the-lords-prayer-july-august-1993

The Lord'

, as we for ive against us.

For Thine i

and the gl

modernREFORMAnON © is a production of CURE Publications Ltd.

Managing Editor

modern REFORMATION

JULY/AUGUST 1993

Sara McReynolds

Assistant Managing Editors

THE LORD'S PRAYER

Doug Hoisington Shane Rosenthal

Layout Design Sara McReynolds Shane Rosenthal

ARTICLES

Production Supervisor Sara McReynolds

Writers Michael S. Horton Dr. Robert Godfrey Alan Maben Kim Riddlebarger Rick Ritchie Dr. Rod Rosenbladt

Artists John Dearstyne Paul Swift CURE Board of Directors Douglas Abendroth Howard F. Ahmanson Cheryl Biehl Robert den Dulk Dr. W. Robert Godfrey Richard Hermes Michael S. Horton

Executive Leadership Team President Michael S. Horton

Executive Vice President

Our Father In Heaven

1

by Michael Horton

Hallowed Be Thy Name

7

by Michael Horton

Thy Kingdom Come

11

by Kim Riddlebarger

Give Us Today Our Daily Bread

15

by Michael Horton

Forgive Us Our Trespasses

17

by Rick Ritchie

Lead Us Not Into Temptation

22

by Ken Jones

Kim Riddlebarger

Thine is the Kingdom and Glory Forever

Executive Administrator

by Michael Horton

24

Jo Horton

Vice President of Communications Sara McReynolds

Vice President of Development

DEPARTMENTS

Dan Bach

Development Assistant Beth Brewer

Vice President of Media & Production Shane Rosenthal

Products Manager Doug W. Gorman

Treasurer Micki Riddlebarger CURE is a non-profit educational foundation committed to communicating the insights of the 16th century Reforma­ tion to the 20th century Church. For more information, call during business hours at: (714) 956-CURE, or write us at: Christians United for Reformation 2034 E. Lincoln Ave. #209 Anaheim, CA 92806

Interview: with JI Packer Glossary of Terms Book Review: Calvin on the Lord's Prayer

20 28 29

p ••••••••••••••••••••••••• I SUBSCRIBE TO...

I I I I A Bi-Monthly Theological Magazine Published by Christians United for Reformation I I I

I D I D

I

I I

1 year (6 issues) $18.00

I

City/St/Zip Phone

I I

2 years (12 issues) $36.00 Copy & send to: CURE

2034 E. Lincoln #209 Anaheim, CA 92806

I I_

Name Address

••••••••••••••••••••••••••

!node rl1 REFORMATION

OUR

FATHER

IN

HEAVEN

n his classic, The Odyssey, Homer's hero, Odysseus, must make his journey home past the isle of the Sirens.

Hypnotizing sailors with their irresistible melodies, the Sirens drew the unsuspecting into destruction. Those sailors who thought they were up to the challenge soon realized that they did not possess the powers of resistance required. Knowing this, Odysseus had his crew tie him to the mast of the ship and seal their own ears with wax. In so doing, the ship passed the isle safely and resisted the Sirens' song, to advance to the next stage in the odyssey.

For us today, the song of the Sirens is secularism, a condition of contemporary life that has resulted from the process of secularization. While there is neither the space nor the scope here for a detailed definition, suffice it to say that secularism is largely the product of two movements: The first, modernity, is rooted in the Enlightenment, which repudiated the supernatural (miracles, salvation, revelation, etc.), leaving room only for naturalism (laws of nature, moral improvement, reason, etc.). The second is postmodernity, in many ways a reaction

I

TIME

T Ii E

\\' I' I' h L Y

\:

r: w S ,\\ r\ C r\

ZI

~

E

Is

God

. Dead~

Do Christians also have a secular view of God? against the arid triumphalism of modernity and rationalism by emphasizing experience over reason and the inner realities of the soul over the external realities of the objective world. Whether drawing us onto the rocks of trusting in our own reason or seducing us into the reef of our own experience, this contemporary cultural condition keeps us from "raising our eyes to heaven" for sanity.

Confident in their powers of resistance to worldliness, many conservative Christians today, like the mainline denominations earlier this century, naively assume that because they are so involved in church and the evangelical subculture, with its own music, art, events, conferences, books and broadcasting, they are sailing safely past the isle of the Sirens. In fact, the more involved individual Christians are with the evangelical subculture, including the churches themselves, the greater the likelihood that they have already succumbed to the hypnotic powers of secularization.

Raising Our Eyes Toward Heaven In Daniel 4, the story is recorded of the Persian king Nebuchadnezzar, whom God humiliated. After his ordeal, he said, "At the end of that time, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my sanity was restored." He went on to praise the one true God who "does as he pleases," without getting human permission.

"Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, because everything he does is right and all his ways are just. And those who walk in pride he i"s able to humble" (Dan. 4:28~

37).

While his eyes were on his own glory and splendor, Nebuchadnezzar had no sense oftranscendence. It was only when this transcendence (raising his eyes toward heaven) was realized through divine humiliation that reality finally fell into place. He realized he was not God (or a god), that he was neither the center of God's universe nor indeed even his own.

by Michael Horton JULY/AUGUST 1993.

1

IJ1odernREFORMATION

To the extent that modern evangelicals have resisted humiliation, to that extent they are incapable of understanding Nebuchadnezzar's joy and sense of release at discovering the majesty, holiness, and sovereignty of God. They have lost transcendence in the pursuit of their own power and splendor and a god within

God instead of in our own flesh? Is there a sense of awe, reverence, and transcendence as the holy and majestically enthroned Lord of heaven and earth is celebrated?

The -apostle Paul warned a church in an upscale city that even many in the church "live as enemies of the cross of

I recently heard a popular preacher say, "Why obey God? Because he is committed to your happiness. " their heart who can be managed with the tried and tested formulae.

R

epeatedly, the children of Israel are called to raise their eyes. On their pilgrimages to Jerusalem, as they made their assent to the City of God, the Israelites would sing the 121st Psalm: "I lift up my eyes to the hills-where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth." God promises Isaiah a restored vision: "In that day men will look to their Maker and turn their eyes to the Holy One of Israel. They will not look to the altars, the work of their hands, and they will have no regard for the Asherah poles and the incense altars their fingers have made" (Is. 17:7). One wonders how much we, like the children of Israel, insist on worshiping a god who meets lis on our terms; the god of modern church growth, who is there to please us, to show us how to find ourselves, enjoy ourselves, and glorify ourselves. And this god is very "practical," very "relevant." He is not holy or separate from his creation, but "He walks with me and talks with me" in the garden "while the dew is still on the roses." How long will we train our eyes on the altars our hands have made­ the clever, sure~fire, proven techniques, the programs, the worship styles? When will we raise our eyes to heaven, to the hills, from which come our only hope and salvation? Are our services God~ centered or man~centered? Do they train us to raise our eyes to heaven, or do they perpetuate our tendency to focus on earthly things like success, pleasure, and self~fulfillinent? Do they remind us to look to the hills and place our trust in 2

•

JULY/AUGUST 1993

Christ. Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things. But our citizenship is in heaven" (Phil. 3: 18~ 19). Paul was calling the early believers to resist the Sirens' song of pagan society and raise their eyes toward heaven. Obsession with self~fulfillment is hardly a modern phenomenon, it is just that the strides in technology have made "you shall be as gods" sound a bit more realistic. This is why Paul warned Timothy, "In the last days men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud .. .lovers of pleasure rather than lovers ofGod" {2Tim. 3:1~5). What Paul probably did not bank on was the possibility that the evangelicals at the end of the twentieth century would actually capitalize on this sinful "self~ fulfillment" orientation and turn it into a gospel. The same apostle tells the Colossians, "Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3: 1~4 ).

If there is one thing that the postmodern version of secularism preaches in the matter of religion it is divine immanence. That is, in its reaction against a deistic rationalism that removed God and the spiritual realm from the interest of everyday thoughts, many secularists today are turning to a very aggressive spirituality, usually in the form of pantheism (everything is a part of god) and the god within. Superstition is most common, according to surveys, among the college~educated, so this growing

paganism ought not to be considered a passing fad inspired by tabloid journalism.

But what Paul tells us here is that we must not place our faith in the idol of reason (modernity), nor the god of experience (postmodernity); not in the god known only through reason, nor in the god within, but in the God outside of us and yet made known to us in the written and living Word. St. Augustine spoke of the essence of original sin as being "curved in" on ourselves, much as an older person might be bent over, unable to see more than a few feet ahead.

Such a person's world is often tragically limited and joyless, as he or she is unable to take in the beauty of the world beyond his or her own two feet.

It cannot be denied that in our worship, we may as well pray, "Our Audience, which art on earth"; in our religion, " ... hallowed (or at least greatly esteemed) be our name"; in our lifestyles, " ... our destiny come, our will be done in heaven as it is on earth. Give us today our daily indulgences and help us to love and forgive ourselves just as we love and forgive others. Lead us not into difficulty, _ suffering, or unhappiness, but deliver us from unmet needs. For ours is the kingdom, the power and the glory, at least here and now, which is what really counts anyway." We suffer from that "curved in" nature Augustine described.

Or, to reverse Nebuchadnezzar's confession, we have not raised our eyes to heaven and have thus caved in to the culture's Siren song of insanity.

Changing Views of God and Self: "Man Is The Measure" Ironically, many of the same folks today who decry "secular humanism" for "making man the measure," in fact, make man their measure in evangelism, in worship, in faith and in practice.

According to University of California sociologist Wade Clark Roof, the self~ centered, self~deifying impulse in American history is now a part ot evangelical as well as New Age spirituality. God has become another source of selrfulfillment. In fact, among "born again" Christians, "This God is ­ thought of in very human terms: God; as it were, is created in one's own image" (A Qeneration of Seekers, p. 75).

Even the formulas evangelicals create

lnodern REFORMATION for serving the Lord, Roof points out, are "geared toward selffulfillment: By keeping one's priorities properly ordered, one will have a better life.

Materialism, competition, achievemerrt, and success­ to cite the dominant secular, individualistic values of America-create the

~~:~~~~:::e:~;~~e;~~;~~~:~: attitudes, and definitions of

agreed, while only 44% of the public university students took this new psychological approach of self~fulfillment.

In a Barna poll, over half of the evangelicals surveyed agreed with the statement, "The purpose of life is

,"

,'.'

~~~~~f~:/:::~enb~ii:f~~:~~~~ can do just about anything if one believes in oneself."

•...

.

.

.. . . . • . .

'

.•.•..

'

.

J\ .

"fet.t~need.s," tto::hsl'a~ior( '

A

',,".'

"

'.,

lWlowedl()r atJeast gr~t1feSt~emed) "

about church." Instead, she says, "You don't have to go to

It's especially good for my family, to teach them the good and moral things" (p. 105).

As Roof points out so well, this is the very epitome of self~ centered individualism and secular autonomy evangelicals decry in the wider culture. Eight in ten conservative evangelicals

c.

''-(QUt Audience,'which art on earth,

~~~~~;l"sl~:g:~~en~~ Ut:~~~~ ~sh~~~~~s~t~i~:l~~~:a:~~r~~

NewLOr.d".'.,~S.·." Ffa"er

The..•·.

reality" (p. 105). Even though one of the evangelicals Roof interviewed said we need to realize America has a covenant with God to which it must

p. 89). In fact, when it comes to salvation, "God helps those who help themselves," according to four out of five "born again," evangelical Christians. Evangelicals are more likely than non~Christians to agree with this "pull yourself up by the bootstraps," selrhelp program

"..

be ourname. ' "

:~~:ed~~n ~~~~:m~~:~~;

>,

bur destinycome,'oqr wHl he/~9nein. heayen as It .is " oneartli~ ·' ., <'

. .\ <>

•

•

G ""

~~~~~!iica~n:~~~~r~h~: ~~~

good people will go to heaven, whether they have embraced Jesus Christ or not" (TheBama Report 1992~1993, p. 51), so redemption seems to depend on one's own goodness rather

d " d "I' ". a-- I ,.'. ay Qur "aiY In' ugence~~

l ye' U,s to ·

and help US.to,love an.dJorgive ours~Ives . . . ' ,. '" just asw.eJoveall,d ' f~rgiv~ 'oth~~s. '

Leadus not intodiffic~l~,. st){fe~htg,:or

~ unhappiness,butde.liverUffrottrunfuettleeds." .

is not even necessary, except as a moral guide. Of course,

~~:;~I~:~iZ:~iSaass ~:~\~~~~: when it is in the world, but I think Barna is quite entitled to demand ofus as evangelicals, "What is being taught in our churches about the nature of salvation?"

Sermons used to focus on sin and grace, but now they are often more concerned with

~~;~~.t~~~~th:~~~;c~:iog~~~;

categories. Why? Because we have recently discovered that

the Bible is interested in

"Obviously,"Roofnotes, "many .' thepo.~efandthe of the older, more rigid religious ' ... . .' .. ....•. '.' . .... . .......... themes like self~esteem, notions about the self have ~ndno,wjwhiclfjs' w4~t codependency, dysfunction, been set aside to make room for . . . ,really counts 'allYW~Y." ·' and unmet needs? No, it is more adaptable psychological because this is the Siren's song conceptions" (p. 109). Of ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ of the culture, ~ring us to course, the biblical interpretation ofhuman enjoyment and personal fulfillment" dote on ourselves through psychology as nature must go, but that does not seem to (What Americans Believe, p. 92). Is it the Romantics doted on themselves bother most Christians these days. possible: Are we more secularized in our through poetry of the last century.

University of Virginia sociologist, James view of the self than the world?

Theology focuses on God (the word Davison Hunter notes that "there are means "the study of God"); psychology ot only is man the center of his strong indications that a total reversal has focuses on ourselves and our own inner own universe now; it is actually taken place in the Evangelical conception needs and experiences. This is why of the nature and value of the self....For fashionable in Christian circles to speak theology is put down as impractical and example, nearly nine out of every ten of Christianity as an answer to low self~ irrelevant, while pastors and church Evangelical students (roughly paralleling esteem rather than as an answer to total workers often gobble up every self,help the number of public university students) depravity. Eighty~three percent (more book that comes off the press. We are agreed that 'self~improvement is important than 4 in 5) of the American adult fixed on ourselves, curved in. Only when we raise our eyes toward heaven will the to me and I work hard at it.' " When asked population believes that people are basically good. But those are just those how many agreed with the statement, spell of the Sirens be broken and our "For the Christian, realizing your full "secular humanists" out there, right? No, sanity be recovered.

77% of the "born~again," evangelical potential as a human being is just as constituency affirms this secular view of Where Are We Looking For Authority? important as putting others before you," 62 % of the evangelical college students human nature (What Americans Believe, Another example of the similarities

For ours isthe ki.n.·gdom, glorY,at least here

N

JULY/AUGUST 1993.

3

moe/ern REFORMATION

between modern evangelicals and secularists is the matter of authority.

Now here, at least, one might suspect that the widest gulf would exist. After all, don't evangelicals stand for moral absolutes over the relativism that pervades our culture? Take a second look. Hunter, like a growing number of sociologists, historians, theologians, and church leaders, points out that evangelicals today are not only ignorant of their theology, but suspicious of theology altogether.

While touting a high view ofscripture on paper, conservative Christians are as likely as the unchurched to say that church is not vital so long as one has an active, if private, "personal relationship with Jesus."

Conservative evangelicals are about as likely to defend their faith on the basis that "it works" or "it feels right," or on some personal experience that validates the truth. As Roof notes, modem people, including Christians, are united in the presupposition that "direct experience is always more trustworthy, if for no other reason than because of its 'inwardness' and 'within~ness'-two qualities that have come to be much appreciated in a highly expressive, narcissistic culture" (p.67).

The "testimony" ("what Jesus did for me") and personal experiences are often the most authoritative tests of truth in evangelical circles today.

If one experienced something, it must be true.

This, too, is a capitulation to the secular spirit of locating the seat of authority somewhere in oneself.

Whereas 4

II

JULY/AUGUST 1993

traditional evangelicals have stood by the Reformation slogan, sola scriptura (only scripture), the pressures of postmodernism (often cloaked in pious phrases, like "personal relationship" over "dead doctrine") have not only replaced God with self as the object of reality, but have replaced God with self as the authority for interpreting that reali ty. The very popular New Age mystic Matthew Fox declares that "heart~knowledge" is the basis for all true knowledge, and that is not far off from the disdain I heard for "head~knowledge" over "heart~knowledge" growing up as an evangelical. Fox also repeated the warning of Carl Jung, a mystic who passed himself off as a scientist (successfully, one might add): the greatest enemy of the soul is to "worship a God outside you" (Roof, p. 75).

A

lthough Jung and Maslow are criticized by evangelicals as fathers of "humanistic psychology," the entire Christian publishing, preaching, and broadcasting industry seems to be bent on "the god within" and personal, subjective, inward experience. Long gone is the focus on Christ crucified for us outside the city center of Jerusalem nearly 2,000 years ago for our objective sin and guilt against a holy God. Now, if religion is to have any "practical" meaning, it must focus on making me happier, taking me inside myself, and providing spiritual experiences.

Another irony comes in when the question of truth and authOrity is raised.

Tim LaHaye criticizes "secular humanism" for its relativism and its belief that

"contradictory assertions are equally true" (The Battle for Our Minds, p. 28). And yet, how many times in a doctrinal dispute (especially between Calvinists and Arminians) does one hear statements like, "There are good people on both sides" (as if one's character had anything to do with determining truth), or, "We can't know," or, better yet, "They're both true." Evangelical Christians, according to Barna, are almost equally divided between those who strongly agree and strongly disagree with the statement, "There is no such thing as absolute truth" (What Americans Believe, p. 84). Remarkably, " ... adults associated with mainline Protestant churches are more likely than all other adults to agree that there is no such thing as absolute truth (73% compared to 65%)" (What Americans Believe, p. 83).

In his controversial treatment, No Place for Truth, evangelical theologian David Wells noted with great sorrow, "In the intervening years I have watched with growing disbelief as the evangelical Church has cheerfully plunged into astounding theological illiteracy" (p. 4).

Not only have evangelicals been shaped by secularism in their theology; they have adopted the patterns of thinking that have opened them up to participate in the idolatry of their contemporaries. Belief in the essential goodness of humanity and its moral perfectability through ethical education, legislation, self~help,and political pressure, evangelicals have also accepted the idea of secular progress: things are getting better and America is a special agent in this global improvement.

Remarkably, this is going on at a time when most evangelicals still officially hold to the dispensational premillenial scheme that has dominated the movement for most of this century, a scheme that argues for a pessimistic view of history, worsening until Jesus returns.

While attacking Russian Orthodoxy for not standing up to the state and status quo Marxism, American Christians can't seem to separate biblical truth from the "American Way of Life."

The Christian Left thinks it is prophetic when it does little more than approve, in strident and self~confident tones, what the culture~shapers have already canonized, while the Christian Right

1110dern REFORMATION follows the same course with a different agenda.

Furthermore, the triumph ofsecularism (whether modem or postmodern) has not only redefined the Gospel and the wider Christian message; it has redefined the nature of the Christian mission and the identity of the Church. John Leith, though himself very active in speaking out on political and social issues, addresses his concerns: Many sermons are moral exhortations, which can be heard delivered with greater skill at the Rotary or Kiwanis Club. Many sermons are political and economic judgments on society, which have been presented with greater wisdom and passion at political conventions. Many sermons offer personal therapies, which can be better provided by well, trained psychiatrists. The only skill the preacher has-or the church, for that matter-which is not found with greater excellence somewhere else, is theology, in particular the skill to interpret and apply the Word of God in sermon, teaching, and pastoral care. This is the great service which the minister and the church can render the world. Why should anyone come to church for what can be better found somewhere else?

lronicaly, Professor Leith was aiming his criticisms at the mainline churches, although today it could just as appropriately describe evangelicalism. And the critique is to the point: Instead of confronting secularism with transcendence, and the merely horizontal (myself and others) with the vertical dimension (God), we are actually trying to play the game. But we are not as good or clever at it, so in our rush toward "relevance" we have actually become irrelevant. That is why, according to poll after poll, so many of the "boomers" have decided to stay away. "Religion seemed so captive to the status quo," Roof explains, " ... more comforting than challenging," simply baptizing "a set of commonly held cultural values such as progress, security, conformity, and confident living-all wrapped up and called 'the American Way of Life'" (p.65).

Many left because they thought the churches were "spiritually and theologically impoverished" and they left, " ...not out of any strong doctrinal or moral objection, but because church or synagogue seemed

irrelevant to them" (p. 55). The church is only relevant if it stops chasing after the competing voices of this passing age and hears the golden strains from another place more real than our own. That does not mean the church resists changes in style in principle, or that it never updates the language of its liturgy, but that its message is relevant precisely because it takes people who are inundated with a this, worldly and self, ward, consumeristic, therapeutic orientation and raises their eyes toward heaven, as N ebuchadnezzar had experienced. "Then my sanity was restored," the king confessed (Dan. 4:36).

T

he church today has lost its sanity. It has been seduced by the Sirens' song and part of the essence of seduction involves not knowing you're being seduced.

Think about how much our society is ruled by commercialism, consumerism, and marketing, creating "felt needs" so that some company can make a fortune on the latest thing that everyone is convinced he absolutely must have. And then think about how much the evangelical church is ruled by the marketplace. The August 9, 1993 issue of Newsweek featured the church growth movement, quoting a church growth pastor as saying, "People today aren't interested in traditional

The mainline denominations may be dying because they lost their theological integrity.

The only thing worse, perhaps, would be the rise of a new Protestant establishment that succeeds because it never had any.

We are looking to ourselves as the source of our authority, as the center of our existence, and as the goal of our energies and thoughts, and the church is helping facilitate this seduction, all the while decrying the moral dividends of the very secularism whose intellectual lies it has adopted hook, line, and sinker. We have followed the world into an insane obsession with the banal, the trivial, the here,and,now immediacy of "felt needs," without stopping to raise our eyes to heaven-that is, regain our theological and God,centered composure. As it is possible to be "so heavenly minded that we're no earthly good," it is also possible to be so earthly minded that we are no earthly good.

Finding The Balance Traditionally, church history records the swing from an over,emphasis on transcendence to immanence, and vice versa. Transcendence refers to God's being "wholly other," completely distinct from his creation, and therefore, the

"We have followed the world into an insane obsession with the banal, the trivial, the here..and..now immediacy of 'felt needs,' without stopping to raise our eyes to heaven." doctrines like justification, sanctification and redemption." Of course, that begs the question, "Why not? Have you ever tried preaching it?" It also begs the question as to whether the message the church preaches depends on a popular vote.

According to Newsweek editor Kenneth Woodward, The difference is that old, line Lutherans, Calvinists and Anglicans saw themselves as heirs to coherent traditions they thought worth passing on. Even when competing for converts, they put doctrinal and devotional integrity before success.

Woodward then offers this pause for thought:

things that are related to him are from another place, another world. The scriptures show us the balance we must have in holding to both the transcendent (the heavenly) and immanent (the personal and earthly) poles. True enough, we must be heavenly minded. We must "raise our eyes toward heaven." But we must also be concerned about the application of eternal verities to contemporary, earthly contexts. That is where the rub comes. When the Jews wanted to worship God in the form of a golden calf, they were simply seeking a more immanent way of worshiping the true God. They wanted a practical, personal, tangible deity and it was hard to have a personal relationship with an unseen God who will not allow himself to JULY/AUGUST 1993.

5

lJlodern REFORMATIO:'-J be seen, discovered, or understood- on man's tenns. They were, one might say, merely "contextualizing," since their neighbors had visible representations of their deity to experience for themselves.

However, the balance is found not in toning down either God's transcendence or immanence or by taking a middle path between this world (the here and now) and heaven (the eternal), but by understanding what our Lord is teaching us as we address God in prayer: "Our Father [immanence] who art in Heaven [transcendence]." Even in this brief prayer our Lord gave us, we have the proper balance between transcendence and immanence. God is completely above and beyond us (transcendent), but we are instructed to call him "our Father."

Isn't this a contradiction? Not at all. For in Christ, the Father reconciles us to himself and adopts us as his own children, co,heirs with Christ. We connect with eternity not by our own speculations, experience, or mysticalladder,climbing for peeks at the Deus nudus (the "naked God"-an experience Luther and Calvin referred to the monks), but by his own self,revelation in scripture and in the incarnation of our Savior. The reason the children of Israel were forbidden to shape idols of their own reason, imagination, or experience as means even of worshiping the true God, was that there is only one true "icon" of God. Speaking not of an experience, a visible representation, or a speculative concept, but of a person-namely, Christ-Paul said: "He is the image of the invisible God...for God was pleased to have all his

6

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

fullness dwell in him... " (Col. 1:15, 19).

In the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus gives us a picture of the Father's love for us. ¡ Having deserted his family and blown his entire inheritance on wine, women and song, the son finally is brought to his senses and returns home, prepared to be nothing more than a servant. "But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his anns around him and kissed him" (Lk. 15:20). The son knew that he merited his father's rejection and acceptance merely as a servant would have been merciful, but the father "was filled with compassion." "Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him," the father commanded the servants. '''Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.

Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let's have a feast and celebrate. For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.' So they began to celebrate" (vv. 22,24).

Similarly, we were "dead in trespasses and sins." And, Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love he made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions-it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus (Eph. 2:1,8).

We were not always children, but were "like the rest, children of wrath." And yet, God chose to reconcile us and become our Father. He did this even while we were sinners, by sending his Son to atone for our sins and to satisfy divine justice and holiness on our behalf.

And then he even gave us the faith to believe before we ourselves chose it: "Because of his great love he made us alive with Christ even when we were were dead in transgressions."

Like the father in the parable, our heavenly Father places the robe of Christ's righteousness, "the best robe," Jesus called it, on the sinner who trusts in him and "comes home." The smell of the pig pen does not keep us from our Father's embrace, because all he smells is the sweetness of Christ; all he sees is the purity of Christ; all he touches is the holiness of Christ. In this way, the holy can adopt the unholy and enter into a personal relationship with those who are in themselves unworthy of anything but God's wrath. It is not because we were worth it, but "because of his great love." And the focus is not on meeting our felt needs here and now, but on God's glory for all eternity in the justification of the ungodly. 0 Michael Horton is president and founder of CURE and the author of Putting

Amazing Back Into Grace, Made in America, and The Law of Perfect Freedom, and is editor of Power Religion, Christ the Lord, and 'The Agony of Deceit.

"lode rn REFOR\IATIO:\

Hallowed Be Thy Name

T

here ought to be little wonder why God's name is not hallowed in our society, for much of popu, lar preaching and evangelism is conform' ing to the mentality of the bumper sticker that sports, "God is my co,pilot." God's name is simply not hallowed in our churches. Our prophets and priests have falsely handled the Word, attributing more to human beings than to God. But in scripture, God is the potter and we are the clay. "Salvation does not depend on man's decision or effort, but on God's mercy ....Therefore, God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden" (Rom. 9:16,21). But in popular religion, God is there for me. I am the potter and he is the clay. After all, he can't do anything ifI don't "let him have his way."

Only if I decide to let him do this or that can he fulfill his will. After all, "Jesus is a gentleman who will not violate our free will.

The biblical God is clearly something other than this finite god of American religion. Taking God's name seriously depends on taking God himself seriously and that requires a God,centered, theo, logical perspective.

We cannot, therefore, blame the courts, public schools, media, or government for

our own theological unfaithfulness. We are the ones-the prophets and priests, who have contributed to this "ichabod," this departure of God's glory in our time.

Only by returning to sound, effective God,centered preaching and teaching, can we restore the confidence not only of Christians themselves in God's great' ness, but of an unbelieving world that is more apathetic toward our benign, help, less, happy deity than hostile.

Many today use God for their own ends. This is not always intentional; in fact, many of those who do this think they are serving God's best interests.

Nevertheless, it is easy forOus to corrupt the truth and refuse any possibility of being challenged by claiming divine au, thority for our own speculations.

When I was about 10 years old, my father was the manager of campgrounds in the Sierra mountains. One week, the director of the camp came up for an inspection, and my parents happened to have "grounded" me for a week by deny, ing me the use of my snowmobile. Now I saw my opportunity: I took the snow, mobile for a two,hour ride and when I found my angry parents waiting for me, I simply told them that Pat, the director, told me to go pick something up for him

on my snowmobile. How could I refuse the director? I never thought my parents would actually ask Pat what happened, and when they did, I suffered the ulti, mate embarassment: My parents didn't confront me; Pat did, and I felt like a fool. I had claimed his authority for my own disobedience. We do this with God whenever we claim God's authority and direction for our own decisions-even when those decisions are not necessarily right or wrong.

One of the ways in which we profane God's name, then, is to use God-his name, authority, or direction, as a blank check for our own decisions and activi, ties. In cases such as the Crusades, slavery, the slaughter of Native Ameri, cans, and apartheid in South Africa, the exploitation of God's name brings enor, mous discredit and scandal to the name ofGod and the cause of Christ. The evils in which professing Christians have par, ticipated (and even created) in the name of God-and continue to participate in, set the progress of the gospel back de, cades.

Many today hear in a word like "fun, damentalist" a ring of ideological fanati,

by Michael Horton JULY/AUGUST 1993.

7

1110e/ern REFORMATION cism that uses religion to achieve tempo' ral power over people. We can either cry out about the media's unfairness in put' ting us in the same comer with the Ayatollah, or we can bend over back, wards to support justice and compassion instead of using religion to support our own political agenda. In the past 20 years, God has been used to justify

dishonor to God's name. This is why the petition, "Hallowed be your name" is followed by, "Your kingdom come; your will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

Hypocrisy "It is," wrote the Puritan Stephen Charnock, "a sad thing to be Christians at a supper, heathens in our shops, and

"When the minister uses the 20 or 30 minutes he is. given to offer his own opinions, speculations, or insights, he is ~taking liberties with the name of God." --::

American nationalism, militarism, and even such debatable issues as the retension of the Panama Canal. He has been used as a mascot for the conservative, white, middle, class establishment, and the guar, antor of such evangelical rights as that of owning sub, machine guns. This smacks of "using God" and exploiting religion when evangelicals do it every bit as much as when mainline liberals paint God "red."

When Amos confronted Israel in terms of its ignorance, unfaithfulness, and social injustice, he encountered more hostility from the religious leaders than from the civil servants. Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, saw his chief end in life to be a "yes, man" to the king. Amaziah sent a message to King Jeroboam: "Amos is raising a conspiracy against you in the very heart of Israel. The land cannot bear all his words" (Am. 7:10). Any criticism of Israel's confusion of God's purposes with Jeroboam's agenda was regarded by Amaziah as a conspiracy.

"Then Amaziah said to Amos, 'Get out, you seer! Go back to the land of Judah.

Earn your bread there and do your proph, esying there. Don't prophesy anymore at Bethel, because this is the king's sanctu' ary and the temple of the kingdom" (Am. 12,13). In other words, it is God who serves Israel, not Israel that serves God. Religion serves the purpose of social glue, providing national identity through civil religion. It is not God's sanctuary and God's temple, but "the king's sanctuary and the temple of the kingdom" of Jeroboam. When we con, fuse the kingdoms and aims of this world with God's, we are bringing shame and 8

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

devils in our closets" (Puritan Treasures., p. 152). We bring disgrace to the name of God when we profess much and possess little. Self, righteousness is the greatest sin of all, but it is rendered even more grotesque when it combines with hypoc, risy. No self, righteous person has ever attained the righteousness of which he boasted, so when he falls his fall is great.

Everyone notices, and not a few take pleasure in it.

Jesus warned about those who would be surprised at the last day to learn that their use of his name was vain: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

(Mt. 7:21,23). Notice that these people are professing Christians ("Lord, Lord," they call him) and they even insist that they prophesied, drove out demons, and performed miracles in his name. They were using his name in vain.

at work, we are giving an opportunity for cynicism. Our motivation for excel, lence in education, at work, in relation, ships, or in the home, must be the sanctity of God's reputation. Weare out there in the world as chosen representa, tives . of his government and whatever we do reflects on our head of state.

Saul was a humble man in his youth and when Israel demanded a king, he was chosen. "When they arrived at Gibeah, a procession of prophets met him; the Spirit of God came upon him in power, and he joined in their proph, esying" (1 Sm. 10:10). But over the years as king, Saul's heart changed. God told the prophet Samuel, "Saul has gone to Carmel. There he has set up a monu' ment in his own honor. .." (1 Sm. 10: 12).

When Saul met up with the king, he told him, "Although you were once small in your own eyes, did you not become the head of the tribes of Israel?

The LORD anointed you king over Is, rael..." (1 Sm. 10:17), but Saul had become arrogant. He thought he could placate God by sacrifices, but Samuel declared, "Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams"{ 1 Sm. 10:22,23).

The name of God is not hallowed by those who have him often on their lips, but far from their hearts (Ez. 33:31). Of those who had been corrupted both in their doctrine and life, Paul warns Titus, "They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him" (Ti. 1:16). But false doctrine can itself be a form of blaspheming the name of God and Paul could just as easily have said, "They claim to know God, but by their doc, trine they deny him" (see Rom. 10:2).

Heresy n our lives, therefore, we must always be aware of the fact that we are representatives of our heavenly Father. If we are engaged in scandal, we necessarily include God in the charges the world makes. When we mark up a product in our store beyond that which is reason' able, simply because the demand is there, and our customers see a "fish" symbol on our calling card, it reflects on God's own character. Whenever we perform poorly

I

~

Error

Just as using God as a mascot for our own causes brings dishonor to his name, so too, using the Bible to support heresy is a serious and soul, imperiling exercise.

Peter warned about the heretic's use of scripture: "They will secretly intro, duce destructive heresies ... " and "Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up.

lJ10dern REFORMATION Their condemnation has long been hang' ing over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping" (2 Pt. 2: 1,3). Heretics have little respect for the Word and do not allow it to speak for'itself. Where it is clear, they make the meaning confus, ing until at last they can substitute the plain meaning for their distortion. Even Paul's letters "contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other scriptures, to their own destruc, tion" (2 Pt. 3: 16).

But heresy is not the only way in which God's name is corrupted. When in sermons we learn more about the history of the preacher through personal anec, dotes than the history of redemption through biblical revelation, the name of God is not given its due. When the minister uses the 20 or 30 minutes he is given to offer his own opinions, specula, tions, . or insights, he is taking liberties with the name of God. When illustra, tions can be recalled better than the morning's text, God's name is not hal, lowed in the church halls.

Nor is God's name protected when we use it in a profane, crass, irreverent man, ner: "God is rad; he's my dad" springs to mind. When "Praise the Lord!" or similar catch,phrases roll off of our tongues, as a Christian equivilent of "That's great!" we are using God's name in vain; that is, unnecessarily. Casual use of God's name is prohibited precisely because it wears away our sensitivity to the enormous reverence we owe it. Once we are able to think lightly of God's name even in our 'discussions with other Christians-even when our intentions are "pious," it is not so difficult to lower our perception of the market price of God's name in more pernicious respects.

Blasphemy The case is recorded in Leviticus 24 of a boy who "blasphemed the Name." God commanded Moses to take the youth outside the camp and have the entire assembly stone him. "Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who blasphemes the name of The LORD must be put to death" (v. 15).

In very few evangelical circles would a dirty joke be considered appropriate, and yet such expressions as, "Good Lord!",

"Lord of Mercy!", as well as "God!" and "Oh my God!" do occur in our circles with distUlbing frequency. This is a form of blasphemy that required execution in the Old Testament. So sensitive were the Jews about God's name that they never even pronounced it or spelled it.

And yet, today I see at evangelical conventions t,shirts bearing such slo, gans as, "This Blood's For You," ''Jesus: He's The Real Thing," or even such bIas' phemous products as "Pop's Almighty" Christian popcorn. Whenever we cheapen God's name by vain repetition, irreverent sloganeering, or by actual curs, ing, we degrade the name of God. Why Is This So Important?

To worship even the true God in our own way is to open the door to specula, tion, superstition, and apostasy. After all, "The Lord is a spirit and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." But why does God take his name so seriously?

It used to be that one's word was his bond. But in biblical times, one's name was much more than a signature at the bottom of a contract. Names were cho, sen in an effort to confer a blessing on a child and they were designed to reveal some aspect of the person's character as he or she grew older. In Hebrew faith, knowledge of God's name, or names, was a means of worshiping, serving, and deepening in the communal relationship with a personal God. Elohim, one of the divine names, refers to God's omnipotence. Yahweh, translated "LORD" in capital letters, to distinguish it from Adbnai, meaning "Lord," is God's personal name. From the verb "to be," it expresses the essence of God's character: That he is a self, existent, self, sufficient Sovereign who depends on no one and nothing, but is rather the one on whom all depends. "I am he: before me there was no Elohim

formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am Yahweh; and beside me there is no savior" (Is. 43: 10, 11 ). The meaning of Yahweh is directly related to the idea God communicated to Moses when the prophet asked whom he shall say sent him to the children of Israel: "When I come to the children of Israel, and say to them, 'The Elohim of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they reply, 'What is his name?', what shall I say? And the Lord said to Moses, 'I am that I am'" (Ex. 3:14,15). EI Shaddai is translated "God Almighty," or "the Sovereign Lord" (NIV). Yahweh, Yirehis first used in Genesis 22, when Abraham is called upon to offer Isaac as a sacrifice. It means "the Lord will provide," and referred to God's ultimate provision for Abraham and his spiritual heirs by the sacrifice of his Son. Yahweh,Rophe is "the Lord who heals"; Yahweh,Nissi is "the Lord my banner" (Ex. 17:15), referring to God's role in providing security for his people in the presence of their enemies; "the Lord of Holiness" is Yahweh,M'Kaddesh; Yahweh,Shalom, of course, is "the Lord of Peace"; Yahweh,Tsidkenu is trans, lated "the Lord our Righteousness," re' ferring to God's gift of justification through his own imputed righteousness.

Other names and titles could be listed, but it is enough for our purposes here to recognize the fact that each of the divine names was packed with information­ not with magical power or spiritual en' ergy, but with doctrinal content. Each name teaches us something crucial about the way God relates to us as his people.

T

herefore, whenever we undermine belief in God's sovereignty, we call into ques~ion his character as EI Shaddai.

Whenever we question his provision by setting out to acquire happiness, wealth or even salvation by our own strength and for our own good, we deny God as our Yahweh,Yireh. If we set out, as Paul's

JULY/AUGUST 1993.

9

1770dern REFORMATION Jewish brothers did, to establish our own righteousness {Rom. 10:2,3), we deny God as Yahweh,Tsidkenu.

Thus, protection of God's name is essential primarily for theological rea' sons. Each name is an affirmation offaith and, taken together, they all form a confession offaith. To hold God's sover, eignty, righteousness, peace, providence, and holiness in high esteem is to rever, ence God himself. Likewise, to discredit any of these names is to pour contempt on the very person ofthe one we worship.

This is why I find it incongruous when brothers and sisters say: "I don't want to get caught up in all that theology. I just want to know the Lord." To know the Lord is to get caught up in theology, for, as these names suggest, it is impossible to know the true God apart from his self, disclosure.

Finally, we are not to misuse the name of God primarily because it is by this name that we are saved. Let me explain what I mean.

The entire Old Testament is cast in the form of an ancient Near Eastern treaty between an emperor (Great King or Suzerain) and a lesser king (a vassal).

Whenever the lesser king saw his realm in military danger, he would call upon the name of the Suzerain, his protector.

By invoking his name, he was officially invoking the clause in the treaty that promised protection in the case of dan, ger. From that time, the invading army would know that its enemy was not the lesser king, whose territory they were plundering, but now the Great King with whom they would have to do battle. In the same way, Israel could rely on God to defend them whenever they were in, vaded-except in the cases where God himself sent Israel into captivity because of their disloyalty to the treaty.

Christ has fulfilled all of the terms of this treaty-not only his end, but ours!

When we are invited to "call upon the name of the Lord," we are not merely asking God for something which he may or may not grant. It is a clause in a treaty which we sign by faith: "Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Rom. 10:3) . We are called, there, fore, to bind God to us in a covenantal obligation. This is not, of course, an obligation of merit. God is not obligated to us because we have done anything 10

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

which put him under obligation (d.

Rom. 11:30). Rather, he is obligated because he himself has promised to bind himself to all who call upon his name. No longer do we have to worry that our failure to meet the conditions will some' how shorten God's arm, or at least his willingness, to save. He has committed himself to rescuing all who have been invaded and held captive by oppression.

We are merely to call upon his name.

After all, Jesus Christ is himself The LORD God, second person of the Holy Trinity. The Father "has given him the name that is above every name" (Phil. 2:9). We are to "believe in the name of the Son ofGod" (I In. 5:13). To call upon Christ's name is to call upon the name of Yahweh,Tsidkenu, "The Lord our Righteousness."

Not only must we hallow God's name because we are saved through calling upon it; this is also a name that we bear as children of God and brothers and sisters of Christ. In the Old Testament, God's people are referred to as "my people, who are called by my name" (2 Chr. 7:14), in contrast to those who sought to "make a name for themselves" at the Tower of Babel (Gn. 11:4). For, unlike any name we could make for ourselves, "the name of The LORD is a strong tower" (Prv. 18:10), defending us from the invading forces of the world, the flesh, and the devil. t is through the person and work of Christ that God gains for himself the greatest glory due his name. When the Israelites returned to Jerusalem from Per, sian captivity to find the City of Peace buried in weeds, there was a renewal of the covenant, with weeping and rep en, tance. But it did not take long for the children to long for the ways of Persia.

Worship, service, and duty to God and neighbor fell by the wayside as secularism invaded the congregation. Malachi re, corded God's displeasure, "It is you, 0 priests, who show contempt for my name" (Mal. 1:6) But God nevertheless prom' ises that, "'My name will be great among the nations, from the rising to the setting of the sun. In every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to my name, because my name will be great among the nations,' says The LORD AI, mighty" (Mal. 1: 11 ).

I

In Christ, this resolution is fulfilled.

His name is great, not only in Israel, but "among the nations" where the name of Christ is known and honored. Around the world incense, representing the prayers of the saints (Ps. 141:2; Rv. 5:8), is rising to God's throne and God is making for himselfliving sacrifices out of those who were "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1; Rom. 12:1). As the Book of Hebrews makes clear, the advent of Christ fulfills the shadows of the Mosaic economy. What the temple service, the, ocracy, and Torah could not accomplish, Jesus Christ himself accomplished as our temple, God's kingdom presence, and the Word made flesh. "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inher, ited is superior to theirs" (Heb. 1:3A).

May his name be hallowed by us at work, at play, in school, and in the home. May politicians in our day speak for the weak and educators execute their calling with excellence, and leaving poli, tics and public relations to the world of big business. May business people carry out their honorable vocation with un, common dignity, integrity, and respect for their clients, consumers, employees, and employers. Let Christians become widely known again as the best workers an employer could hire, and let home' makers and homebuilders set their com, pass toward creating dynasties of faith, their children taking their own places in society as salt and light. Just as moral scandal followed upon the heels of doc, trinal ignorance in Hosea's day, so we today "are destroyed because of a lack of knowledge." Let us long for the day that God's name is no longer blasphemed among the Gentiles because of us, a day when "the earth will be full of the knowledge of The LORD" (Is. 11:9), a day when God's name will truly be hallowed.

o

This article was adapted from "Guarding God's Reputation" which appeared in The Law of Perfect Freedom, published by Moody Press.

'---' .

1110dern REFORMATION

A Christian's view of the end times will dramatically color his understanding of our Lord's words,

"Thy Kingdom Come" T

he second petition of our Lord's Prayer is a simple and yet dramatic one: "Thy Kingdom come." Our Lord tells us that we are to pray that God's kingdom (literally, God's rule, or reign) come in some sense in which God's kingdom is not already preasent. Here we catch a glimpse of one of the most important, though difficult, concepts in all of scripture, and that is the kingdom of God and the relationship of this divine kingdom to both the present course of human history and to our Lord's return in the future. The tension between the present and the future aspects of the kingdom of God is described by Reformed theologians as the tension between the "already," that is, the present aspects of the kingdom of God, and the "not,yet," or the future aspects of that same kingdom.

It should come as no surprise that the particular view of end-times you hold to will have a dramatic effect upon how you understand the relationship between the present reality of the kingdom of God, and your own involvement in the world around you. A Christian, for example, who adopts a pessimistic view of the world's future, and who sees the world as merely the stage for the outbreak of end,times apostasy within the church, the rise of Antichrist, and a tremendous increase in evil as predicted in holy scripture, will very naturally tend to view the world around him as an evil place, simply awaiting judgment and destruction.

The world and the unbelievers who inhabit

it will ultimately be destroyed, because the world and the people in it are evil. In this pessimistic scenario, the kingdom of God, if seen as present in this age in any sense, has virtually no impact upon the decline of world conditions, and has virtually no function in restraining the rising tide of evil. Many Christians would argue, therefore, that the kingdom of God must be an entirely future reality and is not present now sense. And

when our Lord prays "thy kingdom come" he is asking that we pray that his kingdom, which is not a present reality, come in its fullness at some point yet ahead in the future.

Those influenced by dispensationalism, with its untenable doctrine of a pre, tribulational rapture, anticipate the removal of believers from the earth before the great seven,year tribulation period supposedly begins. In this scheme, the primary focus of the church's involvement in the world shifts to evangelism, since the world will soon be subject to tremendous evil due to the rise of Antichrist

and the bowl and trumpet judgments of the Apocalypse. The church's mission is that of Noah-to rescue as many lost souls as possible from the coming end and their ultimate destruction. Implicit within this system are depreciated roles assigned for ecological stewardship, reform of injustice in society, political involvement, as well as a marked diminishing of the doctrine of calling, or vocation, which is each individual's divinely assigned role in fulfilling their God,given mandate to contribute to culture through one's job, family life, and other such "secular" activity. Instead, high value is assigned to "full,time Christian service," and other such r r-__'11'.#fY"'JU tasks specifically oriented

. towards evangelism, and

the creation of a Christian

sub,culture designed to

insulate Christians from the increasing worldliness and evil associated with the impending end.

Dispensationalists argue that when Jesus came in his first advent he brought to the Jews an "offer" of the kingdom, which the Jews subsequently rejected. Jesus, having his plans frustrated by the sovereignty of man, then withdrew his offer of the kingdom until such time as God will remove believing Gentiles from the earth in the rapture. The kingdom of God has been withdrawn and its arrival awaits our Lord's return. The millennial age, set up on earth after the return of Christ will see the kingdom of God manifest in its fullness,

bry K~1m Riddl ebarger JUI...Y/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

n

l1lodernREFORMATION

as Jesus physically rules the nations with a rod of iron. Thus, the kingdom of God has little or nothing to do with the present age. Instead, the kingdom is seen as arriving in its fullness in the millennia I age, and our Lord's instructions focus entirely upon the kingdom which has

in this world is championed as the distinctly Christian activity. The goal is the complete Christianization of civil government, culture, and society in general, and the means is any and all available to the Christian, whether they be political, cultural, economic, or even

"We must remember that a primary aspect of eschatological expectation is that God Himself will redeem and restore the world, an expectation which is to give the Christian hope that one day all will be right." been withdrawn coming back in fullness in the future.

O

n the other hand, some Christians who view the world more optimistically see the world itself as the theater of God's redemptive activity, which accordingly extends to all spheres of life, including political, cultural, and social arenas. Involvement in Christianizing the world before Christ returns, in this system of thought, is the primary mission of the church and the hallmark of true piety. Therefore, the present reality and advance ofthe kingdom of God is often identified with the task of transfonning a given culture, society, or nation. T ransfonnation of the world through vocation, cultural engagement, and political activism is often identified as "kingdom work" by those who see the kingdom of God in this manner.

Though historically present in American evangelicalism in its more optimistic periods, the recent evangelical fascination with the eschatology of postmillennialism comes at a time when many Evangelicals are increasingly pessimistic about the future. This is especially true after the election of Bill Clinton, whose victory was seen as a resounding defeat for the Christian Right.

Ironically, many who eschew the postmillennial label for the more widely accepted premillennialism of American fundamentalism, nevertheless, are functionally postmillennial in their view of the kingdom of God. When seen from this perspective, a Christian's involvement 12

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

religious. Various evils in society, such as pornography, abortion on demand, and the like, are to be rooted out at every possible tum. Therefore, in this view, the church uses every possible means to accomplish these ends, extending all the way from the pacifist approach of simple prayer vigils to the more militant approach of physically obstructing entrances to abortion clinics. The kingdom of God, it is thought, is advanced through the church's "kingdom activity" here on this earth.

The primary focus of such an eschatological viewpoint is upon the moral improvement of the world in anticipation of Christ's return. Since our Lord's coming mayor may not be imminent in this scheme, those holding to this optimistic view will ask themselves, "To what kind of a world, and a moral mess will our Lord return?" "Have we really done all that we can do?" "How do we build the kingdom of God on this earth?" "Can our own efforts usher in our Lord's return?" And so, when our Lord instructs us to pray, "Thy kingdom come," the focus is upon the triumph of Christ's kingdom, now, in this age, over all forces that oppose it.

The optimistic and pessimistic tendencies are present in modern American evangelicalism. And quite surprisingly, both views seem to exist simultaneously in many circles, even though the contradictions inherent within these two views create an almost intolerable tension. Thus, many of God's people are forced to live on the mixed diet of conflicting sermons focusing on the

rapture and an escape from it all on one Sunday, and then focusing on politics, instructing us to take Washington, DC back from the "Hollywood types" the next. In either case, what happens to the meaning of our Lord's words "thy kingdom come"? The meaning of the text gets pushed into the background.

C

learly, there is a great deal that rings true about both of these views. But there is also something definitely amiss about them as well.

How can I deny the present reality of the kingdom of God, as the dispensationalists so easily do, when the scriptures clearly teach the present reality of that kingdom? It was Jesus who said, "From the days ofJohn the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it" (Mt. 11:12). He also said, "But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you" (Mt. 12:28, see also Mt. 3:2; Mk. 1:15; with Lk. 11:20 and Mt. 12:28) On the other hand, I find myself asking just exactly whose kingdom is this that we are talking about? In the Lord's prayer, we need to recall, Jesus prays that his Father's kingdom come.

This kingdom, we are told elsewhere, does not come with our careful observation, it is not visible, and is entirely within us (Lk. 17:20-21). What is my role as an individual believer, and how does the church's corporate role as the body of Christ relate to this kingdom?

For the scriptures also declare that this kingdom is not political. In fact, we are told that this kingdom is not even of this world On. 18:36). It is a kingdom that is not a matter of "eating and drinking, but of righteousness and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 14:17}.

Therefore, such a kingdom will not have a flag, an address, or a world headquarters.

In addition, how am I to deal ,with the fact that both Paul (2 Thes. 2) and John (Rv. 20) anticipate a great rebellion and cataclysmic upheaval of evil and apostasy immediately before the return of Christ to judge the world? Christians have thought long and hard about these questions, and the answer is to be found, in part, by returning to the historic and biblical eschatology of Protestant

1110dern REFORMATION orthodoxy.

One helpful aspect of this historic eschatology (sometimes known as amillennialism, or "present millennialism") is the distinction made between the doctrines of redemption and creation.

Simply stated, the doctrine of creation tells us that the world as created by God was good. It was the Fall of Adam that subjected the world to futili~y (Rom. 8:20), and in fact, one of the great promises that Paul sets out in Romans 8 is that the world itself will someday be redeemed at Christ's return to earth (Rom. 8:21). Therefore, it must be pointed out that the world has evil in it due to the fact that sinful men and women walk upon it, and not because the material world itself is evil. The language in scripture concerning the coming destruction of the world is always connected to express declarations that the world will be re~created in a "new" heaven and earth (2 Pt. 3:10-13).

Therefore, Christians should see those aspects of the doctrine of creation, such as universal human dignity (because God has created all men and women in His image), involvement in civil affairs, the institution of marriage and the sanctity of the family, the need for ecological stewardship of the earth's natural resources and beauty, the importance of calling and vocation, and the creation of culture as parts of the doctrine of creation, not redemption, and therefore, as being good in and of themselves.

A Christian's concerted involvement in all of these vital activities is good and necessary. Thus, the C hristian along with .the rest of humanity should not hate the world but instead, love the world and strive to participate in creation to the fullest. We must remember that a primary aspect of eschatological expectation is that G od Himself will redeem and restore the world, an expectation which is to give the Christian hope th at one day all will be right. There is biblical optimism on this point, regarding a Christian's participation in that which belongs to the doctrine of creation. But since the focus here is on creation, we must be careful not to confuse it with the kingdom of God, which is expressly related to redemption.

There is another aspect of biblical data and historic eschatology that is also _extremely important to keep in view.

C hristians kn ow that an historical fall did

take place. And thus, a Christian must see the world as fallen in Adam. There is truly a biblical pessimism about the world associated with the reality and gravity of sin. Weeds grow in gardens where they once did not. Sweat forms on the brow where it once did not. Women travail in child birth, when they once did not.

There will be wars and rumors of wars.

Loved ones will perish without Christ.

Christians must realize that there is great evil residing deep in every human heart, and that because of this fact, the creation itself is said to be subject to frustration. Things do not work as they should. There is death, sin, and material decay everywhere. Therefore, there is the constant need to work to restrain the evil in the human heart, to work to restore what is in a continual state of decay, and to constantly work to undo the great injustice that exists in society because of fallen human nature. Thus, Christians are not only to engage in such "churchly" tasks as evangelism, but they are also to function as "salt" and "light" in the restraint of evil by fulfilling their roles assigned them through the doctrine of creation.

And yet, the Christian need not ultimately be a pessimist, even if he is pessimistic about human nature; for paradoxically, they know that this battle, however hard and justly they fight against evil, cannot be won, and will not be won until Jesus Christ himself returns to raise his own from the dead and to restore all

with an awesome finality! God will redeem his people, and therefore, this kingdom of God must be seen as a present reality, advancing through the spiritual ministry of Christ's church through the ministry of Word and Sacrament.

But the scriptures also exhort Christians to be in the world, and yet, not of the world. There is the sense in which we must see ourselves as pilgrims, awaiting the summing up of all things in Jesus Christ. Our ultimate home is to be the new heavens and the new earth, and not in the earthly existence that we now know. Even in its fallen condition the world bears compelling testimony to the fact that a day is coming when God will come in Jesus Christ to restore all things.

Thus we must operate under the correct biblical assumptions-that our involvement as Christians in this world really matters; and therefore, in a sense we are to be optimistic about our duties as Christians.

But we must also be realistic, for all of our efforts cannot ultimately usher in the kingdom of God and a new and redeemed earth. T he scriptures assign this role to the Creator at his return. Therefore, we must be careful not to identify our ultimate commitment to this world and the evil that resides within its inhabitants. These things will perish. Nevertheless, God has decreed that our involvement in this world and our prayers on its behalf really do make this life a bit better in the meantime by restraining evil and serving

"God will redeem his people, and therefore, this kingdom of God must be seen as a present reality, advancing through the spiritual ministry of Christ's church through the ministry of Word and Sacrament." things. There is no doubt that Jesus Christ is coming again and he will restore all things when he does return. The final outcome of human history is therefore, quite secure, and there is no need to be an eschatological pessimist, even if one is realistic about sin and the human condition. His kingdom will come, as this petition in the Lord's Prayer is answered

as the means God uses to bring redemption in the midst of increasing evil. From our perspective, our involvement does change things. We can participate in the evangelism of the world.

On a limited scale we can see injustice remedied, the homeless fed and clothed, and the rape of the earth undone while we await our Lord's return. For where the JULY/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

13

117 odern REFORMATION

redemptive kingdom advances, God's people will function as "salt and light" in the secular world around them. Thus, there is a realistic appraisal of the world and the human condition, and hope that our efforts do make a difference based upon the knowledge that our Lord will come back to set all things right.

God's Kingdom Will Come!

Another vital aspect of historic eschatology relates to our understanding of the nature of the kingdom ofGod. We must be clear that the kingdom we pray to come is not ours, nor brought by our efforts. It is God's rule, or reign, to which we refer when we speak of the "kingdom of God." It is something that God extends, God brings, and God controls. Yet God is pleased to use us, his people, in the process of the unrelenting advance of his kingdom. Thus, this kingdom cannot be seen as a geo~political or national entity (such as the nation~state of Israel, or even our own America), nor as a material one such as a place or building, nor as a particular ministry or denomination. But let us not lose sight of the rest of the biblical data which declares this kingdom as a real and powerful kingdom, ultimately 14

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

19,jn. 3:5). And the very nature of this kingdom and its constant advance is to provoke the ever~present evil in the world to violent wrath. Physical evil has not yet been fully destroyed, as it will be when our Lord returns to this earth to judge the quick and the dead.

Thus, there is a sense in which we eagerly await the coming of our Lord to finally put an end to evil and human suffering, to create the new heavens and earth, and to raise up our mortal bodies for glorious ones as our Lord possessed in His resurrection. This is what is known as the "not~yet"-that for which we eagerly wait.

This is why our Lord expressly instructed us to pray "thy kingdom come, thy will be done." For it is not until Christ returns and his kingdom is visible in his physical reign in his redeemed heaven and earth, when every tear has been wiped away and there is no night, that our work and involvement as Christians in service to our Master and his kingdom will finally cease and we will enter into the eternal Sabbath rest, of which we have had but a taste in this life. 0

conquering all of God's enemies in the appointed time (1 Cor. 15:23-28).

Christians must balance this tension Kim Riddlebarger is a graduate of Cal State Fullerton between the all~conquering kingdom on and Westminster Theological Seminary in California. the one hand, and evil (constantly He is currently vice president of CURE, and a increasing before the end) on the other. contributing author to Christ the Lord: The Reformation One way in which the historic eschatology and Lordship Salvation and Power Religion: The Selling of the Reformation has done this is with out ofthe Evangelical Church. the he Ipfu I motif of the [""p;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;~;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;~ "already" and the "not~yet."

The scriptures declare that the kingdom has come. We live in the light of its benefits.

CURE's mission is to see nothing less than a second That is, we possess the Reformation in our own day. If you are interested "already" elements of this in supporting us in this work, consider becoming a kingdom. It is advancing Friend ofCURE: unceasingly even now (Mt 11:12) . We participate in the TkP~ advance of the kingdom of For a monthly gift of $25, or an annual gift of God through all of our $250, you can become a Friend ofCURE. In "spiritual" activity. return, we will send you 1) a copy of Putting But this kingdom is a Amazing Back Into Grace, 2) a free subscription to Modern Reformation, and 3) a complimentary audio spiritual kingdom, and it does cassette each month. Call or write us today at: not occupy any specific geographical location, nor Christians United for Reformation does it take visible form. Its 2034 E. Lincoln Ave. #209 advance is directly connected Anaheim, CA 92806 to the ministry of the Word 714/956-2873 and Sacrament in and through Christ's church (Mt.

28:18~

lnode rn REFORMATION

GIVE US TODAY

our DAILY BREAD

fter robbing a market, one of the arrested youths simply replied, "If you don't look ~out for yourself, who will?" The root of theft is the failure to trust God as a provider. "But how can I trust God?" asks the homeless person who lost everything in a bad business deal, including his family, and has given up all hope in God and others.

It is important to notice that our Lord first draws our attention to things heavenly: God and his name, his kingdom, and his will. Similar to the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer begins with God and his name and then descends to contemplate our own needs and the world around us.

Apart from God, the most important relationships between people and ideas are without definition, meaning, and purpose. When we begin with God, even the most mundane, common, every,day activities become rooted in eternity.

Furthermore, we begin with God and things heavenly because, frankly, God is more important than we are. That is an odd thing to say because, on one hand, it seems so obvious to say and yet, on the other hand, it sounds too offensive. It cuts across the grain of our modern sentiments to think that God exists for his own happiness, not ours and that we, in fact, are merely part of that universal design to bring pleasure to the Holy One of Israel.

By putting God first in the prayer, Jesus puts theology before our needs, that which is universally true before that which is practical for one's own personal life.

Today, we want to run immediately to the "practical" or the "relevant," as if God were irrelevant. What we consider practical is not the study of God, but the study of how we can become happier and more fulfilled. But here, Jesus insists that we be chiefly concerned with the glory of God and the holiness of his name and only secondarily concerned about our own

A

needs, whdher real or felt. This is a priority we must get right and a priority which, I fear, the church growth movement has gotten wrong in its insistence that the primary purpose of the church is to meet the "felt needs" of the unchurched rather than to teach and lead the unchurched to recognize their greatest priority as worshiping the one true God and believing his Word. It is God's command (the Law) and God's invitation (the Gospel) that form the community of faith, not our own felt needs.

Having said that, we must realize that our needs are important, too. After all, just because they are secondary, it does not follow that they are unimportant.

There are many things of secondary importance that are vital. For instance, an education for our children is very important, but it is not essential to their very existence, as the experience of countless people around the world and in our own country affirms. God is pleased to see us acknowledging what is true whether we realize its truth or not. Apart from his fatherly goodness and care, which he owes to no one, neither spiritual nor physical life is possible. The irony is that even the most bitter atheist depends on God for the oxygen he uses to curse him, and requires divine provisions offood and drink to sustain his rebellious existence.

T

here are, it seems to me, two very important things we need to learn from this petition. First, that God is the source of our whole existence, not just of redemption. Second, that his providence extends to every person, not just believers, and it preserves culture, not just the kingdom of God. First, God is the source of our whole existence. I have always liked Peter and found enormous personal comfort in knowing that the chief

of the apostles was slow on the uptake.

The first time he was confronted with the power of Christ to provide for daily needs was on a fishing trip. At this point, Peter was "Simon," and had no idea and probably little interest in Jesus' sermon as the Master stepped into his boat and continued teaching. "Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch," Jesus instructed. I have been on deep sea fishing trips with real fishermen and one thing I've learned, especially with those who have no aversion to using very strong language, is how important it is to keep my mouth shut. No matter how many times Jesus had gone fishing, he was not as experienced as someone who had done this for a living. Nevertheless, with a characteristic boldness that came from his confidence that he was God incarnate, Jesus told Simon to put down the nets even though it was the end of a rather unproductive fishing day. But because Jesus was a rabbi and even the most irreverent sorts tipped their hats to the men of the cloth, Peter agreed to humor the man. You know the rest of the story. The nets began to break, they were so full of fish, and then another boat arrived and both boats began to sink with their catch. And then Luke records a most astonishing response from Simon Peter: "When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus' knees and said, 'Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!'" (Lk.

5:1-11).

That is a strange response, isn't it?

Imagine a healing crusade today, where the most common response was fear rather than joy. A strange power, this, for someone who has such control over common things surely must be divine.

And the presence of the divine makes us uncomfortable. Notice that the most surprising miracles are not those where God exercises power over the sun, moon, and stars, but occur when he intervenes in the most common, everyday affairs. In fact, it is more difficult to see God's activity in the mundane than in the more dramatic moments in history. We can very easily see the hand of God in an earthquake or in the collapse of Communism, but we often miss his fatherly hand in providing for us every

by Michael Horton JULY/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

15

lnode rn REFORMATION day in kind and usual ways.

The Enlightenment had a lot to do with the way we look at God's involvement in daily affairs. The "enlightened" deists insisted that God was the creator who set things into motion, and that the real running of the universe was left to the laws of nature. Ironically, even those today who so emphasize "signs and wonders" and think they qre defending the biblical supernaturalism against deistic naturalism so easily fall into the Enlightenment way of looking at things.

For instance, when Pat Robertson writes that instead of praying for things, "We are to command the money to come to us... " (Answers, CBN Edition, p. 76) and that poverty "is a curse that comes upon those who either have not served God properly, or who are not following certain laws of God ..." (ibid., p. 155), and suggests "spiritual laws" that are just as real as physical laws, he is accommodating the Christian idea of miracle to the deistic, Enlightenment notion. When miracles depend on laws and principles, they are easily controlled, manipulated, predicted, and obtained through mere know,how.

But then, it is not a miracle. One does not expect a miracle! A miracle astonishes, as Simon Peter was astonished. A miracle contradicts laws of nature as well as our expectations of the way things should happen, rather than conforming to them.

Ironically, the "signs and wonders" movement has probably done as much to undermine a supernatural view of miracles (since it is merely a mechanical thing dependent on laws) as did an accomodation to the Enlightenment rejection of miracle.

When legs are lengthened and the blind can see, we say, "Ah! Now there's God at work!" But when we go to work or enjoy a good meal with friends or raise a family, these are mundane, common, everyday things that don't really demand God's involvement. But this is far from the biblical view, which presents God as active in the most minute details of our lives. For instance, "The lot [dice] is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord" (Prv. 16:33). "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny?" Jesus asked.

"Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.

And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered" (Mt. 10:29-30). Paul told the Athenians the identity of the 16

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

"unknown God": "He is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live" (ActsI7:25-26). It is important for us to recover the doctrine of providence. God is as much at work in the days we forget as in those we remember; he is always there, providing, caring, ruling, and protecting. He has been there all along, even in our suffering and lack.

He Cares for Everyone So much is said today of God taking care of believers, and one central reason for people becoming Christians is that God brings blessing and prosperity their way in material terms. Nevertheless, providence is not, like redemption, something that is limited to the realm of believers. While God's saving grace extends only to the elect, his common grace or providence does not ask whether one is a believer. In fact, our Lord uses this kind of "common" love orfavor as an example of how we are to love our enemies. "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Mt. 5:45).

You love your friends? Big deal-Jesus says, "Love your enemies" (v. 46).

T

his helps us when we realize that there are many who never pray for God's name to be hallowed, but instead, profane it. They could care less about God's kingdom and will, as they are too preoccupied with their own. And yet, these same people receive the provision of their daily bread, just as the Christians.

That almost doesn't seem fair, does it?

And yet, we must remember that creation and providence embrace all of humanity, not just Christians. Every person is created in the image of God and every person is cared for by the Creator because of his goodness. Redemption and providence are two distinct categories, and this is why some pagans enjoy prosperity, while some believers have to serve them in poverty and disgrace. This may not seem fair to us either, but we ought to remember that God is giving us all so much more than we deserve, even if all we have is breath.

Who Is This?

The second life changing experience of Simon Peter is recorded in Mark 4:35­ 41. One night, Jesus and his disciples set sail ¡to the other side of the Sea and got caught in a furious storm. Sleeping on a cushion while the boat was being swamped, Jesus was awakened by his desperate disciples. He stood and simply commanded, "Quiet! Be still!" "Then the wind died down and it was completely calm." Again, the response was astonishment rather than joy. More important than their realizing that their lives had been spared was the realization that there was somebody on their boat who had more power over their lives. Perhaps this gave a bit more definition to Jesus' statement, "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him" (Lk. 12:5). With good reason, the disciples were more worried about the man in the boat than the storm in the Sea. "They were terrified and asked each other, 'Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!'"

Just as we often like to think we are responsible for our being saved, so we also like to take the credit for our advancement at work, our success at school or in raising a family, our health or prosperity. It is almost easier for the poor and suffering believer to trust God as his or her daily provider because the hand of God is most clearly seen in the midst of our needs, rather than in our plenty. When we go without, we tend to blame God; when we have plenty, we tend to praise ourselves.

And yet, it is time to put ourselves out on that boat, where we realize that we are actually joined inseparably to the Creator, Sustainer, Provider, and Redeemer of the world. If we recognized him as the author not only of the dramatic (our salvation, a miraculous recovery, etc.), but of the mundane (our da ily provision and delights), we would see him as powerfully active in providence as he is in miracle.

Perhaps we could even see every day as an opportunity to marvel, "Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!" 0

'l1odern REFOR\llATIO\)

Forgive us Our

T respasses

O

h, I forgive you as a Christian, of course; but there are some things one can never forget!" This line comes from C.S. Lewis's book The Great Divorce. While it is spoken in heaven, the character who speaks it is from hell. Lewis's point is that in heaven no one dares to think like this. The line makes all of us laugh because in it we see the all~too~ human attempt to sanctify hard~ heartedness . Not too far beneath the laughter, however, we shrivel inside as we wonder if we face the same future as the ghost who spoke the line. While Lewis's book was speculative fiction , he was thoroughly biblical in linking forgiving ~ith being forgiven. The connection was drawn very clearly by Jesus in the Lord's Prayer. So where does that leave us when we fail to forgive?

I remember once reading a funny line about the Lord's Prayer in a humor book. It went something like "Being Southern means knowing that there is more to the difference between Presbyterians and Methodists than saying 'Forgive us our debts' instead of 'Forgive us our trespasses.' I grew up in a Presbyterian church where we used the word 'debts.' My Lutheran relatives in Minnesota used the word 'trespasses.' I figured that Presbyterians spoke of debts because they were bankers, Lutherans of trespasses because they were farmers.

As the Southern humor book said, however, there is more to the issue than mere words. The great divide comes not between bankers and farmers, but between those who say that we must forgive before we can be forgiven and those who do not.

The stakes are high. Our very souls hang in the balance.

A Deep Muddle Christ says that if we forgive, we will be forgiven, and if we don't forgive, we will not be forgiven (Mt. 6:14-15). Everything is quite simple until we look at ourselves and see how unforgiving we are. Then this passage is anything but simple. What about all those times we thought we had forgiven someone only to find the embers of rage have not quite gone out in our hearts?

With ali tde poking around in our memories we'll probably find our anger very much alive, even when we have tried to be diligent in forgiving as Christ forgave us.

And what about all the other times we couldn't forgive? Clearly this passage puts us into a tough spot.

The issue becomes even more cloudy when we try to square the natural reading of the passage with all we have learned of the grace of God. Strange questions take hold of us. Is failure to forgive a sin in a class by itself? Is it a more heinous sin than others? Will it damn our souls even if we have faith in Christ? At this point we realize that we had better take a deeper

look at the issue.

The surprise is that upon deeper study, the solution to this issue is found where many of us first tried to find it. From the very first, we wanted to see Jesus' command to forgive as a serious call to forgive, since Jesus' commands are always to be taken seriously (Mt. 7:26). For the same reason, we knew that it had to have a real power to make people guilty if they failed to forgive. But somehow, in addition, we knew that if we did fail to forgive, we needed to be able to tum again to Christ and ask him to forgive us for our not forgiving others.

This intuition came not from the passage in the Lord's Prayer itself, but from our general familiarity with the grace of God as it is presented in the scriptures, especially in the Pauline Epistles.

It requires a deeper study to harmonize Jesus' requirement that we forgive with Jesus' forgiveness of us because ultimately, this is a study of the relationship between Law and Gospel, which is much more complex than we sometimes imagine. If we work through the New Testament teaching carefully, however, we will find that everything will work out cleanly. Even better, the result will be that the next time we find ourselves not forgiving others, we need not despair of salvation.

The Great Divide For the Reformers, the Law was by definition rigorous and unforgiving, while the Gospel demanded nothing. Jesus told

by

Rick Ritchie

JULY/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

17

modern REFORMATION us that if we forgave, we would be forgiven, and if we did not, we would not. If the Law is rigorous and unforgiving, then how could a passage like this which mentions the forgiveness of sins contain Law? Yet, if Christ is issuing a demand, how could this be Gospel? Were the Reformers wrong?

Has the distinction between Law and Gospel broken down in the middle of the Lord's Prayer? We have been apprehensive about labelling Christ's statement in the Lord's Prayer as Law since forgiveness is mentioned.

Our conviction that the Law is rigorous makes forgiveness seem out of place in a Law statement. Yet if we~ look again, the mention of forgiveness does not stop a commandment from being Law. Paul says that Moses describes the righteousness of the Law in the terms "the man who does these things shall live by them" (Rom. 10:5). The shape of Law, then, is that we must perform in order to receive life. What we often fail to recognize is that forgiveness and life are intimately connected.

In scripture, a promise of forgiveness is to be regarded as a promise of life. The big difference between the Old Testament and New Testament is that in the Old Testament life itself is promised, while in the New Testament forgiveness is promised, which brings life. If Moses is fight and we gain life by doing God's commands, then we must read all commandments as promises of life.

In the Ten Commandments we are told, "You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name" (Ex. 20:7).

Ifwe keep God's name holy, we will receive

differ from Moses? Life is promised if we obey, withheld if we do not. The fact that forgiveness is mentioned does not change that.

The nature ofwhat is promised does not make a promise Law or Gospel. Both the Law and the Gospel promise the same thing in the Old and New Testaments.

What determines whether a promise is Law or Gospel is what is required to receive the thing promised. The Law demands that we do the things commanded. The Gospel does not demand but delivers the promise to those who trust in the one who fulfilled the demands. Since Christ's promise to forgive those who are forgiving is conditional, it must be Law. Another clue to the fact that Christ's demand is Law is the actual effect it has on the one hearing the command. We surely must conclude that Christ's intent in commanding us to forgive was to bring about a more forgiving world. Oh, if only those who knew that they had been forgiven

by Christ would always forgive! Cycles of bitterness would be broken. Countless lives would be mended. Would not the world be changed?

But must we not all say with Paul, "the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death"? (Rom. 7: 10). There are times in the heat of anger when all we want is justice from those who have wronged us. We could paraphrase Paul (Rom. 7: 7-8) and say we would have

not known what hard,hearted ingratitude was if Christ had not told us to forgive. But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the

"Our sin becomes more sinful when, in addition

to moral failure, we must add our neglect of

God's grace." life, for that is what Moses said of those who did according to God's commands. If we misuse God's name, however, we will not be held guiltless. The contrast is between living if we do what God says, and being guilty if we do not.

Is this not exactly what we find in the Lord's Prayer? Ifwe do according to Christ's command and forgive, we will be forgiven.

If not, we will not be held guiltless, that is, we will not be forgiven. How does this 18

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

commandment, produced in us every type of unforgiving desire. Only now, sin seizes not only the opportunity afforded by the commandment, but that afforded by the Gospel as well. For there are times we could almost resent being forgiven when it deprives us of our right to demand perfect justice of those who have wronged us.

Surely at this point "in order that sin might be recognized as sin ... through the commandment sin [has] become utterly

sinful" (Rom. 7:13). Can we doubt that Christ's commandment to forgive is Law when it performs the function of the Mosaic Law exceedingly better than the Mosaic Law itself?

Child of Wrath, Child of Promise While part of our confusion over Christ's statement comes from not being able to distinguish Law from Gospel, another part comes because we have failed to recognize the dual moral nature of man.

One theme which marks Reformation theology off from other more American theologies is that it insists that the Christian, though he or she has a new identity as a child of God, also has a sinful nature which still needs to be held in check. Luther referred to the new identity as the new man. The old identity he called the old man. The old man is still subject to the threats of the Law. His actions are by nature damnable, and God's Law condemns those actions. This does not invalidate the Gospel, however. Even while the threats still thunder, the promises hold. The old man hears the threat that "No thief shall inherit the kingdom of heaven," while the new man hears the promise, "Today you shall be with me in Paradise."

So Law and Gospel, threat and promise, are true for the Christian, as well as his unsaved neighbor. But what about where the Bible sternly warns those who have heard of grace that bad things await them if they fall away? There seem to be places where the Gospel makes for greater condemnation than the Law! Hold it! True, there are warnings like this. But have you noticed that there is a corresponding set of passages which promise greater care to those who have received grace? Let us examine a pair of these passages to see how these two types of passages relate to each other: Sterner Law After Knowledge of Grace: We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? (Heb. 2: 1-3)

Sweeter Gospel After Knowledge of Grace: Since we have now been justified by his

~

17 U)(/ern REFORMATION

blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been' reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! (Rom. 5:9-10)

The first passage shows a progression.

The message spoken by the angels, the Law, brought condemnation on the disobedient. The disobedient 'were not capable of meeting the requirements of the Law, and yet it condemned harshly. Now the disobedient are offered a way to escape their condemnation. If they reject this, they will be doubly guilty. Their initial guilt comes from violating the Law, their new guilt comes from spurning the generosity of their judge who has granted pardon!

If the first passage is enough to make us tremble, the second quiets us with a comforting message. If God chose to shower his grace upon us while we were hostile to him, how much more will he do now that we have been reconciled to him!

If the first passage demonstrated a progression where sin became more sinful in light of the graciousness of God, the second passage shows a different progression.

In light of the fact that God has saved us by grace, we can expect even more from him! He saved us first when we were his enemies. Can we expect less of him now that he has adopted us? Elsewhere Paul says, "the law was added so that the trespass might increase, but where sin increased, grace increased all the more." (Rom. 5:20) It seems as if this happens to an even greater degree after grace. Our sin becomes more sinful when, in addition to moral failure, we must add our neglect of God's grace. But even so, the very grace which becomes an occasion for more heinous sin, that very grace, increases on account of the new status it has given us as God's children!

So What Then?

At this point, many readers are probably wondering, if what I am saying is true, then why did Jesus even bother to command us to forgive? Without the threat, why bother to forgive?

The Apostle Paul knew that that was what some of his readers were thinking when he had presented the Gospel in the book ofRomans. "What shall we say, then?

Shall we go on sinning so that grace may

increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Rom. 6:1-2) was how he stated the question.

Certainly grace is able to forgive, even when we don't. It has a different end, however. Paul goes on to say that we were "buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life" (Rom. 6:4). The very grace which keeps us from being condemned for our sin is to be the

the heart. The offender gets a free ride, while his offense has caused us pain and despair.

Certainly God has every right to demand we forgive, and to withdraw forgiveness if we fail. But the results of that are predictably bad. The strong~arm tactic proves the weaker, for what God desires he does not achieve. Instead of producing more forgiveness, he produces bitterness.

But we have a better God than that. It

"You are now free to forgive. The inability to forgive shall not have dominion over you, for you are not forgiving out of compulsion, but in response to the grace of God." destroyer of the power of sin.

In relation to our forgiving other people, we can see Paul's argument run as follows: Aha! some ofyou have finally caught on to the fact that the Gospel even covers your not forgiving others. You are now asking "Can we be unforgiving so that God's forgiveness toward us might increase?" No, friends. Never! God's bountiful forgiveness, which is great enough even to cover your hard~heartedness toward those who have wronged you, was given so that you might live a new life. You are now free to forgive.

The inability to forgive shall not have dominion over you, for you are not forgiving out of compulsion, but in response to the grace of God. At first glance this might seem like a weaker way to deal with the issue of forgiveness. After all, God certainly has the right to expect us to forgive the piddly little things others have done to us after all he has forgiven us. No argument; this is true. God has the right to expect this of us.

But what is the end result if he chooses to claim his right? He makes hypocrites of people who outwardly forgive so as to escape punishment. In fact, the bitterness often increases, for now we resent the fact that the Gospel makes the wrongs done to us by others a threat, not to their salvation, but ours! And now they have a blank check to hurt us and expect forgiveness from us.

After we have managed to mumble a half~ hearted "You're forgiven" we really feel the sting, for we know we didn't mean it from

is clear that our inability to forgive is just the power of sin that Paul says God cancels by his grace. While the Law does threaten us when we fail to forgive-even if we hold onto the smallest morsel of bitterness-the Law does not have the last word. The Law is there to show us how truly horrible our sin is, that even the Gospel has become an occasion for increasing our bitterness against God and others. But then the Gospel shows how truly great our God is, that even the condemnation of the Law has become an occasion for increasing our gratitude towards God. For after sin's sinfulness is shown for what it is, God's grace is all the sweeter, for we realize how much we need it.

Weare like the elder brother in the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Lk. 15:11­ 32). By right, our father could disown us for shaming him by not accepting our brothers who have sinned against us. But instead the father comes out to plead with us. When we come back into the feast, we realize that it is we who were the lost sons as much as those who sinned against us.

Our father's mercy is overwhelming. He will forgive us, even if we don't forgive others. Let us then forgive. 0 Rick Ritchie is a staff writer for CURE, and is a contributing author to Christ the Lord: The Reformation and Lordship Salvation. He is a graduate of Christ College Irvine and Gordon­ Conwell Theological Seminary.

JULY/AUGUST 1993

•

19

lJ70de I'll REFOR:VIATIO:--.J

an INTERVIEW With ¡J.I. PACKER

J.I. Packer is professor of theology at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia.

An Anglican theologian, he has played avital role in English and North American evangelicalism, having written such works as Krwwing God, Fundamentalism and the Word of God, Keep In Step with the Spirit and The Pursuit of Godliness.

MR: Dr. Packer, you've done a great deal of writing and speaking on the subject of the need for a new reformation, a new awareness of the sovereignty and grace of God in our day. How do you assess the condition of the state of evangelicalism as it presently exists, and what do you think we can do about that condition? ~acker: I see evangelical strength in

America needing desperately to be undergirded by Reformation convictions, otherwise the numeric growth of evangelicals, which has been such a striking thing in our time, is likely never to become a real power, morally and spiritually, in the community that it ought to be. I mean by Reformation truth, a God~ centered way of thinking, an appreciation of his sovereignty, an appreciation of how radical the damage of sin is to the human condition and community, and with that, an appreciation of just how radical and transforming is the power of the Lord Jesus Christ in his saving grace. If you don't see deep into the problem, you don't see deep into the solution. My fear is that a lot of evangelicals today are just not seeing deep enough in both 20

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

the problem and the need. But Reformation theology takes you down to the very depth of the human problem. And actually, the Reformation itself was a recovery of the tremendous contribution that the great St. Augustine made back at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. He was the man who, more than anyone else in Christendom, saw to the heart of the real problem. He saw how much damage sin had done, how completely we were oriented away from God by nature. He is the one who left us that phrase "original sin" which he got from the text of Psalm 51:5, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." He also saw in response to our sinful condition, how great a work of transformation was needed by the grace of God in human lives. The 16th century reformers stood on Augustine's shoulders at this point. Of course, they clarified the great truth that justification by faith is the way in which the grace of God reaches us. We need, even today, a Christianity that was as deep and strong as that. And this, it seems to me, is where modern evangelicalism is lacking.

MR: Would you say that there is a connection or a similarity between the man~centered theology of evangelicalism and the general humanistic spirit?

Packer: Yes, although I think that it is an indirect connection. Secular humanism, you see, is very man~ centered. It encourages every individual to regard his or her own personal happiness as the supreme value. And the kind of evangelical religion which doesn't challenge this self~centered, self~absorbed stand point, but rather, reinforces it by making one's religious experience the most important thing in the world, or God's gift of personal contentment, happiness, joy, good feelings, or that kind of thing, is simply echoing the tenants of this type of modern humanism. A Reformational emphasis, however, challenges this by asserting that God is the center, not man. We must recognize that he is at the heart of things and that we exist for his glory, that is to say, we exist for him, not he for us. And it is only as we set ourselves to glorify him as the one who supremely matters that we are going to enter into the joy and fulfillment which being a Christian brings. The first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism puts it so well.

Question: What is the chief end of man? Answer: Man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.

The enjoyment comes as we set ourselves to glorify God. But if our concern is with the enjoyment, then we won't be glorifying God. MR: Dr. Packer, you mentioned just a moment ago, in referring to the proliferation and growth of evangelicalism, the lack of any real significant power of the cross and the Gospel. Do you believe that modern evangelicals have lost their grip on the biblical Gospel?

Packer: Well, in one particular respect we've got it all wrong. We are inclined to believe that God exists for us, God is waiting for us, God is there to make us happy. But in the Gospel, God does not play the role of a butler. In the Gospel we are told that God, the creator who made all things for his own praise and glory, has gone into

1110dern REFORMATION

-J

action as mankind's redeemer. We human individuals are impotent of spiritual response, that is, response to God in any shape or form, but God first of all sends us a savior to make atonement for our sins, and then he sends the Holy Spirit to change our hearts and make us willing to see and respond to Christ. Now, if we don't appreciate that our salvation is God's work in that absolutely radical sense, that is, God sends the savior, God gives us the gift of faith to respond to the savior, then we won't even be able to tell folks what the gospel means. You see, we ought to be telling folks that they are helpless, that they need Christ, and that they must ask God for new hearts and for the ability to trust Christ. In other words, you've got to tell them of their own spiritual inability right from the start. If on the other hand we forget this and go around saying that God is just there to help you, and that you call on him whenever you need to, that he is sort of a cosmic bell~hop, well then we are misrepresenting the Gospel in an absolutely fundamental manner. Until the Gospel is understood as a message that obliges us to say that we are hopeless, helpless, lost, and ruined, requiring also that God does the work of salvation from start to finish, then we are not presenting the Gospel as it is revealed in the New Testament.

MR: Given the current trends of the evangelical movement, what do you see for the future?

~

Packer: I think that there is a big risk of fragmentation. Modern evangelicalism is simply too worldly, and the influence of the world is usually always a fragmenting influence. I think perhaps that evangelicalism in America hasn't yet learned the way of unity on anything except the outward trappings of united evangelistic efforts. And that in itself is only a shallow uniting factor because the Gospel as understood

by some doesn't correspond to the Gospel as understood by others. And when it comes to all goals and objectives

beyond evangelism, then I think that evangelicals are very seriously divided.

There are some tightly connected with right wing politics, yet there are others, because of their emphasis on end times speculations, who really don't think that involvement in society is important at all. There are some who are only interested in the supernatural works of the Holy Spirit,

seem to think you can get along without, provided that you read your Bible daily and think one or two guiding thoughts from your passage to keep you on the rails. I don't believe it's at all like that. But theology means the study of God, and if we are to love God, as we are commanded, with all our "minds" then we need to be in the business

"The kind of evangelical religion which doesn't challenge a self-centered, self-absorbed stand­ point, but rather, reinforces it by making one's religious experience the most important thing in the world is simply echoing the tenants of modern humanism." such as faith healing or speaking in tongues, while others seem only interested in the implementations of psychology or self~help type programs.

So I see grave risks of fragmentation down the road. The only thing that can unite us is a bigger, broader, deeper, wider, and more generally agreed upon theology. And I find that theology only in the Refonnation heritage.

MR: If the theology is the only thing that will unite us, do you really think unity is at all achievable? Because from our perspective, the average evangelical, indeed, the average Christian, it seems, is intimidated by theology.

Packer: First of all, theology simply means the study of God. This is something that every Christian needs to realize. I think the way that the word has been used in the past has frightened many Christians away from it, even though they never stopped to consider what the word actually meant. People got the idea somewhere that theology is the business of the seminary professors and the clergy, but has very little to do with the day to day living of the Christian life. It's something people

of theology. So when I speak of theology, I am referring to the truth that God has given us all in scripture which we all need to learn and digest. It is truth for life! Now, I am a professor of theology, but I must tell you that in all my teaching and writing, I am trying to show that theology is supremely practical. If this could be seen, then I think people's fear of theology could melt away and they would appreciate, and benefit from, serious theological instruction. Again, if you will allow me to beat the drum once more, this is a Reformational emphasis. If you actually get around to reading the refonners, such as Luther or Calvin, you will find that they did all their work from a pastoral standpoint, but at every point they are applying truth to the lives of people. What they were trying to do throughout their earthly lives was to build the people up in God's truth so their lives niight bring glory to their creator and redeemer. It's as practical and down to earth, and as pastoral as that. That's what we need to get back to first, I think. 0

JULY/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

21

/Jlodern REFOR\ lATIO\

22

â&#x20AC;¢

JULY/AUGUST 1993

IJlodern REF()R~IATI()0: n order to get a proper understanding of this or any of the petitions contained in Lord's Prayer it is necessary to underst~nd the context in which Jesus is offering these prayer instructions. From the very outset of his instruction Jesus uses the medium ofcontrast in outlining our relationship with God. Therefore, we see the image of a holy, sovereign and sufficient father, contrasted with sinful, dependent children. Each petition can be understood through this contrast.

With that in mind let's consider "And Lead Us Not Into Temptation."

As a child I somehow thought this was a reminder for God to lead me in those green pastures instead of pathways of testing and temptations. However, when viewed through the medium of contrast it becomes clear that the temptations are within me and deliverance from temptation is in the word and way of God. The Apostle James reminds us "When tempted no one should say, 'God is tempting me.' For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed" (Jas. 1:13­ 14). So within this petition we see a recognition of the fact that, as humans, temptation is a very real problem. It is also important to remember that temptation is not a sin within itself, as James points out in verse 1:15, but that it can lead to sin. This is why divine leadership is seen here as a prayer request: not because temptation is a sin, but because it can be a step on the way to sin. So what Jesus is making clear with this petition is the contrast between man following his own mind, which leads to temptation, and man being led by God, which leads away from temptation. In the framework of contrast we are able to see, therefore, our dependence on God for guidance.

Remember the words of Solomon: "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death" (Prv. 14:12).

There is one other thing to be noted about temptation. Weare only tempted by that which is pleasing to us or at least seems expedient at the

I

moment. Temptation in scripture is seen as an urge to satisfy a practical need, such as Satan's temptation of Christ with the stones that he (Christ) could easily tum into bread (Mt. 4:3).

The same conditions are present with Esau in Genesis 25: he is hungry, just as Jesus was in Matthew 4. Food is a legitimate 'human need, but when it is set against spiritual responsibility, or an opportunity to exercise trust in God, it becomes temptation. As Jonathan Edwards stated in his On Religious Affections, "Christ and other things are set before us together, for us particularly to cleave to one and forsake the other."

The other side of temptation that Jesus presents is that of desires born of our sinful natures, pitting the pleasing of self against pleasing God. In either case, we are only tempted by that which satisfies either a legitimate need such as .food, or an exaggerated pleasure.

T

his brings to mind the temptation that Adam and Eve underwent in the garden of Eden. Satan, you will remember, tempted our first parents to disobey God, reminding them that the fruit was "good for food, pleasing to the eyes, and desirable to make one wise."

The way this product was marketed sounds as if it would sell like hotcakes even in our own day. The problem, however, is the fact that God commanded them not to eat the fruit of this particular tree. The violation of this divine command has been the source of many evils. We too, violate God's laws in many ways when we give in to temptation, thinking of ourselves before God, and our neighbors.

Jesus, however, when he was tempted in the desert by the devil, did not think of his own desires of hunger and relief, but rather, thought about God and his neighbors. He said no to immediate gratification, and honored the commands of God, and he also was thinking of us, those he came to save.

For if Jesus would have given in to the devil, he would have failed to be our pure, righteous, and obedient substitute.

This same Jesus, who persevered through his temptations, now calls us to do the same, not to earn salvation, but because he earned salvation for us, and now he

is calling us to be his people.

Therefore, we stand in perpetual need of Divine guidance so that our needs and desires are kept in proper perspective. Remember what the writer of Hebrews says about Jesus: "For we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are; yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). Temptation, when engulfed, ultimately leads away from God, so we need to be led in his Word in order to understand that our needs are not worthy to be compared to the pleasures of his grace. It is only by the hand of our heavenly Father and through his guidance and care that the folly of our own imaginations which promote self,glory instead of his glory, is exposed. This is what prompts Paul to describe the Christian life in terms of "casting down imaginations; and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. 10:5).

Temptation is not always moral but it is always spiritual. Therefore, at times we are tempted to complain about our circumstances rather than realize that "all things do work together for our good." We can be tempted to trust our own understanding of things rather than trust the Word of God. Temptations are manifold but deliverance from them comes only from God.

0, God our father,

lead us into the riches of

the knowledge of thy Word

and the beauty of the Word

and the beauty of thy ways,

and away from the vanity

of our own thoughts

that would tempt us away

from thy glory.

Ken Jones is a pastor at Greater Union Baptist Church in South Central L.A. He is a graduate of Pepperdine University and is the director of CURE's South Central weekly Academy.

by Ken Jones JULY/AUGUST 1993

â&#x20AC;˘

23

mode rll REFORMATION

Thine

is the

Kingdom

and

Glory

Forever

P

rayer is not some battering ram by which we gain entrance to God's treasury," wrote H. Hobbs, in his Matthew commentary. "It is a receptacle by which we receive that which He already longs to give us." So far, our Lord, in such simple profundity, has given us a systematic theology of prayer. We have access to the one true God, creator of heaven and earth, because, through the saving sacrifice and mediation of Christ, we have been made sons of God and co,heirs of Christ. Paul put it this way: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in 24

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

him," heading the list with election, adoption, redemption, faith, and sealing, with the Holy Spirit given as "a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of his glory" (Eph. 1:3-14).

Therefore, we can call God "Father."

"For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father" (Rom. 8:15).

Nevertheless, he is our Father in heaven and this spans the gulf between God and us, the Creator and the creature.

Beyond the matter of our sinfulness, our mere creatureliness puts a distance between God and us, just as even the greatest masterpiece of Rembrandt is still not Rembrandt himself. As we raise our eyes toward heaven, where the anchor of our hope still holds, whe!e Christ the Advocate intercedes for us and where we ourselves are seated with him, all earthly hopes, relationships, and inheritances obtain their proper, sane appraisal and perspective.

Like the Ten Commandments, the

bry M. 1¡Chae1H 0 ron t

THode rn REFOR\IATIO,\ Lord's Prayer begins with petitions concerning things heavenly and directly concerned with our relationship to God. Petitions that his name would be held in honor and sacred esteem; that his kingdom would grow, like the mustard seed, until it became a tree providing shade to the nations, and that his will would be realized in earthly, concrete terms. Then the prayer turns to petitions for oneself: For daily providence in material needs, for forgiveness of sins, and for deliverance from temptation and evil.

T

hus, in this one prayer, our Lord has given us a theology of prayer, anchored in adoption, the holiness of God and his name, eschatology (the unfolding purposes of God and his kingdom), providence, redemption, and sanctification. While there is a category in the prayer for petitions concerning earthly needs ("Give us this day our daily bread"), notice how rich and broad a thing prayer really is, as it concerns first the kingdom ofGod and his righteousness, and then descends from heaven to earth, from God to us, from spiritual blessings in heavenly places to earthly concerns. What an easy thing it is to even fail to raise our eyes toward heaven-to be earth~bound­ even in our prayers! This is why we must be taught how to pray. Like a wild vine needing a trellis, our hearts and minds must be guided from viewing things according to our own imaginations and orientations. Prayer is not merely useful as a means of getting things from God, but is a means of worship and training as our hearts and minds learn to become concerned with those matters which most concern our Heavenly Father.

The doxology, "For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever.

Amen," appears in later manuscripts and may well not have been a part of the original prayer. Regardless, it summarizes the prayer and we have no reason to judge it contrary to scripture even if there is a chance that it is not, in fact, such.

Although God with~held from King David the privilege of building the temple, David was able to get the ball rolling for his son, Solomon, to whom this privileged task was given. After the officers and leaders of the families volunteered their labor and consecrated themselves to the

task, David offered the following doxology (1 Chron. 29:10-13), which closely parallels the Lord's Prayer: Praise be to you, 0 LORD,

God of our father Israel,

from everlasting to everlasting.

Yours, 0 LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor,for everything in heaven and earth is yours.

Yours, 0 LORD, is the kingdom;

you are exalted as head over all.

Wealth and honor come from you;

you are the ruler of all things.

In your hands are strength and po';Ver to exalt and give strength to all..

Now, our God, we give you thanks,

and praise your glorious name.

Even by petitioning God for "our daily bread," we are acknowledging that "everything in heaven and earth" is the Lord's. By confessing our sins to God we are acknowledging that which is wrong is judged so for no other reason than that it is declared to be so by God. By petitioning him for forgiveness, we acknowledge that he alone is the judge and the justifier of the ungodly, and by asking him to keep us from evil, we are acknowledging that he alone is our Sanctifier and Defense against the

the ground of every good gift is the righteousness of Christ; the instrument or means of obtaining every good gift is faith in the Gospel, and the goal of every good gift is the glory of God and advancement of his kingdom in this world. The doxology alone should measure our prayers, to determine whether they are fit for a heavenly audience.

Thine is the Kingdom On their most recent album, U2 has a song about the modern preachers and ttheir"kingdoms": They're building the kingdom, but they don't want God in it." What a tragic, butall too observant remark. David learned the hard way that the kingdom of God is just that­ God's kingdom. When it came time to give Solomon the charge to build the temple, David confessed, "My son, I had it in my heart to build a house for the N arne of the loRD my God. But this word of the LORD came to me: 'You have shed much blood and have fought many wars. You are not to build a house for my Name, because you have shed much blood on the earth in my sight. But you will have a son who will be a man of peace and rest, and I will give him rest from all his enemies on every side .... He will be my son, and I will be his father.

And I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever'" ( 1 Chron.

22:6-10).

"We must recognize that the source of every good gift is God; the ground of every good gift is the righteousness of Christ; and the goal of every good gift is the glory of God and advancement of his kingdom in this world." creature who has made it his sole objective to undermine the glory of God and the faith of the elect. In short, prayer should always be a "declaration of dependence," as much in things earthly as in things heavenly.

When we come to the doxology, we are, so to speak, wrapping up our box of petitions in suitable paper, recognizing that the source of every good gift is God;

Israel was, like Eden, the union of church and state, a "theocracy" through which God himself directly spoke, judged, and acted out the unfolding purposes of redemptive history on the stage of Israel. The kingdom ofGod was Israel, not merely as a spiritual people (i.e., believers in the promise), but as a nation. Nevertheless, in the new covenant, the kingdom is not associated JULY/AUGUST 1993

•

25

1110dernREFORMATION

with Israel or any other earthly nation, but takes on an entirely spiritual character, where the Jews and Gentiles are brought together through the peace of Christ's sacrifice. "Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. The scripture foretold that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the Gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you. So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith" (Gal. 3:7-9). "In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring" (Rom. 9:8). The designation of Israel as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Ex. 19:6) is now applied to the New Testament church, composed of all Abraham's children, Jew and Gentile ( 1 Pt. 2:9) . In fact, Paul tells the Galatian church, composed of Jews and Gentiles both, that they are "the Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16).

Therefore, the kingdom of God is specifically defined as the reign of Christ as prophet, priest and king and it is advanced through the preaching of the Word, accompanied by the Holy Spirit, and by the administration of the

identity ("in Adam") only to be raised to a new one ("in Christ"). Thus, as the Spirit blows, with his Word going before him through his Spirit,filled messengers (all believers), a new community is created; heaven comes to earth and the kingdom of God spreads its shade across the nations.

While the kingdom of God is not identified with any nation in the new covenant, God's sovereign rule through providence is implied here. For instance, not only did David learn that God owned Israel; the pagan King N ebuchadnezzar learned that God owned Persia, too!

While he was boasting about the kingdom he had built as a testimony to his glory and splendor, God made Nebuchadnezzar insane. The king shared meals with the animals, was drenched with dew each morning, his nails grew like claws and his hair like feathers. This picture Daniel gives is very close to the biography of Howard Hughes and it is not at all far, fetched to see how self, intoxication can so upset one's balance and perspective that insanity is inevitable. As Paul said of those who exchange the glory of God for the "glory" of created things, "Seeking to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 1:22).

Nevertheless, Nebuchadnezzar learned that his kingdom really belonged to someone else:

"To the extent that we believe that the source of the kingdom is political or economic power, marketing principles, etc., it is to that extent that our message and methods will be concerned not with 'our Father in heaven,' but with 'our Audience on earth.'" sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper. It is not a kingdom that derives its source from human authority, nor does it depend on any worldly factor for its success. It is the kingdom of God that creates the people of God, not vice versa. The kingdom comes upon us as a fog, or as the wind On. 3:8), and sweeps us into it. Or to use the analogy Jesus uses in this passage in John 3:3, it is to be born a second time, to die to one 26

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

At the end of that time, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my sanity was restored.

Then I praised the Most High; I honored and glorified him who lives forever.

His dominion is an eternal dominion; his kingdom endures from generation to generation. All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing.

He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: 'What have you done?' . ..Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, because everything he does is right and all his ways are just. And those who walk in pride he is able to humble. (Dan. 4:34,37) One wonders if the church today needs to learn this lesson again: That the kingdom is created by, sustained by, and exists for God and his glory. To the extent that we shift the focus of the kingdom from God to man, to that extent it will simply become a social institution. To the extent that we believe that the source of the kingdom is power (i.e., economic or political crusades), or marketing (i.e., principles of business success), it is to that extent that our message and methods will be concerned not with "our Father in heaven," but with "our Audience on earth." And for those who think that the nature of the kingdom is temporal and earthly, their activity will be more concerned with imposing their own will on society in pursuit of the "Christian Nation" idea of the kingdom.

Their new apostles will be the founding fathers, regardless of the fact that many of them were open critics of orthodox Christianity. The new gospel will be salvation of the chosen nation by moral clean,up and social legislation.

Or, for those who agree with the temporal nature of the kingdom but think more in the vein of the church growth movement, the Spirit, empowered preaching of the transcendent Word will be replaced with "down,to,earth," practical pep talks and the administration of the sacraments will be replaced with any number of new practices and designed to entertain and inspire. Evangelism will be edged out by self,oriented programs designed to make us a bit more comfortable with this world and to reinforce this, the congregation at worship will be replaced with the

1710dern REFORMATION audience at play. The music will be happy and as "down,to,earth" as shampoo jingles; and they will focus on me and my personal experience rather than on God and his work in Christ.

Whose kingdom are we building?

Have we become so "down,to,earth" that we have snapped the chord connecting us to the heavenly realities?

And is the goal of this hngdom we are building God's glory? Whatever goals we might consider worthwhile (providing a sense of community and fellowship, assisting families in building good, solid homes, improving the moral and spiritual climate of the country, meeting "felt needs," or even building big churches) are, as a distraction, in competition with God himself. And, like David and Nebuchadnezzar, anyone can be humbled.

Yes, even Americans. We are in desperate need of recovering our eternal perspective-raising our eyes toward heaven, so that our sanity may be restored and God's kingdom, power, and glory might once again occupy the attention of the church and the culture.

God's kingdom, power, and glory are advanced chiefly through the Gospel, in which the brilliant rays of his wisdom, mercy, justice, holiness, and power are captured all at once. Through this Gospel, the holy God is able to establish a just relationship with unholy creatures. It establishes his kingdom on righteousness, as he is the just and the justifier of all who believe; it shows his power, " .. .for it is the power of God unto salvation ... " (Rom. 1:16), and it exalts his glory because salvation "does not depend on man's decision or effort, but on God's mercy" (Rom. 9:16). Nowhere is the sinner justified in taking any glory to himself. "He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things-and the things that are not-to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God-that is, our righteousness, holiness, and redemption" (1 Cor.1:27-30). There is not one shred of holiness, no sparkle of righteousness, no ray of glory in the believer or in the church that comes from us; it is all the kingdom, power, and glory of God in his Word and sacraments.

All of this might run against a church which is so worldly that believers become "lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud .. .lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God" (2 Tim. 3:1-5). We even have high priests of the new gospel, who, like the medieval champions of the kingdom, power, and glory of man resist

comes, and to spend ourselves in good works (in our calling, in our relationships, in our families) to the glory of God. Only then-when we are heavenly minded, will we be any earthly good. Only then will the kingdom advance in the power and glory of God. Remember, it was Bach who signed his

"We are in desperate need of recovering our eternal perspective-raising our eyes toward heaven, so that our sanity may be restored and God's kingdom, power, and glory might once again occupy the attention of the church and the culture." any notion that robs man of his claim to fame. The glory has left the church because the Gospel has left the church­ or has been dismissed. It is not because God has been "ejected" from the public schools, but because his name, his kingdom, his power, and his glory, have been replaced with our own agendas, priorities, goals, and self,glorifying interests.

My greatest prayer for the church today-indeed, for myself-is that we would raise our eyes to heaven, to look to the hills, from which our salvation

compositions, Soli Deo Gloria (the Reformation slogan, "To God Alone Glory"), and it was Be this slogan that still graces the old buildings in the great cities of northern Europe. One might say that at the Reformation, the kingdom, power and glory of Rome met the kingdom, power, and glory of God and we can only expect a similar confrontation within the church in our own time. May God give us the grace to make the correct alliance. 0

JULY/AUGUST 1993

II

27

l170dern REFORMATION

Glossary of Terms

Amillennialism A belief that the Bible does not predict a period of the rule of Christ on earth before the last judgment. According to this outlook there will be a continuous development of good and evil in the world until the second coming of Christ, when the dead shall be raised and the judgment conducted. Amillennialists believe that the kingdom of God is now present in the world as the victorious Christ rules his church through the Word and the Spirit. It is held thatthe "millennium" in Rev. chapter 20 describes an indefinite period of time, and occurs between the first and the second coming of Christ. It is also held that the future, glorious and perfect kingdom refers to the new earth and life in heaven.

Apostasy A deliberate repudiation and abandonment of the faith that one has professed (Heb. 3:12).

Deism In general, it refers to what can be called natural religion, or the acceptance of a certain body of religious knowledge, acquired solely by the use of reason as opposed to knowledge gained either through revelation or the teaching of a church. Deism is sometimes used loosely to define a particular viewpoint with regard to the relationship between God and the world. It would reduce God's function in creation to that of the first cause only. According to the classical comparison with a clock maker, God wound up the clock of the world once and for all at the beginning, so that it now proceeds as would history without the need for his further involvement.

Dispensationalism A system of biblical interpretation associated with J.N. Darby (1800,1882) and his followers and popularized through the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible. It builds on the idea of God's administration or plan for the world, describing the unfolding of that program in various dispensations, or stewardship arrangements, throughout the history of the world. The world is seen as a household administered by God in connection with several stages of revelation that mark off the different economies in the outworking of his total program.

Eschatology The term comes from two Greek words, eschatos and logos,meaning the 'doctrine of last things.' Customarily it has been understood as referring to events which are still to happen, both in relation to the individual and to the world. In modem evangelicalism, eschatology is almost exclusively concerned with questions about the millennium and the relation of the return of Christ to that period popularly known as the "great tribulation."

Modernity With roots in the Renaissance and Enlightenment, Modernity is the condition characterized by a marked confidence in the natural world, natural reason, natural goodness, morality, industry, and progress through technology.

Postmillennialism Emphasizes the present aspects of God's kingdom which will reach fruition in the future. They believe that the millennium will come through Christian preaching and teaching. The new age will not be essentially different from the present, and it will come about as more people are converted to Christ. Evil will not be totally eliminated, but it will be reduced to a minimum as the moral and spiritual influence of Christians is increased. This rule is established through supernatural methods rather than gradually over a long period of time by the means of the conversion of individuals. This period preceeds the return of Christ.

Postmodernity The condition marked by a gradual distrust of rationalism, and cynicism concerning some of modernity's most cherished beliefs. Placing confidence in experience over reason, postmodernity is more interested in inner peace than social or political utopia's.

Premillennialism The belief that the kingdom of Christ will be inaugurated in a cataclysmic way and that divine control will be exercised in a more supernatural manner than does the postmillennialist. The return of Christ will be preceded by signs including wars, famines, earthquakes, the preaching of the gospel to all nations, a great apostasy, the appearance of antichrist and the great tribulation. These events culminate in the Second Coming, which will result in a period of peace and righteousness when Christ and his saints control the world. This period follows the return of Christ.

Secularism In general terms, secularism involves the affirmation of immanent, this,worldly realities, along with a denial or exclusion of transcendent, other,worldy realities. It is a way of life and thought that is pursued without reference to God or religion.

28

â&#x20AC;˘

JULY/AUGUST 1993

l1uu/ern REFORMATION / ~, f' 'f\.';"

..,,5, , ~

(

).

,'"

I

( .

"

~14 A~ . M~~

~ ~~al.y,ili o~#!~:lPrJ?$' Pf~yer '" ~

, , '" " ,.'

'VoIuJl;le 21,,,}:;ibrary: ofCh;istiah 'Classics' , ~hila4elphia,' Westmin;t~~ PreSs, 1960 .', '

",;<0""" ~:

'.:' >'" ,­

' Institu(e!:: ~.Q,ok Ilk Chapret, XX; x:xxiv~' " ,,,, '~~i~ed ,byJolHfT. M'cNeilC, ,e " ~.-

, {' ,,' " '. "

l'

Fo~ h:' ~fes9:ibed .: .£6r~)q~""i~'Wlii:;hjl~~etforrh'\tS1ilai~bl~ a1J. ~t ht' ali~W:'''-'i<)' ;~'ek.;,ih~m; all ~b;,t ', .

• ",0

" ', i$' ,ofbehefl,t ('

•

"

,

{....

tOllS, al,l4;~hat we need '~k,: "from,.rhis kindhess"of hi's)ve .recehre':great,fruit ~f <;:ons01adon.;' , .,.,'

~••

"1 '.'

/~

"I

~

".

~"

'

./,,''''''/':-''

<......

•

~-.~.....

'I(

~<

,'..

:v.

;­

t<,·"

4 '

. "'Ear,,fro:m, w~~irig ~he, tdte ' l~bel\ ~t an ,i~~~Il:c~ual' diY'()~~~d'f~on{~~s:heart;' ¢~;in" s eXP9sit.io~:' of th\s''.Pr~~er' ,.' ..:r,e¥e~s th~ sHo~fRastor-alco~p'¥sion, of theref?~~it.~.S,eeking t~~ gloty'?J a ,s0vetel~!h !:aring' fa~~erj,s " the' . ' , < " piima~, ~peme' S~xin sp6ttik,ht~, \P- this praye'C; a9~!1! ~~d again. While' h~ ,ppints . out tpe bene~ts' i?~~hFistia~s "", ,.:', ., " ip; the 'p.ray~F ' m'od~l~cLh'Yotir L()cd, .~aJvin would rath%f..wehlind ()urse!ves,t.o. ,our ga.1n, than to 'cfetra<;.t.,fllom' " , ,."

GQd~sgi~ry:>ifr'6~~' v~ry:. prayer~t '. ' ~ ~, ;

,., I

."

y

(

,

U

.. ,

~.j'"

);.,

;_t,

''''. " 1

;,1"

',.

:-0'~

,

:;;

~):-';.

.1 (,1.

A

,;A.~;.'. ~"

,,'

'

"

, " ",

•

q~

,

~-"

","

~

..;.'~'"

\.

!~ ~

<$ ",..~

. We claim the ho~or, ofsonsliip 'in relation-to' the 'F'atb~~"only be~ausewe, have been ('adopted 2 chii,,9ren bf 'gracein Christ" (p ..899~. ?al~in 'i~ q'uick to"rerrlind~~, that it.,is no't ,by riawred;ratwe ~e, to 'consicrer' ollrselves ' ," ~sons'<and ~augnteJs, f@r th'e ' Ei~rq,~ Son'is 'sucK bX,"~~ture,< and ' 6ii~, plate-at,the LO'id'§' Table 'fS ' tliro~gha ,. " , gtaci?~~, ad6p'tipn. He"n'o teithat ,God assures .v~· of,alovi)jg,pro;eGtive· !~latibhshipwithhifu; ~' hecalkus ' , f"chaclren 'of t;'od" (1 J~: '~: J)"and'he wants' u~ ,to,cofllmtiiiicare,wi cli him· as ''''d~~ Padre?:" ~.·, :r:. ;. <

.,;'

.

"

:i­

..'~' - ".

.'

,.....

~;.

.

'

,."

\H.':

:S~<;h'~;:l~FionShip is.~[lavoidalllY ~cl;;iv~ J~us co~frqr;e~ th~:~f-rim~~~us. ~rhl;' d"Y'with"thekfw,~r

k 'dl~ d~yH,cCalvin war~s , ~~ ,Rf how'we sin, ag~~ns,t the very i-ta~~,~:J>f()~,~ Jt!dvenly, father ,~fXj{lg ,t'<idln~ .£9. ,tJ-, . " pfuralistic religion df 0'il~i9PS",:'.~Btit· a 'son ca~PQt givcrl1imseIrov~r to tb~'8afe ' keepiog ' ofstrangeJ;" ...'i;wifhout at , . ." ,,» die ~;~e,c din~ ' ~o.mptaini'~,gfith~N)f1iis/a,;~~<s, cimeltY6r want:.J:'hus: ,if we>ar~ '~is.sorrs, w~ ~annot 'seekh~Jp .0,0,>'"

in

> , , ' ,,,,

" ah~h~re 'els~: .: ,."" (p·.g99L, , ,/

.;-- ,"''' ,

;."

,.',

",:..

,v

", ,';.\

",'

<

~

~, JI

' ;

~I

_¥

'.

'0 " ./ '

/,.-,

.,«'

~ ,A ~,~. ...

. Calvin exF~..nds~h~';"",G)'~nd c~;;;f~;'.of~bdas"O~[ E~;h~n~:tlre~iP~~;';~<b~ih~[,'.r~~ Sog(' . .. " Regardles'~ Qf, otfrti~~orthiness" ()f~~ch a c0mpassioii~~~)ath~rj w<'wuse t~~ < r,efuge' ~i~~, hhn and';w'(~h ;no .'~ , other:·\'ye,must r~~tjn ,the''tfu~:(9£his, lovhtgkind:J;l,e,.~~ toward'us ~ho 'bd~~ye,.pattic~raxly" in praye~; " (the'Chief "" exetcis~, o£Jai&," >il~ , Calvinput~> ~t. Christ is"th~' glJ;ga,ntee of'ou{ a,doptiop ,by. the'Fa'~herj, anathe' IioiySplfit"is" the witness to' this s,ame<realItY. ", ­ ". ' , ,. ". <" " ," >' .' " ~ , " ';'•. , '."'., ,.' ';··',';·"',:",,,,0 1,,,,,\,,,A'." ~,:;;::,.r'.,:"."\,, ",' '..' .' ,I,'"'' '" ,,',"~' "."-, J"'''' f,_" ""," Byemp..Qas'izitlg th~Jathedi6od, of,GodtoYbelievers!,GtJ-lvinr'ea:ger]y diCo,¥.XCl,genls·to c()ll$ided:fow tp.e , ·Fathef ' sets us ~J?, fe1l0~s~!p witfl 't~ehrethcen.< We ex~eri~~~~t.beJ0ve, o(?ther" S~I~stian'S;'so, ~~ch '<Christ'j'~p.is relat'ed ," "~'C totheFathe.r ' priITiarily';as 'arhe~'8er( pf~thisfanlify" o,t.he1iev€rs" anq nota~'>~ , ifld~pen,cle~nt .in'diViaual.. .otlr gool' ,~. ,and'loying'heay~nly ' Fatliei, gi~es,good gifts to'bi<i, ~ldren,'; ahd V;y .shai~ 'Jh0se" gfft~'~~th' 6thers f~JQye, ab.cr an ~" ,~ ""<,,' ' , , tliilgE~n )ofGod then < th~k, rh-eir ,Pacher for" ~~~Jp;ving g00dhess .to, the~" This is,'~alvin"s aEten{p~q:o,focus~~ " ,> ,,<,' ",tli~, family of q,elievers; s!gWf1eca by'addi-es~jpg ,God-as " 'OurF3:t,per:'" Calvitr suggests<that as w~ ;embra:ce th~:" ", ' ,<"" ,'" "'f~~er ofa ~~mily with gRod wiH;'sOtO~l' ~~ indudethe fa~"qy' he t'epr~sefifs' ~iib ,tha(samiJQve, <' <.;~"", 'i'

;)

>,<'

, ! " , , ' ,.

i

"

.":

$!! \

'

...... ;,.;:.

,:"';,..~.,

~) ')~

.,

~ :~,

l'

,...... '

;

.;'

~?

:.1.'

<.

,)'~

,.,'

,..,."!

-

t,

F"

<. :,. . . . .'

.)­

"

"

JULY/AUGUST 1993

•

29

"Michael Horton has done it again, this time providing us with a very much needed, insightful, wise, sOllnd, timely, comprehensive, lively, and immensely relevant treatment of the Ten Commandments.

Anyone can read this book with profit. Everyone should."

James M. Boice

AVAILABLE IN

C;)MOODY

The NameYou Can Trust BOOKSTORES

AMINISTRY OF MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE

NOW!

"'1' . -~