The Bible is the Word of God (Part 2) — Charles Hodge

Charles Hodge,

The internal evidence of their divine origin is the proper ground of faith in the Scriptures.

The Scriptures themselves clearly teach that the faith which they demand is founded upon the authority of God, manifesting itself in them by the excellence and power of the truth which they contain. They everywhere represent faith as the effect and evidence of right moral feeling, and unbelief as the result of moral or spiritual blindness. Our Saviour said to the Jews, If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God. (John 7:17) Again, He that is of God, heareth God’s words; ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of God. (John 8:47) On another occasion he said, Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep; my sheep hear my voice. (John 10:26,27) The apostle speaks to the same effect, Hereby know ye the Spirit of God. Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God. We are of God. He that knoweth God heareth us ; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. (1 John 4:2,3) In like manner Paul says, The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14) And again, If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost; in whom the god of this world hath blinded the eyes of them that believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. But God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Cor. 4:3-6) The doctrine taught in these and similar passages, is that there is in the word of God and especially in the person and character of Jesus Christ, a clear and wonderful manifestation of the divine glory. To this manifestation the natural man is blind, and therefore does not believe, but those who have the Spirit of God discern this glory and therefore believe.

It is in accordance with this view that unbelief is represented as so grave a moral offence, and faith as so important a duty. Atheism is every where regarded as a crime, because the evidences of the existence of God are everywhere present, above us, around us and within us. They are addressed to the moral constitution, as well as to the speculative understanding. They cannot be resisted without the same violence to moral obligations, or the authority of moral considerations, that is involved in calling virtue vice, and vice virtue. Hence the Scriptures always speak of unbelief as a sin against God, and the special ground of the condemnation of the world. He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:18) Who is a liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is anti-Christ, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. (1 John 2:22-23) Disbelief of the Son as revealed in the Scriptures, is an offence of the same nature as the denial of God. In both cases supreme excellence is revealed and disregarded. Much to the same effect the Saviour says, He that hateth me, hateth my Father also. (John 15:23) On the other hand, faith is represented as the highest act of obedience, as a moral act of the greatest worth in the sight of God. Whosoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God. (1 John 5:1) As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to as many as believed on his name. (John 1:12) And our Saviour told the enquiring Jews, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. (John 6:29) These representations cannot be reconciled with the assumption that faith is founded on external testimony, which does not address itself to our moral nature, and an assent to which has so little concern with moral character. All is plain, however, if we are required to believe in the Son because his glory as of the only begotten of the Father is presented to us ; and to receive the Scriptures because they bear the impress of the divine perfections. If this be the ground of faith, unbelief is indeed a crime. It is a refusal to recognise wisdom and holiness, and to acknowledge the manifested excellence of God.

This view of the ground of faith is confirmed by the effects ascribed to that grace. It works by love, it purifies the heart, it overcomes the world, it produces peace and joy. It is indeed conceivable that the conviction of truths affecting our interests, however produced, should call forth fear, sorrow or joy according to their nature. But it is not conceivable that belief of moral or religious truths, founded upon the testimony of others, should control our affections. A man may believe on authority, or on merely rational grounds, that we are under a moral government, and that the law by which we are bound is holy, just and good, but such a faith will not subdue his opposition. He may be, by argument or miracle, convinced of the existence of God, but such a faith will not produce love. Faith therefore cannot have the effects ascribed to it, unless it is founded on a spiritual apprehension of the truths believed.

Hence it is that faith is represented as the gift of God. The evidence indeed is presented to all, or there would be no obligation to believe; but men are morally blind, and therefore the eyes of their understanding must be opened that they may understand the things which are freely given to them of God. The apostle therefore says to his believing brethren, Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. I have not written unto you, because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. The anointing which ye have received of him abide th in you, and ye need not that any man teach you : but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. (1 John 2:20,21,27) It is here taught, as in other passages already quoted, that believers are the recipients of an influence, an unction, from the Holy One, which convinces them of the truth, and makes them see and know that it is truth. Hence Paul says, his preaching was not with the enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power; that the faith of his hearers might not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God; that is, that their faith might not be the effect of skillful reasoning, but of the spiritual perception and experience of the truth.

All this is confirmed by the constant practice of the inspired teachers. Though they appealed to all kinds of evidence in support of the doctrines which they taught, to signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost, yet they by no means rested the obligation to believe either exclusively or mainly upon these external signs. In many cases faith was demanded by those inspired men who never wrought miracles of any kind, as was the fact in the case of some of the prophets; and still more frequently it was required of those among whom no such wonders had been performed. When the Jews demanded a sign and the Greeks wisdom, the apostles preached Christ, and him crucified, as the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation. Their constant endeavour was by the manifestation of the truth to commend themselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. And if their gospel was hid, it was hid to them that are lost.

It is, therefore, plainly the doctrine of the scriptures themselves, that the word of God is to be believed because of the authority or command of God manifesting itself therein, in a manner analogous to the exhibition of his perfections in the works of nature. If, as Paul teaches us, the eternal power and godhead are so clearly manifested by the things that are made, that even the heathen are without excuse; and if their unbelief is ascribed not to the want of evidence, but to their not liking to retain God in their knowledge; we need not wonder that the far clearer manifestation of the divine perfections made in the scripture, should be the ground of a more imperative command to believe.

It is the experience of true Christians in all ages and nations that their faith is founded on the spiritual apprehension and experience of the power of the truth. There are multitudes of such Christians, who, if asked why they believe the scriptures to be the word of God, might find it difficult to give an answer, whose faith is nevertheless both strong and rational. They are conscious of its grounds though they may not be able to state them. They have the witness in themselves, and know that they believe, not because others believe, or because learned men have proved certain facts which establish the truth of Christianity. They believe in Christ for the same reason that they believe in God ; and they believe in God because they see his glory and feel his authority and power.

If then the truth of God contains in its own nature a revelation of divine excellence, the sin of unbelief is a very great sin. Not to have faith in God, when clearly revealed, is the highest offence which a creature can commit against its creator. To refuse credence to the testimony of God, when conveyed in the manner best adapted to our nature, is to renounce our allegiance to our creator. To disregard the evidence of truth and excellence in Jesus Christ, is the highest indignity that we can show to truth and excellence. This sin is common, and therefore is commonly disregarded. Men do not easily see the turpitude of evils with which they are themselves chargeable. The faults of those who go beyond them in iniquity they are quick to discern. And therefore the man who feels no compunction at want of faith in the Son of God, will abhor him who pronounces the Redeemer a wicked impostor. He will wait for no explanation and will listen to no excuse. The mere fact that a man, acquainted with the Scriptures, is capable of such a judgment respecting the Son of God, is proof of depravity which nothing can gainsay. Yet how little difference is there between the state of mind which would admit of such a judgment, and the state in which those are who have no faith in the declarations of Christ; who disregard his promises and warnings ; who do not feel them to be true, and therefore treat them as fables. The want of faith therefore of which men think so lightly, will be found the most unreasonable and perhaps the most aggravated of all their sins. It implies an insensibility to the highest kind of evidence, and involves the rejection of the greatest gift which God has ever offered to man, pardon, holiness, and eternal life.

— excerpted from: The Way of Life, Charles Hodge, 1841

The Father of All Lies.....

A Short Explanation and Defense of
Presuppositional Apologetics
by Grover Gunn

This paper is available from Southern Presbyterian Press, the publishing arm of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary.

Christian apologetics is the science of defending the Christian faith against intellectual accusations and objections whether they come from hostile skeptics or sincere seekers. The classic Scriptural foundation for Christian apologetics is the admonition of the uneducated Galilean fisherman Peter that we must ". . . always be ready to give a defense (Greek: apologia) to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear" (1 Peter 3:15). The New Testament also provides specific examples of the actual execution of the apologetic task. For example, when the learned Paul of Tarsus shared his simple Christian testimony with an angry crowd at Jerusalem, he began with the words, "Men, brethren, and fathers, hear my defense (Greek: apologia) before you now" (Acts 21:1; cf. 26:24). Because of clear Biblical statements such as these, few dispute the fact of the Christian's apologetic duty. What is disputed is the proper method and approach to use in fulfilling this Biblical obligation.

There are two basic apologetic methods common among Reformed theologians: evidentialism and presuppositionalism. These two approaches basically differ in their understanding of the relationship of the apologetic task of defending the faith to the theological and evangelical task of sharing the faith. According to evidentialism, Christian apologetics is a form of pre-evangelism¹, an intellectual preparation that precedes the actual gospel presentation. It is a philosophical and empirical task that is logically prior to any theological considerations.

According to evidentialism, the Christian witness to the non-christian inquirer should initially set aside the existence of God², the claims of Christ³ and the authority of the Bible⁴. The evidentialist argues that since these are the very points to be proven, simply to assert their validity from the beginning would be to argue in a circle and to beg the question.⁵ Also, these religious elements could offend or threaten the non-believer and intellectually alienate him before the Christian witness has had an opportunity to gain a hearing. The Christian witness should instead seek out a neutral arena, some non-threatening intellectual environment common to both the believer and the skeptic. And what better common ground than the axiomatic foundations of logic and science: the law of non-contradiction, the law of causality and the reliability of human sense perceptions? The evidentialist's challenge to the skeptic is that if he the skeptic will acknowledge the axiomatic validity of these three principles, then he the evidentialist will demonstrate the probable truthfulness of Christianity. Taking these axioms as common ground, the evidentialist first attempts to prove from logic and nature the philosophical necessity of the existence of a supreme being. That accomplished, he then endeavors to prove from historical considerations the empirical probability of the validity of the miracles in the Bible, especially the resurrection of Christ. The evidentialist then points out to the skeptic that the Bible claims to be the very Word of God. Therefore, argues the evidentialist, because of the philosophical necessity of a supreme being and the historical probability of Biblical miracles, the skeptic should take the Bible's claim seriously and consider its message.

Presuppositionalists disagree with the above described apologetic method. The presuppositional position is that one should not try to isolate the apologetic task from the evangelical witness and the theological context. One should not set aside the authoritative claims of God, Christ and Scripture in a quest for common ground with the skeptic. Nor should one grant the hypothetical possibility of a world independent of God that can successfully function and be successfully understood in terms of the axioms of logic and science. If the Christian apologist begins his argumentation with the assumption that man can successfully use logic and science to analyze and judge reality irrespective of the truth of Christianity, then the apologist has from the beginning abandoned the Christ "in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Colossians 2:3) and who gives epistemological "light to every man who comes into the world" (John 1:9). To say that logic and science are God-neutral common ground is to deny the existence of the sovereign God of Scripture "for [whom] and through [whom] and to [whom] are all things" (Romans 11:36). To say that the impersonal axioms of logic and science are the most basic principles of reality is to deny the Christ who "is before all things, and in [whom] all things consist" (Colossians 1:17). The Christ of Scripture is the Christ apart from whom man can do nothing (John 15:5). To seek to build one's philosophical and scientific house apart from the God of Scripture is to labor in vain (Psalm 127:1). In its quest for common ground with the skeptic, evidentialism makes concessions that compromise the very essence of Biblical Christianity.

Not only does evidentialism concede too much, it seeks to prove too little. The most evidentialism claims to be able to do is to prove the probable truth of Christianity. But if Christianity is only probably true, then Christianity is also possibly false. The presuppositionalist seeks to prove that the non-christian world and life view is thoroughly self-contradictory and therefore totally untenable and that the Christian view of reality is of necessity true. The presuppositionalist is not satisfied with defending the faith in terms of mere probabilities.

But, objects the evidentialist, with these limitations, a rational defense of Christianity simply is not possible. Without presupposing logical and scientific axioms as a basis for objectively proving Christianity, Christian truth becomes an arbitrary assertion and Christian faith becomes an irrational leap. No, counters the presuppositionalist, that is a false dilemma. There is a third way which both respects the ultimacy of divine authority and rationally demonstrates the truth of Christianity. This third way, which avoids the opposite extremes of blind faith and rationalism, looks beyond logical and scientific axioms to life's most ultimate presuppositions.

The apologetic task must be carried out on this most ultimate level because, contrary to evidentialism, regenerate man and non-regenerate man cannot agree upon some common scales upon which to weigh evidence. Contrary to evidentialism, the non-regenerate man's most ultimate measure of reality is not the axioms of logic and science. Totally depraved man has a more basic commitment, and he would accept an irrational and chaotic world where logic and science have no basis in objective reality before he would compromise his true ultimate commitment. After all, is that not the very world accepted by modern man in post-Kantian secular philosophy? Fallen man's most ultimate axiomatic commitment is not to logic and science but to his belief in the lie of Satan.

What is Satan's lie to mankind? We find this lie in the serpent's temptation of Eve in the Garden of Eden. Satan's pseudo-gospel is that man can be as God in the sense of being his own ultimate authority and do so successfully. Since there can be only one truly ultimate authority, the most ultimate authority cannot be both the Word of God and the word of man. Satan challenged man to put "God in the dock," elevating himself over the Word of God as its judge. If the Word of God is true, it is only because man has judged it to be true. And, says Satan, the Word of God cannot be totally true because God has said that man cannot do what is right in man's own eyes and succeed. God has said, In the day man eats of the forbidden fruit, he will die. But, says Satan, sinful man will not die. Man can successfully have ultimate authority and live. Man can successfully be as God. Man can be the measure of all things and the master of his own destiny and his world won't fall apart. That is Satan's big lie. And that is fallen man's most basic philosophical commitment.

Both before and after the fall, man psychologically started with himself as the immediate agent of his own thought and experience. But only after the fall did man presuppositionally start with himself as the ultimate measure of reality. Before the fall, man sought to think God's thoughts after Him and to interpret experience in the light of God's Word. After the fall, man became a "free thinker" and sought to sovereignly give the brute facts of an impersonal universe their original definition. Fallen man's commitment to Satan's lie as his ultimate presupposition is the foundation of fallen man's total life orientation. The result is that fallen man has a radical sin bias that blinds him to truth about God and Christ and Scripture. Natural man walks in the futility of his mind, having his understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in him, because of the hardening of his heart (Ephesians 4:17-18).

The problem is not that natural man in the pagan environment has no witness to God's truth. The whole world is pulsating with the revelation of God (Psalm 19); there is no escaping it. And man, the creature created in God's image, also has an inner witness to God's truth (Romans 2:14-16). The problem is not a lack of revelation but natural man's interpretation of this revelation. Knowledge of the true and living God bombards fallen man, but he "suppresses the truth in unrighteousness" and "exchange(s) the truth of God for the lie" (Romans 1:18,25). Fallen man takes the objective knowledge of general revelation and subjectively filters it through his sin orientation throughout the cognition process. The route from revelation to theology is interpretation, and natural man can only interpret in terms of his radical sin bias. Thus natural man always has a natural theology, but natural man's natural theology is always an idol making theology. Pagan theology is never an abridged version of truth waiting for the Bible to flesh it out. Pagan theology is never a stepping stone to Christianity. Pagan theology is always a comprehensive and antagonistic perversion of God's general revelation. Natural man's natural theology always produces a "god" whose existence does not contradict Satan's lie, and such a "god" by definition cannot be the sovereign Lord God of Scripture. Marduk and Dagon and Molech and Baal and Aristotle's "Unmoved Mover" are all in the same class and category; they are all depraved idols, not partial descriptions of the true and the living God which are true as far as they go.

In spite of general revelation, the pagan world does not know the true and the living God because of the distorting nature of worldly wisdom (1 Corinthians 1:21). Fallen man's intellectual sin bias is so basic and so complete that even when he is exposed to God's truth in plain language through the special revelation of Scripture, he still does not know God's truth in any spiritually significant sense (1 Corinthians 2:14). He knows but he does not know (Isaiah 6:9). The god of this age has blinded his mind (2 Corinthians 4:4). He is like an illiterate man with an open book in his hands (Isaiah 29:12). He sees God's truth spelled out before him but he cannot grasp its meaning, for to rationally comprehend God's truth is to be persuaded by it and to submit to it in faith. To know the formal content of God's special revelation and not to believe is to see without perceiving (cf. Acts 28:24-28).

The way to deal with fallen man is not to cater to his illusions by telling him he has the authority and ability to weigh the truth of God in the scales of autonomous reason. The way to deal with fallen man is to argue against his illusions and to expose Satan's lie for what it is. For man to reject the true and living God and to seek to be as God is to choose death. And not just physical death but multidimensional death and radical death, death that reaches every area of life and penetrates to the very heart of life.

Man through sin has separated himself from God, but God in common grace continues to uphold life for both the just and the unjust. Fallen man continues to live and function not because of his world view but in spite of it. We must seek to show fallen man that his world view contradicts his own life experience. Man values logic, but apart from God, there is no reason why the mental laws of logic should have any true correspondence to objective reality. Man values science, but apart from God, there is no adequate basis for any real order and design in the universe or any assurance that man is really in touch with objective reality through his senses. Man values ethics, but apart from God, morals are merely changing conventions, and today's abomination can become tomorrow's virtue. Man values human personhood, but apart from God, man is but a higher animal or even an advanced machine, and personal existence is a temporary evolutionary fluke in an impersonal universe. Man values purpose and meaning, but apart from God, these have no real basis. If fallen man is right in his world view, then all in the world that is precious dies. The apologist must press home without compromise the point that philosophy and science based not upon Christ but upon the first principles of the world are "empty deceit" (Colossians 1:8) and "foolishness" (1 Corinthians 3:18-19). Even as the skeptic argues against God, he is using logic and language, which exist and have meaning only because of God. As Van Til has said, the skeptic is like the small child who is able to slap his father's face only because his father is holding him up.

Apart from the regenerating grace of God, fallen man will rebel against these arguments. Apart from the regenerating grace of God, he will continue to cling to his lie. He will argue that finite man and pagan gods really are an adequate foundation for a meaningful world. Or he will sink into intellectual skepticism and arrogantly boast of his ability to live in a meaningless world without resorting to the psychological crutch of Christianity. Or, more commonly, he will find some dialectical mix of false faith and proud despair. All the Christian can do is to argue from the Bible that the man who says there is no Jehovah God is truly a fool and that the forbidden fruit will indeed turn to gravel in his mouth. We plead and argue, but only God can cause the blind to see and the deaf to hear.

After seeking to drive the non-christian "below the line of despair" by demonstrating the self-contradictory nature of his world, the Christian then points him to the one solid Rock upon which he can build a valid world and life view. And of course that one solid Rock is Christ. The apologist presents Christ as the Sovereign Savior and Lord and proclaims His Word as ultimate, self-authenticating truth. In the final analysis, we accept the authority of God's Word simply because it is God's Word (Westminster Confession, 1.4). Just as God can swear by no one higher than Himself, there is also no higher authority than God's Word upon which to base our acceptance of God's Word. The importance of this simple principle cannot be overstated. The apologist can argue transcendentally that human logic and science have no adequate foundation apart from the Word of the true and the living God. He cannot make human logic and science his self-authenticating authorities and then use these to prove God. Logic and science derive their authenticity and authority from God, not vice versa.⁶

What then is the proper place for evidence in the apologetic task? Evidences must be presented in the defining context of the gospel message. We must reject the notion that we can somehow use evidences and logical arguments apart from the gospel context to prepare the skeptic's heart and mind for the gospel message. It is in the context of the preached Word that God works His work of regenerating grace which enables the spiritually blind to see and believe. Evidences, no matter how compelling, do not convince those who have not submitted to God's Word in faith (Luke 16:31). Because of the noetic effects of sin, fallen man must be born from above in order to see the kingdom of God (John 3:3). True intellectual submission to Biblical evidences is not a mental preparation for faith; it is a part of the phenomenon of faith. Biblical evidences confirm and strengthen faith only in the context of faith. Fallen man submits to the "arguments whereby [holy scripture] doth abundantly evidence itself to be the word of God" only in the context of "the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts" (Westminster Confession, 1.5).

We must also reject this idea that we can prove Christianity without concurrently defining what Christianity is. We must not seek to separate the that (the bare fact) from the what (the Biblical significance) of apologetic evidences. The Biblical significance is so closely tied to the historical facts of Christianity that to try to separate and isolate these is to destroy them both. The non-christian might accept the probability of the resurrection of Jesus as a bare historical fact isolated from the claims of the Christ of Scripture and the Biblical interpretation of the resurrection event. But who is Jesus apart from the claims of Christ? He is not the Jesus of Scripture. To accept the "bare fact" apart from the Biblical definition is not even historical faith. The demons have historical faith (James 2:19), but they both believe and tremble. The resurrection of Jesus is a reason for trembling only as it is Biblically defined. Apart from the Biblical definition, the resurrection of "Jesus" is merely an entertaining historical curiosity that belongs in "Ripley's Believe It or Not."

In our witnessing, we do present evidence but only in the defining context of the Word. We have the historical evidences of miracles, especially the resurrection of Christ from the dead, and fulfilled prophecy. We have the testimonies of changed lives. We have a basis for science in the God who created an orderly universe of design and gave man both senses that really are in touch with objective reality and rational minds with a logic that really does measure truth in the created realm. We have a basis for purpose, meaning and morality, for the ultimate reality is the personal God of Scripture and not an impersonal universe or impersonal axioms. We accept God as God and we find flowing out of this a world that is the real world, and everyone in their heart of hearts knows it.

Here we find the true common ground between Christian and non-christian. They both live in the real world created by God and covered with His finger prints. They were both created in God's image. They both know in their heart of hearts that the God of Scripture is the true and the living God and that the Bible is His Book. But, as I said in the beginning, the Christian and the non-christian do not agree on this common ground. Only the born again Christian has admitted to himself what all men in their innermost being know to be true. The non-christian remains self-deceived and is blinded by his love for Satan's lie.

With presuppositional apologetics, the uneducated Galilean fisherman or even the child can have a truly effective apologetic, like the apologetic found in the children's song: "Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so." And yet this apologetic is not mindless or arbitrary. It does not throw out evidence but acknowledges that evidence can have its proper significance and impact only in the context of saving faith. It defends the faith without idolatrously elevating human reason above God (rationalism) or abandoning reason altogether (irrationalism).

The rationalistic apologetic is summarized in the statement associated with Thomas Aquinas, "I believe because I understand." The irrational, fideistic apologetic is summarized in the statement associated with Tertullian, "I believe what is absurd." The presuppositional apologetic is summarized in the statement associated with St. Augustine of Hippo, "I believe; therefore, I understand." Contrary to rationalism, human reason is not a religiously neutral or independent realm that is philosophically prior to faith. Contrary to irrationalism, human reason need not be a futile and impossible task that is contrary to true faith. Consistent with presuppositionalism, the realm of true faith encompasses all and is prior to all, including logic and science, and only in the context of faith is a rational and orderly world possible.

---

FOOTNOTES

1	"Though apologetics may not be evangelism, it is a vital part of pre-evangelism." Sproul, Gerstner and Lindsley, Classical Apologetics: A Rational Defense of the Christian Faith and a Critique of Presuppositional Apologetics, p. 21.
2	"We must begin with our reason even before we know that there is a God who validates it." Ibid., p. 222.
3	"This all shows that sound apologetics cannot begin with the inspired Bible or even with a divine Christ." Ibid., p. 149.
4	"From an uninspired Bible we are arguing for miracles, and from miracles we are arguing for an inspired Bible." Ibid., p. 144. "We have traveled not in a circular path back to where we began but up to Jacob's ladder anchored on earth in a merely human and historical Bible into the heavenlies of a divinely inspired Word of God." Ibid., p. 155. "We have proven, independently of the inspired Bible, that the Bible is the Word of God . . ." Ibid., p. 178.
5	"The problem arises . . . when we make God a question-begging first principle of epistemology." Ibid., p. 89. Humans can have the subjective experience of knowing without acknowledging God even though all human experience is dependent upon God as the Creator and Sustainer of life. But can man have a valid and viable epistemology (a philosophical explanation of the subjective knowing experience and its relationship to objective reality) without acknowledging the true and living God? The presuppositionalist's answer to this question is no, and the above quotation is an evidentialist criticism of this position.
6	A transcendental argument is an argument that something must be true because of the impossibility of the contrary. The book Classical Apologetics argues transcendentally for the axioms of logic and science: "In a sense, we are proceeding in a kind of transcendental fashion asking the question, 'What are the assumptions necessary for life and knowledge to be possible?' At this point we are not inquiring about ontological prerequisites to life and truth, but epistemological prerequisites." Ibid., p. 71. "In our search for common assumptions, we isolate three which are held by theists and nontheists alike. There may be far more than three, but these three represent the bare minimum of working non-negotiable assumptions. The three basic assumptions are: 1. The validity of the law of noncontradiction; 2. The validity of the law of causality; 3. The basic reliability of sense perception." Ibid., pp. 71-72.

---

Ready To Reason By Dr. Greg Bahnsen

Ready To Reason
By Dr. Greg Bahnsen

Is it Necessary?

A surge of pious agreement overcame me the first time I heard someone confidently assert that "The word of God no more needs defense than does a lion in a cage. Just let the lion loose, and it will take care of itself!" There seemed something very right about that sentiment. It almost appeared irreverent to disagree with it.

Well, something about that assertion is indeed right. God is certainly not in need of anything - much less the puny efforts of any particular man or woman to defend His word. He is the Creator of heaven and earth, almighty in power, and sovereign in controlling all things. The Apostle Paul, when reasoning with the Athenian philosophers, made that very point: he declared that God is not worshiped with men's hands "as though He needed any thing, seeing that He gives to all life and breath and all things" (Acts 17:24). If God were ever to hunger, for instance, He would not need to tell us since the fullness of all creation is His (Ps. 50:12)! He depends upon nothing outside Himself, and everything outside of Him depends upon Him for its existence, qualities, abilities, accomplishments, and blessings. "In Him we live, and move, and have our being" (Acts 17:28).

So it is obvious that God does not need our inadequate reasoning and our feeble attempts to defend His word. Nevertheless, the pious-sounding remark with which we began is still mistaken. It suggests that we should not concern ourselves with efforts at apologetics[1] because God will directly take care of such matters Himself. The remark is just as mistaken as saying that God does not need us as evangelists (He could even make the stones to cry out, couldn't He?) -- and therefore efforts at evangelistic witness are unimportant. Or, a person might misguidedly think that, because God has the power and ability to provide his family with food and clothing without "help from us," he does not need to go to work tomorrow.

Thinking like this is unbiblical. It confuses what God Himself needs from us and what God requires of us. It assumes that God ordains ends, but not means to those ends (or at least not the instrumentality of created means). There is no need for God to use our evangelistic witness, our daily work for a paycheck, or our defense of the faith -- but He chooses to do so, and He calls us to apply ourselves to them. The Bible directs us to work, although God could provide for our families in other ways. The Bible directs us to evangelize, even though God could use other means to call sinners to Himself. And the Bible also directs us to defend the faith -- not because God would be helpless without us, but because this is one of His ordained means of glorifying Himself and vindicating His truth.

Christ speaks to the church as a whole through Jude, commanding us to "contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). False and heretical teaching was threatening the church and its grasp of gospel truth. Jude very well knew that God was in sovereign control, and indeed that God would in time directly deal with wicked teachers, consigning them to everlasting condemnation. Still Jude also urged his readers themselves to contend with the error of false teaching, not sitting back and expecting that God would simply take care of it Himself.

Paul wrote to Titus that overseers (pastors and elders) in the church are required to be especially adept at refuting those who oppose the truth of God (Titus 1:9). However this is not merely the assigned task of ordained men. All believers are commanded to engage in it as well. Addressing himself to all members of the congregation, Peter penned the following command: "sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to give an answer to anyone who asks from you a reason for the hope that is within you, yet with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15). It is God Himself, speaking through Peter's inspired words, who calls upon us as believers -- each and every one of us -- to be prepared to defend the faith in the face of challenges and questions which come from unbelievers -- any one of them.

The necessity of apologetics is not a divine necessity: God can surely do His work without us. The necessity of apologetics is a moral necessity: God has chosen to do His work through us and called us to it. Apologetics is the special talent of some believers, and the interested hobby of others. But it is the God-ordained responsibility of all believers.

What It Isn't

We should look at 1 Peter 3:15 again and notice a few things that it does not say.

(1) It does not say that believers are supposed to take the initiative and start arrogant arguments with unbelievers, telling them that we have all the answers. We do not have to go out looking for a fight. We certainly should not sport or encourage a "I'll prove it to you" spirit, an attitude which relishes refutation. The text indicates that we offer a reasoned defense in answer to those who ask for such from us, whether they do so as an opening challenge to the integrity of God's word or as the natural response to our evangelistic witness.

The text also indicates that the spirit in which we offer our apologetic answer is one of "gentleness and respect." It is not pugnacious and defensive. It is not a spirit of intellectual one-up-manship. The task of apologetics begins with humility. After all, the fear of the Lord is the starting point of all knowledge (Prov. 1:7). Moreover, apologetics is pursued in service to the Lord, and "the Lord's servant must not strive, but be gentle toward all, apt to teach" (2 Tim. 2:24). Apologetics is not a place for vain flexing of our intellectual muscles.

(2) Another thing that 1 Peter 3:15 does not say is that believers are responsible to persuade anybody who challenges or questions their faith. We can offer sound reasons to the unbeliever, but we cannot make him or her subjectively believe those reasons. We can refute the poor argumentation of the unbeliever, but still not persuade them. We can close the mouth of the critic, but only God can open the heart. It is not in our ability, and not our responsibility, to regenerate the dead heart and give sight to the blind eyes of unbelievers. That is God's gracious work.

It is God who must enlighten the eyes of one's understanding (Eph. 1:18). "The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot know them because they are Spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14). Until God in His sovereign grace changes the sinner from within, he will not see the kingdom of God or submit to the King. Jesus taught this to Nicodemus, reminding him that "the wind [same Greek word as "Spirit"] blows where it will... So is every one who is born of the Spirit" (John 3:8). Our task is to present a faithful and sound witness and defense. The task of persuasion is God's. That is why apologists should not evaluate their success or adjust their message on the basis of whether the unbeliever finally comes to agree with them or not.

(3) Yet another thing that 1 Peter 3:15 does not say is that defending the faith has a different ultimate authority than does the task of expounding the faith. It is a common mistake among evangelicals to imagine that the authority of God and His word is the basis for their theology and preaching, but the authority for defending this faith must be something other than God and His word -- or else we would be begging the question raised by unbelievers. Accordingly, believers will sometimes be misled into thinking that whatever they take as the ultimate standard in apologetical thinking must be neutral and agreed upon by believer and unbeliever alike; and from here they go on to make the second mistake of thinking that something like "reason" is such a commonly understood and accepted standard.

These ideas are quite obviously out of accord with Biblical teaching, however. Does apologetics have a different epistemological[2] authority than expounding theology? Our theology is founded upon the authority of Christ, speaking by His Spirit in the words of Scripture. 1 Peter 3:15 teaches us that the precondition of presenting a defense of the faith (apologetics) is also that we "sanctify [set apart] Christ as Lord in your hearts." It would be a mistake to imagine that Peter is speaking of the "heart" here as though it our center of emotions over against the mind with which we think. In Biblical terminology the "heart" is the location of our reasoning (Rom. 1:21), meditation (Ps. 19:14), understanding (Prov. 8:5), thinking (Deut. 7:17; 8:5) and believing (Rom. 10:10). It is just here -- in the center of our thinking and reasoning -- that Christ is to be consecrated as Lord, when we engage in apologetical discussion with inquiring unbelievers. Thus theology and apologetics have the same epistemological authority -- the same Lord over all.

Reason and Reasoning

Believers who aim to defend their faith make a serious mistake when they imagine, then, that something like "reason" should displace Christ as the ultimate authority (Lord) in their thinking and argumentation. They also fall into very sloppy and confused thinking due to misunderstanding over the word "reason."

Christians are often befuddled about "reason," not knowing whether it is something to embrace or to eschew. This is usually because they do not pinpoint the precise way in which the word is being used. It may very well be the most ambiguous and obscure word in the field of philosophy. On the one hand, reason can be thought of as a tool - man's intellectual or mental capacity. Taken in this sense, reason is a gift of God to man, indeed part of the divine image. When God bids His people "Come let us reason together" (Isa. 1:18), we see that we, like Him, are capable of rational thought and communication. God has given us our mental abilities to serve and glorify Him. It is part of the greatest commandment of the law that we should "love the Lord thy God... with all thy mind" (Matt. 22:37).

Reason Not Ultimate

On the other hand, reason can be thought of as an ultimate and independent authority or standard by which man judges all claims to truth, even God's. In this sense, reason is a law unto itself, as though man's mind were self-sufficient, not in need of divine revelation. This attitude commonly leads people to think that they are in a position to think independently, to govern their own lives, and to judge the credibility of God's Word based on their own insight and authority; more dramatically, this attitude deified Reason as the goddess of the French Revolution. "Professing themselves to he wise, they became fools," as Paul said (Romans 1:22). This view of reason does not recognize that God is the source and precondition of man's intellectual abilities -- that reason does not make sense apart from the perspective of God's revelation. It does not recognize the sovereign and transcendent[3] character of God's thought: "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are. . . My thoughts higher than your thoughts" (Isaiah 55:9).

Reason as God's Gift

Should Christians endorse the use of reason? Two equal but opposite mistakes are possible in answering that question. (1) Believers can recognize the appropriateness of using reason, taken as their intellectual faculty, but then slide into endorsing reason as intellectual autonomy. (2) Believers can recognize the inappropriateness of reason as intellectual autonomy, but then mistakenly think this entails rejecting reason as an intellectual faculty. The first group honors God's gift to man of reasoning ability, but dishonors God through its rationalism. The second group honors God's ultimate authority and the need for obedience in all aspects of man's life, but it dishonors God through anti-intellectual pietism.

Paul counterbalances both of these errors in Colossians 2. He writes that "all treasures of wisdom and knowledge are deposited in Christ" (v. 3). Accordingly we must "beware lest anyone rob you through philosophy, even vain deceit, which is after the tradition of men, after the elementary principles of the world, and not after Christ" (v. 8). This exhortation is not a diatribe against the use of reason or the study of philosophy.

Paul makes it clear that believers have the advantage of the best reasoning and philosophy because Christ is the source of all knowledge -- all knowledge, not simply religious matters or sentiment. Moreover, if there are many philosophies which are not "after Christ," there is also that philosophy which is. Anti- intellectualism throws the baby out with the bath. It destroys true wisdom in the name of resisting foolishness.

On the other hand, it is equally plain from Colossians 2 that Paul does not endorse reasoning and philosophy which refuse to honor the ultimate authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is in Christ that wisdom and knowledge must be found. Any alleged wisdom which follows the traditions of men and elementary principles of the world -- rather than Christ -- is to be rejected as dangerous and deceitful.

The Bible teaches us, therefore, that "reason" is not to be taken as some neutral authority in man's thinking. It is rather the intellectual capacity with which God created man, a tool to be used in serving and glorifying the ultimate authority of God Himself.

Sharpening the Tool

Reason properly understood (reasoning) is to be endorsed by believers in Christ. In particular it is to be employed in defending the Christian faith. This is one of the things which Peter communicates to us when he wrote that we should always be "ready to give a defense to anyone who asks from you a reason for the hope within you" (1 Peter 3:15). A word of explanation and defense is to be offered to those who challenge the truth of our Christian faith. We are not to obscure the glory and veracity of God by answering unbelievers with appeals to "blind faith" or thoughtless commitment. We are to "cast down reasonings and every high thing exalted against the knowledge of God" (2 Corinthians 10:5), realizing all along that we cannot do so unless we ourselves "bring every thought captive to the obedience of Christ."

In 1 Peter 3:15 Peter uses the expression "always ready." This is significant for those who wish to honor the Biblical necessity of engaging in apologetics. What the Lord asks of us is that we be prepared to offer an answer in defense of our faith, whenever anybody asks us for a reason. We are to be "ready" to do this -- indeed, "always ready." And that means that it is imperative that we reflect on the questions that unbelievers are likely to ask and challenges which are commonly laid down to Christianity. We should study and prepare to give reasons for our faith when the faithless ask.

Christians need to sharpen the tool of their reasoning ability so as to glorify God and vindicate the claims of the gospel. We should all give our best efforts in the service of our Savior, who termed Himself "the Truth" (John 14:6). Every believer wants to see the truth of Christ believed and honored by others. And that is why we, need to be "ready to reason" with unbelievers. This study and those which follow are intended to help us become better prepared for that necessary task.

[1] "Apologetics" is the term commonly applied to the defense of the Christian faith against the intellectual opposition and objections of unbelievers.

[2] "Epistemology" refers to one's theory of knowledge (its nature, sources, limits). When we ask "How do you know that to be true? (or how could you justify that claim?)," we are asking an epistemological question.

[3] Whatever originates beyond man's temporal experience or exceeds that finite experience is said to "transcend" man.

Directions for Hating Sin by Richard Baxter

Direct. I. Labour to know God, and to be affected with his attributes, and always to live as in his sight.—No man can know sin perfectly, because no man can know God perfectly. You can no further know what sin is than you know what God is, whom you sin against; for the formal malignity of sin is relative, as it is against the will and attributes of God. The godly have some knowledge of the malignity of sin, because they have some knowledge of God that is wronged by it. The wicked have no practical, prevalent knowledge of the malignity of sin, because they have no such knowledge of God. They that fear God will fear sinning; they that in their hearts are bold irreverently with God, will, in heart and life, be bold with sin: the atheist, who thinks there is no God thinks there is no sin against him. Nothing in world will tell us so plainly and powerfully of the evil of sin, as the knowledge of the greatness, wisdom goodness, holiness, authority, justice, truth, &c. of God. The sense of his presence, therefore, will revive our sense of sin's malignity.

Direct. II. Consider well of the office, the bloodshed, and the holy life of Christ.—His office is to expiate sin, and to destroy it. His blood was shed for it: his life condemned it. Love Christ, and you will hate that which caused his death. Love him, and you will love to be made like him, and hate that which is so contrary to Christ. These two great lights will show the odiousness of darkness.

Direct. III. Think well both how holy the office and work of the Holy Ghost is, and how great a mercy it is to us.—Shall God himself, the heavenly light, come down into a sinful heart, to illuminate and purify it? And yet shall I keep my darkness and defilement, in opposition to such wonderful mercy? Though all sin against the Holy Ghost be not the unpardonable blasphemy, yet all is aggravated hereby.

Direct. IV. Know and consider the wonderful love and mercy of God, and think what he has done for you; and you will hate sin, and be ashamed of it. It is an aggravation which makes sin odious even to common reason and ingenuity, that we should offend a God of infinite goodness, who has filled up our lives with mercy. It will grieve you if you have wronged an extraordinary friend: his love and kindness will come into your thoughts, and make you angry with your own unkindness. Here look over the catalogue of God's mercies to you, for soul and body. And here observe that Satan, in hiding the love of God from you, and tempting you under the pretence of humility to deny his greatest, special mercy, seeks to destroy your repentance and humiliation, also, by hiding the greatest aggravation of your sin.

Direct. V. Think what the soul of man is made for, and should be used to, even to love, obey, and glorify our Maker; and then you will see what sin is, which disables and perverts it.—How excellent, and high, and holy a work are we created for and called to! And should we defile the temple of God? And serve the devil in filthiness and folly, when we should receive, and serve, and magnify our Creator?

Direct. VI. Think well what pure and sweet delights a holy soul may enjoy from God, in his holy service; and then you will see what sin is, which robs him of these delights, and prefers fleshly lusts before them.—O how happily might we perform every duty, and how fruitfully might we serve our Lord, and what delight should we find in his love and acceptation, and the foresight of everlasting blessedness, if it were not for sin; which brings down the soul from the doors of heaven, to wallow with swine in a beloved dunghill!

Direct. VII. Bethink you what a life it is which you must live for ever, if you live in heaven; and what a life the holy ones there now live; and then think whether sin, which is so contrary to it, be not a vile and hateful thing.—Either you would live in heaven, or not. If not, you are not those I speak to. If you would, you know that there is no sinning; no worldly mind, no pride, no passion, no fleshly lust or pleasures there. Oh, did you but see and hear one hour, how those blessed spirits are taken up in loving and magnifying the glorious God in purity and holiness, and how far they are from sin, it would make you loathe sin ever after, and look on sinners as on men in bedlam wallowing naked in their dung. Especially, to think that you hope yourselves to live for ever like those holy spirits; and therefore sin does ill beseem you.

Direct. VIII. Look but to the state and torment of the damned, and think well of the difference betwixt angels and devils, and you may know what sin is.—Angels are pure; devils are polluted: holiness and sin do make the difference. Sin dwells in hell, and holiness in heaven. Remember that every temptation is from the devil, to make you like himself; as every holy motion is from Christ, to mike you like himself. Remember when you sin, that you are learning and imitating of the devil, and are so far like him, John 8:44. And the end of all is, that you may feel his pains. If hell-fire be not good, then sin is not good.

Direct. IX. Look always on sin as one that is ready to die, and consider how all men judge of it at the last.—What do men in heaven say of it? And what do men in hell say of it? And what do men at death say of it? And what do converted souls, or awakened consciences, say of it? Is it then followed with delight and fearlessness as it is now? Is it then applauded? Will any of them speak well of it? Nay, all the world speaks evil of sin in the general now, even when they love and commit the several acts. Will you sin when you are dying?

Direct. X. Look always on sin and judgment together.—Remember that you must answer for it before God, and angels, and all the world; and you will the better know it.

Direct. XI. Look now but upon sickness, poverty, shame, despair, death, and rottenness in the grave, and it may a little help you to know what sin is. These are things within your sight or feeling; you need not faith to tell you of them. And by such effects you might have some little knowledge of the cause.

Direct. XII. Look but upon some eminent, holy persons upon earth, and upon the mad, profane, malignant world; and the difference may tell you in part what sin is.—Is there not an amiableness in a holy, blameless person, that lives in love to God and man, and in the joyful hopes of life eternal? Is not a beastly drunkard or whoremonger, and a raging swearer, and a malicious persecutor, a very deformed, loathsome creature? Is not the mad, confused, ignorant, ungodly state of the world a very pitiful sight? What then is the sin that all this consists in?

Though the principal part of the cure is in turning the will to the hatred of sin, and is done by this discovery of its malignity; yet I shall add a few more directions for the executive part, supposing that what is said already has had its effect.

Direct. I. When you have found out your disease and danger, give up yourselves to Christ as the Saviour and Physician of souls, and to the Holy Ghost as your Sanctifier, remembering that he is sufficient and willing to do the work which he has undertaken.—It is not you that are to be saviours and sanctifiers of yourselves (unless as you work under Christ). But he that has undertaken it, takes it for his glory to perform it.

Direct. II. Yet must you be willing and obedient in applying the remedies prescribed you by Christ, and observing his directions in order to your cure. And you must not be tender, and coy, and fine, and say his is too bitter, and that is too sharp; but trust his love, and skill, and care, and take it as he prescribes it, or gives it you, without any more ado. Say not, It is grievous, and I cannot take it: for he commands you nothing but what is safe, and wholesome, and necessary, and if you cannot take it, must try whether you can bear your sickness, and death, and the fire of hell! Are humiliation, confession, restitution, mortification, and holy diligence worse than hell?

Direct. III. See that you take not part with sin, and wrangle not, or strive not against your Physician, or any that would do you good.—Excusing sin, and heading for and extenuating it, and striving against the Spirit and conscience, and wrangling against ministers and godly friends, and hating reproof, are not the means to be cured and sanctified.

Direct. IV. See that malignity in every one of your particular sins, which you can see and say is in sin in general.—It is a gross deceit of yourselves, if you will speak a great deal of the evil of sin, and see none of this malignity in your pride, and your worldliness, and your passion and peevishness, and our malice and uncharitableness, and your lying, backbiting, slandering, or sinning against conscience for worldly commodity or safety. What self-contradiction is it for a man in prayer to aggravate sin, and when he is reproved for it, to justify or excuse it! This is like him that will speak against treason, and the enemies of the king, but because the traitors are his friends and kindred, will protect or hide them, and take their parts.

Direct. V. Keep as far as you can from those temptations which feed and strengthen the, sins which you would overcome.—Lay siege to your sins, and starve them out, by keeping away the food and fuel which is their maintenance and life.

Direct. VI. Live in the exercise of those graces and duties which are contrary to the sins which you are most in danger of.—For grace and duty are contrary to sin, and kill it, and cure us of it, as the fire cures us of cold, or health of sickness.

Direct. VII. Hearken not to weakening unbelief and distrust, and cast not away the comforts of God, which are your cordials and strength.—It is not a frightful, dejected, despairing frame of mind, that is fittest to resist sin; but it is the encouraging sense of the love of God, and thankful sense of grace received (with a cautious fear).

Direct. VIII. Be always suspicious of carnal self-love, and watch against it.—For that is the burrow or fortress of sin, and the common patron of it; ready to draw you to it, and ready to justify it. We are very prone to be partial in our own cause; as the case of Judah with Tamar, and David when Nathan reproved him in a parable, show. our own passions, our own pride, our own censures, or backbitings, or injurious dealings, our own neglects of duty, seem small, excusable, if not justifiable things to us; whereas we could easily see the faultiness of all these in another, especially in an enemy: when yet we should be best acquainted with ourselves, and we should most love ourselves, and therefore hate our own sins most.

Direct. IX. Bestow your first and chiefest labour to kill sin at the root; to cleanse the heart, which is the fountain; for out of the heart come the evils of the life.—Know which are the master-roots; and bend your greatest care and industry to mortify those: and they are especially these that follow; 1. Ignorance. 2. Unbelief. 3. Inconsiderateness. 4. Selfishness and pride. 5. Fleshliness, in pleasing a brutish appetite, lust, or fantasy. 6. Senseless hard-heartedness and sleepiness in sin.

Direct. X. Account the world and all its pleasures, wealth, and honours, no better than indeed they are, and then Satan will find no bait to catch you. Esteem all as dung with Paul, Phil. 3:8; and no man will sin and sell his soul, for that which he accounts but as dung.

Direct. XI. Keep up above in a heavenly conversation, and then your souls will be always in the light, and as in the sight of God, and taken up with those businesses and delights which put them out of relish with the baits of sin.

Direct. XII. Let christian watchfulness be your daily work; and cherish a preserving, though not a distracting and discouraging fear.

Direct. XIII. Take heed of the first approaches and beginnings of sin. Oh how great a matter does a little of this fire kindle! And if you fall, rise quickly by sound repentance, whatever it may cost you.

Direct. XIV. Make God's word your only rule and labour diligently to understand it.

Direct. XV. And in doubtful cases, do not easily depart from the unanimous judgment of the generality of the most wise and godly of all ages.

Direct. XVI. In doubtful cases be not passionate or rash, but proceed deliberately, and prove things well, before you fasten on them.

Direct. XVII. Be acquainted with your bodily temperature, and what sin it most inclines you to, and what sin also your calling or living situation leave you most open to, that there your watch may be the stricter.

Direct. XVIII. Keep in a life of holy order, such as God has appointed you to walk in. For there is no preservation for stragglers that keep not rank and file, but forsake the order which God commands them.—And this order lies principally in these points: 1. That you keep in union with the universal church. Separate not from Christ's body upon any pretence whatever. With the church as regenerate, hold spiritual communion, in faith, love, and holiness with the church as congregate and visible, hold outward communion, in profession and worship. 2. If you are not teachers, live under your particular, faithful pastors, as obedient disciples of Christ. 3. Let the most godly, if possible, be your familiars. 4. Be laborious in an outward calling.

Direct. XIX. Turn all God's providences, whether of prosperity or adversity, against your sins.—If he gives you health and wealth, remember he thereby obliges you to obedience, and calls for special service from you. If he afflict you, remember that it is sin that he is offended at, and searches after; and therefore take it as his medicine, and see that you hinder not, but help on its work, that it may purge away your sin.

Direct. XX. Wait patiently on Christ till he has finished the cure, which will not be till this trying life be finished.—Persevere in attendance on his Spirit and means; for he will come in season, and will not tarry. "Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the Lord: his going forth is prepared as the morning, and he shall come unto us as the rain: as the latter and former rain upon the earth," Hos. 6:3. Though you have oft said, "There is no healing," Jer. 14:19; "He will heal your backslidings, and love you freely," Hos. 14:4. "Unto you that fear his name, shall the Sun of righteousness arise, with healing in his wings," Mal. 4:2: " and blessed are all they that wait for him," Isa. 30:18.

Thus I have given such directions as may help for humiliation under sin, or hatred of it, and deliverance from it.

It takes a long and painful process to purge it out! by James Smith

"I have refined you, but not as silver is refined. Rather, I have refined you in the furnace of suffering!" Isaiah 48:10

The love of Jesus will not preserve His people from trials--but rather, assures them of trials! All whom He loves--He chastens! He has a furnace to purge our dross, and refine our souls. His Word and the Spirit reveal to us our defilement and impurity--and His grace and providence co-operate to remove them. "I am the Lord God, who sanctifies you."

It is divine love which . . .
prepares the furnace,
kindles the flame,
brings the Christian into it,
superintends the whole process, and
brings him out as gold, seven times purified!

"From all your filthiness and from all your idols, I will cleanse you!" He cleanses them in the laver of the Word by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit. But He also cleanses them by a variety of afflictive dispensations, through which He causes them to pass.

Our sin calls for trials--His love sends them!

Our nature repines at trials--but grace submits to them!

Our corruption is enraged at trials--but the Spirit sanctifies them to our good, and our Savior's glory.

He makes His people choice ones--in the "furnace of affliction!" He says, "I will put you into the fire--and will purely purge away your dross."

Believer, never repine at your trials, nor be over-anxious for their removal. They are appointed by Jesus as your Purifier--and are choice blessings in disguise!

Seek their sanctification,
wrestle with God that you may see His love in every stroke, and
look to Jesus that you may enjoy His presence when passing through the flame!

Nothing can hurt you--while Jesus is near you; and He is never nearer to you--than when you are in the furnace! For He sits right there as the Refiner . . .
watching the process,
regulating the heat, and
waiting to effect a gracious deliverance--when the ends of His love are answered.

He is only preparing you for fresh manifestations of His glory--and fitting you for larger communications of His love.

In the furnace, you will lose nothing that is worth keeping--but you will obtain what is truly valuable!

The flesh and the soul need constant cleansings--for corruption is so deeply rooted in our nature, that it takes a long and painful process to purge it out! But in reference to the furnace, your Lord says, "The Lord did this to purge Israel's wickedness, to take away all her sin!"

A Call To Discernment: Silencing False Teachers — J.C. Ryle

“Men that had understanding of the times” — 1 Chronicles 12:32

J.C. Ryle,

The times require at our hands distinct and decided views of Christian doctrine. I cannot withhold my conviction that the professing church is as much damaged by laxity and indistinctness about matters of doctrine within, as it is by skeptics and unbelievers without. Myriads of professing Christians nowadays seem utterly unable to distinguish things that differ. Like people afflicted with color blindness, they are incapable of discerning what is true and what is false, what is sound and what is unsound. If a preacher of religion is only clever and eloquent and earnest, they appear to think he is all right, however strange and heterogeneous his sermons may be. They are destitute of spiritual sense, apparently, and cannot detect error. Popery or Protestantism, an atonement or no atonement, a personal Holy Spirit or no Holy Spirit, future punishment or no future punishment, “high” church or “low” church or “broad” church, Trinitarianism, Arianism, or Unitarianism, nothing comes amiss to them: they can swallow all, if they cannot digest it! Carried away by a fancied liberality and charity, they seem to think everybody is right and nobody is wrong, every clergyman is sound and none are unsound, everybody is going to be saved and nobody is going to be lost. Their religion is made up of negatives; and the only positive thing about them is, that they dislike distinctness, and think all extreme and decided and positive views are very naughty and very wrong!

These people live in a kind of mist or fog. They see nothing clearly, and do not know what they believe. They have not made up their minds about any great point in the gospel, and seem content to be honorary members of all schools of thought. For their lives they could not tell you what they think is truth about justification or regeneration or sanctification or the Lord’s Supper or baptism or faith or conversion or inspiration or the future state. They are eaten up with a morbid dread of controversy and an ignorant dislike of “party spirit,” and yet they really cannot define what they mean by these phrases. The only point you can make out is that they admire earnestness and cleverness and charity, and cannot believe that any clever, earnest, charitable man can ever be in the wrong! And so they live on undecided; and too often undecided they drift down to the grave, without comfort in their religion and, I am afraid, often without hope…..For your own soul’s sake dare to make up your mind what you believe, and dare to have positive distinct views of truth and error. Never, never be afraid to hold decided doctrinal opinions; and let no fear of man and no morbid dread of being thought party–spirited, narrow or controversial, make you rest contented with a bloodless, boneless, tasteless, colorless, lukewarm, undogmatic Christianity.

Mark what I say. If you want to do good in these times, you must throw aside indecision, and take up a distinct, sharply cut, doctrinal religion. If you believe little, those to whom you try to do good will believe nothing. (excerpted from: Needs of the Times, Holiness, J.C. Ryle)