Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne, Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
I am sorry to have to announce I have to quit blogging. The Lord severely chastised me when in looking at my hits for the day I saw that I had 666 hits for the day.
I reckoned it as a sign of the anti-christ giving objective proof of my evil, and so I am repenting in dust and ashes by giving up blogging.
The end is near. The end is near.
“It is evident, that principallie it apperteineth to the King, or to the Chief Magistrate, to knowe the will of God, to be instructed in his Lawe and Statutes, and to promote his glorie with his hole hart and studie, which be the chief pointed of the First Table. No man denieth, but that the sworde is committed to the Magistrate, to the end that he shulde punishe vice and meinteine vertue. To punishe vice, I say; not onelie that whiche troubeleth the tranquilitie and quiet estat of the common welth, by adulterie, theft, or murther committed, but also suche vices as openly impugne the glorie of God, as idolatrie, blasphemie, and manifest heresie, taught and obstinatly meinteined, as the histories and notable actes of Ezechias, Josaphat, and Josias do plainlie teach us,…”
John Knox, The Works of John Knox, ed. David Laing, 6 vols. (Edinburgh: James Thin, 1895), 4:398
“If we enjoy union with Christ, not only we ourselves but even our works too are just in God’s sight. This doctrine of of the justification or works (which was developed in the Reformed Church) is of the greatest consequence for ethics. It makes clear that the man who belongs to Christ need not be the prey of continual remorse. On the contrary he can go about his daily work confidently and joyfully.”
Wilhelm Niesel
Reformed Symbolics: A Comparison of Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism
The Reformed faith deals with the problem of remaining sin in all that we do by teaching this truth that not only our persons but also our works are justified. When this teaching is combined with the ongoing necessity to be conformed to the image of Christ in our daily walk both the dangers of despair over one’s lack of conformity to Christ and the danger of an attitude that concludes that since sin is inevitable in our works why bother contending for righteousness are eclipsed.
There are other ways to deal with the reality of the sin that remains in all that we do after being declared right with God. The Keswick’s contend that sin can be so suppressed that one can have victory over sin and so not sin anymore. The holiness folk contend that sin can not only be suppressed but that it can be eradicated by a second work of grace called entire sanctification or perfect love. My examination of and my experience in these movements though has lead me to believe that what happens in such a move is a defining of sin downward so that people can convince themselves that they really are done with sin.
This is a case where different theology makes a radical difference in personality. The Keswick and Holiness view when seriously embraced by people leads to a incredible self-righteousness. Obviously, if someone has been delivered from sinning there is a incredible temptation to look down on other people who haven’t yet been delivered. Also people who embrace this view end up as people who take sin lightly. Just try convincing someone that they may have a sin problem who is convinced that they have reached a point where they no longer sin.
In the Reformed faith we both hate and yet at the same time recognize that we continue to sin and yet we are neither in despair about that nor are we casual about it since we believe both that all of our works are justified and that out of gratitude for all the Christ has done for us we must continue to seek to ever increasingly be conformed to the character of our Lord Jesus.
Hence being Reformed keeps us from being twisted in our personality by either living in constant despair about the always present sin in our obedience or by living in a wicked presumptuousness that since the lack in our obedience is always forgiven therefore we have no need to be concerned about the lack in our obedience, or by redefining sin as the Keswick and Holiness people do thus creating personalities inflated with self-righteousness.
Being Reformed — it makes for stable personalities and quality character.
______________________________________________________________
p.s. — An autobiographical word.
I grew up in the holiness movement and was taught entire sanctification. I earnestly sought it but never achieved it — praise God. It is one reason why I left the movement. I just couldn’t convince myself, that I had reached moral perfection. Many of my classmates did make sudden discoveries of their moral perfection in their senior year in college as they could not accept a call to the ministry unless they had been entirely sanctified.
From undergraduate school I went and did my seminary work at a Keswick school. In both my time in the Holiness movement and my time among the Keswicks you could cut with a knife the self-righteousness.
In classes both in undergraduate and in Seminary, in institutions separated by 800 miles, I heard Professors say at the front of classes that I took that “they hadn’t sinned in 30 years.”
(4) Such is the government of the church. We come now to civil authority, by which the church is subject to the magistrate.
Propositions
I. The magistrates are protectors [nutritii] of the church, in that they enforce both tablets of the law, protect [conservere] churches and schools, and defend the truth.
Wollebius: Compendium Theologiae Christianae as found in Reformed Dogmatics edited by John W. Beardslee p. 148
Calling of councils
I. The calling of a council is the privilege of the magistrate, if he is a believer; if he is an unbeliever, either it must be obtained by a petition, or, if he is actively hostile to a council, then as a matter of necessity it must be held with the general consensus of the church.
II. The persons who ought to be present at a council are civil and ecclesiastical presidents, clerks, suitable men chosen for the purpose…
VII. The duty of the civil president is to convene the council, to defend it after it has gathered, to prevent all violence and disorder, to promulgate the regularly adopted decrees by his authority, and to use force against those who are unwilling [to comply].
ibid. p. 149
Chapter IV: The Works Connected with the Second, Third, and Fourth Commandments in General
V. Religion ought to be the concern of everybody, but especially of magistrates and ministers. The former are indeed the guardians of the church. They are responsible, therefore, for the maintenance of churches and schools, the support of ministers, and so on.
VIII. Religion is not to be forced [upon people] but taught.
IX. Religion is not to be spread by arms, but nevertheless it is to be defended by them.
Examples are pious kings, like the Maccabees, and emperors, especially Constatine the Great and Theodosius the Great.X. If any abuse enters religion, it is to be reformed by the prince or magistrate.
Examples are Moses, Joshua, David, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Constatine the Great, Theodosisus, etc.ibid. 201-202
Chapter VII: The Duties Connected with the Fourth Commandment
XIV. The sanctification of the sabbath is the duty of everyone, but especially of magistrates and pastors.
The magistrate should give heed to Nehemiah’s example, lest the sabbath be persistently violated (Neh. 13:15ff.). It is also his duty to moderate the strict obersavation of this day when necessity requires, in order that considerations of love may also be effective. Examples were given by the Maccabees (I Macc. 2:41), and Constantine the Great, who permitted farm labor whenever weighty necessity required it.
ibid. 223
Johannes Wollebius – 1586-1629
“I still regard the bible as an important source for my theological reflections but not the starting point. The black experience and the bible together in dialectic tension serve as my point of departure today and yesterday. The order is significant. I am black first and everything else comes after that. This means I read the Bible through the lens of a black tradition of struggle and not as the objective word of God. The Bible, therefore is one witness to God’s presence in human affairs along with other important testimonies….
Black theology must realize that the white Jesus has no place in the black community and it is our task to destroy him….Black theology is concerned only with the tradition of Christianity that is usable in the black liberation struggle….For to long Christ has been pictured as a blue eyed honky. Black theologians are right; we need to de-honkyify him and thus make him relevant to the black condition.”
Stephen Mansfield’s new book “The Faith Of Barack Obama”
As quoted from James Cone’s Book — Black Theology & Black Power
Several important things here.
First, as to background, Mansfield includes the quote from Jame’s Cone in his book on “The Faith of Barack Obama” because Obama’s spiritual mentor and pastor for twenty years, Jeremiah Wright channeled James Cone and his work in his preaching and ministry. Cone was instrumental in the formation of Black Liberation Theology and Wright was instrumental in popularizing Cone’s work in the church he ministered. Obama thus, at the very minimum has been deeply influenced by Black Liberation Theology. This has crept through some of the things he and his wife have said in the election cycle. Indeed, if you read some of Barack Hussein and Michelle Obama’s recent quotes against this Black Liberation Theology backdrop it is downright scary.
Second, note that for “Theologian” James Cone experience is determinative of what the Bible teaches. This stands in opposition to the idea that the Scriptures should be determinative on how we interpret our experience. Cone has prioritized himself and his experience over against the testimony of God’s Word. This is called idolatry.
Third Cone’s literary methodology is clearly post-modern and so reflects the deconstructionist school of thought. For Cone there is no objective (authorial?) word in the text. For Cone all there is, is the Black reader giving meaning to the text by breathing life into the inert Scriptures. The subjective readers gives objective life to the text. As such, the idea that the Bible serves as one witness of God in the affairs of men is reduced to meaning that the Bible serves as one witness of God in the affairs of men so long as that witness is consistent with the tradition of black struggle.
Fourth, in the last paragraph from the Cone quote above it is clear that Christianity as a religion is subservient to what it means to be black. Further, Jesus is a wax nose that can be shaped to serve the ethnic agenda of any particular people group according to Cone. To make Jesus Black is to make him the figure that justifies whatever is considered black behavior.
Fifth, it is manifestly clear that Black liberation theology does not like white people. Indeed, the purpose of Black liberation theology is to prioritize all things black over any thing not black. This is one reason why I continue to believe that if Barack Huseein Obama is elected there will be pursuit of reparations. It is difficult to understand how a Black man coming from this tradition of thought (and Obama certainly does come from this tradition) can be seriously considered a “post-racial” candidate.
Sixth, notice how Cone posits an antithesis between white people and black people. The White (Honky) Jesus has no place in the Black community and indeed the White Jesus must be destroyed. Now, what do you suppose that the attitude of a Black man, who has imbibed this kind of thinking for twenty tears, is going to be towards white people who don’t agree with him?