Archive | Theology RSS feed for this section

The Sanctuary of Solemn Regard

A body of believers in Christ Jesus is rightfully viewed as an anatomy of a church. It consists of a skeletal structure, internal organs or systems, muscles, and the head. Specifically, as described throughout the book The Master’s Plan for the Church by John MacArthur, various characteristics and performative attributes are associated with the body. From the individual to subgroups of people, together they comprise functions that carry out God’s will for His people and the world. Through effective leadership, maturity, and experience, the church is guided by doctrines and principles centered upon the authority of Scripture. Scripture is the weight by which the church collective is obedient, unified, faithful, and disciplined in truth and righteousness. Among various additional attributes, such as humility, gratitude, accountability, and flexibility, the church’s abiding fruits produce spiritually healthy members to glorify God with outreach, missions, and community well-being.

The Skeletal Structure

There is an interdependence among these attributes that complement one another toward intended and proper functioning order. To meet its objectives and commissioning requirements of Christ, it consists of gifted or obedient people willing to serve in both love and honor. Unpolluted by sin and pervasive self-interest, the internal commitments of the church concerning Scripture, prayer, fellowship, worship, outreach, sacraments, giving, and discipleship are among its chief functions. The church exists with its skeletal structure to understand it as having a framework to include a foundation, specifically around its absolute commitment to sound doctrine, a high view of God, authoritative Scripture, personal holiness, and the supreme authority of Christ. These anatomical elements support the body of the church to perform its functions and achieve its objectives.

The underlying recognition and emphasis that God is the supreme point of attention and authority within the church are of vital necessity. Too often, the church is horizontally focused on community activities or social endeavors that don’t satisfy the church’s vertical purpose and mission. To look at church bulletins with week-by-week events having nothing to do with its purpose and functions dilute its effectiveness and marks congregations as social clubs with a weekly Tedtalk about better living. Churches loaded with bingo gatherings, bowling nights, and sewing events, among others, miss out on God’s plan for the church without paying as much attention to their purpose and mission. Elaborate youth programs that place incidental attention upon instruction, discipleship, or evangelism further indicate the priorities of a church with a low view of God. While social gatherings have their place, small groups for home bible studies are often little more than family or home fellowships without prayer, accountability, learning, time in the Word, etc. Small group gatherings become movie nights, trip planning efforts, or a single speaker-led point of social interest without discussion or God-centered objectives.

The church that supplants the authority of God for its interests instead is a church that at times abuses Scripture to drive outcomes and leverage social capital toward its ability to retain members or sustain economic prosperity or viability. Expositional preaching is a rarity, and there is very little structure around necessary doctrines about core beliefs such as justification, sanctification, holy living, sin, hell, condemnation, service, worship, and so forth. Shallow theology leads to shallow devotion, shallow worship, and shallow instruction. Leaders that set up churches as a source of entertainment to attract members run the risk of producing pleasure-oriented social clubs errant toward self-worship. Some churches seek to eject biblically oriented persons with a high view of God and His interests.

MacArthur writes, “One final component of the skeletal structure of a church is spiritual authority. A church must understand that Christ is the Head of the church (Eph. 1:22; 4:15) and that He mediates His rule in the church through godly elders (1 Thess. 5:13–14; Heb. 13:7, 17)” to stress that the church must accede and operate to the authority of Christ. If the church is a non-praying church, it’s because it has elders that are not praying. If the church is non-biblical, the elders and leadership are not in the Word or don’t accept its authority. The instructions that Christ gave to the church through His apostles are not the primacy of the church. They’re the supremacy of the church. Holy Spirit operates through the Word of God, and the church must abide by what is written in His holy Word.

As a follower of Christ, it is my solemn responsibility to share what I’ve learned and the grace I’ve been given. The abundance of mercy and patience I’ve been given is a model to follow as an instrument of God’s abiding love and grace. While I’m active online in sharing the gospel and biblical principles I’ve learned, I also write quite a lot to cover book reviews and topics of inspiration centered upon Scripture. As the church framework is entirely suitable and necessary for forming the body of Christ, it overlaps with the direct and extended family as a smaller body of believers. I pray and desire that the material I learn through studying church formation and function would lead to personal improvements toward readiness and more meaningful contributions among family, friends, and church members over time.

The Internal Systems

The internal systems of the church represent the various fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:19-25) that correspond to the attitudes of its members. Conversely, as the church is metaphorically viewed as an anatomical body with a skeletal structure, muscles, and head, it also consists of internal systems such as organs to sustain life. These correspond to some behaviors that characterize people of God who live by the Spirit and produce purposeful behaviors as active and conscious efforts stemming from internal predispositions and mindsets. A range of character and behavior attributes operate within a congregation and distill to each individual living in a functional way. The range of internal systems is an organic set of virtues and behaviors predicated upon the attitudes listed within The Master’s Plan for the Church. With varying support from Scripture concerning the internal attitudes, the list is as follows:

The internal attitudes of the church listed represent a weight of obligation or ideal characteristics associated with a biblical body of believers. As the book was published in 1991, it still holds valid, relevant, and of significant necessity or merit, but it is by no means current or exhaustive. The onslaught of cultural Marxism, egalitarianism, and post-modern inclinations of society that plague the church is widespread across all denominations and traditions throughout Christendom. For example, MacArthur mentions the necessity of adherence to truth in a few places, but it isn’t highlighted as a pressing concern. Numerous church attendees today are given to the affirmation of lifestyles that Scripture clearly forbids.

ItemAttitudeDescriptionReference
1.ObedienceThe church does what God says to do.1 Sam 15:22
2.HumilitySet yourself below others.Phil 2:3-4
3.LoveApply biblical love to meet needs.1 Cor 13:4-7
4.UnityAbsence of contention and division.John 17:21
5.Willingness to ServeAbilities actively applied to others.1 Cor 4:1-2
6.JoyOutward exuberance of the heart, soul, and mind.Rom 14:17
7.PeaceInward contentment of the heart, soul, and mind.John 14:27
8.ThankfulnessThe continuous attitude of gratitude.1 Thess 5:18
9.Self-DisciplinePersons with persistent truth and righteousness.Phil 4:8
10.AccountabilityHelping each other overcome sin.Rom 7:15
11.ForgivenessForgive others as God has forgiven you.Matt 6:12-15
12.DependenceAttitude of personal insufficiency toward God.Deut 6:10-11
13.FlexibilityAbsence of stubborn thoughts and practices.Matt 15:1-39
14.Desire for GrowthPersistent interest in feeding on God’s Word.1 Pet 2:2
15.FaithfulnessLong-term reliable attendants, servants, worship1 Cor 4:2
16.HopeConfidence in future security and eternal lifeRom 12:12

Table – MacArthur’s View of Necessary Internal Attitudes of the Church
Published in 1991 with an update in 2008.

Moreover, the rise of pluralistic thought among people significantly infects the church as it concerns various biblical claims of exclusivity. The church isn’t called to be a social activist group, and it can not tolerate harmful and errant ideologies that run counter to the gospel and the purpose of the church. The church’s commitment to truth as a subordinate matter of self-discipline (Phil 4:8) is a weak defense or posture against unwanted influences that degrade its effectiveness. Churches that compromise on truth and biblical principles often become something other than an authentic church, or it dies off by attrition through a loss of people who stop attending or forsake fellowship. Consequently, church leaders who succumb to the short-term confused interests of society and academia can face undue hardships to which there is no viable remedy.

As The Master’s Plan for the Church is a compilation of teachings, it offers a listed means of a well-formed church that isn’t meant to be fully explanatory. Through various specific church stories and lessons learned, biblical principles are explained and reinforced to guide the reader toward circumstances that positively affect individuals and the body as a whole. At times, the term “gift” arises to lead, support, or contribute to the church in a uniquely intended way. Not where service is a chore or the arbitrary efforts of volunteers, but according to what people are good at doing. Paul wrote of gifts in Romans 12:6-8 and 1 Corinthians 7:7 to underscore the spiritual nature of their purpose.

The idea of “just jumping in and doing something” is counter-productive unless a person is entirely flexible and open to serving in any capacity possible. However, suppose church leadership or administration offers opportunities to serve in a group capacity. In that case, that is often a rewarding and productive endeavor (e.g., short-term poverty relief, homeless veteran aid, etc.). Volunteer efforts that support the community through the church to achieve Kingdom objectives by loving people well is an entirely meaningful way to go; however, if it is quid-pro-quo for profit or partnership with a municipality that sets up an interdependency, unwanted entanglements are sure to follow.

Gifts given to people are meant to fulfill the functions of the body as a church to serve God, glorify Him, and satisfy the needs of people. Churches that broadcast to congregations opportunities to meet specific needs leave individuals to assess suitability as relevant. By contrast, spiritual gifts can involve competencies, skills, or talents that accompany people for a spiritual purpose. A close look at the “gift” term Paul uses in Romans 12:6 specifies a uniquely intended purpose supported by the authority of Scripture for the church (Rom 12:4-5).

Gift: χάρισμα, ατος, τό (χαρίζομαι)
that which is freely and graciously given, favor bestowed, gift [1]

of special gifts of a non-material sort, bestowed through God’s generosity on individual Christians 1 Pt 4:10; 1 Cl 38:1.
•  Of spiritual gifts in a special sense (Just., D. 82, 1 and Iren. 5, 6, 1 [Harv. II 334, 2] προφητικὰ χ.; Orig., C. Cels. 3, 46, 12; Hippol., Ref. 8, 19, 2) Ro 12:6; 1 Cor 12:4, 9, 28, 30, 31.[2]

The gifts of grace (Rom 12:3-8) do not correspond to free labor with “no experience required” toward service projects for profit as “doing ministry.” Contributions to the church involving spiritual gifting are not homogenous; as Paul wrote, “members do not all have the same function.” In this sense, service projects that operate as a business from labor or services are not specifically ministry, per se. The intended meaning of Paul’s message indicates that ministry or service to the church comes by grace and the gifts given to people for a specific spiritual purpose.

The church does not bestow gifting. God does this through various means unique to each person. The church adheres to the internal systems developed toward satisfying its purpose. MacArthur wrote, “There are many other areas of ministry a person can get involved in. Cultivate the giftedness that God has given you and become active in whatever ministry God leads you to.” Appropriately, this corresponds to Paul’s instructions to the first-century church of Rome.

The Head

Continuing the body analogy of the Church, “The Head” of the Church is the Lord Jesus Christ. As Paul wrote, “Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Eph 4:15-16), Christ Jesus operates having four functions of the Church as a body. Christ is the Savior, Shepherd, Sovereign, and Sanctifier, where they are a wholly exceptional yet a composite of His perfect Lordship as Messiah, Priest, and King. Together each has immeasurable value to the body of believers and right to each person who consists of that body.

As Savior, Jesus saves people from their sins (Matt 1:21). His very name is “Jehovah saves.” His name represents His identity as Mediator through His sacrificial blood given to satisfy the justice required to atone for sin and forgive them (Heb 9:22, 13:20). He was the perfect sacrifice for the sins of many who would turn to Him under a New Covenant of redemption (Matt 26:28). The New Covenant established by Christ’s sacrifice produced the “blood of the everlasting covenant” and it was full effectual once for all those being sanctified (Heb 10:14). Not as a temporary covenant, or a partially effective covenant. Still, a perfect sacrifice that by His blood of perfect offering sin is forgiven, and people are freed from sin.

His redemptive work on the cross pleased God that He returned Christ from the dead. To reiterate the astonishing biblical fact, God the Father approved Christ’s sacrifice to such an extent that He resurrected Him back to bodily life. With Christ Jesus risen and alive again, He became the great Shepherd to rule and teach His Church. Through His authority and Word (2 Tim 3:16), the teaching, correction, reproof, and training in righteousness represent His workmanship within the Church. From individual persons to the Church body itself, Christ reigns to accomplish His work so that every believer in God may be complete in Him.

Reiterating Christ Jesus’s authority as Head of the Church is necessary. The Church belongs to Him (Matt 16:18). As Shepherd, He leads the Church, but He also rules the Church through discipline and correction for it to accomplish His will. To instruct and guide the Church to abide by His interests as made evident through His Word within Scripture. As the Spirit speaks to the believer to convict, correct, and comfort, the believer is guided by His Word to bear fruit and live toward continual sanctification. To build His Church, individuals, or the Church itself could undergo sanctification toward greater righteousness pleasing to God.

By application, the Church does well to recognize that it is Christ who is head of the body of believers and the authority of church leadership is subordinate to Him. Christ’s plan and spoken intentions for the church must prevail over the plans and programs of the church for His kingdom. Projects not aligned with Christ’s interests for the church can dilute its effectiveness and purpose. This reading is a reminder about the prevailing and supreme authority of Christ over the Church as a body. I intend to become outspoken about the necessity of abiding in Christ as the head of the Church should circumstances present themselves in terms of initiatives to time spent on incidental endeavors.

I completely agree with the principles that Dr. MacArthur wrote about concerning Christ as the head of the Church. Moreover, the categories of Christ’s Lordship over the church are more than mere leadership. His position, status, and ownership of the Church bring any believer to obedience and submission as His authority comes from who He is and what He has accomplished. Believers in the Church are obligated to apply this truth as His obedient body.

The Muscles

The third chapter of The Master’s Plan for the Church covers in some depth the church’s various functions that correspond to the muscles of a body. As the previous two chapters of the book cover the skeletal structure and internal systems of the body, it is natural to view the functions or practices of the church with its behaviors. A range of inward and outward exertions of effort characterize a church as a means of strength, just as the muscles of a body spend energy to perform work. As individuals perform consistent acts of personal devotion and discipleship, the church applies effort to accomplish specific and repetitive tasks for the body’s spiritual development. Collectively, there are functions of worship, prayer, training, fellowship, outreach, missions, and more unique to the body as its various members constitute and extend its capabilities to fulfill its biblical charter.

The sections of this chapter read as a guidebook that serves as a reference for believers and churches who want to refer to the book as an operating guide. To form policy and develop processes or guidelines centered around a healthy congregation with proper attitudes, internal systems, and organizational structures in place. While there are no specific indications of relative priority, weights of concentrative effort, or distributed points of focus, numerous principles direct a church grounded in Scripture and the ministry of the Spirit. The functions of the church are identified and biblically described but without prescriptive one-size-fits-all techniques. The functions of preaching, teaching, shepherding, evangelism, and so forth are covered with the principles about how and what to do with some rationale about why. Much of the subject matter is about Grace Community Church, which stands as a model to emulate.

Some of the various topics within the text overlap or work together as adjacent and related functions toward individual believers or groups responsible for specific ministry areas. For example, both worship and giving are related. Or as teaching and training for instruction and application of discipleship functions such as prayer, fellowship, worship, and Scripture to remain obedient to the lordship of Christ. The degree to which impediments exist can be related to individual levels of sanctification or maturity in Christ. As there are areas of group weaknesses or unhelpful patterns of neglect or diverging interests among believers, the formation, character development, and growth of its members grow toward God’s intended purpose of the church nonetheless.

As a matter of personal interest, the “Building up Families” section has direct applicability. As MacArthur wrote, “In many Sunday school classes, people don’t learn much about the Bible, and they guess about what it teaches,” I continue to see this as a pressing area that needs attention. Especially within my family, there is an opportunity to better invest in bible reading time with my children. To build more Scripture instruction with my family to understand its truths and know God in a more productive or fruitful way. To apply what the functions of the church does, it is of high interest to spend personal prayer and bible time with my family as it also supports the church. Intentionally scheduling a periodic time to further grow in the Word of God separate from what does is sure to produce a valuable return on our efforts. As the church ministers to numerous people, we together haven’t reached sufficient range or depth to serve as a foundation for a lifetime.

A fully functional church requires its members to perform as it should as a body. If there is one single area that isn’t where it could be, there are limitations to its effectiveness that may inhibit its ability to love or serve Christ and His people well.

The Pattern of the Early Church

The first part of The Master’s Plan for the Church covered relevant topics about the church that functions as an anatomical body, and the second section pertains to the dynamic church. More specifically, the pattern of the early Church is examined from its founding to the ministry that grew within the first century. MacArthur makes connections between early churches in Jerusalem and Asia-Minor to churches today that involved formation, how they operated and their characteristics. The early church patterns and distinctions that shaped their founding included the roles of people, locale, governance, doctrine, and pronounced growth. As compared to today, the early church wasn’t fragmented by denominations. There was a unity within the church guided by the Holy Spirit and rooted in doctrines that propelled it well into enormous growth for decades and centuries into the future.

As the purity of the church supported convictions around truth, faith, and practice, it was situated to build its presence within secular societies in the form of ministries. Within the early church, there was a concentrated effort to protect new believers from false teaching and instead provide instruction on sound doctrine. Apostle Paul further supported the continuous effort to assure the doctrinal integrity of the church in his letters to the church. It was especially concerning conduct, organization, scriptural principles, and theological truths as written by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was actively involved in the incubation and development of the early church both directly and through people to render and permanent and lasting understanding of what it means to exist and function within the Kingdom of God on Earth. Paul wrote passages of significant relevance to Timothy about the purpose of Scripture, service, and responsibility (2 Tim 2:1-2, 15, 24-25, 3:14-17, 4:1-2).

Further comparisons between early and modern churches are made concerning leadership. Paul guided New Testament church leadership formation to serve specific purposes according to gifts given to people. Functions, duties, and responsibilities were defined around pastors, deacons, elders, overseers, teachers, and evangelists to provide clarity about leadership and its framework. The early church was unified in its direction as its decision-making, defense, and discipline situated it to accomplish its mission and objectives. The church was rendered stable for organic and geometric growth through direct involvement from the Holy Spirit’s use of Paul.

Paul’s letters to the early church were directed to individuals and congregations susceptible to the influences of secular society (Greco-Roman culture and Judaism) and paganism. It was necessary to align new believers to correct doctrines through the teaching authority of leaders with decision-making capacity (1 Tim 5:17). Consensus among men to arrive at decisions through the study of Scripture, prayer, counsel, and fasting were able to solve church issues and keep it on its intended path. Where or when it was necessary to refute individuals or groups about false instructions or guidance for monetary gain or contradictory interest, a sound and fortified defense was necessary (Titus 1:9-11). Finally, errant individuals who were disruptive to the church were to be disciplined or ejected to protect a vulnerable congregation (1 Tim 1:20).

As the head of the Church is Christ Jesus, His leaders appointed to shepherd it are responsible for its care, feeding, guidance, and protection. The fulfillment of their duties is a privilege but also a divine appointment that brings joy and hardship through the service and obedience of leadership as it is answerable to Jesus Christ. Qualified and blameless leaders who are saturated in the Word of God and indwelt by the Holy Spirit are responsible for its ministry.

Elders, Deacons, Other Church Members

Church leadership is further examined by additional roles within the church. Beginning with the first-century churches in Asia Minor, Paul writes of leadership positions and responsibilities to explain qualifications and eligibility. For a growing church it was necessary to assure order and protection from false teachers and believers, so to prepare the church for unwanted and destructive influences, leadership stability was a high interest. With pervasive secular, pagan, or cultural influences, leadership must be installed and maintained according to the teachings of the apostles. Where the formation of doctrines is upheld and followed with the guidance and enforcement of appropriate leadership with strength and will. Unencumbered by social or cultural influences that advocate for special interests aside from the gospel, discipleship, and the life of the church.

When Elders are selected and placed into positions of authority, that occurs from God according to His word. Not according to what someone’s interests are to suit a specific organization for contradictory purposes. God’s word is the criteria for selection as His word is the method by which leaders are chosen. Selected elders are not chosen from the relationships that exist with leaders already present within the church, nor are they selected as most loyal to a church’s vision, or operating objectives. If an elder is selected and serves as a leader conducive to expected performance requirements, duties, and responsibilities, the church or leaders who choose a leader that way is off course and does not abide by the authority of Scripture. Performance, duties, and responsibilities are not mutually exclusive, but the requirements for eligibility to serve in key functions, as prescribed by Scripture, take an overriding concern and prevail regardless of other factors.

According to Scripture, elders are excluded from positions of leadership from a variety of conditions. In Paul’s letters to Timothy and the Corinthians, he outlines specific requirements concerning leadership (1 Tim 3:1-2). Furthermore, elders, or bishops, are to possess numerous character traits that render them blameless or of a background with a major impediment to leadership, or the church. The leader is to be faithful, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, prepared to teach and share his faith, not given to alcohol, not violent, or a hot-head, not greedy, and someone who manages his home well (1 Tim 3:2-7). While today, this is a tall order, given the seasoned background of everyone, the prospects of leadership are very limited. Generally, everyone has baggage involving weaknesses or a history that brings pause.

Paul’s intent, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is to set leadership in place with continuity across the geographic locations. A standard to which there are consistent expectations about how leadership is to serve in the church. Deacons among those locations who serve as another functional level of leadership have specific requirements concerning qualifications, too. Proven leaders within the church and home, deacons are given delegated authority in positions of leadership to functionally guide the church and perform duties concerning its mission and purpose. Deacons are placed into positions of leadership with the authority necessary to accomplish tasks that render other leaders available to complete their primary duties. Elders and deacons who add formal organizational structure to the church provide the means by which men and women congregants work and care for one another.

Paul instructs the churches about suitable conduct befitting men and women within the church. As people minister to one another, they are given expectations concerning conduct according to male and female distinctions, authority, faith, and practice.

A Look at the Thessalonian Model

When apostle Paul wrote to the church in Thessalonica, he presented to readers down through the centuries essential attributes of the church. MacArthur originates categories to sort through the attributes and partition their meaning to bring understanding about the church is formed and how it functions. More specifically, there are several descriptive titles that are helpful to parse while, taken together, rendering a coherent view of what the biblical church is.

  • A Saved Church
    A church of individuals regenerated by the Holy Spirit who believed the gospel and placed their faith in Christ (1 Thess 1:5)
  • A Surrendered Church
    The pursuit of Christlike behavior is evident among individuals within the church. To Paul’s written testimony, the church of Thessalonica imitated Paul, Silas, and Timothy as models of faith and practice (1 Thess 1:6).
  • A Suffering Church
    The saved and the surrendered church is going to bring consternation to the world. With that will come persecution (1 Thess 2:14-16) and suffering. As the world hated Jesus, it will hate and persecute the church (John 15;18,20).
  • A Soul-Winning Church
    The church is characterized by outreach, missions, and the spread of the gospel. By living Godly and fruitful lives, the church becomes noticed and of appeal to some (1 Thess 1:7-8).
  • A Second-Coming Church
    Anticipation of the return of Christ is a source of motivation for believers within the church. Christ Jesus’ promise to return is deliverance from wrath as He gathers His church awaiting His return (1 Thess 1:10).
  • A Steadfast Church
    Even through affliction and distress by the faith of the Thessalonians, they remained persistent in their commitment and love of one another. They stood firmly on the Word of God and in the gospel (1 Thess 3:7-8).
  • A Submissive Church
    The church’s obedience to Christ and His word isn’t contentious, nor does it question the instructions of the biblical writers among believers concerning faith and practice (1 Thess 1:6, 2:13, 4:1).

All features of the church present a portrait of a model congregation that is modeled after the church pleasing to God and His apostolic servants. Through culture and secular society from this generation extending back to the first century, the aspirational characteristics carry the same weight. Departure from these principles is to depart from the biblical model of how the church is dispositioned and operates within the Kingdom. Christian unity is predicated upon these biblical principles to assure growth and effective use of Christ for His purposes.

As long as the church and its leadership are adherent to the Word of God as properly interpreted, then its congregants, followers, volunteers, and staff have an obligation to accept instruction and obey. A pastor’s perspectives incongruent or contradictory to biblical principles have no place in the lives of believers. The Word of God is not an instrument to compile verses to leverage authority and accomplish objectives and projects on interest outside the core principles of the biblical model. A church diluted in its effectiveness is a church that doesn’t abide by the new covenant structure given by the Holy Spirit through the biblical writers.

Marks of an Effective Church

From the first century to today, there is a marked contrast beyond the early church. Factors inherent within an effective church are widespread concerning its activity, leadership, and trajectories. Regarding its place in the world and its objectives, MacArthur derives biblical principles that cross a spectrum of pillars involving the authority and focus of leaders and believers within the church. The practices of those within an effective church live out their faith through people who are willing to change, have concern for one another, and bear a devotion to God and family to impact loved ones and the local community. To achieve its goals and objectives, the church reaches its functional imperatives through outreach and discipleship, while faith, sacrifice, and worship are at the heart of the church.

Marks of an Effective Church
Godly Leaders
Functional Goals and Objectives
Discipleship
Community Penetration
Active Church Members
Concern for One Another
Devotion to the Family
Bible Teaching and Preaching
Active Church Members
Concern for One Another
Devotion to the Family
Bible Teaching and Preaching
A Willingness to Change

The church is not a reckless assortment of programs that suit the interests of social culture through the local manifestation of the community. Kingdom objectives shall prevail at every turn and have their way through the Holy Spirit whether the local church organization cooperates or not. God assures that His people are brought to His kingdom and instructed to serve His interests. And He uses His church, large or small, to accomplish what He decreed necessary to build His Kingdom of people. God uses the work of the people within the church to meet His objectives as they have concern for one another and love God by doing what He has instructed by His word through the patriarchs, prophets, poets, and apostles.

There are numerous ways in which people show care for one another, as made clear from God’s words to the church. The stirring up of God’s people that his great commission becomes met involves the spiritual health and well-being of individuals committed to Him and each other through various means. It is among these means that God accomplishes what He intends to do through His church. MacArthur lists these in an integrated manner.

Passage“One Another” Description
James 5:16We are to confess our sins one to another.
Col 3:13We are to forgive one another.
Gal 6:2We are to bear one another’s burdens.
Titus 1:13We are to rebuke one another.
1 Thess 4:18We are to comfort one another.
Heb 10:25We are to exhort one another.
Rom 4:19We are to edify one another.
Rom 15:14We are to admonish one another.
James 5:16We are to pray for one another.

By fellowship and unity, as God’s people are gathered together in His name, He is among them (Matt 18:20). As believers conform to the Word of God, He works with them and through them. Churches recognized as “great” are effective according to a relative perspective from history, culture, society, or criteria established through the Word. Accordingly, as a Venn diagram would indicate overlapping characteristics to indicate relative levels of emphasis, there are weights and concentrations of effort and outcomes more suitable to where a church is appointed. All churches are not homogenously even in terms of strengths and what ministries or programs characterize their posture toward believers internal to a specific church. Among all the marks that identify an effective church, those marks bear descriptions of internal practices, whether present or at varying levels of capability and strength.

As church leaders evaluate its condition and effectiveness, these marks may also serve to recognize gaps and prayerfully gauge where to focus corrective action. It simply must be clear what biblical principle(s) to be effective about. Shaping what a church does to build its effectiveness would involve careful attention to what areas of shortcomings exist to develop a way forward. Attainment of goals and objectives that originate from the execution of a strategy assumes there are existing capabilities, capacity, and resources to bring together the initiatives that lead to fulfilling the biblical principles MacArthur outlines.

The Calling of the Church

While it is essential to understand how to recognize an effective church, apostles Peter and Paul make clear what the church is called to do. More specifically, a church can effectively accomplish its objectives and not Kingdom objectives if it sets its own course absent of what God’s word instructs. However, a church that abides by Scripture and obeys its instructions will meet the Kingdom objectives that God requires. A church can certainly meet objectives for social, economic, and community gain, but not for the Kingdom according to what God has given by His word. The calling of the saints as an assembly within the church is to attain states of position and action according to how the early church was instructed (Rom 1:6-7, 1 Cor 1:2, 26, Eph, 4:1-4, 1 Thess 2:12, 2 Tim 1:9, 1 Pet 5:10).

The calling of the authentic Christ-centered church is directional. Before its inception, it was elected and set to exist for God’s sovereign purpose. It is an eternal reality present before God along a corridor of time to accomplish what He knows and forms as an everlasting enteral now. The election of the church begins from its perspective the eternal calling to accomplish what God decreed. A sequence of states, events, and actions that follow from God’s created order bring within His Kingdom people for an everlasting fellowship. Created for His purposes and good pleasure, people who freely choose Him and the existence of a reality He has brought together.

The process in which people are created and brought together involves their redemption from a fall into sin that God foreknew in advance from a historical perspective of humanity. As a theodicy that involved humanity succumbing to evil and subsequent suffering to emerge within creation, His people who chose Him through redemption were appointed before time began. The purpose of redemption is to recover lost humanity and render to God a Kingdom of contingent beings. Beings who desire Him and each other for a purpose independent of time and free of disorder and decay.

As dross is melted away from precious metal, the church is called to sanctification and live in holiness as God is holy (1 Pet 1:16). Set apart from the world living under common grace, sanctification is an instrument by which God’s Kingdom of people are called out from it. Through its consecration, it is sorted and removed from the profane. A spiritual reality separated from the deeds of the flesh (Gal 5:16-25, Col 3:5), God’s sanctified people are separated from the world (2 Cor 6:17) to live holy lives. To live in the world, but not of the world, God’s people are not to love the world as that would set them in enmity with Him (Jas 4:4). Especially relevant to leadership in the church, but also to congregants who are willing and obedient to the Word concerning discipleship, where there is no culture and church staff inclination to become self-insulated.

A church in the Word with a high view of it as a treasure abides by its meaning. It is never neglected but relied upon with deep conviction that it communicates the voice of God about how it should live and what it must do. It isn’t enough to speak from platitudes to inform people of principles, guidance, and messages from the pulpit. It must be lived. The church must be shepherded where new and seasoned believers are encouraged and motivated in the Word, prayer, fellowship, worship, and evangelism. A church about the business of entertainment and social interest that sets a detached environment by which the laity self develops its spiritual formation only through small groups and church programs is utterly unacceptable. The core and peripheral interests that God wants, as made clear by His word, are the given necessities to live by. The pastorate and equipped leaders of the church must be attuned and engaged to the church’s unique needs for its sanctification and to reach its God-given objectives through outreach and biblical discipleship.

The vision of the church must be called to the glory of God. As the affections of the saints within the church are upon God and His interests, there is a separation between them and the world. The citizens of the Kingdom of heaven (Phil 3:20) are the believers among congregations throughout the church. The Lord and King of a different realm that require the loyalty and obedience of people who belong to Him involves a mutually exclusive relationship as biblically stipulated. The glorification of God by people who love Him is most satisfying and pleasing through worship where His people enjoy Him forever (WSC, Question 1; 1 Cor 10:31, Rom 11:36, Ps 73:24-26, John 17:22,24).            

Finally, among all points of calling pertaining to the church, it is to proclaim the Kingdom of God and what it entails. As Christ Jesus proclaimed repentance and the Kingdom of Heaven at hand (Matt 4:17), so are His saints to do the same. The Kingdom of God proclaimed involves the gospel, public, private and corporate worship, and all matters pertaining to life and godliness. The whole counsel of God from His word is shared with the community and the world for His glory and the edification of the saints as the Kingdom grows for His good pleasure.

The Lord’s Work in the Lord’s Way

As the church and people of God set about doing the Lord’s work, there are biblical examples of how that is done. With purpose and intent, the worker doing the Lord’s work is doing what God has appointed through various means to accomplish specific objectives. The examples of apostle Paul’s work as he fulfilled his efforts to form and build the early church are readily apparent through specific instructions in his letters. However, his work’s nature is highlighted through his travels from city to city and among fellow workers. The Holy Spirit guided the circumstances in which he made a lasting difference as opportunities were opened and seemingly appropriate courses of action were blocked or closed. An apparent area of the Lord’s work can get redirected, or directions from the Lord can be held or set aside as “no,” or “yes, but not now.” MacArthur wrote that what seems to be less substantive spiritual material as scripture concerning the apostles’ activity and the early church is very informative about how the Lord’s work is done in the Lord’s way. It certainly appears that the Lord used letters to instruct and develop the church to intentionally inform believers about the meta details concerning Kingdom advancements to follow (1 Cor 16:5-12, 2 Cor 1:5-16, Phil 2:30).

MacArthur also writes about strategic thinking Paul which originates from a visionary perspective. A critical point he makes concerns the preparation and timing of what a worker does to make himself ready to pursue an opportunity God opens. Working now and in the present to prove ourselves useful to the Kingdom enables or supports our readiness for opportunities that should arise. The preparation specifics revolve around planning, setting a vision, and developing a strategy to accomplish the Lord’s work. Concurrent with the development of spiritual gifts, a worker’s ministry is intentional and of deliberate effort in terms of contribution and what the Lord has given. A passive approach to ministry involvement or pursuit is not the biblical model workers are given to undertake and complete the Lord’s work.

As given by the apostle’s work, what they set about to do was organic in nature. Their approach to ministry wasn’t mechanistic, haphazard, or rigidly structured, but persistently successive through the Spirit’s leading. While somewhat event-driven, any pressing circumstances or conditions in the field were of paramount concern. Paul demonstrated malleability in planning and where he would visit cities and towns as the network of churches formed in Asia minor. The methods by which Paul accomplished his work were marvelous examples of geographic growth, but his work was spectacular regarding the depth and range of his discipleship among believers. As churches were formed with the fellowship of believers, leaders would assume responsibility for the continuation of congregations. The Kingdom of God formed in the hearts of people who were together made alive in Christ and held loyalty and love among each other for retention in the Holy Spirit and what He was to accomplish.

MacArthur’s startling assertion is that “if you want God to use you in the future, you need to be ministering in the present.” Without elaboration, the point is that a worker must be committed to service in the present as there are expectations of service in the future. Workers involved in the Lord’s work must always be active in what the Lord can accomplish through them (1 Cor 15:58). This could include family ministry, evangelism, personal outreach, counseling, service projects, writing, encouragement, care for the poor and afflicted, or some combination of numerous possibilities. The workers’ efforts are an outworking of their spiritual gifts to serve the Lord and people for ministry work.

It must be understood and accepted that there will be opposition to ministry work. Both spiritual and natural impediments to equipping the saints and the development of the church are an expected challenge. From examples given in Paul’s work and those of the early church disciples, it is easy to understand the types of opposition that will arise (2 Cor 1). From private persons, businesses, and government, the world and its systems will take an interest in the soft and hard persecution of the saints and the church. Civic, cultural, and economic opposition to the saints and their objectives stem from conflicts of interest that are ultimately spiritual. Moreover, the church itself can run counter to what believers do to accomplish the Lord’s work as biblically described and expected (2 Cor 4:10). With the comfort of Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth, workers of Christ are encouraged to take up the work in such opposition even when the burdens are overwhelming because of the fellowship promised with the King we love (1 Cor 1:8-9). There will be church failures, individual abandonment, and apostasy among people who become adversaries to the gospel and workers of the Kingdom.

As evident through Scripture, various people contributed to the Lord’s work in a synergistic and coherent way. Specifically, by name, a growing number of people were together focused on the commission of Christ Jesus to take the gospel to the world and build His church. The living faith of people involved an interdependency in accomplishing ministry objectives and simply loving and supporting each other well. While there are levels of maturity and authority in the church, there are also, within reason, shared responsibilities that involve all people of the church without regard to any claim of status. Leadership within the church involves delegation of responsibilities as it did in the early church by appointing elders and those who would care for congregants. However, ongoing responsibilities are shared to minister the gospel and the Word of God among people who are being reached and sanctified. The authority and maturity of believers in the church who attain status and privilege do not supersede what responsibilities remain according to the spiritual gifts given among individuals.

A significant point MacArthur makes about leadership involves the dominant role of the Holy Spirit. While an assertive and driven leader presses to meet Kingdom objectives, yielding to the Spirit and not dominating a team is necessary. The Spirit of God works among people who seek His will for their efforts. The work of the Spirit overrides the intent, plans, and directions of a ministry and His workers as gains are produced according to what work God has established. A thorough understanding of what occurred in the book of Acts and from Paul’s letters to the saints provides meaningful guidance today about understanding the Spirit methods of early church development. Corresponding principles applicable today require at the very least a sensitivity to the Spirit’s leading.

Understanding the Seducing Spirit

The subject of “Seducing Spirits” is evaluated at length when considering the qualities of an excellent servant from MacArthur’s perspective. The subject of spiritual seduction centers upon the falling away of people from the faith. To understand apostasy, it is necessary to define it and recognize its predictability, chronology, source, character, and teachings. To grasp the meaning of it as a profound error, apostasy has a common thread of misunderstanding and denial around the goodness of creation and God’s desire for gratitude and worship.

Long ago, during the growth and development of the early church, Paul warned Timothy about people who would leave the faith (1 Tim 4:1-3). In later times, without specificity, Paul characterized desertion by people who would become “devoted to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons.” People seduced away from the faith and who becomes devoted to false teaching are lured away by demonic spirits through the human agency of false teachers (MacArthur, 160).

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.” – 1 Timothy 4:1

People who become apostates will be lured away by deceitful and spiritually fierce predators (Acts 20:29-30) who desire to follow deceptive ideas about truth, God’s word, and the gospel. Some who leave the faith make an intentional effort to deconstruct learned principles and specifics concerning Scripture as revealed divine truth and doctrines of spiritual formation that represent the whole counsel of God.

Apostasy is expected as the Spirit has informed prophets (Deut 13:12-15, 32:15-18, Dan 8:23-25). Where the specific cause is demonic deception, there is certain destruction to those who depart from the truth of God’s word and what He has revealed through the patriarchs, prophets, poets, and apostles. Christ Jesus also warned of people who would depart from the faith. There are very many who will choose to abandon their faith or who will be led away.

Identity of ApostatesReference
“For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. “Matthew 24:5
“For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.”Mark 13:22
“Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction”2 Thessalonians 2:3
“knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires.”2 Peter 3:3
“Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.”1 John 2:18-19

There is a certain condition and trajectory of people who eventually fall away from the faith. The characterization of people who lose faith and abandon the “word of the kingdom” (gospel) is given by Christ Jesus’ explanation of His parable of the sower (Matt 13:18-23). To fulfill prophetic utterance, Christ spoke in parables about many subjects, but His parable of the sower has significant meaning about the states in which people have the word of the kingdom stolen from them, choked out, or pressured away by hardship and persecution.

Characteristics of people who receive God’s word and accept and understand it are those who bear fruit according to individual potential. All other conditions by which the word of the kingdom is received reveal an absence of understanding, shallow-rooted acceptance by the hardness of heart, and the possession of worldly distractions that remove further ability to yield fruit. The word of God heard and understood is meant to bear fruit within a person saved by faith. It is not by happenstance that Jesus spoke of the parable of the weeds (Matt 13:24-30, 36-43) after the parable of the sower (Matt 13:1-9, 18-23) to warn that apostates shall be gathered by the angels and destroyed (Matt 13:42). The loss of faith among people who encounter the word of the kingdom isn’t only by circumstance. There is malevolent intentionality against fields of people who would receive and accept seeds of the kingdom and bear fruit as evidence of salvation.

Jesus spoke of the parable of the weeds to verbally illustrate the presence of Satan (powers of demonic deception), who implants tares (Matt 13:25) among seeds that bear the fruit of wheat. For the ultimate glory of YHWH, the Lord lets the wicked temporarily remain among people of faith and believers while there is risk and occurrence of deception and apostasy. The Lord’s people of the kingdom are retained by understanding and faith while there are demonic influences present among them with evil intent. People who succumb to distractions, hardships, the choking out of the Word, and false teaching will eventually apostatize to bear status as tares or weeds, which are gathered, bound up in bundles, and burned.

In the latter times of this church age initiated by the messianic era, apostasy is to be expected. During this period, people susceptible to false doctrines or contradictions to the truth of God’s word become lured away. More specifically, while the Holy Spirit guides believers into truth (John 16:13), deceitful spirits and false teachers lead people into error. Even in a church or spiritually pure context, the “doctrines of demons” are carried and spread by human agents who communicate lies (1 Tim 4:2). The errors people commit by thoughts, words, and actions are measured by the standard of what God reveals in Scripture. Contradictions to the Word of God originate from a spirit of error (1 John 4:6) compared to those who listen to the spirit of truth. Specifically, the Apostle John wrote to inform the church that those who listen to him by what he spoke and wrote are those who know God and are from Him. Refusal to listen to God’s biblical writers constitutes the error of apostates.

The spirit of apostasy is evident throughout scripture. Both in the Old and New Testaments, people who stop listening to God, or contradict His word, are those who no longer follow Him in truth. Examples of apostatized people throughout old and new covenant history who set their course do so from a posture of disobedience as they are often seduced away from faith and relationship with God toward His kingdom interests. To see who apostates were and how they became distant and alienated from God, it is helpful to understand how and why they were seduced to correlate the same outcomes among believers today. To both guard your heart and mind and warn people of false teaching, it is of utmost necessity to remain close to God’s word and the doctrines originating from the biblical writers.

Understanding the Duties of Ministry

A broad spectrum of activity appears entirely overwhelming on its surface to recognize and understand the “duties” of a minister. With biblical support to indicate how Paul instructed the early church, we get a limited sense of scope about what the work of ministry involves. There are standards and responsibilities inferred beyond the specifics of Paul’s guidance. To focus on a narrow segment of Paul’s letter to Timothy (1 Tim 4), we learn much about the duties of a minister to understand piecemeal what disposition and actions are becoming a servant of Christ.

Minister Duties and AttributesReferences
Warns People of Error1 Tim 4:6, Acts 20:29-32, Eph 4:14, 1 John 2:13-14, 2 Cor 11:14-15, Ezek 3:17-18, Heb 13:17
Expert Student of Scripture1 Tim 4:6, 2 Tim 4:3, 1 Pet 2:2, 2 Tim 2:15, Eph 6:17, Col 3:16, 2 Tim 3:16-17
Avoids Influence of Unholy Teaching1 Tim 4:7, 2 Tim 4:4, 1 Tim 1:4
Disciplined in Personal Godliness1 Tim 4:7, 1 Cor 9:27, 2 Tim 2:3-5, Titus 3:8, 1 Tim 6:3, 5-8, 11, 2 Pet 1:3, 2 Tim 3:12
Committed to Hard Work1 Tim 4:10-11, 1 Cor 3:11-15, 9:26-27, 2 Cor 5:9, 11:24-27, Acts 17:25,28, 27:34, Jas 5:15, Col 1:28
Teaches with Authority1 Tim 4:11, Acts 17:30, Matt 7:28-29, 1 Tim 1:3, 5:7, 20, 6:17, Titus 2:15, Matt 17:5
Models Spiritual Virtue1 Tim 4:12, 1 Cor 4:16, 10:31, 33, 11:1, Phil 3:17, 4:9, 1 Thess 1:5-6, 2 Thess 3:7,9, 2 Tim 1:13
In WordMatt 12:34, 37, Eph 4:25, Col 4:6, 29
In Conduct 
In Love1 Thess 2:7-12, Phil 2:27-30
In Faith1 Cor 4:2, Col 1:7, 4:7
In Purity 
Has a Thoroughly Biblical Ministry1 Tim 4:13
ReadingNeh 8:8
Exhortation 
Doctrine (didaskalia; teaching)1 Tim 3:2, 5:17
Fulfills Ministry Calling1 Tim 4:14, Rom 12, 1 Cor 12, Eph 4, 1 Pet 4, 2 Tim 4:5, Acts 16:1-5
Diligent and Immersed in MinistryPhil 2:25-27, 2 Tim 4:2
Continuous Spiritual Growth1 Tim 4:15, Phil 3:12, 14, Acts 23:1-5

There is an even greater running set of activities that give a better sense of scope concerning ministers of the church today. Ministers support and administer sacraments of marriage, baptism, communion, and others, models faith practices, reproduce Godly leaders, set the environment and standards of fellowship, develop the gifts of others, set expectations, evaluate individual and ministry contributions and effectiveness, protect believers from corruptive influences, monitors and sustains the health of the church, sets the conditions to which the church makes disciples, equips believers for mission work and outreach, contributes to the greater ecclesiological efforts of the community, performs chaplain responsibilities, contributes to church culture of “loving your neighbor,” supervises theology of continuing worship activity, assures church leadership’s fidelity to biblical doctrine, counsels trusted peers and subordinates, shepherds people during times of crisis, and various other duties and responsibilities measured to standards of excellence. The weight of work upon a servant of Christ can be overwhelming with a considerable depth of attention.

The leadership of a shepherd is the most significant responsibility of assuring biblical faith and practice among believers in the church. It is not enough to be a pulpit speaker at a Sunday service each week. That is not what constitutes what Paul wrote to Timothy, nor is it an acceptable approach to what it is to speak a sermon or live as a sermon among people within the church. Leadership involves the initiative to perform what Paul wrote and what Christ Jesus spoke but to develop the same among others. It is of high value to zoom in on the cafeteria of attributes that make an “excellent servant.” Still, there must be an overarching guiding principle by which further imperatives are derived. A coherent sense of purpose around kingdom objectives concerning God’s interests overlays what occurs in a connected fashion. Where synergies, cooperation, and work of the Holy Spirit integrate as intended, there is scalability and longevity to support the spiritual development among new and seasoned believers. The “duties” of an excellent minister are useful to understand, but they are simply integral to a job description by which performance is measured.

Ministers who have defined duties and responsibilities help to clearly define expectations. The points to which measured performance is attained are wide and not easily remembered as a concentrated whole. As a balance of ongoing effort, the framework in which a minister performs duties is biblically structured around lifestyle and work with attention to individual potential and capacity. There is otherwise just too much to remember for consistent practice. Even if a minister is fully absorbed in his work, there are limits to individual capacity without attention to occupational efforts to earn a living (such as tent-making or carpentry) in the event there is insufficient monetary support available or possible from a church. Excellence as a modern notion of understanding infers the highest quality delivered with the least amount of resources necessary. Maximum value as a proposition toward ministry is sometimes a balance of effort by necessity. The idea or definition of excellence isn’t from subjective opinion. It comes with a recognition of quality workmanship, empathy, responsiveness, and assurance toward tangible and effective attributes. The various attributes to remember and put into practice take time and persistence. At times efforts will fall out of balance, and some attributes will go unattended as the minister performs duties in an inferior way. A dull tool is not always a completely ineffective tool. If the instrument is entirely broken and rendered inoperable, it will get attention around where a defect is present without the need for complete renewal from wear or aging. Diligence and persistence are marks of a servant of Christ. With continued attention to areas of concern, where leaders are undergoing development, growth in Christ is the means of workmanship they should walk by (Eph 2:10).

Shepherding the Flock of God

The final chapter, Shepherding the Flock of God, extensively covers the roles of church leadership in terms of biblical duties and responsibilities. The shepherd is metaphorically used throughout the Bible and ancient near eastern literature to identify a person as more than a leader, teacher, guide, counselor, or person with initiative. The title of shepherd denotes an overall set of functions to more fully capture a person’s role as caretaker with authority across a broader range of more significant responsibilities. The categories of duty and care by which shepherds perform their duties involve function by necessity due to the nature of people as a flock within the Church. In secular contexts, the notion of shepherding has become common in everyday use to portray a deeper or closer sense of responsibility of leaders among people.

In this final chapter of MacArthur’s book on the Church, he identifies several fundamental areas of attention about what shepherds do. Shepherds are rescuers, leaders, guardians, protectors, and comforters with the Church, as there are numerous correlating principles, biblical passages, and observations about how shepherds think and operate as driven by circumstances and conditions evident among people as sheep. The categories altogether describe the behavioral conditions associated with people who need very close attention and guidance due to vulnerability, helplessness, ineptitude, and pronounced inclination to error. Sheep need shepherds to survive and exist to serve their purpose in creation. Left to their own, sheep are prey to predators and susceptible to harm due to an absence of behaviors necessary for self-preservation. Within the context of the Church, people as sheep need to be guarded and protected from spiritual and cultural sources of destruction that are both external and self-inflicted.

A time of close observation of sheep’s behavior and innate disposition reveals a lot about the nature and behavior of people. There are numerous comparative attributes between people and sheep as one learns a lot about sheep’s inclination to wander or become incapacitated from an inability to attend to their well-being. As with people, sheep are messy and unable to take too much risk. They are easily disoriented and confused as they wander astray from others who together provide some limited measure of comfort and safety. On their own, sheep are defenseless, just as people need spiritual protection. People and sheep require shepherds to watch over them, care for them, guide them, protect them, and comfort them.

As the shepherds of the authentic Church watch over its congregations of sheep, they’re guarded and protected from all sources of harm, while the chief shepherd, Christ Jesus, keeps watch over them all. Through direct involvement among individuals and groups within the Church, elders and pastors are charged with the spiritual care of people they’re entrusted to keep. Vulnerable people are susceptible to the harmful influences of secular society and the culture in decay. And shepherds are accountable for the hearts and minds of believers who rely upon the Church and one another for safety and well-being. If sheep are harmed or lost, the shepherd takes the loss too. Shepherds, as leaders of the Church who neglect people by insulating themselves or setting themselves at a distance, do not escape the weight of responsibility they bear. The methods by which shepherds care for their sheep are developed through the equipping of discipleship and character development. The organizational leadership of pastors and elders must be structured and thoroughly girded with biblical principles and specifics about how congregants are led, guarded, protected, comforted, and, at times, rescued. They are to work together synergistically as people of God rely upon Him for ongoing relationships.

Appendices

As both church discipline and restoration are integral to the church’s life, it is important to understand what both involve from a biblical perspective. First, principles concerning church discipline are outlined as the six P’s of sequence in an effort to frame its practice and meaning topically. As the practice of discipline is consistently and equally carried out while subject to all members regardless of status or influence, the work of the church in this regard has a cleansing effect on congregations for purposes of protection and sanctification. Individuals confronted, corrected, or set outside the church for inwardly and outwardly unrepentant behaviors have restorative value to people who otherwise continue. Beginning with leadership with the clearest and most thorough standards brought into biblical and doctrinal focus, influential individuals must first be subject to uniform standards regarding morality and conduct within congregations.

The six P’s of church discipline are as follows:

The Place of DisciplineThe Provocation of Discipline
The Purpose of DisciplineThe Process of Discipline
The Person of DisciplineThe Power of Discipline

As a pastoral theology from the early 1990s, the book offers perspectives on how to apply a court of believers within the church. From one-to-one accountability that involves a directed confrontation aimed at an individual’s repentance to a group setting that provides specifics concerning biblical offenses such as moral violations and sinful behaviors. Discipline must be defined by Scripture around the areas of sin and repentance and not the preferences of leaders or people within the church who are displeased with interpersonal style, strict adherence to tradition, or socioeconomic status to form the type of fellowship or environment that matches the church vision and objectives.

There are further subcategories of instruction about what discipline is, where it can occur, and its purpose to fully understand MacArthur’s views about the biblical principles around the practice. For example, four more P’s are subordinate points to form a framework for understanding The Purpose of Discipline. Those elements are “Privacy,” “Permissiveness,” “Pride,” and “Persecution,” involving his personal experience of MacArthur to describe the specifics of what each point entails. As a reader fully grasps what biblical church discipline looks like from MacArthur’s perspective, the process as it is applied is formulaic. The Process of Discipline involves four steps to describe the sequential order by which a person under discipline becomes confronted until put out of the church or rejected from participation in the fellowship of believers. To MacArthur’s words, “You put such a person out for the purity of the church, but you keep calling him back as well.” – A practice that intuitively appears perilous among many believers today, especially those in leadership, who have questionable (at best) internal holiness to the kind of sanctification by comparison that warrants such authority.

Therefore, I would add that such a process should involve a vetting or check to determine if anyone should execute such discipline. The person and associated believers involved before implementation should then undergo a review to determine if the same condition doesn’t exist among them, either externally or internally. I only add this as a step because the widespread and demonstrable hypocrisy in the church is stratospheric. Moreover, suppose a person is subject to disciple for cause in one area of sinful practice (e.g., drunkenness), yet its leadership and congregation continue to practice and support the sin of another type (e.g., homosexuality or same-sex “marriage”). In such cases, any “discipline” subject to an offender against church purity is meaningless and without merit. The biblical standards and authority for discipline are rooted in divine justice revealed by God through correctly interpreted Scripture.

 The Power of Discipline is effective in bringing about repentance and restoration. It is not enough to simply welcome someone back into fellowship after repentance from an offender. Suppose someone is substance addicted or in need of therapy. In that case, restorative efforts are necessary to return to order someone captive in sin and toward a renewed trajectory of continued sanctification. When reading through the appendix concerning the restoration of “a sinning brother,” it is apparent the principle concerns overt external sin practiced where the circumstances negatively affect the church. “Pick him up,” “Hold him up,” and “Build him up” are further instructions in procedural format sequenced for qualified and eligible believers to follow as the restoration process should advance to closure.

The substantive efforts involved in restoration must involve sustained immersion in the Word of God for the Holy Spirit to continue working in the heart of a believer. Coupled with encouragement and continued accountability, leadership and congregants should show continued care and attention to anyone restored to have their burdens and struggles now shared. The biblical character development toward maturity and deeper sanctification transpire through the sharpening of the mind, growth in faith, and continued edification where spiritual stability is sustained and achieved.

The standards to which believers are restored involve external behaviors and internal holiness that are “beyond reproach” (1 Tim 3:2, Titus 1:7). Aside from outward behaviors aligned with the conduct becoming of a pastor or elder, the fruits of the Spirit must be testable, consistently present, authentic, and thoroughly apparent both in public and private life.

The biblical qualifications for spiritual leadership within the church are extensive, involving various character attributes suitable for people who serve and worship God in a holy congregation. When apostle Paul wrote to Timothy concerning the qualifications of elders within the church, he did so with explicit detail that leaves no question about eligibility requirements. Consistent with biblical writers elsewhere, Paul reinforces the required standards by which leaders serve with baseline character traits suitable and appropriate for the care of people in the first-century church as well as today. These traits complement one another to serve as a model and example of conduct for those in the church. Leadership that attempts to perform its shepherding duties with flaws in character in any of these areas presents problems to the church that ultimately affect congregants.

A leader with a reputation, social status, charisma, and wealth who has impeccable qualifications for leadership in a secular context doesn’t render that person suitable for leadership in the church. Godly character over functional capabilities prevails as qualifying attributes as described in 1 Timothy 3. MacArthur’s views in this appendix align with the intended meaning of how qualifications are explicitly transmitted to the early church as well as it is today. Each specific qualifying attribute parsed and defined serves as an individually identified requirement with explicit meaning. These attributes, separately or combined, are not guidelines to loosely follow but specify what requirements must be met to serve as an elder or pastor of a church. These requirements are not optional or subject to cultural conditions within secular society that have a bearing on governance, and commerce or impose contradictory regulatory requirements. God’s Word through the Apostle Paul has the greatest authority.

In comparison to MacArthur’s written views concerning the qualifications of the church, I traced his interpretation of each attribute. I compared all terms and phrases to the original manuscripts of the text to get the highest clarity about the expected qualifications of those who are to enter or maintain leadership roles in the church as either pastors or elders. This table closely corresponds to Paul’s epistle to Timothy and MacArthur’s interpretive and explanatory views. No consideration was given to church denominations that hold to contradictory traditions or social considerations involving cultural pressures.

QualificationsDefinitions and DescriptionsReferences
BlamelessAbove reproach and not deserving or worthy of rebuke or criticism1 Tim 3:2, 1 Tim 5:7
Husband of One WifeMale, married only once, monogamous, and moral.1 Tim 5:9-15
TemperateNot given to excess or extremes in behavior1 Tim 3:2,11,
Titus 2:2
Sober-MindedSelf-disciplined and wisely keeping self-control over passions and desires1 Tim 3:2, Titus 1:8, Titus 2:2,5
Good BehaviorOrganized with admirable propriety and moderation1 Tim 2:9, 1 Tim 3:2
HospitableDisposed to treat guests and strangers with cordiality and generosity1 Tim 3:2, Titus 1:8, 1 Pet 4:9
Able or Apt to TeachAbility to impart skills or knowledge to people and do it well1 Tim 3:2, 2 Tim 2:24
Not a DrunkardNot a drunkard who is especially predisposed to wine beverages1 Tim 3:3, Titus 1:7
Not Violent but GentleNot a fighter, bully, or a cruel, violent, and brutal person1 Tim 3:3, Titus 1:7
PatientLenient and easily pardons human failure – merciful or tolerant of slight deviations from moral or legal rectitude1 Tim 3:3, Titus 3:2, Jas 3:17, 1 Pet 2:18
Not A BrawlerNot quarrelsome – Inclined and disposed to peace1 Tim 3:3, Titus 3:2
Not Greedy
(aischrokerdēs)
Not fond of dishonest gain – being so desirous of acquiring wealth that it brings disgrace and shame on a person1 Tim 3:3,8,
Titus 1:7
Not Covetous
(aphilargyros)
Not a lover of money – not characterized by an immoderate desire to acquire wealth1 Tim 3:3, Heb 13:5
Manages Household of Children WellManages a Godly family household in an exemplary manner1 Tim 3:4-5,
1 Thess 5:12
Not a Recent ConvertA mature believer in Christ1 Tim 3:6
Well Thought of By OutsidersA confirmed testimony and witness of a person’s good character within the community1 Tim 3:7

There is no single denomination in Western evangelicalism that holds to these requirements. There are individual churches within some denominations that are faithful to these requirements, but not many. While I don’t think it is possible to sustain 100% consistency among all pastors and elders in all areas of eligibility in the life of the mind of leaders, there are gaps in character and performance in this regard that will surface. MacArthur makes it clear that none of these attributes are negotiable. And he is correct; however, maintaining this standard of qualification without a lapse into sinful and flawed conduct is unattainable. If leaders could disqualify themselves over a lifetime of leadership, they would. There must be room for brief incidents with immediate recovery and repentance while serving in leadership. Provided there isn’t a pattern of disqualifying conduct, attitudes, or violations of requirements given in 1 Timothy 3, shepherds of the church have the grace necessary to recover without negatively affecting the flock’s health. The spiritual capacity of leadership is largely contingent upon its reputation, training, and maturity to satisfy biblical requirements and its character obligations. People who obtain a calling of leadership are not to enter ministry lightly. It is a sacred responsibility to shepherd the people of God as caretakers of their faith and practice. While today, pastors and elders often carry out their responsibilities at a distance from the flock, they do function with partial eligibility among closer relationships within smaller concentric circles of influence and accountability. Elders or bishops and deacons that see to the affairs of the church aside from pastoral work maintain their duties in ministry according to what they’re gifted to perform and accomplish. Their reach within the church should encompass the entire flock as shepherds who oversee congregants never permit the loss of even a single sheep. Each person’s sanctification is precious before God, and the shepherd’s responsibility is to care for His flock to the last person.

The final reading of The Master’s Plan for the Church includes subject matter about elders and deacons. Questions about their definition and qualifications around the gender of people as male and female are answered from a biblical approach to understand church leadership further. The general reading of Scripture to understand Apostle Paul’s writing about Elders and Deacons, whether male or female, serves as a codified spiritual authority concerning the health and development of the church. The details concerning elders and deacons revolve around their responsibilities and functions. As their relationships with one another are understood, boundaries are set to which church leaders conform to a biblical leadership model consistent with God’s interests for his people. The eligibility of leaders as elders and deacons is subject to a grounding of who they are as male or female. Two genders are explicitly and biologically formed and created as defined by Creator God according to the authority of His word through the biblical authors throughout the canon of holy Scripture.

In narrative form, Paul wrote to his disciple Timothy about the role of an elder. It is not an outline or a list of requirements but a descriptive letter with a rationale about their responsibilities. Specifically, elders possess the authority to oversee the affairs of the local church. As described before, the spiritual qualifications of elders are described in 1 Timothy 3:2, while 1 Timothy 5:17 clearly articulates their functions to include teaching and preaching. While these are performative functions, MacArthur observes that the remaining qualifications are related to individual character traits. There are subordinate activities to teaching and preaching that are instructive, and what elders do as a matter of faith and practice includes prayer and study. Without direct inference to worship, fellowship, or outreach and evangelism, elders appear to concentrate on these two areas of teaching and preaching as an outflow of prayer and study. Inherent among the responsibilities of an elder include the formation of policy and allocation of resources (Acts 15:22) while serving as caretakers who oversee the church (Acts 20:28). While serving as shepherds, elders rule over the church (1 Tim 5:17) and ordain people to service while carrying out interpersonal responsibilities that involve exhortation, refutation, and rebuke those who contradict biblical doctrine (Titus 1:9).

MacArthur’s views about the qualifications of men who exclusively serve as elders in the church align with what Paul explicitly wrote. Without specific Scriptural or principled reference, he asserts that men as elders manage their “household” well (1 Tim 3:5), including the “extended family, servants, lands, possessions, many in-laws, and other relatives.” Furthermore, MacArthur wrote, “If he is in debt, if his children are rebellious, or if his business affairs are not above reproach, he cannot be an elder.”1 Whereas by this standard, nearly every elder serving in the evangelical church today is not qualified to serve in such as capacity. For example, male leaders as elders who hold positions of authority cannot service a mortgage, and by extension, neither can a church itself finance its interests to operate. To this standard, those who have paid off mortgages or paid for their homes are suitable as elders. To hold to this standard would without question shrink the number of churches and their size throughout all traditions of Christendom today.

Further elaboration on MacArthur’s views could be helpful about “if his children are rebellious” as a disqualifier. All children are rebellious—some more than others. Whether internally, externally, or both, during spiritually formative years, youth in adolescence infers that parents who guide their children to faith cannot serve as elders. Or parents with children who have disabilities are not qualified to serve, either, as children must somehow show verifiable and authentic faith. John Piper is a board member of Desiring God Ministries and The Gospel Coalition. At the same time, his son Abraham Piper, John Piper’s son, is an avowed atheist in spiritual rebellion against his father’s household, extended or otherwise. John Piper is a speaking participant in the forthcoming Puritan conference at Grace Community Church. There are literally millions of additional examples among local evangelical and reformed churches and, more broadly, various organizations and institutions led by admired and faithful shepherds (such as John Piper). Further Scriptural rationale and support are necessary to understand better and accept qualifications in this regard from a biblical perspective (such as Levitical principles of the old covenant that extends to the church under grace by the new covenant). In everything, biblical adherence to faith and practice is necessary from root meaning as intended.

The remainder of the reading within The Master’s Plan for the Church includes sections about deacons. As deacon responsibilities are a subset of elders, there are personal and spiritual characteristics that describe and overlap what their qualifications are. Personal character traits of a deacon include a dignified stature (venerable, honorable, reputable, grave, serious, and stately), temperate, consistent, and righteous communication, and sober while unattracted to the pursuit of wealth.

Spiritually, four qualification areas are biblically defined through Paul’s instructions to the early church. First, a deacon understands and accepts the truth of Scripture and applies it to daily life. Second, deacons must be beyond reproach. Third, deacons must be morally pure to exclusively Scriptural standards. Finally, a deacon must manage their children and own households well (1 Tim 3:12). Not marginally with equivocation but managed well.

Apostle Paul wrote that female deacons are scripturally permitted within the church. By inference and examples of historical figures who served in that capacity, it is recognized that deaconesses who serve without the authority of overseers or teachers with instructional authority can serve in positions of value within the church. The Scriptural standards of leadership within the church are very high as pioneered by the early church formed throughout early Christianity. As the ministry of leadership is a high calling, the sanctification and spiritual development of God’s people must be shepherded by people who are wholly eligible and qualified according to what God has decreed through His biblical writers.

____________________
[1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1081.
[2] Ibid. Cl 1 Cl = 1 Clement—List 1, Just. Just(in) , II a.d.—List 5, Iren. Iren. = Irenaeus, Haereses, II a.d.—List 5, Harv. Harv. = WHarvey; s. Iren.—List 5, Orig Orig , var. works, II–III a.d.—List 5, Hippol Hippol , II–III a.d.—List 5.
[3] John F. MacArthur Jr., The Master’s Plan for the Church (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2008), 212-214.


The Dwelling Within

The full-length paper I completed last week was about the covenants of both the Old and New Testaments. A lengthy survey of eight total topically covered the Edenic, Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Deuteronomic, Davidic, and New covenants. It was a very wide look at salient points without much depth. My reason for doing the paper was to get a macro view of the framework of the canon from a kingdom perspective. Retroactive and backward in time to understand how God might view redemptive history (i.e., from our Lord Jesus’s viewpoint). 

As God is outside or transcendent of space and time, and He set in order how free-will humanity would sovereignly become adopted, it was of interest to see how He would build and develop His kingdom. Contrary to traditional interpretation, I somewhat suspect we’re still in the seventh “day” of creation. Or that our existence and emerging kingdom fellowship as adopted people are predicated upon the context of the fall (Gen 3, Rom 8:22). The covenants were a means of the Exodus or a transition from one state of existence to another as a matter of development. More specifically, covenant theology from God’s perspective and dispensationalism from man’s perspective (without the baggage of tradition). So this project was simply to get oriented for added research to follow without any pre-loaded commitments. And it was necessary to do this from a biblically theological standpoint as no other definitive authority exists in my view. Especially from post-modern denominations that have their more basic issues aplenty. Still, I’m aware of the Westminster Confession (WCF) and others, and I’m fully respectful of those. 

So, the effort was an attempt to recognize patterns of covenants as instruments of mediation between God and mankind. – As a foundation to see if the whole point of this ordeal was that the fall was part of God’s sovereignly creative and permissive will. From Genesis 3:15 onward. To better understand God’s heart about what historically occurred along a chronological timeline that led to fulfillment in Christ and to understand more about His revealed character.

“Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” 
– Jesus, Luke 12:32

“For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.”
 – Paul, Romans 8:22

Birth into what? Allegorically, into what? My tentative view is this: 

He intended all along to put His Spirit within us. And not as a fallback plan among people as contingent beings. 

Knowing humanity could fall, it was His will to redeem His created beings to build a kingdom of people who are sanctified to love Him and each other. Beings who are shaped from free-will agency to glorify Him with a permanent and enduring love. Rightfully so, whether from Eden without the fall or the Cross with the fall, He will have His Kingdom.

James Hamilton, the author of God’s Indwelling Presence – The Holy Spirit in the Old & New Testaments writes about the Old Testament circumcision of the heart as compared to the regeneration and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. He makes a compelling and persuasive argument that there is a difference between regeneration and indwelling. And Old Testament believers were regenerated, but not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The inferences and case he makes are that you can be in a state of regeneration for a period, or a lifetime, but never indwelt. Conversely, you can also lose the regeneration, but not the indwelling. 

So where exactly is this indwelling within? The tripartite nature of people situates the body, soul, and spirit. The naturally born person without rebirth is spiritually “dead” (i.e., oblivious to a different internal reality) until regenerated. Upon acceptance and authentic belief in Christ happens, the spirit is superseded by the indwelling Spirit (at His choosing). Belief is not possible without regeneration.

He also surveys by category (patristics, reformation, modern) numerous positions of theologians who hold a continuum of distinctions about regeneration and indwelling.1 He also relies quite a bit on textual criticism and the morphology of terms within ancient manuscript texts (not translations) to get at definitions of Holy Spirit presence, internal and external, present state and future state, and regeneration or indwelling, to understand and write about the original intent of the biblical authors.

The textbook gets the attention of seminary students from various institutions. It covers in explicit detail what it means to be born again (indwelt), regenerative (external presence and grace), and spiritually unregenerate. 


Covenants of the Kingdom

The protoevangelium decree of the living God set in motion a covenantal framework by which intervals of overlapping and sequential promises were rendered certain along a course of their fulfillment. This post attempts to trace what God has ordained, accomplished, and set forth toward the formation and redemption of humanity toward fellowship with Him for His good pleasure and glory. After the fall of humanity in the garden, through history, and by the projection of eschatological events, there would be a reckoning and reconciliation process to forge an everlasting Kingdom fellowship of people who live and abide with God forever. The subject of this research project is about how God develops His Kingdom through covenants, as traced from Scripture. God’s intentions were made clear throughout redemptive history toward His overall soteriological purpose for His glory and good pleasure.

Abstract

Jesus said, “it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (Lk 12:32). Speaking to His “little flock” of sheep, Jesus made entirely clear our Father’s intentions. By the inexpressible magnitude and gravity of His love and sovereign will, God has formed regenerative humanity into a Kingdom through a series of covenants to reclaim humanity after the fall. Covenants that are not merely sequential but overlap and extend to individuals, tribes, and nations. The overwhelming beauty and magnificence of God’s covenantal progression of promises narrow further toward specific Messianic fulfillment. Sovereignly crafted circumstances around empires, kingdoms, and governments appear supported in Scripture through the lineage of peoples with types and conditions of covenantal advancement.

This post aims to show the validity of covenant purpose as it covers in some detail each covenant and corresponding contributions to the framework of God’s redemptive intent. Specifically, as revealed in Scripture, how God intends to give His flock the kingdom (Lk 12:32) through Christ Jesus. To answer the question, how does God perform the necessary actions to accomplish His perfect will, a Scriptural walkthrough of eight covenants represents a biblical theology of macro soteriological purpose. As salvation belongs to the LORD, this post topically traverses the Edenic covenant, the Adamic covenant, the Noahic covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, the Deuteronomic Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the New Covenant. The literary support that matches overlapping points of covenantal integration across time and generations (i.e., epochs or dispensations) shall be covered. From the point of Adam, through the table of nations, and the covenants of law and grace where biblical events unfold, and outcomes are tracked toward successive completion of kingdom objectives.

As a zoomed-out view of what occurred by God’s revealed Word, the post begins with a macro perspective. Each covenant examination entered into successive focus to understand their respective roles and intended purpose of involving a pervasive messianic thread. The prospective concluding idea concerns God’s work as the crowning glory of Jesus in Scripture; illuminated by His entire biblical path through all covenants. This post examines the biblical theology concerning covenantal fulfillment through a chronological timeline and divinely prescribed order while guided by sound hermeneutical methods necessary for proper exegetical interpretation. The authorial intent of the biblical writers shall be best effort honored throughout this entire research project.

Introduction

This post aims to highlight and explore the various covenants that chronologically appear within the Old and New Testaments. By carefully studying the canonical covenants of Scripture, there is a continuity of redemptive work from Yahweh as made evident over time. This post attempts to trace what God has ordained, accomplished, and set forth toward the formation and redemption of humanity toward fellowship with Him for His good pleasure and glory. After the fall of humanity in the garden, through history, and by the projection of eschatological events, there would be a reckoning and reconciliation process to forge an everlasting Kingdom fellowship of people who live and abide with God forever. The subject of this research project is how God develops His Kingdom on Earth through covenants, as traced from Scripture. God’s intentions were made clear throughout redemptive history toward His overall soteriological purpose for His glory and good pleasure.

The approach of this project involves a covenant-by-covenant review of Scripture to recognize and absorb what each meant. A cursory and above-the-surface level view to get at the purposes, methods, and trajectories of all covenants should provide a means of understanding God’s written Word to better value His redemptive work and its implications through covenants formed across generations. There is much to learn from each covenant, as each has a significant underlying depth. Throughout the biblical narratives, a sequence of promises and judgments were upon people to remedy and correct desperate circumstances and behaviors that thoroughly illustrate God’s mercies, justice, and sovereign intentions. There are several covenants with historical and functional distinctions that accomplish prescribed and necessary outcomes as a result of humanity’s fallen condition. Moreover, God, in His wisdom, chooses to return appointed humanity to Him through the instruments of covenantal lineage and retention.

Background

There are eight covenants that this post will cover topically. Due to this project’s limited scope and intent, the subject matter shall be limited to descriptions, definitions, or the plain meaning of covenants as interpreted from Scripture. Through principles of proper hermeneutical methodology, the intent of the biblical authors is sought and applied to understand the meaning and purpose of each covenant correctly—the relationship of each one along a timeline is examined to recognize which covenants overlap or supersede others. As covenant participants are covered by the terms and stipulations of each covenant, some are named after the inheritors to which they were enacted. For example, the “Noahic Covenant” was established with Noah and his family, where God spoke about its purpose and the unique conditions in which it was set in place.

From the time of the historical fall of literal Adam and Eve, the Adamic Covenant, a sequence of covenants was set in motion and propagated across history to restore humanity and creation toward redeemable states of existence. At any moment in time, there was never a covenant that lapsed or became suspended, as recorded by biblical events throughout the pages of Scripture. Covenants anchored by promises generally rendered and to specific men by name were set forth to enact means of reconciliation and standing position before God through His justice and mercy for salvific purposes. Initiation of covenants situated among individuals that originate from God align toward where redemptive history is projected from a retrospective view of covenants. Their interrelated characteristics assure continuity toward a prophetic New Covenant that becomes fulfilled according to promises that were messaged through various prophets. The collection of covenants interspersed with Scripture converges to fulfillment in Christ as God Himself satisfies the requirements necessary for the restored created order.

Old Testament

The seven Old Testament covenants that preceded the new covenant as fulfilled in the New Testament included existing conditions overlapping various biblical events over time. Intervals of time between the initiation of each covenant constitute periods of history that include further covenants followed by or succeeded by additional covenants. For example, before the Edenic covenant (Gen 3:14-19), there was a period of innocence and dominion (Gen 1:28-30) where it is written that God walked the garden among His created man and woman, both male and female (Gen 3:8). After Adam and Eve’s fall at the garden of Eden, an ante-diluvian period preceded the biblical account of Noah and the Mesopotamian flood1 that destroyed humanity for some duration before the inauguration of the Noahic covenant that followed. The Adamic covenant of Genesis 3:15 remained in effect while the Noahic covenant was established and ran its course throughout redemptive history. The duration of the Adamic covenant extends throughout the law and the prophets to the New Testament and beyond toward the eschatological Parousia.2 The propagating covenants within the Old Testament make evident a sovereignly orchestrated assembly of circumstances, events, conditions, and outcomes by which the proclamations between the serpent and the woman of Genesis 3:15 become fulfilled.

After a lengthy study of the various covenants throughout history, biblical readers get the impression they are not freestanding or isolated eras of time without unrelated purposes. They separately carry forward a necessity of a messianic figure who appears among various intertextual genres of Scripture. Numerous themes and recurring narratives identify the presence of God and His involvement, where He prominently appears among kingdoms, kings, prophets, tribes, and nations. His redemptive work throughout human history remains within a covenant context as He is directly and solely responsible for the eschatological purpose of humanity.

To understand the biblical context and use of the term “covenant,” it is necessary to view its meaning from an Ancient Near Eastern perspective. As the “covenant” term has largely fallen out of use in modern society, it will only at times appear within marriage or contract and property language in a legal sense. Historically, the meaning of covenant correlates to the semantic range of the Hebrew word bĕrı̂t. Namely, as a “loyalty oath,” “treaty,” or “charter,” the biblical history of the covenant term had a direct bearing upon individual and tribal behavior patterns that were socially enacted.3 As the contextual meaning of covenant within a biblical framework remains settled, the use of the term marks the nature of the relationship between God and humanity as He defines it by His Word within Scripture. In a more coarse way of looking at the broader meaning of covenant, both Old and New Testaments are viewed as Old and New Covenants by comparison.

The Old Testament of Old Covenants comprises of pre-incarnate arrival of God as Messiah within Creation. The New Testament of the New Covenant consists of Christ Jesus within the first century as the fulfillment of messianic prophecy from the Old Testament covenants. The genealogical relevance of subsequent lineages from Adam through Noah and his offspring assured a generational path of Christ’s arrival. To assure the transition from Old Covenant requirements of the law to New Covenant conditions of grace and indwelling regeneration, an emergence of created historical and social order was necessary for the life and redemptive work of Christ to bring the Kingdom of God to Earth. A kingdom of believers inhabited by the Holy Spirit as the presence of God to reclaim appointed humanity. The supremacy of Christ and His kingdom on Earth for eschatological purposes eventually returns all of redeemed creation to the Father. The spiritual mechanism to which that is achieved is through covenants.

The Edenic Covenant

(Genesis 1:28-30)

Before the fall of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, God’s work of creation was originated and formed to place humanity before Him in fellowship. In perfect harmony, the innocence of people was before God to satisfy His interests, as the apostle Matthew informs us that He made them male and female (Matt 19:4). There were two genders from creation to clarify the complementary order of human work and reproduction.4 No other genders were created before or after the formation of humanity from the garden, nor specified elsewhere throughout the pages of Scripture. Male and female were blessed and told to be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. The blessing of God was inherent and intentional toward the created order He situated around Adam and Eve. This blessing was antithetical to any withdrawal or curse as Adam and Eve were innocent before God even while there was the presence of evil in the Universe beforehand (Isa. 14:12, Luke 10:18, 2 Pet 2:4, Jude 1:6).5 As God provided food for both Adam and Eve in their innocence, there was an expectation to satisfy His interests while He knew of the presence of evil beings separated from Him. Uncorrupted, Adam and Eve were given a covenant charter to occupy and fill the earth according to the will of God.

God revealed humanity’s given ability to choose freely from the trees in the garden by voicing the existence of human agency and choice. He informed Adam and Eve that if they were to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil or touch it, they would “surely die” (Gen 2:17, 3:3). Adam and Eve carried with them God’s blessing, yet they had the choice to obey God by keeping the covenant given to them within Eden. Under no circumstances were they to betray God by their disobedience and reject the covenant bestowed toward them. Yet of the fall inevitable by the sin Adam and Eve chose to commit, God’s purposes prevail.

The Adamic Covenant

(Genesis 3:14-19)

There are two main covenants within Scripture—first, the covenant of works initially described by Genesis in the garden of Eden. Second is the covenant of grace as narrated in the New Testament. From the Edenic Covenant to the Adamic Covenant, the fall narrative of Genesis informs readers of the circumstances surrounding the serpent’s deception and subsequent outcomes. The judgment and curses God put upon Adam meant condemnation upon humanity, and the suffering of sin brought into the world would remain upon all males and females across generations for thousands of years. The covenant of grace first appeared in Genesis as curses were applied to Adam and Eve in the garden. Subordinate to that covenant was the Adamic Covenant, in which God extends mercy to both. The male would be permitted to live the remaining years of his life, and the female would be redeemed through childbearing (1 Tim 2:15).6 Beyond the immediate pronouncement of judgment, there was hope as the deceptive serpent figure was cursed, made lower than all creatures, and rendered hidden from view throughout creation (Gen 3:14).

The first gospel appears immediately after the fall of man. Referred to as the protoevangelion by theologians, it was the first promise of redemption in Scripture.7 Sometimes referred to as the protoevangelium, and it is the promise and prophecy of a coming messianic savior. With the breaking of the Edenic covenant, the Adamic covenant takes effect as God’s pronouncement of curses, judgment, and the promise of coming salvation.8 Genesis 3:15 is the key by which it is necessary to understand the Adamic covenant.

To understand the Adamic covenant and its implications, Scripture informs its readers that the promise would last until the destruction and renewal of the heavens and the Earth, as described by Peter’s letter to the early Church (2 Pet 3:7-13). During the course of redemptive history, various subordinate covenants of works would follow until fulfilled in Christ. The Adamic covenant remains in effect through the first and second coming of Christ. In contrast, the new covenant of grace superseded the covenants of works that extend back to the protoevangelium. More explicitly, the Adamic covenant includes the Genesis 3:15 pronouncement to the serpent as follows (ESV):

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring
and her offspring; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

God’s pronouncement upon the serpent wasn’t a one-and-done conflict. The hostility would remain continuous throughout the course of history. Again and again, the enemy of humanity would suffer violence to iterate upon the judgment and condemnation of the serpent. In the books of the law, the prophets, and the writings, the skull of the serpent’s seed (vis-à-vis) the serpent would be crushed in a recurring fashion.9 The continued animosity between the woman and her offspring reflects the present and ongoing war upon the evil where the incarnate messiah would prevail. At regular prophetic intervals, kingdoms would rise and fall with kingly accessions toward final fulfillment in Christ Jesus. The New Testament gospels record the arrival of Christ, where the Kingdom of God provides the second exodus as people are redeemed by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9). The means of escape from the snare of the serpent became a bruising defeat as people were once held captive by sin and deception.

The Noahic Covenant

(Genesis 9:1-27)

The wider Scriptural account of the Noahic covenant is recorded in Genesis 8:20–9:17. More notably, the “covenant” term bĕrı̂t is again in view in Genesis 9:9, and the term carries the same meaning as prior covenants made. A covenant is an agreement enacted by two parties as actions, performances, or a refrain from behaviors stipulated in advance comprises a covenant between people or organizations. In the language of Genesis, the covenant pertains to the agreements between God and specific individuals or people groups. As such, the Noahic covenant is unique from the others due to preceding historical events and its conditions as Noah and his family recovered from the flooding God caused to wipe out all human life throughout the Mediterranean and Mesopotamian regions of the ancient near east.

The backstory to the Noahic covenant concerns the flood discourse of Genesis 7-8. The infamous accounts of interbreeding between human females and sons of God (Nephilim as evil spirits who inhabited men)10 predicated God’s regret and sorrow for the creation of humanity on the earth (Gen 6:1-4). The days of Noah were abundantly evil to the extent that humanity was entirely corrupted. Yet while the Edenic and Adamic covenants were historically made with eschatological implications, the fulfillment of the protoevangelium of Genesis 3:15 remained a future certainty. A new covenant was to follow with Noah and his offspring. Specifically, three proleptic covenant provisions were specified in Scripture as rendered distinct from the others, while prior covenants were precursors to reset the entire trajectory of the human condition.

The Abrahamic Covenant

(Genesis 12:1-3, 13:14-17, 15:1-18, 17:1-8, 22:15-18)

Noah’s descendants were divided among the nations listed in Genesis 10. At the tower of Babel event of Genesis 11:1-9, they were placed under the governance of the “sons of God.” As a punitive action against the people for violating the Edenic, Adamic, and Noahic covenants, they were allotted (Deut 4:19–20; 29:25–26) to the sons of God, who were lesser divine beings.14 The peoples did not disperse, fill the earth and multiply but instead gathered in one language and concentrated humanity to serve their interests against the directives of God for covenant fulfillment. Placed over the nations were sons of God (elohim) who acted within and among rulers separated from God’s direct and abiding attention. Instead, God reserved a people as His portion through the Abrahamic descendants for covenant continuity and fulfillment (Deut 32:9). From Mesopotamia, the people of Babel were dispersed throughout regions surrounding the Mediterranean Sea, the Dead Sea, and the Jordan River. The positional locality of dispersed peoples was of the table of nations described in Genesis 10.

More specifically, the descendants of Shem, Japheth, and Ham, the sons of Noah, were the progenitors of peoples scattered and given over to the governance of corrupted rulers (Ps 82:2-8). However, God selected and appointed another man from Ur in the land of Shinar, who would continue through the Genesis 3:15 promise. Just as Noah believed God, Abraham did as well, and his faith was counted to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6, Rom 4:3, 5, 9, Jas 2:23). While Deut 32:9 is God’s spiritual claim upon His people from among all other nations, Genesis 12:1-3 is the Abrahamic foundation that extends to God’s relationship with all humanity.15

The propagation of the Abrahamic covenant was a supernatural endeavor. While the covenant was conditional upon Abraham’s obedience to leave his homeland, God puts upon him the obligation to obey to receive descendants and blessings. The intentionality of God’s call to Abraham was with blessings in mind. The tension between God’s displeasure at Babel, the scattering of nations, and His desire to favor Abraham and his offspring rests upon God’s desire to bless humanity or all the nations on earth. How Abraham attained blessings in fulfillment of the covenant wasn’t rationalistic or synergistic efforts.

Contrary to Abraham’s efforts and interests in how to attain the blessings, God’s method of bestowing land and offspring to Abraham and his descendants was a divinely monergistic activity. Abraham wanted Ishmael as first-born by natural means, while Isaac wasn’t born of God’s work toward fulfillment. God intentionally waited until Abraham was of the age that “he was as good as dead” before he conceived a child with Sarah.16 The arrival of Isaac was by necessity of God alone through supernatural means (i.e., flesh and promise of Gen. 17:18, 19; Gal. 4:23). To assure that the continuity of covenants reaches their intended purpose, God did not entirely leave the trajectory of Genesis 3:15 in the hands of His faithful people.

To clearly see the specifics of the Abrahamic covenant, it is necessary to parse and analyze Genesis 12:1-3. There are several components to the covenant that are both temporal and eternal through the extended reach of the blessings. First, God promised Abraham that He would make him a great nation both in a natural and spiritual sense. Genesis 13:16, 17:20 refers to the “dust of the earth” concerning both Isaac and Ishmael. Conversely, “the stars of heaven” (Gen 15:5) concerns the spiritual posterity of Abraham (Gal. 3:6-7, 29). Further depth of blessings was promised to Abraham as the covenant details were made more explicit.

Just as the natural and supernatural descendants were promised to Abraham, so were the more immediate blessings as well. Livestock and lands were given to Abraham (Gen. 13:14–18; 15:18–21; 24:34, 35) as well as a spiritual blessing from God’s confidence in Abraham’s faith (Gen 15:6). The notoriety of Abraham’s name became widely known as God would make his name great among nations and across generations. Extending to nations throughout the centuries, God blessed Abraham both in his time and to the Gentiles much later in time (Gal 3:14). All the families of the earth would become blessed as a promise fulfilled in Christ Jesus, who are spiritual heirs to the covenant of Abraham (Deut. 28:8–14; Isa. 60:3–5, 11, 16). Lastly, the covenant was permanently codified as a spiritual certainty when Abraham obeyed God’s voice and offered his only son as a sacrifice (Gen. 22:15–18). The Abrahamic covenant, still in effect, became an everlasting covenant (Gen. 17:1–8).

The Mosaic Covenant

(Exodus 20:1-26, 31:12-17)

The covenants propagated through the patriarchs of Genesis included Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jacob becomes Israel through blessing and hardship, and his son Joseph was taken captive to Egypt as an enslaved person to gain authority later and rule over the nation by supernatural and divine activity. He became an administrator and protector from a devastating famine through God’s intervention to preserve the people of Israel as Jacob and his sons were reconciled to Joseph.17 As the nation of Israel itself became enslaved by political changes related to its prosperity, population growth, and the dread of the Egyptian people, the Mosaic covenant would take shape through a child born of Hebrews to lead people to freedom through an exodus of enormous natural and supernatural significance.

Both natural and supernatural activity is narrated through the biblical account of Exodus. While the prior patriarchs experienced their share of the presence of God and His work to continue the march toward Genesis 3:15 fulfillment, the spectacular work of God was abundantly evident in the life of Moses, Aaron, Joshua, and the tribes of Israel. The entire sequence of historical confrontations between Moses and the Pharaoh of Egypt was an epic undertaking of monumental proportions. The judgments of God against Pharaoh for refusing to release the Israelite people from slavery were directed against Pharaoh and the people of Egypt. Furthermore, God’s sovereignty and direct action were at work against the spiritual entities who opposed God’s people Israel (Ex 12:12, Rom 9:17).

Once God attained victory over the gods of Egypt, and Pharaoh released the people of Israel after numerous devastating and miraculous judgments, He led them through the parting of the Red Sea to safety in the Sinai wilderness. In the Sinai wilderness, the appearance of the Mosaic covenant emerges through the interaction between God and Moses. The continuity of the covenants that precede the Mosaic covenant propels its purpose as a covenant of works. The Mosaic covenant was developed by God’s design as His sovereign intent was clear about humanity’s inability to save or recover itself. Moreover, any spiritually evil entity or force that would accuse God of entering a covenant of grace toward humanity has no place in redemptive history. The gravity of sin and rebellion must undergo judgment as a necessity to bring about salvation for God’s glory.18 The Mosaic covenant that begins a new era of redemption by works takes its fullest expression in what not to do through behavioral commandments by divine revelation. The ten commandments (Ex 20:1-17) revealed God’s will as a set of moral imperatives God’s people could not escape. There would be many additional laws to follow.

The scope of the Mosaic covenant was more expansive than the decalogue of commandments that God gave to Moses on Mt Sinai.19 The initial covenant as ten commandments originated from Moses before God on behalf of his people to continue their relationship with Him as God’s chosen people. The development of the covenant as commandments soon after took shape as a body of laws around three primary categorical areas. As the ten commandments are foundational to natural law, it is written in the hearts of all people, so it binds all of humanity to it as a standard.20 First, this is the moral law (Ex 20:1-26) as the ten commandments that act as an external constraint, reveal sin, and serve as a body of rules for Godly living. The second categorical area of the Mosaic covenant as law is judicial or civil law (Ex 21:1-24:18). The political requirements of Israel between tribal members expired with the nation as its social equity changed over time to satisfy obligations according to legal and magisterial conditions. For example, the Westminster Confession of Faith specifies, “To them also he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any now by virtue of that institution; their general equity only being of moral use” (WCF 19.4) to correspond to Paul’s letter to the Corinthians concerning principles of equity and justice (1 Cor 9:8-10). The third and final category of the Mosaic covenant involved ceremonial laws (Ex 25:1-40:38) now abrogated within the New Testament (Acts 10; 15; 1 Cor. 8; Heb. 10) to demonstrate its limited usefulness for its intended duration and purpose (WCF 19.3). For example, laws concerning the Tabernacle, the Priesthood, etc., are now extinct.21 These categories of the Mosaic covenant set a framework for a covenantal living before God.

The Deuteronomic Covenant

(Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20)

The decalogue within Deuteronomy widens the scope and depth. It fully expresses what is required to reiterate the Mosaic covenant. While the Mosaic covenant and the ten commandments were about what not to do in keeping the law and covenant of works, the Deuteronomic covenant is about what to do positively. The Deuteronomic structure of the decalogue further develops the Mosaic covenant by specifying what worshipers of Yahweh are not to do; The Deuteronomic Law is in contrast to what they are to do.22 Covenant loyalty to Yahweh was imperative as Israel was prone to covenantal and social injustices, idolatry, and ritualism that poisoned their worship (Deut 12:29-31, 32:16-17).

Before Israel was to leave the wilderness without Moses, they were called to repentance (Deut 30:1-10) and given a choice of life and death to love God and obey His voice (Deut 30:11-20). They were to hear the reading of the law (Deut 31:9-13) upon the renewal of the Mosaic covenant, and God’s promise to remain with Joshua (Deut 31:23) was voiced to bring them into the land of Canaan as promised. The perpetuated covenants that extended back from Genesis 3:15 reached further into the future as the Mosaic covenant was renewed after the Exodus generation died off (Deut 2:14) as the remaining Israelite people were to enter their new homeland.

The renewed Mosaic covenant in the form of the Deuteronomic covenant was more expansive about what to do and what not to do as the people of God. Compared to the moral, judicial, and ceremonial laws, there were more details of living from a nomadic people to a settled nation. However, it was the “covenant of the LORD” they were to obey (Deut 31:25).

The Davidic Covenant

(2 Samuel 7:6-17)

The harmonized covenant promises given to Abraham correlate to those promised to David. Namely, David was promised a great nation, peace, and a kingdom (Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:8-14).23 Just as Abraham was promised land, offspring, and blessing, the purpose of covenants stem from the Adamic covenant that makes the continuation of the Davidic kingdom and promises inevitable. From the time of David, kingly accessions took place where the prominence and failures of rulers led to messianic fulfillment many years later. The building of the Solomonic temple carried with it implications about a house God would build for David. When David intended to build a house for God out of gratitude for temporary covenant fulfillment of peace, he did so to honor God and the Mosaic covenant through priestly practices associated with the tabernacle, offerings, ceremonies, and judicial law.

While God did not permit David to build the temple, Solomon, David’s son, was enabled to do so. However, the crux of the covenant was that God would build David a house instead (2 Sam 7:11). A house that would endure forever as fulfillment toward God’s messianic intentions became the path where a covenant of grace through Christ would emerge. The promise of the Davidic covenant begins with the building of the house of David as it would never be destroyed. While his kingdom and successors would be destroyed and exiled as a consequence of disobedience and covenant violations, David’s throne and kingdom would never be destroyed (2 Sam 7:13). In fact, the Davidic covenant would extend to messianic fulfillment as the angel Gabriel sent from God informed Mary, Jesus’s mother, that she would give birth to a son who would be given the throne of David (Luke 1:32).

Synthesis of Old Testament Covenants

The redemptive path of humanity is along a series of covenants toward eschatological fulfillment. The New Testament is a continuation of the covenants throughout a redemptive-historical timeline that perpetuates recurring themes of the human dynasty, divine events, and God’s direct involvement.24 As there is an enormous background of redemptive history, it is clear that both natural and supernatural work takes place toward the salvation of humanity through judgment for the glory of God. The preservation of God’s people, and nations, even through the destruction of many peoples and nations, still assure that God’s glory would remain, and His promises of covenant fulfillment would eventually situate a kingdom of God both on Earth and within His domain.

The numerous Old Testament covenants consist of a threaded means of redemptive work through various means. Compared to the New Testament covenant of grace, a covenant of works was common among all Old Testament covenants. Both positive and negative expressions involve divine and human activity to recount what went wrong and return to God for His glory where humanity can enjoy Him forever.

The promises of blessings, protection, peace, prosperity and well-being in fellowship with God continued as a recurring cycle. From Adam to Noah and from Noah to Abraham and David, the biblical theology concerning the covenants they carried applied to them individually but also to their immediate surroundings, including families, relatives, property, creation, and humanity itself. Even before the arrival of Christ Jesus, there was a pattern of covenants that implied a convergence toward fulfillment through God’s sovereign will.

New Testament

The narratives of the New Testament gospels offer the clearest view of Christ Jesus’s life to understand what the new covenant would accomplish. The trajectory of Old Testament covenants culminates in the life of Christ and what He was to accomplish. The patriarchs, poets, and prophets wrote about the coming Messiah. And they looked for His arrival with hope and anticipation as they knew the promised fruit of the covenants God spoke to them about. The human appeal to the biblical covenants in the New Testament is compelling because of the desperate need for salvation from sin and condemnation by eternal separation from God.

There is a larger theological rationale concerning the Trinity that cannot be avoided or neglected. Guy M. Richard, in his paper “The Covenant of Redemption,” he offers a perspective that goes to the heart of what covenant theology is about. He makes the point that the inner life of God consists of genuine communication between the three persons of the trinity without lapsing into tritheism.24 While reaching back to the time of creation, the trinitarian effort to make man in their image was an act of divine will to share a cooperative covenant between them (Gen 1:26). References to the Christian life are found in the work of each triadic person’s contribution to the salvation of a person, the church and its leadership, and the Godly life.25 

The revelation of Christ as God incarnate further reinforced the spiritual and physical realities of who God is and what His intentions involved. The Father, the Holy Spirit, and the Messiah were foretold across Old Testament covenants and worked toward humanity’s redemption, each carrying out their will according to Old and New Testament events.

As the new covenant fulfillment unfolds throughout the pages of the New Testament, eternal Christ Jesus enters into creation to accomplish the mission of the Adamic covenant in Genesis 3:15. From Christ’s birth to His life’s ministry and redemptive work, God made it fully known that He was to fulfill numerous prophecies and bring to completion the covenants of old that transitioned to the new covenant as promised through Jeremiah the prophet (Jer 31:31). As Jesus carried out His mission toward the end of His time on Earth, He spoke of the New covenant. The night before His capture, as recorded in Luke 22:20, Jesus was together with His disciples as they shared their Passover meal commemorating the Passover event related to the Exodus (Ex 12:14). The significance of this time in history cannot be overstated as Christ was the new and flawless Passover lamb without blemish (Ex 12:5, Lev 22:20-21, 1 Cor 5:7) and the new Moses who led His people out of captivity. To the Israelites under the old covenant of works by Moses and humanity under the new covenant of grace by Jesus, one exodus was physical while the other was spiritual.

The New Covenant

(Jeremiah 31:31-37, Luke 22:20, Hebrews 8:7-13)

New covenant theology is an enormous topic that takes multiple lifetimes to pursue without ever reaching its fullest extent. However, a minimal perspective about the new covenant must take into account the various covenants established before it. The various means by which God attains glory through the salvation of His people culminates in the life and work of Christ. Jesus said that His blood of the covenant was offered for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28). This covenant Jesus refers to is the “new covenant,” as corroborated by Luke (Lk 22:20). While Clarence Larkin, in 1918, wrote that this is a covenant not yet made until Israel is back in their land, the inauguration of the new covenant is biblically supported by what Jesus said and did through the course of prophetic fulfillment. The covenant of grace was only possible and made effective by Christ’s work and His historical accomplishments. There is no scriptural basis to which the new covenant would only become effective after a lapse of time between Christ’s sacrificial death, resurrection, and ascension and the return of Israel to their homeland (which occurred on May 14th, 1948).26 

From among the Old Testament covenants, Jesus is seen as the fulfilling agent throughout redemptive history. In the Adamic covenant, He is the woman’s offspring (Gen 3:15). In the Noahic covenant, the ark foreshadows a vessel by which humanity begins anew. In the Abrahamic covenant, Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac in obedience to God foreshadows God the Father’s relationship with God the Son in Christ Jesus (Gen 22:2). In the Mosaic covenant, Jesus was the second Moses who led many from captivity to freedom (Luke 4:18). From the Davidic covenant, Jesus is the eternal King of kings and Lord of lords of the new Jerusalem (Rev 21:9-10).

The new covenant, as articulated in depth throughout the New Testament, has abundant intertextual references throughout Scripture. The New Testament’s use of the Old reaches back in time to bring out numerous textual references such as “eternal covenant” (Jer 32:40), “covenant of peace” (Ezek 37:26), or “My covenant” (Isa 49:8; 59:21; Hos 2:18–23; Ezek 16:6–3).27 Particularly among the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel, there are numerous references to new covenant characteristics. Primarily, the new covenant is about spiritual regeneration (Titus 3:5), the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28), and the fulfillment of historical covenants concerning Israel and God’s people throughout humanity across many generations.

James Hamilton makes a compelling case about the Holy Spirit’s presence within believers who live within today’s new covenant of grace. He makes further distinctions between the Old and New Testaments as he surveys the continuity and discontinuity of the Holy Spirit among God’s people between old and new covenant believers. With the Holy Spirit either with them (old covenant), indwelling them (new covenant), or neither. While Ezekiel 36:27 explicitly translates as “And I will put My Spirit within you,” there is a range of corresponding and contradictory perspectives that Hamilton maps across theologians of various eras. Namely, from the early to modern church, various well-known names are attributed to the old and new covenant distinctions about the presence of the Spirit as encountered by Joshua (“I will be with you,”  Deut 31:23) or at Pentecost (“They were filled with the Holy Spirit,” Acts 2:4).

The relatively even distribution of numerous theologians from different perspectives either affirms or denies the Holy Spirit’s continuity among old and new covenant believers. However, Hamilton makes a continuing persuasive case that God provided a means of regeneration and sanctification of saints from both old and new covenants. He argues that the full force of John 7:39, 14:16-17, and 16:7 stand along with the external presence of the Holy Spirit according to various Old Testament narratives.28

Conclusion

There are numerous ways in which the old and new covenants apply to believers today. Modeled throughout Scripture is God’s patience and willingness to stay the course with Israel, His chosen people. In the Old and New Testaments, He remained faithful to Israel while they repeatedly rejected Him. Believers today, as God’s people, can do the same with one another.

In the New Testament, the people of Israel were often hostile to Christ Jesus, their Messiah. The burden of individuals or leaders in the local church who are too often cruel, indifferent to fellow believers, and inattentive to the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) can have an adverse effect on fellowship or the kind of relationships that God expects. Tolerance and forgiveness of people by the guidance of the Word and the Holy Spirit are immediate ways in which believers can meet God’s expectations (Matt 18:21).

The long view of service within the church should reflect the work of God among the covenants among His people. Attainment of interpersonal synergies and weathering various hardships requires communication from a covenantal perspective. As the members of the Trinity remain in communication with one another, the three persons of God are an example to believers within the Church today.

A covenant commitment to the local church and individuals supports the space or spiritual environment in which personal development or discipleship can occur. Even with substantial resistance to instructions about living out the imperatives of Christ to love God and others, there is a covenant model of persistence to achieve peace and interpersonal advancement toward pleasing God and others for a more fruitful life.

Citations

1 Gleason Archer Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 214–215.
2 James M. Hamilton, “The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” Southern Baptist Journal of Theology Volume 10 10, no. 2 (2006): 43.
3 George E. Mendenhall and Gary A. Herion, “Covenant,” ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1180.
4 Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI;  Nottingham, UK: Baker Academic;  Apollos, 2007), 58.
5 P. W. Coxon, “Nephilim,” ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 619.
6 Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible, First Edition. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 90.
7 R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (2015 Edition) (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2015), 19.
8 Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, or “God’s Plan and Purpose in the Ages“ (Philadelphia, PA: Clarence Larkin, 1918), 162.
9 James M. Hamilton, “The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” Southern Baptist Journal of Theology Volume 10 10, no. 2 (2006): 34-39.
10 Thomas R. Schreiner, The King in His Beauty: A Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 11–12.
11 Miles V. Van Pelt, “The Noahic Covenant of the Covenant of Grace,” in Covenant Theology: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Perspectives, ed. Guy Prentiss Waters, J. Nicholas Reid, and John R. Muether (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 118.
12 Miles V. Van Pelt, “The Noahic Covenant of the Covenant of Grace,” in Covenant Theology: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Perspectives, ed. Guy Prentiss Waters, J. Nicholas Reid, and John R. Muether (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 120.
13 Daniel I. Block, Covenant: The Framework of God’s Grand Plan of Redemption (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2021), 2.
14 Michael S. Heiser, Angels: What the Bible Really Says about God’s Heavenly Host (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018), 45.
15 T. Desmond Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 175.
16 Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2003), 81.
17 Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 70.
18 James M. Hamilton Jr., God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 91.
19 Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, “Decalogue,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 607.
20 J. Nicholas Reid, “The Mosaic Covenant,” in Covenant Theology: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Perspectives, ed. Guy Prentiss Waters, J. Nicholas Reid, and John R. Muether (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 159.
21 Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, or “God’s Plan and Purpose in the Ages“ (Philadelphia, PA: Clarence Larkin, 1918), 164.
22 John H. Walton, “The Decalogue Structure of the Deuteronomic Law.” In Interpreting Deuteronomy: Issues and Approaches, by David G Firth, & Philip S. Johnston (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012), 93-117.
23 G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 29–30.
24 Guy M. Richard, “The Covenant of Redemption,” in Covenant Theology: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Perspectives, ed. Guy Prentiss Waters, J. Nicholas Reid, and John R. Muether (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 59.
25 Millard J. Erickson, God in Three Persons: A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1995), 189.
26 Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth, or “God’s Plan and Purpose in the Ages“ (Philadelphia, PA: Clarence Larkin, 1918), 165.
27 Abner Chou, “New Covenant,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
28 James M. Hamilton Jr., God’s Indwelling Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Old & New Testaments (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2006), 24.

Bibliography

Alexander, T. Desmond. From Eden to the New Jerusalem: Exploring God’s Plan for Life on Earth. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity, 2008.

—. From Paradise to the Promised Land. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012.

Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 2007.

Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Beale, G.K. A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011.

Beale, G.K., and D.A. Carson. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

Block, Daniel I. Covenant: The Framework of God’s Grand Plan of Redemption. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2021.

Chou, Abner. I Saw the Lord: A Biblical Theology of Vision. Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2013.

Chou, Abner. “New Covenant.” In The Lexham Bible Dictionary, by John D. ed, et al., Barry. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2016.

Coxon, P.W. “Nephilim.” In Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, by Karel ed. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, & Pieter W. van der Horst, 619. Cambridge: Brill;, 1999.

Erickson, Millard J. God in Three Persons: A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995.

Hamilton Jr., James M. God’s Indwelling Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Old & New Testaments. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2006.

Hamilton, James M. God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology. Wheaton: Crossway, 2010.

Hamilton, James M. “The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15.” Southern Baptist Journal of Theology Volume 10 10, no. 2, 2006: 28-43.

Heiser, Michael. Angels, What the Bible Really Says about God’s Heavenly Host. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2018.

—. The Unseen Realm. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2015.

Horton, Michael. Introducing Covenant Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2006.

Kline, Meredith G. Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2006.

Koehler, Ludwig, and et al. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994-2000.

Larkin, Clarence. Dispensational Truth; Rightly Dividing the Word. Philadelphia: Clarence Larkin, 1921.

Liddell, Henry George et al. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.

Mendenhall, George E, Gary A Herion, and David Noel ed. Freedman. The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

Richard, Guy M. “Parts I – Biblical Covenants.” In Covenant Theology: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Perspectives, by Guy Prentiss Waters, J. Nicholas Reid, & John R. Muether, 43-287. Wheaton: Crossway, 2020.

Schreiner, Thomas R. New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

—. The King in His Beauty: A Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013.

Sproul, R.C. The Reformation Study Bible. Lake Mary: Ligonier Ministries, 2005.

Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.

Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2003. Walton, John. “The Decalogue Structure of the Deuteronomic Law.” In Interpreting Deuteronomy: Issues and Approaches, by David G Firth, & Philip S. Johnston, 93-117. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012.


On Praxis and Neglect

While Hamilton’s book reads as a commentary throughout the canon, he effectively brings to mind his overall point. The center of biblical theology as God’s glory in salvation through judgment is the standing assertion of his book and it is an effective representation of his worldview about the reading of God’s holy words. Salvation as the soteriological purpose of the text concerns humanity’s interest toward the purpose of what God communicates through His appointed writers. However, while Hamilton touches on the meta-narratives adjacent to the plain meaning of Scripture, he does so from both horizontal and vertical perspectives. However, the important and pervasive subtext of scripture is that Christ was out to reclaim humanity and return it to the Creator by what He accomplished. The accession and triumph of Christ Jesus through His life, death, resurrection, ascension, and coronation, redeemed to God human creation that which is rightfully His. In the fulness of time, until all His enemies are made a footstool, the Kingdom was set to stand where the gates of hell shall not withstand it.

Through the timeless covenant of triadic love and unity, bearers of the Imago Dei would return to YHWH through means He appointed. From covenant to covenant, we see that unfold throughout the pages of scripture.

Hamilton’s conclusions in the last chapter of the book call readers to biblically centered ministry that involves intensive attention toward evangelism, discipleship, corrective church discipline, personal spiritual disciplines, bible reading, and prayer. This entire chapter is a refreshing perspective about what to do about biblical theology as it is developed within the hearts and minds of believers.

There were various places where I think he could have further developed some of his perspectives, but here are a few I noted.

  • Hamilton could have elaborated more about the difference between a circumcised heart of the OT and the indwelling of the Spirit in the NT.
  • Jesus’ gratitude for concealing revelation in some passages (Lk 10:21-22).
  • N.T. Wright is cited (pg. 404), but he is a social gospel advocate. Meaning, Wright is on record where he wrote that salvation is attained through ecclesiological efforts. Hamilton’s work here is dated back to 2010, so I suppose it’s limited in terms of growing NPP advocacy.

Low View of Scripture within the Church

Hamilton’s book led me to buy another text written by Kevin Vanhoozer (details here) entitled, Hearers and Doers: A Pastor’s Guide to Making Disciples Through Scripture and Doctrine. I’m going to read that book because its sections are just so relevant today in a world of social chaos. It’s my limited view that, in general, the evangelical church in the West is an epic disaster. It is a ghetto of theological thought as its faith and practice are too often vacant of scriptural principles and imperatives. Have a close look at this year’s SBC convention (2022), for example. And the breakup of various denominations in recent years.

  • Churches are largely social centers of well-being that are good for the local community and missions abroad for the gospel. Churches are a source of free volunteer labor for cities.
  • Over the course of the last year, I’ve firsthand observed that in nearly every church I visited, attendees don’t bring a bible. The same is true by monitoring live-streamed services among very many congregations online. Podium Tedtalks wouldn’t have as much use of Scripture. 
  • You may have already seen this. It’s a research project involving about 400,000 participants. The research yielded the following conclusions: 

Bible reading 1 day a week: No effect on participant
Bible reading 2 days a week: No effect on participant
Bible reading 3 days a week: Negligible effect on participant
Bible reading 4+ days a week:  Pronounced effect that differentiated people of belief

Research demographics and details:
https://www.centerforbibleengagement.org/
https://www.backtothebible.org/research

Predominately, new and seasoned believers among all denominations don’t read their bibles. No exceptions. Therefore, they do not know God as well as they should (if at all). 

It’s my view that the canon itself is inspired. In addition to the root text of Scripture. However, we let the words of our bible guide our convictions about spiritual development. Biblical theology deepens our understanding of what God meant by the Word written on the heart — to know the Lord personally and in a saving way distinct from cultural conditions historically among synagogues or churches. I’m aware of the LXX use among the apostles as their “bible”, the first century Hebrew Scripture, as well as the development of scrolls and codices to pixels. 

God’s Word written on the hearts of His people is a fruit of the new covenant (Jer 31:33, Heb 10:16). It’s also my view that the condition of the modern evangelical church is pretty bleak. Largely because very many don’t recognize or accept the authority of Scripture; never mind simple inattention to what it says.

As we all know, our Lord Jesus says that His disciples continue in His Word (John 8:31-32). So, while we have a lot of undiscipled converts in the church, there are quite a large number of people hungry for the Word, truth, and meaning. There are also very many goats in the church, too. And where shallow theology exists, there you’ll find shallow preaching and shallow worship. The deeper one goes into the doctrine of Scripture, the deeper our faith becomes. The deeper our worship and reverence as well. See Parsons on this. 

Also consider James 1:21, “Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.” In addition to what we learn about the inspiration of Scripture, Dustin Benge reminds us that the Spirit speaks through Scripture and I believe him as well. Here are a few additional points of interest that are top of mind from the Navigators merely as I write these comments. 

  1. Hear God’s Word (Rom 10:17) – Weakest form of scripture intake. Since we retain roughly 5% of what we hear.
  2. Read God’s Word (Rev 1:3) – Daily devotion is a separate dedicated time with the Lord in His word without intermingled distractions (like a phone). We retain roughly 15% of what we read which is why we need to keep at it.
  3. Study God’s Word (Acts 17:11) – Active in-depth analysis to search the Scriptures builds biblical fluency (Deut 6:5, Matt 22:37:40, Mark 12:30). The more we study, the more we retain. 
  4. Memorize God’s Word (Ps 119:9-11, Matt 4:4) – Jesus modeled for us the necessity of the Word to overcome temptation. So that we do not offend the God we love or harm others. He recited Scripture from memory and it was a powerful means of preventing devastating consequences. God’s Word is our sustenance. For the believer with the indwelling Spirit, the Word is our nourishment. 
  5. Meditate on God’s Word (Ps 1:2,3) – This is transformative as we allow all methods of intake to reach us deeper within. We yield to the Holy Spirit as God’s Word takes root, shapes our hearts, and forms within us an inexpressible love of God. 

Scripture Is a Crucial Instructional Guide

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” – Matthew 28:19–20 (ESV)

The word “observe” here is translated in a passive sense, but when we check BDAG, here’s a clearer definition: 

 ③       to persist in obedience, keep, observe, fulfill, pay attention to, esp. of law and teaching (LXX) τὶ someth. (Polyb. 1, 83, 5 legal customs; Herodian 6, 6, 1; Just., A I, 49, 3 τὰ παλαιὰ ἔθη) Mt 23:3; Ac 21:25 v.l.; Hs 5, 3, 9. 
         •      τὸν νόμον (Achilles Tat. 8, 13, 4; Tob 14:9; TestDan 5:1.
         •      τὰ νόμιμα τοῦ θεοῦ Hv 1, 3, 4 (τηρ. τὰ νόμιμα as Jos., Ant. 8, 395; 9, 222). 
         •      δικαιώματα κυρίου B 10:11. 
         •      τὰ πρὸς τὸν κύριον AcPl Ha 8, 11; 13. 
         •      πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν Mt 28:20

William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1002.

So, what is it to obey, specifically? A few years ago I thoroughly read and studied John Piper’s Book What Jesus Demands from the World. You can get a free PDF of it here: Book Copy.  The desiringGod folks made it free for everyone. I chose a printed book version, plus the digital copy to listen to while at times reading at the same time.

The book extracts each and every specific instruction/command Jesus gave to His followers (as He spoke about in Matt 28:20 above). That discipleship is to train people to specifically do what He said. There are 50 commands, instructions, or imperatives within the gospels that Jesus spoke. This book is a walk-through of each. It is a blessing to see where exactly we can obey, but also see where the gaps are among churches that don’t. This is where pastors and church leaders are not fully obeying, or fulfilling their obligation (among various other areas).

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”
– John 14:15 (ESV)

To see what these imperatives are, I put together verse memory cards to review and check myself to stimulate interest, dwell upon, and act toward. I cut them to size and glued them to card stock. What Jesus Demands from the World Cards: 

In addition to the disciplines of prayer, worship, fellowship, scripture, and sharing of our faith, we need to be primarily attentive to what our King wants. 

So I would also like to offer an opportunity for you to consider:

Donating like this is a great way to express our gratitude to God for His Word in our lives. 


Points of Illumination

Just as a matter of clarity, the practice of Biblical Theology is to understand the “theology” of biblical books or their authors in original grammatical, cultural, and historical contexts. Without imposing any modern categories of thought on the text. There is an internal unity of the text interspersed throughout diverse scriptural genres (narratives, poetry, letters, wisdom literature, etc.). The biblical narratives are self-referentially coherent. The narratives between the Old and New Testaments correspond with various modes of authoritative meaning to derive principles, imperatives, and specific instructions concerning faith and practice.

Narrative stories approached theologically inform readers for pastoral utility or academic use to support doctrine and sound beliefs to satisfy covenant obligations of the church and individuals. Biblical theology helps us understand the narratives to yield the fruit of truth as God’s revelation to humanity. Where it becomes clear who abides by objective truth according to valid hermeneutical methods and who doesn’t (i.e., intertextuality, intended interpretation, etc.). Moreover, chronologically sequenced narratives establish presuppositions of biblical authors. Presuppositions in which readers rest upon God’s word as truth according to what authors actually meant without inferior social, religious, or academic interest.

Someone who might think Scripture, or the gospels are merely moral stories misses the larger scope and depth of God’s Word, the Bible.

  • The gospels are a story about a new exodus. Deliverance from one type of slavery in the OT that later became deliverance and freedom from another in the NT
  • Christ Jesus fulfilled expectations to satisfy God’s judgment over sin
  • Christ Jesus came to fulfill the law as articulated in the gospel narratives
  • Jesus performed many miracles
  • Jesus saved many people from temporal and eternal judgment and condemnation
  • Jesus gathered sinners to Him and gave them hope
  • Jesus set the conditions for acceptance or rejection
  • Jesus fulfilled prophecy in numerous recorded events in the gospels
  • Jesus formed and incubated a Kingdom on Earth in the form of His Church
  • Jesus called many to repentance
  • Jesus demonstrated compassion to his followers and enemies
  • Jesus was a model of Godly living
  • Jesus warned of judgment and eternal permanent conscious misery to unbelievers
  • Jesus introduced sacraments, instructions on prayer, and how to worship
  • Jesus offered eternal life to those who would repent, trust, and follow Him.

Questions to highlight the interconnected nature of Scripture largely converge toward the gospels in the life and identity of Christ.


The Mouths of Bashan

Numerous examples of prophetic usage originate from meaning within the Psalms, as illustrated in the reading this week. There are numerous connections from the Psalms to the prophets and the gospel writers. An example comes to mind concerning Psalm 22. 

As Psalm 22 is widely known as a messianic, and it is prophetically echoed in the life of Christ and what He accomplished, as made evident by the Apostle Matthew (Matt 27:32-55). The psalm wasn’t originally about the crucifixion of Jesus, but it certainly carried prophetic weight and meaning at the time of the crucifixion (i.e., the already but not yet principle of prophecy). Specifically, Psalm 22 projects forward a later reference to the prophet Amos concerning the “cows of Bashan” or bovines of Bashan (Amos 4:1-2). Psalm 22:12-13 reads as follows:

12Many bulls encompass me; strong bulls of Bashan surround me;
13they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.

The prophetic implication from Amos 4:1-2 is compared as follows:

1“Hear this word, you cows of Bashan, who are on the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to your husbands, ‘Bring, that we may drink!’
2The Lord God has sworn by his holiness that, behold, the days are coming upon you, when they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks.

The prophet Amos much later than the time of David (author of Ps 22) is a reference back to the bulls of Bashan from the mountains of Samaria. That is, by implication, the “cows of Bashan” are of the mountains of Samaria (cultic area of Caesarea-Philippi, Mt Hermon, region of Dan) who were temple priestesses who served “the gods” as deities in the form of idols or golden calves. The “gods” reference, who oppressed the poor and needy (Ps 82:4), is likely a source that informed the prophet Amos concerning judgment to befall Israel because of their worship of demonic entities (Deut 32:1). The prophet Amos recognized the association between the territory of Bashan and demonic activity related to idolatry.

Sorceress Circe by Il Grechetto
Yr.1651

Fast forward to the first century and second temple period, as Jesus was surrounded by the “Bulls of Bashan,” Matthew knew of what David wrote of the demonic entities who were many that surrounded Him. They opened wide their anthropomorphic mouths at Him during His execution (Ps 22:13). The bulls of Bashan intertextually connect back to both Amos and the messianic psalm with integrated meaning around the cultural and historical evil present in Northern Israel. In my view, this was the reason Christ’s transfiguration with prophets Moses and Elijah took place on Mt Hermon to reclaim humanity and bring the Kingdom of God to Earth right before His crucifixion in Jerusalem. Mt Hermon is in Bashan, and Jesus knew who the bulls of Bashan were. He knew of Israel’s history of demon worship.

The death of Jesus on the cross is of further meaning from Psalm and Amos as it is written concerning the work He accomplished to overcome sin and death. The spiritual entities present at the time of His crucifixion were prophesied in the text of Psalm 22 and in plain sight for the connections made with sufficient research. Further in the reading of Psalm 22, and from materials the psalmists and prophets read, the inference is that the bulls of Bashan were the sons of God referenced in Ps 82:1. The text insinuates that connections are carefully made between the psalms and prophets. However, it takes more than just passive reading to originate those connections. – Further reading into Psalm 22, who were the dogs referenced in Ps 22:16? Who were the Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus? Gentiles. Gentiles in Jewish culture are referred to as “dogs.” The personified connections made throughout the psalm for prophetic inference toward later use permit the reader to make connections not otherwise apparent.

These are the type of connections made throughout the psalms and the prophets. This time, about elohim as disembodied dead, spiritual powers (Eph 6:12), and the sons of God, or watchers/angels that the prophet Daniel wrote about (Dan 4:13-17). Further substantive meaning concerning the Son of Man (Daniel’s cloud rider), divine transgressions, and so forth at length is steeped in material that the poets and prophets were certainly aware of.


Of Continuity & Coherence

While reading through The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers again, I noted various points of interest that I found helpful. There were many excellent points I wrote out separately while reading the book’s chapters. This outline is of some perspectives that stood out and serve as valuable examples.  

  • Jesus drew upon the logic of the OT writers
  • Jesus adhered to principles from the old covenant that extended to the new covenant
  • Jesus recognized the biblical writer’s claims and roles in redemptive history
  • The gospel writers were in thought continuity about OT subject matter
  • Christ’s claims instantiated the grounds that the gospel writers interpreted and applied OT Scripture (i.e., recognition of new and progressive revelation) to derive imperatives and illocutionary force
  • The biblical writers attached new and consistent meaning to earlier authors’ authority
  • The presuppositions of biblical authors were informed by the continuity of OT covenants, humanity’s redemptive history, and YHWH’s soteriological purpose

Look among the nations, and see; wonder and be astounded.
For I am doing a work in your days that you would not believe if told.
– Hab 1:5

  • Look, see, wonder, and be astounded at what God has done during redemptive history during OT and NT revelation

Making Coherent Scripture Connections

Let Scripture illuminate Scripture. There are numerous allusions, echoes, citations, and quotes between the biblical writers. Let’s recognize them to interpret and understand what they meant. The continuity of the prophetic and apostolic hermeneutic rests upon the logical biblical writer’s expression of Scriptural intertextuality. They were models for believers today who seek to interpret and understand revelation according to proper methods of interpretation. The development of biblical theologies is guided by what God wrote through a corpus of texts by authors He appointed. Let’s abide by what He brought together through them for generations who seek Him by His Word.

The Master’s Seminary posted a video series (31-lectures) of Dr. Thomas Schreiner’s course of Biblical Theology. In the first lecture, he briefly points to James Hamilton’s work (very end of the video). Notably, concerning the trace work of passages that concern biblical concepts that extend to further passages through historical and theological development. While Schreiner spoke of the Biblical Theology of God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment text, he also made a vague reference to Hamilton’s paper The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15. Anyone can download the paper (PDF copy) from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

I highly suspect that Hamilton’s paper about Genesis 3:15 from 2006 had a bearing on his biblical theology text as it was published in 2010. In the Genesis 3:15 paper (The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15), Hamilton wrote about biblical connections; not explicitly as an example of a method, but of substance.

Dr. Abner Chou’s hermeneutics text is an excellent complementary view about the how with Hamilton’s textbook example concerning the what and why. To unearth the treasures of biblical theologies from God’s appointed writers. — So, in this case, and in many places, the crushing, smashing, and puncturing of the head of the enemy, beginning from Genesis 3:15, shows up in various canonical texts to definitively record what would happen again and again both literally and figuratively. By this connect the dots approach, Hamilton demonstrates that the OT canon as a whole is a messianic document with soteriological continuity straight from the garden. Which is utterly amazing. 

In addition to the Hamilton paper I read this afternoon, I also highly recommend Schreiner’s Biblical Theology 31-lecture series he gave to TMS some while back. 

I also gathered quite a bit from Dr. Chou’s book concerning the prophetic and apostolic hermeneutic. To where their hermeneutic becomes the Christian hermeneutic. Having read Dr. Chou’s book twice, the intertextual relationships between the biblical materials are important to grasp.

There really is quite a bit there when running a topical course as a biblical theology of interest. For example, here are a few screen captures below from the Logos application I use to visually see what relationships exist. Many theologians, exegetes, pastors, and students use this tool. A lot of bible students use this application and I highly recommend it.

Conducting intertextual analysis is much more efficient this way and all the links of NT to OT and OT to NT are visually mapped with active multi-dimensional links between all passages in the canon. This example below, among very many, is about Jesus from both testaments intertextually linked bringing to the surface contours of meaning. As patterns of continuity among the biblical authors (such as comparing what Isaiah said about Messiah as compared to Ezekiel). From the New Testament’s use of the Old alone, there are 2,574 total allusions, citations, echoes, and quotations definitively mapped. However, there’s quite a bit more from a lateral perspective. 

Example – The Intertextuality of Biblical Christology

Example - The Intertextuality of Biblical Christology

Example – The Christological Intertextuality of Isaiah to the NT

Example - The Christological Intertextuality of Isaiah to the NT

Example – The Christological Intertextuality of Hebrews to the OT

Example - The Christological Intertextuality of Hebrews to the OT

Of course, any book combination between the OT and NT can be selected. And once a link (or strand) is clicked, a grid of reference listing is rendered for the patterns, contours, citations, quotations, allusions, and echoes. As we traverse specific topics to recognize and understand biblical theology, it is with limited results since the text is translated to English. But the breadth and depth are more comprehensive this way to get a rich and full meaning. In my view, full immersion within these tools is time well spent. 


The Well of Coherence

It is a healthy thought exercise to reflect on how the biblical writers change our perspective on Scripture. The hermeneutic of the prophets and apostles is a hermeneutic of surrender. A surrender to the authority and intentional meaning of Scripture from its authors. A reader response hermeneutic is, by comparison, a subjective way of reading the text of Scripture to suit preferences and to shape messages or meaning toward inner personal thoughts, desires, or objectives. Efforts to conform the meaning of Scripture incidental or contrary to the biblical writers’ intended messaging toward instruction, counsel, or pastoral agendas is a defective and unacceptable approach to “interpretation.” The biblical writers extensively sought the intended meaning of what the patriarchs, prophets, and poets wrote and did. Rules of proper hermeneutical interpretation were applied for obedience, faith, and practice to include the development of further narratives and genres to form Spirit-inspired Scripture.

The extent to which the biblical writers were expositors of Scriptural truth cannot be overstated. Their contribution to Scripture’s theological and exegetical groundwork is thoroughly abundant and significant, as made evident by the depth and range of intertextual synthesis. From the Old Testament and the New, biblical writers were thoroughly immersed in Scripture present in their time, and they were exceptional exegetes. Each was able to assemble meaningful theological thoughts from the guidance of the Holy Spirit and by conscious interpretive efforts to produce theologies that would extend to millions across generations. The prophets and apostles developed theologies that provide a framework for continuing biblical interpretation of immeasurable value. Not only of enormous historical significance but of covenantal weight that assures God’s glory and redeemed humanity’s salvation.

There is a continuity of basic, deep, and intricate Scriptural meaning interwoven throughout the Bible. The patterns by which biblical writers wrote, inferred, referenced, overlapped, reinforced, and synchronized theological messaging are interrelated across time, languages, and translations. Scriptural intertextuality is the relationship between texts in a coherent sense of the reading. Still, there is more to its structural value because God’s Word, the Bible, is a supernatural book. As it is written, the implanted word received has the power to save souls (Jas 1:21). It is also a record of Jesus’ life and His work, miracles, teachings, and transformative power. The Word is a source of spiritual nourishment (Deut. 8:3, Matt 4:4). It reports on the fulfillment of ancient prophecies and foretells apocalyptic warnings and promises. It is a self-witness testimony to the wisdom of God, and it shall never pass away.

From the pactum salutis to the ordo salutis, the biblical writers wrote expressions of God’s mercy, grace, and wisdom for people who hunger for Him and objective truth. It’s not an academic book. Or merely a guidebook on godly living. God’s Word is a treasure. It is a storehouse of promises. It is a well of living water. It is a conduit to peace. It bears the fruit of praise for worshipers who love the living and triune God.


The Doctrine of Justification

What is justification? Or justification before God by faith? To quote, justification is “a forensic (legal) term related to the idea of acquittal, justification refers to the divine act whereby God makes humans, who are sinful and therefore worthy of condemnation, acceptable before a God who is holy and righteous. More appropriately described as “justification by grace through faith,” this key doctrine of the Reformation asserts that a sinner is justified (pardoned from the punishment and condemnation of sin) and brought into relationship with God by faith in God’s grace alone.”1

Justification According to Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans

The walkthrough of Paul’s letter to the Romans concerning the doctrine of justification is especially helpful in reinforcing personal convictions about the truth of God’s Word and His covenant promises. The author, Andrew Naselli, offers an exceptional essay about what Paul meant about justification among crucial principles throughout his letter to the Romans. The theological messaging of Romans, as presented by Naselli, is thoroughly contextual as various relevant passages are traversed across both the Old and New Testaments. Moreover, as justification by grace is widely supported by the work of Christ and various New Testament writers, the author details how Paul’s theology contributes to the doctrine of justification.

Naselli’s paper isn’t an exposition of the book of Romans as a commentary or a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter it contains. The author sequentially takes large sections of the book to fully develop the meaning of justification to the church in Rome, but more widely to those of Asia-minor during the first century. Paul’s exhaustive letter concerning justification and soteriology applied to the early church just as it does today. To build the faith and development of believers, Paul makes a persuasive and compelling case about the differences between the Old Covenant and the New before he writes about implications beginning in chapter 5.

The condition and circumstances of sinful humanity condemned before righteous God characterizes the desperate situation relieved by the mercies of God through Christ Jesus, His Son (Matt 3:17). As Paul begins his letter about the sinful condition of people inclined to self-destructive and offensive behaviors, he further reveals the righteousness of God the further he progresses toward good news for those who believe and abide in Christ. Paul’s recitation of the Old Testament that all people are sinful and no one does good (Rom 3:10,12, Ps. 14:1–3; 53:1–3) shows that intervention apart from the law was clearly and desperately needed. The old covenant law has taught us that Christ was necessary to bring us to God so that we might be justified by faith (Gal 3:24). The need to transition from law to grace becomes apparent as people become justified by faith alone, just as Abraham was. As the spiritual children of Abraham, heirs to the Kingdom of God, attain justification just as he did by faith or believing in God. The Abrahamic covenant was fulfilled in Christ by His imputed righteousness to those who believe in Him by faith. Even the ungodly, as made clear from Romans 4:5.

Justification by Faith

The means by which God imputes righteousness for justification is through faith (Rom 3:25). Supported by how Abraham was justified and counted righteous by believing in God, Paul would have to assert that what applied to Abraham applies to his offspring (Gal 3:29). Specifically, external righteousness that comes from faith is transferrable to his offspring as the righteousness of Christ becomes imparted to believers. Even while Abraham was a wandering Aramean, his belief in God informed him and his family where to go and that pleased God, where righteousness was imputed or infused into an ungodly man. While there were various errant and sinful behaviors of Abraham during his journeys recorded in Genesis, there was the presence of grace upon him from God. Since he believed in God, Abraham was credited as righteous by grace through faith as a gift (Eph 2:8-9).

As Paul wrote to the Church in Rome, we can infer that he spoke to both Jews and Gentiles. Everyone was given a path to peace with God as reconciliation became possible through faith in Christ, who died for the ungodly (Rom 5:6). As justification was accomplished through Jesus’ blood, the Messiah’s sacrifice was pleasing to God (Isa 53:10; see BDAG) as believers in Christ were saved from His wrath (Rom 5:9). Naselli makes further observations about what Paul wrote about the outcome of justification. He indicates explicitly that believers have peace with God and access to Him through Christ. Those who abide in Jesus rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, their sufferings, and God Himself.

After Paul’s brief parenthetical account of the law and sin (chapter 7) and its devastating consequences, he pivoted to a theological understanding of condemnation and justification as opposites. Where Christ either perfectly fulfilled the law, or people keep the law through Spirit’s enabling, depending upon your perspective, the sovereignty of God is at work to call people to Him as justified and without condemnation. The certainty of believers before God includes their justification within an unbreakable chain of inevitability. Namely, the well-known golden chain of redemption from beginning to end assures the final eschatological completion of each person in Christ (Rom 8:28-30). God’s actions redeemed people are foreknown then predestined, called, justified, and glorified as an astonishing sequence of theological beauty. In fulfillment of total reconciliation, His people attain justification and are made righteous through faith to become secured in the love of Christ (Rom 8:35-39). No one can condemn His people redeemed to Him through Christ or bring a charge against them as the favor of God rests upon those reconciled (Rom 8:32-34).

Finally, Naselli focuses on a remaining section of Paul’s letter to the Romans concerning justification. Romans 9:30-10:13 specifically aims to contrast believing Gentiles to unbelieving Israel, who were God’s chosen people. To demonstrate the difference between a right standing by the faith of believers or alienation by works of righteousness, Israel tried to satisfy the Mosaic law. It was an impossible and futile effort as they had failed to satisfy all earlier covenants as a nation many times before. Israel did not believe in Jesus as their Messiah but rejected Him. In the Old Testament, God’s people of Israel didn’t accept His gift of righteousness and justification by faith.

Theological Facts of Justification

—Naselli’s narrative discourse on the theology of justification is adapted to a table assembled below for ease of review about theological facts.2

ItemJustification Theological Facts2References
1MeaningJustification is judicial, not experiential.Rom 5:15-19
2MeaningJustification includes forgiveness.Rom 4:6-8
3MeaningJustification includes imputation.Rom 4:1–8; 5:15–19
4MeaningJustification is vertical, not horizontal.Rom 1:17; 3:21–26;
Rom 9:30–10:13
5NeedJustification is necessary because all humans without exception are sinners under God’s condemning wrath.Rom. 1:18–3:20
6BasisJustification is based on God’s imputing Christ’s righteousness to believing sinners —which is possible because of propitiation.Rom. 4:1–8; 5:15–19
Rom 3:25–26
7BasisJustification is based on God’s imputing Christ’s righteousness to believing sinners—which is possible because God raised Christ from the dead.Rom 4:1–8; 5:15–19 Rom 4:24-25
8BasisJustification is based on God’s imputing Christ’s righteousness to believing sinners—which is possible because of union with Christ.Rom. 4:1–8; 5:15–19 Rom 3:24; 5:12–21; 8:1
9MeansJustification is a gracious gift that sinful humans cannot earn.Rom. 2:5–16; 3:9–20, 24, 27–28; 4:1–5; 5:16–17; 9:30–10:5
10MeansJustification is accessible by faith alone in Christ alone.Rom 1:17; 3:22, 25; 4:3–5, 9–25; 5:1–2; 9:30–10:13
11MeansJustification occurs through redemption.Rom 3:24
12Accessibility Justification is accessible to everyone without ethnic distinction.Rom. 3:22–23, 29–30; 4:9–17; 10:11–13
13ResultsJustification is now inseparably connected to freedom from the law.Rom. 3:19–21; 7:1–25; 9:30–10:13
14ResultsJustification is inseparably connected to peace with God.Rom 5:1
15ResultsJustification is inseparably connected to the most deeply rooted and satisfying rejoicing.Rom 5:2-11
16ResultsJustification is inseparably connected to progressive sanctification.Rom 6:1-23
17ResultsJustification is inseparably connected to assurance that God will finish what he planned, accomplished, and applied.Rom 8:28-39
18FutureJustification is definitive and will be final when God publicly vindicates believers.Rom 2:13; 5:18; 8:30, 32-34
19GoalJustification ultimately glorifies God.Rom 11:36

Jesus accomplished these feats of redemption to bring out immense heartfelt gratitude. Where we have nothing but surrender to His kindness and immeasurable love. The theological treatise Apostle Paul sets forward to the Romans applies to everyone today who would confess Christ, invite Him to live within, abide by His teachings, and every day abundant mercies.

The Means of Salvation

Author Brandon Crowe of Westminster Theological Seminary wrote a paper entitled, “By Grace You Have Been Saved through Faith.” This title corresponds to what Apostle Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:8a, “For by grace you have been saved through faith” (ESV), to echo how the whole passage begins. The remainder of the verse reads, “And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Eph 2:8b-9). With complete clarity about what it means to be justified before God (i.e., “saved”), what God spoke through Apostle Paul’s words carries soteriological significance. Because of God’s active involvement among people, both grace and faith are together a gift for individual salvation resulting in eternal life with Him. To walk by faith while under grace as a means of justification is thoroughly supported by additional Pauline letters to the early church.

This very well-known passage concerning justification is supported by letters from Paul he wrote while traveling to developing churches along the Aegean sea and the surrounding interior cities of Asia Minor. He spoke of principles with confidence and authority about what it was to attain salvific standing before God from congregations, towns, homes, individuals, and while in prison. The principles were directly related to God’s acts of justifying the ungodly to return people to Him who were otherwise forever lost. Believers in Christ redeemed through His redemptive work who live lives of faith have the grace to attain salvation in life and from God’s wrath against sin.

Inclusive of all people, both Jews, and Gentiles, the spread of the gospel from Galatia to Corinth and back across the Mediterranean, the specifics involving the work of Christ are especially explicit from 1 Cor 15:1-4, where Paul writes of the gospel message that extends to everyone along his missionary journeys. This gospel message is about the ministry and sacrificial death of Jesus on a cross and His resurrection, ascension, and coronation. The gospel is about reconciliation to God through faith and repentance. Where faith is necessary for justification, Paul consistently spreads the gospel message to the churches in Galatia, Corinth, Thessalonica, Ephesus, Philippi, Colossae, and numerous specific individuals recorded within scripture. Not to mention the various unrecorded locations he visited and individuals he spoke to, there was a pattern of Paul’s gospel message reflected in scripture elsewhere (e.g., Troas, Berea, Tarsus). Everywhere he went, the point of the gospel was reconciliation and justification to involve numerous additional theological teachings such as sanctification, social inclusion, eschatology, church formation, and church discipline.

Of particular interest was Paul’s instruction concerning false teaching and the message of grace that did not include human merit or performance. In contradiction to works of the law, Paul spoke of God’s grace that characterized new covenant faith and practice. The new nature of people free from sin previously held captive by the law was now under grace to produce justification and sanctification through repentance. As Paul wrote each letter addressed to specific churches by geographical locale, the forgiveness of sins and deliverance from sinful living were brought out as a matter of pressing instruction and attention for corrective action or as an underlying subtext about fruitful living and more well informed theological understanding.

Crowe organizes his paper about salvation by grace through faith by each of Paul’s letters. He does that to highlight the point that the doctrine of justification is not a stand-alone perspective from his letter to the Romans. All of Paul’s letters as a corpus of doctrine are necessary for a robust and defensible understanding of justification. Each geographical category Paul addresses pertains to circumstances present during their ancient cultural context, but even today, intended for scriptural truth about God’s total redemptive work as a whole of humanity. Through sovereign intent, the principles that reinforce the work of justification through Christ involve the pastoral epistles and the non-Pauline texts of scripture.

The Doctrine of Justification to the Churches in Galatia

The formative churches within Galatia were East of the Aegean Sea and North of the Mediterranean coast, where modern-day Turkey is. The churches of Galatia included the locations where Paul traveled during his first and second missionary journeys from Antioch to bring the gospel to people. After establishing churches and fellowship of believers was formed among the towns, he wrote to them about various topics. A key among them was concerning justification by faith. The church then and today, informed by Galatians 2:16, reveals the most essential scriptural point that works of the law do not justify a person. While Paul’s message concerned works of the law about Jewish requirements of the Mosaic covenant, the reader of his letter further reads later, “for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love” (Gal 5:6). Written or interpreted more concisely, only faith working through love counts for anything. As the basis for good works, love is not salvific but purely evidence of authentic faith that justifies a person before God.

Further, throughout the letter to the Galatians, Paul sets up an exhaustive refutation of works-righteousness to destroy its value of interest among people who may continue to think that salvation is achieved or earned. Justification is not a synergistic effort as one somehow “partners with God” to attain salvation. Salvation is given by grace through faith and not from “works” an individual does. A careful examination of Greek Lexicons (BDAG and LSJ)3 specific to the grammatical use of “works” within Ephesians 2:9 renders definition as an action, deed, duty, or accomplishment. Definitively, Paul completely removes any faint notion that justification, and therefore salvation, is merited by deeds, actions, fulfillment of duty, achievement, or accomplishment.

The Doctrine of Justification to the Churches in Corinth & Thessalonica

As previously noted above, it was to the Corinthian church that the gospel was again presented to readers who were not regenerated (1 Cor 15:1-4). The message of redemption that involved justification was stressed in Paul’s first letter to the church at Corinth as contentious issues were present from the leadership at the time. While the church was addressed with specific issues involving discipline and various doctrines of the faith, the matter of justification was touched upon as it was with the Galatians. A few sections of Paul’s letter bring further attention to justification by inference in various passages as follows.

A careful reading of 1 Corinthians 1:30 brings into view a phrase that is less than obvious about justification. The verse reading that includes the terms “in Christ” specifies a positional statement inferring justification.4 The text “in Christ” within 1 Cor 1:30 corresponds to the same language earlier in the letter as “the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2). At both locations of the text, Paul uses the terms in Christ to indicate a unity with Jesus as saints are recognized, sanctified, and holy just as He is. Therefore, by inference and reason, it is concluded that justification is attributed to the representative righteousness of Christ to believers. While this is likely better suited to a discussion about the imputation of Christ’s righteousness upon believers, it doesn’t serve a reader well to miss the point of justification by indirect association.

In Paul’s letter to the Thessalonians, he does specifically use the term justification, nor does he use the language of the doctrine as he does later in his letters elsewhere. Current research indicates that 1 Thessalonians was one of the first letters he wrote.5 As Paul wrote to the church in Thessalonica, he spoke of the necessity of escaping God’s wrath to come (1 Thess. 1:9–10; 2:16; 4:6; 5:1–11; 2 Thess. 1:8–9). To infer the urgency of justification made secure from eternity past (Rom. 10:20–21; Eph. 1:4; 1:5; 1:11), the “brothers loved by God” (1 Thess 1:4) are sanctified by the Holy Spirit among God’s sovereignly elected by grace through faith. The justification of God’s chosen people by means of faith was established from eternity past as the firstfruits of a new humanity. Those divinely elected to be saved were marked as sanctified “by the Spirit and belief in the truth” (2 Thess 2:13). Therefore, this “marking” is the event or process of justification accompanied by sanctification to present God’s people holy before Him.            

Paul’s language in 2 Thessalonians 2:14 is key to the meaning and efficacy of salvation. More specifically, “To this” directly appeals to the crucial understanding of salvation appointed to Christians who were called and chosen through the gospel. Justification made certain through the course of redemptive events assured the calling of the saints to the glory and pleasing interests of God. The Father elects, the Son loves, and the Holy Spirit makes holy while unbelievers are marked and excluded from salvation.6 Accordingly, the means by which Christians were to escape God’s wrath involved the sovereign necessity and urgency of justification. The process God uses to bring His people to Him through Christ involves appointed belief and the work of the Spirit as necessary for salvation. In between the points of believer election and glorification are justification and sanctification.

The Doctrine of Justification from the Prison Epistles

Paul’s letters to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon were written from prison while he was in captivity. By divine will, Paul underwent a period of trials and sufferings for the gospel (Acts 9:16), and the sovereign intent of Paul’s isolation while in prison included the work of his letters for formative instruction, theology, exhortation, training, and correction that would positively affect millions through time. Beginning with each church in Asia Minor, the development of the Kingdom of God grew from seeds of inspired truth to involve the doctrine of justification.

To the Church in Ephesus

To be delivered from the wrath of God, justification is necessary. And for justification to be accomplished, the forgiveness of sins is required to satisfy God’s justice (Eph 2:1-9). The gift of God is given to the elect who believe by both grace and faith in Christ. Christ Jesus claimed God’s people through His death and resurrection to make clear the gospel message where appointed people are brought to God to salvation by belief (i.e., grace through faith). Populating the Kingdom is the work of God (Eph 2:10) to justify those appointed to Him by His love, wisdom, and mercy. By faith alone, people are delivered from God’s wrath and made spiritually alive. As made possible by the forgiveness of sins by the atonement of Christ, the human contribution to this process is the gift of grace and faith. The gift accepted is a vehicle by which God justifies through Christ.

To the Church in Philippi

Technically speaking, the meaning of “justification” comes from a forensic (legal) term related to the notion of acquittal for a crime committed by divine act where God makes sinful humans subject to wrath acceptable before Him who is holy and righteous. The righteousness of God (Phil 3:9) stands separate from the righteousness of the law as the old covenant transitions to the new. Acceptable to God is only the righteousness that comes from God (i.e., faith in Christ) to justify believers. The righteousness attained by faith in Christ is the “righteousness from God” that justifies. There is no scriptural support to indicate any other contributing factors toward justification.

On the contrary, “righteousness from the law” serves to illuminate the inadequacy of works as people are entirely unable to satisfy its requirements. Christ has satisfied the law, and it is by His righteousness that His people become justified by faith in Him. For this reason, believers must reject their own works as having salvific merit and instead become “found in Him” (Phil 3:9) as Paul was to attain the forgiveness of sins and justification. To imitate Paul in this regard is to have one’s righteousness originate from Christ based on faith. Conformance to Christ in this way is to accept His righteousness and God’s forgiveness through Him to attain justification for salvation leading to eternal life.

To the Church in Colossae

Paul wrote at length about the forgiveness of sins as a requirement for acceptance before God. And Paul’s letter to the church at Colossae is no exception (Col 2:13-14, 3:13). He wrote of justification in this letter concerning the deliverance and the forgiveness of the sins (Col 1:14) of people appointed to eternal life through faith in Christ. Moreover, Paul speaks of deliverance from an evil age (Col 1:13) or “domain of darkness” (ESV) to Christ’s kingdom. As the process of redemption constitutes transfer from one state of being to another, the work of justification is necessary to undergo rebirth from being dead in sin to alive in Christ (Rom 6:11). Through Paul’s letter, he also stresses the need to put to death the work of sin as the deliverance concerns both an escape from death but also the wrath of God (Col 3:5-7).

The Doctrine of Justification from the Pastoral Epistles

The written work of Paul to the churches in Rome, Achaia, Macedonia, and Asia-Minor is a body of work about justification that must be taken together for a comprehensive meaning of the doctrine spanning hundreds of years. However, as scholars continue to pick at Paul’s written work and the authenticity of New Testament epistles, it is inexcusable to dismiss the letters to Timothy and Titus, who were both written about during his travels and missionary work. These letters carry the weight of canonicity and are a necessary contribution to the entire biblical testimony of Christ, faith, and practice.

Letters to Timothy & Titus

As Paul was a spiritual father to Timothy, he confided in him about his own sinfulness. Paul wrote of himself as the foremost of sinners. That is to say, he confessed to being the chief of sinners who blasphemed and violently persecuted the church (Acts 8:1-3, 1 Tim 1:13, 15; 1 Cor 15:9-10). In contrast, Paul also wrote that he was blameless regarding the law (Phil 3:6) and bore a clear conscience before God (Acts 23:1, 24:16). So what is the difference between the two?

On the one hand, he was chief of sinners, but on the other hand, he held a clear conscience before God. Was Paul sinless after his conversion on the Damascus road (Acts 9:1-8)? No, because he still contended with his flesh and was being made perfect. However, Paul was in perpetual grace, cleansed, forgiven, and justified before God through Christ. Not that Paul would then ignore the law or live a life of antinomianism, but he did believe in Jesus for eternal life to receive mercy. He was set free from sin, and Jesus selected him to become the Apostle to the Gentiles and serve as an example of Christ’s perfect patience to those who would believe in Him (1 Tim 1:16). Since Paul was the chief of sinners, Jesus makes a remarkable statement in the life of a highly sinful man about what He does to justify people for reconciliation and redemption by grace through faith apart from the works of the law.

Believers in Christ must abide in Him and persevere as He justifies everyone according to the Spirit who has vindicated Him (1 Tim 3:16). Said another way, you cannot out sin the grace of God and the perfect work of Christ by His death and resurrection. Putting to death sin and fighting it toward sanctification is made fruitful as believers who remain in Christ abide in Him. He has accomplished redemption and justification for everyone in Him as He lived a perfectly sinless life. Since He lived as Man who encountered temptation without sin, yet died to carry the sins of people to the grave while He was without sin, He rose from the dead to take with Him the sin He carried on behalf of everyone who believes for justification by faith.

It was Christ’s perfect obedience and holiness taken with Him to the cross where the sin of everyone who believes in Him would be abolished for all time (2 Tim 1:8-14). The forgiveness and abolition of sin make possible justification by faith in Christ Jesus, who reconciles believers to God. Furthermore, Jesus brought with Him the sin of believers where the spiritual consequences of death were crucified. Just as sin was abolished, so was death to produce spiritual immortality through the gospel (2 Tim 1:10). So anyone who believes in Christ and is found in Him benefits from His death and resurrection to eternal life (1 Cor 15:21).

Finally, Paul’s correspondence to Titus is consistent with previous letters carefully read to understand justification by grace through faith. To press the point further, Titus 3:7 specifically echoes the same terminology of Eph 2:8, “by grace,” as justification makes believers heirs of eternal life. According to the mercy of God, believers in Christ are saved not because of works, as earlier made clear, but by justification by grace through faith, for the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5).

Penal Substitutionary Atonement

The essay from Stephen J. Wellum entitled Behold, the Lamb of God is described as “Theology Proper and the Inseparability of Penal-Substitutionary Atonement from Forensic Justification and Imputation.” The author makes numerous scripturally supported claims that the atonement of Christ was a process of redemption that involved a payment of legal penalty by payment through substitution. Christ paid for people’s sins through His payment of the penalty to force an acquittal through declarative justification. The clear biblical support for Christ’s redemptive work as substitutionary support has Old Testament precedent and theological grounding. As justification is by faith in Christ (Rom. 3:28, 30; 5:1; Gal. 2:16; 3:8, 24), people escape condemnation and attain peace with God (Rom. 4:2; 5:1; 8:1).

The author makes the case that justification is possible through substitutionary atonement and the imputation of righteousness. The theory of penal substitutionary atonement (or “vicarious atonement”) is a theory prominent among protestant evangelicals who believe that Christ died in the place of sinful people to appease the wrath of God. Where the penalty of sin is death, Christ Jesus paid the penalty at His crucifixion on behalf of people guilty of sin who are subject to judgment. Another legal term, imputation, carries a meaning of credit or debit in a religious sense to believers who attain justification by atonement. As given by the biblical example of Leviticus 17:4, the death of an ox, lamb, or goat killed outside the camp was to become a bloodguilt imputed to the man guilty of the killing if the dead animal is not offered to the LORD as a gift. This imputation upon the guilty man represents the transferability of a debit to the man found in violation of God’s law concerning sacrificial offerings. Regulations concerning atonement in Leviticus are loaded with inferences concerning imputational atonement around sacrificial sin offerings.

A further point made is that justification and imputation go beyond the forgiveness of sins. There are two scriptural principles of justification that have a bearing on redemptive status and understanding beyond atonement. First, there is freedom and reconciliation where God has no further animosity or wrath toward sinful people whose sins are covered (Acts 13:39; Rom. 4:6–7; 5:9–21; 2 Cor. 5:19). Second, as justification involves redemption, there is a purpose to which believers become heirs as God’s children. The theological support from Paul’s letters to the church is clearly articulated for interpretation according to their intent. Romans 5:1-2 is a single pair of verses that reinforce both principles of justification to include access to God with joy through Christ Jesus.

The Reformers and some patristics held to substitutionary atonement among alternate atonement theories. Compared to the Governmental and Socinian views of the atonement, penal substitution is restorative to holy God who requires justice and truth to satisfy necessary retribution due to His nature. As full justification before God requires complete payment for sin, justice is satisfied by substitutionary for atonement, and Christ’s perfect obedience becomes imputed to believers for redemption and reconciliation. In the Arminian view, God could have chosen another method or means of justification other than through God as Christ Jesus having the blood of a perfectly innocent man to satisfy retributive justice from holy God by His nature. Perfect obedience and complete payment of sin are not required to satisfy God’s justice to prevent necessary wrath because of who He is. It is on these grounds that Christ’s imputed righteousness is rejected. To the Arminian (Methodist, Nazarene) view of justification, sinners are justified before God through Christ, satisfying God’s rectoral justice plus faith and repentance from a believer. Christ does not bear the penalty of divine retributive justice for us, nor is our guilt imputed to him and his righteousness to us (Wellum, 367). And Christ suffered and died, not as a satisfaction for the exact penalty, but as a token of God’s concern to uphold God’s moral law. The governmental view of atonement favors rectoral justice over retributive justice as it “dismisses the atonement of Christ as an exact payment of the penalty demanded by the retributive justice of God and His expressed law” (Wellum,368). This difference is a striking point of opposition as God withdraws the necessity of full payment and imputed righteousness and instead receives the repentance of believers directed toward Him by faith in Christ.

The penal-substitutionary position requires an inseparable relationship between it and forensic justification and imputation. In contrast, the Socinian-Classic Liberal Postmodern view of justice denies the sacrificial death of Jesus to satisfy fully God’s justice to prevent His due wrath against sin. The Socinian view also denies imputed righteousness to sinners. The repentance of believers is elevated over the position of Christ’s imputed righteousness as God forgives sinners and raises to eternal life believers who follow Christ and live virtuously. The Socinian view of Christ’s atonement emphasizes God’s love, mercy, and grace over justification. To Socinians, Christ died as a moral example, and there are various other reasons for His death other than to satisfy God’s retributive justice against sin.

There are three points of interest to consider for a plausible warrant and coherent view of penal substitution and the doctrine of justification. All three center around the triune God and the relationship that exists within His being. First, the trinity includes the Son, who is in eternal relationship with the Father and Holy Spirit. The Son has an immeasurable weight of significance as He redeems humanity to reclaim God’s chosen people through belief. Christ’s integral work within triune God demonstrates the love of God (John 3:16) and the presence of the Spirit at the cross. Second, the pactum salutis is the covenant of redemption that exists to fulfill the plan of salvation for those who would believe and become redeemed (Ps. 139:16; Eph. 1:4, 11; 1 Pet. 1:20). The satisfaction of justice the holiness of God requires is not detached from the trinitarian intent of redemption from His sovereign will. The existence of sin in its rebellion against God cannot be permitted to exist or remain through His creation. Third, the triune God is LORD over all the universe. Everything shall be in subjection to Him, and His righteousness demands the punishment of sin. His nature is holy, righteous, and just and while He keeps His promises, He must remain true to His name, glory, and essence. Everything and everyone shall honor and adhere to God’s moral standard. Yet, since He is kind, loving, and merciful, He redeems people through a process of justification that requires atonement for sin. The presence of sin and evil must be fully accounted for to satisfy the necessary removal and destruction of all rebellion and rejection of truth. Sin is enmity against God, and it must be removed from His people through faith in Christ and His process of justification through the atonement He ordained.

Catholic Doctrine of Justification

An understanding of the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification comes from a necessary awareness of what occurred at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ, 1999) that occurred much later. Ruptures of the catholic church during the Protestant Reformation and Eastern Orthodox separation were due to accretions in unbiblical doctrines. The grievances of Luther listed by the 95 theses nailed to the door at the church door of Wittenberg were indicative of the wild departures from apostolic tradition, doctrines, and faith practices. Through the centuries, Roman Catholic teachings about justification, Scripture, faith, sin, authority, and worship became contentious points of opposition insurmountable over the text of Scripture that informed and shaped Protestant theology.

The Council of Trent, or the Concilium Tridentium, was a gathering of the Roman Catholic authorities to establish a Counter-Reformation or response to Protestant theology emergent outside Catholicism. The Council of Trent was a 25-session council meeting held in Trento, Italy, situated squarely within the Reformation Era (1545-1699). Its objectives were to reaffirm and update Catholic doctrines to codify its views and traditions against Protestant beliefs and doctrines forming around Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and others. While there were various points of contention, meritorious works were necessary as a part of saving grace. The doctrine of justification within the Catholic Church was a highly contested matter at the Council of Trent, where the teachings of Catholicism were affirmed along with various other matters of objection among the Reformers.

To elaborate further on the doctrine of justification within the Catholic Church, Trent referred to three stages or states of justification it held as necessary for salvation. First, human free will must assent to the grace God predisposes to people, which is only done through baptism or the desire for it. A person can either accept and cooperate with the grace of God to believe and become justified by faith or reject it. The second stage involves the work of a baptized believer who must work hard to maintain justification until the end of life. Faith and works accompany a person’s efforts to keep the commandments (free or forgiven of venial or mortal sin). That is to say, a person is not justified by faith alone, but a justification for salvific merit includes grace, faith, and good works. The third stage involves lapses in justification as persons fall into sin. The sacraments of penance, confession, priestly absolution, and making satisfaction remain necessary for continued justification that attains to salvation. From Trent, these three stages are the framework of the Catholic Church’s doctrine of salvation (i.e., to which a person is forgiven and placed into right standing before God and saved).

Before the JDDJ in 1999, the first and second Vatican councils convened as separate ecumenical efforts to soften its language and posture to evangelicalism, secularism, and modern culture itself. The first Vatican Council (Vatican I, 1869-1870) was called to deal with advances in science, liberalism, and rationalism. It sought to form a constitution (Dei Filius) around the divine inspiration of Scripture and the primacy of the Roman Catholic pope’s office and its infallibility (Pastor Aeternus). The second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965) was assembled to promote the Catholic Church’s renewal and update its teachings, discipline, and organization. At the same time, the outcome of Vatican II involved changes to its liturgy and how it engaged with other churches within the covenant community. Moreover, the Roman Catholic Church Catechism on justification (Article II) specifies the necessity of faith as conferred in baptism (CCC 1992) and merit for the attainment of eternal life (CCC 2010), or by inference, the necessary justification to salvation.

The JDDJ was an event that sought to bring healing and unity to the Christian community. The joint declaration concerning the doctrine of justification involving both Lutheran and Catholic churches was not by consensus. There were numerous objections from those among the Catholic ranks. The Catholic Church needed to make various equivocations, concessions, and clarifications after the JDDJ was signed and put into effect. No change to the Roman Catholic doctrine on justification was made, while Lutherans made concessions about the necessity of baptism for justification (article 28 of the JDDJ). The grace of Jesus Christ is “imparted” at baptism according to article 30 to render a person eligible or open to accept or reject. Therefore, JDDJ, while it sought Christian unity and healing, it upheld the Trent declaration that grace is within a synergistic process of salvation.

According to Anthony N. S. Lane, in his book Justification by Faith in Catholic-Protestant Dialogue: An Evangelical Assessment, the following 15 issues were analyzed and identified between Catholics and Protestants. Among all of these issues, no changes or adjustments in Catholic doctrine were made from the JDDJ. Together they involve the doctrine of justification and the unreconciled differences between Catholics and Evangelicals.

Unresolved Differences of the JDDJ

Analysis of Subject Areas
1. The status of theological language
2. Taking charge of the biblical tension
3. The interpretation of historical precedent
4. The role of justification in the overall theological system
5. The consideration of human inability
6. The definition of justification
7. Imputation
8. The permanence of sin in the Christian
9. Faith alone
10. Baptism
11. Law and gospel
12. Lapse and the restoration
13. Merit and reward
14. Assurance of salvation
15. Magisterium

For purposes of ecumenical unity, some interpret articles 5 and 11 of the JDDJ as complimentary, while others view them in tension with one another. Article 5 refers to the jointly accepted biblical doctrine of justification held by Protestants, but article 11 continues to recognize that cooperation of infused grace is necessary through baptism. More plainly, from the JDDJ, Catholics in article 5 recognize faith is necessary for justification, but it also accompanies a synergistic process of cooperation through baptism where a believer on his merit must perform. To conclude the difference between the Lutherans and Catholics who signed the JDDJ, justification is not by faith alone. Whereas Reformed theology maintains that salvation is attained by faith alone, Protestant interpretation of Scripture does not support the doctrine of justification as held by the Roman Catholic Church.

Second Temple Works Righteousness

The perspective that Second Temple Judaism was a grace soteriology runs counter to what Paul and the author of Hebrews wrote about old covenant stipulations concerning Mosaic Law that involved obedience, ritual sacrifices, and ceremonial obligations. In contrast, as the Abrahamic covenant included offspring and land, and his belief was counted as righteousness (Gen 15:6), there was later the period of levitical sacrificial offerings for remediation of sin and uncleanliness as a limited Old Testament form of atonement. Yet Old Testament sacrificial offerings could never take away sins, and the only thing that justifies people before God is Jesus Christ (Heb 10:1-18). The period of the law before Jesus’ ministry work was thoroughly about works of the law as the people of Northern and Southern Israel paid heavily for covenant disobedience as they would not return to God in repentance from idolatry, religious ritualism, and social injustice. The period of judgment was a means to demonstrate Israel’s inability to keep the law and that a new covenant would become necessary as foretold within the Adamic covenant (Gen 3:15).

The period of second temple Judaism overlapped with the arrival of Christ and His ministry during the first century. It was then the prophet’s message would become fulfilled about God’s law written on the hearts of His people (Ezek 11:19, 36:26, Jer 31:33, Heb 8:10). The fulfillment of the law arrived through Christ, who would usher in a covenant of grace to rest upon the Kingdom of God on Earth for those who would believe by faith in Him. Christ was the fulfillment of the law and prophets (Matt 5:17) so that grace, not law, would prevail within the hearts of His people as believers who love Him does what He says.

Writers and advocates of the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) follow E.P. Sanders’ work of “covenantal nomism.” First introduced in 1977, Sanders’ work entitled “Paul and Palestinian Judaism” offered the terms Covenantal and Nomism to claim that second temple Judaism accepts salvation by grace as valid, but its maintenance was through Mosaic Law. Specifically, the Mosaic covenant involved the free grace of God, as shown to Israel, but it was necessary to sustain law-keeping and keep oneself in the covenant to inherit salvation. The term nomism (from the Greek nomos, law) originates from the notion that ethical and moral observance of the law involves personal conduct. In his Systematic Theology, Grudem defines Covenantal Nomism as the belief of Jews during the time of Christ who obeyed Mosaic laws out of gratitude to remain God’s people. Still, an initial inheritance of salvation was by election and grace. To remain the people of God, it was necessary to “stay in” or continue in the faith by satisfying the Mosaic law to maintain the covenant. Covenantal Nomism is correlated to a marriage covenant where marriage is maintained by effort, continued intimacy, and consummation once vows are made.

In contrast to Covenantal Nomism, Variegated Nomism involves Jews within 2nd temple Judaism who held that salvation was through law-keeping by various ideas. To both attain and maintain salvation, legalism extended through the lives of individuals by different means of covenantal adherence. The distinction between the two rests upon the various forms of Judaism that held a keeping of the law by covenant, gratitude, and faith, to set a person on a path of justification involving progressive sanctification for final eschatological salvation. Both reject the imputation of Christ’s righteousness and personal belief (union with Christ) as considered righteousness.

As Robert J. Cara sets the record straight about grace and works righteousness within the second temple period, he calls attention to numerous extra-biblical and ancient rabbinic sources. Writings discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), pseudepigraphical literature, the Mishna (rabbinic oral traditions foundational to Judaism), and the Tosefta (supplemental to the Mishna) offered exhaustive evidence about the necessity of righteous acts and merit by law-keeping to attain eschatological salvation. Cara further contests James Dunn’s views about “covenantal faithfulness” as he refers to the scheme of works righteousness contrary to biblical principles of salvation by grace through faith.

Cara further elaborates upon N.T. Wright’s perspective about “getting in” and “staying in” the new covenant provided you perform what is right and good before God.” (Cara, 163) N.T. Wright specifically writes (4QMMT C 30-32):

“If through prayer and the moral strength that God supplies (C 28–29) you keep these precepts, you will rejoice at the end of time, in finding that the advice given, this selection of commands, was on the right track. That is when (C 31) ‘it will be reckoned to you as righteousness when you perform what is right and good before him.’”

This position is works-righteousness theology. It contradicts the verbiage written concerning Abraham and God’s covenant with him, “And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness” (Gen 15:6, Rom 4:9). This “believed” the LORD is explicitly defined by the root manuscript Hebrew language to “have trust in, to believe in, God.” Moreover, Paul’s use of the term “faith” for justification coincides with that type of belief resulting in eschatological salvation.

For further in-depth review, see James D. G. Dunn, “4QMMT and Galatians,” concerning The New Perspective on Paul, 339–45 (originally published in NTS 43, no. 1, 1997); and N. T. Wright, “4QMMT and Paul: Justification, ‘Works,’ and Eschatology,” in History and Exegesis ed. Sand-Won Son (New York: T&T Clark, 2006). Root rationale concerning works-righteousness theology stems from the contributions of Dunn and Wright as they build upon Sander’s insistence on justification through initial covenantal grace followed by required merit and performance for salvation.

Augustine of Hippo vigorously opposed the views of Sanders, Dunn, and Wright as the New Perspective on Paul advocates for a covenantal faithfulness to earn salvation. As the British monk Pelagius believed people were able to live holy lives to merit salvation by good works, Augustine recognized the theological error in contradiction to the authoritative perspective of Paul concerning salvation by grace through faith alone. While NPP adherents are not full-blown Pelagians, they are semi-Pelagians as they advocate a synergistic approach to the salvation of humanity. The synergistic work of God and mankind for individuals to attain salvation by works-righteousness infers a partial efficacy of Christ’s sacrificial work at His execution. Jesus fulfilled the law, and believers by faith who love Him live by the Spirit to abide in Him and do what He wants under the new covenant of grace.

Inseparability of Justification and Sanctification

The essay from R. Lucas Stamps entitled Faith Works is subtitled as “Properly Understanding the Relationship between Justification and Sanctification.” The paper examines three views of the relationship between justification and sanctification. Conflation, separation, and integration of the two are examined for their scriptural merit for understanding and practical rationale. First, to understand sanctification, a theological definition is in order. Sanctification is a process of being brought into complete conformity with Christ. It is the mode of being by which a person is set apart and made more holy. Christians spiritually transformed by justification are rendered holy through Christ but continually grow in sanctification as they strive toward holiness. Sanctification involves cooperation with the indwelling Holy Spirit within a believer’s life with participation in the disciplines of Godly living. To include immersion in the Word of God, prayer, fellowship, worship, training, outreach, charity, and more, the life of a believer becomes less in conformance to the values of the world to live a holy and moral life in honor of God. Further removed from sin, believers are sanctified in pursuit of holiness, as described by the Westminster confession.

Westminster Confession of Faith Definition of Sanctification

They, who are once effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart, and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified, really and personally, through the virtue of Christ’s death and resurrection, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them: the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

With an understanding of the different perspectives around broad and coarse relationships between justification and sanctification, it’s necessary to recognize that Reformed soteriology is a distinct soteriological position where both are separated to achieve an intended purpose. Reformers separate the remission of sin and imputation of Christ’s righteousness (justification) from the practice of personal righteousness and the holy pursuit of living (sanctification). To the Reformers, justification is a conversion event for a change of positional status, while sanctification is a washing of regeneration and renewal of the inner person by the indwelling Spirit.

Reformers’ objections to the Augustinian tradition about justification brought strong opposition from the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent. While the Reformers held to a forensic (legal) understanding of justification for the remission of sins, the Tridentine model of atonement was, by contrast, an entirely different perspective from the Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) from the Council of Trent saw justification as a curative or healing event or process to restore a person’s status before God. The canons and decrees from Trent that RCC adopted involved the following understandings about soteriological atonement: 7

“Justification translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Saviour.” [This movement from sinful nature to grace] “cannot, since the promulgation of the Gospel, be effected except through the laver of regeneration or its desire.”

In this definition, a “laver” refers to a bowl of rinsing and washing for ritual use by a priest. And the author draws attention to the RCC’s adherence to Trent as it adopted its position of justification around regeneration as a curative matter that involved a spiritual washing at conversion. As Titus 3:5 makes use of the phrase, “by the washing of regeneration,” or more fully and explicitly, “He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” It is, therefore, apparent that justification and regeneration by washing are combined or fused into a single redemptive meaning. However, as Paul wrote to the Corinthian church, he separated the terms “washed,” “sanctified,” and “justified” by the Spirit of God to make a point that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:11, 1-11). Therefore, the discontinuity between Scripture and the declaration of Trent that conflates the relationship between justification and sanctification does not appear to hold an exclusive claim on the nature of the relationship other than tradition in the absence of scriptural authority.

The second perspective on the relationship between justification and sanctification entirely severs the correlated necessity between them. Antinomian rejection of requirements of the new covenant responsibilities ignores the inner working purpose of sanctification and works of grace for personal holiness. A process of sanctification separate from saving faith renders it unnecessary in the mind of an Antinomian believer who holds to a “free grace” conviction. Saving faith from an Antinomian perspective views faith as mental assent to the truth of God. At the same time, the work of Christ for justification is limited in reach without concern for personal holiness and perseverance. Without a heart’s desire to live in holiness according to Christ’s instructions, the severed relationship between justification and sanctification contradicts what Scripture says about holiness or sanctification (Heb 12:14) that follows justification.

 Finally, Stamps brings attention to the integration between justification and sanctification from a position of Reformed theology. He notes that Calvin asserted that justification and sanctification are not separate. However, Calvin also maintained they are yet distinct. He went on to claim that justification holds a higher priority than sanctification. He viewed justification as foundational toward sanctification as salvation is necessary to assure a meaningful life of sanctified living. Union with Christ is necessary as a foundational position in which growth or a life course in sanctification takes place with necessary grounding. In this way, Calvin refers to both justification and sanctification as a double grace by necessity in which both are at work in a believer (Stamps, 518). As God is holy, He instructs His redeemed people to be holy (Lev 19:2).

The Ordo Salutis

Under the tradition of Reformed soteriology, the golden chain of redemption (ordo salutis) articulated in Romans 8:29-30 offers a sequence of thought around Pauline theology:

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” 

The clear separation between “conformance to the image of the Son” (sanctification) and “he also justified” indicates a functional partitioning by a definition of terms in this passage to indicate linear activity. Or the presence of concurrent and overlapping work to satisfy Christ’s desire to become firstborn among God’s offspring. In a sense, the salvific work of Christ is both from spiritual death and from captivity to sin after justification. There is a unity in the saving work of God that is inseparable.            

A believer that becomes born-again has a transformative experience that is followed by necessary work from the indwelling Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit’s presence within a person isn’t passive but active to assure spiritual formation toward increasing sanctification for the interests of God where people progressively become satisfied in Him. From a careful reading of Ephesian 2:10, it is abundantly apparent that we are created as the workmanship of God to perform good works and so that Christ Jesus would “show the immeasurable riches of His grace in kindness toward us” (Eph 2:7). God wants to be in fellowship with His people. He loves His children, and He wants to dwell among us. To do that, He has informed us about how He intends to do that through both justification and sanctification.

Citations

______________________
1 Stanley Grenz, David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 69.
2 Andrew David Naselli, “The Righteous God Righteously Righteouses the Unrighteous: Justification according to Romans,” in The Doctrine on Which the Church Stands or Falls: Justification in Biblical, Theological, Historical, and Pastoral Perspective, ed. Matthew Barrett (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 230-235.
3 Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 683.; William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 390.
4 G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New (GrandRapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 475.
5 Brandon Crowe, “‘By Grace You Have Been Saved through Faith’: Justification in the Pauline Epistles,” in The Doctrine on Which the Church Stands or Falls: Justification in Biblical, Theological, Historical, and Pastoral Perspective, ed. Matthew Barrett (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 261.
6 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2318.
7 The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, trans. H. J. Schroeder (Charlotte, NC: TAN Books, 1978), 31.


The Vertical Truth

In Matthew Barrett’s book, The Doctrine on Which the Church Stands or Falls, contributing author Andrew Naselli makes a stratospherically important point about the centrality of Paul’s theology on justification. He calls attention to Luther’s notes about the matter.1 Luther wrote of Romans 3:21-26 as follows, “the chief point, and the very central place of the Epistle [to the Romans], and of the whole Bible.” Specifically, Naselli uses Moo’s observations about Martin Luther’s notes on Paul’s passage to the Romans. The passage is critical to our study of justification. The heart of the doctrine is “the righteousness of God that empowers the gospel to mediate salvation to sinful human beings.”2

So as a matter of course, this section of Romans 3:21-26 must be carefully parsed. To ruminate on it and let it saturate every part of our capacity to reason and accept truth. 

Romans 3:21-26   Justification by Faith

21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ 23 for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Parsed Outline (Naselli, 221-222)

  1. God’s righteousness is revealed from the OT law and the prophets. (Rom 3:21)
  2. All have sinned yet have access to God’s righteousness through exclusive faith in Christ. (Rom 3:22-23)
  3. Source of justification made clear through faith in Christ received as a free gift to people redeemed by His blood to satisfy God’s justice and wrath (propitiation). “In-Christ-redemption is the instrument of grace to bring about justification.… Justification occurs through in-Christ-redemption, which is the instrument of grace.” (Rom 3:24-25a)
  4. Integrity of God plus his character as righteous and just to hold back His anger to appease righteous divine wrath against sin. The just and justifier gives righteous status to people as He passed over sins committed and atoned for through the blood of Christ. So here it is revealed the gospel is an expression of God’s attributes of righteousness and justice. (Rom 3:25b-26)

Just as Luther, Moo, and many other expositors have made super clear, Naselli offers the four-point review above of what Morris called the most important single paragraph ever written.”4  

The polemic to a proper understanding and acceptance of the doctrine of justification rests upon a new covenant biblical principle of soteriological meaning.

The New Perspective on Paul (NPP) is an effort to redefine justification as made clear by the apostle Paul (Rom 3:21-26). Not so much to affect what justification does in terms of its salvific merit but to redirect it toward the interests of cultural Marxism and liberation theology. In the form of Sanders’ covenantal nomism, NPP attempts to necessitate the maintenance of salvation by orienting it toward the cultural well-being of people (a State interest). Justification becomes fundamentally about ecclesiology and not soteriology (Cara, 231). Paul has explicitly and authoritatively informed millions over thousands of years that justification is vertical, not horizontal (Romans 1:17, 3:21-26, 9:30-10:13).

NPP is an effort to detach the meaning and warnings of scripture concerning justification to suit the interests of society, culture, and the State around liberation theology. A theology of grievance concerning the “marginalized” (i.e., feminism, marriage, sex, gender, and abortion activists coupled with ethnic and racial disparities that need attention). That which divides people of truth is diabolical. That which intermingles and draws them to darkness is satanic. 

Cultural Marxists who capture and guide woke social justice ideology shape progressive Christians to form various ecclesiological efforts. Marxism pushes toward a revisionist understanding of biblical justification through cultural pressures for reparational and restorative institutional and theological “justice” to acquire its desire for power. To NPP, justification is about social order toward the interests of liberation theology advocates who want unfettered lifestyles and egalitarian insistence contradictory to explicit biblical language about what’s unacceptable and forbidden to profane the Imago Dei. 

On April 14th, 2022, Carl R. Trueman posted an article entitled “Rowan Williams and our Sentimental Age.” In this article, Trueman makes it completely clear that the esteemed academic scholar (Williams) has advocated for State mandated LGBT lifestyle acceptance within the church. The current Arch Bishop of Canterbury favors same-sex “marriage.” N.T. Wright, a prominent advocate of NPP, is a bishop of the Anglican church. Many pastors and priests across all denominations advocate for the ghetto of theological exploration to recast doctrine toward social interests. Specifically to render people susceptible or trapped by the false social doctrine of NPP.

________________
Andrew David Naselli, “The Righteous God Righteously Righteouses the Unrighteous: Justification according to Romans,” in The Doctrine on Which the Church Stands or Falls: Justification in Biblical, Theological, Historical, and Pastoral Perspective, ed. Matthew Barrett (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 220–221. Here Naselli quotes Douglas Moo’s observations in the Luther Bible with Luther’s margin notes (Epistle to the Romans, 1st ed, 281n1). 
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 219.
Constantine R. Campbell, Paul and Union with Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 114. Campbell skillfully synthesizes justification and union with Christ; see 388–405.
Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 173.


The Nicene Affirmation

It was entirely revealing to me that the criteria of Christ’s deity and biblical Christology are articulated in the Nicene Creed of 325 A.D. Here we have an extra-biblical document that supports the doctrine of Christ’s deity before sola scriptura as framed by Martin Luther (1483-1546). Even while the creed was updated and made more explicit in defense of the Arian controversy, it was highly influenced by “Rule of Faith” teaching and experiences within the early Church. It was the foundation of all seven ecumenical councils while canonical formations ran concurrently.

Among other attempts to determine what’s authoritative, Athanasius comes along decades later (after Nicea) and works within the church body to form the canon of Scripture. Where an assembled 66-books set a standard for faith and practice. Over 1,000 years later, the Reformation arrives at the five Solas to assert the biblical grounding for Christological belief to become more distant from apostolic oral tradition, historical practice, creedal statements,1 and early Christian Hymns.2 Supposed errors in belief from first and second-century “Rule of Faith” approaches to the development of doctrine became an impetus toward the later hardening of Christology and the deity of Jesus.  

Nicene Creed (325 A.D.)
This council occurred before the formation of the canon of Scripture as the final recognized closed canon at the Third Synod of Carthage as shepherded by Athanasius. It was then and from there twenty-seven books of the New Testament were formed, recognized, and accepted. From the Synod of Carthage, the canon of Athanasius was locked in place AFTER THE NICENE CREED was formed. Prior to that, the OT was already settled as the 22 books within the closed canon to eventually constitute a single OT and NT codex.

HANDS: Five Criteria of Deity1
Honors: Jesus shares the honors due to God.
Attributes: Jesus shares the attributes of God.
Names: Jesus shares the names of God.
Deeds: Jesus shares in the deeds that God does.
Seat: Jesus shares the seat of God’s throne.

Nicene Creed Excerpt (to retroactively validate the deity of Christ according to Bowman):

We believe … in one Lord Jesus Christ [honors], the only Son of God, eternally [attributes] begotten of the Father; God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God [names]; begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father [attributes].

Through him all things were made [deeds].

For us and for our salvation [deeds] he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the virgin Mary, and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried.

On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father [seat]. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead [deeds], and his kingdom will have no end [seat].

I have much more work ahead to understand what occurred from the patristics to include Clement, Athanasius, the Didache, those who attended Nicea, Constantinople, and various others. I have the 22-volume Ante and Post-Nicene library of writings. 

Proclamations, and doctrines of the reformation are foundational, but I think I’m going to check myself. —You know, trust but verify.— If I find out from the patristics that doctrinal truths are not as though they’re asserted, due to modernist or post-modern perspectives (to include the Reformers), I’m going to have questions and objections.

_______________________________
1
 Robert M. Bowman Jr. and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2007), 276.
Daniel Liderbach, Christ in the Early Christian Hymns (New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1998), 37.


A Defense of Objective Truth

Truth is subjective to many people and relative to Christians and atheists alike. Subjectivism, as such, is the rejection of objective truth for a wide array of reasons. Atheists and anti-theists generally share a secular creed tacit in nature to declare there is no God. There is no objective truth. There is no ground for Reason. There are no absolute Morals. There is no ultimate Value. There is no ultimate Meaning. There is no eternal hope.1 In the mind of those who hold a worldview of subjectivism, everything is permitted without social constraints—notably, including people who attend and lead churches who do not accept the authority and truth of Scripture as God’s word. To “believers” or “Christians” who live as there is only limited objective truth, do so from a position of upholding the mantra of diversity, equity, and inclusion as a necessary and overriding social doctrine to shape false faith and errant practices.

Anti-theists or atheists outright opposed or indifferent to the existence of God make it clear and consistent that Christians who believe in God are deluded, misguided, or just people who never really grew up. Christians, across the board among every denomination or tradition without exception, hold varying degrees of acceptance concerning the objective truth of the gospel and Scripture. Consequently, most congregations are egalitarian. Very many favor same-sex marriage, tolerate promiscuous lifestyles, advocate homosexuality, ordain female pastors, adopt critical theory, accede to social justice violence, liberation theology, feminism, and numerous other conditions of social decay within the church. In contradiction to Jesus, our Messiah, and Apostles James, John, Peter, Paul, and others were crystal clear about objective truth concerning the gospel, repentance, sin, and Godly living. A survey of social media interaction among too many clergies and laity across a wide swath of denominations, from conservative to liberal ideologies, informs the culture of social positions opposed to objective truth as made clear through the authority of God’s word as His voice of instruction, redemption, and warning to humanity. The poison of subjectivism is thoroughly ingrained within the culture and the church. Where C.S. Lewis informs his readers that beliefs about moral judgments which are exclusively subjective to the individual or community are the poison of subjectivism that eventually leads to the destruction of society, beginning with traditional Christian morality.2

This post offers a defense of objective truth as made clear through the intent and meaning of canonical Holy Scripture as transmitted from ancient manuscripts. Conversely, when Pontius Pilate asked Jesus, “what is truth,” he spoke from a position of cynically subjective understanding to show itself as spiritually vacant from Christ and His word as Truth. To define truth is itself an objectivist position. An alternative or relative definition of truth per se to the subjectivist is unwanted or strained at best. According to Aristotle, truth is defined in terms of ordinary people in a pragmatic sense, “To say that what is is not, or that what is not is, is false; but to say that what is is, and what is not is not, is true; and therefore also he who says that a thing is or is not will say either what is true or what is false.” 3

Jesus defined Himself as the embodiment of Truth (Jn 1:14, 17, 14:6, 1 Jn 5:20). As transliterated from Greek as alētheia, He spoke of Himself in conformance to reality. His being as the embodiment of truth concerns Himself as Messiah and all He claimed, especially about a person’s access to eternal life and God the Father. True God revealed in Christ Jesus was and is made objectively evident “as what is is, and what is not is not, is true,” as Aristotle has put it. Not from subjective rationale stemming from alternate theories of truth to escape revelatory details of actual reality with corresponding metaphysical and philosophical support. “Telling it like it is” corresponds to facts about a matter objectively ascertained independently of a knower and his consciousness. Truth, in general, presupposes commonsense notions of reality, and if anything does not conform to reality, as a practical matter, theory or otherwise, that is by definition false.4 Therefore, a person can consequently frame observation of reality and its corresponding truth in terms of denial or acceptance.

Alternative theories of truth to counter subjectivistic thought, or subjective truth, can offer some perspective as conversations involving disbelief among atheists or unbiblical and sinful behaviors from Christians become evident or come up in conversations. The “what is true for me is not necessarily true for you” holds no credibility in opposition to objective truth. Four theories are generally understood to render universal and religious subjectivism meaningless.

First, a pragmatic theory of truth is Truth that works relatively. It’s a relativistic form of thought that ultimately becomes impractical because it devolves into an unending pursuit of pragmatic or destructive outcomes as an ongoing means to an end until circularity or exhaustion is reached. Second, the empiricist’s theory of truth is what someone would view truth as a function of sensory perception. Without empirical evidence to support rationalistic assertions concerning God and spiritual or supernatural objects of faith, false conclusions are made a priori that such terms and meaning are incomprehensible. Third, rationalists’ view of truth concerns human reason as the judge of reality and must distinctly be understood within cognitive reasoning alone. It is the denial that many truths cannot be proved, such as the law of noncontradiction. Finally, the coherence theory of truth that considers various sets of ideas can yield contradictory conclusions that are actually incoherent. Facts the way they really are can correspond to coherence theory, while a situation evident from another perspective can demonstrate otherwise to produce another contradiction. Coherence theory generally relies upon presuppositions of truth without objective and comprehensive facts as evidentially valid.

Individual abandonment of objective truth would cause a further precipitous decay within society and civilization in general. Atheist and Christian denials of truth as revealed through Creation and God’s word for purposes of convenience, preferences, or social utility erode an ability to comprehend revelation by grace either way. People are not created as necessary beings, but contingent beings grounded by actual alētheic existence with objective truth as a divinely instituted construct and requirement. Without being in fellowship with God, who expects acceptance and adherence to objective truth, both atheists and professing Christians naturally arrive at a place of confusion and misery, often eternally. The objective truth of the gospel and Scripture points to Jesus, who wants people to accept objective truth and come into fellowship with Him and the Father for salvific purposes. People who deny objective truth, or passively dismiss it, have no room for repentance and recognition of sin as made explicit by the authority of Scripture.5 To deny objective truth is what Apostle Paul warns about as a matter of principle with eternally damning consequences (Rom 1:18-32).

Paradoxical truth does not contradict objective truth as revealed and made evident in a natural sense throughout creation. Collisions in faith and reason do not somehow run up against the consistency of logic, but merely point to an inability to process observations and arrive at coherent conclusions due to the limitations of human cognition. While Richard Niebuhr’s (1894-1962) theological work attempted to shape knowledge of objective truth within a relativistic framework, he reasoned that universal truth could be obtained through historical traditions and relativism. Partially to explain the Western drive of denominationalism, he took a specific long-term interest between unity and diversity within the church. It was splintering at a growing rate in the 1950s, and he sought to bring the church into wider cultural acceptance within secular society to suit modern life. 6 The proliferation of church denominations is in the thousands. The largest convention in the U.S. (Southern Baptist Convention) is in a crisis of unity due to its partial acceptance of objective truth. For the same reason, Episcopalian and Lutheran churches have lost hundreds of thousands of members over the course of recent years. Other denominations have become more fragmented.

By further comparison, John Stott (1921-2011), an Anglican priest of evangelical tradition, wrote, “In our post-modern era, the self-confidence of the Enlightenment has gone, the very concept of objective ‘truth’ is rejected, and all that remains are purely personal and subjective opinions.” He wrote this perspective in 2001 to indicate the trajectory of social culture downstream from the church. Consequently, the state of civilization is in upheaval with violence, gender dysphoria, political unrest, political corruption, wars, and corporate greed, unlike any time before in history. Every bit of which serves as evidence of a departure from objective truth as the grounding of faith and morality in obedience to God’s prescriptive order. Consider entertainment and the state of academic institutions. Consider the widespread and deep infestation of subjectivism within local churches at the hands of leaders who believe what God has revealed in His Word but have not surrendered to objective truth to the growing demise of society at large.

Citations

________________
1 Gary DeMar, ed., Pushing the Antithesis: The Apologetic Methodology of Greg L. Bahnsen (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2007), 67.
2 Dr. Alan K. Snyder, “Lewis’s “Poison of Subjectivism” in Our Day” Southeastern University, Lakeland Florida, Accessed 11 April. 2022. https://ponderingprinciples.com/2017/12/16/lewiss-poison-of-subjectivism-in-our-day/
3 Aristotle, Metaphysics, Books I–XIV; Oeconomica; Magna Moralia, ed. Jeffrey Henderson, trans. Hugh Tredennick and G. Cyril Armstrong, vol. 1, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press, 1933–1935), 201.
4 Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, Pocket Handbook of Christian Apologetics, The IVP Pocket Reference Series (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2003), 135.
5 John R. Franke, “Recasting Inerrancy: The Bible as Witness to Missional Plurality,” in Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy, ed. J. Merrick, Stephen M. Garrett, and Stanley N. Gundry, Zondervan Counterpoints Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013), 288.
6 Daniel G. Reid et al., Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990).
7 John Stott, The Incomparable Christ (Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2001), 66.