Tag: Reformation

A Survey of the Reformation, pt. 2: Forerunners of the Reformation

~ Bob Hayton

This Fall, I’m teaching a 10 part Adult Sunday School series called “A Survey of the Reformation: Its History and Doctrine.” This past Sunday’s lesson covered the forerunners of the Reformation. It also sketched out Western church history from around A.D. 1100 through A.D. 1500. Next week we get into the history of the Protestant Reformation itself.

The lesson plan for my series is below, and you can download the audio or view the slides from the first two lessons.

    HISTORY

  1. Introduction & An Overview of Church History – Download the Audio, View the Slides.
  2. Forerunners of the Reformation – Download the Audio, View the Slides.
  3. The Protestant Reformation
  4. Puritanism & The Legacy of the Reformers

    5. DOCTRINE

  5. Reformation Doctrine: The Big Picture
  6. Total Depravity & Irresistable Grace
  7. Unconditional Election & Particular Redemption
  8. Perseverance of the Saints & Answering Objections
  9. The Other “Points” of Calvinism
  10. Why the Reformation Matters Today

If you’re in the Minneapolis area, you can also see the schedule for these lessons at the SS page from our church website for this information as well.

Reformation Gems 4: Wolfgang Musculus on Salvation, Past and Present

~ Bob Hayton

Reformation Gems are excerpts from selections contained in the Reformation Commentary on Scripture, a new commentary series from IVP which gathers the best Reformation-era comments on the text together all in one set. The volumes in this commentary series resurrect long-forgotten voices from the Reformation age and in so doing they recover the piety and vivacity of that era. I hope that by sharing some excerpts from this series, I will edify my readers and promote this important commentary series.
 _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _ 

Today’s selection comes from the Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Volume X (Galatians, Ephesians). I looked through the comments on Ephesians 2:8 and found a gem. Wolfgang Musculus, a reformer contemporary with John Calvin, made the point that there is a sense in which we are both presently saved, and still waiting for our future salvation. This distinction on different perspectives to the concept of salvation is very important. I have been helped in coming to realize there are three tenses or viewpoints of salvation: a sense in which we are presently “being saved,” another sense in which we have already been saved, and yet from another angle, we are not yet totally saved. These past, present and future perspectives on salvation shape how we live as Christians. Accepting the Gospel one time in the past doesn’t mean that we don’t need to depend on a present and future appropriation of the Gospel to help us live the Christian life now. We must be pressing on day by day toward our future and fully consummate salvation.

Here is the excerpt from Musculus’s work originally published in 1561:

We Are Saved Because We Are No Longer Condemned.

Wolfgang Musculus: Our salvation has two sides to it. One of them relates to its beginning and the other to its completion. The beginning is when we receive the forgiveness of our sins in Christ and are set free from slavery to them and to Satan, as well as from condemnation, and are received into the adoption of children and regenerated by the Spirit of God. Of this aspect, Paul says, “By grace you have been saved,” even though sin is still present in our flesh like a poison and we cannot obtain perfect salvation until we are set free from that. Nevertheless, by the grace of Christ we have already reached a point where there is no longer any imputation or condemnation of our sins in the presence of God, and the remains of the evil by which we were originally lost no longer have the power to kill us, so that we are no longer considered to be lost, sinners and children of wrath, but rather saved, righteous, reconciled and children of grace. because of these basic principles of our salvation and the unfailing grace of God that never ceases to preserve us until we are fully saved, the apostle is right to say that we have been saved by grace.

The completion of our salvation, however, is something that we are still hoping and waiting for. It will come when we have been set free from death and corruption and attain eternal life, not only in the spiritual sense but also in our glorified bodies, so that we shall no longer be subject to any miseries, whether corporal or spiritual. We are waiting for this perect salvation in hope; the apostle says in Romans 8:24 that we have been saved by hope. The health of a person who is mortally ill is thus restored and completed in two stages. In the first stage, the mortal illness is overcome and broken by the power of the medicine and the diligence of the doctor, under the overall guidance of God, so that the illness is no longer lethal, nor does it stop the sick person from gradually starting to eat, drink, rest, get up and walk again. Once that stage has been completed, the sick person is said to be well again and restored, even though there is still great weakness in his body and incapacity in his members, pallor and thinness in his face and other lingering signs of the illness that has been overcome. In the second stage full and complete health is gradually restored so that there is nothing left of the former illness, but the whole body, both inside and out, is restored to its natural wholeness and health. Exactly the same thing is true of the salvation that is made available through Christ, our heavenly doctor, to those who believe in him. (pg. 286-287)

About the Reformation-era author: Wolfgang Musculus (1497-1563). Viennese pastor, reformer and theologian. Musculus was an advocate and writer for the cause of reform, producing translations, biblical commentaries and an influential theological text, Loci communes sacrae theologiae (Commonplaces of Sacred Theology), outlining a Zwinglian theology. Musculus began to study theology while at a Benedictine monastery; he departed in 1527 and became secretary to Martin Bucer in Strausbourg. He was later installed as a pastor in Augsburg, eventually performing the first evangelical liturgy in the city’s cathedral. Though Musculus was active in the pursuit of the reform agenda, he was also concerned for ecumenism, participating in both the Wittenburg Concord (1536) and discussions between Lutherans and Catholics. (pg. 429-430)

Learn more about this commentary series at the Reformation Commentary page at IVPress.com, or check out this sampler (PDF). You can pick up a copy of Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Volume X (Galatians, Ephesians) at any of the following online retailers: Westminster Bookstore, Monergism Books, Christianbook.com, Amazon, Barnes&Noble or direct from IVP. You may want to consider becoming a member with IVP and getting the entire series on a subscription discount of more than 40% per volume.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by IVP. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Introducing: “A Survey of the Reformation”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

At my church this week, I started a 10 part Adult Sunday School series called “A Survey of the Reformation: Its History and Doctrine.” Here is the schedule of the lessons, and the slides and audio from lesson 1. You can also view the SS page at our church website for this information as well.

    HISTORY

  1. Introduction & An Overview of Church History – Download the Audio, View the Slides.
  2. Forerunners of the Reformation
  3. The Protestant Reformation
  4. Puritanism & The Legacy of the Reformers

    5. DOCTRINE

  5. Reformation Doctrine: The Big Picture
  6. Total Depravity & Irresistable Grace
  7. Unconditional Election & Particular Redemption
  8. Perseverance of the Saints & Answering Objections
  9. The Other “Points” of Calvinism
  10. Why the Reformation Matters Today

Reformation Gems 3: William Greenhill on the Conversion of the Jews and Ezekiel’s Temple

~ Bob Hayton

Reformation Gems are excerpts from selections contained in the Reformation Commentary on Scripture, a new commentary series from IVP which gathers the best Reformation-era comments on the text together all in one set. The volumes in this commentary series resurrect long-forgotten voices from the Reformation age and in so doing they recover the piety and vivacity of that era. I hope that by sharing some excerpts from this series, I will edify my readers and promote this important commentary series.
 _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _ 

Today’s selection comes from the Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Volume XII (Ezekiel, Daniel). In perusing the comments on Ezekiel, I was surprised to see quite a bit about the prophesied conversion of the Jews and their return to the Promised Land. Most of the comments in that vein came from William Greenhill or Matthew Meade (one of his fellow non-conformist ministers). While many today herald the formation of the modern nation of Israel in 1948 as evidence that God has kept this promise, most still hold to a future conversion of Jewish people to Christianity. Many Reformed theologians, amillennialists and the like, understand the return to the land to be fulfilled already historically, and ultimately that it points to Christ and the greater inheritance that His Church experiences. In this vein, see my “Understanding the Land Promise” series. But I found it insightful to see this same question wrestled with in the 1600s soon after the Reformation by Greenhill, Matthew Meade and others.

Here are some excerpts from Greenhill’s comments, as well as evidence that he wouldn’t quite fit the mold of a standard dispensationalist, when it comes to his thoughts on other aspects of Ezekiel’s prophecy. He takes a literal view of the land in some passages, and in others, he sees a spiritual fulfillment:

Literal interpretation of a future “conversion of the Jews” and “return to the land.”

Ezekiel 37:21-22
…The conversion of the Jews we may with warrant expect and pray for. God has promised to gather the children of Israel and to bring them to David their king, that is, Christ…. Seeing God has promised to do it, we may believe and pray for the same. (pg. 185)

Ezekiel 37:26-27
Some look on this promise of David to be king over the Jews as accomplished in the reign of Christ the Messiah when here on earth because he gave out his commands then and required obedience to them…. Others are of a different judgment and believe that this great promise made here to the two houses of Judah and Israel remains yet to be performed: (1) Because the two houses are not yet united into one…. (2) Because the Jews do not own Christ; neither one house nor the other do it; neither Judah nor Israel acknowledged Christ to be the Messiah…. (3) The Jews have been, and are still, under many kings and shepherds…. (4) They shall then walk in the ways of Christ, not the ways of Moses….

From Ezekiel 37:26-27 I shall only give you this observation that there are great and precious promises that concern the Jews, yet unperformed. The everlasting covenant of peace, Christ being their king and temple, with many others, the Jews expect the fulfilling of. And so may we, for God is faithful and will make good his word. (pg. 187)

Ezekiel 39:25-29
God hid his face seventy years from them in Babylon; and since their crucifying of Christ, he has hid it from them sixteen hundred years. But he has a time to let them see his face again, and never more to hide it from them. They shall have his favor, his counsel, his help and protection. They shall not be under severe judgments but enjoy sweet mercies. (pg. 193)

Spiritual interpretation of Ezekiel’s temple.

Ezekiel 41:1-7
“Of the signification of this temple.” Some make the court belonging to it to represent the world and the temple to represent heaven. It may be considered whether the porch does not point out the common professor of the faith, the temple, the true saints, who are temples of the Spirit, and the holy of holies, the saints in glory, the condition of those made perfect. The true representation of this temple, I take it, is the body of our Lord Jesus Christ; both his body natural and his body mystical, namely, the church. (pg. 207)

Ezekiel 45:1-6
Having laid down the platform and measures of the temple, he comes now to the division and measuring of the land, wherein things are dark, difficult and deep, not to be attempted by human strength but by the help of Christ’s Spirit, which makes dark things, light, difficult things easy and sounds the greatest depths.

…There was a distinction of the land of Canaan in Moses’ and Joshua’s days (Num 34, 35; Josh 13, 21). But this division differs much from the same, and when the Jews returned from Babylon, there was no such division made of the land. Had it been, Ezra or Nehemiah would have made mention of it. This division, therefore, is not to be understood literally but spiritually, and the completing of it to be looked for in the church of Christ, not in the Jewish state or temple. Here, then, seems to be a spiritual lotting, and bringing people out of Judaism and heathenism into the kingdom of Christ and fellowship of the gospel…. The work of grace, and bringing of people into the church, is free; nothing in people, or from people, procures it. (pg. 220)

Ezekiel 47:13-23
Having given you the literal sense of the words… now let us see what may be the spiritual sense of them. Indeed, according to the letter, they were not fulfilled after the return from Babylon, but mystically under the gospel they were.

1. Then here is held out to us the great extent and largeness of the church under Christ and the gospel. The land mentioned signifies the church’s state; and the bordering of it out, north, east, south, west, the extent of it into all parts. The Christian church is larger than the Jewish, that was shut up in one nation; now it reaches to all nations (Mt 28:19), neither Asia, Africa, Europe or America is excluded (Mt 24:14; Lk 24:47; Rev 15:4). The church under the gospel is universal and invisible.

2. Those who are subjects or members of this church are not hypocrites but Israelites. Those who were not Israelites, and true Israelites, were not to be in this church…. true Israelites, such as Nathaniel was (Jn 1:47); of Jews inwardly, such as are circumcised in heart and spirit (Rom 2:29); of such as are enrolled in heaven (Heb 12:23); of sealed ones (Rev 7), and these stood with the Lamb on Mount Zion (Rev 14:1). These made up the church and body of Christ. (pg. 227-228)

About the Reformation-era author: William Greenhill (1591-1671). English nonconformist clergyman. Greenhill attended and worked at Magdalen College. He ministered in the diocese of Norwich but soon left for London, where he preached at Stepney. Greenhill was a member of the Westminster Assembly of Divines and was appointed the parliament chaplain by the children of Charles I. Oliver Cromwell included him among the preachers who helped draw up the Savoy Declaration. Greenhill was evicted from his post following the Restoration, after which he pastored independently. Among Greenhill’s most significant contributions to church history was his Exposition of the Prophet of Ezekiel. (pg. 434-435)

Learn more about this commentary series at the Reformation Commentary page at IVPress.com, or check out this sampler (PDF). You can pick up a copy of Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Volume XII (Ezekiel, Daniel) at any of the following online retailers: Westminster Bookstore, Monergism Books, Christianbook.com, Amazon, Barnes&Noble or direct from IVP. You may want to consider becoming a member with IVP and getting the entire series on a subscription discount of more than 40% per volume.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by IVP. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Matt Olson and “What Matters Most” with Separation

~ Bob Hayton ~ 5 Comments

Matt Olson, the president of Northland Baptist Bible College (now called Northland International University), has been writing a blog recently and saying some really important, and risky things. He’s taking a stand against institutional legalsim and is making his constituents a little uneasy.

Recently he started a multi-part series on “What Matters Most.” He is thinking through separation in light of how the fundamentals of the faith are what truly matter most. I have made a similar point in a post entitled: “Minimizing the Gospel through Excessive Separation.” Olson also is open about the positive influence on his thinking from Al Mohler’s “Theological Triage” illustration, which is quite helpful in my view as well.

Here is how Olson distills the three levels of his view on separation:

The first/top tier is orthodoxy. What doctrines are necessary for a person to truly be “Christian?” Sometimes we have referred to these as “the fundamentals of the faith.” While five of these were distinguished in the early part of the last century, I do think there are more. These would be beliefs that are necessary to have a true gospel, an orthodox faith, and an authentic Christianity. I believe it is very clear that Paul draws a hard line here with orthodoxy when we read Galatians. If we don’t get this right, we don’t get anything right.

The second tier is one of functional distinctives. These teachings are necessary for a local church to function effectively—such as mode of baptism and church polity. We may have great fellowship with a Presbyterian and even have him preach for us in our church, but we probably won’t be members of the same church. We differ because we interpret certain texts differently. I see this as a “dotted line.” We can both be Christians who love the Lord and seek to please Him in all we do and we can enjoy times together in and out of the contexts of our local churches.

The third tier is personal convictions. These are matters of conscience or preference. These are important, but believers should be able to differ and still enjoy fellowship within the context of the same local church. Love and respect will “give people space.” It is a Romans 14 spirit within the body and does not prohibit a healthy functioning of the local assembly of believers. In fact, the differences can be a strengthening characteristic. [from part 1 of his series]

Olson seems to differ from the fundamentalist party line in his last post in this series, where he makes the following observations:

I believe that the same lines that I draw for an orthodox Christian faith are the same lines that I should draw for Christian fellowship. I believe that every true born again Christian is a brother or sister in Christ and that not only can I have fellowship with him or her, it is what Christ has intended, and it is what brings him great delight (Romans 1:1; Philippians 2:1-11). For me to draw dividing lines that He has not drawn grieves Him, hurts the body of Christ, and hinders the work of the Great Commission.

The mode of baptism, timing of the rapture, cessationist or non-cessationist positions, dispensational or covenant positions, church polity, style of music, philosophy of ministry—are NOT fundamentals of the faith. They never have been. When we get to heaven I think there are going to be a lot of people feeling ashamed about how they fought over these things and neglected what matters most.

Every local church or ministry will have its functional distinctives, and we need these. Every believer will have his own personal convictions, beliefs, and opinions. We need these as well. They are not unimportant and they may even affect the degree of practical cooperation in certain ministry contexts. But, these are not matters of separation and those who don’t agree with someone else’s opinions are not simply disobedient brothers.

A disobedient brother is someone who is in clear violation of biblical teaching and one who after repeated confrontation continues in his sin. The Bible gives plenty of instruction on how to work through these situations in love and toward restoration (Galatians 6:1-5). [from part 3]

I wholeheartedly affirm what he is saying above, and can agree with the gist of his conclusion:

What do we separate over?

  1. The Christian should expose and separate from a false Gospel (Galatians 1:8,9).
  2. The Christian should expose and separate from another Christian who continues to walk in disobedience (after following a biblical process for restoration, I Corinthians 5:9-13).
  3. The Christian should separate from the world (This is another discussion that I would like to take up in the future because I find many people have a wrong view of ”the world” I John 2:15-17).

[from part 3]

While I applaud Olson’s conclusions on this matter, I’m curious as to what degree this will impact his decisions at the helm of a large fundamentalist institution. I’m hoping he continues to make positive changes, such as his controversial tack on the use of demerits at the university and his changing stance on music (see his open letter for more on both). I wonder if it is too much to hope that he would steer a course for Type B fundamentalists to come into greater fellowship and interaction with the Type Cs who don’t hold to the name fundamentalist but are nevertheless similar in their beliefs. (I’m using Joel Tetreau’s ABCs here.) Apparently others are taking note about Olson’s practice, as the FBFI blog recently put his feet to the fire over an endorsement of a church that belongs to the Sovereign Grace Ministries group of churches. I’m curious to see how Olson answers the very specific questions that have been raised.

These questions are why I am not a part of the fundamentalist movement, because there is such a to-do made about institutions and structures. If you have a fundamentalist institution committed to the movement, then you can’t endorse churches connected to a non-fundamentalist movement. But following Scripture would move you to endorse such churches in the spirit of all Olson has stated above. This is the quandary in store for other fundamentalist leaders who see the deficiencies of an “us four, no more” mentality and really get the Gospel-centered focus of today’s conservative evangelicals. To truly follow their conscience and lead their institutions, they’ll have to invite Mark Dever to their conferences and will inevitably say and do things the fundamentalist base will see as a betrayal of their “cause.”

Here’s hoping that this next generation of fundamentalist leaders are the genesis of a sweeping change within fundamentalism as a whole, and that the wider Church is blessed because of their willingness to follow Christ at all costs.