Study of Basic Christian Doctrine: How Do We Know God?- Part 3

I have proposed the question, "How do we know God?" As I stated in earlier posts, this is a foundational question. For a review of everything I have said regarding the nature of this question please refer to previous posts. We have actually not even answered this question yet. Instead I have been trying to show you that: 1) it is a legitimate question, and 2) it is an answerable question.

Yesterday, we ended the post with a discussion regarding two important attributes of God: 1) His transcendence, and 2) His immanence. Understanding these two attributes- and garnering a correct balance between the two-is essential in order to answer the proposed question honestly and intelligently. The Bible speaks both about God's transcendence and His immanence. As we have mentioned before, there is an element of mystery when we look at theses two attributes with our finite eyes. Nevertheless, they are both in Scripture, they are both true about God, and they do not contradict or cancel each other out.

Now it is important to understand the Biblical tension between God’s transcendence and His immanence. Throughout the history of the church Christians have tended to swing back and forth between these two concepts like a pendulum. Greek philosophy played a part in this pendulum swinging. As a result, the pendulum swung toward an overemphasis of the transcendence of God in the early church. The Greeks viewed their gods as completely incomprehensible. And this affected in some way the manner in which the early church fathers understood the God of the Bible. They took their cue from the Greek philosophers of the day and allowed philosophical arguments and analysis to ultimately hold sway over the Biblical text.

There have been other times and points in church history when the pendulum has swung the other way to an overemphasis of the immanence of God. Consistently emphasising God's immanence- to the neglect of ever speaking of His transcendence-will result in a view of God that sees Him not much different than us. Probably a good example of an overemphasis of this in our day would be Open Theism. For the most part, however, we find today that the pendulum has almost perched itself completely on the side of emphasizing God’s transcendence (probably in reaction to modernism). Today many are skeptical that we can know anything for sure about God even from God’s most clear revelation of Himself- the Scriptures (this is the postmodern tendency). This is cloaked with a sort of “humble” facade that says, “It is arrogant to try and speak on anything about God with real assurance and confidence”. This, I think, is a reaction. We must balance the transcendence and immanence of God.

The point to grasp- especially for our current context-is that the idea of God’s transcendence should never distract us from fully trusting in God’s ability to reveal Himself to us (especially in Scripture)! Now this is different than saying that He fully and completely reveals Himself. My point is simply that He is competent in what He has revealed to us. And He has indeed revealed much to us. The names and attributes that God gives to us in Scripture to identify Himself truly reveal to us who He is. One Christian theologian says the following: “We should not adopt a mental picture or model of God in which his real identity or essence is hidden in darkness, while His revealed nature is a kind of periphery around that darkness. In that picture, the darkness conceals what God really and truly is; His revealed nature is something less than His real being…Such Biblical terms as holiness, goodness, and eternity express God’s essence. They tell us what He really is, for Scripture is true. They define Him, because through them God has defined Himself”.

I think that was well said. In other words, God has truly revealed Himself to us. He has not just revealed facts or ideas about Himself. Rather, He has truly revealed Himself to us. To put it simply, Scripture never assumes that our finiteness excludes us from being able to understand who God is through the language that He uses. In fact, it assumes just the opposite. It assumes that God is competent enough to communicate effectively to us who He is. And His Spirit (if we are in Christ) is competent enough to aid our understanding. To say that we cannot understand Him exhaustively (which is what I have affirmed throughout these posts) is simply not the same thing as saying that we cannot know anything about Him with any real degree of assurance.

Furthermore, I think you will find that those who desire to emphasize God’s transcendence in this way are really not humble. They are arrogant and independent. They use their assertion, “We can’t know anything about God for sure” as a cloak of humility. But at their heart is a desire to autonomously make God whoever they want to make Him out to be. Rather than being humble, they create a god that Scripture does not represent, and they do this with unmitigated pride.

....Andy

A Study of Basic Christian Doctrine: How Do We Know God?- Part 2

Yesterday I proposed the question, "How do we know God?" This is the second of eight basic questions that I want to look at in an effort to study basic Christian doctrine. If you think about it, we have not really answered the question yet. Rather, we have analysed the legitimacy of such a question. Furthermore, we have simply shown that it is an answerable question. In addition, I have also demonstrated that the answer to such a question is ultimately "Jesus Christ". That is, the only way that we will ever truly know God is through the person of Jesus Christ based upon His work of redemption on the cross. That much is clear. And we will look at this in detail under future questions ("Who is Jesus Christ?" and "What is salvation?"). But as I made clear yesterday, we are looking for the general answer to this question, not the specific answer. The answer "Jesus Christ" is the right answer to the wrong question, we could say.

Let us continue to look at the legitimacy of this question. We are still not ready to answer it. We must persevere through important introductory material before we will be ready to answer this question intelligently, honestly, and (ultimately) Biblically. I closed the last post with a quote that affirmed what I said throughout yesterday's post. Here it is in a nutshell- belief in God is basic to all men. Now from this assertion flows a major premise. And that major premise is that belief in God is therefore rational. As I said yesterday, we are not to say that in order for belief in God to be rational then evidence must exist. Evidence does in fact exist for God's existence (no pun intended). But it does not have to be there. It is there by God's grace. Some even go so far as to say that it is immoral to believe anything without proof. This is the argument of the atheist and agnostic. Okay, well I have a question then. If that is true, then where is the proof for that assertion? I submit to all the readers of this post that you must have proof to make such an assertion if you want to remain consistent with your overall worldview on the rationality of whether something, or someone is a legitimate object of belief. In other words, if you say that all belief is only rational and moral if it is based upon clear proof, then where is your proof that such a reality is the measurement stick for rationality and morality?

As I mentioned last time, the message of the Gospel is logical and reasonable. And the evidence for the existence of God is overwhelming and rational. This does not mean that mystery does not pervade God's truths (including the truth of His existence). But the writers of Scripture never view this tension between truth and mystery as a problem. Just because God’s revelation of Himself as a whole is considered to some degree as incomprehensible does not logically mean that His revelation of Himself as a whole is somehow not genuine, clear, or convincing. The writers of Scripture affirm both truth and mystery in God's sacred Word, and they have no problem affirming both. They do so with great confidence. As John Frame says, “The mysteriousness of God is never the basis of a general agnosticism. God’s revelation is mysterious, but it is a genuine revelation” (The Doctrine of God, 202). In other words, we can say: 1) God is incomprehensible, and 2) God is incomprehensible even in what He has revealed about Himself. Yet in the same breath also affirm that there is much we can know about God. This tension is sometimes described in two attributes that are generally assigned to God- transcendence and immanence. We will talk about these more when we answer the question, “Who is God?” But let’s just take a glance at each one to help us answer our current question, "How do we know God?".

Transcendence refers to the distance of God from us. His majesty and holiness is usually in view- His “otherness” we could call it. Many texts emphasis His otherness (Ps. 8:1). In fact, His holiness is so great, His majesty so awesome, that it literally affects us physically to be in His presence (Is. 6:4-5- Isaiah). Verses that speak about His transcendence are primarily speaking about His sovereignty, Lordship, rule, holiness, and majesty. They do not speak about God’s physical distance per say. The idea that God is sitting in heaven can be strongly misunderstood. Solomon (the wisest person to ever live) said, “The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain You” (I Kings 8:27). This makes sense. After all, God is omnipresent (To borrow the answer from Robert Cecil's catechism, "God is everywhere."). Rather, verses on transcendence seem to emphasize His “otherness” (Ps. 113:5-6). Frame says, “We should, I think, see these expressions primarily as describing God’s royal dignity. He is “exalted”, not mainly as someone living far beyond the earth, but as one who sits on a throne. The expressions of transcendence refer to God’s rule, His kingship, His Lordship” (105).

Immanence, on the other hand, refers to the nearness of God. God accommodates Himself to us in many ways. One of the most obvious examples of this is seen in both major covenants of Scripture when we see God dwelling with people. He willingly took abode with His people in the Old Covenant in the Tabernacle and Temple. In the Old Covenant, His presence was among them. In the New Covenant, His presence is within His people (Rom. 8:9; I Cor. 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21 ff.;).

The apparently opposing attributes of God's transcendence and immanence (though in reality they are not) are often seen together in the same passages. This proves that in reality they do not contradict one another, though one may still maintain that they are paradoxical. Take for example, Isaiah 57:15. The first part of the verse refers to God's transcendence. It says, "For thus says the high and exalted One who lives forever, whose name is Holy; I dwell on a high and holy place...". The second half speaks of God's immanence, "...And also with the contrite and lowly of spirit in order to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite." Here is the verse put together, "For thus says the high and exalted One who lives forever, whose name is Holy, I dwell on a high and holy place, and also with the contrite and lowly of spirit in order to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite."

Grasping these two attributes of God, and maintaining a proper balance between them will aid us in accurately answering the question, "How do we know God?"

Until Tomorrow,

Andy

A Study of Basic Christian Doctrine: How Do We Know God?

This week we will begin answering the second basic question in our study of basic Christian doctrine. The first question was, "Why is it important to study doctrine anyway?" We have answered that question in a satisfactorily way, I think. We looked at 9 reasons that one should study doctrine. If you wonder what these are, then look back at the previous posts at your leisure. Remember: we are going to answer (Lord willing) eight basic questions. So let's get started on this second one, for it is in many ways foundational for the rest of the questions and their answers.

Now let me just point out to you from the get go that this could be a confusing question if we allow it to be. However, I am never interested in shrouding things in mystery to appear intelligent, so let me explain. We are not speaking specifically when we ask this question. The specific answer to this question would be- "Jesus Christ", right? Many of you reading this already knew that answer. That is, in fact, the right answer. But it is the right answer to the wrong question because I am asking something different than one might initially think. It is obviously true that it is only through Jesus Christ that we truly come to know God in personal relationship (Jn. 14:6; 17:3). However, when I ask the above question, I am speaking generally, not specifically. Therefore, the answer to the question in the strictest sense is not "Jesus Christ". The general answer to this question looks differently. In fact, we are not even discussing (at this point) what we might call the “salvation knowledge” of God. That will be taken up later in the questions, “Who is Jesus Christ?”, and “What is salvation?” Really, we are talking about a different topic altogether.

One could ask the above question proposed this way, “How do we know God exists?” Or, maybe we could ask it this way, “How do we know God exists, and furthermore, how do we know what we know about God, and furthermore, how do we know what we know about God is true?” All of these questions get at the heart of what we will be discussing in the next few posts. This is similar to the question proposed by Zophar (Job's "kind of" friend) when he asked, "Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty?" (Job 11:7). In other words, is there any sense whatsoever in which man can understand God, and be confident that what he understands about God is certain fact? The proposed question is important because Scripture does clearly teach us that there is a sense in which all men “know” God. This is encouraging in one sense. But it is also dreadful in another sense. In one sense, Scripture teaches us that the knowledge about God that all men possess reveals that He is indeed there. This could be looked at as a good thing if it were not for sin. And that is where the dreadful part enters in. Scripture tells us that man, on his own, cannot recognize this knowledge of God due to the effect of sin (affecting everything including our minds and general perceptive abilities/ see 2 Cor. 4:4; I Cor. 1:21; 2:5). And the result is that, rather than leading them to a true (salvation) knowledge of God it leaves them simply “without excuse” (Rom. 1:20). In fact, Paul uses some dreadful language in 2 Cor. 4:4 when he explains that the god of this world (Satan) has aided in blinding the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. It is through Jesus Christ (specific answer to our question) that we truly come to "know" God. But we will never seek Jesus on our own. Our minds will never view that as a rational, logical, needful reaction to our sin. It takes a special operation of the Spirit to remove the scales from the eyes of our mind and reveal Jesus Christ to us (Jn. 3:1-8).

But regardless of the fact that man's condition is sadly wrapped up in his own sin to such a degree that he is incapable of seeing the beauty of God in Jesus Christ, he is still culpable and without excuse. And furthermore, this sad affair does not change reality. This is not a movie that has the potential to have a different ending. This is reality: God has revealed Himself to man, and man categorically refuses to read God's handwriting on His creation, or listen to the spoken Word of His own Son.

Let me point out at this point that God’s existence is not dependent upon evidence for His existence. In other words, though the evidence is overwhelming that God exists, His existence is not dependant either on this evidence, or our ability to perceive this evidence is there. Even if we could not prove the existence of God (which we can), it would not make belief in God irrational. Belief in God is rational simply because He exists. The world depends on logic and rational senses in order to prove the validity of something. However, we must understand from the beginning that though the arguments for the existence of God are rational and logical, they are ultimately shrouded in mystery. The Gospel is not completely mystical, but largely rational. Nevertheless, it is not dependant on logic as understood through the eyes of the world (Compare Is. 1:18; Rom. 10:17; and I Cor. 1:21 with Rom. 11:33-36). Therefore, arguments for the existence of God (and the value of Christ) will appear irrational and illogical at some point because of the element of mystery. Nonetheless, this does not take away from the evidence for God’s existence. Rather, it affirms the wondrously complex and incomprehensible God that we serve. In addition, it points to our finiteness, which in turn points to God’s infiniteness.

In addition, to say that evidence for the existence of God must be established in order to prove the rationality of God’s existence is to place believers in an unfair box. It corners the believer in the one true God (the one who actually possesses truth) and demands him to prove the rationality of his belief according to standards of measurement that God Himself did not invent. In fact, that notion is the notion of the atheist and agnostic. The atheist, or agnostic says, “God cannot exist without proof”. Or they will say, “Religious belief must be based upon empirical evidence and logical arguments in order to be rational”. A Christian who says, “The existence of God must be based upon clear proof” is saying the same thing. He comes to a different conclusion than the atheist and agnostic, namely that God exists. Nevertheless, he begins with the same presupposition, namely that proof is paramount for belief in God to be rational. Scripture never demands proof. It gives proof, but it never demands proof for the existence of God. Rather, Scripture assumes God exists everywhere and throughout. One has to look no further than the first verse of the Bible. Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning God created..". Did you notice that? There is evidence given (read the creation account) that God exists. But there are no arguments for it. The Biblical text simply assumes that God exists. This is an important difference that I am making between "the reality of evidence" and "the need for evidence". I am not denying that there is sufficient evidence that God exists. In fact, I have been affirming rather robustly that there is evidence for God's existence. But I am also asserting that this evidence does not have to be there for God to exist. His existence is not dependant on evidence. And I will notch it up a little and also affirm that our ability to perceive the viability of this evidence is also not something that His existence is dependant upon. What the world thinks is wisdom is not. Paul said this very thing in 1 Cor. 2:4-5, "...my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God."

Let me close with a quote from a Christian philosopher:

“God has created us in such a way that we have a strong tendency or inclination toward belief in God. This tendency has been in part overlaid or suppressed by sin. Were it not for the existence of sin in the world, human beings would believe in God to the same degree and with the same spontaneity that we believe in the existence of other persons, an external world, or the past. This is the natural human condition; it is because of our presently unnatural sinful condition that many of us find belief in God difficult or absurd. The fact is, Calvin thinks, one who does not believe in God is…like a man who does not believe that his wife exists, or thinks she is like a cleverly constructed robot and has no thoughts, feelings, or consciousness” (Alvin Plantiga).

Trusting the Scales Have Fallen From Your Eyes to See Christ,

Pastor Andy

Is Studying Scripture Important?.....Ummmmmm- Part 4

Why is the study of doctrine important anyway? That is the question I have been answering in several posts this week. Allow me to give a few more reasons that studying doctrine is important.

Fourth, studying theology is important and advantageous because it guards us from unbiblical teaching (assuming that we are correct in our interpretation). Only two texts will be needed to prove this point (although the texts are numerous on this topic!). First, let's take a look at Eph. 4:11-14. Paul says, "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to a measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by the craftiness in deceitful scheming".

Much could be said about the above verses. Many of you know that if I were preaching these verses, it would take a good 50 minutes to explain them properly (at least). Nevertheless, allow me to make some brief comments that pertain to the main point I am arguing. First, notice that Paul is emphasising several offices (vs. 11). Second, notice that all of those offices have a very common component. The common component is that all of them were concerned with verbally speaking God's word, or we could say God's truth, to His people. Third, the reason for these offices is clear as well. Verse 12 specifically says that it is for the "equipping of the saints". Fourth, this is to take place, as vs. 13 says, "until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God". Let me stop here by just reminding you that Paul was writing to believers. Thus, when he speaks of them attaining to "knowledge of the Son of God" he is not speaking about salvation. Rather, he is speaking about their sanctification. Fifth, notice that vs. 14 gives the ultimate goal of the dissemination of doctrine (God's Word/God's truth) to God's people. It is important simply because it guards His people from being "children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine". And notice the end of vs. 14 points to the reality of this- "by the trickery of men, by craftiness and deceitful scheming". The conclusion cannot be escaped- these verses place a premium on the teaching ministry of the church which serves as the foundation to guard against heresy. God desires for His people to be equipped with truth so that when unbiblical teaching is heard, they will not be drawn to it.

Consider also 2 Pet. 3:17 which says, "You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness". In this context, Peter uses the word “fall” to refer to apostasy- leaving the Christian faith for good. We know that God ultimately guards and keeps us (2 Thess. 3:3; Jude 24). Those who are “carried away” from the Christian faith never were really in Christ (I Jn. 2:19) showing them that God was not guarding or keeping them in the salvation sense because they never truly placed faith in Christ, though it appeared for a season that they did. Nevertheless, the warning that Peter gives in these verses ought not to be ignored, but should be taken seriously. The warning is given in verse 17 and is “to be on your guard”- being aware of the fact that there are false teachers who distort Scripture and teach heresy. Verse 18 provides the means of being on guard- “growing in knowledge”. In short, knowing doctrine helps prevent succumbing to unbiblical teaching.

Fifth, studying doctrine is important and advantageous because it results in worship and praise of God. This, I think, is a rather obvious point. When we come to worship on Sunday, we do not walk in, sit in a big room and just talk. Nor do we just sit in silence (meditation style). Rather, we come to hear God's Word. The hearing of God's Word (God's truth/doctrine) is central to why we come. And the knowledge of the Gospel is what propels worship, right? It is when our minds are engaged and wrapped up with the doctrines surrounding the Gospel that prompts worship. I do not know how else to put it. I will grant that worship often results from experience. If I am on my way to church in the winter with my family and I hit a patch of ice and spin around thirteen times but end up back on the road and make it safely to church I can promise you that I would be so thankful to God! I would be thankful for his preservation of my entire family because they are precious to me. We would walk into church and I promise you that my wife and I would not be able to stop thinking about God's preservation of us just moments before. Even as I stand singing, readying myself to preach, and even as I preach, I would not be able to get the images of just a few moments ago (in the car) out of my mind. This, no doubt, will prompt worship in my heart. Now that is just an illustration. But my point is that worship can result from experience. I am not denying that. I am simply saying that even worship rooted in experience is ultimately rooted in doctrine. How? Well, in order for me to look back on the incident with the patch of ice and be thankful I must recognize several theological truths: 1) God's power, 2) God's providence, 3) God's grace, 4) God's sovereign plan, etc. So it is inescapable, that is, the notion that worship and praise results from the study of doctrine. Here a few verses you can look up on your own that show that the knowledge of God's "testimonies" and "precepts" provoke praise and rejoicing in the heart (Ps. 19:8; 119:14, 103, 111, 162). Also consider Paul's bursting forth of praise right after giving a synopsis of God's great plan of redemption (Rom. 11:33-36).

Sixth, studying doctrine is important and advantageous because it fulfills the church's mission (Matt. 28:19-20; I Pet. 2:9). Evangelism does not stop with telling someone about the Gospel. Rather, it continues with discipleship. Christ commands teaching as integral to the dissemination of the Gospel. Teaching doctrine fulfills the mission of the church which is to preach the Gospel.

Seventh, studying doctrine is advantageous because it challenges and modifies erroneous beliefs we might hold.

Eighth, studying doctrine is advantageous because it serves to strengthen our faith through the compiling of multiple verses on any given topic. Jesus and other Biblical writers often quoted or referenced more than one book of Scripture as they taught doctrine. The classic example of this is Christ's (apparently long) walk with two men on the Emmaus road in Luke 24:13-27. Luke tells us that Christ "beginning with Moses and with all the prophets...explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures" (vs. 27). In other words, Jesus pointed out several verses (prophecies, promises) in the Old Testament that pointed to the Gospel. He probably mentioned the great promise in Genesis 3:15, the wondrous prophecies of Isaiah, and many more verses. The point is that Christ showed to them that the entire message of the Old Testament Scriptures were all about Him! The study of doctrine seeks to compile multiple verses to explain a certain concept. When these verse are compiled together and explained one richly sees the truth or concept from a number of different angles. This does two things: 1) it leaves us in awe of the complexity and wondrous nature of our God, and 2) it strengthens our faith to know that God's written word (God's truth) is united!

Ninth, studying doctrine is advantageous because it will help us be discerning regarding current and future unbiblical trends of belief.

New Covenant Theology Interview of Gary Long

The following interview might be helpful for those of you desiring to truly understand New Covenant Theology. The interview is of Gary Long and is conducted by John Reisinger. It is a short read, and I believe is helpful in clearing up distortions, misrepresentations, and general lack of clarity regarding NCT that I have personally found quite disturbing. It is nice to hear an intelligent, clear, articulate voice for NCT. John does a nice job of asking good questions. Just click on the link below. It should not take long to read at all.


http://www.ptsco.org/jrginterviewofgl.htm

Why Study Doctrine?- Part 3

For this post let's continue to answer the question, "Why is the study of doctrine important anyway?" In previous posts I have given the first two reasons. Here is the third reason.

The third reason that studying doctrine is advantageous is due to the fact that the understanding of doctrinal truth leads (in part) to our salvation, and the understanding of doctrinal truth is the primary instrument of our sanctification. Christianity is not mystical, but logical. Nobody, who is reading this blog post and has come to a genuine saving knowledge of Jesus Christ was "saved" apart from the hearing of doctrinal information. The reason is simple- the Gospel is doctrine! The truths of forgiveness, eternal life, substitution, justification, etc. are......well...doctrines!

Two key passages show us that it is the message of the Gospel spoken and understood first by the mind (through the power of the Holy Spirit) that results in salvation. The first one is Romans 10:17 which says, "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ". The message about Christ- His saving work for elect sinners- is the Gospel. And the hearing of this (or, to be fair, the reading of it as well) is what saves. God has chosen to engage the mind first in order for salvation to take place. This is not denying the work of regeneration that the Spirit ministers. Rather it is affirming it. I am simply saying that the Spirit "does the work" when someone (anyone) is saved. But the instrument that He uses is the doctrine of the Gospel. The tool he uses is the Gospel.

There is a nice size garden behind my house. It is not mine, but my neighbor's. My neighbor is extremely "handy". He works outside often and knows how to do a lot that I have no clue about. I guarantee you that his garden successfully produces vegetables for a number of reasons. The weather, soil, etc. all play a role in my neighbor's success at gardening. However, having proper gardening tools, and purchasing and planting good seed is very important as well. In fact, I would submit to you that if he had no gardening tools whatsoever, he would not be that successful at growing vegetables. That is nothing against him, but the simple fact is that the success of a garden depends largely upon certain tools. My neighbor does the work itself, but he uses certain instruments to bear a good crop. Now the Spirit works the same way. The Spirit does the work of salvation on a heart, but the instrument He uses is the doctrine of the Gospel. There is no other tool. That is a simple fact.

I promised you two verses to prove this point. Here is the other verse, "For since in the wisdom of God the world through wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe" (I Cor. 1:21). The same thought as that of Rom. 10:17 is being expressed here as well. The means (instrument) that God has chosen to save people is the doctrine of the Gospel.

My overall point is that we ought to have a propensity to love doctrine (and the study of it) because it is doctrine which led to our salvation. That is simple enough, I think. But look at the second half of my statement given above..."and the understanding of doctrinal truth is the primary instrument of our sanctification." In other words, doctrine led to our salvation, but it also leads to our sanctification as the Spirit of God is pleased to apply doctrine to our lives for the purpose of godliness.

To prove this point we need look no further than Christ's prayer for His elect in John 17. I will not take the time to explain this passage in detail. However, note especially vss. 18-21. In effect, Christ is praying that all believers be sanctified in truth. Vs. 17 says, "Your Word is truth". The word concerning what? Its simple, right? Christ is speaking about the word concerning the Gospel and all the rich truths that flow from it which are found in Scripture. In other words, it is the study, learning, and understanding of this truth (found in Scripture) that sanctifies us (sets us apart progressively for God's holy purposes to the glory of Jesus Christ). John MacArthur puts it this way, “…believers are set apart for God and His purposes alone so that the believer does only what God wants and hates all that God hates…Sanctification is accomplished by means of the truth, which is the revelation that the Son gave regarding all that the Father commanded Him to communicate and is now contained in the Scriptures left by the Apostles”.

We should study doctrine, as believers, because it is the means by which we grow spiritually, and it was the means that paved the way for spiritual growth to even become a category in our lives because it was what the Spirit of God used to give us new life.

-Pastor Andy

Why Study Doctrine?- Part 2

We have started a series on basic Christian doctrine in which we are answering eight important questions (refer to the last post). In the last post we gave the first part of the answer to the following question, "Why is it important to study doctrine anyway?" Here is another significant reason. (There will be more reasons to follow.)

The second reason that studying doctrine is advantageous lies in the truth that knowledge about God is attainable, though not exhaustive. And furthermore the complexities of God’s truths do not contradict one another. Thus His truths can collectively be called “one truth”. In other words, God speaks to us in language that we can understand. And these truths that He chooses to give us can make sense even to our finite minds, though not entirely. I am not denying mystery. Paul spoke about this in Rom. 11:33-36 when he said, "Oh, the depths of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgements and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to Him again?". The prophet Isaiah also recorded the truth that there exists great mystery in understanding God, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways", declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts" (Is. 55:8-9). In addition, Deut. 29:29 simply declares that the secret things belong to the Lord. God has secrets. He does not reveal everything about Himself to man. He has chosen to reveal Himself to His elect in the person of Jesus Christ and the reality of the Gospel. The Gospel tells us the most about God that any man could know in this lifetime. Nevertheless, as Paul, Isaiah, and Moses records for us in Scripture, it simply does not tell us everything- at least not in this lifetime. The point is simply that knowledge about God is attainable for us in degrees. And the entrance to this truth is always and only the Gospel. It is not until the Spirit of God reveals to us the beauty, glory, worth, value and treasure of Christ that we will begin our journey in knowing God as He has revealed Himself.


Someone once remarked:

“Everything God reveals of Himself transcends man’s comprehension; every doctrine, therefore, must of necessity terminate in mystery, and man must humbly acquiesce in having it so. God does not tell men more of His purpose than man needs to know; and just because man’s knowledge of what God is doing is always incomplete, His actions will often appear to man to have precisely opposite characteristics to those which He Himself ascribes to them. But in such cases it is man’s part deliberately to accept God’s interpretation in preference to his own. Faith will not lean to its own understanding of the appearance. Faith will take God’s word as a safe index of reality, and will wait patiently till contrary appearances dissolve away with the coming of greater light”.


Indeed, that is well said- every doctrine of necessity terminates in mystery. We are on a "need to know" basis regarding who God is. He- and He alone-has chosen what to reveal to His elect- nothing more, nothing less. We simply cannot know all things in this lifetime about God. He is too wondrous. In fact, that is the very thing that makes Him wondrous. He would not be that wondrous if we knew everything there was to know about Him, right?


In addition, what we know about God can "make sense" to us. Again, I am not denying mystery. I am simply asserting that what God has revealed to us about Himself can make sense in our finite, fallen minds (our minds were affected by the Fall in case you were wondering) primarily because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Again I go back to I Cor. 2:14 where Paul says, " But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them". But for the child of God, the Spirit has enlightened the mind! A child of God can make sense of even mysterious truths! Psalm 119:160 is helpful here. It says, "The sum of your word is truth". That is a profound statement. It is affirming that Scripture (all the information that God has revealed to us about Himself) is made up of various truths. Nobody, by the way, would deny this, right? There are many "truths" in Scripture. Let me list a few: 1) the Trinity, 2) justification, 3) faith, 4) regeneration, 5) heaven, 6) hell, etc. But all of these truths, and the concepts that they express can collectively and summarily be called simply "truth" (singular). In other words, God's truths do not contradict one another. All His truths (which all center around the person and work of Jesus Christ) can be called "one truth". God does not contradict Himself. And in this lifetime His elect have been given the privilege to see a glimpse of this reality, though not perfectly. We can make sense of much. We can understand much. This reality should serve as a mighty impetus to the believer to pursue the study of doctrine.


-Andy