The republic is no more

“Many a head was bowed, many a broad chest heaved, and many a manly cheek was wet with tears when that broad field of blue in the center of which, like a signal light, glowed the lone star, emblem of the sovereignty of Texas, was furled and laid away among the relics of the dead republic.”

Written by Noah Smithwick, a blacksmith in attendance at a ceremony lowering the Republic of Texas flag at the republic/state capitol, February 19, 1846. (The Evolution of a State, or, Recollections of Old Texas Days, p. 283)

After the Texas flag was lowered from its place and folded, Anson Jones, last president of the republic, stated, “The Republic of Texas is no more.”

God was manifest in the flesh

George Sayles Bishop on the Revision Version of 1885.

The Revision weakens and removes the Deity of Christ in many places—I will mention five: 

…

I Tim. 3:1—“Great is the mystery of godliness, God was manifest in the flesh.” The Revision leaves out θεὸς God, and renders it “Great is the mystery of godliness, He who was manifest in the flesh,”—i. e., the manifested One was only one phase—the highest—of godliness, the precise rendering for which all the Unitarians have been contending for the last 1,800 years…Dr. Scrivener says his senses report it Theos. “I have examined it twenty times within as many years,” he declares, “and seeing (as every man must do for himself with my own eyes, I have always felt convinced that Codex ‘A’ reads Theos.” That conviction of Dr. Scrivener is my conviction and on the very same grounds—a conviction so deep that I will never yield it, nor admit as a text of my faith a Book pretending to be a Revelation from God which leaves that word out. The Holy Ghost has written it—let no man dare touch it—Great is the mystery of godliness, God was manifest in the flesh.

“Oh, but it is only one word!” yes, but one word of Scripture of which it is said “Thou has magnified Thy Word above all Thy Name!” “Only one Word!” But that word “God.” Better the whole living church of God should perish than that that one word should perish. If any take away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part.” Let criticism pause. The principle at stake is solemn.

George Sayles Bishop, “The Principles and the Tendency of the Revision Examined,” in The Doctrines of Grace: and Kindred Themes, New York, NY: Gospel Publishing House, 1910, pp. 78-80.

Kuyper on predestined Scripture

Psalm 119:89 For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

Dutch original: 

De Schrift is gepraedestineerd. Die Schrift heeft bestaan in Gods raad, voor zij op aarde komen zou. Wat de inhoud zou zijn, door wie de stukken zouden geschreven worden, hoe de samenstelling zou zijn, hoe zij zou vertaald en uitgelegd worden, hoe zij werken zou – en nog veel meer; dat alles lage in den raad Gods besloten, voordat er not een letter van de Schrift geschreven was. Kortelijk dus: zij is gepraedestineerd; ook al gebruikt men he woord praedestinatie anders alleen van organisch levende wezens.

Maar behalve in dezen algemeenen zin (waarin he waar is van alle boeken) geldt het ook van de Schrift bij God bestaan heeft voor de Schrift er was, het geheel en de deelen omvattende; en date God de Heere zelf het geweest is, die naar dat bestek en plan de Schrift heeft gerealiseerd. Voor het eerste zie Hand. 15:18 : Gode zijn al zijne werken van eeuwigheif bekend. De Schrift is een werk Gods. Voor het tweede Num. 8:4, waar gezegd wordt, dat God de מַּרְאֶה van den kandelaar aan Mozes getoond heeft. Als het nu niet strijdt met den eerbied voor de Majesteit van het Goddelijke, een model van een kandelaar te geven, dan kan men ons nooit tegenwerpen, dat het strijdig zou zijn met de eere Gods, dat er een מַּרְאֶהֹ van de H. Schrift in den hemel geweest is.

 English translation:

Scripture is predestined. The Scripture existed in God’s counsel before it came to earth. What the content would be, by whom the pieces would be written, what the composition would be like, how it would be translated and explained, how it would work – and much more. All this was decided in the counsel of God, ere not a letter of the Scripture was written. In short: it is predestined; even if the word predestination is otherwise used only of organic living beings.

Not only in the general sense which it is true of all books, but it is also true that Scripture existed with God before Scripture existed, comprising the whole and the parts; and that it was the Lord God himself who, according to that plan and design, has realized his plan of the Scriptures. For the first, see Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from eternity. Scripture is a work of God. For the second, see Numbers 8:4, where it is said that God showed the מַּרְאֶה (pattern) of the lampstand to Moses. Now, if it is not contrary to the reverence for the Majesty of the Divine to give a model of a lampstand, then it can never be objected that it would be contrary to the honor of God that there should be a מַּרְאֶהֹ (pattern) of the Holy Scriptures in heaven always.

Locus de Sacra Scriptura, Volume I, Dictaten dogmatiek, 1891, p. 92

--

It was not mistakenly, therefore, that a predestined Bible was spoken of in Reformed circles, by which was understood that the preconceived form of the Holy Scripture had been given already from eternity in the counsel of God, in which at the same time all events, means and persons, by which that preconceived form would be realized in our actual life, were predestined. Hence in the course of ages all sorts of events take place, and persons appear who do not know of each other, and in the midst of these events these several persons are induced, without the knowledge of a higher purpose. to commit to writing certain facts, thoughts and perceptions. These persons also write other documents, and other persons among their contemporaries write as well as they. But, nevertheless, all those other writings are lost, or are put aside, while those special documents, which were destined and ordered of God to compose His Holy Scripture, are not merely saved, but are made honorable, are compiled, and gradually attain that authority which He had ordained for these Scriptures. Thus, according to a plan, known to God alone, a structure is gradually raised on which in the course of many ages different persons have labored without agreement, and without ever having seen the whole. No one of the children of men had conceived the plan, to compile such a Scripture; not one had added his contribution with premeditation, nor exhorted others to supplement his contribution with theirs. Thus the plan of the Holy Scripture was hidden, back of human consciousness, in the consciousness of God, and He it is, who in His time has so created each of these writers, so endowed, led and impelled them, that they have contributed what He wanted, and what after His plan and direction was to constitute His Scripture. The conception, therefore, has not gone out of men, but out of God; and it was in connection with this conception, that in every document and by every writer in the course of the ages there should be contributed that very thing, of such a content and in such a form, as had been aimed at and willed by God. There is no chance, and hence this composition and compilation of human writings are not accidental, but predetermined. And this whole has thus been ordained, and in virtue of this fore-ordination has thus been executed, as it had to be, in order to respond to the spiritual needs and wants of the Church of God in every age and among every nation. For, of course, in the strict sense it may be said that every writing is predestined, and this we readily grant; but when our Reformed circles spoke of a “predestined Bible” they intended to convey thereby the idea of a medium of grace, which was taken up as a link in the counsel of God for the salvation of His elect. In the accomplishment of this purpose lay the justification of the Scripture, and the result has fully shown that this wondrous book contains within itself the mystery of being suited to every nation, new to every age, profound for the scholar and rich in comforts for the meek. pp. 474-476

Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920), Principles of Sacred Theology, (translated from the Dutch by J. Hendrik De Vries), Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1898/1954 [Also available HERE.]

The New Covenant

Jeremiah 31:31-34 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Hebrews 8:8-13 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Comments from Crossway:

The old covenant was thus breakable but not bad itself. Though the apostle Paul is often enlisted in Christian theology to criticize the old covenant, he asserts in more than one place that the OT law is fundamentally good (e.g., Rom. 7:12, 16; 1 Tim. 1:8).

Given such theological continuity, why does the writer of Hebrews emphasize discontinuity in stating that “Now hath [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” (Heb. 8:6–7)? And, following a full citation of Jeremiah 31:31–34 (Heb. 8:8–12, the longest quotation of the OT in the NT), the passage continues, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (Heb. 8:13). It is crucial in this respect that the author of Hebrews introduces the Jeremiah quotation with the editorial phrase, “For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord...” (Heb. 8:8). That is, the fault of the old covenant (8:7) lay in how the people themselves were faulty and prone to breaking it (Heb. 8:8a), thus incurring the need for the “new covenant,” which follows in the passage (Heb. 8:8b–12).5 Indeed, the writer to the Hebrews explains that Yahweh instituted the better promises of the new covenant for this reason: “They continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord” (Heb. 8:9).

--

It is a new covenant, unlike the old covenant.

The old covenant was breakable.

The new covenant is sure.

Louis Gaussen on Preservation

(6.) Last, by a new assemblage of other facts, not less striking and incontestable, all of which attest, with equal force, the same continued agency of the Most High for the preservation of the New Testament.

422. This doctrine, we affirm, is already proved, for every one who believes in the inspiration of the Scriptures, by the simple consideration of the divine wisdom and veracity.

This is almost a question of the plainest common sense. Only suppose that a clever watchmaker, by a wonderful exertion of his abilities, prepares and finishes, at great expense, all the parts of a perfect chronometer, which is intended for the use of his beloved son in his travels to foreign parts; shall we not admit, as we would an axiom, that, having thus made it, he would not intentionally leave it out of doors exposed to all the accidents of the weather, or to injuries of passers-by? And who, then can admit that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ would cause His only Son to come down from heaven for His chosen people, without guaranteeing for them the record of His life and teachings? or that He would have commissioned His apostles to write their books by the Holy Spirit, without taking care to preserve in aftertime so precious a deposit? that He watched over these books while they were being written, and ceased to watch over them when once they were given to the world? that He cared no more about them when the churches had received them from the hands of the apostles? and that, in consequence, they have been transmitted from age to age, from country to country, from one generation to another, abandoned henceforward, like any common book to all the hazards of eighteen centuries? Would such negligence be in harmony with the principles of His government; with the care which He takes of the Church to the end of time; with His declarations of the value of the Scriptures, and the permanent certainty of their declarations; with His denunciations against the crime of adding anything to them, or taking anything from them? He numbers the hairs of our head, and would He not number the books of His oracles? He does not allow a sparrow to fall to the ground without His permission, and would He allow the Scriptures to fall from heaven to the ground, which have been given by Himself for the universal gathering together of His elect? What good to give them divinely inspired, unless He transmit them divinely guarded? Why preserve them from all error, if not preserved afterwards from all dangers? He who said, “Every word of God is pure, .... add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee,” will He not keep a jealous eye upon it? And if, by the mouth of Paul, He pronounced an anathema against any who should preach “any other gospel than what His apostles preached,” would He afterwards permit this condemnation to fall on the entire collection of their oracles, by allowing inspired writings to be lost from it, or forged writings to be admitted into it? This is not possible. And we must all admit that, the inspiration of the Scriptures being recognised, our doctrine is already proved by the simplest knowledge of the wisdom and veracity of God.

Francois Samuel Robert Louis Gaussen in Le Canon des saintes ecritures au double point de vue de la science et de la foi (The Canon of the Holy Scriptures from the Double Point of View of Science and Faith) 1860, pp. 430-432.

Since Jesus Christ, my Lord and my God, ‘created all things in heaven and earth, and by him all things subsist,’ (Col. i. 16) I said to myself, how could I doubt that He has taken care of His own revelations, whether in giving them at the first, or in their subsequent preservation and transmission? Our only business, was to study them for the purpose of regulating each one’s faith, and conscience, and life.

Francois Samuel Robert Louis Gaussen in Le Canon des saintes ecritures au double point de vue de la science et de la foi (The Canon of the Holy Scriptures from the Double Point of View of Science and Faith), p. viii.

Quick quote

This is not a direct quote, but a summary of something I recently heard.

Many today complain about King James Onlyism. However, Westcott-and-Hortism has dominated the theology of the word of God in the West, in textual criticism and evangelical bibliology, over the past century and a half.

Idea from Doug Barger, pastor of Christ Reformed Baptist Church, New Castle, Indiana

What is sin?

What is sin?

• It is the glory of God not honored.
• The holiness of God not reverenced.
• The greatness of God not admired.
• The power of God not praised.
• The truth of God not sought.
• The wisdom of God not esteemed.
• The beauty of God not treasured.
• The goodness of God not savored.
• The faithfulness of God not trusted.
• The commandments of God not obeyed.
• The justice of God not respected.
• The wrath of God not feared.
• The grace of God not cherished.
• The presence of God not prized.
• The person of God not loved.
• That is sin.

Attributed to John Piper in an e-mail I received.

John Gill on 2 Timothy 3:16

John Gill on 2 Timothy 3:16a:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God

That is, all holy Scripture; for of that only the apostle is speaking; and he means the whole of it; not only the books of the Old Testament, but of the New, the greatest part of which was now written; for this second epistle to Timothy is by some thought to be the last of Paul’s epistles; and this also will hold good of what was to be written; for all is inspired by God, or breathed by him: the Scriptures are the breath of God, the word of God and not men; they are “written by the Spirit”, as the Syriac version renders it; or “by the Spirit of God”, as the Ethiopic version. The Scriptures are here commended, from the divine authority of them; and which is attested and confirmed by various arguments; as the majesty and loftiness of their style, which in many places is inimitable by men; the sublimity of the matter contained in them, which transcends all human understanding and capacity ever to have attained unto and discovered; as the trinity of persons in the Godhead, the incarnation of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, &c. The purity and holiness of them before observed, show them to be the word of him that is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity; as also their harmony and agreement, though wrote by different persons, in different places, and ages, and at sundry times, and in divers manners; what seeming inconsistencies are observed in them may, with labour and industry, by divine assistance, be reconciled. The predictions of future events in them, as particularly concerning Josiah and Cyrus, by name, long before they were born, and especially concerning Jesus Christ, and which have had their accomplishment, and many others in the New Testament both by Christ and his apostles, are a proof that they could not be the writings of men, but must have the omniscient God for their author; the impartiality of the writers of them, in not concealing the mean extract of some of them, the sins of others before conversion, and even their sins and failings afterwards, as well as those of their nearest relations and dearest friends, strengthens the proof of their divine authority; to which may be added, the wonderful preservation of them, through all the changes and declensions of the Jewish church and state, to whom the books of the Old Testament were committed; and notwithstanding the violence and malice of Heathen persecutors, particularly Dioclesian, who sought to destroy every copy of the Scriptures, and published an edict for that purpose, and notwithstanding the numbers of heretics, and who have been in power, as also the apostasy of the church of Rome; and yet these writings have been preserved, and kept pure and incorrupt, which is not the case of other writings; nor are there any of such antiquity as the oldest of these: to which may be subjoined the testimony of God himself; his outward testimony by miracles, wrought by Moses and the prophets, concerned in the writings of the Old Testament, and by the apostles in the New; and his internal testimony, which is the efficacy of these Scriptures on the hearts of men; the reading and hearing of which, having been owned for the conversion, comfort and edification of thousands and thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand...

A Second Cainan

Comments on the second Cainan in Luke 3.

Luke 3:36-37: which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

Luke 3. v. 36
This insertion of the name of a second Cainan, (besides the Cainan in verse 37,) is one of the hardest things to explain and account for, in the Holy Gospels; for the name does not occur in Genesis xi. 12, between the names of Arphaxad and Salah, where we should, of course, expect to find it; nor indeed elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. It is found, however, in a Greek Translation of the Pentateuch, which was made before the time of our Lord; and which (because it was commonly read in the Synagogues, and therefore familiarly known to the people,) the Evangelists and Apostles are found to have freely used and quoted.

The humble student of the Gospels will do well to believe, on the testimony of St. Luke, that there actually was such a person as Cainan,—the son of Arphaxad and father of Sala; while, at the same time, he may cheerfully admit that, as yet, he sees not how the fact is to be reconciled in a satisfactory manner with the particulars (of age and of descent) which Moses was divinely moved to record. It does not, of course, prove, that when he has occasion to reason concerning the early generations of mankind, he need in the least degree distrust the statements which the Hebrew text supplies. The “Spirit of Truth,”(q) by whom Moses and St. Luke were alike inspired, may well be deemed his sufficient guarantee on this head.

(q) St. John xvi. 13.

John William Burgon, A Plain Commentary on the Four Holy Gospels, Intended Chiefly for Devotional Reading, p. 427

Sad Statement by Darwin

The following quotation is from taken The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, edited by his son Francis Darwin:

“Believing as I do that man in the distant future will be a far more perfect creature than he is now, it is an intolerable thought that he and all other sentient beings are doomed to complete annihilation after such long-continued progress. To those who fully admit the immortality of the human soul, the destruction of our world will not appear so dreadful.”

I do not have much to say about this. I read this and thought, how sad! As a humanist and naturalist, Darwin believed the sun would eventually grow too cold to sustain life on the earth, and that mankind would be annihilated. He was proud of man’s progress and found the loss of it intolerable. He seems that he wished he could believe at least in the immortality of the soul.

The Son of God and Saviour of mankind said:

I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: (John 11:25).

A Murderous Game

“We favor safe, helpful athletics in our schools, but to say the least, our Christian colleges are going far astray when they lend their influence to the training of boys to kick and trample their fellow students to death. We are against the murderous game (football), root and branch...If some of our over-enthusiastic youths that attend Baylor are bound to test their kicking abilities, let them cross legs with a burro. It will be fully as civilized and much less dangerous.”

J. B. Cranfill in The Baptist Standard, 1899

I wonder what Cranfill would think about a Baylor student winning the Heisman trophy; or churches turning out their services to watch a Super football game?? Now I’ve been known to watch a game or two, and even root against the dark side. But I think our old-fogey Baptist fathers had a point or two that we need to consider as well.

Saints above and saints below

"To live above with saints in love, O that will be the glory. But to live below with saints we know, O that's a different story!" -- author unknown

Things that accompany salvation

Oh, believe me, it is a great mistake to suppose we should be happy in heaven, if God were to save us from hell, and take us there, without a great change wrought upon our spirits. Yet this is one of the delusions of the day. Carnal sinners are asking God to save them; and on their death beds send for a minister to pray for them, whereas if God were even to grant their requests, their salvation would be no boon. ... But if we have got the things that accompany salvation, we are given a new life, as well as a new heart. We are not content with mere doctrine; we want experience—we want the Lord to bring home His promise to our hearts—we want the blood applied, we want to realize more of the new creature within, and are never, never satisfied with ourselves, but always longing after holiness, though feeling we never attain to it. — William Parks (1809-1867)

Can We Change What We Are?

Sin, in all its various forms, is [the soul's] natural element. To make man the direct opposite of what he originally is—to make him love God instead of hating Him—to make him fear God instead of mocking Him—to make him obey God instead of rebelling against Him—to make him to tremble at His dreadful majesty instead of defiantly charging against Him—to do this mighty work, and to effect this wonderful change requires the implantation of a new nature by the immediate hand of God Himself! Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to doing evil. - from the writings of J.C. Philpot (1802-1869)