Ruth and the Canaanite Woman of Matthew 15

As I've been studying the glorious book of Ruth, I keep having my mind return to the account of the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:21-28. This first occurred when I read Ruth 2:10, where Ruth reveals her humble awareness of her outsider status: "Then she fell on her face, bowing to the ground, and said to him, 'Why have I found favor in your eyes, that you should take notice of me, since I am a foreigner?'" She knew that she had no right to Boaz's kindness, that she was not a rightful member of the covenant community. She could very well have described herself as a dog, like the account in Matthew: "And he answered, 'It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.' She said, "Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table'" (Matt. 15:26-27). Ruth knew her lowly estate, but she also knew the kindness of Boaz.

As a side note, I listened to a sermon by John Piper on Ruth 2 after I made this connection to Matthew 15 in my mind, and he made the same connection. It is always very affirming to hear or read a respected Bible teacher have the same thought that I had independently. Makes me feel that I'm not grasping at straws, interpretationally. That's cool. But I digress.

Anyway, now I've been in Ruth chapter 3, and again my mind was brought back to the Matthew 15 woman. This time it is in Ruth 3:12-13, where Boaz reveals that there is a nearer kinsman who has "first dibs" on Ruth. Now of course this comparison is not so identical, because with Ruth she has two possible Redeemers while in Matthew there is only one Redeemer with two groups of people needing redemption. But I still see similarity. The Canaanite woman knew that she had no claim on Jesus, especially not more claim than the Jews did, yet she was willing to wait and take what she could from Him. Likewise, Ruth has no direct claim on Boaz, but she is willing to wait and take what he will provide. And he is a faithful provider, promising that she will be taken care of either way. Whether he marries her, or the other kinsman marries her, he makes sure that she will be provided for. Just so, Jesus provided for the outsider with no claim on Him (Matt. 15:28).

Oh what a blessed message this is for miserable sinners such as us, who have no claim at all upon God's grace, but are nevertheless promised His grace. May we love Him and seek Him so as to be under that promise, never presuming that we deserve it, but always sure that He will give it.

John Piper: Fifteen Pro-Life Truths to Speak

I am just copy-and-pasting this from Desiring God. But it is real good and needs to be copy-and-pasted all over the place.

Fifteen Pro-Life Truths to Speak
Download:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By John Piper January 24, 2003


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You will know the truth and the truth will set you free." - Jesus Christ

1. Existing fetal homicide laws make a man guilty of manslaughter if he kills the baby in a mother's womb (except in the case of abortion).

2. Fetal surgery is performed on babies in the womb to save them while another child the same age is being legally destroyed.

3. Babies can sometimes survive on their own at 23 or 24 weeks, but abortion is legal beyond this limit.

4. Living on its own is not the criterion of human personhood, as we know from the use of respirators and dialysis.

5. Size is irrelevant to human personhood, as we know from the difference between a one-week-old and a six-year-old.

6. Developed reasoning powers are not the criterion of personhood, as we know from the capacities of three-month-old babies.

7. Infants in the womb are human beings scientifically by virtue of their genetic make up.

8. Ultrasound has given a stunning window on the womb that shows the unborn at eight weeks sucking his thumb, recoiling from pricking, responding to sound. All the organs are present, the brain is functioning, the heart is pumping, the liver is making blood cells, the kidneys are cleaning fluids, and there is a fingerprint. Virtually all abortions happen later than this date.

9. Justice dictates that when two legitimate rights conflict, the limitation of rights that does the least harm is the most just. Bearing a child for adoption does less harm than killing him.

10. Justice dictates that when either of two people must be inconvenienced or hurt to alleviate their united predicament, the one who bore the greater responsibility for the predicament should bear more of the inconvenience or hurt to alleviate it.

11. Justice dictates that a person may not coerce harm on another person by threatening voluntary harm on themselves.

12. The outcast and the disadvantaged and exploited are to be cared for in a special way, especially those with no voice of their own.

13. What is happening in the womb is the unique person-nurturing work of God, who alone has the right to give and take life.

14. There are countless clinics that offer life and hope to both mother and child (and father and parents), with care of every kind lovingly provided by people who will meet every need they can.

15.Jesus Christ can forgive all sins, and will give all who trusts him the help they need to do everything that life requires.

Minnesota Abortion Clinics

Here are the places where most abortions are done in the Minnesota. Ask God how the gospel of Christ might be most fruitfully shared with those who work here, with a view to saving life now and for eternity. The one nearest the church (Meadowbrook) advertises on their website that they do abortions up to 21.6 weeks.

Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, Highland Park Clinic
1965 Ford Parkway, St. Paul, MN 55116; (651) 698-2406

Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, Minneapolis Clinic
1200 Lagoon Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55408, (612) 823-6300

Meadowbrook Women's Clinic, P.A.
825 South 8th Street, Suite 1018, Minneapolis, MN 55404, (612) 376-7708

The Robbinsdale Clinic
3819 West Broadway, Minneapolis, MN 55422; (763) 533-2534

Midwest Health Center for Women
33 South Fifth Street, Fourth Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55402; (612) 332-2311


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© Desiring God

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be approved by Desiring God.

Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org

Let's Discuss: Ruth

I have started a little personal in-depth study of the book of Ruth so I can create great notes to put into my Stephen Thomas study Bible (aka, ESV journaling Bible). But before I commit permanent ink to paper, I would like to work out what I actually believe about some things. So I have a few questions and I would like some discussion from anybody on what they think. The issues I am about to put forth are ones in which the sources I've been consulting are split just about down the middle on, opinion-wise. No majority to go with. Those resources are the Reformation Study Bible, the John MacArthur Study Bible, John Gill's commentary on Ruth, Iain Duguid's commentary, and Sinclair Ferguson's exposition called Faithful God. I've also listened (or am listening) to a sermon on Ruth by John MacArthur and a 4 sermon series by John Piper. Anyway, on to the questions.

1. In the opening verses of Ruth, when it tells of Elimelech and his family leaving famine-stricken Israel to sojourn awhile in Moab...was this sinful? Should they have stayed in the land of promise that God had given them instead of going to a country that had a long history of animosity towards God's people? Or was it okay since, after all, there was a famine in Israel?

2. And what about Naomi's strong urgings to Orpah and Ruth to stay in Moab? Although humanly speaking she gave very logical and sensible advice, she was in effect discouraging their conversion to the true God. Was this sinfulness on Naomi's part, perhaps springing from her bitterness, or was it more along the lines of Jesus' admonitions to count the cost before committing to follow Him? So was Naomi sinning in this case?

That is all my questions for now. I will have more later, I am sure. I sure would appreciate any input any of you may have. Let's discuss!

David Allen Answers Questions

Today I got to go listen to David Allen field some questions from students over at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is the fellow who falsely labels Dr. James White a hyper-Calvinist, and that accusation, along with other statements he made at the recent John 3:16 Conference, have caused all sorts of questions to be raised. He was gracious enough to allow studens to ask him those questions and he attempted to answer them. He was very gracious, humble, and charitable. I was trying to take notes, and sometimes when a person was asking a question, I could not figure out what the question was, because they were so convoluted with the "back story" to their questions. So I give him credit for trying to answer questions in which it was hard to figure out what the question actually was. I think only one questioner was not a Calvinist, so it was mostly Reformed folk who showed up. But, despite his charity, I must say that in the end, he gave a lot of double talk. Most of the questions had to do with his rather uncharitable past comments about Calvinists, and so the students were wondering how he reconciled that with his otherwise "can't we all just get along" attitude. And I could never really figure out his answers, because they came from both sides of his mouth. A step towards 5-point Calvinism is a step away from the gospel, but there is room for them in the SBC. How does that work out? Well...I couldn't tell from his answers.

Other thoughts, collected from my notes.

He told the story of town in which there was a non-Calvinist SBC church in the same area as two Calvinist SBC churches, and that the Calvinists were telling people at the first church that they should leave that church because it wasn't preaching the full gospel. Dr. Allen says this is wrong. Or, as I interpreted it, it is wrong to warn people to flee from a burning building. A student asked if such a nasty tactic by those Calvinists was any different than Dr. Allen's saying that a step toward 5-point Calvinism is a step away from the gospel. His answer is that it's not the same. We can all claim that another view-point is wrong (as Dr. Allen is doing), but it is wrong to tell people to leave the churches where that wrong view-point is being preached. Or, again in my interpretation, it is okay to tell people that their building is on fire, but it is wrong to warn them to escape from it. All this just amounts to double-talk to me.

Dr. Allen, while deploring the fact that many of his fellow non-Calvinists falsely equate 5-point Calvinism with hyper-Calvinism (they are not the same, he rightly says), he does point out that one cannot become a hyper-Calvinist without first being a 5-pointer. The one thing that links 5-pointers with hypers is the belief in limited atonement. And history has shown that hypers started out as regular 5-pointers. So a student said that hey, this can go the other way, too. You can't be a Univeralist without first being a non-Calvinist. The one thing that links regular non-Calvinists with Universalists is the belief in unlimited atonement. History has shown that all Universalists started out as non-Calvinists, and history has shown that there have been a lot more Universalists than hyper-Calvinists. So that nullifies Dr. Allen's silly point. No, Dr. Allen says, it doesn't because that's not really the same thing or something...I don't know...blah blah blah double talk. It's okay for him to make certain types of arguments, but not for Calvinists to do the same.

One more thing. You may have noticed that I have kept saying "non-Calvinist" rather than "Arminian". That is because David Allen says that he is not an Arminian. But he's not a Calvinist either. Fine. Though I wonder how it is that a "4-point Calvinist" is a "classical/moderate Calvinist" while a 4-point Arminian is not an Arminian at all. Just wondering.

Unfortunately, there was no real biblical discussion because most of the questions were of a "don't you think your comments are mean?" nature. So not really questions of biblical interpretation, you see.

But then again, if you have listened to David Allen's presentation at the John 3:16 conference, then you know there wasn't a lot of biblical discussion there, either.

Sola Conference and Other Random Ramblings

Greetings, young and old. I am excited to learn that there is an annual conference held in the DFW area that talks about the Reformation "solas", and that the next one (in February 2009) will be featuring Dr. Stephen Lawson and Dr. James White. And it's free! So register now and be prepared to hear good stuff! I have met and listened to both men speak before (and I have their autographs of course), and I look forward to seeing them again. Dr. Lawson is a great preacher in the vein of John MacArthur, and Dr. White is probably the greatest theologian that Reformed Baptists have. Read all about it at solaconference.org

The wife and I seem to be getting sick. Sinus pressure and pain, sore throat, drainage, that sort of thing. And just in time for the busiest week ever for retail! Oh, the pain, the pain.

I really want a Gibson Les Paul robot guitar (the wine red one) and a Digitech RP500. Nay, I need them. For the Lord's work.

Autograph for the Day - John Piper

If you have read the last couple of posts, then you will see how today's entry needs no explanation. By the way, the book that was signed, Spectacular Sins, is a great book and you all should read it.

Back from Desiring God

Well, the Desiring God conference (see last blog post) went great. It was a real blessing. You know how lots of times most people refer to their church service schedule as "worship, and then the sermon", as if worship only consisted in singing songs and not in hearing the living and active Word of God preached? Well, as you can tell from the way I worded that last sentence, I hate that false dichotomy. It is all worship. There is worship in the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, and then there is the worship of hearing the preaching of God's Word. Anyway, I say all of this because listening to John Piper's sermons this weekend in Austin was a very worshipful experience. As he talked about Job's suffering and God's sovereignty over all things, there were so many glorious truths brought out that made my soul shout within me "Thank you, Lord! Thank you for your mercy! Thank you for being so valuable! Thank you for your wisdom!"

All of the sessions from the conference are already available at DesiringGod.org in written, audio, and video formats. Check them out! It is all very encouraging to the soul.

Getting Ready for Desiring God

Well, I'm excited as all get out because soon and very soon I will be leaving for Austin to go the the regional Desiring God conference. John Piper will be speaking on "Job: When the Righteous Suffer", which is a topic very near and dear to my heart. When it comes to Christians suffering from afflictions and depression and so forth, John Piper is the best at shepherding hearts. Other good conservative Christians either never address the topic in too much depth, or they generally chalk it up to faithlessness or unbelief. But not Piper. He fully recognizes the reality of the suffering of the righteous. He can reprove and rebuke when necessary, but he also knows that it is not always necessary. And the neat thing is that John Piper also seems to be the most joyous person there is! He is so joyful and has marked his ministry on joy, yet he also understands suffering so well. I am very excited about this conference.

I do pray, as we prepare to leave, that God will keep my focus on Him as my joy and as the only focus of my worship, and that I am not a man-worshipper. I am very excited about seeing John Piper in person, in a celebrity sort of way. I do not think that in itself there is anything wrong with that. But it can be very easy to focus my excitement on Piper himself, and not on the word of God that Piper will be speaking. Keep my heart pure, Lord.

Cigar Review: CAO America: Potomac

I just had a cigar so good that I had to write about it. I used to be a regular cigar smoker but that sort of fell by the wayside. I have been trying to get back into the godly habit by having a cigar every month or so. And I just had a great one. It is a new cigar from CAO called America. The particular one I got was the Potomac, their name for the America that is 5 x 56 in size.

The look of this cigar is what made me want it. It is really neat looking. It is made with two different colored wrappers. The main one is a dark brown, but then there is a layering of a light brown that spirals around it. Just really neat. Just see the attached picture.




Now, the look alone wasn't the determining factor. If it had been a neat looking Helix, for example (which tastes terrible), I wouldn't have purchased it. But I like CAO and have never had a bad CAO cigar. But the neat look combined with the trustworthy name cinched the deal for me. And the price wasn't bad at all. I don't remember how much I paid, but I am sure it was less than $7. Maybe around $6. CAO has always been good on price. Other brands that taste as good are often much more expensive.

The CAO website describes this cigar as full-bodied. I've never been good at determining that sort of thing myself, because it is a rather subjective determination, but I will go with that. It was full-bodied (certainly full of flavor!) but it didn't make me sick to my stomach, as full-bodied cigars often do, especially if I haven't smoked any cigars in a while, which is the case now. But the flavor! Oh wow! It was very cedary and almost sweet. In fact, when the wind would blow the smoke back in my face, I thought it smelled like Drew Estate's Kahlua cigars. There was no harshness or bitterness to it at all. You know how good smelling things often smell better than they taste? For instance, I put sugar in my coffee to make it taste the way it smells. Candles taste terrible. And sometimes cigars just don't taste as great as they smell. But this tasted great in every way. Not a negative drop of smoke touched my tongue. And if you are patient and skinny-fingered enough to let it burn to the last half-inch, then you get the best taste. Pure, straight-on flavor. My my my.

I recommend that you buy yourselves a box of these cigars, invite me over and give me some, and we can smoke and talk theology. That is, after, what Heaven will be like.

Thank you.

Where Have I Been?

I've been in internet limbo. Our apartment was robbed back at the beginning of June, and our computer was one of the things taken. But today I got it back, praise the Lord! So I'm back online. Yay.

Say, for you techie readers out there...Apparently the thief deleted all of my documents and pictures from my computer. I know that unless new stuff hasn't already been saved onto wherever those things were saved then they are still there. I have seen some programs online that allow you to recover those things, but they cost money and the free demos only allow you to restore files so small as to be useless demos. Do any of you know how I can restore anything that may still remain for free?

I will say that none of my music was erased and I am very glad for that because there was a lot of money and time put into that.

Win a Shopping Spree!

Autograph for the Day - Fred Malone

I met Fred Malone at one of the Southwest Founders Conferences. He was very nice and nicely autographed my copy of his excellent book on baptism. Paedobaptists hate this book and spew forth much vitriol against it without ever actually tackling the arguments. I think it's out of print now, but buy it if you can. You can't have mine, though.

Autograph for the Day - Ken Gentry

Nothing fancy about this. I ordered the excellent book God Gave Wine by Ken Gentry from his website so he signed it. Nothing personal. Good book, though.

Autograph for the Day - John MacArthur

I recently got to see John MacArthur preach here in the Arlington area. His sermons was a condensed version of his "Tale of Two Sons" sermon series, the book of which he was promoting. It was awesome. This man is a Preacher. My wife said it was the best sermon she'd heard in a long time. Anyway, the esteemed Dr. MacArthur signed my John MacArthur study Bible (in a way that makes it seem not like a blasphemous autograph in a Bible). Take a look!

Review of In Christ Alone: Living the Gospel Centered Life by Sinclair B. Ferguson

In Christ Alone: Living the Gospel Centered Life by Sinclair B. Ferguson, published by Reformation Trust (Lake Mary, FL: 2007), is a collection of articles originally published in Table talk and Eternity Magazine. The central theme of these articles is, obviously, our Lord Jesus Christ. I could perhaps title this review as Meeting Christ…Again, because this book introduces us to Jesus all over again. The chapters are short, just about four pages each, and are rather introductory level, but they tell us words about Christ that we need to be reminded of over and over again, no matter how far along we are in our Christian development. The chapters are arranged in six sections, each dealing with a different aspect of Christology.

The first section, titled “The Word Became Flesh” deals with the questions of the deity and humanity of Christ, and of His role as servant and conqueror. Due to the shortness of the chapters, you will not find an exhaustive apologetic defending the deity of Christ, or like issues, but you will be provided with many Scripture references to support the orthodox position, which Ferguson takes. Ferguson briefly answers the question of why Jesus had to be a man. Short as the answer is, it is fully Scriptural and satisfying. He does not engage in philosophical speculation but always refers the reader back to the Scriptures. This section serves as an excellent Biblical introduction of just who Jesus really is.

Part two, “The Heart of the Matter” goes from telling us Who Christ is in an introductory manner to telling us what He has done. An overview of the book of Romans explains reconciliation and justification in very clear, well-defined terms, showing how all of it is through Christ alone. Ferguson walks us through Hebrews, pointing out its Christ-glorifying messages on how Jesus is central in the history of redemption. Exposition is given on Jesus’ roles as High Priest and King.

“The Spirit of Christ,“ the third section, moves to a discussion of the Holy Spirit, but in keeping with the Christological focus of the book, ties the Spirit to Christ. Dr. Ferguson explains about the Holy Spirit’s relation to Christ and how the Spirit is given from Christ. He also tells us why knowing about such things matters. He says, “it implies that Jesus bore the Spirit throughout His life in order to give us the same Spirit He bore. The Spirit He gives to us is the very same Spirit who accompanied and sustained our Lord Jesus throughout the whole of His ministry” (p. 78). In this section, we learn about revival and spiritual gifts, all the while keeping the focus on Jesus.

In part four, we are shown “The Privileges of Grace”. We learn of our union with Christ, and of the oft-neglected but very sweet doctrine of our adoptions as sons of God and co-heirs with Christ. We are pointed to Christ’s words on the sovereign and monergistic work of God in regenerating our hearts. Ferguson teaches us of Jesus’ fulfillment and perfection of all the Old Testament types and shadows. He instructs us on the nature and work of faith, and finally, of our total assurance which can only be gained by trusting in Christ alone.

Part five, “A Life of Wisdom,” begins to look more at our practice as Christians. Part of Biblical wisdom is to “be what we are”, that is, to live according to our professions and to be what God has turned us into. Ferguson shows us from the Bible how we are to live, to be discerning, and he tells us about our liberty in Christ, all of which are very practical issues. This section ends with an article on contentment, which is where wisdom leads us.

Finally, in section six, “Faithful to the End”, Ferguson continues with more practical articles on our lives with Christ. I hate to use the word “practical” because all of the Bible is practical. But I use it in the technical sense of “pertaining to our actual practice”. I am digressing from the summary a little bit to ride my own hobby-horse here, but I really, really refuse to say that any part of the Bible is not “relevant”. I hate that word. And I’m sure Dr. Ferguson does as well, because he shows how doctrine is important to all of life. I don’t know if that was his intention in what I’m referring to, but it came through nonetheless. After speaking of Satan’s tendency to whisper to us that God doesn’t really love us after all, he writes, “What is our defense? Here is Paul’s: ‘God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us’ (Rom. 5:8). Let the cross silence the Devil’s slanders and convince you of the wonder of God’s love” (p. 199). The cross is so important for every reason. We must not think that the cross is just an elementary level topic and that we move on from there to bigger and better doctrines like how to get healthy and wealthy. We must always come back to the cross. Elsewhere in this section, Ferguson writes, “Only an understanding of how the gospel method works can provide an adequate foundation and pattern for dealing with sin” (p. 218), and “when we understand the ’glorious exchange’ principle of the gospel of grace, then we begin to make some real advances in holiness” (p. 221). So we see that all doctrine is practical. And thus ends my digression. Back to the book (though my digression is a logical conclusion after reading this excellent work, so I wasn’t straying too off-topic). Ferguson writes of the place of suffering for Christ, of the need for leaders to first be servants, and the nature of temptation. In a chapter on apostasy (specifically dealing with the apostasy passages in the book of Hebrews) Ferguson miraculously manages to say in just a couple pages what it takes most people to say in whole volumes. Here is a writer who knows how to choose his words carefully. There are no wasted phrases here; all is of benefit to the reader.

The book concludes with Sinclair Ferguson’s account of a deceased friend of his who may or may not have inspired the title of this book with his life, which was lived in Christ alone. Thus Ferguson ends this excellent book with an encouragement to live our lives in Christ alone, in light of all that has been said.

For students of the Reformation, the title of this book is immediately recognized as being one of the five sola slogans, but this book is about more than just that one. All of the solas run throughout this work, and I would imagine that this was not intentional on Ferguson’s part, but was just a natural byproduct of him being so thoroughly biblical in thought. Where we glory in Christ alone, we must necessarily glory in God alone. Much of the book is given over to grace and faith. And sola Scriptura is seen in Ferguson’s constant use of and reliance on Scripture. And when speaking on mortification of sin, he writes, “ The first thing to do is to turn to the Scriptures. Yes, turn to John Owen (never a bad idea!) or to some other counselor dead or alive. But remember that we have not been left only to good human resources in this area. We need to be taught from ‘the mouth of God’ if the principles we are learning to apply are to carry with them both the authority of God and the promise of God to make them work” (p. 217). I would recommend that you read this book with the Bible in one hand so that you can look up and meditate upon all the references that he provides. I am sure that this will be a rewarding experience as you are reminded from Scripture of the gloriousness of Christ.

Speaking of that, this book would be excellent for a small group study, as I have recommended to my own Bible study group. A whole evening could easily be spent examining and discussing all of the Bible passages found in just one chapter.

The chapters of the book often end in applicatory questions or statements that cause the reader to think about what he has just read and apply it to himself. And these aren’t just missiles sent into the consciences of those outside “our camp.” These were written for Reformed audiences, so the questions zing at us. For instance: “Do you know the Christ of the Gospels? Or have you fallen into the trap to which Christians (especially, perhaps, Reformed Christians) who love doctrine and systematic theology are sometimes susceptible (unlike John Calvin, it should be said): fascination with dogmatic formula at the expense of love for the Savior’s person?” (p.67). This isn’t just choir preaching.

I can’t really think of anything negative to say. I found nothing in the theology to disagree with. The writing style is very interesting and engaging, much the way R. C. Sproul speaks. If I were to offer any negative criticisms, I guess it would be that the chapters are just too short. Now I understand that this was intentional, as the chapters were originally just little magazine articles. Nevertheless, perhaps a bibliography at the end to lead the reader to more literature on the topics talked about would be very useful. Ferguson whet my appetite for more on just about everything he wrote about. So yes, I would ask for some sort of recommended reading list. Also, this book uses end-notes instead of footnotes, and I hate that. But I guess that is the publisher’s fault and not the author’s.

In all, I must say, what an excellent book! I am now eager to look for other works written by Ferguson, as this was my first substantial exposure to him. As Dr. Ferguson says of the atonement, so all of this book “is theology of the most exalted and mind-stunning nature” (p. 55).

Heresy Row

There is a certain part of Arlington that I used to live in that I noticed had more than its share of heretical congregations in a very small area. I present a map for you here.



1 = Unity church
2 = Unitarian
3 = Christian Science
4 = Mormon

There is also a Russellite Kingdom hall about a mile north of this map. And there is a Campbellite church of Christ in amongst the three-in-a-row, and you can consider them as part of the heretical mix, too, if you like. Fun, huh? Maybe it's some sort of zoning law. Cults have to stay in a certain area, or something. huh.

Notes to Galatians 1:6-10

I now continue with my paraphrased notes to the book of Galatians. Again, these are gathered from Luther, Calvin, Gill, and MacArthur, with no attempt to say who said what since most of the time they said the same thing. Whoopee.

Galatians 1:6-10

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.

1:6

that you are so quickly
That which takes long to build may be quickly undone.

deserting him
May be Christ or the Father. Luther prefers “Christ.”

a different gospel
The devil never calls his work error. He disguises it as truth. It is likely that the Judaizers said that Paul did not give the whole gospel and they were teaching the rest of it.

1:7

not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
The Judaizers were obviously not denying the gospel openly, but were subtly adding to it, which destroys it. This is more dangerous. Anything other than faith alone is a false gospel. Adding works is a perversion of the gospel. It is all Christ or nothing.

1:8

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
We are all subject to the Word of God. Paul would rather curse himself, his co-workers, and the angels than let the gospel be overthrown. How should the false teachers escape the curse of God if even the angels would not?

1:9

now I say again:
He repeats this for the more solemn confirmation of it.

If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
If you do not accept the gospel, you will be cursed. The false teachers should be left to the judgment of God.

1:10

For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God?
Paul does not please men with his doctrine of depravity. He preaches to please God and ascribe to Him glory.

Or am I trying to please man?
By teaching the works of man, the false teachers please man.

If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Paul does not please man as he did before conversion. He was obviously not pleasing to the non-Christians who were persecuting him. To please man and be a servant of Christ is incompatible.

Personal Testimony

Lately I've been thinking a lot of my "personal testimony", or the story of how I first came to Christ. Upon becoming Reformed, the idea of testimony has changed some. So instead of thinking of it all as my own subjective experience, I prefer now to talk about the objective reality of what happened some 2000 years ago in Israel. My testimony is that second person of the Trinity, very God, came down in human flesh and lived the perfect life I could not live, and paid the punishment of sin that I deserved. But I know that when you ask me for my personal testimony, you are already assuming that what I just said is true, so you want to know of the specific time in my life when the benefits of that death of Christ were applied to me.

Well, that is tricky, because I'm not really sure. I will give you the facts as I remember them. They are few. I am not sure exactly how they all piece together. I'm just saying what I know.

I will start of by saying that my parents were (and are) good and Godly parents. My father was a preacher, and the message of the need for salvation and the way of salvation through Christ alone was always preached, not only in the church, but in our home, too. My parents never assumed that us kids were saved by virtue of being their children. They always prayed for our salvation and preached about salvation to us.

Now then. We lived in Lubbock, TX, so I would have been five or younger. I recall that my sister was vacuuming and that she yelled at me for a reason that I do not remember, but I do remember thinking at the time that it was a very stupid reason, and so I got angry. So I went off into my bedroom alone to fume and be angry, and out of nowhere the thought popped into my head that I needed to pray to God for forgiveness of my sins and for Jesus to be my Savior.

And that's all I remember, really. I don't know if I told my parents about it. I don't think so, but probably not out of any embarrassment or anything like that. When I was a kid, I just kind of thought that my parents knew everything, whether I told them something or not, so I probably thought that they just knew I was a Christian now. But I don't really know. I was baptized when I was eight years old, so it took me that long to make a public profession of my faith.

Now when you look at some of these facts: that I was so young, that the day and time is not emblazoned in my memory as if a "Damascus Road" experience had happened to me, and that it took me at least three years to submit to baptism--you add all these up, and you may think that maybe I wasn't saved at all. I have often thought about this. I have decided two things. First, I do think that God saved me at that time. Secondly, even if that isn't the time that I was saved, I know I am saved now. And that is the important thing. I may not know when true faith first was implanted into my heart, but I know I have it now.

For many people, that would be the end of the personal testimony. But it is not for me. I think my testimony is more than just the account of when I was born again and first exercised faith. My testimony includes all of the highs and lows of sanctification along the way. I probably think this way because my testimony is rather short and unexciting (though it is exciting to me that God saved me!) But you know what I mean. I wasn't in a prison cell, strung out on drugs, with a bunch of illegitimate children. I was a little kid. A sinner, a sinning little kid. But I didn't have as many years to accumulate sins as a person who isn't converted until later in life. But that doesn't matter, because sin is sin. Sin against an infinite God is infinitely wicked, so I was deserving of infinite punishment. My salvation was just as miraculous as the salvation of a prisoner on death row.

But I have run out of time for now, so I will give the rest of my autobiography of faith at a later date.

More Photos of Our Covenant Children

This is Isabella chatting in #prosapologian, Home of the Most Unique Christian Fellowship on Line Anywhere! http://www.aomin.org/articles/chat.html
Isabella is getting into vigorous debate on #prosapologian.
Here is Lilly, as sad as can be that she has to wear the halo thing until her stitches from her recent spaying are removed.

I Think You'll Like This One...

This is a picture of me as a child, dressed up in my Ghostbuster gear. Except for the t-shirt and waiting-for-a-flood sweatpants, which is how I always dressed.