The Meaning of Christ’s Ascension
Lois Lowry tells a story about how a utopian state required that all of the community's memories going back through the generations be committed to a single person, a receiver. The elders engineered a society where no one but the receiver had to feel or remember. Life was safe and comfortable. The citizens were spared the pain of knowing, of emoting. And they could always call on the receiver when faced with a decision that exceeded their self-imposed limited experience.
From its inception, preaching has held a prominent place within the life and advance of the church. A current revival of expository ministry is being cultivated throughout the evangelical world. However, such renewed awareness and commitment to an expositional pulpit ministry has been nurtured with a notable lack of historical awareness.
Anyone who felt perplexed – even outraged – the first time they read Romans 9 may identify with Thomas Bradwardine, a 14th-century Archbishop of Canterbury. His age was, like ours, entrenched in Pelagianism, exalting man’s free will and ability to come to God on his own terms. That’s the philosophy he had learned at Oxford, where he “rarely used to hear about grace, except in an ambiguous way.”
At the beginning of the seventh century, the decision of the Council of Chalcedon that Jesus had two natures, human and divine, indivisible but distinct, was still not universally accepted. Even if the Council had specified that the expression “two natures” doesn’t mean that Jesus is “parted or divided into two persons,” many took it this way. It was a cause of disunity, and emperor after emperor tried hard to come to a compromise.
Basic information – four ideas
(Rev. 1:17, 18)
When I found that Banner of Truth was slated to reissue nineteenth-century Scottish pastor Horatius Bonar’s exposition of the doctrine of justification The Everlasting Righteousness this year, I was inordinately delighted.
That’s because, outside of Scripture, The Everlasting Righteousness is the most important book I’ve ever read.
“An error in justification is dangerous, like a crack in the foundation,” said Thomas Watson.
The problem with a crack is two-fold. First, trouble easily passes through, such as swelling ground water, bringing deleterious effects upon the foundation and everything meant to be guarded by it. Second, a little crack does not heal itself. It is soon not so little.
For these reasons we now set our sights on the error concerning justification which emerged among the Remonstrants.
Walking with God