Vol. 80; No. 10; February 15, 2004
One-year's trial
subscription—1/2 price!!
EDITORIAL POLICY
Every editor is solely responsible for the contents
of his own articles. Contributions of general interest from our readers and questions for
"The Reader Asks" department are
welcome. Contributions will be limited to approximately 300 words and must be neatly
written or typewritten, and must be signed. Copy deadlines are the first and fifteenth of
the month. All communications relative to the contents should be sent to the editorial
office.
REPRINT POLICY
Permission
is hereby granted for the reprinting of articles in our magazine by other publications,
provided: a) that such reprinted articles are reproduced in full; b) that proper
acknowledgment is made; c) that a copy of the periodical in which such reprint appears is
sent to our editorial office.
SUBSCRIPTION POLICY
Subscription
price: $17.00 per year in the US., US $20.00 elsewhere. Unless a definite request for
discontinuance is received, it is assumed that the subscriber wishes the subscription to
continue, and he will be billed for renewal. If you have a change of address, please
notify the Business Office as early as possible in order to avoid the inconvenience of
interrupted delivery. Include your Zip or Postal Code.
BOUND VOLUMES
The
Business Office will accept standing orders for bound copies of the current volume. Such
orders are mailed as soon as possible after completion of a volume year.
l6mm microfilm, 35mm microfilm and 105mm
microfiche, and article copies are available through University Microfilms international.
For new subscribers in the United States to the Standard Bearer, there is
a special offer: a ½ price subscription for one year--$8.50. Those in other countries can
write for special rates as well to: The Standard Bearer, P.O. Box 603, Grandville,
MI 49468-0603 or e-mail Mr. Don Doezema.
Each issue of the Standard Bearer is available on cassette tape for those who
are blind, or who for some other reason would like to be able to listen to a reading of
the SB. This is an excellent ministry of the Evangelism Society of the Southeast
Protestant Reformed Church. The reader is Ken Rietema of Southeast Church. Anyone desiring
this service regularly should write:
Southeast PRC
1535 Cambridge Ave. S.E.
Grand Rapids, MI 49506.
Meditation
– Rev. Rodney Miersma
· They
Preached Christ Everywhere
Editorial
– Prof. David J. Engelsma
Review
Article – Prof. David J. Engelsma
· A
Presbyterian Case for the Baptist Rejection of Infant Baptism
Letters
· A
“Pop Treatment” of Culture
· Needed: A Book on Reformed Worldview
· Response
Search
the Scriptures – Rev. Ronald Hanko
· Haggai: Rebuilding the Church
In
His Fear – Rev. Richard Smit
That
They May Teach Their Children – Prof. Russell Dykstra
· Two
Different Covenants, Two Different Schools
All
Thy Works Shall Praise Thee – Mr. Joel Minderhoud
· All
Creatures Created for the Service of Man
News
From Our Churches – Mr. Benjamin Wigger
· Varia
Meditation:
Rev. Rodney Miersma
Rev. Miersma is a missionary of the Protestant
Reformed Churches, currently serving in Ghana, West Africa.
They Preached Christ Everywhere
As
for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and
women committed them to prison. Therefore
they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.
They preached Christ everywhere!
In these first four verses we are
told why this took place. A fierce
persecution against the Jews had arisen, with the result that the Jews were scattered. This was a fulfillment of what Jesus had said
before He ascended, “Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in Samaria,
and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).
This shows that the persecution
that followed upon the martyrdom of Stephen was futile on the part of the enemy. It did not destroy the church, nor did it thwart
the spread of the gospel. Rather, it was a
means in the Lord’s hand to fulfill His own word of Acts 1:8. In this way the text plainly forms an
integral part in the narrative of “the things which Jesus continued to do and to
teach” (Acts
1:1).
The intense persecution at this
time was led by Saul, who later was to be the apostle Paul.
He had just participated in Stephen’s stoning.
Although he took no active part in the prosecution, he no doubt concerned himself
vitally with the proceedings of the trial. He
undoubtedly came to some conclusions at this time that led to his open opposition against
the cause that Stephen represented. At the
stoning itself, even though he picked up not a stone, yet he participated in that he was
there and in that the witnesses laid their clothes at his feet. In Acts 7:58 we
read, “and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose
name was Saul.” We furthermore read that
he consented unto Stephen’s death. This
he confesses himself in Acts 22:20,
“And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and
consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.”
After that day when he stood by,
he became the leader of those persecuting the church.
Believing that he was doing this for God’s sake, he was very zealous in this
work. He was born a Jew, educated at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the
perfect manner of the law of the fathers (Acts 22:3). He even had the support and the backing of
the council.
He imprisoned many because of
their faith. “Haling men and women”
means that he went into the homes of the Christians, dragged them out, and brought them to
prison. This was of such a nature that Saul
“made havock of the church” in that he ravaged the church as a wild beast
pounces on his prey. Many of these who were
placed in prison also suffered death. “Which
thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of
the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and
when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them” (Acts 26:10). Later, as the apostle Paul, he grieved
deeply because of this involvement.
However, as a result of this
persecution many were forced to flee Jerusalem. And
rightly so. Many people who are fainthearted
flee at the slightest rumor of persecution. But
the saints at Jerusalem fled because they saw that the fury of the ungodly could not be
brought to an end in any other way. Their
flight brought them to all parts of the known world.
One sees the wonderful work of
the providence of God here. This was not out
of God’s control. As Jerusalem for the
Old Testament saints was a magnet to which they were drawn, so now in the New Testament
the saints are propelled from Jerusalem as if by some great centrifugal force. Nothing happens apart from the providential care
of our Father.
God uses even the activity of
sinful men to serve His purpose. An example
of this is Joseph and his brethren. Joseph
says in Genesis
50:20, “ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good.” The ultimate example is that of Christ Himself. Christ was crucified by sinful hands, but that was
the means of cleansing His own by His precious blood.
The middle wall of partition was broken down so that both Jews and Gentiles could
be incorporated into the kingdom of God. Then,
prior to His ascension, the Lord commanded His disciples, “Go ye, therefore, and
teach all nations...” (Matt. 28:20).
However, up to the time of our
text, the apostles had no clear indication as to when they were to venture outside of
Jerusalem. But this persecution was the
Lord’s answer and direction at the same time. Thus,
we have an illustration of the providential law according to which what appears to be an
irretrievable calamity is not only overruled, but designed from the beginning to promote
the very cause that it seemed to have threatened with disaster and defeat.
Thus, they preached!
Just exactly what was involved
in their preaching? The word used here is not
the word that means “to herald.” To
herald is to preach officially. This can be
done only by those whom Christ officially calls through the church to be ministers of the
Word. It is this kind of preaching that is not open to everyone.
Rather, the reference is to the
speaking of the gospel to others. This is a
joyful and spontaneous diffusion of the truth, which is permitted and required of all
believers, whether lay or clerical, ordained or not ordained. This is the ready answer of I Peter 3:15: “and be ready always to give an answer
to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and
fear.” This includes our whole life,
which must be a living testimony to all those about us that we belong to Jesus Christ. This we confess in the Heidelberg Catechism,
Lord’s Day 32, Q & A 86. “Since then we are delivered from our misery merely
of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours, why must we still do good works? Because Christ, having redeemed and delivered us
by His blood, also renews us by His Holy Spirit after His own image; that so we may
testify by the whole of our conduct our gratitude to God for His blessings, and that He
may be praised by us; also, that every one may be assured in himself of his faith by the
fruits thereof; and that by our godly conversation others may be gained to Christ.”
We could ask ourselves a couple
of questions in this regard. How can I in my
life speak the gospel to others? Do I do this
when God gives me the opportunity? It
basically comes down to this, Am I living and manifesting the life of Christ in me in such
a way that I am a living witness of my risen Lord?
God uses means to bring to
others the knowledge of salvation. God has
the ability to save anyone directly, without the use of means. But He has chosen to use means, means that we,
therefore, must use. The first and primary
means is the official preaching of the Word by men ordained for this purpose. Of such the text is not speaking. The means spoken of in the text is the testimony
of God’s people, which gets its strength and power from the primary means. The testimony of God’s people will be in
direct proportion to the Word preached faithfully and purely from the pulpit. Where the Word is preached in all its fullness,
God’s people will be filled to overflowing with the good news of the gospel, which
they will not be able to keep to themselves.
Yes, they preached the Word!
The persecuted ones did not
complain about the abuse of “rights.” Today
when people are displaced, the last thing they think about proclaiming is the good news of
the gospel. Rather they complain how their
rights have been infringed upon and violated. Nor
did these scattered Jews complain about all the social ills that plagued them. No, they presented Christ crucified. In this way they would simply tell what they had
heard from the preacher. At the center of
every sermon there must be Jesus Christ crucified. There
simply is no other gospel. Just take note of
the sermons recorded in the Scriptures.
Having presented Christ they
would then present the wonder of grace whereby God has saved His people. A wonder because of sin. A wonder because of the incarnation, suffering,
death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. All
of salvation is indeed a wonder because it is purely of God’s sovereign grace and no
way attributable to us.
This Christ, this wonder of
God’s grace, they preached everywhere.
There was a mass migration to
many different places. They traveled to
various areas of the known world. In each place they spoke the Word of God. They were not first interested in establishing a
new home. Instead they took the opportunity
to speak to many people.
In
this way the gospel finally went over the whole earth.
Churches were established in many places. God’s
people were gathered from every place. Each
spoke the Word where they were.
We have that same calling today. Wherever the Lord places us by whatever means and
for whatever reason, He calls us to preach the Word both officially and by personal
testimony. God blesses this faithfulness in
the gathering and preservation of His church.
Editorial:
Prof. David Engelsma
Confessional Certainty
Assurance is certainty of
personal salvation.
As the loving Father of His human
family in Jesus Christ, God wills that all His children have assurance. It is not His will that only a very few of His
children, His “best and dearest friends,” as the Puritans and their followers
today call these favored few, ever attain to certainty of salvation.
The previous editorial
demonstrated from Scripture that God wills all His children to have and enjoy assurance.
Certainty
in Q. 1 of the Catechism
That God wills all His children
to have assurance of their salvation is the joyful—and binding—doctrine of the
“Three Forms of Unity, our Reformed confessions.”
Upon the lips of every one who believes the gospel of grace as set forth in the
Catechism, the Heidelberg Catechism confidently places this confession:
[My
only comfort in life and death is] that I with body and soul, both in life and death, am
not my own, but belong unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood,
hath fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil;
and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from
my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his
Holy Spirit, he also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready,
henceforth, to live unto him (Q. 1).
This is certainty. The one who confesses has no doubt about his
belonging to Jesus Christ, for his certainty is assurance worked by the Holy Spirit. This assurance is not a doubtful assurance, which
would be no assurance at all.
The assurance of Q. 1 of the
Catechism is certainty of one’s own personal salvation. It is not merely a certainty that Jesus is a
Savior. It is not merely a certainty that
Jesus has satisfied for some people’s sins. It
is not merely a certainty that Jesus would be adequate for my salvation, if some day I
should attain to assurance that He is my Savior. Such
a certainty is worthless. Satan has this
certainty.
The one who confesses the first
answer of the Catechism is certain that “I” myself personally belong to
Jesus Christ, that Jesus Christ is “my” Savior, that Christ died to
satisfy for all “my sins” and to deliver “me” from
Satan’s power, that everything must serve “my salvation,” and that
Christ “assures me of eternal life.”
Belonging to Jesus Christ is “my only comfort.”
This certainty is a reality in
the consciousness of the one who confesses Q. 1 of the Catechism. He does not express wistful hope of eventually
acquiring certainty. He is not voicing an
ideal that everyone should strive for, but that hardly anyone in the church—including
himself—ever attains. He is not promising to seek assurance, until (perhaps) he
obtains it.
To explain the first question
and answer of the Catechism this way (as they must who follow the Puritans in restricting
assurance to only a few special friends of God in the church) is violent wrenching of the
confession.
“What is thy
comfort?” is the question. “What is
the comfort that you personally do truly have and enjoy?” And the living member of the Reformed
congregation—every living member of the congregation—responds by
declaring what is true of him by the Spirit of Christ:
“I have comfort.” “I
belong unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ.”
“I am certain that Christ ‘hath fully satisfied for all my
sins.’” “Jesus Christ
‘assures me of eternal life.’”
It is possible that a believing
child of God so comes under the power of sinful doubt for a time that he loses his
assurance of salvation and cannot make Q. 1 of the Catechism his own. The reasons for this spiritual disease, as well as
the cure, we consider later in this series of articles.
The Reformed church is compassionate to this member in the preaching. If the sad condition of this member comes to the
attention of the pastor and elders, as it should if it continues for any time, the pastor
and elders are to be pitiful and patient—very pitiful and very patient—with
this diseased soul.
But the presence in a Reformed
congregation of one or two sick sheep is not the same as a church full of members, many of
them adults who have grown up in the church from their birth, who, by their own admission,
do not have, and have never had, assurance of salvation.
These cannot confess Q. 1 of the Catechism.
If they repeat it, they merely recite significant words as they would recite any
other document of general interest, say, the Gettysburg Address, or they lie. Q. 1 is not their confession. They do not know that they belong to Christ. They do not trust that He died for them. Christ does not assure them of eternal life by His
Spirit. They lack the only comfort. If they are honest men and women, when the first
question of the Catechism is read out in church on a Sunday morning they reply in anguish
of soul, “I do not have the only comfort of belonging to Jesus, and therefore I have
no comfort at all—no comfort in living and no comfort in dying.”
Who he is who readily confesses
assurance in Q. 1 of the Catechism, the Catechism itself makes plain in following
Lord’s Days. It is the believer who is
speaking in Q. 1. It is the man, woman, or
child in whom God has worked true faith, so that he or she believes all things promised
him or her in the gospel and trusts in Jesus Christ for remission of sin (L. D. 7). It is every believer who speaks in Q. 1. The Catechism knows nothing of a restriction of
assurance to a few favored believers, mostly old and gray, after they have lived in doubt
for many years.
The one speaking confidently of
his assurance in Q. 1 is identified already in Q. 2:
the man, woman, or child who knows his or her sins and miseries, how he or she may
be delivered from those sins and miseries, and how he or she shall express gratitude to
God for such deliverance.
The certainty of salvation of Q.
1 of the Catechism belongs to every living member of the church. Since, as Q. 74 of the Catechism teaches, the
children of believers are included in the church, also the children and young people of
godly parents have assurance of their salvation and are able to confess the opening
question and answer of the Catechism. Indeed,
Ursinus and Olevianus wrote the Catechism especially for the benefit of the covenant
children and young people. On the lips of
covenant children and young people, as their own truthful confession, did these Reformed
ministers place the words of Q. 1.
Certainty
in the Rest of the Catechism
Q. 1 rules the rest of the
Heidelberg Catechism. Q. 54 has every
believer freely confessing that he is and ever shall remain a living member of the holy
catholic church of Christ. This is assurance
that he is saved: gathered, defended, and
preserved by the Son of God by His Spirit and Word and possessing “true faith.” This is assurance that he will persevere unto
everlasting life and glory: “ever shall
remain” a member of the church. This is
assurance of election by God in eternity: Because
the church is “chosen to everlasting life,” to be member of the church is to be
among the chosen. To know oneself as a member of the church is to know
oneself as one of the elect.
Every believer has this
assurance (such is the viewpoint of the Catechism), and he has it by virtue of faith.
That God wills the assurance of
all His children is expressly stated in Q. 86 of the Catechism. It is the gracious, Fatherly will of God that
“every one [of His elect children, whom Christ redeemed] may be assured in himself of
his faith, by the fruits thereof.” To
realize this gracious will, Christ renews every one of them, so that they do good works as
fruits of faith. The Spirit uses these good
works to assure every one of them of his faith: Where
the fruits of faith are found, there faith must be, which produces these fruits. Assured that he has a true and living faith, every
one of God’s redeemed and renewed children is certain of his salvation, for the
promise is that whoever believes is, and shall be, saved.
The previous editorial pointed
out that the address of the model prayer, “Our Father,” reveals the will of God
that all His children have the certainty of His Fatherly love to them, which is the
assurance of salvation. This certainty of
salvation, without which one cannot pray—and may not “try to
pray”—runs throughout the Catechism’s explanation of the model prayer in
Lord’s Days 45-52. Confidence that God
is become our Father in Christ, which is confidence of our salvation, is the very
“foundation of our prayer” (Q. 120).
Certainty
in the Belgic Confession and the Canons
The Belgic Confession and the
Canons of Dordt are one with the Catechism in teaching that God wills assurance for all
His people, and gives it to them. In these
Reformed creeds are any number of statements expressing that all believers have, and are
expected to have, assurance of salvation. Article
23 of the Belgic Confession affirms that justification, which every believer has by his
faith in Christ, gives “us confidence in approaching to God, freeing the conscience
of fear, terror, and dread.” Article 24
warns that if we found our salvation on our good works we “would always be in doubt,
tossed to and fro without any certainty.” The
implication is that when we found our salvation only on the work of Christ for us, as
faith does, we are not in doubt, but have certainty of our salvation. Article 33 teaches that by the sacraments God
works “inwardly in our hearts” that is, in the hearts of all believers who use
the sacraments in obedience to Christ’s command, “assuring and confirming in us
the salvation which He imparts to us.”
A main purpose of the Canons of
Dordt is to safeguard for Reformed believers the assurance that the Arminian heresy robs
them of. I/12, although recognizing with a
pastoral spirit that some struggle for a time with doubt and that the strength of
assurance, like the strength of faith itself, is not the same for all, declares that all
“the elect … attain the assurance of … their eternal and unchangeable
election.” All attain assurance of their
election in time. In Rejection of
Errors/7 of the first head, the Canons insist that this assurance of election is
“certainty,” repudiating as absurdity the notion of “an uncertain
certainty.”
Canons V/9 declares as glorious
gospel-truth and official Reformed doctrine that “true believers”—all
true believers—“may and do obtain assurance” both of their present
salvation in Christ and of their persevering in the faith unto eternal life. This assurance is “certain
persuasion.” True believers are certain
of the forgiveness of their sins, of being living members of the church, and of eternal
life.
The Canons reject as an error
any teaching that in any way denies or threatens this assurance by all true believers. Such teaching again introduces “the doubts of
the papist” into the Reformed church. This
is particularly true of the teaching that assurance is reserved for a few, favored saints
who enjoy it by a “special and extraordinary revelation.” “Special
revelation” includes mystical experiences, a direct voice from heaven, a strange
event in one’s everyday life, and opening the Bible at random to a supposedly
significant text (Canons V, Rejection of Errors/5).
Certainty,
Not a Problem
What stands out so prominently
concerning assurance in the “Three Forms of Unity,” and can for this reason be
overlooked, is that the certainty of believers is matter-of-factly taken for granted. (Lest any misunderstand, this taking of the
assurance of the believer for granted is faith’s undoubted conviction about faith.) Against the Arminian denial of any certainty of
salvation, the Canons must argue for assurance, but also the Canons regard the assurance
of salvation as the normal experience of all who believe the gospel of grace from the
heart.
Assurance is not a special
problem for the “Three Forms of Unity.” Lack
of assurance by many church members is not a major issue demanding careful attention by
the creeds and virtually controlling the preaching and teaching of the church. Widespread and deep-seated doubt in the church
does not demand all kinds of distinctions among church members, especially the distinction
between a few members who are God’s “best and dearest friends,” who have no
doubt, and the majority who doubt their salvation.
On the very surface of the
confessions, perfectly obvious to everyone, is the truth that the “I,”
“me,” “we,” and “us” who speak or are spoken of in the
confessions are people of certainty. They
are certain about everything. They are
certain about Scripture, about the Trinity, about creation, about angels and devils, about
the fall, about the incarnation, about justification, about the church, and about heaven
and hell. They are also certain about their
salvation: that God elected “us”;
that Christ made satisfaction “for us”; that “we” have faith; that
providence governs all things for “our benefit”; and countless other, similar
expressions, using the first person, personal pronouns.
These “I,”
“me,” “we,” and “us” are believers. They are simply believers. They are believers and nothing more—not old
believers, not believers with great faith, not believers who have struggled and worked
heroically for years in order finally to be able to speak of certainty as the confessions
do, and certainly not believers who presume on special experiences.
This undeniable feature of the
creeds regarding assurance is part and parcel of the fundamental gospel truth that God
saves His elect by faith only.
“Easy believism”
charge the Reformed doubters against the confession that all believers have, and have a
right to have, assurance—full assurance.
Works must be added: the work of
agonizing doubting; the work of ardently seeking assurance; all kinds of works making the
seeker worthy of assurance—worthy of becoming God’s “best and dearest
friend”; the works of doubting, seeking, and striving to be worthy for many years.
To which the Reformed
confessions respond with the testimony of the gospel of grace: by faith alone.
To be sure, assurance is rare
and precious.
It is as rare and precious as
the faith itself of which assurance is an essential element.
And this is the issue.
Review
Article:
Prof. David Engelsma
Prof. Engelsma is professor of Dogmatics and Old
Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary.
A Presbyterian Case for the Baptist Rejection of Infant Baptism
The Case for Covenantal Infant
Baptism,
ed. Gregg Strawbridge. Phillipsburg, New
Jersey: P&R, 2003. 330 pages. $16.99
(paper).
A number of prominent Reformed
and Presbyterian theologians, representing almost (but not quite) all the reputedly
conservative churches, argue for infant baptism on the basis of the covenant.
A
Ceremony of (Outward) Dedication
The majority report, again
representing almost (but not quite) all the conservative churches, is that infant baptism
signifies nothing more than formally setting apart the offspring of believing parents for
God. It is merely a ceremony of dedication. It signifies nothing as to God’s salvation of
the infants in their infancy. Most of the
Reformed and Presbyterian ministers who write this book regard the baptized children as
unregenerated members of the church. The
significance of infant baptism is that it puts the children in a privileged position in
the visible church. Through the evangelistic
work of their parents and others, they are more likely to fulfill the conditions upon
which their salvation is said to depend: repentance
and faith.
[Baptized
children] are different from children who are not from believing parents. They are covenant members, and as such are more
privileged (in view of their life inside the covenant), but they are not automatically
saved by their covenant membership (p. 107).
The baptism of a covenant child
is the parents’ declaration that their child belongs to God: “When a child is baptized, his parents
declare that their child belongs to God” (p. 40).
A
Universal, Conditional Promise of Grace
As for any Word of God in infant
baptism, His Word is a conditional promise to every child that is baptized. God promises that He will save the child on the
condition that the child one day will repent and believe.
The
seal [of circumcision in the Old Testament and of baptism in the New Testament] was simply
the visible pledge of God that when the conditions of his covenant were met, the
blessings he promised would apply (p. 15; the emphasis is the author’s).
Describing the Word of God in
infant baptism as a conditional promise of salvation enforces the view of the children as
unregen-erated. Salvation cannot be expected
for them until they are sufficiently mature to be able to fulfill the conditions of
covenant salvation. At baptism, God
“assures us that when such children as this one express faith in Christ, all the
promises of his covenant of grace will apply to them” (p. 28).
This now is the unhappy life of
the covenant in a Reformed or Presbyterian home: Godly
parents are thrust into closest contact, day and night, with spiritually dead children and
young people. The parents can neither worship
with the children, nor rear them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Worship and nurture require spiritual life. All the parents can do is evangelize the little
unregenerates, pleading with them to fulfill the conditions of salvation.
Since the authors of this study
profess Reformed Christianity, the reader may be excused for asking what has become of the
gospel of sovereign, particular grace in all this exposition of the covenant as it applies
to the children of believers. Does the truth
set forth in the Canons of Dordt not apply to the salvation worked in the covenant? Do professing Reformed theologians, all of whom
advertise impressive credentials of Reformed academic training and achievements in the
Reformed community, really suppose it satisfactory to explain infant baptism as a
universal gracious promise dependent for its fulfillment on the performance of conditions
by unregenerated children?
A
Case for the Baptist Position
The case in The Case is
not, in fact, a case for Reformed covenantal infant baptism at all, but a case for the
Baptist rejection of infant baptism, and an Arminian Baptist rejection at that. It is Baptist doctrine that all infants are, and
must be viewed as, unregenerated. It is
Baptist doctrine that salvation is exclusively a matter of a “conversion
experience.” It is Baptist doctrine that
the sacrament (or ordinance as the Baptist calls it) signifies a decision and act of man,
rather than a decision and act of God. And it
is Arminian Baptist doctrine that makes the salvation promised in the gospel and the
sacraments dependent on conditions that the sinner must fulfill.
If God does not save the infants
of godly parents, in their infancy, and if the sprinkling with water merely means
that the parents declare that they dedicate the child to God, and if God’s
involvement is nothing more than a gracious promise to every child that He will one day
save the child on the condition that that child believes and obeys, the Baptists are
right. Let us have a human ceremony of
dedication for our babies, set about to evangelize them, and, when they one day make plain
that they fulfill the conditions, baptize them as believers. The basis of baptism, in this case (and Case),
is not the covenant of God, but the faith and obedience of the baptized.
A
Mortal Dread of Election
The reason for these Reformed
men’s defending the Baptist view of infants and of dealing with infants is their
mortal dread of divine election. The word may
be mentioned occasionally, but election must not determine the covenant promise and
salvation or enter decisively, if at all, into the explanation of the baptism of the
children of believers (as, of course, it does in Paul’s explanation of circumcision,
the covenant promise, and covenant salvation in Romans 9).
After forty-odd years of
studying the treatment of the covenant by Reformed theologians, I am convinced that
nothing so frightens most Reformed theologians as election.
To scare little children, especially in the dark, one says “Boo!” loudly. If one wanted to terrify most Reformed and
Presbyterian theologians, especially at a conference on the covenant, he would utter a
moderately voiced “Election.”
Twisting
Scripture
Refusal to acknowledge
sovereign, particular grace in the covenant of God with the infants of believers results
in outrageous twisting of Scripture. One
writer in The Case is sorely troubled by Jeremiah
31:31-34, as well he might be. The writer
holds that all baptized children alike are in the covenant.
God at baptism makes His covenant with all of them alike by His covenant promise to
all. But the covenant with all of them is
conditional: God’s act of saving them
depends on their act of obeying Him. Therefore,
the covenant is eminently breakable, not in the sense that some who are in the sphere of
the covenant despise and transgress the covenant, but in the sense that God breaks, or
allows men to break, the covenant that He very really established with them, as much as He
established it with those who persevere.
Jeremiah
31:31-34 contradicts this doctrine of the covenant at every point. The covenant is unbreakable. Every one of those with whom God makes the new
covenant is saved in it and by it. So far is
it from being true that the covenant is dependent upon some act or other of those to whom
the covenant is promised that the covenant itself consists
of God’s putting His law in the inward parts and writing His law in the hearts of the
members of the covenant. That is, the new
covenant in Christ, for this is the grand subject of Jeremiah 31,
is not established by a divine promise conditioned on human obedience. But it is established by a divine promise of
human obedience. God does not promise to save
the members of the new covenant on the condition that they obey Him. But He promises them—all of
them—that He will make them obedient. “This
shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith
the Lord, I will put my law in their
inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my
people” (Jer.
31:33).
Jeremiah 31
poses a huge problem for our writer. He
admits his problem. How he views his problem
is significant: Jeremiah 31
seems to rule out infant baptism. Since, on
the covenant doctrine of the writer, infant baptism means that God establishes the
covenant with all the infants conditionally, that some children fail to fulfill the
conditions, and therefore that the covenant is broken with many, Jeremiah 31
seems to rule out infant baptism. Of course,
on this thinking it rules out adult baptism as well, for also many baptized as adults
prove unfaithful, and perish.
Apparently, it never crosses the
writer’s mind that Jeremiah 31
teaches that God makes the new covenant with Jesus Christ as head of the covenant of grace
and with the elect in Him, including the elect infants.
Jeremiah
31 does not rule out infant baptism. Jeremiah 31
rules out the writer’s false doctrine of the covenant.
Ignoring election and committed
to his doctrine of a conditional, breakable covenant, the writer goes to exegetical work
on Jeremiah
31:31-34. When he has finished, the
passage teaches the exact opposite of that inspired by the Holy Spirit and written by the
prophet. The new covenant is made with many
more than those who are saved in it, is in large part only external, is conditional, and
is breakable. “The new covenant …
continue(s) to include people who become covenant breakers, who benefit only from the
external aspects of the new covenant, and who have never been regenerated” (pp. 173,
174). Only in heaven will the new covenant be
what Jeremiah prophesied. Until then the
covenant is as described by the writer’s exegesis of Jeremiah, that is, completely
different from what it will be in heaven. Fatal
to the writer’s explanation is the teaching of Hebrews 8-10
that the new covenant prophesied by Jeremiah is a reality now.
An
Equal but Opposite Error
As though to balance one
grievous error with another, opposite error, the next-to-the-last chapter, “Baptism
and Children: Their Place in the Old and New
Testaments,” is written by an independent who proclaims that all baptized children
alike are united to Christ. All share in the salvation of the covenant. The implication is that many fall away from
Christ, the covenant, and salvation. A volume
advertising itself as a Presbyterian and Reformed defense of the covenant, particularly as
regards the inclusion of covenant children, denies the preservation of saints.
This denial of the preservation
of saints is startling, but not surprising. The
doctrine that all baptized children are united to Christ is essentially the same as the
doctrine that all baptized children are the objects of the gracious promise of God. Both doctrines teach that many children fall away
from grace. In fact, the current doctrine of
the perishing of children once covenantally united to Christ is the logical and inevitable
development of the older doctrine that God graciously, though conditionally, promises to
save all the children of believers.
In the course of his
contribution, the independent is permitted to advocate child-communion. He castigates Reformed churches that reject
child-communion for destroying the children. He
threatens those who admit children to the Table only in the way of confession of faith
with damnation (pp. 298-301).
A
Blessed Contrast
One chapter outlines the sound
Reformed doctrine of infant baptism. Significantly,
this is the chapter on “Infant Baptism in the Reformed Confessions.” On the basis of the creeds, Lyle D. Bierma
explains baptism as “God’s speaking to us, not our speaking to him.” He is not afraid to affirm, against Jewett’s
challenge to infant baptism, that “the regeneration of elect covenant infants that is
signified and sealed in baptism can take place before or after their baptism.” And in blessed contrast to the emphasis on
conditions and the avoidance of election elsewhere in the book, Bierma maintains that
“the baptism of infants is fully in keeping with this emphasis in the Reformed
confessions on the sovereignty of grace in salvation.”
He continues:
Divine
election, the ultimate ground of our salvation, is unconditional; that is, it is not
conditioned upon any merits or acts or claims of human beings. Likewise, it is only at God’s initiative that
the covenant community of the saved is called into being and continues to exist. It is fitting, then, that baptism—as a sign
and seal of God’s promises of salvation and of his placement of the baptized into the
arena where he brings these promises to fruition—be viewed first of all as something
that God does. Baptism is primarily
God’s speaking to us, not our speaking to him. It
is there that he signifies and seals an operation of grace that he performs
in the context of a community that he has established. How can this salvation sola gratia
(“by grace alone”) be any more graphically demonstrated than in the baptism of a
tiny covenant child—helpless, uncomprehending, and wholly incapable of any
meritorious work? Infant baptism sets before
the church in sacramental shorthand the entire doctrine of God’s sovereignty in the
salvation of the elect (pp. 230-245).
To this account of infant
baptism, every Reformed heart responds with an amen.
In view of the understanding of
infant baptism that prevails in The Case, it is not surprising that Reformed and
Presbyterian people increasingly turn Baptist. Herman
Hoeksema warned of this some seventy-five years ago in the first chapter of his classic
treatise on infant baptism, Believers and Their Seed:
Children in the Covenant:
There
are many in the Reformed churches who still walk about with the question in their souls: how are we to conceive of God’s covenant with
respect to our children? There are many who
remain in the Reformed churches but who by conviction are wholly Baptist. And there are not a few also who openly join with
the Baptists and break with the Reformed churches (Believers and Their Seed: Children in the Covenant, RFPA, repr. 1997, p.
5).
Reformed people ought to read The
Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism to learn the thinking on the covenant and covenant
children that prevails in the Reformed churches. But
they must baptize, receive, and rear their precious children—precious because they
are God’s children, already from conception and birth—on the basis of the
covenant as explained in Believers and Their Seed.
This is demanded by the Reformed “Form for the Administration of
Baptism,” particularly, the prayer of thanksgiving after the baptism of infants.
Almighty
God and merciful Father, we thank and praise thee, that Thou hast forgiven [“hast
forgiven,” not: “perhaps will
forgive”] us, and our children [“our children”—our just
baptized infant children], all our sins, through the blood of thy beloved Son Jesus
Christ, and received us [“received us,” that is, us and our children,
not: “will perhaps receive us, if we
fulfill conditions”] through thy Holy Spirit [whom the infant children have as well
as we their parents] as members of thine only begotten Son, and adopted us to be thy
children, and sealed and confirmed the same unto us by holy baptism; we beseech thee,
through the same Son of thy love, that Thou wilt be pleased always to govern these
baptized children by thy Holy Spirit [whom they have as well as we their parents], that
they may be piously and religiously educated [“educated,” not: evangelized as though they were little
unregenerated heathens], increase [“increase,” not: some day by a dramatic “conversion
experience” finally make a beginning in spiritual life] and grow up in the Lord Jesus
Christ, etc. (The Psalter, Eerdmans,
1977, p. 56).
Letters
A “Pop Treatment” of Culture
I read your one-sentence review of the book, Redeeming Pop Culture: A Kingdom Approach, and the quotation from the book that followed (Standard Bearer, Jan. 15, 2004, p. 190). I wonder about your judgment of the attitude toward worldly culture shown in the quotation. It seems to me that the author goes along with the trash of the world. A worship service with guitars and praise songs does not seem like a God-honoring service to me, especially when the guitarist and minister are playing and singing “Love Me Two Times, Baby” right after the service, in the sanctuary.
Fred
Ondersma
Grandville,
MI
Response:
Your judgment, I expressed by
describing the book as a “pop treatment” of culture.
— Ed.
Needed:
A Book on Reformed Worldview
I just
finished reading your editorials on “Reformed World-view” from 1998 in the Standard
Bearer,
and I am almost through reading your book Reformed Education a second time. I first read that book after I had been thoroughly
confused about my own worldview and how I would conceptualize it because, to me, it could
never include common grace, but I was not sure what it positively could be.
To give you some background, I
am in my fourth year at Dordt College and actually recently read a book by a prominent
former Calvin College professor that appealed to common grace as the only reason she
studied sociology. Anyway, before I read your
book and that one, I had been struggling with the issue for over a month. I finally met with Pastor Key about it (I’m a
member of Hull PRC), and reading your book resolved most (I think all) of the issues for
me.
However, the chapter on
“Culture in Reformed Education” is the first time I’ve ever seen a positive
explanation of our worldview by anyone in our churches.
Add this to the fact that at Dordt, as a student (especially, but not exclusively
in my education classes), I have been immersed in worldview. Some professors mention
common grace; some do not. One professor
explained that we study psychology because of general revelation, which is a little more
accurate.
What I want to explain is that
in your book, in a few different places, you mention that there has not been enough
development in our churches about a positive worldview (or God’s covenant with
creation?). Sadly, I was nodding in
agreement. I tried to look for literature,
but I couldn’t find any; perhaps I was looking in the wrong places. I was also confused by references to common grace
in Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion (which I read for a class)
and by the quote from Herman Hoeksema you cited in your book — because the language
he uses, “redeeming” and “claim for Christ,” probably holds much
different connotations today than it did back then.
Really, the purpose of this
letter is to ask you or someone in our churches to write a book explaining our worldview. I would envision it as a very thorough book,
developing our churches’ biblical views of creation, providence, the covenant of God
with creation, and the fact that everything serves the salvation of the elect, including
the works and products of the ungodly. At
least that’s my understanding of the way in which we should view culture.
I know that I am not the only
person that would benefit from such a book. I
think even those who thoroughly support common grace would benefit from such a book. I read your debate with Dr. Mouw — he seemed
to want to know again and again what other choices there were if one did not believe in
common grace. I even wanted to debate with
him after I read it — I understood where he came to wrong conclusions. However, I don’t remember if you set out a
positive view or not. Still, I think that if
we present what’s wrong without presenting what’s right, it is almost (dare I
say it?) like presenting our sin without presenting salvation.
I think perhaps I am too harsh,
but I want to lay on your heart the need for such literature as described. Perhaps it is already available, then I would
gratefully ask that you could point me to it. If
it is not, I hope that you or another in our churches can write it.
Valerie
Westra
Hull,
IA
Response:
I
agree with your concerns and support your proposal that we produce a book setting forth
the right Reformed worldview. Such a book is
long overdue.
Perhaps a conference in
northwest Iowa on the subject could help fill the lack for the time being.
The Federation of Protestant
Reformed Christian Schools has a special course on worldview that all our aspiring and
younger teachers should take.
I am delighted to learn from a
subsequent letter that you aspire to teach in one of the Protestant Reformed Christian
schools. We must have teachers who, having
thoroughly understood the prevailing worldview of common grace, reject it, root and
branch. We must have teachers who, at the
same time, thoroughly understand, firmly take their stand in, and enthusiastically teach
the world view of Scripture and the Reformed confessions, as maintained — sometimes
more implicitly than explicitly — by the Protestant Reformed Churches.
—
Ed.
Search
the Scriptures:
Rev. Ronald Hanko
Rev. Hanko is minister in the Protestant Reformed
Church of Lynden, Washington.
(Preceding article in this series: February 1, 2004, p. 206.)
Haggai:
Rebuilding the Church
The
First Prophecy (cont.)
7. Thus saith the Lord of
hosts; Consider your ways.
8. Go up to the mountain
and bring wood, and build the house; and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be
glorified, saith the Lord.
As in verse 5, the Lord again
admonishes His people and calls them to self-examination and repentance with the words,
“Consider your ways.” All too often
because we are so sluggish the Word of God must come repeatedly before we are roused from
our sloth and begin to do what God requires. In
this also we are no different from Judah. That
God does continue to send His Word and its admonitions is itself an evidence of His
faithfulness and mercy. Instead of saying,
“Enough is enough,” He continues to call.
In this second call we see
another side of repentance and conversion, that it is not only a turning from sin, but a
returning to God’s ways and to God Himself. God
shows this here by calling the people back to the work of building His house and by
promising that He will bless them if they do turn.
We may never think, though, that
God’s call, this or any other, implies that we have in ourselves the ability or power
to do what God says. There are those who draw
that conclusion, but the biblical doctrine of total depravity, that we can of ourselves do
no good, and the words of Scripture in Galatians
6:17, prove that it is not so, not even with Christians. Of ourselves we can do nothing.
The power to obey is in the
command, and it is there because the command comes from Almighty God. Augustine showed that he understood this when he
said that the command was the grace. That is
an important truth for us all. It is
important for the preacher and elders, lest they begin to think that the power of their
preaching and admonitions lies in themselves, or the power to obey in his hearers. Then they will begin to preach unsound doctrine,
use unbiblical practices, and think themselves more than they are. It is important for those who hear the Word, that
they look to God for the grace and help they need.
Here God calls Judah both to
make the necessary preparation for their work by going into the mountains to gather
timber, and to do the work of building His temple. For
us, however, that house is not made of timber and stones, but it is a spiritual house. The work and the tools, therefore, that belong to
the building of that spiritual house are also spiritual.
Nevertheless, to think of the church as a building helps us to understand how it is
that we fulfill our calling to build.
When Scripture describes that
spiritual house, the church, it tells us that the foundation is sound doctrine, the
doctrine of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20-22). The cornerstone is Jesus Christ Himself. Believers are the living stones out of which the
house is built (I Pet. 2:4-8)
and the love of the brethren the cement that binds the stones of that house together (Col. 3:14).
Building that spiritual house
means, therefore, that we insure that the foundation is well laid in relation to Christ
the chief cornerstone. That foundation is
laid through the preaching of the gospel, through prayer for the ministry of the gospel,
through our hearing, receiving, and submitting to the truth of the gospel, and through
reading and studying the Word of God both publicly and privately. In that way every member has a firm foundation for
his faith and for his relationship to the other members.
That is, however, only the
beginning of the work of building. Also
through the gospel, as well as by worship, prayer, and Christian fellowship, by
admonition, the sacraments, and church discipline every member of the church is cut and
shaped like timber and stone and himself built up in faith and holiness, and all the
members are built up in relationship to one another.
To this work belong both the instruction of the church’s children and the work
of evangelism, including both the gathering and teaching of new converts. It is not at all difficult to see that these are
essential to the work of building the church. Through
them the church has the assurance that she is not only well built for the present but will
continue to be well built in the future.
To the building up and
rebuilding of the church belongs also the work of the elders and deacons, each in their
offices. When properly carried out, their
work of ruling the church and of caring for the needs of the widows, the orphans, and the
poor builds up the congregation in which they perform their labors and becomes another
means by which each member grows and all grow together, so that the church is strong and
faithful and stands like a fortress against the assaults of Satan.
Ultimately, even the work that
is done by godly parents in the home fulfills the calling that God lays on His people here
in Haggai 1,
as Paul so eloquently shows in the last chapters of Ephesians. In that book’s great description of the
church as the body of Christ, the closing chapters, which have to do with marriage and
family life as well as with our daily work and walk in the world, are not unconnected to
the rest, but part of what the Spirit has to say about the church. The man who fears Jehovah and walks in His ways
will not only experience family blessedness and happiness, but will see the good of
Jerusalem, the church (Heb. 12:22,
23; Rev.
21:9, 10), all the days of his life, and peace on Israel (Ps. 128:5, 6).
When the church has fallen into
ruin and when its foundations are crumbling, then the church needs to be rebuilt in the
way of church reformation, whether that comes through purifying a church or through
leaving an apostate church for one that is not apostate.
That happened in the sixteenth century through the work of Luther, Calvin, and many
others. It has happened on a smaller scale at
other times. It is a constant need. It is very much needed today.
The word edification, used so
often in connection with the preaching and teaching of the church, means “building
up” and refers to the strengthening and blessing of each individual believer, so that
through him the whole church is built up, strengthened, and blessed. Everything that is done in the church must be for
“edification” (Rom. 15:2; I Cor. 10:23;
I Thess.
5:11).
That calling in all its
different facets belongs to every believer. Even
the preaching of the gospel and church discipline are the responsibility of everyone, not
just of the leaders. All are to be builders
in the house of God. None may leave the work
to others or be too busy with his own affairs to have time for God’s house.
This call God urges upon Judah
and upon us — upon Judah in its Old Testament typical form, and upon us in its New
Testament reality. He urges that call with
the promise that He will take pleasure in the house and be glorified in it. For Judah, that was the promise that He would
reveal Himself in the temple they were building as He had done in the days of Moses and in
the days of Solomon — that He would be present in all of His power and grace and
goodness as the Savior of His people.
For us, that promise is the
promise that the church will be the place of God’s covenant, where He is the God of
His people and is worshiped and glorified as God — the promise that the church will
serve the purpose for which God chose her and saved her, the glory of His own great name. It is also the promise that He will rejoice in His
people and they in Him, thus fulfilling the promise to be their God and Father.
Such encouragement we always
need. By such encouragement God Himself
draws us into and along the way of obedience, not as dumb beasts, but as those who have
learned to know Him and love Him.
9. Ye looked for much,
and, lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith the Lord of hosts. Because of mine house that is waste, and ye run
every man to his own house.
10. Therefore the heaven over you is
stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit.
11. And I called for a drought upon
the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the
oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and
upon all the labor of the hands.
In this closing section of the
first prophecy, God elaborates on what He had told the Jews in verses 4-6. He reminds them once again of their sin, now
described as a running of every man to his own house.
That is really no different than their living in ceiled house, only it emphasizes
Israel’s complete abandonment of the work God had given them to do. That they had forsaken God’s house for their
own materialistic endeavors to establish for themselves a place in Canaan and to become
prosperous. A similar expression is found in Proverbs
1:16 and in Psalm 119:32. In the Hebrew, however, the verb
“running” is in the present tense, indicating that at the time God spoke they
still had not turned from their sins. They
were still running every man to his own house.
Certainly we may learn from this
how difficult it is for us to see our sins. By
nature we are blind especially to our own sins. We
can see them only when they are repeatedly pointed out by God. That is the result of our natural depravity, and
it ought to be remembered whenever our sins are brought to our attention, whether it be by
others or by God Himself through His Word.
In the same way God speaks in
more detail of the troubles they had suffered for their sins. It is here that He explains their lack of material
prosperity by telling them that the drought they had suffered was from Him. Later on He speaks of other judgments (2:17), but
apparently it was a drought that was the chief cause of poverty and starvation among them. The word “drought” is a play on words
not evident in English. The word so
translated is the same word used to describe the ruined condition of God’s house in
verse 9. In effect God says: “My house lies waste, and therefore I
have called for a waste upon the land,” thus connecting the punishment with
the sin and showing how the one fits the other.
God even suggests in a figure of speech that the heavens and earth agree with Him concerning Judah’s sin. Literally verse 10 says: “The heavens over you refrained from dew and the earth refrained from its fruit,” as if the creation itself understood Judah’s sin and willingly held back its gifts from an ungrateful and unrepentant nation. It was as if the creation had more regard for God than did His own people. May we not be so spiritually insensitive to the admonitions of the gospel here in Haggai that even the creation becomes a witness against us by its desire to glorify God where we have none.
In His
Fear:
Rev. Richard Smit
Rev. Smit is pastor of the Protestant Reformed
Church in Doon, Iowa.
This is the second part of a speech delivered on
October 30, 2003 for the Fall Combined Ladies Bible Study meeting of women from the Doon,
Edgerton, and Hull congregations. The first instalment of this series can be found in the
January 15, 2004 issue of the Standard Bearer.
Handmaidens of Jehovah (2)
Redeemed
by Christ
The
truth that these women were handmaidens of Jehovah is based upon the truth of their
redemption. We with them were lost in the
service and bondage of sin. We were enemies
of Jehovah and slaves to sin and the curse of the law.
We were by nature those who enjoyed the lusts of the flesh and being lords unto
ourselves. But Jehovah, who is rich in mercy,
redeemed us unto Himself. He made us His own
property. He purchased us through the blood
of Jesus Christ. By the Spirit of Christ,
through regeneration and conversion, we were made the servants of Jehovah.
That emphasizes the fact that
being handmaidens of Jehovah is possible only because of Jesus Christ. To become and to continue to be a faithful
handmaiden of Jehovah is humanly impossible. That
means that not only was the virgin birth of our Savior humanly impossible, but also for
Mary to become and to be a handmaiden of Jehovah was humanly impossible. Yet, as God said to Mary, what is impossible for
us is possible with God. God does accomplish
His wonder of grace in us for Christ’s sake alone.
This is a truth that we have
learned to confess from our youth. We cannot
say before God, “This is my life, my marriage, my home, my children, my possessions,
my money, and I am going to do my own will and do what is right in my own eyes!” Not at all. Rather,
we have learned to confess,
“That
I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful
Savior Jesus Christ; who, with His precious blood, hath fully satisfied for all my sins,
and delivered me from the power of the devil...” (Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s
Day 1).
In light of that truth, whether
you are single, married, or widowed, you are not your own masters and lords. Christ’s blood has marked you as His
handmaiden to serve and to do His will.
That was exactly at the heart of
Hannah’s confession. Unlike many of her
day, Hannah confessed correctly that her will was to do Jehovah’s will. She wanted what Jehovah desired and had promised
for His covenant people. In submission to
that, she asked for a covenant son whom she could return to Jehovah for the good of
Israel.
Handmaidens of Jehovah, your
duty is to know that you belong unto Him, and then in that knowledge serve Him faithfully
in thanksgiving and praise.
Dedicated
to Jehovah’s Covenant
Hannah, Jesse’s wife, and
Mary served Jehovah faithfully. Let us
consider some of the characteristics of faithful handmaidens of Jehovah that they showed.
First, they were given the
virtue of spiritual dedication towards God’s covenant.
Today, women are faced with many temptations to be dedicated to many other things. The world beckons to have you conform to their
goals in this life. They tempt you to seek
wealth and possessions as a goal in life. They
tempt you to dedicate yourself to goals far beyond the scope of your marriage, your home,
and your church. They tempt you to dedicate
your life and yourself to yourself. The
world tells you to break free from the bondage of the home and many children, or the
bondage of the marriage. The world tells you
to achieve your real potential, even if that means you have to discard your husband for
another “husband.” The world tells
the Christian woman today that the most important thing for you in life is how you
feel and whether your potential is achieved.
There is always the strong
temptation to listen to the evil world. Easy
it is for us to compromise even just a little bit in order to have some of those things
that the world promotes and that our flesh craves and covets.
By God’s grace, Hannah
rejected that. Her goal in life was not
simply even to be a mother. Her life as a
handmaiden of Jehovah went far beyond that of simply having the earthly relationship of a
mother to a child. Her great concern and goal
was the prosperity and continuation of God’s covenant in Israel. In light of the sad state of affairs in Israel,
her desire was made more acute. She desired a
son whom she could dedicate for lifetime service to Jehovah for the good of Israel and for
the sake of God’s covenant promise. Understand,
then, that to train her son for lifetime service and devotion to Jehovah required her own
lifetime devotion and dedication to Jehovah as His handmaiden first. The evidence of that was on the day when at the
appointed time she brought Samuel to the tabernacle and to Jehovah to begin his lifetime
of service.
You, handmaidens of Jehovah,
must also be dedicated to Jehovah in a lifetime of service.
In whatever situation God has placed you, therein you must be content and dedicated
to Jehovah’s covenant, to the communion of His saints, and the continuing of His
covenant in the generations of God’s people, not just your own. Whether she has children or is without children,
the believing woman is called to be dedicated unto Jehovah and have as her burning concern
the welfare of God’s covenant people. Her
life must revolve around that, whether in the single state, in marriage, in a home with
few children, no children, or with many children, like the homes of Jesse’s wife and
Mary.
Your goal in life must be
God’s covenant and kingdom. That goal
may not be yourselves, your will, your convenience, and what is easiest and the most fun
for you. The handmaiden of Jehovah must
willingly submit herself to whatever He calls her to do in whatsoever state He may
providentially place her.
The
True Freedom of a Handmaiden
Did they consider that service
to be misery? No, they showed that it was a
blessed privilege to be a handmaiden of Jehovah.
Of course, that is not what the
world is telling you today. The world tells
you that to sacrifice and to deny yourself for faithful service to Jehovah is bondage. To be like Jesse’s wife and be given the
burden of the needs of ten children is only bondage.
To be like Jesse’s wife and never be mentioned by name, and just to be known
as a mother and as Mrs. Jesse, is degradation, humiliation, and bondage.
The world’s message is:
“Liberate yourselves! Break free from
the bondage of being a handmaiden of Jehovah. Break
out of the prison house of the home and find your fulfilment away from and out from
underneath the authority and will of your husband. Break
free from those endless stacks of dishes, those dirty diapers, those never-ending
mountains of laundry, and a life of seemingly thankless labor. Be your own master!
Let your husbands answer to your will and desires.
Let them submit to your decisions and will once in a while. Force them to approve of your search for
fulfilment outside of the home. Let them be
the homemakers, and you be the breadwinners. Break
free from the life of having to follow the example of Christ, who washed His
disciples’ feet. Don’t be burdened
down with bearing the burdens of others. You
do not have time to help and visit the widows, the single mothers with infants, the
mothers with many children, the orphans, the fatherless, and the motherless teenage girls. Use your time, money, energy, abilities, and
talents your way! After all, you
deserve and have a right to the good life!”
I ask you, what would have
happened if Hannah and Jesse’s wife were of that worldly mentality? Humanly speaking, we may suppose if Jesse and his
wife listened to that devilish philosophy that poured over the borders of Israel from
Moab, Ammon, Edom, and elsewhere, they would not have had and wanted their eighth son,
their youngest son, David, the man after God’s own heart, the type of Christ, the
king of Israel, and the father of Jesus.
What about Hannah? What would have happened if she listened to that
old, anti-Jehovah message of the world? Would
she have desired a son for the right reasons? Would
she have returned her son to Jehovah? Would
he not have become another son of Belial, like Eli’s sons?
Yes, you, handmaidens of
Jehovah, are called to be truly liberated. However,
your true freedom is not outside the boundaries of the truth and the will of Christ. There is no freedom in living apart from Christ. No freedom in finding supposed fulfillment apart
from your husbands and the covenant children. No
freedom apart from being faithful slaves of Jehovah.
True freedom for you is enjoyed
in the way of submitting to Jehovah’s will. That
is the truly blessed life. That is exactly
what Mary confessed by faith: “My soul
doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit doth
rejoice in God my Saviour!” (Luke 1:46-47).
That was not a blessedness
unique to her alone. That is the blessedness
that God gives to His daughters who serve Him faithfully in the single life, in the home
with no children, in a home with few children, in a home with many children, or as a
widow. To serve Jehovah and His covenant is a
blessed privilege all the days of your life.
A
Mother’s Relationship to Her Children
Further, these godly women
demonstrate the importance of the covenantal relationship between mother and child. In the first place, they showed this from the
viewpoint of God’s covenant promise. Jehovah
promised to establish and fulfill His covenant in the line of believers and their seed in
their generations. To each of these three
women, God gave a son for the purpose of His covenant.
Samuel was given to be a judge and prophet in Israel. David was given to be king for Israel and to be
one through whom Christ would come. Jesus
Himself was given to Mary as the fulfillment of that covenant promise.
That relationship between mother
and child is no less important for the sake of God’s covenant today. In I Timothy 2,
the apostle Paul teaches that the believing woman is saved through child-bearing and
rearing. That means that, through the God
ordained way of childbearing and rearing, the believing woman is spiritually enriched. It also means that God is pleased to gather the
generations of His covenant in this way and fulfill His promise.
In the second place, these godly
women are evidence of the utmost importance of the relationship between the mother and the
child in the work of covenant instruction. How
could Samuel be given to the service of the tabernacle at such a young age, unless Hannah
first had diligently taught Samuel all that he needed to know for that faithful service!
From whom did David learn to
sing and to develop his musical talents for the glory of God? Under whose hand did he grow up to be the man
after God’s own heart? God used the
means of the instruction of his mother to accomplish this.
Think about Jesus, too. From whom did He learn the Old Testament
Scriptures? Jesus, who is like us in all
things except sin, learned and memorized perfectly the Scriptures under the instruction of
His mother. He learned the songs of Zion in
the arms of Mary and around the table of Joseph and Mary.
Jehovah prepared these men in
the arms and upon the knees of Hannah, Jesse’s wife, and Mary.
Let us remember that the manner
of faithful instruction for your children is essentially unchanged from the days of these
godly women.
Where will your daughters learn
godliness, meekness, and modesty? Not from
the world, but from you!
Where do your sons grow up to be
strong in the Lord and in His wisdom? Not
from the world, but from you!
Where do they learn to be
faithful servants of Jehovah in their life? Not from the world, but from you, sisters!
Preparing
Your Sons for Church Office
That applies particularly to our
need for ministers in our churches. The need
is great and growing. In light of the
vacancies and the few students in our seminary, does not the care of the churches burden
your souls? Are not your souls heavy with the
concern that solidly Reformed preaching continue by God’s grace in your pulpits?
In response to that concern,
what must you do? Those sons in your arms and
upon your knees you must prepare to be returned unto the Lord for a lifetime of service in
His church as ministers, elders, deacons, spiritual leaders, fathers, and faithful
husbands. Those spiritual sons are not yours
to train for what you might want them to be. These
sons are the heritage of Jehovah. Jehovah
has given those sons to you for a little while so that they may be returned unto Him.
Normally, by the instruction,
the example, the modesty, the humility, the dedication, the wholehearted devotion, and
faithfulness of Jehovah’s handmaidens, God grants His church the gifts of Samuels and
Davids for the welfare of His covenant in our generations and, particularly, for the
pulpits of our churches and mission fields.
Are you preparing those Samuels
and Davids for a lifetime of dedicated service in the office of believer? Or in the
special offices of the church, especially the ministry of the Word?
If you do not do that, who will?
By faith, you must!
The
Gracious Reward for Faithfulness
To follow the godly example of
Hannah, Jesse’s wife, and Mary is the urgent calling of godly women today. We live in spiritual times that are strikingly
similar to their times. The world continues
to grow in wickedness. The apostasy in the
church world continues to increase. Clearly,
these are the times in which we need faithful handmaidens of Jehovah, who know the times
and what the churches need!
We need Hannahs whose eyes of
faith are fixed on Jehovah’s covenant. We
need those faithful wives who are not ashamed to be joined in marriage in the Lord unto
the lowly and meek Jesses of the earth who shall inherit eternal glory. We need those who, like Mary, are willing to
submit wholeheartedly and unashamedly to the will of God alone.
Be assured that in such
faithfulness there is great reward. There is
in that faithfulness the expectation that in the judgment the Lord shall say unto you,
“Even as ye have done it unto the least of my brethren, so ye have done it unto me. Enter into my everlasting joy and glory!” Christ shall give His handmaidens the glorious
reward of a faithful handmaiden of Jehovah, which He has merited for them.
Therefore, what a blessing it is
when the most outstanding memory about you that your spiritual sons and daughters have all
the days of their life and before the throne of Christ is:
“Behold, she was a
hand-maiden of Jehovah!
And I had the blessed privilege
to be her son!”
That They May Teach Them to Their
Children:
Prof. Russell Dykstra
Prof. Dykstra is professor of Church History and New
Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary.
Two Different Covenants,Two Different
Schools
Every
builder will testify that the foundation of a building is of crucial importance for the
building as a whole. The foundation not only
determines the size and the shape of the building, but affects its value and longevity. A well-constructed building on a sure foundation
should stand strong and function well in the purpose for which it was constructed.
The foundation of the Christian
school (not the school building, now, but the school itself) is likewise crucial. The foundation of the school will reflect its
conceived purpose and what motivated the parents to establish the school. In the history of the Reformed churches, the
foundation of the Christian school has been God’s covenant of grace with believers
and their seed.
Christian schools have a long
and honorable history within the Reformed camp, dating back to Calvin, and especially
maintained in the Reformed churches in the Netherlands.
Believing parents have considered it an obligation of the covenant to establish
parental, Christian schools where the covenant seed might be reared in the fear of God and
taught His truth. The great Synod of Dordt
made reference to Christian schools and/or teachers in three separate articles of the
church order.
The doctrine of the covenant is
also the heart of the Reformed faith. It ties together all the doctrines of the Reformed
truth. The covenant gives warmth and beauty
to the doctrines of Calvinism. The covenant
is religion! It determines our relationship
to God as well as our walk of life. The
doctrine of the covenant of grace has uniquely a Reformed heritage.
Sad to say, there is much
disagreement within the Reformed camp on the doctrine of the covenant. Different views of the covenant have been set
forth by theologians since the Reformation. These
differences on the covenant came into sharp contrast in the controversy in the Protestant
Reformed Churches resulting in the split of 1953. That
controversy made plain that there are essentially but two covenant views possible, namely,
a conditional covenant, and an unconditional covenant.
The question that we face is
this: How does the particular covenant
doctrine affect the schools that believers establish for their children? The point of this article is that the covenant
view of the parents and teachers has far-reaching effects on the school. As the foundation of the building determines many
significant elements of a building, so the covenantal foundation of the school determines
the character of the school, including the purpose, content, and focus of the instruction,
the discipline administered, and the very social life within the school.
A word of caution is in order. Parents, school boards, and teachers are not
always consistent, and they may not necessarily establish and maintain a school that
follows the principles of the covenant that they confess.
Foundations can be forgotten, even abandoned.
That can be true of Protestant Reformed schools, as well as Christian Reformed
schools, or Canadian Reformed schools, or Netherlands Reformed schools. And, on the other hand, there are “happy
inconsistencies” in schools where the (erroneous) principles have not yet been
carried through to all the instruction.
In addition, it should be
evident to all that there can be other significant influences on the Christian school than
merely the doctrinal foundation of the covenant. Other
beliefs and practices can have an impact for good or for evil. The doctrine of common grace, particularly if it
posits good in the activities of the ungodly, opens the floodgates to the world’s
influence. The AACS movement (now centered in
the Institute for Christian Studies, ICS, in Toronto) forces the instruction into the
post-millennial mold that ever directs students to dominate the world for Christ.
Hence, in this evaluation,
allowance must be made for possible inconsistency in application of the principles, as
well as the possibility of other influences in a school.
Nevertheless, so determinative is the doctrine of the covenant in the school, that
we maintain that these two different doctrines of the covenant will produce two different
kinds of Christian schools.
These articles will highlight
the differences between schools founded on the basis of a conditional covenant, and those
maintaining an unconditional covenant. There
are obvious difficulties in this enterprise. It
is difficult for one committed all his life to the unconditional covenant to get a handle
on the character of a school founded on the conditional covenant, and that with limited
firsthand experience in such a school. School handbooks and mission statements are brief,
and do not always even specify that a school is based on the covenant. Thus some of the conclusions will be based on the
logical implications of the conditional covenant, and then substantiated as much as
possible by the experience of others and the writings that are available.
It is necessary, first of all,
briefly to set forth these two opposing views of the covenant, that is, conditional and
unconditional. As any regular reader of the Standard
Bearer knows, the Protestant Reformed Churches are solidly committed to the doctrine
of an unconditional covenant of grace, and this is the view explained here.
We who confess that God’s
covenant is unconditional define this covenant as the relationship of friendship that God
sovereignly establishes with His elect in Christ. This
emphasizes that the covenant is God’s. He
planned it, determined what it would be, how it would be realized, as well as with whom it
would be established. Such a covenant is
one-sided (unilateral); the covenant is all of God.
Christ is the Mediator of
God’s covenant, as well as its Head, with whom God established the covenant
eternally. Christ is not only the Seed of
the woman referred to in the “mother promise” (Gen. 3:15),
but also the Seed of Abraham in Genesis 17
with whom God established His covenant (cf. Gal. 3:16). In Christ, God established the covenant with
all those who are in Christ, namely, the elect.
Thus, God’s covenant is
eternal, being before the time and history of this world, and continuing after the time
and history of this present creation. This
covenant is established with believers and their seed in the line of continued
generations.
This covenant is not a
conditional agreement, but an unconditional relationship formed by God. God takes His
people unto Himself and makes them to be of His own party.
Within the covenant, they become living and active in the life of fellowship with
God. Therefore, this covenant is not a means
to an end, not the means to save, which means can be done away with once it has
accomplished its purpose. Rather, the
covenant is itself the goal of God, namely, it is God’s purpose to live in covenant
fellowship with His people forever, in and through Christ.
Standing in contrast and
opposition to that conception of the covenant is the conditional covenant. It may be defined as the arrangement that God
makes with believers and their children in which the blessings of salvation are given to
them, on condition of faith and obedience. In
this covenant, God comes to His covenant people with both promise and demand.1 The promise is eternal life. The demand is faith and obedience. God makes the promise to every covenant member,
but the actual receipt of the promises depends on the demand being met by the individual.
The proponents of the
conditional covenant teach that the covenant is unilateral in its establishment, but
bilateral in its manifestation. God and His
people are two parties in the covenant, each with his own necessary activity. God takes into His covenant all believers and all
their baptized children. The covenant is a
means to an end, the goal being to give the blessings of salvation to some of them.
In this view, Christ is the
Mediator of the covenant, but not the Head of the covenant.
The covenant is not made collectively with Christ and His people, but individually. Election is taken into account only as an
explanation of who is saved — after the fact. Election
must not be introduced into the discussion of the covenant.
Election unto salvation is narrower than the establishment of the covenant with its
members.
That brings up the place of
children in the covenant. In the conditional
covenant conception, all baptized children (Jacobs and Esaus alike) are members of
God’s covenant. At baptism, God declares
that He establishes His covenant with the child, and promises eternal life and redemption
in the blood of Christ — objectively.2 In addition, God promises that the Spirit will
dwell in this child and will apply all these blessings subjectively. The Reformed form for the administration of infant
baptism is interpreted to mean that the Father and Son promise existing realities, but
that the words “the Spirit will dwell…” mean something different. Most of those espousing a conditional covenant
insist that these words are not a continuous future, that is, the Spirit will dwell with
you constantly. Rather, they insist that
“will” means “desires to” or that He “will under certain
conditions.” Such are the promises in
the conditional covenant.
But, they aver, God also makes
demands on the child in the covenant (by which is meant every baptized child), namely
faith and obedience as a condition. They
would insist that this is not a condition in the Arminian sense. Rather, it is a condition as a necessary way by
which God has determined to save. Such insist
that God is not giving a condition to get into the covenant, because He lays these demands
upon the children who are already in the covenant. And
finally, it is affirmed that because God’s promise is inseparable from the demand as
condition, that God always keeps His word. He
punishes the covenant breakers, and blesses the faithful.
In this covenant doctrine, all
the baptized are sanctified. This is drawn
from I
Corinthians 7:14, where Paul writes, “…now are your children holy.” This is understood to mean that all the
children of believers are “sanctified,” that is, not necessarily made holy, but
sanctified in the sense of being set apart from the children of unbelievers, and
identified as God’s. God has a claim on
them, as His children.3
In harmony with that, it is
claimed that grace is bestowed upon all these baptized children. Different explanations are given as to what this
grace really is. For some, the promise itself is grace in some undefined way. For others, a kind of common grace works within
each child, enabling each to make the choice of whether or not to believe God’s
promise. Some are so bold as to teach that at
baptism God promises to the child, “You are one of my elect.”
Often the figure of a bank check
is used to illustrate the conditional promise of God to the baptized child. It is said that every child receives at baptism
what amounts to a check, written out to the child, and signed by God. The check promises eternal life to the child.
That child can do one of three
things with this check. He can shred it, and
thereby indicate that he wants nothing to do with this God or the promise of life. By this act he becomes a covenant breaker, and
there is no hope for him. A second
possibility is that the child never cashes it, which is to say, never claims the promise. Perhaps he merely takes pride in the fact that he
has this wonderful promise from God. Perhaps
he wanders far from the church and godliness. But
if he never cashes it, the “check” becomes worthless, and he dies without
receiving the eternal life God promised him. A
third possibility is that the child endorses the check.
He does that by believing the promises of God.
He then receives all that God has promised, and has eternal life.
Thus, what every baptized child
is taught amounts to this: “The promises
are for you, personally. Your baptism is a
guarantee that God spoke the promises to you. God
promises you the blessings of salvation. The
promises were sealed to you personally at baptism. Claim
them! Take hold of the promises. Believe that God means what He says.”
In contrast to that is the
teaching of the unconditional covenant concerning the place of children in God’s
covenant. Since this has been set forth a
number of times in the Standard Bearer and in this rubric, we can be brief. We maintain that with the elect children of
believers alone does God establish His covenant of friendship. The promises at baptism are spoken to the elect,
as are all the promises in the preaching only to the elect.
They are sealed only to the elect in baptism.
And God keeps His promises to them, unfailingly.
Those promises include faith as God’s gift.
God works faith, but not as the fulfillment of a condition. Faith is rather a fruit of the promises, a work
and gift of sovereign grace, and is thus part of God’s work of salvation in His
chosen people.
The unconditional covenant
teaches that these elect children are sanctified in Christ, really so! They are regenerated, and thus made holy in
principle. The Holy Spirit does dwell in
each and apply the blessing of the cross.
There are demands made of these
children, but not as covenantal conditions. God
comes to the elect seed with many commands, as for example, Repent of your sins! Believe
in Christ! Obey Me! The baptism form teaches the same: “Whereas in all covenants there are contained
two parts, therefore are we … admonished of and obliged unto new
obedience….”
These covenant children live in
fellowship with God and are to show their thankfulness by an obedient life. They are called to live as God’s friends by
living the antithetical life. Obviously, that
demands obedience to the Word of God.
How does this apply to the
schools? What differences will exist between
schools that maintain the conditional covenant and those who hold to the unconditional
covenant? That will be the focus next time.
1. Some have adopted a form
for the administration which uses that language, specifically. The form used by the Canadian Reformed Churches
reads: “Third, since every covenant
contains two parts, a promise and an obligation….”
2. I freely admit that I do not know what it
means to have the blessings of eternal life and redemption in the blood of Christ objectively,
as here presented. It is maintained that
these blessings are really the property of the child, objectively, but that if the child
never believes, he will never have the benefits of the cross of Christ. That seems to imply Christ died for all the
baptized children of believers, but whether they receive the forgiveness of sins and
eternal life is conditioned on faith. That is
virtually identical to the Arminian teaching of the atonement, except that here it is
limited to the covenant. The more Reformed
proponents of the conditional covenant would reject that.
However, I have yet to find an understandable, consistently Reformed explanation
for the idea that these blessings belong to every baptized child objectively.
3. The third form for the administration of
infant baptism found in the 1957 edition of the Psalter Hymnal of the Christian Reformed
Church includes the following: “God
graciously includes our children in his covenant, and all his promises are for them
as well as us…. We are therefore always
to teach our little ones that they have been set apart by baptism as God’s own
children.” Though not explicitly stated,
it appears to be teaching that all the baptized children are God’s children. The first prayer in the form adopted by the
Canadian Reformed Churches asks God to “look upon this child of
Thine and incorporate him …” (my emphasis, RJD).
All Thy Works Shall Praise Thee:
Mr. Joel Minderhoud
Mr. Minderhoud is a teacher in Covenant Christian
High School and a member of Hope Protestant Reformed Church, Walker, Michigan.
(Preceding articles in this series: January 1 and February 1, 2004.)
All Creatures Created for the Service of
Man
Article 12 of our Belgic
Confession of Faith begins “We believe that the Father, by the Word, that is, by His
Son, hath created of nothing the heaven, the earth, and all creatures as it seemed good
unto Him, giving unto every creature its being, shape, form, and several offices to serve
its Creator; that He doth also still uphold and govern them by His eternal providence
and infinite power, for the service of mankind, to the end that man may serve his
God.”
Most certainly the creatures of
God display His handiwork and thereby bring praise to God.
“Let them praise the name of the Lord; for he commanded and they were created. He hath also established them for ever and ever;
he hath made a decree which shall not pass” (Ps. 148: 5-6). We noticed this previously when we observed
the various aspects of nitrogen and its compounds. The
order, beauty, and intricacy found in the creation reveal the power and divinity of God. In the very nature and essence of each creature,
the creature itself brings glory and praise to God.
But there is another aspect to
the creation, explained by Article 12, that brings glory to God and humbles us. Not only did God create each creature and give
unto each creature its unique essence, but God sovereignly upholds and governs those
creatures and their essence for the service of us His people so that we might serve Him! What a marvel!
Consider all the creatures! All these
creatures serve us?! How humbled we ought to
be! And so too we must recognize that God
made nitrogen with all its aspects and unique characteristics to serve us! God uses the nitrogen cycle for our care and
service as well. These things are upheld to
serve us, so that we might be able to partake in our spiritual work — that we might
serve our God!
This truth was part of the
controversy in the CRC in the 1920s. Rev.
Hoeksema and Rev. Danhof appealed to the truth of Article 12 in their book Van Zonde en
Genade in the common grace controversy of the early 1920s. Hoeksema and Danhof explained that Kuyper and
Bavinck taught that the development of things in the creation is not related to the
spiritual-moral development of the rational creature.
“But Bavinck, just as Kuyper, wants a one-sided separate cosmic development of
the creation through common grace, which development is neither rational, spiritual, nor
normal.”1
And
they admit that the purpose of the life of all creatures is indeed the honor of God. But that life, though proceeding from one source,
goes in two directions. The mistake is that
in this way the idea of the honor of God is actually without any content, because they
place the life of the creation outside the foreordination of the life of the rational and
moral creatures. And so they make a division
between that which we insist must be as closely united as possible. 2
Hoeksema
and Danhof viewed the work of God in light of Article 12 of the Belgic Confession, and
they saw that all things, even the creatures of creation and the development of the powers
within that creation, are in the counsel of God for the purpose of the salvation of His
church! The salvation of the church through
Jesus Christ, in worshiping God alone in covenant friendship, is all important! All things must serve that end! They write,
Sin
did not remove the creation, nor did it destroy the original unity of the creation. God continued to work in all creatures by His
infinite power and according to the counsel of His providence…. All things continue to develop according to their
own natures and in an underlying organic relationship to each other. But they develop out of the principles of sin and
grace, and in eternal, spiritual-ethical antithesis of friendship with God, on the one
hand, and enmity towards the God of the covenant, on the other.
3
Part
of the common grace controversy involved an understanding of how all things, even the
creatures, fit into the counsel of God. Article
12 maintains that all creatures are created and maintained in the providence of God for
the service of mankind, to the end that man may serve his God.
For
the service of mankind
In previous articles we have
examined nitrogen, its compounds, and the nitrogen cycle in light of the first phrases of
Article 12. We now observe how these
particular creatures serve us in our various callings in this life.
Some brief examples of how
nitrogen atoms are used for our service should be discussed. It is clear that we cannot have our physical life
apart from the food and nutrients that we must receive on a regular basis. Part of this nourishment is the receiving of a
very important element — nitrogen. The
nitrogen atoms, as has been stated before, are a necessary part of the very basic
molecules of man — DNA, enzymes, proteins, etc.
Therefore, the nitrogen cycle serves us in providing us the basic components that
give us our physical life.
The nitrogen cycle serves the
plant world so that the plants are nourished and can grow.
In this way the plants themselves develop and grow beautifully and praise God in
that they show God’s power and wisdom. But
the plants themselves can then be used by us that we might receive nourishment and energy
to take up our labors. The food that we eat
gives us the energy we need to do whatever our calling is, whether in the church, home,
our realm of labor, or as a citizen of the country. “He
causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the
earth” (Ps.
104: 14). Thereby we are equipped
to serve our God in faithful labor.
Scripture also says that the
plants and the fruit of the plants are for our enjoyment.
In the proper enjoyment of those good gifts, God is glorified. “And wine that maketh glad the heart of man,
and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man’s heart” (Ps. 104: 15: See also Eccl. 2:10,
24; 9:7-10). We also exercise dominion
over the creation and press the powers of the creation for our service. For example, nitrogen gas molecules are used in
the food-packaging industry to preserve foods. Man
uses nitrogen molecules in the liquid form — liquid nitrogen — to keep items
frozen. This allows objects to be preserved
and to be kept from being damaged. And we
have in previous articles seen how the farmer efficiently uses nitrogen to add fertilizers
to his fields and how the mother uses nitrogen products in household cleaners. These are just a few of the many examples of how
nitrogen is used for the service of man.
To
the end that man may serve his God
Article 12 teaches that God
created all things for the service of mankind (Ps. 8:6, Ps. 104:14-15)
so that man might serve his God. To
understand this properly we must see clearly what it means to serve God. Some have incorrect views of this service of God
or of “kingdom service.” There are
those who teach that to serve God one must be involved in grandiose works in the political
and social arenas. Prof. Dykstra recognized
this trend when he wrote about “Christian humanism” in a recent Standard
Bearer article. He writes:
The
social calling of this humanism is the obligation to do something in this creation
and in society to improve both…. If you
attended Dordt, Calvin, Trinity, or any other Christian college, you heard that you can
do something for Christ, you can make a difference in this world, and you must
make a difference in this world…. This
movement may sound very pious and pressure the Christian school to do its “Christian
duty,” but it is humanism for all that. The
cry is: “Christ has redeemed the world,
and now it is up to you to make the whole creation subservient to Christ. We must save the world. Christ will come after our mission is
accomplished.” 4
This
kind of “kingdom service” involves having a “reforming” influence on
society. “To serve God” we
apparently must be “world-shakers,” transforming and changing societal
institutions for the betterment of society, fixing the problems of society, reclaiming and
redeeming all of creation for Christ. This
work, this idea of “kingdom service,” is a work of “building” an
earthly kingdom of God.
When
we consider Article 12’s statement that all creatures are governed and sustained by
God’s providence for the service of mankind, to the end that man may serve his God,
we see that the point of the service of God is not the kind of “kingdom service”
mentioned above. The idea is that God created
all creatures to be used by man in the everyday, seemingly insignificant, activities of
faithfully laboring and living in the calling God gives to him for the glory of God. The work in the kingdom is the normal everyday
activities of living the life of God’s people. It
is generally not extraordinary or spectacular labors.
It is the common work of the people of God. It
is not the “world shaking,” the “transforming” and
“redeeming” of creation, that others have in mind. It is the faithful service of God in the
callings He gives to His people. God
created all creatures for the service of mankind in his common, everyday labor that brings
all glory to God.
Jesus taught us to pray
“Give us this day our daily bread.” When
we pray this, we are to acknowledge that God is the fountain of all good and that He
created all things to serve us. It is a
prayer that teaches us to trust in God and to renounce all our trust in man and in the
creation. How gloriously is this evident in
the topics we have recently studied! Do we
place our trust in the creation? Do we look
at nitrogen and its compounds and trust in them? When
we look at the nitrogen cycle we must see a sovereign God providing us our daily bread. We might consider God’s provision of
nourishment of Elijah from the ravens or His provision of meal and oil for the widow as
great wonders of God. Yet, no more wondrous
were those events than the amazing government of nitrogen and its compounds for our
service. These microscopic creatures are
servants of the living God to serve us and provide us what we truly need in our spiritual
pilgrimage here below. Do we recognize this
as we ought? Do we acknowledge and thank God
for this? When we pray “Give us this day
our daily bread,” we thereby confess to God our complete dependence on Him and in so
doing we worship and serve Him.
By looking at nitrogen we have seen how our great
God provides and cares for us. May this stir
us on in faithful obedience in our callings, whatever that calling may be. In faithful acknowledgment and thanks to Jehovah
God for all things, we serve Him. Unbelievers
refuse to bow before Jehovah. They rebel when
they see an almighty God in creation and turn what they see into the lie of evolution. In the previous articles we have seen how God made
all aspects of nitrogen, all its compounds, and weaved them intricately into the lives of
every living organism. God upholds and
governs the amazing nitrogen cycle with the lightning, bacteria, and plants that all work
together to serve us. Yet, unbelieving man
rebels and denies that God has a hand in this. Unbelieving
man, who is often given much ability to research and investigate the creation, denies what
is so obviously the work of an almighty Creator sovereignly upholding His creation every
moment of the day. Yes, even the being,
shape, form, and several offices of nitrogen testify to the unbeliever of God’s
“eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20). Besides their rebellion and denial of God,
unbelievers use the creation to serve themselves. They
use the powers in the creation to serve mankind that man may serve man. But, by the grace of God, our eyes are opened to
see His work in the 4.
Dykstra, R. “Humanism and the PR
Teacher: No R and R (2).” Standard Bearer, 79, pp. 425-6.
creation
so that we begin to serve our faithful Father as we grow in closer covenant friendship and
dependence upon Him.
Therefore, nitrogen, its
compounds, and the nitrogen cycle serve us in our callings of labor,
marriage, church, family life, society life, and so on.
And thereby we serve our God in as much as we faithfully use these good gifts in
our various callings in life to the end that we might better know our God, fear Him, and
obey His commands. Nitrogen atoms, its
compounds, the nitrogen cycle, and all creatures were not created, are not maintained, do
not develop alongside the decrees of election and reprobation, but they serve
the decrees of election and reprobation. Thus,
as Article 12 maintains, all things, even nitrogen atoms, are created and maintained by
God so that we can serve our God.
Consider the wondrous works of God! God created and maintains all things, even the tiny particles of creation, that by His providence these creatures might serve the king of creation — mankind — in order that man ultimately may serve and honor Him. May we learn to confess the truth as expressed in Article 12. May we be diligent in observing God’s handiwork in the creation as He gives to each creature its being, shape, form, and several offices. May we be humbled to see that God made all things and that He continues to govern and sustain all creatures for man’s good, for man’s service. And may we see that our calling is to use all these good gifts for the glory and service of God by acknowledging that they come from our Father and that they bring us in closer friendship and dependence on Him.
1. Danhof, Henry and Herman Hoeksema. Sin and Grace. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Grandville, MI, 2003, p. 160.
4. Dykstra, R.
“Humanism and the PR Teacher: No
R and R (2).” Standard Bearer,
79, pp. 425-6.
News From Our Churches:
Mr. Benjamin Wigger
Mr.
Wigger is an elder in the Protestant Reformed Church of Hudsonville, Michigan.
Mission
Activities
Rev. A. Spriensma, our denomination’s
missionary to the Philippines, continues to be very busy heading into the new year. On a Saturday morning in early January, he began
his day with a church meeting with all the heads of households of the members of the
Berean Church of God Reformed in Manila, followed by teaching a Reformed church government
class, and then a Board of Trustees meeting. On
Sunday he preached two services, with an Essentials catechism class in between. The following weekend he planned to travel to the
island of Negros, and meet with a small group in the city of Bacolod to hold a conference
and preach again. During the week he
continues to mentor and teach some of the pastors and Bible students with whom he has
recently started meeting.
Rev. Rodney and Sharon Miersma
left around 5 p.m. on Tuesday, January 13,
from Sioux Falls, S.D., arriving in Ghana and the city of Accra the following day at 7 p.m. They
were met there by members of the Fellowship, along with Rev. Wayne and Phyllis Bekkering
and Justin and Kathy Koole. Pray for the
Miersmas as they begin their missionary labors with the Bekkerings and Kooles and the
Fellowship.
Rev. R. Cammenga, Elders William
DeKraker, Roger Groenendyk, and Dave Rau, as well as Deacons Marc Kuiper and Steve Kuiper,
members of Southwest PRC in Grandville, MI, the calling church for our denomination’s
mission work in Pittsburgh, PA, visited the field January 15-19. Their visit was to include meeting with our
missionary, Rev. J. Mahtani, and the steering committee of the Fellowship. Plans also called for the elders to conduct family
visitation, under the theme, “As for me and my house,” and the deacons to make
some diaconal visits. As a denomination we
can be thankful for this supervision of our calling church, and we pray that God will make
their work profitable for our missionary and the saints in Pittsburgh.
An effort is also underway to
organize pen pals between the Pittsburgh Mission and the members of Southwest PRC. Mr. Brian Suber, a member of the Mission,
recently developed a questionnaire for the members to complete. From this questionnaire he planned to develop a
brief article on each one of them to be included in future publications of
Southwest’s Messenger.
School
Activities
Monday, January 5, members of the Hope PR Christian School Society in Grand Rapids, MI
gathered together for a special society meeting to consider their Board’s plans for
building expansion. The Board reminded the
school society members that having the need for building expansion is evidence of
God’s continued faithfulness at Hope School. Plans
approved that evening call for the construction of four classrooms and a gym, with
bathrooms, storage area, and lobby area, along with parking lot, new well, and site work
for relocation of the playground.
Saturday evening, January 17,
supporters of Hope PR Christian School in Grand Rapids, MI were invited to come and visit
“Yellowstone High Country Treasure” at Grandville Middle School for the first of
four travelogues to benefit the Hope School Foundation.
Teachers, prospective teachers,
and parents in and around our churches in the Grand Rapids, MI area were invited to enroll
in a college credit seminar, sponsored by the Federation of Protestant Reformed Christian
Schools, entitled, “Principles and Practices of Reformed Education.” This seminar began meeting in January at our
Seminary and was scheduled to continue every other Wednesday evening through May.
Starting in the spring of 2004,
the city of Wyoming, MI will begin a project to expand Byron Center Ave. As a landowner along this section, Adams Christian
School will be compelled to sell a strip of land to the city. The strip is 17 feet wide and runs the entire
length of Adams’ property, making a total of about a quarter of an acre. This expansion will include improving the street
with curb and gutter, cement sidewalks, and cement approaches for all driveways connected
to the street. Adams will also use this
street expansion project to relocate their existing north driveway and add a new south
driveway to 56th
Ave. Plans also call for Adams to use this
opportunity to hook up to sanitary sewer.
Congregation
Activities
For some time now we have noticed that bulletins at the Georgetown PRC in Hudsonville, MI
have included announcements concerning a Boy’s G.R.O.W. Group at their church. G.R.O.W. is an effort by members of Georgetown to
have their boys from the 4th
through the 8th
grade grow spiritually in giving, righteousness, obedience, and wisdom, hence the acronym
G.R.O.W. Under the direction of several men
at Georgetown, 25 boys meet together on Tuesday nights for a Bible Study followed by some
time spent with assorted craft projects. On
January 20 they were scheduled to tour our own PR Seminary.
Besides such activities they also recently had a visit from a member of the Ottawa
County sheriff department and his K-9 Unit.
With great joy and gladness in
our hearts to our heavenly Father, Classis East, meeting January 14 at the Grandville, MI
PRC, received the Wingham, Ontario congregation, formerly of the OCRC, into our churches. This group consists of 13 families and 27
communicant members. A committee consisting
of the church visitors was appointed to assist them in making the transition out of the
OCRC and into our denomination.
Minister
Activities
Rev.
W. Bruinsma declined the call extended to him from the Immanuel PRC in Lacombe, AB Canada
to be their next pastor. Immanuel will meet
together on January 29 to call a pastor from a trio of the Revs. A. Brummel, C. Haak, and
C. Terpstra.
On Sunday, January 18, Rev. C.
Haak declined the call he had been considering to serve as the next pastor of the Faith
PRC in Jenison, MI.
Priorities in Marriage
Resolving Conflict in Marriage
The Man’s Role as Husband and Father
The Woman’s Role as Wife and Mother
Audio recordings of these
four speeches are available from Trinity PRC by contacting Chuck Ensink at (616)
669 2412 or by email chensink@iserv.net. You
can also mail your order to Chuck Ensink at 3116 New Holland St. Hudsonville, MI, 49426.
(Tapes — $6, CDs — $10).
Last modified: 13-feb-2004