Recently the State of Arkansas has been debating Senate Bill 199 which would establish a statute of limitations for the civil liability of doctors who provide gender transition services to minors. This would include puberty suppression, hormone therapy, and gender-reassignment surgeries, which we used to call vivisection but have lately redefined as compassionate, gender affirming healthcare. The effect of the bill would be to allow persons receiving such services as a minor to later sue the healthcare provider for damages many years later. The hope is that establishing financial liability for doctors engaged in these practices at the same time that a growing number of de-transitioners are coming forward to tell their personal horror stories will put an end to this madness and the social contagion of transgenderism.
During a Judiciary Committee hearing last week the Arkansas Senate heard from Gwendolyn Herzig, a pharmacist in Little Rock who showed up in woman-face to testify against the proposed bill. After Gwen’s opening statement, State Senator Matt McKee asked whether the witness was aware of “the large body of medical evidence of the harm that has come upon people who have gone through these processes.” Dr. Herzig replied, “I am familiar with the large body of evidence showing that providing good affirming care saves lives.” Senator McKee asked the same question again, and then again, and each time the witness responded by saying, “I will repeat what I just said.” For those of you keeping score at home, that’s called not answering the question and is characteristic of a hostile witness. That’s when Senator McKee transgressed the current blasphemy laws in our secular, tolerant, and pluralistic society.
I couldn’t agree more. It is horrible that the State Senate would allow a dude dressed in woman-face to come and testify against a bill designed to protect children. It’s horrible that they took this charade seriously. It’s horrible that now we have to hear from wincing and winsome Christians who winsomely wince at the shocking language of Senator McKee. Doesn’t he know that Gwendolyn, and his penis, is an image-bearer of God?
Senator McKee’s error was in publicly observing that the emperor has no clothes, or more specifically, that he is unsuccessfully trying to stuff a penis into a pair of bikini bottoms. You might think that is rude, but that is only because many of us have grown accustomed to the ever shifting rules of etiquette in clownworld. McKee did not walk up to Dr. Herzig on the sidewalk and publicly accost him. He did not mock him at the pharmacy where he works. He did not suggest Gwen’s fetish is “insulting, dehumanizing, egregious” and “horrible.” He simply asked whether the witness in woman-face wearing a wig and dress had a penis hidden under there too.
This madness will not end by affirming a demonic delusion. We can treat individuals with love and respect while treating insanity, rebellion, and lies with the righteous scorn and irreverence they deserve. Repentance is our only hope for salvation, and repentance is the result of confrontation and conviction leading to contrition. As an individual, Gwen Herzig should be treated with compassion and respect and called to faith and repentance in Jesus Christ. As a witness testifying against SB 199, Dr. Herzig should be treated as a deceiver and threat to children and exposed and discredited accordingly.
The cross does not allow us to retain our delusions. God’s Law identifies, reproves, and corrects our errors and calls us to turn from them. We must repent not only of what we have done but also of the lies we have told ourselves about ourselves. Jesus did not die for good, moral people but for sinners like you and me, for people like Gwen Herzig and Matt McKee, and none of us can remain as we are. The Church must not ooh and aah over the emperor’s new clothes. Truth is found in the mouth of babes and state Senators from Arkansas. There is a bulge under the skirt, and it appears the king has been in the queen’s closet. –JME
Psalm 23: Crossing Safely When Summoned by the Lord
I had the privilege of being the last friend to visit with LuAnne before she died. I sat with her for a couple of hours on Sunday before evening worship, and she died later that night. By that time, of course, she was no longer conscious. She slept on the bed as I sat in a chair beside her and read Scripture aloud, prayed, and read several pieces to her from John Bunyan.
The last thing I read to her was the final chapter of Part Two of The Pilgrim’s Progress. Many people are familiar with Part One, but I have found over the years that fewer people are aware of Part Two. In Part One Christian becomes a pilgrim and journeys to the Celestial City, but his family refuses to accompany him. Part Two is the story of what happened afterward, when his family’s minds are changed, his wife becomes Christiana, and she and their children go on pilgrimage to the Celestial City, following the footsteps of their father.
The last chapter of Part Two depicts Christiana and various friends from her journey assembled on the bank of the river across from the city. The river depicts death, and the city is Heaven. There the pilgrims wait for word from the King telling them when they are to cross to the other side.
After this, I beheld until they were come unto the Land of Beulah, where the sun shineth night and day. Here, because they were weary, they betook themselves awhile to rest. And because this country was common for pilgrims, and because the orchards and vineyards that were here belong to the King of the Celestial Country, therefore they were permitted to make bold with any of His things. But a little while soon refreshed them here; for the bells did so ring, and the trumpets continually sound so melodiously, that they could not sleep and yet they received as much refreshing as if they had slept their sleep never so soundly. Here also the noise of them that walked in the streets was, "More pilgrims are come to town!" And another would answer, saying, "And so many went over the water, and were let in at the golden gates, to-day!" They would cry again, "There is now a legion of Shining Ones just come to town, by which we know that there are more pilgrims upon the road; for here they come to wait for them, and comfort them after all their sorrow!" Then the pilgrims got up, and walked to and fro. But how were their ears now filled with heavenly voices, and their eyes delighted with celestial visions! In this land they heard nothing, saw nothing, felt nothing, smelt nothing, tasted nothing, that was offensive to their stomach or mind; only when they tasted of the water of the river over which they were to go, they thought that it tasted a little bitterish to the palate, but it proved sweeter when it was down.
Eventually letters begin to arrive, and as the major characters prepare to embark on the final stage of their journey, they make brief speeches or offer final sayings on their way to glory. Christiana is the first to go across.
She called for her children, and gave them her blessing, and told them that she yet read with comfort the mark that was set in their foreheads, and was glad to see them with her there, and that they had kept their garments so white. Lastly, she gave to the poor that little she had, and commanded her sons and her daughters to be ready against the messenger should come for them.
The mark on their foreheads is the mark of God, the seal of the Holy Spirit, the sign given to them at baptism identifying them as servants of the living God, and the messenger that she anticipated would one day come for them was the messenger who would bring news of their own death.
Now, the day drew on that Christiana must be gone. So the road was full of people to see her take her journey. But, behold, all the banks beyond the river were full of horses and chariots, which were come down from above to accompany her to the City gate. So she came forth and entered the river, with a beckon of farewell to those that followed her to the river-side. The last words that she was heard to say were, "I come, Lord, to be with Thee, and bless Thee!"
The next to make the journey was Mr. Ready-to-Halt who had been unable to walk easily in life and had to make his pilgrimage on crutches.
When he came to the brink of the river, he said, "Now I shall have no more need of these crutches, since yonder are chariots and horses for me to ride on." The last words he was heard to say were, "Welcome life!" So he went his way.
After Mr. Ready-to-Halt went Mr. Feeble-mind, whose last words as he crossed the river were: “Hold out, faith and patience!” Then Mr. Despondency and his daughter, Much Afraid, received their summons. “The last words of Mr. Despondency were, ‘Farewell, night! welcome, day!’ His daughter went through the river singing, but none could understand what she said.” Mr. Honest’s last words were: “Grace reigns!” Mr. Valiant- for-Truth quoted Scripture as he waded into the water saying: “Death, where is thy sting? Grave, where is thy victory?”
Mr. Stand-fast is the last pilgrim to cross the river in the story, and his crossing is of particular importance for learning to think rightly of that journey.
Now, there was a great calm at that time in the river; wherefore Mr. Stand-fast, when he was about half-way in, stood a while, and talked to his companions that had waited upon him thither. And he said, "This river has been a terror to many; yea, the thoughts of it have also frighted me; but now methinks I stand easy; my foot is fixed upon that on which the feet of the priests that bare the ark of the covenant stood while Israel went over Jordan. The waters, indeed, are to the palate bitter, and to the stomach cold; yet the thought of what I am going to, and of the conduct that waits for me on the other side, doth lie as a glowing coal at my heart. I see myself now at the end of my journey; my toilsome days are ended. I am going to see that head which was crowned with thorns, and that face which was spit upon for me. I have formerly lived by hearsay and faith; but now I go where I shall live by sight, and shall be with Him in whose company I delight myself. I have loved to hear my Lord spoken of; and wherever I have seen the print of His shoe in the earth, there I have coveted to set my foot too. His name has been to me as a perfume box; yea, sweeter than all sweet smells. His voice to me has been most sweet, and His countenance I have more desired than they that have most desired the light of the sun. His Word I did use to gather for my food, and for medicine against my faintings. He has held me, and hath kept me from my sins; yea, my steps hath He strengthened in His way."
Now, while he was thus speaking, his countenance changed, his strong man bowed under him; and, after he had said, "Take me, for I come unto Thee!" he ceased to be seen of them.
But glorious it was to see how the open region was filled with horses and chariots, with trumpeters and pipers, with singers and players on stringed instruments to welcome the pilgrims as they went up, and followed one another in at the beautiful gate of the City.
Those were some of the last words that LuAnne heard in this life, and they are words that should ring in our ears and hearts throughout whatever remains of our own earthly pilgrimage. That night LuAnne crossed over the river of death, and we trust in God’s promise that she was carried by angels and received into Christ’s presence with the glorified saints and pilgrims who had gone there before. Can you imagine what it was like for her to cross over? As I told Dave and Kathy a few days before she died, she will not miss you, though we all will miss her. How different our sense of death and life might be if we could see it with the clarity that Bunyan did in the pilgrims’ story.
Psalm 23 speaks of the confidence we have in passing through the valley of the shadow of death. We will fear no evil. Why? Because we are strong or bold or brave? No, because the Lord is with us. His rod, to fight against our enemies, and his staff, to guide us in the good and right way, are a comfort and support to us.
Jesus is our good Shepherd, and we, as his sheep, must pass through that valley. But the Bible says we are no longer enslaved to the fear of death. Death remains an enemy, but it is an enemy Christ has vanquished in his death and resurrection. Death is a curse, but its holds no terror or danger for the believer anymore. Apart from Christ, men and women live in bondage to the fear of death, but Christ has set us free from its terror by taking our place on the cross and then breaking death’s power from the inside. In his resurrection, we have the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life, but only if we believe.
LuAnne lived and died in faith, and the promises and comfort and hope of the gospel apply to her because they are given to all who believe. They are not given to everyone. The forgiveness of sins and the gift of salvation is not a human right; it is a privilege of the children of God. If you believe in Jesus, then Jesus is your Savior, and you do not have to fear passing through the valley of the shadow of death and crossing the river. Jesus will meet you on the other side, along with all the glorified saints, which now includes our sister LuAnne. But if you do not believe, these promises do not apply to you, and you should fear that valley. You are not strong enough to travel it safely on your own. Only Jesus can bring you through it. You must trust him and not yourself. You must follow him, obey him, and stop living life on your own terms and for yourself.
Saving faith is a living faith, an obedient faith. Do you have such faith? Would any of your friends and family know it? Don’t tell me about the warm feeling you have in your heart. Do you believe? If so, there will be fruit and evidence. You will follow the Lord just as Bunyan’s pilgrims did, just as LuAnne did. We know she was a believer because we could see it, we could see her faith. Where is yours? Will you live your life for the Lord, looking to Jesus, anticipating that river, and eager to cross to the other side? Or will you live for yourself, in disobedience, and hope to claim the promises that do not belong to you at the last hour? A loved one’s funeral is a good time to examine yourself, repent, and make your heart right with God. Your own funeral will be too late.
She called for her children, and gave them her blessing, and told them that she yet read with comfort the mark that was set in their foreheads, and was glad to see them with her there, and that they had kept their garments so white. Lastly, she gave to the poor that little she had, and commanded her sons and her daughters to be ready [for] the messenger [who would] come for them.
LuAnne was a sinner, just like the rest of us. But she believed in Christ, she loved the Lord, and she sought to serve him during her life. She died as a faithful member of the Church, and we trust, not in her goodness or her kindness or her religious activity but in the God who made her and saved her for himself.
For God so loved the world that he sent his Only Begotten Son that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life. LuAnne believed in Christ, and that is why we have hope today, that is our comfort. She loved the One who loved her first, who loved her best, who loved her to the end, and who loves her still. May God grant each of us to live so that we may never be afraid to die, so that living and dying we may be His, the Lord who gave himself for us and rose again, who leads us safely through the valley of shadow of death and into the joy and glory on the other side.
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
I was encouraged to read my friend Uri Brito's post on Kuyperian Commentary this morning---"Political Pluralism is a Sham!"---and in the spirit of piling on, I wanted to share my own "Yes, and Amen!"
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023, the House of Representatives passed a bill, barely, requiring doctors to provide medical care to babies who survive an attempted abortion. Just to be clear, this law, which the Senate will not pass and the President will veto if it comes to his desk, obligates medical providers to try to save the life of infants who have been poisoned, mutilated, and otherwise harmed in an attempt to kill them and remove them from their mother’s womb but who, somehow, survive the attack. Every Republican in the House who was present voted for the bill. Every Democrat, except one, refused to support it. Of the 212 Democrats in the House of Representatives, 210 voted against saving the child’s life, one voted present (cf. cowardice in a dictionary), and one voted in favor of it. (It’s got to be awkward to be the only orc that doesn’t think we should kill and eat the prisoners.)
Now I realize I am breaking a cardinal rule here. American society has been rapidly reconditioned (i.e. brainwashed) not to notice that the dude in a dress is a guy, and prominent Reformed denominations have been encouraged not to notice the (D) next to certain politicians’ names. But it is hard not to notice that for all the negative things that can be said about those Republicans—and there are a lot of negative things one might say—the Democrat Party, qua Party, stands explicitly, uniformly, and vehemently opposed to the most basic creational, biblical, and ethical norms. Whether it is promoting envy and unbiblical economic policies, gaslighting the American public regarding “systemic racism” while promoting programs that establish that very thing, queering our children and grooming them on behalf of sexual perverts, flaunting the same perversion on embassy soil in foreign nations, or promoting, protecting, and celebrating the mass slaughter of unborn children as a moral good—in every case the Democrats have taken the side of Sauron and proven their intransigence, contumacy, and steadfast opposition to all that is true, good, and beautiful.
We have heard a lot since 2016 about political pluralism in the Church. Ambivalence on political questions and opposition to “culture warriors” has been well-represented and promoted by prominent thinkers in the OPC. I did not vote for Trump in 2016. I did not trust him. But the notion that disgust with Republican compromise somehow validates a vote for the other major party should not be tolerable. That members of “conservative” Reformed denominations openly supported a violent, Marxist, anti-Christian organization like BLM and the politicians who stand with them says a great deal about the lack of clarity that has been found in our preaching and leadership in churches for far too long. Where are the prophets who will call out Israel’s worldliness in moral and political matters today? –JME
2022 is now complete, and it is time for a review of my reading in the fourth quarter and to turn the page to the reading plan for 2023. Earlier installments in this series can be found HERE. My hope is to inspire and encourage some of you to a more disciplined and diligent practice of reading.
I planned to read 100 books in 2022 spread across six categories: theology, philosophy, history, classics, biographies, and books I regularly re-read. I completed 37 books in the first quarter, 31 in the second, 32 in the third, and 27 in the fourth, finishing with a total of 127. My reading in the fourth quarter included 8 volumes of theology, 5 biographies, and 10 re-reads. My final totals in each category were 29 theology, 12 philosophy, 10 history, 11 classics, 19 biographies, and 28 re-reads.
Here are three books I read in the fourth quarter I particularly enjoyed or found profitable.
First, The Everlasting Man by G. K. Chesterton. It is no secret that Chesterton is probably my favorite author of all-time, and I am almost always reading something by him throughout the year. Everlasting Man is not one that I have re-read yearly, but it likely will become so after this year’s read-through. The argument is stimulating, the prose delightful, and the encouragement to faith and wonder at the work of God in human history is truly a blessing. Chesterton argues that Christianity is the “true myth.” This work was a key influence in C. S. Lewis’s conversion, and I have been blessed every time I read it.
Second, John Knox: Stalwart Courage by Douglas Wilson. This is a very accessible and practical treatment of Knox’s life and the virtues God’s grace wrought and manifested in this Reformed father. It would be especially appropriate for young men looking for role models of manly piety and courage.
Third, God and Generals by Jeff Shaara. I’m not sure how I never read this particular novel— and as a novel I categorized it as an elective, not history or biography—since I have known about it for many years. I do not read a great deal of historical fiction—though I do enjoy fiction that is historical—but I greatly enjoyed this volume and look forward to reading others in the series.
The 2023 Reading Plan
2022’s reading plan was a success, the most successful that I have developed so far, and I feel encouraged to continue to set goals in specific categories and genres. I have decided to base my reading goals in 2023 on quarterly, rather than annual, totals with an ambition of reading 120 works for the entire year. Every three months I plan to read the English Bible once-through in a different translation, starting with the Geneva Bible. (I read the Psalms and certain parts of Scripture more frequently, but this refers to my general plan of reading.) I also plan to read 4 volumes in each of the designated categories: theology, philosophy, history, biography, classics, and re-reads, leaving 5 electives. --JME
Tomorrow is… Christmas Eve. The day after is the Lord’s Day. Presbyterians are divided on the observance of Christmas. Some (compromised and unorthodox) Presbyterians like Christmas <gasp, hiss>. They have been known to preach advent sermons—can you imagine the Apostle Paul ever doing such a thing?—and to have church on Christmas Eve when it does not fall on a Sunday (perish the thought). Other Presbyterians understand that Christmas is a pagan holiday, full of human traditions, papist superstitions, and food designed to keep cardiologists and endocrinologists in business the rest of the year. These brethren know that Christmas is merely a secular holiday, a paid day off from labors in the common kingdom, a time for eating, drinking, and sharing gifts, in other words the kind of celebration that ought to have nothing to do with faith in God or the Lordship of Christ. If the Church was supposed to celebrate Jesus’ birth, the Lord would have told us so. Such celebration is clearly unbiblical. The angels who sang with joy outside of Bethlehem obviously did not understand the Regulative Principle of Worship.
I jest, obviously, but it is no secret I spent the first 30 years of my life in the second camp. I preached a sermon every year on why we should not celebrate Christmas for around a decade. I was 31 the first time I had a Christmas tree in my house. That purchase confirmed in the minds of some that my slide into apostasy was well underway, a conclusion that was further justified when I became… presbyterian. I have written before about why I changed my mind regarding Christmas. I understand the arguments against celebrating it, and refusing to do so is certainly the believer’s right (Rom. 14:5-8), but such a refusal is based on a misunderstanding of the Regulative Principle and is often (not always) accompanied by legalistic, human traditions, ironically justified by the very principle upheld by Reformed theologians to guard against the binding of consciences by the doctrines of men.
No one is obligated to attend or participate in the Christmas Eve service at ROPC. We won’t drive by your house to see if you are skipping church or phone you to ask if you hate the Lord Jesus Christ. We won’t think you are unspiritual or that you are the weaker brother or sister. Christmas Eve is not the Lord’s Day. It is an opportunity to join the saints in fellowship as we sing and pray and give thanks for the coming of the Son of God who has delivered us from guilt, misery, and divine wrath.
It is interesting that we have Presbyterians who refuse to participate in a Saturday evening service of Scripture reading, prayer, and songs of praise and thanksgiving for the birth of Christ at the same time that many evangelical churches are canceling worship services on the Lord’s Day because it falls on… Christmas. The two positions have more in common than you might realize. Both reject the value and importance of the Church’s historic calendar and patterns of worship. Canceling worship on Christmas Sunday says a lot about what the average church in America thinks regarding the priority of corporate worship. We should not expect much improvement in America’s morality and culture until there is significant reformation and revival in her churches… and no, that reformation does not begin by canceling the Christmas Eve service.
When we look at the state of the visible Church, we might be tempted to despair of cultural renewal. Indeed, many Christians do not expect it and insist that the evil world will remain just as evil as it now is until the Lord’s return. But Christ shall have dominion, and whatever you think that means for the rest of the world, you certainly should believe that the work of regeneration and sanctification begun in the heart of every believer will have a good influence and bear much fruit in the life and ministry of the global Church. God is not saving sinners in order to leave them as they are. He is saving us and changing us, and as each one of us is changed, so too will be the Church, and so too the world.
Whether you are preparing your heart for Christmas Eve and the Lord’s Day or only for the latter, it is good and right for us to meditate upon the Savior who is Christ our Lord. Once a babe laid in a manger, he is now the crucified and risen King of all kings and Lord of all lords, Serpent-crusher, Dragon-slayer, the Warrior on a White Horse, the Bridegroom, Redeemer of the Church, and Savior of the world. He is worthy of our worship. Indeed, his glory demands it, duty requires it, and gratitude prompts it. Whether we agree that the Church should acknowledge his birth on December 25th or not, we all should agree that it is good to sing and pray and give thanks that Christ was born. His Incarnation in the womb of the virgin Mary, his birth in Bethlehem, his deliverance from Herod, his flight to Egypt and exodus, his righteous life of faithfulness from infancy even unto his death on the cross is the foundation of our hope and the reason for our joy and peace. So let us prepare our hearts to assemble, some on Saturday night, but all of us on Sunday, the Lord’s Day. Let us come with joy into the house of the Lord knowing that we are able to do so because Christ our Lord came to the house of bondage in order to rescue us when we were held there. Let us sing and give thanks from the heart for his mercy and great goodness. Let us humbly hear his Word and receive the instruction that is good for our souls. Let us greet one another with joy knowing that we are the Body, united to Christ and destined for glory. Let us rejoice in hope knowing that although in this world we will have tribulation, Christ has overcome the world. O come, let us adore him! --JME
In 1 Corinthians 10:1-11 we have an example of apostolic biblical theology. Systematic theology is when we take everything the Bible says about a given subject and synthesize and summarize that information under a doctrinal heading. That is a good, godly, necessary, and inevitable work if we believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. Biblical theology is a little different. It is the study of the progressive revelation of God and his will through the redemptive history and story of Scripture. Rather than synthesizing and summarizing facts which Christians are to believe, biblical theology examines doctrine as it is revealed through the Bible story. After all, God did not give us a systematic theology book, as helpful and proper as those volumes can be. He gave us a book which tells a story, a true story, an historical story, but a story, not a textbook. God makes himself known to us through that story. Neither biblical nor systematic theology are better or worse than the other. Either can be done faithfully and well or not. In fact, you can’t do systematic theology well without also practicing biblical theology, and visa versa. The two approaches are mutually reinforcing and necessary.
In our passage today Paul looks back at the OT story of the exodus and wandering in the wilderness and draws from it lessons the church in Corinth (and the rest of us) needed to learn. He saw an authoritative model in the Hebrew Bible, a story that was historical but was more than just historical; it was pedagogical, exemplary, and alarming. It was a story relevant to the experience of Christians living under the New Covenant, and though this passage is in everyone’s Bible, it uses the OT and views covenant theology in a way that many (Reformed) Christians do not.
Have you ever heard a parent say he was unwilling to discipline or correct a child because he had done the same things at his age? (I hope you’ve never done this yourself.) “I can’t tell my son not to smoke pot because I smoked some when I was his age. I can’t make firm rules about his dating habits because I sowed wild oats back in the day. I can’t tell him not to play Russian roulette with my pistol because who among us hasn’t done so!” One might hope the wicked absurdity of such an approach is self-evident. Parenting requires a certain use of the past, a particular view of history. It involves telling your children stories so that they learn what to do and what not to do. The lesson is not: “Dad smoked pot and slept around, and he turned out okay.” It is: “Don’t be an idiot like Dad was. Don’t presume upon and transgress against God’s grace.”
Paul is a good parent, and the saints in Corinth were his children. He wanted his kids to know their family history: good, bad, and ugly. He expected them to learn from their forebears what was appropriate, and what was not, for the people of God. If you think making moral lessons from examples in the OT is a type of legalistic moralizing, you might want to skip this sermon and section of verses. But since you already showed up for church today, I will try to be gentle as we examine how Paul takes a sledgehammer to the way some people think of interpreting the Bible.
Whose Fathers in the Wilderness?
It is unknown how many of the members of the church in Corinth had been rank pagans immediately prior to their conversion. A good case can be made that many (perhaps the majority?) were God-fearers, i.e. Gentile worshipers of Yahweh, prior to embracing Jesus as the Messiah. But whether that is so or not, no one (that I know of) disputes that the congregation in Corinth was mostly made up of non-Jews. Some of them had worshiped idols in the local temples before they came to faith in Christ, and even if some of them had worshiped Yahweh in the local synagogues, they came from families where their parents and grandparents had worshiped false gods.
If most of the Corinthian Christians were non-Jews, how can Paul say what he does in v.1: Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers [were in the wilderness]? Paul calls them brethren. No problem, you say, they are brethren in Christ. Fair enough. But then Paul says, all our fathers. All our fathers? Since when did the Israelites in the OT become fathersto the converted Greeks and former pagans in Corinth? Paul is not merely saying that he and they were brothers in the Lord; he is saying they are brothers from the same family.
One commentator has observed that “we have a tendency to draw contrasts between the Old and New Testaments in the very places where the New Testament draws parallels” (Douglas Wilson, Partakers of Grace, 137-138). We think that we are being biblical when we draw radical distinctions between the people of God in the OT and NT. Dispensationalists—which means the majority of evangelicals—openly affirm that Israel and the Church are two different groups, two different people groups whom God saves and for whom he has different plans and distinct promises. Obviously there is a distinction between ethnic Israel considered in its hereditary and political sense and spiritual Israel, which Paul calls the Israel of God (Gal. 6:16). But this is where our passage begins to challenge our thinking, whether you are a dispensationalist or simply a modern covenant theologian. Paul affirms continuity between Israel in the OT and the Church in the NT, and that continuity includes many reprobates who died under God’s judgment in the wilderness and were damned.
Let me head off a question I am bound to be asked after this sermon. No, not every one of the Israelites who died in the wilderness were lost. As many as believed in God were saved. There may have been many, maybe even the majority, who recognized their sin of unbelief and repented but who nevertheless died under the judgment God decreed. Dying in the wilderness did not mean they all went to Hell. Remember that Moses was forbidden to enter the Promised Land too, and yet he was saved. But lest some infer from this that all of them were saved or that those Paul has in mind here might have been, let’s pay close attention to the language. The apostle is referring to those with whom God was not well pleased, who lusted after evil things, who tempted Christ, and who were destroyed by the destroyer. These are not descriptions of saved persons who fell into sin and were chastised for it. They didn’t just lose a jewel in their crown. This is a description of those who were false professors, hypocrites, reprobates, destined for hell, and even though not everyone in that wilderness generation belonged to that category, everyone from that generation who was in that category was first a member of the visible Church and once partook, in some way, of Christ.
The Spiritual Advantages They Shared (with Us)
This is the very point over which many modern Presbyterians will stumble, so we need to write some of this in our minds with a boldface font and make liberal use of underlining. The Jews Paul is describing here were reprobates who died under God’s judgment and were members of the Church in the OT who actually partook of Christ. What does Paul say? All our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. Ahem. It appears someone needs to sit down and have a gentle but firm chat with Paul about his covenant theology. He doesn’t appear to realize that only those who are saved partake of Christ and all of those who do so can never be lost.
I should say immediately that neither this passage nor any of those dozens of others in your Bible that make the same point indicate that Paul is an Arminian. Paul was a very good Calvinist, or we might better say, Calvin was a good Paulinist. (Not that either of them would appreciate my saying so. They both would insist they were simply following Christ and tell me to stop talking like a sectarian.) What I mean to say is that nothing taught in this passage contradicts the theology we confess and love in the Westminster Confession. It does, however, contradict what some claim the Westminster Confession says.
Specifically, the Bible says those who belong to the visible Church, those who have been baptized and welcomed to the Table, truly partake of Christ without ever truly possessing the grace of Christ. They have a real connection, a covenantal one, but it is to their condemnation rather than salvation. They belong to the consecrated community, but because they do not believe, they are set apart for judgment rather than for joy. If we wanted to illustrate this, we might describe them as branches connected to the Vine of Christ but which do not bear fruit and are, therefore, cut off and burned. Or we might say they are like bad fish caught in a net, drawn out of the sea of humanity, but then removed and cast aside in the final sorting. We could describe them as branches cut off from an olive tree, actually connected at one time, but ultimately dead and destined to be pruned. We could use any of these analogies, and many others, because they are analogies Scripture uses.
Their passage through the Red Sea is interpreted by Paul as a baptism. The manna they ate is described as spiritual food, i.e. food of the Spirit. The Rock from which they drank is identified as Christ. This is Paul saying these things. He is relating their experience to ours. They were part of the Church. They were connected to Jesus. They enjoyed a covenantal access to him.
The Mosaic economy was an administration of the Covenant of Grace, not the Covenant of Works. So says our Westminster Confession of Faith (7.5), and for good reason. It’s what the Bible teaches. It was gracious in its origin, in its operation, and in its outcome. Those who believed in God under the Law were saved by Christ whose blood flows forward and backward in time (Heb. 9:15). The Law was not given to Israel as a covenant of works so as to justify or condemn them. It had the same purpose for them as it does for us: to serve as a rule of life, a guide to faith, and a path of gratitude.
Christ was the Savior of the Israelites in the OT. He was the Rock from which they drank. Their covenant with God was a covenant of grace. They were baptized just as we are; they ate the bread of heaven just as we do. The forms and symbols may have been different, but the underlying reality was the same. As Calvin explains it in his commentary:
“For that people was a figure of the Christian Church, in such a manner as to be at the same time a true Church. Their condition represented ours in such a manner that there was at the same time, even then, a proper condition of a Church. The promises given to them shadowed forth the gospel in such a way, that they had it included in them. Their sacraments served to prefigure ours in such a way, that they were nevertheless, even for that period, true sacraments, having a present efficacy. In fine, those who at that time made a right use, both of doctrine, and of signs, were endowed with the same spirit of faith as we are.” –s.v. 10:11
Yet… They Fell
But… they fell. A generation was sentenced to death in the wilderness. Why? The writer of Hebrews tells us: We see that they could not enter in because of unbelief (Heb. 3:19). They did not believe in God, and so their covenant proximity and privileges were all for nothing. Their baptism and sacramental bread was a true ministry of Christ, but it could not save them apart from faith. The terms of their covenant were the same as ours: faith in God, trusting the Savior with a living faith, faith that bears the fruit of obedience. None of them were saved by works. No one could be, then or now. God didn’t require that of them. What he required was belief. He required it of them, and he requires it of us. We know that faith is the gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9; Php. 1:29), but it is still a command of God. This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent (John 6:29). They did not fall because their works were inadequate. They were rejected because they did not believe. They disobeyed the Lord because they did not love and trust him.
I want to be very clear. None of those chosen by God for salvation from the foundation of the world were lost. No one who was justified by faith later lost their faith and, consequently, their justified status. We do not only believe the Lord irresistibly draws his elect to Christ; we believe he irresistibly and inevitably preserves them through faith for life everlasting. When we say that those who fell under (eternal) condemnation in the wilderness were once partakers of Christ, we do not mean they ever partook of the saving benefits of Christ. They were covenantally connected, but not savingly so. They were part of the (OT) Church and, therefore, were sanctified by circumcision and baptism, but they never received the true atoning benefits of Christ’s blood. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us (1Jn. 2:19).
But the fact that they were not truly “of us” in one sense, does not mean they were never truly “with us” in another sense. The NT, not the OT, the NT Scriptures written to the Church after the death and resurrection of Christ warn Christians of the danger of falling from grace.
Gal. 5:4: You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
Peter says false teachers in the Church deny the Lord who bought them.
2Pet. 2:1: But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
In what sense were they bought? Not savingly, obviously. But it was not pretend either. They did not merely appear to be bought. They were bought, but then denied the relation by their error. Peter goes on to describe Christians who are misled by such men.
2Pet. 2:20-22: For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”
How does the writer of Hebrews describe those who fall away?
Heb. 6:4-6: For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. (cf. Heb. 10:26-31)
Evangelical commentaries notwithstanding, this is not a “hypothetical category.” These are real people who were enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, partook of the Holy Spirit, but were lost! They were never saved, but they were connected to Christ, not savingly, not everlastingly, but truly. They trampled the Son of God underfoot and counted the blood of the covenant by which [they were] sanctified a common thing (Heb. 10:29). They were like many of these Israelites. The closing verses of Jude make no sense if covenantal apostasy is not possible in the New Covenant.
Jude 20-25: But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. And on some have compassion, making a distinction; but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.
Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, And to present you faultless
Before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy, To God our Savior, Who alone is wise,
Be glory and majesty, Dominion and power, Both now and forever. Amen.
It is God who keeps us from stumbling. It is Christ who saves his people to the uttermost. But that salvation is not an insurance policy purchased and then put into a drawer. We have been saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved, but only by Christ and only if we continue to trust in him.
Saint Paul the Moralizer
So what does St. Paul have to say about all of this history in the OT? It turns out what he says isn’t nearly as gospel-centered or Christocentric as some experts think it ought to be. What he says could be summarized by saying: “Do you see what happened to those Israelites with all of their Presbyterian privilege and advance copies of the Westminster Confession of Faith? They took it all for granted and fell into unbelief and disobedience and died. Don’t do that!”
I have been reliably informed that using OT characters and stories to draw moral lessons for NT believers is bad, a species of moralizing legalism. But we must pardon Paul for doing such things. He went to a Jewish seminary, not a Reformed one, so we can’t really expect him to know how to handle the biblical text in the proper way. Love covers a multitude of sins.
While “heaping scorn on an inexcusably silly idea,” in this case, about preaching, I do want to register my objection to reductionistic moralism. The OT isn’t about the diligence of Noah, the faithfulness of Abraham, the holiness of Joseph, the perseverance of Moses, the courage of David, or the loyalty of Daniel.The OT is, from start to finish, inside and out, every line in every book, about Christ. The Hebrew Bible must not be treated like Aesop’s Fables, and anyone who thinks the OT is simply to teach him how to be a better Boy Scout will eventually find himself equipped to build campfires in Hell. But if you think you can read the OT and not observe, be convicted by, learn from, and aspire to imitate the faith and faithfulness of these men and women, then you’re not reading the Bible the way Jesus and the apostles did.
The Hebrew Scriptures are a revelation of God, not a manual for a better life. They prepare our hearts for the gospel, not provide a self-help program for saving ourselves by the law. Every hero in the Bible is a flawed character, all but one, the Lord Jesus. The Lord gave his life to atone for the sin of ungodly men like Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, David, and Daniel, and also for Reformed seminary professors who seem to have little to say about the third use of the Law. But the OT not only prepares us for the gospel, it reveals to us its fruit. It shows us examples of faith that we might be faithful. It recounts stories of obedience that we might be diligent. It also shows us examples of apostasy and the pain of unbelief. All these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. God gave this to us as an example for our good. It would not only be a shame not to learn from it. It would be sin.
Pastoral Application
Paul gives us the application he intends for these verses: Do not trust in covenant proximity and privileges, but receive God’s covenant grace by faith, and be faithful. As Charles Hodge says in his commentary on the passage:
“It is not enough, therefore, to be recipients of extraordinary favors; it is not enough to begin well. It is only by constant self-denial and vigilance, that the promised reward can be obtained. This is the lesson the apostle intends to inculcate.” –Hodge, 1 Corinthians, 171
To be an Israelite is not enough. It is not enough to participate in the exodus, pass through baptism in the Red Sea, eat spiritual food from heaven every morning, and drink flowing water from the Rock of Christ. All of these things are wonderful. Praise God for every one of his precious gifts! But these things cannot save you. It is not enough to be in the Church, part of the covenant, and to receive and enjoy the blessings of proximity and privilege which your membership provides. You must trust in Christ, and in him alone.
If you asked these Israelites if they believed in Yahweh, every one of them would have said yes. But the Bible says they fell from grace through unbelief. Their unbelief was seen in lusting after evil things, idolatry, sexual immorality, tempting Christ, and complaining. They claimed they believed, but God said they didn’t. They only had a dead faith, which is not true faith at all. We are not saved by works, but faith without works is dead. The faith that receives God’s grace unto everlasting life is a living faith, a faithful faith, an obedient one.
Living faith is imperfect, just like everything in our lives. I need Christ’s righteousness to atone for my imperfect faith, my imperfect repentance, and my imperfect religion, just as much as for my lust, idolatry, immorality, and complaints. But there is a definitive difference between living faith, true faith, and that which is not faith but often claims to be. Jesus said: Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven (Matt. 7:21).
So what is the will of the Father in heaven? It is to believe in the One whom he sent. It is to look away from ourselves and our sin and to look to Christ. The Israelites fell because they took for granted what God had done for them and continued to look at themselves and to themselves for the satisfaction of their lusts. They lived for their own pleasure, in pride and selfishness, not in faith and humility and gratitude. They were without reverence, even though the pillar of cloud and fire was visible from any place within the camp all the time. After a while you simply get used to it. It’s not enough that we eat heavenly bread every morning. After all, it’s always the same flavor. So we look for something more.
The Hebrews writer, again—it’s almost as if the same author wrote this passage and that book, isn’t it?---the Hebrews writer admonishes us: Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God (Heb. 3:12). Maybe we can’t imagine such a thing happening to us. But what does Paul say in v.12 of our passage? Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.
The point in all of this is not to undermine assurance, but to find it in the right place! “I was born in the Reformed Church. I memorized the Heidelberg Catechism in my youth, in German, and then I memorized the Westminster Larger Catechism as well… after I translated it into Latin. I was baptized by a former Moderator of the General Assembly. My profession of faith is regarded as the one the top 10 professions made in the 20th century. I always attend church both Sunday morning and evening, and no one reads their Bible as often as I think about doing so. If you think that is something, just ask me about my humility!” In terms of religious experiences, none of us can compare with any one of those Israelites who saw the ten plagues, were led out of Egypt by God’s mighty hand, and passed through the waters of the sea on dry land. Every one of them had a story to tell, but very few of them believed God when it came time to enter Canaan, and many of them proved to be unbelievers and reprobates and are now in Hell. If we stand, it is only by grace.
You must not trust in your religiousness, in your heritage, in your good works, in whatever you think commends you among the brethren. All I have is Christ. Lord, keep me. The waters of baptism through which you passed were a covenantal cleansing and consecration to Jesus. Live like you belong to him, because you do. The bread you receive at the Lord’s Table is spiritual food. Eat it with gratitude, as if it were bread from heaven to sustain your soul, because it is. The water you drink, the living water that flows in your heart, the Holy Spirit, flows out of the Rock who is Christ. Trust him that he will sustain you in this wilderness. Rely on him, and not on yourself. Cultivate reverence for him and beware of indifference. Be obedient to him, not out of guilt or fear but out of faith and love and gratitude for his grace. Let us not tempt Christ as they also tempted and were destroyed by serpents. Rather let us trust Christ, the One who destroys the serpent’s seed and who will crush Satan under our feet. Amen. --JME
