Should I Always Expect Goodness from God?

by HARVEYOPP | Mar 16, 2023 | RCUS News

This post was originally published on this site

In Lord’s Day #35, Question #94 of the Heidelberg Catechism it says, in part, “trust in [God] alone, with all humility and patience, expect all good from Him only.” Have you ever been confused with the phrase “expect all good?” Is the Catechism teaching I should always expect good, or is it saying that it is all good because it comes from God?
This is a great question because it explores the nature of “good.” What do we mean when we call something “good?” Typically when we call something “good,” we are saying that that thing is somehow qualitatively good. For example, if I get a raise from work, it’s a qualitative good because making more money is qualitatively better than making less money. When I buy a new car, it’s a qualitative good because a new car is qualitatively better than having an older car. When a young couple gets married, it’s a qualitative good because being married is qualitatively better than living alone. Now in saying all of that, I realize that we should make the qualification “all things being equal.”
But notice how I am defining “good” subjectively, based on how it affects me. Going back to one of the above examples, suppose that raise from work was due to a job promotion. Further suppose there were two people in competition for that one promotion. My getting the promotion is good for me, and not so good for the other person. Another example, suppose 100 people were on an airplane, and that airplane crashed with only ten survivors. Surviving the plane crash was good for the ten who survived, and not so good for the 90 who didn’t. So we tend to define “good” in terms of how outcomes affect me, or those closest to me.
There are other, more philosophical, ways to define “good.” There is the hedonistic way of defining “good” as whatever increases pleasure and reduces pain is “good.” There is the utilitarian way of defining “good” as whatever causes the greatest good for the greatest number. But all of these ways of defining “good” cannot transcend the subjective nature of good. For example, if we look at the hedonistic definition of good, what increases my pleasure might increase your pain. That’s good for me, not so good for you. Looking at the utilitarian definition of good, whatever causes the greatest good for the greatest number will still leave a minority for whom it might not be so good.
That’s why we need a definition of good that is objective, one that does not waiver depending on my mood or the changing fancies of the majority. For Christianity, the standard and source of all goodness is found in God. In Article #1 of the Belgic Confession of Faith, we read that God is “eternal, incomprehensible, invisible, immutable, infinite, almighty, perfectly wise, just, good, and the overflowing fountain of all good.”
Consider the following Biblical passages:

Exodus 34:6 (NKJV) And the LORD passed before [Moses] and proclaimed,“The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth.”

Psalms 119:68 (NKJV) You are good, and do good; Teach me Your statutes.

There has always been a debate in philosophical and theological circles that asked the following question: “Does God do something because it’s good, or is it good because God does it?” If you answer that God does something because it’s good, then you’re saying there is some standard of good that exists out- side of God. If you answer that it’s good because God does it, then you open yourself up to the charge that God is capricious. However, God is the standard of what is good (the overflowing fountain of all good), and when God acts, He acts in accordance with His nature, which is good.
So let’s now look at Heidelberg Catechism Q94. The context of this question is the Catechism’s discussion on the Ten Commandments, in particular the first commandment. The first commandment is “You shall have no other gods before Me.” The question asks “What does God require in the first commandment?” In the answer, it warns against the evils of idolatry, sorcery, and other illegitimate means of seeking help and guidance. Instead of trusting in these false gods, we should rely on the only true and living God. It is from this only true and living God that we should “with all humility and patience expect all good from Him only.” The Catechism uses as a “proof text” for this answer the following verse from the Book of James:

James 1:17 (NKJV) Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.

Now the verse is clear, God only sends down “good and perfect” gifts. Yet this is also the same book that opens with these words,“My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials” ( James 1:2). So when God sends us “good and perfect” gifts, we need to resist the temptation to think good is being defined on our terms. God is not interested with our short term “good” or with our immediate pleasure. He is interested in molding and shaping us to reflect the image of His only- begotten Son, Jesus Christ:

Romans 8:28-29 (NKJV) 28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

So the answer the above question is an unqualified “YES.” We should always expect good from God, but“good” as defined by God, not us. Additionally, it’s all good because it comes from God, but “good” as defined by God, not us. Everything God sends our way is serving the twin purposes of bringing glory to God and conforming us into the image of Jesus, and that conforming work will be complete on the day of Christ Jesus when God completes the work He started in us (Philippians 1:6). Finishing the thought the Apostle began in Romans 8:28- 29, he says, “Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified” (Romans 8:30). What God be- gins with “calling us according to His purpose” ultimately ends with our glorification, and what can be better than that?

Rev. Carl F. Gobelman is pastor of Emmanuel Reformed Church in Sutton, NE

Read more of The Reformed Herald here.

The post Should I Always Expect Goodness from God? appeared first on RCUS.

Using the Gift of Reason

by HARVEYOPP | Mar 14, 2023 | RCUS News

This post was originally published on this site

We are living in what has been called “postmodern” times. Our culture elevates emotion and celebrates imagination. Reason, however, has not totally lost its influence. It still has significant “sway over the centers of knowledge and power in society.”¹ We see this in the advocates of theological liberalism.

The Supremacy of Human Reason in Liberalism

Contemporary liberals in theology, like their predecessors of the early twentieth century, maintain that human reason has a central role to play in theology as the criterion of a sound theology. An example of this is reflected in the work of David Tracy, Emeri- tus Professor of Theology at the University of Chicago Divinity School. Tracy speaks about “the importance . . . of reason and its critical, self-correcting function for all theology.”² Because he gives reason such a paramount place, he takes the position that “much of the traditional Christian manner of understanding … should be rejected.”³
Tracy reminds us that we live at a time when much of con- temporary theology is intent on attacking the faith once for all delivered to the saints ( Jude 3). Tracy, likewise, illustrates a commitment to the view that human reason has a corrective function with respect to the Bible.“Corrective reason” is“directed upon the revelation . . . questioning its credentials, submitting it to scrutiny and criticism, removing from its content whatever may be involved in irreconcilable conflict with other well-founded convictions that may be held.”⁴ Sad to say, this is the message that Tracy conveyed to a generation of divinity students who sat in his classroom.
Although Tracy and other liberals believe that this corrective function of critical reason is quite legitimate when it operates with reference to Scripture, we should remember that the biblical position is much different. It is not our place to correct Scripture. It is the place of God-breathed Scripture to correct us: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable . . . for correction” (2 Tim. 3:16). It is our thinking that ever stands in need of improvement so that we “may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:17).

The Enlightenment Tradition on Reason

Contemporary liberals, in fact, are full-blooded sons of the Enlightenment.“Reason” was“the highest Virtue” for Enlightenment thinkers. They often underscored their position by capitalizing both words—reason was referred to as Reason, and virtue was called Virtue.⁵ The contemporary liberal theological establishment stands in the tradition of Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) on this point. Kant’s Enlightenment motto is well remembered: “Have courage to use your own reason!”⁶ Tracy, no doubt, would agree heartily with the Kantian exhortation.⁷
We may better understand the place that liberals give to reason if we remember that the issue is between “reason as reason and reason as God.”⁸ Biblical Christianity affirms that the proper use of human reason is to think God’s thoughts after him. The believer echoes the prayer of the Psalmist: “Blessed are you, O LORD! Teach me your statutes.” “I will delight myself in your statutes; I will not forget your word” (Ps. 119:12, 14). Theological liberalism, conversely, operates on the assumption that reason
is God.

Reason Is to Be Corrected by Scripture

Liberalism gives to reason a finality and authority that it does not possess. The first sin included a commitment to the supremacy of the human intellect. The position of God was clear. Eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil would bring death (Gen. 2:17). There ought to have been a proper use of human reason at this point. Adam and Eve were called upon to think God’s thoughts after him. Man, however, fell when he no longer regarded his own reason as nothing more than reason. Reason in the fall became God. The human intellect was elevated, and the divine perspective was repudiated. The Tree of Knowledge should have been an object of fear, something to stay away from lest it bring death. Reason, though, determined that the forbidden fruit was “good for food . . . pleasant to the eyes,” and“desirable to make one wise” (Gen. 3:6).
What does Genesis teach? It lays out an important lesson. Giving to reason such a decisive authority is sin by the very nature of the case. How much more inappropriate it is to give reason a corrective function with reference to Scripture after the fall in the Garden of Eden! It is no exaggeration to say that “reason since the fall has been blind, proud, vain, wrapped in error and self-deceit.”⁹ Paul makes a fundamental statement regarding the pagan mind,“The Gentiles walk in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened” (Eph. 4:17–18). The fact of a darkened understanding in the mind of the unregenerate means that reason must not have a magisterial function in theology, standard of what theology ought to be.

A Better Way Forward

What exactly is the proper use of reason in theology? There can be no doubt that God invites us to use our reason in reflect- ing upon God and salvation. The ancient invitation still stands: “Come now, and let us reason together . . . though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow” (Isaiah 1:18). This indeed is sweet consolation to us as we contemplate our fallen condition and the sins that pollute our lives. If we will turn from the evil of our ways, the Lord promises to wash and cleanse us within. David shows us the way in his cry for mercy: “Blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin” (Ps. 51:1–2). He testifies of his experience: “I acknowledged my sin to you, and my iniquity I have not hidden. I said, ‘I will confess my transgressions to the LORD.’ And you forgave the iniquity of my sin” (Ps. 32:5).
There likewise can be no dispute that the apostolic ministry entailed the use of reason. Luke summarizes the ministry of Paul in the synagogue in Thessalonica in these words: “Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, ‘This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ’” (Acts 17:2–3). This is a significant text because it demonstrates the elucidatory exercise of human reason.“In its elucidatory function, reason sifts, analyzes, expounds and, generally speaking, brings into light the content of revelation.”¹⁰ This is precisely what Paul was doing with respect to the Old Testament. He was expounding its contents and showing how it found fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth. More than that, he was endeavoring to win souls for Christ (1 Cor. 9:19–22). He later rejoiced that the Thessalonians had “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come” (1 Thess. 1:9–10).
Why do we give ourselves to the labor of using reason in the service of biblical exposition? It has been well said that the end of theology is always for“the clear and graceful proclamation of the gospel.”¹¹ May we find encouragement in the declaration of Paul:“I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power
of God to salvation for everyone who believes” (Rom. 1:16).

Mark J. Larson
Pastor Emeritus
Warrenville, South Carolina

Read more of The Reformed Herald here.

_{“1 Donald G. Bloesch, A Theology of Word and Spirit: Authority and Method in Theology, vol. 1 of Christian Foundations (Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 1992), 25–26.
2 David Tracy, Blessed Rage for Order: The New Pluralism in Theology (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1996), xiii.
3 Ibid., 5.
4 John Macquarrie, Principles of Christian Theology, 2d ed. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977), 17
5 George Brown Tindall, America: A Narrative History, vol. 1 (New York and London: W. W. Norton and Company, 1984), 120.
6 Quoted in Colin Brown, Christianity and Western Thought: A History of Philosophers, Ideas and Movements (Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 1990), 285–86.
7 Kant’s perspective on reason and theology is seen in his book Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone.
8 Rousas J. Rushdoony, By What Standard? An Analysis of the Philosophy of Cornelius Van Til (Fairfax, VA: Thoburn Press, 1974), 17.
9Thomas C. Oden, The Living God, vol. 1 of Systematic Theology (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987), 395.
10Macquarrie, Principles of Christian Theology, 17.
11Duane H. Larson, “A Current Agenda for Systematic Theology,” Lutheran Theological Seminary Bulletin 74 (Winter 1994): 23.}

The post Using the Gift of Reason appeared first on RCUS.

Words and Meanings

by HARVEYOPP | Mar 14, 2023 | RCUS News

This post was originally published on this site

Some words change meaning over time. For instance, the earliest meaning of English “bully” was “sweetheart” (so says Merriam-Webster.com), but in our day its accepted meaning is a far cry from “sweetheart” (!) and if one needs to learn the current definition of “bully”, standard dictionaries prescribe it. A dictionary changing the meaning of a word may just reflect the change in society’s usage of the word. But the new or alternative meaning, because it is now so defined by the dictionary, is also
authoritative, since the dictionary is the accepted standard for the definition of words; look it up in the dictionary.
Just recently, the editors of the Cambridge Dictionary updated the traditional definition of “woman” (“an adult female human being”), to now include: “an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.” Likewise, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary also added a definition that defines “female” as “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.” In response, a political commentator tweeted: “Remember, if you can control the language, you can control the population.”
Words and their meanings have power. We Christians know that God’s Word has power. Genesis 1 records that God spoke, and it was so; as well: the gospel of Christ is the power of God to salvation for all who believe (Rom1:16 NKJV). Words and their meanings can also be powerful unto deception when used by the devil and his hosts (think of the encounter between Eve and the Serpent). Even our own tongues can have power like fire (see James 3). Words and meanings have the power to sway beliefs and conduct. Words and meanings can be used to indoctrinate, to establish and nurture a certain mind-set, a way of looking at things. Back in 1755, Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary, one of the oldest and most influential, defined “woman” as the “female of the human species.” That authoritative basic definition has stood the test of time for 267 years. So now, when standard dictionaries give a meaning to “woman” that is altered from God’s creational definition, then in whose service is that dictionary?
If this standard dictionary redefining of “female” and “woman” was just a reflection of “what has become just recently accepted in our culture, well, that in itself is a testimony to a self-absorbed, self-determining society. And as we are those who believe and confess and contend for the doctrines of the Christian faith once for all delivered to the saints ( Jude 3), we understand the basic“why” of society’s confu- sion about biological sex and gender. There is a way that seems right to a man. But its end is the way of death (Prov.14:12 NKJV). That way that seems right is due to lack of knowledge and wisdom, in this particular case as it pertains to God creating humankind: male and female He created them (Gen 1:27). The dictionaries’ reflecting the current culture’s“way that seems right,” is due to the lack of “fear” of the Lord and its attendant foolish- ness: The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise and instruction (Prov.1:7).
Words and meanings have power. Their power is evident when changed meanings influence national and state and local policies to allow for and even fund the mutilation of children for the sake of asserting their self-determined gender identity that differs from their biological sex.
We who believe and profess that God’s inscripturated Word is the Truth ought not be confused about gender identity. And we as well ought not think this particular dictionary change in word meaning is just one more cultural moral issue. We ought to see it as part of the pervasive attack against Christ Jesus and His body, the Church, dating back to the history of Genesis 3. Christ, who is the Word that became flesh as the seed of the woman is the way, the truth, and the life ( John 14:6) and by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities and powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist (Col. 1:16-17).
Christ has already, before the Creation, as the Word, assigned the meaning to all things, and that meaning is given by the words of His inspired, by His Spirit, Scriptures. And however standard dictionaries may change the meaning of words, God’s Word will still have remained unchangingly inerrant and infallible and trust- worthy as the Truth in all that is says, including its definition and meaning of “woman.”
God’s established, creational, word meanings may not be descriptive of the culture- assigned meaning of words like“woman,” but God’s Word is prescriptive for every culture. It is wisdom that calls out, and as Proverbs 8:35-36 states of wisdom (which is personified in Christ Jesus, see Proverbs 8:22-31): For whoever finds me finds life, and obtains favor from the Lord; but he
who sins against me wrongs his own soul; all those who hate me love death. Because God’s Word is prescriptive for everyone created in His image, judgment unto eternal death awaits those who wrong their own souls by refusing to heed it as truth, as wisdom unto life.
To “fear” the Lord is to find life-giving wisdom by heeding His Word, trusting in the Christ Jesus who became for us the wisdom of God (I Cor. 1:30), repenting of idolatry, including self-determinism such as gender identity. By God’s grace through faith unto reverential, awe-full, trustful submission to the Lord and His standard-setting Word, deadly self-determinism gives way to acknowledging God in all your ways and Him blessedly directing your paths (see Prov. 3:5-8).
For us who are abiding in God’s wisdom, we understand that it the devil, the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience (Eph.2:2). He is the one who influences men and women and children to determine meaning for themselves, as He did as the Serpent in the Garden, and he can even use standard dictionaries for his deceptive, Christian
-church-destroying aims.
So even as we take comfort in belonging to our faithful Savior Jesus Christ, who has redeemed me from all the power of the devil, we are yet in this present life engaged in a spiritual battle between Satan and his hosts and us who are Christ’s disciples, His church. We pray: “Thy Kingdom Come” and our calling is to make disciples of all the nations…. teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you (see Matt. 28:20). Making dis- ciples is through proclaiming/witnessing the Jesus Christ of the gospel and that involves being engaged in the spiritual battle against all the current influencers/promoters/indoctrinators of self-determined meanings; of a deceptive, false reality that rejects God and His preceptive Word. To be engaged in the battle requires abiding in His Word so we are properly armed for the conflict (Eph 6:10-18).
So when the Lord gives us opportunities to speak the Truth in love, whether that is to a neighbor who makes some reference to a changed definition, or to a newspaper editor in response to a raised cultural issue, or, more close to home, making sure your family is all on the same page when it comes to biblical definitions, let us Christians be bold to counter, prudently, wisely, winsomely, the ungodly culture’s many-pronged misinforming influences, including even standard dictionaries.
Thy Word is Truth

George Horner
Ridgeland, SC

Read more from The Reformed Herald here.

The post Words and Meanings appeared first on RCUS.