be gentle is not a small thing nor is it something to be associated with being weaker. It actually takes great strength to be gentle as a mother is gentle with her child. You will see a mother talk gently and gently handle her little child, who has just thrown up, who has just soiled the diaper for the 20th time today, who has just thrown a tantrum over eating vegetables. If an adult treated you the way a child treats his or her parents in these ways, there is no way you would respond gently in response to them.

But this is the picture of strength – to display gentleness, a meek and quiet spirit that brings peace and calm. Gentleness is something that we need to value more in the life of the church as well as in the home.

Gentleness is a manifestation of the work of the Holy Spirit in your life as well.

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.” (Galatians 5:22–23)

Note that the fruit of the Spirit is a multi-colored expression of different character qualities and gentleness is highlighted as a quality that reflects the work of the Holy Spirit in your life.

“Now I, Paul, myself urge you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ—I who am meek when face to face with you, but bold toward you when absent!” (2 Corinthians 10:1)

The apostle Paul urges by the gentleness of Christ – what a picture of one who instead of asserting apostolic authority instead appeals to the gentleness of Christ as the means by which he would exhort and even correct those who had stubbornly questioned his apostleship.

“Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4:1–3)

Again Paul highlights among other things the quality of gentleness to be that which reflects a worthy walk as well as that which contributes to the preserving of the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace in the life of the church.

“So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you. Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity.” (Colossians 3:12–14)

How do you show that you are one of God’s chosen? By a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience.

“Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.” (Galatians 6:1)

Even in your confronting of a fellow believer in sin, true spirituality is shown in the pursuit of restoration in a spirit of gentleness.

“But flee from these things, you man of God, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance and gentleness.” (1 Timothy 6:11)

Instead of being the kind of person who seeks the sordid gain of the love of money, Paul urges Timothy to flee from such things and instead among other things, pursue gentleness.

“What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love and a spirit of gentleness?” (1 Corinthians 4:21)

You can only imagine as Paul is being tested by what he has heard going on in the Corinthian church. There were those who questioned his authority and were arrogant because Paul wasn’t there. But even then, Paul questions them as to how he should come – whether with the rod or with love and a spirit of gentleness?

A good question to ask is how would you want your spiritual leaders to come to you when you are caught up in your sin. Sometimes there is a call for strong reproof and discipline when there is a stubborn, rebellious heart. But how must more would it be preferred to not have it come to that but instead invite a gentle response. So there is a time for a stern reproof but even so, there would be a preference to display gentleness.

“The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.” (2 Timothy 2:24–26)

Again, even when facing opposition, there is a maturity and a sense of perspective that looks beyond the immediate situation and expresses gentleness in the hope of seeing God grant repentance.

“Who among you is wise and understanding? Let him show by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your heart, do not be arrogant and so lie against the truth. This wisdom is not that which comes down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, unwavering, without hypocrisy. And the seed whose fruit is righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.” (James 3:13–18)

Spiritual wisdom, wisdom from above, is the kind of wisdom that is characterized by gentleness. It stands in opposition to bitter jealousy and selfish ambition, to arrogance and lies.

Wisdom from heaven is characterized by a gentleness that exudes both in the content and in how it is presented.

Tender Care

The primary thought behind this word is the idea to cherish. It is to treat with tenderness and affection. It is to have a nurturing spirit, one that would figuratively warm someone with their care. The same word is used in Ephesians 5:29 in the context of how a husband is to cherish his wife, just as Christ cherishes the church

Probably the most significant picture of tender care would be that of a mother nursing her child. That’s why Paul uses this description to convey the heart attitude of how ministry should be conducted.

This tenderness is not something to be seen as just a feminine trait.

“And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High;
For you will go on before the Lord to prepare His ways;
To give to His people the knowledge of salvation
By the forgiveness of their sins,
Because of the tender mercy of our God,
With which the Sunrise from on high will visit us,
To shine upon those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death,
To guide our feet into the way of peace.” (Luke 1:76–79)

God Himself exercises a tender mercy. This is something that one might not expect to be highlighted of the omnipotent God but when you consider the whole gift of salvation, is it not appropriate to see the tenderness of God revealed to undeserving sinners?

“Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.” (Ephesians 4:32)

If we have experienced the tender mercies of God in being granted forgiveness of Christ, you would think that this would have a profound impact in the life of His children. There is something to be said about a congregation that is tenderhearted toward one another. You will also see a kindness, an atmosphere of forgiveness because it all points to the reality of the gospel

Fond Affection

The idea behind this quality is that of a strong and persistent longing, a yearning, a very strong affection. John MacArthur notes that ancient inscriptions on the tombs of dead babies sometimes contained this term when parents wanted to describe their sad longing for a too-soon-departed child.

You can see this in the heart of a mother toward her child, especially when she is separated from her child for any reason. Try talking to a mother who is longing for her child – that is the only thing on her mind! But why? Because there is this strong affection, a longing, a persistent yearning.

This is the kind of affection that should exist within the church as well, especially in the leaders.
There should be such a sense of affection that there would be the willingness to lay down your life. The ministry of the gospel was not just one of imparting information but one of imparting life. A true minister of the gospel is one who is willing to give his very life for the sake of those that God has given to minister in the church body.

Paul shows such an example, that at the heart of his ministry was not just cold obligation, not just an imparting of information, but a fond affection.

“For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. For it is only right for me to feel this way about you all, because I have you in my heart, since both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers of grace with me. For God is my witness, how I long for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus.” (Philippians 1:6–8)

There are some pastors and church leaders who show absolutely no affection toward the members of the church. There is a business mentality, almost like looking at people simply as commodities or numbers instead of thinking of how to truly shepherd them as Christ would shepherd the flock. It is tragic when you see this kind of attitude, especially in the leaders of the church. They fail to represent and reflect the Savior, who presented Himself to be gentle and humble in heart.

“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28–30)

My hope and prayer is that our Lighthouse churches, especially the leadership of all the churches, would reflect these kind of qualities in such a way that the watching world can see the absolute stunning brilliance of how the gospel has transformed our lives and how we treat one another. It really goes against everything the world would value and highlights what would reflect our Savior in the most appropriate ways, especially in the life of the church.

by Pastor Mark Chin

Could we live without words, be they spoken, written, or signed? Words are more than just pieces of information. At the end of the day, words are about relationships. They represent and share the person who gives them. Without words, real relationships cease to exist. All we are left with is silence.

Sadly, we live in a time where words are plentiful and cheap. Is it any surprise that our relationships are frequently the same – including our relationships with God and the people of God?

Quality and meaningful time in the Word begins with a transformed heart that appreciates by faith the value, meaning, and significance of the words being spoken to us as we read the Scriptures.

The overwhelming temptation of the flesh is to view the Bible as just another book – a difficult textbook filled with an abundance of words, just like all the words of any other book. The result, when we give in to such a temptation, is to reduce our devotional time to a check box on our to-do list, like purchasing groceries or reading through a health insurance manual. Is it any surprise that our time in the Word is dry and feels like reading an old telephone book that has been lying around the house when we approach Scripture in this way?

In John 15, Jesus draws a connection between abiding in Him, abiding in His Word, and obeying His commandments. A living relationship with Christ is directly related to a living relationship with His Word – a relationship where His Word is more than just something we read. It is lived.

For the men of Scripture, especially our Lord and Savior, the words of Scripture were exciting, compelling, living, and life-changing because they were, for them, the very words of God Himself, made alive by the Spirit of God.

Heb. 4:12 says “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

What is evident as we read the words of Scripture is that the men whom God used to write these words genuinely appreciated and treasured, by faith, the person, the relationship, and the gift these words represented. Do we?

One of the essential ingredients for a fruitful Bible reading plan or daily devotional is a heart that, by faith, truly appreciates God’s words for what they are – His words – and approaches them as such. This is something only God can give and so, it is something we need to pray for – desperately. Without the help of His Holy Spirit, our daily devotionals will be just like reading a telephone book.

So lets pray consistently for ourselves – and one another – that the Lord would give the members of our church a heart to know and love Christ by knowing and loving His precious words to us.

“And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. Whoever says, ‘I know Him,’ but does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in Him.” (1 John 2:3-4)

by Pastor Patrick Cho

Growing up in church I remember whenever the pastor announced the morning’s sermon was going to be about evangelism, my heart would sink a little. The truth is that a message on evangelism is almost always convicting because of how much more faithful most believers could be in their witness. Sadly, there aren’t too many Christians who would say they have a problem with evangelizing too much. Most often it’s the other way around and the average Christian knows they should be telling others about the good news of Jesus more.

The Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20 is probably the most fundamental passage we could turn to in regards to Christ’s command to take the gospel to the ends of the earth. It could be said that there is a form of the Great Commission in all four of the gospels and the book of Acts (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-47; John 20:21; Acts 1:8), but the Matthew passage gives the most detail. Jesus issues the command with His full authority (v. 18), so it is imperative that His followers understand and heed His words. The main command of the Great Commission is to “make disciples,” and this is supported by three participles: going, baptizing, and teaching.

Discipleship is a great word to describe the Christian life. It is about following Jesus. Being a Christian in the everyday, ordinary, normal sense means submitting to the Jesus Christ as Lord and following Him wherever He might lead. The command to make disciples essentially means that every believer should seek to reproduce themselves. As followers of Christ, our responsibility is to help others know likewise how to follow Him.

“Going” is necessary if we are going to make disciples of all nations and we are going to be His witnesses to the ends of the earth (cf. Acts 1:8). It doesn’t necessarily mean that every believer must pack up and go (though obviously some must go and surely all must be willing to go if the Lord so leads). It does necessitate, however, that no Christian is exempt from this command. The participle implies that wherever a believer goes or finds himself, he is to live in obedience to this Commission. In other words, there is no place where the Great Commission doesn’t apply. A Christian can never rightly say, “Well, I just can’t devote myself to evangelism and missions right now.” Whether you are a student or working, single or married, young or old, busy or free, you are called to make disciples of Christ.

“Baptizing” refers to the ordinance of immersing people as a picture of their new life in Christ. It is the first act of obedience that believers are called to upon being saved, but this part of the Great Commission involves more than putting people underwater. It includes everything that baptism signifies – dying to your old self and being raised in newness of life identifying with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. In other words, being committed to baptizing is being committed to helping people understand what saving faith is all about. It involves helping them understand who God is, what sin is, why salvation is necessary, and how to attain it by faith in Christ. Importantly, it also involves helping people to understand that true saving faith calls for a changed life in obedience to Christ since we are baptized according to the command of Christ. True Christians are those who have been radically transformed by the power of the gospel and the Spirit in their lives so that they turn away from sin and walk according to the truth of Christ.

The participle “teaching” helps us to understand that Great Commission work is about more than just making converts. It is about helping people come to saving faith, but then committing to helping them grow in their understanding of God’s truth. If I traveled to South America to preach the gospel to a group of Argentines and some trusted in the gospel and were saved by God’s grace, how devastating would it be for me to abandon them and return home without ensuring that they have any means of growing with respect to their salvation? The Great Commission ensures that those who are saved are able to continue to grow as believers in Christ because they are being taught all that Christ has commanded. If I am going to fulfill the Great Commission, I need to be willing not only to share the gospel with others, but also either to remain with them to help them understand the whole counsel of God or ensure that they find a local church that will continue to nurture their infantile faith to maturity.

As believers, we are not to be ashamed of the gospel (Rom. 1:16). Rather than fearing men and others’ opinion of us, we are called to boldly proclaim the truth of Christ in love. Didn’t Jesus teach that if we are ashamed of Him before men in this sinful generation, He would likewise be ashamed of us in the end at His return (Mark 8:38)? Yes, the message of the gospel will be rejected by most. People may mock or scorn you for your proclamation of what comes across as a narrow, exclusive, judgmental, and offensive message. But we must also remember and trust that God works through the message preached to transform hearts and lives and to reconcile sinners to Himself.

Faithful evangelism also involves living a holy life as a testimony to the life changing power of the gospel. Those who do not know Jesus as Lord and Savior should notice the difference in genuine believers, that they live for something different and hope in something different. John Piper once wisely said that if non-Christians don’t ask you about the hope in your life, perhaps it is because you are hoping in the same things they are. Unbelievers should see a marked difference in the way a Christian lives in desiring to be set apart from this world and to live ultimately for the glory of God.

Helping others understand the gospel goes beyond lifestyle evangelism, though. The gospel is a message that must be proclaimed. Unless people hear the gospel, they cannot become followers of Christ (cf. Rom. 10:17). Too often believers are committed only to “lifestyle evangelism” without ever telling others about the salvation God offers in Christ and calling people to turn from their sins. We need to remember that unless they hear about what Christ accomplished on the cross and through His resurrection, they cannot be saved. They might be impressed with the way you live your life. They might tell you they respect you for the faith you possess as your own. But they need to be told that apart from Christ they have no true and lasting hope. All men will stand before God one day and give an account for their lives, and the only question that will matter on that day is, “What did you do with the gospel?” Those who turned away from the truth of God will suffer an eternal judgment, but by the grace of God, those who trust in Christ for salvation will enjoy eternal life. Since we possess the message of life and the remedy for sin, let’s strive to be faithful in our proclamation God’s truth in love.

by Pastor James Lee

Ever since I was 17, I’m grateful to have always had some type of job. During undergrad and graduate school, a few seasons I had up to 3 part-time jobs to make ends meet. But in hindsight, it gets amped up exponentially when you have people depending on you, and it’s not just you, that you have to take care of. It’s a totally different ball game. As a UCLA student, it didn’t seem to affect others if I played basketball all night till 5am or foolishly ran up my credit card debt. But when I became a Christian, my outlook on what I thought was mine began to change. When I became a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the sobering weight of that responsibility changed the practical course of my life forever. When I became a husband and father, those very gifts altered my choices even more, so that I was forced in a good way to be confronted with my selfishness and embrace those new joys in ways I was not used to. Brushing your teeth on a daily basis matters, studying diligently at school makes a difference, loving the church as an active member is loving Christ and not doing so is not loving Him. God is sovereign. That’s a comfort; that’s an assurance. But we’re responsible for all that we’ve been given. We don’t control who the next President will be; God does. But we do have a responsibility to discern the need of the times and to vote with an informed Christian conscience. We don’t control the size of our underground aquifers, but we can better control our own water consumption and not run up our utility bills so that the Lord’s money is better managed. We don’t control whether others will be saved or not, but we are commanded to preach the gospel to all.

J. Oswald Sanders in his book on leadership wrote,

“The way we employ our time will determine if we develop into mediocre or powerful people. Leisure is a glorious opportunity and a subtle danger. Each moment of the day is a gift from God that deserves care, for by any measure, our time is short and the work is great… William James affirmed that the best use of one’s life is to spend it for something that will outlast it. Life’s value is not its duration but its donation – not how long we live, but how fully and how well. Time is precious, but we squander it thoughtlessly… ‘I don’t have the time.’ Such an excuse is usually the refuge of a small-minded and inefficient person. We do not have time to do all we want, but each of us has all the time we need to do the whole will of God for our lives… Our problem is not little time, but making better use of the time we have. Be it the President of the United States, you, or me. Each of us has the same 24 hours as anyone else. Others may surpass our abilities, influence, or money, but no one has more time.”

I want us to consider two common ways we mock God in neglecting our stewardship of our short time here on the earth, two principles in which we need forgiveness as much as we find so much grace and fresh opportunity.

1. Complaining About Time is Complaining About God

We must, as Paul wrote in Ephesians, “Redeem the time.” We must maximize our life direction, ponder and prioritize a prayerful manner of life priorities. We must be intentional, because if we are not intentional with our use of time, someone else will do so for us. If you don’t attack life, it will attack you. Jesus said that no one can serve two masters, that one will either serve one or the other. As believers, we are not to be mastered by anyone except the Lord – not circumstances, not peer pressure, not career pursuits, not our children. Therefore, we don’t find time to pray; we make time to pray. We don’t find time to fellowship with other Christians; we prioritize it. It is a commitment to make first things first without compromise, deciding well beforehand what boundary will not be crossed, and what treasure will not be forfeited.
So rightly understood, there are no valid excuses for not praying, not reading the Bible daily, not serving others in church ministry consistently and sacrificially, so that it hurts our wallets significantly, sometimes our health, infringes on our leisure time and vacation destinations, as much as we embrace godly rest and gospel freedom. Even our rest and vacations aren’t always utilized to the glory of God, and sometimes I’m more tired than refreshed from my vacations. Not saying that it’s always a bad thing at all when we want to see all the sights and have a schedule to maximize our vacation trip, so that’s not the issue. But do we prayerfully and intentionally steward that time for God’s glory? As I get older and more beat down, I realize that sometimes, not always, the best use of my vacation, is not to see new things, but to go to one place and spend extended quality time with my wife and children… and really get some rest, get some sleep, have my physical body get a healthy dose of restoration and joy for life and ministry. Is godly wisdom directing those things, or are we simply trying to escape and be entertained? There is no excuse for not caring for our families, not growing in our knowledge of His Word and His character – God simply makes no allowance for neglecting them on the basis of allotment of time or circumstances. He expects us to do those things in the time that He gives us or to strip away the stuff that is peripheral and idolatrous and distracting – it is not a matter of getting a magical 36 hour day that would only add to many people’s wastefulness; it is a matter of wisely using the 24 hours and gifts we already have. Ephesians 5:15-17 urges, “Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.”

Our time is precious and irretrievable. Once it is gone, it is lost forever. It cannot be hoarded or stored up, only spent frivolously or invested well. One pastor wrote, “If we progress in the economy of time, we are learning to live. If we fail here, we fail everywhere.” The investment or waste of our time is crucial to our worship of God and to our discipleship, a manifestation of our hearts. What kind of legacy will you leave for God’s glory? What will the epitaph on your life say one day? What impact have you made thus far?

I’ve always been inspired and challenged by former Angels pitcher Jim Abbot who, despite not having a right hand and learning to pitch and catch the ball with only his left, enjoyed a long successful major league baseball career. He said, “I’ve learned that it’s not the disability that defines you, it’s how you deal with the challenges the disability presents you with. And I’ve learned that we have an obligation to the abilities we DO have, not the disability… The Bible tells us to be grateful in every situation. I am grateful for mine.”

How about you and I? Do you remember that spiritually, we were all born in a far worse situation? Born separated from God, we were born foolish, ungrateful, rebellious, facing His wrath. 1 Cor 2:14 says the natural man is spiritually appraised. The natural man has the most important things in life exactly reversed: he thinks foolishness is wisdom and wisdom is foolishness. And the way of the fool is that he is right in his own eyes (Prov 12:15). The ultimate destiny of fools, 2 Tim 3:7 says is that they are “always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” But it is not to be so with God’s people! At salvation every believer has been made wise by God’s Word and Spirit. By God’s grace, Christ Jesus became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness, sanctification, and redemption (1 Cor 1:30). The Scriptures make us wise unto salvation (2 Tim 3:15). In Christ, the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Him and therefore also in us (Col 2:3). The Holy Spirit is our resident truth teacher. We are born again with all provision for wisdom to live for our Lord, yet we must grow in wisdom, and pray for it (James 1:5).

Paul writes, “Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men, but as wise.” The word “careful” in Greek has the basic meaning of “accurate” and “exact with alertness.” We are to walk wisely as those living in the light. We are to avoid Satan’s traps, and not revert to the practices of our old lives. As Christians, we are not immune from reverting back to foolishness. One way, you and I, sometimes are guilty of that, is by not believing God completely. Jesus said to the men on the Emmaus road, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken.” (Luke 24:25). To the extent that we do not accept any part of God’s Word, we are foolish. When we place our hope and priorities in making money, keeping up with the Joneses, instead of healthy communion with the Lord and obeying His will by faith – then we are reverting to foolishness, rather than feasting on the riches of eternal kingdom living. What genuine Christian in his or her right mind would ever give up their salvation for all the riches of this world? Not one. And yet in our practical lives, we forfeit our true treasures for things that rust and moths destroy.

In verse 16, Paul writes, “making the most of your time, because the days are evil.” For many people, life is a series of unfinished symphonies, delayed constructions, and half-baked resolutions. No one can turn dream into reality unless he makes the most of his time. Paul here did not use the Greek word chronos, the term for clock time, the continuous time that is measured in hours, minutes, and seconds, but rather kairos which denotes a measured, allocated, fixed season. The word time is also preceded by the definite article, “the” time. God already predetermines the length of our lives. We can achieve our potential in His Service only as we maximize the time He’s set for us. Making the most in Greek is the idea of buying back or buying out. It implies redemption, to redeem the time, buy it all up, and devote it to the Lord. One pastor wrote, “The most foolish thing a Christian can do is to waste time and opportunity, to fritter away his life in trivia and half-hearted service of the Lord.” We must take full advantage of every opportunity to follow God, redeeming our time. Recall the people who hadn’t heeded Noah’s warnings as the Ark door was closed, or the five foolish virgins who let their oil run out before the bridegroom arrived and were then shut out of the wedding feast. Jesus lamented over Jerusalem who He longed to gather like a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and instead, Jerusalem rebelled and killed the prophets. Judas Iscariot, a tragic example of wasted opportunity, spent 3 years with Jesus, loved by Him, only to betray Him for 30 pieces of silver.

Instead let us, by His grace and enablement, strive to fight the good fight and finish our course, keeping the faith. Not only because our days are numbered, but because the days are evil. As we make the most of our opportunities for God, the world will continually and increasingly oppose us. Things will get worse and not better, but God will work to His glory. John MacArthur wrote,

When we have opportunity to do something for His name’s sake and for His glory, we should do so with all that we have. How God’s heart must be broken to see His children ignore or half-heartedly take up opportunity after opportunity that He sends to them. Every moment of every day should be filled with things good, things righteous, things glorifying to God… When our priorities are God’s priorities, He is free to work in us and through us to accomplish great things; but when our priorities are not His priorities, He can do little with us because He has little of us.

by Pastor Mark Chin

INTRODUCTION

How is a Christian to understand, appreciate, and experience the role of the Holy Spirit in his or her life today? True to the post-modern spirit of the world in which we live, we are given as many explanations as there are individual experiences. For the evangelical Christian, however, there is the alleged comfort of being able to find clear answers to such questions in an authoritative source that transcends human experience and human reason. For the saints, this authoritative source is the testimony of the Holy Spirit Himself, the canon of Holy Scripture, the Word of God. Yet even among evangelical theologians who purportedly believe in the infallibility, inerrancy, sufficiency, and perspicuity of God’s Word, a divisive debate over what should define the normative role of the Holy Spirit in the Christian life rages on. It is a debate that touches on all aspects of Christian life, both corporate and individual. At the heart of this debate is how a Christian is to rightly understand the Spirit’s testimony concerning the baptism in/of the Holy Spirit? Henry I. Lederle pinpoints the key interpretive question which has divided the evangelical ranks when he asks, “Is Spirit-baptism identified with regeneration or conversion or with an experiential “second blessing” that occurs after conversion?” [1] He goes on to note the doctrinal implications of such a question by concluding, “The crucial issue is the question whether the Christian life is characterized by “one or two stages.” [2] Is there a second stage to the Christian life, marked by a second blessing of the Holy Spirit which empowers a higher level of sanctification and/or service? Or, is the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer a unified whole that begins with regeneration and will be completed with the believer’s glorification in the presence of the returning King?

At the heart of the debate are differing interpretations of the biblical meaning of Spirit-baptism or the baptism of/in the Holy Spirit. These, in turn, are based upon differing ways of handling Scripture, especially the book of Acts and how it relates to the whole of Scripture. Nowhere is this more evident than in how the different sides of the debate view the event of Pentecost in Acts 2. Here lies what has often been the primary battleground for our understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit in the lives of New Covenant saints. Yet it is my conviction that the testimony of the Holy Spirit is clear and consistent, demonstrating continuity throughout the entirety of Scripture as to the meaning, significance, and implications of the baptism in the Holy Spirit that is documented in Acts 2. Furthermore, the clear and consistent testimony of the Spirit of God testifies to a unity in purpose and effect in the Spirit’s ministry which is not found within the framework and function of the two stage paradigm of the Christian life.

I will attempt to support these convictions by first examining the two stage/second blessing of the Holy Spirit paradigm of the Christian life. I will first examine the history of this paradigm and how this paradigm has come to define the baptism of the Holy Spirit among Charismatic and Pentecostal evangelicals. I will then examine the theology and hermeneutics that is used to support this paradigm. Finally, I will briefly discuss the conclusions and implications of the two stage methodology as it relates to Spirit-baptism.

PART I: AND THEN THERE WERE TWO

Within Protestant orthodoxy, regardless of dispensational or covenantal affinities, there has been a general consensus from the patristic period onwards that within the New Covenant era, Spirit-baptism is “a one-time experience (Eph 4:5)… synonymous with regeneration or new birth.” [3] James Dunn defines baptism in the Spirit as “the chief element in conversion-initiation so that only those who had thus received the Spirit could be called Christians….” [4] Without it, there is no New Covenant Christian life whatsoever. It is the fulfillment of the New Covenant promises given by the prophets (Ezk 36:24-27; Jer 32:37-40; Joel 2:30-31), whereby God promised that He would “give his people new hearts and spirits through the indwelling of his Spirit, resulting in a new lifestyle.” [5] Though the emphases may vary slightly between the dispensational and covenantal camps, the common ground within protestant orthodoxy is that Spirit-baptism is a one-time New Covenant event with permanent results whereby the Holy Spirit inaugurates the believer’s union with Christ, the believer’s union with the body of Christ (i.e. the church), and the believer’s progressive sanctification into the image of Christ within the context of both those relationships. [6] The baptism in the Holy Spirit is the initial step in the life of the New Covenant saint that inducts him or her into the unified whole of the Spirit’s sovereign and providential work, not only in the life of the individual believer, but in the life of the body of Christ as a whole, in fulfillment of God’s promise.

In contrast to this one-step inaugural position adhered to throughout history by protestant orthodoxy, the two-step or two-stage paradigm of the Christian life defines Spirit-baptism as a distinct repeatable and pivotal second work, gift, or blessing of the Spirit subsequent to, and therefore separate from, one’s regeneration or conversion. [7] It is a gift that is given for a specific purpose in the individual believer’s life. Its presence in the believer’s life is visibly affirmed by a tangible experience and a visible demonstration of the Spirit’s power. There have been, arguably, fringe proponents of the two-step paradigm throughout the history of the Christian faith, especially among those who desired to experience God in a “deeper way” beyond their initial conversion to the faith. Within the Catholic tradition, the sacramental system, the ecclesiastical system, and the system of sainthood are all highly suggestive of a two-stage ideal for the Christian life among those who are already, allegedly, members of the body of Christ. Within the history of protestant evangelicalism, we find the early rumblings of such a paradigm with certain Puritans, “known as the “Sealers” and possibly early primitive Baptists who held to a dramatic experience to be sought which brings “assurance of one’s sonship” and results in power (a new boldness).” [8]

However it is within the Wesleyan Methodist movement that we begin to see the roots of a clearly articulated theology of a two-stage Christian life marked by a second gifting of the Holy Spirit. [9] It is important to highlight the word “roots” with regard to Wesley. Wesley, himself, was never a proponent of a clearly articulated doctrine of a post-conversion Spirit-baptism, nor were the terms “the baptism of the Spirit” or “fullness of the Spirit” used by him, nor did he develop any extensive expositions on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. [10] The focus of much of Wesley’s work was on the Spirit’s sanctification of the individual believer’s life. [11] Wesley saw the work of the Spirit in sanctification as being a continuum throughout the pilgrim’s journey, but a continuum that was marked by different stages. [12] The difference in stages was a difference in degree of sanctification, not necessarily in kind. [13] However, he famously introduced the idea of a “second crisis” stage of instantaneous entire sanctification by the Holy Spirit in which “all sin is taken away and the heart is purified …. There is no mixture of any contrary affections: All is peace and harmony after.” [14]

Interestingly enough, it is in America, the land of the free and the home of the brave, where we see the two-stage paradigm for the Christian life and Spirit-baptism blossoms. It was Wesley’s successors, the Wesleyan-Holiness movements and the Keswick Holiness movement that help clearly define a normative two-stage Christian life where Spirit-baptism was described initially as a second indwelling event of the Spirit after salvation for the perfection in love and then later for victorious Christian living in the life of the individual believer. [15] Salvation, a one time event for all Christians was to be followed, for some, by a second gifting, blessing, or baptizing by the Holy Spirit for a specific function or purpose, initially for victorious personal sanctification and later for a powerful winning of souls for Christ. As a consequence, according to this view, the body of Christ becomes divided into two classes of believers – those who have received the second gift of Spirit-baptism or Spirit-anointing and those who have not. Those who embraced the Keswick version of the second blessing included such influential evangelical leaders as Andrew Murray, D.L. Moody, R.A. Torrey, A.J. Gordon, A.B. Simpson, Alexander Dowie, and O.J. Smith, many of whom were considered to be the spokesmen and fathers of modern American evangelicalism. The attainment of the victorious life-changing second stage of the Christian life, made possible by the two-stage definition of Spirit-baptism, was to be aspired to by all but would be achievable only by some. Criteria were put forth that supposedly would open one’s life up to this second work of the Spirit. Christians were encouraged to actively pursue the second blessing through seeking, praying, repenting, obeying the Bible, and increasing their faith. “From Wesley’s view of a sanctifying event of perfecting in love or Christian perfection brought about by the Holy Spirit, a two-tier system evolved as the pattern for the Christian life.” [16]

It is on the clearly defined two-stage framework hammered out by Wesley’s American evangelical successors, resting upon a new second-work definition of Spirit-baptism, “that the whole Pentecostal movement would later be built.” [17] It was arguably on Azusa street, in California, at the turn of the 20th century, where the Pentecostal movement exploded onto the evangelical world scene. Within a few years it would rival Coca Cola as an international American export, taking root in over 50 nations. [18] Though the “gifts of the Spirit” and “speaking in tongues” would be the distinctive hallmarks of the movement, it would be the two-stage paradigm, dependent on “the classical Pentecostal view of Spirit-baptism as “subsequent, conditional, and evidenced by glossolalia” [19] which would shape the heart of the movement. Gee, a representative of Pentecostal theology, declared in 1955 that Spirit-baptism “was the central issue in Pentecostalism.” [20] He further described what he meant by Spirit-baptism: “The designation “Pentecostal” arises from its emphasis upon a baptism in the Holy Spirit such as that recorded in Acts 2… as a separate individual experience possible for all Christians… subsequent to, and distinct from, regeneration.” [21] Stanley Horton describes the Pentecostal Spirit-baptism as a “second step of faith,” “an observable and intensely personal experience,” whereby God’s Spirit comes “into a believer’s life in a very focused way.” [22] The General Council of the Assemblies of God outlined their position on the baptism of the Holy Spirit in article 7 of their Statement of Fundamental Truths.

Article 7. The Baptism in the Holy Ghost

All believers are entitled to and should ardently expect and earnestly seek the promise of the Father, the baptism in the Holy Ghost and fire, according to the command of our Lord Jesus Christ. This was the normal experience of all in the early Christian church. With it comes the enduement of power for life and service, the bestowment of the gifts and their uses in the work of the ministry (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8; 1 Cor. 12:1-31). This experience is distinct from and subsequent to the experience of the new birth (Acts 8:12-17;10:44-46; 11:14-16; 15:8-9). With the baptism in the Holy Ghost come such experiences as an overflowing fullness of the Spirit (John 7:37-39; Acts 4:8), a deepened reverence for God (Acts 2:43; Heb. 12:28), an intensified consecration to God and dedication to His work (Acts 2:42), and a more active love for Christ, for His Word and for the lost (Mark 15:20). [23]

By the movement’s own definition, then, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, was no longer to be understood as an initial, inaugural, regenerating, unifying, unilateral, monergistic, one-step work of God with a strong corporate emphasis in Christ, but rather as a second-step, subsequent, separate, synergistic, conditional event with a strong individual emphasis and a heavy experience-based affirmation, endorsing a two-stage Christian life and two-tier body of Christ. From Oxford to Asuza street, by way of the great American evangelical revival leaders, “a new elitist division was struck in Christianity – not connected to function, as the unfortunate dichotomy between clergy and laity which evolved in patristic times, but dependent on a specific spiritual experience.” [24] A uniquely American brand of evangelicalism was born in which “the individual becomes the prime-mover in this process.” [25]

PART II: WHY TWO ARE BETTER THAN ONE, OR SO THEY SAY

a. The Method In The Madness

How can one justify and defend a definition of Spirit-baptism that encompasses the doctrines of subsequence (Spirit-baptism subsequent to conversion), of tongues as initial evidence for it, of pre-conditions for receiving it, and of individual empowerment for service as the primary result of it? It is done by appealing to the same testimony and authority that protestant orthodoxy appeals to, the Word of God. The division between the two camps, then, lies not in the authority but rather in the handling of that authority. Charismatic theologian, Roger Stronstad, rightly notes, “This division is not simply theological. Fundamental hermeneutical or methodological differences lie at the heart of the matter….Consequently, the experiential and theological tensions over the doctrine of the Holy Spirit will only be resolved when the methodological issues have first been resolved.” [26] This in turn, begs the question, “What method is to be used to accurately understand the meaning of the Holy Spirit’s activity?”

b. Luke Is The Man

The methodology used by many Pentecostal and Charismatic theologians gives both precedence and priority to the writings of Luke, especially with regard to Spirit-baptism. Within this methodology, a specific attempt is made to distance the canonical contributions of Luke from those of Paul. I. Howard Marshall writes, “Luke was entitled to his own views, and the fact that they differ in some respects from those of Paul should not be held against him at this point. On the contrary, he is a theologian in his own right and must be treated as such.” [27] Clark Pinnock calls us to “read Luke by himself, and listen to him” in order to see that his authorial intent with regard to the doctrine of Spirit-baptism is different from Paul.” [28] Stronstad, arguing that: (1) Luke-Acts is theologically homogenous, (2) Luke is a theologian as well as a historian, and (3) Luke is an independent theologian in his own right, concludes, “… since Luke is a theologian in his own right, interpreters ought to examine his writings with a mind open to the possibility that his perspective on the Holy Spirit may, in fact, differ from Paul’s.” [29] From here, he goes on to conclude that “… in principle Luke’s narratives are an important and legitimate data base for constructing a Lukan doctrine for the Spirit. Thus, rather than providing a flimsy foundation upon which to erect a doctrine for the Holy Spirit, as is commonly alleged, the historical accounts of the activity of the Spirit in Acts provide a firm foundation for erecting a doctrine of the Spirit which has normative implications for the mission and religious experience of the contemporary church.” [30] As is evident, a concerted effort is made to set Luke not only apart but above the other inspired contributors to the canon, especially Paul, in matters pertaining to the Holy Spirit.

c. Charismatic Theology Rules

Having set Luke apart and above the rest of the canon with regard to pneumatology, priority is given to a charismatic theology of Scripture. Stronstad defines charismatic as “God’s gift of His Spirit to His servants, either individually or collectively, to anoint, empower, or inspire them for divine service. As it is recorded in Scripture, therefore, this charismatic activity is necessarily an experiential phenomenon.” [31] Stronstad’s conclusion, with regard to Luke’s testimony about the Holy Spirit, is that “Luke is found to have a charismatic rather than a soteriological theology of the Holy Spirit.” [32] In full agreement with him, is Clark Pinnock, who states, “If you read Luke by himself, and listen to him, it seems rather clear that the outpouring of the Spirit he has in mind is not brought into relation to salvation [initiation/incorporation], as it is in Paul, but in relation to service and witness. Therefore, Luke does not tie the coming of the Spirit to the salvation event…” [33] Not only, then, is the soteriological component set aside with this methodology, but also the eschatological and ecclesiological components are also discarded in favor of a rather one dimensional charismatic perspective. The events of Luke’s gospel and Acts, as well as the rest of Scripture are assigned little if any eschatological, soteriological, or ecclesiological significance or weight. Yet clearly, Scripture attests to the fact that “there is much more to the Spirit’s effect on the believer’s life than the dispensing of gifts.” [34] Dunn rightly points out that, “Where the Pentecostal thesis breaks down is in its failure to grasp the fact that we are dealing here with events whose significance, at least for those who recorded them, lies almost totally in the part they play in salvation-history.” [35]

d. Narrative is Normative

Having isolated and elevated Luke above the rest of Scripture and having placed his writing almost exclusively beneath a charismatic lens, the Pentecostal and Charismatic methodology is then able to make historical narrative the normative paradigm for believers of all ages. Horton alleges that since “Luke is accepted as both a historian and a theologian…he is providing “divine truth” for Christians of all ages.” [36] Stronstad argues that the baptism of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost is the normative paradigm for believers of all ages. He states, “Finally, just as the anointing of Jesus (Luke 3:22; 4:18) is a paradigm for the subsequent Spirit baptism of the disciples (Acts 1:5; 2:4), so the gift of the Spirit to the disciples is a paradigm (a normative framework for the mission and character of God’s people living in the last days) for God’s people throughout the “last days” as a charismatic community of the Spirit – a prophethood of all believers (Acts 2:16-21).” [37] With this approach, the historical, soteriological, and eschatological context is removed from the hermeneutical method. Freed up from these checks, narrative is made to be normative for the individual believer regardless of where it is found or how it is used in the canon. Horton illustrates this approach by making no distinction between Old Covenant and New Covenant Saints when he cites the outpouring of the Spirit on Old Covenant saints – Samson in Judges 15:14 and Elijah in 1 Kings 18:38, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Zechariah – as biblical precedence for believer’s receiving a subsequent baptism of the Spirit affirmed by visible manifestations of power such as wind and fire. [38]

e. The Charismatic Spirit: The Glory of Man

Having isolated and elevated Luke above the rest of God’s Word, having narrowed the focus to a charismatic theology, and having made historical narrative normative for all New Covenant believers, how is one to understand the New Covenant relationship between the believer and the Holy Spirit? The events of Pentecost and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are to have no corporate or ecclesiastical significance or implications. Pentecost is to be understood independently of Paul’s inspired epistles, including 1 Cor 12:13, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.” [40] It is to be understood independently of the New Covenant prophecies (Jeremiah 31:27-31, Ezek 37: 15-28 and Joel 2:28-32 which Peter affirmed the fulfillment of at Pentecost and directly linked with Spirit-baptism) which are all corporate addresses with corporate implications to the House of Israel as opposed to individuals. [40] Within the two-stage paradigm, Spirit-baptism is about the empowerment of the individual, not about union with the body of Christ. As Horton says, “Spirit baptism is an observable and intensely personal experience” and ““…we see a distinction between the Spirit baptizing believers into the one body and being “given the one Spirit to drink.” [41] It is of no consequence within the Charismatic hermeneutic that it is the same Spirit who inspired Paul’s epistles and the OT prophets. Nor is it of any consequence that Luke had an extremely close and extended affiliation with Paul. Nor is it of any consideration that, as John Stott points out, “The Greek expression is precisely the same in all seven occurrences (throughout the NT), and therefore a priori, as a sound principle of interpretation, it should refer to the same baptism experience in each verse.” [42]

For Paul, according to 1 Cor 12:7-13, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is an event that takes place in the heart of all true Christians at the time of regeneration. [43] In the New Covenant prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Joel, the outpouring of the Spirit of God is directly connected with repentance, salvation, and the inauguration of a “New” Covenant between God and His people. Peter, himself, the chief spokesperson and interpreter of the Spirit-baptism of Pentecost, in complete harmony with both Paul and the Old Covenant prophets, inspired by the same Spirit, makes the same soteriological and eschatological connections in his testimony, calling for the crowd to repent, to be baptized in the name of Christ, and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. [44] However, having isolated the Spirit-baptism at Pentecost not only from the rest of Scripture, but also from any soteriological, eschatological, and ecclesiological meaning, the Charismatic hermeneutic and methodology lays the foundation for a doctrine of subsequence and a two-stage Christian life. Spirit-baptism is separated in time and meaning from the event of regeneration, union with Christ, and union with the body of Christ.

It is the testimony of Christ Himself in John 16:14 that the Spirit would ultimately glorify Him. The testimony of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Joel all make clear that the outpouring of the Spirit in the New Covenant was a unilateral monergistic act of God as an expression of His magnificent grace, His faithfulness, and His lovingkindness. Peter, at Pentecost, in keeping with the testimony of Jesus and the OT prophets, directly connects the outpouring of the Spirit to the exalted, ascended, glorified Christ. According to Peter’s witness at Pentecost, the baptism in the Holy Spirit not only testifies to Christ as the one who unilaterally pours out this “gift” to all (not some) who believe, but it also testifies to Christ’s death, His resurrection, and His exaltation to the right hand of the Father. Having removed the continuous testimony of the Spirit throughout Scripture from the meaning of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Christ and His glorification is removed from the definition. Nowhere, in the two-stage paradigm is the glorification of Christ articulated as a component of Spirit-baptism. The emphasis is completely on empowerment for service. With Christ removed from the narrative, all that is left is man. For the two-stage paradigm, it is for man to decide what he must do to obtain a Spirit-baptism of empowerment for service.

CONCLUSION

How is a Christian to understand, appreciate, and experience the role of the Holy Spirit in his or her life? A Christian does so by listening to the entire testimony of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit has spoken and has testified clearly, comprehensively, continuously, progressively, yet consistently as to its relationship with the members of the body of Christ. It is a relationship of holiness, of love, and of unity. It is a relationship that is given freely and graciously by Christ without a list of preconditions. It is a relationship that is given to all, not some, who call upon the name of Christ to be saved from their sin. It is a relationship that testifies to the glory of Christ, His life, His death, His resurrection, and His exaltation by God. Any suggestion of something other than this is the suggestion of a relationship that is not His.

[1] Henry I. Lederle, Treasures Old and New: Interpretations of “Spirit-Baptism” in the Charismatic Renewal Movement, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1988),1.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Stephen F. Olford with David L. Olford, Anointed Expository Preaching (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 1998) 216.

[4] James Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Reexamination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today, (London: SCM, 1970), 4.

[5] Sinclair Ferguson, The Holy Spirit: Contours of Christian Theology, (Downers Grove, IL.: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 116.

[6] Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, (Chicago, IL.: Moody Press, 1989), 266,269.

[7] Henry I. Lederle, Treasures Old and New: Interpretations of “Spirit-Baptism” in the Charismatic Renewal Movement, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1988), xiv.

[8] Ibid., ix.

[9] Ibid., 5.

[10] H.Ray Dunning, “ A Wesleyan Perspective on Spirit Baptism,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 184,186.

[11] Ibid.,185.

[12] Ibid., 191,192.

[13] Ibid.

[14] John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, 3rd ed. 14 vols. (London: Wesleyan Methodist Book Room, 1872; reprint, Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1978), 6;488-89.

[15] Henry I. Lederle, Treasures Old and New: Interpretations of “Spirit-Baptism” in the Charismatic Renewal Movement, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1988), 5.

[16] Ibid., 11.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 51.

[19] Henry I. Lederle, Treasures Old and New: Interpretations of “Spirit-Baptism” in the Charismatic Renewal Movement, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1988), 5.

[20] Ibid., 25.

[21] J.J. McNamee, “The Role of the Spirit in Pentecostalism. A Comparative Study” (Ph.D. diss., Eberhard Karls university, Tubingen, 1974), 46.

[22] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 47, 48.61.

[23] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 55.

[24] Henry I. Lederle, Treasures Old and New: Interpretations of “Spirit-Baptism” in the Charismatic Renewal Movement, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1988), 11.

[25] Ibid., 27.

[26] Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1984), 2.

[27] I. Howard Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian, Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), 75.

[28] Clark Pinnock, review of I Believe in the Holy Spirit, by Michael Green, in HIS (June, 1976), 21.

[29] Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1984), 11,12.

[30] Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1984), 2.

[31] Ibid., 13.

[32] Ibid., 12.

[33] Clark Pinnock, review of I Believe in the Holy Spirit, by Michael Green, in HIS (June, 1976), 21.

[34] Tyndale Theological Seminary. (1998; 2002). Conservative Theological Journal Volume 2 (2:228). Tyndale Theological Seminary.

[35] James Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Reexamination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today, (London: SCM, 1970), 4.

[36] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 56.

[37] Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, (Peabody, MS.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1984), 2.

[38] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 56.

[39] New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (1 Co 12:13). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.

[40] Irvin A. Busenitz, Commentary on Joel, (Ross-Shire, GB.: Christian Focus Publications, 2003), 184.

[41] Stanley M. Horton, “Spirit Baptism: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville, TN.: B&H Publishers, 2004), 48.

[42] John R. Stott, The Baptism and Fullness of the Holy Spirit, (Downer’s Grove, IL.; Inter-Varsity Press, 1964), 23.

[43] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology ( Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1994), 767.

[44] Irvin A. Busenitz, Commentary on Joel, (Ross-Shire, GB.: Christian Focus Publications, 2003), 195.

by Pastor John Kim

The theme for Lighthouse Bible Church Los Angeles is “Love Them Like Jesus.” I explained that I used the same theme back in San Diego and while I tried to find a different way to phrase it, I just kept coming back to the song by Casting Crowns that painted a very vivid picture in my mind when I first heard it. We are surrounded by lost and hurting people who walk through the doors of the church and often times we have no idea just how much pain and suffering they have gone through. As ambassadors of the kingdom of heaven, the church has the great responsibility and task to share the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is an urgent matter, one that we cannot afford to be lax about since there are men and women dying every day and their eternal destiny is at stake.

I know and understand that the gospel must be preached. This is a non-negotiable issue that is something we must never compromise. But if there is one thing that really creates a complication, it is when the very lips of those who claim to represent Christ are attached to a person who contradicts the very gospel message with the absence of the love of Christ.

“For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.” (2 Corinthians 5:14–15)

If the love of Christ truly controls us, we are to no longer live for ourselves but for Him who died and rose again on our behalf. If we have even the slightest idea of the grace and mercy that has been shown to us at the cross and that we have been overwhelmingly loved with a love that cannot be separated from us (Romans 8:39), the question really does beg to be asked, “How can one who knows the love of Christ not only fail to manifest the love of Christ in the way that Christ has loved, but even go as far as to demean that love by belittling or ignoring the multiple times where Christians are commanded, not just suggested or advised, but given the imperative that is meant to be obeyed to the glory of God and to magnify the grace that has been shown through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

When Jesus confronts the church of Ephesus is Revelation 2, He confronts a church that is doctrinally sound, that is hard-working, and persevering in the midst of tribulations. But there is the one thing that He has against them, that they have left their first love. The church had departed from or abandoned their first love. There is no particular aspect highlighted here. It is everything to do with what God intended for love to be in the life of the church. Love for God, love for Christ, love for the Holy Spirit, for the church, for the lost – all of it was left behind. How could this be? How could those who actually have the very thing that the world longs for, true love, be willing to divorce themselves from that which would grieve the Lord Jesus Christ to the extent where He would condemn a church?

1 Corinthians 13 gives us a pretty good clue in that the apostle Paul confronts the Corinthian church, amongst many things, that they have failed to love one another with the love of Christ. They have turned the church into a chaotic whirlwind of selfishness, self-promotion, divisions, tolerance for sin, and at the heart of it, in the midst of what was to be the beauty of exercising their spiritual gifts for the edification of the body, they are vying for power, judging one another, and comparing against one another instead. This all completely failed to represent what the church was meant to be and do.

Jesus told His disciples in no uncertain terms in John 13:34-35 to love one another just as He had loved them.

“A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34–35)

We are called to love one another as Christ has loved us.

“Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.” (Ephesians 5:1–2)

What is amazing to me and often leaves me completely flabbergasted is the blatant disregard, hard-hearted contempt, and absolute deliberate choice to treat others with a complete absence of grace and mercy and yet at the same time claim to desire someone’s spiritual growth. Yes, there is no one who perfectly matches up to the standard of Christ and we all, including myself, need to be corrected, admonished, and exhorted along the way. But if there is one thing that I continue to grow in my understanding, it is that the love of Christ controlling me and compelling me and constraining me cannot help but reveal itself especially in times where you deal with the pain of conflicts, the unfairness of judgments, and the unwillingness to seek peace by those who claim to be Christians. It is in the crucible of suffering that we find whether the love of Christ is truly at the heart of why we live. So we can be grateful and thankful that the times of suffering and trial give us opportunity to cling to the love of Christ as well as to display the love of Christ to those who would treat you like an enemy. Did not Christ call us to love our enemies?

Yet I can tell you that over the years I have grown to understand a little bit better what Paul meant when he wrote to the Philippian church these words:

“For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things.” (Philippians 3:18–19)

The tears of grief and overwhelming sadness have been experienced many times because to fail to live in light of the love of Christ has lead some to the point where they actually become enemies of the cross of Christ. Paul’s heart broke, I’m sure, as the faces of those he once had fellowship with turned not only against him but against Christ and it caused him to weep.

Does your heart break, especially for those who claim to know Christ but contradict everything that Christ stands for in their refusal to love the way He loved? This has been my greatest struggle – to love those who are unloving. I can honestly say that God has allowed me to love the unlovely, the unlovable, and those who have never experienced love. It is because we all share common ground – we all know what it means to be unloved but now because of Christ, we are loved beyond comprehension. But those who purposefully, deliberately, and often times heartlessly display a harsh spirit, a judgmental spirit, a condemning spirit, a merciless spirit, a spirit that denigrates grace and spits on mercy, a spirit that measures others with a pharisaical hypocrisy that reveals their callousness of their own hearts, a spirit that is so self-righteous and arrogant that produces such a stench of putrid hate that it is no surprise that many turn away and are disgusted with such obscenity that claims the name of Christ. And yet, our Savior, when dealing with the very ones who plotted and ultimately called for Him to be crucified, was still patient and persevering, even to the point of death, death on a cross, for the very ones who even called for His death!

If Jesus could still love those who hated Him, if Jesus could still show mercy to the thief on the cross who only minutes before was cursing him but then begged for mercy, if Jesus could cry out to the Father, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do!”, if Jesus could for the joy set before Him endure the cross and despise the shame, if Jesus could love us like this, then I think we know that the way we are called to love all too often falls short of the love with which we have been loved. So will you love them like Jesus? Will you carry them to Him? Maybe instead of trying to give your answers to everyone’s problems, will you instead stand by their side and weep with them? Will you show a love that is patient, kind, bearing all things, believing all things, hoping all things, enduring all things?

My heart is so burdened with the lack of love by those who claim to be Christians that it really at times can be so disheartening. But as I have been recently reminded through reading Alexander Strauch’s books Love or Die and Leading with Love, I can only hope and pray the prayer that Paul prays in Ephesians 3:

“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God. Now to Him who is able to do far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us, to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.” (Ephesians 3:14–21)

May the Lighthouse churches know the love of Christ, be controlled by the love of Christ, and proclaim the love of Christ both in word and deed to His glory.

by Pastor Jim Kang

If the world would judge Christianity by social media posts by American Christians, what would they say? If some of the Christians from the third-world countries would judge American Christianity by our social media, what would they think? What type of message do American Christians give about Christianity?

I have had several conversations with Christians from various parts of the world, especially, from underdeveloped regions, such as India, continent of Africa, and rural areas of South America. Many of these believers say that Christianity in North America seems to be about personal happiness and success, but rarely about suffering. Judging from what many professing Christians post on social media, it is hard to argue. Myriads of food pictures, selfies, and venerating their favorite evangelical celebrities all say more about the Christian’s idolatry than Christianity. No wonder many non-American believers say American Christianity seems so self-absorbed. I now understand what John Piper means when he says American Christianity is like a Disney ride.

I am convinced that what Christians/churches desperately need today (especially, here in North America) is to understand the inseparable connection between the sovereignty of God and theology of suffering. Perhaps one of the loving things a pastor can do for his congregation is to help disciple and help others to disciple such reality – that because God is sovereign he will use sufferings to treasure him and to enjoy him alone, and that God would be glorified in and through sufferings.

When you read about the life of Joseph in Genesis and come to Genesis 45, you finally get to hear Joseph’s own interpretation of all that he went through up to this point. You get to hear how he saw all the wrongdoings he received (e.g., wrongly imprisoned, false accusations, mistreatment, injustice) from others, including his own brothers!

If there was someone who had legitimate reason to complain, it would have been Joseph. If there was someone who had legitimate reason to retaliate or revenge, it would have been Joseph. Yet he did none of that. Rather, he viewed the whole thing in utterly theocentric ways!

Joseph exemplifies a man who trusts in the sovereignty of God. The narrative does not depict a man who is consumed with himself, how he feels, or how he’s hurt though he’s painfully aware of what he went through. At the end of the day, he realized that God had a bigger plan and purpose. According to Joseph, he suffered in order that others would greatly benefit (vv. 5, 7, 8, 9). And that is theology of suffering!

I’m not sure how many of us think of suffering that way, namely, we suffer so that others would become the beneficiaries!

Yet, this is not a foreign concept in the redemptive history. Jesus said, “Unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit” (John 12:24). This is certainly true of the voluntary, sacrificial, and substitutionary death of Jesus. He died so that we would become the beneficiaries. All that to say, theology of suffering is real and relevant. And this doctrine must have a strong grip on God’s people because he promised that his people would suffer.

by Pastor Mark Chin

INTRODUCTION

Though many Christian scholars dispute the proper methodology for Christian apologetics, few dispute its definition, its significance, or its purpose for the Christian faith. Almost all Christian apologists, whatever their epistemological or methodological conviction, color, or stripe may be, invariably begin by paying homage to what Dr. Bahnsen describes as the “verse that has long been taken as the biblical charter for Christian apologetics” – 1 Peter 3:15. [1] Apologetics, deriving its name from the Greek word for defense, apologia, is then commonly defined as that “branch of theology that offers a rational defense for the truthfulness of the divine origin and the authority of Christianity.” [2] Its purpose, whatever method one may choose, is commonly agreed upon and narrowly defined by most to be twofold: (1) to bolster the faith of Christian believers, and (2) to aid in the task of evangelism. [3]

Presuppositional apologists, for the most part, concur with such definitions and purpose statements for their practice. John Frame defines apologetics as “the discipline that teaches Christians how to give a reason for their hope.” [4] Presuppositional apologetics, according to Bahnsen, defends Christianity taken as a whole, vindicates Christian theism, and provides a basic method for answering every challenge brought to bear against the Christian faith. [5] Frame admirably sets this discipline within a larger context than most – the glory of God. Consequently his defining purpose statement for apologetics is grander than most – it is the proclamation of a message that “ultimately, is nothing less than the whole of Scripture, applied to the needs of his hearers.” [6] In practice, however, the end purposes for presuppositional apologists are similar to those of other Christian apologists. They seek to rationally defend the truth of Christianity for the two-fold purpose of defending and propagating what the (reformed) Christian believes. [7] What distinguishes them from other apologists is not necessarily the purpose of apologetics, but rather the path to this purpose.

It is my conviction that such purposes, though biblical, fall well short of the divine purpose for apologetics. Apologetics, especially presuppositional apologetics, has a much greater purpose for the church, the believer, and the world – a purpose that goes well beyond evangelism and Christian assurance. This purpose is most explicitly articulated by the apostle Paul in Colossians 1:28: “We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ.” [8]

I believe that presuppositional apologetics is critical for the preservation and promotion of the holiness, the purity, and the glory of God in the body of Christ, in the daily lives of the individual believer, and in the world at large – for the purpose of presenting every man complete in Christ. I believe that one of the most significant and most neglected divine purposes for apologetics is our sanctification in Christ. Nowhere is this more clearly demonstrated than in the apostle Paul’s epistle to the Galatians. In Paul’s epistle to the Galatians we are given a clear example of presuppositional apologetics. However in the Apostle Paul’s hands, we see an apologetic whose purpose was not merely to evangelize unbelievers, to provide assurance for the doubts of believers, or to respond to challenges to the faith, but to present every man complete in Christ through a presuppositional defense of the true gospel of Christ.

Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians as Apologia

When considering biblical examples of apologetics in practice, invariably Acts 17, 22, 24, and occasionally 2 Cor.10: 3-5; 12:12; Phil. 1:7 are cited. [9] Galatians is almost nowhere to be found in scholarly treatments of Christian apologetics. Yet Paul’s epistle to the Galatians exemplifies and sets the standard for Christian apologetics on multiple levels. By virtue of content alone, it is “Paul’s most direct defense and exposition of justification by faith, which is so much the heart of Paul’s understanding of the gospel and of Christian experience.” [10] Its divine challenge to distortions of the gospel is fundamental to the apostle Paul, to the individual believer, to the church, and to the true Christian faith, especially during times of soteriological uncertainty. [11]

Paul’s epistle to the Galatians is quite possibly “the first written of Paul’s extant letters … and possibly antedates everything else written in the NT.” [12] As such, it provides a divinely inspired document of one of the earliest apologetics of the gospel in the history of the church. The occasion for Paul’s defense was the defection by Galatian believers from the true gospel of grace in Christ in favor of a hybrid Christ plus works of the Law Christianity. This was the result of a two-front attack on the Christian faith: (1) a direct frontal attack by false teachers from the Judaizer party who promoted a justification and sanctification by works of the Law and (2) an indirect rear attack by prominent Jewish believers, including Peter and Barnabas, whose fearful separation from Gentile believers endorsed the same heretical position in deed if not by word. As such, Paul’s defense of the gospel provided an apologetic for not only Gentile believers, but also believing Jews, unbelieving Jewish opponents of the gospel, leaders of the church, and the church at large. “The Epistle was written as an answer to the Judaizers who were troubling the Gentile churches of Galatia with their insistent demands that, to be a good Christian, one had first to become a good Jew.” [13]

Betz argues that, when analyzed according to Greco-Roman rhetoric and epistolography, “Galatians is an ‘apologetic letter’ that conforms closely to the requirements of forensic rhetoric (i.e. rhetoric addressed to a jury or judge, which seeks to defend or accuse someone with regard to certain past actions) as set out in the handbooks of rhetoric by Aristotle (Rhetoric), Cicero, and others.” [14] Some feel that Betz pushes this argument too far. [15] However most agree that the elements of both an epistolary framework and an apologetic genre are part of one and the same composition. [16]

Conforming to the apologetic genre not only in style, organization, and purpose, the content of Galatians is built largely around both positive and negative arguments for the cornerstone of the true gospel of grace – justification by faith in Christ alone. [17] Consequently, Paul’s letter to the Galatians is essentially, in form, style, content, and purpose, a divinely inspired apologetic defense of the true gospel. Close analysis reveals that it is an apologetic letter that strongly endorses the presuppositional position on apologetic method.

Epistemology and Apologetics

To understand Paul’s apologetic method, one must first understand the central role of epistemology in apologetics. Dr. Bahnsen makes the point that “epistemology is at the heart of apologetics.” [18] Epistemology, the theory or study of knowledge, is a branch of philosophy concerned with the source, scope, and limits of knowledge. [19] Conclusions about knowledge and its acquisition, the nature of truth, belief, meaning, evidence, proof, experience, and, ultimately, reality – essentially the building blocks of one’s worldview, the philosophical lens through which one interprets and responds to reality – are all informed by one’s theory of knowledge.

Practically applied, epistemology addresses the issue of how one verifies what is true or false. It also defines how one interprets and explains reality. Inasmuch as apologetics involves the defense of particular truth claims, apologetics “entails the application (even if the unwitting application) of one’s basic theory of knowledge.” [20]

The determining foundation of one’s particular epistemology, and consequently one’s worldview, is one’s ruling presuppositions – one’s network of ultimate assumptions and commitments about reality, knowledge, and ethics. [21]Three key presuppositions in particular determine and distinguish one’s epistemology: (1) one’s presupposition on the source of true knowledge (where does truth originate?), (2) one’s presupposition on the ultimate reference point for true knowledge (how is truth to be measured or verified?), and (3) one’s presupposition on the process of knowing true knowledge (how is truth to be acquired?). Obviously, differences in any of these three areas will result in different epistemologies, different truth claims, and consequently, conflicting worldviews.

Reformed Epistemology

For the reformed Christian, it is one’s whole-hearted all-consuming commitment to Christ as Savior and Lord and to His Word that is to determine one’s presuppositions, one’s epistemology, and one’s worldview. The self-sufficient God of the Bible who created the universe in six days is the one and only source and starting point of true knowledge, not man. [22] Van Til notes that “God himself is the source of all possibility, and, therefore, of all space-time factuality.” [23]

As such, God, as revealed in His Word and in Christ, is also the ultimate reference point – the ultimate standard and authority – of true knowledge. It is not man, the reason of man, nor the expertise of man. Van Til points out : “If God is self-sufficient, he alone is self-explanatory. And if he alone is self-explanatory, then he must be the final reference point in all human predication.”  [24] Bahnsen notes : “The believer understands that truth fundamentally is whatever conforms to the mind of God.” [25] “ ‘Reason’ is simply an intellectual tool, rather than an ultimate standard of knowledge (more authoritative even than God), and as such will be affected by the regenerate or unregenerate condition of the man using it.” [26]

Finally, as finite creatures made in His image by Him, the process of man’s knowing is completely dependent on the ultimate source and reference point of true knowledge. Consequently, “the way in which we know anything at all is first and foremost a matter of revelation.” [27] As fallen creatures who have rejected God and His Word, the only way in which we can receive His revelation rightly, is through complete dependence on the saving work of Christ that provides the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in the heart and mind of man (Jn 3:3). The acquisition of truth, then, is first and foremost a spiritual process as opposed to an intellectual one, according to the reformed Christian worldview.

Clearly, as demonstrated above, one’s particular epistemology is the product of one’s ultimate commitments. Consequently one’s epistemology and the truth claims that it arrives at are essentially an expression of worship. Who or what will sit on the throne of truth? Who or what will determine truth in my life? Inasmuch as anything or anyone but God occupies any three of these controlling commitments or presuppositions, in part or in whole, it follows that a different god is being worshipped, a different epistemology is being promoted, and different truth claims will be embraced that are opposed to the truth of the gospel. Consequently, there is no neutral ground between different epistemologies. So “Van Til taught that abstract epistemological neutrality is an illusion and that, given the kind of God revealed in the Bible, imagined neutrality is actually prejudicial against God.” [28] Disagreements over what is truth are disagreements over epistemologies that in turn are disagreements over ultimate commitments that in turn are disagreements over the object of worship.

Epistemology in Paul’s Defense of the Faith

Central, then, to the discussion of Paul’s epistle to the Galatians as an apologia of the true gospel of Christ is the issue of conflicting epistemologies – that of Paul and that of the straying Galatians, the compromised believing Jews, and the Judaizers. The apostle Paul takes great pains in this epistle to delineate and distinguish the two separate epistemologies the conflicting truth claims they have both spawned. The truth claim of the Judaizers that was being embraced by the Galatians and endorsed by the behavior of the believing Jews, was that both justification and sanctification were based upon faith in Christ plus works of the Law. [29]  In direct opposition to this truth claim, Paul presents justification by faith in Christ alone (Gal 2:16-17) and not by works of the Law as the central propositions of this defense of the true gospel. Based upon this defense, Paul concludes and exhorts sanctification by the Spirit of God (Gal 5:16) as opposed to sanctification by works of the flesh.

In the first three chapters of Galatians, Paul lays out clearly and explicitly his epistemology for the truth claims of the gospel. In doing so, he tears down that of his opponents. Explicit in Paul’s defense are Paul’s presuppositions on: (1) the source of true knowledge, (2) the ultimate reference point of true knowledge, and (3) the process of knowing true knowledge.

The source of true knowledge for Paul is the God of the Bible and not man. Paul is an apostle “not sent from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead” (Gal 1:1). Paul’s truth claim, the gospel of Christ, “is not according to man” but rather it is entirely from God (Gal 1:11). Paul spends the better part of the first two chapters demonstrating that God alone and not man, in any way, is the source of the gospel of Christ that he has preached.

Paul’s ultimate reference point for true knowledge is the Word of God, specifically the revealed gospel of Christ and not the tradition, teachings, or expertise of men(Gal 1:12). Paul measures every truth claim and all behavior against the ultimate measure and authority of the gospel (Gal 1:6-10). In Galatians 2:14, Paul explicitly describes “the truth of the gospel” as the fixed point of reference with which to measure all reality, including both knowledge and behavior. Consequently he describes Peter and the believing Jews attempt at neutral behavior in matters of faith and the Law as literally “not walking straight towards the truth of the gospel.” [30] Longenecker concludes: “The implicit major premise is that all messages received by revelation from God have ultimate authority, which is the premise that shapes the entire argument of Galatians.” [31]

By contrast, the teaching of men, the expertise of men, and the reputation of men are clearly denounced by Paul as having no authority and value in and of themselves in the measure of truth (Gal 1:11). “But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality) – well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me” (Gal 2:6). From the premise that ultimate authority rests entirely on direct revelation from God (what Paul has faithfully proclaimed) he “concludes that the message of the Judaizers is under a curse since it contradicts what he proclaimed (1:8-9).” [32]

Paul’s process of receiving true knowledge is admittedly first and foremost by revelation and not by any act of reason, intellectual achievement, or personal work. Paul explicitly states that the truth of the gospel, the ultimate reference point for all true knowledge, is something he “neither received … from man, nor was … taught by man, but … received… through a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal1:12). Furthermore, in light of man’s finite, fallen, condition, Paul makes clear that this involves the regenerating work of the Spirit in the life of the recipient – something that is received by faith (total dependency on God) and not by works of the Law (Gal 3:1-5). For Paul, truth is a gift entirely from God. Any attempts to promote, sell, or acquire it by any other means are attempts to deny its divine source.

By contrast, the truth claims of the Judaizers and the behavior of the Galatians and the believing Jews reflect a hybrid epistemology. Truth source, ultimate reference point, and process of receiving truth are all composed of a God plus “traditions of man/works of Law” hybrid entity. Veneration is given to experts in the Law, not God’s revealed word. Man is not dependent on God but on his own ability to perform “the traditions of the Jews.”

It is an epistemological model that Van Til uses to describe the Roman Catholic and Arminian position, “where God and man become partners in an effort to explain a common environment.” [33] This can be seen in the Council of Trent where the Catholic church bestowed the same authority to the “unwritten traditions” of the Catholic church as that attributed to God’s Word. [34] With the ultimate reference point and source for truth being both the direct revelation of God and the traditions of man, the authority for truth is no longer the self-sufficient God of the Bible. Christ can no longer be the sole Lord and Savior. Christ stands alongside the experts of the Law. Such an epistemology leaves no place for the gift of grace and faith in Christ alone. Such a hybrid epistemology, along with its truth claims and the behavior it engenders, is entirely hostile to the God of the bible and the truth of the gospel. This is the very point that Paul makes in his letter to the Galatians.

The Apostle Paul’s Method of Apologetics

In light of Paul’s explicit God-centered epistemology, it is no surprise that his apologetic method provides an excellent example of what is now called presuppositional apologetics. Paul’s commitment to the authority of Christ and His word for the entirety of his defense, rather than intellectual autonomy or the traditions of men, is self-evident throughout the entirety of Galatians (Gal 6:14,17). It is summed up by his self-reference as literally “a slave of Christ” (Gal 1:10) at the very outset of his defense. It is this commitment that shapes Paul’s starting point, Paul’s method of defense, and Paul’s conclusion.

Paul’s starting point does not include an appeal to human reason, to human expertise, or to some area of alleged common ground with his opponents. Instead, he “takes revelational authority as his starting point and controlling factor in all reasoning.” [35] The first five verses of his epistle proclaim the source of truth, the ultimate point of reference, and the process of receiving truth to be the God of the bible and the gospel of Jesus Christ (Gal 1:1-5). He explicitly articulates his total commitment and dependency on God, not man, for his present position as an apostle (Gal 1:1). He explicitly and succinctly proclaims his entire worldview up front. “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forevermore. Amen” (Gal 1:3-5).

Paul’s method of defense then sets “his worldview with its scriptural presuppositions and authority in antithetical contrast to the worldview” of the Judaizers. [36] In the first two chapters Paul uses a narrative recounting of his past to unleash this gospel epistemology in direct confrontation and opposition to that promoted by the Judaizers, embraced by the Galatians, and endorsed indirectly by believing Jews. Throughout the entirety of this epistle he repeatedly contrasts the authority, revelation, justification, and sanctification of God with those of man, setting the two in direct opposition (Gal 1:1; 1:9-12; 2:5-6; 5; 6:14). In doing so he directly exposes the presupposition of his opponents epistemology and worldview, a Christ plus man hybrid, that ultimately places man on the throne of truth in place of God.

Paul then exposes the absurdity of the Judaizer’s position, showing “the impossibility of the contrary”. In his public rebuke of Peter (Gal 2:11-21), Paul demonstrates the internal inconsistency and absurdity of those who proclaim Jesus as Messiah but try to live by works of Law. The rational consistent conclusion of their epistemology, their truth claims, and their lifestyle – one based entirely on the teachings of experts in the Law – makes Christ a promoter of sin (Gal 1:17) who died needlessly (Gal 2:21) – contrary to their public confession of Jesus as Messiah.

Paul’s conclusion, like the entirety of his defense, allows no room for neutrality or common ground with the opposing worldview of the Judaizers. This is most notably demonstrated in his public confrontation and condemnation of those believing Jews, Peter and Barnabas chief among them, who tried to take a middle position on the issue of justification by faith in Christ alone verses works of the Law (Gal 2:11-14). By measure of the gospel of Christ, Paul publicly states that Peter in this matter “stood condemned” (Gal 2:11), being guilty of hypocrisy and of making a direct assault on the gospel, having departed from a straight walk towards the truth of the gospel – the ultimate reference point of truth.

So by measure of the truth of the gospel, Paul demonstrates that the Judaizers position is primarily a moral and ethical position that rejects the grace and cross of Christ (Gal 2:21). It is not a neutral intellectual one – something he explicitly concludes (Gal 6:13). As such, Paul explicitly demonstrated and proclaimed that the Judaizers, along with all who followed them, were morally culpable before God (Gal 1:8,9) for their truth claims – truth claims that were essentially a denial of the gospel. Paul’s defense ends with a warning of judgment, a call to repentance as evidenced by his exhortations in chapters 5 and 6, and a testimony of his enduring commitment to the cross of Christ alone (6:14, 17,18).

Paul’s Purpose – Beyond Presuppositional Apologetics

Inasmuch as Van Til and the presuppositional reformed apologists have built their entire apologetic position and method solely on the Word of God, it is no surprise that Paul’s defense of the gospel in his letter to the Galatians clearly endorses their work. Sadly, it is no surprise that it bears little resemblance to classical apologetics, evidential apologetics, and cumulative case apologetics. It is also no surprise that Galatians enabled Martin Luther to do in life what Van Til’s work did on paper – to confront and expose Romanism as an anti-gospel, anti-Christ worldview. However, in light of Paul’s letter to the Galatians, the presuppositional purposes for apologetics seem to fall short.

Clearly Paul’s purpose in writing this letter went well beyond merely “defending and propagating what the Christian believes.” [37] The false worldview and apologetic of the Judaizers had contaminated not only the minds of believers, but also the very life of the body of Christ – threatening to divide and destroy the entire church, along with the souls of many believers. The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 clearly demonstrates this truth, as does Paul’s testimony in Galatians (Gal 3:1; 5:4).

Inasmuch as believers and churches had succumbed in part or in whole to a hybrid Christ plus man epistemology, they too, stood just as much as unbelievers, in direct opposition to the gospel and as such, morally condemned by God. This was very much Paul’s point to Peter in Galatians 2:11-14. Clearly, Galatians was not written to make believers feel more certain or assured about their faith. Instead, it was written to make the believers feel most uncertain about their newfound hybrid faith in a life changing way.

Furthermore, Paul does not lay down his pen after having argued his case in the first four chapters of Galatians. He goes on in chapters five and six to exhort the Galatians to a sanctified life of liberty that is empowered by the Spirit of God as opposed to a life of immoral bondage to the flesh. Ultimately, Paul’s letters “were written to Christian believers for instruction in their common life together by one who was self-consciously an apostle, and so an official representative of early Christianity.” [38] Paul’s defense of justification by faith in Christ alone was made for the sanctification of the lives of individual believers and for the divine purification of the body of Christ as a whole. In this way, God used Paul’s apologetics to extend saving grace to a faltering church, to sanctify it, and to set the standard for how God intended the gospel message to not only be understood but also lived.

Conclusion

Longenecker points out that: “It is necessary to understand Galatians aright if we are to understand Paul and the rest of the NT aright… whatever its place in the lists of antiquity, the letter to the Galatians takes programmatic primacy for (1) an understanding of Paul’s teaching, (2) the establishing of a Pauline chronology, (3) the tracing out of the course of early apostolic history, and (4) the determination of many NT critical and canonical issues.” [39] For the same reason, it is necessary to understand and heed Paul’s apologetics in Galatians aright – its epistemology, its method, and its purposes, especially in light of its divine source and authority.

Key to understanding Paul’s apologetics aright is an appreciation of a critical gospel truth: the true gospel was given to transform and renew not only the mind of sinful man but also the entire life of sinful man. A proper defense of the gospel, as exemplified in Galatians, should hold us accountable and bring us back to this same truth. The gospel was given to present every man complete in Christ. The defense of the gospel should do no less. Inasmuch as any apologetic falls short of this same end, it falls short of the gospel it attempts to defend. Paul’s apologetics did not merely “bolster believer’s faith” or serve as an evangelistic tool for the propagation of it. Paul’s apologetics transformed lives because it was built upon the power and the purpose of the gospel of Christ.

Longenecker concludes: “Paul’s Galatians is, like a lion turned loose in the arena of Christians. It challenges, intimidates, encourages and focuses our attention on what is really essential as little else can. How we deal with the issues it raises and the teachings it presents will in large measure determine how we think as Christians and how we live as Christ’s own.” [40] Our apologetics should be and do no less.

[1] Greg L. Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 1998) 1.

[2] Wayne H. House & Joseph M. Holden, Charts of Apologetics and Christian Evidences, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006) Chart 1.

[3] Steven B. Cowan ed., Five Views on Apologetics, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000) 8

[4] Frame, John M., Apologetics to the Glory of God: An Introduction, (Philipsberg: P & R Publishing, 1994) 1.

[5] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 34,36,38.

[6] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 31.

[7] Van Til, Cornelius, The Defense of the Faith, (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 1967) 67.

[8] All Scripture quoted is taken from NASB.

[9] Dr. Bahnsen’s choice of Scripture for a biblical exposition on presuppositional apologetics is Acts 17. It is placed in the appendix of the book Always Ready. (Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith, Robert R. Booth ed, [Nacogdoches: CMP: P & R Publishing, 2008] 235-276).

[10] Ronald Y.K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. , 1988) ix.

[11] A point made in my paper, “Was the Apostle Paul a Republican? Unity and Identity in Christ.” Submitted for Theology 3, Dr. Craigen, October 28,2009, TMS, M.Div.

[12] Richard Longenecker, Word Biblical Commentary: Galatians. [Columbia: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990] xli.

[13] Alan. R. Cole, The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1984) 23.

[14] Richard Longenecker, Word Biblical Commentary: Galatians. [Columbia: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990] cix.

[15] Ibid., civ.

[16] Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians: Hermenieia Series, (Philadelphia:Fortress Press, 1979) 15.

[17] Ronald Y.K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. , 1988) 115.

[18] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 144.

[19] Cowan, 5 Views on Apologetics, 21.

[20] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 144.

[21] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 148.

[22] Cornelius Van Til, A Christian Theory of Knowledge, (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 1969) 12.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 163.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Ibid., 146.

[27] Ibid., 163.

[28] Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, 145,6.

[29] Longenecker, Galatians. xcviii.

[30] Longenecker translates Paul’s verb, orthopdeio, the basis of the English term “orthodpedics” as “go straight towards a goal.” (Longenecker, Galatians. 77).

[31] Longenecker, Galatians, cxvi.

[32] Ibid., cxvi.

[33] Van Til, A Christian Theory of Knowledge,12.

[34] Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 1955) 138.

[35] Bahnsen, Always Ready, 253.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, 67.

[38] Longenecker, Galatians, cii.

[39] Longenecker, Galatians, xli.

[40] Ibid., lvii.