Tag: Presbyterian

Singing Theologically: Modern Hymns and the Atonement

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Several years ago I highlighted the advent of the “Modern Hymn.” Keith Getty and Stuart Townend, along with others, have revived and reinvented the hymn for our generation. The most well known modern hymn, is perhaps one of the best: “In Christ Alone.” This song ranks up there with other greats and is as widely sung and loved today as “Amazing Grace.”

Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School of Samford University, recently highlighted the refusal of the authors of “In Christ Alone,” to allow it to be slightly edited and thus included in a new Presbyterian (PCUSA) hymnal. George lauds that decision, since the proposed edit would take out the idea of Christ bearing God’s wrath for sin. Here is the proposed edit:

From: “Till on that cross as Jesus died / the wrath of God was satisfied.”

To: “Till on that cross as Jesus died / the love of God was magnified.”

George’s article, “No Squishy Love” was shared and discussed online and in print so much, that he has followed it up with a part 2, today. One of the places where his first article was discussed was Sharper Iron; and this most conservative of online evangelical blogs, was not even immune from those who argued against the idea that Jesus bore God’s wrath for sin. Truthfully the orthodox idea of Jesus bearing the punishment of our sin on the cross is facing hard times today.

The follow up piece by Dr. George, doesn’t back down from defending the satisfaction theory of the atonement, and it includes more historical insight on the question. In the piece, George also highlights another hymn with theological substance, “How Deep the Father’s Love for Us,” by Stuart Townend.

For my part, we should be glad that modern hymns are not as substance-less as some of the praise songs of the last few decades. Unadulterated joy and songs of intense emotion are needed, yes. But the didactic value of theologically rich hymns, which both move and instruct, is untold. May a new generation of hymn-writers pick up the mantle of Isaac Watts and continue to give the church faithful hymns for the next generation.

Revisiting Baptism and Young Children

~ Bob Hayton ~ 28 Comments

I’ve considered this question before. As Baptists, when should we baptize our children? A few blog posts recently give reasons why we should or should not delay baptism until our children are more mature (apx. ages 10-12).

First, Trevin Wax gave 4 points on his position relating to this question (which is that we should delay baptizing children until they are around 10 years old or so).

John Starke at The Gospel Coalition Blog then gave 4 reasons why we should baptize small children.

On the heels of these posts, Mike Gilbart-Smith at 9 Marks Blog posted his own “9 reasons why we should not baptize young children“.

For my part, I have a hard time getting around the household baptism passages in Acts. Presbyterians point to household baptisms as evidence of the batpism of small children and infants. Baptists demur and say these passages are silent about the age of children, and often give evidence that all the members of the households evidenced faith. Now, however, when it comes to young children old enough to express faith, Baptists are free to let these children wait in some cases years before affirming their faith through baptism? The very same passages in Acts where all members of a household (presumably including children) believe and then are immediately baptized, now have nothing to say about children below the age of 12. It’s one thing to assume the passages don’t refer to infants, now we are supposed to believe they don’t refer to children under 12? Just who should we include as being in the households of the Cornelius, Lydia, the Philippian jailer and others?

As Starke points out, “the Bible doesn’t seem to give us any examples of an un-baptized Christian”. Furthermore, Justin Taylor in linking to Starke’s post above, added this insight:

There is an irony in the discussion””namely, that Jesus tells us to have faith like a child, and we often tell children that they first have to have demonstrate faith like an adult.

All things considered, at the risk of being considered a closet Presbyterian, I tend to think that the symbolism of Baptism is as much about the objective work of Christ for us (washing our hearts clean), as it is about the subjective experience of our testifying to our belief in the gospel (being buried with Christ in baptism). What happens in Baptism is an identifying with Christ and a celebration of what He has done, ultimately, not what we have done. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate for young children who have demonstrated faith in Christ. And since baptism doesn’t save, I am not persuaded by arguments for delaying baptism. I may not agree fully with Vern Poythress’ thoughts about how even 2 and 3 year old children can have saving faith, but I also think he has a point.

I’m interested in what my readers think about this. I understand that some of us find ourselves in churches with an official policy of delaying baptism. I’m not advocating that you disregard your church’s teaching on this subject. Please don’t misunderstand me. But I think a more biblical position is to accept the little children that come to Jesus, and allow them after a period of evaluation, to be baptized.

Recommended Resource on Dispensationalism vs. Covenant Theology

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

My friend Nathan Pitchford has turned several of his essays into books by means of Lulu.com’s self-publishing capabilities. His essays are excellent and several of them got me thinking regarding the problems of dispensationalism. Pitchford’s books are available for free .pdf download so I encourage you all to check them out.

One of his newest books is Themes in Theology vol. 4, Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology. Several of his best essays are in there. You can download the book here, or purchase a print copy here. I’d also encourage you to read the first two essays for sure: Is Dispensationalism Biblical? and Land, Seed and Blessing in the Abrahamic Covenant. He also includes an appendix with a Scripture verse list on the topic.

One other note about Nathan, he is going to be a guest on Scott Oakland’s ReformedCast podcast tonight. You can listen live at 6pm Central, or get the free download later. He will be sharing his transition from Baptist to Presbyterian. That’s one area I still disagree with Nathan. The show will be worth listening to, however, as I’ve found the Baptism debate is beneficial and can increase your understanding of those in the Church who disagree with your particular position.

“James (Reformed Expository Commentary)” by Daniel Doriani

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

Author: Daniel Doriani
Publisher: P & R Publishing
Format: hardcover
Publication Date: 2007
Pages: 220
ISBN: 9780875527857
Stars: 5 of 5

It’s hard to keep up with all of the new commentary series available these days. Critical, expository, application, practical, scholar’s, layman’s, preacher’s, everyman’s — commentaries come in all shapes and sizes. They also run the whole gamut of theological positions. One can find a commentary to fit almost anyone’s personal taste. This is actually a good thing, as non-English speaking people could certainly attest. Availability of good resources (along with some less useful ones) is a blessing we must not take for granted.

When I picked up a volume from P&R’s Reformed Expository Commentary series, I wasn’t sure quite what to expect. As it turned out, I was totally unprepared for how truly excellent a commentary actually can be.

James, by Daniel Doriani, is a joy to read — and use. I’ve been putting it to use in a men’s Bible study on the book of James. And the book serves well to that end. Not only is it an able study tool, but it would serve as excellent devotional reading material. It has the right balance of practical theology and careful scholarship.

The Reformed Expository Commentary series purposely aims to keep the volumes more pastoral and accessible to lay leaders within the church. The authors of each book in the series are pastors committed to the Reformed understanding of Bible doctrine as embodied in the Westminster Confession of Faith. Don’t let that scare you. Even if you are not reformed or Calvinist-leaning, you should be thankful for the Westminster Confession of Faith. People who ascribe to it are likely to be conservative Bible-believing scholars. They are chained to the text of Scripture, which the WCF does a good job of handling (albeit as a Baptist, I differ in at least one point).

As a pastor-scholar, Doriani is able to bring an exposition of the text to us in his commentary. He doesn’t merely break down the text, but he applies it and is free to connect the text to parallel passages in Scripture that develop the same theme. While the book goes out of its way to apply the sense of Scripture, it doesn’t become merely a written sermon. Doriani traces the flow of the text well, and seeks to cover all the questions laymen and scholars alike would have. Still, this is not a critical commentary that might delve deeply into the Greek; and so it will not be the only resource one should consult for study.

The tone of the commentary allows for more of the author’s personality to come through. We see this in Doriani’s treatment of James’ teaching on the elders praying over the sick and anointing them with oil. He shares how his study of the book of James led him to encourage his church to follow James chapter 5 in their practice. He relates two touching stories of God’s healing in answer to the prayer of the elders (and the simple faith of following God’s teaching in this matter). The personal story however, does not turn into a soap-box in any sense. Doriani is careful to cover how faith is not something obligating God to heal in every case, nor is sin behind every illness. His treatment of this passage alone, is worth the price of the book.

The most transformational passage I encountered in my own study of James (with Doriani’s help) has been chapter 1:12-17. Doriani confronts the confusing nature of verses 13 and 14 which seem to say God would never “tempt” anyone. Doriani brings out that God does “tempt” Abraham and also Moses and the Israelites, etc. Of course “tempt” can mean “test” , or “trial” , and context is king here. But Doriani helped me to really get the sense of of the overall teaching of that passage. Here is an excerpt that is especially helpful.

So there are two potential paths in any test. Testing met with endurance makes us mature and complete; it leads to life (1:3-4, 12). Or testing met with selfish desire leads to sin and death (1:14-15). “Death” is more than the death of the body, tragic as that is. Rather, just as faith and endurance lead to eternal life (1:12; cf. Matt. 10:22), so selfish desire and sin lead to eternal death (Rev. 20:14-15).

This is the worst possible result of testing, and a idea we might prefer to avoid. Therefore, James commands, “Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers” (1:16 ESV). James warns his readers against blaming temptation and sin on God. He hopes his readers see the truth. Sin begins in our hearts which are all too willing to follow evil desires. How foolish it is to succumb to temptation, then blame the results on God.

Because of our sin, tests can lead to spiritual death, but God designed them to bring us good. Tests stand among God’s gifts, not his curses. But if our sinfulness leads us to fail life’s tests, how can we escape our failures? The final two verses [17-18] offer an answer. (pg. 39)

This insight is going to stick with me my whole life, Tests offer two alternative responses: endurance & faith or selfish desire/doubt/blaming God. Our choice is important, we must not be deceived. But this topic (covered in verses 12-16) flows right into verse 17 which says every good gift comes from God. Tests, in the context of James chapter 1, then, are God’s gifts to us!

The extended quote above also serves to illustrate Doriani’s style in two ways. Notice first, the end of the first paragraph, where he looks beyond the focus of the text in James to the teaching of other Scripture as well. Second, the last paragraph above shows how Doriani is always looking for the gospel. We do fail life’s tests, what then?

This gospel focus serves readers well as they encounter James through this book. James can be seen as merely a book of practical advice or a collection of commands, yet sprinkled throughout the book are elements of Gospel. And it is the gospel which makes sense of James. Doriani shows us how to see James as complementary to Paul, and warns against a legalistic approach to the book.

I cannot more highly recommend this resource. If other titles in the series are as well put together, and as helpful as this book, I am going to want to collect them all. I suspect you will too.

My thanks go out to Presbyterian and Reformed Publishers for providing me with a review copy of this book.

Daniel M. Doriani (M.Div., Ph.D., Westminster Theological Seminary; S.T.M., Yale Divinity School) is senior pastor of Central Presbyterian Church, Clayton, Missouri. He previously was dean of faculty and professor of New Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary. He is a frequent speaker at conferences and seminars, and the author of Getting the Message: A Plan for Interpreting and Applying the Bible, Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application, and The Sermon on the Mount: The Character of a Disciple.

Disclaimer: this book was provided by the publisher for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to provide a positive review.

This book is available for purchase at the following sites: Westminster Bookstore, Amazon.com, or direct from P & R Publishing.