Warfield on What Paul Knew of Jesus
Warfield on What Paul Knew of Jesus

Throughout his later career, B. B. Warfield was a much sought-after encyclopedist. Before the internet and sites like Wikipedia, multi-volume encyclopedias were an important way to amass information on the whole range of subjects within a larger field of endeavor. The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica 11th Edition was among the most famous of these.[1]

Christian scholars developed several notable such encyclopedias (i.e., the McClintock and Strong, Biblical Ccyclopedia; and the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia—ISBE. The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1910) was one of the most well-known and respected of these. At the time of its publication, Warfield held the chair of Professor of Didactic and Polemic Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary. It was his job to pounce upon any and all departures from Presbyterian orthodoxy as expressed in the Westminster Standards. As a highly-esteemed scholar and a well-known theological conservative, Warfield was asked to write key entries in a number of these encyclopedias.

Warfield contributed the entry on “Jesus Christ,” for New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia (NSHERK). His essay can be found here in its entirety. I pulled out several of Warfield’s assertions about Paul’s knowledge of Jesus (given my Blessed Hope Podcastseries on the letters of Paul). Since Warfield was concerned to defend historic and orthodox Christianity, Warfield’s entry on “Jesus Christ” in NSHERK has a definite apologetic flavor. We certainly see this in Warfield’s treatment of Jesus and Paul.

___________________________________________

Paul As Witness from the Earliest Days of Christianity

Paul had known the Christian movement from its beginning; first from the outside, as one of the chief agents in its persecution, and then from the inside, as the most active leader of its propaganda [note: the term did not yet have the negative connotation it does now]. He was familiarly acquainted with the Apostles and other immediate followers of Jesus, and enjoyed repeated intercourse with them. He explicitly declares the harmony of their teaching with his, and joins with his their testimony to the great facts which he proclaimed. The complete consonance of his allusions to Jesus with what is gathered from the hints of the heathen historians is very striking. The person of Jesus fills the whole horizon of his thought, and gathers to itself all his religious emotions. That Jesus was the Messiah is the presupposition of all his speech of Him, and the Messianic title has already become his proper name behind which His real personal name, Jesus, has retired. This Messiah is definitely represented as a divine being who has entered the world on a mission of mercy to sinful man, in the prosecution of which He has given Himself up as a sacrifice for sin, but has risen again from the dead and ascended to the right hand of God, henceforth to rule as Lord of all. Around the two great facts, of the expiatory death of the Son of God and his rising again, Paul’s whole teaching circles. Jesus Christ as crucified, Christ risen from the dead as the first fruits of those that sleep—here is Paul’s whole gospel in summary (150-151).

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
B. B. WarfieldKim RiddlebargerWhat Paul knew of ChristComment
“Christ is Faithful” Hebrews 3:1-19 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Five)
“Christ is Faithful” Hebrews 3:1-19 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Five)

The Superiority of Jesus

In the first two chapters of this epistle, the author of Hebrews has built a very impressive case for the superiority of Jesus Christ to all things. Jesus, who is the radiance of the glory of God, is the creator of all. Yet the same Jesus who is God’s eternal son, now shares our flesh and blood by virtue of his incarnation. After dying for our sins and being raised from the dead, Jesus has been given the highest possible honor–he alone sits at God’s right hand. In the opening chapters of Hebrews, the author has demonstrated that Jesus is superior to angels as well as Israel’s priesthood. As we now move into chapter 3, the author begins to make his case that Jesus Christ is superior to Moses, and more importantly, he is the mediator of a far better covenant (the new covenant) than the covenant God made with Israel at Mount Sinai.

Writing to an unknown church in an unknown city, the unknown author of this epistle is addressing the difficult situation facing the congregation to which he is writing. Many in this church were Hellenistic Jews (Greek in culture, but Hebrew in theology) who had recently become Christians. In the face of opposition from their Jewish friends and family, and even perhaps from governing authorities, many in this church had given up on their faith in Jesus Christ and returned to Judaism. The epistle to the Hebrews is the author’s very pointed warning to those remaining in the church who were considering doing the same thing. He addresses head-on the gravity of the sin of apostasy, and will continue to do so throughout this letter.

To read the rest, follow the link below:

Read More
HebrewsKim RiddlebargerSuperiority of Jesus, Persevere Comments
“The Inadequacy of the Law” -- Article Five, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort
“The Inadequacy of the Law” -- Article Five, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 5: The Inadequacy of the Law

In this respect, what is true of the light of nature is true also of the Ten Commandments given by God through Moses specifically to the Jews. For man cannot obtain saving grace through the Decalogue, because, although it does expose the magnitude of his sin and increasingly convict him of his guilt, yet it does not offer a remedy or enable him to escape from his misery, and, indeed, weakened as it is by the flesh, leaves the offender under the curse.

_______________________________________

Since the purpose of natural revelation is not to redeem humanity but to provide a natural knowledge of God as well as to further expose fallen humanities’ sinfulness, the authors of the Canons now turn to the question of the ability of Adam’s fallen race to satisfy God’s righteous requirements as they are revealed in the law.

Though it is absolutely clear from Scripture that the law is written upon the hearts of all of humanity—Paul makes this point in Romans 2:14-15—it is equally important for us to take note of the fact that the Ten Commandments give concrete and explicit content to that which is implicitly revealed in natural revelation. God’s revelation of the law to Moses at Mount Sinai (which is a republication of the terms of the covenant of works God made with Adam in Eden) is God’s act in making explicit (through publication) what had been only implicit (i.e. in the human heart) in general revelation.

It has been argued by some that, even after the fall, humanity can earn sufficient merit to attain a right standing before God on the basis of obedience to the law of nature (i.e. the light which God has given to all). But if the purpose of natural revelation was to give a natural knowledge of God and further expose humanities’ sinfulness, the same is certainly the true purpose of the law, only more so! The law can only condemn, not give life.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerInadequacy of the LawComment
December Musings, Updates, and Lots of Links (12/13/2024)
December Musings, Updates, and Lots of Links (12/13/2024)

Riddleblog and Blessed Hope Updates:

  • I have gathered all the essays from my recent ecclesiology series into one place (Christ’s Spotless Bride).

  • Recent and future episodes of the Blessed Hope Podcast deal with controversial subjects of much interest, such as the Lord’s Supper, spiritual gifts (including speaking in tongues), as well as the question of whether or not spiritual gifts are still operative in the church. I hope you’ll find these episodes helpful. I enjoyed putting them together. Given the subject matter, the episodes covering 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14, will be a tad longer than usual.

  • I’ll be taking a break from December 22, 2024 through January 1, 2025. Now that I’m retired I can do stuff like that.

Thinking Out Loud:

  • When someone says , “I don’t want to be that guy . .” you know full well that they are that guy and are about to correct you or raise some otherwise obvious observation.

  • Churchill at War (on Neflix) is very good—even if the actor really doesn’t look like Winston.

  • Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred has recently floated the most ridiculous proposed rule change in MLB history (The “Golden at Bat”). When Manfred retires, no doubt he’ll leave with a favorability rating on a par with Joe Biden’s.

  • Speaking of baseball, Juan Soto is a great player and a good get for the Mets. But at 765 million? That’s ridiculous. The Mets will eventually be hamstrung by that deal. I guess Bobby Bonilla will have to take a pay cut.

  • Lincoln Riley really makes me miss Pete Carroll.

  • NIL as currently constituted is destroying college football.

  • Anyone else watching NewsNation? So far, I really like the dinner time news coverage and program format. It reminds me of CNN and Fox when they first started and were news driven, not partisan cheerleaders.

To read the rest of “my musings” follow the link below

Read More
MusingsKim RiddlebargerThe God of Israel, Church membership, China's military budget, Dr. Strimple, Golden at bat Comment
Calvin's Second Rule of Prayer
Calvin's Second Rule of Prayer

One thing all of God’s people can do in an uncertain time such as ours is to pray fervently and regularly while trusting in God’s providential purposes, whatever these purposes might be. John Calvin is a useful guide here. His rules for prayer are wise and simple.

In his second rule, Calvin cautions against rote prayers arising from habit and cold hearts. What do we seek when we pray?

The Second Rule—Repentance and a Sincere Sense of Need

The Sense of Need Excludes Unreality

Let this be the second rule: that in our petitions we ever sense our own insufficiency, and earnestly pondering how we need all that we seek, join with this prayer an earnest—nay, burning—desire to attain it. For many perfunctorily intone prayers after a set form, as if discharging a duty to God. And although they admit it to be a necessary remedy for their ills, because it would be fatal to lack the help of God which they are beseeching, still it appears that they perform this duty from habit, because their hearts are meanwhile cold, and they do not ponder what they ask.

Calvin also cautions against praying for forgiveness when someone does not truly acknowledge they are sinners. Such people mock God and are merely going through the motions because they are “stuffed with depravity.”

Indeed, a general and confused feeling of their need leads them to prayer, but it does not arouse them, as it were in present reality, to seek the relief of their poverty. Now what do we account more hateful or even execrable to God than the fiction of someone asking pardon for his sins, all the while either thinking he is not a sinner or at least not thinking he is a sinner? Unquestionably something in which God himself is mocked! Yet, as I have just said, mankind is so stuffed with such depravity that for the sake of mere performance men often beseech God for many things that they are dead sure will, apart from his kindness, come to them from some other source, or already lie in their possession.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
John CalvinKim Riddlebarger2nd Rule of Prayer, Repentance and NeedComment
"The Lord's Supper" -- A New Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast! (1 Corinthians 11:17-34)
"The Lord's Supper" -- A New Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast! (1 Corinthians 11:17-34)

Episode Synopsis:

One of the saddest indicators of human sinfulness is found in the last half of 1 Corinthians 11. The sacrament of Christian unity (the Lord’s Supper) had instead become the occasion for further division in the Corinthian church. Paul laments that in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper the rich were exploiting the poor, the body of Christ was not properly being discerned, and the Supper was being celebrated in such an improper way that what was being done was not the Lord’s Supper and was actually doing more harm than good.

In this section of Paul’s Corinthian letter we find a description of how Christians in the apostolic age were to celebrate the Supper in Christian worship. Paul explains the words of institution given by Jesus just twenty years previously– “this is my body,” “this is my blood.” The Lords Supper is the new covenant fulfillment of the Passover meal centering upon eating the bread and drinking the wine wherein the signs (the bread and wine) are taken as though they were the thing signified, (Christ’s body and blood). And through faith what has been promised by Jesus, is actually received by his people.

Paul rebukes the Corinthians for the fiasco which the celebration of the Lord’s Supper had become, and he offers a number of common sense practical ways in which the Supper ought to be celebrated. Each member was to partake, they were to discern the body of Christ, and the service was to be conducted in an orderly manner when the church assembled on the Lord’s Day.

To see the show notes and listen to the podcast, follow the link below

Read More
Blessed Hope PodcastKim RiddlebargerThe Lord's Supper, 1 Corinthians 11:17-34Comment
The Late Great Hal Lindsey (November 23, 1929-November 25, 2024)
The Late Great Hal Lindsey (November 23, 1929-November 25, 2024)

Hal Lindsey has died at age 95. Here’s an obit in CT from Daniel Hummel—Hal Lindsey

Say what you will, Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth was the best-selling book in America during the 1970s. It was, I recall, the first theological book I picked out and read on my own as a young teen. That book was one of the reasons for my life-long interest in eschatology. Although now largely forgotten, Lindsey put the biblical prophecy industry on the map and opened the door for the Left Behind series and a host of other prophecy punditry.

My parody of Lindsey’s ever-changing mustache was one of the most popular posts on the old Riddleblog which I re-posted here several years ago. And There Will Be Signs on the Earth—Hal Lindsey’s Mustache

Read More
eschatology, End Times Nuttiness, Current EventsKim RiddlebargerHal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth Comment
Christ's Spotless Bride -- Apostolicity As an Attribute of the Church (Part Nine)
Christ's Spotless Bride -- Apostolicity As an Attribute of the Church (Part Nine)

Reformed Reflections

The last attribute of Christ’s church mentioned in the Nicene Creed is apostolicity—one holy, catholic, and apostolic church. According to Herman Bavinck, “apostolicity is undoubtedly a distinguishing mark of the church of Christ.”[1] Edmund Clowney adds, “the sure sign of Christ’s true church is the preaching of the apostolic gospel.”[2] Protestants generally, and especially the Reformed, see this attribute as closely connected to the apostolic gospel which gave birth to the church. Roman Catholics understand apostolicity to be essentially about the birth and organization of the church and its subsequent history (of which Rome claims to be the true heir), while the Eastern Orthodox closely tie apostolicity to the Eucharist and the succession of bishops who guard its purity. Protestants focus upon the message which is the foundation of the church (the gospel) while others tend to focus upon the history and continuity of the church as an institution which has its origin in the apostolic age (apostolic succession).

Not all Reformed folk frame the matter this way since the foundation of the church upon the preached gospel and its subsequent history of promulgation cannot be fully separated. J. A. Heyns, a South African theologian, contends that apostolicity is not on the same level as the previous three attributes. “Apostolicity is not an eschatological attribute . . . but rather the historical method by which the Church realizes those three attributes” (i.e, unity, holiness, catholicity). “Moreover,” says Heyns, “it is clear that ‘apostolic’ can easily be replaced by ‘biblical’ or ‘scriptural’, so that what is expressed by this term might equally well be included among the notae ecclesiae [marks of the church].” He concludes that “none the less, apostolicity . . . would indicate the Church’s historical continuity in respect of its origin, message, and task.”[3]

Michael Horton offers another important qualification. “Apostolicity is guaranteed neither by immanent history nor by inner immediacy; it is a gift from above, in time and across time. On this point . . . only the ministry of the Spirit working through the Word and the sacraments, maintaining discipline across the generations, is able to sustain this kind of integrated praxis.”[4]

As an attribute of the church, the meaning of apostolicity arises from Jesus Christ creating his church through the preached word in the days of the apostles and sustaining it across time through word and sacrament in the power of the Holy Spirit.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
EcclesiologyKim RiddlebargerThe apostolicity of the churchComment
“He Himself Has Suffered” Hebrews 2:10-18 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Four)
“He Himself Has Suffered” Hebrews 2:10-18 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Four)

A Brief Review to Set the Context

The very fact that human priests are themselves sinners raises a number of important questions. How can sinful priests offer sacrifices that remove the guilt of our sin, unless they first offer sacrifices for themselves? And the sacrifices they offer–the blood of animals–only temporarily remove the guilt of our sins. Such sacrifices only delay the judgment of God and they must be continually repeated by the priests, not only for themselves, but also for those on whose behalf they are offered. It will take a perfect priest, offering a perfect sacrifice, if we are to saved from the guilt and power of sin. This perfect priest is Jesus Christ who has made himself lower than the angels, suffered on the cross and tasted death, was raised from the dead and then ascended on high, before taking his place at God’s right-hand. And yet, this perfect priest is merciful to us because he himself has suffered and was tempted, just as we suffer and are tempted.

As we continue working our way through the Book of Hebrews we come to the second half of the second chapter of this epistle, where the author continues to make his case for the superiority of Jesus Christ. As the author has shown us from the pages of the Old Testament, Jesus Christ is superior to angels. Jesus is superior to Moses. And Jesus is superior to the priesthood of Israel. While in the previous verses, the author has focused upon our Lord’s superiority over the angels, in verses 10-18 of Hebrews 2, the author now addresses a topic he will develop in great detail throughout the balance of this epistle–the superiority of the priesthood of Jesus Christ. Jesus is a much greater priest who offers a much better sacrifice for sin.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
HebrewsKim RiddlebargerChrist our Priest, Christ the sanctifierComment
“The Inadequacy of the Light of Nature” -- Article Four, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort
“The Inadequacy of the Light of Nature” -- Article Four, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 4: The Inadequacy of the Light of Nature

There is, to be sure, a certain light of nature remaining in man after the fall, by virtue of which he retains some notions about God, natural things, and the difference between what is moral and immoral, and demonstrates a certain eagerness for virtue and for good outward behavior. But this light of nature is far from enabling man to come to a saving knowledge of God and conversion to him—so far, in fact, that man does not use it rightly even in matters of nature and society. Instead, in various ways he completely distorts this light, whatever its precise character, and suppresses it in unrighteousness. In doing so he renders himself without excuse before God.

___________________________________

The Reformed understanding of total depravity and total inability raises the nagging question about what happens to those who live apart from the light of Holy Scripture and who may have never heard the gospel. This is a common question and is often framed as follows: “What happens to the `innocent person’ in distant lands who has never heard the gospel of Jesus Christ?”

Historically, Arminians have charged that it is not fair for God to hold people accountable for Adam’s act of rebellion in Eden. Therefore, it is certainly not fair for God to hold those accountable for not believing in Christ who have never even heard the gospel. Recall that the Arminian has argued that prevenient grace is universal, so there must be some divine provision for those outside of Christ.

In light of this charge, the authors of the Canons take up the subject of the purpose and consequences of natural revelation, or the “light of nature.”

Given the fact of total depravity, what does the Scripture say about natural revelation, or what is more commonly spoken of as general revelation? This is best done by contrasting the purpose of general revelation (“the light of nature”) and special revelation (Holy Scripture). This puts us in a position to ask “what do fallen men and women do with the knowledge of God they that derive from `general revelation”? Does general revelation lead men and women to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ?

Read More
The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerThe Light of Nature, General RevelationComment
A Blessed Thanksgiving to You All!
A Blessed Thanksgiving to You All!

The Riddlebargers will celebrate Thanksgiving at home this year. After attending Christ Reformed's annual Thanksgiving Service, my son Dave and his family will be joining us for a traditional Thanksgiving fare.

Lord willing, it will be a "Nutribullet free" weekend of ham, turkey, dressing, pie, leftovers (ham sandwiches), and a massive tryptophan coma.  But it is back to the Nutribullet on Monday.

We have so much for which to be thankful! Retirement has been productive—the Blessed Hope Podcast and the Riddleblog keep me plenty busy. My wife and I are well. He has given her the grace to stand me for forty-six years. Both of our sons and their families are members of solid PCA congregations, and we have four wonderful grandchildren. Yup, much for which to be thankful!  

Micki and I wish you and yours a blessed Thanksgiving!  As the Psalmist reminds us (Psalm 107:1-9) . . . 

1 Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever!

2 Let the redeemed of the Lord say so, whom he has redeemed from trouble

3 and gathered in from the lands, from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south.

4 Some wandered in desert wastes, finding no way to a city to dwell in;

5 hungry and thirsty,their soul fainted within them.

6 Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble, and he delivered them from their distress.

7 He led them by a straight way till they reached a city to dwell in.

8 Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love, for his wondrous works to the children of man!

9 For he satisfies the longing soul, and the hungry soul he fills with good things.

Read More
Riddleblog UpdateKim RiddlebargerA Blessed ThanksgivingComment
A New Episode of the Blessed Hope: “Style, Fashion, and Propriety in Worship” – 1 Corinthians:11:1-16
A New Episode of the Blessed Hope: “Style, Fashion, and Propriety in Worship” – 1 Corinthians:11:1-16

Episode Synopsis:

As a cosmopolitan city and home to many varieties of Greco-Roman paganism, Corinth was a cutting edge place for first century fashion and culture. From what we know regarding the city’s ethos at the time, there was growing tension between traditional gender roles and a desire for women to express themselves in non-traditional ways long associated with polite Greco-Roman society. One obvious way to show this quest for personal freedom was for a woman to wear her hair down (long and flowing) in public or during pagan sacrifices, and not put it up in a bun or wear the traditional head covering. We think nothing about such things today, but for a woman to wear her hair down in public in Corinth was scandalous in Paul’s day.

This section of Paul’s Corinthian letter (the first half of chapter eleven) raises the question of style, fashion, and propriety in worship. Should the Christian women in Corinth seek to follow those pushing the envelope by exposing their hair in public? Paul’s answer is “no.” Christian women are to dress and wear their hair in ways which reflect the doctrine of creation. Adam was created first, so Christian men in Corinth were not to cover their heads in prayer or while prophesying, while women were to show submission to Christ and to their husbands by dressing modestly–in Greco-Roman culture that meant wearing your hair up or wearing a head covering when in public settings.

Paul could never envision a cultural situation such as our own where women are societal equals to men. Although the particulars of first-century culture and clothing cannot be made to fit current trends–given advances of women’s status and modern fabrics and clothing, the general principle remains binding across time–Christians are to acknowledge the distinctions between men and women, and are to wear nothing in worship which might identify the wearer as a devotee of any sort of pagan religion. For Paul, this means modesty in dress and in spirit.

To see the show notes and listen to the episode, follow the link below

Read More
Blessed Hope PodcastKim Riddlebargerheadcoverings, propriety in worshipComment
Calvin's First Rule of Prayer
Calvin's First Rule of Prayer

We live under the threat of war and rumors of war, there is political and economic uncertainty following the election, and we face an increasingly immoral and hostile culture. One thing all of God’s people can do is pray as we trust in God’s providential purposes, as mysterious as these purposes might be.

Calvin’s treatment of prayer is very useful in helping us think about how and for what we ought to pray. We start with his first rule and sub points.

The First Rule: Reverence

Devout detachment required for conversation with God:

By this, Calvin meant clearing our minds and reflecting upon the great privilege of entering into God’s presence.

Now for framing prayer duly and properly, let this be the first rule: that we be disposed in mind and heart as befits those who enter conversation with God. This we shall indeed attain with respect to the mind if it is freed from carnal cares and thoughts by which it can be called or led away from right and pure contemplation of God, and then not only devotes itself completely to prayer but also, in so far as this is possible, is lifted and carried beyond itself. Now I do not here require the mind to be so detached as never to be pricked or gnawed by vexations, since, on the contrary, great anxiety should kindle in us the desire to pray.

Thus we see that God’s saintly servants give proof of huge torments, not to say vexations, when they speak of uttering their plaintive cry to the Lord from the deep abyss, and from the very jaws of death [cf. Ps. 130:1]. But I say that we are to rid ourselves of all alien and outside cares, by which the mind, itself a wanderer, is borne about hither and thither, drawn away from heaven, and pressed down to earth. I mean that it ought to be raised above itself that it may not bring into God’s sight anything our blind and stupid reason is wont to devise, nor hold itself within the limits of its own vanity, but rise to a purity worthy of God.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
John CalvinKim RiddlebargerThe first rule of prayerComment
Francis Schaeffer – Apologist and Evangelist (Part One)
Francis Schaeffer – Apologist and Evangelist (Part One)

Introduction

These lecture notes on “Schaeffer’s Apologetics” were prepared for a course taught at the Simon Greenleaf School of Law in Anaheim, CA, in the Fall of 1988, and taught several times subsequently. The notes were revised and updated in 2007 for an Academy series at Christ Reformed Church. They are dated, but hopefully still of value.

Why Study Schaeffer?

1). To gain a basic understanding of the apologetic methodology of Francis Schaeffer.[1]

2). A study of Schaeffer’s life, times, and apologetic methodology will help us to hone and refine our own approach to unbelievers in both evangelistic and apologetics contexts.

3). Such a study can also shed great light on the on-going debate within the Reformed tradition on apologetic method.

a. To answer the broad question, “of what significance is the work of Schaeffer as an evangelist, pastor, and apologist for us today?”

b. To identify those things we can learn from Schaeffer not only in defending our faith, but in communicating, applying, and living out our Christian faith in the twenty-first century.

Cautions When Studying Schaeffer

1). I am not an expert on Schaeffer. I have never been to L'Abri, nor to any of the L'Abri conferences in the States.[2]

2). I never had the privilege of studying under Schaeffer in any personal forum.

3). Schaeffer’s own stated concerns present several areas of difficulty in working through his apologetic material. In his essay “The Question of Apologetics” (which is an appendix to Schaeffer’s book, The God Who Is There), Schaeffer expresses some perplexity over how his readers and students evaluated his work. Therefore, we need to be sensitive to Schaeffer’s clearly-stated desire to have his endeavors understood in the manner in which he intended. Yet, that is easier said than done, as Schaeffer’s work is profound in some areas and perplexing in others.

4). Schaeffer made it clear in a number of places that in some sense he wished to avoid the type of treatment that we will be giving to him in this series of lectures.

a. Schaeffer makes his sentiments clearly known:

“The answer as to whether I am an apologete depends upon how the concept of apologete or apologetics is defined. First. I am not an apologete if that means building a safe house to live in, so that we Christians can sit inside with safety and quiescence. Christians should be out in the midst of the world as both witness and salt, not sitting in a fortress surrounded by a moat. Second . . . as we turn to consider in more detail how we may speak to men of the twentieth century, we must emphasize first of all that we cannot apply mechanical rules. We, of all people, should realize this, for as Christians we believe that personality really does exist and is important. We can lay down some general principle, but there can be no automatic application. If we are truly personal, as created by God, then each individual will differ from everyone else. Therefore each man must be dealt with as an individual, not as a case or static or machine. If we would work with these people; we cannot mechanically apply the things of which we have been speaking in this book. We must look to the Lord in prayer, and to the work of the Holy Spirit, for effective use of these things.”[3]

To read the rest of these lecture notes, follow the link below

Read More
Francis SchaefferKim RiddlebargerIntoduction to SchaefferComment
“Crowned With Glory” Hebrews 2:1-9 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Three)
“Crowned With Glory” Hebrews 2:1-9 (An Exposition of the Book of Hebrews–Part Three)

Background

Although we do not know which church received the letter we now know as the Epistle to the Hebrews, we do know that a number of people in that church had renounced their profession of faith in Jesus Christ and returned to Judaism (the religion in which they had been raised). Apostasy among professing Christians was a real issue facing this church, and the subject raises a number of important questions which the author of Hebrews must address. Can a Christian lose their salvation? What is the status of those who make a profession of faith, are baptized, but then fall away? Having established in the opening chapter that Jesus Christ is the creator and sustainer of all things, the author now exhorts his readers to consider the greatness of that salvation which Jesus has earned for us through his death and resurrection, before Jesus ascended on high and took his place at God’s right hand. It is a serious thing to neglect so great a salvation!

As we continue our time in the Book of Hebrews, so far we have discussed the problems surrounding the authorship, destination, and date of the writing of this epistle, and we have covered the author’s principle argument in the opening chapter for the superiority of Jesus Christ to Moses, to Israel’s priesthood, and to the angels. Since it is likely that most of the members of the church receiving this letter were Hellenistic Jews (Greek in culture, Hebrew in theology) who had recently become Christians, as such, they fully accepted the LXX as the word of God. So, in order to respond to the questions raised by those who had made professions of faith in Jesus Christ and were baptized, but then renounced both, the author cites seven passages from the Old Testament (predominantly from the Psalms) which prove that Jesus is the son of God, and possesses a glory equal to that of the Father.

Angels – Fertile Soil for Speculation

An undue interest in angels (and even the worship of angels) was a problem in Hellenistic Judaism, and there are hints throughout the New Testament that this was an issue in some of the first Christian churches (Galatians 1, Hebrews 13, Colossians 2). While acknowledging that angels are God’s messengers, and that they have played a significant role in redemptive history, the author of Hebrews turns to the Old Testament to prove that angels are Christ’s servants, and therefore inferior to the eternal Son of God. From the pages of the Old Testament, the author demonstrates that Jesus is the creator of all things. And having created all things, Jesus holds them together, directing them to fulfill their appointed ends. Jesus is worshiped by the angels. Jesus gives these invisible creatures orders and directives, and Jesus alone sits at God’s right hand. The author has already made a very impressive case for the deity of Jesus Christ.

Apostasy Is the Issue

As we move into Hebrews chapter two, the author issues his first admonition to this congregation in verses 1-4. Although angels played a role in Old Testament revelation, given the superiority of Jesus Christ, it is vital that Christians not neglect due consideration of all that Jesus has done for them to save them from the guilt and power of sin. Then, in verses 5-9, the author reminds believers of Jesus’s humiliation and exaltation, and how both were necessary for Jesus to secure our salvation.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
HebrewsKim RiddlebargerSo Great a SalvationComment
“Total Inability” -- Article Three, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort
“Total Inability” -- Article Three, The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine, Canons of Dort

Article 3: Total Inability

Therefore, all people are conceived in sin and are born children of wrath, unfit for any saving good, inclined to evil, dead in their sins, and slaves to sin; without the grace of the regenerating Holy Spirit they are neither willing nor able to return to God, to reform their distorted nature, or even to dispose themselves to such reform.

________________________________________

Whenever we address the subject of “total inability,” we need to be clear that we are speaking of but one of the major consequences of the Fall. The Bible clearly teaches that all are born guilty for Adam’s act of rebellion in Eden, since Adam acted for us and in our place as both the federal and biological head of the human race as God’s chosen representative for humanity (cf. Romans 5:12-19). Because of Adam's sin, the entire human race is under the just condemnation of God, and guilty (by imputation) for Adam’s act of rebellion from the very moment of our conception.

As we have seen throughout the prior articles, the biblical data demonstrates that we are born with what is called “original corruption.” As a consequence of Adam's fall, we are inclined toward all evil, we are darkened in our understanding, we are ignorant of the things of God, and separated from God at birth. We are without God and without hope in the world (Ephesians 2:12-13). We are “turned in on ourselves” and, left to our own devices, we are unable to do any good (from God’s perspective) whatsoever. As the Canons indicate, we are unfit "for any saving good, inclined to evil, dead in [our] sins, and slaves to sin.”

Total inability refers to the fact that our wills are in bondage to our inherited sinful nature, as well as weakened by the darkness of our intellectual faculties (Ephesians 4:17-19). The Reformers spoke of this in terms of “the bondage of the will” to the flesh (our sinful orientation). None of the fallen children of Adam are born “innocent,” nor are they “neutral” toward the things of God—as though the moral direction of each individual depends upon an act of the human will to follow either Christ’s good example or Adam’s bad one. This is, as the Canons point out, the heresy of Pelagianism.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
The Canons of DortKim RiddlebargerTotal inability Comment
"The Bread, the Wine, and the Glory of God" A New Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast (1 Corinthians 10:14-11:1)
"The Bread, the Wine, and the Glory of God" A New Episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast (1 Corinthians 10:14-11:1)

Episode Synopsis:

We’ve come to 1 Corinthians 10:14-11:1, as Paul wraps up his discussion of idolatry. In the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, Christian believers drink the cup of blessing and eat the broken bread–described by Paul as a participation in Christ’s body and blood. Since so many in Corinth were still hanging on to remnants of their pagan past, from what Paul says here it seems many were still attending both the Christian sacrament as well as pagan sacrifices. To those claiming to worship Jesus but still engaging in pagan practices, Paul extends a very stern warning. You cannot partake of Christ’s body and blood and still participate in pagan sacrifices. If you do so, you will provoke the Lord to jealousy just as Israel did in the wilderness. Paul is emphatic in his warning to the Corinthians–flee from idolatry or face the consequences.

Paul reminds the Corinthians that since an idol is nothing, what benefit can people gain from eating at the pagan feast where sacrifices are offered to demons? The apostle’s concern is that for Christians, the Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of unity–one cup, one bread, one body. Christians all partake of the same elements together–bread and wine–as one body, which Paul describes as a participation in Christ’s body and blood. How can members of Christ’s body still offer sacrifices to imaginary idols while professing faith in Christ? They cannot.

In 1 Corinthians 10:23-11:1, Paul deals with the very practical matter of buying meat or eating in another’s home. How do you know whether what you are consuming has been used in a sacrifice to idols? Paul offers a very practical solution–don’t ask. If the source of the food is unknown then go ahead and eat without so much as a twinge of conscience. But if you are told that the food had in fact been used in a pagan sacrifice, then do not eat it as a matter of conscience. His conclusion is simple and profound, whatever you eat or drink, says Paul, do all to the glory of God.

To see the show notes and listen to the episode, follow the link below

Read More
Blessed Hope PodcastKim RiddlebargerBread and Wine, Do all to the glory to GodComment
Christ's Spotless Bride -- Catholicity As an Attribute of the Church (Part Eight)
Christ's Spotless Bride -- Catholicity As an Attribute of the Church (Part Eight)

The Third Attribute in the Nicene Creed – Catholicity

It is useful to begin with a brief survey of historical reflection on catholicity of the church:

  • Avery Dulles (a Roman Catholic theologian): “Cyril of Jerusalem in his Catechetical Lectures gives the fullest discussion of the term in Christian antiquity. He assigns five reasons why the Church is called catholic: it extends to the ends of the earth; it teaches all the doctrine needed for salvation; it brings every sort of human being under obedience; it cures every kind of sin; and it possesses every form of virtue.” (Dulles, The Catholicity of the Church, 14)

  • Dulles continues: “The Orthodox churches have continued to claim catholicity, which for them means, above all else, adherence to the fullness of the faith as handed down from the Fathers.” Dulles, The Catholicity of the Church, 15)

  • Edmund Clowney (Presbyterian): “The Greek term katholikos means that which is universal or general, having to do with the whole; it is not used in the New Testament to describe the church. The early church fathers used it to express an important New Testament teaching: that the church as a whole is more than the local church.” (Clowney, The Church, 91)

  • Clowney: “As the church struggled against false teaching, the term ‘catholic’ came to be used to describe the orthodox church as distinct from the Gnostic, Montanist and Arian heresies . . . . Catholicity took yet another meaning when the Novatians [who did not admit the lapsed] and later the Donatists held to orthodox theology, but separated from the church . . . . Augustine appealed to the geographical spread of the catholic church. . .” Reformers replied to Roman Catholics “by pointing to another dimension of catholicity: its extension in time.” (The Church, 91-92)

Reformed Teaching

Louis Berkhof addresses catholicity:

Protestants again “apply this attribute primarily to the invisible Church, which can be called catholic in a far truer sense than any one of the existing organizations . . . . The invisible Church is primarily the real catholic Church, because she includes all believers on earth at any particular time, no one excepted; because, consequently, she also has her members among all the nations of the world that were evangelized; and because she exercises a controlling influence on the entire life of man in all its phases. Secondarily, they also ascribe the attribute of catholicity to the visible Church.” Berkhof (Systematic Theology, 575)

To read the rest of this essay, follow the link below

Read More
EcclesiologyKim RiddlebargerCatholicityComment
Warfield: With the Loss of Meaning of Critical Christian Terms, So Too Goes the Gospel
Warfield: With the Loss of Meaning of Critical Christian Terms, So Too Goes the Gospel

Just over a hundred years ago (September 17, 1915), B. B. Warfield gave the opening address in the Miller Chapel of Princeton Theological Seminary. To kick off the new academic year, Warfield took up the theme of the importance of the terms “Redeemer” and “Redemption,” — words, which when uttered by a Christian, brought forth the thought of “the cross . . . placarded before our eyes.” But upon making the point about the significance of these terms to the Christian—both in terms of the theology they carry, and the sense of trust in the Savior they convey, Warfield spends the bulk of his address on the sad state of affairs due to the loss of these terms throughout the Christian world—and about which Warfield is cautioning the new students.

The address has been reprinted as “Redeemer” and “Redemption” in Biblical Doctrines, Volume 2, in the Works of Benjamin B. Warfield, 375-398. It is also available in its entirety here.

Warfield laments the loss of proper meaning of a number of “Christian” terms, including the term “Evangelical.” He calls attention to the fact that . . .

Does anybody in the world know what “Evangelical” means, in our current religious speech? The other day, a professedly evangelical pastor, serving a church which is certainly committed by its formularies to an evangelical confession, having occasion to report in one of our newspapers on a religious meeting composed practically entirely of Unitarians and Jews, remarked with enthusiasm upon the deeply evangelical character of its spirit and utterances.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Read More
B. B. WarfieldKim RiddlebargerRedeemer, redemptionComment