
Tonight we continue our fall study. We’ll be unpacking Psalm 37, trusting Him when our enemies prosper. All are welcome at our home at 7:00, or to tune in on Facebook Live at RC- Lisa Sproul. We hope you’ll join us.

Tonight we continue our fall study. We’ll be unpacking Psalm 37, trusting Him when our enemies prosper. All are welcome at our home at 7:00, or to tune in on Facebook Live at RC- Lisa Sproul. We hope you’ll join us.

Perhaps the most subtle verbal sleights of hand are acts of equivocation. Equivocation is when we use one word, but with two different meanings. The change happens so fast we miss the palmed meaning, and are made fools. The classic illustration is in this syllogism — God is love. Love is blind. Ray Charles is blind. Therefore Ray Charles is God. Something isn’t right there, and what it is, is shifting meanings.
It is when dealing with pronouns that we face the toughest temptation. Antecedents get lost in a sea of pronouns. Soon enough we not only don’t know what he said but don’t know who he is. And where confusion abounds, there you will find the devil. It is one of his favorite weapons.
Consider for a moment the wisdom in the Bible about loving one another. Love is indeed a dominant theme in the Bible. The Bible is so full of injunctions to love that we in turn have great difficulty reconciling that teaching with this: “Oh Lord, dash their little ones against the rocks” (Psalm 137:9). The Bible, in addition to sundry summons to love, includes what we call imprecatory psalms, wherein the psalmist calls down God’s judgment on His enemies. Read through Moses’ celebration of the deliverance of the people and the destruction of Pharaoh’s army, and you probably won’t feel the love.
How do these things cohere? Lest you think the solution is a division between the old and new covenants, give a read to Paul in thundering against the Judaizers in Galatians. While it is true that there is a kind of love we are called to toward those outside the kingdom, (that is, we are called to love our enemy), that in turn matches a kind of love God Himself has for His enemies (the love of benevolence). By the same token, we are called to love discriminately. We have different kinds of loves for different kinds of people. I love my wife one way, and I love my neighbor an entirely different way. We have missed this, because our enemy has confused us on the pronouns. The Bible’s call that “we” love “one another” isn’t ultimately about man’s call to love man. The “we” isn’t human beings, but the redeemed.
Those wolves in the church, liberal clerics and theologians, began this sleight of hand when they first spoke of the “universal fatherhood of God and the universal brotherhood of man.” The idea, as with so many from this particular pit of hell, became eventually accepted wisdom in the evangelical church. It operates under the assumption that God has a duty to treat all people exactly the same way, an assumption that the Bible explicitly denies: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy” (Rom. 9:15). There is no getting around the fact that God did not treat Esau as He treated Jacob, and this before either had been born. And He does not treat the seed of the serpent the same way He treats us, the seed of the woman.
Why not? What accounts for the difference? The answer is simple enough — our union with Christ. Pardon the confusing pronouns, but while we love Him because He first loved us, He first loved us because He first loved Him. We are in ourselves, just like the seed of the serpent, merely dust and rebellion. But in Christ we are altogether lovely. It is not for mere pity that He loves us, but for His Son.
But what of His love for the lost? If they are not in union with Christ, why would they be loved at all? What would account for what the theologians call this “love of benevolence”? What accounts for this love, and the kindness that flows from it, bringing the rains upon the fields of the unjust, isn’t union with Christ, but is the image of God. There is, in short, something lovely about the lost, the very remnants of the image of pure loveliness. What God loves in the reprobate isn’t the reprobate, isn’t the Son, but is Himself, something indeed worthy of His love.
And we who are in union with Christ not only bear that same image, but are called to polish it, to improve upon it, to labor with the Holy Spirit that we might more and more reflect His glory. Which in turn means that we too ought to love the lost, for the very same reason. We love one another with a holy love, because we are together in union with Christ. But we love outside the circle of the kingdom because they yet maintain the fragments of the image of God. In their depravity, they do everything they can to smash that mirror to ever tinier pieces. Indeed their degeneration is nothing more than leaving that image behind until finally, at their death, they reach reach utter horror. They become nothing but dust and rebellion, enveloped in eternal flame.
But not here and not now. Ironically, it is for His love for us that He shows them kindness. If He released the restraints, we would find ourselves living in a living hell. But by His grace toward us, He restrains them, and He kindly showers them with His beneficent love. In His grace toward us, He teaches us our pronouns, so that like Him we too would love His sheep as His sheep, and love the goats for the im

I believe the proper gift for a tenth anniversary is listening, liking, sharing and commenting on a podcast. Don’t commit a faux pas. Tune in. Consider the podcast our thank-you card. From a grateful and blessed man-

Yes there are. I know this because I am one. You, I pray, are one as well. Because there are only two kinds of genuine Christians, carnal ones and dead ones. It is important, as always, that we define our terms. When I affirm the existence of carnal Christians I’m affirming the truth that all living Christians are engaged in a constant battle between their own flesh and the Spirit, between the old man and new.
Paul admonishes the ones he calls brothers, to whom he says God has given grace, who are the very children of God, that they are carnal (I Cor. 3:3). If the believers in Corinth are described by the Holy Spirit as carnal, well then, believers at the very least can be carnal.
Why then ask the question? Because there is no such thing as a “Carnal Christian”™. Here we are not talking about believers who continue to battle against sin, but unbelievers who don’t battle against sin, while claiming to be believers. There was a time when well-respected evangelical scholars advocated for the notion that one could embrace Christ as one’s Redeemer while denying Him Lordship over one’s life. There was a time when the world’s largest para-church organization taught this noxious notion. Some have even gone so far as to suggest that were a person to cry out for God’s mercy in Christ, later repudiate that profession, embrace atheism or satanism, and live a life that makes Liberace, Hugh Hefner and Jeffrey Dahmer look like a Girl Scout troop, that said person would after his death be with Jesus forever.
Such a lifestyle, however, is not what keeps anyone out of heaven. Embracing atheism or Satanism will not keep anyone out of heaven. The only thing that keeps anyone out of heaven is any sin uncovered by the blood of Christ. And all who have so been covered, while they may battle this besetting sin or walk into some other moral failure, continue to battle, and by His grace and power walk out of their moral failure. The denial of the faith, whether in word or deed, is the evidence the faith was never there, not that the sins were too great for grace.
The only thing “Carnal Christianity”™ is good for is to open wider the gate to the wide road to hell. It is the devil’s own patented false assurance machine. Getting jabbed with it will not keep you out of hell. It’ll just delude you into thinking you’ll never end up there, until you die and join the millions of other jabbed goats in eternal torment.
The grace of God is the balm of Gilead, the comfort to those beaten down by their sins. It is not an invitation to surrender to our sins. May God give us carnal Christians grace to fight the good fight and may “Carnal Christianity”™ return to the pit from which it came, never to return.

When Alice found herself at a crossroads in Wonderland, she looked about for help. There in a tree nearby was a smile. Just a smile. Soon though, the full body of the Cheshire Cat appeared. Alice asked the cat which way she should go. The cat asked her where she was headed. Alice explained to him that she had no particular destination, and then the cat spoke words of wisdom—”Then it doesn’t matter.”
If we are going nowhere we cannot go wrong. You can only get lost if you have a destination. Which is why eschatology matters. Rightly understood, eschatology, the study of the last things, is the study of where we are headed. Trouble is, more often than not, we find ourselves going down a dead-end road. We get distracted by mileposts along the way. We argue about where we are or where we almost are. And so we utterly lose sight of the real end of the story.
The Bible speaks of a millennium. It does so in the midst of a profoundly difficult bit of inerrant literature— John’s Apocalypse, the book of Revelation. And all that the Bible teaches is understandable. God doesn’t waste His time or ours telling us about things we can’t possibly understand. So there is a sound view on the millennium that is biblical, knowable, and valuable. We should seek to affirm and grasp that view.
The millennium, however, is not the end, in either sense of the word. It is not the reason for all things; neither is it the last of all things. It should not, therefore, deeply divide and separate us.
Some views assert that we are in the midst of the millennium, that this language refers to the time between the ascension of Christ and His return. Some views affirm that the world will grow progressively worse, and then Jesus will return to rule for a thousand years. Still others affirm that the world will grow increasingly faithful to God’s Word, that we will enjoy a thousand-year golden age before Jesus returns. That’s rather a lot of differences between millennial views.
But do you notice what one thing each of these views shares? Whatever position one might take, in the end we all agree on one thing: Jesus wins. When history is complete, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. When history is complete, all His enemies will have been made into His footstool. History will be complete; there will be no more tears, no more sickness, no more death. When history ends, that which we now are called to seek, the kingdom of God, will be consummated. What we seek will have been found in all its glory, in all its fullness.
There is, however, one more step before the end, one part of the story we are wont to miss out on. The real end, the true end, is not found in the final chapters of Revelation but in Paul’s first letter to the church at Corinth, chapter 15. There we read, “Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power” (v. 24).
The end is when the Son, after bringing all things under subjection, delivers the kingdom to His Father. Then the second Adam, having completed the calling given to the first Adam that the earth would be filled and subdued, will hand back to His Father the creation that had been put under our stewardship.
How can we miss that? How has our story left out this great climax? The Son returns the kingdom to the Father. We must come to grasp this, as it is precisely this glorious truth that animates our labors here and now. The kingdom that we seek first is this same kingdom that the Son returns to the Father. Our labors in the here and now, insofar as they reflect and flow out of our commitment to the reign of Christ, no matter what happens between now and the end, will survive. Our work matters into eternity. Or, as one wise theologian is apt to describe it, right now counts forever.
Our efforts, our labors in raising our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, in calling out the elect from the four corners of the earth, of taking God’s dust and molding and shaping it into widgets, this is not just pursuing the kingdom of God but manifesting it. It is neither what we do while we wait for the end, nor what we do to bring to pass our favorite millennial view. Rather it is what we do to move the story to the end of the end, the Son returning the kingdom to the Father.
And that, of course, is also the beginning of the beginning. From there we will enjoy in the true and eternal Mount Zion— in the New Jerusalem— the very presence of the living God. We will take in the beatific vision, beholding His glory. We know the end, both the purpose and the goal of the story— Jesus wins, to the glory of the Father. And by His grace, He takes us with Him. That’s our reason for living, and our hope in dying.

It’s not by accident that Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount was delivered on a mountain. “On the Mount” isn’t in the title merely to distinguish it from another sermon given on a plain. What we have instead is an intentional connection being drawn between God’s people meeting with God on Mount Sinai and God’s people meeting with God on this mount. Here are a few reasons we can tell this is so.
1. In both instances, the message begins with affirmations of God’s graciousness, the former reminding God’s people of His rescue of them from Egypt, the latter reminded of God’s blessings in the beatitudes.
2. In both instances law is delivered. With the former the ten commandments are given. In the latter Jesus reminds us, “You have heard it said, but I say to you…” Given that the 10 commandments are a summation of the whole of God’s law, and that He doesn’t change, we shouldn’t be surprised the exposition of the law overlaps each other from these two events.
3. In both instances the law is given prior to the inauguration of a new era in the lives of God’s people. In the former God’s people are about to enter into the land God promised to Abraham and his seed. In the latter, as both John and Jesus preached, the kingdom of God was at hand.
This last point is often lost on us. It is absolutely true that all men everywhere have a duty to obey whatever God commands. God does not have one set of standards for His people and a different set for those outside. Yeah and amen.
That said, we’d be fools to not notice that in neither instance is the law-word delivered from the sky to all humanity. The 10 commandments were given to Moses, not Noah. The Sermon on the Mount was given to those who went to hear Jesus, not to everyone under the authority of the Roman empire. These are not laws given merely as a restraint againt the heathen, laws we as His people naturally have mastered.
No. Before Israel, carried on eagles’ wings, inherits the land, set apart as God’s bride, they are told, “Don’t start worshipping false gods.” They, God’s people, are warned, “Don’t steal from each other. Don’t kill your neighbor. Be faithful to your own wife.”
And as the kingdom is being inaugurated under Jesus, His people are being told much the same thing, with the warning that these laws also apply to what goes on in the privacy of our own hearts.
Which is one more reminder that what sets God’s people apart from the rest isn’t in the end how wonderfully we do in keeping His law, but how amazing His grace in forgiving us. What divides us isn’t that we obey and they don’t, but that we, by His grace, repent, and they do not. Our sins, past, present and future have been forgiven. Which must not lead us to forget that we still struggle with present and future sins. We, like everyone else, need His law, both to drive us to His grace, and to know how to live in it.

Tonight we continue our fall study. We’ll be unpacking Psalm 32, celebrating His constant grace and certain promises for us. All are welcome at our home at 7:00, or to tune in on Facebook Live at RC- Lisa Sproul. We hope you’ll join us.

The devil is not content to encourage us to fall off one side of the horse. He takes great pleasure in seeing us fall off both sides. We live, for instance, in what is a most permissive culture. This is true of both the world and the church. All things, we seem to believe, are permissible. Law is something old fashioned and forgotten.
For this reason I define legalism three different ways. The first, and most deadly is when we see our obedience to God as a means to the end of our justification. This was the Galatian error, and it is perhaps most commonly reprised in our own day among the Campbellites who teach that we have peace with God through the work of Christ and our baptism.
The second error, which is far more benign, is when we simply add to God’s law. The Pharisees were experts at this, as are fundamentalists in our own day. No dancing, no cards is no God-given law. The most common usage for this word, however, is this- it is a word we use to accuse others who call us to obey the law of God. That is, in terms of raw usage, legalism means teaching others to obey whatsoever Christ has commanded.
While we live in light of this third definition, the question is grounded in the second definition. That is, while we have no scruples about disobeying God’s law, we often also have scruples about that for which there is no law. We do this often in failing to understand spheres of authority and responsibility. To put it more bluntly, we end up with misplaced scruples when we think ourselves master of all that we survey.
Consider for a moment the Roman soldiers that were baptized by John the Baptist. Prior to their conversions they had served as henchmen for the most rapacious, aggressive and vile state the world had as yet known. The Roman empire put the whole world under its boot. It kept its citizens happy with the bloody gladiatorial games. And John tells them, “Keep serving, and serve honorably.” He does not hold them responsible for the actions of their superiors. He only holds them accountable for themselves.
Now suppose I am employed by Widgets Are Us. My job is to write ad copy for these widgets. My calling is to write honestly and fairly. My calling is to give an honest day’s work for an honest wage. My calling is to submit to those who are in authority over me. My calling is not to make sure that the powers that be at Widgets Are Us don’t use their profits to buy crack cocaine, support wicked political candidates or write checks to Planned Parenthood. I have traded my labor for my wages. I have not been assimilated by the Widgets Are Us Borg wherein we are all one being and I am responsible for what happens with the profits.
Remember this. The single biggest contributor to Planned Parenthood over the past 30 years has been the United States federal government. Even with Republican majorities in the Senate and House, a Republican president and a majority of Republican appointed justices. But the ethical principle is this. Neither you, nor your taxes support Planned Parenthood. Your taxes are paid to the federal government, and your responsibility before God is to pay them.
The government’s obligation is to spend those tax moneys on legitimate government callings, the protection of life and property against aggressors foreign and domestic, or in Biblical language, the use of the sword. Their failure to obey is their fault, not yours.
Please note that Planned Parenthood is almost certainly the most wicked organization in the country. The point isn’t, “It’s okay because they are okay.” They are most assuredly not okay, and should be the object of our frequent and heartfelt imprecatory prayers. But your work does not support them; your bosses may.
We may have one later this week, or wait until next week. In the meantime, please find last week’s Bible study and yesterday’s blog piece above.