Computer Rage

When Jonathan Edwards was about nineteen years old he wrote a bunch of resolutions, thus setting an explicit agenda for his thought and conduct. They're pretty hardcore.

Here's number 15.

15. Resolved, Never to suffer the least motions of anger towards irrational beings.

As someone who commits 'computer rage' (well, with PCs anyway, who could get angry at something so beautiful as a Mac?) and gets angry with other inanimate objects, I find that extremely challenging. He is, of course, completely right - such displays of anger are childish (toys out of pram anyone?) and ungodly.

So I'm resolved to try at number 15 now too.

And I'm also resolved to find time in the first five years of ministry to read much more Edwards (I think I'll need to limit myself to making a list of four or five 'friends' to commit to reading over the first few years, otherwise the list could just go on and on and on).

John Owen - Transformationist?

This view of the intention of God in the creation leads John Owen to propose a (to my mind at least) distinctly 'Kuyperian' (or 'transformationist' - see here for a good quote on that sort of thing) approach to culture.

“…God would hereby instruct us both in the use that we are to make of his creatures, and the improvement that we are to make of the work of the creation unto his glory. For the first, it is his will that we should not use any thing as merely made and created by him, though originally for that purpose, seeing as they are so left they are under the curse, and so impure and unclean unto them that use them…but he would have us look upon them and receive them as they are given over unto Christ…This God instructs us in, namely, to look for a profitable, sanctified use of the creatures in Christ, in that [he?] himself ordered them in the very first creation to fall at length naturally under his rule and dominion, making them all by him."

So, if we want to glorify God in our use of the various elements of the old creation, we must view them as not just having been created by God, but as belonging specifically to Christ the Redeemer, as being intended for subjection to him in the new creation.

So what does this mean of non-Christian use of the creation?

"The whole mystery of laying the works of the old creation in a subserviency unto the new being hidden from many ages and generation, from the foundation of the world men did, by the effects and works which they saw, conclude that there was an eternal power and infinite wisdom whereby they were produced: but whereas there is but a twofold holy use of the works of the creation – the one suited unto the state of innocency, and the moral-natural worship of God therein, which they had lost; the other to the state of grace, and the worship of God in that, which they had not attained, - the world and the inhabitants thereof, being otherwise involved in the curse and darkness wherewith it was attended, exercised themselves in fruitless speculations about them…and glorified not God in any due manner, Rom. i. 21. Neither do nor can men unto this day make any better improvement of their contemplation on the works of creation, who are unacquainted with the recapitulation of all things in Christ, and the beauty of it, that all things at first were made by him. "

I think this means that Owen would, for example, argue against any concept of common grace, or natural law, providing a 'neutral zone' where Christians and non-Christians can meet to do social-political-cultural work. God-honouring use of the creation in all of these activities (whether painting, building a bridge, teaching geography, or writing a song) is only possible when creation is viewed as properly belonging to, and destined for, the Lord Jesus Christ. God wants us to look at and treat creation as being subject to him.


All from John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Vol III. 81-82.

John Owen: The purpose of creation

In drawing theological instruction from the description of the Son in the latter part of Hebrews 1:2 ('by whom he made the worlds') Owen argues that the creation always had the new creation in view:

“God designed from eternity that his great and everlasting glory should arise from the new creation.”

That's why the creation was made by the Son - the very one who would later become incarnate and inherit the creation as its Redeemer:

“God in infinite wisdom ordered all things in the first creation, so as that the whole of that work might be subservient to the glory of his grace in the new creation of all by Jesus Christ. By the Son he made the worlds in the beginning of time, that in the fullness of time he might be the just heir and lord of all.”

Or, put another way, “[a]ll things at first were made by him, that when they were lost, ruined, scattered, they might again, in the appointed seasons, be gathered together into one head in him.”

This, he argues, explains the idea in Romans 8:19-22 of creation eagerly awaiting the full manifestation of Christ's kingdom:

“The creation hath, as it were, a natural propensity, yea, a longing, to come into subjection unto Christ, as that which retrieves and frees it from the vanity, bondage, and corruption that it was cast into, when put out of its first order by sin. And this ariseth from that plot and design which God first laid in the creation of all things, that they, being made by the Son, should naturally and willingly, as it were, give up themselves unto obedience unto him, when he should take the rule of them upon the new account of his mediation.”

Creation was made in such a way (by the Son) as would fit with God's intention that it be redeemed and brought under the rule of Jesus Christ in his role as mediator.


All from John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Vol III. 77-81.

John Owen: The purpose of God in the call of Abraham

Biblical theology and 'missiological readings of the bible story' are nothing new. Here's John Owen on Abraham and the nation of Israel:

“God having from the foundation of the world promised to bring forth the 'Seed of the woman,' to work out the redemption of his elect in the conquest of Satan, did, in the separation of Abraham from the rest of the world, begin to make provision of a peculiar stock, from whence the Seed of the woman should spring. That this was the cause and end of his call and separation is evident from hence, that immediately thereupon God assures him that ‘in his seed all the kindreds of the earth should be blessed,’ Gen xii. 1-3, xxii. 18; which is all one as if he had expressly said to him ‘For this cause have I chosen and called thee, that in thee I might lay a foundation of bringing forth the promised Seed, by whom the curse is to be taken away, and the blessing of everlasting life procured,’ as Gal iii. 13, 14. For this cause was his posterity continued in a state of separation from the rest of the world, that He might seek a godly seed to himself, Num. xxiii. 9; Mal. ii. 15: for this cause did he raise them into a civil, regal, and church state, that he might in them typify and prefigure the offices and benefits of the promised Messiah, who was to gather to himself the nations that were to be blessed in the seed of Abraham, Gen. xlix. 10; Ps xlv.; Hos. iii. 5; Ezek. xxxiv. 23. And all their sacrifices did but shadow out that great expiation of sin which he was to make in his own person…”


From: John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Vol III. p13.

Puritan Preaching

Scattered thought arising from approximately four hours today spent discussing Puritan Preaching (material from a variety of sources).

1. Preaching puts forward the will of God from the word of God for the edification of the people of God.

2. Ministers must be bible experts, knowing the scriptures better than they know any other book.

3. Given the goal of edification, application is of most importance in preaching.

4. It is a sin to preach and have no application.

5. Application should be specific, direct, clearly arising from the teaching in question.

6. Application can console, exhort, admonish.

7. Exhortation involves spelling out the means of change as well as calling for such change.

8. Speech should be simple, and as unaffected as possible (the more affected the less effective - thanks Pete M).

9. Preaching should anticipate and deal with doubts and objections to the teaching in question.

10. Application should make listeners 'feel the word of God to be quick [i.e. alive] and powerful, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart' (Westminster Assembly Directory for the Publick Worship of God).

And a great quote (by a guy called Ryken, via a guy called Maclure) to round things off:

"For the Puritans, the sermon is not just hinged to Scripture; it quite literally exists inside the word of God; the text is not in the sermon but the sermon is in the text...listening to a sermon is being in the bible."

I have to admit to feeling rather like we are pygmies when we compare ourselves with these older brothers of ours. And I am a dwarf among the pygmies. Sometimes it feels like we are playing at sermons when we preach. Or half-starving the people. Or asking them to live off MacDonalds and Haribo. Or trying really hard to make the word of God boring.

But God is good, gracious, wise and sovereign. So, it must be time to pray more, devour more bible, think harder, graft longer, and focus more intently.

Final Semester

2008 is here. Semester 2, year 3 begins today. While fighting off the mild panic (I only have x number of weeks left to make the most of this important phase in training for ministry) here's what I'll be studying:

The Doctrine of Salvation. Does what it says on the tin. Doctrine, plenty of it, and about salvation.

Psalms. Final attempt to get my Hebrew at least functional amidst immersion in the bible's hymn-book.

Puritan Models of Ministry. Learning from the heirs of the reformation. Last year's module handouts can be found here.

Books, books, and more books

So, you're in London, you've got some time off from your studies, what to do? Visit the Evangelical Library of course. This is a very extensive library of (roughly 80,000) books largely from the reformed evangelical stream, including some rare collections, copies of journals/ periodicals going back a century or so and a significant collection of old hymn books. Stepping into the library was a little like stepping back in time at least a century or two. Lloyd-Jones was involved in establishing it back in the 1930s, though the vision really belonged to a guy called Geoffrey Williams who saw it as a resource for the church in this country and beyond for generations to come. The library was not insignificant in the resurgence of calvinism in the UK in the 1950s-60s.

If you are an Oak Hill student and you are reading this then go visit and join, benefit from and support this important resource. I got the impression from my first look round the place today that someone who had a little more of a clue about our forefathers in the faith from the 17th-18th century than I do would've been even more excited about the place than I was.

The second place I visited today was the Metropolitan Tabernacle Bookshop - the bookshop attached to the church where C. H. Spurgeon was once the minister. The staff were really friendly and even let us have a little peak in the actual church building itself. Only the front of the building remains from the original which Spurgeon had built in the 1800s as most of the building was destroyed by fire in the late 1800s and then again in WWII. The bookshop itself was a little limited in scope though it was very well endowed with works by the Puritans.

Of course, neither the writers whose works are found in the Evangelical Library, nor Spurgeon, would want either of these places to be mere memorials - which was one reason why I didn't stop to bow before the little statuette of Spurgeon (pictured above) at the tabernacle bookshop. But I do think they would be glad to know that Christ's people are mining some of the riches left behind from the Spirit's work in the Church of yesteryear. Of course, books are not good simply because they are old (and man, some of the books in that library especially are Old) but we are fools if we collectively fail to tap into what our 'older brothers and sisters' in Christ found and did as they reflected on the bible.

Pilgrim's Progress and Justification

This is a great little excerpt from Pilgrim's Progress which is my current loo-reading of choice. Christian and Hopeful are in conversation with Ignorance about where he stands with God. Ignorance has recently denied that his heart is bad.

IGNORANCE: Why, to be short, I think I must believe in Christ for justification.
CHRISTIAN: How! think thou must believe in Christ, when thou seest not thy need of him! Thou neither seest thy original nor actual infirmities; but hast such an opinion of thyself, and of what thou doest, as plainly renders thee to be one that did never see the necessity of Christ’s personal righteousness to justify thee before God. How, then, dost thou say, I believe in Christ?
IGNORANCE: I believe well enough, for all that.
CHRISTIAN: How dost thou believe?
IGNORANCE: I believe that Christ died for sinners; and that I shall be justified before God from the curse, through his gracious acceptance of my obedience to his laws. Or thus, Christ makes my duties, that are religious, acceptable to his Father by virtue of his merits, and so shall I be justified.
CHRISTIAN: Let me give an answer to this confession of thy faith.
1. Thou believest with a fantastical faith; for this faith is nowhere described in the word.
2. Thou believest with a false faith; because it taketh justification from the personal righteousness of Christ, and applies it to thy own.
3. This faith maketh not Christ a justifier of thy person, but of thy actions; and of thy person for thy action’s sake, which is false.
4. Therefore this faith is deceitful, even such as will leave thee under wrath in the day of God Almighty: for true justifying faith puts the soul, as sensible of its lost condition by the law, upon flying for refuge unto Christ’s righteousness; (which righteousness of his is not an act of grace by which he maketh, for justification, thy obedience accepted with God, but his personal obedience to the law, in doing and suffering for us what that required at our hands;) this righteousness, I say, true faith accepteth; under the skirt of which the soul being shrouded, and by it presented as spotless before God, it is accepted, and acquitted from condemnation.

The Puritans and the Veil Issue

THIS is sort of interesting, making a connection I'd not really thought of. Of course, it's also half-correct 'pop history' which perhaps too easily reads modern categories of moderacy and radicalism back into events of the past. And the Puritans don't come out of it that well either.