Tag: salvation

10 Points to Consider Before You Contemplate Divorce

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

It boggles my mind that so many Christians today are convinced that divorce is a viable option for them. They agree that the Bible generally frowns on divorce, and that it isn’t best. But in their situation…. If we just knew how rough they had it, we’d understand!

To those in that place, let me offer some advice. Here are 10 points I pray you’d consider carefully before you ever contemplate divorce. [And I’m referring to divorce without any Biblical warrant such as adultery or abandonment.]

1) If you claim that Jesus is your Lord, ask yourself this: “Does my Lord and Master agree with me on this decision? Does Jesus really want me to divorce my spouse?”

2) If you think He does agree with you, then look a little more closely at the following Bible passage:

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”… And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery. (Matt. 19:3-6, 9)

Jesus, our Lord, makes it very clear that divorce for just any old reason is not permissible.

3) You might say, “that is just your interpretation of this passage.” To that, I would reply with a question. “How then, can you know anything about God, salvation, eternal life or anything?” If you can’t take God at His Word here, and you prefer to twist it to allow an exception for yourself, who’s to stop you from twisting any other passage? And who’s to say we’re not wrong about everything when it comes to Christianity?

4) Now let me try a different approach. Consider Jesus and His bride, the church. All believers are part of His church — we are His bride. Aren’t you glad Jesus hasn’t left you? Can you even contemplate the possibility that Jesus would leave you?

5) If we are thankful that Jesus loves us, and that He doesn’t leave us when the relationship doesn’t offer enough return on His investment, shouldn’t that influence how we treat our spouse? After all, Jesus’ forgiveness of our sin is the basis for our obligation to forgive others (Eph. 4:32). And even more soberly, if we don’t forgive others, we can not expect Jesus to forgive us (Matt. 6:14-15).

6) If you’re tracking with me even a little bit, I hope the following passage will perhaps connect with you more powerfully.

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word…

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. (Eph. 5:24-26, 31-33)

No I’m not preaching at you here. No one lives up to the ideal presented in this teaching. Instead, look at the picture. Christ loves his church, and men ought to love their wives the same way. The church respects & submits to Christ, and wives ought so to respect their husbands. What will your divorce say about Christ and the church? How does what you’re about to do fit with this picture? As Christians we are to be “like Christ”. Divorce is entirely unlike Christ.

7) Here’s another angle, does a promise matter anymore? If you take back your promise to your spouse, do you think it’d be fine if Christ took back some of his promises to you? Isn’t this just a “lie” plain and simple? There may not be a more serious and damaging lie than the lie of divorce.

8) Another, and perhaps even more serious consideration focuses on the nature of sin. Sin is deceptive. It often feels right, but it isn’t. Sin can even give a temporary pleasure, but it won’t satisfy. The blatant sinner is one who convinces himself that there is very little sin in his actions. If you honestly think this divorce you are considering is not a terrible sin, you need to heed the warnings in the next 2 points.

9) Sin must be punished. Adultery (which is Jesus’ words for unwarranted divorce) is sin of the first degree. Adulterers don’t inherit the kingdom of God, unless they are washed and sanctified (1 Cor. 6:9-11). And people who claim to be washed and sanctified cannot lightly commit adultery, without risking serious injury to their soul.

10) You say, but this is all just so hard! You don’t know how hard this whole trial of a marriage has been. I do know. It’s not easy. Neither is fighting the sin of pornography, or any number of other sins which our sinful society so strongly encourages. It’s not easy to choose the narrow way that leads to life, and we aren’t promised a life full of roses with no thorns. The words of the author of Hebrews seem especially appropriate here.

…let us lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us…

Consider [Jesus] who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood…

For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. Therefore, lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed. Strive… for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.

See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and casues trouble, and by it many become defiled; that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it with tears. (Heb. 12:1b, 3-4, 11-17)

I want what’s best for you, really. I don’t want you to miss out on “the peaceful fruit of righteousness”, and the joy of seeing the Lord, because you didn’t like God’s painful discipline and couldn’t fight for “the holiness without which no one will see the Lord”. I fear you are ready to sell your birthright “for a single meal” and miss out on so much. And like Esau, you may find yourself crossing a line to the point of no return — a place where, when you come to your senses and even seek for a chance to repent, you won’t be able to. That is what I fear the most.

Friend, I hope these points will help you. And for those like me who know people considering divorce, may you find this article helpful. May God be pleased to intervene and gloriously change hearts and heal relationships.

A Resurrection-less Gospel?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

Adrian Warnock (an influential blogger whom I’ve had in my blogroll for quite some time here at Fundamentally Reformed) has a new book out this year (from Crossway) on the Resurrection. I plan on jumping into this book between now and Easter. It is entitled Raised with Christ: How the Resurrection Changes Everything.

In an online interview at ChristianityToday.com, Adrian had this to say about the resurrection.

It is interesting that most Christians talk about the Cross often, and yet we seem to only speak about the Resurrection at Easter. I have also noticed that there is a big contrast between our preaching today, which tends to assume the Resurrection while emphasizing the Cross, and the preaching of the book of Acts, which does the exact opposite, speaking far more about the Resurrection and how it has saved us. Charles Spurgeon noticed this neglect in his day as well, and argued that if our preaching better matched the book of Acts, we would see more people become Christians.

But it is not just preaching. When speaking about the gospel to unbelievers, before I got into studying the Resurrection, often I would bring them to the Cross and leave them there without even mentioning that Jesus had risen again. I am now convinced that if we do that we have only done half of the job. Without explicitly proclaiming the Resurrection, we have not declared the biblical gospel at all. We must also explain the implications of this event. If our understanding of how Jesus saved us makes the Resurrection almost an optional extra, it is clearly deficient.

I found that quite insightful and correct. His words here make me more eager to jump into the book. In my years in extreme fundamentalism, I heard quite a few truncated gospel presentations. I fear this tendency to make the Resurrection a footnote to the gospel is shared by many other segments of evangelicalism today, as well.

Check out sample pages at this link, or go ahead and get the book. I gave a fuller excerpt of the interview over at CrossFocusedReviews.com. Read the whole interview at ChristianityToday.com.

My Explanation of “The Five Points of Calvinism”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 19 Comments

For a while now, I’ve wanted to do a series on the five points of Calvinism, or at least, in my own words, answer the question: “What is Calvinism?” The wait is over, and my brief (for me) explanation of Calvinism is ready. You can check it out at my Calvinism page, but I want to share it here for your benefit as well.

———————–

This is my own work on the five points here. I recommend John Piper’s clear and concise booklet as the best explanation of Calvinism to those who are ignorant of what Calvinism is and what it teaches. His treatment is respectful and very Biblical, it is available online here.

When it comes to Calvinism I think of it as a description of what happens “behind the scenes” with respect to our salvation. We are confronted with the gospel and asked to believe, we feel conviction and then relief when we trust Christ. Biblically, however, what happened in our heart was more than us independently deciding what we would do with the gospel. I have found that the more we know of what Scripture teaches about the inner workings of salvation, the greater will be our respect and regard for the One who saved us. All of this should tend toward a greater degree of personal worship, a sincere humility, and more glory to God, not a higher degree of pride or party spirit.

T – stands for Total Depravity. This means that every aspect of man is tainted by sin. No one is as evil as they can be, but evil affects every part of our being – mind, will, heart, etc. We do not seek after God, naturally. And apart from God’s initiative, we cannot please God. In fact, we are enslaved by the devil and are lost, blinded to the truth of the gospel and in need of God to mercifully reach down and intervene. (Rom. 3:10-18, 8:7-8; 1 Cor. 2:14; 2 Cor. 4:3-6; 2 Tim. 2:24-26)

U – stands for Unconditional Election. Since we are helpless and totally depraved, we need God to intervene. God doesn’t sit on the sidelines and see who is worthy of being chosen, God chooses. And because of His choice, the “elect” live lives worthy of their calling. Scripture is quite emphatic that neither our belief nor our works fit us for being elected but rather, flow from our election. (Acts 13:48; John 6:44, 6:64-65; 10:26; Eph. 1:3-6; 1 Thess. 1:4-5; 2 Thess. 2:13)

L – stands for Limited Atonement. The choice of “limited atonement” to fit with the TULIP acronym is unfortunate. Actually TULIP doesn’t date back before 1900, and “limited atonement” wasn’t widely used much before then. “Particular redemption” or “definite atonement” give the sense better. Jesus’ death is of infinite value and is sufficient for all but efficient for the elect only. Jesus didn’t just make salvation possible (if “activated” by one’s own contribution of faith). He actually redeemed and saved a people through His death. These are the sheep for whom He died and the church whom He purchased with His blood and the bride whom He died for. He died in some different sense for these than He did for those He knew would reject His atoning sacrifice. He actually bore their real punishment and substituted on their behalf in a real way — He made true propitiation for these. (John 10:11 compared to 10:26; Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25-27; Titus 2:14; 2 Tim. 1:9; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Jn. 4:9-11)

*It should also be noted that there have historically been varying positions regarding this point among Calvinists. All Calvinists hold that Christ died for everyone in a general sense and for the elect in a specific sense (1 Tim. 4:10). Some take this to mean the typical understanding of “L” must be flawed and so they call themselves 4 point Calvinists, others take this as a “multiple intentions” view that in the atonement, God had more than one purpose. The majority today hold that God’s purpose in the atonement was the saving of the elect, other benefits such as common grace extend to all as an extension of what Jesus did on the cross, but the cross-work was not performed on the behalf of all, but only for the elect. (This does not mean we should not preach to all, since we have no way of knowing who the elect are. Hyper-Calvinists are the ones who do not preach the gospel indiscriminately to all, and they do not speak for Calvinists in this extreme and errant practice.)

I – stands for Irresistible Grace. This point does not mean no one can resist God’s grace. People do resist. But for all who have been elected, God will overcome their resistance and graciously save them. This captures the idea of regeneration preceding faith. Calvinists believe faith flows from a heart that has been regenerated. A dead heart can’t believe. Faith is the sign of what happened behind the scenes in the internal workings of the heart. So while it may look like faith causes the new birth from our perspective, it actually is the new birth which evidences itself in faith. (John 1:13, 3:3-8; 1 Cor. 2:14; 1 John 4:7, 5:1 [note Greek tense on both of these = “has been born of God”]; Deut. 30:6; Ez. 36:25-27; Heb. 10:15-16; James 1:18; Phil. 2:13)

P – stands for Perseverance of the Saints. This means more than the common understanding of the eternal security of the believer. God preserves all the elect so that not one of them is finally lost, but He also so works in them that they persevere in their faith. When they fall, they aren’t utterly destroyed, they get back up. They bear fruit and have good works which testify to the genuineness of their professed faith. For those who fail to persevere, we are not the ultimate judge God is. But we should exhort one another daily to “fight the good fight of faith”. When understood properly, this point allows believers to take seriously the many warning passages and “if” statements in Scripture. It also gives us confidence to trust that “He who began a good work in [us], will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ”. (Phil. 1:6; 1 Cor. 15:2; John 10:28; 1 Pet. 1:3-5; Heb. 3:12-14, 6:11-12, 10:23-25, 12:14; Col. 1:21-23; Matt. 3:8-10, 7:15-23;)

——————-

I’m open to critique and feedback on this; so please use the comments to let me know what you think. We can have a charitable debate on the topic too, if you’d like.

Bob’s Blog Finds: “Asking Jesus into Your Heart”, Preservation & More

~ Bob Hayton

In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds in my sidebar, under the Bob’s Blog Finds & Bob’s on Twitter sections.

“Asking Jesus in Your Heart”

Brian McCrorie has an important post at Sharper Iron on the idea of leading children to “ask Jesus into their heart”. He rightly takes issue with this method and gives a good case why we should avoid this misleading terminology. The comments include some good discussion. I also have a few older posts in the same vein, which may prove useful as you think through this issue:

Preservation (of the Bible)

Aaron Blumer, the site manager of Sharper Iron, has a great post on the what and how of preservation. He examines the Bible passages that some use to say the Bible teaches every word of the Bible will be preserved in an available, single copy (think King James Bible). It is worth the read, and the comments are helpful as well.

David Brooks

I recently read a couple great columns by David Brooks, both for The New York Times. These are both worth the read (and they really aren’t that long).

Mining the Archives: Why Pray the “Sinner’s Prayer”?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 7 Comments

From time to time, I’ll be mining the archives around here. I’m digging up Bob’s best posts from the past. I’m hoping these reruns will still serve my readers.

Today’s post was originally published December 10, 2005.

I wrote the following as a comment to a post by Jason Janz over at Sharper Iron. The post provided excerpts from an hour and a half long interview of Mark Dever that Jason conducted. I commented on the brief excerpt below. What follows that quote is my original comments (posted back before their site crashed and lost many of their old posts). Note: I’ve updated the link to point to the current page which contains the interview. The excerpts are no longer included in that post.

Jason Janz: And if they did, then you would or wouldn’t lead them in a prayer per se?

Mark Dever: What do you mean if they “did it?”

Jason Janz: If they said “I believe.”

Mark Dever: Well, wonderful. Let’s watch. We’ll see….

I listened to much of this interview a few weeks back. Mark Dever is very interesting to listen to! This interchange, though, stuck out the most to me. Dever’s “What do you mean if they ‘did it’?” is simply amazing. He seems to come from a tradition that is not inundated with the “1,2,3 pray after me” menatlity, like most of fundamentalism is.

I see a big question raised by Jason’s question, “And if they did, then you would or wouldn’t lead them in a prayer per se?”: what would the prayer do? If they said “I believe” or if they, presumably, responded favorably to an “invitation” (a modern notion, with its roots in Charles Finney, a rank arminian, openly heretical on the doctrine of the atonement), or were convicted by a sermon and were directed to trust in Jesus and then had faith, what would praying for salvation or praying to be saved do? If all who genuinely believe are saved, as John 3:16, Acts 16:31, and etc. teach, then why does anybody need to pray for salvation?

Is there any example of any evangelist or of Christ himself ever directing someone to ask for salvation or to pray anything like a “sinner’s prayer”? The “sinner’s prayer” so often cited was a story Jesus told, and certainly someone praying the kind of prayer the publican prayed manifested genuine faith. That is why I believe that sometimes people will naturally pray some kind of prayer, as an expression of faith. Much like someone might stand and say “I believe”. But what happened first, the prayer or the belief?

Rom. 10:14 would clearly say the belief. It is important to see that Rom. 10:14 comes right on the heels of vs. 13 and provides much to help us in interpreting vs. 13. It seems to force us to see “saved” as referring to ultimate salvation. For all who believingly pray on the Lord/worship the Lord (trace the phrase “call on the Lord” in the Old Testament or New Testament and see how it is used of worship often, and often describes those who are saints. 1 Cor. 1:2–the saints are those who continually are calling on the Lord.) will be ultimately saved at the resurrection/judgment. I think it is clear that “saved” in Romans 10 refers to glorification. And I believe this is substantiated by vs. 14 saying how can they call if they have not believed (first)? Vs. 10 gives the correct order in time concerning justification, while the order given in vs. 9 is paralleling the quote of Moses discussed in vs. 5-8. I believe vs. 11 is more correctly translated by the ESV’s “put to shame” rather than the KJV’s “ashamed” (the KJV has something similar for the translation of the same greek word in 1 Pet. 2:6). Vs. 11 really is not paralleling the english idea of shame in the sense of “everyone who believes will not be ashamed of the gospel, but will eventually confess Christ before men”. But rather is saying “everyone who believes in the cornerstone will not be destroyed by the coming flood of judgment, they will not be put to shame by the judgment coming”.

Think about it. When someone is praying the “sinner’s prayer” they may have already believed, but really are still unsure that mere simple faith in Christ will be enough to save them, so they add the prayer in hopes that this will really work. So then, are we really making our converts two-fold more the child of hell by giving them assurance based on a prayer (a work that they did)? If they have believed, they should be encouraged that belief alone is all that is needed since we have such a wonderful Savior. They may want to pray a prayer of thanks for God’s already having saved them, as they are already united to Jesus Christ by faith. They should further be encouraged to live for Jesus, and warned that their faith will be proven genuine by their fruits. Then they should be baptized and added to the fellowship of believers, their local church.

For more on “the sinner’s prayer”, see my later post: “The Sinner’s Prayer Problem“.