Hudsonville Protestant Reformed Church
5101 Beechtree
Hudsonville, Michigan 49426
Services: 9:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Homepage on Internet: http://www.prca.org
Vol. 8, No. 10
Contents:
The Judgment
Christ, the Propitiation for the World (2)
Is the Pope Antichrist?
The Judgment
The final judgment is the event that concludes the history of this present world and ushers in the everlasting kingdom of Christ. Scripture, therefore, has a great deal to say about the judgment day.
That judgment, because it is one day, one event, as we have seen in the previous article, will be universal. All men, angels, and devils shall appear before God to receive from Him the reward of grace or unrighteousness and shall receive it in the body in which they lived and acted unrighteously or righteously.
The universality of the judgment is clearly taught in Scripture. All shall be judged (Matt. 16:27; 25:31-32; Jn. 5:28-29; Rom. 2:5-6; II Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:11-14; 22-12). If there are any exceptions at all they are the beast, the false prophet and the devil, who apparently shall be cast into the lake of fire without judgment since their wickedness is already fully manifest (Rev. 19:20; 20:10).
This judgment is be according to works (I Cor. 3:13-15; I Pet. 1:17; Rev. 2:23;20:12-13) though not because of works, for that would make merit the basis of judgment and on that basis none could stand. In the judgment, the works of every person will show whether or not He is in Christ - they will be the proof either of his justification before God (cf. James 2:14-20) or of his unrighteousness and demerit.
According to these works, therefore, everyone shall receive a proper reward - either the rewards of works, that is, of eternal damnation, or of grace, that is, of eternal life (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 4:4; Rev. 22:12). That reward will reveal the justice of God in the condemnation and damnation of the ungodly and the greatness of His grace to His people.
That judgment and rewarding is the work of Christ. To Him the Father has given all judgment (Jn. 5:26-27; Rev. 22:12-13). This is necessary for all, both righteous and wicked must be judged in relation to Him. He it is that the wicked have crucified and slain (Rev. 1:7; Heb. 6:6) and He it is who has provided a justifying righteousness for His own.
To Him the book of life belongs (Rev. 17:8). That book of election (Lk. 10:20) and its fruits that guarantees the salvation of those whom the Father has given Him and it is out of that book that some receive not what they have merited, but grace for grace.
For the believer, therefore, the day of judgment is not a day of terror, but the object of his hope and longing. In spite of the fact that he too must be judged, his confidence is in Christ and in his righteousness through Christ.
Indeed, there is great hope for believers in the judgment. Not only shall He sit as Judge, who is their Lord, their elder brother, their justifier and Redeemer, but when they appear in the judgment they shall appear as they are in Him.
The fact that the resurrection precedes the judgment means that when believers appear in the judgment seat of Christ, they shall already be in His likeness (I Jn. 3:2). Their vile bodies shall have already been changed into the likeness of His glorious body (Phil. 3:21). What a comfort and foundation for hope! We trust it is yours. Rev. Ronald Hanko
Christ, the Propitiation for the World (2)
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world (I John 2:2).
In our discussion of this passage from Holy Scripture, I was showing how the battle between the defenders of universal atonement and particular redemption is a battle that has gone on over the centuries. It was a battle that was fought at the Synod of Dordt as well as at the Westminster Assembly. Both bodies incorporated the doctrine of particular redemption in the creeds which they wrote.
Some, however, have appealed to the Canons of Dordt in support of the doctrine that the death of Christ, while efficient for the elect, was nevertheless, sufficient for all men. They quote Article 3 of the 2nd head of doctrine. It reads: "The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sin; and is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world."
No one may, however, find in this article comfort in his support of a universal atonement. The fathers of Dordt in no way compromised their views here.
It must be remembered that the Arminians charged the Reformed with demeaning the atonement of the Son of God by limiting it to the elect only. The Arminians claimed that this doctrine of limited atonement (or particular redemption) diminished the significance of the fact that the eternal Son of God made atonement for sin.
The fathers are responding to this. Their response is this. If one looks at the atonement from the viewpoint of the One who performed it, that is, from the viewpoint that the eternal Son of God died on the crosss, then indeed "the death of the Son of God…is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world." In other words, if God had one or two more elect for whom Christ died, He would not have had to suffer more. The eternal Son of God, who is infinite in power, made a sacrifice of infinite worth.
The fact of the matter is, however, according to these same fathers of Dordt, that Christ's sacrifice is only for the elect. Listen to them. "For this was the sovereign counsel, and must gracious will and purpose of God the Father, that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Son should extend to all the elect, for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith, thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation: that is, it was the will of God, that Christ by the blood of the cross, whereby he confirmed the new covenant, should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and language, all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation and given to him by the Father…."
This is a strong and emphatic statement concerning the extent of the atonement. It is stronger than the Westminster Confession in a way. The WC read: "The Lord Jesus by his perfect sacrifice of himself…hath…purchased…an everlasting inheritance…for all those whom the Father hath given unto him" (VIII,5). "Although the work of redemption was not actually wrought by Christ till after his incarnation, yet the virtue, efficacy, and benefits thereof were communicated unto the elect… (VIII,6).
The Canons are somewhat stronger on this point than the Westminster Confession because of the exclusionary clause found in the Canons, which is not found in the WC: "…He should effectually redeem…all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation." The words, "and those only" are not found in the WC.
It may have been this omission that enabled some Amyrauldians, such as Richard Baxter, to sign the WC.
In any case, Dordt insists that the death of Christ was for the elect, and for them only. That allows for no possibility that Christ's death on the cross was for all men.
It is sometimes argued (and several books have been written on the subject) that Calvin never taught a limited atonement.
This is a remarkable slander of the great Reformer of Geneva. I quote from Calvin's commentary on the very passage we are discussing.
"Here the question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretence extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. They who seek to avoid this absurdity, have said that Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly revealed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true, yet I deny that it is suitable to this passage; for the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church. Then under the word all or whole, he does not include the reprobate, be designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world. For then is really made evident, as it is meet, the grace of Christ, when it is declared to be the only true salvation of the world."
This is Calvin. To teach that Christ's atonement is for all is "monstrous' and the "dotages of the fanatics."
We agree with Calvin. John, in his first epistle, 2:2, refers to the fact that the church for which Christ died is a church gathered from the whole world. It is a catholic church to show forth the riches of the manifold grace of God, a church purchased and saved through the blood of the cross.
This truth is a glorious truth. Prof. Herman Hanko
Our reader writes: "In the Epistle of John we read of antichrist who denies that Jesus is come in the flesh. But the papacy clearly teaches the virgin birth. For a long time I was puzzled by this, as the pope has been regarded as the antichrist. But I came to the conclusion that in words they say that Jesus is come in the flesh, but in works they deny him. In the sacrifice of the mass they claim to bring Christ down from heaven in the flesh under the elements of bread and wine. In so doing they also deny the sufficiency of the cross. What is your opinion of the matter?"
Most of our readers are aware that the Protestant Reformers all regarded the Pope as Antichrist, and that this teaching is reflected in the Westminster Confession of Faith which states: "There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof: but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God" (xxxv,6). Were this Confession and the Reformers right or wrong?
In our view they were correct. There is, we believe, no clearer representative today of the antichristian power and kingdom than the Pope. He, more than any other, fits the Bible's description of the Antichrist. Note the following:
(1) He fits the description given in II Thess. 2:3-4. He is the leader of the greatest falling away in history. He claims for himself the worship that is due to God alone, and claims to be the Vicar of Christ, thus setting himself in God's place.
(2) He fits the description of Antichrist given in Matthew 24:15. In claiming for himself and for the mass the worship that is due to God he becomes the abomination, the idol, that makes the worship and church of God desolate. None more so.
(3) As our reader points out, he even fits the description given in I John 2:18, 22 and 4:1-3. He denies not only the whole purpose and work of Christ in His coming in the flesh, but blatantly and blasphemously denies that Jesus is the Christ (2:22) by his claim to be the head of the church and one who can forgive sins.
(4) He fits the description of Revelation 13. Whenever he opens his mouth, he speaks blasphemies (witness his recent attempts to exalt Mary as co-mediatrix with Christ). He makes and has made through the ages, war with God's saints, persecuting and killing them. And, as we have noticed in other passages, he claims for himself the worship of God.
Nor is this unimportant. We must see this lest we give any credence to the efforts of the ecumenical movement to establish "dialogue' with Rome, to compromise or even to seek unity with her.
Nevertheless, the Pope is not the only Antichrist! As John tells us (I Jn. 2:18) there are always many antichrists. The cults and their founders and leaders, many leaders of the charismatic movement, the liberals, and all who deny the truth, are to one degree or another representatives of Antichrist. They show themselves to be "against Christ" when they contradict the doctrines of the Trinity, of the deity of Christ, of blood atonement, and when they claim for themselves power and position in the church that belongs only to Christ.
We must not, then, be so taken up with the idea that the Pope is Antichrist that we do not notice the evil work and influence of all these other antichrists, who do the same things and have the same destructive influence in the church. Rev. Ronald Hanko